| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
sagefreke
United States241 Posts
"We need some big changes to SC2! Photon Overcharge nerf is not enough! None of these changes will affect my matchup. Why won't David Kim listen!?" (David Kim decides to try out some more risky changes like the community wants) "Oh my god RIP my race! Does David Kim listen to the SC2 community? These changes are too much!" This is the majority of the people posting in these threads for the last 30 days. I'm glad David Kim doesn't listen to us because you guys don't know what you want. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26044 Posts
On February 11 2014 09:47 sagefreke wrote: Once again the SC2 community over reacts. "We need some big changes to SC2! Photon Overcharge nerf is not enough! None of these changes will affect my matchup" (David Kim decides to try out some more risky changes like the community wants) "Oh my god RIP my race! Does David Kim listen to the SC2 community? These changes are too much!" This is the majority of the people posting in these threads for the last 30 days. I'm glad David Kim doesn't listen to us because you guys don't know what you want. Some people are plenty consistent, as much as people can be inconsistent, it is equally annoying to have those who have consistently mentioned the same issues tarred with the same brush as the race-biased crowd. | ||
|
SC2Toastie
Netherlands5725 Posts
On February 11 2014 09:44 Whitewing wrote: It really isn't, one base stargate openers are at a build order advantage against every build except blink openers in PvP right now. 3 gate stargate kills almost every expand build outright, it deals with DT's no problem (oracle can detect), it outright kills any robo play, and it's not hard to defend 3 gate pressure with it. Blink builds are strong against it, which is the only reason it doesn't always show up every single game. And how exactly do blink builds combat this that relies not on making a high stalker count faster and viable but on conscecutive blinks? | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On February 11 2014 09:47 sagefreke wrote: Once again the SC2 community over reacts. "We need some big changes to SC2! Photon Overcharge nerf is not enough! None of these changes will affect my matchup" (David Kim decides to try out some more risky changes like the community wants) "Oh my god RIP my race! Does David Kim listen to the SC2 community? These changes are too much!" This is the majority of the people posting in these threads for the last 30 days. I'm glad David Kim doesn't listen to us because you guys don't know what you want. Well no, it's been terrans saying that the changes aren't big enough, and now it's the protosses saying the changes are too big, so this isn't an inconsistency at all. | ||
|
AxiomBlurr
786 Posts
On February 11 2014 04:59 GreenMash wrote: good changes but NERF SWARM HOSTS This...Superbad unit is Ubercrap... The increase in 2hr games with Zerg is just...ummm....viewer numbing and culling... But how to change the SH to make them still viable but weak for a turtling player? Suggestions anyone? | ||
|
SC2Toastie
Netherlands5725 Posts
On February 11 2014 09:49 AxiomBlurr wrote: This...Superbad unit is Ubercrap... The increase in 2hr games with Zerg is just...ummm....viewer numbing and culling... But how to change the SH to make them still viable but weak for a turtling player? Suggestions anyone? Make locust movement range smaller, offline time longer, make hosts able to move 'over' locust (like collosi can), slight decrease in locust speed... hundreds of options really. | ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
On February 11 2014 09:20 Wombat_NI wrote: I'm surprised at the positive feedback for a blink change. Blink cooldown was never REALLY the issue with Blink builds in PvT as I see it, and it makes blink pressure/contain styles in PvP a lot less effective, which is actually quite entertaining to me. I know not all of these will go live, but a world with nerfed Blink Stalkers, nerfed MSC and stronger hydras increases the Protoss incentive to turtle and not be aggressive in the midgame in PvZ, which is potentially big. Blink is one the cool things a truly great things a great protoss can use to distinguish himself from the merely good. One of few, might be said. Would be sad if it got nerfed and fell out of use. | ||
|
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On February 11 2014 09:48 SC2Toastie wrote: And how exactly do blink builds combat this that relies not on making a high stalker count faster and viable but on conscecutive blinks? Blink builds are strong because you can blink it, kill a pylon or two or some probes, then blink out, and the enemy force can't catch them. If you can blink 2/3 as often as you could before (that's what this change is doing), you'll be taking a much bigger risk for small returns, and you are much less likely to be able to outrun the enemy. Add in that all forms of direct attacks with stalkers rely on being able to blink stalkers back behind other units as they take damage, and it's easy to see why the nerf is a big deal. If you poke to my natural, get deflected and have to blink away to avoid a force field trap, I now have 5 additional seconds to get out more units or split my units before your next poke comes in my main or natural. This is a significant drop in the viability of this kind of play, and the only thing stopping people from opening stargate every game is the expectation that your opponent might go blink, which is at a big build order advantage vs. stargate. If people are less likely to go blink because blink is worse, then stargate will be even more popular because there will be less blind countering. Yes, PvP is actually this dumb. Further, blink stalkers has always been the penultimate example of a protoss unit designed correctly. It should not be nerfed. | ||
|
ZeromuS
Canada13389 Posts
 | ||
|
SC2Toastie
Netherlands5725 Posts
On February 11 2014 09:52 Whitewing wrote: Blink builds are strong because you can blink it, kill a pylon or two or some probes, then blink out, and the enemy force can't catch them. If you can blink 2/3 as often as you could before (that's what this change is doing), you'll be taking a much bigger risk for small returns, and you are much less likely to be able to outrun the enemy. Add in that all forms of direct attacks with stalkers rely on being able to blink stalkers back behind other units as they take damage, and it's easy to see why the nerf is a big deal. If you poke to my natural, get deflected and have to blink away to avoid a force field trap, I now have 5 additional seconds to get out more units or split my units before your next poke comes in my main or natural. This is a significant drop in the viability of this kind of play, and the only thing stopping people from opening stargate every game is the expectation that your opponent might go blink, which is at a big build order advantage vs. stargate. If people are less likely to go blink because blink is worse, then stargate will be even more popular because there will be less blind countering. Yes, PvP is actually this dumb. Further, blink stalkers has always been the penultimate example of a protoss unit designed correctly. It should not be nerfed. I know PvP is stupid. But isn't this a problem with the SG (more exactly, the Oracle? Guess once which buff everybody has hated for ages. Oracle is the prime example for a unit that could use a Fleet Beacon Research)..? Is PvP being a terrible matchup because Warpgate is a idioticly designed "race-defining mechanic" a reason to make Blink Stalkers in TvP as good as they are? What nerf would you propose as an alternative (that being said, I'm all for looking how the vision nerf turns out first!!!!) | ||
|
lowercase
Canada1047 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12352 Posts
| ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On February 11 2014 09:48 Wombat_NI wrote: Some people are plenty consistent, as much as people can be inconsistent, it is equally annoying to have those who have consistently mentioned the same issues tarred with the same brush as the race-biased crowd. What matters, though, is that the community as a whole is completely inconsistent. | ||
|
MrProdigious
36 Posts
| ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
On February 11 2014 10:18 MrProdigious wrote: I don't even understand why they need to nerf blink? hasn't it been the same cool down for years? it isn't blinking to quickly that's the problem. I really hope they don't change it. The effects on PvP and PvZ will be crazy. It's the mothership core that helps a blink all-in become better. Blink itself is fine. People used to get a robo before, but the mothership core gives vision, and a slow-down spell on top of it. Blizzard should really think how to separate blink all-in from mothership core rather than destroy blink as a strategy. What worries me is the new mine's damage. It's absolutely going to destroy probes if one is too busy to notice a mine drop. | ||
|
Scarlett`
Canada2392 Posts
On February 11 2014 10:14 Nebuchad wrote: Can we get pro players to react on these proposed changes, like we did last time? Just because these aren't awful doesn't mean insight isn't warranted. Pro players speaking their mind shouldn't be a scolding, it should be an asset. There'll be a TL post up in a day or so | ||
|
Dingobloo
Australia1903 Posts
On February 11 2014 10:18 MrProdigious wrote: I don't even understand why they need to nerf blink? hasn't it been the same cool down for years? it isn't blinking to quickly that's the problem. I really hope they don't change it. The effects on PvP and PvZ will be crazy. There really aren't that many ways to nerf it, they've already made it one of the longest researches in the game and they can't move it up the tech tree anywhere, nerfing the blink distance wont' really do anything, they simply don't have that many numbers left to work with directly related to blink. Something needs to give as it's just too strong as a TvP timing to punish pre-sitm timings and they're running out of things to do the mothership core. | ||
|
Daralii
United States16991 Posts
On February 11 2014 09:49 AxiomBlurr wrote: This...Superbad unit is Ubercrap... The increase in 2hr games with Zerg is just...ummm....viewer numbing and culling... But how to change the SH to make them still viable but weak for a turtling player? Suggestions anyone? I'm pretty sure they're hesitant to nerf anything zerg given how flimsy they can be, so they're trying to add things that counter super passive SH/static defense styles. The tempest change is what they're playing around with first. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12352 Posts
On February 11 2014 10:26 Acer.Scarlett` wrote: There'll be a TL post up in a day or so Thanks, that's good to hear. | ||
|
Snusmumriken
Sweden1717 Posts
On February 11 2014 10:18 WolfintheSheep wrote: What matters, though, is that the community as a whole is completely inconsistent. lol what would you expect? This isnt some north korean prison camp, people will have different opinions. There is nothing inconsistent about that. | ||
| ||
|
|
|
EPT
