|
On January 04 2014 09:11 Plansix wrote:
We should totally argue about personal opinion about which match up is best and most robust.
Ready? GO!
I think PvT is the best because I like the animation that marines make when the colossi burn them and zealots slice them. PROVE ME WRONG!
i'm not sure what the alternative to arguing about personal opinions is. should we close the forum? or are we supposed to be posting nothing but facts, which would mean the pool of data available to us is basically winrates and unit statistics?
|
On January 04 2014 09:11 Waise wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 09:11 Plansix wrote:
We should totally argue about personal opinion about which match up is best and most robust.
Ready? GO!
I think PvT is the best because I like the animation that marines make when the colossi burn them and zealots slice them. PROVE ME WRONG! i'm not sure what the alternative to arguing about personal opinions is. should we close the forum? or are we supposed to be posting nothing but facts, which would mean the pool of data available to us is basically winrates and unit statistics?
I think we can discuss stuff without measuring which match up gave us the "best games" and "most amazing Esports moments" and other shit posts like that. There are smarter discussions to be had out there.
Like, with the the PO only lasting 40 seconds, does the terran have a window to attack early if they can bait it out? That is basically one warp in cycle, so can does it provide room to pressure the protoss? Show you work.
|
On January 04 2014 09:15 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 09:11 Waise wrote:On January 04 2014 09:11 Plansix wrote:
We should totally argue about personal opinion about which match up is best and most robust.
Ready? GO!
I think PvT is the best because I like the animation that marines make when the colossi burn them and zealots slice them. PROVE ME WRONG! i'm not sure what the alternative to arguing about personal opinions is. should we close the forum? or are we supposed to be posting nothing but facts, which would mean the pool of data available to us is basically winrates and unit statistics? I think we can discuss stuff without measuring which match up gave us the "best games" and "most amazing Esports moments" and other shit posts like that. There are smarter discussions to be had out there. Like, with the the PO only lasting 40 seconds, does the terran have a window to attack early if they can bait it out? That is basically one warp in cycle, so can does it provide room to pressure the protoss? Show you work.
Better close the TL news section then  Why else are we here if not to celebrate the best that StarCraft has brought us.
|
The whole thread is people posting their personal opinions on balance changes over which they have zero influence. That's usually what a forum is.
I never said that my choices of best match ups were somehow objectively true. But I do contend that with the way PvP is, it cannot be used a reason not to go through with this, because any dependence on PO to survive early aggression in PvP is a sign of far deeper issues that cannot be resolved in a balance patch. If even shittier PvP is the price we pay for better PvZ and specifically PvT, I am cool with that.
|
On January 04 2014 09:17 Squat wrote:
The whole thread is people posting their personal opinions on balance changes over which they have zero influence. That's usually what a forum is.
I never said that my choices of best match ups were somehow objectively true. But I do contend that with the way PvP is, it cannot be used a season not to go through with this, because any dependence on PO to survive early aggression in PvP is a sign of far deeper issues that cannot be resolved in a balance patch. If even shittier PvP is the price we pay for better PvZ and specifically PvT, I am cool with that.
ok, make scan require an armory research. If you have trouble with banshees and mines, it's just a sign of deeper issues with Terran that cannot be resolved in a balance patch.
#stupidlogic
|
On January 04 2014 09:17 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 09:15 Plansix wrote:On January 04 2014 09:11 Waise wrote:On January 04 2014 09:11 Plansix wrote:
We should totally argue about personal opinion about which match up is best and most robust.
Ready? GO!
I think PvT is the best because I like the animation that marines make when the colossi burn them and zealots slice them. PROVE ME WRONG! i'm not sure what the alternative to arguing about personal opinions is. should we close the forum? or are we supposed to be posting nothing but facts, which would mean the pool of data available to us is basically winrates and unit statistics? I think we can discuss stuff without measuring which match up gave us the "best games" and "most amazing Esports moments" and other shit posts like that. There are smarter discussions to be had out there. Like, with the the PO only lasting 40 seconds, does the terran have a window to attack early if they can bait it out? That is basically one warp in cycle, so can does it provide room to pressure the protoss? Show you work. Better close the TL news section then Why else are we here if not to celebrate the best that StarCraft has brought us.
I'm all for celbrating SC2, but I think we can do better than:
"No TvT is the best mirror match, noob"
"No, scrub, TvZ is the best match up period. Must beautiful games of all time".
But I have high standards sometimes.
|
On January 04 2014 09:20 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 09:17 Ghanburighan wrote:On January 04 2014 09:15 Plansix wrote:On January 04 2014 09:11 Waise wrote:On January 04 2014 09:11 Plansix wrote:
We should totally argue about personal opinion about which match up is best and most robust.
Ready? GO!
I think PvT is the best because I like the animation that marines make when the colossi burn them and zealots slice them. PROVE ME WRONG! i'm not sure what the alternative to arguing about personal opinions is. should we close the forum? or are we supposed to be posting nothing but facts, which would mean the pool of data available to us is basically winrates and unit statistics? I think we can discuss stuff without measuring which match up gave us the "best games" and "most amazing Esports moments" and other shit posts like that. There are smarter discussions to be had out there. Like, with the the PO only lasting 40 seconds, does the terran have a window to attack early if they can bait it out? That is basically one warp in cycle, so can does it provide room to pressure the protoss? Show you work. Better close the TL news section then Why else are we here if not to celebrate the best that StarCraft has brought us. I'm all for celbrating SC2, but I think we can do better than: "No TvT is the best mirror match, noob" "No, scrub, TvZ is the best match up period. Must beautiful games of all time". But I have high standards sometimes.
Hey, I would even be OK with that, if people would
a) realize it's personal taste and not up for discussion
b) do so without shitting on all other races/matchups ("TvT is the best matchup, because PvP is shit and...")
|
On January 04 2014 09:20 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 09:17 Ghanburighan wrote:On January 04 2014 09:15 Plansix wrote:On January 04 2014 09:11 Waise wrote:On January 04 2014 09:11 Plansix wrote:
We should totally argue about personal opinion about which match up is best and most robust.
Ready? GO!
I think PvT is the best because I like the animation that marines make when the colossi burn them and zealots slice them. PROVE ME WRONG! i'm not sure what the alternative to arguing about personal opinions is. should we close the forum? or are we supposed to be posting nothing but facts, which would mean the pool of data available to us is basically winrates and unit statistics? I think we can discuss stuff without measuring which match up gave us the "best games" and "most amazing Esports moments" and other shit posts like that. There are smarter discussions to be had out there. Like, with the the PO only lasting 40 seconds, does the terran have a window to attack early if they can bait it out? That is basically one warp in cycle, so can does it provide room to pressure the protoss? Show you work. Better close the TL news section then Why else are we here if not to celebrate the best that StarCraft has brought us. I'm all for celbrating SC2, but I think we can do better than: "No TvT is the best mirror match, noob" "No, scrub, TvZ is the best match up period. Must beautiful games of all time". But I have high standards sometimes.
If you have high standards for posting, lead the way. Be a role model. Knowing your posting habits, I'd say that requires a wee bit of elevation on your part 
|
On January 04 2014 09:26 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 09:20 Plansix wrote:On January 04 2014 09:17 Ghanburighan wrote:On January 04 2014 09:15 Plansix wrote:On January 04 2014 09:11 Waise wrote:On January 04 2014 09:11 Plansix wrote:
We should totally argue about personal opinion about which match up is best and most robust.
Ready? GO!
I think PvT is the best because I like the animation that marines make when the colossi burn them and zealots slice them. PROVE ME WRONG! i'm not sure what the alternative to arguing about personal opinions is. should we close the forum? or are we supposed to be posting nothing but facts, which would mean the pool of data available to us is basically winrates and unit statistics? I think we can discuss stuff without measuring which match up gave us the "best games" and "most amazing Esports moments" and other shit posts like that. There are smarter discussions to be had out there. Like, with the the PO only lasting 40 seconds, does the terran have a window to attack early if they can bait it out? That is basically one warp in cycle, so can does it provide room to pressure the protoss? Show you work. Better close the TL news section then Why else are we here if not to celebrate the best that StarCraft has brought us. I'm all for celbrating SC2, but I think we can do better than: "No TvT is the best mirror match, noob" "No, scrub, TvZ is the best match up period. Must beautiful games of all time". But I have high standards sometimes. If you have high standards for posting, lead the way. Be a role model. Knowing your posting habits, I'd say that requires a wee bit of elevation on your part
You're turn, I already did. See example from above:
"Like, with the the PO only lasting 40 seconds, does the terran have a window to attack early if they can bait it out? That is basically one warp in cycle, so can does it provide room to pressure the protoss? Show you work."
See, I wanted to discuss a real, early game timing and not ether and theory craft.
|
On January 04 2014 09:31 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 09:26 Ghanburighan wrote:On January 04 2014 09:20 Plansix wrote:On January 04 2014 09:17 Ghanburighan wrote:On January 04 2014 09:15 Plansix wrote:On January 04 2014 09:11 Waise wrote:On January 04 2014 09:11 Plansix wrote:
We should totally argue about personal opinion about which match up is best and most robust.
Ready? GO!
I think PvT is the best because I like the animation that marines make when the colossi burn them and zealots slice them. PROVE ME WRONG! i'm not sure what the alternative to arguing about personal opinions is. should we close the forum? or are we supposed to be posting nothing but facts, which would mean the pool of data available to us is basically winrates and unit statistics? I think we can discuss stuff without measuring which match up gave us the "best games" and "most amazing Esports moments" and other shit posts like that. There are smarter discussions to be had out there. Like, with the the PO only lasting 40 seconds, does the terran have a window to attack early if they can bait it out? That is basically one warp in cycle, so can does it provide room to pressure the protoss? Show you work. Better close the TL news section then Why else are we here if not to celebrate the best that StarCraft has brought us. I'm all for celbrating SC2, but I think we can do better than: "No TvT is the best mirror match, noob" "No, scrub, TvZ is the best match up period. Must beautiful games of all time". But I have high standards sometimes. If you have high standards for posting, lead the way. Be a role model. Knowing your posting habits, I'd say that requires a wee bit of elevation on your part You're turn, I already did. See example from above: "Like, with the the PO only lasting 40 seconds, does the terran have a window to attack early if they can bait it out? That is basically one warp in cycle, so can does it provide room to pressure the protoss? Show you work." See, I wanted to discuss a real, early game timing and not ether and theory craft.
Considering there are already timing windows with the 60s PO...
|
On January 04 2014 09:20 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 09:17 Squat wrote:
The whole thread is people posting their personal opinions on balance changes over which they have zero influence. That's usually what a forum is.
I never said that my choices of best match ups were somehow objectively true. But I do contend that with the way PvP is, it cannot be used a season not to go through with this, because any dependence on PO to survive early aggression in PvP is a sign of far deeper issues that cannot be resolved in a balance patch. If even shittier PvP is the price we pay for better PvZ and specifically PvT, I am cool with that. ok, make scan require an armory research. If you have trouble with banshees and mines, it's just a sign of deeper issues with Terran that cannot be resolved in a balance patch. #stupidlogic
No, because that would be purposefully making the match up worse in order to create problems where there previously were none. In the case with PO, it was a giant band aid applied because of the myriad problems that were already there. It also had a deleterious effect on PvT and PvZ, which is why I consider any issues the nerf might cause in PvP a worthwhile sacrifice for a chance to improve the protoss non mirror match ups. I'm starting to suspect you are being intentionally fatuous.
The whole #stupid thing is kind of played out. If you disagree, then do so, but contrary to what you may believe, saying that everything someone who disagrees with you is saying is stupid doesn't actually make it so.
|
When a patch against maphack?...
|
On January 04 2014 09:41 Squat wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 09:20 Big J wrote:On January 04 2014 09:17 Squat wrote:
The whole thread is people posting their personal opinions on balance changes over which they have zero influence. That's usually what a forum is.
I never said that my choices of best match ups were somehow objectively true. But I do contend that with the way PvP is, it cannot be used a season not to go through with this, because any dependence on PO to survive early aggression in PvP is a sign of far deeper issues that cannot be resolved in a balance patch. If even shittier PvP is the price we pay for better PvZ and specifically PvT, I am cool with that. ok, make scan require an armory research. If you have trouble with banshees and mines, it's just a sign of deeper issues with Terran that cannot be resolved in a balance patch. #stupidlogic No, because that would be purposefully making the match up worse in order to create problems where there previously were none. In the case with PO, it was a giant band aid applied because of the myriad problems that were already there. It also had a deleterious effect on PvT and PvZ, which is why I consider any issues the nerf might cause in PvP a worthwhile sacrifice for a chance to improve the protoss non mirror match ups. I'm starting to suspect you are being intentionally fatuous. The whole #stupid thing is kind of played out. If you disagree, then do so, but contrary to what you may believe, saying that everything someone who disagrees with you is saying is stupid doesn't actually make it so.
I'm blown away that you're of the opinion that PvP is bad and we should sacrifice it for other matchups. That's just lazy. Do something that makes all the matchups better. PvP is a far better matchup right now than the community gives it, spearheaded by the amount of hate it gets even in articles by writers who still talk about PvP like were in 2011 saying it's a coin flip and boring buildup. Just read the best games of 2013 for what I'm talking about. There's 3 PvP games I remember and none inside the top 30 when in fact several of them deserved much higher places on the list.
|
On behalf of tigerSC2 he suggests tanks fire two shots after researching. The first shot to catch act as a shield damage shell and the second the current tank shot. Both acting in aoe.
Secondly thors need their air weapons to be changed. They should retain their splash attack but the unit targeted should take additional impact damage. This way magic box will still have its place, but its effectiveness will reduce as muta numbers reduce.
Again, not my suggestions, but someone wanted me to post this to talk about it for some reason. :/ So I figured, "Why not?" Though, to be honest I disagree with the EMP tank idea.
|
On January 04 2014 09:41 Squat wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 09:20 Big J wrote:On January 04 2014 09:17 Squat wrote:
The whole thread is people posting their personal opinions on balance changes over which they have zero influence. That's usually what a forum is.
I never said that my choices of best match ups were somehow objectively true. But I do contend that with the way PvP is, it cannot be used a season not to go through with this, because any dependence on PO to survive early aggression in PvP is a sign of far deeper issues that cannot be resolved in a balance patch. If even shittier PvP is the price we pay for better PvZ and specifically PvT, I am cool with that. ok, make scan require an armory research. If you have trouble with banshees and mines, it's just a sign of deeper issues with Terran that cannot be resolved in a balance patch. #stupidlogic No, because that would be purposefully making the match up worse in order to create problems where there previously were none. In the case with PO, it was a giant band aid applied because of the myriad problems that were already there. It also had a deleterious effect on PvT and PvZ, which is why I consider any issues the nerf might cause in PvP a worthwhile sacrifice for a chance to improve the protoss non mirror match ups. I'm starting to suspect you are being intentionally fatuous. The whole #stupid thing is kind of played out. If you disagree, then do so, but contrary to what you may believe, saying that everything someone who disagrees with you is saying is stupid doesn't actually make it so.
PvP early game was in pretty good shape before HotS came in with cheaper DTs, oracles and a MsC that can be used for blink and gateway rushes. If you disagree, I advise you to watch PvP form late 2012 and 2013, which had hardly any problems with early game rushes being too strong. HotS MsC is a fix to HotS introductions to this matchup.
So if you break PvP with a nerf to PO you are
purposefully making the match up worse in order to create problems where there previously were none. , just as in the scan example.
And I'm not #stupidthinging anything I disagree with. I'm stupidthinging anything that is either a matter of personal taste or a matter of logically wrong, as your example of "when you break PvP it's not because you broke it".
|
On January 04 2014 10:00 Wingblade wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 09:41 Squat wrote:On January 04 2014 09:20 Big J wrote:On January 04 2014 09:17 Squat wrote:
The whole thread is people posting their personal opinions on balance changes over which they have zero influence. That's usually what a forum is.
I never said that my choices of best match ups were somehow objectively true. But I do contend that with the way PvP is, it cannot be used a season not to go through with this, because any dependence on PO to survive early aggression in PvP is a sign of far deeper issues that cannot be resolved in a balance patch. If even shittier PvP is the price we pay for better PvZ and specifically PvT, I am cool with that. ok, make scan require an armory research. If you have trouble with banshees and mines, it's just a sign of deeper issues with Terran that cannot be resolved in a balance patch. #stupidlogic No, because that would be purposefully making the match up worse in order to create problems where there previously were none. In the case with PO, it was a giant band aid applied because of the myriad problems that were already there. It also had a deleterious effect on PvT and PvZ, which is why I consider any issues the nerf might cause in PvP a worthwhile sacrifice for a chance to improve the protoss non mirror match ups. I'm starting to suspect you are being intentionally fatuous. The whole #stupid thing is kind of played out. If you disagree, then do so, but contrary to what you may believe, saying that everything someone who disagrees with you is saying is stupid doesn't actually make it so. I'm blown away that you're of the opinion that PvP is bad and we should sacrifice it for other matchups. That's just lazy. Do something that makes all the matchups better. PvP is a far better matchup right now than the community gives it, spearheaded by the amount of hate it gets even in articles by writers who still talk about PvP like were in 2011 saying it's a coin flip and boring buildup. Just read the best games of 2013 for what I'm talking about. There's 3 PvP games I remember and none inside the top 30 when in fact several of them deserved much higher places on the list.
Well I'm a pragmatist, and I do not believe there is anything that can plausibly be done in a small patch that can make PvP good or at least decent. If the choice is between not nerfing something that is hurting other match ups and keeping it because it's needed due to the slightly absurd nature of PvP, I say it's gone in an instant. Sometimes you just have to cut your losses and focus on what can realistically be done.
As for lazy, maybe, but after four years of feedback and essay long posts by dozens, if not hundreds of people...I think our expectations for what can actually be done need to be a little more grounded. This seems like a solution blizzard would be willing to do, and it will have to suffice. Much like everything in this game, it's about what we can do to make it suffice. Trying to fix PvP is a pipe dream.
|
On January 04 2014 10:03 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 09:41 Squat wrote:On January 04 2014 09:20 Big J wrote:On January 04 2014 09:17 Squat wrote:
The whole thread is people posting their personal opinions on balance changes over which they have zero influence. That's usually what a forum is.
I never said that my choices of best match ups were somehow objectively true. But I do contend that with the way PvP is, it cannot be used a season not to go through with this, because any dependence on PO to survive early aggression in PvP is a sign of far deeper issues that cannot be resolved in a balance patch. If even shittier PvP is the price we pay for better PvZ and specifically PvT, I am cool with that. ok, make scan require an armory research. If you have trouble with banshees and mines, it's just a sign of deeper issues with Terran that cannot be resolved in a balance patch. #stupidlogic No, because that would be purposefully making the match up worse in order to create problems where there previously were none. In the case with PO, it was a giant band aid applied because of the myriad problems that were already there. It also had a deleterious effect on PvT and PvZ, which is why I consider any issues the nerf might cause in PvP a worthwhile sacrifice for a chance to improve the protoss non mirror match ups. I'm starting to suspect you are being intentionally fatuous. The whole #stupid thing is kind of played out. If you disagree, then do so, but contrary to what you may believe, saying that everything someone who disagrees with you is saying is stupid doesn't actually make it so. PvP early game was in pretty good shape before HotS came in with cheaper DTs, oracles and a MsC that can be used for blink and gateway rushes. If you disagree, I advise you to watch PvP form late 2012 and 2013, which had hardly any problems with early game rushes being too strong. HotS MsC is a fix to HotS introductions to this matchup. So if you break PvP with a nerf to PO you are Show nested quote +purposefully making the match up worse in order to create problems where there previously were none. , just as in the scan example. And I'm not #stupidthinging anything I disagree with. I'm stupidthinging anything that is either a matter of personal taste or a matter of logically wrong, as your example of "when you break PvP it's not because you broke it".
But then the problems are with oracles, cheap DTs and the MSC as a whole, basically the whole HotS package made PvP bad. It can't be helped or reversed at this point, it is what is. Avoiding a minor nerf to MSC that can help PvT and PvZ because PvP ended up being shit in HotS is not a good reason. The nerf to PO isn't what is making it bad, HotS made it bad, and PO has just swept the problems under rug for a while. My logic is fine, and frankly your puerile "ur stupid" is becoming irritating.
Should worse come to worst, it's still a mirror so it's still balanced even if the gameplay is bad. The none mirror match ups take precedence, balance is more important that gameplay. Saying we should not nerf PO because it helps mitigate the underlying issues of PvP is a terrible argument.
|
Honestly, I don't really like the nerf approach. If PO gets nerfed, how about some buff for protoss to compensate? For example.. -10 sec to warpgate research? I've never understood why this thing got nerfed so hard in WoL. Yes, 4 gate all-in but it was overnerfed at some point.
|
I really wish Blizz would release hard data about the matchup balance for every level of skill. We know they have an enormous wealth of statistical data, but they are stubbornly refusing to share it, which has resulted in hyperbole and murky anecdotal evidence being all we have. Is random reddit poster #324242 correct when they assert that PvT seems broken at X skill level? We have no way of knowing.
Perhaps the game really and truly is fairly well balanced at all skill levels and current opinion is just a run-away train of discontent. Perhaps it's utterly and completely broken at some or all skill levels. How are we supposed to give feedback on whether or not changes seem appropriate when we have no idea if there's anything truly wrong? I can't trust my own experience. I thought terran was underpowered at the start of WoL, for fucks' sake. Of course my opinion is going to be skewed by my own inadequacy. We need objectivity if things are going to get better.
|
On January 04 2014 10:17 Squat wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2014 10:03 Big J wrote:On January 04 2014 09:41 Squat wrote:On January 04 2014 09:20 Big J wrote:On January 04 2014 09:17 Squat wrote:
The whole thread is people posting their personal opinions on balance changes over which they have zero influence. That's usually what a forum is.
I never said that my choices of best match ups were somehow objectively true. But I do contend that with the way PvP is, it cannot be used a season not to go through with this, because any dependence on PO to survive early aggression in PvP is a sign of far deeper issues that cannot be resolved in a balance patch. If even shittier PvP is the price we pay for better PvZ and specifically PvT, I am cool with that. ok, make scan require an armory research. If you have trouble with banshees and mines, it's just a sign of deeper issues with Terran that cannot be resolved in a balance patch. #stupidlogic No, because that would be purposefully making the match up worse in order to create problems where there previously were none. In the case with PO, it was a giant band aid applied because of the myriad problems that were already there. It also had a deleterious effect on PvT and PvZ, which is why I consider any issues the nerf might cause in PvP a worthwhile sacrifice for a chance to improve the protoss non mirror match ups. I'm starting to suspect you are being intentionally fatuous. The whole #stupid thing is kind of played out. If you disagree, then do so, but contrary to what you may believe, saying that everything someone who disagrees with you is saying is stupid doesn't actually make it so. PvP early game was in pretty good shape before HotS came in with cheaper DTs, oracles and a MsC that can be used for blink and gateway rushes. If you disagree, I advise you to watch PvP form late 2012 and 2013, which had hardly any problems with early game rushes being too strong. HotS MsC is a fix to HotS introductions to this matchup. So if you break PvP with a nerf to PO you are purposefully making the match up worse in order to create problems where there previously were none. , just as in the scan example. And I'm not #stupidthinging anything I disagree with. I'm stupidthinging anything that is either a matter of personal taste or a matter of logically wrong, as your example of "when you break PvP it's not because you broke it". But then the problems are with oracles, cheap DTs and the MSC as a whole, basically the whole HotS package made PvP bad. It can't be helped or reversed at this point, it is what is. Avoiding a minor nerf to MSC that can help PvT and PvZ because PvP ended up being shit in HotS is not a good reason. The nerf to PO isn't what is making it bad, HotS made it bad, and PO has just swept the problems under rug for a while. My logic is fine, and frankly your puerile "ur stupid" is becoming irritating. Should worse come to worst, it's still a mirror so it's still balanced even if the gameplay is bad. The none mirror match ups take precedence, balance is more important that gameplay. Saying we should not nerf PO because it helps mitigate the underlying issues of PvP is a terrible argument.
No, it did not make it bad, because there is a Mothership Core in HotS. It's a fact that it is here and that the gameplay has been figured/balanced as it is because it has been here.
It's the scan example all over again, the scan is required as it is, because gameplay has been figured/balanced around it.
It's an interactive game, you can't remove some screws and then say that the apparate has been broken all along, despite it working before.
And I can partly agree that if it is 2nonmirrors vs 1mirror that can be improved/worsened, I would usually take the 2nonmirrors. Just that I think that it rather makes PvZ worse (is there any problem with PO currently? not really... but if Gateway expands become unavailable because of nerfs to the PO, jokes on you because it makes the matchup much worse and less diverse). Also I don't believe we should buff tanks eternally until only Mech is viable in TvT, if it is required to make Mech playable in TvZ and TvP. There are borders how much you want to sacrifice of a matchup for another one...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
