|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On May 13 2013 09:14 Pazuzu wrote:
This is a great change to be honest. the game is still by far in its infancy and large changes shouldn't be made this early on.
Also what happened to the philosophy of balancing races via new maps? Not complaining, just seems like it could be a easier way to make very subtle changes (though admittedly it would take more work to make things small)
Thankfully proleague is trying new maps each season but just recently it feels that GSL outside of maybe red city and DMZ (for GSTL) don't seem to want to switch up their map pool with any super interesting maps and WCS EU has a relatively supser standard pool too with some maps that shouldn't be there like Daybreak.
God all the games on daybreak PvZ in HoTS I've seen have been so bad, infact pretty much every game I've seen on it has been. Can't wait for next season when hopefully it'll be switched up.
|
On May 13 2013 04:46 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 02:05 Nirel wrote:
All the progamers I've heard, said that Hellbats are bad. They are a unit with obvious flaws design. The thing is it is not overpowered, just a boring unit, pretty much like colossi.
Hellbats do OP dps for cost. You can throw them away into mineral lines and basically never NOT get your money's worth. You only have to kill 4 probes to pay for them, and due to lost mining time you don't even have to kill 4 to pay for them. Very rarely will they ever do less damage than that, and you always have the chance to do devastating damage with a single drop.
The unit was designed to help terrans against mass chargelot, which is why they are a slower shorter range version of the hellion that is tankier and does a splash damage radius that is more effective against units in melee range. The mistake blizzard made was making the hellbat do 281% dps to non-light of its hellion counter part, making it do great dps to everything. It also does over 200% dps to light of a blue-flame hellion, making it completely shred light units like workers.
The unit does way too much aoe dps for a 100 mineral 2 supply unit that can be reactored out. Sure it requires an armory, but Terran gets an armory every game anyway for +2/+2 and +3/+3 upgrades, whether they make any hellbats or not. The thing needs a dps nerf badly.
Smart Terrans should be hellbat dropping all game, and throwing them into their composition against Toss so they can laugh at chargelots. Once the mineral dump chargelots are gone in PvT, there is just a gas expensive fragile army left over that can be run over.
|
On May 13 2013 04:46 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 02:05 Nirel wrote:
All the progamers I've heard, said that Hellbats are bad. They are a unit with obvious flaws design. The thing is it is not overpowered, just a boring unit, pretty much like colossi.
Is "boring" the new thing to say when we don't like an unit but have can't have no real argument against it?
Hellbats are fine. A slow, heavy-hitting melee unit that forces micro from your opponent to deal with them cost effectively. Terran players deserve a unit they can pretty much just a-move with.
|
On May 13 2013 09:25 Zanzabarr wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 04:46 Godwrath wrote:On May 13 2013 02:05 Nirel wrote:
All the progamers I've heard, said that Hellbats are bad. They are a unit with obvious flaws design. The thing is it is not overpowered, just a boring unit, pretty much like colossi. Hellbats do OP dps for cost. You can throw them away into mineral lines and basically never NOT get your money's worth. You only have to kill 4 probes to pay for them, and due to lost mining time you don't even have to kill 4 to pay for them. Very rarely will they ever do less damage than that, and you always have the chance to do devastating damage with a single drop. The unit was designed to help terrans against mass chargelot, which is why they are a slower shorter range version of the hellion that is tankier and does a splash damage radius that is more effective against units in melee range. The mistake blizzard made was making the hellbat do 281% dps to non-light of its hellion counter part, making it do great dps to everything. It also does over 200% dps to light of a blue-flame hellion, making it completely shred light units like workers. The unit does way too much aoe dps for a 100 mineral 2 supply unit that can be reactored out. Sure it requires an armory, but Terran gets an armory every game anyway for +2/+2 and +3/+3 upgrades, whether they make any hellbats or not. The thing needs a dps nerf badly. Smart Terrans should be hellbat dropping all game, and throwing them into their composition against Toss so they can laugh at chargelots. Once the mineral dump chargelots are gone in PvT, there is just a gas expensive fragile army left over that can be run over.
I 100% agree with this post.
At the moment, hellbats are ridiculous for their cost.
|
Using ladder as an objective measure of anything is completely absurd. I don't even know if the game is imbalanced, but that's about as stupid Bud Selig saying "The average record in Major League Baseball is about 500, so our disciplinary and officiating policies must be solid"
And Hellbats are fucking stupid.
|
On May 13 2013 09:26 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 04:46 Godwrath wrote:On May 13 2013 02:05 Nirel wrote:
All the progamers I've heard, said that Hellbats are bad. They are a unit with obvious flaws design. The thing is it is not overpowered, just a boring unit, pretty much like colossi. Is "boring" the new thing to say when we don't like an unit but have can't have no real argument against it? Hellbats are fine. A slow, heavy-hitting melee unit that forces micro from your opponent to deal with them cost effectively. Terran players deserve a unit they can pretty much just a-move with.
The problem with them is that you can't really micro against them. As a zerg, Widow mines for example are extremely annoying, but you know that you can atleast micro against them. If you're getting hellbat-dropped, there's no real micro to be done other than try to focus down the medivac asap and just have your units in position. If a streaight up fight, there isn't really any specific micro against hellbats, other than to not engage them.
And honestly, I don't know why not more terrans abuse hellbat-drops or just mix in a few hellbats overall since they make lings completely useless.
|
Terrans in code S destroying Protoss and Zergs with hellbat drops? Can link some vods please?
|
OK I haven't read all 25 pages of this thread, but does anyone know why Blizzard isn't considering buffing hydralisks instead of spores? This change is really frustrating because I think the game would be much better with a hydra buff. I think it would be best if they buffed the movement speed upgrade so that it also buffed speed on creep.
- I see a lot of discussion in this thread about ZvT balance. I have no idea if the matchup is balanced overall, but I do think that roach/hydra style is underpowered. It is also INCREDIBLY fun to play. I do it all the time on ladder (even though I think it's worse than ling/bane/muta) because it's so enjoyable. But a competent terran will just rip you apart with drops, and unless you can get an absurdly strong econ to put static D everywhere (while still making enough units to trade effectively against bio) then you will simply lose. I think the matchup would be much improved if roach/hydra was more viable, and I hardly think that buffing hydra speed on creep would make roach/hydra in anyway overpowered. But it would make dealing with drops a lot easier.
- I think it would do a much better job of fixing ZvZ than the spore change. The spore change is the worst idea I can think of. I absolutely love muta v muta, I think it's tons of fun, but after the first spore change it's already gotten boring. I expect the next spore change will only make it more boring. It's so much more difficult to be aggressive that a lot of the time both players are just incredibly defensive and macro up, instead of playing a really fun style where there's lots of micro and multitasking trying to attack with mutas, lings somewhere else, etc. This happens much less often after the first spore change, simply because spores deter mutas so well. But if hydralisks were faster on creep, then they could do a much better job of defending against muta harass. They could also split better against banelings so the roach/hydra player could trade more efficiently vs the muta player.
- I don't think it would particularly affect ZvP a huge amount. It would make it easier to split hydras against skytoss/templar, which I think is a good thing, as that style is ridiculously easy to play from the protoss perspective and quite a bit harder for the zerg. So giving the zerg a bit of help there I think would make the game better.
Anyway, that's just the opinion of a high master zerg player. I'm mostly worried that ZvZ will get even more boring, and I think making hydras more viable against terran would make that matchup even more fun to watch.
|
On May 13 2013 09:25 Zanzabarr wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 04:46 Godwrath wrote:On May 13 2013 02:05 Nirel wrote:
All the progamers I've heard, said that Hellbats are bad. They are a unit with obvious flaws design. The thing is it is not overpowered, just a boring unit, pretty much like colossi. Hellbats do OP dps for cost. You can throw them away into mineral lines and basically never NOT get your money's worth. You only have to kill 4 probes to pay for them, and due to lost mining time you don't even have to kill 4 to pay for them. Very rarely will they ever do less damage than that, and you always have the chance to do devastating damage with a single drop. The unit was designed to help terrans against mass chargelot, which is why they are a slower shorter range version of the hellion that is tankier and does a splash damage radius that is more effective against units in melee range. The mistake blizzard made was making the hellbat do 281% dps to non-light of its hellion counter part, making it do great dps to everything. It also does over 200% dps to light of a blue-flame hellion, making it completely shred light units like workers. The unit does way too much aoe dps for a 100 mineral 2 supply unit that can be reactored out. Sure it requires an armory, but Terran gets an armory every game anyway for +2/+2 and +3/+3 upgrades, whether they make any hellbats or not. The thing needs a dps nerf badly. Smart Terrans should be hellbat dropping all game, and throwing them into their composition against Toss so they can laugh at chargelots. Once the mineral dump chargelots are gone in PvT, there is just a gas expensive fragile army left over that can be run over.
Extreme Protoss bias, and it sounds like you're a bit bitter over losing to drops. Try building static defense.
Aside from killer works, which normal hellions are already better at, Zealots are more effective as general purpose unit because of charge and speed while hellbats can die before doing anything because of 2 range and slow movement speed.
On May 13 2013 09:25 Zanzabarr wrote: there is just a gas expensive fragile army
I assure you no Protoss unit is "fragile" considering Protoss units tend to have the best cost:life ratios in the game.
|
I wonder whats in store for us
|
On May 13 2013 11:34 DemigodcelpH wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 09:25 Zanzabarr wrote:On May 13 2013 04:46 Godwrath wrote:On May 13 2013 02:05 Nirel wrote:
All the progamers I've heard, said that Hellbats are bad. They are a unit with obvious flaws design. The thing is it is not overpowered, just a boring unit, pretty much like colossi. Hellbats do OP dps for cost. You can throw them away into mineral lines and basically never NOT get your money's worth. You only have to kill 4 probes to pay for them, and due to lost mining time you don't even have to kill 4 to pay for them. Very rarely will they ever do less damage than that, and you always have the chance to do devastating damage with a single drop. The unit was designed to help terrans against mass chargelot, which is why they are a slower shorter range version of the hellion that is tankier and does a splash damage radius that is more effective against units in melee range. The mistake blizzard made was making the hellbat do 281% dps to non-light of its hellion counter part, making it do great dps to everything. It also does over 200% dps to light of a blue-flame hellion, making it completely shred light units like workers. The unit does way too much aoe dps for a 100 mineral 2 supply unit that can be reactored out. Sure it requires an armory, but Terran gets an armory every game anyway for +2/+2 and +3/+3 upgrades, whether they make any hellbats or not. The thing needs a dps nerf badly. Smart Terrans should be hellbat dropping all game, and throwing them into their composition against Toss so they can laugh at chargelots. Once the mineral dump chargelots are gone in PvT, there is just a gas expensive fragile army left over that can be run over. Extreme Protoss bias, and it sounds like you're a bit bitter over losing to drops. Try building static defense. Aside from killer works, which normal hellions are already better at, Zealots are more effective as general purpose unit because of charge and speed while hellbats can die before doing anything because of 2 range and slow movement speed. Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 09:25 Zanzabarr wrote: there is just a gas expensive fragile army I assure you no Protoss unit is "fragile" considering Protoss units have the best cost:life ratios in the game.
Lol do you even play this game? You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. My opinion is based on facts, math, and watching a lot of high level starcraft where I've seen plenty of hellbat abuse already. The numbers don't lie. I'm talking in terms of context of the matchup when I talk about zealots and hellbats. The hellbats don't need to move fast because the zealots have to come to them, and when they do, they get demolished. Once that happens, the fragile expensive protoss army gets run over.
Best cost:life ratios in the game? What game are you playing? You should do some research before you open your mouth. Zealots and tempest are the only thing protoss has that have lots of life for cost, and even then, it's not by much (hellbat has 135 and does more dps, and has splash. Roach is 75/25 and has 145). How is that relevant when the fragile toss army I am referring to is the stuff that isn't zealots?
Hellbats are so stupidly cost effective right now, Terrans should be using them. Some high level terrans have already stated that they almost try not to use them because they know they have to be nerfed and will be nerfed. Static defense? Like I've already stated, hellbats are so cost effective, you can drop them to their death and they'll still be worth it. I could have two cannons in the mineral line at each base, and you'd still be able to zoom in with a medivac, drop them, not lose the medivac, and have the hellbats do massive damage before dying. Even Terrans complain of OP hellbats in TvT.
|
On May 13 2013 11:34 DemigodcelpH wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 09:25 Zanzabarr wrote:On May 13 2013 04:46 Godwrath wrote:On May 13 2013 02:05 Nirel wrote:
All the progamers I've heard, said that Hellbats are bad. They are a unit with obvious flaws design. The thing is it is not overpowered, just a boring unit, pretty much like colossi. Hellbats do OP dps for cost. You can throw them away into mineral lines and basically never NOT get your money's worth. You only have to kill 4 probes to pay for them, and due to lost mining time you don't even have to kill 4 to pay for them. Very rarely will they ever do less damage than that, and you always have the chance to do devastating damage with a single drop. The unit was designed to help terrans against mass chargelot, which is why they are a slower shorter range version of the hellion that is tankier and does a splash damage radius that is more effective against units in melee range. The mistake blizzard made was making the hellbat do 281% dps to non-light of its hellion counter part, making it do great dps to everything. It also does over 200% dps to light of a blue-flame hellion, making it completely shred light units like workers. The unit does way too much aoe dps for a 100 mineral 2 supply unit that can be reactored out. Sure it requires an armory, but Terran gets an armory every game anyway for +2/+2 and +3/+3 upgrades, whether they make any hellbats or not. The thing needs a dps nerf badly. Smart Terrans should be hellbat dropping all game, and throwing them into their composition against Toss so they can laugh at chargelots. Once the mineral dump chargelots are gone in PvT, there is just a gas expensive fragile army left over that can be run over. Extreme Protoss bias, and it sounds like you're a bit bitter over losing to drops. Try building static defense. Aside from killer works, which normal hellions are already better at, Zealots are more effective as general purpose unit because of charge and speed while hellbats can die before doing anything because of 2 range and slow movement speed. Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 09:25 Zanzabarr wrote: there is just a gas expensive fragile army I assure you no Protoss unit is "fragile" considering Protoss units have the best cost:life ratios in the game.
You don't understand this game.
|
On May 13 2013 05:15 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 01:03 vRadiatioNv wrote:On May 12 2013 17:03 Sissors wrote:On May 12 2013 12:50 vRadiatioNv wrote:On May 12 2013 08:50 aksfjh wrote:On May 12 2013 08:11 Big J wrote:On May 12 2013 03:41 Zarahtra wrote:On May 12 2013 03:21 Rabiator wrote:On May 12 2013 03:16 Chocobo wrote:On May 11 2013 19:49 Godwrath wrote:
[quote]
Erhm, no. Other than broodlords, what is cost efficient against mines for zerg? 1. Spore and Spine Crawlers for the early game ... (They are even good against Hellbat drops since neither of these dies easily to the "vs light" damage and the Medivac dies faster ... which prevents its reuse. Spore Crawlers are great against Phoenix and Oracle too ....) 2. Sending in Overlords to soak up the shots right before your charge ... Just watch a few TvZ games with early harrassment and IMO it is always the "diehard oldschoolers" who try to defend against Hellbat harrassment with Zerglings who are losing the match while the ones who build static defenses seem to be fine. That might be a misperception on my part, but I would suggest you check for yourself. The whole point of HotS seems to be "more harrassment" ... Hellbat, Oracle, Mutalisk regen, Medivac speed, Widow Mine, ... so preparing for that is a requirement and not optional now IMO. Also 2x +3 attack upgrade blings kill a mine(that is less than +3 armor upgrade) which I'd argue isn't that cost inefficient for a zerg(100/50 vs 75/25). It is really obnoxious when a zerg sends 2x blings ontop of a widow mine and blows it up, but terrans quite often in a hurry burry 2x next to each other, so atleast those times it is cost effective. I see it as a great way for a zerg to keep the amount of widow mines on the field in control, rather than letting it spiral. So, just to be clear: I don't think there is any imbalance in the matchup overall, but I do believe that ling/bling/muta (even if you manage to upgrade 3-3+cracklings, 3-0 AND even with small infestor support) can't fight against marine/medivac/mine (or hellbat/tank/marauder variations) and you have to go ultras/broodlords to win after the early 3base Terran phase. That being said, it's not good to trade banes vs mines like that. The equation goes basically like this: 1) marines > lings, mutas, roaches, hydras, queens, swarm hosts 2) marines < banelings, ultralisks, huge infestor count, huge broodlord count Basically, all you want to do as a Terran in those engagements is kill as many banelings efficiently or in equal trades as you can before they touch marines. The rest is just a mob up. On May 12 2013 04:51 plogamer wrote:On May 12 2013 04:48 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 12 2013 03:20 Whitewing wrote:
Be very careful about changing TvZ even if you conclude it is imbalanced. Right now at the highest level, it's the most engaging and exciting matchup to watch. The entire matchup frequently turns into a super long push from terran trying to break zerg while zerg tries to throw the push back one time, with both players micro'ing their faces off to try to be efficient. It's incredibly interesting to watch how they try to out control one another with constant battles and counter attacks. The wrong buff to zerg or nerf to terran could ruin that kind of push and send us back to both players maxxing out before doing anything.
TBH, I think the main problem is that zergs let terrans be too greedy and don't punish it. I kind of agree if they opened with Hellions/Reapers etc. however, you can't always punish it, and it is a lot harder if they opened with 1-2 Siege Tanks(which some of them are doing, mind you) or Mines. It also depends on the map a lot. Or Idra's super greedy opener versus Polt could also be the correct response when scouting 3 cc opener. /edit When it comes to greed, I don't think any race can top the Zerg race. I disagree. When zerg is greedy, zerg gets more mining earlier but no tech at all. When Terran is greedy, they still get their full tech tree much earlier and still have the same amount of CCs, but terran only needs to defend a single entrance (compared to two for outdoor basing zerg). Both races have their ups and downs when playing greedy. I agree with Whitewing on that matter. People should roach rush the fuck out of Terrans. Soulkey, Roro, Symbol and Kangho all have been roach rushing, baneling busting and nydusing their way into Ro8 against Terrans this GSL. Shine made it far similarily (those games against Fantasy...). Life, BBong, DRG, Hyun tried to play macrogames and got destroyed. The macro-metagame right now is very simple. Terrans build 3CCs, double ebays, a few hellions/reapers and go into mass reactored barracks+stim/shields and reactored widow mines/medivacs. Before 9-10mins, a Terran won't have any defences down apart from the hellions and a handful of widow mines/marines. On the flip side, a zerg invests into multiple queens, speed, speedlings, sometimes roaches/defenses relatively early without there even being any actual thread apart from those few hellions/reapers and just falls behind. But if you just blindly allin with roaches, a Terran often won't even have the production to react to anything you do because that build can't really produce anything that does not come from a reactored factory, before 9-10mins. And if a Terran even goes more greedy (like instead of defensive mines, even drops mines/hellbats early with this or gets his upgrades even faster or even more barracks early on, or just 4hellions), it's just a freewin, even if you just put on some semiallinish roach aggression with a third behind it, or a really late roach allin that hits at 10+mins. The only thing I want to add to this is the fact that, while having access to the tech, Terran can't utilize it in quite the explosive nature that Zerg (and even Protoss) can, nor is it as central of a role in winning. The only upgrade/tech that plays a huge, instant role is stim, and maybe combat shields and a tank. Having a starport or being able to produce hellbats isn't going to change the game when the first unit rolls out, unlike finishing a spire or making that first colossus (with range). I agree with pretty much everything Big J said except I do feel that TvZ is just slightly in favor of Terran (as most stats show) and just needs a tiny, tiny adjustment. Most stats don't show that. Only one sets of stats shown that, which was proven again and again to lack statistical significance (when you removed WCS qualifiers it was pretty much 50/50). And at what level do you think TvZ favors Terran? Since even the most hardcore zerg supporters here have a very hard time defending that at pro level terran would be stronger, with half the Code S RO8 for example being zerg. And at every level above silver it is kinda weird that way more people play zerg than terran if zerg would be so much weaker. But what kind of tiny ajustments do you want to boost zerg without allowing them to dominate pro levels and become even more popular on 'normal' levels? And not to nerf terran against toss would also be nice. Oh and take into account due to their production nature zerg always needs longer to adapt to new metagames so I would also consider it a pré if zerg don't dominate the next 6 months yet again. @Decendos, terran has never been able to go for a pure macro game against any of the other races. So why should zerg be allowed to do it? I've seen many different statistics posted on this site and very few of them don't show Terran being favored over Zerg. Most seem to be ~54-56% which is extremely close of course. Most seem to be 54-56% because they are all based on the exactly the same spreadsheet only they made different graphs with it. And that again is the spreadsheet where deleting the WCS qualifiers puts it back to pretty much 50/50 (actually 51/49 in favor of terran), which proofs that it lacked statistical significance. Show nested quote +I think Terran is probably slightly favored at all levels but it's harder to see in lower level stats because the lower leagues are so volatile. At the pro level Life and many other pro players (including many Terrans) claim and Zerg is slightly underpowered. As for "half of Code S being Zerg" let's face it, Terran has a smaller player pool than the other races for whatever reason so there were bound to be more Zergs in the GSL. Come on even many of those who want terran nerfed here don't try to claim that terran is favored at pro level. There is literally nothing indicating that would be the case. Show nested quote +I disagree with people saying it takes Zerg so much longer to adapt especially in the case of HoTS where Zerg didn't receive many new units or adjustments. It is much easier for Zerg to use Ling/Muta since they have been since WoL whereas Terran received huge changes. Well zerg also has to adapt how to use ling/muta against mines, that is pretty much what this entire topic is about. Just a-moving isn't the best idea anymore. And the basic idea of terran isn't really anything shocking, bio play was also around in WoL, now only mines were added. If it was just TvZ I would agree that terran got quite a bit of adjustment to do, but since bio was the standard in TvP most players are pretty used to it. The difference is that zerg is inherently a reactive race, unless they go all-in, where even the most hardcore zerg supporter here doesn't claim they are struggling. As example, lets say TvP. With changes in the metagame I need to know roughly when Oracles can come so I am prepared for it, and when I need to start worrying about DTs. Then also a bit when to roughly start making vikings, but thats it, as non-pro I really don't need to know that very accurate. Meanwhile zerg playstyle is pretty much pure droning as long as possible, and then switching to pure making army. In an all-in (although imo generally it isn't an all-in, just an early game push, but thats another discussion) thats fairly easy: mass drones till X-supply, then mass roaches for example. But if you want to go for a longer game you really need to know based on what you scout when to exactly switch from droning to army production. This means zerg take longer to adjust to new metagames, and why zerg more than other races can highly optimize their builds, but it also takes longer before they are optimized.
No, I have seen different spreadsheets by different users using different data samples, not to mention aligulac. I don't take them too seriously, I just notice Terran is slightly favored usually.
As for people taking issue with what I said about Terran player pool, I was obviously talking about Code S level Terrans. There haven't been very many recently and many of them are still adjusting to HoTS. How can we expect them all to make Ro8 GSL in the very first season (not saying that GSL will be heavily Terran favored, just saying I expect some Code S Terrans that already got knocked out to perform better next season).
What you say about Zerg playstyle and being reactive is pretty much true for everyone. There are builds and timings each race can do and each other race has to be prepared for. You are either attacking or expanding/teching depending on what the other player is doing; this is true for everyone. Zerg has to decide when to build drones or cut drones, Terrans and Protoss also have to decide when to cut probe and SCV production when they are doing certain timing pushes (or defending pushes) as well. You haven't said anything that's not also true for the other races lol. The fact is, Zergs already know how to deal with and kill Mines/Hellbats/Medivacs, what they don't know yet is how much Terrans can improve their control of these units and improve their compositions in general. From what I am seeing and experiencing it just seems that there are optimal compositions of Mines/Hellbats/Medivacs/Marines which, when controlled properly, should be nearly unbeatable for Zerg in the midgame. I have yet to see Terrans reach a balance with their production of these units and their control of the new units is not perfect. I feel Ling/Bling/Muta can only get Zerg so far but Terrans still have room for improvement. We'll see what happens.
I still would like to see more room for Zerg aggression (especially multipronged stuff similar to what Terran can do easily now) in the midgame. The way Mines currently function just make this so risky. You can't have your screen on focused on 2 armies in 2 different places at the same time obviously...
|
On May 13 2013 09:26 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 04:46 Godwrath wrote:On May 13 2013 02:05 Nirel wrote:
All the progamers I've heard, said that Hellbats are bad. They are a unit with obvious flaws design. The thing is it is not overpowered, just a boring unit, pretty much like colossi. Is "boring" the new thing to say when we don't like an unit but have can't have no real argument against it? Hellbats are fine. A slow, heavy-hitting melee unit that forces micro from your opponent to deal with them cost effectively. Terran players deserve a unit they can pretty much just a-move with.
I don't understand your point. You think the introduction of a-move units is a good thing, just because a race doesn't already have one? I would argue that introducing a boring unit to the game is bad no matter which race gets it. The hellbat is thought of as a boring unit because the full extent of the micro you can do with it is essentially focus firing nearby units and loading and unloading it from medivacs. That seems like a "real argument" to me.
As a counterexample, consider the widow mine. You can unburrow it to prevent it from firing, keep switching between targets to keep it from firing, load and unload it from medivacs, focus fire particular units, and you need to position them well to maximize their effectiveness and prevent wasted shots. That is definitely not a boring unit.
|
On May 13 2013 11:25 glad. wrote:
OK I haven't read all 25 pages of this thread, but does anyone know why Blizzard isn't considering buffing hydralisks instead of spores? This change is really frustrating because I think the game would be much better with a hydra buff. I think it would be best if they buffed the movement speed upgrade so that it also buffed speed on creep.
I completely agree. I don't like the spore change for zvz- it encourages the not muta player to turtle in his base, whereas hydras allow him to move out. In a perfect world I imagine using hydras against mutas would be somewhat similar to terran muta defense- spores to slow them down and hydras to take out the mutas.
|
On May 13 2013 11:25 glad. wrote:
OK I haven't read all 25 pages of this thread, but does anyone know why Blizzard isn't considering buffing hydralisks instead of spores? This change is really frustrating because I think the game would be much better with a hydra buff. I think it would be best if they buffed the movement speed upgrade so that it also buffed speed on creep.
Why would they need to buff the "machinegun Hydras" in any way? If you want them against Mutalisks JUST BUILD SOME ... they are good enough already.
|
I wonder what would happen if Hellbats cost a small amount of gas to make and transform.
Like a Z can invest resources to turn a zergling into a more powerful baneling.
It certainly would address the problem of the hyper-costeffectiveness of Hellbats seeing as how they won't be just throwing away minerals anymore.
|
On May 13 2013 14:08 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 11:25 glad. wrote:
OK I haven't read all 25 pages of this thread, but does anyone know why Blizzard isn't considering buffing hydralisks instead of spores? This change is really frustrating because I think the game would be much better with a hydra buff. I think it would be best if they buffed the movement speed upgrade so that it also buffed speed on creep. Why would they need to buff the "machinegun Hydras" in any way? If you want them against Mutalisks JUST BUILD SOME ... they are good enough already.
I hope this is sarcasm. Go roach/hydra against muta and you might as well gg right there.
|
On May 13 2013 12:33 Zanzabarr wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 11:34 DemigodcelpH wrote:On May 13 2013 09:25 Zanzabarr wrote:On May 13 2013 04:46 Godwrath wrote:On May 13 2013 02:05 Nirel wrote:
All the progamers I've heard, said that Hellbats are bad. They are a unit with obvious flaws design. The thing is it is not overpowered, just a boring unit, pretty much like colossi. Hellbats do OP dps for cost. You can throw them away into mineral lines and basically never NOT get your money's worth. You only have to kill 4 probes to pay for them, and due to lost mining time you don't even have to kill 4 to pay for them. Very rarely will they ever do less damage than that, and you always have the chance to do devastating damage with a single drop. The unit was designed to help terrans against mass chargelot, which is why they are a slower shorter range version of the hellion that is tankier and does a splash damage radius that is more effective against units in melee range. The mistake blizzard made was making the hellbat do 281% dps to non-light of its hellion counter part, making it do great dps to everything. It also does over 200% dps to light of a blue-flame hellion, making it completely shred light units like workers. The unit does way too much aoe dps for a 100 mineral 2 supply unit that can be reactored out. Sure it requires an armory, but Terran gets an armory every game anyway for +2/+2 and +3/+3 upgrades, whether they make any hellbats or not. The thing needs a dps nerf badly. Smart Terrans should be hellbat dropping all game, and throwing them into their composition against Toss so they can laugh at chargelots. Once the mineral dump chargelots are gone in PvT, there is just a gas expensive fragile army left over that can be run over. Extreme Protoss bias, and it sounds like you're a bit bitter over losing to drops. Try building static defense. Aside from killer works, which normal hellions are already better at, Zealots are more effective as general purpose unit because of charge and speed while hellbats can die before doing anything because of 2 range and slow movement speed. On May 13 2013 09:25 Zanzabarr wrote: there is just a gas expensive fragile army I assure you no Protoss unit is "fragile" considering Protoss units have the best cost:life ratios in the game. Lol do you even play this game? You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. My opinion is based on facts, math, and watching a lot of high level starcraft where I've seen plenty of hellbat abuse already. The numbers don't lie. I'm talking in terms of context of the matchup when I talk about zealots and hellbats. The hellbats don't need to move fast because the zealots have to come to them, and when they do, they get demolished. Once that happens, the fragile expensive protoss army gets run over. Best cost:life ratios in the game? What game are you playing? You should do some research before you open your mouth. Zealots and tempest are the only thing protoss has that have lots of life for cost, and even then, it's not by much (hellbat has 135 and does more dps, and has splash. Roach is 75/25 and has 145). How is that relevant when the fragile toss army I am referring to is the stuff that isn't zealots? Hellbats are so stupidly cost effective right now, Terrans should be using them. Some high level terrans have already stated that they almost try not to use them because they know they have to be nerfed and will be nerfed. Static defense? Like I've already stated, hellbats are so cost effective, you can drop them to their death and they'll still be worth it. I could have two cannons in the mineral line at each base, and you'd still be able to zoom in with a medivac, drop them, not lose the medivac, and have the hellbats do massive damage before dying. Even Terrans complain of OP hellbats in TvT.
Ironically you cite no "fact", and then transition into more ad hominem which is more or less all I need to know that you, unfortunately, have no argument aside from your unfounded balance whine combined with no rebuttal to my main point. Regular hellions are better at wiping mineral lines than Hellbats, so if you're losing workers to Hellbats then it's because of your own negligence as you would lose even more to normal hellions; furthermore with 2 range and extremely slow movement speed Hellbats are also extremely kitable in direct engagements (while being less "tanky" than the Zealot and the Roach) which means that, combining these two points, if you're losing to them you're simply getting outplayed.
I understand getting outplayed is frustrating, but you're not as good as you think. Balance is not your issue.
|
On May 13 2013 14:38 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2013 14:08 Rabiator wrote:On May 13 2013 11:25 glad. wrote:
OK I haven't read all 25 pages of this thread, but does anyone know why Blizzard isn't considering buffing hydralisks instead of spores? This change is really frustrating because I think the game would be much better with a hydra buff. I think it would be best if they buffed the movement speed upgrade so that it also buffed speed on creep. Why would they need to buff the "machinegun Hydras" in any way? If you want them against Mutalisks JUST BUILD SOME ... they are good enough already. I hope this is sarcasm. Go roach/hydra against muta and you might as well gg right there.
The question is DEFENSE againt Mutalisks and you bring in Roaches?
1. Get Spore Crawlers at your bases.
2. Research burrow.
3. Get Hydralisks in sufficient numbers to defend your bases against any form of Mutalisk harrassment and set a trap by placing your Hydralisks burrowed at a suspiciously light defended base ...
4. While you are at it get burrowed movement for your Roaches to attack and/or hide from Mutalisks out on the field.
In any case there is zero need to buff Hydralisks in any way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
