|
On June 13 2013 04:32 mahO wrote:
This is simply scary, reading David Kim you can tell he's not an expert on balance and doesnt understand the essence of it, it's not making the game "more fun" and "viewer friendly", by adding shittons of drops and big explosions (mainly to one race that already won a shitload of titles in WoL but clearly was weak in the end of it, but now ahah what the fuck start of WoL all over again).
They're looking at it the wrong way, they're trying to make the game exciting and "promote skill"? How's widow mine gameplay promoting skill? Thats just a really ridiculous thing to say as head of SC2 balance team... Zergs cheesing the fuck out of terrans even when they got much better macro (Soulkey vs Alive rofl, tell me Soulkey isnt confident in a stable macro game against Alive, and yet he still goes for coin flippy early timings that can get blind countered, especially after his final vs innovation, Alive should have prepared, he didnt, yay, coin flip won) than their opponent should be enough for them to wake up. The thing is, the ball is on terran side in the ZvT match up, they are going to get much better at defending timings, and learn to use properly their bio mine gameplay, I seriously dont see ZvT in 3 months being anything else than roach bane / +1+1 ling bane timings type of play, followed by "macro" after damage has been dealt.
But hey, "they're taking their time", good for them, less work I suppose, but this is fucked up, ZvZ, spore buff, what the fuck... When you see the spore buff you know for good that they dont have a fucking clue...
And most of this is said from a viewer perspective, call me biased, I was the first to aknowledge infestors were OP in WoL and even avoided including them in gameplay because I hated feeling outplayed and winning at the same time, same reason I switched to zerg 3 months into WoL, I play this game for fun and to do my best, and I mostly watch, not play, I wished terran would be honest about this and stop that fucking hypocrisy, this is way too long for the esport scene, they're killing it because they ARE going to make big changes, we all know it, and the longer it takes, just like first GSLs, we'll just look at it and be like "meh, was ugly back then", good thinking David, good thinking...
Pretty sure he is an expert on balance by definition, he's certainly more of an authority than anyone else here. And they are looking at it the exactly right way. Widowmines have spiced up the game more than anything else they put in the game in HotS. And Soulkey destroyed Alive, coin-flippy is 50/50, and I'm pretty sure he won more than half his games. He punished greedy play. You don't macro up vs. greedy play, you punish it.
|
I'd like to see tanks buffed in NON-seige mode. I think mobile tank armies look really cool, and if the non-seige tank was buffed it would put a damper on just how freaking good Hellbats are. I have no idea what the buff would be, and it would have to be balanced to make siege mode still worth the dramatic tradeoff in versatility, but I don't like the idea of people just not needing Tanks because Mines are so good.
|
I'm really confused at the lack of Ravens in mid game Terran play by the way, at least in TvZ. A flying detector with a spell that nullifies Mutalisks around a certain area? Why don't more people go for it? HSM timings could even be explored.
I think mines may need a rework, something like a smaller radius wouldn't be bad. I don't know. But the general sentiment is that the mine is pretty damn strong, not the most interesting unit and it's replacing the siege tank that everyone loves.
@Crownlol, they should get extra armor unsieged so that they become actual tanks! xD
|
On June 12 2013 08:27 Qwyn wrote:
...
I also think that Blizzard is focusing too much on removing defensive strategies such as swarmhost + static in order to avoid the infestor/broodlord effect, without actually considering why such strategies exist in the first place. The reason that strategy exists is that it is the only way that Zerg can consistently beat an endgame Protoss deathball. Instead of attempting to stamp that out Blizzard should consider why the comp exists in the first place and what is causing it...It's ironic because outside of two-base allins the sole goal of a Protoss is to turtle to death on 3 bases.
...
So true... blizzard "watching DEFENSIVE swarmhost play carefully" but giving protoss planetary nexus, timwarp, teleport...
i mean protoss is the most defensive race ever,outside of allins, but if zerg has to camp to stop it ...
|
On June 13 2013 03:22 WindCalibur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2013 03:18 Aequos wrote:
I'm not saying this is needed (and it may in fact cause more issues than it solves), but if you want some way for widow mines to synergize with tanks, wouldn't having them attack only air be a possible solution? The reason I suggest this is that Mech really has terrible anti-air without going into a bio-mech composition, and part of what people want from mech is more positional play. Widow mines, like tanks, need to deploy to be effective (although their deploy is called burrow), and the stats of the widow mine could be tweaked to make them into more of a dedicated anti-aircraft unit.
Just a suggestion, and I'd like to re-affirm that I don't think it's needed as a nerf - it may just be an interesting possible change. So you are essentially forcing the Terrans to use a less mobile army against zergs when going bio. I don't know what logic persuaded you to think that this is not a nerf.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean that it had to be done; what I was suggesting is that they could potentially redefine the role of the Widow Mine to be the dedicated anti-air of the mech army. I wasn't saying this has to happen, or even should; I wanted to say that it was a possibility to make the unit more interesting and not overlap with Siege Tanks quite so much. Obviously this change couldn't be made in a vaccuum - you would have to adjust another unit (most likely the siege tank, but possibly something else) to fill the gap left by its changing role, were this to go through in any form.
|
When you see an army of Marines and Widow Mines, it comes down to the skill of the players in that specific battle.
When you see an army of Marines and Widow Mines, it comes down to the skill of the Zerg player in that specific battle.
|
On June 13 2013 05:38 archflames wrote:Show nested quote +When you see an army of Marines and Widow Mines, it comes down to the skill of the players in that specific battle. When you see an army of Marines and Widow Mines, it comes down to the skill of the Zerg player in that specific battle.
Agreed, from what I hear, Stephano played very well turning his opponent's widow mines against him in a WCS series.
|
Tank lines arent scary against protoss (at all), 50 damage per shot (against armored; 35 otherwise) is really nothing, no matter how you look at it. Archons tank a ton of tank shots, i wont even mention immortals. On top of that widow mines outperform tanks in TvZ. Mech is underwhelming and the only thing keeping it afloat is the hellbat (which is weak against archons, biological >.<).
So even after the expansion Terran is forced into specific compositions for the two non-mirror matchups and in both of them mech is weaker. I dont know if im right here, but in my opinion a siege tank buff (at the very least against protoss) is definitely needed.
|
So let me get this straight, Terrans spend all of WOL busting their wrists trying to split against fungal, banelings, ultras...
And now zergs finally have to watch their army in fights and they can't scream for nerfs fast enough.
Please, make me a list of zerg players with wrist problems and I'll find four times as many terrans.
|
On June 13 2013 05:38 archflames wrote:Show nested quote +When you see an army of Marines and Widow Mines, it comes down to the skill of the players in that specific battle. When you see an army of Marines and Widow Mines, it comes down to the skill of the Zerg player in that specific battle.
What happens when Terran a-moves his mines in, burrows all his mines right next to each other, and some banelings roll in? You're making it sound like Terran don't have to do anything in engagements. When it came to tanks, you just hit siege and maybe target priority targets if you can spare the APM (from splitting bio). Mines not so easy. You have to move them to the front, split them, burrow... that's more APM not focused on your bio.
I've seen plenty of pro games where Terran isn't microing at all with his bio/mine army, and the zerg (also not microing) a-moves in and wins. Stop pretending like Terran can just a-move in and win while Zerg need 400 APM.
|
 death of siege tank in TvZ
|
Most of these issues could be solved by simply mitigating how much armies clump together
I understand the development team has resisted this change fearing that MarineKing's splits will become a thing of the past, however in doing so they've failed to acknowledge two things: first, that splits are really only reliable for armies on the retreat (e.g. splitting infantry while retreating from banelings), and second, that splitting armies prior to advancing is most often pointless because they always break formation and re-clump immediately after issuing a move or attack command (and for you smart asses, I don't keep all of my units on a single control group). In short, the inability to hold a spread out formation while advancing is what truly makes Widow Mines so devastating.
Would every AOE ability besides the widow mine and hellbat need to be buffed as a result of this change? Most likely, yes. Would it be worth it? I sincerely believe so.
|
On June 13 2013 05:38 archflames wrote:Show nested quote +When you see an army of Marines and Widow Mines, it comes down to the skill of the players in that specific battle. When you see an army of Marines and Widow Mines, it comes down to the skill of the Zerg player in that specific battle.
I specifically use tanks in TvZ to lower the amount of micro required. I don't want to say lower the amount of skill required, since tanks require other stuff more. But simply saying widow mines require less skill than what we had with siege tanks is flat out incorrect.
|
On June 12 2013 12:10 xAdra wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 12:04 aZealot wrote:On June 12 2013 11:52 xAdra wrote:On June 12 2013 11:48 Bagi wrote:On June 12 2013 11:41 aZealot wrote:On June 12 2013 11:19 xAdra wrote:
I think they could try introducing more buffs as opposed to nerfs. Like something that will majorly shake up the game, such as Tanks getting +damage against shields, or stalkers having better upgrade scaling but longer blink cooldown. It would be really cool, especially the former which will make mech viable. If mech were viable, TvP as both a viewer and a player would be diversified so much, it would seem like an all new sc2. Tanks getting +damage against shields? What? Er, no. Thanks, but no, thanks. Can't argue with this kinda reasoning. Yeah, I think it's good to try out. I mean, mech is not viable against toss as it is. Why should it be viable? Apart from the panting longing for BW Mech? Terran also has a unit that can be produced in multiple numbers that is able to destroy Protoss shields. And now you want another? Which already also does considerable damage, especially to armoured on top of that? Think about it for a while, and you'll see why it's another one of those ideas that sound nice, but are really, just more than a little silly. Because we want to diversify play? Is that wrong? Would you like to be back in the days when protoss had to go robo every game or die instantly? Saying that marauders take that role is stupid: would you go marauder/tank? Units that have different upgrades? I'm no terran player, but it's obvious that bio and mech are completely different playstyles. While bio players want constant harass and aggression, relying on micro and mechanics to stay on even footing, mech players utilize decision making and positioning to a greater extent. By allowing mech against protoss, you make the game more interesting. Let's ask a different question: why are you so violently adverse to the idea of making mech more viable? Apart from the panting longing for ladder points against terran?
When some players say they want mech vs Protoss to be viable, what they mean is they want to be able to make 90% of their army be siegetanks and that it should beat any and all groundarmies no matter what. That's sort of like Protoss saying they want skytoss to be valid against Terran, and wanting to be able to make 90% of their army voidrays that can kill any and all ground armies.
Does that sound reasonable in the least? Neither sound resonable. To make mech fair in PvT, Blizzard would have to severely nerf bio into the ground in all matchups. That will never happen. Just like to make an all voidrays army work against Terran, the whole game would have to be rearranged.
I can't get to make all voidrays or phoenix or any air unit and win in a macro game against Terran, and you (non-pro joes) will have to be content to not make all tanks and win in a macro game against P.
|
On June 12 2013 12:11 Elldar wrote:
Well, everything boils down to the three broken mechanics of sc2 either way (warp gate, larva inject and mule) ...
warp gate gives the protoss instant reiforcement, larva inject let the zerg create new armies instantly and mule let the terran have better economy then the other races(less workers needed for the same eco as the other races). These mechanics is all imbalanced given certain situations which makes for flimsical gameplay.
on topic though I can not see how widow mines require as much skill to use as to play against. Only real microing that can be going is reburrowing, retargetting is not something any good terran can do without neglecting something else. Maybe you can retarget 1-3 wm in battle but that is pushing it (if all terran did so every battle would be bad for the zerg).
Reburrowing just make the terran tantrum from beta that zerg should bait widow mines shots with a few lings obsolete or not as great.
On a side note the most boring match-up is ZvP to play on ladder, the toss either does some weirdass all in with 1 or 2 bases Or they sit on there asses while getting void rays then 1-a at some point unless you hit a nice hydra timing. Just a ridicolous match-up right now. Widow is less random then the toss cheeses imo.
Toss likes allins vs Zerg in current meta because late game swarmhosts are no fun and broken if done correctly.
|
On June 12 2013 13:10 DavoS wrote:
The reason that the Void ray isn't screwing with the win percentages is because it's only broken in PvP (spoiler: Protoss wins). There's no Protoss unit that can trade effectively vs Void rays using overcharge, so it's like Hellbat drops in TvT. I'm a random player, and my WoL PvP was pretty terrible. But in HotS, I have a great win rate going mass void ray. I'm glad to see my ability to box a-move and then hit e be rewarded with a huge win rate
But there is a unit... two even... that can trade effectively vs. voidrays. Three if you count high templar with storm.
|
On June 12 2013 13:40 Msr wrote:
Well shows how clueless blizzard is about the game's balance. Leaving the mine is understandable in the skill it requires for both players, but not fixing the lack of priority the mine takes in fights is honestly a joke.
The voidray is not exciting to me atleast and requires 0 skill while destroying everything (pvz atleast). If they are content with the voidray then either the hydra or corrupter need massive reworking because they are not cost effective vs the voidray.
Mine priority... yeah that has been discussed and maybe it would make it better. It does feel just a little too good and easier on the Terran side in straight up fights. It is certainly too easy to use as random defense and killing of large groups of expensive units with zero input from the Terran. Like when Zerg wins a battle and chases away the T army, but doesn't know two mines are left b/c all the detection died. Before detection is rebuild, loses 5 infestors or something equally insane. That happened not long ago at high Korean matches.
Voidray... well the VR is sort of boring, but Protoss is in desperate need of something vs. Zerg. Colossus got nerfed into the ground via the viper, and swarmhost turtling is unbeatable. Waiting for legacy of the void.
|
Germany6799 Posts
On June 13 2013 05:15 Incognoto wrote:
I'm really confused at the lack of Ravens in mid game Terran play by the way, at least in TvZ. A flying detector with a spell that nullifies Mutalisks around a certain area? Why don't more people go for it? HSM timings could even be explored.
A 5 second seeker missile is useless against extremely fast-moving units that wrap around your army when they engage, you end up hitting yourself with splash. PDD is "okay" but really not good enough to stop medivac production for ravens.
Ravens are great against most zerg units, just not ling/muta/ultra.
|
On June 13 2013 07:01 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2013 05:15 Incognoto wrote:
I'm really confused at the lack of Ravens in mid game Terran play by the way, at least in TvZ. A flying detector with a spell that nullifies Mutalisks around a certain area? Why don't more people go for it? HSM timings could even be explored.
A 5 second seeker missile is useless against extremely fast-moving units that wrap around your army when they engage, you end up hitting yourself with splash. PDD is "okay" but really not good enough to stop medivac production for ravens. Ravens are great against most zerg units, just not ling/muta/ultra.
also raven too expensive. 2 starport with tech lab is heavy investment and means you won't have any medivacs
|
On June 13 2013 03:22 Ragnarork wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2013 03:11 Targe wrote:On June 13 2013 01:48 Prog455 wrote:
Personally i would love to see a buff to Tanks and a nerf to Hellbats. I always felt that the sole purpose of Hellbats was to make up for the fact that Siege Tanks are hard-countered by next to every Protoss unit in the game, especially Zealots. A plain buff to tank damage vs. shields would be great :/ Am I the only one who feels it's wrong that in the end we'll have the following : Damage : 35 (+ 15 vs Armored) (+15 vs shield) (+10 vs Psionic) (insert another exception damage)
No, you are not. I've argued elsewhere in the thread why this particular idea is silly.
SC2 is a different game from BW. Mech will likely not work in the same way. It's time to let go of that particular Tank fetish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
