Increases damage to armored units by 6 for 20 seconds, with a 1 minute cooldown. This does not scale with upgrades.
Activating the ability now causes a timer to display over the Void Ray for the duration of the effect.
Supply cost increased from 3 to 4.
TERRAN
Armory
The Armory now only has one armor upgrade for both air and ground upgrades for both Factory and Starport units.
Battlecruiser
Yamato Cannon energy cost decreased from 125 to 100.
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Hellbat
Medivac
New ability: Ignite Afterburners
Speed boost that increases movement speed and acceleration to 4.25 for 8 seconds. 20 second cooldown.
Raven
Seeker Missile has been redesigned:
Energy cost decreased from 125 to 75.
Can now fire from 10 range.
Missile comes out and stays immobile in front of the Raven for 5 seconds while charging up, then rapidly moves and explodes at the target for 100 damage plus splash damage.
Targeted unit lights up red when targeted. If the unit moves 13 range out of where the Seeker Missile is, the Missile fizzles.
Reaper
New passive ability: Combat Drugs
Health regenerates 2hp/s if not attacked during the last 10 seconds (same as Protoss shields)
Health increased from 50 to 60.
Movement speed increased from 2.95 to 3.75.
No longer requires a Tech Lab Addon.
No longer have their anti-building grenades.
P-45 Gauss Pistol weapon damage decreased from 4 +5 vs. Light to 4.
Siege Tank
Siege Tanks no longer require an upgrade in order to enter Siege Mode.
Thor
250mm Strike Cannons has been removed, along with its associated energy bar.
The Thor can now switch between two modes: High-Impact Payload and Explosive Payload. The mode shift takes 4 seconds.
When in High-Impact Payload mode, the Thor switches to a different anti-air gun (250mm Punisher Cannons) that has 10 range and deals 24 flat damage.
Thor radius, inner radius, and separation radius increased from 0.8215 to 1.
Previously hellbats received +1 to non light/+2 to light with every attack upgrade but now the scaling has been changed to +2 to non light/+3 to light. Max attack hellbats should now 1 shot max armored zerglings and 3 shot max armored emped zealots instead of 4.
Now, Hellbat damage are the following, with the upgrades of :
+0: 18 to non-Light, 30 to Light
+1: 20 to non-Light, 33 to Light
+2: 22 to non-Light, 36 to Light
+3: 24 to non-Light, 39 to Light
This seems more of a 'fix' rather than a 'buff' since all damage upgrades in the game scale by 10% of the base damage rounded. That would also explain why it was forgotten in the patch notes.
I'd say if you really had a concern, it should be with the base damage rather than the upgrades, the upgrades just follow naturally for the most part (sadly, units in certain dmg ranges like the hydralisk get the short end of the stick when it comes to upgrades, since technically they should get 1.5 per upgrade to scale like other units do, but instead get 1, same as the marine which has half the base damage)
On February 23 2013 23:39 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: Hellbats may be built when Armory is constructed. Hellion transformation is available with Armory research.
This afternoon, we will be making the balance changes listed below. This will not require that we bring down the beta service. Thanks again for all the great feedback you've provided while testing Heart of the Swarm. We hope to see you testing these changes and sharing your input soon!
Terran
Hellion
Transformation to and from Hellbat Mode now requires the Transformation Servos upgrade from the Factory Tech Lab.
Transformation Servos requires an Armory and costs 150/150, with a 110 second research time.
Now that the highest skilled pro players have been playing the beta for a few weeks, we've been gathering pro level ladder data, pro feedback, as well as watching all the HotS tournaments/show matches that have been going on.
Out of everything we're seeing and hearing from pro players, we think the most important issue we need to deal with rather quickly is early game ZvT.
The biggest issue in the ZvT early game at the highest pro level seems to be the mass Hellion contain leading into the various potential mass Hellbat combinations right when the Armory comes into play. The time between Terran gaining full map control and then converting all their map control units into straight up power units looks to be too narrow.
Even without this threat, Terran has plenty of early game strategies to utilize vs. Zerg. We're most likely going to add the Hellion to Hellbat transformation upgrade back to the Factory Tech lab with an Armory requirement. This will give Zerg more time to scout and prep against possible Hellbat based attacks when they see lots of Hellions in play.
Poll: Balance Update #15 First Impressions?
Thumbs Up (322)
61%
Thumbs Down (165)
31%
No Thumbs (44)
8%
531 total votes
Your vote: Balance Update #15 First Impressions?
(Vote): Thumbs Up (Vote): Thumbs Down (Vote): No Thumbs
Great, now there's a unit I'll never use again, which is a shame. Maybe they could change back the cargo slots in the medivac now, seeing as rushes will be severely delayed, that would mean that the unit would still have some use, but people would have that extra time to prepare for something of that caliber.
Yay, TvP mech viable again I guess.. At least fucking remove bio flag, no one is going to research this shit for 150/150 going bio or something.. Such a mess. Siege tech gone, hellbat requiring armory and cost 150/150/110, shared vehicle/air armor, but no attack.. Is it just me or are they completely clueless?
I hope Blizzard has a major patch or three waiting in the wings, because it sure looks like they are drawing down on a final release with these increasingly incremental patches. The game is completely fubar, and they have accomplished NONE of their alleged goals of reducing protoss deathball play, making mech viable, etc.. It sure looks like they have no idea what they are doing, and don't even care that they are about to release what is really an extremely weak, weird, even seriously defective expansion.
Add to this the fact they never fixed any of the gameplay complaints about Wings of Liberty after release. The HOTS expansion was their big chance to correct their mistakes from WOL. And.... nothing.
You can't have the hellbat research requirement and NOT roll back the cargo space nerf :O. If you can't get hellbats as quickly and not be able to do as much damage with them then that takes away one of the strongest points of hellbats, that they were really strong in the early-mid stages of the game.
Plus with a 150/150 cost? I don't know, I understand that people were mad that hellbats didn't have a gas cost but this is honestly too much. Now it's always better to go blue flame upgrade opening if you want to do an early game drop, and then hope that you did enough damage to transition in to hellbats midgame, or just go straight for hellbats and turtle.
On February 23 2013 09:47 Everlong wrote: Yay, TvP mech viable again I guess.. At least fucking remove bio flag, no one is going to research this shit for 150/150 going bio or something.. Such a mess. Siege tech gone, hellbat requiring armory and cost 150/150/110, shared vehicle/air armor, but no attack.. Is it just me or are they completely clueless?
Wait I'm confused, nerfing hellbats makes TvP mech more viable? Doesn't it make it less viable? Maybe I'm just hallucinating here.
I'm totally okay with this as long as cargo goes back to its previous amount. Otherwise, complete and total nerfage into oblivion - which is always a huge disappointment. It just seems like theres now an overwhelming amount of stuff to do just to get one hellbat onto the field, once you have it researched you then have to do all of the building swapping if you want it to have a reactor... It just seems a little silly to me. "It's beta"
On February 23 2013 10:04 ssg wrote: Great, Terran needed another useless unit.
Great, another terran bitching before trying out the changes.
It's still strong as hell. It still decimates lings/zealots/marines. It's still good for drops. It's still the same fucking unit. It just takes longer to get. Oh no, you can't win games at 7 minutes by having 8 of them anymore. Good.
On February 23 2013 10:04 ssg wrote: Great, Terran needed another useless unit.
Great, another terran bitching before trying out the changes.
It's still strong as hell. It still decimates lings/zealots/marines. It's still good for drops. It's still the same fucking unit. It just takes longer to get. Oh no, you can't win games at 7 minutes by having 8 of them anymore. Good.
Oh, I'm going to try it out right now. I wonder how it's going to afect my play.
I guess I will just load my medivac with 2 hellbats at 10 min. mark and fly into flock of Mutas?
150/150 Blizzard,really??? What about TvP mech??? Almost two weeks to launch and you seem to do abslutly nothing. Cant wait to see the first GSL after the launch. I bet we wont see any new strategies and there will be no Hellbats and Widowmines. So sad.
Polt,Demuslim,ForGG,TheStC...None of this players is playing mech vs P.Still the same shit as in WoL....
The balance team are either biding their time before they unveil a major patch, one that will fix TvP mech, deathball play, and ZvP skytoss, or I am in fact completely delusional
On February 23 2013 10:04 ssg wrote: Great, Terran needed another useless unit.
Great, another terran bitching before trying out the changes.
It's still strong as hell. It still decimates lings/zealots/marines. It's still good for drops. It's still the same fucking unit. It just takes longer to get. Oh no, you can't win games at 7 minutes by having 8 of them anymore. Good.
Like you say, it's still strong as hell. Instead of making it weaker but still an option in early-mid, they make it less accessible but they keep it broken. This patch is another "anti-timing" nerf that shuts down diversity, which is simply shit design.
Anyway I couldn't care less if the hellbat is nerfed or even disappears, it's such a disgraceful unit that nobody wants to see on the screen.
The change was needed. It's sad the game is so close to release and nothing was done for Mech TvP tho. They ran out of time I gues,s but changes are gonna be a lot harder to make once the game is out of beta
On February 23 2013 10:04 ssg wrote: Great, Terran needed another useless unit.
Great, another terran bitching before trying out the changes.
It's still strong as hell. It still decimates lings/zealots/marines. It's still good for drops. It's still the same fucking unit. It just takes longer to get. Oh no, you can't win games at 7 minutes by having 8 of them anymore. Good.
Like you say, it's still strong as hell. Instead of making it weaker but still an option in early-mid, they make it less accessible but they keep it broken. This patch is another "anti-timing" nerf that shuts down diversity, which is simply shit design.
Anyway I couldn't care less if the hellbat is nerfed or even disappears, it's such a disgraceful unit that nobody wants to see on the screen.
I don't really see why people hate the hellbat so much. I agree that these hellbat drops when no one had anything to defend against it were redicilous, but if pure mech is supposed to work, tanks need some defense, which hellbats provide. Is everyone that hates the hellbat design just a bio player(or z/p), or what would you actually rather have infront of the tanks?
Why the fuck did they say "we want to make mech viable vP". It's 3 weeks before release and nobody in their right mind is going mech. WoL siege tanks are not strong enough to be a core unit vP. Hellbats and thors remain these unmicro-able, silly a-move units.
On February 23 2013 10:27 SHODAN wrote: Why the fuck did they say "we want to make mech viable vP". It's 3 weeks before release and nobody in their right mind is going mech. WoL siege tanks are not strong enough to be a core unit vP. Hellbats and thors remain these unmicro-able, silly a-move units.
STC is going mech on his stream, so is Goody. People are doing it, just not in the runs ups to tournaments.
On February 23 2013 10:04 ssg wrote: Great, Terran needed another useless unit.
Great, another terran bitching before trying out the changes.
It's still strong as hell. It still decimates lings/zealots/marines. It's still good for drops. It's still the same fucking unit. It just takes longer to get. Oh no, you can't win games at 7 minutes by having 8 of them anymore. Good.
Like you say, it's still strong as hell. Instead of making it weaker but still an option in early-mid, they make it less accessible but they keep it broken. This patch is another "anti-timing" nerf that shuts down diversity, which is simply shit design.
Anyway I couldn't care less if the hellbat is nerfed or even disappears, it's such a disgraceful unit that nobody wants to see on the screen.
I don't really see why people hate the hellbat so much. I agree that these hellbat drops when no one had anything to defend against it were redicilous, but if pure mech is supposed to work, tanks need some defense, which hellbats provide. Is everyone that hates the hellbat design just a bio player(or z/p), or what would you actually rather have infront of the tanks?
I dislike the hellbat because there are so many special rules around it. Trying to balance 2 units that are in fact 1 is a disaster. I would rather see a new mech unit, tanky and why not ... with anti-air ! So you wouldn't have to rely on 6 supply unit like the thor or on mines that aren't mines anyway because they fire ze missile.
Blizzard's approach makes me feel dizzy not sure I would do any better, but eh it's not my damn job.
On February 23 2013 10:27 SHODAN wrote: Why the fuck did they say "we want to make mech viable vP". It's 3 weeks before release and nobody in their right mind is going mech. WoL siege tanks are not strong enough to be a core unit vP. Hellbats and thors remain these unmicro-able, silly a-move units.
STC is going mech on his stream, so is Goody. People are doing it, just not in the runs ups to tournaments.
No, no they are not. This is what mech looks like:
Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
To bad they were funny in the early game at dealing with roach pushes, when you wanted to pressure the Zerg at the same time abit. And I had no problems stopping them without roaches, though most of my opponents never heard of the word split or were to slow or didn't kept some hellions ... so normally the Zerg surround with lings and Banelings was enough. But usually roaches were the most easy thing to beat for me when going for Hellbats. Oh and most Terrans missed the Banelings might burrow on t1 warning as well. I'll miss them, but I guess they were so easy to deal with for me because every Terran goes for them and I copied an anti strategy from a pro. So the only indication for me that it was overpowered was because it was used so often.
Anyway more nerfs to the offensive early game might mean Terran gets some defensive buffs. Maybe 75 Mineral Turrets or a cheaper +2 armor upgrade.
well they obviously had to do something. that's one way to approach it. at least the ridiculously op hellbat pushes are now gone. sooner or later they will have to address reapers as well, which will probably be nerfed so that almost noone plays them anymore. but thats fine since I don't really see too much of a role for both hellbats and reapers in this game.
On February 23 2013 10:27 SHODAN wrote: Why the fuck did they say "we want to make mech viable vP". It's 3 weeks before release and nobody in their right mind is going mech. WoL siege tanks are not strong enough to be a core unit vP. Hellbats and thors remain these unmicro-able, silly a-move units.
STC is going mech on his stream, so is Goody. People are doing it, just not in the runs ups to tournaments.
No, no they are not. This is what mech looks like:
Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
I am seeing mech tvp from streams where terrans go tank/hellbat/mines with some vikings later on. Dunno what you are talking about I rarely see just hellbat/thor/medivac except when toss is doing a sky toss transition (which happened in bw when terrans went a ton of goliaths).
On February 23 2013 10:27 SHODAN wrote: Why the fuck did they say "we want to make mech viable vP". It's 3 weeks before release and nobody in their right mind is going mech. WoL siege tanks are not strong enough to be a core unit vP. Hellbats and thors remain these unmicro-able, silly a-move units.
STC is going mech on his stream, so is Goody. People are doing it, just not in the runs ups to tournaments.
No, no they are not. This is what mech looks like:
Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
By your definition, nobody has and nobody will ever go mech again. Good logic.
On February 23 2013 10:37 SHODAN wrote: Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
Oh god, not this bullshit again.
Mech stands for mechanical, as opposed to biological units. If you want to define it further just say tank-based mech or something. Don't start making your own rules for words because "that's how it was in BW".
On February 23 2013 10:37 SHODAN wrote: Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
Oh god, not this bullshit again.
Mech stands for mechanical, as opposed to biological units. If you want to define it further just say tank-based mech or something. Don't start making your own rules for words because "that's how it was in BW".
Mech is a style, and the style is defined by fucking siege tanks. There is no sub category called "tank-based mech" because mech = tanks, end of story.
On February 23 2013 10:37 SHODAN wrote: Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
Oh god, not this bullshit again.
Mech stands for mechanical, as opposed to biological units. If you want to define it further just say tank-based mech or something. Don't start making your own rules for words because "that's how it was in BW".
Mech is a style, and the style is defined by fucking siege tanks. There is no sub category called "tank-based mech" because mech = tanks, end of story.
Well clearly your definition and blizzard's definitions are in conflict. Since your opinion has no comparative value, we'll go with Blizzard's definition here.
On February 23 2013 10:37 SHODAN wrote: Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
Oh god, not this bullshit again.
Mech stands for mechanical, as opposed to biological units. If you want to define it further just say tank-based mech or something. Don't start making your own rules for words because "that's how it was in BW".
Mech is a style, and the style is defined by fucking siege tanks. There is no sub category called "tank-based mech" because mech = tanks, end of story.
The time between Terran gaining full map control and then converting all their map control units into straight up power units looks to be too narrow.
Lol, so we are back to the point where zerg pretty much has map control AND vision the entire game WHILE having super fast mutas?
Again, there were issues with the hell bat but tech lab, 150/150, 110 seconds? Why is the hell bat not getting gradually nerf like the infestor (which has a big problem for much much longer?). Why not try something like 75/75 and 60 seconds first?
On February 23 2013 10:37 SHODAN wrote: Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
Oh god, not this bullshit again.
Mech stands for mechanical, as opposed to biological units. If you want to define it further just say tank-based mech or something. Don't start making your own rules for words because "that's how it was in BW".
Mech is a style, and the style is defined by fucking siege tanks. There is no sub category called "tank-based mech" because mech = tanks, end of story.
Well clearly your definition and blizzard's definitions are in conflict. Since your opinion has no comparative value, we'll go with Blizzard's definition here.
As the guy is saying, Mech doesn't mean marine/marauder with skin of mechanical units. Mech is a particular style. Surprisingly, people wanting a different option weren't asking for the standard ball playstyle but with a different name.
The time between Terran gaining full map control and then converting all their map control units into straight up power units looks to be too narrow.
Lol, so we are back to the point where zerg pretty much has map control AND vision the entire game WHILE having super fast mutas?
Again, there were issues with the hell bat but tech lab, 150/150, 110 seconds? Why is the hell bat not getting gradually nerf like the infestor (which has a big problem for much much longer?). Why not try something like 75/75 and 60 seconds first?
They want Terrans to be happy during the next round of nerfs. "It really sucks that reapers and widow mines only have 20 health now, but at least it's not as bad as that time hellbats were nerfed!"
Siege Tank based mech is much stronger in HotS, because Hellbats (especially with medivac support) make crazy good damage soak units vs. the Toss units that made mech unviable in WoL--they shred chargelots, and Immortals (and Stalkers) take absolutely forever to kill them, and they're bulky enough to be less vulnerable to splash than bio. Unlike Hellions, they don't need to kite, meaning they actually work as front line units. If you engage properly, the Toss army ends up taking tons of additional siege tank shots while they're stuck trying to punch through the Hellbat front line--an emp or two and good target firing with tanks can bring down all the immortals and chargelots long before they ever reach the siege tanks. Judicious use of mines makes this even harder to break (and obviously vikings are a must vs Colossi).
HotS TvP mech is not exactly BW mech, but it certainly doesn't eschew siege tanks entirely--they synergize really well with the other units that have been added...sygnificantly better than they synergized with traditional Hellions. If you aren't playing TvP mech with an eye towards good positioning, protecting your back lines, and choosing good terrain to engage, then you aren't doing it properly. If you are doing that, its become a vastly stronger style than it ever was in BW. A well-positioned terran mech army with good upgrades is all but impossible for Toss to take on a straight on engagement if they just use gateway/robo. Stargate is the only Toss answer to Terran mech currently, and if it wasn't as good as it is, I don't think Protoss would have an effective answer. And frankly, I'm ok with that--Terran mech should be all but impossible to take head on with a ground army, that's the entire point.
150/150 is a joke. The fact that this is patched but oracle burst/Protoss early game vs Terran is left the same is a joke.
Looks like we're back to the WOL philosophy - if it's Terran it's imbalanced and they need to play better, if it's Protoss/Zerg then it's "well played good sir, *golf clap* and here are your buffs."
So, if this was a problem, I will assume roach burrow rushes and ling/bane roach/bane allins are a problem in early game TvZ correct, right blizzard?
Ohhhhhh, i get it. It's only OP if it was a Terran winning in the beginning of the game. It's perfectly fine if it was a P/Z all-in. But a Terran winning with aggression...nerf it immediately.
On February 23 2013 11:13 awesomoecalypse wrote: Siege Tank based mech is much stronger in HotS, because Hellbats (especially with medivac support) make crazy good damage soak units vs. the Toss units that made mech unviable in WoL--they shred chargelots, and Immortals (and Stalkers) take absolutely forever to kill them, and they're bulky enough to be less vulnerable to splash than bio. Unlike Hellions, they don't need to kite, meaning they actually work as front line units. If you engage properly, the Toss army ends up taking tons of additional siege tank shots while they're stuck trying to punch through the Hellbat front line--an emp or two and good target firing with tanks can bring down all the immortals and chargelots long before they ever reach the siege tanks. Judicious use of mines makes this even harder to break (and obviously vikings are a must vs Colossi).
HotS TvP mech is not exactly BW mech, but it certainly doesn't eschew siege tanks entirely--they synergize really well with the other units that have been added...sygnificantly better than they synergized with traditional Hellions. If you aren't playing TvP mech with an eye towards good positioning, protecting your back lines, and choosing good terrain to engage, then you aren't doing it properly. If you are doing that, its become a vastly stronger style than it ever was in BW. A well-positioned terran mech army with good upgrades is all but impossible for Toss to take on a straight on engagement if they just use gateway/robo. Stargate is the only Toss answer to Terran mech currently, and if it wasn't as good as it is, I don't think Protoss would have an effective answer. And frankly, I'm ok with that--Terran mech should be all but impossible to take head on with a ground army, that's the entire point.
You last 2 statements invalid your entire point. Yes, HoTS mech is good vs WoL protoss units. But where is the Air Toss fix? So basically they buffed mech to be viable against WoL protoss but introduce an even harder counter with air toss, how in the world does that make sense?
On February 23 2013 11:14 avilo wrote: 150/150 is a joke. The fact that this is patched but oracle burst/Protoss early game vs Terran is left the same is a joke.
Looks like we're back to the WOL philosophy - if it's Terran it's imbalanced and they need to play better, if it's Protoss/Zerg then it's "well played good sir, *golf clap* and here are your buffs."
So, if this was a problem, I will assume roach burrow rushes and ling/bane roach/bane allins are a problem in early game TvZ correct, right blizzard?
Ohhhhhh, i get it. It's only OP if it was a Terran winning in the beginning of the game. It's perfectly fine if it was a P/Z all-in. But a Terran winning with aggression...nerf it immediately.
A bit disgusting.
It's a bit disgusting how in zvt right now you can't all in unless the terran is bad. With current terran builds who abuse hots stuff you can't ever all in a terran as it will just fail hardcore.
On February 23 2013 11:14 avilo wrote: 150/150 is a joke. The fact that this is patched but oracle burst/Protoss early game vs Terran is left the same is a joke.
Looks like we're back to the WOL philosophy - if it's Terran it's imbalanced and they need to play better, if it's Protoss/Zerg then it's "well played good sir, *golf clap* and here are your buffs."
So, if this was a problem, I will assume roach burrow rushes and ling/bane roach/bane allins are a problem in early game TvZ correct, right blizzard?
Ohhhhhh, i get it. It's only OP if it was a Terran winning in the beginning of the game. It's perfectly fine if it was a P/Z all-in. But a Terran winning with aggression...nerf it immediately.
A bit disgusting.
It's a bit disgusting how in zvt right now you can't all in unless the terran is bad. With current terran builds who abuse hots stuff you can't ever all in a terran as it will just fail hardcore.
Well, Terrans in WoL couldn't all in a zerg unless the zerg is bad. Same with HoTS. A lot of all-ins involve the opponent to play non-optimally (not scouting, being greedy).
I feel like reapers have been overlooked. Any zerg who has experienced it will agree, double proxy rax reapers are rough. You don't even need an add-on, so the first three reapers can actually get there before a queen.
On February 23 2013 10:37 SHODAN wrote: Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
Oh god, not this bullshit again.
Mech stands for mechanical, as opposed to biological units. If you want to define it further just say tank-based mech or something. Don't start making your own rules for words because "that's how it was in BW".
Mech is a style, and the style is defined by fucking siege tanks. There is no sub category called "tank-based mech" because mech = tanks, end of story.
Well clearly your definition and blizzard's definitions are in conflict. Since your opinion has no comparative value, we'll go with Blizzard's definition here.
As the guy is saying, Mech doesn't mean marine/marauder with skin of mechanical units. Mech is a particular style. Surprisingly, people wanting a different option weren't asking for the standard ball playstyle but with a different name.
Right! Mechanical units ≠ mech play or mech style play. Stalkers, immortals and colossi are all mechanical units, but they share none of the codified behavior that makes for a mech style. As far as I'm concerned, colossi, thors, immortals and hellbats are all infantry units that walk in and attack the same, usually deathball style. Mech is the antithesis of deathball.
Mech style = tanks, cannon fodder, raiders, static defence and cheap ground-based anti-air. For a mech style to be possible, Blizz need to grant a massive buff to siege mode damage, reduce tank supply to 2, and increase the siege mode set-up time. Thors need to be axed for a cheaper, faster anti-air ground unit. Mech needs a strong unit to protect flanks - widow mines look very promising for this. Speed medivacs definitely help make mech viable vP. But without siege tanks as a core unit it aint gonna happen.
On February 23 2013 11:29 QuasiMachina wrote: I feel like reapers have been overlooked. Any zerg who has experienced it will agree, double proxy rax reapers are rough. You don't even need an add-on, so the first three reapers can actually get there before a queen.
You say "before a queen" as if this is some timing which is set in stone. I guarantee if there was a race between a terran and a zerg to see if the terran could build 3 reapers and have them in the zergs base before the zerg built a queen the zerg would win every time.
On February 23 2013 10:37 SHODAN wrote: Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
Oh god, not this bullshit again.
Mech stands for mechanical, as opposed to biological units. If you want to define it further just say tank-based mech or something. Don't start making your own rules for words because "that's how it was in BW".
Mech is a style, and the style is defined by fucking siege tanks. There is no sub category called "tank-based mech" because mech = tanks, end of story.
Well clearly your definition and blizzard's definitions are in conflict. Since your opinion has no comparative value, we'll go with Blizzard's definition here.
As the guy is saying, Mech doesn't mean marine/marauder with skin of mechanical units. Mech is a particular style. Surprisingly, people wanting a different option weren't asking for the standard ball playstyle but with a different name.
Right! Mechanical units ≠ mech play or mech style play. Stalkers, immortals and colossi are all mechanical units, but they share none of the codified behavior that makes for a mech style. As far as I'm concerned, colossi, thors, immortals and hellbats are all infantry units that walk in and attack the same, usually deathball style. Mech is the antithesis of deathball.
Mech style = tanks, cannon fodder, raiders, static defence and cheap ground-based anti-air. For a mech style to be possible, Blizz need to grant a massive buff to siege mode damage, reduce tank supply to 2, and increase the siege mode set-up time. Thors need to be axed for a cheaper, faster anti-air ground unit. Mech needs a strong unit to protect flanks - widow mines look very promising for this. Speed medivacs definitely help make mech viable vP. But without siege tanks as a core unit it aint gonna happen.
What about mechanical play? I think I've heard Blizz reps sometimes call it mechanical in interviews. Are we allowed to call thor/hellbat mechanical?
"I think terran mech play should revolve around tanks as it creates a unique playstyle from the more common bio play in SC2" is a perfectly fine and valid opinion to have.
"You can't call it mech if it doesn't include units X and Y functioning in a manner Z" is complete wankery and counterproductive to any kind of discussion.
On February 23 2013 11:29 QuasiMachina wrote: I feel like reapers have been overlooked. Any zerg who has experienced it will agree, double proxy rax reapers are rough. You don't even need an add-on, so the first three reapers can actually get there before a queen.
Lets change spwaning pool to 300 gold aswel, I can't believe 6 lings can possibly arrive at my base before I get my first marine/zealot.
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
My patience is slowly wearing out @_@;; They're ignoring such blatant issues with the game, even when it's being talked about on talk shows with pro players. What else do they want from us? We lay the issues out very clearly for them and they still don't even acknowledge they exist :/
This is an okay patch, but I still feel like it's still just a soft cap problem for the battle hellion. It will still be as strong as it was before... which doesn't really fix the problem >.>
guess i figured out i'm not playing terran in the new expansion. this isn't QQ, i just really dont want to struggle against nerfs for the next two years again and have to completely change how i play every 3 months or so just because blizzard can't be patient for the meta to correct itself. i switched to random towards the end of WOL now i feel like i'll enver look back..
i wonder how exciting and fun this game would be had blizzard wait'n'see'd all of the beta patching (minus the obvious ones, like trashing the warhound) instead of kneejerk patching the crap out of everything.
So when terrans lost horribly against 6 Queen openings, they whined but were told to adapt and play better. Then 6 months lately, blizzard makes minor nerfs to infestors.
And when zergs lost horribly against hell bat openings, they whined and Blizzard nerfs the shit out of hell bats twice within a week.
On February 23 2013 10:27 SHODAN wrote: Why the fuck did they say "we want to make mech viable vP". It's 3 weeks before release and nobody in their right mind is going mech. WoL siege tanks are not strong enough to be a core unit vP. Hellbats and thors remain these unmicro-able, silly a-move units.
STC is going mech on his stream, so is Goody. People are doing it, just not in the runs ups to tournaments.
No, no they are not. This is what mech looks like:
Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
Mech = Mechanical.
Just because you have some retarded definition of what Mech is does not change the fact that Mech is short for Mechanical.
If you don't like it, GO PLAY FUCKING BW.
So I assume that we can call protoss play mech play and zerg play as bio?
On February 23 2013 10:37 SHODAN wrote: Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
Oh god, not this bullshit again.
Mech stands for mechanical, as opposed to biological units. If you want to define it further just say tank-based mech or something. Don't start making your own rules for words because "that's how it was in BW".
Mech is a style, and the style is defined by fucking siege tanks. There is no sub category called "tank-based mech" because mech = tanks, end of story.
Well clearly your definition and blizzard's definitions are in conflict. Since your opinion has no comparative value, we'll go with Blizzard's definition here.
As the guy is saying, Mech doesn't mean marine/marauder with skin of mechanical units. Mech is a particular style. Surprisingly, people wanting a different option weren't asking for the standard ball playstyle but with a different name.
Right! Mechanical units ≠ mech play or mech style play. Stalkers, immortals and colossi are all mechanical units, but they share none of the codified behavior that makes for a mech style. As far as I'm concerned, colossi, thors, immortals and hellbats are all infantry units that walk in and attack the same, usually deathball style. Mech is the antithesis of deathball.
Mech style = tanks, cannon fodder, raiders, static defence and cheap ground-based anti-air. For a mech style to be possible, Blizz need to grant a massive buff to siege mode damage, reduce tank supply to 2, and increase the siege mode set-up time. Thors need to be axed for a cheaper, faster anti-air ground unit. Mech needs a strong unit to protect flanks - widow mines look very promising for this. Speed medivacs definitely help make mech viable vP. But without siege tanks as a core unit it aint gonna happen.
What about mechanical play? I think I've heard Blizz reps sometimes call it mechanical in interviews. Are we allowed to call thor/hellbat mechanical?
"I think terran mech play should revolve around tanks as it creates a unique playstyle from the more common bio play in SC2" is a perfectly fine and valid opinion to have.
"You can't call it mech if it doesn't include units X and Y functioning in a manner Z" is complete wankery and counterproductive to any kind of discussion.
"mechanical" has no real meaning when you talk about hellbats & thors. It's just a term to describe them aesthetically. when you play the actual game, they are more or less robot marauders with splash - infantry from a factory. they don't deserve a phrase like "mechanical play" because it makes them sound like they can actually attack and move in a way unique to bio. tank + widow mine is mech play because they have to be completely immobile to shoot. do you understand yet??
On February 23 2013 10:27 SHODAN wrote: Why the fuck did they say "we want to make mech viable vP". It's 3 weeks before release and nobody in their right mind is going mech. WoL siege tanks are not strong enough to be a core unit vP. Hellbats and thors remain these unmicro-able, silly a-move units.
STC is going mech on his stream, so is Goody. People are doing it, just not in the runs ups to tournaments.
No, no they are not. This is what mech looks like:
Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
Mech = Mechanical.
Just because you have some retarded BW definition of what Mech is does not change the fact that Mech is short for Mechanical.
If you don't like it, GO PLAY FUCKING BW.
Mech is a simple way to express an idea of position based play. No one actually cares whether the units are mechanical or biological, they just want the playstyle that came with BW mech.
On February 23 2013 10:27 SHODAN wrote: Why the fuck did they say "we want to make mech viable vP". It's 3 weeks before release and nobody in their right mind is going mech. WoL siege tanks are not strong enough to be a core unit vP. Hellbats and thors remain these unmicro-able, silly a-move units.
STC is going mech on his stream, so is Goody. People are doing it, just not in the runs ups to tournaments.
No, no they are not. This is what mech looks like:
Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
Mech = Mechanical.
Just because you have some retarded BW definition of what Mech is does not change the fact that Mech is short for Mechanical.
If you don't like it, GO PLAY FUCKING BW.
Mech is a simple way to express an idea of position based play. No one actually cares whether the units are mechanical or biological, they just want the playstyle that came with BW mech.
Then they should play BW.
Mech = Mechanical.
Bio = Biological.
Alright, apparently someone hates life way too much and is way too negative/serious for his own good. Take the blue pill and just chill, hater.
On February 23 2013 10:27 SHODAN wrote: Why the fuck did they say "we want to make mech viable vP". It's 3 weeks before release and nobody in their right mind is going mech. WoL siege tanks are not strong enough to be a core unit vP. Hellbats and thors remain these unmicro-able, silly a-move units.
STC is going mech on his stream, so is Goody. People are doing it, just not in the runs ups to tournaments.
No, no they are not. This is what mech looks like:
Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
Mech = Mechanical.
Just because you have some retarded BW definition of what Mech is does not change the fact that Mech is short for Mechanical.
If you don't like it, GO PLAY FUCKING BW.
Mech is a simple way to express an idea of position based play. No one actually cares whether the units are mechanical or biological, they just want the playstyle that came with BW mech.
Then they should play BW.
Mech = Mechanical.
Bio = Biological.
but... the overwhelming majority of fans want a similar style of mech to be made viable in SC2. you are missing the whole fucking point. we don't want to play BW. we just want a spiritual successor to mech
yeah i got super pissed at blizzard. I was in the middle of a good winning streak and got my stream up and shit and freaking blizzard decides to upload the patch while I'm in mid game..... On topic: This is going to make my TvP build a lot harder now
On February 23 2013 10:12 Dvriel wrote: 150/150 Blizzard,really??? What about TvP mech??? Almost two weeks to launch and you seem to do abslutly nothing. Cant wait to see the first GSL after the launch. I bet we wont see any new strategies and there will be no Hellbats and Widowmines. So sad.
To be honest I would be happy if the widow mine didn't make it to launch. Blizzard messed up when they removed the warhound and changed the widow mine instead of changing the warhound and removing the widow mine.
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
My patience is slowly wearing out @_@;; They're ignoring such blatant issues with the game, even when it's being talked about on talk shows with pro players. What else do they want from us? We lay the issues out very clearly for them and they still don't even acknowledge they exist :/
This is an okay patch, but I still feel like it's still just a soft cap problem for the battle hellion. It will still be as strong as it was before... which doesn't really fix the problem >.>
I'm sure they don't ignore it, even though they don't say anything. I think they are especially hesitant to nerf protoss's air or buff other race's antiair, as the only thing protosses are getting in HotS are new air units, so I can understand that. And given that it's more a lategame problem, it's not as easy to diagnose as something that needs to be fixed as very early game things. They're doing their common 'lets wait and see if players can come up with their own solutions.'
Up until recently I felt like most zergs did, that the right skytoss army is nearly unbeatable or completely unreasonable to beat, but I've recently discovered that the most talked about lategame 'unbeatable' composition, tempests/HTs, does maybe have a reasonable way for zergs to deal with it. And that's simply that a pure, or nearly pure hydralisk army is reasonably effective if and only if you engage in such a way to make a gigantic arc, while also never letting them clump up to let too many get hit by storm.
The problem is that tempests are just so incredibly awful vs hydras that storm is really the only way to beat the hydras, and if you are completely surrounded by hydras who are in an arc (standing in a line, shoulder to shoulder), storm isn't actually that effective at dealing with them. Then you can add in some storm dodging with hydra's faster move speed, and it's not problematic to not be attacking and only running as again the tempests are just so bad vs hydras.
Of course this only works if they're depending on HTs to support their tempests, rather than colossus which would be very problematic for a hydra army obviously. vipers are the obvious way to react to colossus, but with mass tempests shooting down vipers that's a pretty big problem for them as vipers dont fair very well. the protoss must have vision of course, but that's often not an issue as most protosses keep an oracle or 2 just for that sick reveal ability that goes so well with tempests.
On February 23 2013 10:27 SHODAN wrote: Why the fuck did they say "we want to make mech viable vP". It's 3 weeks before release and nobody in their right mind is going mech. WoL siege tanks are not strong enough to be a core unit vP. Hellbats and thors remain these unmicro-able, silly a-move units.
STC is going mech on his stream, so is Goody. People are doing it, just not in the runs ups to tournaments.
No, no they are not. This is what mech looks like:
Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
Mech = Mechanical.
Just because you have some retarded definition of what Mech is does not change the fact that Mech is short for Mechanical.
If you don't like it, GO PLAY FUCKING BW.
So I assume that we can call protoss play mech play and zerg play as bio?
Protoss usually have to mix both Mechanical and Biological units together to have a viable composition, so distinguishing between Biological and Mechanical is redundant. The best you can do is distinguish between Robo/Twilight/Stargate, but you need a mix of at least two of those to possess a viable late-game composition. Zerg don't have Mechanical units, so saying that a Zerg player is going Bio is also redundant.
In both cases, upgrades aren't split down Biological/Mechanical lines, adding to the redundancy.
Try again with your silly response, child.
Your response contradicts yourself. Either it is mech or it is bio by definition. Who cares if it is a viable composition?
On February 23 2013 12:36 nkr wrote: So many people who want race X to be OP for a while because race Y has recently been OP in WoL.
What about balance?
I think even most terrans agree that hell bats needed change. But tech lab + 150/150 + 110 seconds? It just screams 'Queen patch' to me. Blizzard over reacting to early game strategies and just let the late game stuff unchecked. I would be find if they made this change but also said they would be looking into terran late game (which is still crap).
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
My patience is slowly wearing out @_@;; They're ignoring such blatant issues with the game, even when it's being talked about on talk shows with pro players. What else do they want from us? We lay the issues out very clearly for them and they still don't even acknowledge they exist :/
This is an okay patch, but I still feel like it's still just a soft cap problem for the battle hellion. It will still be as strong as it was before... which doesn't really fix the problem >.>
I'm sure they don't ignore it, even though they don't say anything. I think they are especially hesitant to nerf protoss's air or buff other race's antiair, as the only thing protosses are getting in HotS are new air units, so I can understand that. And given that it's more a lategame problem, it's not as easy to diagnose as something that needs to be fixed as very early game things. They're doing their common 'lets wait and see if players can come up with their own solutions.'
Up until recently I felt like most zergs did, that the right skytoss army is nearly unbeatable or completely unreasonable to beat, but I've recently discovered that the most talked about lategame 'unbeatable' composition, tempests/HTs, does maybe have a reasonable way for zergs to deal with it. And that's simply that a pure, or nearly pure hydralisk army is reasonably effective if and only if you engage in such a way to make a gigantic arc, while also never letting them clump up to let too many get hit by storm.
The problem is that tempests are just so incredibly awful vs hydras that storm is really the only way to beat the hydras, and if you are completely surrounded by hydras who are in an arc (standing in a line, shoulder to shoulder), storm isn't actually that effective at dealing with them. Then you can add in some storm dodging with hydra's faster move speed, and it's not problematic to not be attacking and only running as again the tempests are just so bad vs hydras.
Of course this only works if they're depending on HTs to support their tempests, rather than colossus which would be very problematic for a hydra army obviously. vipers are the obvious way to react to colossus, but with mass tempests shooting down vipers that's a pretty big problem for them as vipers dont fair very well. the protoss must have vision of course, but that's often not an issue as most protosses keep an oracle or 2 just for that sick reveal ability that goes so well with tempests.
If early game things are easier to spot and fix, what about oracles?
but seriously, this sounds reasonable. 150/150 sounds steep to me, but i never play terran so i dunno. revert their cargo space back to 2 and remove the bio tag and i'll be pretty happy with where this unit is for now.
On February 23 2013 12:46 neoghaleon55 wrote: They said this is the most pressing issue that requires immediate attention. Hopefully, Blizz will consider the other broken aspects of the game next.
Would probably make terrans feel better if they list out the other aspects they are looking into. They just nerfed the cargo requirement recently and then do this? It just feels like they are always looking at terran early game first for nerfs.
I mean Blizzard said they want to make TvP mech viable and yet they created air toss.
On February 23 2013 12:36 nkr wrote: So many people who want race X to be OP for a while because race Y has recently been OP in WoL.
What about balance?
I think even most terrans agree that hell bats needed change. But tech lab + 150/150 + 110 seconds? It just screams 'Queen patch' to me. Blizzard over reacting to early game strategies and just let the late game stuff unchecked. I would be find if they made this change but also said they would be looking into terran late game (which is still crap).
I think most Terrans agree that it was something to keep an eye on. We know how powerful hellbats are, but we also look around and see how powerful skytoss is, and how little Zerg is willing to use their new units and upgrades in their matchups (outside of mass ultra). These are all things we should be watching and analyzing to see if minor changes need to be made after a large sample of changes.
However, this is just more of the same that we saw in WoL. "Let's wait and see..." for potential Protoss and Zerg nerfs, "OMG TERRAN IS BREAKING OUR GAME FIXITFIXITFIXITFIXITFIXITFIXIT!!!" for Terran nerfs.
On February 23 2013 12:46 neoghaleon55 wrote: They said this is the most pressing issue that requires immediate attention. Hopefully, Blizz will consider the other broken aspects of the game next.
Would probably make terrans feel better if they list out the other aspects they are looking into. They just nerfed the cargo requirement recently and then do this? It just feels like they are always looking at terran early game first for nerfs.
I mean Blizzard said they want to make TvP mech viable and yet they created air toss.
i think the shared armor upgrade and high impact payload were meant to help deal with that? HIP seems pretty weak from what i've seen so i wouldn't be surprised if it got buffed eventually, but they've obviously got their eyes on this issue. i think they're nervous to shut air toss down too hard cos then pvt just becomes wings of liberty pvt plus widow mines and helbats - an across the board net nerf for protoss in that match-up. they'll have to work out solutions for this that don't involve making air toss pointless.
On February 23 2013 12:36 nkr wrote: So many people who want race X to be OP for a while because race Y has recently been OP in WoL.
What about balance?
I think even most terrans agree that hell bats needed change. But tech lab + 150/150 + 110 seconds? It just screams 'Queen patch' to me. Blizzard over reacting to early game strategies and just let the late game stuff unchecked. I would be find if they made this change but also said they would be looking into terran late game (which is still crap).
I think most Terrans agree that it was something to keep an eye on. We know how powerful hellbats are, but we also look around and see how powerful skytoss is, and how little Zerg is willing to use their new units and upgrades in their matchups (outside of mass ultra). These are all things we should be watching and analyzing to see if minor changes need to be made after a large sample of changes.
However, this is just more of the same that we saw in WoL. "Let's wait and see..." for potential Protoss and Zerg nerfs, "OMG TERRAN IS BREAKING OUR GAME FIXITFIXITFIXITFIXITFIXITFIXIT!!!" for Terran nerfs.
You're really complaining about time-frames? It took GomTvTvTvTvTvTvT happening before Blizzard started taking a serious look at Terran in WoL (outside of obviously broken strategies like 5 Rax Reaper et. al.)
And there were several terran patches during the era (ghosts, barracks, hellions)... How long between queen patch and infestor patch?
On February 23 2013 12:36 nkr wrote: So many people who want race X to be OP for a while because race Y has recently been OP in WoL.
What about balance?
I think even most terrans agree that hell bats needed change. But tech lab + 150/150 + 110 seconds? It just screams 'Queen patch' to me. Blizzard over reacting to early game strategies and just let the late game stuff unchecked. I would be find if they made this change but also said they would be looking into terran late game (which is still crap).
I think most Terrans agree that it was something to keep an eye on. We know how powerful hellbats are, but we also look around and see how powerful skytoss is, and how little Zerg is willing to use their new units and upgrades in their matchups (outside of mass ultra). These are all things we should be watching and analyzing to see if minor changes need to be made after a large sample of changes.
However, this is just more of the same that we saw in WoL. "Let's wait and see..." for potential Protoss and Zerg nerfs, "OMG TERRAN IS BREAKING OUR GAME FIXITFIXITFIXITFIXITFIXITFIXIT!!!" for Terran nerfs.
You're really complaining about time-frames? It took GomTvTvTvTvTvTvT happening before Blizzard started taking a serious look at Terran in WoL (outside of obviously broken strategies like 5 Rax Reaper et. al.)
I'm sorry but that's just plain wrong. Terran nerfs happened frequently in reaction to the meta. Which was dumb because the biggest issue was the maps. Balancing based on Steppes of War was a mistake.
On February 23 2013 10:27 SHODAN wrote: Why the fuck did they say "we want to make mech viable vP". It's 3 weeks before release and nobody in their right mind is going mech. WoL siege tanks are not strong enough to be a core unit vP. Hellbats and thors remain these unmicro-able, silly a-move units.
STC is going mech on his stream, so is Goody. People are doing it, just not in the runs ups to tournaments.
No, no they are not. This is what mech looks like:
Mass hellbat/thor/medivacs marching in a ball across the map is not mech.
Mech = Mechanical.
Just because you have some retarded BW definition of what Mech is does not change the fact that Mech is short for Mechanical.
If you don't like it, GO PLAY FUCKING BW.
Mech is a simple way to express an idea of position based play. No one actually cares whether the units are mechanical or biological, they just want the playstyle that came with BW mech.
the play style that came with mech is doable in sc2 imo, especially with the hots changes to mech but this is theorycrafting of a noob player. i am masters but this means nothing in the grander scheme of things. also, we cant just go play broodwar because theres way less games, most of them are cheating anyways, the players that still play it are lightyears ahead of me at this point even w/ my moderate experience in bw so it's not going to be fun, ETC.
theres just notre ally a reason to play anymore, i dont win because sc2 has cripple my mechanics, lol. mech wasn't unstopppably strong in bw but had solid timings - i wish this was the case for sc2. The reason i dont play mech as terran anymore is because its far too reactive of a style for a game like sc2. Just think about it.. Why spend hours of frustration analyzing when you should have made the most minute composition changes against a race that can literally warp in or morph in 20 units at a time, a NEW composition for you to tackle. Its just far more difficult because shit is made SO FAST in this game and the battles happen SO FUCKING FAST .
edit: the question isnt "can mech work" cause yes it obviously can. it has all the tools (or the starport combination with it does) to stop all the threats you can beat it with, but its more of a "Why even?" because its way harder question
edit;
what bothers me the most having played this patch a bit is that i can no longer do cc first or rax fe > hellion > raxes + ebays + 3rd > armory + medivacs > hellbat marine timing into standard play. it was a really nice bonus to hellions to be able to have a reliable timing attack after a standard opening. right now hellion banshee is getting pulled back to it's main base to defend roaches, in almost every game vs strong zerg players. you often lose hellions to all ins or bad control, this gave me a reason to preserve them and they didn't feel so useless once roaches were out (like useless so where you run in for drones, because they're really just waste of supply and i dont want to have to manage this unit anymore). there is no way i will be researching this upgrade for a timing after opening standard now.......... there is just not enough time, i will die to mutas or collosus or whatever. 150 gas is fucking crazy?>?
On February 23 2013 12:36 nkr wrote: So many people who want race X to be OP for a while because race Y has recently been OP in WoL.
What about balance?
I think even most terrans agree that hell bats needed change. But tech lab + 150/150 + 110 seconds? It just screams 'Queen patch' to me. Blizzard over reacting to early game strategies and just let the late game stuff unchecked. I would be find if they made this change but also said they would be looking into terran late game (which is still crap).
I think most Terrans agree that it was something to keep an eye on. We know how powerful hellbats are, but we also look around and see how powerful skytoss is, and how little Zerg is willing to use their new units and upgrades in their matchups (outside of mass ultra). These are all things we should be watching and analyzing to see if minor changes need to be made after a large sample of changes.
However, this is just more of the same that we saw in WoL. "Let's wait and see..." for potential Protoss and Zerg nerfs, "OMG TERRAN IS BREAKING OUR GAME FIXITFIXITFIXITFIXITFIXITFIXIT!!!" for Terran nerfs.
You're really complaining about time-frames? It took GomTvTvTvTvTvTvT happening before Blizzard started taking a serious look at Terran in WoL (outside of obviously broken strategies like 5 Rax Reaper et. al.)
I'm sorry but that's just plain wrong. Terran nerfs happened frequently in reaction to the meta. Which was dumb because the biggest issue was the maps. Balancing based on Steppes of War was a mistake.
You're being delusional and you're in possession of a selective memory. Obvious changes to the other races were treated in much the same way once pro-level play showed that problems were present. For example, Templar and their Amulets.
Actually, most of the nerfs were pretty quick except for the infestor. Unfortunately, that happened at the end of WoL and is the freshest in our memory.
As for the whole air army thing, vipers continue to be too underused for me to really want to demand changes. Skytoss is definitely really strong, but I've never had anybody use vipers effectively...
That said, if they make a change, they should definitely change blinding cloud to affect EITHER air or spellcasters. I think either of those would be excellent changes.
Also to point out to anybody who might not be aware: You can still make hellbats with a factory and reactor after an armory. You just can't switch back and forth. I don't really see this affecting much macro play. And if you consider it a timing nerf, it's not 110 seconds, its 50 (or 60? However long an armory takes). Because you're delaying your hellbats that long, until you can make them. There's also walk time true, but at least in TvP any early hellbat pressure usually involves a medivac.
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play. I've been shut down many times against masters and GM that know had to defend early Hellbat pushes - you just don't take a fast third. But 2 nerfs to the Hellbat in 2 weeks is a little overkill...the unit should just be removed from the game and now we just have Terran WoL units.
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
I'm talking mainly early harassment and supply level requirement. It's a large investment to use them early on for anything. Reaper? DPS a joke. Banshee? No evo requirement and queendralisk. Now we're just left with good old crappy hellions.
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play. I've been shut down many times against masters and GM that know had to defend early Hellbat pushes - you just don't take a fast third. But 2 nerfs to the Hellbat in 2 weeks is a little overkill...the unit should just be removed from the game and now we just have Terran WoL units.
That's why you don't drop widow mines... it hardly ever works. Burrow time takes way too long, and the splash radius isn't very high. The hellbat itself isn't really being nerfed that badly. It's great for macro play, and it was really really broken from a ZvT standpoint. You literally could not ever make lings. Normal hellions would instantly go from map control to flat out kill the zerg. It was silly. And personally this doesn't really affect PvT.
On February 23 2013 12:36 nkr wrote: So many people who want race X to be OP for a while because race Y has recently been OP in WoL.
What about balance?
I think even most terrans agree that hell bats needed change. But tech lab + 150/150 + 110 seconds? It just screams 'Queen patch' to me. Blizzard over reacting to early game strategies and just let the late game stuff unchecked. I would be find if they made this change but also said they would be looking into terran late game (which is still crap).
I think most Terrans agree that it was something to keep an eye on. We know how powerful hellbats are, but we also look around and see how powerful skytoss is, and how little Zerg is willing to use their new units and upgrades in their matchups (outside of mass ultra). These are all things we should be watching and analyzing to see if minor changes need to be made after a large sample of changes.
However, this is just more of the same that we saw in WoL. "Let's wait and see..." for potential Protoss and Zerg nerfs, "OMG TERRAN IS BREAKING OUR GAME FIXITFIXITFIXITFIXITFIXITFIXIT!!!" for Terran nerfs.
You're really complaining about time-frames? It took GomTvTvTvTvTvTvT happening before Blizzard started taking a serious look at Terran in WoL (outside of obviously broken strategies like 5 Rax Reaper et. al.)
I'm sorry but that's just plain wrong. Terran nerfs happened frequently in reaction to the meta. Which was dumb because the biggest issue was the maps. Balancing based on Steppes of War was a mistake.
You're being delusional and you're in possession of a selective memory. Obvious changes to the other races were treated in much the same way once pro-level play showed that problems were present. For example, Templar and their Amulets.
i guess you blacked out from like may 2012 until now huh?
KA was the same... was collosus voidray? no, it was given time to develop. eventually people realized it was really bad against infestors, and now we see a lot of prism harss with grav. boost. i think that style was worth the wait to develop. what about the roach ling bane? or the speedling timing? those were just as common and likely had similar win % to those earlier terran builds (okay.. maybe not proxy 11's on 60 second rax speed on all medium-small maps). terrans adapted and added depots EARLIER on the lowground, and in more intelligent locations, in front of bunkers, bunkers not being stupidly exposed out in the front but near the ramp with less surface area for lings (also forcing damage on roaches if they try to run by) etc. they also (you may have not noticed. i am a race picker/random so i have noticed) have all learned how to micro scvs vs banes/ling all ins and things like that
its interesting that you call it selective memory.. you can literally look back at the tournaments where certain builds came to prominence, and see that quickly after a patch was made "slayersblueflame = mlg anaheim" "gsl the first season forgg was there but i dont remember t.t = hellion banshee into fast 3 CC" (was later nerfed by giving queens range. terrans could expand too safely behind the hellions/banshee and always force roaches)
i think a lot of it was justified, but its hardly fair to call this guy delusional. He's pretty much calling it like it is, but putting the maps twist on it (which i dont agree with. map sizes vary a lot but 11 11 was far too powerful on every map size in the terran vs zerg match)
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
I know you are a pro player. But how could prove that it is still terran favored only after a few hours with this patch? Many zerg said this about queen patch as well and look how that turned out.
Also, did you think WoL was zerg favored at the end? Or you think 'the better player won'?
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
One of the best unit in the game you say ? This is so ignorant. You can't even hold-fire or target fire, it's a totally random "unit" that his ruled by your opponent (he's the one who triggers the mine) and by the computer (who choses the target). A code S terran can hardly make it work better than a bronze terran.
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
I'm talking mainly early harassment and supply level requirement. It's a large investment to use them early on for anything. Reaper? DPS a joke. Banshee? No evo requirement and queendralisk. Now we're just left with good old crappy hellions.
Reapers are super good vs zerg early. Their DPs is not an issue, they never before speedlings out, and their regen allows them to quite easily beat queens. There's a reason that 9/10 terrans I face go reaper they're anything but useless and proxy reapers are a huge threat for zergs too. Banshees are still useful vs zerg, its not like the only thing stopping zerg from not taking any damage from banshees was evo chamber requirement.. Hellion 2 banshee will always be useful with good control. Spores can't cover all, esp since most zergs go for 3 base. Hellions are far from crappy wtf..
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
One of the best unit in the game you say ? This is so ignorant. You can't even hold-fire or target fire, it's a totally random "unit" that his ruled by your opponent (he's the one who triggers the mine) and by the computer (who choses the target). A code S terran can hardly make it work better than a bronze terran.
I wouldn't go that far. The higher skill terrans will have better position and army compositions to take better advantage of it. But yes, it isn't really micro-able in combat situations.
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
One of the best unit in the game you say ? This is so ignorant. You can't even hold-fire or target fire, it's a totally random "unit" that his ruled by your opponent (he's the one who triggers the mine) and by the computer (who choses the target). A code S terran can hardly make it work better than a bronze terran.
I think the widow mine is bad because of the lack of a "hold fire" command, but you actually can select the target in the 1s it takes to activate the mine. It's not very practical, but it's still possible.
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
I know you are a pro player. But how could prove that it is still terran favored only after a few hours with this patch? Many zerg said this about queen patch as well and look how that turned out.
Also, did you think WoL was zerg favored at the end? Or you think 'the better player won'?
All zergs know that ZvT has been zerg favored for months in WOL. It's still terran favored because hellbat rushes weren't even that good before. No good zerg was having trouble with hellbat rushing. If terran opened 1 base hellion, that's just a bad build, and if they go 1 rax CC into hellion or CC first into hellion you can scout and have either roaches or banelings out easily by the time they do a hellbat attack. Of course this patch will make zerg slightly stronger vs terran since zerg can now play a bit greedier, but the reason it's going to still be terran favored is because of medivac speed boost being so strong (huge speed boost and very short cd), siege mode being free, and widow mines, along with fungal being much worse against terran.
On February 23 2013 12:36 nkr wrote: So many people who want race X to be OP for a while because race Y has recently been OP in WoL.
What about balance?
I think even most terrans agree that hell bats needed change. But tech lab + 150/150 + 110 seconds? It just screams 'Queen patch' to me. Blizzard over reacting to early game strategies and just let the late game stuff unchecked. I would be find if they made this change but also said they would be looking into terran late game (which is still crap).
I think most Terrans agree that it was something to keep an eye on. We know how powerful hellbats are, but we also look around and see how powerful skytoss is, and how little Zerg is willing to use their new units and upgrades in their matchups (outside of mass ultra). These are all things we should be watching and analyzing to see if minor changes need to be made after a large sample of changes.
However, this is just more of the same that we saw in WoL. "Let's wait and see..." for potential Protoss and Zerg nerfs, "OMG TERRAN IS BREAKING OUR GAME FIXITFIXITFIXITFIXITFIXITFIXIT!!!" for Terran nerfs.
You're really complaining about time-frames? It took GomTvTvTvTvTvTvT happening before Blizzard started taking a serious look at Terran in WoL (outside of obviously broken strategies like 5 Rax Reaper et. al.)
I'm sorry but that's just plain wrong. Terran nerfs happened frequently in reaction to the meta. Which was dumb because the biggest issue was the maps. Balancing based on Steppes of War was a mistake.
You're being delusional and you're in possession of a selective memory. Obvious changes to the other races were treated in much the same way once pro-level play showed that problems were present. For example, Templar and their Amulets.
i guess you blacked out from like may 2012 until now huh?
KA was the same... was collosus voidray? no, it was given time to develop. eventually people realized it was really bad against infestors, and now we see a lot of prism harss with grav. boost. i think that style was worth the wait to develop. what about the roach ling bane? or the speedling timing? those were just as common and likely had similar win % to those earlier terran builds (okay.. maybe not proxy 11's on 60 second rax speed on all medium-small maps). terrans adapted and added depots EARLIER on the lowground, and in more intelligent locations, in front of bunkers, bunkers not being stupidly exposed out in the front but near the ramp with less surface area for lings (also forcing damage on roaches if they try to run by) etc. they also (you may have not noticed. i am a race picker/random so i have noticed) have all learned how to micro scvs vs banes/ling all ins and things like that
its interesting that you call it selective memory.. you can literally look back at the tournaments where certain builds came to prominence, and see that quickly after a patch was made "slayersblueflame = mlg anaheim" "gsl the first season forgg was there but i dont remember t.t = hellion banshee into fast 3 CC" (was later nerfed by giving queens range. terrans could expand too safely behind the hellions/banshee and always force roaches)
i think a lot of it was justified, but its hardly fair to call this guy delusional. He's pretty much calling it like it is, but putting the maps twist on it (which i dont agree with. map sizes vary a lot but 11 11 was far too powerful on every map size in the terran vs zerg match)
I agree. Queen patch destroyed Terran w/l against Zerg and they haven't won a GSL since. The w/l is significantly has the highest gap (moreso than any other matchup). I enjoy how Terran is quickly judged as OP in a 2 week time frame with such a small amount of games played - Code S players are still finishing WoL. I don't know what GM's Blizzard are polling (mid, low level?) most are barcoded anyway. It just seems like a double standard to me that Blizzard waits 7 months to realize there is an issue with the infestor and finally addresses it in HoTS. And they don't connect the dots when new Zergs exploded on the scene after the queen patch winning many large NA and EU tournaments. Instead of calling it OP, it was classified as "new emerging talent."
I'm not against reworking the hellbat if it is too strong, but I criticize Blizzard for making two drastic changes to the unit in a two week time frame when they took months re-evaluating other races. Remember, Terran really didn't get any new units in the expansion. The Window mine is the most notable but not a game changer late game like a Tempest or Viper/Swarm Host; instead they just repackaged the same units and put a crappy "hope you feel better" bow on it.
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
One of the best unit in the game you say ? This is so ignorant. You can't even hold-fire or target fire, it's a totally random "unit" that his ruled by your opponent (he's the one who triggers the mine) and by the computer (who choses the target). A code S terran can hardly make it work better than a bronze terran.
No its you who is ignorant. I'm living with two professional terran players (Forgg and Dayshi) and we are all playing HOTS full time. Both of them think that widow mine is one of the best units in the game for terran in TvZ. And saying its totally random and ruled by his opponent is completely untrue. Widow mines have a roughly 1 second delay between when a unit comes in range of it and when it goes off. You can't usually set widow mines off with a few lings because bio will kill them in the 1 second before the widow mine attacks the units. Besides this, you can target fire units with the widow mines to achieve maximum damage.
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
One of the best unit in the game you say ? This is so ignorant. You can't even hold-fire or target fire, it's a totally random "unit" that his ruled by your opponent (he's the one who triggers the mine) and by the computer (who choses the target). A code S terran can hardly make it work better than a bronze terran.
Widow mines, I predict will have the highest skill ceiling, or the provide top top pros a way to really differentiate themselves from others.The amount of uses people will come up with this unit go beyond any of our imagination s IMO. And i'm calling it now, because so many newer/lower lvl players just see the obvious limitations of this unit, like if unprotected they can be made useless for 40 seconds just by 1 unit activating it..they will be all the more ecstatic when players like mkp/flash use them in smart/effective/creative ways. All sorts of sick micro/positioning/repositioning of mines..
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
I know you are a pro player. But how could prove that it is still terran favored only after a few hours with this patch? Many zerg said this about queen patch as well and look how that turned out.
Also, did you think WoL was zerg favored at the end? Or you think 'the better player won'?
All zergs know that ZvT has been zerg favored for months in WOL. It's still terran favored because hellbat rushes weren't even that good before. No good zerg was having trouble with hellbat rushing. If terran opened 1 base hellion, that's just a bad build, and if they go 1 rax CC into hellion or CC first into hellion you can scout and have either roaches or banelings out easily by the time they do a hellbat attack. Of course this patch will make zerg slightly stronger vs terran since zerg can now play a bit greedier, but the reason it's going to still be terran favored is because of medivac speed boost being so strong (huge speed boost and very short cd), siege mode being free, and widow mines, along with fungal being much worse against terran.
I dunno. Most pro zergs seemed to tout the 'the better player won' for a long long time in WoL.
As for zerg getting 'slightly' stronger vs terran since they can now play a bit greedier. Isn't this the same as the Queen patch? All that patch really did was allow zergs to play greedier and looked what happened.
Being able to play greedier in the early game has HUGE ramifications in the mid/late game because everything snowballs. Hellbats were a way to force the roach warren from zergs. Everything else can be dealt with by speedlings, Queens and a couple spores.
Many people go on about how terran has the most diverse openings which is true. But if the same BO/comp from zerg can counter most of them, how advantageous is it really to have that many openings?
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
I'm talking mainly early harassment and supply level requirement. It's a large investment to use them early on for anything. Reaper? DPS a joke. Banshee? No evo requirement and queendralisk. Now we're just left with good old crappy hellions.
Reapers are super good vs zerg early. Their DPs is not an issue, they never before speedlings out, and their regen allows them to quite easily beat queens. There's a reason that 9/10 terrans I face go reaper they're anything but useless and proxy reapers are a huge threat for zergs too. Banshees are still useful vs zerg, its not like the only thing stopping zerg from not taking any damage from banshees was evo chamber requirement.. Hellion 2 banshee will always be useful with good control. Spores can't cover all, esp since most zergs go for 3 base. Hellions are far from crappy wtf..
I open reaper expand versus many Zerg but I dont make more than one. I don't call 1-2 drone kills harassment - maybe map control but it doesn't put the Zerg behind. And, yes, versus 6 queendralisks openers with transfuse (very common)helions are pretty crappy.
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
One of the best unit in the game you say ? This is so ignorant. You can't even hold-fire or target fire, it's a totally random "unit" that his ruled by your opponent (he's the one who triggers the mine) and by the computer (who choses the target). A code S terran can hardly make it work better than a bronze terran.
Widow mines, I predict will have the highest skill ceiling, or the provide top top pros a way to really differentiate themselves from others.The amount of uses people will come up with this unit go beyond any of our imagination s IMO. And i'm calling it now, because so many newer/lower lvl players just see the obvious limitations of this unit, like if unprotected they can be made useless for 40 seconds just by 1 unit activating it..they will be all the more ecstatic when players like mkp/flash use them in smart/effective/creative ways. All sorts of sick micro/positioning/repositioning of mines..
Maybe. I feel like a rat in a maze with several paths to find the cheese and Blizzard has put road blocks to all, once valid, paths except one - the Window Mine. The question now is, "Do we have any option but the Window Mine" for early harass. I suppose there is always WoL openers - but this is HoTs. Aren't we looking for something new?
It isn't that big a change for most builds. it just helps with being able to pump hellions to be your future hellbats while waiting for the armory to build.
I still think you can hit potent hellbat timings, perhaps people will make mines instead of hellions while building the armory? After that just pump hellbats as normal. The hellion contain into hellbat finishing blow was just to seamless and the upgrade is good to at least delay that transition.
On February 23 2013 10:04 ssg wrote: Great, Terran needed another useless unit.
Great, another terran bitching before trying out the changes.
It's still strong as hell. It still decimates lings/zealots/marines. It's still good for drops. It's still the same fucking unit. It just takes longer to get. Oh no, you can't win games at 7 minutes by having 8 of them anymore. Good.
Marines handily counter hellbats with stutter step micro.
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
One of the best unit in the game you say ? This is so ignorant. You can't even hold-fire or target fire, it's a totally random "unit" that his ruled by your opponent (he's the one who triggers the mine) and by the computer (who choses the target). A code S terran can hardly make it work better than a bronze terran.
No its you who is ignorant. I'm living with two professional terran players (Forgg and Dayshi) and we are all playing HOTS full time. Both of them think that widow mine is one of the best units in the game for terran in TvZ. And saying its totally random and ruled by his opponent is completely untrue. Widow mines have a roughly 1 second delay between when a unit comes in range of it and when it goes off. You can't usually set widow mines off with a few lings because bio will kill them in the 1 second before the widow mine attacks the units. Besides this, you can target fire units with the widow mines to achieve maximum damage.
whenever I try to do that it ignores what I do o.O (it just goes and kills the closest unit)
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
One of the best unit in the game you say ? This is so ignorant. You can't even hold-fire or target fire, it's a totally random "unit" that his ruled by your opponent (he's the one who triggers the mine) and by the computer (who choses the target). A code S terran can hardly make it work better than a bronze terran.
No its you who is ignorant. I'm living with two professional terran players (Forgg and Dayshi) and we are all playing HOTS full time. Both of them think that widow mine is one of the best units in the game for terran in TvZ. And saying its totally random and ruled by his opponent is completely untrue. Widow mines have a roughly 1 second delay between when a unit comes in range of it and when it goes off. You can't usually set widow mines off with a few lings because bio will kill them in the 1 second before the widow mine attacks the units. Besides this, you can target fire units with the widow mines to achieve maximum damage.
How is that completely untrue ? Let's imagine you can actually find the time to target fire during that 1sec timing window, it's still rely on your opponent to trigger it or not, he's the one who decides "hey, you've 1sec to decide who dies or the computer will do it for you", that's what i'm referring to when calling it random: it's out of your hand to decide if you want to use that fucking missile, unlike the baneling. In BW it's fine because mines are free, take no supply and no production time, but in sc2 you end up with a unit that can be triggered by a 0 supply unit (changeling finally have a better role?) and the mine goes inactive for 40 sec. Killing off the zerg unit that baits the mine sounds do-able in theory, but you can hardly clean the whole area in < 1sec in most situations.
From what I've seen so far, using the mine does not require great skills from the terran. Or, it takes way too much skill because of that short 1 sec window, but I don't see how pros could even think about manually targetting during 200/200 battles. They won't and the missile will strike randomly. The mine can deal great damage, no doubt about it, even way too much in some situations and can be game breaking. Strong unit ? Yes it is in some cases, but a good one ? In its current state, I say no, it can be improved because right now the terran makes close to no decision once the mine is burrowed.
Are they keeping the cargo change as well? Honestly they should revert the cargo space change and just switch Hellbats back to mechanical. It doesn't make any sense that the unit can be healed by medivacs.. I know they want to buff bio with all the changes in HOTS but having hellbats as biological does not make any sense to me.
On February 23 2013 12:17 vthree wrote: So when terrans lost horribly against 6 Queen openings, they whined but were told to adapt and play better. Then 6 months lately, blizzard makes minor nerfs to infestors.
And when zergs lost horribly against hell bat openings, they whined and Blizzard nerfs the shit out of hell bats twice within a week.
Quite the pattern eh? And with catz leading the charge on hellbat's being "op" (they aren't) it'll be interesting to see if blizzard continues on in the "nerf everything Terran direction."
On February 23 2013 14:30 BrassMonkey27 wrote: Are they keeping the cargo change as well? Honestly they should revert the cargo space change and just switch Hellbats back to mechanical. It doesn't make any sense that the unit can be healed by medivacs.. I know they want to buff bio with all the changes in HOTS but having hellbats as biological does not make any sense to me.
At some point, if hellbat balancing gets more and more awkward, shouldn't Blizzard just give up and completely separate hellbats and hellions into two separate units? As somebody who is only casually following HotS beta, I don't even know if they have anything in common anymore.
If you guys want the three biggest balance issues with the game right now across all 3 races, here they are:
1) Tempest too supply efficient/too much HP. Needs to be back to original 6 supply for TvP/ZvP lategame. 2) Hellbat needs to not be able to be healed and be turned back into a mech unit. Affects TvZ in Zergs favor, affects mech TvP in Terrans favor (ever so slightly on both of those). 3) TvP early game is utterly advantage for Protoss currently. The oracle able to burst down workers so quickly, along with force 300 minerals in missile turrets means not only can oracles sometimes get a freewin, but it is completely safe due to 300 minerals in missile turrets = 1 nexus = planetary nexus from mothership core. There are also a myriad of other all-ins, DT, blink stalker, etc. that are made better with the mothership core. Terran only has 1/1/1 (planetary nexus freewins vs this) and 1 rax FE (you can die to any all-in or be put behind for free due to oracles).
That's about it. The rest can be solved by players imo.
that's a huge nerf, I was expecting it to be a little bit less. Won't be such a big problem if it was medivac speed upgrade requires additional upgrade instead to be honest. Hellbat by itself isn't so troublesome
was also expecting some nerf to protoss air units or a slight buff to zerg anti air
I am truly disapointed. I think before a metagame is even established, and counter builds are developed, the unit is nerfed. I cannot argue it was a bit OP - but so is infestor broodlord - and you see how long it took to develop a counter to that. I just get the sense the changes to this game are very "knee-jerk" reactionary, as opposed to sensible changes.
I know I am going to get a billion counter arguments to this, but this is my thoughts. Niteshade
On February 23 2013 12:17 vthree wrote: So when terrans lost horribly against 6 Queen openings, they whined but were told to adapt and play better. Then 6 months lately, blizzard makes minor nerfs to infestors.
And when zergs lost horribly against hell bat openings, they whined and Blizzard nerfs the shit out of hell bats twice within a week.
"Minor nerf" lol. And that wasnt a beta. How about we bring back 1 supply roach and watch Terran player adapt to it, should be fun
On February 23 2013 12:17 vthree wrote: So when terrans lost horribly against 6 Queen openings, they whined but were told to adapt and play better. Then 6 months lately, blizzard makes minor nerfs to infestors.
And when zergs lost horribly against hell bat openings, they whined and Blizzard nerfs the shit out of hell bats twice within a week.
"Minor nerf" lol. And that wasnt a beta. How about we bring back 1 supply roach and watch Terran player adapt to it, should be fun
On February 23 2013 12:17 vthree wrote: So when terrans lost horribly against 6 Queen openings, they whined but were told to adapt and play better. Then 6 months lately, blizzard makes minor nerfs to infestors.
And when zergs lost horribly against hell bat openings, they whined and Blizzard nerfs the shit out of hell bats twice within a week.
"Minor nerf" lol. And that wasnt a beta. How about we bring back 1 supply roach and watch Terran player adapt to it, should be fun
yeah then let's get back 5rax reaper too.
and the even earlier 11/11
Whoa, slow down. Those sound like Terran buffs. I think we need to take our time to see how Terran fares in the next 6-12 months before we do anything drastic. 1 supply roach sounds fine though.
On February 23 2013 12:17 vthree wrote: So when terrans lost horribly against 6 Queen openings, they whined but were told to adapt and play better. Then 6 months lately, blizzard makes minor nerfs to infestors.
And when zergs lost horribly against hell bat openings, they whined and Blizzard nerfs the shit out of hell bats twice within a week.
"Minor nerf" lol. And that wasnt a beta. How about we bring back 1 supply roach and watch Terran player adapt to it, should be fun
So you think -1 range to fungal is a major nerf? Compare to snipe damage getting halved? LOL.
I guess the ghost, BFH, Thor nerfs all were in beta?
Now this is what i hate about the balance team. Most of the time they seem to identify the correct problems, but they go completely ape shit on the changes...150/150 and 2 mins on the armory + bio (i understand it's meant to help bio play, but it fucks up mech against archons) + 2 cargo ...
There is a problem with Hellbat pressure being to strong, and instead of toning it down, they remove it entirely. Have they really learned nothing from WOL?!
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play. I've been shut down many times against masters and GM that know had to defend early Hellbat pushes - you just don't take a fast third. But 2 nerfs to the Hellbat in 2 weeks is a little overkill...the unit should just be removed from the game and now we just have Terran WoL units.
Agreeing with this. With all of the new units and changes in HotS a lot of people have forgotten about some of the core reasons as to why Terran was so underpowered in WoL: P/Z superior production mechanics, vulnerability to P/Z tech-switch speed that is near-abusive, and a bad late game. Zerg and Protoss both have a significantly buffed late game in HotS... could this be the queen patch 2.0?
On February 23 2013 15:08 perser84 wrote: i wonder why i should buy hots as a terran
On February 23 2013 14:30 BrassMonkey27 wrote: Are they keeping the cargo change as well? Honestly they should revert the cargo space change and just switch Hellbats back to mechanical. It doesn't make any sense that the unit can be healed by medivacs.. I know they want to buff bio with all the changes in HOTS but having hellbats as biological does not make any sense to me.
Welcome to 4th quarter 2012.
It didn't make sense to me then and it doesn't make any sense to me now. The fact that its been a while since the change was implemented doesn't mean I'll be more accustomed to it.
On February 23 2013 14:36 andrewlt wrote: At some point, if hellbat balancing gets more and more awkward, shouldn't Blizzard just give up and completely separate hellbats and hellions into two separate units? As somebody who is only casually following HotS beta, I don't even know if they have anything in common anymore.
They are separate units. Current Patch: - Armory UNLOCKS hellbats - T.Seros TRANSFORMS hellions to hellbats and back.
CONGRATULATIONS pre-10min hellbat drop is dead. Well played, Zerg pro-gamers, well played.
Back to hellion run bys even though they can wall off ramps, Back to marine drops countered by mass drones and 4 roaches, Why? Because win-ratio. And the Zerg cartel, whining their way into harass free double expands since 2010.
On February 23 2013 14:36 andrewlt wrote: At some point, if hellbat balancing gets more and more awkward, shouldn't Blizzard just give up and completely separate hellbats and hellions into two separate units? As somebody who is only casually following HotS beta, I don't even know if they have anything in common anymore.
They are separate units. Current Patch: - Armory UNLOCKS hellbats - T.Seros TRANSFORMS hellions to hellbats and back.
CONGRATULATIONS pre-10min hellbat drop is dead. Well played, Zerg pro-gamers, well played.
Back to hellion run bys even though they can wall off ramps, Back to marine drops countered by mass drones and 4 roaches, Why? Because win-ratio. And the Zerg cartel, whining their way into harass free double expands since 2010.
AVILO WAS RIGHT.
Get to a bomb shelter quickly man, looks like the entire sky is falling right on your position ^^
On February 23 2013 12:17 vthree wrote: So when terrans lost horribly against 6 Queen openings, they whined but were told to adapt and play better. Then 6 months lately, blizzard makes minor nerfs to infestors.
And when zergs lost horribly against hell bat openings, they whined and Blizzard nerfs the shit out of hell bats twice within a week.
"Minor nerf" lol. And that wasnt a beta. How about we bring back 1 supply roach and watch Terran player adapt to it, should be fun
yeah then let's get back 5rax reaper too.
and the even earlier 11/11
Whoa, slow down. Those sound like Terran buffs. I think we need to take our time to see how Terran fares in the next 6-12 months before we do anything drastic. 1 supply roach sounds fine though.
On February 23 2013 10:18 Hadley88 wrote: Ridiculous. Looks like Mech has become Turtle until Max again... and thats makes TvP even more terrible. Mech isn't even close to be Viable in TvP.
Mech in TvP is alright now as long as they don't nerf hellbats any more than this. They need to be this powerful to play on a level field with Protoss ground comps. Also, 150/150 is quite a lot for a mid game investment all things considered.
P.S I'm sick of pro Zerg players whining about losing after rushing their deathball into UNIT COMPOSITIONS SPECIFICALLY BUILT TO KILL THEM!!!
Marauder beats Roach (with stutter step and medivac) Hellbat beats lings Both queen and Medivacs have heal spell. Zergs have mobile "defense" buildings, spore and spine Zergs have, via creep spread, ability to expand map vision the longer they hold a position. Terrans have scan...
What do Zerg "pros" do? Rush 3:1 ratio of roach/sling into stutter stepping line of marine/marauders. Dies, then complains Terran IMBA and they NEED a bigger economy to beat Terran.
Blizzard then buffs Zerg against every viable pre-10min push, giving free spores, OL Speed Now that they can't buff Zerg anymore, now they resort to nerfing Zerg's opponents.
On February 23 2013 15:44 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: P.S I'm sick of pro Zerg players whining about losing after rushing their deathball into UNIT COMPOSITIONS SPECIFICALLY BUILT TO KILL THEM!!!
Marauder beats Roach (with stutter step and medivac) Hellbat beats lings Both queen and Medivacs have heal spell. Zergs have mobile "defense" buildings, spore and spine Zergs have, via creep spread, ability to expand map vision the longer they hold a position. Terrans have scan...
What do Zerg "pros" do? Rush 3:1 ratio of roach/sling into stutter stepping line of marine/marauders. Dies, then complains Terran IMBA and they NEED a bigger economy to beat Terran.
Blizzard then buffs Zerg against every viable pre-10min push, giving free spores, OL Speed Now that they can't buff Zerg anymore, now they resort to nerfing Zerg's opponents.
I'm honestly curious as to whether this is a troll or someone who is completely out of touch with reality.
What I dont understand is that when it comes to Terran "issues" they apply very quick fixes (that sometimes are reverted along the way) while approaching P/Z issues from a mile away.
I think they should just make hellbats a seperate unit OR have them what they use to do i.e. ability to ransform once upgrade finished (requiring an armory).. Its getting way to confusing now.
It's a necessary change but it's waaaay too expensive. The issue is hellbat timing, not cost. Having an upgrade is a great way to fix it but it shouldn't cost more than 50 gas.
On February 23 2013 16:12 MilesTeg wrote: It's a necessary change but it's waaaay too expensive. The issue is hellbat timing, not cost. Having an upgrade is a great way to fix it but it shouldn't cost more than 50 gas.
Why? The unit doesn't cost gas. It's a pretty huge upgrade. I see no issue with the cost.
Edit: Shit concussive is what? 50/50? I have to pay 200/200 to counter that as a toss player.
On February 23 2013 15:44 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: P.S I'm sick of pro Zerg players whining about losing after rushing their deathball into UNIT COMPOSITIONS SPECIFICALLY BUILT TO KILL THEM!!!
Marauder beats Roach (with stutter step and medivac) Hellbat beats lings Both queen and Medivacs have heal spell. Zergs have mobile "defense" buildings, spore and spine Zergs have, via creep spread, ability to expand map vision the longer they hold a position. Terrans have scan...
What do Zerg "pros" do? Rush 3:1 ratio of roach/sling into stutter stepping line of marine/marauders. Dies, then complains Terran IMBA and they NEED a bigger economy to beat Terran.
Blizzard then buffs Zerg against every viable pre-10min push, giving free spores, OL Speed Now that they can't buff Zerg anymore, now they resort to nerfing Zerg's opponents.
I'm honestly curious as to whether this is a troll or someone who is completely out of touch with reality.
He's lost touch with reality. There are a few like him in in team liquid, eventually you learn to just skip their posts.
Blizzard then buffs Zerg against every viable pre-10min push, giving free spores, OL Speed Now that they can't buff Zerg anymore, now they resort to nerfing Zerg's opponents.
I think you've seriously failed to appreciate just how much Hellbats, Widow Mines and Reapers have distored TvZ, each one of those units are/were poorly designed and virtually forced Zerg into Roach openings.
The main balancing issue in TvZ from WOL to HOTS was the Infestor, which was nerfed, and giving Terrans a cost efficient end game composition. The Raven is about where it should be, but if Blizzard would've focued on making the Ghost a playable unit vs Zerg (out Snipe, in Irradiate) instead of wasting time on new, OP units for Terran the game would be so much better off right now.
Blizzard then buffs Zerg against every viable pre-10min push, giving free spores, OL Speed Now that they can't buff Zerg anymore, now they resort to nerfing Zerg's opponents.
I think you've seriously failed to appreciate just how much Hellbats, Widow Mines and Reapers have distored TvZ, each one of those units are/were poorly designed and virtually forced Zerg into Roach openings.
The main balancing issue in TvZ from WOL to HOTS was the Infestor, which was nerfed, and giving Terrans a cost efficient end game composition. The Raven is about where it should be, but if Blizzard would've focued on making the Ghost a playable unit vs Zerg (out Snipe, in Irradiate) instead of wasting time on new, OP units for Terran the game would be so much better off right now.
I think it's an interesting note that most Zergs these days complain, not about not being able to win, but being "pigeonholed" into a composition in order to win. "I wish I didn't have to go X comp every game!" Meanwhile, Terran seems to be concerned with being able to win at all.
On February 23 2013 16:12 MilesTeg wrote: It's a necessary change but it's waaaay too expensive. The issue is hellbat timing, not cost. Having an upgrade is a great way to fix it but it shouldn't cost more than 50 gas.
Why? The unit doesn't cost gas. It's a pretty huge upgrade. I see no issue with the cost.
Edit: Shit concussive is what? 50/50? I have to pay 200/200 to counter that as a toss player.
probably more like "I have to pay 200/200 to break even as a toss player" would be more accurate
So, I played a bunch of games on this most recent patch. This upgrade is way too expensive. 150/150 and tech lab time.
This is pitiful. So as a Terran i'm not allowed to attack Zerg pre 8 minutes, but they are allowed to kill me with roach all-ins because i don't have hellbat mode.
Yeah...i expect we'll see the pattern of wings of liberty patching. Nerf Terran repeatedly because Z/Ps "can't deal with the new things" but leave everything that is potent against Terran alone because Terran will "learn to play against it."
It's disgusting.
BTW guys, i love the double standard patching due to whining. It's imbalanced for Terran to do anything early game, but Zerg is allowed to research burrow on tier1 and do random attacks with burrowed roaches and save all their drones with burrow.
Come on...i'm sure some of you find this hilarious in the sad way.
Blizzard then buffs Zerg against every viable pre-10min push, giving free spores, OL Speed Now that they can't buff Zerg anymore, now they resort to nerfing Zerg's opponents.
I think you've seriously failed to appreciate just how much Hellbats, Widow Mines and Reapers have distored TvZ, each one of those units are/were poorly designed and virtually forced Zerg into Roach openings.
The main balancing issue in TvZ from WOL to HOTS was the Infestor, which was nerfed, and giving Terrans a cost efficient end game composition. The Raven is about where it should be, but if Blizzard would've focued on making the Ghost a playable unit vs Zerg (out Snipe, in Irradiate) instead of wasting time on new, OP units for Terran the game would be so much better off right now.
I think it's an interesting note that most Zergs these days complain, not about not being able to win, but being "pigeonholed" into a composition in order to win. "I wish I didn't have to go X comp every game!" Meanwhile, Terran seems to be concerned with being able to win at all.
These couple of patches are just frustrating.
Yup, zergs feel they should be able to defend everything with the comp they want. Roaches 'forces' marauders if terrans go bio and muta 'forces' Thors for mech. Why shouldn't zergs be forced to make roaches now that speedlings have a true hard counter (tanks did a really poor job against lings unless behind buildings)
On February 23 2013 09:48 shin_toss wrote: Zergs rejoicing everywhere
Of course Zergs are rejoicing everywhere it's the most popular and over played race out there. Get ready for never ending ZvZ and PvZ on ladder again - just like WoL. Again, Blizzard succeeded in making Zerg "unharassable" in the first 10 minutes. God forbid any Zerg is intruppted in droning up the 65 drones in the first 10 minutes or that would be unacceptable. Don't get me started on Widow Mine drops - over priced high supply unit that, with the spore buff (non-evo chamber requirement), is futile; One spore one queen and shut down. Kill two birds with one stone if Terran even considers Banshee play.
Are you even serious right now? Terran is favored vs zerg even after this buff.. Widow mines are one of the best units in the game, and are anything but overpriced.
One of the best unit in the game you say ? This is so ignorant. You can't even hold-fire or target fire, it's a totally random "unit" that his ruled by your opponent (he's the one who triggers the mine) and by the computer (who choses the target). A code S terran can hardly make it work better than a bronze terran.
Widow mines, I predict will have the highest skill ceiling, or the provide top top pros a way to really differentiate themselves from others.The amount of uses people will come up with this unit go beyond any of our imagination s IMO. And i'm calling it now, because so many newer/lower lvl players just see the obvious limitations of this unit, like if unprotected they can be made useless for 40 seconds just by 1 unit activating it..they will be all the more ecstatic when players like mkp/flash use them in smart/effective/creative ways. All sorts of sick micro/positioning/repositioning of mines..
Widow Mines are like Banelings ... it is the DEFENDER who has to micro and learn to deal with it correctly or else they deal huge amounts of damage. That is a terrible thing for a combat unit and it should be the other way round. You can tweak the efficiency of the Widow Mine a bit, but that is marginal compared to the "noob or pro defender?" bit.
Thus the Widow Mine will probably make Terrans in low leagues rather more powerful than they "deserve".
For the Battle Hellion this is totally different, because you can use your own skill to use drops and multitasking to be more effective than simply a-moving into a base, but that was considered too strong and got nerfed. But was it nerfed in the right area? I dont think so.
On February 23 2013 14:38 avilo wrote: If you guys want the three biggest balance issues with the game right now across all 3 races, here they are:
1) Tempest too supply efficient/too much HP. Needs to be back to original 6 supply for TvP/ZvP lategame. 2) Hellbat needs to not be able to be healed and be turned back into a mech unit. Affects TvZ in Zergs favor, affects mech TvP in Terrans favor (ever so slightly on both of those). 3) TvP early game is utterly advantage for Protoss currently. The oracle able to burst down workers so quickly, along with force 300 minerals in missile turrets means not only can oracles sometimes get a freewin, but it is completely safe due to 300 minerals in missile turrets = 1 nexus = planetary nexus from mothership core. There are also a myriad of other all-ins, DT, blink stalker, etc. that are made better with the mothership core. Terran only has 1/1/1 (planetary nexus freewins vs this) and 1 rax FE (you can die to any all-in or be put behind for free due to oracles).
That's about it. The rest can be solved by players imo.
agreed, especially for point 3. not saying protoss is imbalanced early game, but it's too coinflippy right now.
On February 23 2013 17:19 avilo wrote: So, I played a bunch of games on this most recent patch. This upgrade is way too expensive. 150/150 and tech lab time.
This is pitiful. So as a Terran i'm not allowed to attack Zerg pre 8 minutes, but they are allowed to kill me with roach all-ins because i don't have hellbat mode.
Yeah...i expect we'll see the pattern of wings of liberty patching. Nerf Terran repeatedly because Z/Ps "can't deal with the new things" but leave everything that is potent against Terran alone because Terran will "learn to play against it."
It's disgusting.
BTW guys, i love the double standard patching due to whining. It's imbalanced for Terran to do anything early game, but Zerg is allowed to research burrow on tier1 and do random attacks with burrowed roaches and save all their drones with burrow.
Come on...i'm sure some of you find this hilarious in the sad way.
Build a fucking tank you clown if you think Zerg is going to Roach all in you. Christ on a Rubber crutch its not like you have to research siege mode anymore is it!!
On February 23 2013 14:38 avilo wrote: If you guys want the three biggest balance issues with the game right now across all 3 races, here they are:
1) Tempest too supply efficient/too much HP. Needs to be back to original 6 supply for TvP/ZvP lategame. 2) Hellbat needs to not be able to be healed and be turned back into a mech unit. Affects TvZ in Zergs favor, affects mech TvP in Terrans favor (ever so slightly on both of those). 3) TvP early game is utterly advantage for Protoss currently. The oracle able to burst down workers so quickly, along with force 300 minerals in missile turrets means not only can oracles sometimes get a freewin, but it is completely safe due to 300 minerals in missile turrets = 1 nexus = planetary nexus from mothership core. There are also a myriad of other all-ins, DT, blink stalker, etc. that are made better with the mothership core. Terran only has 1/1/1 (planetary nexus freewins vs this) and 1 rax FE (you can die to any all-in or be put behind for free due to oracles).
That's about it. The rest can be solved by players imo.
hä? In which way is it good for zerg that the hellbat is biological? Because you can NP it and then heal it with Queens? Because if a Protoss player lifts the Terran Hellbat with a Phoenix over a Zerg spore crawler, the spore crawler does extra damage?
On February 23 2013 17:19 avilo wrote: So, I played a bunch of games on this most recent patch. This upgrade is way too expensive. 150/150 and tech lab time.
This is pitiful. So as a Terran i'm not allowed to attack Zerg pre 8 minutes, but they are allowed to kill me with roach all-ins because i don't have hellbat mode.
Yeah...i expect we'll see the pattern of wings of liberty patching. Nerf Terran repeatedly because Z/Ps "can't deal with the new things" but leave everything that is potent against Terran alone because Terran will "learn to play against it."
It's disgusting.
BTW guys, i love the double standard patching due to whining. It's imbalanced for Terran to do anything early game, but Zerg is allowed to research burrow on tier1 and do random attacks with burrowed roaches and save all their drones with burrow.
Come on...i'm sure some of you find this hilarious in the sad way.
Build a fucking tank you clown if you think Zerg is going to Roach all in you. Christ on a Rubber crutch its not like you have to research siege mode anymore is it!!
Why arent Terrans rushing tanks or tank-drop then? The answer is easy: they arent really worth it because some Zerglings easily kill them.
On February 23 2013 17:19 avilo wrote: So, I played a bunch of games on this most recent patch. This upgrade is way too expensive. 150/150 and tech lab time.
This is pitiful. So as a Terran i'm not allowed to attack Zerg pre 8 minutes, but they are allowed to kill me with roach all-ins because i don't have hellbat mode.
Yeah...i expect we'll see the pattern of wings of liberty patching. Nerf Terran repeatedly because Z/Ps "can't deal with the new things" but leave everything that is potent against Terran alone because Terran will "learn to play against it."
It's disgusting.
BTW guys, i love the double standard patching due to whining. It's imbalanced for Terran to do anything early game, but Zerg is allowed to research burrow on tier1 and do random attacks with burrowed roaches and save all their drones with burrow.
Come on...i'm sure some of you find this hilarious in the sad way.
Build a fucking tank you clown if you think Zerg is going to Roach all in you. Christ on a Rubber crutch its not like you have to research siege mode anymore is it!!
I used to whine against Bio and Terrans in particular when I was toss.. but when I switched to T, I realized that I've been whining against the race that requires BY FAR the most micro and multitasking skill.
Try it too, you'll see. (this is actually not an insult or anything, I really WISH you would try and realize it)
On February 23 2013 17:19 avilo wrote: So, I played a bunch of games on this most recent patch. This upgrade is way too expensive. 150/150 and tech lab time.
This is pitiful. So as a Terran i'm not allowed to attack Zerg pre 8 minutes, but they are allowed to kill me with roach all-ins because i don't have hellbat mode.
Yeah...i expect we'll see the pattern of wings of liberty patching. Nerf Terran repeatedly because Z/Ps "can't deal with the new things" but leave everything that is potent against Terran alone because Terran will "learn to play against it."
It's disgusting.
BTW guys, i love the double standard patching due to whining. It's imbalanced for Terran to do anything early game, but Zerg is allowed to research burrow on tier1 and do random attacks with burrowed roaches and save all their drones with burrow.
Come on...i'm sure some of you find this hilarious in the sad way.
You got mines and free siege tech, so it's actually much easier to defend roach allins compared to Wol.
______________
This change at least makes hellions viable how it is supposed to be. As i see it, hellions - fast harassment unit, hellbat - tanky Aoe defensive unit.
From zerg's perspective i wish they could change:
- Increase Viper's spell range - Merge both hydra upgrades into one. - Make medivac speed boost cost 25 energy.
On February 23 2013 14:38 avilo wrote: If you guys want the three biggest balance issues with the game right now across all 3 races, here they are:
1) Tempest too supply efficient/too much HP. Needs to be back to original 6 supply for TvP/ZvP lategame. 2) Hellbat needs to not be able to be healed and be turned back into a mech unit. Affects TvZ in Zergs favor, affects mech TvP in Terrans favor (ever so slightly on both of those). 3) TvP early game is utterly advantage for Protoss currently. The oracle able to burst down workers so quickly, along with force 300 minerals in missile turrets means not only can oracles sometimes get a freewin, but it is completely safe due to 300 minerals in missile turrets = 1 nexus = planetary nexus from mothership core. There are also a myriad of other all-ins, DT, blink stalker, etc. that are made better with the mothership core. Terran only has 1/1/1 (planetary nexus freewins vs this) and 1 rax FE (you can die to any all-in or be put behind for free due to oracles).
That's about it. The rest can be solved by players imo.
hä? In which way is it good for zerg that the hellbat is biological? Because you can NP it and then heal it with Queens? Because if a Protoss player lifts the Terran Hellbat with a Phoenix over a Zerg spore crawler, the spore crawler does extra damage?
Because medivacs cannot heal them, helps especially with hellbat drops.
On February 23 2013 14:38 avilo wrote: If you guys want the three biggest balance issues with the game right now across all 3 races, here they are:
1) Tempest too supply efficient/too much HP. Needs to be back to original 6 supply for TvP/ZvP lategame. 2) Hellbat needs to not be able to be healed and be turned back into a mech unit. Affects TvZ in Zergs favor, affects mech TvP in Terrans favor (ever so slightly on both of those). 3) TvP early game is utterly advantage for Protoss currently. The oracle able to burst down workers so quickly, along with force 300 minerals in missile turrets means not only can oracles sometimes get a freewin, but it is completely safe due to 300 minerals in missile turrets = 1 nexus = planetary nexus from mothership core. There are also a myriad of other all-ins, DT, blink stalker, etc. that are made better with the mothership core. Terran only has 1/1/1 (planetary nexus freewins vs this) and 1 rax FE (you can die to any all-in or be put behind for free due to oracles).
That's about it. The rest can be solved by players imo.
hä? In which way is it good for zerg that the hellbat is biological? Because you can NP it and then heal it with Queens? Because if a Protoss player lifts the Terran Hellbat with a Phoenix over a Zerg spore crawler, the spore crawler does extra damage?
you missread there (and avilos post was a bit confusing):
he wants to say that they loose being bio and are mech only again. this way they cant be healed. -> hellbatdrops are a lot weaker also this means that archons dont do additional damage against them.
On February 23 2013 17:19 avilo wrote: So, I played a bunch of games on this most recent patch. This upgrade is way too expensive. 150/150 and tech lab time.
This is pitiful. So as a Terran i'm not allowed to attack Zerg pre 8 minutes, but they are allowed to kill me with roach all-ins because i don't have hellbat mode.
Yeah...i expect we'll see the pattern of wings of liberty patching. Nerf Terran repeatedly because Z/Ps "can't deal with the new things" but leave everything that is potent against Terran alone because Terran will "learn to play against it."
It's disgusting.
BTW guys, i love the double standard patching due to whining. It's imbalanced for Terran to do anything early game, but Zerg is allowed to research burrow on tier1 and do random attacks with burrowed roaches and save all their drones with burrow.
Come on...i'm sure some of you find this hilarious in the sad way.
What a clown. Please stop posting until you're capable of making a good point.
On February 23 2013 14:38 avilo wrote: If you guys want the three biggest balance issues with the game right now across all 3 races, here they are:
1) Tempest too supply efficient/too much HP. Needs to be back to original 6 supply for TvP/ZvP lategame. 2) Hellbat needs to not be able to be healed and be turned back into a mech unit. Affects TvZ in Zergs favor, affects mech TvP in Terrans favor (ever so slightly on both of those). 3) TvP early game is utterly advantage for Protoss currently. The oracle able to burst down workers so quickly, along with force 300 minerals in missile turrets means not only can oracles sometimes get a freewin, but it is completely safe due to 300 minerals in missile turrets = 1 nexus = planetary nexus from mothership core. There are also a myriad of other all-ins, DT, blink stalker, etc. that are made better with the mothership core. Terran only has 1/1/1 (planetary nexus freewins vs this) and 1 rax FE (you can die to any all-in or be put behind for free due to oracles).
That's about it. The rest can be solved by players imo.
hä? In which way is it good for zerg that the hellbat is biological? Because you can NP it and then heal it with Queens? Because if a Protoss player lifts the Terran Hellbat with a Phoenix over a Zerg spore crawler, the spore crawler does extra damage?
you missread there (and avilos post was a bit confusing):
he wants to say that they loose being bio and are mech only again. this way they cant be healed. -> hellbatdrops are a lot weaker also this means that archons dont do additional damage against them.
No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
The problem with this patch is, you have to skip hellions or never transform them. Because the upgrade is so expensive. Only if you go 2 fax hellions it is worthy to upgrade. Sure there was a nerf necessary. They should at least combine the bf Upgrade and the new transform upgrade. The idea is, you have to decide if you want to go for some runbys -> you choose bf Hellions. Or if you want to go for drop or take a big fight -> you choose Hellbat. Hellbat would have always Blueflame but the damage is the same as atm. You can transform your Blueflame Hellions if Armory is ready. So the players have to take more strategic decisions and nevertheless it's a nerf (bf ugrade required 150/150)
-> remove transform upgrade -> Hellbat now requires bf upgrade 150/150 -> Hellbat requires armory but you can transform your blueflame hellion without any additional upgrades -> Hellbat has always blueflame (same damage as redflame atm)
On February 23 2013 19:00 Suikakuju wrote: would love to see some changes for Zerg Air units. I really wonder why Blizzard say they suck and then letting them go unchanged lol
But at least D3 is coming for PS3 ^^
Hey dont laugh about PS3\PS4 the best thing that could happen to SC2 is a port to the new consoles coming out. the extra players would be a good thing provided they didn't gimp the game and let people hook up a mouse and keyboard. The hardware is capable of doing it
On February 23 2013 18:31 avilo wrote: No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
You are the most consistent, Terran biased, with some of the longest whining posts and you are failing to make blizzard to change the game in your way lol you talked about terran cannot attack zerg pre 8 mins in previous post. Well watch how thorzain plays then, I don't see him having issue with early reaper into hellions harassment.
I am not saying your points are all wrong, but if people have to ignore all those "wtf blizzard so stupid only nerf terran 1!@#" before reading any of your points, I for one would not take your points as neutral.
On February 23 2013 18:31 avilo wrote: No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
You are the most consistent, Terran biased, with some of the longest whining posts and you are failing to make blizzard to change the game in your way lol you talked about terran cannot attack zerg pre 8 mins in previous post. Well watch how thorzain plays then, I don't see him having issue with early reaper into hellions harassment.
On February 23 2013 19:18 Solarist wrote: Quite hilarious that it now takes more to make a hellbat, than it does a god damn thor
It's just the transformation upgrade. You can make hellbats directly after getting an armory. Which is why I find it super expensive. Make it 100/100 like siege mode, wtf...
On February 23 2013 18:31 avilo wrote: No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
You are the most consistent, Terran biased, with some of the longest whining posts and you are failing to make blizzard to change the game in your way lol you talked about terran cannot attack zerg pre 8 mins in previous post. Well watch how thorzain plays then, I don't see him having issue with early reaper into hellions harassment.
I just saw him get rolled. Nice example.
his opening didn't have any problem, it was his transition that had the issue. look at the game he is playing now.
150/150 huh? Okey then it is better to go for 6 hellions to get some map control > throw armory in meantime > pump hellbats and ignore upgrade alltogether .
On February 23 2013 19:44 Snusmumriken wrote: At least combine blueflame upgrade with hellbat so that terran has some options. Why arent they doing that instead of this mess?
I'm surprised no one has mentioned how awkward blue flame at this point. They should have just nerfed the hellbat damage slightly, and have blue flame make up for the lost damage. Then you have weaker hellbats but can still get them early-ish, and stronger hellbats later on. Right now its no hellbats at all without an upgrade and an upgrade that only helps one half of the unit. And they both cost freakin 150/150.
The problem with this patch is, you have to skip hellions or never transform them. Because the upgrade is so expensive. Only if you go 2 fax hellions it is worthy to upgrade. Sure there was a nerf necessary. They should at least combine the bf Upgrade and the new transform upgrade. The idea is, you have to decide if you want to go for some runbys -> you choose bf Hellions. Or if you want to go for drop or take a big fight -> you choose Hellbat. Hellbat would have always Blueflame but the damage is the same as atm. You can transform your Blueflame Hellions if Armory is ready. So the players have to take more strategic decisions and nevertheless it's a nerf (bf ugrade required 150/150)
-> remove transform upgrade -> Hellbat now requires bf upgrade 150/150 -> Hellbat requires armory but you can transform your blueflame hellion without any additional upgrades -> Hellbat has always blueflame (same damage as redflame atm)
Well, I assume somebody who goes mech will get the upgrade eventually. But I really like your idea. It would be a first step into making the Hellbat more logical. Also, will removing the beeing healed ability cause balance problems? Removing the ability to be healed would aso really help to make the unit more logical.
I just hope that blizzard doesn't keep hating on Terran anymore. Struggling to stay 50/50 in masters when I used to go nearly 2/3 b4 queen buff/infestor is wrong
I just don't understand why they don't nerf the Hellbat damage and you get the old damage back when you research the Infernal pre-igniter. This doesn't make any sense to me, Infernal Pre-igniter upgrade is useless since nobody is even using Hellions for anything except for speed, there is really no reason to upgrade it when you have Hellbat that is 2 times stronger than Hellion vs. everything.
I would remove the Hellbat upgrade right now, and give the Armory requirement for Infernal Pre-igniter, so you can get Hellbats early, but not nearly as strong.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
Aren't you getting really tired to fight avilo? I fought years, and I finally gave up, and believe me, its feels great. I play LoL now, because I realized that things will never change.
For example: broodlord infestor in wol: it's so strong, I never saw a terran who was EVEN with the zerg win against it, never. And it's still in the game. Blizzard never touched it.
Another example is the greedyness: zergs can play greedy, and allins are really not viable against them (still talking about wol). Meanwhile zergs can allin terrans without a problem. Zergs tell us then that "we shouldn't play so greedy", but meanwhile we can't punish their greedyness. Blizzard refuses to change this.
And then there is hots, our new hope. And as you can see, no change in policy.
The amount of whining in this thread is amusing, really. The hellbat is the same unit, it just requires an upgrade from the building you needed to get anyway.
Suddenly, Terran has nothing against Zergs, cannot go mech anymore and most probably will never win a game on ladder. For it's price the Hellbat is still WAY too good, it doesn't matter when you get this unit. It beats marines, zealots, lings, it's good for harass and some of you are raging when you can no longer get this unit in the first 5 minutes of the game. Funny.
Am I the only one thinking people here think they can't build Hellbat when armory is done without this upgrade?
It's still possible to build Hellbats from Factory after Armory is done. You only need this upgrad if you want to transoform Hellions into Hellbats and vica versa.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
Aren't you getting really tired to fight avilo? I fought years, and I finally gave up, and believe me, its feels great. I play LoL now, because I realized that things will never change.
For example: broodlord infestor in wol: it's so strong, I never saw a terran who was EVEN with the zerg win against it, never. And it's still in the game. Blizzard never touched it.
Another example is the greedyness: zergs can play greedy, and allins are really not viable against them (still talking about wol). Meanwhile zergs can allin terrans without a problem. Zergs tell us then that "we shouldn't play so greedy", but meanwhile we can't punish their greedyness. Blizzard refuses to change this.
And then there is hots, our new hope. And as you can see, no change in policy.
i LOVE how terrans say stuff like "zerg can play so greedy" while T got WM and free siege mode and are the ones that can play supergreedy in HOTS AND have a nice lategame army with the new superraven now. and on the hellbat topic. they are 100% the same good unit except it comes later. the reasoning behind this patch was maybe the best explained patch notes ever: you cant have supermapcontrol units and make them into combat units for 150/100 (and that 150/100 you will need later anyway). that would be like making 50 zerglings and for 100 gas you could morph ALL of them into banelings. maybe now you realize how powerful and stupidly cheap hellbats still are.
but overall i think blizzard should go the other way and dont nerf stuff (which is much easier) but instead buff stuff to counter the "OP" things. thats a lot harder obv since that effects everything else and its too late now but i would like to see more OP stuff but also more OP stuff that counter that ^^
oh and the amount of nerfs/buffs to a race is retarded to count. if one race is superOP and they get 10 nerfs that is as fine as 3 nerfs. its about content of the nerfs and a balanced and fun game.
On February 23 2013 20:29 Everlong wrote: Am I the only one thinking people here think they can't build Hellbat when armory is done without this upgrade?
It's still possible to build Hellbats from Factory after Armory is done. You only need this upgrad if you want to transoform Hellions into Hellbats and vica versa.
Wait...seriously? I haven't actually looked, but I assume you tested it?
On February 23 2013 20:24 Inex wrote: The amount of whining in this thread is amusing, really. The hellbat is the same unit, it just requires an upgrade from the building you needed to get anyway.
Suddenly, Terran has nothing against Zergs, cannot go mech anymore and most probably will never win a game on ladder. For it's price the Hellbat is still WAY too good, it doesn't matter when you get this unit. It beats marines, zealots, lings, it's good for harass and some of you are raging when you can no longer get this unit in the first 5 minutes of the game. Funny.
This being or not a significant change is not the even the main reason for the whine, nor the main point in the end. It probably has more to do with terran's frustration from bashing our heads against a wall for a year, since the patch speeds and the nerfs/buffs themselves seem to be unidirectional.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
Aren't you getting really tired to fight avilo? I fought years, and I finally gave up, and believe me, its feels great. I play LoL now, because I realized that things will never change.
For example: broodlord infestor in wol: it's so strong, I never saw a terran who was EVEN with the zerg win against it, never. And it's still in the game. Blizzard never touched it.
Another example is the greedyness: zergs can play greedy, and allins are really not viable against them (still talking about wol). Meanwhile zergs can allin terrans without a problem. Zergs tell us then that "we shouldn't play so greedy", but meanwhile we can't punish their greedyness. Blizzard refuses to change this.
And then there is hots, our new hope. And as you can see, no change in policy.
i LOVE how terrans say stuff like "zerg can play so greedy" while T got WM and siege mode
WM is one of those interesting game concepts, in which depending on the fluctuation of my MMR, the unit is either fantastic and completely wrecks early pushes, or ends up killing one zergling / trigger. I personally love things designed this way, that greatly take skill into consideration, but the unit is not insane, and even getting two siege tanks is still a considerable investment. We have to cut something between tech, production, upgrades and a quick third. Apparently, it's a complete blasphemy if you have to cut anything, even though you have much better scouting.
The problem with this patch is, you have to skip hellions or never transform them. Because the upgrade is so expensive. Only if you go 2 fax hellions it is worthy to upgrade. Sure there was a nerf necessary. They should at least combine the bf Upgrade and the new transform upgrade. The idea is, you have to decide if you want to go for some runbys -> you choose bf Hellions. Or if you want to go for drop or take a big fight -> you choose Hellbat. Hellbat would have always Blueflame but the damage is the same as atm. You can transform your Blueflame Hellions if Armory is ready. So the players have to take more strategic decisions and nevertheless it's a nerf (bf ugrade required 150/150)
-> remove transform upgrade -> Hellbat now requires bf upgrade 150/150 -> Hellbat requires armory but you can transform your blueflame hellion without any additional upgrades -> Hellbat has always blueflame (same damage as redflame atm)
Well, I assume somebody who goes mech will get the upgrade eventually. But I really like your idea. It would be a first step into making the Hellbat more logical. Also, will removing the beeing healed ability cause balance problems? Removing the ability to be healed would aso really help to make the unit more logical.
well you can remove biological, so it isn't possible to heal them. AND it would be a slightly buff for mech vs Protoss (cause of Archon bonus dmg). So healing/biological is also a thing blizzard can look at.
On February 23 2013 20:29 Everlong wrote: Am I the only one thinking people here think they can't build Hellbat when armory is done without this upgrade?
It's still possible to build Hellbats from Factory after Armory is done. You only need this upgrad if you want to transoform Hellions into Hellbats and vica versa.
Wait...seriously? I haven't actually looked, but I assume you tested it?
That's even MORE confusing
Sure I tested it. You can build Hellbat when Armory is done just like berfore.. It's just that if you want to TRANSFORM them, you need this upgrade.
For example: broodlord infestor in wol: it's so strong, I never saw a terran who was EVEN with the zerg win against it, never. And it's still in the game. Blizzard never touched it.
Another example is the greedyness: zergs can play greedy, and allins are really not viable against them (still talking about wol). Meanwhile zergs can allin terrans without a problem. Zergs tell us then that "we shouldn't play so greedy", but meanwhile we can't punish their greedyness. Blizzard refuses to change this. .
Holy shit! I am so happy that they removed fungal to its original form, the missile was so bad. They also removed the damage change vs armored You might want to use HSM vs broodlords, since in does not require an upgrade anymore. Also, siege upgrade was removed, that will help you defend bases and not die to roach baneling all ins, so I guess it's fine that you have to upgrade hellbats now.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
Aren't you getting really tired to fight avilo? I fought years, and I finally gave up, and believe me, its feels great. I play LoL now, because I realized that things will never change.
For example: broodlord infestor in wol: it's so strong, I never saw a terran who was EVEN with the zerg win against it, never. And it's still in the game. Blizzard never touched it.
Another example is the greedyness: zergs can play greedy, and allins are really not viable against them (still talking about wol). Meanwhile zergs can allin terrans without a problem. Zergs tell us then that "we shouldn't play so greedy", but meanwhile we can't punish their greedyness. Blizzard refuses to change this.
And then there is hots, our new hope. And as you can see, no change in policy.
i LOVE how terrans say stuff like "zerg can play so greedy" while T got WM and siege mode
WM is one of those interesting game concepts, in which depending on the fluctuation of my MMR, the unit is either fantastic and completely wrecks early pushes, or ends up killing one zergling / trigger. I personally love things designed this way, that greatly take skill into consideration, but the unit is not insane, and even getting two siege tanks is still a considerable investment. We have to cut something between tech, production, upgrades and a quick third. Apparently, it's a complete blasphemy if you have to cut anything, even though you have much better scouting.
i also like the mine taking skill from both sides. you can trigger it with 1 ling but also T can kill the 1 ling with 2 rines before the mine is triggered etc. never said WM is imba.
as for your argument. if Z wants to be aggressive with roach ling (bling) it got way easier to defend that in HOTS than it was in WoL, so yes T can play more greedy. on the other hand Z has to play less greedy because of hellbats and mines while having to play more greedy because aggressive play got way worse. see the dilemma of zerg early game? believe me all zerg players would like to have good pressure builds early on but they got even worse in HOTS. people think zerg like to mass drone, build mass infestor and build slowmoving BL/infestor army in WoL. WE DONT!!! but most other units/strats sucked in WoL so we had to. in HOTS there is the same problem only with other units. now BL/infestor sucks but ultras are a lot better. still zerg has to mass drone and either build mutas or fast hive since SHs, hydras suck and nydus, drop etc. is still too bad. blizz promised to fix T2 zerg...well they fucked it up even more. you need hive more than ever to have a chance.
I'm a terran player. This change was needed. The whole "mass contain into autowin" that a pure hellion or hellion marine opening provided was completely overpowered.
You can happily build hellbats from the factory with this upgrade, IIRC my games correctly. Just can't transform them in the field straight away. Will have to double check this but still.
It beats marines, zealots, lings,
What?
Split stimmed marines with medivac support and the most basic of micro slaughter hellbats. Hell. People don't seem to have figured it out yet, but so do pure hellions, roaches, hydras and stalkers. They just aren't the casual autowin make immortal bullshit that mech has suffered. They require micro to deal with.
That is fine. That's what they are there to do. They are an anti-a-move unit. They stop a player from just building 90 units and clicking somewhere behind a terran army. They are MEANT TO BE POWERFUL.
People seem shocked that zealots and lings lose to a unit designed to counter them directly. In which case, allow me to gifrt you with a clue. Don't build those units against hellbats.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
Aren't you getting really tired to fight avilo? I fought years, and I finally gave up, and believe me, its feels great. I play LoL now, because I realized that things will never change.
For example: broodlord infestor in wol: it's so strong, I never saw a terran who was EVEN with the zerg win against it, never. And it's still in the game. Blizzard never touched it.
Another example is the greedyness: zergs can play greedy, and allins are really not viable against them (still talking about wol). Meanwhile zergs can allin terrans without a problem. Zergs tell us then that "we shouldn't play so greedy", but meanwhile we can't punish their greedyness. Blizzard refuses to change this.
And then there is hots, our new hope. And as you can see, no change in policy.
i LOVE how terrans say stuff like "zerg can play so greedy" while T got WM and siege mode
WM is one of those interesting game concepts, in which depending on the fluctuation of my MMR, the unit is either fantastic and completely wrecks early pushes, or ends up killing one zergling / trigger. I personally love things designed this way, that greatly take skill into consideration, but the unit is not insane, and even getting two siege tanks is still a considerable investment. We have to cut something between tech, production, upgrades and a quick third. Apparently, it's a complete blasphemy if you have to cut anything, even though you have much better scouting.
i also like the mine taking skill from both sides. you can trigger it with 1 ling but also T can kill the 1 ling with 2 rines before the mine is triggered etc. never said WM is imba.
as for your argument. if Z wants to be aggressive with roach ling (bling) it got way easier to defend that in HOTS than it was in WoL, so yes T can play more greedy. on the other hand Z has to play less greedy because of hellbats and mines while having to play more greedy because aggressive play got way worse. see the dilemma of zerg early game? believe me all zerg players would like to have good pressure builds early on but they got even worse in HOTS. people think zerg like to mass drone, build mass infestor and build slowmoving BL/infestor army in WoL. WE DONT!!! but most other units/strats sucked in WoL so we had to. in HOTS there is the same problem only with other units. now BL/infestor sucks but ultras are a lot better. still zerg has to mass drone and either build mutas or fast hive since SHs, hydras suck and nydus, drop etc. is still too bad. blizz promised to fix T2 zerg...well they fucked it up even more. you need hive more than ever to have a chance.
so yeah we will have to wait for LotV rofl....
Oh come on. Very few zerg ever bothered to explore the extent of nydus play. Swarm hosts are awesome. Hydras are now awesome. There is a vast amount of the zerg arsenal that no zerg bothered to exploit because the easiest way to win games was just to build infestors and let them autowin you the game with whatever T3 unit you chose to build. It wasn't just the best strategy, it was virtually unbeatable. It defined the entire game.
On February 23 2013 20:29 Everlong wrote: Am I the only one thinking people here think they can't build Hellbat when armory is done without this upgrade?
It's still possible to build Hellbats from Factory after Armory is done. You only need this upgrad if you want to transoform Hellions into Hellbats and vica versa.
I agree with you that people seem to be misunderstanding this change. Indeed you can still build Hellbats once you have the armory. What is no longer possible is building hellions while the armory is still in progress, then transform the already built hellions when the armory is finished, and attack with them. This change seems to nerf hellbat-rushes (based on reactor-factory and armory) in the early game, but not hellbats in general.
On February 23 2013 12:36 Zelniq wrote:if you are completely surrounded by hydras who are in an arc (standing in a line, shoulder to shoulder), storm isn't actually that effective at dealing with them.
On February 23 2013 20:29 Everlong wrote: Am I the only one thinking people here think they can't build Hellbat when armory is done without this upgrade?
It's still possible to build Hellbats from Factory after Armory is done. You only need this upgrad if you want to transoform Hellions into Hellbats and vica versa.
Did you have to spoil it? This was the greatest IQ check to date to find out what people that actually test things out and if they have basic reading comprehension. Ah well, gonna note down the people in this thread so far that gotten caught and hope that people don't read this O_o.
On February 23 2013 20:29 Everlong wrote: Am I the only one thinking people here think they can't build Hellbat when armory is done without this upgrade?
It's still possible to build Hellbats from Factory after Armory is done. You only need this upgrad if you want to transoform Hellions into Hellbats and vica versa.
I agree with you that people seem to be misunderstanding this change. Indeed you can still build Hellbats once you have the armory. What is no longer possible is building hellions while the armory is still in progress, then transform the already built hellions when the armory is finished, and attack with them. This change seems to nerf hellbat-rushes (based on reactor-factory and armory) in the early game, but not hellbats in general.
Do you think the removal of the seeker missile research is a buff to the Raven, or that the removal of siege upgrade is a buff to the siege tank? If yes, then this new upgrade is also a nerf to hellbats in general. Yes, you can build hellbats and hellions, but they aren't as flexible as one that can transform between the two. Some tech trees that previously incorporated hellbats won't do so anymore because of the upgrade cost and time needed on a factory with techlab that is better spent somewhere else.
I do not see why people like Everlong are raging hard on this change, while it may be less beneficial for TvP, it is very much needed in TvZ. But as others pointed out, I guess that guys like him rage because their 7 minute 8 hellbat push doesn't kill Zergs out right and that it needs more skill to actually 'win' matches.
I agree with this change, it needed to be done. But I do however feel Blizzard are heading in the wrong direction with a lot of things. The only thing that seems extremely well done is the new BN UI.
Balancing HoTS based on Korean pro players who self admittedly have 1 or 2 day of Beta experience ? Blizzard balance team is once again activating the nitro boosts of their failmobile.
On February 23 2013 20:29 Everlong wrote: Am I the only one thinking people here think they can't build Hellbat when armory is done without this upgrade?
It's still possible to build Hellbats from Factory after Armory is done. You only need this upgrad if you want to transoform Hellions into Hellbats and vica versa.
Did you have to spoil it? This was the greatest IQ check to date to find out what people that actually test things out and if they have basic reading comprehension. Ah well, gonna note down the people in this thread so far that gotten caught and hope that people don't read this O_o.
Yep this and a lot of people failed big time. The change isn't as bad as people panicked about, it simply proves that 1/ they cant read and 2/ they haven't tried the change before posting
On February 23 2013 21:30 DeCoup wrote: Its not a nerf its a timing adjustment.
Lol, this is a RTS. Any changes in timing is a nerf/buff. It would be saying the if mutas were move to hive tech, it wouldn't be a nerf but only a timing adjustment. How ridiculous does that sound?
As a Terran, i can completely agree hellbat needed to Change. However with this change, the upgrade seems a bit useless? If Terrans want hellbats, they'll produce hellbats from the factory instead of Hellions.
I guess only when someone really over committed to Hellions and they're just taking up supply someone might get the upgrade....
On February 23 2013 22:06 Mithriel wrote: As a Terran, i can completely agree hellbat needed to Change. However with this change, the upgrade seems a bit useless? If Terrans want hellbats, they'll produce hellbats from the factory instead of Hellions.
I guess only when someone really over committed to Hellions and they're just taking up supply someone might get the upgrade....
As a terran I also agree with this change and the upgrade to me makes sense as it means you can't go mass hellion as a bio player to start with for map control, then change them all into hellbats and have a really strong standing army really quickly in the game. It means you can commit into hellions, but to get the full use out of them you'll need the upgrade. Or you can still get hellbats, but you can't transform them without the upgrade which means you won't be able to switch in and out for map control and mobility when you want too.
I'm just wondering - are terrans supposed to get something new for late game? Did they buff Battlecruisers or Vikings and I missed it? Did Marauders receive a buff?
On February 23 2013 22:38 ToKoreaWithLove wrote: I'm just wondering - are terrans supposed to get something new for late game? Did they buff Battlecruisers or Vikings and I missed it? Did Marauders receive a buff?
Ravens are actually much better now they don't require like 5 upgrades to get. Also the lower cost on HSM makes them a really nice support unit for mech.
On February 23 2013 22:38 ToKoreaWithLove wrote: I'm just wondering - are terrans supposed to get something new for late game? Did they buff Battlecruisers or Vikings and I missed it? Did Marauders receive a buff?
Ravens are actually much better now they don't require like 5 upgrades to get. Also the lower cost on HSM makes them a really nice support unit for mech.
Well HSM got like a nerf/burff to me. When you had HSM in WoL it was really strong, when you casted it. Now you have it earlier, but the opponent can do stuff like move out of range in the 5 seconds or move into the direction of my army to use it againt me or at least, just gets this one unit killed. But fungal still owns ravens, maybe even more because of the range buff.
On February 23 2013 22:38 ToKoreaWithLove wrote: I'm just wondering - are terrans supposed to get something new for late game? Did they buff Battlecruisers or Vikings and I missed it? Did Marauders receive a buff?
with the improvement on ravens, many terran open with mech and opt for 3 starports on 3 bases, relying less on thors and tanks to make way for the skyterran transition earlier
On February 23 2013 22:52 DoubleReed wrote: I don't understand this at all. Why don't they just make blueflame affect hellbats so they do their full damage once they have blueflame?
On February 23 2013 15:44 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: P.S I'm sick of pro Zerg players whining about losing after rushing their deathball into UNIT COMPOSITIONS SPECIFICALLY BUILT TO KILL THEM!!!
Marauder beats Roach (with stutter step and medivac) Hellbat beats lings Both queen and Medivacs have heal spell. Zergs have mobile "defense" buildings, spore and spine Zergs have, via creep spread, ability to expand map vision the longer they hold a position. Terrans have scan...
What do Zerg "pros" do? Rush 3:1 ratio of roach/sling into stutter stepping line of marine/marauders. Dies, then complains Terran IMBA and they NEED a bigger economy to beat Terran.
Blizzard then buffs Zerg against every viable pre-10min push, giving free spores, OL Speed Now that they can't buff Zerg anymore, now they resort to nerfing Zerg's opponents.
I'm honestly curious as to whether this is a troll or someone who is completely out of touch with reality.
Yes, I upset you, therefore I'm either a troll or crazy. So much for mature discussions, two can play that game.
I noticed most Terran player idea of fun is punish greedy/careless/lazy openings and punish sloppy deployment/execution. This fact speaks volumes about a Zerg player's skill/knowledge/ ability to strategize in a strategy game.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
Aren't you getting really tired to fight avilo? I fought years, and I finally gave up, and believe me, its feels great. I play LoL now, because I realized that things will never change.
For example: broodlord infestor in wol: it's so strong, I never saw a terran who was EVEN with the zerg win against it, never. And it's still in the game. Blizzard never touched it.
Another example is the greedyness: zergs can play greedy, and allins are really not viable against them (still talking about wol). Meanwhile zergs can allin terrans without a problem. Zergs tell us then that "we shouldn't play so greedy", but meanwhile we can't punish their greedyness. Blizzard refuses to change this.
And then there is hots, our new hope. And as you can see, no change in policy.
i LOVE how terrans say stuff like "zerg can play so greedy" while T got WM and siege mode
WM is one of those interesting game concepts, in which depending on the fluctuation of my MMR, the unit is either fantastic and completely wrecks early pushes, or ends up killing one zergling / trigger. I personally love things designed this way, that greatly take skill into consideration, but the unit is not insane, and even getting two siege tanks is still a considerable investment. We have to cut something between tech, production, upgrades and a quick third. Apparently, it's a complete blasphemy if you have to cut anything, even though you have much better scouting.
i also like the mine taking skill from both sides. you can trigger it with 1 ling but also T can kill the 1 ling with 2 rines before the mine is triggered etc. never said WM is imba.
as for your argument. if Z wants to be aggressive with roach ling (bling) it got way easier to defend that in HOTS than it was in WoL, so yes T can play more greedy. on the other hand Z has to play less greedy because of hellbats and mines while having to play more greedy because aggressive play got way worse. see the dilemma of zerg early game? believe me all zerg players would like to have good pressure builds early on but they got even worse in HOTS. people think zerg like to mass drone, build mass infestor and build slowmoving BL/infestor army in WoL. WE DONT!!! but most other units/strats sucked in WoL so we had to. in HOTS there is the same problem only with other units. now BL/infestor sucks but ultras are a lot better. still zerg has to mass drone and either build mutas or fast hive since SHs, hydras suck and nydus, drop etc. is still too bad. blizz promised to fix T2 zerg...well they fucked it up even more. you need hive more than ever to have a chance.
so yeah we will have to wait for LotV rofl....
Oh come on. Very few zerg ever bothered to explore the extent of nydus play. Swarm hosts are awesome. Hydras are now awesome. There is a vast amount of the zerg arsenal that no zerg bothered to exploit because the easiest way to win games was just to build infestors and let them autowin you the game with whatever T3 unit you chose to build. It wasn't just the best strategy, it was virtually unbeatable. It defined the entire game.
oh yeah beta is going on since 5 months or so but zergs are too stupid to make hydras, swarmhost, nydus, ovidrop etc. work now that BL/infestor doesnt work anymore. 5 months in which brainless zerg players didnt try that....oh wait actually some zerg players arent mentally retarded like you suppose and tried that stuff and even their opponents say that hydras suck hardcore and SH are a shit all in unit unless supermassed. so please dont troll and say stuff like "hydras are awesome". they are literally the worst unit in the game.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
Aren't you getting really tired to fight avilo? I fought years, and I finally gave up, and believe me, its feels great. I play LoL now, because I realized that things will never change.
For example: broodlord infestor in wol: it's so strong, I never saw a terran who was EVEN with the zerg win against it, never. And it's still in the game. Blizzard never touched it.
Another example is the greedyness: zergs can play greedy, and allins are really not viable against them (still talking about wol). Meanwhile zergs can allin terrans without a problem. Zergs tell us then that "we shouldn't play so greedy", but meanwhile we can't punish their greedyness. Blizzard refuses to change this.
And then there is hots, our new hope. And as you can see, no change in policy.
i LOVE how terrans say stuff like "zerg can play so greedy" while T got WM and siege mode
WM is one of those interesting game concepts, in which depending on the fluctuation of my MMR, the unit is either fantastic and completely wrecks early pushes, or ends up killing one zergling / trigger. I personally love things designed this way, that greatly take skill into consideration, but the unit is not insane, and even getting two siege tanks is still a considerable investment. We have to cut something between tech, production, upgrades and a quick third. Apparently, it's a complete blasphemy if you have to cut anything, even though you have much better scouting.
i also like the mine taking skill from both sides. you can trigger it with 1 ling but also T can kill the 1 ling with 2 rines before the mine is triggered etc. never said WM is imba.
as for your argument. if Z wants to be aggressive with roach ling (bling) it got way easier to defend that in HOTS than it was in WoL, so yes T can play more greedy. on the other hand Z has to play less greedy because of hellbats and mines while having to play more greedy because aggressive play got way worse. see the dilemma of zerg early game? believe me all zerg players would like to have good pressure builds early on but they got even worse in HOTS. people think zerg like to mass drone, build mass infestor and build slowmoving BL/infestor army in WoL. WE DONT!!! but most other units/strats sucked in WoL so we had to. in HOTS there is the same problem only with other units. now BL/infestor sucks but ultras are a lot better. still zerg has to mass drone and either build mutas or fast hive since SHs, hydras suck and nydus, drop etc. is still too bad. blizz promised to fix T2 zerg...well they fucked it up even more. you need hive more than ever to have a chance.
so yeah we will have to wait for LotV rofl....
Oh come on. Very few zerg ever bothered to explore the extent of nydus play. Swarm hosts are awesome. Hydras are now awesome. There is a vast amount of the zerg arsenal that no zerg bothered to exploit because the easiest way to win games was just to build infestors and let them autowin you the game with whatever T3 unit you chose to build. It wasn't just the best strategy, it was virtually unbeatable. It defined the entire game.
oh yeah beta is going on since 5 months or so but zergs are too stupid to make hydras, swarmhost, nydus, ovidrop etc. work now that BL/infestor doesnt work anymore. 5 months in which brainless zerg players didnt try that....oh wait actually some zerg players arent mentally retarded like you suppose and tried that stuff and even their opponents say that hydras suck hardcore and SH are a shit all in unit unless supermassed. so please dont troll and say stuff like "hydras are awesome". they are literally the worst unit in the game.
You expect us to believe a 14.5 dps unit that moves at 2.81 (with upgrade) is the worst unit in the game. Either you have no idea how to optimize their damage output beyond a-move, you use them unescorted or both.
On February 23 2013 22:06 Mithriel wrote: As a Terran, i can completely agree hellbat needed to Change. However with this change, the upgrade seems a bit useless? If Terrans want hellbats, they'll produce hellbats from the factory instead of Hellions.
I guess only when someone really over committed to Hellions and they're just taking up supply someone might get the upgrade....
Wait, did I misread something, or can Terrans produce Hellbats from the Factory after they build an Armory and the upgrade only allows Hellions to transform into Hellbats or Hellbats to transform into Hellions?
On February 23 2013 22:06 Mithriel wrote: As a Terran, i can completely agree hellbat needed to Change. However with this change, the upgrade seems a bit useless? If Terrans want hellbats, they'll produce hellbats from the factory instead of Hellions.
I guess only when someone really over committed to Hellions and they're just taking up supply someone might get the upgrade....
Wait, did I misread something, or can Terrans produce Hellbats from the Factory after they build an Armory and the upgrade only allows Hellions to transform into Hellbats or Hellbats to transform into Hellions?
Hey everybody, i have some ideas to change the hellbat in a different way than patch #15 did. The problem with this patch is, you have to skip hellions or never transform them. Because the upgrade is so expensive. Only if you go 2 fax hellions it is worthy to upgrade.
Blizzard should at least combine the bf Upgrade and the new transform upgrade. The idea is, you have to decide if you want to go for some runbys -> you choose bf Hellions. Or if you want to go for drop or take a big fight -> you choose Hellbat. Hellbat would have always Blueflame but the damage is the same as atm. You can transform your Blueflame Hellions if Armory is ready. So the players have to take more strategic decisions and nevertheless it's a nerf (bf ugrade required 150/150)
-> remove transform upgrade -> Hellbat now requires bf upgrade 150/150 -> Hellbat requires armory but you can transform your blueflame hellion without any additional upgrades -> Hellbat has always blueflame (same damage as redflame atm)
in addition to this it is imaginable that hellbats aren't biological anymore. So it is a slightly nerf vs Zerg - you can't heal them. But a slightly buff vs Toss - no Archon bonus dmg. Furthermore it makes the Unit itself and the transform of the Hellbat more logical!
So what do you guys think about it? Don't hesitate to ask me.
Sry for my english. It is not my mother language :/
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
Aren't you getting really tired to fight avilo? I fought years, and I finally gave up, and believe me, its feels great. I play LoL now, because I realized that things will never change.
For example: broodlord infestor in wol: it's so strong, I never saw a terran who was EVEN with the zerg win against it, never. And it's still in the game. Blizzard never touched it.
Another example is the greedyness: zergs can play greedy, and allins are really not viable against them (still talking about wol). Meanwhile zergs can allin terrans without a problem. Zergs tell us then that "we shouldn't play so greedy", but meanwhile we can't punish their greedyness. Blizzard refuses to change this.
And then there is hots, our new hope. And as you can see, no change in policy.
i LOVE how terrans say stuff like "zerg can play so greedy" while T got WM and siege mode
WM is one of those interesting game concepts, in which depending on the fluctuation of my MMR, the unit is either fantastic and completely wrecks early pushes, or ends up killing one zergling / trigger. I personally love things designed this way, that greatly take skill into consideration, but the unit is not insane, and even getting two siege tanks is still a considerable investment. We have to cut something between tech, production, upgrades and a quick third. Apparently, it's a complete blasphemy if you have to cut anything, even though you have much better scouting.
i also like the mine taking skill from both sides. you can trigger it with 1 ling but also T can kill the 1 ling with 2 rines before the mine is triggered etc. never said WM is imba.
as for your argument. if Z wants to be aggressive with roach ling (bling) it got way easier to defend that in HOTS than it was in WoL, so yes T can play more greedy. on the other hand Z has to play less greedy because of hellbats and mines while having to play more greedy because aggressive play got way worse. see the dilemma of zerg early game? believe me all zerg players would like to have good pressure builds early on but they got even worse in HOTS. people think zerg like to mass drone, build mass infestor and build slowmoving BL/infestor army in WoL. WE DONT!!! but most other units/strats sucked in WoL so we had to. in HOTS there is the same problem only with other units. now BL/infestor sucks but ultras are a lot better. still zerg has to mass drone and either build mutas or fast hive since SHs, hydras suck and nydus, drop etc. is still too bad. blizz promised to fix T2 zerg...well they fucked it up even more. you need hive more than ever to have a chance.
so yeah we will have to wait for LotV rofl....
Oh come on. Very few zerg ever bothered to explore the extent of nydus play. Swarm hosts are awesome. Hydras are now awesome. There is a vast amount of the zerg arsenal that no zerg bothered to exploit because the easiest way to win games was just to build infestors and let them autowin you the game with whatever T3 unit you chose to build. It wasn't just the best strategy, it was virtually unbeatable. It defined the entire game.
oh yeah beta is going on since 5 months or so but zergs are too stupid to make hydras, swarmhost, nydus, ovidrop etc. work now that BL/infestor doesnt work anymore. 5 months in which brainless zerg players didnt try that....oh wait actually some zerg players arent mentally retarded like you suppose and tried that stuff and even their opponents say that hydras suck hardcore and SH are a shit all in unit unless supermassed. so please dont troll and say stuff like "hydras are awesome". they are literally the worst unit in the game.
You expect us to believe a 14.5 dps unit that moves at 2.81 (with upgrade) is the worst unit in the game. Either you have no idea how to optimize their damage output beyond a-move, you use them unescorted or both.
a 14,5 dps unit (which btw is lower vs every armored unit) with only 80 hp and a movementspeed of 2,81 which is slower than stalker (even without blink lol), stimmed MM, roaches, lings, speedbanes and only a tiny bit faster than chargelots (much slower with charge). you let 2,81 sound fast...it aint...its the slowest of all single target massable units!!! their hp/supply is by far the lowest of all single target massable units! and their DPS isnt supergreat either. chargelots and marines do way more DPS and cost minerals only.
oh and btw they need a 400/400 investment to actually be a halfway okay unit for 2-3 minutes. nice.
hydras suck. deal with it. every objective player knows it and i like that most P/T player say so also because they actually want to play against different zerg styles. they dearly need 6 range as base range and some sort of hivetech upgrade that gives them +20-40 hp so they dont instadie vs everything and zerg has finally a way to fight skytoss + HT!
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
Aren't you getting really tired to fight avilo? I fought years, and I finally gave up, and believe me, its feels great. I play LoL now, because I realized that things will never change.
For example: broodlord infestor in wol: it's so strong, I never saw a terran who was EVEN with the zerg win against it, never. And it's still in the game. Blizzard never touched it.
Another example is the greedyness: zergs can play greedy, and allins are really not viable against them (still talking about wol). Meanwhile zergs can allin terrans without a problem. Zergs tell us then that "we shouldn't play so greedy", but meanwhile we can't punish their greedyness. Blizzard refuses to change this.
And then there is hots, our new hope. And as you can see, no change in policy.
i LOVE how terrans say stuff like "zerg can play so greedy" while T got WM and siege mode
WM is one of those interesting game concepts, in which depending on the fluctuation of my MMR, the unit is either fantastic and completely wrecks early pushes, or ends up killing one zergling / trigger. I personally love things designed this way, that greatly take skill into consideration, but the unit is not insane, and even getting two siege tanks is still a considerable investment. We have to cut something between tech, production, upgrades and a quick third. Apparently, it's a complete blasphemy if you have to cut anything, even though you have much better scouting.
i also like the mine taking skill from both sides. you can trigger it with 1 ling but also T can kill the 1 ling with 2 rines before the mine is triggered etc. never said WM is imba.
as for your argument. if Z wants to be aggressive with roach ling (bling) it got way easier to defend that in HOTS than it was in WoL, so yes T can play more greedy. on the other hand Z has to play less greedy because of hellbats and mines while having to play more greedy because aggressive play got way worse. see the dilemma of zerg early game? believe me all zerg players would like to have good pressure builds early on but they got even worse in HOTS. people think zerg like to mass drone, build mass infestor and build slowmoving BL/infestor army in WoL. WE DONT!!! but most other units/strats sucked in WoL so we had to. in HOTS there is the same problem only with other units. now BL/infestor sucks but ultras are a lot better. still zerg has to mass drone and either build mutas or fast hive since SHs, hydras suck and nydus, drop etc. is still too bad. blizz promised to fix T2 zerg...well they fucked it up even more. you need hive more than ever to have a chance.
so yeah we will have to wait for LotV rofl....
Oh come on. Very few zerg ever bothered to explore the extent of nydus play. Swarm hosts are awesome. Hydras are now awesome. There is a vast amount of the zerg arsenal that no zerg bothered to exploit because the easiest way to win games was just to build infestors and let them autowin you the game with whatever T3 unit you chose to build. It wasn't just the best strategy, it was virtually unbeatable. It defined the entire game.
oh yeah beta is going on since 5 months or so but zergs are too stupid to make hydras, swarmhost, nydus, ovidrop etc. work now that BL/infestor doesnt work anymore. 5 months in which brainless zerg players didnt try that....oh wait actually some zerg players arent mentally retarded like you suppose and tried that stuff and even their opponents say that hydras suck hardcore and SH are a shit all in unit unless supermassed. so please dont troll and say stuff like "hydras are awesome". they are literally the worst unit in the game.
You expect us to believe a 14.5 dps unit that moves at 2.81 (with upgrade) is the worst unit in the game. Either you have no idea how to optimize their damage output beyond a-move, you use them unescorted or both.
Well, Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps 550HP/3armor unit with a 300damage blast (with upgrade) which additionally can fly as bad unit.
You see how ridicolous such stuff sounds when you don't include how much those units cost or what they require? And you tell other people how immature their discussion style is...
I think OP should mention that this upgrade is ONLY for TRANSFORMATION, you don't have to research it in order to make Hellbats after your Armory is finished. So much confusion here.
On February 23 2013 22:06 Mithriel wrote: As a Terran, i can completely agree hellbat needed to Change. However with this change, the upgrade seems a bit useless? If Terrans want hellbats, they'll produce hellbats from the factory instead of Hellions.
I guess only when someone really over committed to Hellions and they're just taking up supply someone might get the upgrade....
Wait, did I misread something, or can Terrans produce Hellbats from the Factory after they build an Armory and the upgrade only allows Hellions to transform into Hellbats or Hellbats to transform into Hellions?
Let's repeat:
Hellbats may be built when Armory is constructed. Hellion transformation is available with Armory research.
At least from what people have posted before.
Essentially the 7:30min hellbat drop is dead. And Zerg may continue to open 14hatch with impunity.
Actually I just realized something about hellions and Hellbats. They have 2 upgrades both 150/150 and now its funny coz in TvT you rather have blueflame hellions over hellbats in TvP and TvZ you rather have Hellbats over hellions so its like you never want both upgrades in single matchup O.o .
On February 23 2013 23:43 Zorgaz wrote: No revert to the medivac cargo change now that the timing to hellbat drop has been delayed? A little surprised.
4Hellbat drops would still one shot a mineral line. They require skill now with the cargo change (you have to target fire, basically, like with normal hellions), and are still decently effective.
On February 23 2013 22:06 Mithriel wrote: As a Terran, i can completely agree hellbat needed to Change. However with this change, the upgrade seems a bit useless? If Terrans want hellbats, they'll produce hellbats from the factory instead of Hellions.
I guess only when someone really over committed to Hellions and they're just taking up supply someone might get the upgrade....
Wait, did I misread something, or can Terrans produce Hellbats from the Factory after they build an Armory and the upgrade only allows Hellions to transform into Hellbats or Hellbats to transform into Hellions?
That's exactly what it means.
Then early game Hellbat pushes are still going to be viable vs Zerg, the CC first, double Reactor/Factory opening can just build Widow Mines and then move into Hellbat production as soon as the Armory is finished.
Should be interesting to test on ladder, essentially all Blizzard did was separate the two units - which is the smartest thing they've done in awhile.
On February 23 2013 23:40 Tomasy wrote: Actually I just realized something about hellions and Hellbats. They have 2 upgrades both 150/150 and now its funny coz in TvT you rather have blueflame hellions over hellbats in TvP and TvZ you rather have Hellbats over hellions so its like you never want both upgrades in single matchup O.o .
I'd argue that you would in pretty much every matchup (I know I have on ladder)
I'd argue that hellbat drops, while good to attack a main are relatively pointless the later the game goes on as where bases become a lot more spread out, it's a lot easier to move BFH's around the map than it is to bother with added supply of a dropship.
Of course if they start pylon walling everywhere and stop you from getting in by ground, drops will be the better choice. It's definately a situational thing now rather than Hellbat drops being the best option all the time.
On February 23 2013 22:38 ToKoreaWithLove wrote: I'm just wondering - are terrans supposed to get something new for late game? Did they buff Battlecruisers or Vikings and I missed it? Did Marauders receive a buff?
That's the joke. With all of the new units and changes in HotS a lot of people have forgotten about some of the core reasons as to why Terran was so underpowered in WoL: P/Z superior production mechanics, vulnerability to P/Z tech-switch speed that is near-abusive, and a bad late game. Zerg and Protoss both have a significantly buffed late game in HotS... could this be the queen patch 2.0?
On February 23 2013 22:38 ToKoreaWithLove wrote: I'm just wondering - are terrans supposed to get something new for late game? Did they buff Battlecruisers or Vikings and I missed it? Did Marauders receive a buff?
That's the joke. With all of the new units and changes in HotS a lot of people have forgotten about some of the core reasons as to why Terran was so underpowered in WoL: P/Z superior production mechanics, vulnerability to P/Z tech-switch speed that is near-abusive, and a bad late game. Zerg and Protoss both have a significantly buffed late game in HotS... could this be the queen patch 2.0?
At least Z/P lategame are not nearly as strong as ctrl+c combined with ctrl+v
On February 23 2013 18:31 avilo wrote: No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
I think this post had far too many unfair statements, that do a poor and misleading job of representing the community/situation. You make a few reasonable points maybe, but some lines are just flat out incorrect, and many are exaggerated, showing how 1-sided and skewed your perception is. This is common in a lot of your posts, and needs to stop.
Even though nobody reads, I'll take a shot at addressing a few things that seem in my mind to be going on :
1 - This isn't an upgrade to get hellbats. This is an upgrade simply to transform hellions to hellbats. Seem to be some people who don't get that. You can pump hellbats just the same as before once your armory is done.
2 - This addresses the easy seamless transition from mass hellion contain into a hellbat timing. All the benefits of early game hellion with all the mid game punch of hellbats was just hitting to hard to fast. Hellbat timings will still be strong just delayed a bit or it means trying strategies where instead of making hellions early maybe go mines and then when armory is done pump hellbats.
3 - People asking for cargo space to be reverted are missing the point. Hellbat drops weren't to strong because of the timing, they were strong at any point in the game really. Actually late game is where you really saw hellbat drops shine most because static defense/lings/blings which you'd use to stop marine drops did nothing. 2-3 simultaneous drops going on late game with cheap hellbats were just very cost effective. And to leave roaches at each base late game is so supply inefficient. Not saying I agree or disagree with the change, but this patch and the cargo are independent of each other and addressing 2 different issues.
4 - People that keep claiming terran just gets nerfed over and over.. well as far as I can tell the last few patches have seen terran buffs. Everything they did to Ravens, no siege upgrade, making hellbats bio, reapers viable, adding extra damage to mines... apparently nobody cares or counts those changes... they bring things up like Zerg gets early burrow? I haven't used burrow once pre-lair and I haven't seen one build exploiting that. Maybe Zerg should complain about all the worthless buffs. Overall, all races have gotten a lot of buffs and nerfs during beta please stop including WoL post release patches to HotS beta.
On February 24 2013 00:31 FLuE wrote: Even though nobody reads, I'll take a shot at addressing a few things that seem in my mind to be going on :
1 - This isn't an upgrade to get hellbats. This is an upgrade simply to transform hellions to hellbats. Seem to be some people who don't get that. You can pump hellbats just the same as before once your armory is done.
2 - This addresses the easy seamless transition from mass hellion contain into a hellbat timing. All the benefits of early game hellion with all the mid game punch of hellbats was just hitting to hard to fast. Hellbat timings will still be strong just delayed a bit or it means trying strategies where instead of making hellions early maybe go mines and then when armory is done pump hellbats.
3 - People asking for cargo space to be reverted are missing the point. Hellbat drops weren't to strong because of the timing, they were strong at any point in the game really. Actually late game is where you really saw hellbat drops shine most because static defense/lings/blings which you'd use to stop marine drops did nothing. 2-3 simultaneous drops going on late game with cheap hellbats were just very cost effective. And to leave roaches at each base late game is so supply inefficient. Not saying I agree or disagree with the change, but this patch and the cargo are independent of each other and addressing 2 different issues.
4 - People that keep claiming terran just gets nerfed over and over.. well as far as I can tell the last few patches have seen terran buffs. Everything they did to Ravens, no siege upgrade, making hellbats bio, reapers viable, adding extra damage to mines... apparently nobody cares or counts those changes... they bring things up like Zerg gets early burrow? I haven't used burrow once pre-lair and I haven't seen one build exploiting that. Maybe Zerg should complain about all the worthless buffs. Overall, all races have gotten a lot of buffs and nerfs during beta please stop including WoL post release patches to HotS beta.
Agree completely with 1-3, great points. 4 I agree with your main point that terrans did just get an insane amount of buffs (more than you mentioned such as medivac boost), and I agree that it feels ridiculous to complain about earlier burrow. Although, I wouldn't say it doesn't have any use, just seems not right to complain about it in the way that a few (like avilo) have done. Burrow rushes to me feel like a way to make an attack that would already be successful without burrow vs a player who was under-prepared, a little bit stronger/more annoying to deal with... Rather than a way to turn an attack that would normally be deflected, into a successful one. In all matchups.
I really don't get why you wouldn't make 2 Helions transform into 1 Hellbat when when amory is done, aswell as making straight from factory Hellbat 200 minerals. It explains the cargo space change, solves the problems of hellbats being to cheap for the damage (I'm terran and they obviously are too good for 100 minerals) while not hurting mech, because they still don't cost any gas. Also it would rule out some strong bio hellbat comps that could potentially become a problem.
I really don't see a big factor that speaks against it.
Edit: Obviously they can't be 4 supply though. Guess that might be a small problem.
On February 24 2013 00:31 FLuE wrote: Even though nobody reads, I'll take a shot at addressing a few things that seem in my mind to be going on :
1 - This isn't an upgrade to get hellbats. This is an upgrade simply to transform hellions to hellbats. Seem to be some people who don't get that. You can pump hellbats just the same as before once your armory is done.
2 - This addresses the easy seamless transition from mass hellion contain into a hellbat timing. All the benefits of early game hellion with all the mid game punch of hellbats was just hitting to hard to fast. Hellbat timings will still be strong just delayed a bit or it means trying strategies where instead of making hellions early maybe go mines and then when armory is done pump hellbats.
3 - People asking for cargo space to be reverted are missing the point. Hellbat drops weren't to strong because of the timing, they were strong at any point in the game really. Actually late game is where you really saw hellbat drops shine most because static defense/lings/blings which you'd use to stop marine drops did nothing. 2-3 simultaneous drops going on late game with cheap hellbats were just very cost effective. And to leave roaches at each base late game is so supply inefficient. Not saying I agree or disagree with the change, but this patch and the cargo are independent of each other and addressing 2 different issues.
4 - People that keep claiming terran just gets nerfed over and over.. well as far as I can tell the last few patches have seen terran buffs. Everything they did to Ravens, no siege upgrade, making hellbats bio, reapers viable, adding extra damage to mines... apparently nobody cares or counts those changes... they bring things up like Zerg gets early burrow? I haven't used burrow once pre-lair and I haven't seen one build exploiting that. Maybe Zerg should complain about all the worthless buffs. Overall, all races have gotten a lot of buffs and nerfs during beta please stop including WoL post release patches to HotS beta.
The patch note was rather confusing, I sure thought that you could only produce hellbats after researching the new upgrade. In this case, keeping the cargo space as it is makes perfect sense. The fact that players now have to choose hellions or hellbats in early-mid game is good, the more decisions the better but I reckon hellbats still need a dps nerf + the ability to use BF.
About burrow, it can force early scans and prevent your opponent from mining, like the WM. DRG used burrowed roaches really well against Jjakji on Daybreak, the upgrade has some potential and can punish terrans who wasted all their energy on mules.
An upgrade that requires 150/150 and 110seconds , a tech lab and an armory...just insane. I would had expected a 50/50 60seconds upgrade or combining blue flame and the transformation into a single upgrade with the new price but this wow. I guess now we will have to skip helions and go straight to hellbats.
You expect us to believe a 14.5 dps unit that moves at 2.81 (with upgrade) is the worst unit in the game. Either you have no idea how to optimize their damage output beyond a-move, you use them unescorted or both.
Well, Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps 550HP/3armor unit with a 300damage blast (with upgrade) which additionally can fly as bad unit.
You see how ridicolous such stuff sounds when you don't include how much those units cost or what they require? And you tell other people how immature their discussion style is...
I didn't believe you'd resort to lying, Big J. I'll try to be civil.
It should be read as:
Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps range 6, 550HP/3 armor unit with 300 damage blast (with upgrade) every 125 seconds, vulnerablility to feedback spell and which additionally can fly as bad unit.
In any case on 4 bases, cost is not an issue, production rate is.
On February 23 2013 18:31 avilo wrote: No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
I think this post had far too many unfair statements, that do a poor and misleading job of representing the community/situation. You make a few reasonable points maybe, but some lines are just flat out incorrect, and many are exaggerated, showing how 1-sided and skewed your perception is. This is common in a lot of your posts, and needs to stop.
Fact: Terran is the least played race: http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all Fact: Terran has the worst w/l ratio TvZ; moreso than any other race Fact: Terran hasn't won a GSL since the queen patch and a significant amount of Zerg began to dominate major EU and NA tournaments since the patch Fact: Blizzard admits to balance issues with the infestor but chose to address it in HoTS - 7 months later. Fact: Even Stephon, the 4 hotkey Code S player, admits Zerg is the best race: http://starcraftstalker.blogspot.com/2012/11/zerg-imba_12.html Fact (arguable): Terran was the least "improved" race in HoTS. Aside from the Window mine, no new units were introduced but "reworked" or improved. While P and Z receive a whole host of T2 and T3 units: Tempest, Oracles, Swarm Hosts, Vipers. And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game. Fact: Taking some of these issues into account, Blizzard instituted two MAJOR nerfs to one of the new, core Terran units. No other race has seen such a drastic change so close to release. Many Protoss (myself admittedly, b/c I play T and P) see Prismatic alignment as way too powerful. But the only change Blizzard makes is a timer on the unit? The only advantage I see the timer providing is letting your opponent know how long it will take to obliterate your army.
While avilo's statement can come off as inflammatory, and I may have taken a different approach, it is hard to ignore the frustration Terran players have with the kneejerk reaction Blizzard has to this race compared to Protoss and Zerg.
You expect us to believe a 14.5 dps unit that moves at 2.81 (with upgrade) is the worst unit in the game. Either you have no idea how to optimize their damage output beyond a-move, you use them unescorted or both.
Well, Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps 550HP/3armor unit with a 300damage blast (with upgrade) which additionally can fly as bad unit.
You see how ridicolous such stuff sounds when you don't include how much those units cost or what they require? And you tell other people how immature their discussion style is...
I didn't believe you'd resort to lying, Big J. I'll try to be civil.
Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps range 6, 550HP/3 armor unit with 300 damage blast (with upgrade) every 125 seconds, vulnerablility to feedback spell and which additionally can fly as bad unit.
In any case on 4 bases, cost is not an issue, production rate is.
Really hard to even know where to begin with responding to this bullshit. I know I shouldn't, it's not worth my time. But whatever, I'm in a good mood, can as well have some fun with this troll,
So whenever someone describes a unit he has to point out every stat the unit has and every spell interaction? Yeah, what a lyer I am not mentioning every freaking thing that is true for the BC. Pssst, before someone says that hydralisks don't get a dusk/dawn sight bonus you really should mention it... Oh too late. I found out that you didn't mention it. You lyer! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
And to your "cost is no issue, production rate is". Well, if cost is no issue and you have 50scvs (so building production rate is 50), why don't you build 50starports to get the same production rate as a zerg? Of course cost is THE issue. Z and P have more production, because their infrastructure COSTS less.
On February 23 2013 18:31 avilo wrote: No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
I think this post had far too many unfair statements, that do a poor and misleading job of representing the community/situation. You make a few reasonable points maybe, but some lines are just flat out incorrect, and many are exaggerated, showing how 1-sided and skewed your perception is. This is common in a lot of your posts, and needs to stop.
Fact: Terran is the least played race: http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all Fact: Terran has the worst w/l ratio TvZ; moreso than any other race Fact: Terran hasn't won a GSL since the queen patch and a significant amount of Zerg began to dominate major EU and NA tournaments since the patch Fact: Blizzard admits to balance issues with the infestor but chose to address it in HoTS - 7 months later. Fact: Even Stephon, the 4 hotkey Code S player, admits Zerg is the best race: http://starcraftstalker.blogspot.com/2012/11/zerg-imba_12.html Fact (arguable): Terran was the least "improved" race in HoTS. Aside from the Window mine, no new units were introduced but "reworked" or improved. While P and T receive a whole host of T2 and T3 units: Tempest, Oracles, Swarm Hosts, Vipers. And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game. Fact: Taking some of these issues into account, Blizzard instituted two MAJOR nerfs to one of the new, core Terran units. No other race has seen such a drastic change so close to release. Many Protoss (myself admittedly, b/c I play T and P) see Prismatic alignment as way too powerful. But the only change Blizzard makes is a timer on the unit? The only advantage I see the timer providing is letting your opponent know how long it will take to obliterate your army.
While avilo's statement can come off as inflammatory, and I may have taken a different approach, it is hard to ignore the frustration Terran players have with the kneejerk reaction Blizzard has to this race compared to Protoss and Zerg.
There are several problems I have with this post, but I've got to run and it would take a lot of time to pick apart your post and find all the evidence that would back my argument up. However there's one point in particular that struck me as heinously wrong, and that's
And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game.
maxed terran mech and even scarier, ultimate sky terran armies are afaik widely considered incredibly difficult to beat and seemingly impossible to beat, respectively. for a quick reference to back me up, listen to SOTG's most recent episode where qxc says that if he gets a maxed mech army vs zerg he never loses, and if he gets maxed skyterran it's impossible to lose
Please note: i'm not saying lategame terran is imbalanced, that remains to be seen. I'm just saying that the way things seem right now, both terrans and zergs alike seem to think that it's pretty tough for zerg once terran gets those things. Hopefully we just haven't figured the game out yet, and it's very very new still and so many changes are happening all the time. And it was hard to get to a normal sort of midgame and normal endgame with the crazy aggression terrans were having success with earlygame, but with the new patches that changes a ton. So we'll see.
On February 23 2013 18:31 avilo wrote: No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
I think this post had far too many unfair statements, that do a poor and misleading job of representing the community/situation. You make a few reasonable points maybe, but some lines are just flat out incorrect, and many are exaggerated, showing how 1-sided and skewed your perception is. This is common in a lot of your posts, and needs to stop.
Fact: Terran is the least played race: http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all Fact: Terran has the worst w/l ratio TvZ; moreso than any other race Fact: Terran hasn't won a GSL since the queen patch and a significant amount of Zerg began to dominate major EU and NA tournaments since the patch Fact: Blizzard admits to balance issues with the infestor but chose to address it in HoTS - 7 months later. Fact: Even Stephon, the 4 hotkey Code S player, admits Zerg is the best race: http://starcraftstalker.blogspot.com/2012/11/zerg-imba_12.html Fact (arguable): Terran was the least "improved" race in HoTS. Aside from the Window mine, no new units were introduced but "reworked" or improved. While P and T receive a whole host of T2 and T3 units: Tempest, Oracles, Swarm Hosts, Vipers. And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game. Fact: Taking some of these issues into account, Blizzard instituted two MAJOR nerfs to one of the new, core Terran units. No other race has seen such a drastic change so close to release. Many Protoss (myself admittedly, b/c I play T and P) see Prismatic alignment as way too powerful. But the only change Blizzard makes is a timer on the unit? The only advantage I see the timer providing is letting your opponent know how long it will take to obliterate your army.
While avilo's statement can come off as inflammatory, and I may have taken a different approach, it is hard to ignore the frustration Terran players have with the kneejerk reaction Blizzard has to this race compared to Protoss and Zerg.
There are several problems I have with this post, but I've got to run and it would take a lot of time to pick apart your post and find all the evidence that would back my argument up. However there's one point in particular that struck me as heinously wrong, and that's
And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game.
maxed terran mech and even scarier, ultimate sky terran armies are afaik widely considered incredibly difficult to beat and seemingly impossible to beat, respectively. for a quick reference to back me up, listen to SOTG's most recent episode where qxc says that if he gets a maxed mech army vs zerg he never loses, and if he gets maxed skyterran it's impossible to lose
Please note: i'm not saying lategame terran is imbalanced, that remains to be seen. I'm just saying that the way things seem right now, both terrans and zergs alike seem to think that it's pretty tough for zerg once terran gets those things. Hopefully we just haven't figured the game out yet, and it's very very new still and so many changes are happening all the time. And it was hard to get to a normal sort of midgame and normal endgame with the crazy aggression terrans were having success with earlygame, but with the new patches that changes a ton. So we'll see.
Don't open your eyes when you play against a well controlled skyprotoss w/ ht support. That will be significantly more one sided.
On February 23 2013 18:31 avilo wrote: No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
I think this post had far too many unfair statements, that do a poor and misleading job of representing the community/situation. You make a few reasonable points maybe, but some lines are just flat out incorrect, and many are exaggerated, showing how 1-sided and skewed your perception is. This is common in a lot of your posts, and needs to stop.
Fact: Terran is the least played race: http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all Fact: Terran has the worst w/l ratio TvZ; moreso than any other race Fact: Terran hasn't won a GSL since the queen patch and a significant amount of Zerg began to dominate major EU and NA tournaments since the patch Fact: Blizzard admits to balance issues with the infestor but chose to address it in HoTS - 7 months later. Fact: Even Stephon, the 4 hotkey Code S player, admits Zerg is the best race: http://starcraftstalker.blogspot.com/2012/11/zerg-imba_12.html Fact (arguable): Terran was the least "improved" race in HoTS. Aside from the Window mine, no new units were introduced but "reworked" or improved. While P and T receive a whole host of T2 and T3 units: Tempest, Oracles, Swarm Hosts, Vipers. And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game. Fact: Taking some of these issues into account, Blizzard instituted two MAJOR nerfs to one of the new, core Terran units. No other race has seen such a drastic change so close to release. Many Protoss (myself admittedly, b/c I play T and P) see Prismatic alignment as way too powerful. But the only change Blizzard makes is a timer on the unit? The only advantage I see the timer providing is letting your opponent know how long it will take to obliterate your army.
While avilo's statement can come off as inflammatory, and I may have taken a different approach, it is hard to ignore the frustration Terran players have with the kneejerk reaction Blizzard has to this race compared to Protoss and Zerg.
There are several problems I have with this post, but I've got to run and it would take a lot of time to pick apart your post and find all the evidence that would back my argument up. However there's one point in particular that struck me as heinously wrong, and that's
And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game.
maxed terran mech and even scarier, ultimate sky terran armies are afaik widely considered incredibly difficult to beat and seemingly impossible to beat, respectively. for a quick reference to back me up, listen to SOTG's most recent episode where qxc says that if he gets a maxed mech army vs zerg he never loses, and if he gets maxed skyterran it's impossible to lose
Please note: i'm not saying lategame terran is imbalanced, that remains to be seen. I'm just saying that the way things seem right now, both terrans and zergs alike seem to think that it's pretty tough for zerg once terran gets those things. Hopefully we just haven't figured the game out yet, and it's very very new still and so many changes are happening all the time. And it was hard to get to a normal sort of midgame and normal endgame with the crazy aggression terrans were having success with earlygame, but with the new patches that changes a ton. So we'll see.
Don't open your eyes when you play against a well controlled skyprotoss w/ ht support. That will be significantly more one sided.
Do you have an inability to make ghosts? There goes the HT support. Ravens will rape anything that's grouped. Yamato cannon can rape anything that's not grouped.
On February 23 2013 18:31 avilo wrote: No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
I think this post had far too many unfair statements, that do a poor and misleading job of representing the community/situation. You make a few reasonable points maybe, but some lines are just flat out incorrect, and many are exaggerated, showing how 1-sided and skewed your perception is. This is common in a lot of your posts, and needs to stop.
Fact: Terran is the least played race: http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all Fact: Terran has the worst w/l ratio TvZ; moreso than any other race Fact: Terran hasn't won a GSL since the queen patch and a significant amount of Zerg began to dominate major EU and NA tournaments since the patch Fact: Blizzard admits to balance issues with the infestor but chose to address it in HoTS - 7 months later. Fact: Even Stephon, the 4 hotkey Code S player, admits Zerg is the best race: http://starcraftstalker.blogspot.com/2012/11/zerg-imba_12.html Fact (arguable): Terran was the least "improved" race in HoTS. Aside from the Window mine, no new units were introduced but "reworked" or improved. While P and T receive a whole host of T2 and T3 units: Tempest, Oracles, Swarm Hosts, Vipers. And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game. Fact: Taking some of these issues into account, Blizzard instituted two MAJOR nerfs to one of the new, core Terran units. No other race has seen such a drastic change so close to release. Many Protoss (myself admittedly, b/c I play T and P) see Prismatic alignment as way too powerful. But the only change Blizzard makes is a timer on the unit? The only advantage I see the timer providing is letting your opponent know how long it will take to obliterate your army.
While avilo's statement can come off as inflammatory, and I may have taken a different approach, it is hard to ignore the frustration Terran players have with the kneejerk reaction Blizzard has to this race compared to Protoss and Zerg.
There are several problems I have with this post, but I've got to run and it would take a lot of time to pick apart your post and find all the evidence that would back my argument up. However there's one point in particular that struck me as heinously wrong, and that's
And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game.
maxed terran mech and even scarier, ultimate sky terran armies are afaik widely considered incredibly difficult to beat and seemingly impossible to beat, respectively. for a quick reference to back me up, listen to SOTG's most recent episode where qxc says that if he gets a maxed mech army vs zerg he never loses, and if he gets maxed skyterran it's impossible to lose
Please note: i'm not saying lategame terran is imbalanced, that remains to be seen. I'm just saying that the way things seem right now, both terrans and zergs alike seem to think that it's pretty tough for zerg once terran gets those things. Hopefully we just haven't figured the game out yet, and it's very very new still and so many changes are happening all the time. And it was hard to get to a normal sort of midgame and normal endgame with the crazy aggression terrans were having success with earlygame, but with the new patches that changes a ton. So we'll see.
As a high masters mech Terran I've never won an engagement against a Zerg going Hydra/Roach/Viper while both fully maxed. In WoL max mech (ground) used to always win versus a maxed zerg (ground). But that has changed. Perhaps its my composition (more WIndow Mines?) - I've even spread my tanks out BW style in clumps of 3, but blinding cloud lasts way too long, not to mention abduct ability. This is then usually followed up by Swarm Hosts to contain then BL.
As for Terran air. I've seen 60 minute games of Thorzain versus Zerg and can see how that can work. It usually ends up with the zerg mining out their side and just banging their heads against the wall running into Window mines and BC's. But honestly what percent of games get to the 50 minute mark?
On February 24 2013 02:54 SirPinky wrote: Fact (arguable): Terran was the least "improved" race in HoTS. Aside from the Window mine, no new units were introduced but "reworked" or improved. While P and Z receive a whole host of T2 and T3 units: Tempest, Oracles, Swarm Hosts, Vipers. And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game.
Widow mine is still an effective unit in the lategame, as is obviously the hellbat since its just a more tanky version of the same unit. You can't just ignore the reworked and improved units either, the thor/raven changes make a huge difference in many situations and air transitions are much easier when you get shared armor upgrades.
Terran used to struggle in the lategame, I don't think they struggle at all in the HOTS meta right now. I say this as a terran player.
On February 24 2013 02:54 SirPinky wrote: Fact (arguable): Terran was the least "improved" race in HoTS. Aside from the Window mine, no new units were introduced but "reworked" or improved. While P and Z receive a whole host of T2 and T3 units: Tempest, Oracles, Swarm Hosts, Vipers. And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game.
Widow mine is still an effective unit in the lategame, as is obviously the hellbat since its just a more tanky version of the same unit. You can't just ignore the reworked and improved units either, the thor/raven changes make a huge difference in many situations and air transitions are much easier when you get shared armor upgrades.
Terran used to struggle in the lategame, I don't think they struggle at all in the HOTS meta right now. I say this as a terran player.
this! WM + new superravens make T more than competitive lategame TvX. the race that struggles the most is by far Z in lategame HOTS which is mainly due to the fact that zerg AA is by far the worst in the whole game.
On February 23 2013 18:31 avilo wrote: No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
I think this post had far too many unfair statements, that do a poor and misleading job of representing the community/situation. You make a few reasonable points maybe, but some lines are just flat out incorrect, and many are exaggerated, showing how 1-sided and skewed your perception is. This is common in a lot of your posts, and needs to stop.
Fact: Terran is the least played race: http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all Fact: Terran has the worst w/l ratio TvZ; moreso than any other race Fact: Terran hasn't won a GSL since the queen patch and a significant amount of Zerg began to dominate major EU and NA tournaments since the patch Fact: Blizzard admits to balance issues with the infestor but chose to address it in HoTS - 7 months later. Fact: Even Stephon, the 4 hotkey Code S player, admits Zerg is the best race: http://starcraftstalker.blogspot.com/2012/11/zerg-imba_12.html Fact (arguable): Terran was the least "improved" race in HoTS. Aside from the Window mine, no new units were introduced but "reworked" or improved. While P and T receive a whole host of T2 and T3 units: Tempest, Oracles, Swarm Hosts, Vipers. And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game. Fact: Taking some of these issues into account, Blizzard instituted two MAJOR nerfs to one of the new, core Terran units. No other race has seen such a drastic change so close to release. Many Protoss (myself admittedly, b/c I play T and P) see Prismatic alignment as way too powerful. But the only change Blizzard makes is a timer on the unit? The only advantage I see the timer providing is letting your opponent know how long it will take to obliterate your army.
While avilo's statement can come off as inflammatory, and I may have taken a different approach, it is hard to ignore the frustration Terran players have with the kneejerk reaction Blizzard has to this race compared to Protoss and Zerg.
There are several problems I have with this post, but I've got to run and it would take a lot of time to pick apart your post and find all the evidence that would back my argument up. However there's one point in particular that struck me as heinously wrong, and that's
And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game.
maxed terran mech and even scarier, ultimate sky terran armies are afaik widely considered incredibly difficult to beat and seemingly impossible to beat, respectively. for a quick reference to back me up, listen to SOTG's most recent episode where qxc says that if he gets a maxed mech army vs zerg he never loses, and if he gets maxed skyterran it's impossible to lose
Please note: i'm not saying lategame terran is imbalanced, that remains to be seen. I'm just saying that the way things seem right now, both terrans and zergs alike seem to think that it's pretty tough for zerg once terran gets those things. Hopefully we just haven't figured the game out yet, and it's very very new still and so many changes are happening all the time. And it was hard to get to a normal sort of midgame and normal endgame with the crazy aggression terrans were having success with earlygame, but with the new patches that changes a ton. So we'll see.
Don't open your eyes when you play against a well controlled skyprotoss w/ ht support. That will be significantly more one sided.
I've actually had some success with a really HUGE flank of just pure 3-3 hydras, since air is so awful vs them, and the only thing they can do is storm which is actually not very good if the hydras aren't clumped but standing in an arc attacking them. However this is mostly against a tempest/HT comp, carriers actually kill hydras fast which is a problem with support. And if they had colossus that'd be another problem, as vipers don't fare well against tempests that are revealed by oracles. And of course getting a huge arc can sometimes be difficult/impossible.
On February 23 2013 18:31 avilo wrote: No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
I think this post had far too many unfair statements, that do a poor and misleading job of representing the community/situation. You make a few reasonable points maybe, but some lines are just flat out incorrect, and many are exaggerated, showing how 1-sided and skewed your perception is. This is common in a lot of your posts, and needs to stop.
Fact: Terran is the least played race: http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all Fact: Terran has the worst w/l ratio TvZ; moreso than any other race Fact: Terran hasn't won a GSL since the queen patch and a significant amount of Zerg began to dominate major EU and NA tournaments since the patch Fact: Blizzard admits to balance issues with the infestor but chose to address it in HoTS - 7 months later. Fact: Even Stephon, the 4 hotkey Code S player, admits Zerg is the best race: http://starcraftstalker.blogspot.com/2012/11/zerg-imba_12.html Fact (arguable): Terran was the least "improved" race in HoTS. Aside from the Window mine, no new units were introduced but "reworked" or improved. While P and T receive a whole host of T2 and T3 units: Tempest, Oracles, Swarm Hosts, Vipers. And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game. Fact: Taking some of these issues into account, Blizzard instituted two MAJOR nerfs to one of the new, core Terran units. No other race has seen such a drastic change so close to release. Many Protoss (myself admittedly, b/c I play T and P) see Prismatic alignment as way too powerful. But the only change Blizzard makes is a timer on the unit? The only advantage I see the timer providing is letting your opponent know how long it will take to obliterate your army.
While avilo's statement can come off as inflammatory, and I may have taken a different approach, it is hard to ignore the frustration Terran players have with the kneejerk reaction Blizzard has to this race compared to Protoss and Zerg.
There are several problems I have with this post, but I've got to run and it would take a lot of time to pick apart your post and find all the evidence that would back my argument up. However there's one point in particular that struck me as heinously wrong, and that's
And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game.
maxed terran mech and even scarier, ultimate sky terran armies are afaik widely considered incredibly difficult to beat and seemingly impossible to beat, respectively. for a quick reference to back me up, listen to SOTG's most recent episode where qxc says that if he gets a maxed mech army vs zerg he never loses, and if he gets maxed skyterran it's impossible to lose
Please note: i'm not saying lategame terran is imbalanced, that remains to be seen. I'm just saying that the way things seem right now, both terrans and zergs alike seem to think that it's pretty tough for zerg once terran gets those things. Hopefully we just haven't figured the game out yet, and it's very very new still and so many changes are happening all the time. And it was hard to get to a normal sort of midgame and normal endgame with the crazy aggression terrans were having success with earlygame, but with the new patches that changes a ton. So we'll see.
As a high masters mech Terran I've never won an engagement against a Zerg going Hydra/Roach/Viper while both fully maxed. In WoL max mech (ground) used to always win versus a maxed zerg (ground). But that has changed. Perhaps its my composition (more WIndow Mines?) - I've even spread my tanks out BW style in clumps of 3, but blinding cloud lasts way too long, not to mention abduct ability. This is then usually followed up by Swarm Hosts to contain then BL.
As for Terran air. I've seen 60 minute games of Thorzain versus Zerg and can see how that can work. It usually ends up with the zerg mining out their side and just banging their heads against the wall running into Window mines and BC's. But honestly what percent of games get to the 50 minute mark?
You should be watching this game then, MVP telling us that unsieged Tanks are actually really good vs. Roach/Hydra/Ultra/Viper.
Please note: i'm not saying lategame terran is imbalanced, that remains to be seen. I'm just saying that the way things seem right now, both terrans and zergs alike seem to think that it's pretty tough for zerg once terran gets those things.
I'd imagine late game TvZ will only get better for zerg. It will take zergs learning how to properly use Vipers though. Even today in the GSTL Ragnarok had pretty poor viper control in mass engagements and only really used them for fun (chain fungaling medivacs). He only used blinding cloud twice in a mass engagement and seemingly forget about them about 3/4 ways through his match vs MMA.
On February 23 2013 18:31 avilo wrote: No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
I think this post had far too many unfair statements, that do a poor and misleading job of representing the community/situation. You make a few reasonable points maybe, but some lines are just flat out incorrect, and many are exaggerated, showing how 1-sided and skewed your perception is. This is common in a lot of your posts, and needs to stop.
Fact: Terran is the least played race: http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all Fact: Terran has the worst w/l ratio TvZ; moreso than any other race Fact: Terran hasn't won a GSL since the queen patch and a significant amount of Zerg began to dominate major EU and NA tournaments since the patch Fact: Blizzard admits to balance issues with the infestor but chose to address it in HoTS - 7 months later. Fact: Even Stephon, the 4 hotkey Code S player, admits Zerg is the best race: http://starcraftstalker.blogspot.com/2012/11/zerg-imba_12.html Fact (arguable): Terran was the least "improved" race in HoTS. Aside from the Window mine, no new units were introduced but "reworked" or improved. While P and T receive a whole host of T2 and T3 units: Tempest, Oracles, Swarm Hosts, Vipers. And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game. Fact: Taking some of these issues into account, Blizzard instituted two MAJOR nerfs to one of the new, core Terran units. No other race has seen such a drastic change so close to release. Many Protoss (myself admittedly, b/c I play T and P) see Prismatic alignment as way too powerful. But the only change Blizzard makes is a timer on the unit? The only advantage I see the timer providing is letting your opponent know how long it will take to obliterate your army.
While avilo's statement can come off as inflammatory, and I may have taken a different approach, it is hard to ignore the frustration Terran players have with the kneejerk reaction Blizzard has to this race compared to Protoss and Zerg.
There are several problems I have with this post, but I've got to run and it would take a lot of time to pick apart your post and find all the evidence that would back my argument up. However there's one point in particular that struck me as heinously wrong, and that's
And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game.
maxed terran mech and even scarier, ultimate sky terran armies are afaik widely considered incredibly difficult to beat and seemingly impossible to beat, respectively. for a quick reference to back me up, listen to SOTG's most recent episode where qxc says that if he gets a maxed mech army vs zerg he never loses, and if he gets maxed skyterran it's impossible to lose
Please note: i'm not saying lategame terran is imbalanced, that remains to be seen. I'm just saying that the way things seem right now, both terrans and zergs alike seem to think that it's pretty tough for zerg once terran gets those things. Hopefully we just haven't figured the game out yet, and it's very very new still and so many changes are happening all the time. And it was hard to get to a normal sort of midgame and normal endgame with the crazy aggression terrans were having success with earlygame, but with the new patches that changes a ton. So we'll see.
Don't open your eyes when you play against a well controlled skyprotoss w/ ht support. That will be significantly more one sided.
Do you have an inability to make ghosts? There goes the HT support. Ravens will rape anything that's grouped. Yamato cannon can rape anything that's not grouped.
Yeah as Zerg, i do have the inability to make ghosts.
@Zelniq
I also deal ok with tempests, however, vr + carriers+ timewarp + storm makes it way too hard to use hydras. Not sure if i should just max out on infestors and corruptors only.
You expect us to believe a 14.5 dps unit that moves at 2.81 (with upgrade) is the worst unit in the game. Either you have no idea how to optimize their damage output beyond a-move, you use them unescorted or both.
Well, Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps 550HP/3armor unit with a 300damage blast (with upgrade) which additionally can fly as bad unit.
You see how ridicolous such stuff sounds when you don't include how much those units cost or what they require? And you tell other people how immature their discussion style is...
I didn't believe you'd resort to lying, Big J. I'll try to be civil.
It should be read as:
Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps range 6, 550HP/3 armor unit with 300 damage blast (with upgrade) every 125 seconds, vulnerablility to feedback spell and which additionally can fly as bad unit.
In any case on 4 bases, cost is not an issue, production rate is.
Really hard to even know where to begin with responding to this bullshit. I know I shouldn't, it's not worth my time. But whatever, I'm in a good mood, can as well have some fun with this troll,
So whenever someone describes a unit he has to point out every stat the unit has and every spell interaction? Yeah, what a lyer I am not mentioning every freaking thing that is true for the BC. Pssst, before someone says that hydralisks don't get a dusk/dawn sight bonus you really should mention it... Oh too late. I found out that you didn't mention it. You lyer! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
And to your "cost is no issue, production rate is". Well, if cost is no issue and you have 50scvs (so building production rate is 50), why don't you build 50starports to get the same production rate as a zerg? Of course cost is THE issue. Z and P have more production, because their infrastructure COSTS less.
actually protoss infrastructure is more expensive.
factory is 150/100, 190/100 if you count for scv build time. Robo facility is 200/100. But its really only 150/100 because Terran have mules to offset scvs building, and the minerals don't actually go away.
a star port is also 150/100 I believe? Compared to a star gate bring 150/150. And how much is a fusion core? Fleet beacon is 300/200. An armory is 150/100 while a robotics bay is 200/200. And a ghost academy is 100/50 right? Vs a 100/200 templar archives, not to mention the need for a 150/100 twilight council. No need to mention barracks/gateway.
edit: as a sky toss versus zerg: I think allowing blinding cloud to hit air or affect casters would be a wonderful idea personally. Does anybody else share it? I think it would definitely help balance out pvz, and I don't think needing skytoss is how to do it.
You expect us to believe a 14.5 dps unit that moves at 2.81 (with upgrade) is the worst unit in the game. Either you have no idea how to optimize their damage output beyond a-move, you use them unescorted or both.
Well, Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps 550HP/3armor unit with a 300damage blast (with upgrade) which additionally can fly as bad unit.
You see how ridicolous such stuff sounds when you don't include how much those units cost or what they require? And you tell other people how immature their discussion style is...
I didn't believe you'd resort to lying, Big J. I'll try to be civil.
It should be read as:
Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps range 6, 550HP/3 armor unit with 300 damage blast (with upgrade) every 125 seconds, vulnerablility to feedback spell and which additionally can fly as bad unit.
In any case on 4 bases, cost is not an issue, production rate is.
Really hard to even know where to begin with responding to this bullshit. I know I shouldn't, it's not worth my time. But whatever, I'm in a good mood, can as well have some fun with this troll,
So whenever someone describes a unit he has to point out every stat the unit has and every spell interaction? Yeah, what a lyer I am not mentioning every freaking thing that is true for the BC. Pssst, before someone says that hydralisks don't get a dusk/dawn sight bonus you really should mention it... Oh too late. I found out that you didn't mention it. You lyer! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
And to your "cost is no issue, production rate is". Well, if cost is no issue and you have 50scvs (so building production rate is 50), why don't you build 50starports to get the same production rate as a zerg? Of course cost is THE issue. Z and P have more production, because their infrastructure COSTS less.
actually protoss infrastructure is more expensive.
factory is 150/100, 190/100 if you count for scv build time. Robo facility is 200/100. But its really only 150/100 because Terran have mules to offset scvs building, and the minerals don't actually go away.
a star port is also 150/100 I believe? Compared to a star gate bring 150/150. And how much is a fusion core? Fleet beacon is 300/200. An armory is 150/100 while a robotics bay is 200/200. And a ghost academy is 100/50 right? Vs a 100/200 templar archives, not to mention the need for a 150/100 twilight council. No need to mention barracks/gateway.
edit: as a sky toss versus zerg: I think allowing blinding cloud to hit air or affect casters would be a wonderful idea personally. Does anybody else share it? I think it would definitely help balance out pvz, and I don't think needing skytoss is how to do it.
Addons. And yes, fleet beacon has always been ridiculously expensive, I don't know what Blizzard was thinking with that one. They could make it 150/150, wouldn't change a damn thing.
On February 23 2013 18:31 avilo wrote: No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
I think this post had far too many unfair statements, that do a poor and misleading job of representing the community/situation. You make a few reasonable points maybe, but some lines are just flat out incorrect, and many are exaggerated, showing how 1-sided and skewed your perception is. This is common in a lot of your posts, and needs to stop.
Fact: Terran is the least played race: http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all Fact: Terran has the worst w/l ratio TvZ; moreso than any other race Fact: Terran hasn't won a GSL since the queen patch and a significant amount of Zerg began to dominate major EU and NA tournaments since the patch Fact: Blizzard admits to balance issues with the infestor but chose to address it in HoTS - 7 months later. Fact: Even Stephon, the 4 hotkey Code S player, admits Zerg is the best race: http://starcraftstalker.blogspot.com/2012/11/zerg-imba_12.html Fact (arguable): Terran was the least "improved" race in HoTS. Aside from the Window mine, no new units were introduced but "reworked" or improved. While P and T receive a whole host of T2 and T3 units: Tempest, Oracles, Swarm Hosts, Vipers. And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game. Fact: Taking some of these issues into account, Blizzard instituted two MAJOR nerfs to one of the new, core Terran units. No other race has seen such a drastic change so close to release. Many Protoss (myself admittedly, b/c I play T and P) see Prismatic alignment as way too powerful. But the only change Blizzard makes is a timer on the unit? The only advantage I see the timer providing is letting your opponent know how long it will take to obliterate your army.
While avilo's statement can come off as inflammatory, and I may have taken a different approach, it is hard to ignore the frustration Terran players have with the kneejerk reaction Blizzard has to this race compared to Protoss and Zerg.
There are several problems I have with this post, but I've got to run and it would take a lot of time to pick apart your post and find all the evidence that would back my argument up. However there's one point in particular that struck me as heinously wrong, and that's
And it is commonly accepted Terran already stuggles late game.
maxed terran mech and even scarier, ultimate sky terran armies are afaik widely considered incredibly difficult to beat and seemingly impossible to beat, respectively. for a quick reference to back me up, listen to SOTG's most recent episode where qxc says that if he gets a maxed mech army vs zerg he never loses, and if he gets maxed skyterran it's impossible to lose
Please note: i'm not saying lategame terran is imbalanced, that remains to be seen. I'm just saying that the way things seem right now, both terrans and zergs alike seem to think that it's pretty tough for zerg once terran gets those things. Hopefully we just haven't figured the game out yet, and it's very very new still and so many changes are happening all the time. And it was hard to get to a normal sort of midgame and normal endgame with the crazy aggression terrans were having success with earlygame, but with the new patches that changes a ton. So we'll see.
As a high masters mech Terran I've never won an engagement against a Zerg going Hydra/Roach/Viper while both fully maxed. In WoL max mech (ground) used to always win versus a maxed zerg (ground). But that has changed. Perhaps its my composition (more WIndow Mines?) - I've even spread my tanks out BW style in clumps of 3, but blinding cloud lasts way too long, not to mention abduct ability. This is then usually followed up by Swarm Hosts to contain then BL.
As for Terran air. I've seen 60 minute games of Thorzain versus Zerg and can see how that can work. It usually ends up with the zerg mining out their side and just banging their heads against the wall running into Window mines and BC's. But honestly what percent of games get to the 50 minute mark?
You should be watching this game then, MVP telling us that unsieged Tanks are actually really good vs. Roach/Hydra/Ultra/Viper.
Not trying to take anything away from MVP, but Curious had the worst engagement i've seen in a while. Focus on 20:15+. He had a much smaller army and fought in a narrow choke while MVP had a perfect concave of tanks, Also, if you've noticed, the ultras were at the back doing absolutely nothing. Things would be really different if he used fungal growth on those tanks while they were still under the cloud and the ultras were actually in front.
You expect us to believe a 14.5 dps unit that moves at 2.81 (with upgrade) is the worst unit in the game. Either you have no idea how to optimize their damage output beyond a-move, you use them unescorted or both.
Well, Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps 550HP/3armor unit with a 300damage blast (with upgrade) which additionally can fly as bad unit.
You see how ridicolous such stuff sounds when you don't include how much those units cost or what they require? And you tell other people how immature their discussion style is...
I didn't believe you'd resort to lying, Big J. I'll try to be civil.
It should be read as:
Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps range 6, 550HP/3 armor unit with 300 damage blast (with upgrade) every 125 seconds, vulnerablility to feedback spell and which additionally can fly as bad unit.
In any case on 4 bases, cost is not an issue, production rate is.
Really hard to even know where to begin with responding to this bullshit. I know I shouldn't, it's not worth my time. But whatever, I'm in a good mood, can as well have some fun with this troll,
So whenever someone describes a unit he has to point out every stat the unit has and every spell interaction? Yeah, what a lyer I am not mentioning every freaking thing that is true for the BC. Pssst, before someone says that hydralisks don't get a dusk/dawn sight bonus you really should mention it... Oh too late. I found out that you didn't mention it. You lyer! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
And to your "cost is no issue, production rate is". Well, if cost is no issue and you have 50scvs (so building production rate is 50), why don't you build 50starports to get the same production rate as a zerg? Of course cost is THE issue. Z and P have more production, because their infrastructure COSTS less.
actually protoss infrastructure is more expensive.
factory is 150/100, 190/100 if you count for scv build time. Robo facility is 200/100. But its really only 150/100 because Terran have mules to offset scvs building, and the minerals don't actually go away.
a star port is also 150/100 I believe? Compared to a star gate bring 150/150. And how much is a fusion core? Fleet beacon is 300/200. An armory is 150/100 while a robotics bay is 200/200. And a ghost academy is 100/50 right? Vs a 100/200 templar archives, not to mention the need for a 150/100 twilight council. No need to mention barracks/gateway.
edit: as a sky toss versus zerg: I think allowing blinding cloud to hit air or affect casters would be a wonderful idea personally. Does anybody else share it? I think it would definitely help balance out pvz, and I don't think needing skytoss is how to do it.
I see in you are counting SCV build times, what happens when you include separate upgrades for terran land units but not protoss ones? What about addons, how do they factor in?
I wonder when people will learn not to directly compare races in Starcraft.
You expect us to believe a 14.5 dps unit that moves at 2.81 (with upgrade) is the worst unit in the game. Either you have no idea how to optimize their damage output beyond a-move, you use them unescorted or both.
Well, Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps 550HP/3armor unit with a 300damage blast (with upgrade) which additionally can fly as bad unit.
You see how ridicolous such stuff sounds when you don't include how much those units cost or what they require? And you tell other people how immature their discussion style is...
I didn't believe you'd resort to lying, Big J. I'll try to be civil.
It should be read as:
Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps range 6, 550HP/3 armor unit with 300 damage blast (with upgrade) every 125 seconds, vulnerablility to feedback spell and which additionally can fly as bad unit.
In any case on 4 bases, cost is not an issue, production rate is.
Really hard to even know where to begin with responding to this bullshit. I know I shouldn't, it's not worth my time. But whatever, I'm in a good mood, can as well have some fun with this troll,
So whenever someone describes a unit he has to point out every stat the unit has and every spell interaction? Yeah, what a lyer I am not mentioning every freaking thing that is true for the BC. Pssst, before someone says that hydralisks don't get a dusk/dawn sight bonus you really should mention it... Oh too late. I found out that you didn't mention it. You lyer! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
And to your "cost is no issue, production rate is". Well, if cost is no issue and you have 50scvs (so building production rate is 50), why don't you build 50starports to get the same production rate as a zerg? Of course cost is THE issue. Z and P have more production, because their infrastructure COSTS less.
actually protoss infrastructure is more expensive.
factory is 150/100, 190/100 if you count for scv build time. Robo facility is 200/100. But its really only 150/100 because Terran have mules to offset scvs building, and the minerals don't actually go away.
a star port is also 150/100 I believe? Compared to a star gate bring 150/150. And how much is a fusion core? Fleet beacon is 300/200. An armory is 150/100 while a robotics bay is 200/200. And a ghost academy is 100/50 right? Vs a 100/200 templar archives, not to mention the need for a 150/100 twilight council. No need to mention barracks/gateway.
edit: as a sky toss versus zerg: I think allowing blinding cloud to hit air or affect casters would be a wonderful idea personally. Does anybody else share it? I think it would definitely help balance out pvz, and I don't think needing skytoss is how to do it.
well, robo/SG is very similar or more expensive. But lategame extra Warpgate production is quite cheaper than barracks production:
Zealot: 100/0 28seconds --> spending: 3.57/0 per second Stalker: 125/50 32seconds --> spending: 3.91/1.56 per second Marine: 50/0 25seconds --> spending 2/0 per second Marauder: 100/25 30seconds --> spending 3.33/0.83 per second
Basically you need to invest into a barracks and a reactor (200/50) to be able to spend a similar amount of money on marine production as 1 (sometimes chronoboosted) warpgate (150/0) provides in zealot production.
Unless Terran spends his money on ghosts and medivacs (which are really great to spend money on), Terran needs to invest more into infrastructure than Protoss to get the same amount of production. (of course this is not happening as barracks units beat gateway units cost for cost, so you don't need the same production. But just speaking possiblities, once P has the tech infrastructure like core, warpgate, twlight, templar archives, adding production is cheaper for toss than for terran. That's why we sometimes see those ridicolous amounts like 20+ warpgates for Protoss which Terran can only match with like 12barracks+addons)
First, 150/150 is way to expensive, even 100/100 would maybe be too high just to transform, I mean Viking, Tanks, Thors can transform for free. Also now they can revert the cargo nerf.
Please note: i'm not saying lategame terran is imbalanced, that remains to be seen. I'm just saying that the way things seem right now, both terrans and zergs alike seem to think that it's pretty tough for zerg once terran gets those things.
I'd imagine late game TvZ will only get better for zerg. It will take zergs learning how to properly use Vipers though. Even today in the GSTL Ragnarok had pretty poor viper control in mass engagements and only really used them for fun (chain fungaling medivacs). He only used blinding cloud twice in a mass engagement and seemingly forget about them about 3/4 ways through his match vs MMA.
Reminds me of infestor usage before and right after the queen buff. You had Zergs stating infestors just weren't strong enough, but would group them with their army (out front sometimes), throw a few fungals, and then suicide the infestors. We didn't even see infested terran tanking tank shells for 2-3 months. Likewise, we seem to be seeing a large amount of viper usage using blinding cloud then moving next to vikings, or running over a blinded position expecting insta-gg from the Terran.
You expect us to believe a 14.5 dps unit that moves at 2.81 (with upgrade) is the worst unit in the game. Either you have no idea how to optimize their damage output beyond a-move, you use them unescorted or both.
Well, Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps 550HP/3armor unit with a 300damage blast (with upgrade) which additionally can fly as bad unit.
You see how ridicolous such stuff sounds when you don't include how much those units cost or what they require? And you tell other people how immature their discussion style is...
I didn't believe you'd resort to lying, Big J. I'll try to be civil.
It should be read as:
Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps range 6, 550HP/3 armor unit with 300 damage blast (with upgrade) every 125 seconds, vulnerablility to feedback spell and which additionally can fly as bad unit.
In any case on 4 bases, cost is not an issue, production rate is.
Really hard to even know where to begin with responding to this bullshit. I know I shouldn't, it's not worth my time. But whatever, I'm in a good mood, can as well have some fun with this troll,
So whenever someone describes a unit he has to point out every stat the unit has and every spell interaction? Yeah, what a lyer I am not mentioning every freaking thing that is true for the BC. Pssst, before someone says that hydralisks don't get a dusk/dawn sight bonus you really should mention it... Oh too late. I found out that you didn't mention it. You lyer! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
And to your "cost is no issue, production rate is". Well, if cost is no issue and you have 50scvs (so building production rate is 50), why don't you build 50starports to get the same production rate as a zerg? Of course cost is THE issue. Z and P have more production, because their infrastructure COSTS less.
actually protoss infrastructure is more expensive.
factory is 150/100, 190/100 if you count for scv build time. Robo facility is 200/100. But its really only 150/100 because Terran have mules to offset scvs building, and the minerals don't actually go away.
a star port is also 150/100 I believe? Compared to a star gate bring 150/150. And how much is a fusion core? Fleet beacon is 300/200. An armory is 150/100 while a robotics bay is 200/200. And a ghost academy is 100/50 right? Vs a 100/200 templar archives, not to mention the need for a 150/100 twilight council. No need to mention barracks/gateway.
edit: as a sky toss versus zerg: I think allowing blinding cloud to hit air or affect casters would be a wonderful idea personally. Does anybody else share it? I think it would definitely help balance out pvz, and I don't think needing skytoss is how to do it.
I see in you are counting SCV build times, what happens when you include separate upgrades for terran land units but not protoss ones? What about addons, how do they factor in?
I wonder when people will learn not to directly compare races in Starcraft.
Agreed. Though, there seems to be a lot of complaints from the other side of the fence of "It's only a 100 mineral unit!"
Terran in HotS in high level still play the same way like WoL : Heavy bio. No evolution for Mech whether Hellbat got buffed or nerfed. Next more 2 years with bio for Terran
On February 24 2013 05:49 Porishan wrote: Terran in HotS in high level still play the same way like WoL : Heavy bio. No evolution for Mech whether Hellbat got buffed or nerfed. Next more 2 years with bio for Terran
They still play bio as with the big teams not everyone (including their top players) switching to HoTS mech hasn't been being explored outside of the likes of Goody, Dragon and TheStC on ladder. Bio is still the go-to build currently as it's what everyone already knows how to play. I'm sure in a few weeks we'll see more meching pros in games.
On February 24 2013 05:02 Big J wrote: well, robo/SG is very similar or more expensive. But lategame extra Warpgate production is quite cheaper than barracks production:
Zealot: 100/0 28seconds --> spending: 3.57/0 per second Stalker: 125/50 32seconds --> spending: 3.91/1.56 per second Marine: 50/0 25seconds --> spending 2/0 per second Marauder: 100/25 30seconds --> spending 3.33/0.83 per second
Basically you need to invest into a barracks and a reactor (200/50) to be able to spend a similar amount of money on marine production as 1 (sometimes chronoboosted) warpgate (150/0) provides in zealot production.
Unless Terran spends his money on ghosts and medivacs (which are really great to spend money on), Terran needs to invest more into infrastructure than Protoss to get the same amount of production. (of course this is not happening as barracks units beat gateway units cost for cost, so you don't need the same production. But just speaking possiblities, once P has the tech infrastructure like core, warpgate, twlight, templar archives, adding production is cheaper for toss than for terran. That's why we sometimes see those ridicolous amounts like 20+ warpgates for Protoss which Terran can only match with like 12barracks+addons)
Barracks production has to be crippled early game or SCV-pull allins are unbeatable. If Barracks converted minerals to marines at the rate gateways convert minerals to zealots then marine/scv would be an autowin every time, especially against Zerg. You think proxy 11/11 would be beatable by Zerg if marines built in 14 seconds? You could 2 rax against Protoss too and beat anything greedier than 3 gate expo.
Marine/tank + all your SCVs would be even worse, completely impossible to hold with the amount of marines you'd be able to pump out early.
On February 24 2013 05:49 Porishan wrote: Terran in HotS in high level still play the same way like WoL : Heavy bio. No evolution for Mech whether Hellbat got buffed or nerfed. Next more 2 years with bio for Terran
On February 24 2013 05:49 Porishan wrote: Terran in HotS in high level still play the same way like WoL : Heavy bio. No evolution for Mech whether Hellbat got buffed or nerfed. Next more 2 years with bio for Terran
So this unit comes from the factory, has its tech lab upgrade with an armory requirement back. Good change
Though as long as it gets heals from the medivac... it will forever be a bad unit. Mech / Air gets repaired by scv's/mule. Thats one of the big identities of the terran race, they repair shit.
On February 24 2013 05:11 Aquila- wrote: First, 150/150 is way to expensive, even 100/100 would maybe be too high just to transform, I mean Viking, Tanks, Thors can transform for free. Also now they can revert the cargo nerf.
No they can't revert the nerf. You need to learn how to read. You can still build hellbats out of the armory. Meaning those 7 minute helldrops with 4 bats would still rape. You just need to purchase the upgrade in order to switch between the two. If they reverted the change z's would go back to getting raped by these drops.
On February 24 2013 07:27 6BiT wrote: So this unit comes from the factory, has its tech lab upgrade with an armory requirement back. Good change
Though as long as it gets heals from the medivac... it will forever be a bad unit. Mech / Air gets repaired by scv's/mule. Thats one of the big identities of the terran race, they repair shit.
This unit is becoming ridiculous, and I've a hard time to believe that blizzard "forgot" to mention that uncalled buff in patch #15.
It is not a buff, it is a bugfix.
Upgrades don't have to be consistent, they should scale in whatever way is most balanced. If +3 hellbats 1-shotting lings and 4-shotting zealots is OP, then the upgrade change should be reverted.
On February 24 2013 05:11 Aquila- wrote: First, 150/150 is way to expensive, even 100/100 would maybe be too high just to transform, I mean Viking, Tanks, Thors can transform for free. Also now they can revert the cargo nerf.
No they can't revert the nerf. You need to learn how to read. You can still build hellbats out of the armory. Meaning those 7 minute helldrops with 4 bats would still rape. You just need to purchase the upgrade in order to switch between the two. If they reverted the change z's would go back to getting raped by these drops.
No they wouldn't. In order to hit the drop timing you need to have your helions ready before armory is done. If you build your factory and wait for the armory to finish building, you wont have helions for map control. If you do make helions you need to research or they are forever wheelies. It was first a direct nerf to the drop, the medivac load one, and a indirect nerf in the form of delaying the tech. It basically pushed back for a few minutes the fastest possible timing for a hellbat.
Terran has other decent options for earlier/mid game, but the problem is that mech becomes less interesting as the transition is less smooth and the fact that T lategame is the weaker one right now.
Ravens on paper are really strong but they are not reliable as an infestor or a templar.
Wow, that's way to expensive for an ability that's not really used that many times, and combined with a 110 second long research time no bio player will ever get this. As a player who likes mech I can't really see myself ever getting this upgrade either. For 150/150 to be worth it I'd better already have a shit ton of hellions I don't longer need.
It's a shame, because it was a fun ability even if it was more of a quality-of-life ability that rarely got used.
I am not even surprised anymore about Blizzrd's stupidity for balance seriously.. First they take forever to tweak something super imbalanced and now they are majorly nerfing something like early game hellbats (which is pretty much when you may need em the most) I could understand the upgrade itself - maybe a bit shorter research time. I could understand if it only required the armory to be built. But Armory need AND such a long upgrade time with that cost ? No one is gonna do it lol, Blizzard so clueless as usual goddamit
You expect us to believe a 14.5 dps unit that moves at 2.81 (with upgrade) is the worst unit in the game. Either you have no idea how to optimize their damage output beyond a-move, you use them unescorted or both.
Well, Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps 550HP/3armor unit with a 300damage blast (with upgrade) which additionally can fly as bad unit.
You see how ridicolous such stuff sounds when you don't include how much those units cost or what they require? And you tell other people how immature their discussion style is...
I didn't believe you'd resort to lying, Big J. I'll try to be civil.
It should be read as:
Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps range 6, 550HP/3 armor unit with 300 damage blast (with upgrade) every 125 seconds, vulnerablility to feedback spell and which additionally can fly as bad unit.
In any case on 4 bases, cost is not an issue, production rate is.
Really hard to even know where to begin with responding to this bullshit. I know I shouldn't, it's not worth my time. But whatever, I'm in a good mood, can as well have some fun with this troll,
So whenever someone describes a unit he has to point out every stat the unit has and every spell interaction? Yeah, what a lyer I am not mentioning every freaking thing that is true for the BC. Pssst, before someone says that hydralisks don't get a dusk/dawn sight bonus you really should mention it... Oh too late. I found out that you didn't mention it. You lyer! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
And to your "cost is no issue, production rate is". Well, if cost is no issue and you have 50scvs (so building production rate is 50), why don't you build 50starports to get the same production rate as a zerg? Of course cost is THE issue. Z and P have more production, because their infrastructure COSTS less.
actually protoss infrastructure is more expensive.
factory is 150/100, 190/100 if you count for scv build time. Robo facility is 200/100. But its really only 150/100 because Terran have mules to offset scvs building, and the minerals don't actually go away.
a star port is also 150/100 I believe? Compared to a star gate bring 150/150. And how much is a fusion core? Fleet beacon is 300/200. An armory is 150/100 while a robotics bay is 200/200. And a ghost academy is 100/50 right? Vs a 100/200 templar archives, not to mention the need for a 150/100 twilight council. No need to mention barracks/gateway.
edit: as a sky toss versus zerg: I think allowing blinding cloud to hit air or affect casters would be a wonderful idea personally. Does anybody else share it? I think it would definitely help balance out pvz, and I don't think needing skytoss is how to do it.
well, robo/SG is very similar or more expensive. But lategame extra Warpgate production is quite cheaper than barracks production:
Zealot: 100/0 28seconds --> spending: 3.57/0 per second Stalker: 125/50 32seconds --> spending: 3.91/1.56 per second Marine: 50/0 25seconds --> spending 2/0 per second Marauder: 100/25 30seconds --> spending 3.33/0.83 per second
Basically you need to invest into a barracks and a reactor (200/50) to be able to spend a similar amount of money on marine production as 1 (sometimes chronoboosted) warpgate (150/0) provides in zealot production.
Unless Terran spends his money on ghosts and medivacs (which are really great to spend money on), Terran needs to invest more into infrastructure than Protoss to get the same amount of production. (of course this is not happening as barracks units beat gateway units cost for cost, so you don't need the same production. But just speaking possiblities, once P has the tech infrastructure like core, warpgate, twlight, templar archives, adding production is cheaper for toss than for terran. That's why we sometimes see those ridicolous amounts like 20+ warpgates for Protoss which Terran can only match with like 12barracks+addons)
You're forgetting warpgate research, if we're talking about earlygame. Lategame sure. See my bit at the bottom about addons. And I don't profess to love warpgate, but it's absolutely necessary with how protoss is designed right now. Terran bio (especially with medivacs now) is way too mobile for normal gateways to compensate. And also keep in mind terran T1 tends to be more efficient than Protoss T1, especially without support (early game in particular). Obviously no comparison will be direct, but yeah. I don't think the cost of production has ever been the reason for imbalance essentially.
You expect us to believe a 14.5 dps unit that moves at 2.81 (with upgrade) is the worst unit in the game. Either you have no idea how to optimize their damage output beyond a-move, you use them unescorted or both.
Well, Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps 550HP/3armor unit with a 300damage blast (with upgrade) which additionally can fly as bad unit.
You see how ridicolous such stuff sounds when you don't include how much those units cost or what they require? And you tell other people how immature their discussion style is...
I didn't believe you'd resort to lying, Big J. I'll try to be civil.
It should be read as:
Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps range 6, 550HP/3 armor unit with 300 damage blast (with upgrade) every 125 seconds, vulnerablility to feedback spell and which additionally can fly as bad unit.
In any case on 4 bases, cost is not an issue, production rate is.
Really hard to even know where to begin with responding to this bullshit. I know I shouldn't, it's not worth my time. But whatever, I'm in a good mood, can as well have some fun with this troll,
So whenever someone describes a unit he has to point out every stat the unit has and every spell interaction? Yeah, what a lyer I am not mentioning every freaking thing that is true for the BC. Pssst, before someone says that hydralisks don't get a dusk/dawn sight bonus you really should mention it... Oh too late. I found out that you didn't mention it. You lyer! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
And to your "cost is no issue, production rate is". Well, if cost is no issue and you have 50scvs (so building production rate is 50), why don't you build 50starports to get the same production rate as a zerg? Of course cost is THE issue. Z and P have more production, because their infrastructure COSTS less.
actually protoss infrastructure is more expensive.
factory is 150/100, 190/100 if you count for scv build time. Robo facility is 200/100. But its really only 150/100 because Terran have mules to offset scvs building, and the minerals don't actually go away.
a star port is also 150/100 I believe? Compared to a star gate bring 150/150. And how much is a fusion core? Fleet beacon is 300/200. An armory is 150/100 while a robotics bay is 200/200. And a ghost academy is 100/50 right? Vs a 100/200 templar archives, not to mention the need for a 150/100 twilight council. No need to mention barracks/gateway.
edit: as a sky toss versus zerg: I think allowing blinding cloud to hit air or affect casters would be a wonderful idea personally. Does anybody else share it? I think it would definitely help balance out pvz, and I don't think needing skytoss is how to do it.
I see in you are counting SCV build times, what happens when you include separate upgrades for terran land units but not protoss ones? What about addons, how do they factor in?
I wonder when people will learn not to directly compare races in Starcraft.
He was the one comparing races calling out terran production being cheaper.
Terran overall has the same number of upgrades as protoss and zerg now, with one of the factory upgrades being combined, if I'm not mistaken. And a terran player going bio and skyterran is pretty analogous with my going from ground toss to skytoss. In which case the upgrades are pretty equivalent.
At most, a reactor is 50/50. That brings a factory or starport up to par with the equivalent robo/stargate if you really need me to count those in. And like I said earlier, SCV build time is not really a loss, because of mules and the fact that the minerals don't go anywhere. And protoss has plenty of other buildings that have no terran counterpart (not comparing races directly note) because of this... TC, templar archives and dark shrine. Any of those three are more expensive than a ghost academy, which is the most approximate "cost" equivalent. The additional resources over that GA (300/350 i think?) bring the production pretty similar.
lol at the nerfbat of 150/150 + armory + 4 spot in medivac + upg time..how can blizz not see that making early game variance huge is such of an importance.. this is the opposite of that and gonna be like storm tech.. if i get it, i cant get nothing other than that since the timeframe is like this...
I rly wanted to see rivo with LotV, but since it would be nerfed so hard, better leave that one for the bw.
On February 24 2013 11:33 gosublade wrote: lol at the nerfbat of 150/150 + armory + 4 spot in medivac + upg time..how can blizz not see that making early game variance huge is such of an importance.. this is the opposite of that and gonna be like storm tech.. if i get it, i cant get nothing other than that since the timeframe is like this...
I rly wanted to see rivo with LotV, but since it would be nerfed so hard, better leave that one for the bw.
You know you can still build hellbats like normal? The only thing the upgrade changed was morphing normal hellions to hellbats. It wasn't variance, it was killing variance. Ling openings were impossible the way it was. Now they're at least partially possible. And this doesn't actually affect something like a medivac drop timing if you wanted to do it with hellbats - you can make the armory and the starport at the same time, and then make the hellbats and medivac at the same time.
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
If protoss and terran lategame gets too strong, it will kinda turn zerg completely upside down, considering how they used to play in wol with turtle with infestors into unstopable hive army.
But i guess having a bad lategame isen't going to make your race underpowered. Terrans never really used lategame oriented play in wol (even though terran air could be really good) and still had around 50% win (sometimes less, sometimes more) most of the time in tvp and tvz.
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
If protoss and terran lategame gets too strong, it will kinda turn zerg completely upside down, considering how they used to play in wol with turtle with infestors into unstopable hive army.
But i guess having a bad lategame isen't going to make your race underpowered. Terrans never really used lategame oriented play in wol (even though terran air could be really good) and still had around 50% win (sometimes less, sometimes more) most of the time in tvp and tvz.
They had a 50% winrate until the queen buff. When forced to go to the late game almost every game, GSL winrates dropped to the low 40s and mid 30s. There's a lot of Zerg talk that sounds like "ZOMG Terran air is SOOOOOO strong! Just max 200 on ravens, BCs, and vikings!" But it doesn't seem to work all too well at the pro level, otherwise we would see Terran do it to overcome their now abysmal chances in the matchup.
In contrast, even when ZvT didn't revolve around infestors, there wasn't a real need to adapt to the infestor playstyle. GSL winrates for Zerg were still pretty solid, with the occasional dip here and there.
I just don't buy that Terrans are somehow ignoring this supposed blatant lategame army strength while having extremely dismal numbers. Doesn't add up.
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
If protoss and terran lategame gets too strong, it will kinda turn zerg completely upside down, considering how they used to play in wol with turtle with infestors into unstopable hive army.
But i guess having a bad lategame isen't going to make your race underpowered. Terrans never really used lategame oriented play in wol (even though terran air could be really good) and still had around 50% win (sometimes less, sometimes more) most of the time in tvp and tvz.
They had a 50% winrate until the queen buff. When forced to go to the late game almost every game, GSL winrates dropped to the low 40s and mid 30s. There's a lot of Zerg talk that sounds like "ZOMG Terran air is SOOOOOO strong! Just max 200 on ravens, BCs, and vikings!" But it doesn't seem to work all too well at the pro level, otherwise we would see Terran do it to overcome their now abysmal chances in the matchup.
In contrast, even when ZvT didn't revolve around infestors, there wasn't a real need to adapt to the infestor playstyle. GSL winrates for Zerg were still pretty solid, with the occasional dip here and there.
I just don't buy that Terrans are somehow ignoring this supposed blatant lategame army strength while having extremely dismal numbers. Doesn't add up.
It's almost impossible to transition. Look at Bomber vs Sniper r32 this gsl (entombed). Bomber wins, but it's by a hair where he plays massive macro and barely holds Sniper's ultralisk agression with a close to maxed army several times. A switch to unupgraded bc's would get him killed. Heck, many terrans struggle with having enough vikings.
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
If protoss and terran lategame gets too strong, it will kinda turn zerg completely upside down, considering how they used to play in wol with turtle with infestors into unstopable hive army.
But i guess having a bad lategame isen't going to make your race underpowered. Terrans never really used lategame oriented play in wol (even though terran air could be really good) and still had around 50% win (sometimes less, sometimes more) most of the time in tvp and tvz.
They had a 50% winrate until the queen buff. When forced to go to the late game almost every game, GSL winrates dropped to the low 40s and mid 30s. There's a lot of Zerg talk that sounds like "ZOMG Terran air is SOOOOOO strong! Just max 200 on ravens, BCs, and vikings!" But it doesn't seem to work all too well at the pro level, otherwise we would see Terran do it to overcome their now abysmal chances in the matchup.
In contrast, even when ZvT didn't revolve around infestors, there wasn't a real need to adapt to the infestor playstyle. GSL winrates for Zerg were still pretty solid, with the occasional dip here and there.
I just don't buy that Terrans are somehow ignoring this supposed blatant lategame army strength while having extremely dismal numbers. Doesn't add up.
It's almost impossible to transition. Look at Bomber vs Sniper r32 this gsl (entombed). Bomber wins, but it's by a hair where he plays massive macro and barely holds Sniper's ultralisk agression with a close to maxed army several times. A switch to unupgraded bc's would get him killed. Heck, many terrans struggle with having enough vikings.
But shouldn't we see some more attempts if it is that powerful? You know, turtle until T has the economy, or slowly build up to it by cutting marines and tanks here and there. The way I see it, even this magic army comp SkyTerran that nobody can agree on isn't actually better than Z or P options, but might be able to "compete" with them after a huge investment, which is only a minor improvement over current trends.
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
If protoss and terran lategame gets too strong, it will kinda turn zerg completely upside down, considering how they used to play in wol with turtle with infestors into unstopable hive army.
But i guess having a bad lategame isen't going to make your race underpowered. Terrans never really used lategame oriented play in wol (even though terran air could be really good) and still had around 50% win (sometimes less, sometimes more) most of the time in tvp and tvz.
They had a 50% winrate until the queen buff. When forced to go to the late game almost every game, GSL winrates dropped to the low 40s and mid 30s. There's a lot of Zerg talk that sounds like "ZOMG Terran air is SOOOOOO strong! Just max 200 on ravens, BCs, and vikings!" But it doesn't seem to work all too well at the pro level, otherwise we would see Terran do it to overcome their now abysmal chances in the matchup.
In contrast, even when ZvT didn't revolve around infestors, there wasn't a real need to adapt to the infestor playstyle. GSL winrates for Zerg were still pretty solid, with the occasional dip here and there.
I just don't buy that Terrans are somehow ignoring this supposed blatant lategame army strength while having extremely dismal numbers. Doesn't add up.
It's almost impossible to transition. Look at Bomber vs Sniper r32 this gsl (entombed). Bomber wins, but it's by a hair where he plays massive macro and barely holds Sniper's ultralisk agression with a close to maxed army several times. A switch to unupgraded bc's would get him killed. Heck, many terrans struggle with having enough vikings.
Yeah it's not as hard in hots though. Well to a point. Ravens are sick good now so it's not hard to tech to ravens and get quiet a few, but yeah teching to the ultimate raven/bc/viking is very hard to get to thank god. If it was easy oh lord T_T
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
If protoss and terran lategame gets too strong, it will kinda turn zerg completely upside down, considering how they used to play in wol with turtle with infestors into unstopable hive army.
But i guess having a bad lategame isen't going to make your race underpowered. Terrans never really used lategame oriented play in wol (even though terran air could be really good) and still had around 50% win (sometimes less, sometimes more) most of the time in tvp and tvz.
They had a 50% winrate until the queen buff. When forced to go to the late game almost every game, GSL winrates dropped to the low 40s and mid 30s. There's a lot of Zerg talk that sounds like "ZOMG Terran air is SOOOOOO strong! Just max 200 on ravens, BCs, and vikings!" But it doesn't seem to work all too well at the pro level, otherwise we would see Terran do it to overcome their now abysmal chances in the matchup.
In contrast, even when ZvT didn't revolve around infestors, there wasn't a real need to adapt to the infestor playstyle. GSL winrates for Zerg were still pretty solid, with the occasional dip here and there.
I just don't buy that Terrans are somehow ignoring this supposed blatant lategame army strength while having extremely dismal numbers. Doesn't add up.
It's almost impossible to transition. Look at Bomber vs Sniper r32 this gsl (entombed). Bomber wins, but it's by a hair where he plays massive macro and barely holds Sniper's ultralisk agression with a close to maxed army several times. A switch to unupgraded bc's would get him killed. Heck, many terrans struggle with having enough vikings.
Yeah it's not as hard in hots though. Well to a point. Ravens are sick good now so it's not hard to tech to ravens and get quiet a few, but yeah teching to the ultimate raven/bc/viking is very hard to get to thank god. If it was easy oh lord T_T
First to make a "but Zerg gets to do it as well easily, double standards, whine whine whine"-nonsense comment! Yes, I always wanted to do that!
On February 24 2013 05:33 Zelniq wrote: Previously hellbats received +1 to non light/+2 to light with every attack upgrade but now the scaling has been changed to +2 to non light/+3 to light. Max attack hellbats should now 1 shot max armored zerglings and 3 shot max armored emped zealots instead of 4. This seems more of a 'fix' rather than a 'buff'
I loled. Seems a little too strong to me -.- Are Terrans still mad that the cargo change was not cancelled? Now you can one shot worker lines again !
On February 24 2013 05:33 Zelniq wrote: Previously hellbats received +1 to non light/+2 to light with every attack upgrade but now the scaling has been changed to +2 to non light/+3 to light. Max attack hellbats should now 1 shot max armored zerglings and 3 shot max armored emped zealots instead of 4. This seems more of a 'fix' rather than a 'buff'
I loled. Seems a little too strong to me -.- Are Terrans still mad that the cargo change was not cancelled? Now you can one shot worker lines again !
One shot worker lines ? Nothing changed in hellbat drops they do max 39 to light > drones probes have 40 hp. If you mean that 2 hellbats 1 shot worker then it was same before this fix , dont know what you mean.
On February 24 2013 05:33 Zelniq wrote: Previously hellbats received +1 to non light/+2 to light with every attack upgrade but now the scaling has been changed to +2 to non light/+3 to light. Max attack hellbats should now 1 shot max armored zerglings and 3 shot max armored emped zealots instead of 4. This seems more of a 'fix' rather than a 'buff'
I loled. Seems a little too strong to me -.- Are Terrans still mad that the cargo change was not cancelled? Now you can one shot worker lines again !
One shot worker lines ? Nothing changed in hellbat drops they do max 39 to light > drones probes have 40 hp. If you mean that 2 hellbats 1 shot worker then it was same before this fix , dont know what you mean.
Yeah...no. I was just complaining. they should have kept the fix as a nerf...
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
If protoss and terran lategame gets too strong, it will kinda turn zerg completely upside down, considering how they used to play in wol with turtle with infestors into unstopable hive army.
But i guess having a bad lategame isen't going to make your race underpowered. Terrans never really used lategame oriented play in wol (even though terran air could be really good) and still had around 50% win (sometimes less, sometimes more) most of the time in tvp and tvz.
They had a 50% winrate until the queen buff. When forced to go to the late game almost every game, GSL winrates dropped to the low 40s and mid 30s. There's a lot of Zerg talk that sounds like "ZOMG Terran air is SOOOOOO strong! Just max 200 on ravens, BCs, and vikings!" But it doesn't seem to work all too well at the pro level, otherwise we would see Terran do it to overcome their now abysmal chances in the matchup.
In contrast, even when ZvT didn't revolve around infestors, there wasn't a real need to adapt to the infestor playstyle. GSL winrates for Zerg were still pretty solid, with the occasional dip here and there.
I just don't buy that Terrans are somehow ignoring this supposed blatant lategame army strength while having extremely dismal numbers. Doesn't add up.
It's almost impossible to transition. Look at Bomber vs Sniper r32 this gsl (entombed). Bomber wins, but it's by a hair where he plays massive macro and barely holds Sniper's ultralisk agression with a close to maxed army several times. A switch to unupgraded bc's would get him killed. Heck, many terrans struggle with having enough vikings.
When it comes to transitioning to air as Terran it is incredibly map dependant. Obviously Metropolis is the ultimate sky Terran map because you stick two planetaries at the choke and Terran is impenetrable for 20 minutes. You simply can't do it on most maps though.
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
If protoss and terran lategame gets too strong, it will kinda turn zerg completely upside down, considering how they used to play in wol with turtle with infestors into unstopable hive army.
But i guess having a bad lategame isen't going to make your race underpowered. Terrans never really used lategame oriented play in wol (even though terran air could be really good) and still had around 50% win (sometimes less, sometimes more) most of the time in tvp and tvz.
They had a 50% winrate until the queen buff. When forced to go to the late game almost every game, GSL winrates dropped to the low 40s and mid 30s. There's a lot of Zerg talk that sounds like "ZOMG Terran air is SOOOOOO strong! Just max 200 on ravens, BCs, and vikings!" But it doesn't seem to work all too well at the pro level, otherwise we would see Terran do it to overcome their now abysmal chances in the matchup.
In contrast, even when ZvT didn't revolve around infestors, there wasn't a real need to adapt to the infestor playstyle. GSL winrates for Zerg were still pretty solid, with the occasional dip here and there.
I just don't buy that Terrans are somehow ignoring this supposed blatant lategame army strength while having extremely dismal numbers. Doesn't add up.
It's almost impossible to transition. Look at Bomber vs Sniper r32 this gsl (entombed). Bomber wins, but it's by a hair where he plays massive macro and barely holds Sniper's ultralisk agression with a close to maxed army several times. A switch to unupgraded bc's would get him killed. Heck, many terrans struggle with having enough vikings.
Yeah it's not as hard in hots though. Well to a point. Ravens are sick good now so it's not hard to tech to ravens and get quiet a few, but yeah teching to the ultimate raven/bc/viking is very hard to get to thank god. If it was easy oh lord T_T
I know youre pretty high rated in hots, so Im kinda curious about how terrans hold ultras while getting ravens out. Like how are the ravens used in order to help against the ultras?
I play quite a bit of hots, but Ive been avoiding ravens except in air vs air situations. Not being an ass, actually want to know.
On February 24 2013 08:58 NKexquisite wrote: Ohhh... Here come the Blizzard "stack nerfs"... Just like they "stack nerfed" the Reaper into oblivion in WoL...
First you nerf the cargo space Then you nerf w/ an upgrade Next you increase the build time of the factory
They need to be sure to not "stack nerf" it...
It's even funnier when you compare it to the hydra from the WoL beta
it was nerfed twice extremely early on in the beta (feb / march 2010 I believe) and had it's HP nerfed from 90 to 80 and attack speed from .75 to .86 (I think, not sure of exact numbers).
Then comes HotS and blizzard is like, "why isn't anyone using hydras? We should introduce a speed upgrade that gives them 25% more speed off creep, that'll work!"
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
If protoss and terran lategame gets too strong, it will kinda turn zerg completely upside down, considering how they used to play in wol with turtle with infestors into unstopable hive army.
But i guess having a bad lategame isen't going to make your race underpowered. Terrans never really used lategame oriented play in wol (even though terran air could be really good) and still had around 50% win (sometimes less, sometimes more) most of the time in tvp and tvz.
They had a 50% winrate until the queen buff. When forced to go to the late game almost every game, GSL winrates dropped to the low 40s and mid 30s. There's a lot of Zerg talk that sounds like "ZOMG Terran air is SOOOOOO strong! Just max 200 on ravens, BCs, and vikings!" But it doesn't seem to work all too well at the pro level, otherwise we would see Terran do it to overcome their now abysmal chances in the matchup.
In contrast, even when ZvT didn't revolve around infestors, there wasn't a real need to adapt to the infestor playstyle. GSL winrates for Zerg were still pretty solid, with the occasional dip here and there.
I just don't buy that Terrans are somehow ignoring this supposed blatant lategame army strength while having extremely dismal numbers. Doesn't add up.
It's almost impossible to transition. Look at Bomber vs Sniper r32 this gsl (entombed). Bomber wins, but it's by a hair where he plays massive macro and barely holds Sniper's ultralisk agression with a close to maxed army several times. A switch to unupgraded bc's would get him killed. Heck, many terrans struggle with having enough vikings.
Yeah it's not as hard in hots though. Well to a point. Ravens are sick good now so it's not hard to tech to ravens and get quiet a few, but yeah teching to the ultimate raven/bc/viking is very hard to get to thank god. If it was easy oh lord T_T
I know youre pretty high rated in hots, so Im kinda curious about how terrans hold ultras while getting ravens out. Like how are the ravens used in order to help against the ultras?
I play quite a bit of hots, but Ive been avoiding ravens except in air vs air situations. Not being an ass, actually want to know.
From thorzain stream, I have seen him doing it in many ways: He almost only plays mech now. Turtle in 3 bases, with tanks, thors and sometimes with widow mines. Starts a starport earlier than wol mech style for a raven and some vikings. (mostly to deal with the vipers blinding clouds) Running hellions in to keep his army on their side and denying the tech and push. If opponent went for roach hydra, they usually go for roach hydra viper, he adds more ravens and BCs. If opponent use more ling heavy style like ling muta in lair tech, and he somehow scouted a ultra tech, he would add some banshees and more widow mines before adding too many BCs.
I am no where near GM level though but I hope I got these details down right.
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
If protoss and terran lategame gets too strong, it will kinda turn zerg completely upside down, considering how they used to play in wol with turtle with infestors into unstopable hive army.
But i guess having a bad lategame isen't going to make your race underpowered. Terrans never really used lategame oriented play in wol (even though terran air could be really good) and still had around 50% win (sometimes less, sometimes more) most of the time in tvp and tvz.
They had a 50% winrate until the queen buff. When forced to go to the late game almost every game, GSL winrates dropped to the low 40s and mid 30s. There's a lot of Zerg talk that sounds like "ZOMG Terran air is SOOOOOO strong! Just max 200 on ravens, BCs, and vikings!" But it doesn't seem to work all too well at the pro level, otherwise we would see Terran do it to overcome their now abysmal chances in the matchup.
In contrast, even when ZvT didn't revolve around infestors, there wasn't a real need to adapt to the infestor playstyle. GSL winrates for Zerg were still pretty solid, with the occasional dip here and there.
I just don't buy that Terrans are somehow ignoring this supposed blatant lategame army strength while having extremely dismal numbers. Doesn't add up.
It's almost impossible to transition. Look at Bomber vs Sniper r32 this gsl (entombed). Bomber wins, but it's by a hair where he plays massive macro and barely holds Sniper's ultralisk agression with a close to maxed army several times. A switch to unupgraded bc's would get him killed. Heck, many terrans struggle with having enough vikings.
Yeah it's not as hard in hots though. Well to a point. Ravens are sick good now so it's not hard to tech to ravens and get quiet a few, but yeah teching to the ultimate raven/bc/viking is very hard to get to thank god. If it was easy oh lord T_T
I know youre pretty high rated in hots, so Im kinda curious about how terrans hold ultras while getting ravens out. Like how are the ravens used in order to help against the ultras?
I play quite a bit of hots, but Ive been avoiding ravens except in air vs air situations. Not being an ass, actually want to know.
From thorzain stream, I have seen him doing it in many ways: He almost only plays mech now. Turtle in 3 bases, with tanks, thors and sometimes with widow mines. Starts a starport earlier than wol mech style for a raven and some vikings. (mostly to deal with the vipers blinding clouds) Running hellions in to keep his army on their side and denying the tech and push. If opponent went for roach hydra, they usually go for roach hydra viper, he adds more ravens and BCs. If opponent use more ling heavy style like ling muta in lair tech, and he somehow scouted a ultra tech, he would add some banshees and more widow mines before adding too many BCs.
I am no where near GM level though but I hope I got these details down right.
Makes sense. If you have the starports with tech labs, just get banshees if its ultra and ravens if its hydra or broods. HSM is pretty good against hydras too i remember seeing.
On February 24 2013 08:58 NKexquisite wrote: Ohhh... Here come the Blizzard "stack nerfs"... Just like they "stack nerfed" the Reaper into oblivion in WoL...
First you nerf the cargo space Then you nerf w/ an upgrade Next you increase the build time of the factory
They need to be sure to not "stack nerf" it...
It's even funnier when you compare it to the hydra from the WoL beta
it was nerfed twice extremely early on in the beta (feb / march 2010 I believe) and had it's HP nerfed from 90 to 80 and attack speed from .75 to .86 (I think, not sure of exact numbers).
Then comes HotS and blizzard is like, "why isn't anyone using hydras? We should introduce a speed upgrade that gives them 25% more speed off creep, that'll work!"
They nerfed it because no one was using roach. The movement buff was to FINALLY make hydra/roach a viable composition. In WoL, the composition was only viable on creep highways as retreat was not an option compared to the utility of roach/infestor.
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
If protoss and terran lategame gets too strong, it will kinda turn zerg completely upside down, considering how they used to play in wol with turtle with infestors into unstopable hive army.
But i guess having a bad lategame isen't going to make your race underpowered. Terrans never really used lategame oriented play in wol (even though terran air could be really good) and still had around 50% win (sometimes less, sometimes more) most of the time in tvp and tvz.
They had a 50% winrate until the queen buff. When forced to go to the late game almost every game, GSL winrates dropped to the low 40s and mid 30s. There's a lot of Zerg talk that sounds like "ZOMG Terran air is SOOOOOO strong! Just max 200 on ravens, BCs, and vikings!" But it doesn't seem to work all too well at the pro level, otherwise we would see Terran do it to overcome their now abysmal chances in the matchup.
In contrast, even when ZvT didn't revolve around infestors, there wasn't a real need to adapt to the infestor playstyle. GSL winrates for Zerg were still pretty solid, with the occasional dip here and there.
I just don't buy that Terrans are somehow ignoring this supposed blatant lategame army strength while having extremely dismal numbers. Doesn't add up.
It's almost impossible to transition. Look at Bomber vs Sniper r32 this gsl (entombed). Bomber wins, but it's by a hair where he plays massive macro and barely holds Sniper's ultralisk agression with a close to maxed army several times. A switch to unupgraded bc's would get him killed. Heck, many terrans struggle with having enough vikings.
When it comes to transitioning to air as Terran it is incredibly map dependant. Obviously Metropolis is the ultimate sky Terran map because you stick two planetaries at the choke and Terran is impenetrable for 20 minutes. You simply can't do it on most maps though.
Plus with Metro, you have 5 bases secured once you have the 2 planetariums down. The 2 high grounds also make it so it is easier to not get all your Vikings/ravens fungaled.
On February 25 2013 03:51 Mongolbonjwa wrote: 0.86 attacks per second is better than 0.75 attacks.
That's not how attack speed works in SC2. Roaches have an attack speed of 2, but they don't fire 2 shots a second. They fire a shot, wait two seconds, and shot again.
Why are people suggesting that the hellbat cargo space nerf needs to be rolled back? The transform upgrade nerf doesn't affect anything regarding how strong the 4-hellbat drops were. Also, the purpose of hellbats was not to give Terran yet another way of cheesing/exploiting in the early game.
Terrans need to be more objective instead of TTing about nerfs. The nerfs are meant to balance the game, and Terran are getting them now because of how powerful their new units are and can be used.
I'm still waiting for players to figure out how to deal with mass Mines, and if not possible, then for Blizz to nerf it.
On February 25 2013 03:51 Mongolbonjwa wrote: 0.86 attacks per second is better than 0.75 attacks.
The number is referring to cooldown time. Therefore a lower nmber is better. That is why when you stim marines and marauders the number drops (marauders attack cooldown goes from 1.5 to 1.0 when stimmed)
Played many more games this patch, 150/150 and the time investment is way out of line. Even previous siege mode research only costed 100/100.
If they wanted to take this route to nerfing something (that was unnecessary and hurt mech tvp) they need to put it at around 50/50 and make it take about half the amount of time to research.
As it is, the cost is way too high resource-wise, and time wise.
I now just make hellions until armory then switch and make hellbats. I see no reason to ever research the transformation upgrade. Hellions do enough to stop lings and stupidly greedy expansions early game. HellBat drops are now intended to make sure the zerg can't auto remax. 3/3 hellbat drops late game completely decimate. Since you can produce hellbats 2 at a time from the factory there is never a reason to get the upgrade. Why build a hellion and transform it when you can build a hellbat in the same amount of time? I liked the cargo nerf, though I thought it should have been three hellbats not two. I never understood removing the blue flame upgrade...it's the same unit...and I still don't understand the bio tag. The core issue is that the hellbat takes the same amount of time that a hellion does to produce. If hellbats took 5 seconds longer to produce, hellion transform takes ~ 4 seconds, then it would make sense to get the upgrade. You would then be trading speed of having the unit for ~4 seconds of vulnerability. As it stands now I don't see this upgrade ever being used. It's almost like the overlord speed upgrade for zerg. Before lair it's almost never useful to spend the gas on that upgrade. There is almost no advantage to getting it that soon, much like there is almost no advantage to getting the servos.
I think they'll come to the seemingly "unbeatable compositions" for various match-ups in late game. My guess is that they want to fix what is easy to fix first, i.e. timings that are too powerful in the early/mid-game. But the game release is very soon, I fear they don't have enough time to address more complicated matters :'(
Edit: I've played a bit with the upgrade in the new patch. Doesn't really bother me at all, tbh. What was nerfed heavily was the obviously abusive shit like "make a buncha hellions and a-move them later on monobattle-style in your face" which was not interesting at all for the metagame. I like all-ins and timing attacks, but I like them smart :D
On February 25 2013 09:46 YarNhoj wrote: I now just make hellions until armory then switch and make hellbats. I see no reason to ever research the transformation upgrade. Hellions do enough to stop lings and stupidly greedy expansions early game. HellBat drops are now intended to make sure the zerg can't auto remax. 3/3 hellbat drops late game completely decimate. Since you can produce hellbats 2 at a time from the factory there is never a reason to get the upgrade. Why build a hellion and transform it when you can build a hellbat in the same amount of time? I liked the cargo nerf, though I thought it should have been three hellbats not two. I never understood removing the blue flame upgrade...it's the same unit...and I still don't understand the bio tag. The core issue is that the hellbat takes the same amount of time that a hellion does to produce. If hellbats took 5 seconds longer to produce, hellion transform takes ~ 4 seconds, then it would make sense to get the upgrade. You would then be trading speed of having the unit for ~4 seconds of vulnerability. As it stands now I don't see this upgrade ever being used. It's almost like the overlord speed upgrade for zerg. Before lair it's almost never useful to spend the gas on that upgrade. There is almost no advantage to getting it that soon, much like there is almost no advantage to getting the servos.
As a meching terran I use that upgrade all the time. Being able to switch modes is really great and means you don't get pigeonholed into only having hellbats or only having hellions.
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
If protoss and terran lategame gets too strong, it will kinda turn zerg completely upside down, considering how they used to play in wol with turtle with infestors into unstopable hive army.
But i guess having a bad lategame isen't going to make your race underpowered. Terrans never really used lategame oriented play in wol (even though terran air could be really good) and still had around 50% win (sometimes less, sometimes more) most of the time in tvp and tvz.
They had a 50% winrate until the queen buff. When forced to go to the late game almost every game, GSL winrates dropped to the low 40s and mid 30s. There's a lot of Zerg talk that sounds like "ZOMG Terran air is SOOOOOO strong! Just max 200 on ravens, BCs, and vikings!" But it doesn't seem to work all too well at the pro level, otherwise we would see Terran do it to overcome their now abysmal chances in the matchup.
In contrast, even when ZvT didn't revolve around infestors, there wasn't a real need to adapt to the infestor playstyle. GSL winrates for Zerg were still pretty solid, with the occasional dip here and there.
I just don't buy that Terrans are somehow ignoring this supposed blatant lategame army strength while having extremely dismal numbers. Doesn't add up.
It's almost impossible to transition. Look at Bomber vs Sniper r32 this gsl (entombed). Bomber wins, but it's by a hair where he plays massive macro and barely holds Sniper's ultralisk agression with a close to maxed army several times. A switch to unupgraded bc's would get him killed. Heck, many terrans struggle with having enough vikings.
Yeah it's not as hard in hots though. Well to a point. Ravens are sick good now so it's not hard to tech to ravens and get quiet a few, but yeah teching to the ultimate raven/bc/viking is very hard to get to thank god. If it was easy oh lord T_T
I know youre pretty high rated in hots, so Im kinda curious about how terrans hold ultras while getting ravens out. Like how are the ravens used in order to help against the ultras?
I play quite a bit of hots, but Ive been avoiding ravens except in air vs air situations. Not being an ass, actually want to know.
With ultra heavy tech, it's better to maintain a tank/thor/hellbat army while keeping them mobile at all times. Only transition into air if you're really far ahead. The gas cost for a mech into air transition is significant, you will need up to 6 bases to transition smoothly. Stay on mech with viking support for TvZ, it's a better composition until Z starts fielding broodlords in large numbers, then replace tank/hellbats with ravens and vikings. In realistic games, the transition is too lengthy unless both players play turtly i.e. split map situations on daybreak.
On February 23 2013 18:31 avilo wrote: No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
im thinking that because they are less and less terran players curently playing this game also most of the good one are korean , while they are ALOT of good foreigner pro zerg and protoss , and they never wait for cry nerf at anything and are usualy very vocal .
also at lower level terran kinda look OP more easy ,and also because that the only race who realy need to win early game because the late game realy bad ( so since forever when terran find something or good all in for end the game fast , they never stop ) and it got nerfed . mostly because people think that more op when the build make you loss before the 15 min mark , when something hit at late game they take more time to say that because ''the build op'' and at lower level this never reach this point and most of them dont even know what strong or why they loss or if that fair at this point in the game .
also the fact that many master and higher foreigner terran just stoped this game for exemple i was playing bw for 8 year at a high level and switched to sc2 , but so did about 7-8 people i have know from bw , everyone of them was diamond right when the league have open , and everyone of them got master right when the league got open too , many of them was playing less that 10 hour week , im not saying that for say they are amazing but because all of them KNOW how rts work and when they reply for exemple in a forum they make realy good post who are often taked more seriously , they know what broken .
im saying that because most good foreigner who switched bw to starcraft 2 , most of them droped this game . but you cant say the same from the zerg and protoss in bw , they are often more influential that new rts player who are curently good at starcraft 2 , and many terran who are curently good in starcraft 2 are usualy new rts player who just dont whine because they dont have enough rts background for know if the nerf was fine or what realy wrong with the game .
for exemple the old NTT from bw did try some foreplay into sc2 for end up stoping disgusted . i got gm myself playing after my 8 hour/day job but stoped about 5 months ago , totaly disgusted at the way blizzard balance this title , im saying that because people who are good curently in sc2 are not that much talented at rts ( for exemple many B teamer in bw was top 1-5 in sc2 right away ) but strangely realy amazing broodwar player never did that good in sc2 , these people were far more talented at rts that the b teamer who dominated them in sc2 , i would realy like to know what are the skill required for be sucessful in sc2 .( maybe not playing terran a part of it )
just the fact that many bw b teamer got that good prove something , in about 8 people in my f list ( 4 terran ) ( who could clearly have been pro gamer in sc2 if they wanted ) almost all of them stoped ,my f list was full of amazing player at some point and even 2 of them got gm playing almost never but all of them droped this game at some point .
also the fact you cant just talk about what wrong with the game will never help you guy ''when something was broken in bw everyone was talking or would talk about it ''
you find some strange rules for this sc2 titles with the community who got the name ESPORTS right away that you cant talk about his balance or flaw in balance because people think it should be perfect for some strange reason .
im many website you are banned or flagged right away as whiner when you make a post saying you think the game not totaly balanced and you are labeled right away : ''a balance whiner ''
that a pure childiss dream to hope a game complex like sc2 was balanced right at the releases date ( it got the title esport right away and everyone got say ''stfu about balance whine'' the game perfect )
bw have take year for get the tag esport ( mostly after the team behind the game stoped changing all stuft each week ) then people figured stuft during year for get the balance at the end .
sc2 got changed each week , stuft changed , build changed , unit removed and so on , with a team of monkey for balance it ( blizzard also balance wow and diablo 3 , why you think this team would balance more into a complex rts like sc2 ??? )
im saying that because im realy not taking this game seriously as a rts game sucessor , people should just take this game as a fun litle game in space where you kill monster and be done with it ,
On February 25 2013 08:51 avilo wrote: Played many more games this patch, 150/150 and the time investment is way out of line. Even previous siege mode research only costed 100/100.
If they wanted to take this route to nerfing something (that was unnecessary and hurt mech tvp) they need to put it at around 50/50 and make it take about half the amount of time to research.
As it is, the cost is way too high resource-wise, and time wise.
The siege research was removed for the sake of timings not the cost. So when comparing WoL to HoTS your total required research cost for defensive mech has only increased by 50/50 (-100/100+150/150). You then have the option in late game to get the mine upgrade, but I don't really think that upgrade is in the scope of this situation.
On February 25 2013 09:24 blade55555 wrote: Avila you can still make hellbats without upgrade just can't transform till upgrade. It doesn't hurt mech much at all.
On February 25 2013 04:19 Jinky wrote: Why are people suggesting that the hellbat cargo space nerf needs to be rolled back? The transform upgrade nerf doesn't affect anything regarding how strong the 4-hellbat drops were. Also, the purpose of hellbats was not to give Terran yet another way of cheesing/exploiting in the early game.
Terrans need to be more objective instead of TTing about nerfs. The nerfs are meant to balance the game, and Terran are getting them now because of how powerful their new units are and can be used.
I'm still waiting for players to figure out how to deal with mass Mines, and if not possible, then for Blizz to nerf it.
How do you deal with mass mines? Get detection? It seems like some TTing to me.
Well, from what I'm seeing and deducting, Terran players no longer really have any legitimate room to complain about having units that can't perform well after the midgame. Honestly, the best Terran players are the ones that are either incredibly good at the game itself, are some of the best at micro-management, and can utilize every Terran unit effectively. MVP, Boxer, qxc - These guys are just a few of the best that know how to actually play Terran.
From a Protoss player's perspective, Hellbats finally offer a solid counter to the powerful mid-lategame Zealot-Archon combination we see in WoL. After playing several games against Terran players that actually use Hellbats correctly alongside M/M/M/V, not only does Zealot-Archon fail, but so does the classic Protoss Ground Deathball. With Hellbats in that mix, Protoss literally has to grab Archons, Colossus, and High Templar/Psistorm for that one battle to win a normally favorable engagement at a choke. That's not even mentioning H/M/M/M/V mixed with Mech support or Ravens. I'm not certain about Skytoss against Terran (other than Mass Marine, Viking, and Medivacs being a classic counter still), but all I'm saying now is that Terran players really have NO reason whatsoever to complain about their being inferior lategame now.
On February 25 2013 13:54 Jasiwel wrote: Well, from what I'm seeing and deducting, Terran players no longer really have any legitimate room to complain about having units that can't perform well after the midgame. Honestly, the best Terran players are the ones that are either incredibly good at the game itself, are some of the best at micro-management, and can utilize every Terran unit effectively. MVP, Boxer, qxc - These guys are just a few of the best that know how to actually play Terran.
From a Protoss player's perspective, Hellbats finally offer a solid counter to the powerful mid-lategame Zealot-Archon combination we see in WoL. After playing several games against Terran players that actually use Hellbats correctly alongside M/M/M/V, not only does Zealot-Archon fail, but so does the classic Protoss Ground Deathball. With Hellbats in that mix, Protoss literally has to grab Archons, Colossus, and High Templar/Psistorm for that one battle to win a normally favorable engagement at a choke. That's not even mentioning H/M/M/M/V mixed with Mech support or Ravens. I'm not certain about Skytoss against Terran (other than Mass Marine, Viking, and Medivacs being a classic counter still), but all I'm saying now is that Terran players really have NO reason whatsoever to complain about their being inferior lategame now.
I've had more success just keeping terran on the backfoot. Always having warp prisms/pylons and warpins everywhere. Avoid that big fight. He can't get going if he has to keep pulling his army back.
On February 25 2013 08:51 avilo wrote: Played many more games this patch, 150/150 and the time investment is way out of line. Even previous siege mode research only costed 100/100.
If they wanted to take this route to nerfing something (that was unnecessary and hurt mech tvp) they need to put it at around 50/50 and make it take about half the amount of time to research.
As it is, the cost is way too high resource-wise, and time wise.
The siege research was removed for the sake of timings not the cost. So when comparing WoL to HoTS your total required research cost for defensive mech has only increased by 50/50 (-100/100+150/150). You then have the option in late game to get the mine upgrade, but I don't really think that upgrade is in the scope of this situation.
Siege was removed because of the mothership core in TvP.
On February 25 2013 13:54 Jasiwel wrote: Well, from what I'm seeing and deducting, Terran players no longer really have any legitimate room to complain about having units that can't perform well after the midgame. Honestly, the best Terran players are the ones that are either incredibly good at the game itself, are some of the best at micro-management, and can utilize every Terran unit effectively. MVP, Boxer, qxc - These guys are just a few of the best that know how to actually play Terran.
From a Protoss player's perspective, Hellbats finally offer a solid counter to the powerful mid-lategame Zealot-Archon combination we see in WoL. After playing several games against Terran players that actually use Hellbats correctly alongside M/M/M/V, not only does Zealot-Archon fail, but so does the classic Protoss Ground Deathball. With Hellbats in that mix, Protoss literally has to grab Archons, Colossus, and High Templar/Psistorm for that one battle to win a normally favorable engagement at a choke. That's not even mentioning H/M/M/M/V mixed with Mech support or Ravens. I'm not certain about Skytoss against Terran (other than Mass Marine, Viking, and Medivacs being a classic counter still), but all I'm saying now is that Terran players really have NO reason whatsoever to complain about their being inferior lategame now.
I've had more success just keeping terran on the backfoot. Always having warp prisms/pylons and warpins everywhere. Avoid that big fight. He can't get going if he has to keep pulling his army back.
I was doing this too with DTs, thinking that I could force the Terran player into a bad situation by forcing him to burn scans (for less Mules) and kill a good bit of SCVs at the same time. I did. He still was able to accumulate an army consisting of H/M/M/M/V with Mech support that was just too much. I had more than 15 Zealots, several Colossus, a couple of Immortals, several Archons attacking, a good group of Stalkers, a few Void Rays, and Sentries for Guardian Shield/FF. I turned my attention away for a second to start Psistorm (or something, might have been an upgrade) and when I looked back my Zealots were liquidated, his tanks were blowing the hell out of everything else, and my Colossus/Archons were JUST finishing his Hellbats. That's not even mentioning that his M/M/M was still there, plus there were no Ghosts. It was engaged at a choke, at my base, with the Nexus using Photon Overcharge. Yeah, not sure how I borked that engagement, or if there is a balance issue. All I know is that Hellbats changed that entire battle.
On February 25 2013 09:46 YarNhoj wrote: I now just make hellions until armory then switch and make hellbats. I see no reason to ever research the transformation upgrade. Hellions do enough to stop lings and stupidly greedy expansions early game. HellBat drops are now intended to make sure the zerg can't auto remax. 3/3 hellbat drops late game completely decimate. Since you can produce hellbats 2 at a time from the factory there is never a reason to get the upgrade. Why build a hellion and transform it when you can build a hellbat in the same amount of time? I liked the cargo nerf, though I thought it should have been three hellbats not two. I never understood removing the blue flame upgrade...it's the same unit...and I still don't understand the bio tag. The core issue is that the hellbat takes the same amount of time that a hellion does to produce. If hellbats took 5 seconds longer to produce, hellion transform takes ~ 4 seconds, then it would make sense to get the upgrade. You would then be trading speed of having the unit for ~4 seconds of vulnerability. As it stands now I don't see this upgrade ever being used. It's almost like the overlord speed upgrade for zerg. Before lair it's almost never useful to spend the gas on that upgrade. There is almost no advantage to getting it that soon, much like there is almost no advantage to getting the servos.
It's just a very crude fix in an attempt to delay a hellbat timing. This basically reduces the effectiveness of almost all types of early-mid hellbat drops, and if you want to do an early drop, you would have to proxy the factory and the medivac which puts you at a massive disadvantage if it's scouted. Well, i'm happy about this change, but i sincerely hope they don't nerf hellbat's damage/hp, since they're needed for TvP mech.
On February 25 2013 09:46 YarNhoj wrote: I now just make hellions until armory then switch and make hellbats. I see no reason to ever research the transformation upgrade. Hellions do enough to stop lings and stupidly greedy expansions early game. HellBat drops are now intended to make sure the zerg can't auto remax. 3/3 hellbat drops late game completely decimate. Since you can produce hellbats 2 at a time from the factory there is never a reason to get the upgrade. Why build a hellion and transform it when you can build a hellbat in the same amount of time? I liked the cargo nerf, though I thought it should have been three hellbats not two. I never understood removing the blue flame upgrade...it's the same unit...and I still don't understand the bio tag. The core issue is that the hellbat takes the same amount of time that a hellion does to produce. If hellbats took 5 seconds longer to produce, hellion transform takes ~ 4 seconds, then it would make sense to get the upgrade. You would then be trading speed of having the unit for ~4 seconds of vulnerability. As it stands now I don't see this upgrade ever being used. It's almost like the overlord speed upgrade for zerg. Before lair it's almost never useful to spend the gas on that upgrade. There is almost no advantage to getting it that soon, much like there is almost no advantage to getting the servos.
It's just a very crude fix in an attempt to delay a hellbat timing. This basically reduces the effectiveness of almost all types of early-mid hellbat drops, and if you want to do an early drop, you would have to proxy the factory and the medivac which puts you at a massive disadvantage if it's scouted. Well, i'm happy about this change, but i sincerely hope they don't nerf hellbat's damage/hp, since they're needed for TvP mech.
How is it a 'crude fix' when this is how it originally was? They just reverted a previous patch.
On February 25 2013 09:46 YarNhoj wrote: I now just make hellions until armory then switch and make hellbats. I see no reason to ever research the transformation upgrade. Hellions do enough to stop lings and stupidly greedy expansions early game. HellBat drops are now intended to make sure the zerg can't auto remax. 3/3 hellbat drops late game completely decimate. Since you can produce hellbats 2 at a time from the factory there is never a reason to get the upgrade. Why build a hellion and transform it when you can build a hellbat in the same amount of time? I liked the cargo nerf, though I thought it should have been three hellbats not two. I never understood removing the blue flame upgrade...it's the same unit...and I still don't understand the bio tag. The core issue is that the hellbat takes the same amount of time that a hellion does to produce. If hellbats took 5 seconds longer to produce, hellion transform takes ~ 4 seconds, then it would make sense to get the upgrade. You would then be trading speed of having the unit for ~4 seconds of vulnerability. As it stands now I don't see this upgrade ever being used. It's almost like the overlord speed upgrade for zerg. Before lair it's almost never useful to spend the gas on that upgrade. There is almost no advantage to getting it that soon, much like there is almost no advantage to getting the servos.
It's just a very crude fix in an attempt to delay a hellbat timing. This basically reduces the effectiveness of almost all types of early-mid hellbat drops, and if you want to do an early drop, you would have to proxy the factory and the medivac which puts you at a massive disadvantage if it's scouted. Well, i'm happy about this change, but i sincerely hope they don't nerf hellbat's damage/hp, since they're needed for TvP mech.
How is it a 'crude fix' when this is how it originally was? They just reverted a previous patch.
Maybe because the whole unit (the Battle Hellion) is still too good and they are trying everything to "make it work" despite the bad design? It is still healed by Medivacs, right? I would say this is one of the major reasons why the unit is soo good and yet they havent removed it. Increase cargo space, add the transmutation upgrade, but never remove the healing ...
The hellbat has indeed become a franken-unit. It always was weird, but now it is positively bizarre. Its HP changes when it transforms, and it becomes Biological, and it changes from 2 to 4 cargo size. It can be produced from a factory with an armory tech requirement, but it can be morphed from a hellion with a research from the factory tech lab. Its damage distribution and typing are completely different from the hellion's, and now only the hellion benefits from blue flame.
It's just ugly. I would infinitely prefer a second new and completely discrete unit instead of this transforming nonsense.
I get the impression Browder thinks Terran players loved the "transform-y" part of the Siege Tank, and now we have four units that "transform." The tank, the widow mine, the hellion, and the viking, All of which really need some work. They really just have no idea.
On February 25 2013 16:10 ledarsi wrote: The hellbat has indeed become a franken-unit. It always was weird, but now it is positively bizarre. Its HP changes when it transforms, and it becomes Biological, and it changes from 2 to 4 cargo size. It can be produced from a factory with an armory tech requirement, but it can be morphed from a hellion with a research from the factory tech lab. Its damage distribution and typing are completely different from the hellion's, and now only the hellion benefits from blue flame.
It's just ugly. I would infinitely prefer a second new and completely discrete unit instead of this transforming nonsense.
I get the impression Browder thinks Terran players loved the "transform-y" part of the Siege Tank, and now we have four units that "transform." The tank, the widow mine, the hellion, and the viking, All of which really need some work. They really just have no idea.
Funnily enough, a reworked warhound would have been a better response. I agree that the hellbat is prehaps becoming an awkward unit that's basically a new addition to the whole transformers theme. The patch history for this unit is wonky at best, and no other unit shares this sort of patch change.
On February 25 2013 16:10 ledarsi wrote: The hellbat has indeed become a franken-unit. It always was weird, but now it is positively bizarre. Its HP changes when it transforms, and it becomes Biological, and it changes from 2 to 4 cargo size. It can be produced from a factory with an armory tech requirement, but it can be morphed from a hellion with a research from the factory tech lab. Its damage distribution and typing are completely different from the hellion's, and now only the hellion benefits from blue flame.
It's just ugly. I would infinitely prefer a second new and completely discrete unit instead of this transforming nonsense.
I get the impression Browder thinks Terran players loved the "transform-y" part of the Siege Tank, and now we have four units that "transform." The tank, the widow mine, the hellion, and the viking, All of which really need some work. They really just have no idea.
Thanks for posting this ... after your post it became clearer why the unit is so terrible. The sum of "mutations" really makes it two separate units which magically change into one another instead of two sides of the same coin. It doesnt work from a design point of view, because it doesnt make sense. One thing (like blue flame OR cargo space OR bio/mechanical) being different might be acceptable, but all of them just make it totally ridiculous and artificial.
The only thing which Blizzard thinks about now is "Does it work?" and they totally dont care about "Does it make sense?".
Oh and dont get me started on the name "Hellbat" ... which is completely the opposite of what the unit is.
On February 25 2013 16:10 ledarsi wrote: The hellbat has indeed become a franken-unit. It always was weird, but now it is positively bizarre. Its HP changes when it transforms, and it becomes Biological, and it changes from 2 to 4 cargo size. It can be produced from a factory with an armory tech requirement, but it can be morphed from a hellion with a research from the factory tech lab. Its damage distribution and typing are completely different from the hellion's, and now only the hellion benefits from blue flame.
It's just ugly. I would infinitely prefer a second new and completely discrete unit instead of this transforming nonsense.
I get the impression Browder thinks Terran players loved the "transform-y" part of the Siege Tank, and now we have four units that "transform." The tank, the widow mine, the hellion, and the viking, All of which really need some work. They really just have no idea.
Thanks for posting this ... after your post it became clearer why the unit is so terrible. The sum of "mutations" really makes it two separate units which magically change into one another instead of two sides of the same coin. It doesnt work from a design point of view, because it doesnt make sense. One thing (like blue flame OR cargo space OR bio/mechanical) being different might be acceptable, but all of them just make it totally ridiculous and artificial.
The only thing which Blizzard thinks about now is "Does it work?" and they totally dont care about "Does it make sense?".
Oh and dont get me started on the name "Hellbat" ... which is completely the opposite of what the unit is.
I think they use "hellbat" because it is "hellion" + "firebat" because that is kind of what the unit is. But I agree that it is a mutant unit.
On February 25 2013 16:10 ledarsi wrote: The hellbat has indeed become a franken-unit. It always was weird, but now it is positively bizarre. Its HP changes when it transforms, and it becomes Biological, and it changes from 2 to 4 cargo size. It can be produced from a factory with an armory tech requirement, but it can be morphed from a hellion with a research from the factory tech lab. Its damage distribution and typing are completely different from the hellion's, and now only the hellion benefits from blue flame.
It's just ugly. I would infinitely prefer a second new and completely discrete unit instead of this transforming nonsense.
I get the impression Browder thinks Terran players loved the "transform-y" part of the Siege Tank, and now we have four units that "transform." The tank, the widow mine, the hellion, and the viking, All of which really need some work. They really just have no idea.
Actually, it makes a bit sense right now. Hellbat went through many changes, so people are confused now.
You have Hellion as a fast scout and you have Hellbat as a fighter. You can research upgrade to make them able to transform between each other at Armory tech, which only makes sense, because why would you have mid-late game fighter avaiable in early game.
Now, only thing that is kinda "wrong" is this bio-flag, but I guess Blizzard likes it.
Blue Flame upgrade is pretty useless, because you only want it to kill workers faster. For this purpose, Hellbat drops are probably better. In direct engagements, you always want Hellbats. So I guess, this upgrade can be dismissed.
On February 25 2013 16:10 ledarsi wrote: The hellbat has indeed become a franken-unit. It always was weird, but now it is positively bizarre. Its HP changes when it transforms, and it becomes Biological, and it changes from 2 to 4 cargo size. It can be produced from a factory with an armory tech requirement, but it can be morphed from a hellion with a research from the factory tech lab. Its damage distribution and typing are completely different from the hellion's, and now only the hellion benefits from blue flame.
It's just ugly. I would infinitely prefer a second new and completely discrete unit instead of this transforming nonsense.
I get the impression Browder thinks Terran players loved the "transform-y" part of the Siege Tank, and now we have four units that "transform." The tank, the widow mine, the hellion, and the viking, All of which really need some work. They really just have no idea.
Well, it's really not that hard to get, just think of it as a completely separate unit B that can transform back into this unit A. Now as for the lore justifications...
The widow mine doesn't really tranform, it has to burrow to do something, like the swarmhost, or the lurker. The thor, however, does transform as well now :D
On February 25 2013 16:10 ledarsi wrote: The hellbat has indeed become a franken-unit. It always was weird, but now it is positively bizarre. Its HP changes when it transforms, and it becomes Biological, and it changes from 2 to 4 cargo size. It can be produced from a factory with an armory tech requirement, but it can be morphed from a hellion with a research from the factory tech lab. Its damage distribution and typing are completely different from the hellion's, and now only the hellion benefits from blue flame.
It's just ugly. I would infinitely prefer a second new and completely discrete unit instead of this transforming nonsense.
I get the impression Browder thinks Terran players loved the "transform-y" part of the Siege Tank, and now we have four units that "transform." The tank, the widow mine, the hellion, and the viking, All of which really need some work. They really just have no idea.
Actually, it makes a bit sense right now. Hellbat went through many changes, so people are confused now.
You have Hellion as a fast scout and you have Hellbat as a fighter. You can research upgrade to make them able to transform between each other at Armory tech, which only makes sense, because why would you have mid-late game fighter avaiable in early game.
Now, only thing that is kinda "wrong" is this bio-flag, but I guess Blizzard likes it.
Blue Flame upgrade is pretty useless, because you only want it to kill workers faster. For this purpose, Hellbat drops are probably better. In direct engagements, you always want Hellbats. So I guess, this upgrade can be dismissed.
I too had my reservations of the bio-flag on hellbat, until my short story and further research.
Now tell me its impossible for mech to have bio-flag. Hellbats are giant SCVs with shields-for-arms and head mounted flame-thrower.
On February 25 2013 16:10 ledarsi wrote: The hellbat has indeed become a franken-unit. It always was weird, but now it is positively bizarre. Its HP changes when it transforms, and it becomes Biological, and it changes from 2 to 4 cargo size. It can be produced from a factory with an armory tech requirement, but it can be morphed from a hellion with a research from the factory tech lab. Its damage distribution and typing are completely different from the hellion's, and now only the hellion benefits from blue flame.
It's just ugly. I would infinitely prefer a second new and completely discrete unit instead of this transforming nonsense.
I get the impression Browder thinks Terran players loved the "transform-y" part of the Siege Tank, and now we have four units that "transform." The tank, the widow mine, the hellion, and the viking, All of which really need some work. They really just have no idea.
Actually, it makes a bit sense right now. Hellbat went through many changes, so people are confused now.
You have Hellion as a fast scout and you have Hellbat as a fighter. You can research upgrade to make them able to transform between each other at Armory tech, which only makes sense, because why would you have mid-late game fighter avaiable in early game.
Now, only thing that is kinda "wrong" is this bio-flag, but I guess Blizzard likes it.
Blue Flame upgrade is pretty useless, because you only want it to kill workers faster. For this purpose, Hellbat drops are probably better. In direct engagements, you always want Hellbats. So I guess, this upgrade can be dismissed.
I too had my reservations of the bio-flag on hellbat, until my short story and further research.
Now tell me its impossible for mech to have bio-flag. Hellbats are giant SCVs with shields-for-arms and head mounted flame-thrower.
But why would Hellion then not be flagged as "bio" too?
I guess the second it starts transforming, orbital command calls down guy from space to jump in right when the transofrmation finishes? :D
If you think about it, when the hellion is in hellion mode, the medivac beam is blocked by the car roof (as the car is completely covering the driver), where as in hellbat mode the armor doesn't entirely cover every part of the drivers body so the medivac beam is able to reach it.
If anything I'm more surprised people are not annoyed with beams coming from the sky magically healing people.
On February 23 2013 18:31 avilo wrote: No Terran player is going to argue btw guys, because this is how it works during beta:
Zerg players die from only building drones and queens, while complaining about anything from Terran on stream.
Blizzard sees this, they also see all the Protoss whining about "widow mine drops."
If any Terran *raises his hand* and is like, "eh...wait what? We're only nerfing Terran stuff that wasn't an issue in the first place?" they get labelled as a "whiner" by the Zerg / Protoss whiners.
All the attention lately is on Terran's only two new units, the hellbat and widow mine, and how they "MUST BE NERFED THEY'RE SO IMBA" after literally 2 weeks of new metagame usage of the hellbat.
Things ignored by the community (possibly blizzard? would hope not) :
-viper blinding cloud radius/duration -ultra buff vs bio -oracles vs all races bursting down workers -tvp early game being a cluster fuck
I cannot wait till people find out about the new Zerg abuse that will be shown soon - mass vipers + mass static defense with traditional broodlords+corruptor+infestor turtle mode.
As well as mass swarmhost + corruptor.
When this strategy comes out soon, it won't be deemed imbalanced (because it's Zerg) - people are instead going to say how fucking innovative it is and golf clap their hands without a second thought because right now whichever part of the community whines the loudest or whichever popular streamers do get the game changed for the worse.
I agreed with a lot of the hellbat nerfs, especially the cargo one. But double and triple nerfing/buffing units is a bit too much. And it historically only happens to Terran. I personally don't care if Terran is nerfed further, nor should any other Terran player. What would be nice though is that they were consistent across all 3 of the races with nerfs/buffs, instead of only nerfing Terran.
If you're going to nerf/buff something of one race, you have to do it across the board and look at all three races and what's possibly too strong or weak. Not to mention you get 10x better PR for it.
And Terrans will continue to not say shit here or anywhere else because of the backlash they get for actually having an opinion.
It would be nice if more Terran players had some balls.
im thinking that because they are less and less terran players curently playing this game also most of the good one are korean , while they are ALOT of good foreigner pro zerg and protoss , and they never wait for cry nerf at anything and are usualy very vocal .
also at lower level terran kinda look OP more easy ,and also because that the only race who realy need to win early game because the late game realy bad ( so since forever when terran find something or good all in for end the game fast , they never stop ) and it got nerfed . mostly because people think that more op when the build make you loss before the 15 min mark , when something hit at late game they take more time to say that because ''the build op'' and at lower level this never reach this point and most of them dont even know what strong or why they loss or if that fair at this point in the game .
also the fact that many master and higher foreigner terran just stoped this game for exemple i was playing bw for 8 year at a high level and switched to sc2 , but so did about 7-8 people i have know from bw , everyone of them was diamond right when the league have open , and everyone of them got master right when the league got open too , many of them was playing less that 10 hour week , im not saying that for say they are amazing but because all of them KNOW how rts work and when they reply for exemple in a forum they make realy good post who are often taked more seriously , they know what broken .
im saying that because most good foreigner who switched bw to starcraft 2 , most of them droped this game . but you cant say the same from the zerg and protoss in bw , they are often more influential that new rts player who are curently good at starcraft 2 , and many terran who are curently good in starcraft 2 are usualy new rts player who just dont whine because they dont have enough rts background for know if the nerf was fine or what realy wrong with the game .
for exemple the old NTT from bw did try some foreplay into sc2 for end up stoping disgusted . i got gm myself playing after my 8 hour/day job but stoped about 5 months ago , totaly disgusted at the way blizzard balance this title , im saying that because people who are good curently in sc2 are not that much talented at rts ( for exemple many B teamer in bw was top 1-5 in sc2 right away ) but strangely realy amazing broodwar player never did that good in sc2 , these people were far more talented at rts that the b teamer who dominated them in sc2 , i would realy like to know what are the skill required for be sucessful in sc2 .( maybe not playing terran a part of it )
just the fact that many bw b teamer got that good prove something , in about 8 people in my f list ( 4 terran ) ( who could clearly have been pro gamer in sc2 if they wanted ) almost all of them stoped ,my f list was full of amazing player at some point and even 2 of them got gm playing almost never but all of them droped this game at some point .
also the fact you cant just talk about what wrong with the game will never help you guy ''when something was broken in bw everyone was talking or would talk about it ''
you find some strange rules for this sc2 titles with the community who got the name ESPORTS right away that you cant talk about his balance or flaw in balance because people think it should be perfect for some strange reason .
im many website you are banned or flagged right away as whiner when you make a post saying you think the game not totaly balanced and you are labeled right away : ''a balance whiner ''
that a pure childiss dream to hope a game complex like sc2 was balanced right at the releases date ( it got the title esport right away and everyone got say ''stfu about balance whine'' the game perfect )
bw have take year for get the tag esport ( mostly after the team behind the game stoped changing all stuft each week ) then people figured stuft during year for get the balance at the end .
sc2 got changed each week , stuft changed , build changed , unit removed and so on , with a team of monkey for balance it ( blizzard also balance wow and diablo 3 , why you think this team would balance more into a complex rts like sc2 ??? )
im saying that because im realy not taking this game seriously as a rts game sucessor , people should just take this game as a fun litle game in space where you kill monster and be done with it ,
I actually read this whole post and if you can get through the fragmented verbiage (looks like KR to English) it has a lot to say. I believe there are many "A-Teamers" specifically a lot of Terran that picked this game up and can, perhaps, make GM in a week but overall the game is broken. This post does not stem from just beta but also WoL. I'm not picking on one race, although you have a ridiculous amount of Zerg in GM in WoL, but the inherent unit design and composition will not stand the test of time like BW. It's a problem when people like Flash, with continuous training, is now losing to "B-Teamers". This post demonstrates many Koreans are not vocal about imbalance and just end up putting the game down and find something more advantageous and lucrative. This release, espcially, let there be way too much a-move necessary for victory and, frankly, I think Blizzard let whiners nerf one race into oblivion.
On February 25 2013 20:09 Rider517 wrote: bio/tag switch is weird and inelegant, the research requires too much, no one we will research it, better invest in something else
Mech players will research it. It's really useful for mech to have.
On February 25 2013 16:10 ledarsi wrote: The hellbat has indeed become a franken-unit. It always was weird, but now it is positively bizarre. Its HP changes when it transforms, and it becomes Biological, and it changes from 2 to 4 cargo size. It can be produced from a factory with an armory tech requirement, but it can be morphed from a hellion with a research from the factory tech lab. Its damage distribution and typing are completely different from the hellion's, and now only the hellion benefits from blue flame.
It's just ugly. I would infinitely prefer a second new and completely discrete unit instead of this transforming nonsense.
I get the impression Browder thinks Terran players loved the "transform-y" part of the Siege Tank, and now we have four units that "transform." The tank, the widow mine, the hellion, and the viking, All of which really need some work. They really just have no idea.
Dustin Browder must think that terran players are uniformly 12 year old Transformer 2 fanboys.
Remove the transform, imo. Then all the rules for the unit can make sense again.
Removing the transformation basically is a massive nerf to mech. You don't want either hellbats or hellions, the thing that makes them useful is you can transform to take map control and then transform again when you need them in a fight.
i wonder why they didn't "wait and see" as they often said about changing something... now that more progamers are playing hots why not wait and see if they find an answer to this problem about hellion/bats
oh yeah, it's because is terran stuff, let's nerf it asap
On February 25 2013 08:51 avilo wrote: Played many more games this patch, 150/150 and the time investment is way out of line. Even previous siege mode research only costed 100/100.
If they wanted to take this route to nerfing something (that was unnecessary and hurt mech tvp) they need to put it at around 50/50 and make it take about half the amount of time to research.
As it is, the cost is way too high resource-wise, and time wise.
The siege research was removed for the sake of timings not the cost. So when comparing WoL to HoTS your total required research cost for defensive mech has only increased by 50/50 (-100/100+150/150). You then have the option in late game to get the mine upgrade, but I don't really think that upgrade is in the scope of this situation.
Siege was removed because of the mothership core in TvP.
No, Avilo. Siege was removed because mech was basically defenseless early game against Toss pushes and has always been defenseless against said pushes. Removing siege means heavy siege tank defenses now work.
On February 23 2013 09:53 Everlong wrote: Also, Are they only watching TvZ for the first 10 minuts games?
...
Yeah what about maxed terran mech or air armies, or sky toss? :/
If protoss and terran lategame gets too strong, it will kinda turn zerg completely upside down, considering how they used to play in wol with turtle with infestors into unstopable hive army.
But i guess having a bad lategame isen't going to make your race underpowered. Terrans never really used lategame oriented play in wol (even though terran air could be really good) and still had around 50% win (sometimes less, sometimes more) most of the time in tvp and tvz.
They had a 50% winrate until the queen buff. When forced to go to the late game almost every game, GSL winrates dropped to the low 40s and mid 30s. There's a lot of Zerg talk that sounds like "ZOMG Terran air is SOOOOOO strong! Just max 200 on ravens, BCs, and vikings!" But it doesn't seem to work all too well at the pro level, otherwise we would see Terran do it to overcome their now abysmal chances in the matchup.
In contrast, even when ZvT didn't revolve around infestors, there wasn't a real need to adapt to the infestor playstyle. GSL winrates for Zerg were still pretty solid, with the occasional dip here and there.
I just don't buy that Terrans are somehow ignoring this supposed blatant lategame army strength while having extremely dismal numbers. Doesn't add up.
Terran air is insanely strong but the transition to terran air is incredibly hard. Considering it is by far the hardest transition to pull off, it probably deserves to be the flat out strongest army in the game.
On February 25 2013 08:51 avilo wrote: Played many more games this patch, 150/150 and the time investment is way out of line. Even previous siege mode research only costed 100/100.
If they wanted to take this route to nerfing something (that was unnecessary and hurt mech tvp) they need to put it at around 50/50 and make it take about half the amount of time to research.
As it is, the cost is way too high resource-wise, and time wise.
The siege research was removed for the sake of timings not the cost. So when comparing WoL to HoTS your total required research cost for defensive mech has only increased by 50/50 (-100/100+150/150). You then have the option in late game to get the mine upgrade, but I don't really think that upgrade is in the scope of this situation.
Siege was removed because of the mothership core in TvP.
No, Avilo. Siege was removed because mech was basically defenseless early game against Toss pushes and has always been defenseless against said pushes. Removing siege means heavy siege tank defenses now work.
Defenseless against pushes with the MSC. In WOL, you can open mech very safe (Goody has been doing it for years).
On February 25 2013 16:10 ledarsi wrote: The hellbat has indeed become a franken-unit. It always was weird, but now it is positively bizarre. Its HP changes when it transforms, and it becomes Biological, and it changes from 2 to 4 cargo size. It can be produced from a factory with an armory tech requirement, but it can be morphed from a hellion with a research from the factory tech lab. Its damage distribution and typing are completely different from the hellion's, and now only the hellion benefits from blue flame.
It's just ugly. I would infinitely prefer a second new and completely discrete unit instead of this transforming nonsense.
I get the impression Browder thinks Terran players loved the "transform-y" part of the Siege Tank, and now we have four units that "transform." The tank, the widow mine, the hellion, and the viking, All of which really need some work. They really just have no idea.
I completely agree with this. I'm all in favor of 'ugly' fixes if it improves gameplay drastically and is just needed to get an unit to work. For example the biological tag was a really ugly fix but I could sort of get behind it as they wanted to give medivacs a role in mech play which is not really possible in other ways except other ugly stuff like giving them repair drones. They've gone completely too far with ugly fixes for the hellbat though. In the meantime any chance they had for getting mech to work in TvP, which seemed to have been the entire goal of hots changes for T, are gone again.
Blizzard design is completely oblivious and should have been sacked long ago, HotS hardly changes the game for the better..
On February 25 2013 23:08 Markwerf wrote: In the meantime any chance they had for getting mech to work in TvP, which seemed to have been the entire goal of hots changes for T, are gone again.
The problem with this is that there are two "schools of thought" as to what "mech" actually means.
One part of the community - mostly made up of new Starcraft players / fans - is happy with the term describing any unit from the factory, but the other part of the community - mostly those who actually played / watched Brood War - think that it describes a playstyle which bases itself around the immobility of the Siege Tank.
There are pros and cons for each of these two ways, but I certainly belong in the second group because I feel the Siege Tank needs to have an army built around it due to its unique immobility and weaknesses. When it comes to "making mech viable in TvP" Blizzard certainly follows the first path, because they did nothing to make the Siege Tank with its pitiful damage potential more viable and focused fully on the two new units. Even though the Battle Hellions could be used as meatshields they dont synergize particularly well with the Siege Tank (due to the immobility of the BH and lack of AA capability) and the Widow Mine doesnt synergize at all with any other unit. The mine is great to block / guard / early assault on its own, but thats about it. Especially with the current boosts to Protoss air some improved mech anti-air capabilities would be great for Terrans.
----
I think it is high time to make a poll here on TL about what mech actually means, because it leads to too many "heated arguments" and will never be resolved otherwise. After that poll discussions should be a lot clearer ...
maybe we should wonder what actually mech is...for blizzard. they clearly stated that they don't want a factory-only composition so, imo, there is no mech to look for, only a more mixed bio-mech
I would love a siege tank buff myself (2 supply please) but it's too late into the beta for blizzard to do any drastic changes. I wish this wasn't the case, but they put all their eggs into one basket (new units instead of buffing siege tank).
If we do get a siege tank buff, it'll be in around 3 years with legacy of the void.
On February 25 2013 19:54 Qikz wrote: I'm not so much talking about you, but I've noticed constantly for weeks now people are claiming it's illogical :p
Yep, I wonder why that is too, I had the same "lore explanation" as you in mind and it doesn't bother me at all :D
On February 25 2013 16:10 ledarsi wrote: The hellbat has indeed become a franken-unit. It always was weird, but now it is positively bizarre. Its HP changes when it transforms, and it becomes Biological, and it changes from 2 to 4 cargo size. It can be produced from a factory with an armory tech requirement, but it can be morphed from a hellion with a research from the factory tech lab. Its damage distribution and typing are completely different from the hellion's, and now only the hellion benefits from blue flame.
It's just ugly. I would infinitely prefer a second new and completely discrete unit instead of this transforming nonsense.
I get the impression Browder thinks Terran players loved the "transform-y" part of the Siege Tank, and now we have four units that "transform." The tank, the widow mine, the hellion, and the viking, All of which really need some work. They really just have no idea.
i wonder where is the philosophy " easy for new players" in this unit. so much variables in one unit is dumb.
Here is what I propose for the Hellbat using minimal changes.
Make the Hellbat be produced by the Barracks as a completely separate unit from the Hellion, no transformation possible. Requires a tech lab. Remove Mechanical tag, make it fill 2 cargo size like a Marauder, and give it Stimpack. It is now a Firebat. Change armor type from Light to Armored and give it 1 base armor. Reduce its damage to something like 15 (+10 Light) with blue flame increasing its damage to 15 (+15 Light). If the unit is too strong with those numbers, reduce its damage. Terran would then have an Armored unit that does bonus damage to Light, which currently does not exist.
Terran now has two completely separate units; the Hellbat is an Armored Barracks unit that is Biological, and the Hellion is a Light Factory unit that is Mechanical. Thematically, they both have a fire-based attack, signifying it does bonus damage to Light armor. Blue flame applies to both with the same effect.
I don't really like it but it's a correction I could live with. Give me unlimited license to change the game and I can come up with a much better solution than this involving the Hellbat becoming the first Factory unit which morphs into a reworked Hellion that can't be independently produced (morph analogous to Ion Thruster upgrade for Vulture), a new Goliath-Warhound, a Thor rework, siege tank buff, widow mine tweak, and maybe even a Viking rework using Transformation Servos (hellion and viking affected) and changed ground mode.
On February 25 2013 08:51 avilo wrote: Played many more games this patch, 150/150 and the time investment is way out of line. Even previous siege mode research only costed 100/100.
If they wanted to take this route to nerfing something (that was unnecessary and hurt mech tvp) they need to put it at around 50/50 and make it take about half the amount of time to research.
As it is, the cost is way too high resource-wise, and time wise.
The siege research was removed for the sake of timings not the cost. So when comparing WoL to HoTS your total required research cost for defensive mech has only increased by 50/50 (-100/100+150/150). You then have the option in late game to get the mine upgrade, but I don't really think that upgrade is in the scope of this situation.
Siege was removed because of the mothership core in TvP.
No, Avilo. Siege was removed because mech was basically defenseless early game against Toss pushes and has always been defenseless against said pushes. Removing siege means heavy siege tank defenses now work.
It was removed to help mech tvp viability due to the mothership core allowing previous all-ins to be more powerful (blink stalker all-in) vs Terran. Also to help Terran "open" mech in general. Terran was never "defenseless" against early game toss pushes, you just had to make the right number of bunkers vs all-ins in wings of liberty.
On February 25 2013 16:10 ledarsi wrote: The hellbat has indeed become a franken-unit. It always was weird, but now it is positively bizarre. Its HP changes when it transforms, and it becomes Biological, and it changes from 2 to 4 cargo size. It can be produced from a factory with an armory tech requirement, but it can be morphed from a hellion with a research from the factory tech lab. Its damage distribution and typing are completely different from the hellion's, and now only the hellion benefits from blue flame.
It's just ugly. I would infinitely prefer a second new and completely discrete unit instead of this transforming nonsense.
I get the impression Browder thinks Terran players loved the "transform-y" part of the Siege Tank, and now we have four units that "transform." The tank, the widow mine, the hellion, and the viking, All of which really need some work. They really just have no idea.
i wonder where is the philosophy " easy for new players" in this unit. so much variables in one unit is dumb.
On February 26 2013 04:03 ledarsi wrote: Here is what I propose for the Hellbat using minimal changes.
Make the Hellbat be produced by the Barracks as a completely separate unit from the Hellion, no transformation possible. Requires a tech lab. Remove Mechanical tag, make it fill 2 cargo size like a Marauder, and give it Stimpack. It is now a Firebat. Change armor type from Light to Armored and give it 1 base armor. Reduce its damage to something like 15 (+10 Light) with blue flame increasing its damage to 15 (+15 Light). If the unit is too strong with those numbers, reduce its damage. Terran would then have an Armored unit that does bonus damage to Light, which currently does not exist.
Terran now has two completely separate units; the Hellbat is an Armored Barracks unit that is Biological, and the Hellion is a Light Factory unit that is Mechanical. Thematically, they both have a fire-based attack, signifying it does bonus damage to Light armor. Blue flame applies to both with the same effect.
The problem I see with this is that bio is buffed and mech drastically nerfed, since mech would lose it's essential tanking unit. Hellbats are still at their strongest when you make them in combination with mech due to shared upgrades, so having a cheap yet strong mech unit strongly promotes more people to go mech. After all one of their major goals for this expansion was to encourage more mech play from terrans.
Hellbats are already Biological, and they certainly don't play like mech should. The only thing moving it to the Barracks does is restore the natural order.
Encouraging the current Hellbat is encouraging more bio play- not mech.
On February 26 2013 06:54 ledarsi wrote: Hellbats are already Biological, and they certainly don't play like mech should. The only thing moving it to the Barracks does is restore the natural order.
Encouraging the current Hellbat is encouraging more bio play- not mech.
Not...really. It is a mech AND bio unit. The whole point is that it helps mech be better and helps Terran bio deal with mass zealot/ling which they've never had a real counter to while P and Z do.
It would be nice if the hellbat upgrades were either infantry OR mech, whichever is higher of the two so that it can actually work well with both compositions. This is also the only way I see removing the biological trait, because right now hellbats in a bio comp are going to be way behind the upgrades of the marines and marauders. The healing is what gives them some usefulness even if behind on upgrades. But since I don't see them doing that upgrade change, they need to keep it bio and mech.
im not surprised at all. blizzard took little to no time at all being prompt with their changes for terran, but still ignore other aspects of the game. how typical of them and i saw it coming from a mile away. they havent changed one bit from wol, what a disappointment, no point in buying hots. its going to be a waste of money... not surprised to see 14% of TL community does not want to buy hots..
The whole point of having 6 different armor/weapon paths were that terran units are supposed to be dominant in unique situations. That's why Terran always had the extra upgrade until they combined armor for air/vehicle. Vikings are just too weak and mech AA is not strong. So now they have to go to this extent and combine an upgrade path. Hell, now we are talking about combining another by giving a unit both bio AND mech upgrade.
Something isn't right. It just doesn't sit well. Why not do the same with Vikings if that were the case? Then you can keep the extra armor upgrade that air units need. I hate when they have to cut crap out completely to balance something. Something needs to be done. Terran is supposed to be about linear play. You can't switch to a bio ball after upgrading to 1/2 mech for half the game once your opponent starts going mass hydras or charge zealots. Add the hellbat to bio and keep him there, with a tech lab requirement. Or buff the helion so it is more of a meat shield. Still doesn't solve mech anti air but that's where merging the upgrade in the armory helps, when in fact I would have increased the upgrade time for the other races or nerfed them somehow instead of going this route.
On February 26 2013 06:54 ledarsi wrote: Hellbats are already Biological, and they certainly don't play like mech should. The only thing moving it to the Barracks does is restore the natural order.
Encouraging the current Hellbat is encouraging more bio play- not mech.
Especially after the last patch hellbats are used way less with bio. They actually work very well with tank/thor armies, being slow moving units that creates a buffer for them to deal massive DPS.
I don't even know what "restoring the natural order" is even supposed to mean, but if it means making mech extinct because adding firebats makes more sense to some random guy on the forums, I'm against it.
Blizzard didn't wanted to reintroduce the Firebat and/or the Goliath simply because they were BW units Both these units were needed, one to fight against mass zerglings and zealots and the other to be an all around anti-air unit. Moreover, Blizzard wanted to promote mech play in Hots.
To solve some of these problems, Blizzard created this abomination called the Hellbat also know as the Messbat or the Frankenbat. It plays like a bio unit, it can be healed like a bio unit, it comes from a factory but i can turn into biological, it occupies variable cargo space, it can transform but it only benefits from an upgrade in a certain form, etc.
It is a complete mess right now. I have to agree with the opinion of many others in this thread, given that there's no time to rework this expansion, assuming this unit as a Firebat would be a better solution.
On February 26 2013 10:47 Warpish wrote: Blizzard didn't wanted to reintroduce the Firebat and/or the Goliath simply because they were BW units Both these units were needed, one to fight against mass zerglings and zealots and the other to be an all around anti-air unit. Moreover, Blizzard wanted to promote mech play in Hots.
To solve some of these problems, Blizzard created this abomination called the Hellbat also know as the Messbat or the Frankenbat. It plays like a bio unit, it can be healed like a bio unit, it comes from a factory but i can turn into biological, it occupies variable cargo space, it can transform but it only benefits from an upgrade in a certain form, etc.
It is a complete mess right now. I have to agree with the opinion of many others in this thread, given that there's no time to rework this expansion, assuming this unit as a Firebat would be a better solution.
They could have simply adjusted the pitiful damage of the Siege Tank (against non-armored units) upwards and mech would have been fine. Then they could have done the same for the anti-air damage of the Thor. They did neither of these and introduced new and powerful flyers for both other races, so any claim by Dustin Browder that they want to make mech viable is just a flat out lie.
With this expansion - and the whole SC2 bonus damage design - there are far too many units available to each race and they are too specialized in what they do. This adds too much randomness and build-order-wins into the game and also makes it harder and harder to balance because the number of variables increases with every new unit and bonus damage type. "Specialized solutions" - like the specific adjustments for the Battle Hellion, Widow Mine and Spore Crawler - are the only thing which can save them by now ... we just have to live with it and wait for the big crash (probably after the next expansion when they will have to introduce even more ridiculous stuff to make things work).
On February 26 2013 10:47 Warpish wrote: Blizzard didn't wanted to reintroduce the Firebat and/or the Goliath simply because they were BW units Both these units were needed, one to fight against mass zerglings and zealots and the other to be an all around anti-air unit. Moreover, Blizzard wanted to promote mech play in Hots.
To solve some of these problems, Blizzard created this abomination called the Hellbat also know as the Messbat or the Frankenbat. It plays like a bio unit, it can be healed like a bio unit, it comes from a factory but i can turn into biological, it occupies variable cargo space, it can transform but it only benefits from an upgrade in a certain form, etc.
It is a complete mess right now. I have to agree with the opinion of many others in this thread, given that there's no time to rework this expansion, assuming this unit as a Firebat would be a better solution.
Copy-pasting BW units is lazy design in the expansions. It would be completely unacceptable to the world outside of the 3 people who think it is "smrt" on TL.net.
That said, Terran did not need either of the things you specify, especially your hilarious suggestion that they need help to do with mass zerglings or zealots. Hellions with blue flame OBLITERATE Zealots and Zerglings. Literally like 20 Hellions vs 20 Zealots or 80 Zerglings and you come out with 20 Hellions alive.
The Battle Hellion was actually a good idea. I have no idea why they thought it needed the biological tag though, when it worked perfectly in its Terran Mech role of absorbing damage that Hellions could not handle.
Hellions with blue flame OBLITERATE Zealots and Zerglings
Yes but the goal is not to obliterate zealot and zerglings the goal is to tank them to protect your fragile tank.... So he is right saying terran needed something to "fight" not to kite zealot and zerglings
On February 26 2013 10:47 Warpish wrote: Blizzard didn't wanted to reintroduce the Firebat and/or the Goliath simply because they were BW units Both these units were needed, one to fight against mass zerglings and zealots and the other to be an all around anti-air unit. Moreover, Blizzard wanted to promote mech play in Hots.
To solve some of these problems, Blizzard created this abomination called the Hellbat also know as the Messbat or the Frankenbat. It plays like a bio unit, it can be healed like a bio unit, it comes from a factory but i can turn into biological, it occupies variable cargo space, it can transform but it only benefits from an upgrade in a certain form, etc.
It is a complete mess right now. I have to agree with the opinion of many others in this thread, given that there's no time to rework this expansion, assuming this unit as a Firebat would be a better solution.
Terrans needed a unit that help protect tanks, buffer for them and did 'reasonable' damage against zealots. Hellbats give T a fighting chance with mech. Having goliath or hellbats back will not address the problem, since mass immortals will kill goliaths as fast as anything, and firebats just mean mech becomes bio-mech instead, which is not the solution blizzard is looking for.
they should just remove the bio tag from hellbat and let them get the mech upg, it would make more sense overall, there is no point on promoting medivac usage in mech and they can still be usefull in bio play even without medivac heal due to their great damage and hp
and for god sake give mine manual detonation or target fire
Dropships used to be viable in BW with mech play since positional play was heavily weighted. Like lots of them, considering the mobility was lacking for mech. But you could move formidable mech armies that way and plant them in a corner of your opponents base where they are buffered by the enemies own buildings. I can see why they'd want to synergize some medivac play with mech despite the massive gas cost. Plus the fact that armor upgrade is now merged. Trying to play devils advocate here, but this allows the mech army to be mobile.
The problem again in anti-air. If you have a reactored starport then you can pump medivac Viking or 3/4 Viking to medivac ratio to supplement your mech. But that means you are sacrificing Raven and Banshee if required, or just more base mech units, as Viking/Medivac is such a tax on resources.
I think you need a composition that will favor the mobility play vs brute force play. If you want deathball mech, you probably mass Thor/Bat/Raven/banshee. If you want mobility play, I don't know. Other than bio, you may want to feature Helion/Tank/Mine/Viking more heavily, to spend the gas evenly compared to Thor/Raven/Banshee. Tank drops do not seem to be as effective in SC2 as I never see them loaded up even to capture high ground.
Again, changes can work if used correctly. It's just not a game changer for mech with the changes to the other races.
On February 26 2013 19:37 Rider517 wrote: they should just remove the bio tag from hellbat and let them get the mech upg, it would make more sense overall, there is no point on promoting medivac usage in mech and they can still be usefull in bio play even without medivac heal due to their great damage and hp
and for god sake give mine manual detonation or target fire
Mines have target fire once they've been activated. You're welcome.
On February 26 2013 19:37 Rider517 wrote: they should just remove the bio tag from hellbat and let them get the mech upg, it would make more sense overall, there is no point on promoting medivac usage in mech and they can still be usefull in bio play even without medivac heal due to their great damage and hp
and for god sake give mine manual detonation or target fire
Mines have target fire once they've been activated. You're welcome.
Yep, few people seem to know that. It's cool, because it requires actually more skill than a hold fire mode + target fire. You have to be there at the exact moment your mine triggers if you want to pick among the reachable targets.
On February 27 2013 00:00 Blamajama wrote: Dropships used to be viable in BW with mech play since positional play was heavily weighted. Like lots of them, considering the mobility was lacking for mech. But you could move formidable mech armies that way and plant them in a corner of your opponents base where they are buffered by the enemies own buildings. I can see why they'd want to synergize some medivac play with mech despite the massive gas cost. Plus the fact that armor upgrade is now merged. Trying to play devils advocate here, but this allows the mech army to be mobile.
The problem again in anti-air. If you have a reactored starport then you can pump medivac Viking or 3/4 Viking to medivac ratio to supplement your mech. But that means you are sacrificing Raven and Banshee if required, or just more base mech units, as Viking/Medivac is such a tax on resources.
I think you need a composition that will favor the mobility play vs brute force play. If you want deathball mech, you probably mass Thor/Bat/Raven/banshee. If you want mobility play, I don't know. Other than bio, you may want to feature Helion/Tank/Mine/Viking more heavily, to spend the gas evenly compared to Thor/Raven/Banshee. Tank drops do not seem to be as effective in SC2 as I never see them loaded up even to capture high ground.
Again, changes can work if used correctly. It's just not a game changer for mech with the changes to the other races.
indeed, if i want mobility bio is a better choice, if i go mech i would rather relay on positional play, going mech plus medivac to have mobility is a bit meh imo
On February 26 2013 19:37 Rider517 wrote: they should just remove the bio tag from hellbat and let them get the mech upg, it would make more sense overall, there is no point on promoting medivac usage in mech and they can still be usefull in bio play even without medivac heal due to their great damage and hp
and for god sake give mine manual detonation or target fire
Mines have target fire once they've been activated. You're welcome.
my bad, didn't notice that, but it's still hard for me to consider it a unit, it looks like movable static defense lol
i think it's interesting the whole "steampunk" half mech-half bio shit hthey are forcing terrans into, but was there ever anything wrong with mech or marine tank? i thought marine tank was the most beautiful thing to ever watch. now there are no tanks. LOL, its bio ++ mines, because now terran have a way to deal with mass ling/bling amove without building a 3 supply gas sink with virtually zero utility vs other units. its sad to see the iconic siege tank so terrible in the new expansion, but i promise it was blizzard's direct intention. siege tanks are just too difficult to play against. they punish retardation and make people strategic, and blizzard knows they can't bank on their player base enjoying these dynamics
I remember the days of retardation. A-moving some hydras or dragoons or marines into tank lines in BW. It was still fun though.
To the previous point, Marine/Tank not viable against toss. And I don't think it will be exclusive against zerg either with the new dark swarm thing they put in, plus the other abilities. Mech builds have to incorporate some sort of air support or Ghost support. Just like Bio needs air support. Can't be mutually exclusive anymore. That's probably a good thing.
On February 26 2013 10:47 Warpish wrote: Blizzard didn't wanted to reintroduce the Firebat and/or the Goliath simply because they were BW units Both these units were needed, one to fight against mass zerglings and zealots and the other to be an all around anti-air unit. Moreover, Blizzard wanted to promote mech play in Hots.
To solve some of these problems, Blizzard created this abomination called the Hellbat also know as the Messbat or the Frankenbat. It plays like a bio unit, it can be healed like a bio unit, it comes from a factory but i can turn into biological, it occupies variable cargo space, it can transform but it only benefits from an upgrade in a certain form, etc.
It is a complete mess right now. I have to agree with the opinion of many others in this thread, given that there's no time to rework this expansion, assuming this unit as a Firebat would be a better solution.
I couln't have said it better.
You could however extend much of this argument to the lurker vs. host debate. They did not want to put in the lurker, but they did not come up with something new either. Now we have this lurker/broodlord-hybrid that can attack while burrowed, but can't fly.
TBH, this expansion becomes rather silly. Yes Blizz it's SC2 and new units are nice. But hell, it's also SC2. Noone will hate you just because you stick to fan favorites. Especially not if they fit the design. Firebat > Hellbat all the way. There's no contest really.
Sequels should be new games that stand alone. Not retreads that repeat the same patterns. That's just lazy, unimaginative game development. That said, I think SC2 has a lot of short comings and the nostalgia from Brood War is not going to save it. Blizzard has lost a lot of luster for me. Best they cash in with movie adaptations while they still have the huge fan base.
On February 27 2013 04:31 Blamajama wrote: Sequels should be new games that stand alone. Not retreads that repeat the same patterns. That's just lazy, unimaginative game development. That said, I think SC2 has a lot of short comings and the nostalgia from Brood War is not going to save it. Blizzard has lost a lot of luster for me. Best they cash in with movie adaptations while they still have the huge fan base.
I think most of "we want old units back" isn't just nostalgia (which does play a part in it) but rather what blizzard has done for the new units. If all the new units were fun, cool, and imaginative, people would probably want more of them.
Do you like the colossus over the reaver? Do you like the roach over the bw hydralisk? Do you like the swarm host over the lurker? Do you like the hellion over the vulture?
I think blizzard got some of the new units right (Viking in TvT for instance, new reaper is fun and gives you something to do early game, Baneling provides awesome micro / spectator experience in ZvZ and ZvT, Blink stalker micro is cool to watch) but most of the new units in SC2 are rather boring and don't fit the races. Example would be the extremely beefy (125!? hp marauder / 145 hp roach) for terran and zergs.
I do think with time a lot of cool stuff can happen. Swarm Host has the potential to be really cool but a lot of people are already turned off over the "free units" thing (mostly because of those boring months of a shit ton of brood lords / infested terrans). The viper also has this potential too. But a lot of really cool stuff was cut from brood war, such as vultures would provided a great micro opportunity and had access to the spider mine (which defined pretty much every terran match-up). I don't think the hellion is nearly as cool as the vulture. Scourge being removed has removes micro potential.
If we had a new unit that replaced an old one, but was cool enough to make up for it, there would be less blame at blizzard. but a lot of the new units are just "dumb" down graded versions of their brood war counter-parts.
A big point here is a lot of units that did provide great micro experiences (whether watching or playing) were removed and replaced with an inferior product. Not all, but a lot.
On February 27 2013 04:31 Blamajama wrote: Sequels should be new games that stand alone. Not retreads that repeat the same patterns. That's just lazy, unimaginative game development. That said, I think SC2 has a lot of short comings and the nostalgia from Brood War is not going to save it. Blizzard has lost a lot of luster for me. Best they cash in with movie adaptations while they still have the huge fan base.
Yes they should be, but HoTS isn't Starcraft 3, it's an expansion to Starcraft 2. So it should be relatively similar, just with a new story (which it's got) and slight changes to multiplayer to make it interesting again (which it has, HoTS is about 4 times as interesting to play and watch if not more).
On February 26 2013 17:23 dcemuser wrote: Copy-pasting BW units is lazy design in the expansions. It would be completely unacceptable to the world outside of the 3 people who think it is "smrt" on TL.net.
Yet “innovation” for the sake of innovation is somehow smarter? Transforming the agile, reasonably cheap and flexible Goliath into the horribly clunky, unmicroable, expensive Thor with a 3x supply inflation is smarter? (Because having a big guy with super cannons on the field is cool and new and stuff, and too bad if he does not even fulfill his role.) Giving transformation gimmicks to all mech units—which just means copying an interesting feature of the siege Tank while totally missing why it was interesting in the first place on this particular unit—is smarter?
Besides, what do we even call “innovation”? Is it “innovation” or basically a half-disguised and badly executed copy paste to do what is mentioned above, or split old units into two (such as splitting the old Hydra into Roach + Hydra, Wraith into Viking + Banshee, Goliath into Thor + Viking, Dragoon into Stalker + Immortal) with inevitable overlapping/"pigeonholed" issues?
And when SC2 really innovates, it gives birth to the nameless aberration that is the Sentry, it comes up with Warpgate aka the living horror which crudely violates basic rules in RTS, it "enhances" creep with a bonus movement speed to Zerg ground units which makes them very difficult to balance since their efficiency drastically varies depending on whether they operate on or offcreep, it fills the game with supply/economic/production inflation so that all races can comfortably max in 14-15 minuts, after which the game can be decided by 4 seconds of sweeping lasers or green fungi/goo or whatever; what a true success indeed.
No, there are definitely more than “3 people” who would be glad if the hollow “innovation for innovation” motto was finally cast aside into oblivion with the contempt it rightfully deserves. Fairly sure that, for instance, the come back of (something close to) the Goliath would have been met with a standing ovation from the Terran players and not “lol ctrl-v BW” mockeries because there is no shame in bringing back basic, solid stuff which was proven to work instead of locking yourself into a never-ending hassle of gimmicks to fix things you broke alone in the first place because of the “innovation” requirement.
That said, Terran did not need either of the things you specify, especially your hilarious suggestion that they need help to do with mass zerglings or zealots. Hellions with blue flame OBLITERATE Zealots and Zerglings. Literally like 20 Hellions vs 20 Zealots or 80 Zerglings and you come out with 20 Hellions alive.
Yet this completely misses the point. On top of the most obvious issues such as Warpgate, asymmetric production capacities, SC2 economy growing at a rabid rate allowing tech switches with far too much ease, stupid abilities negating terrain such as Blink or Colossi cliffwalking and the fact that Protoss was blessed with an idiotic hardcounter to Tanks allowing them to charge sieged positions with little to no troubles, one of the core problems in TvP mech WoL is the inability to deal with Charge Zealots. It does not matter that 20 BFH easily kill 20 Zealots, what matters is how they do that, and in this case it means hitting & running across several screens which, of course, leaves your Tank completely vulnerable not only to Zealots (which also means self-splash) but also to the rest of Protoss army and therefore defeats the cannon fodder purpose that Hellions failed to fulfill anyway; plus did you even ask yourself if Terran was interested in having 40+ supply tied in BFH to (fail to) deal with Zealots while barely scratching what lies behind i. e. Archons, Immortals and Colossi? So yes mech needed something to deal with Zealots as BFH were not able to do the job properly.
On February 27 2013 04:31 Blamajama wrote: Sequels should be new games that stand alone. Not retreads that repeat the same patterns. That's just lazy, unimaginative game development. That said, I think SC2 has a lot of short comings and the nostalgia from Brood War is not going to save it. Blizzard has lost a lot of luster for me. Best they cash in with movie adaptations while they still have the huge fan base.
In that case this game should not have marines, or siege tanks. Or zerglings, battlecruisers, carriers and zealots. By that logic it should not be called StarCraft at all.
SC:BW is great design. It's no shame at all to try to add new units to the mix. But to me, it just feels lame if you take a sleek and elegant unit with a clear purpose out of the game (firebat), then realize terrans need a relatively cheap and tanky AOE unit to deal with certain stuff (mass zealots in particular), and instead of putting the firebat back in or create a really new unit that deals with the problem in a new way, you create this mockery of a firebat on wheels that - lo and behold does AOE fire damage! - you can put that "brand new"-label on to. What Blizz has done with HotS is copy their own old ideas, but they are not honest enough to admit it. Firebat? Hellbat! Lurker? Swarm Host! Dark swarm? Blinding cloud!
Not a good idea. And yes I think Blinding cloud works. But we all know what it should be called.
Firebat? Hellbat! Lurker? Swarm Host! Dark swarm? Blinding cloud!
Lurkers and Swarm Hosts really don't fill the same role at all. They don't play the same, they don't have the same strategic function, their mechanics are not similar. Literally the only similarity comes down to "they both do their damage while burrowed."
Giving transformation gimmicks to all mech units—which just means copying an interesting feature of the siege Tank while totally missing why it was interesting in the first place on this particular unit—is smarter?
I think making transformation a mech thing is a good thing--it doesn't just give a consistent theme to the tech tree, it also provides some much needed flexibility to mech, which can otherwise be expensive and vulnerable to tech switches. It also makes it a lot easier to tweak units to be better in one area without making them too strong in another. For example, if Mech proves too weak against air switches, Blizzard can buff High Impact Payload to address the issue, without causing imbalances in other areas.
On February 26 2013 19:37 Rider517 wrote: they should just remove the bio tag from hellbat and let them get the mech upg, it would make more sense overall, there is no point on promoting medivac usage in mech and they can still be usefull in bio play even without medivac heal due to their great damage and hp
and for god sake give mine manual detonation or target fire
Mines have target fire once they've been activated. You're welcome.
it can still be baited with a single ling or a worker which is the annoying thing
Firebat? Hellbat! Lurker? Swarm Host! Dark swarm? Blinding cloud!
Lurkers and Swarm Hosts really don't fill the same role at all. They don't play the same, they don't have the same strategic function, their mechanics are not similar. Literally the only similarity comes down to "they both do their damage while burrowed."
Fair enough though I still think the "attacking while burrowed" defines the role of a unit very much
Firebat / Hellbat illustrates the issue very well though. To me this is not a new unit. It's a twisted (no pun intented) firebat and the way they put it in creates a hole lot of problems. The design is not clean. They can be repaired, the are bio (in one form). They take up 1 cargo in one form, 2 in the other. The profit from an upgrade in one form but not the other. It really is a mess. And all that for a unit that, once all the transformation stuff is done functions like a firebat.
On February 26 2013 17:23 dcemuser wrote: Copy-pasting BW units is lazy design in the expansions. It would be completely unacceptable to the world outside of the 3 people who think it is "smrt" on TL.net.
Yet “innovation” for the sake of innovation is somehow smarter? Transforming the agile, reasonably cheap and flexible Goliath into the horribly clunky, unmicroable, expensive Thor with a 3x supply inflation is smarter? (Because having a big guy with super cannons on the field is cool and new and stuff, and too bad if he does not even fulfill his role.) Giving transformation gimmicks to all mech units—which just means copying an interesting feature of the siege Tank while totally missing why it was interesting in the first place on this particular unit—is smarter?
Besides, what do we even call “innovation”? Is it “innovation” or basically a half-disguised and badly executed copy paste to do what is mentioned above, or split old units into two (such as splitting the old Hydra into Roach + Hydra, Wraith into Viking + Banshee, Goliath into Thor + Viking, Dragoon into Stalker + Immortal) with inevitable overlapping/"pigeonholed" issues?
And when SC2 really innovates, it gives birth to the nameless aberration that is the Sentry, it comes up with Warpgate aka the living horror which crudely violates basic rules in RTS, it "enhances" creep with a bonus movement speed to Zerg ground units which makes them very difficult to balance since their efficiency drastically varies depending on whether they operate on or offcreep, it fills the game with supply/economic/production inflation so that all races can comfortably max in 14-15 minuts, after which the game can be decided by 4 seconds of sweeping lasers or green fungi/goo or whatever; what a true success indeed.
No, there are definitely more than “3 people” who would be glad if the hollow “innovation for innovation” motto was finally cast aside into oblivion with the contempt it rightfully deserves. Fairly sure that, for instance, the come back of (something close to) the Goliath would have been met with a standing ovation from the Terran players and not “lol ctrl-v BW” mockeries because there is no shame in bringing back basic, solid stuff which was proven to work instead of locking yourself into a never-ending hassle of gimmicks to fix things you broke alone in the first place because of the “innovation” requirement.
That said, Terran did not need either of the things you specify, especially your hilarious suggestion that they need help to do with mass zerglings or zealots. Hellions with blue flame OBLITERATE Zealots and Zerglings. Literally like 20 Hellions vs 20 Zealots or 80 Zerglings and you come out with 20 Hellions alive.
Yet this completely misses the point. On top of the most obvious issues such as Warpgate, asymmetric production capacities, SC2 economy growing at a rabid rate allowing tech switches with far too much ease, stupid abilities negating terrain such as Blink or Colossi cliffwalking and the fact that Protoss was blessed with an idiotic hardcounter to Tanks allowing them to charge sieged positions with little to no troubles, one of the core problems in TvP mech WoL is the inability to deal with Charge Zealots. It does not matter that 20 BFH easily kill 20 Zealots, what matters is how they do that, and in this case it means hitting & running across several screens which, of course, leaves your Tank completely vulnerable not only to Zealots (which also means self-splash) but also to the rest of Protoss army and therefore defeats the cannon fodder purpose that Hellions failed to fulfill anyway; plus did you even ask yourself if Terran was interested in having 40+ supply tied in BFH to (fail to) deal with Zealots while barely scratching what lies behind i. e. Archons, Immortals and Colossi? So yes mech needed something to deal with Zealots as BFH were not able to do the job properly.
I'm not interested in joining your philosophy jerk-off of which design is better than what.
But I'm just a bit miffed at a few comparisons...
Goliath => Viking NOT Goliath => Thor
(The fact that Thor's and Goliaths both walk on legs does not mean that they are designed similarly.
Wraith => Banshee NOT Wraith => Viking/Banshee
(The fact that Vikings and Wraiths both shoot flying units does not make them similar)
Dragoons were not transformed into Stalkers--Stalkers behave and are designed *VERY* differently from Dragoons. One is a slow long range unit with a lot of hitpoints (for its cost) designed to use its range to outgun bunkers. Stalkers are mobility based map control unit that uses a combination of its fast speed and blink to engage enemy lines with hit and run strikes ala dark templar instead of through brute force like the zealot. The Stalker is the opposite of the Dragoon being that it has short range, is fragile, and depends on outrunning the enemy instead of outpowering the enemy.
This is like listening to people say that Swarm Hosts are similar to Lurkers just because they both burrow. It's infuriating.
Blueflame Hellions deal 19 Concussive damage in a line AoE--which is 1 less than a Lurker. It costs no gas and half the supply. If Hellions had a cloak mode where it turned invisible but couldn't move--it would be exactly like the Lurker in design. Why isn't the comparison made? Because the graphics look different.
I wish people would stop comparing units based on graphic similarities and instead actually talk about the game.
On February 26 2013 19:37 Rider517 wrote: they should just remove the bio tag from hellbat and let them get the mech upg, it would make more sense overall, there is no point on promoting medivac usage in mech and they can still be usefull in bio play even without medivac heal due to their great damage and hp
and for god sake give mine manual detonation or target fire
Mines have target fire once they've been activated. You're welcome.
it can still be baited with a single ling or a worker which is the annoying thing
Only if the Terran player is busy. The hold technique can prevent a mine from firing indefinetly even if they do run a ling in.
I wish people would stop comparing units based on graphic similarities and instead actually talk about the game.
Rant finished, my bad.
For the most part this is about Firebat / Hellbat. Graphics aside, both units end up standing on the ground shooting a low range AOE flame attack. This is design recycling at best, only that the hellbat has additional problems stacked on top.
I wish people would stop comparing units based on graphic similarities and instead actually talk about the game.
Rant finished, my bad.
For the most part this is about Firebat / Hellbat. Graphics aside, both units end up standing on the ground shooting a low range AOE flame attack. This is design recycling at best, only that the hellbat has additional problems stacked on top.
Sort of--the only thing that's really making them comparable is that Hellbats can be healed.
Heck, I could also say that the Hellbat is short ranged roach that replaces speed with aoe.
On February 27 2013 04:31 Blamajama wrote: Sequels should be new games that stand alone. Not retreads that repeat the same patterns. That's just lazy, unimaginative game development. That said, I think SC2 has a lot of short comings and the nostalgia from Brood War is not going to save it. Blizzard has lost a lot of luster for me. Best they cash in with movie adaptations while they still have the huge fan base.
I think most of "we want old units back" isn't just nostalgia (which does play a part in it) but rather what blizzard has done for the new units. If all the new units were fun, cool, and imaginative, people would probably want more of them.
Do you like the colossus over the reaver? Do you like the roach over the bw hydralisk? Do you like the swarm host over the lurker? Do you like the hellion over the vulture?
I think blizzard got some of the new units right (Viking in TvT for instance, new reaper is fun and gives you something to do early game, Baneling provides awesome micro / spectator experience in ZvZ and ZvT, Blink stalker micro is cool to watch) but most of the new units in SC2 are rather boring and don't fit the races. Example would be the extremely beefy (125!? hp marauder / 145 hp roach) for terran and zergs.
I do think with time a lot of cool stuff can happen. Swarm Host has the potential to be really cool but a lot of people are already turned off over the "free units" thing (mostly because of those boring months of a shit ton of brood lords / infested terrans). The viper also has this potential too. But a lot of really cool stuff was cut from brood war, such as vultures would provided a great micro opportunity and had access to the spider mine (which defined pretty much every terran match-up). I don't think the hellion is nearly as cool as the vulture. Scourge being removed has removes micro potential.
If we had a new unit that replaced an old one, but was cool enough to make up for it, there would be less blame at blizzard. but a lot of the new units are just "dumb" down graded versions of their brood war counter-parts.
A big point here is a lot of units that did provide great micro experiences (whether watching or playing) were removed and replaced with an inferior product. Not all, but a lot.
It's a different game. Accept that. Remaking or "re-imagining" BW may come across as solid, safe, game development that appeals to a core fanbase. It's also rehashing a brand and a flat out money grab.
SC2 still tried to be too similar to BW and did not do enough to differentiate itself. An underwhelming campaign ten years in the works was the least of its concerns. They made the same game, and added so new "elegant" units and simplified features for the next generation. That's why you have death balls and hard counters. Because that's what the modern gamer understands and can work with.
They played it safe. It's not good enough. They have alienated much of the core fanbase. But that fanbase is older and many have become disinterested in PC games. Blizzard has probably long since moved on from that target audience. What I wanted was extreme variation and entirely new mechanics that gave me a brand new experience as revolutionary as BW. They made a rehash. Just took them a lot longer than we have come to expect relative to releases of other highly anticipated sequels to popular original titles.
On February 26 2013 10:47 Warpish wrote: Blizzard didn't wanted to reintroduce the Firebat and/or the Goliath simply because they were BW units Both these units were needed, one to fight against mass zerglings and zealots and the other to be an all around anti-air unit. Moreover, Blizzard wanted to promote mech play in Hots.
To solve some of these problems, Blizzard created this abomination called the Hellbat also know as the Messbat or the Frankenbat. It plays like a bio unit, it can be healed like a bio unit, it comes from a factory but i can turn into biological, it occupies variable cargo space, it can transform but it only benefits from an upgrade in a certain form, etc.
It is a complete mess right now. I have to agree with the opinion of many others in this thread, given that there's no time to rework this expansion, assuming this unit as a Firebat would be a better solution.
Copy-pasting BW units is lazy design in the expansions. It would be completely unacceptable to the world outside of the 3 people who think it is "smrt" on TL.net.
That said, Terran did not need either of the things you specify, especially your hilarious suggestion that they need help to do with mass zerglings or zealots. Hellions with blue flame OBLITERATE Zealots and Zerglings. Literally like 20 Hellions vs 20 Zealots or 80 Zerglings and you come out with 20 Hellions alive.
The Battle Hellion was actually a good idea. I have no idea why they thought it needed the biological tag though, when it worked perfectly in its Terran Mech role of absorbing damage that Hellions could not handle.
Why do you think it is good to replace something that works with something new that might not work? + Show Spoiler +
Yes, obviously the Firebat wasnt in SC2 so "replace" is the wrong word, but I am talking about the crappy design decisions they made at the start of SC2. If they had started with BW units AND mechanics (!) and then added / evolved them it would have been a much smoother game since they would have started with a pretty much balanced game. They didnt do it and "had to" make something new on their own with only very very very reluctantly adding a few units from the old game. Just think back on how long they took to "balance" WoL and you know I am right.
Personally I believe that "new stuff" MUST BE BETTER ("better" isnt the same as "more damage" ...) or else it isnt worth it. Too many kids assume that new things are automatically better - as your arrogance shows - and they dont realize that they are getting an ever more unstable game with their new and funky units.
Who would engage 20 Hellions with Zealots or Zerglings and who would build these units to fight the Hellions in the first place? Since both Protoss and Zerg have faster production than Terrans it wont be an "oh they have lots of Zealots/Zerglings, so lets get to mass producing Hellions" reaction.
Your own assessment of the Battle Hellion shows that you see the problem with the current dev team and yet you cant bring yourself to acknowledge that BW was better from its unit / mechanics design and rather show the pathetic hatred towards the old game which so many non-BW-players do? Too bad.
On February 27 2013 13:09 Blamajama wrote: It's a different game. Accept that. Remaking or "re-imagining" BW may come across as solid, safe, game development that appeals to a core fanbase. It's also rehashing a brand and a flat out money grab.
Typical BS, because there would be improved graphics and utility with the "remake" AND they could have added a few units to the game to add new impulses. Totally worth it and they would have saved on development time ... which would have cut the cost of the game.
Apparently you prefer to be "milked" by Blizzard in the same way that Microsoft does it ... being sold an unfinished (unbalanced) product and suffer a mix up of the balancing every few months because their stupid design makes it impossible to achieve a stable balance.
The new game *should have been* an EVOLUTION instead of a completely new design. Do you want to know why? Because there are only a LIMITED NUMBER of unit designs available. Just think about it: - damage types: 2 (attack, spell) - damage delivery types: 2 (melee, ranged) - damage area types: 2 (single target, area) - damage effect duration types: 2 (instant, duration) - ... Even with non damage spells you only have a rather limited amount of variables to design new stuff, but with a blind "dont add BW units, because that would be lazy" attitude they are basically "not allowed" to add a Goliath and the Thor is a gigantic failure when it comes to mech-anti-air. Thats what you get from "IT MUST BE NEW DESIGN" nonsense. The same is true for the Hellion and its transformer mutation ... it simply doesnt work or is extremely weird at the least.
For the guys who bitch about some units are IMBA against other units, let me remind everyone that Starcraft 2 is a Real Time Strategy Game. With emphasis on STRATEGY.
Just as you wouldn't block a rook by placing a pawn in its attack/move path, please don't complain about slowlots losing to micro'd hellions. It shows how lacking your understanding of this game is.
On February 27 2013 14:31 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: For the guys who bitch about some units are IMBA against other units, let me remind everyone that Starcraft 2 is a Real Time Strategy Game. With emphasis on STRATEGY.
Just as you wouldn't block a rook by placing a pawn in its attack/move path, please don't complain about slowlots losing to micro'd hellions. It shows how lacking your understanding of this game is.
Wait, isn't that one of the main roles of pawns? I mean if you have another pawn ready to kill anything that takes out the first pawn, block away.
On February 27 2013 14:31 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: For the guys who bitch about some units are IMBA against other units, let me remind everyone that Starcraft 2 is a Real Time Strategy Game. With emphasis on STRATEGY.
Just as you wouldn't block a rook by placing a pawn in its attack/move path, please don't complain about slowlots losing to micro'd hellions. It shows how lacking your understanding of this game is.
Wait, isn't that one of the main roles of pawns? I mean if you have another pawn ready to kill anything that takes out the first pawn, block away.
Yes, that's a higher level of strategy, baiting or mind games or as we call it, metagame. The same way we produce mass lings to force a reaction (specific techpath/contain/etc) on the opponent.
Edit: I was using the specific comparison of rooks vs. a line of pawns (with no other units backing them) the same way mass slowlots vs. micro'd hellions of equal nos. Mano a Mano will stand no chance.
Thus two pawns in formation to block a rook from taking the "open" pawn limits the options of the rook, as rooks need a clear path to move/attack. In SC2 terms, this would be using speedlings to kill off hellion harass by pre-splits to surround, prevent flames from lining up, trap and kill off the hellions.
On February 27 2013 04:31 Blamajama wrote: Sequels should be new games that stand alone. Not retreads that repeat the same patterns. That's just lazy, unimaginative game development. That said, I think SC2 has a lot of short comings and the nostalgia from Brood War is not going to save it. Blizzard has lost a lot of luster for me. Best they cash in with movie adaptations while they still have the huge fan base.
I think most of "we want old units back" isn't just nostalgia (which does play a part in it) but rather what blizzard has done for the new units. If all the new units were fun, cool, and imaginative, people would probably want more of them.
Do you like the colossus over the reaver? Do you like the roach over the bw hydralisk? Do you like the swarm host over the lurker? Do you like the hellion over the vulture?
I think blizzard got some of the new units right (Viking in TvT for instance, new reaper is fun and gives you something to do early game, Baneling provides awesome micro / spectator experience in ZvZ and ZvT, Blink stalker micro is cool to watch) but most of the new units in SC2 are rather boring and don't fit the races. Example would be the extremely beefy (125!? hp marauder / 145 hp roach) for terran and zergs.
I do think with time a lot of cool stuff can happen. Swarm Host has the potential to be really cool but a lot of people are already turned off over the "free units" thing (mostly because of those boring months of a shit ton of brood lords / infested terrans). The viper also has this potential too. But a lot of really cool stuff was cut from brood war, such as vultures would provided a great micro opportunity and had access to the spider mine (which defined pretty much every terran match-up). I don't think the hellion is nearly as cool as the vulture. Scourge being removed has removes micro potential.
If we had a new unit that replaced an old one, but was cool enough to make up for it, there would be less blame at blizzard. but a lot of the new units are just "dumb" down graded versions of their brood war counter-parts.
A big point here is a lot of units that did provide great micro experiences (whether watching or playing) were removed and replaced with an inferior product. Not all, but a lot.
It's a different game. Accept that. Remaking or "re-imagining" BW may come across as solid, safe, game development that appeals to a core fanbase. It's also rehashing a brand and a flat out money grab.
SC2 still tried to be too similar to BW and did not do enough to differentiate itself. An underwhelming campaign ten years in the works was the least of its concerns. They made the same game, and added so new "elegant" units and simplified features for the next generation. That's why you have death balls and hard counters. Because that's what the modern gamer understands and can work with.
They played it safe. It's not good enough. They have alienated much of the core fanbase. But that fanbase is older and many have become disinterested in PC games. Blizzard has probably long since moved on from that target audience. What I wanted was extreme variation and entirely new mechanics that gave me a brand new experience as revolutionary as BW. They made a rehash. Just took them a lot longer than we have come to expect relative to releases of other highly anticipated sequels to popular original titles.
The core fanbase was about six people and one dog who were still watching Korean tournament streams. The real core fanbase was people like me, who played Brood War and Warcraft 3 and TFT and were never able to enjoy it online because we were either late to the party or were unable to penetrate the incredibly closeted and frankly antisocial community that developed around the game.
I am playing SC2 now not because of TeamLiquid but because of TotalBiscuit and Day9. I am improving because of FilterSC and Apollo. As far as I know, only one of those four ever played any serious Brood War.
You have to face the fact that Brood War simply never took off here. It took off in Korea, but its success in Korea was never worth alienating everyone else. There are plenty of insanely popular Korean games that are simply shite. I refuse to lump BW in with those games (I enjoyed single player BW very much) but you have to admit that SC2 is a much more enjoyable, much more accessable game with a well designed interface and a really enjoyable metagame.
What I wanted was a Blizzard RTS in the vein of WC3 and BW. That's what I got.
On February 27 2013 14:31 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: For the guys who bitch about some units are IMBA against other units, let me remind everyone that Starcraft 2 is a Real Time Strategy Game. With emphasis on STRATEGY.
Just as you wouldn't block a rook by placing a pawn in its attack/move path, please don't complain about slowlots losing to micro'd hellions. It shows how lacking your understanding of this game is.
I think "blocking some units with stuff" is more a TACTIC ("implementation of a specific mission") and not a STRATEGY (long term goal). The strategy would be to "defend until I have the superawesome army and then win" or "to win with air attacks" while the tactic is the unit-wise implementation on the battlefield. Just read the wiki entrys to check their definitions ... maybe you agree with me.
Sadly Strategy plays a far less important role than tactics do in SC2 ... at least in my opinion. This is the case because there are too many units involved in each battle and the economics of the game make reproducing your units almost more important than being able to use them well. If the game was about strategy it would involve a lot of units which have seen many battles and defensive positions which are hard to crack, but that isnt the case.
On February 27 2013 14:31 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: For the guys who bitch about some units are IMBA against other units, let me remind everyone that Starcraft 2 is a Real Time Strategy Game. With emphasis on STRATEGY.
Just as you wouldn't block a rook by placing a pawn in its attack/move path, please don't complain about slowlots losing to micro'd hellions. It shows how lacking your understanding of this game is.
I think "blocking some units with stuff" is more a TACTIC ("implementation of a specific mission") and not a STRATEGY (long term goal). The strategy would be to "defend until I have the superawesome army and then win" or "to win with air attacks" while the tactic is the unit-wise implementation on the battlefield. Just read the wiki entrys to check their definitions ... maybe you agree with me.
Sadly Strategy plays a far less important role than tactics do in SC2 ... at least in my opinion. This is the case because there are too many units involved in each battle and the economics of the game make reproducing your units almost more important than being able to use them well. If the game was about strategy it would involve a lot of units which have seen many battles and defensive positions which are hard to crack, but that isnt the case.
Thank you for pointing that out. You are correct, a strategy game is only as entertaining as the tactics available. Personally I define tactics as the mechanical implementation of strategy.
I use tactics to help bridge the understanding that units are designed a certain way to perform a certain task, their level of skill and ability thus affects the strategic considerations. Had I used strategy to define SC2 and similarity with Chess, I am quite sure it would have been way over their head (the whiners).
As for that, read Sun Tzu's Art of War, he defines War beyond war, including times of peace and the balance of power between states. This includes a kingdom's economy, resources and bureaucracy/politics in addition to its war machinery and personnel. I am opposite, I consider SC2 a far richer strategy game BECAUSE it factors economics and supply lines (moving units from hive/factory/prism to frontlines).
In this tactic/strategy talk => BW was more tactic based than SC2 while SC2 is more strategy based than BW
In SC2 if you bring marauders to a stalker fight--you're pretty much going to win the fight while the stalker player will have to find new uses for the stalkers outside of direct engagements.
In BW, due to unit glitching, control limitations, etc... If you brought stalkers to a marauder fight you could still win through better micro.
That's not to say that BW has no strat and SC2 has no tactics. It's just a different interface. BW was more strategically forgiving, SC2 is mor tactically forgiving.
On February 27 2013 23:57 Thieving Magpie wrote: In this tactic/strategy talk => BW was more tactic based than SC2 while SC2 is more strategy based than BW
In SC2 if you bring marauders to a stalker fight--you're pretty much going to win the fight while the stalker player will have to find new uses for the stalkers outside of direct engagements.
In BW, due to unit glitching, control limitations, etc... If you brought stalkers to a marauder fight you could still win through better micro.
That's not to say that BW has no strat and SC2 has no tactics. It's just a different interface. BW was more strategically forgiving, SC2 is mor tactically forgiving.
Sometimes I wish stalkers felt the need to avoid the bridge and take the scenic route past the siege tanks in order to shoot the marauder.
On February 27 2013 23:57 Thieving Magpie wrote: In this tactic/strategy talk => BW was more tactic based than SC2 while SC2 is more strategy based than BW
In SC2 if you bring marauders to a stalker fight--you're pretty much going to win the fight while the stalker player will have to find new uses for the stalkers outside of direct engagements.
In BW, due to unit glitching, control limitations, etc... If you brought stalkers to a marauder fight you could still win through better micro.
That's not to say that BW has no strat and SC2 has no tactics. It's just a different interface. BW was more strategically forgiving, SC2 is mor tactically forgiving.
Sometimes I wish stalkers felt the need to avoid the bridge and take the scenic route past the siege tanks in order to shoot the marauder.
That's actually what I mean by tactically forgiving
If you ran hellions into stalkers your hellions just die, but since goons kind of collide with each other and move crazy, vultures would have openings to move in, drop mines/pop shots and run off. Marines randomly walked away from the group and would get sniped by a pack of mutalisks, siege tanks would randomly decide to focus all their fire on one zealot leaving the rest of the army untouched, etc....
The AI in BW would act dumb and players would feel gosu exploiting it. Its just a different system with different priorities.
On February 27 2013 23:57 Thieving Magpie wrote: In this tactic/strategy talk => BW was more tactic based than SC2 while SC2 is more strategy based than BW
In SC2 if you bring marauders to a stalker fight--you're pretty much going to win the fight while the stalker player will have to find new uses for the stalkers outside of direct engagements.
In BW, due to unit glitching, control limitations, etc... If you brought stalkers to a marauder fight you could still win through better micro.
That's not to say that BW has no strat and SC2 has no tactics. It's just a different interface. BW was more strategically forgiving, SC2 is mor tactically forgiving.
Sometimes I wish stalkers felt the need to avoid the bridge and take the scenic route past the siege tanks in order to shoot the marauder.
I always remember loving TvP on Match Point because Dragoons could just not deal with the small ramps outside the naturals. It was great to siege down there and just watch the carnage. It wasn't even from you attacking, it was just the poor innocent dragoons trying to get down a ramp.
On February 27 2013 14:31 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: For the guys who bitch about some units are IMBA against other units, let me remind everyone that Starcraft 2 is a Real Time Strategy Game. With emphasis on STRATEGY.
Just as you wouldn't block a rook by placing a pawn in its attack/move path, please don't complain about slowlots losing to micro'd hellions. It shows how lacking your understanding of this game is.
I think "blocking some units with stuff" is more a TACTIC ("implementation of a specific mission") and not a STRATEGY (long term goal). The strategy would be to "defend until I have the superawesome army and then win" or "to win with air attacks" while the tactic is the unit-wise implementation on the battlefield. Just read the wiki entrys to check their definitions ... maybe you agree with me.
Sadly Strategy plays a far less important role than tactics do in SC2 ... at least in my opinion. This is the case because there are too many units involved in each battle and the economics of the game make reproducing your units almost more important than being able to use them well. If the game was about strategy it would involve a lot of units which have seen many battles and defensive positions which are hard to crack, but that isnt the case.
Thank you for pointing that out. You are correct, a strategy game is only as entertaining as the tactics available. Personally I define tactics as the mechanical implementation of strategy.
I agree with your definition, but here is the twist: Since Starcraft is *supposed to be* a STRATEGY game it should be far less about tactics and mechanics (and economics) than it is atm. For a huge part SC2 is about the gathering of resources and building a huge reproduction capability to finally overwhelm your opponent with - more or less - endlessly replaced units.
Either this or the category of "Strategy game" is wrong. You only think / adjust your strategy few times while permanently thinking about unit engagements and unit production, so its easily more about economics and tactics than it is about strategy. Personally I have thought for quite some time that SC2 is more about real-time-action than it is about real-time-strategy and we simply need to accept that fact. No biggie.
----
Since you had to "fight the UI and movement" in Brood War and the game didnt have any turbo boosts for production and economy it was still a strategy game in my opinion. You simply had far fewer units all the time and cared more about the individual ones. Thus choosing the right strategy (i.e. the way in which to overcome the enemy) was more important than simply overwhelming the enemy by sheer numbers. Sure overwhelming numbers could happen, but due to the mechanics you could still come back from most disadvantaged positions.
I wish people would stop comparing units based on graphic similarities and instead actually talk about the game.
Rant finished, my bad.
For the most part this is about Firebat / Hellbat. Graphics aside, both units end up standing on the ground shooting a low range AOE flame attack. This is design recycling at best, only that the hellbat has additional problems stacked on top.
Sort of--the only thing that's really making them comparable is that Hellbats can be healed.
Heck, I could also say that the Hellbat is short ranged roach that replaces speed with aoe.
That they both share the same form of attack cannot be compared? You can try to find differences where there are none if you which I guess. HF.
I wish people would stop comparing units based on graphic similarities and instead actually talk about the game.
Rant finished, my bad.
For the most part this is about Firebat / Hellbat. Graphics aside, both units end up standing on the ground shooting a low range AOE flame attack. This is design recycling at best, only that the hellbat has additional problems stacked on top.
Sort of--the only thing that's really making them comparable is that Hellbats can be healed.
Heck, I could also say that the Hellbat is short ranged roach that replaces speed with aoe.
That they both share the same form of attack cannot be compared? You can try to find differences where there are none if you which I guess. HF.
Beefy short range unit with high hits per attack. Has high hitpoints but very immobile with higher tier tech helping. Sounds like a roach to me.
Oh wait? Unless you're talking about the animation.... which has nothing to do with design.
I wish people would stop comparing units based on graphic similarities and instead actually talk about the game.
Rant finished, my bad.
For the most part this is about Firebat / Hellbat. Graphics aside, both units end up standing on the ground shooting a low range AOE flame attack. This is design recycling at best, only that the hellbat has additional problems stacked on top.
Sort of--the only thing that's really making them comparable is that Hellbats can be healed.
Heck, I could also say that the Hellbat is short ranged roach that replaces speed with aoe.
That they both share the same form of attack cannot be compared? You can try to find differences where there are none if you which I guess. HF.
Beefy short range unit with high hits per attack. Has high hitpoints but very immobile with higher tier tech helping. Sounds like a roach to me.
Oh wait? Unless you're talking about the animation.... which has nothing to do with design.
I wish people would stop comparing units based on graphic similarities and instead actually talk about the game.
Rant finished, my bad.
For the most part this is about Firebat / Hellbat. Graphics aside, both units end up standing on the ground shooting a low range AOE flame attack. This is design recycling at best, only that the hellbat has additional problems stacked on top.
Sort of--the only thing that's really making them comparable is that Hellbats can be healed.
Heck, I could also say that the Hellbat is short ranged roach that replaces speed with aoe.
That they both share the same form of attack cannot be compared? You can try to find differences where there are none if you which I guess. HF.
Beefy short range unit with high hits per attack. Has high hitpoints but very immobile with higher tier tech helping. Sounds like a roach to me.
Oh wait? Unless you're talking about the animation.... which has nothing to do with design.
The roach does not have an AOE attack.
Firebats don't have a sturdy body => highly relevant for a melee unit
Hellbats don't have stim => highly relevant since its both a DPS and Speed boost
A medivac + roaches will act much more similar to medivac + hellbats compared to Medivac + Firebats.
Stop only looking at graphics when you want to talk about design.
I wish people would stop comparing units based on graphic similarities and instead actually talk about the game.
Rant finished, my bad.
For the most part this is about Firebat / Hellbat. Graphics aside, both units end up standing on the ground shooting a low range AOE flame attack. This is design recycling at best, only that the hellbat has additional problems stacked on top.
Sort of--the only thing that's really making them comparable is that Hellbats can be healed.
Heck, I could also say that the Hellbat is short ranged roach that replaces speed with aoe.
That they both share the same form of attack cannot be compared? You can try to find differences where there are none if you which I guess. HF.
Beefy short range unit with high hits per attack. Has high hitpoints but very immobile with higher tier tech helping. Sounds like a roach to me.
Oh wait? Unless you're talking about the animation.... which has nothing to do with design.
The roach does not have an AOE attack.
Firebats don't have a sturdy body => highly relevant for a melee unit
Hellbats don't have stim => highly relevant since its both a DPS and Speed boost
A medivac + roaches will act much more similar to medivac + hellbats compared to Medivac + Firebats.
Stop only looking at graphics when you want to talk about design.
AOE is not about graphics. Single Target Damage, AOE, DoT etc. are at the core of unit design. Stimpack is an upgrade - not the core of the design of the units that can use it. The lurker / swarm host is about a unit that can only be fought with detection and not engaged (efficiently) without it, but yes the graphics differ. You're right on that one. It's beside the point though.
I wish people would stop comparing units based on graphic similarities and instead actually talk about the game.
Rant finished, my bad.
For the most part this is about Firebat / Hellbat. Graphics aside, both units end up standing on the ground shooting a low range AOE flame attack. This is design recycling at best, only that the hellbat has additional problems stacked on top.
Sort of--the only thing that's really making them comparable is that Hellbats can be healed.
Heck, I could also say that the Hellbat is short ranged roach that replaces speed with aoe.
That they both share the same form of attack cannot be compared? You can try to find differences where there are none if you which I guess. HF.
Beefy short range unit with high hits per attack. Has high hitpoints but very immobile with higher tier tech helping. Sounds like a roach to me.
Oh wait? Unless you're talking about the animation.... which has nothing to do with design.
The roach does not have an AOE attack.
Firebats don't have a sturdy body => highly relevant for a melee unit
Hellbats don't have stim => highly relevant since its both a DPS and Speed boost
A medivac + roaches will act much more similar to medivac + hellbats compared to Medivac + Firebats.
Stop only looking at graphics when you want to talk about design.
AOE is not about graphics. Single Target Damage, AOE, DoT etc. are at the core of unit design. Stimpack is an upgrade - not the core of the design of the units that can use it. The lurker / swarm host is about a unit that can only be fought with detection and not engaged (efficiently) without it, but yes the graphics differ. You're right on that one. It's beside the point though.
Here's what you don't seem to understand.
Hellbats have similar DPS and similar health to a roach. For less speed, no burrow movement, and 50% range nerf, it gets AoE. However, in the end, they do about the same thing.
Firebat AoE only was relevant against Zerglings and *maybe* zealots--but usually it wasn't really relevant there either. So trying to say Firebats and Hellbats are similar because Firebats are an AoE source is very very childish.
Lurkers burrow and need scans. Just like baneling landmines, infestor harass, burrow move roaches, etc...
What made the lurker strong was its dynamic when mixed with Hydralisks/Overlords (to snipe observers) or Defiler/Zergling (to defend against pushes) Without those dynamics, a lurker is just a blueflame hellion with cloak.
The Swarm Host is long range seige unit that (much like the siege tank) is useless in small numbers (the opposite of the Lurker). It's more akin to a siege tank that trades aoe for double the range + burrow.
If you're willing to say SH = Lurker because they burrow, then Infestor = Lurker because they burrow.
On February 27 2013 14:31 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: For the guys who bitch about some units are IMBA against other units, let me remind everyone that Starcraft 2 is a Real Time Strategy Game. With emphasis on STRATEGY.
Just as you wouldn't block a rook by placing a pawn in its attack/move path, please don't complain about slowlots losing to micro'd hellions. It shows how lacking your understanding of this game is.
I think "blocking some units with stuff" is more a TACTIC ("implementation of a specific mission") and not a STRATEGY (long term goal). The strategy would be to "defend until I have the superawesome army and then win" or "to win with air attacks" while the tactic is the unit-wise implementation on the battlefield. Just read the wiki entrys to check their definitions ... maybe you agree with me.
Sadly Strategy plays a far less important role than tactics do in SC2 ... at least in my opinion. This is the case because there are too many units involved in each battle and the economics of the game make reproducing your units almost more important than being able to use them well. If the game was about strategy it would involve a lot of units which have seen many battles and defensive positions which are hard to crack, but that isnt the case.
Thank you for pointing that out. You are correct, a strategy game is only as entertaining as the tactics available. Personally I define tactics as the mechanical implementation of strategy.
I agree with your definition, but here is the twist: Since Starcraft is *supposed to be* a STRATEGY game it should be far less about tactics and mechanics (and economics) than it is atm. For a huge part SC2 is about the gathering of resources and building a huge reproduction capability to finally overwhelm your opponent with - more or less - endlessly replaced units.
Either this or the category of "Strategy game" is wrong. You only think / adjust your strategy few times while permanently thinking about unit engagements and unit production, so its easily more about economics and tactics than it is about strategy. Personally I have thought for quite some time that SC2 is more about real-time-action than it is about real-time-strategy and we simply need to accept that fact. No biggie.
----
Since you had to "fight the UI and movement" in Brood War and the game didnt have any turbo boosts for production and economy it was still a strategy game in my opinion. You simply had far fewer units all the time and cared more about the individual ones. Thus choosing the right strategy (i.e. the way in which to overcome the enemy) was more important than simply overwhelming the enemy by sheer numbers. Sure overwhelming numbers could happen, but due to the mechanics you could still come back from most disadvantaged positions.
How can you whine about SC2's needing to be far less "about tactics and mechanics" than it currently is (and thus by implication not being strategical enough according to you) but then praise BW for its strategical aspects when that game is the most mechanically demanding game in existence? BW's mechanical challenges were so significant that you literally had no hope of beating a KESPA pro unless you were on a Korean team practicing along with them 12 hours a day. That's obviously not the case with SC2. There were also far fewer viable builds in BW than there are in SC2. There are fewer useless units in SC2 than there are in BW, etc. All of this leads to more choices in SC2 and more choices increases the chances for strategy, rather than mechanics, to influence the game, which is why someone like Nestea could have all of the success he's had in SC2.
To this point, I've followed most of your HoTS posts with what I'd call "confused amusement", but I do have to ask -- were you fired by Blizzard at some point? Did David Kim diss your mom?
Hellbats have similar DPS and similar health to a roach. For less speed, no burrow movement, and 50% range nerf, it gets AoE. However, in the end, they do about the same thing.
Many units share the same or similar numbers. As do the Hellbat and the Firebat from BW. On top of that they even share the same attack type. Yet you somehow dismiss the notion of them being similar. That's pretty childish.
Firebat AoE only was relevant against Zerglings and *maybe* zealots--but usually it wasn't really relevant there either. So trying to say Firebats and Hellbats are similar because Firebats are an AoE source is very very childish.
No it's not. Dismissing it is though. Design =/= how a unit will be used. When I say design I look at attack types, flying vs. ground, cloak vs. no cloak etc. Yes, some units will end up being used like they were meant to be and than everyone says this is "by design". If 2 units end up being used for different things does not necessarily mean their design is fundamentally different.
In this case however: Firebats did kill zerglings. As do Hellbats now. In fact, even trying to engage Hellbats with zerglings is suicide in most cases. They share the same core design. Blizzard just decided to not implement this "new" unit as a seperate unit. Instead they added it as a new form for the hellion. Which again, once the transformation is complete serves the same purpose. I don't know how I can explain this better. If you can't see that we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Hellbats have similar DPS and similar health to a roach. For less speed, no burrow movement, and 50% range nerf, it gets AoE. However, in the end, they do about the same thing.
Many units share the same or similar numbers. As do the Hellbat and the Firebat from BW. On top of that they even share the same attack type. Yet you somehow dismiss the notion of them being similar. That's pretty childish.
Firebat AoE only was relevant against Zerglings and *maybe* zealots--but usually it wasn't really relevant there either. So trying to say Firebats and Hellbats are similar because Firebats are an AoE source is very very childish.
No it's not. Dismissing it is though. Design =/= how a unit will be used. When I say design I look at attack types, flying vs. ground, cloak vs. no cloak etc. Yes, some units will end up being used like they were meant to be and than everyone says this is "by design". If 2 units end up being used for different things does not necessarily mean their design is fundamentally different.
In this case however: Firebats did kill zerglings. As do Hellbats now. In fact, even trying to engage Hellbats with zerglings is suicide in most cases. They share the same core design. Blizzard just decided to not implement this "new" unit as a seperate unit. Instead they added it as a new form for the hellion. Which again, once the transformation is complete serves the same purpose. I don't know how I can explain this better. If you can't see that we'll just have to agree to disagree.
The firebat has 50 hp and deals 16 concussive damage
In SC2 terms that means it has less hp than a marine and deals the less damage than a reaper except its slow, short ranged, and costs almost as much as a reaper.
The Hellbat has 125% additional hitpoints and deals 200% more damage than the firebat.
They're not even remotely similar in design. Firebat damage is the concussive version of the Zealot damage and his hitpoint range is similar to the marine. Its splash radius was so aweful that only zerglings actually cared about the splash damage. So no, Hellbats and Firebats are nothing at all alike other than their animation.
Hellbats have similar DPS and similar health to a roach. For less speed, no burrow movement, and 50% range nerf, it gets AoE. However, in the end, they do about the same thing.
Many units share the same or similar numbers. As do the Hellbat and the Firebat from BW. On top of that they even share the same attack type. Yet you somehow dismiss the notion of them being similar. That's pretty childish.
Firebat AoE only was relevant against Zerglings and *maybe* zealots--but usually it wasn't really relevant there either. So trying to say Firebats and Hellbats are similar because Firebats are an AoE source is very very childish.
No it's not. Dismissing it is though. Design =/= how a unit will be used. When I say design I look at attack types, flying vs. ground, cloak vs. no cloak etc. Yes, some units will end up being used like they were meant to be and than everyone says this is "by design". If 2 units end up being used for different things does not necessarily mean their design is fundamentally different.
In this case however: Firebats did kill zerglings. As do Hellbats now. In fact, even trying to engage Hellbats with zerglings is suicide in most cases. They share the same core design. Blizzard just decided to not implement this "new" unit as a seperate unit. Instead they added it as a new form for the hellion. Which again, once the transformation is complete serves the same purpose. I don't know how I can explain this better. If you can't see that we'll just have to agree to disagree.
By these standards then Mutalisks and Scouts are the same design.
I wish people would stop comparing units based on graphic similarities and instead actually talk about the game.
Rant finished, my bad.
For the most part this is about Firebat / Hellbat. Graphics aside, both units end up standing on the ground shooting a low range AOE flame attack. This is design recycling at best, only that the hellbat has additional problems stacked on top.
Sort of--the only thing that's really making them comparable is that Hellbats can be healed.
Heck, I could also say that the Hellbat is short ranged roach that replaces speed with aoe.
That they both share the same form of attack cannot be compared? You can try to find differences where there are none if you which I guess. HF.
Beefy short range unit with high hits per attack. Has high hitpoints but very immobile with higher tier tech helping. Sounds like a roach to me.
Oh wait? Unless you're talking about the animation.... which has nothing to do with design.
The roach does not have an AOE attack.
Firebats don't have a sturdy body => highly relevant for a melee unit
Hellbats don't have stim => highly relevant since its both a DPS and Speed boost
A medivac + roaches will act much more similar to medivac + hellbats compared to Medivac + Firebats.
Stop only looking at graphics when you want to talk about design.
AOE is not about graphics. Single Target Damage, AOE, DoT etc. are at the core of unit design. Stimpack is an upgrade - not the core of the design of the units that can use it. The lurker / swarm host is about a unit that can only be fought with detection and not engaged (efficiently) without it, but yes the graphics differ. You're right on that one. It's beside the point though.
Here's what you don't seem to understand.
Hellbats have similar DPS and similar health to a roach. For less speed, no burrow movement, and 50% range nerf, it gets AoE. However, in the end, they do about the same thing.
Firebat AoE only was relevant against Zerglings and *maybe* zealots--but usually it wasn't really relevant there either. So trying to say Firebats and Hellbats are similar because Firebats are an AoE source is very very childish.
Lurkers burrow and need scans. Just like baneling landmines, infestor harass, burrow move roaches, etc...
What made the lurker strong was its dynamic when mixed with Hydralisks/Overlords (to snipe observers) or Defiler/Zergling (to defend against pushes) Without those dynamics, a lurker is just a blueflame hellion with cloak.
The Swarm Host is long range seige unit that (much like the siege tank) is useless in small numbers (the opposite of the Lurker). It's more akin to a siege tank that trades aoe for double the range + burrow.
If you're willing to say SH = Lurker because they burrow, then Infestor = Lurker because they burrow.
While I agree with most of what you say, I think your stance on the Swarm Host is only half accurate. For me the main relation between Swarm Host and Lurker is the way they mix with hydra/overseer or queen/oveseer or corrupter/overseer. This makes swarm host play feel very similar to BW lurker with relation to getting in position and sniping observers in ZvP. Yes you need more SH than you did Lurkers for these compositions to work, but the feel is quite similar. When using them in this way you also generally have them much closer to your opponents than you would when utilising them for a more seige style because you need each wave in the action asap to maintain the pressure.
On February 27 2013 14:31 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: For the guys who bitch about some units are IMBA against other units, let me remind everyone that Starcraft 2 is a Real Time Strategy Game. With emphasis on STRATEGY.
Just as you wouldn't block a rook by placing a pawn in its attack/move path, please don't complain about slowlots losing to micro'd hellions. It shows how lacking your understanding of this game is.
I think "blocking some units with stuff" is more a TACTIC ("implementation of a specific mission") and not a STRATEGY (long term goal). The strategy would be to "defend until I have the superawesome army and then win" or "to win with air attacks" while the tactic is the unit-wise implementation on the battlefield. Just read the wiki entrys to check their definitions ... maybe you agree with me.
Sadly Strategy plays a far less important role than tactics do in SC2 ... at least in my opinion. This is the case because there are too many units involved in each battle and the economics of the game make reproducing your units almost more important than being able to use them well. If the game was about strategy it would involve a lot of units which have seen many battles and defensive positions which are hard to crack, but that isnt the case.
Thank you for pointing that out. You are correct, a strategy game is only as entertaining as the tactics available. Personally I define tactics as the mechanical implementation of strategy.
I agree with your definition, but here is the twist: Since Starcraft is *supposed to be* a STRATEGY game it should be far less about tactics and mechanics (and economics) than it is atm. For a huge part SC2 is about the gathering of resources and building a huge reproduction capability to finally overwhelm your opponent with - more or less - endlessly replaced units.
Either this or the category of "Strategy game" is wrong. You only think / adjust your strategy few times while permanently thinking about unit engagements and unit production, so its easily more about economics and tactics than it is about strategy. Personally I have thought for quite some time that SC2 is more about real-time-action than it is about real-time-strategy and we simply need to accept that fact. No biggie.
----
Since you had to "fight the UI and movement" in Brood War and the game didnt have any turbo boosts for production and economy it was still a strategy game in my opinion. You simply had far fewer units all the time and cared more about the individual ones. Thus choosing the right strategy (i.e. the way in which to overcome the enemy) was more important than simply overwhelming the enemy by sheer numbers. Sure overwhelming numbers could happen, but due to the mechanics you could still come back from most disadvantaged positions.
How can you whine about SC2's needing to be far less "about tactics and mechanics" than it currently is (and thus by implication not being strategical enough according to you) but then praise BW for its strategical aspects when that game is the most mechanically demanding game in existence? BW's mechanical challenges were so significant that you literally had no hope of beating a KESPA pro unless you were on a Korean team practicing along with them 12 hours a day. That's obviously not the case with SC2. There were also far fewer viable builds in BW than there are in SC2. There are fewer useless units in SC2 than there are in BW, etc. All of this leads to more choices in SC2 and more choices increases the chances for strategy, rather than mechanics, to influence the game, which is why someone like Nestea could have all of the success he's had in SC2.
To this point, I've followed most of your HoTS posts with what I'd call "confused amusement", but I do have to ask -- were you fired by Blizzard at some point? Did David Kim diss your mom?
1. Not everyone lives in the US and I wouldnt work for Blizzard unless they would hire me as a dictator. Since that wont happen I would say your remarks about my post just come from confusion and unwillingness to understand the problem. - MORE isnt automatically BETTER. - FASTER isnt automatically BETTER. - You CAN have too much of some things ... Maybe you will figure out some things that are wrong with these guidelines.
2. You apparently didnt understand the point of my praise of BW. It was SLOWER than SC2 and this made "mechanical control" (clicking skills) far less important than it is in SC2 + Show Spoiler +
Sure you could improve your skill through better control of units in BW, but there was no "you MUST split your Marines against these Banelings" units in BW which totally screw over newbies and casuals.
; consequently STRATEGY was more important. Sure, some of the "tough parts" of BW was the not-so-easy movement control, but the opposite way in SC2 is far worse IMO. Too many people refuse to think that there are consequences to "technological advancement". SLOWER is BETTER because it allows more control. (Allows for casuals to be not-so-far-behind their not-so-casual friends who can more easily manage vast amount of multitasking.) FEWER UNITS on the battlefield is BETTER because it allows more control. (Watching a 2v2 Zergling v Zergling battle where one player wins with BOTH his Zerglings still alive is far more exciting than watching two clumps 50-100 units for both sides annihilate each other.) Only the really pro players can actually manage the amount of stuff that needs to be done in SC2 now and casuals - who are the excuse for putting in the whole ez-mode junk - dont really get anything at all. All they get is being overwhelmed by massive a-move-all-ins with Banelings or whatever crazy stuff is the flavour of the month.
3. Who are you kidding about Koreans? They are trained in the most intense environment and hardly any westerner can make up for that except with superior talent; in the Korean "prepare a week for one match against a player you analyze beforehand" situation beating them is hardly possible at all. The only exception is a long and tough competition - like MLG or Dreamhack - where you play many games a day and are physically taxed in addition to the challenge of the game.
2. You apparently didnt understand the point of my praise of BW. It was SLOWER than SC2 and this made "mechanical control" (clicking skills) far less important than it is in SC2
You and I have very different recollections of BW it would seem. The BW I remember took considerably more clicks to do just just about anything. Try sending an army of zerglings anywhere across them map and then tell me whether or not you think mechanical control is less important in BW than SC2. Don't get me wrong BW micro was a beautiful thing, but stop making up stuff to try and prove a point that doesn't matter.
On February 27 2013 14:31 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: For the guys who bitch about some units are IMBA against other units, let me remind everyone that Starcraft 2 is a Real Time Strategy Game. With emphasis on STRATEGY.
Just as you wouldn't block a rook by placing a pawn in its attack/move path, please don't complain about slowlots losing to micro'd hellions. It shows how lacking your understanding of this game is.
I think "blocking some units with stuff" is more a TACTIC ("implementation of a specific mission") and not a STRATEGY (long term goal). The strategy would be to "defend until I have the superawesome army and then win" or "to win with air attacks" while the tactic is the unit-wise implementation on the battlefield. Just read the wiki entrys to check their definitions ... maybe you agree with me.
Sadly Strategy plays a far less important role than tactics do in SC2 ... at least in my opinion. This is the case because there are too many units involved in each battle and the economics of the game make reproducing your units almost more important than being able to use them well. If the game was about strategy it would involve a lot of units which have seen many battles and defensive positions which are hard to crack, but that isnt the case.
Thank you for pointing that out. You are correct, a strategy game is only as entertaining as the tactics available. Personally I define tactics as the mechanical implementation of strategy.
I agree with your definition, but here is the twist: Since Starcraft is *supposed to be* a STRATEGY game it should be far less about tactics and mechanics (and economics) than it is atm. For a huge part SC2 is about the gathering of resources and building a huge reproduction capability to finally overwhelm your opponent with - more or less - endlessly replaced units.
Either this or the category of "Strategy game" is wrong. You only think / adjust your strategy few times while permanently thinking about unit engagements and unit production, so its easily more about economics and tactics than it is about strategy. Personally I have thought for quite some time that SC2 is more about real-time-action than it is about real-time-strategy and we simply need to accept that fact. No biggie.
----
Since you had to "fight the UI and movement" in Brood War and the game didnt have any turbo boosts for production and economy it was still a strategy game in my opinion. You simply had far fewer units all the time and cared more about the individual ones. Thus choosing the right strategy (i.e. the way in which to overcome the enemy) was more important than simply overwhelming the enemy by sheer numbers. Sure overwhelming numbers could happen, but due to the mechanics you could still come back from most disadvantaged positions.
How can you whine about SC2's needing to be far less "about tactics and mechanics" than it currently is (and thus by implication not being strategical enough according to you) but then praise BW for its strategical aspects when that game is the most mechanically demanding game in existence? BW's mechanical challenges were so significant that you literally had no hope of beating a KESPA pro unless you were on a Korean team practicing along with them 12 hours a day. That's obviously not the case with SC2. There were also far fewer viable builds in BW than there are in SC2. There are fewer useless units in SC2 than there are in BW, etc. All of this leads to more choices in SC2 and more choices increases the chances for strategy, rather than mechanics, to influence the game, which is why someone like Nestea could have all of the success he's had in SC2.
To this point, I've followed most of your HoTS posts with what I'd call "confused amusement", but I do have to ask -- were you fired by Blizzard at some point? Did David Kim diss your mom?
2. You apparently didnt understand the point of my praise of BW. It was SLOWER than SC2 and this made "mechanical control" (clicking skills) far less important than it is in SC2...
Not sure if troll or serious.
the moment when a person tries to tell me that sc1 was easier(in terms of micro/multitask/unitcontrol) and not as demanding as sc2, is the moment when i close the browser and stop taking anything that person has or will say seriously.
Hellbats have similar DPS and similar health to a roach. For less speed, no burrow movement, and 50% range nerf, it gets AoE. However, in the end, they do about the same thing.
Many units share the same or similar numbers. As do the Hellbat and the Firebat from BW. On top of that they even share the same attack type. Yet you somehow dismiss the notion of them being similar. That's pretty childish.
Firebat AoE only was relevant against Zerglings and *maybe* zealots--but usually it wasn't really relevant there either. So trying to say Firebats and Hellbats are similar because Firebats are an AoE source is very very childish.
No it's not. Dismissing it is though. Design =/= how a unit will be used. When I say design I look at attack types, flying vs. ground, cloak vs. no cloak etc. Yes, some units will end up being used like they were meant to be and than everyone says this is "by design". If 2 units end up being used for different things does not necessarily mean their design is fundamentally different.
In this case however: Firebats did kill zerglings. As do Hellbats now. In fact, even trying to engage Hellbats with zerglings is suicide in most cases. They share the same core design. Blizzard just decided to not implement this "new" unit as a seperate unit. Instead they added it as a new form for the hellion. Which again, once the transformation is complete serves the same purpose. I don't know how I can explain this better. If you can't see that we'll just have to agree to disagree.
By these standards then Mutalisks and Scouts are the same design.
No because the attack type is different. Scouts only deal single target damage, Mutalisk hit multiple targets.
You see, tweak the numbers down of the hellbat form and you have the firebat. I've seen a couple of Blizz devs talk about how they want to try and balance a unit by tweaking its numbers, without changing the core design. This is what I think they mean.
A good example of this is the tempest. Its original design was to be a mass anti-air unit. Then Blizz decided to change the design to a long range, single target unit. Now they have to tweak the numbers (damage, HP, speed and whatnot) to finally balance the unit.
Hellbats have similar DPS and similar health to a roach. For less speed, no burrow movement, and 50% range nerf, it gets AoE. However, in the end, they do about the same thing.
Many units share the same or similar numbers. As do the Hellbat and the Firebat from BW. On top of that they even share the same attack type. Yet you somehow dismiss the notion of them being similar. That's pretty childish.
Firebat AoE only was relevant against Zerglings and *maybe* zealots--but usually it wasn't really relevant there either. So trying to say Firebats and Hellbats are similar because Firebats are an AoE source is very very childish.
No it's not. Dismissing it is though. Design =/= how a unit will be used. When I say design I look at attack types, flying vs. ground, cloak vs. no cloak etc. Yes, some units will end up being used like they were meant to be and than everyone says this is "by design". If 2 units end up being used for different things does not necessarily mean their design is fundamentally different.
In this case however: Firebats did kill zerglings. As do Hellbats now. In fact, even trying to engage Hellbats with zerglings is suicide in most cases. They share the same core design. Blizzard just decided to not implement this "new" unit as a seperate unit. Instead they added it as a new form for the hellion. Which again, once the transformation is complete serves the same purpose. I don't know how I can explain this better. If you can't see that we'll just have to agree to disagree.
By these standards then Mutalisks and Scouts are the same design.
No because the attack type is different. Scouts only deal single target damage, Mutalisk hit multiple targets.
You see, tweak the numbers down of the hellbat form and you have the firebat. I've seen a couple of Blizz devs talk about how they want to try and balance a unit by tweaking its numbers, without changing the core design. This is what I think they mean.
A good example of this is the tempest. Its original design was to be a mass anti-air unit. Then Blizz decided to change the design to a long range, single target unit. Now they have to tweak the numbers (damage, HP, speed and whatnot) to finally balance the unit.
If you honestly believe that what differentiates a Mutalisk and a Scout is that glaive worms bounce then I have honestly no more interest in talking to someone who clearly doesn't understand BW.
Hellbats have similar DPS and similar health to a roach. For less speed, no burrow movement, and 50% range nerf, it gets AoE. However, in the end, they do about the same thing.
Many units share the same or similar numbers. As do the Hellbat and the Firebat from BW. On top of that they even share the same attack type. Yet you somehow dismiss the notion of them being similar. That's pretty childish.
Firebat AoE only was relevant against Zerglings and *maybe* zealots--but usually it wasn't really relevant there either. So trying to say Firebats and Hellbats are similar because Firebats are an AoE source is very very childish.
No it's not. Dismissing it is though. Design =/= how a unit will be used. When I say design I look at attack types, flying vs. ground, cloak vs. no cloak etc. Yes, some units will end up being used like they were meant to be and than everyone says this is "by design". If 2 units end up being used for different things does not necessarily mean their design is fundamentally different.
In this case however: Firebats did kill zerglings. As do Hellbats now. In fact, even trying to engage Hellbats with zerglings is suicide in most cases. They share the same core design. Blizzard just decided to not implement this "new" unit as a seperate unit. Instead they added it as a new form for the hellion. Which again, once the transformation is complete serves the same purpose. I don't know how I can explain this better. If you can't see that we'll just have to agree to disagree.
By these standards then Mutalisks and Scouts are the same design.
No because the attack type is different. Scouts only deal single target damage, Mutalisk hit multiple targets.
You see, tweak the numbers down of the hellbat form and you have the firebat. I've seen a couple of Blizz devs talk about how they want to try and balance a unit by tweaking its numbers, without changing the core design. This is what I think they mean.
A good example of this is the tempest. Its original design was to be a mass anti-air unit. Then Blizz decided to change the design to a long range, single target unit. Now they have to tweak the numbers (damage, HP, speed and whatnot) to finally balance the unit.
If you honestly believe that what differentiates a Mutalisk and a Scout is that glaive worms bounce then I have honestly no more interest in talking to someone who clearly doesn't understand BW.
I think a good distinction would be the lack of stim for hellbats. It seems like a small difference, but it plays a huge roll how they are and can be used.
Airbattles: are cause of the lack of collision not as nice to watch as the more micro and pathing focused ground fights. At first as was afraid of the way Protoss in HOTS was evolving, but after seeing more games I pretty much like it. I am still concerned when it comes so mass air vs. air situations. I dont like it at all.
What do you think? Do you agree that ground to anti-air should be more potent?
I was thinking of changing the Role of the Thor, to become even better against (not-light) air, as well as giving him a more specific role in general.[If both of the Thors Weapons were to fire at the same time and even further increasing their reload time while improving their damage output, they would be more microble and more specific in ground fights - stronger against tougher units and even weaker than before against smaller ones]
I would as well like to see Hydras being modified in a way that they are of even better usage against air. Hydras are expansive and you have to take good care of them. They also require a lot of investment. I was thinking of giving them +1 Range (maybe even +2) versus air, when upgraded with range. That might as well fix the over dominant muta vs. muta fights in ZvZ (I think they are stupid and spore crawler change is way to specific and not sufficient enough) What do you think?
I am okay with Swarm Hosts an I like the addition of Widow Mines. There are details somehow I would change. First the Swarm Host: there main purpose should be to make pressure, retreating from them should be a more legit option. As a consequence I would reduce the movement speed of the spawnlings (30% maybe?)
I am seeing their role somewhat close to a siege tank (same goes for the widow mine). Using them should require more tactical decision making. I would like them to un-borrow instantly, but at the same time increasing the amount of time for them to be burrowed by a lot. It should be well considered moving them blindly to the front without having good intel on whats going on.
Widow mines should not be allowed to target workers as primary target.
Protoss: Giving them more options via the Air-tech is nice. I would like to see a comeback to the original “townportal” approach earlier in the beta. If the Mothership-Core would still be able to function as a recall unit, operating from a nexus (required upgrade from cyber-core), with even more powerful recall capabilities, Protoss would be more encouraged to try to move out (at this stage they are staying inside the base way to often until 200 supply). The Mothership-Nexus could have the permanent cannon added - adding a new primary target to destroy (and a new little addition to the gameplay with that, which Nexus do you choose?). Recall could work like this: when being activated the units can’t move for some seconds and then have to remain paralyzed at the home nexus for 5-10 seconds (?)
Doing this and really making it a strong and core mechanism to Protoss would allow to fix one of the older and bigger issues with Protoss - the force field. I love them, but at times they can become ridiculous. Reducing the max. energy from sentries to let’s say 140 could really improve the situation, especially combined with the stronger recall ability. This would as well improve the too powerful scouting via hallucinate - you have to choose more carefully how to spend your energy.
Terran: As many I would like to see more tank usage. Mech based on mainly Thors and (Battle-) Hellions doesn’t count as mech! Changing the tank damage-profit from upgrades even more could help (1. +5. 2. +10. 3. +15) ?
The speed bonus to medivacs adds some nice new possibilities, but being completely free isn’t the right way. If using the speed bonus would come along with an stop of energy regeneration - until the ability of after burner is available again - that would put an end to wasteful usage of the boost without having to huge of an impact.
Of course these are just some thoughts, some of these changes would be problematic in specific circumstances - but in my opinion it would improve the overall game.
What do you think, please don’t be too focused on details as they are not perfect
On February 27 2013 14:31 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: For the guys who bitch about some units are IMBA against other units, let me remind everyone that Starcraft 2 is a Real Time Strategy Game. With emphasis on STRATEGY.
Just as you wouldn't block a rook by placing a pawn in its attack/move path, please don't complain about slowlots losing to micro'd hellions. It shows how lacking your understanding of this game is.
I think "blocking some units with stuff" is more a TACTIC ("implementation of a specific mission") and not a STRATEGY (long term goal). The strategy would be to "defend until I have the superawesome army and then win" or "to win with air attacks" while the tactic is the unit-wise implementation on the battlefield. Just read the wiki entrys to check their definitions ... maybe you agree with me.
Sadly Strategy plays a far less important role than tactics do in SC2 ... at least in my opinion. This is the case because there are too many units involved in each battle and the economics of the game make reproducing your units almost more important than being able to use them well. If the game was about strategy it would involve a lot of units which have seen many battles and defensive positions which are hard to crack, but that isnt the case.
Thank you for pointing that out. You are correct, a strategy game is only as entertaining as the tactics available. Personally I define tactics as the mechanical implementation of strategy.
I agree with your definition, but here is the twist: Since Starcraft is *supposed to be* a STRATEGY game it should be far less about tactics and mechanics (and economics) than it is atm. For a huge part SC2 is about the gathering of resources and building a huge reproduction capability to finally overwhelm your opponent with - more or less - endlessly replaced units.
Either this or the category of "Strategy game" is wrong. You only think / adjust your strategy few times while permanently thinking about unit engagements and unit production, so its easily more about economics and tactics than it is about strategy. Personally I have thought for quite some time that SC2 is more about real-time-action than it is about real-time-strategy and we simply need to accept that fact. No biggie.
----
Since you had to "fight the UI and movement" in Brood War and the game didnt have any turbo boosts for production and economy it was still a strategy game in my opinion. You simply had far fewer units all the time and cared more about the individual ones. Thus choosing the right strategy (i.e. the way in which to overcome the enemy) was more important than simply overwhelming the enemy by sheer numbers. Sure overwhelming numbers could happen, but due to the mechanics you could still come back from most disadvantaged positions.
How can you whine about SC2's needing to be far less "about tactics and mechanics" than it currently is (and thus by implication not being strategical enough according to you) but then praise BW for its strategical aspects when that game is the most mechanically demanding game in existence? BW's mechanical challenges were so significant that you literally had no hope of beating a KESPA pro unless you were on a Korean team practicing along with them 12 hours a day. That's obviously not the case with SC2. There were also far fewer viable builds in BW than there are in SC2. There are fewer useless units in SC2 than there are in BW, etc. All of this leads to more choices in SC2 and more choices increases the chances for strategy, rather than mechanics, to influence the game, which is why someone like Nestea could have all of the success he's had in SC2.
To this point, I've followed most of your HoTS posts with what I'd call "confused amusement", but I do have to ask -- were you fired by Blizzard at some point? Did David Kim diss your mom?
1. Not everyone lives in the US and I wouldnt work for Blizzard unless they would hire me as a dictator. Since that wont happen I would say your remarks about my post just come from confusion and unwillingness to understand the problem. - MORE isnt automatically BETTER. - FASTER isnt automatically BETTER. - You CAN have too much of some things ... Maybe you will figure out some things that are wrong with these guidelines.
2. You apparently didnt understand the point of my praise of BW. It was SLOWER than SC2 and this made "mechanical control" (clicking skills) far less important than it is in SC2 + Show Spoiler +
Sure you could improve your skill through better control of units in BW, but there was no "you MUST split your Marines against these Banelings" units in BW which totally screw over newbies and casuals.
; consequently STRATEGY was more important. Sure, some of the "tough parts" of BW was the not-so-easy movement control, but the opposite way in SC2 is far worse IMO. Too many people refuse to think that there are consequences to "technological advancement". SLOWER is BETTER because it allows more control. (Allows for casuals to be not-so-far-behind their not-so-casual friends who can more easily manage vast amount of multitasking.) FEWER UNITS on the battlefield is BETTER because it allows more control. (Watching a 2v2 Zergling v Zergling battle where one player wins with BOTH his Zerglings still alive is far more exciting than watching two clumps 50-100 units for both sides annihilate each other.) Only the really pro players can actually manage the amount of stuff that needs to be done in SC2 now and casuals - who are the excuse for putting in the whole ez-mode junk - dont really get anything at all. All they get is being overwhelmed by massive a-move-all-ins with Banelings or whatever crazy stuff is the flavour of the month.
3. Who are you kidding about Koreans? They are trained in the most intense environment and hardly any westerner can make up for that except with superior talent; in the Korean "prepare a week for one match against a player you analyze beforehand" situation beating them is hardly possible at all. The only exception is a long and tough competition - like MLG or Dreamhack - where you play many games a day and are physically taxed in addition to the challenge of the game.
I think this is a a very articulate and accurate post in my 12 year experience with BW. Many progamers citicize the fact that you have "B-Teamers" easily making it to Code A or Code S that never had the skillset to be there before. Most korean backlash is not present because they don't want to appear "bad manner." Instead they just stop playing the game and find another strategy game more lucrative.
2. You apparently didnt understand the point of my praise of BW. It was SLOWER than SC2 and this made "mechanical control" (clicking skills) far less important than it is in SC2
You and I have very different recollections of BW it would seem. The BW I remember took considerably more clicks to do just just about anything. Try sending an army of zerglings anywhere across them map and then tell me whether or not you think mechanical control is less important in BW than SC2. Don't get me wrong BW micro was a beautiful thing, but stop making up stuff to try and prove a point that doesn't matter.
The thing is that you couldnt do "precise minute movement" in BW (for ground units), so it wasnt really possible to do 0.1 sec super-precise adjustments to your unit movement. Thus all you could do is "approximate movement" and thus the precision movement wasnt as important FOR MOST OF US. Only at the real top end of the skill meter did it start to make a difference, BUT it was basically needed for ALL UNITS instead of just some like in SC2.
In contrast you have these stupid "you lose if you fail to micro your units away" units in SC2 and these apply to ALL SKILL LEVELS. Thus the requirement of minute control is put on people who cant really do it ... the casuals.
On March 01 2013 23:43 RampancyTW wrote: Okay Rabiator has officially lost it
Can we ban him from the HotS forum now, please? It's long overdue
And you base this opinion on what?
On March 01 2013 23:47 Bagi wrote: Anyone saying BW is mechanically easier than SC2 should get banned for trolling.
BW didnt REQUIRE mechanic control as much as SC2 does. You could just live with your units taking a scenic route, but in SC2 you - as the defender - more or less "instantly lose" if you fail to move against Banelings and there are many more units and skills which have this "you failed to move properly" part attached to them ... like spreading against/not being split by Forcefields, running blindly into Widow Mines, ... All these things work for all skill levels and thats the terrible part of it. The "sucky movement" in BW was acceptable for most levels of play and in any case you didnt lose half your army from such a mistake because you only had 12 per control group anyways.
----
Many people might agree with the sentiment that I have "lost it", but I would counter that with "you dont think outside the box (if at all) and just believe the ads of Blizzard that everything new is better." Just grow up, grow wise, stop believing the propaganda (ads) and learn to think for yourselves.
Increased economy, production speed boosts, perfectly tigh unit movement and unlimited unit selection do have their price and it is the super precise balance (which might not even be achievable) which they need to reach. Specialized balance solutions like the ones for Widow Mines, Battle Hellions and Spore Crawler (which have essentially made up the last few patches) are just the symptoms which really make it obvious that something is wrong / badly implemented / designed.
2. You apparently didnt understand the point of my praise of BW. It was SLOWER than SC2 and this made "mechanical control" (clicking skills) far less important than it is in SC2
You and I have very different recollections of BW it would seem. The BW I remember took considerably more clicks to do just just about anything. Try sending an army of zerglings anywhere across them map and then tell me whether or not you think mechanical control is less important in BW than SC2. Don't get me wrong BW micro was a beautiful thing, but stop making up stuff to try and prove a point that doesn't matter.
The thing is that you couldnt do "precise minute movement" in BW (for ground units), so it wasnt really possible to do 0.1 sec super-precise adjustments to your unit movement. Thus all you could do is "approximate movement" and thus the precision movement wasnt as important FOR MOST OF US. Only at the real top end of the skill meter did it start to make a difference, BUT it was basically needed for ALL UNITS instead of just some like in SC2.
In contrast you have these stupid "you lose if you fail to micro your units away" units in SC2 and these apply to ALL SKILL LEVELS. Thus the requirement of minute control is put on people who cant really do it ... the casuals.
On March 01 2013 23:47 Bagi wrote: Anyone saying BW is mechanically easier than SC2 should get banned for trolling.
BW didnt REQUIRE mechanic control as much as SC2 does. You could just live with your units taking a scenic route, but in SC2 you - as the defender - more or less "instantly lose" if you fail to move against Banelings and there are many more units and skills which have this "you failed to move properly" part attached to them ... like spreading against/not being split by Forcefields, running blindly into Widow Mines, ... All these things work for all skill levels and thats the terrible part of it. The "sucky movement" in BW was acceptable for most levels of play and in any case you didnt lose half your army from such a mistake because you only had 12 per control group anyways.
----
Many people might agree with the sentiment that I have "lost it", but I would counter that with "you dont think outside the box (if at all) and just believe the ads of Blizzard that everything new is better." Just grow up, grow wise, stop believing the propaganda (ads) and learn to think for yourselves.
Increased economy, production speed boosts, perfectly tigh unit movement and unlimited unit selection do have their price and it is the super precise balance (which might not even be achievable) which they need to reach. Specialized balance solutions like the ones for Widow Mines, Battle Hellions and Spore Crawler (which have essentially made up the last few patches) are just the symptoms which really make it obvious that something is wrong / badly implemented / designed.
Well, at least now we got to the bottom of the issue. Rabiator was terrible at BW and is apparently even worse at SC2, and looks for ridiculous excuses such as "BW required less mechanical skill than SC2" to justify his inability to adjust to change.
The funny part is that you think we're just brainwashed by Blizzard propaganda when, unlike you, we've actually been playing and experiencing SC2. Whereas you (self-admittedly) don't even play.
Since this seems to be the final balance going into launch I'm happy with a lot of HotS. I played a lot of games and a lot of 2v2 so I won't speak of 1v1 balance directly but the good thing about 2s is you see what is really abusive(think stopping 2 rax reaper is hard try 4).
But I'm happy with : Zerg - Viper is a cool caster unit. Fun to watch. Cloud will get nerfed but it is a unit a pro player will get a lot out of. Swarm host will be tough to balance but a unit that has good utility and Zerg needed it. New muta is strong and fun to use.
Protoss - MC is a cool idea and overall well designed and useful. The race is strong and diverse now and not having to open robo for obs is good. The race doesn't play a ton different early game from WoL though.
Terran - Love widow mine. Fun to use, pros will do cool things with it. New medivac boost is great but maybe to strong. Hellbat is a strong unit, nothing exciting about it but if you are a Terran player you will like them.
What I don't like : Zerg - Hydras need some more work. They are still a bit weak and it would be nice if it was a bit stronger AA unit. Infestor seems more in balance but wish neural was looked at. Corrupters corruption is lame, wish a better spell its not fun to watch as a spectator or use as a player.
Protoss - Oracle, although strong, seems like a unit that was forced in simply for the OBS need. I just don't love the unit... Tempest is strong but boring. Rather they just made the carrier better. Using tempest isn't fun and watching pros use them won't be exciting.
Terran - BCs needed some love and didn't get it. Raven is strong but I hate it. HSM design is dumb. Thors are a unit that should have been removed for a more mobile AA unit. The cannon thing seems useless to me.
Just some of my personal feelings after a few hundred games playing random.
On March 04 2013 21:08 Rabiator wrote: BW didnt REQUIRE mechanic control as much as SC2 does. You could just live with your units taking a scenic route, but in SC2 you - as the defender - more or less "instantly lose" if you fail to move against Banelings and there are many more units and skills which have this "you failed to move properly" part attached to them ... like spreading against/not being split by Forcefields, running blindly into Widow Mines, ... All these things work for all skill levels and thats the terrible part of it. The "sucky movement" in BW was acceptable for most levels of play and in any case you didnt lose half your army from such a mistake because you only had 12 per control group anyways.
I am mid-Masters in SC2, and when I try to go back and play Brood War I struggle to be able to macro decently and have any semblance of control over my army. I'm not sure how to respond to the claim that BW required less mechanical control than SC2, because the claim is so absurd.
On March 04 2013 21:08 Rabiator wrote: BW didnt REQUIRE mechanic control as much as SC2 does. You could just live with your units taking a scenic route, but in SC2 you - as the defender - more or less "instantly lose" if you fail to move against Banelings and there are many more units and skills which have this "you failed to move properly" part attached to them ... like spreading against/not being split by Forcefields, running blindly into Widow Mines, ... All these things work for all skill levels and thats the terrible part of it. The "sucky movement" in BW was acceptable for most levels of play and in any case you didnt lose half your army from such a mistake because you only had 12 per control group anyways.
In BW the player with the superior mechanics will still have twice as many units as you, and your army will be still be running in a straight line into the meatgrinder that is sieged tanks + spider mines unless you know how to control it properly.
BW absolutely required raw mechanics, and moreso than SC2 it required them in every single aspect of the game. Without mechanics you won't have SCV production or have then mining, you cannot macro properly, you cannot move your army around. That's a lot worse than having a few units (such as banes) that require a player to split up their units really quickly in response. Even with banes a player with lacking mechanics but good game sense can keep their units pre-split in case they have scouted the enemy massing banes, now tell me how you can prepare for keeping up in macro in BW?
I don't really understand why you ignore the fact that you need solid mechanics in BW to get anywhere at all - yet because SC2 has ONE instance where it requires you to react faster than anything in BW, it suddenly requires more mechanics and is less noob friendly than BW ever was. Could you be any more biased in your comparison?
I feel like recall should either be a 50/50/60sec upgrade at the cybercore or it should take longer to activate, after watching pro games protoss seems to have the safest early to mid game which will allow even more corners to be cut when teching up once timings and unit cohesion is figured out. There needs to be some minor tweaks to stop this.
Another thing that can be done is reworking the nexus cannon, 20 damage with 13 range is way too much. I thought the original purpose of nexus cannon was to stave off early rushes/harassment. Reducing range to 10 and making the damage base 10 with +5 or 8 for light units would be more than sufficient to help against early aggression. Or maybe reduce the duration to 30 or 45 seconds.
EDIT: one last thing to add, time warp should effect friendly units that are in it, not just the enemies. There needs to be a trade off when it comes to abilities and a lot of the new abilities lack this.
On March 05 2013 05:14 TeslasPigeon wrote: I feel like recall should either be a 50/50/60sec upgrade at the cybercore or it should take longer to activate, after watching pro games protoss seems to have the safest early to mid game which will allow even more corners to be cut when teching up once timings and unit cohesion is figured out. There needs to be some minor tweaks to stop this.
Another thing that can be done is reworking the nexus cannon, 20 damage with 13 range is way too much. I thought the original purpose of nexus cannon was to stave off early rushes/harassment. Reducing range to 10 and making the damage base 10 with +5 or 8 for light units would be more than sufficient to help against early aggression. Or maybe reduce the duration to 30 or 45 seconds.
EDIT: one last thing to add, time warp should effect friendly units that are in it, not just the enemies. There needs to be a trade off when it comes to abilities and a lot of the new abilities lack this.
I was thinking along the same lines with the longer to activate. So you will still lose some units for you're all in attempt. Seems a bit too risk-free to try an all in right now.
I was watching SOTG EP82 and realised.. did anyone actually do the mass hellion contain to hellbat timings?? Ive never seen/heard/played the strat ever. Did Blizzard just scam us?
On March 04 2013 23:05 FLuE wrote: But I'm happy with : Zerg - Viper is a cool caster unit. Fun to watch. Cloud will get nerfed but it is a unit a pro player will get a lot out of. Swarm host will be tough to balance but a unit that has good utility and Zerg needed it. New muta is strong and fun to use.
The problem with cloud is that it is given to a flying unit. Cloud, like a dark sworm from BW, should belongs to ground unit, only then it can be balanced properly. By now cloud is OP spell, that is hard to balance.
Muta now is way too OP vs Toss, only strong storm can handle it. But at the other side, storm is way too strong against all others.
On March 04 2013 23:05 FLuE wrote: But I'm happy with : Zerg - Viper is a cool caster unit. Fun to watch. Cloud will get nerfed but it is a unit a pro player will get a lot out of. Swarm host will be tough to balance but a unit that has good utility and Zerg needed it. New muta is strong and fun to use.
The problem with cloud is that it is given to a flying unit. Cloud, like a dark sworm from BW, should belongs to ground unit, only then it can be balanced properly. By now cloud is OP spell, that is hard to balance.
Muta now is way too OP vs Toss, only strong storm can handle it. But at the other side, storm is way too strong against all others.
Wow you are wrong on everything you just said.
viper in general is really easy to counter.
Mutalisks really easy to beat as protoss - open up stargate - see mutas - make phoenix = mutalisks are defended ^^.
You expect us to believe a 14.5 dps unit that moves at 2.81 (with upgrade) is the worst unit in the game. Either you have no idea how to optimize their damage output beyond a-move, you use them unescorted or both.
Well, Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps 550HP/3armor unit with a 300damage blast (with upgrade) which additionally can fly as bad unit.
You see how ridicolous such stuff sounds when you don't include how much those units cost or what they require? And you tell other people how immature their discussion style is...
I didn't believe you'd resort to lying, Big J. I'll try to be civil.
It should be read as:
Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps range 6, 550HP/3 armor unit with 300 damage blast (with upgrade) every 125 seconds, vulnerablility to feedback spell and which additionally can fly as bad unit.
In any case on 4 bases, cost is not an issue, production rate is.
Really hard to even know where to begin with responding to this bullshit. I know I shouldn't, it's not worth my time. But whatever, I'm in a good mood, can as well have some fun with this troll,
So whenever someone describes a unit he has to point out every stat the unit has and every spell interaction? Yeah, what a lyer I am not mentioning every freaking thing that is true for the BC. Pssst, before someone says that hydralisks don't get a dusk/dawn sight bonus you really should mention it... Oh too late. I found out that you didn't mention it. You lyer! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
And to your "cost is no issue, production rate is". Well, if cost is no issue and you have 50scvs (so building production rate is 50), why don't you build 50starports to get the same production rate as a zerg? Of course cost is THE issue. Z and P have more production, because their infrastructure COSTS less.
actually protoss infrastructure is more expensive.
factory is 150/100, 190/100 if you count for scv build time. Robo facility is 200/100. But its really only 150/100 because Terran have mules to offset scvs building, and the minerals don't actually go away.
a star port is also 150/100 I believe? Compared to a star gate bring 150/150. And how much is a fusion core? Fleet beacon is 300/200. An armory is 150/100 while a robotics bay is 200/200. And a ghost academy is 100/50 right? Vs a 100/200 templar archives, not to mention the need for a 150/100 twilight council. No need to mention barracks/gateway.
edit: as a sky toss versus zerg: I think allowing blinding cloud to hit air or affect casters would be a wonderful idea personally. Does anybody else share it? I think it would definitely help balance out pvz, and I don't think needing skytoss is how to do it.
I see in you are counting SCV build times, what happens when you include separate upgrades for terran land units but not protoss ones? What about addons, how do they factor in?
I wonder when people will learn not to directly compare races in Starcraft.
Agreed. Though, there seems to be a lot of complaints from the other side of the fence of "It's only a 100 mineral unit!"
I don't understand how zergs can complain so much about hellbats "only costing 100 minerals" when they have queens that only cost 150 and are tier 1. I mean out of all 3 races zerg has the best mineral sinks by far. Queens have so much utility and snowball when semi-massed and don't even cost larvae. Combine them with spines and spores (T1 and minerals only) and that is why we saw gasless 3 base zergs in WOL. Hellbats require a significant amount of gas and tech to even start production so it's not really even fair to evaluate them purely as a mineral sink until the late game. During which zerg has spines/lings/queens/spores for a mineral sink, and late game toss have cannons/chargelots and relatively gas inexpensive stalkers. All of this MYTH about Terran having 2 mineral sinks and Zerg and Protoss only having 1 needs to just end because it's simply not true.
You expect us to believe a 14.5 dps unit that moves at 2.81 (with upgrade) is the worst unit in the game. Either you have no idea how to optimize their damage output beyond a-move, you use them unescorted or both.
Well, Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps 550HP/3armor unit with a 300damage blast (with upgrade) which additionally can fly as bad unit.
You see how ridicolous such stuff sounds when you don't include how much those units cost or what they require? And you tell other people how immature their discussion style is...
I didn't believe you'd resort to lying, Big J. I'll try to be civil.
It should be read as:
Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps range 6, 550HP/3 armor unit with 300 damage blast (with upgrade) every 125 seconds, vulnerablility to feedback spell and which additionally can fly as bad unit.
In any case on 4 bases, cost is not an issue, production rate is.
Really hard to even know where to begin with responding to this bullshit. I know I shouldn't, it's not worth my time. But whatever, I'm in a good mood, can as well have some fun with this troll,
So whenever someone describes a unit he has to point out every stat the unit has and every spell interaction? Yeah, what a lyer I am not mentioning every freaking thing that is true for the BC. Pssst, before someone says that hydralisks don't get a dusk/dawn sight bonus you really should mention it... Oh too late. I found out that you didn't mention it. You lyer! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
And to your "cost is no issue, production rate is". Well, if cost is no issue and you have 50scvs (so building production rate is 50), why don't you build 50starports to get the same production rate as a zerg? Of course cost is THE issue. Z and P have more production, because their infrastructure COSTS less.
actually protoss infrastructure is more expensive.
factory is 150/100, 190/100 if you count for scv build time. Robo facility is 200/100. But its really only 150/100 because Terran have mules to offset scvs building, and the minerals don't actually go away.
a star port is also 150/100 I believe? Compared to a star gate bring 150/150. And how much is a fusion core? Fleet beacon is 300/200. An armory is 150/100 while a robotics bay is 200/200. And a ghost academy is 100/50 right? Vs a 100/200 templar archives, not to mention the need for a 150/100 twilight council. No need to mention barracks/gateway.
edit: as a sky toss versus zerg: I think allowing blinding cloud to hit air or affect casters would be a wonderful idea personally. Does anybody else share it? I think it would definitely help balance out pvz, and I don't think needing skytoss is how to do it.
I see in you are counting SCV build times, what happens when you include separate upgrades for terran land units but not protoss ones? What about addons, how do they factor in?
I wonder when people will learn not to directly compare races in Starcraft.
Agreed. Though, there seems to be a lot of complaints from the other side of the fence of "It's only a 100 mineral unit!"
I don't understand how zergs can complain so much about hellbats "only costing 100 minerals" when they have queens that only cost 150 and are tier 1. I mean out of all 3 races zerg has the best mineral sinks by far. Queens have so much utility and snowball when semi-massed and don't even cost larvae. Combine them with spines and spores (T1 and minerals only) and that is why we saw gasless 3 base zergs in WOL. Hellbats require a significant amount of gas and tech to even start production so it's not really even fair to evaluate them purely as a mineral sink until the late game. During which zerg has spines/lings/queens/spores for a mineral sink, and late game toss have cannons/chargelots and relatively gas inexpensive stalkers. All of this MYTH about Terran having 2 mineral sinks and Zerg and Protoss only having 1 needs to just end because it's simply not true.
So much this.
Seriously, Zerg have the most imba unit (Queen) being underutilized for one spell when they really have THREE powerful spells, 150hp heal and a vision spell (via creep spread). Did I mention queens also have the same dps of a roach?
I have always found it odd that Zerg pros don't do creep tumor drops on the opponent's third base to force them to burn scans or build observers. Also, mass queen drops.
You expect us to believe a 14.5 dps unit that moves at 2.81 (with upgrade) is the worst unit in the game. Either you have no idea how to optimize their damage output beyond a-move, you use them unescorted or both.
Well, Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps 550HP/3armor unit with a 300damage blast (with upgrade) which additionally can fly as bad unit.
You see how ridicolous such stuff sounds when you don't include how much those units cost or what they require? And you tell other people how immature their discussion style is...
I didn't believe you'd resort to lying, Big J. I'll try to be civil.
It should be read as:
Terrans are trying to sell a 35.6dps range 6, 550HP/3 armor unit with 300 damage blast (with upgrade) every 125 seconds, vulnerablility to feedback spell and which additionally can fly as bad unit.
In any case on 4 bases, cost is not an issue, production rate is.
Really hard to even know where to begin with responding to this bullshit. I know I shouldn't, it's not worth my time. But whatever, I'm in a good mood, can as well have some fun with this troll,
So whenever someone describes a unit he has to point out every stat the unit has and every spell interaction? Yeah, what a lyer I am not mentioning every freaking thing that is true for the BC. Pssst, before someone says that hydralisks don't get a dusk/dawn sight bonus you really should mention it... Oh too late. I found out that you didn't mention it. You lyer! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
And to your "cost is no issue, production rate is". Well, if cost is no issue and you have 50scvs (so building production rate is 50), why don't you build 50starports to get the same production rate as a zerg? Of course cost is THE issue. Z and P have more production, because their infrastructure COSTS less.
actually protoss infrastructure is more expensive.
factory is 150/100, 190/100 if you count for scv build time. Robo facility is 200/100. But its really only 150/100 because Terran have mules to offset scvs building, and the minerals don't actually go away.
a star port is also 150/100 I believe? Compared to a star gate bring 150/150. And how much is a fusion core? Fleet beacon is 300/200. An armory is 150/100 while a robotics bay is 200/200. And a ghost academy is 100/50 right? Vs a 100/200 templar archives, not to mention the need for a 150/100 twilight council. No need to mention barracks/gateway.
edit: as a sky toss versus zerg: I think allowing blinding cloud to hit air or affect casters would be a wonderful idea personally. Does anybody else share it? I think it would definitely help balance out pvz, and I don't think needing skytoss is how to do it.
I see in you are counting SCV build times, what happens when you include separate upgrades for terran land units but not protoss ones? What about addons, how do they factor in?
I wonder when people will learn not to directly compare races in Starcraft.
Agreed. Though, there seems to be a lot of complaints from the other side of the fence of "It's only a 100 mineral unit!"
I don't understand how zergs can complain so much about hellbats "only costing 100 minerals" when they have queens that only cost 150 and are tier 1. I mean out of all 3 races zerg has the best mineral sinks by far. Queens have so much utility and snowball when semi-massed and don't even cost larvae. Combine them with spines and spores (T1 and minerals only) and that is why we saw gasless 3 base zergs in WOL. Hellbats require a significant amount of gas and tech to even start production so it's not really even fair to evaluate them purely as a mineral sink until the late game. During which zerg has spines/lings/queens/spores for a mineral sink, and late game toss have cannons/chargelots and relatively gas inexpensive stalkers. All of this MYTH about Terran having 2 mineral sinks and Zerg and Protoss only having 1 needs to just end because it's simply not true.
So much this.
Seriously, Zerg have the most imba unit (Queen) being underutilized for one spell when they really have THREE powerful spells, 150hp heal and a vision spell (via creep spread). Did I mention queens also have the same dps of a roach?
I have always found it odd that Zerg pros don't do creep tumor drops on the opponent's third base to force them to burn scans or build observers. Also, mass queen drops.
Just gotta love how you two guys completly missed the point of the posts you are responding to. aksfjh and Bagi argue that units and their costs are not directly comparable. Next thing you guys do is initiate a counterwhine about queens and their costs...
On March 04 2013 23:05 FLuE wrote: MC is a cool idea and overall well designed and useful.
I strongly disagree with this. It's a very poorly designed unit. I'm fine with the Time Warp and the Recall abilities, I think they're good and needed, but they could be given to other unit(s). For example, the Photon Overcharge and the Recall could be casted from the Nexus itself.
If we take aesthetics in consideration, the MSC is horrible, it's simply a floating ball. Even the attack animation is awkward. The MSC was introduced to avoid the removal of the Mothership from the game. The problem is that Blizzard removed the Vortex ability from the Mothership, so now it is almost pointless to build one since your only advantage is the cloaking field.
Then, Blizzard tried make the MSC an early defense unit, that would attach to the Nexus. Then it became an independent unit that can attack and defend with a multitude of abilities . In the end of this mess and amalgamation of different concepts what we have is an unit with and undefined role that just adds up to the Protoss deathball.
In my opinion, there's nothing well designed about this unit. Blizzard's objectives with this unit were always unclear. The final result is a wierd unit that fills strange roles within the game.
On March 04 2013 23:05 FLuE wrote: Hellbat is a strong unit, nothing exciting about it but if you are a Terran player you will like them.
A mech unit that can be healed by a Medivac! Requires variable cargo space! Infernal Pre-Igniter what !! I'm not even going to talk about the Messbat anymore.
On March 04 2013 23:05 FLuE wrote: Tempest is strong but boring. Rather they just made the carrier better. Using tempest isn't fun and watching pros use them won't be exciting.
I'm with you on this one. The Tempest is such an uninspired unit that it hurts to watch. This is another unit that suffers from the same problem that the MSC. There was never a plan for this unit, it was just hammered down into the game until it fitted somehow...
By the way, if Blizzard wanted to promote Terran mech play versus Protoss why would they add a flying unit that shoots from such a ridiculous range therefore directly countering Siege Tanks? Does this make any sense?
On March 05 2013 21:56 Warpish wrote: For example, the Photon Overcharge and the Recall could be casted from the Nexus itself.
That would be horribly overpowered, even at 200 energy. Gateway units are down and your colossi are about to fall? Recall. There, the enemy lost most of his army, I warp zealots/stalkers from 12 warpgates and still have 4 colossi to go with them. Recall as an ability can only work because the mothership core is unique and vulnerable in the late game.
On March 05 2013 21:56 Warpish wrote: For example, the Photon Overcharge and the Recall could be casted from the Nexus itself.
That would be horribly overpowered, even at 200 energy. Gateway units are down and your colossi are about to fall? Recall. There, the enemy lost most of his army, I warp zealots/stalkers from 12 warpgates and still have 4 colossi to go with them. Recall as an ability can only work because the mothership core is unique and vulnerable in the late game.
Not necessarily. In BW you could build several Arbiters that could all recall. That was never a problem. I think that the warpgate mechanic is more problematic than that, but that would be another discussion. Anyway, it was only an example.
On March 05 2013 21:56 Warpish wrote: For example, the Photon Overcharge and the Recall could be casted from the Nexus itself.
That would be horribly overpowered, even at 200 energy. Gateway units are down and your colossi are about to fall? Recall. There, the enemy lost most of his army, I warp zealots/stalkers from 12 warpgates and still have 4 colossi to go with them. Recall as an ability can only work because the mothership core is unique and vulnerable in the late game.
Not necessarily. In BW you could build several Arbiters that could all recall. That was never a problem. I think that the warpgate mechanic is more problematic than that, but that would be another discussion. Anyway, it was only an example.
In BW, recall was a rather offensive ability used mainly as a massive drop (units appeared under the recalling arbiter), meanwhile in hots the recall brings you back in your base, which is a lot safer.
On March 05 2013 21:56 Warpish wrote: For example, the Photon Overcharge and the Recall could be casted from the Nexus itself.
That would be horribly overpowered, even at 200 energy. Gateway units are down and your colossi are about to fall? Recall. There, the enemy lost most of his army, I warp zealots/stalkers from 12 warpgates and still have 4 colossi to go with them. Recall as an ability can only work because the mothership core is unique and vulnerable in the late game.
Not necessarily. In BW you could build several Arbiters that could all recall. That was never a problem. I think that the warpgate mechanic is more problematic than that, but that would be another discussion. Anyway, it was only an example.
In BW, recall was a rather offensive ability used mainly as a massive drop (units appeared under the recalling arbiter), meanwhile in hots the recall brings you back in your base, which is a lot safer.
I know that and I agree with you. I was just pointing out to Telenil that I think that Recall does not need to be an ability that is exclusive to an hero-like unit like the MSC.
Moreover, the Arbiter version of the Recall is much superior because it allows offensive and defensive recalls. The Mothership in WoL also allowed that but you couldn't build more than one Mothership.
The mothership core and all the various incarnations I believe were trying to develop defensive options for protoss that didn't require a forge. So it allows for more variation in protoss openings.
I think the mothership core is pretty cool. I like the way it eventually ties into the mothership. I just wish they made the mothership a bit cooler.
On March 06 2013 13:49 DoubleReed wrote: The mothership core and all the various incarnations I believe were trying to develop defensive options for protoss that didn't require a forge. So it allows for more variation in protoss openings.
I think the mothership core is pretty cool. I like the way it eventually ties into the mothership. I just wish they made the mothership a bit cooler.
I am still of the opinion that when a single unit + nexus that can lock out any army for what seems to be 5 mins at full energy is pretty silly. I feel like attacking toss early nowasays is a suicide mission
EPT
Widow Mine
.
(
not sure I would do any better, but eh it's not my damn job.![[image loading]](http://www.thinkdigit.com/FCKeditor/uploads/Brood%20Wars%20-%20Terran%20Siege%20Tanks%20get%20to%20see%20what%20a%20Zealot%20dropped%20on%20them%20feels%20like.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.kent.net/robotech/mecha/ref/lite-cycle.gif)
![[image loading]](http://www.kent.net/robotech/mecha/ref/lite-battloid.gif)
