|
On April 24 2013 08:22 Havik_ wrote:
Oracle change is good. Rewarding skill is a good thing and Oracles are weak anyway. What do they have 80hp? That's nothing.
More like 160? (100hp +60 shield, which regenerate fast enough). I think buff to AA of hydras could potentialy fix ZvZ and help ZvP against skytoss. Just a slight buff, nothing too crazy. I might be totally wrong but thats how I feel atm.
|
On April 24 2013 08:22 Havik_ wrote:
Oracle change is good. Rewarding skill is a good thing and Oracles are weak anyway. What do they have 80hp? That's nothing.
Oracles are weak? What? They can clean a mineral line so fast!
|
If a solution for mutas is found in ZvZ, Swarm host will become the new unit to mass. Zerg has no answer for swarm hosts besides mutalisks. But considering the speed of mutas I dont see any solution to the current ZvZ besides maybe brining back the old fungal growth... Which also would be a questionable decision.
I'm not sure what buffing spores will do, it might work but... currently 3 spores will win against ~20 mutalisks and mutas are still superior. What difference will more damage really do? Just make the match up even more silly where mutas litterally cannot attack anything defensive yet they will STILL destroy all armies outside of spore range.
|
On April 24 2013 09:36 phodacbiet wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 08:22 Havik_ wrote:
Oracle change is good. Rewarding skill is a good thing and Oracles are weak anyway. What do they have 80hp? That's nothing. Oracles are weak? What? They can clean a mineral line so fast!
only if the guy is stupid enough to not move the workers, seriously, the oracle only attacks when it stops moving and its acceleration/deceleration is so bad that it takes forever to kill workers that are fleeing...
|
On April 24 2013 09:35 omnic wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 09:32 Daralii wrote:On April 24 2013 09:15 Dreamer.T wrote:
Lol, a buff to the oracle would mean terrans will be staying in their base forever while the toss does what ever he wants. Or they could build one turret, which forces the P to either abandon the harass or focus all his attention on microing it. Are you suggesting that somebody that is harassing an enemy player shouldn't have to pay attention to it and micro it?
I'm saying that, to not just feed your oracle against any static D, it would take a lot of focus even with the proposed speed buff, focus the P isn't using to control an engagement the T is forcing on the other side of the map.
If anything, the buff would reward the P players with incredible multitasking and micro.
|
No Terran changes?
Hellbat, Medivac, and Widow mine can all benefit from some change, not necessarily a nerf.
|
On April 24 2013 09:48 Daralii wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 09:35 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 09:32 Daralii wrote:On April 24 2013 09:15 Dreamer.T wrote:
Lol, a buff to the oracle would mean terrans will be staying in their base forever while the toss does what ever he wants. Or they could build one turret, which forces the P to either abandon the harass or focus all his attention on microing it. Are you suggesting that somebody that is harassing an enemy player shouldn't have to pay attention to it and micro it? I'm saying that, to not just feed your oracle against any static D, it would take a lot of focus even with the proposed speed buff, focus the P isn't using to control an engagement the T is forcing on the other side of the map. If anything, the buff would reward the P players with incredible multitasking and micro.
Isn't that a good thing?
On April 24 2013 09:48 jkim91 wrote:
No Terran changes?
Hellbat, Medivac, and Widow mine can all benefit from some change, not necessarily a nerf.
I really agree with this especially on the medivac. I'm not going to go into if the medivac needed a buff or not in HOTS but imo giving it a speed boost is about the worst way you could buff it.
|
On April 24 2013 09:54 omnic wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 09:48 Daralii wrote:On April 24 2013 09:35 omnic wrote:On April 24 2013 09:32 Daralii wrote:On April 24 2013 09:15 Dreamer.T wrote:
Lol, a buff to the oracle would mean terrans will be staying in their base forever while the toss does what ever he wants. Or they could build one turret, which forces the P to either abandon the harass or focus all his attention on microing it. Are you suggesting that somebody that is harassing an enemy player shouldn't have to pay attention to it and micro it? I'm saying that, to not just feed your oracle against any static D, it would take a lot of focus even with the proposed speed buff, focus the P isn't using to control an engagement the T is forcing on the other side of the map. If anything, the buff would reward the P players with incredible multitasking and micro. Isn't that a good thing?
Yes.
|
okay, blizzard if you want to make oracle faster, at least nerf its damage, or set it so that it onyl attacks workers. even 5 marines can't kill it -_-;;
|
Some of the games I've been watching recently have lacked the excitement of the really early HotS stuff. Lots of turtle-y play. (Specifically in the Acer Team Story Cup). I feel like something should be done about Widow Mines, but I don't know what.
|
On April 24 2013 03:17 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 02:12 Darksoldierr wrote:On April 24 2013 01:24 Rabiator wrote:On April 24 2013 00:39 ishmoks wrote:Regarding rewarding high level players, check out Artosis blog post "The Raised Skill Ceiling: HotS vs BW" at http://scdojo.tumblr.com/What he wrote makes sense. Sadly he only looks at how the new game mechanics affect high level players ... who can manage the additional power of not having to "battle the (movement) AI and unit selection mechanics" really nicely, but for the average players it is a totally different story. They are overwhelmed by the amount of stuff and thus the biggest part of being good is the ability to split-second-multitask. Just watch TLO streaming and you will see him switching his view 3-4 times per second in constant action while a normal player might switch once every 5 seconds maybe. SC2 has the power, but for most people this amount of power is too much to handle and that is where BW was better, because the stuff you had to "fight" (unit selection limit, movement, low production) leveled the playing field between the players to such an extent that you games werent such easy walkovers as they are in SC2 on the lower end of the scale IF you manage to get one of several stupidly powerful and gimmicky units going. Banelings, warp-ins in the enemy base, Nydus worms are some of the examples, but now we have to add Oracles, Mutalisks, Speed-Medivacs and a few more to the list. I dont want to be rude, but a good Brood War player would have destroyed a causal Brood War player even more than in Sc2. In Sc2 thanks to the lot of all ins, the weaker player (unless the skill difference is that high) has a chance to win. Sc2 is lot more forgiving than BW was. Saying Sc2 is "harder" because you don't fight the AI or UI but units is like saying Football is hard, because the ball is rounded and can go anywhere. Ummm ... the difference between a "good" and a "casual" player is not the question. It is the difference between a casual and a slightly better casual and the ability to have "stupid wins" (the ones ending with ragequit) in SC2 due to the all-or-nothing kind of units AND the ability mass up a critical number with about any kind of unit while your opponent - who is rather sloppy with his mechanics just as you are - does not do so. In BW you didnt have the ability to get a critical number with any kind of unit because you had to "fight the game" with the movement and the unit selection limitations. THAT WAS GOOD ... for casuals but pros dont care for either way!!!! SC2 is obviously harder because you have LOTS MORE to do at the same time ... multitasking is a killer and so are gimmicky units which bypass strategic play. In BW you didnt have blink, burrowed movement, Nydus worms that can surface anywhere, warp-ins, ... all things which add requirements to SC2 which casuals do not have. Thus the game is harder for casuals than BW is. BW was simpler and less gimmicky and thus easier to play, even though it took more effort to play. Just dont think about "using units" but rather think about "playing against units" and then limit yourself to half your thoughts about them and you might see the problem of SC2.
I'm sure BW was not simpler. The thing about BW was that you needed to allocate your limited actions to the basic tasks such as macro and micro based on what felt was more important. In other words, you had to think about whether you should micro/macro because a lot of times you could not do both well. In SC2, if you can't keep your money down you're a baddie. Since basic RTS decisions were very taxing, the higher order strategic/tactical side of the game was incredibly difficult, especially for casuals. As far as gimmicks, BW had its fair share. In fact the game was balanced around these gimmicks such as using zealot bombs to fend off certain pushes when you open robo. If you had played BW, I'm going to assume you mostly played fastest or BGH which pitted you against terrible opponents and greatly simplified the game by funneling the viable openings to a few per race. That would explain why you made such a facile comparison of the two games.
|
I wish they would do something more about Protoss. Right now it's still very much all about 1 battle in all of the PvX matchups. You can really see this at the top level protoss like Parting/Rain.
Almost every PvT Rain/Parting only moves across the map once, and there's very few engagements until 15 minutes. At that point, it's determined who will win the game. Either the protoss comes out ahead in supply a ton or they die right there. There's also a few all ins.
In PvZ, it's a similar thing. Protoss trying to get to high templar colossi composition without dying and then they can start being aggressive, and then the zerg usually dies. I am unsure why Zergs in proleague don't go muta corruptor, I see that a lot on ladder but rarely in pro games.
PvP has been mostly BO wins/losses and coinflips from what I've seen in Proleague/GSL.
Basically the issue being that Protoss is very very timing oriented because gateway units are so bad. I don't see the oracle change fixing this.
|
I dislike the ZvZ changes, giving Spore Crawler even more damage against bio I feel won't do anything to really impact the Muta's war.
Increasing the Oracle speed, I'm a bit neutral, I do feel like Oracles are a bit weak once Static Defense have been built, but I don't think increasing their speed was the solution, it's going to be interesting seeing how this pans out.
The burrow change sounds like it can be a ton of fun, so I'm quite interested in what they plan on doing with burrow.
|
heres to them not nerfing the crap out of terran
|
An idea for the early burrow plan/situation.
"early" burrow can become a disadvantage for the other two races if too early, however like Bilzzard say could be and should be available for zerg to help for early base defense and so on.
So how about this for thought, burrow is a passive ability for all Zerg units on creep, however off creep it should require the usual upgrades? This will give Zerg an option to defend early without the early burrow becoming an out of control issue.
|
On April 24 2013 10:52 Voetsek wrote:
An idea for the early burrow plan/situation.
"early" burrow can become a disadvantage for the other two races if too early, however like Bilzzard say could be and should be available for zerg to help for early base defense and so on.
So how about this for thought, burrow is a passive ability for all Zerg units on creep, however off creep it should require the usual upgrades? This will give Zerg an option to defend early without the early burrow becoming an out of control issue.
I'm unsure about this. It basically would mean that you can't kill drones without a scan/overseer/obs/oracle, which would significantly strengthen Z against early harass. The problem then is that they wouldn't need to dedicate any larvae to remaking drones, and they're gonna have a lot more units a lot faster. I think it'd be fine vT given the potential of widows and tanks, but could really skew ZvP.
|
If I'm not mistaken, most pro players agree that oracles need a buff because it has very few uses outside of the initial harassment - that said, I feel like this change will have almost no impact outside of gimmicky strats in tournament levels. Faster speed is just probably going to only frustrate lower level ladder players.
|
I still don't understand why there's no energy cost on the medivacs boost.
|
I really do not like the idea of buffing spore damage vs bio. First of all because it really will not deter people from going muta, it will just cause players to do exactly what they do now except that it will be delayed to the point where the mutas can just 1 shot the spores. Also it will nor change the way spores work at all. None of the top pros would ever take an engagement over a spore in the current state making this change overall pointless. Buffing the spore would not promote players to pick other comps it only promotes players to get massive flocks of mutas before attacking, making the game less interesting and even more dependent on deathballs.
|
Personally I think the pinnacle of ZvZ was Ling Banling. Many foreign players hated it calling it "Coin Flip", but the stats showed multiple players( albeit Koreans) who during the Ling Bling Era had very strong ZvZ records.
The match-up wasn't a game a chance, but rather micro intensive match-up. A match-up that simply left no room for the type of player who would rather turtle to 200.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
