|
I really liked the Oracle changes (would really have helped my Funday monday proxy oracle into warp-prism DTs build), but overall not unhappy with the no changes. HotS is a fucking amazing game and is probably more balanced than WoL ever was it (it's certainly more fun for me).
|
Super glad to hear this!
I was too obsessed with the Idra news to see this right away but I'm glad they're just considering the spore crawler change at this point. I'm really happy with the state of the game right now as far as balance as both a player and a fan.
|
More air damage for Queens, please.
|
On May 10 2013 23:38 kafkaesque wrote:
More air damage for Queens, please.
Actually, with how much they are used in other matches, I don't think that Queens need any buff. We have seen recently new pushes in ZvZ with Queens, Roaches and Nydus, that were made just for stopping mass Mutas from happening.
|
On May 10 2013 23:38 kafkaesque wrote:
More air damage for Queens, please.
Only against biological air units right? Like with the spore crawlers? Otherwise it is going to affect non-ZvZ matchups.
|
No oracle buff!!! blizz finally making good choices!!! also good they are not messing with burrow. dont know if spore is the right change, but we certainly need one so i guess just wait and see how it works out.
|
This announcement is tipping point for me and i had to uninstall the game.
My current level was slightly behind GM, best rated as 259th (Master) few days ago. (http://sc2ranks.com/eu/603719/Pitro)
I am playing with 21% win-rate vs Terran on my level while i have 60+ vs Z and 70- vs P. (+- 150 games sample size)
I believe all-ins should be way to add variability to your game. If they became standard in metagame i feel it is wrong and game is volatile. Ultra-greedy terran openings are forcing zergs to make allin or be behind. We can see this on GSL (Symbol nydus play) and everywhere else with roach - bling busts.
I always loved ling, bling, muta style while adding fast burrow to expand and map control, baneling mines and infestors instead of hive rush.
Things i hate:
1, Terran scan randomly to push creep and because of ridiculous size of scan he sees baneling mines before line of creep.
2, Hellbat drop is impossible to be cost ineffective. Even if i loose 0 drones and pull them all until the drop is cleared i lost more than 300:100 in mining time.
3, Overseers are so uncomfortable to use. When i compare ease of pressing button and gaining vision to struggles of keeping overseers alive ... Eventually they run into stimmed marines or mine and die .. i have to remake and wait for them with rest of army due to their ridiculous move speed (even upgraded)
4, You loose one fight, you lost the game. .. this never applies vice versa. Ever since terrans realised all they have to do is to rally all barracks after winning fight i loose a lot more games.
5,Great disparities in gas spending. Having to upgrade 4 upgrades instead of terran 2 when i play my style. Terrans had to upgrade vehicle weapons as well, now they just rush to 3:3 bio. They had to use ghost and spend gas. Now ? They don't even need or use them. Zerg, on the other hand must upgrade melee and muta upgrades while making gas heavy units like infestors or banelings to counter mineral sink. (powered by mules)
6, Fact that you almost cant punish widow mines. If you caught sieges out of position you could snipe them. Now you need 3 baneling (150 : 75) to snipe 1 widow mine (75 : 25). If you are being dropped in several places while trying to hold main army, creeps spread etc you don't have chance for more micro intensive techniques .. at least i don't on my level.
7, Fact that you almost cant counter attack now. WM negate fast counter attacks into thinking how to split lings if overseer is needed, where is your overseer located etc.
8, Expand structure on maps. While i have 3 bases close to each other i can defend. Later in game you are getting dropped, trying to deny terran 4 active mining bases ( which if achieved by T is GG) your expands tend to be far more apart from each other. Often times your expands are on different side of map. You need to get your main army thinner and thinner while terran start to go into mass orbital mode, sacrifice scv's and his army is getting bigger and bigger instead.
9, Fact that zerg static defence is loosing in value as time progress. Terran can upgrade armour, toss shields. I cant make spine crowlers do shit in late games against 3:3 bio... but i still make them since i have to spend minerals somehow.
This is why i cant stand playing ZvT anymore .. it may be balanced stat wise (which i dont believe except for top 30 zerg worldwide) but i am forced to do allins and it sure is not balanced effort or satisfaction - wise... whole ZvT feels like big frustration-fest for me.
|
On May 10 2013 23:45 plogamer wrote:Only against biological air units right? Like with the spore crawlers? Otherwise it is going to affect non-ZvZ matchups.
Against every unit, but this is just me being frustrated with drops and voidray allins, spouting nonsense. 
|
On May 11 2013 00:04 kafkaesque wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2013 23:45 plogamer wrote:On May 10 2013 23:38 kafkaesque wrote:
More air damage for Queens, please. Only against biological air units right? Like with the spore crawlers? Otherwise it is going to affect non-ZvZ matchups. Against every unit, but this is just me being frustrated with drops and voidray allins, spouting nonsense.
Build static defenses ...
With the amount of buffing which harrassment got with HotS you should realize that Day[9]'s mantra of "that is a Spine Crawler he didnt want to build" is made totally obsolete (if it wasnt already). Spore Crawlers are great against Medivacs and Oracles and they even detect Widow Mines AND they cost no gas (which is scarce in the beginning of the game anyways).
You REALLY NEED the stuff and the efficiency of Widow Mines and Hellbats against Zerglings (the usual fast response unit) should make this need absolutely clear.
On May 10 2013 23:49 Pandahunterz wrote:
No oracle buff!!! blizz finally making good choices!!! also good they are not messing with burrow. dont know if spore is the right change, but we certainly need one so i guess just wait and see how it works out.
That isnt a "good choice" it is "not making a terrible choice" ... which isnt the same.
|
On May 10 2013 19:00 FirstGear wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2013 18:28 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 10 2013 18:14 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 10 2013 18:07 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 10 2013 17:40 Sissors wrote:On May 10 2013 17:10 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 10 2013 16:20 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 07:05 DemigodcelpH wrote:On May 10 2013 05:43 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 05:05 Rostam wrote:
[quote]
Good thing Code S is filled with retarded Terrans, then, otherwise zerg would be having issues. The game is very well balanced at the pro level but at the mere-humans level, mines are pretty silly. Incredibly cost efficient, takes 10 times more effort to counter than to use, and one mistake vs mines can be game ending. Welcome to Banelings for all of WoL. As a Zerg player you're simply not accustomed to having to face which you've been dishing out. Infestor/BL really did a number on what players like you perceive as a "balanced" matchup causing you to complain when ZvT is the best it has ever been not only from a gameplay depth and viability standpoint but from a spectator standpoint too. Like I've been saying, banelings are not particularly cost efficient. Yes they are slightly harder to counter than to use, but not anywhere near the level that mines take things. It's fine for an RTS game to have strong units that take a specialized effort to deal with, but mines take it too far. "Be ready to split your army when the banelings come and try to target them down" is a challenge, but an achievable one with practice. "Always have detection around, and follow this complex mine-removal process, and don't ever send units across the map without being ready to instantly turn around if you see a mine, and don't mess up even once or you'll be too cost inefficient" is too much effort and requires too much skill to perform for all but the very best of players. Don't put that "infestor/BL was balanced" strawman on me. Stop arguing with them. Mines don't even suicide, and you name all the problems we have with Mines, while they start to compare them to Banelings that suicides, you lose them to do damage, you almost always lose half of them before they even connect to something, and in the end, if our attack and Banelings hit were good, the resources lost are about equal. I am not saying that things are imbalanced at the moment. I enjoy new match-ups a lot more than the camping ones from WoL, but saying that Widow Mines are same as Banelings is stupid as hell. You can't reason with Terran players that are saying this. No one is saying mines are same as banelings... But since banelings are the zerg unit most like mines it is the logical choice for comparisons. And I can also make such a list about mines: They are alot slower than your banelings, they have to burrow to attack, they do friendly damage!, you cannot disable their autoattack, etc. Of course, you can make such list for every unit in SC2, my point is that Banelings are suicide units, and Mines aren't, and it is extremely hard to be cost-efficient with Banelings, since most of the times you won't kill as much as they cost, while it is hard for Mines to NOT be cost-efficient when they are used as support for Bio units. You can't trigger them with few units when the Bio is on top of them, and if you charge on Terran army with your units then complete chaos happens. That's so incredibly biased. You know what happens most of the time when I use mines at Diamond level? I move command them while the Z attacks and they never go off. Or they burrow and eat popcorn as the Z army runs past them and ravages everything I have. Mines are essentially siege tanks with tiny range, if you don't position them well and have good timings for burrow, they do absolutely nothing. They sit there, wiggle their little legs and get eaten by zerglings. Not to mention, why are talking about the balance worries of low master players. Just like I don't think mines should be any easier to use, you shouldn't think that your ling a-moves should be easier to execute. The game is finally looking great at the highest level of play and that's what we want. So, when you fuck up, Mines don't do anything? You don't say!? You know what happens when I a-click with Banelings? 10 of them get killed, 7 of them suicide on single Marauder, next 7 on the next Marauder, and I am out of the Banelings! Yeah, Banelings are terrible! On a serious note, Zerg won't be able to pass by them if you use them correctly, or should I say, burrow the Mines, and attack with Bio, then stim Bio and run back to the Mines when he tries to attack? Only problem you can have if you don't burrow the Mines on time, and with the upgrade, Mines burrow in one second, so in the mid game, I don't even see that happening. I agree with you about the highest level of play though, as I said in one of previous posts, I am not balance whining, I like how game is played right now, just when Terran players think that Mines are same as Banelings, or that Banelings are as cost-efficient as Mines are, those Terrans are delusional. I would argue Terran is the hardest to play at the lowest level. The reason I feel this is because they have the most players in bronze. Terran has always been over represented in bronze/silver, whilst zerg is under represented in the lower leagues. Evidence - http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all. Not that I mind. I'd prefer if rank scaled more evenly with skill between the races, but I don't think it really matters. If mines make the match up a little harder for zerg at lower levels I don't think thats a bad thing.
Or it could be that the people that are completely new to RTS, bought sc2 and played the campaign then tried laddering with the only race they knew how, do their 5 placement matches and then quit cause they didnt know how to play.
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
4, You loose one fight, you lost the game. .. this never applies vice versa. Ever since terrans realised all they have to do is to rally all barracks after winning fight i loose a lot more games.
Marine building time = 25 sec
Locust spawning time for free = 25 sec
|
On May 11 2013 00:19 phodacbiet wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2013 19:00 FirstGear wrote:On May 10 2013 18:28 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 10 2013 18:14 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 10 2013 18:07 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 10 2013 17:40 Sissors wrote:On May 10 2013 17:10 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 10 2013 16:20 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 07:05 DemigodcelpH wrote:On May 10 2013 05:43 Chocobo wrote:
[quote]
The game is very well balanced at the pro level but at the mere-humans level, mines are pretty silly. Incredibly cost efficient, takes 10 times more effort to counter than to use, and one mistake vs mines can be game ending. Welcome to Banelings for all of WoL. As a Zerg player you're simply not accustomed to having to face which you've been dishing out. Infestor/BL really did a number on what players like you perceive as a "balanced" matchup causing you to complain when ZvT is the best it has ever been not only from a gameplay depth and viability standpoint but from a spectator standpoint too. Like I've been saying, banelings are not particularly cost efficient. Yes they are slightly harder to counter than to use, but not anywhere near the level that mines take things. It's fine for an RTS game to have strong units that take a specialized effort to deal with, but mines take it too far. "Be ready to split your army when the banelings come and try to target them down" is a challenge, but an achievable one with practice. "Always have detection around, and follow this complex mine-removal process, and don't ever send units across the map without being ready to instantly turn around if you see a mine, and don't mess up even once or you'll be too cost inefficient" is too much effort and requires too much skill to perform for all but the very best of players. Don't put that "infestor/BL was balanced" strawman on me. Stop arguing with them. Mines don't even suicide, and you name all the problems we have with Mines, while they start to compare them to Banelings that suicides, you lose them to do damage, you almost always lose half of them before they even connect to something, and in the end, if our attack and Banelings hit were good, the resources lost are about equal. I am not saying that things are imbalanced at the moment. I enjoy new match-ups a lot more than the camping ones from WoL, but saying that Widow Mines are same as Banelings is stupid as hell. You can't reason with Terran players that are saying this. No one is saying mines are same as banelings... But since banelings are the zerg unit most like mines it is the logical choice for comparisons. And I can also make such a list about mines: They are alot slower than your banelings, they have to burrow to attack, they do friendly damage!, you cannot disable their autoattack, etc. Of course, you can make such list for every unit in SC2, my point is that Banelings are suicide units, and Mines aren't, and it is extremely hard to be cost-efficient with Banelings, since most of the times you won't kill as much as they cost, while it is hard for Mines to NOT be cost-efficient when they are used as support for Bio units. You can't trigger them with few units when the Bio is on top of them, and if you charge on Terran army with your units then complete chaos happens. That's so incredibly biased. You know what happens most of the time when I use mines at Diamond level? I move command them while the Z attacks and they never go off. Or they burrow and eat popcorn as the Z army runs past them and ravages everything I have. Mines are essentially siege tanks with tiny range, if you don't position them well and have good timings for burrow, they do absolutely nothing. They sit there, wiggle their little legs and get eaten by zerglings. Not to mention, why are talking about the balance worries of low master players. Just like I don't think mines should be any easier to use, you shouldn't think that your ling a-moves should be easier to execute. The game is finally looking great at the highest level of play and that's what we want. So, when you fuck up, Mines don't do anything? You don't say!? You know what happens when I a-click with Banelings? 10 of them get killed, 7 of them suicide on single Marauder, next 7 on the next Marauder, and I am out of the Banelings! Yeah, Banelings are terrible! On a serious note, Zerg won't be able to pass by them if you use them correctly, or should I say, burrow the Mines, and attack with Bio, then stim Bio and run back to the Mines when he tries to attack? Only problem you can have if you don't burrow the Mines on time, and with the upgrade, Mines burrow in one second, so in the mid game, I don't even see that happening. I agree with you about the highest level of play though, as I said in one of previous posts, I am not balance whining, I like how game is played right now, just when Terran players think that Mines are same as Banelings, or that Banelings are as cost-efficient as Mines are, those Terrans are delusional. I would argue Terran is the hardest to play at the lowest level. The reason I feel this is because they have the most players in bronze. Terran has always been over represented in bronze/silver, whilst zerg is under represented in the lower leagues. Evidence - http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all. Not that I mind. I'd prefer if rank scaled more evenly with skill between the races, but I don't think it really matters. If mines make the match up a little harder for zerg at lower levels I don't think thats a bad thing. Or it could be that the people that are completely new to RTS, bought sc2 and played the campaign then tried laddering with the only race they knew how, do their 5 placement matches and then quit cause they didnt know how to play.
Not after this long time ... and Terran is the most limited and most complicated race to play. You need to decide which amount of buildings you want and can not switch that easily.
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
On May 11 2013 00:22 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2013 00:19 phodacbiet wrote:On May 10 2013 19:00 FirstGear wrote:On May 10 2013 18:28 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 10 2013 18:14 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 10 2013 18:07 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 10 2013 17:40 Sissors wrote:On May 10 2013 17:10 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 10 2013 16:20 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 07:05 DemigodcelpH wrote:
[quote]
Welcome to Banelings for all of WoL. As a Zerg player you're simply not accustomed to having to face which you've been dishing out.
Infestor/BL really did a number on what players like you perceive as a "balanced" matchup causing you to complain when ZvT is the best it has ever been not only from a gameplay depth and viability standpoint but from a spectator standpoint too. Like I've been saying, banelings are not particularly cost efficient. Yes they are slightly harder to counter than to use, but not anywhere near the level that mines take things. It's fine for an RTS game to have strong units that take a specialized effort to deal with, but mines take it too far. "Be ready to split your army when the banelings come and try to target them down" is a challenge, but an achievable one with practice. "Always have detection around, and follow this complex mine-removal process, and don't ever send units across the map without being ready to instantly turn around if you see a mine, and don't mess up even once or you'll be too cost inefficient" is too much effort and requires too much skill to perform for all but the very best of players. Don't put that "infestor/BL was balanced" strawman on me. Stop arguing with them. Mines don't even suicide, and you name all the problems we have with Mines, while they start to compare them to Banelings that suicides, you lose them to do damage, you almost always lose half of them before they even connect to something, and in the end, if our attack and Banelings hit were good, the resources lost are about equal. I am not saying that things are imbalanced at the moment. I enjoy new match-ups a lot more than the camping ones from WoL, but saying that Widow Mines are same as Banelings is stupid as hell. You can't reason with Terran players that are saying this. No one is saying mines are same as banelings... But since banelings are the zerg unit most like mines it is the logical choice for comparisons. And I can also make such a list about mines: They are alot slower than your banelings, they have to burrow to attack, they do friendly damage!, you cannot disable their autoattack, etc. Of course, you can make such list for every unit in SC2, my point is that Banelings are suicide units, and Mines aren't, and it is extremely hard to be cost-efficient with Banelings, since most of the times you won't kill as much as they cost, while it is hard for Mines to NOT be cost-efficient when they are used as support for Bio units. You can't trigger them with few units when the Bio is on top of them, and if you charge on Terran army with your units then complete chaos happens. That's so incredibly biased. You know what happens most of the time when I use mines at Diamond level? I move command them while the Z attacks and they never go off. Or they burrow and eat popcorn as the Z army runs past them and ravages everything I have. Mines are essentially siege tanks with tiny range, if you don't position them well and have good timings for burrow, they do absolutely nothing. They sit there, wiggle their little legs and get eaten by zerglings. Not to mention, why are talking about the balance worries of low master players. Just like I don't think mines should be any easier to use, you shouldn't think that your ling a-moves should be easier to execute. The game is finally looking great at the highest level of play and that's what we want. So, when you fuck up, Mines don't do anything? You don't say!? You know what happens when I a-click with Banelings? 10 of them get killed, 7 of them suicide on single Marauder, next 7 on the next Marauder, and I am out of the Banelings! Yeah, Banelings are terrible! On a serious note, Zerg won't be able to pass by them if you use them correctly, or should I say, burrow the Mines, and attack with Bio, then stim Bio and run back to the Mines when he tries to attack? Only problem you can have if you don't burrow the Mines on time, and with the upgrade, Mines burrow in one second, so in the mid game, I don't even see that happening. I agree with you about the highest level of play though, as I said in one of previous posts, I am not balance whining, I like how game is played right now, just when Terran players think that Mines are same as Banelings, or that Banelings are as cost-efficient as Mines are, those Terrans are delusional. I would argue Terran is the hardest to play at the lowest level. The reason I feel this is because they have the most players in bronze. Terran has always been over represented in bronze/silver, whilst zerg is under represented in the lower leagues. Evidence - http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all. Not that I mind. I'd prefer if rank scaled more evenly with skill between the races, but I don't think it really matters. If mines make the match up a little harder for zerg at lower levels I don't think thats a bad thing. Or it could be that the people that are completely new to RTS, bought sc2 and played the campaign then tried laddering with the only race they knew how, do their 5 placement matches and then quit cause they didnt know how to play. Not after this long time ... and Terran is the most limited and most complicated race to play. You need to decide which amount of buildings you want and can not switch that easily.
I would say it's 1. due to the original expansion being Terran based and 2. because Terran matches the design of most other RTS races more closely than Protoss or Zerg.
|
I think it's too early to make changes deliberately focused around encouraging different styles. Oh, well, it doesn't affect me much because I don't play Zerg.
|
My personal journey.
Oh a balance change! cool.
Oh nothing is changing except ZvZ, eh i guess thats ok Muta vs Muta is getting quite old.
Good call by blizzard though, if everything is balanced then why poke it.
|
I find it hillarious, that Zergs are still complaining.Yes you can't amove every single engagement anymore and expect to win by a large margin - tough luck! And btw. your personal little balance stats matter jack shit, because of the way MMR works. It only means, that YOU suck at this specific MU.
|
On May 11 2013 00:49 Greenei wrote:
I find it hillarious, that Zergs are still complaining.Yes you can't amove every single engagement anymore and expect to win by a large margin - tough luck! And btw. your personal little balance stats matter jack shit, because of the way MMR works. It only means, that YOU suck at this specific MU.
This is pretty much the truth of the matter.
I'd really like to see hellbats changed a bit (even just removing the bio tag so they can't be healed by medivacs would be fantastic) because they're so cost-efficient, but if dropping those every game to win TvT is what has to be done, then i'll do it.
|
On May 11 2013 00:19 phodacbiet wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2013 19:00 FirstGear wrote:On May 10 2013 18:28 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 10 2013 18:14 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 10 2013 18:07 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 10 2013 17:40 Sissors wrote:On May 10 2013 17:10 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 10 2013 16:20 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 07:05 DemigodcelpH wrote:On May 10 2013 05:43 Chocobo wrote:
[quote]
The game is very well balanced at the pro level but at the mere-humans level, mines are pretty silly. Incredibly cost efficient, takes 10 times more effort to counter than to use, and one mistake vs mines can be game ending. Welcome to Banelings for all of WoL. As a Zerg player you're simply not accustomed to having to face which you've been dishing out. Infestor/BL really did a number on what players like you perceive as a "balanced" matchup causing you to complain when ZvT is the best it has ever been not only from a gameplay depth and viability standpoint but from a spectator standpoint too. Like I've been saying, banelings are not particularly cost efficient. Yes they are slightly harder to counter than to use, but not anywhere near the level that mines take things. It's fine for an RTS game to have strong units that take a specialized effort to deal with, but mines take it too far. "Be ready to split your army when the banelings come and try to target them down" is a challenge, but an achievable one with practice. "Always have detection around, and follow this complex mine-removal process, and don't ever send units across the map without being ready to instantly turn around if you see a mine, and don't mess up even once or you'll be too cost inefficient" is too much effort and requires too much skill to perform for all but the very best of players. Don't put that "infestor/BL was balanced" strawman on me. Stop arguing with them. Mines don't even suicide, and you name all the problems we have with Mines, while they start to compare them to Banelings that suicides, you lose them to do damage, you almost always lose half of them before they even connect to something, and in the end, if our attack and Banelings hit were good, the resources lost are about equal. I am not saying that things are imbalanced at the moment. I enjoy new match-ups a lot more than the camping ones from WoL, but saying that Widow Mines are same as Banelings is stupid as hell. You can't reason with Terran players that are saying this. No one is saying mines are same as banelings... But since banelings are the zerg unit most like mines it is the logical choice for comparisons. And I can also make such a list about mines: They are alot slower than your banelings, they have to burrow to attack, they do friendly damage!, you cannot disable their autoattack, etc. Of course, you can make such list for every unit in SC2, my point is that Banelings are suicide units, and Mines aren't, and it is extremely hard to be cost-efficient with Banelings, since most of the times you won't kill as much as they cost, while it is hard for Mines to NOT be cost-efficient when they are used as support for Bio units. You can't trigger them with few units when the Bio is on top of them, and if you charge on Terran army with your units then complete chaos happens. That's so incredibly biased. You know what happens most of the time when I use mines at Diamond level? I move command them while the Z attacks and they never go off. Or they burrow and eat popcorn as the Z army runs past them and ravages everything I have. Mines are essentially siege tanks with tiny range, if you don't position them well and have good timings for burrow, they do absolutely nothing. They sit there, wiggle their little legs and get eaten by zerglings. Not to mention, why are talking about the balance worries of low master players. Just like I don't think mines should be any easier to use, you shouldn't think that your ling a-moves should be easier to execute. The game is finally looking great at the highest level of play and that's what we want. So, when you fuck up, Mines don't do anything? You don't say!? You know what happens when I a-click with Banelings? 10 of them get killed, 7 of them suicide on single Marauder, next 7 on the next Marauder, and I am out of the Banelings! Yeah, Banelings are terrible! On a serious note, Zerg won't be able to pass by them if you use them correctly, or should I say, burrow the Mines, and attack with Bio, then stim Bio and run back to the Mines when he tries to attack? Only problem you can have if you don't burrow the Mines on time, and with the upgrade, Mines burrow in one second, so in the mid game, I don't even see that happening. I agree with you about the highest level of play though, as I said in one of previous posts, I am not balance whining, I like how game is played right now, just when Terran players think that Mines are same as Banelings, or that Banelings are as cost-efficient as Mines are, those Terrans are delusional. I would argue Terran is the hardest to play at the lowest level. The reason I feel this is because they have the most players in bronze. Terran has always been over represented in bronze/silver, whilst zerg is under represented in the lower leagues. Evidence - http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all. Not that I mind. I'd prefer if rank scaled more evenly with skill between the races, but I don't think it really matters. If mines make the match up a little harder for zerg at lower levels I don't think thats a bad thing. Or it could be that the people that are completely new to RTS, bought sc2 and played the campaign then tried laddering with the only race they knew how, do their 5 placement matches and then quit cause they didnt know how to play.
That was argument in WoL. Now we have campaing where you play Zerg not Terran.
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
On May 11 2013 00:57 keglu wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2013 00:19 phodacbiet wrote:On May 10 2013 19:00 FirstGear wrote:On May 10 2013 18:28 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 10 2013 18:14 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 10 2013 18:07 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 10 2013 17:40 Sissors wrote:On May 10 2013 17:10 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 10 2013 16:20 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 07:05 DemigodcelpH wrote:
[quote]
Welcome to Banelings for all of WoL. As a Zerg player you're simply not accustomed to having to face which you've been dishing out.
Infestor/BL really did a number on what players like you perceive as a "balanced" matchup causing you to complain when ZvT is the best it has ever been not only from a gameplay depth and viability standpoint but from a spectator standpoint too. Like I've been saying, banelings are not particularly cost efficient. Yes they are slightly harder to counter than to use, but not anywhere near the level that mines take things. It's fine for an RTS game to have strong units that take a specialized effort to deal with, but mines take it too far. "Be ready to split your army when the banelings come and try to target them down" is a challenge, but an achievable one with practice. "Always have detection around, and follow this complex mine-removal process, and don't ever send units across the map without being ready to instantly turn around if you see a mine, and don't mess up even once or you'll be too cost inefficient" is too much effort and requires too much skill to perform for all but the very best of players. Don't put that "infestor/BL was balanced" strawman on me. Stop arguing with them. Mines don't even suicide, and you name all the problems we have with Mines, while they start to compare them to Banelings that suicides, you lose them to do damage, you almost always lose half of them before they even connect to something, and in the end, if our attack and Banelings hit were good, the resources lost are about equal. I am not saying that things are imbalanced at the moment. I enjoy new match-ups a lot more than the camping ones from WoL, but saying that Widow Mines are same as Banelings is stupid as hell. You can't reason with Terran players that are saying this. No one is saying mines are same as banelings... But since banelings are the zerg unit most like mines it is the logical choice for comparisons. And I can also make such a list about mines: They are alot slower than your banelings, they have to burrow to attack, they do friendly damage!, you cannot disable their autoattack, etc. Of course, you can make such list for every unit in SC2, my point is that Banelings are suicide units, and Mines aren't, and it is extremely hard to be cost-efficient with Banelings, since most of the times you won't kill as much as they cost, while it is hard for Mines to NOT be cost-efficient when they are used as support for Bio units. You can't trigger them with few units when the Bio is on top of them, and if you charge on Terran army with your units then complete chaos happens. That's so incredibly biased. You know what happens most of the time when I use mines at Diamond level? I move command them while the Z attacks and they never go off. Or they burrow and eat popcorn as the Z army runs past them and ravages everything I have. Mines are essentially siege tanks with tiny range, if you don't position them well and have good timings for burrow, they do absolutely nothing. They sit there, wiggle their little legs and get eaten by zerglings. Not to mention, why are talking about the balance worries of low master players. Just like I don't think mines should be any easier to use, you shouldn't think that your ling a-moves should be easier to execute. The game is finally looking great at the highest level of play and that's what we want. So, when you fuck up, Mines don't do anything? You don't say!? You know what happens when I a-click with Banelings? 10 of them get killed, 7 of them suicide on single Marauder, next 7 on the next Marauder, and I am out of the Banelings! Yeah, Banelings are terrible! On a serious note, Zerg won't be able to pass by them if you use them correctly, or should I say, burrow the Mines, and attack with Bio, then stim Bio and run back to the Mines when he tries to attack? Only problem you can have if you don't burrow the Mines on time, and with the upgrade, Mines burrow in one second, so in the mid game, I don't even see that happening. I agree with you about the highest level of play though, as I said in one of previous posts, I am not balance whining, I like how game is played right now, just when Terran players think that Mines are same as Banelings, or that Banelings are as cost-efficient as Mines are, those Terrans are delusional. I would argue Terran is the hardest to play at the lowest level. The reason I feel this is because they have the most players in bronze. Terran has always been over represented in bronze/silver, whilst zerg is under represented in the lower leagues. Evidence - http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all. Not that I mind. I'd prefer if rank scaled more evenly with skill between the races, but I don't think it really matters. If mines make the match up a little harder for zerg at lower levels I don't think thats a bad thing. Or it could be that the people that are completely new to RTS, bought sc2 and played the campaign then tried laddering with the only race they knew how, do their 5 placement matches and then quit cause they didnt know how to play. That was argument in WoL. Now we have campaing where you play Zerg not Terran.
Plus there are tons of new things for new players, like training stages as all races, some challenges, laddering vs AI, etc etc
|
Other than a fix for Muta ZvZ, I don't think much of anything needs a huge overhaul. WM's are showing to be difficult to deal with in TvZ, but I don't think "being difficult" is enough of a reason to change them. People will adapt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
