EPTHotS Balance Update - November 11 - Page 57
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
KJSharp
United States84 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
On November 14 2013 01:48 Big J wrote: yeah. Or even just do the nerf part of it to begin with (since blinding cloud is hardly played outside of countering tanks). The other one is optional to give zerg more options as well. Blinding cloud is useful against stalkers, when they blink up to snipe something, a good zerg can Blinding Cloud them to counter the move. The viper might be a nice gimmick, and offers a much needed tool in ZvP (corruptors are just useless and make the game worse), but its abilities ruin any tank-based TvZ. | ||
|
PPN
France248 Posts
On November 14 2013 00:04 Godwrath wrote: Stop trying to sound reasonable when you are not,or maybe you are reading discussion threads about patch notes expecting people to not discuss those changes. Manners can be different, as people get more emotionally attached to their races, which is totally reasonable given the amount of time some people put into the game, and for every person in this thread that may be overracting, there is atleast one dude underreacting, to the patch changes, giving them less importance than they have on day by day gameplay for fellow sc2 players. And i have yet to read a justification to widow mine's nerf and oracle's buff which may sound reasonable. If you have one opinion, you could share it with us, instead of whining about the whining. Nerfing widow mine in an already balanced match ups (their numbers) do not work towards allowing more variety, in fact it is the oppossite, since they will need to overcompensate somewhere else, which will turn into a default choice instead. We already know MMMM worked on TvZ, and for what we know it is balanced, so the logical thinking towards more variety in army compositions would be to find and buff a different unit composition to reach the level of MMMM, not downgrade it. Sure. I guess I'm unreasonnable when I expect some people here to speak their mind calmly and not to be shameless crybabies who wish Blizzard/SC2/DK's death at every turn and patch no matter its content and justification. I should stop reading this thread in the hope of finding some enlightening opinions. "Whining about the whining". What does it even mean anyway? And aren't you admitting this is not even close to a discussion about these changes but pretty much a whine fest which often has nothing to do with this patch. Except avilo's and some guy I've forgotten the nickname, I barely see any constructive posts here. I just hope I'm not the only one who has this impression and thinks this is going the wrong road. Even kids who play fighting games which are unbalanced as it can get do not write as spitful posts some here do. What a great display of a SC2 "community" (not sure it's the right word the more I read here). I'm sure anyone reading this thread will think TL and Battle.net is the place to be and have some fun when they may expect everyone on it to be like some of you. As for my view I frankly have no clue. I'm just playing and having fun for now. We're only patch day+2 and major tournaments have yet to happen. And when I do, I'll gladly pass on expressing it here considering the sorry state of this joke of a "discussion". You say DK does not sound reasonnable but you too are making an awful lot of assumptions and simplifications. It's like people discussing about economy: everyone has its theory but nobody is entirely right. How about not lynching each other, sit, watch and maybe in a few months cry over spilled milk when there will be post-patch facts to back it up? :> | ||
|
Qwerty85
Croatia5536 Posts
On November 14 2013 01:10 BronzeKnee wrote: The problem wasn't balance. SC2 is probably at the most balanced point it has ever been. The problem is that the game is getting stale and a lot of units are going unused due to game design. In this case, Widow Mines are terrible to watch and rendered Tanks - the iconic Starcraft unit - totally useless in ZvT, where they used to be a mainstay. Damage wise, mines do almost everything Tanks can do (the exception being they that their missile don't have huge range), and do it cheaper, while also being able to kill flocks of Muta's and forcing gas into Overseers. Marine/Tank/Medivac is so much more exciting than Marine/Marauder/Medivac/Mine. The problem is with their decision to make this change, is that Blizzard forgot they introduced the Viper. Siege Tanks are dead unless they change the Viper. So lets say we now have balanced but stale matchup After the change, tanks will still be as bad as before because of all sorts of things = faster creep spread (WoL queens = Hots queens but creep can be put on the ramp as well and terran has nothing new to deny creep spread better than in WoL), better ultras, vipers, swarm hosts, and most important much better and faster mutas which would pick off tanks in a marine-tank army way easier than before, especially since thors are not as threatening due to fast muta regen. Only hope is that mech somehow becomes viable with slight tank buff and combined upgrades, but then again, most experienced mech players like HTO Mario, relied a lot on mines in their mech play and all above mentioned counters still exist+ now also better roaches. What will be your anti air? Thors against stronger mutas, vikings? So people will most likely still use bio + mine and avoid marine - tank or mech.. The result? Matchup is still stale but becomes slightly imbalanced in zerg favor. Most frustrating thing about playing terran in Hots is the lack of options in both TvP and TvZ... And nerfing stuff only makes things worse because it kills strats. Sure, hellbats were too strong but now we rarely see them at all. Blizzard basically neuters strats because they are too strong and then they nerf the race again because the matchup is stale but nerfing the unit in the first place is what made the matchup stale. I just dont see how this change can be considered good but I guess we will have to see how terrans will do in the following months. | ||
|
vthree
Hong Kong8039 Posts
On November 14 2013 02:48 PPN wrote: Sure. I guess I'm unreasonnable when I expect some people here to speak their mind calmly and not to be shameless crybabies who wish Blizzard/SC2/DK's death at every turn and patch no matter its content and justification. I should stop reading this thread in the hope of finding some enlightening opinions. "Whining about the whining". What does it even mean anyway? And aren't you admitting this is not even close to a discussion about these changes but pretty much a whine fest which often has nothing to do with this patch. Except avilo's and some guy I've forgotten the nickname, I barely see any constructive posts here. I just hope I'm not the only one who has this impression and thinks this is going the wrong road. Even kids who play fighting games which are unbalanced as it can get do not write as spitful posts some here do. What a great display of a SC2 "community" (not sure it's the right word the more I read here). I'm sure anyone reading this thread will think TL and Battle.net is the place to be and have some fun when they may expect everyone on it to be like some of you. As for my view I frankly have no clue. I'm just playing and having fun for now. We're only patch day+2 and major tournaments have yet to happen. And when I do, I'll gladly pass on expressing it here considering the sorry state of this joke of a "discussion". You say DK does not sound reasonnable but you too are making an awful lot of assumptions and simplifications. It's like people discussing about economy: everyone has its theory but nobody is entirely right. How about not lynching each other, sit, watch and maybe in a few months cry over spilled milk when there will be post-patch facts to back it up? :> I think the main issue is the trust or there lack of for Blizzard. When BL/ infestor were shown to be a problem, Blizzard simply buried their head in the sand and just kept repeating that it was fine and the win rates were even. In a balance matchup, if they want alternatives used, they should buff the underused units, there is no need for corresponding nerfs. Like they did with oracles, they want to see mid game usage. Did they nerf stalkers, zealot openings? | ||
|
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
On November 13 2013 21:50 Big J wrote:*snipped* remove the ebay requirement. Also helps Mech, since Mech doesn't really need an ebay apart from the ability to build turrets. As someone who supports this patch -- especially the Terran changes -- I also would like to see this change. As you say, it would make mech a more direct tech path. We don't require zergs to finish their evo chambers to build their spores, we just buffed protoss' air rushes, so it really would just follow suit to get rid of this e-bay requirement. edit: frankly the oracle buff, the one part of the patch I voted "disapprove" on, seems like they were just throwing something to the protoss race for the sake of feigned fairness. It's kind of a meaningless change, more psychological to players than substantial. | ||
|
Qwerty85
Croatia5536 Posts
On November 14 2013 03:45 Leporello wrote: As someone who supports this patch -- especially the Terran changes -- I also would like to see this change. As you say, it would make mech a more direct tech path. We don't require zergs to finish their evo chambers to build their spores, we just buffed protoss' air rushes, so it really would just follow suit to get rid of this e-bay requirement. Yes oracles come super fast but I doubt we would see a buff like that, they obviously want to buff oracles vs. terran for some reason | ||
|
awesomoecalypse
United States2235 Posts
If Photon Overcharge retained its current range, duration and damage it would still be a very useful defensive tool, especially against the stuff like the 1/1/1 that it was instituted to stop in the first place. But with a lower attack priority, it wouldn't shut down worker line harass quite so effortlessly, and that could open up more room for early, non all-in aggression in TvP. | ||
|
ZAiNs
United Kingdom6525 Posts
On November 14 2013 04:30 awesomoecalypse wrote: You know, with all the complaints about Protoss being too safe in early game PvT, I wonder if it'd be worth it to reduce the Photon Overcharge attack priority? That is, right now as soon as the Nexus cannon goes down, the Nexus gains a high enough attack priority that units will autotarget it before attacking other units like probes. In some cases this makes sense, but for stuff like marine drops or ling runbys that are intended primarily to kill workers, its a huge defensive buff for Protoss, because the lings or marines will focus all their energy uselessly attacking the nexus unless individually directed to do otherwise. If Photon Overcharge retained its current range, duration and damage it would still be a very useful defensive tool, especially against the stuff like the 1/1/1 that it was instituted to stop in the first place. But with a lower attack priority, it wouldn't shut down worker line harass quite so effortlessly, and that could open up more room for early, non all-in aggression in TvP. Agreed, the Nexus is such a huge immovable target, if people want to target it they easily can. | ||
|
IAmWithStupid
Russian Federation1016 Posts
| ||
|
Pirfiktshon
United States1072 Posts
I think 1 of 2 simple changes need to happen with it. Either the PO stops when the MSC dies or you can ONLY PO 1 nexus at a time and when you cast it on another nexus the PO is negated on the previous nexus and the Full duration is casted on the new target.............. | ||
|
SuperYo1000
United States880 Posts
On November 14 2013 04:43 Pirfiktshon wrote: Personally I would like a Temporary cannon that Shoots 13 Range with 25 DMG for 2 Minutes whenever I get in trouble LOL I think 1 of 2 simple changes need to happen with it. Either the PO stops when the MSC dies or you can ONLY PO 1 nexus at a time and when you cast it on another nexus the PO is negated on the previous nexus and the Full duration is casted on the new target.............. I would rather think of ways to buff terran/zerg lategame instead of thinking of a way to nerf protoss early game | ||
|
geokilla
Canada8245 Posts
On November 14 2013 03:45 Leporello wrote: As someone who supports this patch -- especially the Terran changes -- I also would like to see this change. As you say, it would make mech a more direct tech path. We don't require zergs to finish their evo chambers to build their spores, we just buffed protoss' air rushes, so it really would just follow suit to get rid of this e-bay requirement. edit: frankly the oracle buff, the one part of the patch I voted "disapprove" on, seems like they were just throwing something to the protoss race for the sake of feigned fairness. It's kind of a meaningless change, more psychological to players than substantial. Then you'd have to remove the Forge for Photon Cannons too. Cannon rushing just got much easier. | ||
|
TeeTS
Germany2762 Posts
Yes, they had a feature that was not justified by their cost alone (the huge AoE damage). But they were given some pretty important disadvantages, that make up for that. - They are a slow short range unit with not a lot of defensive stats: ---They hav less HP/minerals than zealots and zerglings f.e. ---For a melee/short range unit they move at very slow speed and don´t have a gapcloser like zealots Hellbat drops were so strong because of the medivacs. But Protoss and Zerg are given tools to deal with medivacs even early on, that are very robust against Hellbats. Only Terran´s early anti air is very vulnerable to Hellbats and therefor Hellbatdrops dominated TvT earlygame, while being a reasonable but far from imbalanced strategy in the other matchups. The thing is, that Zerg and Protoss do have those ridiculous strong/cost efficiant units too, that have strong features that are not justified by their cost: Talk about MSC! Do 100/100 justify the abilities of a MSC? We are talking here about a flying unit with 190 HP, 9,4 ground DPS and 3 very impactful spells - for 100/100!!! Talk about Queen! Do 150 minerals justify the abilities of a queen? She has 175HP, is neither Armored nor Light (so no unit gets bonus dmg against her), has ground DPS of 8 at range 5 and an air DPS of 9 at range 7. She has a 125HPS Heal which makes medivacs just look silly. The Hellbat nerf was as justified as a nerf to the queen or the MSC would be now. The problem with it dominating in TvT was, that because of them being so strong in the mirror matchup, the research of counterplay is slower than in non-mirrors. Because most players will just use the "OP" strat instead of looking for other ways to counter it. BUT we already saw some glimpses of very potent counters right before the nerf-patch hit us. To finally come to my point: The stale situation in TvP and TvZ is not a result of terran players thinking only in one direction and not being innovative, but Blizzard´s Balance team with D. Kim as its head shutting down options with the nerf hammer. The Hellbat nerf was as unnessecary as the widow mine nerf. It´s just to shut down lazy whiners on the forums, that don´t want to learn counterplay to strong units. With the same logic, they would´ve needed to nerf banelings in early WoL and they probably would have done it, if terran wasn´t really OP back then and maps weren´t favoring Terran too. But this approach just ruins the game, because it takes away options and then we get to a point where we are now, where nearly everyone just plays the one single standard way, because everything else is nerfed to being plain badly. | ||
|
Qwyn
United States2779 Posts
Still my Zerg wet dream. Haven't experimented with it yet, but there was an idea of getting tunneling claws over roach speed against immortal sentry allins or gateway allins. Might be cool though I don't know about its viability. | ||
|
awesomoecalypse
United States2235 Posts
On November 14 2013 04:43 Pirfiktshon wrote: Personally I would like a Temporary cannon that Shoots 13 Range with 25 DMG for 2 Minutes whenever I get in trouble LOL Its 20 damage for 1 minute. Also, I'm not sure your proposed changes would do much. Once its cast the cannon, the MSC rarely plays any meaningful direct role in the subsequent engagement (apart from timewarp if they have the energy, but thats fire and forget so its not like the MSC has to stick around for it), so Protoss players would likely just fly it out of harm's way as soon as it was cast. And photon overcharging two different nexuses simultaneously is a very niche situation that simply doesn't occur that often. I think reducing the attack priority would be the most intuitive way to maintain the Nexus cannon's intended role of stablizing PvP (and Protoss early game play in gneral) and holding off the 1/1/1, while reducing its impact in completely shutting down worker harassment. | ||
|
awesomoecalypse
United States2235 Posts
On November 14 2013 04:48 geokilla wrote: Then you'd have to remove the Forge for Photon Cannons too. Cannon rushing just got much easier. You wouldn't, actually, anymore than removing the prereqs to build Spores required letting cannons be built without forges.The races are not entirely equivalent, and one of the ways they are different is that T and Z have their static D split between ground and air, while Protoss do not. As such, its much easier to buff T or Z static D vs air without opening up new aggressive cheeses. Cannons are fine, and with Photon Overcharge Protoss defense in the early game already got a huge buff compared to WoL. There's no reason that making turrets more accessible should somehow require an equivalent buff to cannons. | ||
|
Hextor
16 Posts
| ||
|
Pirfiktshon
United States1072 Posts
On November 14 2013 06:22 Hextor wrote: Funny how Tanks can't tank shit... HAHAHA Very True. If it was a protoss unit it would have been buffed so that it can shoot lazers in a straight line anything in the path would be hit for the full amount of 30 DMG HIgh Rate of Fire and have a Run Speed of at least 5 with perma cloak LOLOLOLOL Seriously this patch has put a serious Nail in the coffin of my playstyle its very hard to play TvT now  | ||
|
awesomoecalypse
United States2235 Posts
On November 14 2013 06:22 Hextor wrote: Funny how Tanks can't tank shit... Umm, "Tank" has meant "an armored fighting vehicle with some sort of powerful turret or cannon for shooting stuff" for a LOT longer than its meant "a class or unit that soaks up damage in a video game." Going back to BW, Siege Tanks have always been Tanks in the original sense, not the MMO sense. Wanting Tanks to be good at soaking damage because they happen to share a name with an unrelated term is pretty silly. Also, how would that even work? A super long range unit that is designed to soak up damage on the front lines is an inherent contradiction. | ||
| ||
