EPTBlizzard's Potential Balance Test Map Changes - Page 28
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
trotul
Brazil4 Posts
| ||
iViNtaGe
United States254 Posts
| ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On April 24 2013 06:10 StarscreamG1 wrote: If Hydras had +1 armor, would't it help a lot specially against voids, mutalisks, and stimmed marines? That's such a huge buff to hydralisks, you'd see a lot of mass hydra armies. Remember the difference between 2 armor roaches and 1 armor roaches? | ||
|
Cloak
United States816 Posts
On April 24 2013 02:06 Erik.TheRed wrote: My main problem with the oracle is how it has this window of time where if it hasn't payed off by killing a ton of workers, it won't help at all vs any straight up counter attack (especially stim timings and the like). In fact the stargate is almost completely worthless vs terran if you haven't managed to make the oracles pay off early on and don't start to gain utility again until lategame with revelation in max army battles. What if they added some other interesting utility to the oracle like a channeled shield generator that might actually help defend against marine/marauder or roach hydra counters? Maybe reduce the damage of the oracle attack as well and make it a normal attack rather than energy based. I think that would create for a more interesting and skill-based unit that can really pay for itself throughout the entire game if it's microd well. Well, Time Warp was supposed to be that spell when it was on the Oracle. It pretty much made midgame pushes more troublesome if the Protoss had a decent # of Zealots. I still don't get why they did the switcheroo with the MsC. Even though I love Time Warp, it doesn't belong on an early game unit. | ||
|
llIH
Norway2143 Posts
| ||
|
omnic
United States188 Posts
On April 24 2013 06:37 Whitewing wrote: That's such a huge buff to hydralisks, you'd see a lot of mass hydra armies. Remember the difference between 2 armor roaches and 1 armor roaches? To be frank I think what balanced roaches more was the supply cost being increased to 2 supply instead of 1 and the 2 armor down to 1 was much less important. At any rate though it wouldn't help in zvz because the problem with hydralisks are banelings and mass lings. On April 24 2013 06:40 llIH wrote: Kind of wierd balance. But I like the AA Hydra buff I think you misread the post. There is no AA hydra buff coming. | ||
|
andrewnguyener
United States548 Posts
 | ||
|
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
On April 24 2013 06:24 trotul wrote: i always giggle when someone says SC2 is harder than BW To be quite honest, it has different kinds of difficulty. If we speak from mechanical point of view, nothing beats BW, absolutely none other RTS. Micro was harder, macro was harder, no MBS, limited unit selection to 12 etc. But, there are some things in SC2 that are definitely harder in some way. For example, decision making is a lot harder, because the game itself is very unforgiving. We saw in BW that players keep attacking at different places with some high-tech units, losing them wasn't as bad as losing some of those kind of units in SC2. In SC2 it is way harder to make a comeback when you are behind. Scouting in SC2 is a lot more important, a lot of time you can lose just because of the bad scouting, I mean that happened in BW too, but it wasn't that bad, because you didn't have 1000 different all-ins that you defend differently. Also, in engagements, one misclick can cost you the game, in BW that could barely happen. This comes from a player that loves BW, but loves SC2 too, BW was definitely harder game, but there are parts where I would say SC2 is harder because of it being a lot less forgiving. So, I would say that SC2 is a lot more frustrating.  | ||
|
BadBorz
Canada61 Posts
| ||
|
Nazeron
Canada1046 Posts
| ||
|
Bam Lee
2336 Posts
| ||
|
GolemMadness
Canada11044 Posts
On April 24 2013 06:24 trotul wrote: i always giggle when someone says SC2 is harder than BW There are people who think that...? | ||
|
omnic
United States188 Posts
Read the last few pages and you'll see one at least. | ||
|
_Search_
Canada180 Posts
I've always thought it should be a natural ability. Zerg has way too many researched upgrades. | ||
|
mishimaBeef
Canada2259 Posts
Also, I would like to see burrow cost 100/50 and research time be 72 (equal to 3 zergling build times). | ||
|
OneSpeed
Norway47 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20319 Posts
On April 24 2013 06:40 omnic wrote: To be frank I think what balanced roaches more was the supply cost being increased to 2 supply instead of 1 and the 2 armor down to 1 was much less important. At any rate though it wouldn't help in zvz because the problem with hydralisks are banelings and mass lings. I think you misread the post. There is no AA hydra buff coming. You said it yourself.. It takes three banelings (150/75) to kill a hydralisk (100/50) therefore banes have to hit an average of 1.5 hydralisks to be efficient. They're good in large blobs where splitting is much harder, but their main use is to pull hydra numbers down a lot to make it so lings and mutas can deal with them easier, lings and other units are the main threat. I mean somebody going pure bane, he wont ever beat hydralisk in low numbers, and with great micro, in high ones either. If you throw in +1 base armor to hydras (20% damage nerf to lings, 20% to muta if an attack hits 3 hydras) or for example - if you were to get a fast evo chamber and have +1 armor done and +1 armor base - completely arbitrary, maybe won't happen in a game, but: 40% less damage on lings, 35% less damage on mutas (9-3-1 reduced to 7, 1, 0.5) (0.5 is minimum damage) I mean, if Hydras have +1 base armor and you get fast armor upgrades - maybe if hydra speed is buffed (it was nerfed from +50% speed to +25% between battle reports and beta though it was moved to lair) then you can make ONE HELL OF A DENT against a ling muta army. It's just economy and banelings wrecking you too hard that you have to worry about. Of course that's all random theorycrafting speculation etc, but i could totally see hydra heavy armies becoming a LOT LOT STRONGER even if they dont work - with only +1 base armor, people getting armor upgrades earlier - perhaps a slight speed boost. Hell - if they lost the "light" tag and got +1 armor they would instantly become GODLIKE vs ling muta because you can't bane to break up bigger packs of them. | ||
|
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On April 24 2013 06:40 omnic wrote: To be frank I think what balanced roaches more was the supply cost being increased to 2 supply instead of 1 and the 2 armor down to 1 was much less important. At any rate though it wouldn't help in zvz because the problem with hydralisks are banelings and mass lings. I think you misread the post. There is no AA hydra buff coming. It really isn't. You know why Protoss rush to get +1 armor in PvT? It's because armor makes an absurdly huge difference in that matchup. 1 Armor is what, 1/6th of a marine's total dps dealt with? Hydras with +1 armor would ruin ZvT. | ||
|
Sciurine
United States11 Posts
On April 24 2013 06:01 danl9rm wrote: Don't be silly. "...burrow your scout drone[S] to block their" everything I always thought that burrowed units shouldn't block a building... they should be crushed under its weight and die. | ||
|
TeeTS
Germany2762 Posts
Make Oracles faster? Why didn't you make Banshees faster in WoL? I can tell you why: because it's a stupid idea! Harassment without risk is just plain stupid. | ||
| ||
