|
On January 04 2014 00:26 Frex wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 00:17 Faust852 wrote:On January 04 2014 00:11 Frex wrote:On January 03 2014 23:41 Brett wrote:
They are really starting to fucking interfere with this game way too much. It's becoming WoW-like with the rolling nerfs and buffs. Dog chasing its tail. They have barely touched the game since HotS. It is actually quite alarming to me how little they have done since release. During WoL we had 3 major patches (1.1.0., 1.2.0. and 1.3.0.) quicker than we have the first major patch in HotS (2.1.0.). These major patches were not balance patches, but feature patches, like IU, chats, etc. Since it's pretty good right now, not much change was needed. Now there is 2.1 that will add the f2p aspect but that's pretty much it. You are absolutely wrong. All of the major patches also included balance changes in WoL. The total amount of balance changes in those major patches far exceeds the amount of balance changes we have had so far in HotS. On the top of these balance changes there was even more changes between the major patches. And all of this happened in pretty much the same time frame.
What he ment is that nowadays, 'major patches' are always content (2.1, 2.2), Balance patches are just implemented (possibly 2.0.1, 2.0.2, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, etcetera)
|
On January 04 2014 00:26 Frex wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 00:17 Faust852 wrote:On January 04 2014 00:11 Frex wrote:On January 03 2014 23:41 Brett wrote:
They are really starting to fucking interfere with this game way too much. It's becoming WoW-like with the rolling nerfs and buffs. Dog chasing its tail. They have barely touched the game since HotS. It is actually quite alarming to me how little they have done since release. During WoL we had 3 major patches (1.1.0., 1.2.0. and 1.3.0.) quicker than we have the first major patch in HotS (2.1.0.). These major patches were not balance patches, but feature patches, like IU, chats, etc. Since it's pretty good right now, not much change was needed. Now there is 2.1 that will add the f2p aspect but that's pretty much it. You are absolutely wrong. All of the major patches also included balance changes in WoL. The total amount of balance changes in those major patches far exceeds the amount of balance changes we have had so far in HotS. On the top of these balance changes there was even more changes between the major patches. And all of this happened in pretty much the same time frame.
So you're saying that 1.1.0 was a bigger balance patch than 1.1.2 ?
Or 1.3.0 bigger than 1.3.3.
These big patches were not "balance patches" bug sc2 patches in general, just adding balance in it because why not, better doing one big update than 3 or 4 of them. Look at the frequency of these : September 2010, January 2011, March 2011. That's a lot of change within a really short period. They just "packed" everything inside one big patch.
|
On January 03 2014 07:55 IeZaeL wrote:
Nice shit. Templar openings are dead now. 10 min push + 2 emp = gg
you don´t need ghost energy for that, my little friend, because ghosts without EN upgrade will have an emp ready, when they arrive at protoss base.
and making pure mech playstyles too strong is a bad idea. It´s really boring gameplay-wise. Enable all currently underused units to synergyze well with bio strats instead!
|
On January 03 2014 21:20 Plansix wrote:
I love how people are getting upset about the proposed buff to tanks vs armored, yet that would make tanks do more damage to the majority protoss ground units. I think we need to see it in action with the EMP buff before we judge.
What I think is odd is that they're proposing a buff to damage vs armored. Tanks already eat armored units, the damage as it is is pretty good. The real weakness of the tank in TvP (apart from immortals) is that zealots and archons piss on them because neither one is armored. If we're gonna buff tank damage, we should just do a flat buff instead of buffing it against armored only.
|
Well thats kinda the idea of boosting EMP usage Because what tanks don't deal with Emps will IE BFH EMp Eat Archon and Zlots .... you can't expect to make 1 unit and win 100% of the time in engagements lol
|
No nerf to Oracle? After the justified nerfs to Hellbat and Widow Mine, this is one of the last units that makes me cringe every time I see it in a pro match.
|
On January 04 2014 00:56 forsooth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2014 21:20 Plansix wrote:
I love how people are getting upset about the proposed buff to tanks vs armored, yet that would make tanks do more damage to the majority protoss ground units. I think we need to see it in action with the EMP buff before we judge. What I think is odd is that they're proposing a buff to damage vs armored. Tanks already eat armored units, the damage as it is is pretty good. The real weakness of the tank in TvP (apart from immortals) is that zealots and archons piss on them because neither one is armored. If we're gonna buff tank damage, we should just do a flat buff instead of buffing it against armored only.
Agreed, I'm not really understanding Blizzard logic here. A buff against armored will just buff mech against zerg (roaches, utlras) and in TvT (marauders). What it wont do is help against the standard immortal/archon that a-moves over mech armies without breaking a sweat.
|
Agreed, I'm not really understanding Blizzard logic here. A buff against armored will just buff mech against zerg (roaches, utlras) and in TvT (marauders). What it wont do is help against the standard immortal/archon that a-moves over mech armies without breaking a sweat
Your completely right but I think they are trying to decide on this on top of the emp buff so that Tanks will do good against that composition seeing how Immortl are Armored so if you are fighting that kind of army you have to have Ghost Tank Hellbat and you will come out ahead on the fight....
|
On January 04 2014 00:56 forsooth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2014 21:20 Plansix wrote:
I love how people are getting upset about the proposed buff to tanks vs armored, yet that would make tanks do more damage to the majority protoss ground units. I think we need to see it in action with the EMP buff before we judge. What I think is odd is that they're proposing a buff to damage vs armored. Tanks already eat armored units, the damage as it is is pretty good. The real weakness of the tank in TvP (apart from immortals) is that zealots and archons piss on them because neither one is armored. If we're gonna buff tank damage, we should just do a flat buff instead of buffing it against armored only.
hellbats wreck zealots on their own and wreck archons with tank support. Has any of you actually even tried it or even watched a replay? So much ignorance in this thread wtf.
|
Just buff the fucking tank damage against shield already. One simple fix to buff mech against protoss without fucking zerg over completely. I also honestly cant believe they say they want to buff mech by buffing a fucking bio-unit.
airmech international...
|
On January 04 2014 01:07 cptjibberjabber wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 00:56 forsooth wrote:On January 03 2014 21:20 Plansix wrote:
I love how people are getting upset about the proposed buff to tanks vs armored, yet that would make tanks do more damage to the majority protoss ground units. I think we need to see it in action with the EMP buff before we judge. What I think is odd is that they're proposing a buff to damage vs armored. Tanks already eat armored units, the damage as it is is pretty good. The real weakness of the tank in TvP (apart from immortals) is that zealots and archons piss on them because neither one is armored. If we're gonna buff tank damage, we should just do a flat buff instead of buffing it against armored only. hellbats wreck zealots on their own and wreck archons with tank support. Has any of you actually even tried it or even watched a replay? So much ignorance in this thread wtf.
Youre completely wrong. Archons absolutely destroy hellbats because hellbats have a biotag and archons do +dmg to biological. Tanks do shit against archons because again, archons arent armored, which is about the only thing tanks are good against except lings and marines.
|
On January 04 2014 01:07 cptjibberjabber wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 00:56 forsooth wrote:On January 03 2014 21:20 Plansix wrote:
I love how people are getting upset about the proposed buff to tanks vs armored, yet that would make tanks do more damage to the majority protoss ground units. I think we need to see it in action with the EMP buff before we judge. What I think is odd is that they're proposing a buff to damage vs armored. Tanks already eat armored units, the damage as it is is pretty good. The real weakness of the tank in TvP (apart from immortals) is that zealots and archons piss on them because neither one is armored. If we're gonna buff tank damage, we should just do a flat buff instead of buffing it against armored only. hellbats wreck zealots on their own and wreck archons with tank support. Has any of you actually even tried it or even watched a replay? So much ignorance in this thread wtf.
I don't think I could make a more ironic post if I tried.
Archons absolutely wreck hellbats. Add a storm or two and they wont last more than a few seconds.
|
As a protoss player, I think these changes are good. PO is just a very boring spell. Takes no skill and prevents all early attacks what so ever by terran and zerg. Now it will at least increase the posibilties of in early game TvP and ZvP. Only problem is, as many have pointed out, that Pvp will get more wierd.
|
United Kingdom12071 Posts
One amazing change they could do is move EMP to ravens since it'd mean they'd get used more and it'd actually help mech.
|
On January 04 2014 01:15 Qikz wrote:
One amazing change they could do is move EMP to ravens since it'd mean they'd get used more and it'd actually help mech.
They're even easier to feedback though :/
|
Revert oracle to prepatch. All other changes sound really weird / unessecary. Blizz is not allowing for more responses on their official thread so sorry for posting here.
|
For moving EMP to ravens, it could be a good thing, although the slowness of the ravens could be 'very' tricky, maybe add one range to the spell, although in this case i'd better test it like it is now than buffing it first.
If this changes comes up, add lockdown to the ghost could be very cool, AND reverting old ghost cost (or even rebuff snipe a litlle while making it 50(100)/200. Making it like: Add Raven or Ghost first, because of gas cost, and it'll add to the ghost something Only against mechanical while snipe is only against biological. Something like that can be interesting as well as fun.
Against Collo play, it can make ghost first interesting too, instead of 'always vikings'. More than one response to the same thing is really good gameplay-wise. And it can be tricky for mech too if gas cost is reverted, making it even harder for biomech/mech to add ghost AND ravens, while the 2 of them are useful or even needed in late-late game.
For the mech part, just REVERT THAT UPGRADE THING. it's ugly and bad, as only good for the turtling mech style. Just make ground mech good, or anti-air mech good, or ground-viking better, or just buff mech units so biomech can be done.
Any buff to the tanks will be good because promoting at least biomech if not pure mech, Donm't care about TvT if it's only mech, we have one TvT out of 20 games aniway. and MechvsMech can be fun too, for now it's the only MU where mech can be used competitively, or even can be used without this 45+ minutesboring game mass raven.
But they won't do that: they don't revert the stupid changes, they don't look back and try something new even if it's ugly design wise and unintuitive.
|
One amazing change they could do is move EMP to ravens since it'd mean they'd get used more and it'd actually help mech.
I smell a BW Lover  hahaha Honestly i'm not a fan of mech so i'm not really interested in seeing it work but I think these changes would be interesting haha
As a protoss player, I think these changes are good. PO is just a very boring spell. Takes no skill and prevents all early attacks what so ever by terran and zerg. Now it will at least increase the posibilties of in early game TvP and ZvP. Only problem is, as many have pointed out, that Pvp will get more wierd.
Yea this i completely agree with but in no world should a Race balance be defined by the mirror match up.... I think thats where blizzard is getting this wrong.... if they make the race a Micro rewarding race as opposed to this unit kills things instantly with an A move then PvP is ALWAYS going to be a weird match up where Mid masters players can Own GMs if he can execute a Counter build well against the GM hahahaha
|
its not really rocket science but if you skip the reaper opening and go straight to factory and widow mines you will hold the blink allin that you scouted with 1 scv.
|
On January 04 2014 01:09 Snusmumriken wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 01:07 cptjibberjabber wrote:On January 04 2014 00:56 forsooth wrote:On January 03 2014 21:20 Plansix wrote:
I love how people are getting upset about the proposed buff to tanks vs armored, yet that would make tanks do more damage to the majority protoss ground units. I think we need to see it in action with the EMP buff before we judge. What I think is odd is that they're proposing a buff to damage vs armored. Tanks already eat armored units, the damage as it is is pretty good. The real weakness of the tank in TvP (apart from immortals) is that zealots and archons piss on them because neither one is armored. If we're gonna buff tank damage, we should just do a flat buff instead of buffing it against armored only. hellbats wreck zealots on their own and wreck archons with tank support. Has any of you actually even tried it or even watched a replay? So much ignorance in this thread wtf. Youre completely wrong. Archons absolutely destroy hellbats because hellbats have a biotag and archons do +dmg to biological. Tanks do shit against archons because again, archons arent armored, which is about the only thing tanks are good against except lings and marines.
correct, but you don't take into consideration how expensive an archon is. Say you have 2 archons, that's 200/600 or 500/500. you can use 7 Hellbats and still be cost-efficient. Theorycrafting alone isn't good enough. Yeah they do +dmg, but that doesn't mean hellbats are instantly not viable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
