|
On February 03 2014 18:08 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard could buff the corruptor by giving them higher attack speed with lower damage so that pdd would be less impactful. And while rebalancing this way they could tweak the stats to also give a small strength increase vs protoss. (Corruptors are very boring though, so not sure how much I like making them stronger.)
Hydralisks have two expensive upgrades so knowing blizzard they'll probably remove one of them. It would still be a buff to hydras though.
If you don´t want to buff boring corruptors then something like fungal damage against shields is needed. Zerg AA just is not good enough against toss air. Hydras also melt to toss aoe damage Give zerg some way to fight toss late game and you can also change the SH.
|
Nice feedback from the players. I hope Blizz will take them into account. I like miniguns thoughts about overcharge casting range and MSC vision range. Sounds a pretty good idea imo. And of course, the hydra buff has to be a joke.
|
On February 03 2014 18:12 RaFox17 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2014 18:08 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard could buff the corruptor by giving them higher attack speed with lower damage so that pdd would be less impactful. And while rebalancing this way they could tweak the stats to also give a small strength increase vs protoss. (Corruptors are very boring though, so not sure how much I like making them stronger.)
Hydralisks have two expensive upgrades so knowing blizzard they'll probably remove one of them. It would still be a buff to hydras though. If you don´t want to buff boring corruptors then something like fungal damage against shields is needed. Zerg AA just is not good enough against toss air. Hydras also melt to toss aoe damage Give zerg some way to fight toss late game and you can also change the SH.
Do the balance numbers reflect this need for a buff to AA? Terran Mech is still relatively new as is SH Turtle style. So, it's not like the numbers are being weighted by these styles (at least not yet). Code S has near equal representation of Z and P. Overall win rates are still quite good. I don't know what they are precisely, but last I heard they were well within acceptable range.
I am hearing this need for better AA a lot but is it for aesthetic reasons or for balance? Is there a valid reason at all?
|
On February 03 2014 18:18 aZealot wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2014 18:12 RaFox17 wrote:On February 03 2014 18:08 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard could buff the corruptor by giving them higher attack speed with lower damage so that pdd would be less impactful. And while rebalancing this way they could tweak the stats to also give a small strength increase vs protoss. (Corruptors are very boring though, so not sure how much I like making them stronger.)
Hydralisks have two expensive upgrades so knowing blizzard they'll probably remove one of them. It would still be a buff to hydras though. If you don´t want to buff boring corruptors then something like fungal damage against shields is needed. Zerg AA just is not good enough against toss air. Hydras also melt to toss aoe damage Give zerg some way to fight toss late game and you can also change the SH. Do the balance numbers reflect this need for a buff to AA? Terran Mech is still relatively new as is SH Turtle style. So, it's not like the numbers are being weighted by these styles (at least not yet). Code S has near equal representation of Z and P. Overall win rates are still quite good. I don't know what they are precisely, but last I heard they were well within acceptable range. I am hearing this need for better AA a lot but is it for aesthetic reasons or for balance? Is there a valid reason at all?
Scarlett says so. :o
|
woah half gas cost.
Who the fuck decided this might be a good idea for a race that is designed around spamming units >_>?
This seems like its addressing a problem that was present at the beginning of WoL where people decided roaches were more cost efficient due to gas costs and decided to flat out not make any hydras anymore.
Can someone calculate the cost efficiency between a hydra and a marine :D?
|
Maybe consider developing all future maps to the same extent as the main and natural of habitation station?
- Blinks are risky because the main/nat ramp is not easily timewarped and it is very limited space you can blink into the main
- The natural ramp is relatively smaller and provides better defence for all races in all matchups. Making expansions a much more viable option but at the same time.
- The smaller airspace makes oracles and terran drops as well as mutas less scary as well.
I think airspace and rush-distances can vary, but to me it is quite clear that the natural should have a permanent 2-by-3-by-1 grid ramp like habitation station as well as an uneasy accessable ramp, like some kind of obstacle or height-level must block in order to prevent abusive forcefields and timewarps as well as runbys.
Other than that, habitation station is a quite awful map because of the design of the gold base and the various abuses that lies there.
|
On February 03 2014 18:21 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2014 18:18 aZealot wrote:On February 03 2014 18:12 RaFox17 wrote:On February 03 2014 18:08 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard could buff the corruptor by giving them higher attack speed with lower damage so that pdd would be less impactful. And while rebalancing this way they could tweak the stats to also give a small strength increase vs protoss. (Corruptors are very boring though, so not sure how much I like making them stronger.)
Hydralisks have two expensive upgrades so knowing blizzard they'll probably remove one of them. It would still be a buff to hydras though. If you don´t want to buff boring corruptors then something like fungal damage against shields is needed. Zerg AA just is not good enough against toss air. Hydras also melt to toss aoe damage Give zerg some way to fight toss late game and you can also change the SH. Do the balance numbers reflect this need for a buff to AA? Terran Mech is still relatively new as is SH Turtle style. So, it's not like the numbers are being weighted by these styles (at least not yet). Code S has near equal representation of Z and P. Overall win rates are still quite good. I don't know what they are precisely, but last I heard they were well within acceptable range. I am hearing this need for better AA a lot but is it for aesthetic reasons or for balance? Is there a valid reason at all? Scarlett says so. :o
Ha! Hey, I like the Hydra and a better Hydra sounds good to me. But, I get the feeling that where this buff is concerned there is a danger of repetition, "Zerg need something!" becoming fact. I just want to know if the balance numbers and performance at the highest level of play actually reflect the need for a strong buff to Zerg for balance reasons. So far, I don't think I see it.
|
On February 03 2014 11:45 aZealot wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2014 11:22 Squat wrote:On February 03 2014 11:12 Ammanas wrote:On February 03 2014 11:07 aZealot wrote:On February 03 2014 09:37 Hryul wrote:thanks for the effort tl. really nice to see some opinions on it. e: On February 03 2014 09:35 Pino wrote:On February 03 2014 08:31 Squat wrote:On February 03 2014 03:11 stuchiu wrote:On February 03 2014 03:04 Big J wrote:On February 03 2014 02:57 stuchiu wrote:
The hydra buff is kind of analogous to the oracle speed buff. No one asked for it, no one even thought about it. But here it is. Throughout half of HotS Oracles (amongst others) have been said to be useless additions and that Protoss still cannot harass properly and is still forced into deathballing. Noone asked for "the speed buff", but I guess that's what happens when people shittalk units for too long. Blizzard will try to buff those units. Really, blizzard's balance patches just mirror the community's whines in a naive way. Protoss is still deathballing after the patch =O They could add 50 bastardized, inbred cousins to the oracle and give them all 8.5 move speed. It's not going to make protoss stop deathballing. How anyone thought that giving protoss some random harass units would break up the deathball is beyond me, there is nothing in the addition of the oracle that works to change how protoss plays late game at all. It does not change that colossi, templars, immortals, tempests, void rays, i.e. every big scary gas unit, needs to be in a big blob to be effective. If you want to break up the deathball, you have to attack its constituent parts, not add new ones that don't fit in it. That will just lead to them being unused, or in the case of the oracle, used in the early/mid game and then discarded precisely because they have no real place in the deathball. Some really ass backwards logic went into this kind of thinking. This is precisely on spot, like the best comment in this thread. To me the problems is deeper, and the real discussion should not lie in balance but in design. I hope one day blizzard has the balls to redesign protosses. Like remove FF, redesign WG to keep a defender's advantage, buff gateway units and let them be effective by themselves, with a synergy boost from higher tech units (in this case nerfing them, just like medivacs are for bio), mutas for ling/bane and so on. All these buffs, like MSC addition, oracle speed etc. looks like bandaids. After so many of them, you gotta see there's something wrong with the design. After so many times, I wonder when the "design whine" will stop. it's really annoying. When will it stop? Never. There will always be something to complain about and tack "design" onto. There's a difference between 'always something' and 'exactly the same few things for last 4 years' If people complain about something for four years, might be something to it. Or they might be dead wrong but be unable or unwilling to realise it or accept it.
Unlikely. You can't really be wrong about a subjective experience of fun anyway. Your passive-aggressive defense of every aspect of the game strikes me as somewhat frantic.
|
On February 03 2014 18:18 aZealot wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2014 18:12 RaFox17 wrote:On February 03 2014 18:08 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard could buff the corruptor by giving them higher attack speed with lower damage so that pdd would be less impactful. And while rebalancing this way they could tweak the stats to also give a small strength increase vs protoss. (Corruptors are very boring though, so not sure how much I like making them stronger.)
Hydralisks have two expensive upgrades so knowing blizzard they'll probably remove one of them. It would still be a buff to hydras though. If you don´t want to buff boring corruptors then something like fungal damage against shields is needed. Zerg AA just is not good enough against toss air. Hydras also melt to toss aoe damage Give zerg some way to fight toss late game and you can also change the SH. Do the balance numbers reflect this need for a buff to AA? Terran Mech is still relatively new as is SH Turtle style. So, it's not like the numbers are being weighted by these styles (at least not yet). Code S has near equal representation of Z and P. Overall win rates are still quite good. I don't know what they are precisely, but last I heard they were well within acceptable range. I am hearing this need for better AA a lot but is it for aesthetic reasons or for balance? Is there a valid reason at all?
The better zerg AA would ideally coincide with a SH nerf/redesign. If you look at pro feedback over the past few months, a lot of Zergs hate the turtle SH style just as much as their counterparts. It's just that they're forced into it to stand any chance vs the P deathball.
|
On February 03 2014 18:28 Squat wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2014 11:45 aZealot wrote:On February 03 2014 11:22 Squat wrote:On February 03 2014 11:12 Ammanas wrote:On February 03 2014 11:07 aZealot wrote:On February 03 2014 09:37 Hryul wrote:thanks for the effort tl. really nice to see some opinions on it. e: On February 03 2014 09:35 Pino wrote:On February 03 2014 08:31 Squat wrote:On February 03 2014 03:11 stuchiu wrote:On February 03 2014 03:04 Big J wrote:
[quote]
Throughout half of HotS Oracles (amongst others) have been said to be useless additions and that Protoss still cannot harass properly and is still forced into deathballing.
Noone asked for "the speed buff", but I guess that's what happens when people shittalk units for too long. Blizzard will try to buff those units.
Really, blizzard's balance patches just mirror the community's whines in a naive way. Protoss is still deathballing after the patch =O They could add 50 bastardized, inbred cousins to the oracle and give them all 8.5 move speed. It's not going to make protoss stop deathballing. How anyone thought that giving protoss some random harass units would break up the deathball is beyond me, there is nothing in the addition of the oracle that works to change how protoss plays late game at all. It does not change that colossi, templars, immortals, tempests, void rays, i.e. every big scary gas unit, needs to be in a big blob to be effective. If you want to break up the deathball, you have to attack its constituent parts, not add new ones that don't fit in it. That will just lead to them being unused, or in the case of the oracle, used in the early/mid game and then discarded precisely because they have no real place in the deathball. Some really ass backwards logic went into this kind of thinking. This is precisely on spot, like the best comment in this thread. To me the problems is deeper, and the real discussion should not lie in balance but in design. I hope one day blizzard has the balls to redesign protosses. Like remove FF, redesign WG to keep a defender's advantage, buff gateway units and let them be effective by themselves, with a synergy boost from higher tech units (in this case nerfing them, just like medivacs are for bio), mutas for ling/bane and so on. All these buffs, like MSC addition, oracle speed etc. looks like bandaids. After so many of them, you gotta see there's something wrong with the design. After so many times, I wonder when the "design whine" will stop. it's really annoying. When will it stop? Never. There will always be something to complain about and tack "design" onto. There's a difference between 'always something' and 'exactly the same few things for last 4 years' If people complain about something for four years, might be something to it. Or they might be dead wrong but be unable or unwilling to realise it or accept it. Unlikely. You can't really be wrong about a subjective experience of fun anyway. Your passive-aggressive defense of every aspect of the game strikes me as somewhat frantic.
Heh, that is ironic coming from you. 
|
On February 03 2014 18:29 ssxsilver wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2014 18:18 aZealot wrote:On February 03 2014 18:12 RaFox17 wrote:On February 03 2014 18:08 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard could buff the corruptor by giving them higher attack speed with lower damage so that pdd would be less impactful. And while rebalancing this way they could tweak the stats to also give a small strength increase vs protoss. (Corruptors are very boring though, so not sure how much I like making them stronger.)
Hydralisks have two expensive upgrades so knowing blizzard they'll probably remove one of them. It would still be a buff to hydras though. If you don´t want to buff boring corruptors then something like fungal damage against shields is needed. Zerg AA just is not good enough against toss air. Hydras also melt to toss aoe damage Give zerg some way to fight toss late game and you can also change the SH. Do the balance numbers reflect this need for a buff to AA? Terran Mech is still relatively new as is SH Turtle style. So, it's not like the numbers are being weighted by these styles (at least not yet). Code S has near equal representation of Z and P. Overall win rates are still quite good. I don't know what they are precisely, but last I heard they were well within acceptable range. I am hearing this need for better AA a lot but is it for aesthetic reasons or for balance? Is there a valid reason at all? The better zerg AA would ideally coincide with a SH nerf/redesign. If you look at pro feedback over the past few months, a lot of Zergs hate the turtle SH style just as much as their counterparts. It's just that they're forced into it to stand any chance vs the P deathball.
Ah, thanks. I haven't seen the SH Turtle style much (maybe I haven't seen enough games) although - admittedly - a lot more recently. So, it's to stop Z being backed into a corner by p/T? If so, that's a fair reason. And a better Hydra would be good.
|
On February 03 2014 18:35 aZealot wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2014 18:29 ssxsilver wrote:On February 03 2014 18:18 aZealot wrote:On February 03 2014 18:12 RaFox17 wrote:On February 03 2014 18:08 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard could buff the corruptor by giving them higher attack speed with lower damage so that pdd would be less impactful. And while rebalancing this way they could tweak the stats to also give a small strength increase vs protoss. (Corruptors are very boring though, so not sure how much I like making them stronger.)
Hydralisks have two expensive upgrades so knowing blizzard they'll probably remove one of them. It would still be a buff to hydras though. If you don´t want to buff boring corruptors then something like fungal damage against shields is needed. Zerg AA just is not good enough against toss air. Hydras also melt to toss aoe damage Give zerg some way to fight toss late game and you can also change the SH. Do the balance numbers reflect this need for a buff to AA? Terran Mech is still relatively new as is SH Turtle style. So, it's not like the numbers are being weighted by these styles (at least not yet). Code S has near equal representation of Z and P. Overall win rates are still quite good. I don't know what they are precisely, but last I heard they were well within acceptable range. I am hearing this need for better AA a lot but is it for aesthetic reasons or for balance? Is there a valid reason at all? The better zerg AA would ideally coincide with a SH nerf/redesign. If you look at pro feedback over the past few months, a lot of Zergs hate the turtle SH style just as much as their counterparts. It's just that they're forced into it to stand any chance vs the P deathball. Ah, thanks. I haven't seen the SH Turtle style much (maybe I haven't seen enough games) although - admittedly - a lot more recently. So, it's to stop Z being backed into a corner by p/T? If so, that's a fair reason. And a better Hydra would be good.
The current "better hydra" will just lead to some sick timing push, but it won't be much of use in macro TvZ mech. Buffing a bit its resistance or something is much better than make it twice cheaper.
I agree with others here, zerg need a much better AA, but SH should be nerfed, because an unit that spawn 2 free hydra every 30s is kinda ridiculous.
|
Let me just say that I like what they're trying to accomplish with changing the Hydra.
Currently there's no place for Hydras, early game they're ruled out by Roaches. In anti-air they're often ruled out by Queens and in lategame they're ruled out by Swarm Hosts. Having many counter units they only fulfill a niche.
I feel this is the wrong approach trying to take some of that power back and I think instead they should try and find a new role for the Hydralisk giving it something unique.
|
On February 03 2014 18:28 Squat wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2014 11:45 aZealot wrote:On February 03 2014 11:22 Squat wrote:On February 03 2014 11:12 Ammanas wrote:On February 03 2014 11:07 aZealot wrote:On February 03 2014 09:37 Hryul wrote:thanks for the effort tl. really nice to see some opinions on it. e: On February 03 2014 09:35 Pino wrote:On February 03 2014 08:31 Squat wrote:On February 03 2014 03:11 stuchiu wrote:On February 03 2014 03:04 Big J wrote:
[quote]
Throughout half of HotS Oracles (amongst others) have been said to be useless additions and that Protoss still cannot harass properly and is still forced into deathballing.
Noone asked for "the speed buff", but I guess that's what happens when people shittalk units for too long. Blizzard will try to buff those units.
Really, blizzard's balance patches just mirror the community's whines in a naive way. Protoss is still deathballing after the patch =O They could add 50 bastardized, inbred cousins to the oracle and give them all 8.5 move speed. It's not going to make protoss stop deathballing. How anyone thought that giving protoss some random harass units would break up the deathball is beyond me, there is nothing in the addition of the oracle that works to change how protoss plays late game at all. It does not change that colossi, templars, immortals, tempests, void rays, i.e. every big scary gas unit, needs to be in a big blob to be effective. If you want to break up the deathball, you have to attack its constituent parts, not add new ones that don't fit in it. That will just lead to them being unused, or in the case of the oracle, used in the early/mid game and then discarded precisely because they have no real place in the deathball. Some really ass backwards logic went into this kind of thinking. This is precisely on spot, like the best comment in this thread. To me the problems is deeper, and the real discussion should not lie in balance but in design. I hope one day blizzard has the balls to redesign protosses. Like remove FF, redesign WG to keep a defender's advantage, buff gateway units and let them be effective by themselves, with a synergy boost from higher tech units (in this case nerfing them, just like medivacs are for bio), mutas for ling/bane and so on. All these buffs, like MSC addition, oracle speed etc. looks like bandaids. After so many of them, you gotta see there's something wrong with the design. After so many times, I wonder when the "design whine" will stop. it's really annoying. When will it stop? Never. There will always be something to complain about and tack "design" onto. There's a difference between 'always something' and 'exactly the same few things for last 4 years' If people complain about something for four years, might be something to it. Or they might be dead wrong but be unable or unwilling to realise it or accept it. Unlikely. You can't really be wrong about a subjective experience of fun anyway. Your passive-aggressive defense of every aspect of the game strikes me as somewhat frantic.
Well he is a zealot after all. ;D ;D ;D
But yea tbh you've got to be delusional not to realize the flaws that this game's had since its inception. I mean it's great that Blizzard are still trying to fix things, but still...
Then again looking at this suggested batch of chances it makes you wonder if they have any idea what the problems are, since this would break more than it would fix for sure.
|
On February 03 2014 18:18 aZealot wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2014 18:12 RaFox17 wrote:On February 03 2014 18:08 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard could buff the corruptor by giving them higher attack speed with lower damage so that pdd would be less impactful. And while rebalancing this way they could tweak the stats to also give a small strength increase vs protoss. (Corruptors are very boring though, so not sure how much I like making them stronger.)
Hydralisks have two expensive upgrades so knowing blizzard they'll probably remove one of them. It would still be a buff to hydras though. If you don´t want to buff boring corruptors then something like fungal damage against shields is needed. Zerg AA just is not good enough against toss air. Hydras also melt to toss aoe damage Give zerg some way to fight toss late game and you can also change the SH. Do the balance numbers reflect this need for a buff to AA? Terran Mech is still relatively new as is SH Turtle style. So, it's not like the numbers are being weighted by these styles (at least not yet). Code S has near equal representation of Z and P. Overall win rates are still quite good. I don't know what they are precisely, but last I heard they were well within acceptable range. I am hearing this need for better AA a lot but is it for aesthetic reasons or for balance? Is there a valid reason at all?
If you want to nerf SH, you need to buff zerg AA. If you're fine with status quo, then no. The obsession with win rates is misleading. WoL was close to 50/50 in ZvP too for a long while, and the match up was still awful. SH turtle is far and away the best way to play late game ZvP. Again, this has nothing to do with balance, it's about making ZvP less shit.
The valid reason is to make the game better.
Heh, that is ironic coming from you.
Solid argument, wonderful, intellectually honest rebuttal.
|
On February 03 2014 18:43 Faust852 wrote:
SH should be nerfed, because an unit that spawn 2 free hydra every 30s is kinda ridiculous.
Hydralisks: 6 range, shoots up.
Locust: 2 range (where did the other 4 range go then?!), does not shoot up(wtf?)
All that is equal would be its dps. But did you know that 6 siege tanks can hold off locusts indefinitely without ever taking damage? And did you know that a colossus or 6 can do the same?
Also, once you get a mothership , your locusts cant do damage anymore.
Last but not least, having 2 instead of 6 range and not shooting up means their effective DPS is not anywhere near a hydralisks. Look at zerglings vs marines for example, 3/3 cracklings have more dps than 3/3 stimmed marines, yet the marines have much more effective DPS since they have 5 range.
Now please stop being so anti-zerg bias, with your ridiculous statements.
|
On February 03 2014 19:09 Squat wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2014 18:18 aZealot wrote:On February 03 2014 18:12 RaFox17 wrote:On February 03 2014 18:08 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard could buff the corruptor by giving them higher attack speed with lower damage so that pdd would be less impactful. And while rebalancing this way they could tweak the stats to also give a small strength increase vs protoss. (Corruptors are very boring though, so not sure how much I like making them stronger.)
Hydralisks have two expensive upgrades so knowing blizzard they'll probably remove one of them. It would still be a buff to hydras though. If you don´t want to buff boring corruptors then something like fungal damage against shields is needed. Zerg AA just is not good enough against toss air. Hydras also melt to toss aoe damage Give zerg some way to fight toss late game and you can also change the SH. Do the balance numbers reflect this need for a buff to AA? Terran Mech is still relatively new as is SH Turtle style. So, it's not like the numbers are being weighted by these styles (at least not yet). Code S has near equal representation of Z and P. Overall win rates are still quite good. I don't know what they are precisely, but last I heard they were well within acceptable range. I am hearing this need for better AA a lot but is it for aesthetic reasons or for balance? Is there a valid reason at all? If you want to nerf SH, you need to buff zerg AA. If you're fine with status quo, then no. The obsession with win rates is misleading. WoL was close to 50/50 in ZvP too for a long while, and the match up was still awful. SH turtle is far and away the best way to play late game ZvP. Again, this has nothing to do with balance, it's about making ZvP less shit. The valid reason is to make the game better.
I think it's hilarious that even David Kim & co. have figured this out before some people on here. xD
|
Don't know about the Hydra, seems extreme, but might as least bring the game forward and away from SH Inf Corr.
Terran changes... I don't know, not really significant might just lead to certain terran timings and all ins. Who wants to see that?
Want to fix terran. Buff the tank, maybe the unsieged tank. Make tanks viable vs protoss, make Terran late game viable against protoss.
|
I wonder what would happen to that mass voidray style vs zerg if guardian shield just didn't affect air units anymore. (It doesn't affect high ground units when the sentry is on low ground but it does affect air units - so it would even be more consistent).
With that change there might be no need for a hydra buff at all anymore - and it would almost exclusively affect pvz , so wouldn't risk screwing up zvt or zvz.
|
TLO and minigun the most sensible opinions.
Ghost buff should be done in an other way if at all, improving timings is a bit stupid and doesn't help lategame issues at all.
Hydra buff is way too big, just give them +5 or +10 hp, possibly attached to the range upgrade to prevent timings from being too strong. +1 armor is possible too but less optimal as it would do practically nothing in ZvZ while being very strong against voidrays and marines. Slightly more hp or slightly faster attack would just be a good nudge in every matchup. I do agree with blizzard they could use a small nudge just to make ZvZ better and potentially make the roach/hydra style viable in ZvT while slightly buffing Z in ZvP (it moves ZvP away from SH a bit more which is better I think, SH could hopefully be reworked later on to be really different and not the boring whittle away unit they are now)
Minigun's opinion on MSC nerf is great, this does practically nothing for bringing back terran timings but hurts expanding in PvP the most. The msc is a hard design to fix because it's role is neccesary for PvP expanding but makes TvP terrible. Reducing the casting range and vision seem like better idea's to fix all-ins and the ease the MSC effectively defends two bases while still making it good enough to defend expansions. Another possibility is a small delay to the cannon or range reduction so terran can actually poke and get out without losing all their marines.
At the same time oracle should be changed to armored instead of light I think. This matters nothing for PvZ. In PvT vikings become slightly better against them and thors slightly worse, overall slightly better for terran as vikings are easier to get early on. In PvP it makes stalkers much better at defending against oracles, you could basically defend mineral lines with 2 instead of 3 which is critical for making expanding somewhat reliable if the MSC get's nerfed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
