|
On October 15 2013 05:44 Antylamon wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2013 05:39 bGr.MetHiX wrote:On October 15 2013 05:26 Antylamon wrote:On October 15 2013 05:24 bGr.MetHiX wrote:On October 15 2013 05:14 ZeromuS wrote:On October 15 2013 05:12 bGr.MetHiX wrote:
burrowing/unburrowing/cloaking/uncloaking who cares man.that's never been the issue with oracles. once again blizzard proves to be totally clueless ................................................ -.- I think this is more of a Quality of Life change for revelation. The fact you could cloak or burrow then unburrow or uncloak to remove it wasn't necessarily intended. Its not meant to fix the entire oracle, just to make revelation more useful in some situations. when was the last time you saw burrowing/cloaking being the issue with oracles in a high level game? Something tells me you aren't getting the point It's not supposed to matter at high level play, if anything it should be marked as a bug fix something tells me you aren't getting the point. blizzard intended to buff oracles so they would be more useful mid-late game. well fixing that "bug" of yours wont be noticeable. guess why? because seeing units after they unburrow \ uncloak will reap no benefits at high level play.guess why? because oracles arent seen mid-late-game because they have little to no use. something blizzard intended to fix, but i guess it wont happen. Bashing Revelation really isn't the best way to vent out your anger towards how underused Oracles are
My friend, i feel no anger towards how underused Oracles are mid-late game. And i'm not bashing Revelation . All i am saying is that this change does not affect the game AT ALL . They said they were going to make oracles more viable and this change does not do that at all. Now please try to argue with real arguments because that last post wasn't really what i would call an argument rofl :D
|
On October 15 2013 05:48 bGr.MetHiX wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2013 05:44 Antylamon wrote:On October 15 2013 05:39 bGr.MetHiX wrote:On October 15 2013 05:26 Antylamon wrote:On October 15 2013 05:24 bGr.MetHiX wrote:On October 15 2013 05:14 ZeromuS wrote:On October 15 2013 05:12 bGr.MetHiX wrote:
burrowing/unburrowing/cloaking/uncloaking who cares man.that's never been the issue with oracles. once again blizzard proves to be totally clueless ................................................ -.- I think this is more of a Quality of Life change for revelation. The fact you could cloak or burrow then unburrow or uncloak to remove it wasn't necessarily intended. Its not meant to fix the entire oracle, just to make revelation more useful in some situations. when was the last time you saw burrowing/cloaking being the issue with oracles in a high level game? Something tells me you aren't getting the point It's not supposed to matter at high level play, if anything it should be marked as a bug fix something tells me you aren't getting the point. blizzard intended to buff oracles so they would be more useful mid-late game. well fixing that "bug" of yours wont be noticeable. guess why? because seeing units after they unburrow \ uncloak will reap no benefits at high level play.guess why? because oracles arent seen mid-late-game because they have little to no use. something blizzard intended to fix, but i guess it wont happen. Bashing Revelation really isn't the best way to vent out your anger towards how underused Oracles are My friend, i feel no anger towards how underused Oracles are mid-late game. And i'm not bashing Revelation . All i am saying is that this change does not affect the game AT ALL . They said they were going to make oracles more viable and this change does not do that at all. Now please try to argue with real arguments because that last post wasn't really what i would call an argument rofl :D
Point taken. I'm sorry I didn't understand what you meant earlier.
|
On October 15 2013 02:45 Everlong wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2013 02:44 lolfail9001 wrote:On October 15 2013 02:41 Snusmumriken wrote:On October 15 2013 02:38 a176 wrote:
All these random balance changes, most of them he doesn't even go through with, it seems like David Kim doesn't have a fucking clue what to do with this game anymore. Indeed. The tank"buff" does absolutely shit. Please buff the tanks properly... Suggest one without screwing up the game completely. Also, i still liek the direction they are going. + 10 dmg to shields.
What if they reduced the transformation time for siege mode? Wouldn't that help TvZ since it's more of a positional issue(blinding clouds, random flanks)
They could also build it into the widow mine burrow upgrade.
|
Excellent. Really creative change on the mines, and I think that Revelation can definitely use some revitalization.
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
We'd also like to try a lesser version of the Widow Mine nerf. Right now, we feel just straight downgrading to the 1.25 range is too big of a nerf. Therefore, we'd like to try a change where widow mines don't do full damage. Units within the 1.25 radius will take 100% damage like we're testing right now. From 1.25 to 1.75, units will take 50% or 25% of the full damage. This way, the total splash radius is the same as is on live, but the actual damage output is still nerfed."
Wow!! It's first time when Blizzard nerfs their nerf!
|
On October 15 2013 05:04 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2013 05:01 SHODAN wrote:
this might be a significant buff to widow mines. running zerglings in to trigger friendly fire on marines will no longer be worth it. Well, in this case, halving Storm damage might be a buff since Zealots would take less friendly fire damage from it in PvT. Still, something tells me no Protoss would buy this way to present things.
wind your neck in, TheDwf. I'm a terran player 
friendly fire is the strongest tactic zergs are using in TvZ. we know that if you burrow mines too far from your marines, they can easily be sniped by overseer/muta. burrow too many mines too close to your marines and they will cause devastating levels of friendly damage. Polt uses 2 control groups of marines - the front line that is supposed to damage the 4th hatch and eat the friendly fire from mines - the back line darts in to do burst damage whenever a sacrificial ling/bane squad approaches the mines. taking down the 4th hatch is an extremely slow ordeal for terran. you can try leapfrogging small packs of marine/mine, but zerg buys so much time running in small packs of zerglings with 3-4 banes. and while all of this is happening, where do you think all his gas is going? 20% on banes, all the rest on mutas. zerg eventually decides to crush your 2/2 or 3/3 push and counter-attack with 30+ mutas. game over. It's the most abusive tactic in the game - zerg slows down any bio/mine push using small chokes, high ground, and small packs of ling/bane in order to buy critical time on those 7th & 8th geysers. that's how DRG beat Innovation. Scarlett can defend that 4th base choke on Bel'shir for what seems like forever - 2-3 spines, small packs lings & 4 banes. mutas can snipe the front mines because terran simply can't commit too many marines up front. the threat of friendly splash is too great. so, I think the patch change is good because you will have more marines surviving up front if zerg tries to trigger the mines. the hatch will go down quicker, and the clock is ticking faster for zerg. halving storm damage is in no way comparable...
|
On October 15 2013 05:54 Iodem wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2013 02:45 Everlong wrote:On October 15 2013 02:44 lolfail9001 wrote:On October 15 2013 02:41 Snusmumriken wrote:On October 15 2013 02:38 a176 wrote:
All these random balance changes, most of them he doesn't even go through with, it seems like David Kim doesn't have a fucking clue what to do with this game anymore. Indeed. The tank"buff" does absolutely shit. Please buff the tanks properly... Suggest one without screwing up the game completely. Also, i still liek the direction they are going. + 10 dmg to shields. What if they reduced the transformation time for siege mode? Wouldn't that help TvZ since it's more of a positional issue(blinding clouds, random flanks) They could also build it into the widow mine burrow upgrade.
I think there is pretty much no terran mech player in favor of that. The entire idea behind siege tanks is the sieging/unsieging mechanic. A long range splash damage unit that doesn't need to do it already exists: The colossus, and it is boring. Okay just decreasing the time isn't the same as making it a colossus, but it is imo still a bad idea. Just letting it do full damage against all units is imo already a good place to start.
On October 15 2013 05:56 Nuclease wrote:
Excellent. Really creative change on the mines, and I think that Revelation can definitely use some revitalization.
While I think the mine change is at least better than what they first proposed, this wasnt exactly creative, it is the same as siege tanks and often enough proposed by the community already.
@Shodan, keep your mines permantly unburrowed, no more friendly fire!
But you are really serious about it? While mine friendly fire is a problem, if they are doing more friendly fire than enemy fire you are doing something wrong and probably better of not making them. If they dont do more friendly fire than enemy fire, then nerfing their damage really wont help you.
|
This mine change is exactly (pat's self on back) what I suggested and wanted. I know there were some of us who were vocal about simply reducing the outer radius damage instead of a radius nerf, so I am glad Blizzard listened to us.
|
On October 15 2013 05:54 Iodem wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2013 02:45 Everlong wrote:On October 15 2013 02:44 lolfail9001 wrote:On October 15 2013 02:41 Snusmumriken wrote:On October 15 2013 02:38 a176 wrote:
All these random balance changes, most of them he doesn't even go through with, it seems like David Kim doesn't have a fucking clue what to do with this game anymore. Indeed. The tank"buff" does absolutely shit. Please buff the tanks properly... Suggest one without screwing up the game completely. Also, i still liek the direction they are going. + 10 dmg to shields. What if they reduced the transformation time for siege mode? Wouldn't that help TvZ since it's more of a positional issue(blinding clouds, random flanks) They could also build it into the widow mine burrow upgrade.
That would break TvT completely.. It is really easy, they can tweak mech and specifically Tank in TvP, there are so many options they can at least test. They just don't want to do it.
1) + X dmg to shields on Tank
2) lower Immos shields, increase hp
3) -1 range to Immortal (1/1/1 is stopped easily with MSC)
4) reduce Tempest HP or increase it's supply (4 supply wtf)
5) remove bio flag from Hellbat
6) lower armory cost (so you can fight 2/2 vs 2/2 and not 1/0 vs 2/2)
7) ...
edit: the merged upgrades are really good though.. One of the biggest issues with mech TvP is that you need to go heavy Hellbat/Tank/Ghost to hold ground against Zealot/Immortal/Archon and remaxes. Protoss can easily throw you off with adding just few Tempests or Voidrays and he can adjust his composition better then you, because of warpgates and chronoboost. 3/3 Vikes are going to help big time against those pesky air switches.
|
Great changes. I especially appreciate the widow mine change, the splash damage gradient thing is something people have been asking for since HotS came out. 
|
I feel like they will end up needing a thor buff or muta nerf if this widow mine change goes through because mass muta might become a problem. That being said it's still something I hope goes through.
|
On October 15 2013 02:38 a176 wrote:
All these random balance changes, most of them he doesn't even go through with, it seems like David Kim doesn't have a fucking clue what to do with this game anymore.
He is experimenting to see how things are going to play out. You cannot blame him for that
|
Leave the widowmine back to original stats.
Zerg players have adapted. Check the ladders; check the tourney results. Widowmines not the problem.
|
Good changes across the board
|
I wonder if they realize part of mech's problem is that thors are terrible anti-air. It's very obvious when watching TvT where one side goes mech and the other goes marine/tank. The marine/tank player can drop with impunity while the mech player has to be careful around marines.
Siege tanks are still too vulnerable to air units and to all the insanely fast units that SC2 has.
|
Can we please try a nydus buff?
|
Hehehe,now widowmines are just as shit as siege tanks well done
Edit : and also, no more mines vs BCs in TVT anymore
|
reduce widow mines hp to 50 or 60; or their range to 4; or get rid of the upgrade. I'd prefer the HP.
I think they're probably 90 just so they survive psi storm, but that's way too much HP. It's rare that a mine gets killed before it gets a chance to burrow.
I don't think they need a damage or splash reduction. I like the way TvZ is right now. (I play zerg). It's very fun to watch.
Mines are supposed to be weak when they're detectable, they're really not. It's going to take 9-10 stalker shots. 3 fungal growths. And in the meantime they can unburrow and burrow very quickly with the claws upgrade.
|
On October 15 2013 06:33 aeligos wrote:
Leave the widowmine back to original stats.
Zerg players have adapted. Check the ladders; check the tourney results. Widowmines not the problem.
Widow mine is still a problem, not because it is too strong at the present time, even though keep in mind that it took 9 month and several nerf/buff to adapt to it, it doesn't mean that terran can't improve too, but because it is getting boring to watch every TvZ are the same game. Nerfing widow mine while buffing late game transition, it's not a bad idea, the question is if they are doing it the right way.
|
On October 15 2013 06:43 DuneBug wrote:
reduce widow mines hp to 50 or 60; or their range to 4; or get rid of the upgrade. I'd prefer the HP.
I think they're probably 90 just so they survive psi storm, but that's way too much HP. It's rare that a mine gets killed before it gets a chance to burrow.
I don't think they need a damage or splash reduction. I like the way TvZ is right now. (I play zerg). It's very fun to watch.
Mines are supposed to be weak when they're detectable, they're really not. It's going to take 9-10 stalker shots. 3 fungal growths. And in the meantime they can unburrow and burrow very quickly with the claws upgrade.
I too find it amusing that WMs have the same amount of health as Hellions 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
