|
On January 03 2014 12:48 Redfish wrote:
I'm going to blow my lid here. Excuse me in advance. This is a total rant, but I think I have a point.
I'm sorry, but I think this whole MsC debacle has been gone about in an incredibly ham-handed way that doesn't address what really is at issue here, and that issue is that Gateway units just plain suck.
Has anyone asked why Protoss players feel like they have to scramble for a MsC as quickly as possible in their builds? Why are split Protoss armies so ineffective and thus always deathballed, whereas small pods of Terran bio drops or Zerg hit squads can do game-altering damage? Why do the successes or failures of singular attack timings tend to dominate games with Protoss in them, and a lost army almost universally means a lost game, whereas in TvZ you have these epic back-and-forth slugfests? Again, it's because Gateway units suck.
We rush for an MsC because we have to spend 125/50/2 on a unit that does less DPS than a ZERGLING. Try defending an early attack with just those and see how it goes. The MsC is a crutch we have to lean on.
Our drops get cleaned up really insanely easily for what they cost and our other harass options suck past the point when proxy openers lose their effectiveness (Terrans, if you want a lesson in humility, try to drop 400 or 800 minerals worth of Zealots at a Planetary, ignoring the missile turrets like you would cannons. See what happens when you try that.). Our static defense sucks so much that Medivacs just drop top of it with no care, and we can't resposition cannons either - in fact, we're the only race that can't reposition buildings. So, we turtle with the MsC.
Gateway units are so weak in small numbers and so reliant on Force Field to both do damage (corral units for chargelots) or defend themselves, that they have no choice but to clump. All they really do late game is soak damage and provide support for the splash units, such as Colossi and Templars, to do the actual work. If Colossi get hung up or storms get dodged, we're dead, numbers be damned.
We tech switch so freakishly expensively and slowly (saw you go Spire? Another 300/300 of Stargates, plus a 300/200 Fleet Beacon, plus a 150/150 upgrade....oh wait you just made more roaches and hydras anyways, over 600/600 thrown away not counting however many phoenix I made, lol wp gg) that we can't keep up late and therefore go for earlier game timings or excessively greedy third builds.
I know Protoss are doing well overall right now, but I get so confused when I see players try some stupid rush that only worked in WoL and then whine about how it doesn't work any more now. Well no kidding it doesn't work now, the game has changed, TRY NEW THINGS. I'm sorry your old marine-SCV all-in that you abused up to Masters your first season doesn't work any more. I'm sorry you can't seven pool into expand any more, now knowing that you can't count on Forge FE 100% of the time. I can't four gate everyone to oblivion any more and you don't see me whining (though nerf PO any more and I guarantee you'll see PvP become a 4gate fest again). Stuff happens, try new things - the pros are and they are winning against all races.
I'd actually prefer they get rid of the MsC - just chuck the whole stupid thing. Then you'd see how crappy Gateway units really are, and then you just might see the Protoss of yore that didn't rely on temporary walls to defend themselves but had units that had the firepower in small groups that their cost warrants.
And as far as the whole roach burrow thing goes, I see it work really well when used properly (want to know how to utterly defecate on a sentry-heavy army?) but I almost never see it used in the first place. I don't think it's the developers job to cheapen a skill or unit overly heavily until it gets used like they want to see it, let people figure it out on their own. It's not the devs fault that people aren't using tools available to them.
You have put into words the annoyances/frustrations I've felt about playing Protoss for a long time, and much more precisely than I ever could.
I've ALWAYS felt like Protoss is this crutch based race. Manage to kick the crutch out from under us and we're completely dominated =/
edit: Having said this, I don't disagree with the proposed nerf to PO duration. I really don't see it turning PvP back into the 4gate era, we kind of left that well behind even back in WoL. I'm not really sure it will change up much of the dynamic in PvT, either. 40 seconds is still a lot of time to do damage to an army, or zone stuff out until another warp in round is ready, or you're chrono boosting out more colossus or something.
It probably means that Protoss is going to have become even MORE reliant on tight, inflexible builds though.
|
Yay balance patch! I would love to see tanks cost 25 less gas...that'd be great.
|
On January 03 2014 12:59 LingBlingBling wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2014 12:43 Chvol wrote:
I really despise the way blizzard talks about their changes. They're so vague. A change should be directed towards a very specific problem, not some generalizing claim like " oh, we want to give this style some more potency".
The PO change is likely targeted in the general direction of giving drop play a little more strength vs P, but in the process it makes SCV all ins stronger, and it also makes PvP even more 1 base oriented than it already is. I think these two things can, for the most part, be unanimously agreed to be negative side effects. Maybe blizzard is right, and we do need to buff drop plays, but do we have to do so in a way that also hinders much of what was good about PO? I have no clue why people are stating that PO has anything to do with PVP. 4gate era has been gone ages ago. Right before Heart of the Swarm, PVP in wings evolved into massive macro style with mass colossi/immortal battles. There has not been 1 base vs 1 base in a long time, PO has nothing to do with that. Map choices do, back in the day the maps were so broken and small, best builds were 1 base all ins, that can be said for zvz and tvt to so can't even argue that with PO nerf. PO reduction in time wont even be that game changing, protoss players really use it as a crutch more then anything. PO still has it's insane range, time reduction means it gives a better window for players to apply more aggression in the early game vs protoss. Protoss can do anything they want in any part of the game, differently vs Terran, Blink all ins, or they can sit back on PO and afk building a death ball with out worry of drops or any kind of early attacks. Terran has very little options vs protoss in the early game. at least in wings terran had a nice time to be aggressive when their first 2 medivacs popped out.
I find it funny when people think that PO is like something that oneshots instantly everything which gets within its 13 range (or whatever it is) when it is literally a photon cannon planted on a nexus. 2 medivacs full of units can easily destroy a nexus with PO. And considering the HUGE buff that medivacs got with HotS it was just natural to give Protoss some help to defend from drops. Plus protoss had always been the weakest defensive race, considering that the other static defenses suck and forcefields are useless after some time.
With this I'm not saying that the nerf is wrong, but if they completely removed the PO like many terran player would like, the vast majority of PvTs would see the protoss player simply dying to drops or scv pulls in the midgame.
|
is this a joke david kim?
|
Please jump to "conclusion" to see the changes I would like to see done. To understand them, read the whole thing.
This thread focuses on the "greater perspective" rather on mathemathical balance. This is the most valid way to approach balance at first hand. Therefore I have excluded most mathematical data in my arguments.
I have been gathering a lot of thoughts on the recent balance patches and I am very glad that blizzard actually in their balance test statements almost copy-paste sentences from some of the feedback from the users, but I can also be slightly afraid that the game, especially with the introduction of Heart of the Swarm, is giving the three races new and equal strategical opportunities that individual unit mathemathical adjustments no longer is the only thing needed for proper balance adjustments.
I would initially like to start pointing out my thoughts on why we currently experience problems in TVZ and TVP mech play and how PVZ scouting and individual unit counters causes random winning scenarioes due to limited scouting resources, windowed production mechanics and overexpensive tech investments.
I believe, despite the little I have read, that 99% of the "whine" or "critic" on the current game balance is either:
a) Directly pointed on protoss having overdefensive capabilities (such as the photon overcharge defends everything - meaning that technically any terran "allin" has much less efficiency that of protoss)
b) criticise At individual unit-to-unit counters or engagements (such as the immortal vs every armored unit)
c) Targets the overpowered exectuion of protoss allins in partiqularily PVZ
d) Predicts the future of how the oracle is essentially too good versus terran or in PVP. Some claim that it is not even necessary in the protoss arsenal - it is just there.
I think all of these statements above have some valid, but I would like to reject every single of them by looking at the greater perspective of things.
Lets first look at A:
Protoss defense (Overcharge) allows for too much greed and solid defence. Terrans and zergs has a hard time allining and harassing a defensive protoss player.
I believe blizzard agrees with me that variety of strategy across all matchups is essential to "fun" and pleasent viewership, including harass and intensity. However, since the matchups in fact rely on much different and heavy factors, we should only be allowed to see fun and intensity at different places in the game.. If you think about it, the protoss warpgate essentially means that statistics on individual protoss units must be lower in order to compensate for the games highest reinforcement value. This means protoss should be "safe" untill an X number of gateways (In my opinion it is commonly four-five, depending on strategy and matchup and base count). This is probably the reasoning for the implementation of the Photon Overcharge alongside the ability to use supportive and weak offensive units (sentries) to be recalled in case of an overrun. Especially in PVZ we all know that the very early expanding means zerg can get away with most economy if knowing that no aggression is coming, thus making moveouts with certain openings neccessary. The stalker is basically a supportive unit only which has different effects versus vikings and corrupters because these do heavy counters to colossus, which brings me to my other point. Blink allows the stalker to have micro-effiency in various amounts of scenarioes, but only if supported by a heavy gateway count. This brings me to my other point about protoss. Splash is necessary to defeating any zerg or terran army. This means at the highest level that rushing multiple gateways from 1 or 2 bases in PVZ or PVT must always only be allin since it slows splash teching too much. Splash units are also up to the 3 base count too expensive to be lost because of how well zerg and terran tier 1 and tier 2 units must trade. This is obviously fine, but that also means that terran and zerg units must have a slower rallying mechanism.
With the current mathemathical balance design applying to multiple concave engagements etc, etc, my point is that while it may be true that protoss is hardest to allin, one must also think it is necessary for protoss to be able to survive allins more because of the neccessity of teching and/or expanding to the midgame. With overcharge reduction from 60-40 two things may happen. Either protoss will start to lose more often to 3 rax double-techlab openings to the common metagame protoss "greed" to storm, or protoss will have to invest more into either robo or gateways making the korean-level games slightly more terran favored, perhaps even positive to the terran side.
Let us look at B:
There is too much individual unit countering in the current state of the game. (Immortals versus Mech.) This may also be affected by other things such as protoss not being able to get punished early
Through my points on a, I do not think it is a good idea to touch the protoss earlygame defence in order to improve mech play in PVT, thus I will not comment it here. Neither do I believe that the immortals statistics causes problems for terrans. I rather believe again that the greater race + map design causes the most problems for terran players and might favor protoss players. However, like everything else, this must be seen in a korean-level perspective and an eveything-else level perspective.
I think that terrans playing mech automatically commits to turtling, which they should. This is of course very varied on terran mech compositions, but typically a massive amount of either siegetanks or thors with at least 30% support in hellbats with a 14-15 minute moveout is necessary (preferebly without being seen coming) for a terran mech army to work without getting counter attacked or crushed.
One of the reasons this is the truth is because of the existence of the raven. The raven is basically, in my opinion, the strongest "amassing" unit in the game because of its well-round abilities and exponentiel power if supported by siegetanks, planetaries, turrets or vikings. Especially in PVT. However, the response to "teching to ravens" from the protoss side can be straight forward because of the lack of raw mech headsup power whilst doing the teching.
1. A terran mech army is only able to battle a protoss army if it is exponentially empowered by siegetank amounts.
2. While empowering the army with siege tanks, an close-to-equal amount of immortals counters this composition.
3. While terrans probably have no immediate response to this, they try to find positional and structural value in order to compensate for siege-tank destroying armies, such as mass amounts of hellbats, planetaries or turrets.
4. Establishing such a defensive position is hard because of the time and resource investments too it. This gives protoss a lot of free work space.
If this was not the case, terrans would have greater acces to ravens. Thus my point is not that while you only buff terran mech units, you also buff the acces to ravens.
The reasons koreans often choose bio is because the balance and unit design allows micro-efficiency while macroing to top and therefore win the games. Terran mech does not have these abilities. This makes me believe that protoss should not be changed almost at all since it would otherwise result in bio-play strength at korean level.
I am not saying an overcharge reduction from 60 to 40 will make bio play too strong, but neither does it really boost mech, but it might cause problems that I have mentioned earlier.
c) Protoss allins are too storng in PVZ (Some say in PVT too.)
This is quite simple, really. The reason protoss allins are "too strong" is because of a scouting-information window, depending on protoss gw/forge openings, which basically allows zerg to drone either ahead or behind by making units. Essentially the truth is that any protoss allin should be defended if known coming, making 100% scouting a no-go from blizzard development, but a non-scouted or "threat-sheet" with various allins or midgame transitions can make protoss allins strong, not to mention cannonrushes or gateway expandings.
As mentioned in A, early protoss gateways means that a timing window MUST allow for more strength in order to compensate for the lack of mid-game splash damage preperation.
Since warpgate exists, splash damage units or protoss allins cannot be nerfed and protoss must almost always have the ability to make these investments without dying.
For terrans, this means that protoss should be slightly favored unless it is at the korean level where individual bio-units can be maximumly efficiently traded.
d) The oracle is too strong in PVT and PVP, and now we see it way too often in PVZ too. The acceleration buff was a mistake.
When it comes to individual unit abilities, I actually agree that the oracle is very "gimmick" (meaning that it is simply an allin investment, either it does everything and wins or it does nothing and you are behind, partiqularily in PVP and PVT). Although I do not think it is overpowered despite it probably does a bit more than it does not when it is in fact opened, which is how it is supposed to be, but to me the oracle design could help the game so much more instead of being a harass unit and expensive "scout unit."
What Blizzard SHOULD consider implementing in the game
I only accounted for a fraction of the problems I see in the SC2 design, but that is only accountable because it is such a great game which such complexity that if there was not a thousand problems it would not be good. However - with everything above in mind I think it is time to look at specific changes I think would could help the game and solve or decrease the problme-magnitude of the listed criticisms of the current game/balance.
- Increasing roach burrow to 2.25 or even 2.3 is a GOOD idea for game fun and intensity, but since it can force too much armor-counter with later expansions in PVP and perhaps threaten terran teching with allins and make muta switches in both matchups much more hard to deal and/or scout. I can only able to account in detail from the protoss perspective, so whilst the change actually can be a "balanced" and viable strategy against protoss, I think it allows zerg to do a lot of "stephano-style" openings making the roaches equally powered as in wings of liberty, except the muta transition can no longer be stopped by ground counters even closely to that was in Wings of Liberty, so to me it is actually quite logical that the mass-roach style is no longer a part of the game.
In my opinion Blizzard should only boost the roach burrow while compensating for either scouting or anti-muta ground-style in PVZ. This can be done by the following changes:
- Decrease the energy cost of revelation from 75 to 50 (The ability that reveals a large area of units and buildings) AND make reveal units being produced from eggs.
This will obviously make the oracle stronger, especially in PVT where it can both be threatening and scout for medivac drops. That is why I think the pulsar beam damage should be reduced to 20 versus light so it can still two-shot probes and drones but not scvs. It will also have the same N amounts of shots needed to kill a zergling, baneling and hydralisk. The marine will instead need 3 shots to be killed, likely to make oracle a less prefered proxy-opener in PVT, but shall instead be greater to deal with medivacs and unit movement.
Making the oracle able to reveal units being produced from eggs essentially means it is a level 2 observer. Since zerg has typically 4 or 5 producing structures before winning a game, it is to me clear that something to reveal production is needed to make reactions as intelligent as possible. An oracle with 3 or 4 rounds of revelation from full energy can therefore only make up to 60-80% production revelation, and this energy should also be conserved for army-tracking for tempest and air unit targeting.
I can not emphasize how important it could be to PVZ that protoss can actually follow a muta army with revelation. Currently I think that it is very back and forth "techplay", but if zerg can enforce greater aggression with burrow roaches, protoss should therefore have an easier time seeing zerg units coming as typically 2 observers with immediate immortal production plus forcefields with energy for hallucination otherwise would be the only thing which to me makes the roach threat too strong for muta and swarmhost transitionings.
- Decrease the siege-tank deployment speed from approximately 4 real time seconds (including attack delay) to 2 real time seconds.
I think the real problem with mech both in PVT and PVZ is that it lacks both mobility and positional/micro capabilities while having strong damage potential. If you change the damage, you will almost never see direct engagements at even games. If you change the mobility easily, terran can take expansions and tech to ravens much more easily. As accounted for earlier I believe that mech units with ravens included can create scenarioes that litterally forms the strongest possible army in the game, but the "positional" and teching aspect of it is too slow and therefore gives too much workspace for zerg and protoss.
It COULD be an alternative to make an upgrade in the techlab that increases the siege tank deployment rate so it is a midgame and lategame thing to avoid making it too powerful in earlygames. I really think mech should be played postional with many factors included, and the ability to quickly redeploy siege tanks at many locations as we also saw in brood war might be the solution in my opinion.
These things could happen at korean level:
A favored immortal+archon+chargelot army approaches a terran attempt to take a 4th base. The terran is well aware of this and has 4 medivacs ready for harass, but decides to use them defensively.
- After the first attack from siegetanks, he quickly unloads them in 1.5 seconds instead of 3 to pick them up to avoid losing them, quickly redeploying them at high ground or a more defensive location.
Why do I suggest this?
Because I believe that mech needs the ability to be "postionally played" just like with bio. I also think this would increase the level of fun.
These are basically the only two suggestions I have for the game that I see should be considered.
Conclusion:
- Changing the oracle revelation from 75 to 50 can improve the game like this:
Early oracle revelation will make early-scouting with revelation a good idea if the opponent goes for early scout denial.
Gives protosses the ability to set up counter-attacks or do micro-intensive unit snipes based on exact intel. Here is a few examples:
PVT: Oracles will be able to detect "greedy" 3rd bases without harassing even if turrets, widowmines and/or marines are in place.
PVP: Oracles will be able to detect phoenixes before entering a mineral line to do damage, making less concern for phoenix openings when doing oracles. This will require a delay in attack (25 energy for pulsar beam activation and 50 for revelation) otherwise there will be little energy to harass with.
PVZ: Oracles will be able much more easily to keep track on muta armies, threats and production, ultimately decreasing the level of "tech wars" which zerg at the moment leads in my eyes. However, this would probably need a compensation (roach burrow speed.)
Note: For PVZ it might be dangerous to let the oracle be able to scout too much if toss goes for heavy air, but in current high-level games not much scouting with air armies is done because the void-ray rush is necessary or you have phoenixes.
- Decreasing oracle damage from 25 versus light to 20 versus light
Will keep the same amount of pulsar attacks versus zerglings, banelings and hydralisks, but will need to three-shot marines and scvs instead of two. However, this will require that the oracle can do 4 instances of revelation with max energy instead of currently 2.5.
PVT: Terrans does at the moment play a bit "oversafe" when trying to determine whether a scout-denying protoss opens DT, blink allin or oracles. Decreasing the threat of the oracle at earlygame but increasing it´s utility in mid and earlygame through revelation THEN harass or just revelation only makes it a more skill-requiring and reacting game.
PVP: No big changes to the game.
PVZ: No big changes to the game.
Note: The oracle has never been designed to be used in offensive battles because of the lack of unit control (i.e. Lalush micro video/thread)
- Decreasing siege tank deployment rate either by default or through a mid-game upgrade (from approximately 4 real-time seconds including attack delay to 2 real time seconds.)
EDIT: It has been suggested that the siegemode should take 4 seconds, but unsiege take 2. This will keep the ability to make escapes with siege tanks.
PVT: Allows mobile medivac+tank combinations to be used. Allows for quick and more spread deployments since you more often can escape with tanks. Makes the tanks more micro intensive. Increases engagement value by letting tanks siege earlier and be caught off guard later.
TVT: Allows mobile medivac+tank combinations to be used. Allows for quick and more spread deployments since you more often can escape with tanks. Makes the tanks more micro intensive. Makes "offensive" tank playstyles more valuable and gives the pre-sieged terran player less advantage.
TVZ: Allows mobile medivac+tank combinations to be used. Allows for quick and more spread deployments since you more often can escape with tanks. Makes the tanks more micro intensive. Causes banelings to be dealt with more easily since deploying becomes more rapid and thus buys at least 1 round of shots more time to micro bio with.
SideTopic
I do also sincerely believe that Blizzard should consider implementing the micro-mechanics that Lalush has so greatly shown in his video.
Sorry for typos. Will probably edit the thread later for mistakes!
|
On January 03 2014 13:13 tshi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2014 07:42 iHirO wrote:
David Kim:
Detailed feedback based on good reasoning is greatly appreciated.
DID HE REALLY WRITE THAT WHAT IS HE TRYING 2 SAY BY THAT IS HE INSULTING THE SC2 COMMUNITY Y DOES HE HAVE TO POST SOMETHING SO INSULTING 2 SO MANY PPL ON THE BLIZZARD AND TL FORUMS??????????????????????????????????????????????????
You are insulted because you lack feedback, and good reasoning, He is quite right to ask for QQless feedback.
|
On January 03 2014 13:07 Existor wrote:Show nested quote +2. Swarm Host
These units are a huge problem against mech, basically against a mech army these units take over the map (wich Zerg should be able to do against mech.), burrow and from there the Terran is never able to advance his possition at all. In fact they are so strong that they can actually do damage against Sieged Tanks, wich is too good and basically gives Zerg and options to lock down and destroy mech from afar without ever actually confronting the army. Just remove Enduring Locust upgrade and make Locusts themselfs faster. Show nested quote +The big bad tank destroyer that will make hordes of staple siege tanks drop their pants (unsiege) and run for the hills. Nobody will ever make a significant number of tanks with a late-game in mind a long as there is no solution to the Brood Lord. At the moment you make vikings to combat the Brood Lord but the problem is that zerg then makes corruptors and infestors to beat your vikings and now we're transitioning out from mech into a air fight and so again you cant make a mech army for the late game in this state. Seeker Missiles with Vikings and Yamatos already counter very well Broods-Corruptors.
Yes you can make an air army against zerg air, but this is not about making air viable is it?
|
My mech suggestions:
1: Allow ghost emp / feedback / overseer building dump to dispel photon overcharge (then revert the timing nerf).
2: Make hellion transformation research much cheaper.
3: Allow PDD to block immortal shots.
All of these changes encourages more play actions through more ability usage and open up more build options (9 minute MMM ghost drop would be pro). The hellion transform costing 150/150 is ridiculous. Why is that so damned much? I get it taking a long time to research to prevent certain timings against zerg. But the cost is way out of line with its power.
|
On January 03 2014 07:51 mewo wrote:
Won't the msc thing just screw up pvp? Were terrans really worried about chain photon overcharges?
Name a single build or all in that can kill a protoss besides proxy double rax.
at the moment a protoss can kill a terran player with
DT
proxy gates
oracle openings
heavy gateway attack
blink stalker all in
just to name a few.
It's bullshit that terran has no options.
|
I forgot balance patch threads were like this and people demand their their race be buffed in the way they want it specifically buffed. Glad nothing has changed.
|
hmm ok quick brainstorm on DTs, Archons and Immortals
So DTs and Immortals have very unique passive abilities: permanent cloak and hardened shield.
Blizzard briefly attempted a buff to DTs, making them faster and more exciting/microable. This was obviously a bit troublesome because they would be insanely hard to kill. Why not try a buff/nerf instead: make them faster, but remove permanent cloaking make it a spell with energy or with cool down. This way, they could be less feast or famine, because they would be more effective for a shorter period of time. They would be much more consistant because if the opponent is prepared they could still take damage due to speed buff, and DTs could be retained. If opponent is not prepared, then its not necessarily game over, because cloak will run out. I feel it could make more like cloakshees
Archons and Immortals seem to overlap too much. Both have a sort of "fragile state" once their shields are gone, so the counter to both is emp (redundant).
Hardened shield is really interesting and there is nothing quite like it in the game. While I'll admit it is a really cool ability, why not change it so immortals still strong against armored units but not strong-untill-its-sheilds-are-done like the archon. Maybe just give it flat out more health and damage.
just brainstorming
TLDR: make DTs faster but make cloaking a spell with either cooldown or energy
immortal and archon both have "good until the sheilds are gone syndrom" making them feel redundant. Remove hardened shield and buff HP
|
On January 03 2014 13:34 CannonsNCarriers wrote:
My mech suggestions:
1: Allow ghost emp / feedback / overseer building dump to dispel photon overcharge (then revert the timing nerf).
2: Make hellion transformation research much cheaper.
3: Allow PDD to block immortal shots.
All of these changes encourages more play actions through more ability usage and open up more build options (9 minute MMM ghost drop would be pro). The hellion transform costing 150/150 is ridiculous. Why is that so damned much? I get it taking a long time to research to prevent certain timings against zerg. But the cost is way out of line with its power.
Interesting changes. I think they are all reasonable except #1. The biggest problem with PO is the early and early-mid game. Just push it back a bit with energy cost or duration changes. Blizzards change is better I feel.
|
If the photon overcharge change go through I don't think I'll ever win against Hitman again.
|
On January 03 2014 13:24 00higgo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2014 13:13 tshi wrote:On January 03 2014 07:42 iHirO wrote:
David Kim:
Detailed feedback based on good reasoning is greatly appreciated.
DID HE REALLY WRITE THAT WHAT IS HE TRYING 2 SAY BY THAT IS HE INSULTING THE SC2 COMMUNITY Y DOES HE HAVE TO POST SOMETHING SO INSULTING 2 SO MANY PPL ON THE BLIZZARD AND TL FORUMS?????????????????????????????????????????????????? You are insulted because you lack feedback, and good reasoning, He is quite right to ask for QQless feedback.
Nah it was sarcasm 'cause a lot of the ppl who add balance in the blizz forums typically have terrible ideas and just yell. I can imagine the people who get annoyed at something like that are probably the ones who are doing that kind of posting. I was being IRONICAL.
Oh hey i got a warning, lol I should put /sarcasm spoiler or something.
|
On January 03 2014 13:51 Aiursc wrote:
If the photon overcharge change go through I don't think I'll ever win against Hitman again.
Wait? Its a nerf, you know that? Or are you using the sarcasm?
On January 03 2014 13:52 tshi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2014 13:24 00higgo wrote:On January 03 2014 13:13 tshi wrote:On January 03 2014 07:42 iHirO wrote:
David Kim:
Detailed feedback based on good reasoning is greatly appreciated.
DID HE REALLY WRITE THAT WHAT IS HE TRYING 2 SAY BY THAT IS HE INSULTING THE SC2 COMMUNITY Y DOES HE HAVE TO POST SOMETHING SO INSULTING 2 SO MANY PPL ON THE BLIZZARD AND TL FORUMS?????????????????????????????????????????????????? You are insulted because you lack feedback, and good reasoning, He is quite right to ask for QQless feedback. Nah it was sarcasm 'cause a lot of the ppl who add balance in the blizz forums typically have terrible ideas and just yell. I can imagine the people who get annoyed at something like that are probably the ones who are doing that kind of posting. I was being IRONICAL. Oh hey i got a warning, lol I should put /sarcasm spoiler or something.
It was the all caps and the lack of a sarcasm spoiler fo sur.
|
On January 03 2014 13:06 ImperialFist wrote:
Meanwhile protoss can all-in left and right like Gods and still have a lategame that is so strong and extremely easy for all non-progamers to handle. Like a random master PvT, equal skill massively favors the protoss, i just dislike how some people have no shame.
Protoss has many gimmicks available, but they're still gimmicks. Lo and behold the almighty protoss all ins, which get easily crushed if scouted and the terran knows how to fend them off.
Scv trains are disgusting against colossi in the mid game. And it's not our fault most terrans below master league can't properly micro their ghosts. Most of these terrans get stuck in the drop phase of the game and don't even make ghosts. You don't see terrans complaining about colossi much because vikings pretty much "self-micro", but then you see players whine like crazy when they get raped by templars... without a single ghost on the field.
It's also funny to see players talk about protoss late game being strong. Considering how strong 3-3 bio is and how bad gateway units are, it's no wonder it all comes down to aoe. Try being careless with colossi, high templar, and observers, and see how badly protoss late game gets raped. You can't just a-move into the terran army and storm everything if the terran knows what he's doing.
|
How about a buff to adrenal gland to prevent Terran Bio from raping everything.
|
This thread talks more about the radical changes to make on the Protoss, and I think people should check it out, if they feel the Protoss design is faulty.
http://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/1knwus/protoss_design_discussion/
The balance changes seem nice, but I still think that the Protoss is still a race with a lot of strong all-ins (I personally get sick and tired of seeing a lot of NA Protoss players all-ining against Zergs) and heavily dependent on AOE. I really hope Blizzard would someday fix that because it does ruin the laddering experience for some Zerg players.
As for Terran, it's nice to see more about mech because I think Terran bio unless it is in the hands of Maru is not very good against the recent Protoss composition. So, it's nice to see a change up and force up all kinds of transitions from both sides.
|
On January 03 2014 13:20 Theobeo wrote:
- Changing the oracle revelation from 75 to 50 can improve the game like this:
Early oracle revelation will make early-scouting with revelation a good idea if the opponent goes for early scout denial.
Gives protosses the ability to set up counter-attacks or do micro-intensive unit snipes based on exact intel. Here is a few examples:
PVT: Oracles will be able to detect "greedy" 3rd bases without harassing even if turrets, widowmines and/or marines are in place.
PVP: Oracles will be able to detect phoenixes before entering a mineral line to do damage, making less concern for phoenix openings when doing oracles. This will require a delay in attack (25 energy for pulsar beam activation and 50 for revelation) otherwise there will be little energy to harass with.
PVZ: Oracles will be able much more easily to keep track on muta armies, threats and production, ultimately decreasing the level of "tech wars" which zerg at the moment leads in my eyes. However, this would probably need a compensation (roach burrow speed.)
Note: For PVZ it might be dangerous to let the oracle be able to scout too much if toss goes for heavy air, but in current high-level games not much scouting with air armies is done because the void-ray rush is necessary or you have phoenixes.
- Decreasing oracle damage from 25 versus light to 20 versus light
Will keep the same amount of pulsar attacks versus zerglings, banelings and hydralisks, but will need to three-shot marines and scvs instead of two. However, this will require that the oracle can do 4 instances of revelation with max energy instead of currently 2.5.
PVT: Terrans does at the moment play a bit "oversafe" when trying to determine whether a scout-denying protoss opens DT, blink allin or oracles. Decreasing the threat of the oracle at earlygame but increasing it´s utility in mid and earlygame through revelation THEN harass or just revelation only makes it a more skill-requiring and reacting game.
PVP: No big changes to the game.
PVZ: No big changes to the game.
Note: The oracle has never been designed to be used in offensive battles because of the lack of unit control (i.e. Lalush micro video/thread)
- Decreasing siege tank deployment rate either by default or through a mid-game upgrade (from approximately 4 real-time seconds including attack delay to 2 real time seconds.)
PVT: Allows mobile medivac+tank combinations to be used. Allows for quick and more spread deployments since you more often can escape with tanks. Makes the tanks more micro intensive. Increases engagement value by letting tanks siege earlier and be caught off guard later.
TVT: Allows mobile medivac+tank combinations to be used. Allows for quick and more spread deployments since you more often can escape with tanks. Makes the tanks more micro intensive. Makes "offensive" tank playstyles more valuable and gives the pre-sieged terran player less advantage.
TVZ: Allows mobile medivac+tank combinations to be used. Allows for quick and more spread deployments since you more often can escape with tanks. Makes the tanks more micro intensive. Causes banelings to be dealt with more easily since deploying becomes more rapid and thus buys at least 1 round of shots more time to micro bio with.
While I agree, and am thoroughly impressed, with your oracle suggestions upon looking through your explanations (though I was resistant at first by the raw descriptions), I don't agree that allowing the tank to siege up quicker would be a wise decision for that unit. However, on the unsiege front, I think I actually agree with you. Changes that allow easier retreat are usually a good idea, as that helps players conserve their armies easier if they take part of a suboptimal engagement - saves them for a future engagements. And unlike loveless remarriages, more engagements is always a good thing for a Starcraft game!
I would have the unsiege time buff tied in with the Transformation Servos upgrade, and possibly have the cost of that upgrade lowered to 100/100 again. Similarly, I'd have Hellbats be able to transform into Hellions time be lowered to 2s, but leave the reverse at 4s. This would make them a greater threat to chase down workers if a Medivac is no longer available, or just allows them to retreat more easily. Perhaps I'd also have Viking transformation time be similarly decreased, in the hope that players would make greater use of landed Vikings. That upgrade is terribly unused, and there are units that could make good use of being included in it.
As far as other changes that I think could greatly improve the game, I'd lower the cost of Ravens significantly, at a dear cost to their massing potential. For cost, I'd drop their gas cost down to 125, but I'd make the footprint of their auto-turrets 3x3, but leave the collision radius the same for pathing reasons. This makes laying down mass auto-turrets even less useful in the lategame, as it greatly reduces their DPS density. Furthermore, and most importantly, I'd make overlapping PDDs shoot each other's lasers! This will emphasize proper positioning of PDDs, and make them significantly less spammable versus Hydras, Corruptors, Vikings, and Stalkers that have been produced out of necessity to counter mass Raven flocks.
|
I wonder, sometimes, in threads like these,
with people posting massive essays on what the issues are,
with people posting idea after idea on what should be done,
with hundreds of individual voices at no point cohesing into a single scream.
I wonder if everyone thinks what they're writing will be read.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
