Before we begin, I’d like to point out these changes are for a test map. There seems to be some confusion when we’ve tested changes in the past that all the changes we are testing are going to be patched into the game. This is simply not the case. Please keep this in mind as you consider and respond to the change-list.
Mothership Core vision radius decreased from 14 to 9 We currently feel this would be a helpful change, but we’re worried that a vision radius decrease doesn’t really nerf the highest end Protoss players who are positioning the Mothership Core perfectly already. We’ll talk to professional Protoss players about this one once the test map goes live.
Blink cooldown increased from 10 to 15 This is a more direct nerf that affects all Protoss players. If Blink play continues to be problematic, this is the sort of thing we’d want to have tested and prepared to put in the game.
Widow Mine splash damage component deals 40 + 40 shield damage We’ve seen some games against Protoss where Widow Mines are used, and they are very exciting to watch, whether they’re just Widow Mine drops or Widow Mines in combination with the Terran army (while sniping Observers). We feel like both of these strategies could use a bit of help. The Widow Mine potential against Protoss basic units will be unchanged for direct hits, but we’d reduce the number of indirect hits required against units like Stalkers, Zealots, or Sentries. Also, when using Widow Mine drops against Protoss, the chance of splash damage one-shotting Probes will increase slightly.
Tempest ground weapon damage increased from 30 to 30+30-to-structures We still think this is a good change, and we want to see more testing with it. If Tempests gain more ability to wear down Zerg defenses, Zerg players will be less incentivized to play a completely defensive style. Surprisingly, we’ve gotten a lot of feedback that proxy Tempest rushes are too strong right now, and this change would make that strategy even stronger, but we’ve been watching all of the major tournament games, and we still don’t think it’s being used enough (or being used at all). If you can identify some games where the best of the best pro players have successfully used this strategy against a formidable opponent, please let us know. We’d like to check out such games and analyze them.
Hydralisk delay between attacks decreased from .83 to .75 This would increase Hydralisk damage output against all targets by about 10%. Our stance on Hydralisks needing a buff in TvZ and ZvZ hasn’t changed. Additionally, the trend toward Protoss being stronger than Zerg has continued. We need more time and results to draw conclusions on the most-recent balance patch, but we’d like to be prepared to help Zerg here if it’s necessary.
Again, none of these are final; we’re just testing these changes. We do this so that potential changes are tested and ready if another balance patch is needed. We do not aim to have every single change we test go into the live game. We'll be releasing a test map later this week, but until then, your feedback here is greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
Poll: Impressions on Mothership Core Vision Decrease?
Approve (1834)
84%
Disapprove (263)
12%
Neutral (77)
4%
2174 total votes
Your vote: Impressions on Mothership Core Vision Decrease?
Wait they are finally going to test the vision change that people have been suggesting for months. I cant believe what I am reading, I mean they are doing it very begrudgingly but they are still doing it.
Intuitively it feels like it's a little too much, but I'm willing to try it out and see if I'm wrong. Doubt we'll see many blink all-ins after that, which is a good thing.
On February 11 2014 04:55 Adreme wrote: Wait they are finally going to test the vision change that people have been suggesting for months. I cant believe what I am reading, I mean they are doing it very begrudgingly but they are still doing it.
When I played WoW, this was exactly how Blizzard was doing things. 6-12 months to fix glaring issues.
haha, I was just thinking after Reality vs Soulkey: "Emergency patch round 2! David Kim" and here it is...
Actually, these mostly look good all around unlike the last one. The latter two (tempest and hydralisks) I'm still unsure of though.
Again, I have to wonder especially now since they seem to be going the dps route of buffing the hydra...why not give it a bonus solely towards bio units. That pretty much only affects bio ZvT and ZvZ which is apparently their intent. They're already used against mech and in ZvP to decent effect, where hp is really more the issue in those scenarios.
Finally a MCore vision reduction. Maybe it would be better to try with 11 like many air units, but whatever.
Bye Blink micro & blink based builds? Not really sure about this change...
WM drops against toss is going to be very annoying (again). Not sure if good or bad though, we'll see.
Tempest change still looks as stupid as it was when first announced. Please, make some Swarm Host changes that favours active players and punish pasive turtle players (a window of time without locust would be a good start, although I'd go further)
Hydras getting a buff. We have to see how it goes, I hope it doesn't destroy VR builds in ZvP.
On February 11 2014 05:01 Storm-Giant wrote: WM drops against toss is going to be very annoying (again). Not sure if good or bad though, we'll see.
WM aren't hellbats. If you are prepared for them, the likelyhood of still receiving damage is a lot lower. I don't think it's a bad thing that we have to scout a little bit and get ready for that strat if it happens, instead of being like, "oh I notice two widow mines in my base, let's react to it."
On February 11 2014 04:58 DarkLordOlli wrote: Blink cooldown is too much. Zero reason not to open stargate in PvP with this. And PvT blink openings would die out as well
Yeah I didn't even consider pvt, this is dropping the nerf hammer once again if this goes through. Blink stalkers will be seen as much as we see ghosts in tvz
I hope this doesn't ruin Blink wars in PvP...From a spectator's POV, it's one of the most intense things to watch. As far as the hydra buff, I wished they took TLO's suggestions instead. We need to slow down battles not increase DPS.
I don't like this hydra change at all; it doesn't solve any of the lategame issues zerg has vs air based compositions from terran and protoss. Hydras will still get trashed by aoe.
I would like to see some experimentation with moving the air upgrades of zerg to the evolution chamber; possibly with a lair requirement on level 1 to prevent zergs from upgrading air too quickly. Spire would unlock level 2; and hive level 3.
This may help zerg to stay on fairly equal upgrades against air based compositions, which would help a lot.
On February 11 2014 05:04 ssxsilver wrote: I hope this doesn't ruin Blink wars in PvP...From a spectator's POV, it's one of the most intense things to watch.
Well it does, to an extent. It's the one thing that I think is a little over the top in this.
Blink cd increase is way too much, maybe make it 12 seconds? But rather just let it be and just see how the visions range nerf works out. Hydra attack speed is good enough, rather give them a hive upgrade so they can fight against storm/skytoss armies somewhat. This would also reduce the number of SH/spore turtlestyle games.
awesome changes. will weaken blinkallins vs terran a bit, make them slightly less effective pvp (which is good for the mu imo). Hydra buff is good, i would wish they would additionally get 1 armor (would make them more effective vs bio!) Dno about widow mines, dont think it will chance a whole lot TvP.
too bad they didnt lower Locust and swarmhost HP, i think they should be more glass cannonish and u should be rewarded for coming near the swarmhosts. locust themselves too much HP for a free unit imo. in exchange, buff fungal dmg plz!
Like the widow mine idea. It might be too strong, but I like the philosophy behind it. Same with the hydralisk, but I think that as long as mutas are as strong as they are, hydralisk won't be used. Also, tempest buff just isn't adressing the real problem with ZvP, which is that swarmhosts are just a stupid unit that has to be redesigned.
Blink cooldown increased: I like it somewhat,on one hand it reduces Blink micro in direct engagements, but on the other forces Protoss to make more impactful decisions while blinking offensively, it also allows more damage to be dealt to the Stalkers, which would help.
Widow Mines: I dont know, but I can see 4M+Vikings become a standart composition if this goes through. Zealots will shred if hit with multiple mines, and it would help against blink all-ins while opening more resources up than a Tank defense. Also it forces the Protoss to actually split Zealots if he doesnt want to get wrecked by Mines I'd still like to see them revert the WM patch they did before, that tipped ZvT from around 50% to a Zerg favored matchup.
Tempests: Uhm well, I dont know, this kinda misses the point. I guess it could help vs. Swarm Hosts turtle, but it would also allow for weird 1 base all-ins vs. . No real idea, need to test it.
Hydralisks: This could help vs. many Protoss all-ins but I feel this will allow the SH turtling style to become more promintent, enabling the Zerg to defend all-ins better forcing the game into the later stages. It doesnt change too much vs. , but I think it'll have a big impact on PvZ mid-game, especially 3 base Zerg all-ins vs. Air styles and Zerg defence vs. Soultrain and other midgame timings.
On February 11 2014 05:07 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote: Blink cd change is ridiculous. Better to make researching longer but increasing cd is somewhat sad.
I'm a newbie in vision of SC2 but afaik most of air units have 11? So 9 is a bit sad as well.
It doesn't matter if most have 11 when MsC has 14, so it is not like most of the air units at all, it is not like most of the other units at all whatsoever since it is only hero unit in the game(if we don't count Mothership).
Please don't touch Blink, get your nasty hands off it! Ppl who complain about A-move Protoss, this is one of the tools where Pro Protosses can actually look different from a mid tier Protoss player..... ::::////
I like that blizzard is fixing tvp this way. But im affraid that blizzard doesn't realize that the SH is overshadowing the problem in PvZ. The only reason that PvZ is only slightly favored in P's way, is because the swarmhost is covering up the terrible state PvZ is in atm. Buffing hydra dps seems a very odd fix for this problem. I think that with the tempest buff vs buildings, pvz will atleast get more favored to P so maybe blizzard will try and fix the current pvz
The think I like about the msc and blink nerfs is that they : 1) Reduce PvT all ins effectiveness without making them worthless 2) Punish especially bad plays (risky blink or risky msc scout), and that's also what we (well what I) want for protoss.
I see where they are getting at, but seriously, is there no way of fixing the game without giving almost every unit bonus damage? This seems too much like patchworking to me... D:
Well, blink nerf is a bit too much, even for me, that stalkers with blink should be renamed immortals. Momma's vision nerf is good, let's see if it's a bit too much aswell. Hydras don't need more DPS.. They need to have more HP or armor. Meh. Tempest change, can't comment, since I hate Swarm hosts. Widow mines change is good, but I don't think it's the way to balance this game. Units are getting a lot of specific attacks.
although I'd like to nerf tvp blink allins in different ways,stalkers are one of few things that are really cool as P, so I'd rather nerf timewarp more or completely remove it because msc vision+timewarp(usually ramp) are things that make pvt blink allin so broken...and with increasing CD for 50% it's affecting all 3 mus
On February 11 2014 05:09 NovaMB wrote: I'd still like to see them revert the WM patch they did before, that tipped ZvT from around 50% to a Zerg favored matchup.
seriously, the TvZ played by innovation vs drg or curious on the old patch were some the best i ever watched. such high skill cap. a nerf was warrented , but reverting it a bit would be ok imo
On February 11 2014 05:10 ejozl wrote: Please don't touch Blink, get your nasty hands off it! Ppl who complain about A-move Protoss, this is one of the tools where Pro Protosses can actually look different from a mid tier Protoss player..... ::::////
Don't worry, it probably won't be as much if they nerf it at all. It will probably be changed to 12 since all of the races disagree with 15 sec, and 2 more seconds is like ~1 more real second, so it really isn't that big.
I would really like to see Swarm Hosts getting a bit smaller, faster, they can reduce their HP like to 120, and make Locusts last for 10 - 15 seconds, so you have to actually get close to your opponents army than stay in your base while being able to send Locusts over the whole map...
It looks like a lot of the initial feedback about the blink proposition is that it's too much, so I hope this gets reverted to at most 12. The rest is really good though.
I'm glad to see a MSC vision reduction, but as they said, I don't know how much it will change at the top.
The blink change is drastic! Maybe even too drastic... ah well, I guess we will see.
I think Widow Mines might be a bit too powerful actually, as a zerg player. Widow mine drops would be devastating vP.
Tempest change I think makes no sense at all. They should look to either change something about the swarm host or change something else about a P unit that will counter it.
Hydra buff... I thought they were good already. If Blizz wants to test this out though, I won't prevent them, as they are one of my favorite units.
i would rather see an increased blink upgrade researching time than a straight up nerf to blink play ,in general its a good feature and allows toss players to micro a bit ... im terran btw
The hydra buff can't go through, I just don't see what it has to do with anything in the current metagame. The only thing it'll do is make toss 2 base all ins worse, make voidrays worse which are a core unit right now that's direly needed in the current meta situation, and vs terran like someone already said.. mutas own that match up no reason to build hydras
the problem is swarm hosts david kim, why aren't you addressing that specifically? Tempest buff is like a band aid, sure I like having stronger tempest to play with but that's not fixing the actual issue.
It's like how they gave us the Msc, it's just a huge band aid.
Maybe they can make incremental adjustments to the MsC range, rather than touch Blink cooldown. The build only became a problem with the introduction of the MsC (yes you can use hallucinations, but that's 2 less stalkers by gas) so wouldn't logic dictate you address that unit T.T?
I wouldnt listen to him either if he goes "rip protoss" after D.Kim explicitly writes:
This is a more direct nerf that affects all Protoss players. If Blink play continues to be problematic, this is the sort of thing we’d want to have tested and prepared to put in the game.
Woe is me they might change blink if msc vision isnt enough, and probably not as much as to 15... I mean come on.
Regarding hydra buff im all for it, but they need to increase blinding cloud radius whilst having it reduce sight with a set number instead of totally nullifying units like the tank. That way suiciding vipers into victory isnt as viable and vipers become more viable vs bio.
The blink change is the most off change ever proposed by the design team.
If that goes live: 1) Blink PvT would never happen again. Colossus builds would be very weak. 2) Blink micro in general would be rare. 3) PvP openings would be drastically limited. 4) The protoss unit with the higher skill ceiling wil be doomed, therefore lowering the skill ceiling of the race.
MsC is move in the right direction, the rest is pretty silly.
Blink nerf straight up neuters that opening and removes it as a transition after a push, since you can just chase the stalkers across the map with stim bio.
WM buff is dumb, it still doesn't adress the fact that they either win you the game or don't do anything at all. Very little potential for micro, you burrow it and cross your fingers.
Tempest change is a bandaid, if you can afford to park your deathball and shoot the buildings in peace, you have already won. As today's games showed, free units are not exactly the greatest mechanic in the game.
Hydra change - if they think it's going to do something ...
LOL These are good proposed nerfs but I think they only truthfully plan to let like 1 go through... maybe the hydra one just because they don't want SH standoffs to become the norm so Hydras would be a nasty Coutner to Late game Raven comps as the Faster shots would kill PDD use lol all in all I think these are things that may change things for the better...
On February 11 2014 05:16 shivver wrote: The hydra buff can't go through, I just don't see what it has to do with anything in the current metagame. The only thing it'll do is make toss 2 base all ins worse, make voidrays worse which are a core unit right now that's direly needed in the current meta situation, and vs terran like someone already said.. mutas own that match up no reason to build hydras.
Any Zerg antiair buff is welcome IMO. I'd still hope for less OP damage in general but I think it's a pretty sweet buff.
The Blink nerf is too heavy i think, since it affects all Matchups, taking diversity in PvZ and especially PvP. Also Not sure about Widow Mine change, i don't see the necessity for it.
Wow, that's a lot of changes to PvT in one test map. I thought they would test them one at a time rather than make such large changes to the match-up all in one go. I'd be surprised if all those changes go through.
I'm happy that they are trying to get the hydra to work, and to my very non-expert opinion this hydra change would be much better than the gas cost reduction.
Well Protoss players are grumpy about the blink nerf, so that might be a good sign that it is at will make a difference. I still think 12 seconds would be sufficient, but it is a test map.
What I'd like to see is a reduction in plasma shield regeneration or perhaps make it how it is in BW (to all of Protoss or just to Stalkers). Blink stalkers are difficult to deal with so early, because they never die due to the quick regeneration.
Actually, scratch that, I would love if they would make blink cost shields. like -10 shields every blink.
It would also be interesting if blink cooldown was 5, but Stalker shields is halved. More blink micro.
Increasing CD for blink is silly. Makes blink micro even easier than it already is, on top of just getting rid of paths Protosses can take.
Blizzard needs to make changes that allow more skilled players to be better, not allow people to play the same and get more out of their units.
Would've thought they might have gone for a + shields dmg buff to the tank rather than the Widow Mine. I foresee more bio players just using mines than actual mech play occurring...
The way it's worded looks like the blink nerf isn't intended to make it in the game any time soon. Protosses are having a bit of an overreaction here (and I'm guilty of it myself).
On February 11 2014 05:23 Nebuchad wrote: The way it's worded looks like the blink nerf isn't intended to make it in the game any time soon. Protosses are having a bit of an overreaction here (and I'm guilty of it myself).
That change is insane. Pro players are going nuts on twitter right now. You can't do that.
The Blink Stalker nerf should be reconsidered in the light of whether they still want the build to be viable, but a little less stronger than it is now. 15s cooldown will make the build disappear very quickly, as the micro needed to keep your stalkers alive when they can't blink for 5s more than before will be too hard.
I'd like to see how the Tempest change affects PvP too. Overall, I like the idea behind these changes and we'll see how the test map goes.
On February 11 2014 05:23 Nebuchad wrote: The way it's worded looks like the blink nerf isn't intended to make it in the game any time soon. Protosses are having a bit of an overreaction here (and I'm guilty of it myself).
That change is insane. Pro players are going nuts on twitter right now. You can't do that.
Just read what is written. We'd like to test this to see if we can implement it in the future if the blink all-in is still a problem after the MSC nerf. Can't be any clearer.
On February 11 2014 05:23 Nebuchad wrote: The way it's worded looks like the blink nerf isn't intended to make it in the game any time soon. Protosses are having a bit of an overreaction here (and I'm guilty of it myself).
That change is insane. Pro players are going nuts on twitter right now. You can't do that.
Just read what is written. We'd like to test this to see if we can implement it in the future if the blink all-in is still a problem after the MSC nerf. Can't be any clearer.
On February 11 2014 05:21 Plansix wrote: Well Protoss players are grumpy about the blink nerf, so that might be a good sign that it is at will make a difference. I still think 12 seconds would be sufficient, but it is a test map.
I'm more scared about WM change...my poor probes
Though really, WM drops is all about scouting and being map aware so w/e
On February 11 2014 05:27 Lunareste wrote: everyone really needs to remember that +5 seconds to Blink is 5 in game seconds, not 5 seconds IRL.
it's more like 2-3 seconds difference.
so with the +5 in game seconds change, ppl are getting what they want.
remove enduring locust upgrade, give the actual swarmhost a speed upgrade. Would be one example. There are many ways of fixing a unit. The problem in pvz isnt the tempest not being good enough, its the swarmhost being lame.
Why are so many people saying this is the end of protoss or blink? 5 seconds in game is 2-3 real seconds, i doubt the entire protoss race and strategy depends on bliking 2 seconds faster. If this is the case theres larger issues at hand.
On February 11 2014 05:23 Nebuchad wrote: The way it's worded looks like the blink nerf isn't intended to make it in the game any time soon. Protosses are having a bit of an overreaction here (and I'm guilty of it myself).
That change is insane. Pro players are going nuts on twitter right now. You can't do that.
Just read what is written. We'd like to test this to see if we can implement it in the future if the blink all-in is still a problem after the MSC nerf. Can't be any clearer.
So what?
What do you mean, so what? The difference is fairly obvious.
On February 11 2014 05:25 zev318 wrote: so their answer to SH play is to not encourage zerg to use other units but to buff protoss air. interesting.
maxed zerg army can't really be better than maxed protoss army because of zerg's reliance on the larva + tech switch mechanics. that's why lategame zerg requires "free units" to be competitive. i can't see a simple way to "encourage zerg to use other units" other than straight buffs to core DPS dealers which would potentially make zerg armies come out too strong in certain situations. it's a deeply embedded design aspect of zvp and it's the reason they can't just "nerf swarm hosts"
Thinking about it for a while, I think Proxy Tempests could now become an issue in all matchups, amassing 3-4 Tempests before Terran or Zerg can get any realiable anti-air out (Vikings/Corruptor) will allow them to snipe the production structures and after that they can freely roam the skies. I can see Zergs going Lair before Speed just so they dont run into risks of getting the Pool killed before Lair starts (wouldnt work on all maps ofc, but it would work on maps with airspace around the main, which in the current WCS pool would be : Habitation Station (vs. T mostly though), Polar Night, Yeonsu (because its so damn small), Heavy Rain(above the cliff on the side of the main) and Daedalus(you can reach most of the main from the third base) ; Alterzim, Frost should be fine I think)
On February 11 2014 05:28 herMan wrote: Blink cooldown to 15 seems a bit too excessive. As people pointed out, 12 or 13 could be the way to go
Probably true, but if you read what D.Kim wrote it doesnt even seem hes considering doing anything at all about blink cooldown at the moment. Its more of "down the line if msc vision range isnt enough" kind of thing.
He probably has written from 10 to 15 and not 10 to 12 mainly because he want to calm the people saying hes not willing to do enough. I doubt 15 would be implemented.
The blink change is the most off change ever proposed by the design team.
If that goes live: 1) Blink PvT would never happen again. Colossus builds would be very weak. 2) Blink micro in general would be rare. 3) PvP openings would be drastically limited. 4) The protoss unit with the higher skill ceiling wil be doomed, therefore lowering the skill ceiling of the race.
Explain how making a Strategy harder to execute lowers the skill ceiling of the race? LOL There is a ton of PvP/T/Z Openings making Blink Stalkers harder to execute is very much needed Protoss at this point with that build are next to unstoppable with 2 base DT opening / 2 base blink / 1 base blink / 1 base oracle / 2 base oracle / Stargate 3 gate all in / 1 Base DT into Zlot ARchon rush follow up / Double forge opening into 12 min ARchon Zlot timing / 3 Colo Rush / Colo opening / 2 base Storm Chargelot opener / (rare but still happens) 3 Gate Immortal push / Just a good ole 4 Gate ( which also rarely happens anymore) / Phoenix Openers ( which has shown to be EXTREMELY STRONG in PL ) into Colo / 10/10/10 into Oracle Rush / proxy 2 gate and the list keeps going on..... all of which can be used to transition and defend easily any counter because of the MSC so yea it wouldn't hurt to see 1 opener be nerfed a bit to give terrans a little bit of breathing room ok?
On February 11 2014 05:21 Plansix wrote: Well Protoss players are grumpy about the blink nerf, so that might be a good sign that it is at will make a difference. I still think 12 seconds would be sufficient, but it is a test map.
Yea I feel the same way. The fact they are so mad about it probably means it will work
I am not much of contributor on balance changes on TL but I feel that Protoss was not too strong in WoL and then when HoTs came out. They wanted to buff the air because of late game zerg with broodlord, infestor. I think they really should have tested more in the beta of HoTs before launching the real deal... I love and play protoss but I agree they are way too strong. So with this balance changes... it will be sad to see if they nerf Protoss, they will get nerfed back to the dark ages...
So why is it that blizzard isn't OK with hydras being used only really in one match-up, yet they maintain that tanks are fine, when they are only used in one match-up as well?
The blink will get totally useless, just change the vision radius, which is a good thing. BUT! Blink is one of the things in starcraft 2 that is based on SKILL, dont change things that need skill to be used. Dont nerf those nice TL´Hero moves. Try to play out the game for christ sake.
Well, the hydra change is really nice, didnt think they will want to mess with the attack speed of the unit, but sure. MSC+Blink changes - MSC change is really good, blink change, well, I didnt think this kind of change will happen, I think changing it from 10 -> 15 is a bit too much, 10 -> 13 or so would have been effecting pro players more, like not changing it that drastically, but it is a healthy change indeed. The Tempest change is also good, should combat the SH strategies that focus on mass spore, doing x2 the damage is now going to give a more focused role - the tempest is a long range base siege unit. Also using it to remove enemy siege units. Sounds like a more focused role. WM change - no opinion, I have no clue what it will do, so its fine I guess, doing some changes around to see what is going to happen.
i think a few people need a reminder that protoss is a pretty damn good race with a huge diversity of viable tech options and none of these nerfs would cripple them from playing standard games in any matchup. one build or all-in being less viable or nonviable won't kill protoss. it's not like they're taking the colossus away or something...
On February 11 2014 05:33 Teoita wrote: LOL i read now about proxy tempest being op according to the feedback they receive.
That one is pure fucking genius
I like David Kim's response though, asking for any evidence at all that it is even a viable strategy. I suspect DK isn't convinced about it. I wonder who was saying proxy tempest is OP...
On February 11 2014 05:33 Teoita wrote: LOL i read now about proxy tempest being op according to the feedback they receive.
That one is pure fucking genius
I like David Kim's response though, asking for any evidence at all that it is even a viable strategy. I suspect DK isn't convinced about it. I wonder who was saying proxy tempest is OP...
Has anyone ever seen a proxy Tempest rush? This is a serious question.
The blink will get totally useless, just change the vision radius, which is a good thing. BUT! Blink is one of the things in starcraft 2 that is based on SKILL, dont change things that need skill to be used. Dont nerf those nice TL´Hero moves. Try to play out the game for christ sake.
If you don't nerf blink directly than the tool to defend woudl have to get buffed which is Stim.... Otherwise Blink will = auto win if you can simply do blink micro.... LOL
Which we have seen a TON of in recent tourneys.....
If the hydra buff goes through (which I highly doubt) I will be soooooooooo happy!
I'm not to sure about the blink nerf though. Blink is a nice, highly micro-able ability that just happens to have some very strong early all-ins. If they want to nerf blink all-ins I think they should do it a different way that doesn't effect blink later in the game. Perhaps nerf blink similarly to this but add an upgrade higher up the tech tree that will cancel out the added nerf.
They could always make it so you can not blink up cliffs instead, while still being able to jump gaps. Then it's just a micro tool instead of an abusive heavy aggression build which can't really be punished. But what they are suggesting right now is better than how it currently is...
Overall, it's a decent change and a step in the right direction (unlike many previous ones.... LOLoLol oRacLes)
On February 11 2014 05:33 Teoita wrote: LOL i read now about proxy tempest being op according to the feedback they receive.
That one is pure fucking genius
It's a sick build and now your opponent won't ever get stim or enough units to defend, since you can just kill the reactors and tech labs . Rotti will be GM in no time now!
Of course once this build gets popular it will never work on the highest levels, but I'm sure a lot of Terrans will be in for a surprise after the patch goes through.
Can we put a big fat bolded announcement somewhere, saying that they don't plan to implement blink cooldown anyway so it's useless to complain about it?
Why not remove timewarp instead of nerfing blink? Let both players micro. This spell is absolutely not necessary for a race that already has forecefields!
Tiny DPS buff to Hydra is meaningless. SH will remain the only way to deal with Toss in general, and Terran's mech. The main issue with Hydra is that they're super squishy AND expensive. Their DPS is fine. Make them either gas cheaper, or noticeably more durable.
I don't like the Z change, and I don't like the blink change either, as it brings a lot of action. Very cool to watch.
On February 11 2014 05:33 WeaponX.7 wrote: So why is it that blizzard isn't OK with hydras being used only really in one match-up, yet they maintain that tanks are fine, when they are only used in one match-up as well?
they're trying to introduce hydras to zvz to diversify the "roachwars" ground situation and make them slightly stronger as a core army unit in zvp. it's not about "making them viable in all matchups" as they've already said they think it's fine for a unit to be used only in one matchup
Im mainly concerned with the widow mine buff. I think for most decent toss it will be fine since detection is easy to get and stalkers outrange mines. However, I'm expecting to see a lot of qq from the lower leagues.
Hydra change will be interesting, especially good for zerg to deal with air late games the swarmhosts are all forcing...
Tempest change might help peel the static D from around swarm hosts. Should be good.
The blink nerf will not go through, as is obvious from the wording of that change. Which is good as I think that would influent PvP and PvT too much.
CHange in the vision range was basically requested by community, but I personally share David Kim's opinion that it will probably not change too much - why should it? Perfectly placed MSC is still out of marine range anyway.
Widow mine change seems good to encourage terrans using bio mine play a lot more. Diversity in matchup, finally? Unless it's too strong, obviously.
Tempest change will not do shit and the hydra change seems fine.
The blink cooldown is a fucking bad nerf. Blink is not a boring ability on its own, I don't see the point of nerfing it. Overall though I'm glad that they're at least willing to try shit.
Wait is it just me or does this indicate that the widow mine splash component is going back to the old way with a boost to shield damage. I'm looking at the old balance patches and the wording makes it seem like this is the case.
Blinks nerf is plain fucking bullshit. Nerf vision, nerf bubble, boost something, but don't take enjoyment from this game. If this goes through Im done with starcraft.
On February 11 2014 05:30 NovaMB wrote: Thinking about it for a while, I think Proxy Tempests could now become an issue in all matchups, amassing 3-4 Tempests before Terran or Zerg can get any realiable anti-air out (Vikings/Corruptor) will allow them to snipe the production structures and after that they can freely roam the skies. I can see Zergs going Lair before Speed just so they dont run into risks of getting the Pool killed before Lair starts (wouldnt work on all maps ofc, but it would work on maps with airspace around the main, which in the current WCS pool would be : Habitation Station (vs. T mostly though), Polar Night, Yeonsu (because its so damn small), Heavy Rain(above the cliff on the side of the main) and Daedalus(you can reach most of the main from the third base) ; Alterzim, Frost should be fine I think)
On February 11 2014 05:37 Zealously wrote: I'll be really sad if the Protoss nerfs go through unchanged.
I sincerely doubt they will. As DK stated, these are test changes, and the blink CD change is one they just wanted to try out. I'd expect at most 2 of the MSC/blink/widow-mine changes will go through, and that at least one of them will be not as dramatic as proposed in the OP.
On February 11 2014 05:35 Waise wrote: i think a few people need a reminder that protoss is a pretty damn good race with a huge diversity of viable tech options and none of these nerfs would cripple them from playing standard games in any matchup. one build or all-in being less viable or nonviable won't kill protoss. it's not like they're taking the colossus away or something...
This. A lot of PvP finals lately indicates Protoss has many viable options, so nerfing one of them isn't a bad idea at all in my opinion.
On February 11 2014 05:33 Teoita wrote: LOL i read now about proxy tempest being op according to the feedback they receive.
That one is pure fucking genius
I like David Kim's response though, asking for any evidence at all that it is even a viable strategy. I suspect DK isn't convinced about it. I wonder who was saying proxy tempest is OP...
Has anyone ever seen a proxy Tempest rush? This is a serious question.
Go watch rotterdams stream he does it all the time vs terran its really funny how many games he has won with it.
Will nerfing vision to 9 really affect the blink all-in TvP? I mean as long as the Toss can see the high ground he can just blink up a Stalker then blink the whole bunch. The cooldown, however, would.
Some of you really need to go back to other "balance test map" threads and read what you wrote about ppls reactions regarding changes affecting other races than P
On February 11 2014 05:33 Teoita wrote: LOL i read now about proxy tempest being op according to the feedback they receive.
That one is pure fucking genius
I like David Kim's response though, asking for any evidence at all that it is even a viable strategy. I suspect DK isn't convinced about it. I wonder who was saying proxy tempest is OP...
Has anyone ever seen a proxy Tempest rush? This is a serious question.
I never have. Not in a competitive game anyway. I think I saw someone (Day9 maybe) do it while messing about. I doubt that counts
don't like blink nerf, blink should still be viable when used to extend stalkers through out the game in all matchups. Blink was made very strong because of the MsC. Logically it is the MsC's fault that blink is too strong. Though I don't have an answer or recommendation to fix this issue, Blink is not the source of the issue and a nerf will effect every matchup, not just PvT.
What's funny is most of these changes have always been in the game since HOTS released (blink since WOL 2011). Only a few group of people noticed the OP-ness of protoss, especially those that play random at master+ level like me. Takes a certain race to win constantly over only a month or two for blizzard to notice from the fanbase/pros to do anything.
On February 11 2014 05:33 Teoita wrote: LOL i read now about proxy tempest being op according to the feedback they receive.
That one is pure fucking genius
I like David Kim's response though, asking for any evidence at all that it is even a viable strategy. I suspect DK isn't convinced about it. I wonder who was saying proxy tempest is OP...
Has anyone ever seen a proxy Tempest rush? This is a serious question.
EES Semifinals mouz vs. MiA Heromarine vs. Graywarden game 1.
On February 11 2014 05:44 Tenks wrote: Will nerfing vision to 9 really affect the blink all-in TvP? I mean as long as the Toss can see the high ground he can just blink up a Stalker then blink the whole bunch. The cooldown, however, would.
I think the idea is that reducing the vision range makes the mothership core more vulnerable. If it is poking in to get vision for a blink up then marines will have a better chance to shoot it. If the msc goes down the blink all-in is much weaker.
Vision reduction would be great, blink cooldown doesn't seem too short, if anything I'd change the upgrade (cost or time). Widow mine buff might be nice, both for defence and and offence. I'd still make the mothership core slower or something to make it less viable as early scout/harass.
On February 11 2014 05:33 Teoita wrote: LOL i read now about proxy tempest being op according to the feedback they receive.
That one is pure fucking genius
I like David Kim's response though, asking for any evidence at all that it is even a viable strategy. I suspect DK isn't convinced about it. I wonder who was saying proxy tempest is OP...
Has anyone ever seen a proxy Tempest rush? This is a serious question.
I never have. Not in a competitive game anyway. I think I saw someone (Day9 maybe) do it while messing about. I doubt that counts
I'd rather proxy a Carrier for the flavour. But if I wanted to win, wouldn't something else (theoretically) be more reliable? :S
I mean the stupid Tempest doesn't even 1hko workers like a DT.
On February 11 2014 05:46 b0ub0u wrote: Can someone explain to me the WM buff?
Why did he say we could now one shot probes? Wasn`t the central splash damage already 40? A probe has 40HP so it already died on the first hit no?
What am I missing here?
So this only affect the area where it does 40 splash damage?
The splash damage got nerfed, it now does less than 40 damage outside a certain AOE (can't remember the exact value), thus making widow mines really inefficient against probes. But I think this change is moreso for widow mines becoming helpful units against the main protoss army.
Good patch imo. The blink all in nerfs are absolutely necessary and widow mines being actually useful against protoss is a very interesting concept. The hydra buff is a lot more reasonable too.
On February 11 2014 05:44 Tenks wrote: Will nerfing vision to 9 really affect the blink all-in TvP? I mean as long as the Toss can see the high ground he can just blink up a Stalker then blink the whole bunch. The cooldown, however, would.
9 is pretty freaking close. Units like Medivacs, Pheonixes and Mutas have 11 range so the MSC likely has to come within turret range to determine if it's safe to blink up. It could poke in a bit farther vs marines but the main issue with the MSC right now is that it can determine safe blink spots as opposed to simply giving vision.
As a Terran I fear that tempest +30 damage against structures. If the protoss player is smart it will be quite a bit harder to get to the tempests and take them out.
A side fix to this could be to add something similar to the medivac boost to vikings. Which in turn could also help Terran catch the warp prism/oracle.
On February 11 2014 05:33 Teoita wrote: LOL i read now about proxy tempest being op according to the feedback they receive.
That one is pure fucking genius
I like David Kim's response though, asking for any evidence at all that it is even a viable strategy. I suspect DK isn't convinced about it. I wonder who was saying proxy tempest is OP...
Has anyone ever seen a proxy Tempest rush? This is a serious question.
EES Semifinals mouz vs. MiA Heromarine vs. Graywarden game 1.
Yeah, look in to the WM as a harass tool and support bio, not that it's useless for actual mech play. Also nerf the SH already, it's making the game worse.
On February 11 2014 05:51 Sapphire.lux wrote: Yeah, look in to the WM as a harass tool and support bio, not that it's useless for actual mech play. Also nerf the SH already, it's making the game worse.
nerf? just remove or redesign its worse then the warhound!
On February 11 2014 05:33 Teoita wrote: LOL i read now about proxy tempest being op according to the feedback they receive.
That one is pure fucking genius
I like David Kim's response though, asking for any evidence at all that it is even a viable strategy. I suspect DK isn't convinced about it. I wonder who was saying proxy tempest is OP...
Has anyone ever seen a proxy Tempest rush? This is a serious question.
EES Semifinals mouz vs. MiA Heromarine vs. Graywarden game 1.
I just don't understand... for the longest time there were no balance patched at all... and now they are seemingly pushing as hard as they can to generally nurf Protoss while actual problems with the game go ignored... also wtf is a proxy tempest rush?!
Blink cooldown to me looks like they are really taking into account the non pros opinion. (terrible idea) Vision change is really needed and should even be implemented tomorrow. Hydra change is easily justified that someone at blizzard is really stubborn and loves Zerg.. WM buff is just yet another buff into Terran mech to go up against the ultimate Protoss.
Would have liked to see some little change towards the Swarm Host for this change or yet ANOTHER season will go by.
I agree with nerfing the shit out of stalkers and indirectly reducing colossus play. Colossus as a unit really needs to be phased out. If the way to do it is to weaken the ability to support it, then I'm all for it.
I seriously doubt the blink thing will go through, I don't think people should worry about it. Remember this is a test map, they want to test out certain things just to see how they work in reality. It's about collection of data. Testing a change in blink cool down would give them data for the future.
Peoples are hardly talking about the Hydra change, is it because its non significant ?
I hope everyone here realize that this buff would be FAR from making Hydra compo good enough against toss deathballs. God I hate playing with SH, but I see no reason to stop. And if Blizz eventually nerfs SH without giving some zerg core unit a significant boost, zerg will be even more gimped. Yes, EVEN more.
Fixing TvP is well needed, but i'm expecting way more from blizz to help Z against P.
On February 11 2014 05:33 Teoita wrote: LOL i read now about proxy tempest being op according to the feedback they receive.
That one is pure fucking genius
I like David Kim's response though, asking for any evidence at all that it is even a viable strategy. I suspect DK isn't convinced about it. I wonder who was saying proxy tempest is OP...
Has anyone ever seen a proxy Tempest rush? This is a serious question.
EES Semifinals mouz vs. MiA Heromarine vs. Graywarden game 1.
Doesn't Graywarden lose that game? It's cool that it was used but it doesn't answer DK's question. Fun game though. Proxy tempest might work once in a blue moon because the opponent is totally not expecting it and doesn't have any idea how to react. Such as the Ruin offensive wall-off. I am amazed anyone considers proxy tempest OP.
But thanks for the VOD. It will be fun to watch someone try proxy tempest.
On February 11 2014 05:46 b0ub0u wrote: Can someone explain to me the WM buff?
Why did he say we could now one shot probes? Wasn`t the central splash damage already 40? A probe has 40HP so it already died on the first hit no?
What am I missing here?
So this only affect the area where it does 40 splash damage?
The splash damage got nerfed, it now does less than 40 damage outside a certain AOE (can't remember the exact value), thus making widow mines really inefficient against probes. But I think this change is moreso for widow mines becoming helpful units against the main protoss army.
Good patch imo. The blink all in nerfs are absolutely necessary and widow mines being actually useful against protoss is a very interesting concept. The hydra buff is a lot more reasonable too.
Ok so basically it will do 40 (+40 shield) 20 (+40 shield) 10 (+40 shield)
On February 11 2014 05:33 Teoita wrote: LOL i read now about proxy tempest being op according to the feedback they receive.
That one is pure fucking genius
I like David Kim's response though, asking for any evidence at all that it is even a viable strategy. I suspect DK isn't convinced about it. I wonder who was saying proxy tempest is OP...
Has anyone ever seen a proxy Tempest rush? This is a serious question.
EES Semifinals mouz vs. MiA Heromarine vs. Graywarden game 1.
Doesn't Graywarden lose that game? It's cool that it was used but it doesn't answer DK's question. Fun game though. Proxy tempest might work once in a blue moon because the opponent is totally not expecting it and doesn't have any idea how to react. Such as the Ruin offensive wall-off. I am amazed anyone considers proxy tempest OP.
But thanks for the VOD. It will be fun to watch someone try proxy tempest.
I dont know if its OP, but imagine if Protoss gets the proxy stargate up unscouted and kills the spawning pool with 4 shots with his 3 Tempests lol.
On February 11 2014 05:46 b0ub0u wrote: Can someone explain to me the WM buff?
Why did he say we could now one shot probes? Wasn`t the central splash damage already 40? A probe has 40HP so it already died on the first hit no?
What am I missing here?
So this only affect the area where it does 40 splash damage?
The splash damage got nerfed, it now does less than 40 damage outside a certain AOE (can't remember the exact value), thus making widow mines really inefficient against probes. But I think this change is moreso for widow mines becoming helpful units against the main protoss army.
Good patch imo. The blink all in nerfs are absolutely necessary and widow mines being actually useful against protoss is a very interesting concept. The hydra buff is a lot more reasonable too.
Ok so basically it will do 40 (+40 shield) 20 (+40 shield) 10 (+40 shield)
Depending on the radius
Is that right?
My guess of what they have in mind is this: 40 (+40 shield) 20 (+20 shield) 10 (+10 shield)
Edit: Basically it doubles the spash damage, but only on shields (Not on health, even for P units).
On February 11 2014 05:46 b0ub0u wrote: Can someone explain to me the WM buff?
Why did he say we could now one shot probes? Wasn`t the central splash damage already 40? A probe has 40HP so it already died on the first hit no?
What am I missing here?
So this only affect the area where it does 40 splash damage?
The splash damage got nerfed, it now does less than 40 damage outside a certain AOE (can't remember the exact value), thus making widow mines really inefficient against probes. But I think this change is moreso for widow mines becoming helpful units against the main protoss army.
Good patch imo. The blink all in nerfs are absolutely necessary and widow mines being actually useful against protoss is a very interesting concept. The hydra buff is a lot more reasonable too.
Ok so basically it will do 40 (+40 shield) 20 (+40 shield) 10 (+40 shield)
Depending on the radius
Is that right?
My guess of what they have in mind is this: 40 (+40 shield) 20 (+20 shield) 10 (+10 shield)
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
On February 11 2014 05:46 b0ub0u wrote: Can someone explain to me the WM buff?
Why did he say we could now one shot probes? Wasn`t the central splash damage already 40? A probe has 40HP so it already died on the first hit no?
What am I missing here?
So this only affect the area where it does 40 splash damage?
The splash damage got nerfed, it now does less than 40 damage outside a certain AOE (can't remember the exact value), thus making widow mines really inefficient against probes. But I think this change is moreso for widow mines becoming helpful units against the main protoss army.
Good patch imo. The blink all in nerfs are absolutely necessary and widow mines being actually useful against protoss is a very interesting concept. The hydra buff is a lot more reasonable too.
Ok so basically it will do 40 (+40 shield) 20 (+40 shield) 10 (+40 shield)
Depending on the radius
Is that right?
My guess of what they have in mind is this: 40 (+40 shield) 20 (+20 shield) 10 (+10 shield)
Hopefully, or probes are fucked no matter what.
Doesnt this change only revert it to before the AoE nerf against Probes? So just back to early Hots? Ofc it changes Mines in normal army compositions
On February 11 2014 05:46 b0ub0u wrote: Can someone explain to me the WM buff?
Why did he say we could now one shot probes? Wasn`t the central splash damage already 40? A probe has 40HP so it already died on the first hit no?
What am I missing here?
So this only affect the area where it does 40 splash damage?
The splash damage got nerfed, it now does less than 40 damage outside a certain AOE (can't remember the exact value), thus making widow mines really inefficient against probes. But I think this change is moreso for widow mines becoming helpful units against the main protoss army.
Good patch imo. The blink all in nerfs are absolutely necessary and widow mines being actually useful against protoss is a very interesting concept. The hydra buff is a lot more reasonable too.
Ok so basically it will do 40 (+40 shield) 20 (+40 shield) 10 (+40 shield)
Depending on the radius
Is that right?
My guess of what they have in mind is this: 40 (+40 shield) 20 (+20 shield) 10 (+10 shield)
Hopefully, or probes are fucked no matter what.
They are soulless monsters anyway, so don't feel bad for them.
On February 11 2014 05:46 b0ub0u wrote: Can someone explain to me the WM buff?
Why did he say we could now one shot probes? Wasn`t the central splash damage already 40? A probe has 40HP so it already died on the first hit no?
What am I missing here?
So this only affect the area where it does 40 splash damage?
The splash damage got nerfed, it now does less than 40 damage outside a certain AOE (can't remember the exact value), thus making widow mines really inefficient against probes. But I think this change is moreso for widow mines becoming helpful units against the main protoss army.
Good patch imo. The blink all in nerfs are absolutely necessary and widow mines being actually useful against protoss is a very interesting concept. The hydra buff is a lot more reasonable too.
Ok so basically it will do 40 (+40 shield) 20 (+40 shield) 10 (+40 shield)
Depending on the radius
Is that right?
My guess of what they have in mind is this: 40 (+40 shield) 20 (+20 shield) 10 (+10 shield)
Hopefully, or probes are fucked no matter what.
Not more fucked than before the WM nerf though, right? I don't think mines were nerfed because mine drops were too strong vs Protoss.
Edit: In fact, less fucked, some spashed Probes would have 10 hp left.
On February 11 2014 05:56 Norz wrote: Peoples are hardly talking about the Hydra change, is it because its non significant ?
I hope everyone here realize that this buff would be FAR from making Hydra compo good enough against toss deathballs. God I hate playing with SH, but I see no reason to stop. And if Blizz eventually nerfs SH without giving some zerg core unit a significant boost, zerg will be even more gimped. Yes, EVEN more.
Fixing TvP is well needed, but i'm expecting way more from blizz to help Z against P.
People arent generally askign for a nerf to swarmhost per se, theyre asking for it to be redesigned. My own suggestion would be to remove enduring locust and implement a speed upgrade affecting ONLY the swarmhost and not the locust. Ie the swarmhost would burrow/unburrow much faster as well as move faster. I would also remove speed buffs while on creep for swarmhosts/locusts.
This would then award multitasking with swarmhosts. Using nydus to have locusts come from all angles etc. Much skill so amaze ^^
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
We’ve seen some games against Protoss where Widow Mines are used, and they are very exciting to watch, whether they’re just Widow Mine drops or Widow Mines in combination with the Terran army (while sniping Observers). We feel like both of these strategies could use a bit of help. The Widow Mine potential against Protoss basic units will be unchanged for direct hits, but we’d reduce the number of indirect hits required against units like Stalkers, Zealots, or Sentries. Also, when using Widow Mine drops against Protoss, the chance of splash damage one-shotting Probes will increase slightly.
The point is that it doesnt really increase the chance of killing workers by very much (and it doesnt, remember probes have 20 HP so you would only need 20+20 to kill probes.
Didnt sos do a tempest rush on habitation station, because the map geometry works out such that you both defend your gold while seiging the enemy gold with tempest.
Hmm, I recall a few proxy tempests. What was that online team cup something like EES. Someone used it against Heromarine and it was quite fun to watch. Altho it is likely to be very scary if sOs tries to make it his standard PvT opener.
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
I would prefer a nerf to blink research time over blink cd, blink is a fun ability and it is one of the few things that p have to show off thier micro skill. so instead of nerfing the strength of blink allin its timming should be nerfed hard, make it so that terran have alot more time to react, pump rauders and get really close to stim finishing before a blink allin can hit them, one of the biggest problem with blink allin play is that it abuses the inability of terran to quickly react to a situation by building counter units, if T has more rauders out when the allin hits they will be in a much better spot. this kind of nerf has worked before, 3 rax to strong nerf stim time, hellbat to strong, make armory requirement and blue flame requirement. I don't see why this would not work on blink allin.
Overall not bad changes. I like hydras being buffed but I'm glad they're toning it down a little. I think the MSC vision range nerf is ok too. I think the blink change is a bit too much, but like they said they just want to have that tested in case blink play continues to be a problem. Buffing widow mines vs toss is whatever I'm a zerg player lol. The tempest change may introduce some new cheeses on the ladder but I doubt it will make a real impact on pro games except for late late game PvZ when there are spores everywhere and the toss is trying to gradually push in with an air army. Not surprised that they aren't ready to implement something regarding swarmhosts yet as they have to decide exactly what it is they want to change or nerf, but wouldn't be surprised to see something about swarmhosts in the next iteration of the balance test map
I wanted them to switch back ghost cost from 200/100 to 100/200 though
I feel like this change would buff ghosts crazily because what terran doesn't float Gas Past Midgame lol Unless you are going mech.... Bio Ghosts would be 10x stronger hahaha
Isn't the problem with Blink the MSC and the horrible map pool? A nerf to Blink, in my opinion, is heavy handed and does not address the core problem(s).
Tempest change is ridiculous and shouldn't be implemented, address SwarmHosts by making them more microable(such as can't rally locusts).
Not sure how the Hydra buff will affect the meta but I think an HP buff would probably be better.
Widowmine change should be interesting for early harass and defense.
Hydralisk delay between attacks decreased from .83 to .75
That's exactly what it was before beta patch 5 of the wol beta.
reverting a change 4 years later lol
He did say he was willing to revert previous changes. I wanted them to switch back ghost cost from 200/100 to 100/200 though.
This.This.This. And this. Cause it makes sense, terran got a HUGE gas bank with bio.
Yeah the original change was to nerf ghosts w/ bio and buff ghosts w/ mech since you don't have the gas to spare when you're meching. Hasn't really worked out though
I wanted them to switch back ghost cost from 200/100 to 100/200 though
I feel like this change would buff ghosts crazily because what terran doesn't float Gas Past Midgame lol Unless you are going mech.... Bio Ghosts would be 10x stronger hahaha
Sorry mate, but i hate having 2k gas in my bank when i am done with my ups. 10x stronger yeah. -__-
On February 11 2014 05:07 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote: Blink cd change is ridiculous. Better to make researching longer but increasing cd is somewhat sad.
I'm a newbie in vision of SC2 but afaik most of air units have 11? So 9 is a bit sad as well.
When you do a blink all in, what is the point of having MSC?
1. To provide high ground vision 2. To be able to cast time warp
Right now, you have 0 risk MSC that can't be sniped by anything terran has and you also have complete vision of outer edges of terran base so you can't risk blinking in a well defended place.
So all you use MSC for will still be available and even reduction to 9 won't change how MSC is used at all in TvP, it will just finally create some risks to protoss when doing blink aggression.
And aggressive play should be risky for the attacker.
But I doubt they will go as low as 9 even though I feel it is not such a big deal as it looks at first when you think about it a bit more (I was also surprised at first since I was expecting nerf to 11).
On February 11 2014 06:18 BlackCompany wrote: Did the Hydra gas change go through btw? So Hydras are only 100/25 AND got increased attack speed? Thats a little over the top i feel
Mothership vision nerf is good, dont know about the blink cooldown. Might be too much of a nerf.
Widowmine getting changed is good, though all this extra attacks that only affect shields etc are stupid in my eyes.
No opinion about tempest buff
No this is an alternative change to the gas change for hydras, and the widow mine change seems to be to encourage openers and early plays that lead into mech vs protoss
Hydralisk delay between attacks decreased from .83 to .75
That's exactly what it was before beta patch 5 of the wol beta.
reverting a change 4 years later lol
He did say he was willing to revert previous changes. I wanted them to switch back ghost cost from 200/100 to 100/200 though.
This.This.This. And this. Cause it makes sense, terran got a HUGE gas bank with bio.
Yeah the original change was to nerf ghosts w/ bio and buff ghosts w/ mech since you don't have the gas to spare when you're meching. Hasn't really worked out though
I'm still a proponent of moving EMP to Raven and ditching one of the Raven's current spells.
TBH I'm surprised that people like the Blink nerf. I think Blink itself is not a problem at all, and in fact Stalkers are even a bit weak in the late game, the problem is that Protoss has approximately 4,239,771,004 early-to-mid game options (give or take 2), while Terran has like 3.
Hydralisk delay between attacks decreased from .83 to .75
That's exactly what it was before beta patch 5 of the wol beta.
reverting a change 4 years later lol
He did say he was willing to revert previous changes. I wanted them to switch back ghost cost from 200/100 to 100/200 though.
This.This.This. And this. Cause it makes sense, terran got a HUGE gas bank with bio.
Yeah the original change was to nerf ghosts w/ bio and buff ghosts w/ mech since you don't have the gas to spare when you're meching. Hasn't really worked out though
I'm still a proponent of moving EMP to Raven and ditching one of the Raven's current spells.
I would be down for that if they removed auto turret. But then ghosts are useless
I actually think that most of these Changes are pretty good but i doubt the ones concerning Tempests and Blink.
First of all, I agree with the idea of buffing WMs vs shields because it could make 4M viable in TvP as well as improve mech play. A bit more diversity shouldn't be bad at all.
Reducing the vision range of the MSC obviously is what the community requested for an eternity now but still i like the idea behind it. It nerfes blink allins because the Protoss has to be more careful about whether he should blink up or not. He just can't see as much as before and it's easier to set up traps on the high ground. Overall i think this change makes blink allins easier defendable but doesn't make them useless.
And there we are at the blink CD change. I'm sceptic about this one because it would not only effect TvP but also PvZ and PvP. Blink is a really fun ability and i don't wanna miss it in pro games.
Now the Tempest change: Well, i don't really know what to say about this one. I don't see the point in helping against SHs by increasing the damage vs buildings. Only thing i'm afraid of is that proxy Tempests might become pretty popular
The Hyrda buff again sounds nice, but i think is just yet another try to avoid changing the SH by making other compositions more useful.
As I said in the beginning, these changes seem pretty nice overall, but there are a few points (blink CD, Tempest dmg vs buildings) that might have to be worked on.
On February 11 2014 06:18 BlackCompany wrote: Did the Hydra gas change go through btw? So Hydras are only 100/25 AND got increased attack speed? Thats a little over the top i feel
Mothership vision nerf is good, dont know about the blink cooldown. Might be too much of a nerf.
Widowmine getting changed is good, though all this extra attacks that only affect shields etc are stupid in my eyes.
No opinion about tempest buff
No this is an alternative change to the gas change for hydras, and the widow mine change seems to be to encourage openers and early plays that lead into mech vs protoss
Ah okay. Then the Hydra change isnt too bad, though more Hp would probably better.. but its ok.
On February 11 2014 06:18 BlackCompany wrote: Did the Hydra gas change go through btw? So Hydras are only 100/25 AND got increased attack speed? Thats a little over the top i feel
Mothership vision nerf is good, dont know about the blink cooldown. Might be too much of a nerf.
Widowmine getting changed is good, though all this extra attacks that only affect shields etc are stupid in my eyes.
No opinion about tempest buff
No this is an alternative change to the gas change for hydras, and the widow mine change seems to be to encourage openers and early plays that lead into mech vs protoss
Ah okay. Then the Hydra change isnt too bad, though more Hp would probably better.. but its ok.
I guess DK wants to buff the weak Z anti air with this too. Not only the roach hydra push aspect.
On February 11 2014 06:22 sCnInfinity wrote: Now the Tempest change: Well, i don't really know what to say about this one. I don't see the point in helping against SHs by increasing the damage vs buildings.
It helps kill the spine/spore crawlers. The swarm hosts in PvZ are used with a large wall of static defence.
I actually think a 9 vision range for the MSC is fine, remember it's an "air unit" that comes out WAY before any other air unit in the game. Giving air unit vision range at 7 minutes is still kinda silly. But double nerfing blink play in PvT is over the top. The goal should be to make it defendable not remove it entirely. This also eliminates a strategic option in the other matchups at well. If you HAVE to nerf blink cd, make it 12. I actually like the tempest change, I'm not sure how this would affect proxy tempest builds. Static defense isn't useful against something like that anyways with the ridiculous range, you would need Vikings as terran(which is where I've mostly seen it), and there have been exciting games with swarm hosts in their current state.
Widow mine change is good IMO it opens some aggressive option for Terran early against Protoss potentially although Protoss have been working on defending that for a while now.
I Honestly Believe that buffing hydras will make ZvP and ZvT with Roach Hydra styles Very Strong to the point where in Conjunction with Vipers and Infestors we will an UBER STrong Push 17 mins that will darn near impossible to stop head on lol but i'm actually ok with that I miss the Days where Zerg just ROFLSTOMPED ME with just Pure Infestor ling into INfestor/ BL
On February 11 2014 06:27 Wingblade wrote: I actually think a 9 vision range for the MSC is fine, remember it's an "air unit" that comes out WAY before any other air unit in the game. Giving air unit vision range at 7 minutes is still kinda silly.
Except for overlords. They are much slower than a MSC but they are air units that come out way before a MSC and have 11 sight range.
The MsC vision nerf was much needed, thank goodness this one is in.
The blink change though is terrible, blink itself is a fine ability and one of the few APM intensive ones that Toss have, blink wars are very fun to see, and I always admire a player with excellent blink stalker micro. This is just bringing a sledgehammer to the equation and nerfing blink all across the board, including in MUs and situations where it doesn't need a nerf, overall terrible change.
WM change is interesting, I guess we'll now we might have another style to use against chargelot archon, 4M. I don't think it will actually change much, late game you probably will still want a mass of vikings, ghosts and supporting bio and medivacs, this just seems like a early to mid game thing.
Hydralisk buff I guess is decent, I'd have much rather prefered if they reduced their damage point to 0 to make them more microable, but this is still a buff. However late game its still irrelevant, late game Protoss still has storm + colossus to melt the Hydras.
Tempest change I don't like at all, but if it goes trough it will for sure accomplish what they want, breaking static defense. I still don't think it will make the game more fun, you'll still have turtling from both sides just that toss can better deal with it now.
Edit: One nice change in there, some interesting ones, and a couple of bad ones, Blizz are kind of going in the right direction with the MsC vision nerf, but they still need guidance or they'll nerf what doesn't need nerfing.
On February 11 2014 06:27 Wingblade wrote: I actually think a 9 vision range for the MSC is fine, remember it's an "air unit" that comes out WAY before any other air unit in the game. Giving air unit vision range at 7 minutes is still kinda silly.
Except for overlords. They are much slower than a MSC but they are air units that come out way before a MSC and have 11 sight range.
But overlord is merely a supply/scout unit. It doesn't strengthen zerg early game aggression in any way. You can't compare those two units at all.
I'm still doubtful about the blink and tempest (proxy tempest/tempest rush might actually become a thing, we'll need to see for ourselves..) but I totally support the rest! Better than expected when I saw the title :D
I don´t understand why they are so obsessed with buffing Hydralisks in TvZ and ZvZ. I don´t mind the buff at all, but I just get the feeling that they really get attached to certain units / abilities / upgrades and want to make them work no matter what, even though it isn´t necessarily best for the game.
I like the vision range change, since the reduction is reasonable, even so 11 would have been the more logical step considering all air units have 11 vision.
The new Blink cd will be super weird to play with and feels like a very very strong nerf considering blink is a rather important ability in PvZ
hydra change should be alright.
Tempst change is meh. just make them unabductable if you only want to only affect ZvP.
aaaand then there is the WM buff. WTF?! Mineral lines on all servers will be cleansed of probes time and again.
The core problem with swarm hosts remain unaddressed. That unit will continue to produce boring games if they wont change drastically way the locusts work. Decrease duration, reduce hp , buff movement speed and maybe dmg a bit. Make it more mobile with hit and run strategy rather then: hit and hit and hit and hit. Also their changes always amuse me. Why on earth do they change smth by 50 or 100% like blink cd? Wouldn't changing it by 2 sec be better rather then doing such huge jump?
Remember everyone, the blink change is simply being tested. They want to have the change in their back pocket in case blink plays are still too strong after the MSC vision nerf (since this change, or at least a very similar one, is probably going to go through). If this blink change tests poorly, then they will scrap it for something new
On February 11 2014 06:29 Pirfiktshon wrote: I Honestly Believe that buffing hydras will make ZvP and ZvT with Roach Hydra styles Very Strong to the point where in Conjunction with Vipers and Infestors we will an UBER STrong Push 17 mins that will darn near impossible to stop head on lol but i'm actually ok with that I miss the Days where Zerg just ROFLSTOMPED ME with just Pure Infestor ling into INfestor/ BL
Depends how strong the hydralisks become. With what they're proposing (+10% dps) I only see ZvZ being somewhat affected. Muta/ling is still way better against bio ZvT, and a dps buff isn't going to break mech TvZ nor ZvP as hp and attack range are more of an issue vs those compositions.
MSC vision: It´s a totally reasonable nerf. The MSC now doesn´t know way in advance, if its little scouting tour becomes dangerous. This is a little buff against blink opener as well, but only a very small one there. Still a good change, since the MSC was not only an incredible strong offensive and defensive unit in the early game, but also a brilliant scouting tool. The latter will become way harder.
blink cooldown: If I viewed this isolated on TvP, I would totally approve. Designwise you have 2 options how to deal with those shitty blink allins: Either limit maps to not giving a lot of opportunities for blink-ins or nerf the blink allin into oblivion - what would happen here. Blink "allins" are just simply toxic to the matchup, because they are by no means allin. They combine the kill potential of a fully commited allin with the smooth transition options of a small pressure. This should not be possible, especially if it´s that easy to execute. The other use of blink stalkers in the matchup (blink under Vikings and dropships) would be totally unaffected by this. However: I don´t like this nerf for PvP and PvZ at all, because Blink adds well needed diversity to the protoss strategy pool there. Therefor I disapprove to this change. It can not be the goal to repair one problem by creating two new ones. edit: I´m still for the solution of simply removing the possibility of the blink allin! But it needs to be done in a way, that doesn´t affect PvP and PvZ that much!
Widow mine splash: I like the change in general. I would love widow mines to have a real impact on battles in TvP as an answer to zealots, since Hellbats are not allowed to fulfill this task. However Widow mines are not really more accessable than Ghosts in the matchup, since you still want to use your factory to build a reactor for the starport first. A plain splash damage increase to 60 maybe? I don´t think this does enough, since the effect is overlapping with emp.
Tempest building attack: No! Just no! The unit is already terrible strong. It does not need a buff, whatever it is, NO!
Hydralisk attackspeed buff: See Tempest. Buffing an already strong unit just seems so wrong. I mean giving hydras a little more defensive stats would sound ok for me, to make them a bit stronger, when they´re engaged directly. (+10HP would come to mind as a good solution for that). However, increasing their already strong damage output, when they sit behind a roach/ling wall just is so terrible wrong, I don´t know what they are thinking at blizzard!
On February 11 2014 06:27 Wingblade wrote: I actually think a 9 vision range for the MSC is fine, remember it's an "air unit" that comes out WAY before any other air unit in the game. Giving air unit vision range at 7 minutes is still kinda silly.
Except for overlords. They are much slower than a MSC but they are air units that come out way before a MSC and have 11 sight range.
But overlord is merely a supply/scout unit. It doesn't strengthen zerg early game aggression in any way. You can't compare those two units at all.
I'm not comparing the units. I was replying to Wingblade's assertion that the MSC "comes out WAY before any other air unit in the game" which is not true.
I'm not comparing the units. I was replying to Wingblade's assertion that the MSC "comes out WAY before any other air unit in the game" which is not true.
Still it comes olut before any "useful" Units. Yeah i know that Overlords can scout but Zerg does not have blink
On February 11 2014 06:35 Yorkie wrote: Remember everyone, the blink change is simply being tested. They want to have the change in their back pocket in case blink plays are still too strong after the MSC vision nerf (since this change, or at least a very similar one, is probably going to go through). If this blink change tests poorly, then they will scrap it for something new
I wish it was the other way around. I couldn't care less about blink cool down timing. If it were 25 second cool down, w/e. But, the vision change is large and actually affects every build/stage in the game. All of that because of stalkers? Jesus, sick trade off.
If something could possibly be this strong that it takes 2 blink all-in nerfs, yet the test is just happening, wtf? That's inexcusable. Was David Kim in a coma? Where is the explanation for this? The guy who is always trying to make pointless changes, finally gets around to making a change in a matchup where everyone has greater than 70% win rate simply through deciding to do a blink all-in. Jesus.
The blink will get totally useless, just change the vision radius, which is a good thing. BUT! Blink is one of the things in starcraft 2 that is based on SKILL, dont change things that need skill to be used. Dont nerf those nice TL´Hero moves. Try to play out the game for christ sake.
If you don't nerf blink directly than the tool to defend woudl have to get buffed which is Stim.... Otherwise Blink will = auto win if you can simply do blink micro.... LOL
Which we have seen a TON of in recent tourneys.....
blink has been like this always and has never been a problem. The reason it is a problem now is mostly because of mothership core. If they dont like it, they can again extend the research time for blink as it used to be previously.
Mothership need buf!!!!Maybe pasive ability who add+1 cannon range.Mother ship must counter swarmhost but abduct.Mothership must def bases/Or move back vortex/
The blink will get totally useless, just change the vision radius, which is a good thing. BUT! Blink is one of the things in starcraft 2 that is based on SKILL, dont change things that need skill to be used. Dont nerf those nice TL´Hero moves. Try to play out the game for christ sake.
If you don't nerf blink directly than the tool to defend woudl have to get buffed which is Stim.... Otherwise Blink will = auto win if you can simply do blink micro.... LOL
Which we have seen a TON of in recent tourneys.....
blink has been like this always and has never been a problem. The reason it is a problem now is mostly because of mothership core. If they dont like it, they can again extend the research time for blink as it used to be previously.
Blink research time is longer now than it has ever been before.
The mothership core vision decrease is great, but the blink nerf is going to cripple protoss to a point where it wont even be researched. You already need amazing micro for blink in battles, and this is just going to kill it. The Tempest buff is great, it will give the tempests a siege role. The Hydra buff is.....interesting, I would have prefered a slight health increase to say 90 or 95, but we'll see how this goes. The widow mines shouldn't be a real change.
(On a side note, you can literally pick out every Terran player on this thread)
There is something I only now just thought up. If the WM buff turns out to create strong early game pressures/all-ins then it might, just might be enough to force Protoss into being more defensive early game, which will force them to spend more resources in that regard, and thus might cut down on their incredible greed, hopefully shifting the balance more towards terran.
On February 11 2014 06:46 Destructicon wrote: There is something I only now just thought up. If the WM buff turns out to create strong early game pressures/all-ins then it might, just might be enough to force Protoss into being more defensive early game, which will force them to spend more resources in that regard, and thus might cut down on their incredible greed, hopefully shifting the balance more towards terran.
The blink will get totally useless, just change the vision radius, which is a good thing. BUT! Blink is one of the things in starcraft 2 that is based on SKILL, dont change things that need skill to be used. Dont nerf those nice TL´Hero moves. Try to play out the game for christ sake.
If you don't nerf blink directly than the tool to defend woudl have to get buffed which is Stim.... Otherwise Blink will = auto win if you can simply do blink micro.... LOL
Which we have seen a TON of in recent tourneys.....
blink has been like this always and has never been a problem. The reason it is a problem now is mostly because of mothership core. If they dont like it, they can again extend the research time for blink as it used to be previously.
Blink research time is longer now than it has ever been before.
They could revert the +1 attack they gave to Stalkers like a million years ago now that maxed out roaches don't win every game.
On February 11 2014 06:46 Destructicon wrote: There is something I only now just thought up. If the WM buff turns out to create strong early game pressures/all-ins then it might, just might be enough to force Protoss into being more defensive early game, which will force them to spend more resources in that regard, and thus might cut down on their incredible greed, hopefully shifting the balance more towards terran.
Shifting balance toward a race isn't balance....
Well it's obvious that he meant to say that this change could shift the game away from terran deficits
On February 11 2014 06:46 Destructicon wrote: There is something I only now just thought up. If the WM buff turns out to create strong early game pressures/all-ins then it might, just might be enough to force Protoss into being more defensive early game, which will force them to spend more resources in that regard, and thus might cut down on their incredible greed, hopefully shifting the balance more towards terran.
On February 11 2014 06:46 Destructicon wrote: There is something I only now just thought up. If the WM buff turns out to create strong early game pressures/all-ins then it might, just might be enough to force Protoss into being more defensive early game, which will force them to spend more resources in that regard, and thus might cut down on their incredible greed, hopefully shifting the balance more towards terran.
Shifting balance toward a race isn't balance....
Well it's obvious that he meant to say that this change could shift the game away from terran deficits
All of this together combined feels like overkill, but we'll have to see.
I feel like the hydra buff might break ZvP, but it would indeed help ZvZ and ZvT, so I dunno how I feel.
The blink cooldown nerf is going to nuke blink stalkers in all matchups, especially PvP. Actually this is going to make stargate play even harder to deal with, it's somewhat concerning.
Mothership core vision decrease is good. Do it.
Tempest bonus damage against ground feels like a band-aid.
40+40 vs. shields? So what, widow mine splash will one shot sentries? I didn't feel that widow mines were weak.
Hydralisk delay between attacks decreased from .83 to .75
That's exactly what it was before beta patch 5 of the wol beta.
reverting a change 4 years later lol
He did say he was willing to revert previous changes. I wanted them to switch back ghost cost from 200/100 to 100/200 though.
This.This.This. And this. Cause it makes sense, terran got a HUGE gas bank with bio.
Yeah the original change was to nerf ghosts w/ bio and buff ghosts w/ mech since you don't have the gas to spare when you're meching. Hasn't really worked out though
I'm still a proponent of moving EMP to Raven and ditching one of the Raven's current spells.
I would be down for that if they removed auto turret. But then ghosts are useless
Yeah, ghosts would need something else. Idk, maybe bring lockdown back!
On February 11 2014 06:46 Destructicon wrote: There is something I only now just thought up. If the WM buff turns out to create strong early game pressures/all-ins then it might, just might be enough to force Protoss into being more defensive early game, which will force them to spend more resources in that regard, and thus might cut down on their incredible greed, hopefully shifting the balance more towards terran.
So you want the hellbat drop to come back?
WHY WOULD YOU SAY THAT?! Dont mention that, it never happened....EVER!
On February 11 2014 06:46 Destructicon wrote: There is something I only now just thought up. If the WM buff turns out to create strong early game pressures/all-ins then it might, just might be enough to force Protoss into being more defensive early game, which will force them to spend more resources in that regard, and thus might cut down on their incredible greed, hopefully shifting the balance more towards terran.
So you want the hellbat drop to come back?
WHY WOULD YOU SAY THAT?! Dont mention that, it never happened....EVER!
On February 11 2014 06:27 Wingblade wrote: I actually think a 9 vision range for the MSC is fine, remember it's an "air unit" that comes out WAY before any other air unit in the game. Giving air unit vision range at 7 minutes is still kinda silly.
Except for overlords. They are much slower than a MSC but they are air units that come out way before a MSC and have 11 sight range.
Overlords can't attack or cast spells...and Zerg doesn't have Blink. So there's that...
Hydralisk delay between attacks decreased from .83 to .75
That's exactly what it was before beta patch 5 of the wol beta.
reverting a change 4 years later lol
He did say he was willing to revert previous changes. I wanted them to switch back ghost cost from 200/100 to 100/200 though.
This.This.This. And this. Cause it makes sense, terran got a HUGE gas bank with bio.
Yeah the original change was to nerf ghosts w/ bio and buff ghosts w/ mech since you don't have the gas to spare when you're meching. Hasn't really worked out though
I'm still a proponent of moving EMP to Raven and ditching one of the Raven's current spells.
I would be down for that if they removed auto turret. But then ghosts are useless
Yeah, ghosts would need something else. Idk, maybe bring lockdown back!
Fix the snipe nerf (45-20 vs. massive instead of 25+25 psionic), nukes are still really strong and are dirt cheap, they can still cloak, and give them something other than EMP (lockdown is a possibility but would be too strong if it works on massive units, protoss would then have no answer to mass ghost medivac in PvT, and it would be useless if it didn't (what are you gonna do, lockdown a stalker?).
Solid changes overall IMO. FINALLY THE MSC RANGE. Blink nerf a little too much. Nerfing it so it's defendable is one thing, nerfing it to the point of destruction is too much. Widow Mine against Protoss... hmm... I doubt it'll seriously change the opening in TvP, as the early Forge opening developed by sOs still shuts it down very well. Maybe it'll force the Protoss to play a little less greedy (i.e. build Cannons)? I'm more interested in its performance in head on battles. Theoretically it could counter the all so popular Templar openings, as Chagelots that accompany these openings are a little more vulnerable. Tempest change and Hydra change... worthy of a test definitely. Let's see how these turn out.
On February 11 2014 06:46 Destructicon wrote: There is something I only now just thought up. If the WM buff turns out to create strong early game pressures/all-ins then it might, just might be enough to force Protoss into being more defensive early game, which will force them to spend more resources in that regard, and thus might cut down on their incredible greed, hopefully shifting the balance more towards terran.
So you want the hellbat drop to come back?
I didn't say I want hellbat drops to come back or for WM drops to become the next HB drops, I'm just theorizing on the possible implications of this buff. I guess when you put it like that, yeah I'm no longer as excited for it.
On February 11 2014 06:34 Tomasy wrote: The core problem with swarm hosts remain unaddressed. That unit will continue to produce boring games if they wont change drastically way the locusts work. Decrease duration, reduce hp , buff movement speed and maybe dmg a bit. Make it more mobile with hit and run strategy rather then: hit and hit and hit and hit. Also their changes always amuse me. Why on earth do they change smth by 50 or 100% like blink cd? Wouldn't changing it by 2 sec be better rather then doing such huge jump?
I'm for removing Enduring Locusts upgrade. That recent game where DRG forgot/didn't get the upgrade, he was forced to be more proactive with moving his swarm hosts around because you didn't have the next wave of locusts showing up right as his opponent just barely kills off the current wave. It was probably the most exciting swarm host game I've ever seen. He ended up losing because he made some weird decisions and I didn't really care for the composition of his supporting units, but I think that removing that upgrade could be a good first step.
Haha, love the glasses! On the actuall test: hope the core sight fixes the issues since the community has been pining for the change for quite some time already; blink change sounds quite drastic; hydra change is atleast better than the crazy half-gas fix in the previous test. But what do I know, I'm just a spectator. The swarm host dilemma seems to revolve against protoss, but what about mech vs SH?
I haven't played in a bit but it seems everyone 'loves' this patch more because it's nerfing protoss rather than complimenting the actual balance changes.
Are these changes legitimately good or is everyone just loving them because it's a P nerf? Pls help.
As an outsider some of these changes seem quite extreme and I can't imagine proxy tempest is actually a 'thing' to be concerned about...
Hydralisk delay between attacks decreased from .83 to .75
That's exactly what it was before beta patch 5 of the wol beta.
reverting a change 4 years later lol
He did say he was willing to revert previous changes. I wanted them to switch back ghost cost from 200/100 to 100/200 though.
This.This.This. And this. Cause it makes sense, terran got a HUGE gas bank with bio.
Yeah the original change was to nerf ghosts w/ bio and buff ghosts w/ mech since you don't have the gas to spare when you're meching. Hasn't really worked out though
I'm still a proponent of moving EMP to Raven and ditching one of the Raven's current spells.
I would be down for that if they removed auto turret. But then ghosts are useless
Yeah, ghosts would need something else. Idk, maybe bring lockdown back!
Fix the snipe nerf (45-20 vs. massive instead of 25+25 psionic), nukes are still really strong and are dirt cheap, they can still cloak, and give them something other than EMP (lockdown is a possibility but would be too strong if it works on massive units, protoss would then have no answer to mass ghost medivac in PvT, and it would be useless if it didn't (what are you gonna do, lockdown a stalker?).
Well, locking down immortals would be incredibly useful
On February 11 2014 06:57 crms wrote: I haven't played in a bit but it seems everyone 'loves' this patch more because it's nerfing protoss rather than complimenting the actual balance changes.
Are these changes legitimately good or is everyone just loving them because it's a P nerf? Pls help.
As an outsider some of these changes seem quite extreme and I can't imagine proxy tempest is actually a 'thing' to be concerned about...
There are some issues with the mothership core that have been addressed, but its mostly just because people are really hating Protoss. They were finally given the tools to do well, they did (GSL) and now everyone is raging about it.
I can't believe people are saying blink will never be researched. Holy crap, talk about exaggeration and cluelessness. Sure, we're not going to see blink allins as often, if ever, but it's still an amazing ability.
Hydralisk delay between attacks decreased from .83 to .75
That's exactly what it was before beta patch 5 of the wol beta.
reverting a change 4 years later lol
He did say he was willing to revert previous changes. I wanted them to switch back ghost cost from 200/100 to 100/200 though.
This.This.This. And this. Cause it makes sense, terran got a HUGE gas bank with bio.
Yeah the original change was to nerf ghosts w/ bio and buff ghosts w/ mech since you don't have the gas to spare when you're meching. Hasn't really worked out though
I'm still a proponent of moving EMP to Raven and ditching one of the Raven's current spells.
I would be down for that if they removed auto turret. But then ghosts are useless
Yeah, ghosts would need something else. Idk, maybe bring lockdown back!
Fix the snipe nerf (45-20 vs. massive instead of 25+25 psionic), nukes are still really strong and are dirt cheap, they can still cloak, and give them something other than EMP (lockdown is a possibility but would be too strong if it works on massive units, protoss would then have no answer to mass ghost medivac in PvT, and it would be useless if it didn't (what are you gonna do, lockdown a stalker?).
I wouldn't mind a revert off the sniper nerf, maybe even make it 50 - 20 vs massive, but I disagree with lockdown. We don't need any more micro limiting abilities in this game.
On February 11 2014 06:54 dyDrawer wrote: Solid changes overall IMO. FINALLY THE MSC RANGE. Blink nerf a little too much. Nerfing it so it's defendable is one thing, nerfing it to the point of destruction is too much. Widow Mine against Protoss... hmm... I doubt it'll seriously change the opening in TvP, as the early Forge opening developed by sOs still shuts it down very well. Maybe it'll force the Protoss to play a little less greedy (i.e. build Cannons)? I'm more interested in its performance in head on battles. Theoretically it could counter the all so popular Templar openings, as Chagelots that accompany these openings are a little more vulnerable. Tempest change and Hydra change... worthy of a test definitely. Let's see how these turn out.
idk, with the widow mine buff I actually think this test map introduces THREE nerfs to blink all in. Widow Mines are much faster/cheaper to get out than tanks (you don't even need a tech lab). I would think that sight range + widow mine buff vs shields would be more than enough to give Terran better tools against a dedicated blink all-in
On February 11 2014 06:57 crms wrote: I haven't played in a bit but it seems everyone 'loves' this patch more because it's nerfing protoss rather than complimenting the actual balance changes.
Are these changes legitimately good or is everyone just loving them because it's a P nerf? Pls help.
As an outsider some of these changes seem quite extreme and I can't imagine proxy tempest is actually a 'thing' to be concerned about...
As a Protoss player who has been very sick of the Protoss hate, I like most of these changes. My only gripe is that I think messing with Blink cooldown is the wrong way to go. I would be all for seeing the sight range nerf and the widow mine buff going through, I think those are very reasonable changes and will introduce some new variety to the PvT matchup.
The Hydra change is...ok I guess, but Hydras can already be pretty scary in ZvP
In short: Decent changes + nerf OPtoss = people happy
On February 11 2014 06:59 Zenbrez wrote: I can't believe people are saying blink will never be researched. Holy crap, talk about exaggeration and cluelessness. Sure, we're not going to see blink allins as often, if ever, but it's still an amazing ability.
The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
If I didn't know better, reading some of the toss reactions to this test patch would have me believing they were going to remove blink all together.
Tell me 15 seconds instead of 10 would have prevented anything that happens at 45 minutes in this VoD of StarDust v Revenge this weekend http://us.esl.tv/video/6cfff390cd080e0c/
Okay, it might prevent the gg that comes at about 46 minutes of the VoD, but then that would be the entire point.
On February 11 2014 07:04 Xinzoe wrote: The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
Don't forget the widow mine buff, that's also an indirect nerf to blink all-ins
On February 11 2014 07:04 dvorakftw wrote: If I didn't know better, reading some of the toss reactions to this test patch would have me believing they were going to remove blink all together.
Tell me 15 seconds instead of 10 would have prevented anything that happens at 45 minutes in this VoD of StarDust v Revenge this weekend http://us.esl.tv/video/6cfff390cd080e0c/
Okay, it might prevent the gg that comes at about 46 minutes of the VoD, but then that would be the entire point.
People are more concerned about the PvP blink battles, I think. Which are awesome. Plus, it would make defending vs stargate play a lot more difficult. PvP is in a really good place right now, I really don't want to see any big changes to it
Sight range nerf + widow mine splash damage buff vs shields would be excellent changes to help Terran out while not touching PvP much, if at all.
On February 11 2014 07:04 Xinzoe wrote: The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
Don't forget the widow mine buff, that's also an indirect nerf to blink all-ins
because you can still dodge the shots with blink micro?
On February 11 2014 06:54 dyDrawer wrote: Solid changes overall IMO. FINALLY THE MSC RANGE. Blink nerf a little too much. Nerfing it so it's defendable is one thing, nerfing it to the point of destruction is too much. Widow Mine against Protoss... hmm... I doubt it'll seriously change the opening in TvP, as the early Forge opening developed by sOs still shuts it down very well. Maybe it'll force the Protoss to play a little less greedy (i.e. build Cannons)? I'm more interested in its performance in head on battles. Theoretically it could counter the all so popular Templar openings, as Chagelots that accompany these openings are a little more vulnerable. Tempest change and Hydra change... worthy of a test definitely. Let's see how these turn out.
This is way too many big changes in the same map at the same time. Also, changes are drastic man. 14 to 9? I've said from the beginning that mshipcore vision range was ridiculous. It took them one year to try a nerf and they try a 5 point neft lol what the fuck is this. Hell will break loose in tvp. No protoss will ever want to play this test map.
On February 11 2014 07:04 Xinzoe wrote: The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
Don't forget the widow mine buff, that's also an indirect nerf to blink all-ins
because you can still dodge the shots with blink micro?
What's your point? Without observers, you can't see where the mines even are. You really think Protoss players will want to blindly blink into a Terran base if they think there might be buffed widow mines around? That splash damage buff is pretty big. Plus, even if the mines just make the Protoss player blink away, they've done their job as a deterrent to buy more time.
On February 11 2014 07:10 Names wrote: This is way too many big changes in the same map at the same time. Also, changes are drastic man. 14 to 9? I've said from the beginning that mshipcore vision range was ridiculous. It took them one year to try a nerf and they try a 5 point neft lol what the fuck is this. Hell will break loose in tvp. No protoss will ever want to play this test map.
14 to 9 is fine, I'm more concerned with this blink nerf being overkill. Hydras getting a 10% dps buff overall might be okay, only one way to find out.
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
On February 11 2014 07:04 Xinzoe wrote: The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
Don't forget the widow mine buff, that's also an indirect nerf to blink all-ins
because you can still dodge the shots with blink micro?
What's your point? Without observers, you can't see where the mines even are. You really think Protoss players will want to blindly blink into a Terran base if they think there might be buffed widow mines around? That splash damage buff is pretty big. Plus, even if the mines just make the Protoss player blink away, they've done their job as a deterrent to buy more time.
Approve vision - everybody is talking about this and finally we see it tested
Blink delay is pretty harsh and may make blink harassment in general pretty iffy
Widowmine damage is interesting and worth a try. It may help TvP mech openings or even bio widowmine for early aggression not to mention hurt blink stalker "all ins"
Tempest change is a bandaid fix to a really dumb lategame interaction between Toss and Zerg. We deserve better.
Hydra attack reduction is interesting and worth testing for sure as this may make them better vs bio, roaches, mutas, and void rays. Only concern is how this will impact PvZ but it may be fine as hydras force colossus anyways as it is.
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
On February 11 2014 07:15 DinoMight wrote: This test map is simply ludicrous.
They're nerfing Mothership core vision by 60% and Blink cooldown by 50%. At the same time.
How do you even begin to scientifically analyze the impact of the changes when the changes are simultaneous and this large?
How do you analyzea ny simultanious change? How do you analyze those at all without player skill playing a role?
Test maps are probably just to prevent them from making massive gamechanging mistakes (akin to giving the Marine 15 damage, marine rushes would be unstopable, they'd notice, they'd not patch.)
I'm against the blink nerf going through, seems too much. I think all these changes are likely too do for TvP is make it so Protoss has less aggressive options, making the remaining ones esier to scout, meaning that Terran can play greedier ( which might help even out win rates), but it wont help Terran be aggressive at all so we'll like end up with ~10 minutes of passive play every TvP, which will be less entertaining both for players and viewers.
To everyone upset with the Blink change, read the fine print:
Blink cooldown increased from 10 to 15 This is a more direct nerf that affects all Protoss players. If Blink play continues to be problematic, this is the sort of thing we’d want to have tested and prepared to put in the game.
Note the "if". They're not patching it in with this change, they're testing it in the current environment. The idea is that should Blink builds be too powerful in the coming patch, they have a change tested and ready so we don't have to wait another round of testing. It's their way of saying "We don't know what the next needed change will be, but I'm guessing Blink, so just to be safe, let's have a change warming up on the back burner"
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
With this change, Probes in the secondary widow mine radius die, in the third radius (the largest) they survive. So, it's still better than before the 'TvZ is getting stale so let's nerf a core unit' patch.
You are quite adamant about preventing any of the changes by the way, already. Can you show me some test map replays?
On February 11 2014 07:04 Xinzoe wrote: The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
Don't forget the widow mine buff, that's also an indirect nerf to blink all-ins
because you can still dodge the shots with blink micro?
You just put widow mines in spots where they blink up. Then how will you dodge? :D You'll probably lose 2-3 stalkers and the all-in is pretty much over.
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Right, but micro'ing the probes away is risky if you aren't super fast (which is fine IMO). If you clump them up and the shot goes off while they are running, you lose MORE than if you hadn't micro'd at all. If terrans get the burrow speed upgrade for them and do this harass, it's going to be terrifying, since a cannon or two won't kill the mines fast enough to stop a shot, but I suppose that if a pro player can deal with it (and they should), it isn't too bad.
The widow mine change seems a little excessive, but I'm more or less okay with it overall.
I especially like the WidowMine proposed change, but I would really like for the rest of the previous WM nerfs to be reverted to some degree since they were VERY excessive.
I hope to see more WM beneficial changes in the future.
On February 11 2014 07:21 Bagi wrote: Isn't it pretty obvious though this blink nerf is an answer to protoss domination in general, not just blink all ins against terran?
2 birds with one stone and all that, if you don't like it then you should suggest alternative nerfs to overall protoss.
You don't have to nerf protoss to fix dominance, you can buff zerg and terran. The mothership core nerf combined with the widow mine buff seems like it will help TvP a fair bit. The hydra buff should help a bit too.
I don't think blink should be touched, nerfing it will strongly impact PvP.
On February 11 2014 07:21 Bagi wrote: Isn't it pretty obvious though this blink nerf is an answer to protoss domination in general, not just blink all ins against terran?
2 birds with one stone and all that, if you don't like it then you should suggest alternative nerfs to overall protoss.
win rates are currently 50% in ZvX, the only matchup that needs fixing balance-wise is PvT, the MSC vision range and maybe a smaller blink nerf should be enough to bring that to 50%.
ZvP is broken design-wise but that's another issue.
Now the true bias of pros is showing, progamer feedback is so weak in many ways.
Lol, I remember the first time we saw a Korean protoss do a storm drop. A protoss caster (I think it was ToD or Grubby) was saying that this is amazing because it only works when master league players are trolling lower leagues.
Now we see storm drops all the time.
Proxy tempest could be strong on maps that have a lot of dead space around main bases
So would the blink nerf fix the apparent imbalance with blink allins in pvt? i think they tried to nerf timewarp, but people said you only need one anyway, so that wouldn't help. does this help?
On February 11 2014 07:04 Xinzoe wrote: The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
Don't forget the widow mine buff, that's also an indirect nerf to blink all-ins
because you can still dodge the shots with blink micro?
You just put widow mines in spots where they blink up. Then how will you dodge? :D You'll probably lose 2-3 stalkers and the all-in is pretty much over.
How many widow mines do you need to cover Yeonsu? I'd say about 5.
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Right, but micro'ing the probes away is risky if you aren't super fast (which is fine IMO). If you clump them up and the shot goes off while they are running, you lose MORE than if you hadn't micro'd at all. If terrans get the burrow speed upgrade for them and do this harass, it's going to be terrifying, since a cannon or two won't kill the mines fast enough to stop a shot, but I suppose that if a pro player can deal with it (and they should), it isn't too bad.
The widow mine change seems a little excessive, but I'm more or less okay with it overall.
They dealt with it just fine even when mines killed probes in its full radius, and this change is still an overall nerf compared to that.
I don't know if you are just clueless because this is not a new strategy at all and even it its old form its was perfectly manageable.
Okay with mothership core vision nerf. Blink nerf is way too ridiculous and would heavily affect all matchups. Not sure i like the widow mine buff but i think it is worth testing a bit. Tempest change needs more testing but i think it could possibly be a good change. Hydralisk change i'm still unsure of, i know they want to buff it to be usable in TvZ but the DPS of the hydra has never been the problem with the unit. Also, his comment that there is a trend that Protoss is stronger than Zerg does seem a bit weird considering how ridiculously strong SH turtle is atm.
On February 11 2014 07:04 Xinzoe wrote: The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
Don't forget the widow mine buff, that's also an indirect nerf to blink all-ins
because you can still dodge the shots with blink micro?
You just put widow mines in spots where they blink up. Then how will you dodge? :D You'll probably lose 2-3 stalkers and the all-in is pretty much over.
How many widow mines do you need to cover Yeonsu? I'd say about 5.
I'm thinking more like 6 or 7, might have to load up a map and have a look.
Happy cause they finally are testing the Widow-Mine vs Protoss.. Something I've been pointing at for months now
Worried cause not sure how vision would work on MSC.. It's already crowd-favorite for a long-time though, so I guess I don't see something about that one
The Blink nerf however goes far too far.. There are some PvZ games won by the Protoss Baaarely.. True that most of the time if the Zerg defending isn't Jaedong will occasionally get pushed by good blink-stalker micro, so like maybe around 70% of the Blink-push games are won by the Protoss I think ATM.. But to go that one up to 15 from 10 is just too far.. (more like 12 would be more appropriate I feel).. PvT isn't the only matchup where Blink play is important, gotta think of PvZ chances to preserve the blink aggression as well..
Hard nerf Stalker won't be needed if in any possible form we see the change to the Widow-Mine.. Ofc. though - it would be even better if the WM vs Shields damage is lesser vs Air targets IMO..
Mines should probably be good vs Zealot/Stalker/Robo, but not vs VoidRays and Prisms as much
I like the rest of the changes though.. They will certainly bring in some new fresh blood
Perhaps increasing the Siege-Tank range to 14 and making Locusts slightly faster (on creep - they currently have a diminished on-creep bonus - i.e. - 40% movement-speed bonus instead of the regular 50%) but less on lifetime would be a good change as well IMO.. Like - make the Enduring-Locusts upgrade increase the Locust lifetime by 5 seconds instead of 10, but yah - as a compensation - make it's bonus on creep be regular instead of diminished
On February 11 2014 07:22 Skynx wrote: Bit unrelated but I think it's time to give hellbats a buff, just saying.
Why? Hellbats are already really strong. They are tanky and rip through zealots/lings like nobody's business. I love it when I see Terran players mix in hellbats vs Zealot heavy Protoss armies, it makes a HUGE difference lol
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
On February 11 2014 07:04 Xinzoe wrote: The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
Don't forget the widow mine buff, that's also an indirect nerf to blink all-ins
because you can still dodge the shots with blink micro?
You just put widow mines in spots where they blink up. Then how will you dodge? :D You'll probably lose 2-3 stalkers and the all-in is pretty much over.
How many widow mines do you need to cover Yeonsu? I'd say about 5.
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Right, but micro'ing the probes away is risky if you aren't super fast (which is fine IMO). If you clump them up and the shot goes off while they are running, you lose MORE than if you hadn't micro'd at all. If terrans get the burrow speed upgrade for them and do this harass, it's going to be terrifying, since a cannon or two won't kill the mines fast enough to stop a shot, but I suppose that if a pro player can deal with it (and they should), it isn't too bad.
The widow mine change seems a little excessive, but I'm more or less okay with it overall.
It's still worse than before the nerf that had nothing to do with your matchup. What are you complaining about?
On February 11 2014 07:04 Xinzoe wrote: The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
Don't forget the widow mine buff, that's also an indirect nerf to blink all-ins
because you can still dodge the shots with blink micro?
You just put widow mines in spots where they blink up. Then how will you dodge? :D You'll probably lose 2-3 stalkers and the all-in is pretty much over.
How many widow mines do you need to cover Yeonsu? I'd say about 5.
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Right, but micro'ing the probes away is risky if you aren't super fast (which is fine IMO). If you clump them up and the shot goes off while they are running, you lose MORE than if you hadn't micro'd at all. If terrans get the burrow speed upgrade for them and do this harass, it's going to be terrifying, since a cannon or two won't kill the mines fast enough to stop a shot, but I suppose that if a pro player can deal with it (and they should), it isn't too bad.
The widow mine change seems a little excessive, but I'm more or less okay with it overall.
The game is littered with scenarios that can mean GG if not reacted to properly or scouted in time. That's the nature of the game and the only reason I posted that.
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Aww
Still better for you than pre mine nerf for TvZ, so stop whining about microing probes. If you let a 1/1/1 get mines in your mineral line AND are to slow to respond you deserver to lose workers.
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Widow mine takes 3 seconds to burrow + at least 3 more seconds from when you spot the medivac until it goes to the mineral line. It is not a lot of time but it is still enough time to react. And at least mines won't be able to chase your probes like oracle can. Not to mention that mine drop comes like 2 minutes later than for example fastest proxy oracle.
On February 11 2014 07:04 Xinzoe wrote: The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
Don't forget the widow mine buff, that's also an indirect nerf to blink all-ins
because you can still dodge the shots with blink micro?
You just put widow mines in spots where they blink up. Then how will you dodge? :D You'll probably lose 2-3 stalkers and the all-in is pretty much over.
How many widow mines do you need to cover Yeonsu? I'd say about 5.
That's a map specific problem.
Ok, how many widow mines do you need to cover these maps:
Daedulus Polar Night Star Station Yeonsu Alterzim Heavy Rain Frost Akilon
On February 11 2014 07:30 r691175002 wrote: Loving the Protoss tears. Only thing better will be if the change goes through.
Most of the tears aren't even warranted for. It's complaining about having to micro workers against a unit that still has lower damage potential than before the nerf for a whole other matchup xP
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Aww
Still better for you than pre mine nerf for TvZ, so stop whining about microing probes. If you let a 1/1/1 get mines in your mineral line AND are to slow to respond you deserver to lose workers.
I kind of agree. I suck vs Widow Mine drops, but it's because my scouting and minimap awareness isn't as good as I would like. That's 85% of what it takes to deal with early game widow mine drops (which is what everyone seems to be freaking out about) and the rest is just not screwing up your build order so you have units to actually defend. You can pretty much say the same thing about Oracle openers lol
On February 11 2014 07:04 Xinzoe wrote: The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
Don't forget the widow mine buff, that's also an indirect nerf to blink all-ins
because you can still dodge the shots with blink micro?
You just put widow mines in spots where they blink up. Then how will you dodge? :D You'll probably lose 2-3 stalkers and the all-in is pretty much over.
How many widow mines do you need to cover Yeonsu? I'd say about 5.
That's a map specific problem.
Ok, how many widow mines do you need to cover these maps:
Daedulus Polar Night Star Station Yeonsu Alterzim Heavy Rain Frost Akilon
I don't know, and I don't care. Someone else will figure it out. Plus, maps are way easier to change than tweaking balance lol
On February 11 2014 07:04 Xinzoe wrote: The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
Don't forget the widow mine buff, that's also an indirect nerf to blink all-ins
because you can still dodge the shots with blink micro?
You just put widow mines in spots where they blink up. Then how will you dodge? :D You'll probably lose 2-3 stalkers and the all-in is pretty much over.
How many widow mines do you need to cover Yeonsu? I'd say about 5.
That's a map specific problem.
Ok, how many widow mines do you need to cover these maps:
Daedulus Polar Night Star Station Yeonsu Alterzim Heavy Rain Frost Akilon
Daedulus: 7-8 Polar Night: 4-5 Star Station: 6 Yeonsu: 5-7 Alterzim: 3-4 Heavy Rain: 9? Frost: 3-4 Akilon: 5-6?
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Please. The potential new Mine would still be weaker than the old one, which was already more than manageable.
On February 11 2014 07:04 Xinzoe wrote: The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
Don't forget the widow mine buff, that's also an indirect nerf to blink all-ins
because you can still dodge the shots with blink micro?
You just put widow mines in spots where they blink up. Then how will you dodge? :D You'll probably lose 2-3 stalkers and the all-in is pretty much over.
How many widow mines do you need to cover Yeonsu? I'd say about 5.
That's a map specific problem.
Ok, how many widow mines do you need to cover these maps:
Daedulus Polar Night Star Station Yeonsu Alterzim Heavy Rain Frost Akilon
I don't know, and I don't care. Someone else will figure it out. Plus, maps are way easier to change than tweaking balance lol
I actually think its the opposite though. We get more balance patches than we do map changes.
MSC Range It has been asked for a while now, I would say it is about time. First I was unsure about the number 9, I felt that 10 or 11 would be better choice but after thinking about it more it makes perfect sense. MSC main purpose should be for defense and not to give extra vision for protoss thus 9 vision range seems right to me.
Blink CD I sincerely hope this won´t go through, I like to watch blink play but not the kind of blink play we are seeing right now when protoss blinks and ends the game right there. Personally I don´t find blink to an issue, rather to me the issue is blink "all-in" with MSC. We should rather first see how much of a difference the vision range change does. I liked to play against blink in WoL, it just got out of hand with HotS, and I literally stopped playing for a while because of blink and protoss.
Widow Mine This could be one thing that could really make a good shift in meta-game. It could open up new builds for terran and create interesting games, for example, I could see this promoting new playstyles such as the one we are seeing where terran floats factory near protoss base and start making widow mines with mid-game push. However, I really don´t want this change to affect probe harass, mines are already good at that. I don´t want widow mine to become like oracle that is good at wiping out mineral lines and ending games right there.
Tempest Doesn´t seem like the right direction to go about the Swarm Host issue. If we think back to early WoL, when terrans were abusing early game reapers, you would think Blizzard learned that giving units extra damage against structures isn´t necessarily good idea and shouldn´t happen again.
Hydralisk The idea is to encourage Hydralisk play in TvZ and ZvZ but to me it feels that this change concerns PvZ the most and should be considered with PvZ in mind, and I really don´t know too much about PvZ.
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
I said "micro" not pull everything and hope. If you have good map awareness and see the Medivac coming in, you should reasonably be able to pull workers no? If the T pressures the front and drops simultaneously in the mineral line, I would say that's intelligent play.
An unscouted DT shrine drop can have the same effect of wiping out a mineral line. I guess I just don't see the big deal here.
On February 11 2014 07:04 Xinzoe wrote: The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
Don't forget the widow mine buff, that's also an indirect nerf to blink all-ins
because you can still dodge the shots with blink micro?
You just put widow mines in spots where they blink up. Then how will you dodge? :D You'll probably lose 2-3 stalkers and the all-in is pretty much over.
How many widow mines do you need to cover Yeonsu? I'd say about 5.
That's a map specific problem.
Ok, how many widow mines do you need to cover these maps:
Daedulus Polar Night Star Station Yeonsu Alterzim Heavy Rain Frost Akilon
I don't know, and I don't care. Someone else will figure it out. Plus, maps are way easier to change than tweaking balance lol
I actually think its the opposite though. We get more balance patches than we do map changes.
The other thing is...do you really need full mine coverage? Just the threat of mines is enough, imo. Otherwise you start gambling. "Does he have a mine there or not?!?!?" Mind games like that happen in SC2 all the time.
Even if it just makes Protoss do Observer style blink all-ins, it will be better as those hit later, and gives Terran more time to prepare.
As long as MSC vision is equal to or greater than Time Warp casting range, it will not significantly decrease the strength of blink all ins. I still think MSC vision should be changed though.
I don't think the range reduction will be enough, it still gives enough to vision to safely see what you're blinking into.
Cool down definitely sounds a good change, it'll increase that critical mass at which stalkers can continuously blink.
The tempest thing is crazy town.... it's the swarm host that's busted, this just makes PvZ even more compositional, and it will affect all of the other matchups too...
The EMP mine thing is silly and hard to reason. It might work but it's kind of like the reaper regen thing, even if it works it just feels like it doesn't belong. They're already strong in rushed drop/runbys so I'm not sure that's a good thing.
Mothership Core vision radius decreased from 14 to 9 It's about time lol
Blink cooldown increased from 10 to 15 Ridiculous tbh, massive nerf. That's a 50% increase in blink cooldown, that's NUTS. 2 blinks now for the same time you could do 3 before. Also kills tactics that use blink to keep ppl in their base, blinking is so ridiculously risky now. No way no way no way, talk about over nerfing.... A direct nerf to blink is not the solution to TvP blink all-in (the only situation in the entire game where blink is a problem), you're killing a ton of strategy and micro just to attempt to fix one all in in one of the 9 matchups?
Widow Mine splash damage component deals 40 + 40 shield damage What a random change. I can see what they were going for in the late game here, but isn't hellbats enough already to remove the zealot threat (this is all it'd do, don't pretend it'd ever hit a ranged unit against a good toss). Also it makes widow mine drops more gimmicky against lower level players... I don't like it, especially a buff to a "just set it and leave it" micro unit
Tempest ground weapon damage increased from 30 to 30+30-to-structures This is still a silly change. This is not the issue with swarm hosts, and kinda has a dumb effect in other matchups. Please fix swarm hosts instead of a silly bandaid (attempted) fix
Hydralisk delay between attacks decreased from .83 to .75 I guess?? Idk, I'd have to see it in action to see the impact
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Aww
Still better for you than pre mine nerf for TvZ, so stop whining about microing probes. If you let a 1/1/1 get mines in your mineral line AND are to slow to respond you deserver to lose workers.
Have you ever even played Protoss? Because I've played Terran. A lot. For starters, a medivac is the same size on the minimap as a marine. For comparison a Warp Prism is 4x as big on the minimap. With Turbovacs it moves insanely fast. So unless you are staring at your base, it's quite hard to catch immediately.
Then there's the issue of splitting the workers. When the mines drop they spread out quite a bit because of the speed the Medivac is traveling at. So you basically have 3 seconds to decide where the ideal place to send every probe is and to actually click there.
And then one misclick can cost you close to every single probe (I'm not exaggerating here and I can show you replays of me as Terran doing this to Protosses on ladder).
Then there's the fact that you don't even get an attack warning, because the widow mine hit is instantaneous...so when you do hear "your workers are under attack" it means half of them are already dead and you better get an observer over there fast.
So yes. It's very hard to deal with unless you're fucking Hawkeye. Now add the fact that Protoss has the most difficult time recovering from worker losses (no MULES, can't make 15 drones at once) and you'll see why every Protoss player is up in arms about this widow mine patch. I really don't think its unreasonable to be upset by this.
On February 11 2014 07:22 Skynx wrote: Bit unrelated but I think it's time to give hellbats a buff, just saying.
Why? Hellbats are already really strong. They are tanky and rip through zealots/lings like nobody's business. I love it when I see Terran players mix in hellbats vs Zealot heavy Protoss armies, it makes a HUGE difference lol
I will say that finally DK has gone on the point.. Well - probably mainly cause I've been saying that for ages now..
But yah - the WM change will mean at least the very following - even if you're not pro at splitting Marines - you can occasionally try mech (or even better - Light-Mech-Marauder - a bit of a hybrid --> Hellbat/Marauder/Mine - like - keep all your Reactors to factories, and keep all your techlabs to Rax) vs Protoss now if they are decent enough to guard the approaches vs Tanks.. And I think they will be now
Like - I don't mind if the Immortals or Archons can bust Tank lines, but really the problem is that Zealots can do that fairly easy ATM.. So yah - the WM finally is worked on now
On the broader looks - it will mean the following for the TvP - no longer the deciding factor of TvPs will be if you are a good Marine spreader.. There's finally (hopefully for all us lesser-skilled players) an alternative now
As a Terran player, I dislike the Blink Stalker change. It'll remove the early Protoss pressure and completely remove the usefulness of Blink Stalkers in all early and mid game matchups.
On February 11 2014 07:30 r691175002 wrote: Loving the Protoss tears. Only thing better will be if the change goes through.
Most of the tears aren't even warranted for. It's complaining about having to micro workers against a unit that still has lower damage potential than before the nerf for a whole other matchup xP
I'm all for the mine upgrade, I think its a really cool idea and might also help with oracle based strats (you would need detection earlier if mines became popular again) Its just the blink nerf and to a lesser extent hydra buff that get me I love opening 2star voidray, I think stronger hydras would shut down skytoss openers
On February 11 2014 07:39 geokilla wrote: As a Terran player, I dislike the Blink Stalker change. It'll remove the early Protoss pressure and completely remove the usefulness of Blink Stalkers in all early and mid game matchups.
I salute you my friend for this statement, but I think isn't that the change is a bad idea, but it is that it's too drastic done.. 15 sec up from 10 is far too much
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Aww
Still better for you than pre mine nerf for TvZ, so stop whining about microing probes. If you let a 1/1/1 get mines in your mineral line AND are to slow to respond you deserver to lose workers.
It is very unforgiving if you don't pay attention for a couple of seconds and literally most of your entire worker line dies, especially when it is so early in the game. That said, it was quite manageable in the past when you do react on time, so i'm not necessarily against this change. This and the mothership core vision nerf will probably require Protoss to go back to doing safer robo/forge builds every game, but that is potentially a good thing.
No but seriously someone edit this in a disclaimer in the OP
FOR EVERYONE TALKING ABOUT BLINK CHANGE
Blink cooldown increased from 10 to 15 This is a more direct nerf that affects all Protoss players. If Blink play continues to be problematic, this is the sort of thing we’d want to have tested and prepared to put in the game.
Note the "if". They're not patching it in with this change, they're testing it in the current environment. The idea is that should Blink builds be too powerful in the coming patch, they have a change tested and ready so we don't have to wait another round of testing. It's their way of saying "We don't know what the next needed change will be, but I'm guessing Blink, so just to be safe, let's have a change warming up on the back burner"
Gonna offer my views for 2v2 as well, since I hardly ever play 1v1 anymore.
MSC - won't really affect anything. Will be good for 1v1 though, reducing the strength of blink stalker all ins.
Blink - will change so much. I hardly ever use blink in 2v2 anyway, but PvP will be altered significantly. Whether it will affect micro positively or negatively (every blink is more significant, but misjudged blinks will be punished hugely) remains to be seen. It will reduce the strength of blink stalker all ins vs Terran though, which is good.
Widow mines - oh god. Widow mine drops in 2v2 are super super strong. Now they can basically kill all the probes in an instant. This will be super hard to deal with. Sad times.
Tempest - I think this will really benefit against the stagnant, boring swarm host play. It will however open doors for more proxy tempest shenanigans. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Considering carrier turtles are a legit strat in 2v2, I wouldn't be surprised to see oracle/tempest/msc base sniping going on.
Hydralisk - the hydra attacks super fast anyway. I think the problem is they're too squishy for their cost. A +10 hp buff, maybe adding +1 armour to the muscular alignments upgrade or something would be better in my opinion. Will likely change ZvZ a bit too though, which could be good.
All in all, okay changes. The only one I'm really against is the widow mine one because it really will punish players who aren't looking for more than a few seconds at their base. This isn't the kind of thing new players are going to find attractive. A widow mine drop is easy to execute and hard to defend for lower league players.
On February 11 2014 07:39 geokilla wrote: As a Terran player, I dislike the Blink Stalker change. It'll remove the early Protoss pressure and completely remove the usefulness of Blink Stalkers in all early and mid game matchups.
I salute you my friend for this statement, but I think isn't that the change is a bad idea, but it is that it's too drastic done.. 15 sec up from 10 is far too much
Why? something like 12 seconds would hardly be noticeable
The blink change wont go through anyway, they are just testing it as a general nerf to protoss. I think vision nerf, wm and hydra buff will go through, tempest change and blink wont.
All in all, okay changes. The only one I'm really against is the widow mine one because it really will punish players who aren't looking for more than a few seconds at their base. This isn't the kind of thing new players are going to find attractive. A widow mine drop is easy to execute and hard to defend for lower league players.
So is an oracle, what's your point? For that matter l, 8 marines in a medivac is just as deadly for lower league players. SC is a hard game.
On February 11 2014 07:04 Xinzoe wrote: The changes individually make sense. But a combination of BOTH blink nerf and MSC nerf is too much. Blizzard should just pick one imo. Tempest change might solve the problem of stalemates in PvZ (or at least 60+ minute long games). Hydralisks are probably too powerful now after reaching critical mass, i think combined upgrades for speed + range will be better.
Don't forget the widow mine buff, that's also an indirect nerf to blink all-ins
because you can still dodge the shots with blink micro?
You just put widow mines in spots where they blink up. Then how will you dodge? :D You'll probably lose 2-3 stalkers and the all-in is pretty much over.
How many widow mines do you need to cover Yeonsu? I'd say about 5.
That's a map specific problem.
Ok, how many widow mines do you need to cover these maps:
Daedulus Polar Night Star Station Yeonsu Alterzim Heavy Rain Frost Akilon
I don't know, and I don't care. Someone else will figure it out. Plus, maps are way easier to change than tweaking balance lol
I actually think its the opposite though. We get more balance patches than we do map changes.
The other thing is...do you really need full mine coverage? Just the threat of mines is enough, imo. Otherwise you start gambling. "Does he have a mine there or not?!?!?" Mind games like that happen in SC2 all the time.
Even if it just makes Protoss do Observer style blink all-ins, it will be better as those hit later, and gives Terran more time to prepare.
No Protoss worth his salt needs an obs to see a widow mine. So long as they have some amount of vision they can see it. The real nerfs to Protoss blink attacks are the vision on the MsC, the possible blink cd and the increased energy on timewarp.
I can't think of any protoss who should lose 2-3 stalkers to a widow mine even if this buff went through. And beyond that, there are still variations of blink all-is (Duckdeok's that starts with a proxy oracle and Mc's that starts with an early sentry) that can both easily defuse a Terran that overrelies on WM defense against Blink. It's the maps that make blink extremely viable, more so than any numbers tweaking done to the units imo.
As a zerg/terran player, I do not agree with the blink nerf. Blink existed in that form forever, and it got a bit imbalanced due to the MSC being able to spot any defense or rather weak spot. Combined with spellcasters (like MSC + Sentry) that are available early game, I think blink still is okay. The MSC is the problem, and the vision nerf approach feels great. Nerf the vision and reduce the overcharge to 30-40 seconds (even that is stupidly long), and please(!) approach the swarm host / mech turtle issue.
Last week i installed and uninstalled twice.. If these changes goes through I am prepared to give it another try!
Vision change is good. I am not a fan of blink change, I don't think vision change is enough for blink allins but this is not the way to go. WM change wont affect much but I guess WM drops will work better as harassment. Anytime hydras can shoot freely in pvz they already wreck shit so I don't think this will change much. Maby hydras will work better in zvt. Tempest change is silly.
On February 11 2014 07:44 Qwerty85 wrote: The blink change wont go through anyway, they are just testing it as a general nerf to protoss. I think vision nerf, wm and hydra buff will go through, tempest change and blink wont.
But we will see soon I guess.
I wouldn't want them to buff the tempest if they aren't buffing the hydra, but I wouldn't want the opposite either. These two should go hand in hand, imo.
On February 11 2014 07:39 geokilla wrote: As a Terran player, I dislike the Blink Stalker change. It'll remove the early Protoss pressure and completely remove the usefulness of Blink Stalkers in all early and mid game matchups.
I salute you my friend for this statement, but I think isn't that the change is a bad idea, but it is that it's too drastic done.. 15 sec up from 10 is far too much
Why? something like 12 seconds would hardly be noticeable
It means a Stalker takes 20% more damage until it can be blunk away.
On February 11 2014 07:39 geokilla wrote: As a Terran player, I dislike the Blink Stalker change. It'll remove the early Protoss pressure and completely remove the usefulness of Blink Stalkers in all early and mid game matchups.
I salute you my friend for this statement, but I think isn't that the change is a bad idea, but it is that it's too drastic done.. 15 sec up from 10 is far too much
Why? something like 12 seconds would hardly be noticeable
Not really - you're not thinking the vs Zerg Roach vs Stalker battles.. Protoss can't afford to have Sentires all game long.. They're openers, enders, or if preserved well - part of the deathball.. But can't afford to make those just because having Stalkers.., and the foremost - you're not including the new change of the Widow-Mine..
So yah - the direction is good, but still needs some more testing now..
Already like the changes A LOT.. The blink nerf however is far too harsh.. Instead of nerfing the Stalker far too hard - add up some "nice" bonus of the mine to deal with the problem.. Just the blink all-in case-scenario in PvT shouldn't dictate all Protoss matchups so hard
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Aww
Still better for you than pre mine nerf for TvZ, so stop whining about microing probes. If you let a 1/1/1 get mines in your mineral line AND are to slow to respond you deserver to lose workers.
Have you ever even played Protoss? Because I've played Terran. A lot. For starters, a medivac is the same size on the minimap as a marine. For comparison a Warp Prism is 4x as big on the minimap. With Turbovacs it moves insanely fast. So unless you are staring at your base, it's quite hard to catch immediately.
Then there's the issue of splitting the workers. When the mines drop they spread out quite a bit because of the speed the Medivac is traveling at. So you basically have 3 seconds to decide where the ideal place to send every probe is and to actually click there.
And then one misclick can cost you close to every single probe (I'm not exaggerating here and I can show you replays of me as Terran doing this to Protosses on ladder).
Then there's the fact that you don't even get an attack warning, because the widow mine hit is instantaneous...so when you do hear "your workers are under attack" it means half of them are already dead and you better get an observer over there fast.
So yes. It's very hard to deal with unless you're fucking Hawkeye. Now add the fact that Protoss has the most difficult time recovering from worker losses (no MULES, can't make 15 drones at once) and you'll see why every Protoss player is up in arms about this widow mine patch. I really don't think its unreasonable to be upset by this.
Is your replay pre or post wm nerf? No offense but this sounds like a bunch of whining to me. You have cannons, photon overcharge, etc.
You also have chrono boost, let's not short ourselves in the economy talk. After many games of being proxy-oracled, proxy DT drop, blink all-in, your counter rebuttal makes me laugh. EDIT: Laughable in a sense that scv losses are almost guaranteed by all three of those builds I just mentioned.
Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Right, but micro'ing the probes away is risky if you aren't super fast (which is fine IMO). If you clump them up and the shot goes off while they are running, you lose MORE than if you hadn't micro'd at all. If terrans get the burrow speed upgrade for them and do this harass, it's going to be terrifying, since a cannon or two won't kill the mines fast enough to stop a shot, but I suppose that if a pro player can deal with it (and they should), it isn't too bad.
The widow mine change seems a little excessive, but I'm more or less okay with it overall.
They dealt with it just fine even when mines killed probes in its full radius, and this change is still an overall nerf compared to that.
I don't know if you are just clueless because this is not a new strategy at all and even it its old form its was perfectly manageable.
.... I said it was fine overall? Not sure why you are calling me clueless, I'm aware its what they used to do before they got nerfed, but they got nerfed largely because the harass was so powerful.
On February 11 2014 07:50 dark1882 wrote: if said it before i'll say it again every blink all-in problem would be fixed by making mothershipcore a ground unit
Yes but that would reduce it effectiveness as a defensive tool since it would be harder to move between bases, and we don´t want to nerf it too drastically as defensive tool when major complaints are about the fact how strong it is offensively.
Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
make mothership core ground unit maybe give it more range to compensate
Yes but that would reduce it effectiveness as a defensive tool since it would be harder to move between bases. and we don´t want to nerf it too drastically as defensive tool when major complaints are about the fact how strong it is offensively.
range buff maybe to something like 8 and increase movement possibly slightly increase cast range of photon over charge or timewarp it's not hard to compensate for it
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Bunkers start with + armor and capacity upgrades. Done.
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Right, but micro'ing the probes away is risky if you aren't super fast (which is fine IMO). If you clump them up and the shot goes off while they are running, you lose MORE than if you hadn't micro'd at all. If terrans get the burrow speed upgrade for them and do this harass, it's going to be terrifying, since a cannon or two won't kill the mines fast enough to stop a shot, but I suppose that if a pro player can deal with it (and they should), it isn't too bad.
The widow mine change seems a little excessive, but I'm more or less okay with it overall.
They dealt with it just fine even when mines killed probes in its full radius, and this change is still an overall nerf compared to that.
I don't know if you are just clueless because this is not a new strategy at all and even it its old form its was perfectly manageable.
.... I said it was fine overall? Not sure why you are calling me clueless, I'm aware its what they used to do before they got nerfed, but they got nerfed largely because the harass was so powerful.
My memory was that it got nerfed because a widow mine could kill 20 banelings in a single shot.
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Again, they don't plan to implement the blink change. They are just testing the effect in case the sight range nerf isn't enough. If we get to the point where they actually plan to implement it, then maybe we can launch a crusade.
The best thing to do if you're so worried is just to play the test map and provide actual content on how these stalkers would fare.
On February 11 2014 05:59 Nebuchad wrote: when we say 20 (+40 shield), do we mean it removes 40 shield, or it removes 40 "life" from units who have shield? That isn't the same thing at all.
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Aww
Still better for you than pre mine nerf for TvZ, so stop whining about microing probes. If you let a 1/1/1 get mines in your mineral line AND are to slow to respond you deserver to lose workers.
Have you ever even played Protoss? Because I've played Terran. A lot. For starters, a medivac is the same size on the minimap as a marine. For comparison a Warp Prism is 4x as big on the minimap. With Turbovacs it moves insanely fast. So unless you are staring at your base, it's quite hard to catch immediately.
Then there's the issue of splitting the workers. When the mines drop they spread out quite a bit because of the speed the Medivac is traveling at. So you basically have 3 seconds to decide where the ideal place to send every probe is and to actually click there.
And then one misclick can cost you close to every single probe (I'm not exaggerating here and I can show you replays of me as Terran doing this to Protosses on ladder).
Then there's the fact that you don't even get an attack warning, because the widow mine hit is instantaneous...so when you do hear "your workers are under attack" it means half of them are already dead and you better get an observer over there fast.
So yes. It's very hard to deal with unless you're fucking Hawkeye. Now add the fact that Protoss has the most difficult time recovering from worker losses (no MULES, can't make 15 drones at once) and you'll see why every Protoss player is up in arms about this widow mine patch. I really don't think its unreasonable to be upset by this.
It does make no sense.
They are worse than before the nerf and you still whine abotu something that wansn't even an issue before.
Pros take no damage from mines, so it is no problem.
How long have tosses been telling terran to just split and deal with it? This is just untargetted whine because yo uare afraid of a minor buff to another unit
I personally don't really understand how reducing the mothershipcore vision would make the blink all in that much stronger. Terran can't even affort risking enough marines on the edge of the ramp to snipe the mothershipcore, and I think it's vision is still big enough to stay out of range of getting sniped...
I mean, the idea that it's making the strat slightly more risky is good and all, and I think it should be changed, but I really wonder if it'll actually significantly reduce the blink all in potential.
On February 11 2014 07:43 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
On February 11 2014 07:40 VArsovskiSC wrote:
On February 11 2014 07:39 geokilla wrote: As a Terran player, I dislike the Blink Stalker change. It'll remove the early Protoss pressure and completely remove the usefulness of Blink Stalkers in all early and mid game matchups.
I salute you my friend for this statement, but I think isn't that the change is a bad idea, but it is that it's too drastic done.. 15 sec up from 10 is far too much
Why? something like 12 seconds would hardly be noticeable
It means a Stalker takes 20% more damage until it can be blunk away.
It's a huge change.
Are you really managing the stalkers exactly on the 10 second cooldown when in combat? I mean the first blink away with a wounded stalker will still be instant. I don't think many people are managing the blink cooldown to the second on each individual wounded stalker after their first blink back. So it needs to be a significant amount to be noticed.
The nerf will hit cliff abuse harder because you stay up or down longer and that's fine I think.
On February 11 2014 07:57 Jerom wrote: I personally don't really understand how reducing the mothershipcore vision would make the blink all in that much stronger. Terran can't even affort risking enough marines on the edge of the ramp to snipe the mothershipcore, and I think it's vision is still big enough to stay out of range of getting sniped...
I mean, the idea that it's making the strat slightly more risky is good and all, and I think it should be changed, but I really wonder if it'll actually significantly reduce the blink all in potential.
When you have a sight-14 MSC near a cliff, you don't simply provide opportunity to blink up. You also provide intel on where the terran units are and if it's safe to blink up.
On February 11 2014 06:00 DaveSprite wrote: [quote]
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Right, but micro'ing the probes away is risky if you aren't super fast (which is fine IMO). If you clump them up and the shot goes off while they are running, you lose MORE than if you hadn't micro'd at all. If terrans get the burrow speed upgrade for them and do this harass, it's going to be terrifying, since a cannon or two won't kill the mines fast enough to stop a shot, but I suppose that if a pro player can deal with it (and they should), it isn't too bad.
The widow mine change seems a little excessive, but I'm more or less okay with it overall.
They dealt with it just fine even when mines killed probes in its full radius, and this change is still an overall nerf compared to that.
I don't know if you are just clueless because this is not a new strategy at all and even it its old form its was perfectly manageable.
.... I said it was fine overall? Not sure why you are calling me clueless, I'm aware its what they used to do before they got nerfed, but they got nerfed largely because the harass was so powerful.
My memory was that it got nerfed because a widow mine could kill 20 banelings in a single shot.
Zergs were already dealing with widow mines very well at the time, and zerg was winning more and more against bio-mine. The stated reason was that they wanted to see more tanks and mines rather than just mines alone, but that doesn't make any sense.
Stop making changes based on what is and isn't fun to watch, viewership is at an all time low because of the stupid shit you thought would be fun to watch when in reality it is the complete opposite
Make changes based on fair gameplay and fun, and in return it will be entertaining to watch
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Bunkers start with + armor and capacity upgrades. Done.
proxy 11-11 the shit out of any zerg on ladder.
here, we even fixed the lategame Raven shenanigans :D
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Bunkers start with + armor and capacity upgrades. Done.
Don't think zergs would appreciate that kind of change.
On February 11 2014 08:00 magnaflow wrote: Stop making changes based on what is and isn't fun to watch, viewership is at an all time low because of the stupid shit you thought would be fun to watch when in reality it is the complete opposite
Make changes based on fair gameplay and fun, and in return it will be entertaining to watch
This post is devoid of all content :D I thought I had seen a content and was answering to it, but it's not even there.
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Bunkers start with + armor and capacity upgrades. Done.
Don't think zergs would appreciate that kind of change.
Now we know why there were maps with 500 range Spines.
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Bunkers start with + armor and capacity upgrades. Done.
Don't think zergs would appreciate that kind of change.
Then 10 pool will be a real build again in ZvT. Just as planned.
On February 11 2014 06:00 DaveSprite wrote: [quote]
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Aww
Still better for you than pre mine nerf for TvZ, so stop whining about microing probes. If you let a 1/1/1 get mines in your mineral line AND are to slow to respond you deserver to lose workers.
Have you ever even played Protoss? Because I've played Terran. A lot. For starters, a medivac is the same size on the minimap as a marine. For comparison a Warp Prism is 4x as big on the minimap. With Turbovacs it moves insanely fast. So unless you are staring at your base, it's quite hard to catch immediately.
Then there's the issue of splitting the workers. When the mines drop they spread out quite a bit because of the speed the Medivac is traveling at. So you basically have 3 seconds to decide where the ideal place to send every probe is and to actually click there.
And then one misclick can cost you close to every single probe (I'm not exaggerating here and I can show you replays of me as Terran doing this to Protosses on ladder).
Then there's the fact that you don't even get an attack warning, because the widow mine hit is instantaneous...so when you do hear "your workers are under attack" it means half of them are already dead and you better get an observer over there fast.
So yes. It's very hard to deal with unless you're fucking Hawkeye. Now add the fact that Protoss has the most difficult time recovering from worker losses (no MULES, can't make 15 drones at once) and you'll see why every Protoss player is up in arms about this widow mine patch. I really don't think its unreasonable to be upset by this.
Is your replay pre or post wm nerf? No offense but this sounds like a bunch of whining to me. You have cannons, photon overcharge, etc.
You also have chrono boost, let's not short ourselves in the economy talk. After many games of being proxy-oracled, proxy DT drop, blink all-in, your counter rebuttal makes me laugh. EDIT: Laughable in a sense that scv losses are almost guaranteed by all three of those builds I just mentioned.
There's a lot of irony in you writing that his post sounds like whining(which it isn't) and then your next paragraph is full of you whining. You also refer to someone who stated that he is a Terran player in the second person, implying that he is a Protoss. Your post reads like the internet equivalent of walking up to a stranger, saying "no offense", and then kicking them in the balls and spitting in their face.
Also wtf is a proxy DT drop? Are you telling me that an early game investment of 600 as SHOULDNT kill any probes? How would you even take serious damage from a proxy build that requires 600 gas you should easily be ready for something like that.
Blink is getting nerfed deservedly so don't worry about that anymore, and proxy oracle isn't as popular because of the high prevalence of reaper expands with heavy scouting.
On February 11 2014 05:36 Blargh wrote: They could always make it so you can not blink up cliffs instead, while still being able to jump gaps. Then it's just a micro tool instead of an abusive heavy aggression build which can't really be punished. But what they are suggesting right now is better than how it currently is...
Overall, it's a decent change and a step in the right direction (unlike many previous ones.... LOLoLol oRacLes)
I always thought a change like this would be ok. Still allow a stalker to blink up a cliff, but not two levels of high ground. A reaper can't jump up 2 levels, why is blink allowed to do so?
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Bunkers start with + armor and capacity upgrades. Done.
And bunkers in TvZ ?
what about the 11/11 in TvZ now ?
The Widow-Mine is a good approach.. It's a fairly good start - just needs some more polishing now.. The only problem I see is if the Blink-micro juke of Mine-missiles happens to be too effective overall.. Still - think that that can also be dealt with later on with far less "side-effects" caused
So yah - I guess the WM is the good unit to focus on to solve the problem, just need some more experience/data with it's change now
The very best part of it is that - Zerg isn't concerned about this change at all
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Bunkers start with + armor and capacity upgrades. Done.
proxy 11-11 the shit out of any zerg on ladder.
here, we even fixed the lategame Raven shenanigans :D
Holy shit, now I'm actually wondering if researching Neosteel frames would be viable for this. I remember seeing Jjakji (I think it was Jjakji) doing it on Calm Before the Storm to bunker rush a protoss to death because the research is so fast.
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Bunkers start with + armor and capacity upgrades. Done.
Don't think zergs would appreciate that kind of change.
Then 10 pool will be a real build again in ZvT. Just as planned.
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Aww
Still better for you than pre mine nerf for TvZ, so stop whining about microing probes. If you let a 1/1/1 get mines in your mineral line AND are to slow to respond you deserver to lose workers.
Have you ever even played Protoss? Because I've played Terran. A lot. For starters, a medivac is the same size on the minimap as a marine. For comparison a Warp Prism is 4x as big on the minimap. With Turbovacs it moves insanely fast. So unless you are staring at your base, it's quite hard to catch immediately.
Then there's the issue of splitting the workers. When the mines drop they spread out quite a bit because of the speed the Medivac is traveling at. So you basically have 3 seconds to decide where the ideal place to send every probe is and to actually click there.
And then one misclick can cost you close to every single probe (I'm not exaggerating here and I can show you replays of me as Terran doing this to Protosses on ladder).
Then there's the fact that you don't even get an attack warning, because the widow mine hit is instantaneous...so when you do hear "your workers are under attack" it means half of them are already dead and you better get an observer over there fast.
So yes. It's very hard to deal with unless you're fucking Hawkeye. Now add the fact that Protoss has the most difficult time recovering from worker losses (no MULES, can't make 15 drones at once) and you'll see why every Protoss player is up in arms about this widow mine patch. I really don't think its unreasonable to be upset by this.
Is your replay pre or post wm nerf? No offense but this sounds like a bunch of whining to me. You have cannons, photon overcharge, etc.
You also have chrono boost, let's not short ourselves in the economy talk. After many games of being proxy-oracled, proxy DT drop, blink all-in, your counter rebuttal makes me laugh. EDIT: Laughable in a sense that scv losses are almost guaranteed by all three of those builds I just mentioned.
There's a lot of irony in you writing that his post sounds like whining(which it isn't) and then your next paragraph is full of you whining. You also refer to someone who stated that he is a Terran player in the second person, implying that he is a Protoss. Your post reads like the internet equivalent of walking up to a stranger, saying "no offense", and then kicking them in the balls and spitting in their face.
Also wtf is a proxy DT drop? Are you telling me that an early game investment of 600 as SHOULDNT kill any probes? How would you even take serious damage from a proxy build that requires 600 gas you should easily be ready for something like that.
Blink is getting nerfed deservedly so don't worry about that anymore, and proxy oracle isn't as popular because of the high prevalence of reaper expands with heavy scouting.
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Right, but micro'ing the probes away is risky if you aren't super fast (which is fine IMO). If you clump them up and the shot goes off while they are running, you lose MORE than if you hadn't micro'd at all. If terrans get the burrow speed upgrade for them and do this harass, it's going to be terrifying, since a cannon or two won't kill the mines fast enough to stop a shot, but I suppose that if a pro player can deal with it (and they should), it isn't too bad.
The widow mine change seems a little excessive, but I'm more or less okay with it overall.
They dealt with it just fine even when mines killed probes in its full radius, and this change is still an overall nerf compared to that.
I don't know if you are just clueless because this is not a new strategy at all and even it its old form its was perfectly manageable.
.... I said it was fine overall? Not sure why you are calling me clueless, I'm aware its what they used to do before they got nerfed, but they got nerfed largely because the harass was so powerful.
My memory was that it got nerfed because a widow mine could kill 20 banelings in a single shot.
Zergs were already dealing with widow mines very well at the time, and zerg was winning more and more against bio-mine. The stated reason was that they wanted to see more tanks and mines rather than just mines alone, but that doesn't make any sense.
Zergs were doing better against hellion harass in May 2012, we still got range 5 queens.
On February 11 2014 07:56 Ammanas wrote: Can someone pls explain to me how exactly will MSC range change influence the blink allin in any way?
No more risk-free full intel about Terran's defence, MSC will need to be closer if Protoss wants to see further = more risk involved.
makes sense, but doesn't it mean it will not really nerf the push? The push will be no less defendable when executed correctly, just much more coin-flippy. I guess that's basically the opposite of buffs such as prism shield buff and queen range as in it will not make it MUCH worse, it will just discourage people.
And as far as sniping MSC goes, how exactly? It has 9 vision, marine has 6 range. If positioned correctly you can blink in and marines can't touch it.
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Bunkers start with + armor and capacity upgrades. Done.
proxy 11-11 the shit out of any zerg on ladder.
here, we even fixed the lategame Raven shenanigans :D
Holy shit, now I'm actually wondering if researching Neosteel frames would be viable for this. I remember seeing Jjakji (I think it was Jjakji) doing it on Calm Before the Storm to bunker rush a protoss to death because the research is so fast.
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Right, but micro'ing the probes away is risky if you aren't super fast (which is fine IMO). If you clump them up and the shot goes off while they are running, you lose MORE than if you hadn't micro'd at all. If terrans get the burrow speed upgrade for them and do this harass, it's going to be terrifying, since a cannon or two won't kill the mines fast enough to stop a shot, but I suppose that if a pro player can deal with it (and they should), it isn't too bad.
The widow mine change seems a little excessive, but I'm more or less okay with it overall.
They dealt with it just fine even when mines killed probes in its full radius, and this change is still an overall nerf compared to that.
I don't know if you are just clueless because this is not a new strategy at all and even it its old form its was perfectly manageable.
.... I said it was fine overall? Not sure why you are calling me clueless, I'm aware its what they used to do before they got nerfed, but they got nerfed largely because the harass was so powerful.
My memory was that it got nerfed because a widow mine could kill 20 banelings in a single shot.
Zergs were already dealing with widow mines very well at the time, and zerg was winning more and more against bio-mine. The stated reason was that they wanted to see more tanks and mines rather than just mines alone, but that doesn't make any sense.
Zergs were doing better against hellion harass in May 2012, we still got range 5 queens.
Yeah, that was dumb too. I don't see an inconsistency here.
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Aww
Still better for you than pre mine nerf for TvZ, so stop whining about microing probes. If you let a 1/1/1 get mines in your mineral line AND are to slow to respond you deserver to lose workers.
Have you ever even played Protoss? Because I've played Terran. A lot. For starters, a medivac is the same size on the minimap as a marine. For comparison a Warp Prism is 4x as big on the minimap. With Turbovacs it moves insanely fast. So unless you are staring at your base, it's quite hard to catch immediately.
Then there's the issue of splitting the workers. When the mines drop they spread out quite a bit because of the speed the Medivac is traveling at. So you basically have 3 seconds to decide where the ideal place to send every probe is and to actually click there.
And then one misclick can cost you close to every single probe (I'm not exaggerating here and I can show you replays of me as Terran doing this to Protosses on ladder).
Then there's the fact that you don't even get an attack warning, because the widow mine hit is instantaneous...so when you do hear "your workers are under attack" it means half of them are already dead and you better get an observer over there fast.
So yes. It's very hard to deal with unless you're fucking Hawkeye. Now add the fact that Protoss has the most difficult time recovering from worker losses (no MULES, can't make 15 drones at once) and you'll see why every Protoss player is up in arms about this widow mine patch. I really don't think its unreasonable to be upset by this.
Is your replay pre or post wm nerf? No offense but this sounds like a bunch of whining to me. You have cannons, photon overcharge, etc.
You also have chrono boost, let's not short ourselves in the economy talk. After many games of being proxy-oracled, proxy DT drop, blink all-in, your counter rebuttal makes me laugh. EDIT: Laughable in a sense that scv losses are almost guaranteed by all three of those builds I just mentioned.
There's a lot of irony in you writing that his post sounds like whining(which it isn't) and then your next paragraph is full of you whining. You also refer to someone who stated that he is a Terran player in the second person, implying that he is a Protoss. Your post reads like the internet equivalent of walking up to a stranger, saying "no offense", and then kicking them in the balls and spitting in their face.
Also wtf is a proxy DT drop? Are you telling me that an early game investment of 600 as SHOULDNT kill any probes? How would you even take serious damage from a proxy build that requires 600 gas you should easily be ready for something like that.
Blink is getting nerfed deservedly so don't worry about that anymore, and proxy oracle isn't as popular because of the high prevalence of reaper expands with heavy scouting.
Quickly browse the last pages of the Balance discussion thread and you will see why this guy is getting called out like that...
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Bunkers start with + armor and capacity upgrades. Done.
proxy 11-11 the shit out of any zerg on ladder.
here, we even fixed the lategame Raven shenanigans :D
Holy shit, now I'm actually wondering if researching Neosteel frames would be viable for this. I remember seeing Jjakji (I think it was Jjakji) doing it on Calm Before the Storm to bunker rush a protoss to death because the research is so fast.
IIRC it was Bomber and was a massive troll game.
Wait, I actually think it was Yoda. God damn, I wish I could remember.
On February 11 2014 08:07 VieuxSinge wrote: Does the WM splash +40 against shield remove 40 shield from a immortal (not targeted directly but taking splash) ?
Widow Mines are spell damage so yes, it's 40 off the shield
On February 11 2014 07:56 Ammanas wrote: Can someone pls explain to me how exactly will MSC range change influence the blink allin in any way?
No more risk-free full intel about Terran's defence, MSC will need to be closer if Protoss wants to see further = more risk involved.
makes sense, but doesn't it mean it will not really nerf the push? The push will be no less defendable when executed correctly, just much more coin-flippy. I guess that's basically the opposite of buffs such as prism shield buff and queen range as in it will not make it MUCH worse, it will just discourage people.
And as far as sniping MSC goes, how exactly? It has 9 vision, marine has 6 range. If positioned correctly you can blink in and marines can't touch it.
Yes, but then you just see the edge of the cliff, and there might be angry Marauders just a few inches away eagerly waiting to lay waste to your Stalkers. It does nerf the push as one of the numerous things that make him too strong is the fact Protoss could perfectly plan the "Blink where Terran is weak → Time Warp to intercept bio troops" maneuver often resulting in crippling damage.
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Bunkers start with + armor and capacity upgrades. Done.
proxy 11-11 the shit out of any zerg on ladder.
here, we even fixed the lategame Raven shenanigans :D
Holy shit, now I'm actually wondering if researching Neosteel frames would be viable for this. I remember seeing Jjakji (I think it was Jjakji) doing it on Calm Before the Storm to bunker rush a protoss to death because the research is so fast.
IIRC it was Bomber and was a massive troll game.
Wait, I actually think it was Yoda. God damn, I wish I could remember.
Yoda vs Cyrano in GSTL. He credited Jjakji with the build. This was back before Yoda was a nameless Korean and was instead a super cheesy one who liked mass reaper openings, 1 base ghost play and 2 rax.
On February 11 2014 08:10 magnaflow wrote: To all you protoss players concerned about the WM being to strong in the early game with this change, I only have 1 thing to say to you.
Build a cannon
I agree, cannon rush them before they ever get there. Ask yourself, what would Bubbles do?
On February 11 2014 07:59 Nebuchad wrote: When you have a sight-14 MSC near a cliff, you don't simply provide opportunity to blink up. You also provide intel on where the terran units are and if it's safe to blink up.
It's not all that different though, because you want the MSC within 9 range of spots you want to time warp anyway.
On February 11 2014 08:10 magnaflow wrote: To all you protoss players concerned about the WM being to strong in the early game with this change, I only have 1 thing to say to you.
Build a cannon
You could also remind them that Mines used to be even stronger, and were already defendable in that state.
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Bunkers start with + armor and capacity upgrades. Done.
proxy 11-11 the shit out of any zerg on ladder.
here, we even fixed the lategame Raven shenanigans :D
Holy shit, now I'm actually wondering if researching Neosteel frames would be viable for this. I remember seeing Jjakji (I think it was Jjakji) doing it on Calm Before the Storm to bunker rush a protoss to death because the research is so fast.
IIRC it was Bomber and was a massive troll game.
Wait, I actually think it was Yoda. God damn, I wish I could remember.
Looked it up, it was Yoda.
GSTL S1 Day 4: TSL vs IM set 3, Cyrano v Yoda, Calm before the Storm,
On February 11 2014 07:59 Nebuchad wrote: When you have a sight-14 MSC near a cliff, you don't simply provide opportunity to blink up. You also provide intel on where the terran units are and if it's safe to blink up.
It's not all that different though, because you want the MSC within 9 range of spots you want to time warp anyway.
Your cue is when TheDwf argues that a nerf changes something protoss does, you should be damn sure that it does.
On February 11 2014 08:10 magnaflow wrote: To all you protoss players concerned about the WM being to strong in the early game with this change, I only have 1 thing to say to you.
Build a cannon
You could also remind them that Mines used to be even stronger, and were already defendable in that state.
Sometimes I even wonder why pros keep trying to go 1-1-1 mine drop these days. It seems to get shutdown hard 95% of the time. Use it in a series to keep protoss honest I guess
On February 11 2014 07:59 Nebuchad wrote: When you have a sight-14 MSC near a cliff, you don't simply provide opportunity to blink up. You also provide intel on where the terran units are and if it's safe to blink up.
It's not all that different though, because you want the MSC within 9 range of spots you want to time warp anyway.
Your cue is when TheDwf argues that a nerf changes something protoss does, you should be damn sure that it does.
Especially when it was one of the changes I suggested. (;
They can't nerf blink! Blink is one of the best abilities in the entire game, opening up so many possibilities in strategy, tactics and micro. It's perfect!
On the other hand, the other changes look pretty cool.
On February 11 2014 08:10 magnaflow wrote: To all you protoss players concerned about the WM being to strong in the early game with this change, I only have 1 thing to say to you.
Build a cannon
You could also remind them that Mines used to be even stronger, and were already defendable in that state.
Sometimes I even wonder why pros keep trying to go 1-1-1 mine drop these days. It seems to get shutdown hard 95% of the time. Use it in a series to keep protoss honest I guess
Sometimes the threat of an attack can be as powerful as the attack itself. You see that in the current trend of terran builds, they all incorporate some failsafes against things like oracles or blink all-in, because the threat of those is great enough that it needs to be taken into account. Now if terrans had 1 or 2 of those kinds of builds, and they also needed some special kind of scouting to also discern one from the other, then the threat alone would make protoss play a lot more conservative, and both races could maybe enter the mid game on even footing.
Edit: I probably should add though, that if a attack/pressure of sorts can be deflected with a very small/simple deviation of a BO then it won't actually change much, the attacks need to be strong enough to force a good reaction.
On February 11 2014 08:10 magnaflow wrote: To all you protoss players concerned about the WM being to strong in the early game with this change, I only have 1 thing to say to you.
Build a cannon
You could also remind them that Mines used to be even stronger, and were already defendable in that state.
Sometimes I even wonder why pros keep trying to go 1-1-1 mine drop these days. It seems to get shutdown hard 95% of the time. Use it in a series to keep protoss honest I guess
Sometimes the threat of an attack can be as powerful as the attack itself. You see that in the current trend of terran builds, they all incorporate some failsafes against things like oracles or blink all-in, because the threat of those is great enough that it needs to be taken into account. Now if terrans had 1 or 2 of those kinds of builds, and they also needed some special kind of scouting to also discern one from the other, then the threat alone would make protoss play a lot more conservative, and both races could maybe enter the mid game on even footing.
Edit: I probably should add though, that if a attack/pressure of sorts can be deflected with a very small/simple deviation of a BO then it won't actually change much, the attacks need to be strong enough to force a good reaction.
What Destructicon means:
Terran now needs to incorporate having 4 marines vs MSC poke, having 6 marines and or Ebay vs Oracles, space in thebuild to easilly add marauders and 4 bunkers, fast stim vs frontal all ins, fast medivacs to put on pressure to delay the third, reasonably timed upgrades not to fall to far behind. Meanwhile, Protoss is pretty safe just getting a robo reasonably fast, and there's nothing really Terran can threaten with (the failsafes Protoss incorporate into its build is a fast stalker vs reapers and the MSC vs kinda everything else.)
On February 11 2014 08:10 magnaflow wrote: To all you protoss players concerned about the WM being to strong in the early game with this change, I only have 1 thing to say to you.
Build a cannon
You could also remind them that Mines used to be even stronger, and were already defendable in that state.
Sometimes I even wonder why pros keep trying to go 1-1-1 mine drop these days. It seems to get shutdown hard 95% of the time. Use it in a series to keep protoss honest I guess
Sometimes the threat of an attack can be as powerful as the attack itself. You see that in the current trend of terran builds, they all incorporate some failsafes against things like oracles or blink all-in, because the threat of those is great enough that it needs to be taken into account. Now if terrans had 1 or 2 of those kinds of builds, and they also needed some special kind of scouting to also discern one from the other, then the threat alone would make protoss play a lot more conservative, and both races could maybe enter the mid game on even footing.
Edit: I probably should add though, that if a attack/pressure of sorts can be deflected with a very small/simple deviation of a BO then it won't actually change much, the attacks need to be strong enough to force a good reaction.
What Destructicon means:
Terran now needs to incorporate having 4 marines vs MSC poke, having 6 marines and or Ebay vs Oracles, space in thebuild to easilly add marauders and 4 bunkers, fast stim vs frontal all ins, fast medivacs to put on pressure to delay the third, reasonably timed upgrades not to fall to far behind. Meanwhile, Protoss is pretty safe just getting a robo reasonably fast, and there's nothing really Terran can threaten with (the failsafes Protoss incorporate into its build is a fast stalker vs reapers and the MSC vs kinda everything else.)
3 Marines are enough against the MSC (assuming they all come and hit at the same time).
On February 11 2014 08:25 Azelja wrote: What the frick is a "proxy tempest rush" :O Anybody got some replays/vods? o_O
In PvT, it's a proxy Oracle into proxy Tempest. After the first Oracle, Protoss builds a Fleet Beacon and begins Tempest production, then starts bombing your base from afar, picking SCVs and whatever is in range.
Increased on-creep speed bonus up to 50% from 40% that is currently now.. EL upgrade now gives +5 sec locust lifetime instead of +10
how about that one ??
Seriously, there are a lot of ways for it to be done, duh
Which makes it even more defensive?
Problem isn't that the swam host is so amazing on attack that it needs better creep synergy.
I suggested removing creep bonus for locusts entirely as well as the enduring locust upgrade and instead have a speed upgrade that doesnt affect locusts but makes the swarmhost itself very fast both movementwise and in burrowing/unborrowing. Either as upgrade or as instant change that is, depending on how strong it is.
Something like that, basically reward agressive multitasky play with nydus worms in various locations.
I still don't quite understand the tempest buff, but I'm on board with everything else.
Prevents 3 hour Mana vs Firecake games, because the Tempest can then kill the Spores that Vipers Abduct you into. Still doesn't fix 2 hour long ZvZ and ZvT's.
What the frick is a "proxy tempest rush" :O Anybody got some replays/vods? o_O
I did this a little in the HOTS beta, when Tempest didn't require Fleet Beacon, could become a viablo metagame cheese, but rly, it's scoutable and can't imagine it being much more dangerous than proxy Oracle o_O
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Bunkers start with + armor and capacity upgrades. Done.
Don't think zergs would appreciate that kind of change.
Then 10 pool will be a real build again in ZvT. Just as planned.
Increased on-creep speed bonus up to 50% from 40% that is currently now.. EL upgrade now gives +5 sec locust lifetime instead of +10
how about that one ??
Seriously, there are a lot of ways for it to be done, duh
Which makes it even more defensive?
Problem isn't that the swam host is so amazing on attack that it needs better creep synergy.
It's a good way to approach the problem - Locust waves will deal more damage (a bit), and the Protoss will have 5 more seconds to respond back, so Zerg will need to use other armies to "buy" that time..
Problem isn't about creep-synergy I agree, but it's a good change.. It deals with it in a way that you can change the Locust lifetime and keep the Range-reach of the Swarm-Host about the same on the map
It will also - make "hit&run" much more required, and sniping units easier if they are on creep..
Also helps another good problem - TvZ - Tanks will maybe "eat" some damage as well due to faster approaching, but Terran has 5 second plain window to snipe Swarmhosts if not repositioned or guarded innefectively for 5 full sec time
I hope every change comes through. I agree that the swarmhost is kinda broken and swarmhost matches are very boring for the bulk of the viewership and the player. But is really the ONLY option zerg has, to win a lategame vs either turtle Mech ir turtle Protoss, if not something very special happens or the zerg has a huge bank/advantage from the early/midgame. If you nerf the swarmhost, you will break the lategame zvp and zvt. So change the swarmhost, fine, but give the zerg a realistic (!) chance to win. Especially the lategame antiair aka corrupter sucks as hell. I think even a infestor buff, like give the infested terrans upgrades back, would be a step in the right direction, which is to find a way that zerg can beat a desthball directly, without playing super passive.
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Bunkers start with + armor and capacity upgrades. Done.
Don't think zergs would appreciate that kind of change.
Then 10 pool will be a real build again in ZvT. Just as planned.
Increased on-creep speed bonus up to 50% from 40% that is currently now.. EL upgrade now gives +5 sec locust lifetime instead of +10
how about that one ??
Seriously, there are a lot of ways for it to be done, duh
Which makes it even more defensive?
Problem isn't that the swam host is so amazing on attack that it needs better creep synergy.
I suggested removing creep bonus for locusts entirely as well as the enduring locust upgrade and instead have a speed upgrade that doesnt affect locusts but makes the swarmhost itself very fast both movementwise and in burrowing/unborrowing. Either as upgrade or as instant change that is, depending on how strong it is.
Something like that, basically reward agressive multitasky play with nydus worms in various locations.
that would not really be to viable. A lot of investment for something that could be easily shut down via scouting. The way Swarm host are designed, the only viable way to play them in the late game vs protoss is with static d and viper pulling in, they are to fragile and valuable to risk losing in active movement around the map.
I mean Soulkey uses swarm host like you suggest once in a while, he will attack with roach/hydra and a few swarm host send locust then move away, but good luck doing that once it hits the late game vs the protoss deathball.
What else can you honestly say zerg has that can contest the late game Protoss death ball other then swarm host turtle play with vipers and static d? Not much other than to do a timing attack and kill the protoss before then, and that's not always viable in top level Korean games. The swarm host allow zerg to tech switch to muta or ultra better as well vs Protoss death balls.
At least with the tempest buff, swarm host are still good and zerg just has to come up with a way to take care of the tempest before they destroy all the static d quickly or try to play in a different fashion.
- Mothership Core vision nerf is right, 14 is a very high range;
- Blink cooldown is something that will kill every single blink play, 15 seconds are really too much, and If they are going to buff the mines (that I think it could be a right buff to heLp counter blinkers allin), I don't see why they even have to nerf blink;
- Tempest buff is really don't needed, they should nerf Swarm Hosts, it's a completely broken unit and I don't know why they are Keeping their eyes closed on that;
- Hydralisk buff is.. well, it will just kill air play in PvZ I think, hydralisk is already an high dps unit.
Why do people think 15 seconds will kill blink play before even testing?
Yes, it weakens the all in if you commit into the main base, but guess what, blinking into a main base should be a commitment, right? Meanwhile Frontal pushes are barely affected.
I wonder what it is that Widow Mines got against Protoss. Maybe they bear a grudge from their husbands dead in the Brood Wars, the Spider Mines, hence the + bonus vs Shield?
Well thank Odin they are aware of the dangers of proxy tempests and are taking measures to contain this menace before it's too late.
The blink nerf will never go through, the hydra change is weird and dumb, the mine change is cool, the MSC vision change is the best by far and long overdue.
On February 11 2014 08:40 ejozl wrote: I wonder what it is that Widow Mines got against Protoss. Maybe they bear a grudge from their husbands dead in the Brood Wars, the Spider Mines, hence the + bonus vs Shield?
They needed a way to kill Oracles in one shot without affecting other match-ups; hence the +35 to Shields.
On February 11 2014 08:39 SC2Toastie wrote: As for the Hydra, I'd rather like to see a damage point change instead of a blunt attack speed buff.
Yeah, basically my thoughts as well. Maybe if enough people push for this, especially some pros, they might end up changing it. I mean the extra attack speed is great and all, but it doesn't change the fact Hydras are still unintuitive and sort of unreliable to micro, unlike marines, reducing the damage point to 0 would at least make them on par with marines.
Increased on-creep speed bonus up to 50% from 40% that is currently now.. EL upgrade now gives +5 sec locust lifetime instead of +10
how about that one ??
Seriously, there are a lot of ways for it to be done, duh
Which makes it even more defensive?
Problem isn't that the swam host is so amazing on attack that it needs better creep synergy.
I suggested removing creep bonus for locusts entirely as well as the enduring locust upgrade and instead have a speed upgrade that doesnt affect locusts but makes the swarmhost itself very fast both movementwise and in burrowing/unborrowing. Either as upgrade or as instant change that is, depending on how strong it is.
Something like that, basically reward agressive multitasky play with nydus worms in various locations.
that would not really be to viable. A lot of investment for something that could be easily shut down via scouting. The way Swarm host are designed, the only viable way to play them in the late game vs protoss is with static d and viper pulling in, they are to fragile and valuable to risk losing in active movement around the map.
I mean Soulkey uses swarm host like you suggest once in a while, he will attack with roach/hydra and a few swarm host send locust then move away, but good luck doing that once it hits the late game vs the protoss deathball.
What else can you honestly say zerg has that can contest the late game Protoss death ball other then swarm host turtle play with vipers and static d? Not much other than to do a timing attack and kill the protoss before then, and that's not always viable in top level Korean games. The swarm host allow zerg to tech switch to muta or ultra better as well vs Protoss death balls.
At least with the tempest buff, swarm host are still good and zerg just has to come up with a way to take care of the tempest before they destroy all the static d quickly or try to play in a different fashion.
except no one likes watching swarmhost turtlefests. If other changes are needed for pvz to work then so be it, the tempest for one is an almost equally stupid unit I wouldnt mind seeing removed (buff carriers instead) but dont pretend swarmhost isnt the biggest problem in current ZvX.
Also if you have nydus in key locations and can burrow/unborrow and move your swarmhosts very quickly, it will be difficult to defend multiple locations. You cant really compare to current swarmhost play since it currently only works well as a turtle.
On February 11 2014 08:39 SC2Toastie wrote: As for the Hydra, I'd rather like to see a damage point change instead of a blunt attack speed buff.
Yeah, basically my thoughts as well. Maybe if enough people push for this, especially some pros, they might end up changing it. I mean the extra attack speed is great and all, but it doesn't change the fact Hydras are still unintuitive and sort of unreliable to micro, unlike marines, reducing the damage point to 0 would at least make them on par with marines.
I agree, more microability and perhaps slightly faster offcreep so they can better retreat.
I disagree with the Blink nerd. It's too much. However, I'm loving this new attention toward the Hydralisk. It's a unit that needs some focus and fine tuning/buffs.
Still no SH changes being contemplated. IMO they should change Timed Life for Locusts to "Lose HP over time until they die". This way it is harder to do consistent damage with locusts being sent halfway across the map. And enduring locusts could just reduce the rate of HP loss.
Also where were these hydralisk buffs back in WoL lol
Can't they just remove timewarp and solve a whole host of issues with all-ins and the MSC? Wouldn't need a blink nerf or anything like it and its not like timewarp adds anything interesting to the game.
Mothership Core vision radius decreased from 14 to 9 We feel that listening to what people shout the most about on the forums is an effective way to balance our game, also we'd really like to see Maru make it to the next round of Code S.
Blink cooldown increased from 10 to 15 Players that individually micro units in battles are unfairly stealing wins from more mechanically challenged opponents and we want to put a stop to this nonsense.
Widow Mine splash damage component deals 40 + 40 shield damage We're meching it happen. Terrans only got one new unit in HotS (transforming hellions don't count) and were determined that they use it in every match up. Also lets ignore the fact that the Widow Mine's attack ignores the Immortal's Hardened Shell.
Tempest ground weapon damage increased from 30 to 30+30-to-structures The Swarm Host is our baby, we love how it burrows and sends waves of cute little units across the map; it's not up for discussion... not even when Stephano insists on playing 3+ hour games against FireCake. Also I watched Independence Day yesterday and I really liked the bit where the Alien mothership blows up all the cities.
Hydralisk delay between attacks decreased from .83 to .75 We're hoping Zergs will learn to stutter step.
On February 11 2014 07:53 Destructicon wrote: Ok guys, I see a lot of other people here that think the blink CD nerf is too much. We kind of managed to make Blizz listen regarding the vision nerf, lets think up an appropriate change that won't destroy blink in all MU's but will help terran specifically against blink all-ins more.
Bunkers start with + armor and capacity upgrades. Done.
Don't think zergs would appreciate that kind of change.
Then 10 pool will be a real build again in ZvT. Just as planned.
Intersting changes. I like the blink cooldown and the Wm buff most. They promised to make Mech attractive vs P but it seems a little bit forced. Tempest I dont like , this unit shouldnt be in the game. They should really look at Swarmhosts like they promised since last Blizzcon. And Hydra buff: Hmmm Neutral on that. But is it really the damage thats the problem? I dont think so. Theres already so much units with insane DPS *coughmarinecough* ending combats in secs so I dont think its good to buff attackspeed. maybe 75 mins or 1 supply just like in BW.
On February 11 2014 08:43 JacobShock wrote: a zerg anti air buff, I approve!
Eh, marginal at best. The problem with the hydra is not its sustained DPS, it's, well, just about everything else. It's still slow, still fragile, still expensive, still needs two upgrades to not be complete shit. Queen is still the best AA for zerg.
I find it funny that everyone just keep saying to just "fix the swarm host", as it was the only problematic unit. To me, that would be to fix all the boring units, that you build and turtle with it until you have a death ball. So the Swarmhost is one of them for sure, but the raven is as shitty and boring as the Swarmhost, and the Void Ray is not that far behind.
For sure the SH is problematic, but as crazy as it sound late game boring vs boring in Zv* is more or less balanced, so without it, how do you ever win against a skymech/skytoss late game composition? You just don't, you are never going to win at this point of the game. To me, the different solution are therefore to :
- nerf/tweak/change all boring units for all three races and keep the game balanced. - big nerf to the SH, but to compensate make it way harder to get to that max skymech/toss army,either by making raven/VR cost more gaz or something like that, or buffing other options for the zerg to kill the enemy before they get to that stage of the game, I am thinking like buffing to mid/beginning of late game units such as hydra or Ultralisk, or other options as drop or nyddus play. -
I expect to see the MSC vision range changed to 11, consistent with all air units. The blink nerf is utter garbage - thankfully, it is something they are just looking at and therefore won't make it through.
I like the Hydra change. A better Hydra is better for Z and the game. (Even if there could be other ways of achieving it?)
As to WM and the Tempest, better leave well enough alone Blizzard. Think about it and maybe try again (or just leave it).
But, please consider Time Warp and make it an upgrade at Core (and affect friendly units too).
Wow, actually changes that the community has been asking for. I don't think this looks like the patch we're actually getting but msc vision nerf, WM and hydra together should be a nice patch.
I'm still a proponent of moving EMP to Raven and ditching one of the Raven's current spells.
Honestly this would just be a nerf to T because do you realy want to have to build 3-4 tech labed starports to transition to late game, I mean this would give terran much worse accessibility to emp, at least we can build ghosts out of tech labed raxes which you will have on hand because you are going to want marauders mid game. T is very limited by infrastructure so moving things away from the barracks will almost always nerf t. now changing ghost cost back to what it used to be on the other hand would be quite a nice buff.
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Aww
Still better for you than pre mine nerf for TvZ, so stop whining about microing probes. If you let a 1/1/1 get mines in your mineral line AND are to slow to respond you deserver to lose workers.
Have you ever even played Protoss? Because I've played Terran. A lot. For starters, a medivac is the same size on the minimap as a marine. For comparison a Warp Prism is 4x as big on the minimap. With Turbovacs it moves insanely fast. So unless you are staring at your base, it's quite hard to catch immediately.
Then there's the issue of splitting the workers. When the mines drop they spread out quite a bit because of the speed the Medivac is traveling at. So you basically have 3 seconds to decide where the ideal place to send every probe is and to actually click there.
And then one misclick can cost you close to every single probe (I'm not exaggerating here and I can show you replays of me as Terran doing this to Protosses on ladder).
Then there's the fact that you don't even get an attack warning, because the widow mine hit is instantaneous...so when you do hear "your workers are under attack" it means half of them are already dead and you better get an observer over there fast.
So yes. It's very hard to deal with unless you're fucking Hawkeye. Now add the fact that Protoss has the most difficult time recovering from worker losses (no MULES, can't make 15 drones at once) and you'll see why every Protoss player is up in arms about this widow mine patch. I really don't think its unreasonable to be upset by this.
Is your replay pre or post wm nerf? No offense but this sounds like a bunch of whining to me. You have cannons, photon overcharge, etc.
You also have chrono boost, let's not short ourselves in the economy talk. After many games of being proxy-oracled, proxy DT drop, blink all-in, your counter rebuttal makes me laugh. EDIT: Laughable in a sense that scv losses are almost guaranteed by all three of those builds I just mentioned.
There's a lot of irony in you writing that his post sounds like whining(which it isn't) and then your next paragraph is full of you whining. You also refer to someone who stated that he is a Terran player in the second person, implying that he is a Protoss. Your post reads like the internet equivalent of walking up to a stranger, saying "no offense", and then kicking them in the balls and spitting in their face.
Also wtf is a proxy DT drop? Are you telling me that an early game investment of 600 as SHOULDNT kill any probes? How would you even take serious damage from a proxy build that requires 600 gas you should easily be ready for something like that.
Blink is getting nerfed deservedly so don't worry about that anymore, and proxy oracle isn't as popular because of the high prevalence of reaper expands with heavy scouting.
That's not a "proxy DT drop". He did a totally standard DT drop build except he just hid the dark shrine. And of course Bbyong made my point, bad play is the only way something like that works. Bbyongs reaper WALKED BY and IGNORED the probe that scouted his whole base and then built the twilight+DT shrine. Then he leaves a good portion of his bio force standing in the middle of the map doing absolutely nothing, the attack hits right after Bbyong dropped his mules(poor luck), and doesn't have any turrets anywhere.
You showed me a pro game that ISNT a "proxy DT drop" and showed the opponent playing badly and getting bad luck. Thanks for wasting my time.
On February 11 2014 08:39 SC2Toastie wrote: Why do people think 15 seconds will kill blink play before even testing?
Yes, it weakens the all in if you commit into the main base, but guess what, blinking into a main base should be a commitment, right? Meanwhile Frontal pushes are barely affected.
It makes stalkers vastly weaker in PvZ, especially against mtualisks. One of the reasons blink is even viable right now is that you can use them to buy time to get phoenix out if a muta switch comes, since they shouldn't be able to overwhelm you immediately. Blink cooldown increase means good luck ever catching them at all. This is a mobility nerf on the only ground protoss unit that is mobile at all. Combined with a buff to hydras making stargate openers weaker, this is starting to look like a PvZ nightmare.
It also weakens blink based aggression measurably. This won't have much of an impact in PvT on the all-in, but it will badly weaken blink based play in PvP and PvZ.
I feel like the current ZvP problem also has something to do with the current strength of the void rays. At the first few months of HOTS many people were saying that void rays were really OP and that they couldn't imagine them staying in the game like this. But Zerg managed to use swarm hosts turtle style against the void ray colossus deathball which works out, but is super boring to play/watch.
If they plan on redesigning or nerfing the swarm hosts, they should also look into void rays. Or they should look at the counters to void rays. Maybe they would make corruptors scale better with upgrades or something like that. Possibly an infestor buff or something (as much as Im afraid of end WoL infestors).
Great proposed changes! Now please just remove the swarm host and work out how to replace it with the lurker. You guys all are smart enough to figure it out.
On February 11 2014 07:14 xxjcdentonxx wrote: [quote]
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Aww
Still better for you than pre mine nerf for TvZ, so stop whining about microing probes. If you let a 1/1/1 get mines in your mineral line AND are to slow to respond you deserver to lose workers.
Have you ever even played Protoss? Because I've played Terran. A lot. For starters, a medivac is the same size on the minimap as a marine. For comparison a Warp Prism is 4x as big on the minimap. With Turbovacs it moves insanely fast. So unless you are staring at your base, it's quite hard to catch immediately.
Then there's the issue of splitting the workers. When the mines drop they spread out quite a bit because of the speed the Medivac is traveling at. So you basically have 3 seconds to decide where the ideal place to send every probe is and to actually click there.
And then one misclick can cost you close to every single probe (I'm not exaggerating here and I can show you replays of me as Terran doing this to Protosses on ladder).
Then there's the fact that you don't even get an attack warning, because the widow mine hit is instantaneous...so when you do hear "your workers are under attack" it means half of them are already dead and you better get an observer over there fast.
So yes. It's very hard to deal with unless you're fucking Hawkeye. Now add the fact that Protoss has the most difficult time recovering from worker losses (no MULES, can't make 15 drones at once) and you'll see why every Protoss player is up in arms about this widow mine patch. I really don't think its unreasonable to be upset by this.
Is your replay pre or post wm nerf? No offense but this sounds like a bunch of whining to me. You have cannons, photon overcharge, etc.
You also have chrono boost, let's not short ourselves in the economy talk. After many games of being proxy-oracled, proxy DT drop, blink all-in, your counter rebuttal makes me laugh. EDIT: Laughable in a sense that scv losses are almost guaranteed by all three of those builds I just mentioned.
There's a lot of irony in you writing that his post sounds like whining(which it isn't) and then your next paragraph is full of you whining. You also refer to someone who stated that he is a Terran player in the second person, implying that he is a Protoss. Your post reads like the internet equivalent of walking up to a stranger, saying "no offense", and then kicking them in the balls and spitting in their face.
Also wtf is a proxy DT drop? Are you telling me that an early game investment of 600 as SHOULDNT kill any probes? How would you even take serious damage from a proxy build that requires 600 gas you should easily be ready for something like that.
Blink is getting nerfed deservedly so don't worry about that anymore, and proxy oracle isn't as popular because of the high prevalence of reaper expands with heavy scouting.
That's not a "proxy DT drop". He did a totally standard DT drop build except he just hid the dark shrine. And of course Bbyong made my point, bad play is the only way something like that works. Bbyongs reaper WALKED BY and IGNORED the probe that scouted his whole base and then built the twilight+DT shrine. Then he leaves a good portion of his bio force standing in the middle of the map doing absolutely nothing, the attack hits right after Bbyong dropped his mules(poor luck), and doesn't have any turrets anywhere.
You showed me a pro game that ISNT a "proxy DT drop" and showed the opponent playing badly and getting bad luck. Thanks for wasting my time.
This was a proxy DT drop. Of course the robotics isn't proxied, what would be the point when you can safely have it at home to produce Colossi afterwards... Your analysis is ridiculous; whether ABomb proxied the Dark shrine with a Probe that should have been destroyed or not is irrelevant since he could just have sent another Probe to proxy that. Bad play isn't at all the only way this works, if DTs hit while Terran has no scan available, Protoss instantly wins from essentially building something unscoutable somewhere on the map. But I am sure mid-GM EU players winning against Code S opponents (I think the same thing happened to jjakji today in GO4SC2) because of a single unit is totally fair for you.
Blink cooldown will likely effect too much, blink stalkers are really border line in a lot of situations as a tech choice and any nerf to them just pushes us towards the more boring options, really hope they can find a different change that is more limited to the TvP timing.
Hydra change as people have been discussing is the least interesting change they could have made and runs the risk of not doing anything in ZvP where it's desperately needed to combat protoss air without having to rely so heavily on the queen or corruptor, they're simply too fragile as-is.
I like the widow mine change, tempest change needs to be closely monitored but I think will be okay and the mothership core radius relatively innocuous all things considered.
On February 11 2014 08:39 SC2Toastie wrote: Yes, it weakens the all in if you commit into the main base, but guess what, blinking into a main base should be a commitment, right?
No it shouldn't. Stalkers are not particularly good units. Their mobility makes them useful because they can survive and keep doing damage. Adding 5 extra seconds to Blink cooldown makes a Blink very all-in.
You see more Protosses going Blink Stalkers now to abuse the immobility of Swarm Hosts. They rely on Blink to take fights against packs of Hydras when they have to.
This rather huge nerf to Blink is a bit overboard, especially with all the other nerfs specifically targeting blink allins (time warp, mothership core vision, to an extent widow mine).
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.
On February 11 2014 07:17 DinoMight wrote: [quote]
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Aww
Still better for you than pre mine nerf for TvZ, so stop whining about microing probes. If you let a 1/1/1 get mines in your mineral line AND are to slow to respond you deserver to lose workers.
Have you ever even played Protoss? Because I've played Terran. A lot. For starters, a medivac is the same size on the minimap as a marine. For comparison a Warp Prism is 4x as big on the minimap. With Turbovacs it moves insanely fast. So unless you are staring at your base, it's quite hard to catch immediately.
Then there's the issue of splitting the workers. When the mines drop they spread out quite a bit because of the speed the Medivac is traveling at. So you basically have 3 seconds to decide where the ideal place to send every probe is and to actually click there.
And then one misclick can cost you close to every single probe (I'm not exaggerating here and I can show you replays of me as Terran doing this to Protosses on ladder).
Then there's the fact that you don't even get an attack warning, because the widow mine hit is instantaneous...so when you do hear "your workers are under attack" it means half of them are already dead and you better get an observer over there fast.
So yes. It's very hard to deal with unless you're fucking Hawkeye. Now add the fact that Protoss has the most difficult time recovering from worker losses (no MULES, can't make 15 drones at once) and you'll see why every Protoss player is up in arms about this widow mine patch. I really don't think its unreasonable to be upset by this.
Is your replay pre or post wm nerf? No offense but this sounds like a bunch of whining to me. You have cannons, photon overcharge, etc.
You also have chrono boost, let's not short ourselves in the economy talk. After many games of being proxy-oracled, proxy DT drop, blink all-in, your counter rebuttal makes me laugh. EDIT: Laughable in a sense that scv losses are almost guaranteed by all three of those builds I just mentioned.
There's a lot of irony in you writing that his post sounds like whining(which it isn't) and then your next paragraph is full of you whining. You also refer to someone who stated that he is a Terran player in the second person, implying that he is a Protoss. Your post reads like the internet equivalent of walking up to a stranger, saying "no offense", and then kicking them in the balls and spitting in their face.
Also wtf is a proxy DT drop? Are you telling me that an early game investment of 600 as SHOULDNT kill any probes? How would you even take serious damage from a proxy build that requires 600 gas you should easily be ready for something like that.
Blink is getting nerfed deservedly so don't worry about that anymore, and proxy oracle isn't as popular because of the high prevalence of reaper expands with heavy scouting.
That's not a "proxy DT drop". He did a totally standard DT drop build except he just hid the dark shrine. And of course Bbyong made my point, bad play is the only way something like that works. Bbyongs reaper WALKED BY and IGNORED the probe that scouted his whole base and then built the twilight+DT shrine. Then he leaves a good portion of his bio force standing in the middle of the map doing absolutely nothing, the attack hits right after Bbyong dropped his mules(poor luck), and doesn't have any turrets anywhere.
You showed me a pro game that ISNT a "proxy DT drop" and showed the opponent playing badly and getting bad luck. Thanks for wasting my time.
This was a proxy DT drop. Of course the robotics isn't proxied, what would be the point when you can safely have it at home to produce Colossi afterwards... Your analysis is ridiculous; whether ABomb proxied the Dark shrine with a Probe that should have been destroyed or not is irrelevant since he could just have sent another Probe to proxy that. Bad play isn't at all the only way this works, if DTs hit while Terran has no scan available, Protoss instantly wins from essentially building something unscoutable somewhere on the map. But I am sure mid-GM EU players winning against Code S opponents (I think the same thing happened to jjakji today in GO4SC2) because of a single unit is totally fair for you.
As long as it is a unit in his own race, sure :p There's a lot of highly hypocritical tosses around...
On February 11 2014 08:39 SC2Toastie wrote: Yes, it weakens the all in if you commit into the main base, but guess what, blinking into a main base should be a commitment, right?
No it shouldn't. Stalkers are not particularly good units. Their mobility makes them useful because they can survive and keep doing damage. Adding 5 extra seconds to Blink cooldown makes a Blink very all-in.
You see more Protosses going Blink Stalkers now to abuse the immobility of Swarm Hosts. They rely on Blink to take fights against packs of Hydras when they have to.
This rather huge nerf to Blink is a bit overboard, especially with all the other nerfs specifically targeting blink allins (time warp, mothership core vision, to an extent widow mine).
Blink cooldown increased from 10 to 15 This is a more direct nerf that affects all Protoss players. If Blink play continues to be problematic, this is the sort of thing we’d want to have tested and prepared to put in the game.
They didn't say they would instantly implement it.
On February 11 2014 09:20 DinoMight wrote: PvP will turn into Stargate vs. Stargate every game if the Blink change goes through. It's just way too drastic as is.
For sure, I've also seen hundreds of PvP games on the test map already!
Don't act like the blink cooldown comes into effect that much, you're not going to tell me you micro your blink stalkers by the second.
On February 11 2014 08:39 SC2Toastie wrote: Yes, it weakens the all in if you commit into the main base, but guess what, blinking into a main base should be a commitment, right?
No it shouldn't. Stalkers are not particularly good units. Their mobility makes them useful because they can survive and keep doing damage. Adding 5 extra seconds to Blink cooldown makes a Blink very all-in.
You see more Protosses going Blink Stalkers now to abuse the immobility of Swarm Hosts. They rely on Blink to take fights against packs of Hydras when they have to.
This rather huge nerf to Blink is a bit overboard, especially with all the other nerfs specifically targeting blink allins (time warp, mothership core vision, to an extent widow mine).
No it shouldn't. What? Moving your army into the opponents base should not be dangerous?
I'm done here. Go back to playing minesweeper please. Mine op. You're just blatantly whining without a single example or prove AT ALL. Blink doesn't disappear as you make it out to be.
On February 11 2014 09:20 DinoMight wrote: PvP will turn into Stargate vs. Stargate every game if the Blink change goes through. It's just way too drastic as is.
For sure, I've also seen hundreds of PvP games on the test map already!
Don't act like the blink cooldown comes into effect that much, you're not going to tell me you micro your blink stalkers by the second.
Blinking in is going to be more dangerous because you have to stay in their base 1.5x as long.
On February 11 2014 06:00 DaveSprite wrote: [quote]
It removes 40 shield. The latter would be freaking retarded. Shield is a resource, like hp or energy, that can be decremented individually than either of the above.
Then how does the buff increase chances of killing workers with splash damage?
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Aww
Still better for you than pre mine nerf for TvZ, so stop whining about microing probes. If you let a 1/1/1 get mines in your mineral line AND are to slow to respond you deserver to lose workers.
Have you ever even played Protoss? Because I've played Terran. A lot. For starters, a medivac is the same size on the minimap as a marine. For comparison a Warp Prism is 4x as big on the minimap. With Turbovacs it moves insanely fast. So unless you are staring at your base, it's quite hard to catch immediately.
Then there's the issue of splitting the workers. When the mines drop they spread out quite a bit because of the speed the Medivac is traveling at. So you basically have 3 seconds to decide where the ideal place to send every probe is and to actually click there.
And then one misclick can cost you close to every single probe (I'm not exaggerating here and I can show you replays of me as Terran doing this to Protosses on ladder).
Then there's the fact that you don't even get an attack warning, because the widow mine hit is instantaneous...so when you do hear "your workers are under attack" it means half of them are already dead and you better get an observer over there fast.
So yes. It's very hard to deal with unless you're fucking Hawkeye. Now add the fact that Protoss has the most difficult time recovering from worker losses (no MULES, can't make 15 drones at once) and you'll see why every Protoss player is up in arms about this widow mine patch. I really don't think its unreasonable to be upset by this.
Is your replay pre or post wm nerf? No offense but this sounds like a bunch of whining to me. You have cannons, photon overcharge, etc.
You also have chrono boost, let's not short ourselves in the economy talk. After many games of being proxy-oracled, proxy DT drop, blink all-in, your counter rebuttal makes me laugh. EDIT: Laughable in a sense that scv losses are almost guaranteed by all three of those builds I just mentioned.
He means in the Splash Damage way. DT, Oracles and Stalkers shot one SCV at time while Widow Mines can deal damage in area. All of them can be shutdown. Oracle is one shot from Widow Mines, DTs require Detection, Widow Mines takes time to burrow. It's not easy as may sound but is possible.
but there is an upgrade for Protoss, that gives the vision back? (blink allin timing will have MSC with low vision, but regular or macro non blink builds will be able to get that 14 vision MSC back eventually in the game)
Assuming they haven't accidentally reverted the previous WM nerf as per my first post in this thread, AND the shield damage is appropriately proportioned the shot now does:
As you can see, there are probes farther from the shot that die.
Does that mean that currently, the shield damage is applied to only one single unit, whichever is directly hit?
Yes. With this change it's actually pretty feasible that 2 widow mines wipe 75% or so of a mineral line given the base range, splash range, and damage in the splash range. If you drop 2 mines in a mineral line and they both happen to shoot inward it's pretty much GG.
So micro your probes away?
This is Starcraft, after all.
Do you know how hard that is? If you select them all quickly and pull you're actually increasing the chances that one hit could kill your whole mineral line (it has happened to me many times).
It's like having to split marines against an instant bling detonation. Except in your worker line.
Aww
Still better for you than pre mine nerf for TvZ, so stop whining about microing probes. If you let a 1/1/1 get mines in your mineral line AND are to slow to respond you deserver to lose workers.
Have you ever even played Protoss? Because I've played Terran. A lot. For starters, a medivac is the same size on the minimap as a marine. For comparison a Warp Prism is 4x as big on the minimap. With Turbovacs it moves insanely fast. So unless you are staring at your base, it's quite hard to catch immediately.
Then there's the issue of splitting the workers. When the mines drop they spread out quite a bit because of the speed the Medivac is traveling at. So you basically have 3 seconds to decide where the ideal place to send every probe is and to actually click there.
And then one misclick can cost you close to every single probe (I'm not exaggerating here and I can show you replays of me as Terran doing this to Protosses on ladder).
Then there's the fact that you don't even get an attack warning, because the widow mine hit is instantaneous...so when you do hear "your workers are under attack" it means half of them are already dead and you better get an observer over there fast.
So yes. It's very hard to deal with unless you're fucking Hawkeye. Now add the fact that Protoss has the most difficult time recovering from worker losses (no MULES, can't make 15 drones at once) and you'll see why every Protoss player is up in arms about this widow mine patch. I really don't think its unreasonable to be upset by this.
Is your replay pre or post wm nerf? No offense but this sounds like a bunch of whining to me. You have cannons, photon overcharge, etc.
You also have chrono boost, let's not short ourselves in the economy talk. After many games of being proxy-oracled, proxy DT drop, blink all-in, your counter rebuttal makes me laugh. EDIT: Laughable in a sense that scv losses are almost guaranteed by all three of those builds I just mentioned.
He means in the Splash Damage way. DT, Oracles and Stalkers shot one SCV at time while Widow Mines can deal damage in area. All of them can be shutdown. Oracle is one shot from Widow Mines, DTs require Detection, Widow Mines takes time to burrow. It's not easy as may sound but is possible.
DT Stalker Oracle however deal guaranteed damage and force tons of shit of out Terran. A mine drop isn't even guaranteed to do damage and only deals good damage if the protoss opponent fucks up.
On February 11 2014 09:32 mikumegurine wrote: how bout go through with the MSC vision nerf
but there is an upgrade for Protoss, that gives the vision back? (so that after the blink allin timing, later in the game MSC can get that 14 vision back)
Why? They wanted their goddamn Oracles to be used in lategame, that's the opportunity.
On February 11 2014 09:32 mikumegurine wrote: how bout go through with the MSC vision nerf
but there is an upgrade for Protoss, that gives the vision back? (so that after the blink allin timing, later in the game MSC can get that 14 vision back)
Why? They wanted their goddamn Oracles to be used in lategame, that's the opportunity.
It'll take them some time to recognice Revelation duration is too long in non-turtle games where army movement and positioning matters, but oh well
On February 11 2014 04:58 DarkLordOlli wrote: Blink cooldown is too much.
Agreed. I think a better solution is for blink research to take an extra 30-60 seconds.
Zero reason not to open stargate in PvP with this.
Arguable, but also not a big deal even if it is the case. IMO stargate openers are a) the most fun and b) produce the best games.
And PvT blink openings would die out as well
I think this is kinda the point (and I'm ok with it). Blink is very, VERY scary for a short window in the early game. Making it less scary is definitely good, IMO.
On February 11 2014 08:39 SC2Toastie wrote: Yes, it weakens the all in if you commit into the main base, but guess what, blinking into a main base should be a commitment, right?
No it shouldn't. Stalkers are not particularly good units. Their mobility makes them useful because they can survive and keep doing damage. Adding 5 extra seconds to Blink cooldown makes a Blink very all-in.
You see more Protosses going Blink Stalkers now to abuse the immobility of Swarm Hosts. They rely on Blink to take fights against packs of Hydras when they have to.
This rather huge nerf to Blink is a bit overboard, especially with all the other nerfs specifically targeting blink allins (time warp, mothership core vision, to an extent widow mine).
Blink cooldown increased from 10 to 15 This is a more direct nerf that affects all Protoss players. If Blink play continues to be problematic, this is the sort of thing we’d want to have tested and prepared to put in the game.
They didn't say they would instantly implement it.
Thats what they say about every balance change they put into these maps, that doesn't mean they won't, and it doesn't mean they will. It's still something they are talking about and thinking about, so people are pointing out why it might be a bad move.
And i don't agree that widow mines will become annoying. They are annoying on their own vs toss already enough. It's not that they increased the splash radius.
anyways last balance test map .. i was so disappointed.. now i think blizzard is doing a good thing for tvp.
Although with the tempest and the hydra change. I don't know what will happen with zvp. Obviously we get a more microable hydra and deadlier tempest.
I think this is kinda the point (and I'm ok with it). Blink is very, VERY scary for a short window in the early game. Making it less scary is definitely good, IMO.
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.
On February 11 2014 09:32 mikumegurine wrote: how bout go through with the MSC vision nerf
but there is an upgrade for Protoss, that gives the vision back? (blink allin timing will have MSC with low vision, but regular or macro non blink builds will be able to get that 14 vision MSC back eventually in the game)
This upgrade already exists. It will increase the vision to 14 and cloak friendly units.
"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.
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.
On February 11 2014 04:58 DarkLordOlli wrote: Blink cooldown is too much.
Agreed. I think a better solution is for blink research to take an extra 30-60 seconds.
Zero reason not to open stargate in PvP with this.
Arguable, but also not a big deal even if it is the case. IMO stargate openers are a) the most fun and b) produce the best games.
And PvT blink openings would die out as well
I think this is kinda the point (and I'm ok with it). Blink is very, VERY scary for a short window in the early game. Making it less scary is definitely good, IMO.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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.
On February 11 2014 04:58 DarkLordOlli wrote: Blink cooldown is too much.
Agreed. I think a better solution is for blink research to take an extra 30-60 seconds.
Zero reason not to open stargate in PvP with this.
Arguable, but also not a big deal even if it is the case. IMO stargate openers are a) the most fun and b) produce the best games.
And PvT blink openings would die out as well
I think this is kinda the point (and I'm ok with it). Blink is very, VERY scary for a short window in the early game. Making it less scary is definitely good, IMO.
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?
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.
On February 11 2014 04:58 DarkLordOlli wrote: Blink cooldown is too much.
Agreed. I think a better solution is for blink research to take an extra 30-60 seconds.
Zero reason not to open stargate in PvP with this.
Arguable, but also not a big deal even if it is the case. IMO stargate openers are a) the most fun and b) produce the best games.
And PvT blink openings would die out as well
I think this is kinda the point (and I'm ok with it). Blink is very, VERY scary for a short window in the early game. Making it less scary is definitely good, IMO.
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?
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!!!!)
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.
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.
What matters, though, is that the community as a whole is completely inconsistent.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Well, the solution is rather simple, no? Just buff stim pack's research time. Protoss can still defend easily with the mothership core in HotS. There, fixed! This should solve Terran's problem without breaking blink.
On February 11 2014 04:58 DarkLordOlli wrote: Blink cooldown is too much.
Agreed. I think a better solution is for blink research to take an extra 30-60 seconds.
Zero reason not to open stargate in PvP with this.
Arguable, but also not a big deal even if it is the case. IMO stargate openers are a) the most fun and b) produce the best games.
And PvT blink openings would die out as well
I think this is kinda the point (and I'm ok with it). Blink is very, VERY scary for a short window in the early game. Making it less scary is definitely good, IMO.
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?
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!!!!)
It's not explicitly the oracle, as phoenix basically cause the same issue (and are actually better IMO). Voidrays being strong early game in PvP (they get weaker as the game goes on because archons tank them very well, and ground upgrades outstrip air upgrades), combined with the harass potential of oracles or phoenix and the detection an oracle provides makes stargate an all around powerful opening build. Taking away the oracle speed wouldn't solve the problem, as long as phoenix and void rays exist stargate is going to be strong (it was very strong in WoL too, it was just that blink was more common).
Warpgate isn't even really the problem in PvP, as the mothership core deals with that reasonably well. The problem is that, for the most part, tech choices for both players are made when neither player can scout, so players have to play blindly and every tech choice is countered by at least one other choice.
Hmm idk DK, why would everyone assume that all the "test map" changes will just become a patch later on? Could it be because you have a history of routinely doing just that while wholly ignoring the community's opinion on the proposed changes??
blink change is extreme, but i think protoss overreact. it's not like you don't have a good lategame against terran, it's just not as easy as the blink BS that happened up until now
i think they could change blink differently, or reduce the nerf to 12 seconds, but else, this is looking at least like it tries to get us out of the "protoss freewins every game" situation i hope.
On February 11 2014 10:31 magnaflow wrote: Are hydras able to stutter step now? Would be cool to see some marine like hydra micro
Marines attack animation is different. They are always firing, whereas the hydra actually shoots individual projectiles, so they will never be able to stutter step like marines. However you already can stutter step them as far as kiting goes.
On February 11 2014 10:31 magnaflow wrote: Are hydras able to stutter step now? Would be cool to see some marine like hydra micro
They already can, sort of, on creep. Typically though, forcefields and colossus will fuck them up so quickly that it's not worth it. Too slow generally, and too much shit that interferes. Don't see it changing much. In fact, this will change absolutely nothing about how the unit is used, it's most boring and unimaginative way to improve them.
I guess they'll kill phoenixes slightly quicker when bad protosses park them over a hydra pack, but that's about it.
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?
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.
Ah ,,yeah I guess you are right...
Actually one thing I thought about was : what if spores and spines no longer counted as structures (only in the sense of elimination?) The fact zerg can just move their spores and spines with the SH is really BM I feel...
On February 11 2014 04:58 DarkLordOlli wrote: Blink cooldown is too much.
Agreed. I think a better solution is for blink research to take an extra 30-60 seconds.
Zero reason not to open stargate in PvP with this.
Arguable, but also not a big deal even if it is the case. IMO stargate openers are a) the most fun and b) produce the best games.
And PvT blink openings would die out as well
I think this is kinda the point (and I'm ok with it). Blink is very, VERY scary for a short window in the early game. Making it less scary is definitely good, IMO.
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?
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!!!!)
It's not explicitly the oracle, as phoenix basically cause the same issue (and are actually better IMO). Voidrays being strong early game in PvP (they get weaker as the game goes on because archons tank them very well, and ground upgrades outstrip air upgrades), combined with the harass potential of oracles or phoenix and the detection an oracle provides makes stargate an all around powerful opening build. Taking away the oracle speed wouldn't solve the problem, as long as phoenix and void rays exist stargate is going to be strong (it was very strong in WoL too, it was just that blink was more common).
Warpgate isn't even really the problem in PvP, as the mothership core deals with that reasonably well. The problem is that, for the most part, tech choices for both players are made when neither player can scout, so players have to play blindly and every tech choice is countered by at least one other choice.
I understand all this, but how could that be fixed, is the question. PvP is just a clusterfuck of a matchup which all comes down to warpgate ignoring defenders advantage...
I still think blink time is kinda fine, maybe 1/2 seconds, but going for +50% is rough.
On February 11 2014 04:58 DarkLordOlli wrote: Blink cooldown is too much.
Agreed. I think a better solution is for blink research to take an extra 30-60 seconds.
Zero reason not to open stargate in PvP with this.
Arguable, but also not a big deal even if it is the case. IMO stargate openers are a) the most fun and b) produce the best games.
And PvT blink openings would die out as well
I think this is kinda the point (and I'm ok with it). Blink is very, VERY scary for a short window in the early game. Making it less scary is definitely good, IMO.
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?
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!!!!)
Warpgate isn't even really the problem in PvP, as the mothership core deals with that reasonably well. The problem is that, for the most part, tech choices for both players are made when neither player can scout, so players have to play blindly and every tech choice is countered by at least one other choice.
So you mean a lot like how Terrans feel versus Toss nowadays..except we don't have a get out of jail free core to help us out..
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
And I thought I was being Coy with my face.
its on the way, will take time to put together but hopefully sooner rather than later
On February 11 2014 10:32 Survivor61316 wrote: Hmm idk DK, why would everyone assume that all the "test map" changes will just become a patch later on? Could it be because you have a history of routinely doing just that while wholly ignoring the community's opinion on the proposed changes??
There have been lots of test map changes that didn't go in (DT speed buff, oracle gas cost, burrow cost) or partially went in (widow mine nerf, banshee cloak buff, roach burrow speed). They do listen to community feedback. Maybe not as quickly as people we like, but of course they don't listen to everyone's feedback because some people are so blinded by emotion or are have just terrible ideas.
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
And I thought I was being Coy with my face.
its on the way, will take time to put together but hopefully sooner rather than later
Good to hear, it was an interesting read last time.
On February 11 2014 10:32 Survivor61316 wrote: Hmm idk DK, why would everyone assume that all the "test map" changes will just become a patch later on? Could it be because you have a history of routinely doing just that while wholly ignoring the community's opinion on the proposed changes??
lol, very few of the changes they implement make it in to actual balance patches and very rarely do they get implemented without the initial proposed change at least being tweaked.
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?
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.
Have SH unburrow (or are exposed and cannot move) everytime they unload locusts, make it so that it is not auto cast and that the player must manually unload. This would allow for some sort of element of surprise.
Remove or decrease the time enduring locust lengthens locust life, but in return make SH move faster. This would allow for more hit and run tactics. Then slightly reduce the attack speed or attack of individual locusts since locusts do have a high dps.
Also like SC2Toastie said, make it so that SH are able to walk over locust.
Vision range nerf is tooo much!!...10 or 12 is more reasonable...the MSC vision range is soooo big to start with to help scout proxies in the proxy heavy world of PvP...
And I am very anti the increase in blink cooldown time...
someone suggested faster stim research time...I like this!!!!~~~ But I am bias towards marines ,,,cos they are sooo cute and ambitious!!!~~
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?
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.
Have SH unburrow (or are exposed and cannot move) everytime they unload locusts, make it so that it is not auto cast and that the player must manually unload. This would allow for some sort of element of surprise.
Remove or decrease the time enduring locust lengthens locust life, but in return make SH move faster. This would allow for more hit and run tactics. Then slightly reduce the attack speed or attack of individual locusts since locusts do have a high dps.
Also like SC2Toastie said, make it so that SH are able to walk over locust.
They sound like reasonable answers...more hit and run oriented Sh would be a lot more fun to watch and use...Nice suggestion dude!!
On February 11 2014 10:45 AxiomBlurr wrote: Vision range nerf is tooo much!!...10 or 12 is more reasonable...the MSC vision range is soooo big to start with to help scout proxies in the proxy heavy world of PvP...
Maybe just learn to scout for proxies with a probe and count pylons like other races have had to do since forever?
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.
Well, the solution is rather simple, no? Just buff stim pack's research time. Protoss can still defend easily with the mothership core in HotS. There, fixed! This should solve Terran's problem without breaking blink.
This would have run on effects in TvZ as well as really altering some other staple PvT builds, I know it was like this early on in WoL so it's hard to say that it would be "imbalanced" but it also might be even more far-reaching then just changing blink. It also only solves the problem for Bio (which admittedly is what most Terran's play) but traditionally it has been an even larger constrictor on Mech openings so it would be nice to have some movement on that side of things.
There's also some ways that good protoss players can delay their mothership core in favor of sentries if they're confident they can deal with reapers, faster stim would be really damaging to that kind of meta-game movement, if they can adjust the mothership core's ability to swing back with aggression then it might become more of a choice and we'll see some movement in the early game of the PvT match up.
Now that might be all worth it in favour of fixing the balance side of it, but it's not a simple fix, it rarely is.
On February 11 2014 10:45 AxiomBlurr wrote: Vision range nerf is tooo much!!...10 or 12 is more reasonable...the MSC vision range is soooo big to start with to help scout proxies in the proxy heavy world of PvP...
Maybe just learn to scout for proxies with a probe and count pylons like other races have had to do since forever?
That is all very well but as you know cos you are here on TL...the PvP is not everyother race...how often in TvT is there proxies? How often in ZvZ? thank you...your welcome...
As it is in PvP...Pros scout a probe for proxies...then the MSC and then the first stalker... and still miss the proxy buildings sometimes...the MSC range really helps in this area tho...
"Learn to scout with a probe"...comments like that are just trolllolololol.....
On February 11 2014 10:45 AxiomBlurr wrote: Vision range nerf is tooo much!!...10 or 12 is more reasonable...the MSC vision range is soooo big to start with to help scout proxies in the proxy heavy world of PvP...
Maybe just learn to scout for proxies with a probe and count pylons like other races have had to do since forever?
That is all very well but as you know cos you are here on TL...the PvP is not everyother race...how often in TvT is there proxies? How often in ZvZ? thank you...your welcome...
Terran has had to scout with 2 reapers and an scv for months now in tvp, so stop whinging. Msc vision nerf is long overdue.
Blink stalker nerf I dont know about, maybe theres a better way to nerf blink "allins".
this polls arent even funny anymore its always same : nerf protoss gets a HUGE approve any even a small buff while nerfing the shit out of them gets a HUGE dissaprove
even a huge nerf as blink wich would get a huge dissaprove if it would be t or z gets an approve ...
that makes me sad because i know people just whining and voting by their loosingstreak not even thinking before clicking
sad world sad world
ofc some nerfs are correct, but blink is rid. and mines then makes a mess out of every probe ecoline msc nerf is a good thing, even blink perhaps slightly but with that, its not a help for pvt, its a destruction for pvz
even now they wanna change i only read ONLY NOW ? WHY SO LONG ... where does that angryness come from ? its the same you get when you play protoss on ladder ... you think its cool because your winning alot ? no its not becauee 98% are flaming you that they wanna kill ur parents ... its red. that people are not able to think 2 meters ahead when coming for balance of their race
blink nerf would be 50% !!! its like i saying broodlords or emps cost double of energy
On February 11 2014 10:45 AxiomBlurr wrote: Vision range nerf is tooo much!!...10 or 12 is more reasonable...the MSC vision range is soooo big to start with to help scout proxies in the proxy heavy world of PvP...
Maybe just learn to scout for proxies with a probe and count pylons like other races have had to do since forever?
That is all very well but as you know cos you are here on TL...the PvP is not everyother race...how often in TvT is there proxies? How often in ZvZ? thank you...your welcome...
Terran has had to scout with 2 reapers and an scv for months now in tvp, so stop whinging. Msc vision nerf is long overdue.
Blink stalker nerf I dont know about, maybe theres a better way to nerf blink "allins".
I am happy with the vision nerf...but 9 is too much,,,,,10 is more reasonable...or 11 or even 12...for that matter...
Bet you a squillion Ringet or Rand or Dong that the MSC is not nerfed to 9...
On February 11 2014 10:45 AxiomBlurr wrote: Vision range nerf is tooo much!!...10 or 12 is more reasonable...the MSC vision range is soooo big to start with to help scout proxies in the proxy heavy world of PvP...
Maybe just learn to scout for proxies with a probe and count pylons like other races have had to do since forever?
That is all very well but as you know cos you are here on TL...the PvP is not everyother race...how often in TvT is there proxies? How often in ZvZ? thank you...your welcome...
As it is in PvP...Pros scout a probe for proxies...then the MSC and then the first stalker... and still miss the proxy buildings sometimes...the MSC range really helps in this area tho...
"Learn to scout with a probe"...comments like that are just trolllolololol.....
Toughen up, butter cup. 14 sight range is crazy. There is no reason that one race should have the ultimate scouting tool on top of all the other stuff the MCS does.
On February 11 2014 10:45 AxiomBlurr wrote: Vision range nerf is tooo much!!...10 or 12 is more reasonable...the MSC vision range is soooo big to start with to help scout proxies in the proxy heavy world of PvP...
Maybe just learn to scout for proxies with a probe and count pylons like other races have had to do since forever?
That is all very well but as you know cos you are here on TL...the PvP is not everyother race...how often in TvT is there proxies? How often in ZvZ? thank you...your welcome...
Terran has had to scout with 2 reapers and an scv for months now in tvp, so stop whinging. Msc vision nerf is long overdue.
Blink stalker nerf I dont know about, maybe theres a better way to nerf blink "allins".
I am happy with the vision nerf...but 9 is too much,,,,,10 is more reasonable...or 11 for that matter....
meh the vision nerf is fine, the blink nerf ... tahts where the jokes coming
I don't even understand the argument. Why should you be able to scout every proxy building with ease? The whole point of proxying a building is that it's hard to find and it's trying to work on the surprise factor. It should be possible to scout for proxies, but it shouldn't be easy, otherwise there would be no reason to do it.
On February 11 2014 05:04 ssxsilver wrote: I hope this doesn't ruin Blink wars in PvP...From a spectator's POV, it's one of the most intense things to watch. As far as the hydra buff, I wished they took TLO's suggestions instead. We need to slow down battles not increase DPS.
On February 11 2014 11:09 Nebuchad wrote: I don't even understand the argument. Why should you be able to scout every proxy building with ease? The whole point of proxying a building is that it's hard to find and it's trying to work on the surprise factor. It should be possible to scout for proxies, but it shouldn't be easy, otherwise there would be no reason to do it.
All these complaints about the mine buff devastating probe lines just proves how incredibly biased or just clueless people are about this damn game.
Just a few months ago mines were just as effective against probe lines, yet the minedrop strategy was a niche thing players would occasionally do in a BOX but most of the time it fell flat on its face. Now bringing it back is going to ruin the game for every protoss. Seriously, reading this stuff just disgusts me.
Almost half msc vision AND 5 seconds blink? I guess they are REALLY pushing it to gauging the effect of these changes. There's no need for 2 drastic nerfs.
5 seconds cool to blink will most likely kill blink builds PvP, which aren't that good atm to begin with. So now, besides blink taking quite a bit longer to research than in wol, it's actually much worse as well? For that change to go through without making blink awful, there'd have to at least a slight buff to blink research or something... and I'm not sure that would make it better without making it too strong in PvP either. Blink's already pretty iffy in PvZ too.
The tempest buff is a nice idea for PvZ. Late game PvZ is already pretty good for zerg, so I don't see a reason why protoss can't have some kind of edge (zerg has an econ edge thoughout the game and can make ridiculous tech switches by simply having a single tech building and enough larva, which includes units that make free units and dreaful muta switches). But they should probably make it only deal extra damage against organic structures, so that it doesn't affect other matchups.
The fact that they still want to go through with this hydra buff is just ridiculous. There's no reason to buff a freaking core unit that is completely fine. I couldn't care less about the ZvZ and ZvT metagame. Blizzard really needs to stop telling players what to do or trying to control the metagame. Hydras have their purpose and work just fine. PvZ has always been a pain for most protoss players, I don't know how they can even consider buffing zerg...
There's a huge difference between keeping an open mind and doing things like this. No wonder I haven't been playing much as of late. The current map pool is disgusting - instead of removing Alterzim and adding cool maps, they keep it and add Daedalus -, they consider the most ridiculous buffs like hydras (a core unit ffs), buff units that are coinflippy as hell like oracles.
On February 11 2014 05:04 ssxsilver wrote: I hope this doesn't ruin Blink wars in PvP...From a spectator's POV, it's one of the most intense things to watch. As far as the hydra buff, I wished they took TLO's suggestions instead. We need to slow down battles not increase DPS.
The rest seems okay.
What was TLO's suggestion?
IIRC he said they should either give 1 armor or +10HP.
I'm really not certain the mothership vision range nerf will weaken blink all-ins that much. Marines are usually the only anti-air available when it hits Terrans, and they shoot at 5 range.
I'm much more in favour of the increase on blink cooldowns. Because now I can pull scvs and actually hope to catch some of those stalkers.
The thing is Protoss earlygame is getting hammered pretty hard here. I think just the msc nerf/widow mine buff should be enough, with the blink nerf slightly over the top. Either that or they should just do one of either the msc nerf/blink nerf. Not to mention that blink builds in PvP will start dying off, and we'll be seeing a TON of stargate play.
Hydra change is ok I guess I wish they just made them more durable, but I don't hate it. Tempest change I am unsure of but it doesn't seem completely game breaking.
Mothership Core vision radius decreased from 14 to 9 We currently feel this would be a helpful change, but we’re worried that a vision radius decrease doesn’t really nerf the highest end Protoss players who are positioning the Mothership Core perfectly already. We’ll talk to professional Protoss players about this one once the test map goes live.
AWESOME. It's nice to see this player-suggested change being tested.
Blink cooldown increased from 10 to 15 This is a more direct nerf that affects all Protoss players. If Blink play continues to be problematic, this is the sort of thing we’d want to have tested and prepared to put in the game.
Feels more like a band-aid fix. Why not buff Stalkers and give them more health and attack damage so they trade better with Terran and Zerg armies, remove Blink and replace it with an ability that temporarily increases the Stalker's attack range and vision. It would solve a lot of problems that removing Blink in PvZ and PvT would generate like being unable to hold mutas and drops. It would also solve a lot of problems like Blink Stalkers soft-countering Siege Tanks by blinking on top of them, which should never happen according to the game's design logic.
Widow Mine splash damage component deals 40 + 40 shield damage We’ve seen some games against Protoss where Widow Mines are used, and they are very exciting to watch, whether they’re just Widow Mine drops or Widow Mines in combination with the Terran army (while sniping Observers). We feel like both of these strategies could use a bit of help. The Widow Mine potential against Protoss basic units will be unchanged for direct hits, but we’d reduce the number of indirect hits required against units like Stalkers, Zealots, or Sentries. Also, when using Widow Mine drops against Protoss, the chance of splash damage one-shotting Probes will increase slightly.
Unpopular opinion incoming, I approve of this change.
It won't affect Widow Mine drops that drastically. What it will affect is the sky-high survivability rates of Protoss deathballs against Widow Mines. Toss players will now have to think twice about attack-moving into a tank-reinforced minefield.
Tempest ground weapon damage increased from 30 to 30+30-to-structures We still think this is a good change, and we want to see more testing with it. If Tempests gain more ability to wear down Zerg defenses, Zerg players will be less incentivized to play a completely defensive style. Surprisingly, we’ve gotten a lot of feedback that proxy Tempest rushes are too strong right now, and this change would make that strategy even stronger, but we’ve been watching all of the major tournament games, and we still don’t think it’s being used enough (or being used at all). If you can identify some games where the best of the best pro players have successfully used this strategy against a formidable opponent, please let us know. We’d like to check out such games and analyze them.
I still disagree profusely with this. I have a feeling this sort of Tempest buff would lead to proxy Stargate strategies where you could violently demolish your opponent's base from the safety of impassable terrain. The Spore Crawlers are also not the problem but rather the abundance of Corruptors in the air.
Hydralisk delay between attacks decreased from .83 to .75 This would increase Hydralisk damage output against all targets by about 10%. Our stance on Hydralisks needing a buff in TvZ and ZvZ hasn’t changed. Additionally, the trend toward Protoss being stronger than Zerg has continued. We need more time and results to draw conclusions on the most-recent balance patch, but we’d like to be prepared to help Zerg here if it’s necessary.
Buffing Hydralisk attack speed, even slightly, can lead to dire consequences in PvZ or ZvT versus Mech. A buff to their damage versus Biological units would have made a lot more sense, especially when buffing Roach Hydra versus Bio and making it a viable Zerg composition.
On February 11 2014 11:50 Darkhoarse wrote: The thing is Protoss earlygame is getting hammered pretty hard here. I think just the msc nerf/widow mine buff should be enough, with the blink nerf slightly over the top. Either that or they should just do one of either the msc nerf/blink nerf. Not to mention that blink builds in PvP will start dying off, and we'll be seeing a TON of stargate play.
Hydra change is ok I guess I wish they just made them more durable, but I don't hate it. Tempest change I am unsure of but it doesn't seem completely game breaking.
I don't think it makes stargate play that much stronger - when you watch games currently, it's usually one blink to chase off that pesky oracle. Or blinking back individual stalkers against voids (more often the case it's just one giant blink forward to snipe it if possible). It just means the Protoss has to disengage for 5 seconds more with blink stalkers on retreat against void rays before they can execute blink micro again.
Same with phoenix, it's usually just one blink to chase them off. Phoenix and oracle are fast enough that currently blink isn't enough to chase them down.
And, both Protoss have access to stargate! Phoenix kind of hard counter oracles (oracles being light armored and unable to shoot air). So while game meta might shift, balance should not be an issue given its a mirror match up.
Blink is one of the cool, micro intensive skills in the game. It is a skill that is clear to see when done flawlessly. I'd be super saddened as a spectator to see it nerfed. It is definitely not the way to go.
The thing people forget sometimes, is that to some of us Starcraft is a spectator sport. And fixing balance issues wrong can sometimes hurt the experience. Hellbat drops era was one of the most exciting periods of SC2 as a viewer. Innovation was amazing to watch hitting several bases simultaneously and actually had a chance to shine as a micro player. I believe nerfing blink is a step in that wrong direction for spectators.
On February 11 2014 11:56 BisuDagger wrote: Blink is one of the cool, micro intensive skills in the game. It is a skill that is clear to see when done flawlessly. I'd be super saddened as a spectator to see it nerfed. It is definitely not the way to go.
The thing people forget sometimes, is that to some of us Starcraft is a spectator sport. And fixing balance issues wrong can sometimes hurt the experience. Hellbat drops era was one of the most exciting periods of SC2 as a viewer. Innovation was amazing to watch hitting several bases simultaneously and actually had a chance to shine as a micro player. I believe nerfing blink is a step in that wrong direction for spectators.
Blink will remain spectacular for audiences still because it's always been the micro itself that was amazing to watch. There's an added 5 second delay after that amazing spectacle - but that would not be noticable to spectators at all.
On February 11 2014 05:04 ssxsilver wrote: I hope this doesn't ruin Blink wars in PvP...From a spectator's POV, it's one of the most intense things to watch. As far as the hydra buff, I wished they took TLO's suggestions instead. We need to slow down battles not increase DPS.
The rest seems okay.
What was TLO's suggestion?
Just the simple suggestion that's been thrown out there many times before: +1 armor or HP increase to deal with the AOE.
Nice changes overall, though blink cooldown nerf doesn't sound very good. I have a feeling it would screw up PvP more than anything.
Instead of decreasing Hydra attack cooldown, I'd prefer they change the Hydra attack animation to have a shorter set up and longer follow through, allowing it to be a microable attack animation. The current attack has a long wind-up and short follow through, making it basically pointless to micro. Having this change allows players who micro to be more effective with their Hydras, instead of just buffing their attack speed.
THE reason why blink all in is strong in PvT, (which blink research time is increased in HotS from WoL btw) is because mothershipcore provides VISION! So all they have to do is do something about people bringing MSC to battle by like nerf its movementspeed(MSC has to move back and forth between terran ramp and deep in the base to choose which side protoss blinks in, and to cast time warp) and its vision. How simple is that??? Why would even touch blink which has like no problem outside this one single all in.
And for widowmine, it is already an awkward unit... it has bonus damage to shield like...wtf? it has to 1shot stalker but not roach? Then now they want widowmine to one shot probeline but not drone nor SCV? If they're fine with unit design like this, why not they make colossus bonus damage to locust? It literally solves problem, and not change any other things at all.
On February 11 2014 11:59 lichter wrote: Nice changes overall, though blink cooldown nerf doesn't sound very good. I have a feeling it would screw up PvP more than anything.
Instead of decreasing Hydra attack cooldown, I'd prefer they change the Hydra attack animation to have a shorter set up and longer follow through, allowing it to be a microable attack animation. The current attack has a long wind-up and short follow through, making it basically pointless to micro. Having this change allows players who micro to be more effective with their Hydras, instead of just buffing their attack speed.
Definitely agree with you on changing the hydra attack animation. Higher skill ceiling is always better - as a player and as a spectator.
At last a MSC vision change! I don't think that they will go for blink nerf or WM buff. I hope that they keep blink as it is now, it is a cool ability very micro intensive! Tempest... Not quite sure Hydra buff, as a zerg I like it, but could be quite devastating against P, will make hydra allins quite strong. But can be quite a good thing in ZvZ because it will make players transition out of Roaches v Roaches faster imo even if the big problem is the time needed to up Hydras...
I'm willing to put money down that if Hydra gets that buff, and Stalkers get that nerf, Colossi will need to be buffed or at the very least become the dominant meta. Are people okay with that? The Hydra steamroll will hit before Storm and the only other way Protoss can adequately respond to that is with everybody's favorite. If Proxy Tempests is a thing, let that meta evolve before we squash it.
On February 11 2014 12:03 Cloak wrote: I'm willing to put money down that if Hydra gets that buff, and Stalkers get that nerf, Colossi will need to be buffed or at the very least become the dominant meta. Are people okay with that? The Hydra steamroll will hit before Storm and the only other way Protoss can adequately respond to that is with everybody's favorite. If Proxy Tempests is a thing, let that meta evolve before we squash it.
Right, like blink stalkers are used to hold hydra timings in the current patch. Nor will blink stalkers be used even if blink wasn't nerfed.
First impression is i rly like the widowmine change. The unit is kinda tactical initself imo. Will also propose a new build for terran i guess in tvp? At the same time, toss against widowmine play will have to play tactical against it to. Ex: Snipe them with stalkers, then move in with charge zealots.
And i think its really cool to go bio and mix in widowmines.
I personally like the hydra buff idea. I was all for a slight buff to their HP to possibly increase their survivability (way too squishy for the cost), but then again the dps output can really play a huge part in making them more cost effective in the end game.
On February 11 2014 12:01 CriMsoN sc2 wrote: THE reason why blink all in is strong in PvT, (which blink research time is increased in HotS from WoL btw) is because mothershipcore provides VISION! So all they have to do is do something about people bringing MSC to battle by like nerf its movementspeed(MSC has to move back and forth between terran ramp and deep in the base to choose which side protoss blinks in, and to cast time warp) and its vision. How simple is that??? Why would even touch blink which has like no problem outside this one single all in.
And for widowmine, it is already an awkward unit... it has bonus damage to shield like...wtf? it has to 1shot stalker but not roach? Then now they want widowmine to one shot probeline but not drone nor SCV? If they're fine with unit design like this, why not they make colossus bonus damage to locust? It literally solves problem, and not change any other things at all.
Agree. This is funny if you really look at it. We have snipe that do extra dage vs psi unit. Tempest vs building? It might create better balance game but it make less and less sense.
On February 11 2014 12:17 darkness wrote: Can anyone explain a logical reason why the new mine should be able to 1shot probes, while it's perfectly okay not to 1shot scvs and drones?
Because protoss is the only race with a piece static defence that can simultaneously detect and kill the mine.
I'm only being partially facetious but the extra shield damage is necessary to deal with the huge asymmetry in protoss HP compared to the other races, and this is just a side effect of that.
If you want to be super-pedantic you could say that you're still able to one-shot drones as well, just in a smaller radius then the probes.
The tempest is already used fairly often, why not make Interceptors free for Carriers instead, that would solve a lot more issues imo? Although Protoss needs anything against these turtle swarm hosts, anything at all really.
Well, we will see I guess. I'll have to try out this test map and see how shitty it is.
On February 11 2014 12:18 Sc2Corpse wrote: Okay lets make already OP widow mines even more OP!
This won't help shit.
I like the Widow Mine change. They will be so much more effective versus Zealots, Immortals and Archons which at the moment wreck Mech armies. It will mean that Tier 3 deathballs will have to think twice about engaging a minefield reinforced by tanks through just a simple a-move.
Instead, they'll have to move Stalkers and an Observer in, take a few volleys to whittle down their Stalker count and eliminate the minefield before moving the rest of their army in.
On February 11 2014 12:03 Cloak wrote: I'm willing to put money down that if Hydra gets that buff, and Stalkers get that nerf, Colossi will need to be buffed or at the very least become the dominant meta. Are people okay with that? The Hydra steamroll will hit before Storm and the only other way Protoss can adequately respond to that is with everybody's favorite. If Proxy Tempests is a thing, let that meta evolve before we squash it.
Talk is cheap. Link paypal by PM if you're serious.
The Hydra attack speed buff does more for ZvZ than it does for ZvP. Hydras will still melt to storms and collossus late game, which means ZvP will still turn into games of attrition thanks to SH and the fact that Zerg won't be able to trade evenly against Toss without free units. It moderately helps their AA which Zergs have been asking for months now.
On February 11 2014 12:03 Cloak wrote: I'm willing to put money down that if Hydra gets that buff, and Stalkers get that nerf, Colossi will need to be buffed or at the very least become the dominant meta. Are people okay with that? The Hydra steamroll will hit before Storm and the only other way Protoss can adequately respond to that is with everybody's favorite. If Proxy Tempests is a thing, let that meta evolve before we squash it.
Right, like blink stalkers are used to hold hydra timings in the current patch. Nor will blink stalkers be used even if blink wasn't nerfed.
They're not specifically designed to hold Hydra timings, but they are good follow-up and general slush for composition transition.
On February 11 2014 12:18 Sc2Corpse wrote: Okay lets make already OP widow mines even more OP!
This won't help shit.
Thats the pay for the proxy-oracles. Now both sides can anihilate worker line in two seconds, not only Protoss
Ya, don't really see how + shields for widow mine will break anything in Tvp.
One thing they should do for Terran is make the Hellions/Hell bats not auto group together now when you Ctl click one.
For the hellion/hellbat thing, it was like that up until the most recent patch, and they changed it intentionally who knows why.
As for how it could break TvP, both sentries and high templar are 40/40 shields and health, we might see some hilarious games of whole groups of sentries or high templar being taken out by single mines for a while.
Everyone bitching about mech, and now looking at TvZ it's sooooooooooooooooo fucking boring now, just line up your units with static defense and wait 3 hours for the game to finish. So let's just hold off on all the complaining for now.
On February 11 2014 11:50 Darkhoarse wrote: The thing is Protoss earlygame is getting hammered pretty hard here. I think just the msc nerf/widow mine buff should be enough, with the blink nerf slightly over the top. Either that or they should just do one of either the msc nerf/blink nerf. Not to mention that blink builds in PvP will start dying off, and we'll be seeing a TON of stargate play.
Hydra change is ok I guess I wish they just made them more durable, but I don't hate it. Tempest change I am unsure of but it doesn't seem completely game breaking.
I don't think it makes stargate play that much stronger - when you watch games currently, it's usually one blink to chase off that pesky oracle. Or blinking back individual stalkers against voids (more often the case it's just one giant blink forward to snipe it if possible). It just means the Protoss has to disengage for 5 seconds more with blink stalkers on retreat against void rays before they can execute blink micro again.
Same with phoenix, it's usually just one blink to chase them off. Phoenix and oracle are fast enough that currently blink isn't enough to chase them down.
And, both Protoss have access to stargate! Phoenix kind of hard counter oracles (oracles being light armored and unable to shoot air). So while game meta might shift, balance should not be an issue given its a mirror match up.
It makes stargate a better choice because it makes blink a weaker choice in general, and therefore less likely to be the initial build choice. The only build that has a build order advantage against stargate is blink.
On February 11 2014 12:18 Sc2Corpse wrote: Okay lets make already OP widow mines even more OP!
This won't help shit.
Thats the pay for the proxy-oracles. Now both sides can anihilate worker line in two seconds, not only Protoss
Ya, don't really see how + shields for widow mine will break anything in Tvp.
One thing they should do for Terran is make the Hellions/Hell bats not auto group together now when you Ctl click one.
For the hellion/hellbat thing, it was like that up until the most recent patch, and they changed it intentionally who knows why.
As for how it could break TvP, both sentries and high templar are 40/40 shields and health, we might see some hilarious games of whole groups of sentries or high templar being taken out by single mines for a while.
On February 11 2014 12:18 Sc2Corpse wrote: Okay lets make already OP widow mines even more OP!
This won't help shit.
Thats the pay for the proxy-oracles. Now both sides can anihilate worker line in two seconds, not only Protoss
Ya, don't really see how + shields for widow mine will break anything in Tvp.
One thing they should do for Terran is make the Hellions/Hell bats not auto group together now when you Ctl click one.
For the hellion/hellbat thing, it was like that up until the most recent patch, and they changed it intentionally who knows why.
As for how it could break TvP, both sentries and high templar are 40/40 shields and health, we might see some hilarious games of whole groups of sentries or high templar being taken out by single mines for a while.
I don't see that as being too likely, given that having an obs with your army is pretty much obligatory in TvP, or at the very least it might take a few horror shows to hafe those who aren't doing this, start doing this
ZvP Hydra timings will stagnate the matchup if that goes through imo. I'm not usually wrong for some reason, despite sucking at the game. I don't see how you'll be able to hold those 3 base Roach/Hydra/Ling timings without rushing out a few Collosi, which is pretty much WoL turtling PvZ all over again.
On February 11 2014 11:56 BisuDagger wrote: Blink is one of the cool, micro intensive skills in the game. It is a skill that is clear to see when done flawlessly. I'd be super saddened as a spectator to see it nerfed. It is definitely not the way to go.
The thing people forget sometimes, is that to some of us Starcraft is a spectator sport. And fixing balance issues wrong can sometimes hurt the experience. Hellbat drops era was one of the most exciting periods of SC2 as a viewer. Innovation was amazing to watch hitting several bases simultaneously and actually had a chance to shine as a micro player. I believe nerfing blink is a step in that wrong direction for spectators.
Blink will remain spectacular for audiences still because it's always been the micro itself that was amazing to watch. There's an added 5 second delay after that amazing spectacle - but that would not be noticable to spectators at all.
If armies get run over more easily because blink isn't an option for another 5 seconds then it looks pretty dumb too. 5 seconds is huge.
On February 11 2014 11:50 Darkhoarse wrote: The thing is Protoss earlygame is getting hammered pretty hard here. I think just the msc nerf/widow mine buff should be enough, with the blink nerf slightly over the top. Either that or they should just do one of either the msc nerf/blink nerf. Not to mention that blink builds in PvP will start dying off, and we'll be seeing a TON of stargate play.
Hydra change is ok I guess I wish they just made them more durable, but I don't hate it. Tempest change I am unsure of but it doesn't seem completely game breaking.
I don't think it makes stargate play that much stronger - when you watch games currently, it's usually one blink to chase off that pesky oracle. Or blinking back individual stalkers against voids (more often the case it's just one giant blink forward to snipe it if possible). It just means the Protoss has to disengage for 5 seconds more with blink stalkers on retreat against void rays before they can execute blink micro again.
Same with phoenix, it's usually just one blink to chase them off. Phoenix and oracle are fast enough that currently blink isn't enough to chase them down.
And, both Protoss have access to stargate! Phoenix kind of hard counter oracles (oracles being light armored and unable to shoot air). So while game meta might shift, balance should not be an issue given its a mirror match up.
It makes stargate a better choice because it makes blink a weaker choice in general, and therefore less likely to be the initial build choice. The only build that has a build order advantage against stargate is blink.
"Weaker choice in general" is really vague. I pointed out why blink isn't a weaker choice by comparing the proposed nerf against blink's current interaction with each of the Protoss stargate unit.
On February 11 2014 12:03 Cloak wrote: I'm willing to put money down that if Hydra gets that buff, and Stalkers get that nerf, Colossi will need to be buffed or at the very least become the dominant meta. Are people okay with that? The Hydra steamroll will hit before Storm and the only other way Protoss can adequately respond to that is with everybody's favorite. If Proxy Tempests is a thing, let that meta evolve before we squash it.
Talk is cheap. Link paypal by PM if you're serious.
The Hydra attack speed buff does more for ZvZ than it does for ZvP. Hydras will still melt to storms and collossus late game, which means ZvP will still turn into games of attrition thanks to SH and the fact that Zerg won't be able to trade evenly against Toss without free units. It moderately helps their AA which Zergs have been asking for months now.
Fair enough, PMd. It will likely be moot because both conditions must be met. Blink nerf already has too much pushback; will get attenuated.
On February 11 2014 11:56 BisuDagger wrote: Blink is one of the cool, micro intensive skills in the game. It is a skill that is clear to see when done flawlessly. I'd be super saddened as a spectator to see it nerfed. It is definitely not the way to go.
The thing people forget sometimes, is that to some of us Starcraft is a spectator sport. And fixing balance issues wrong can sometimes hurt the experience. Hellbat drops era was one of the most exciting periods of SC2 as a viewer. Innovation was amazing to watch hitting several bases simultaneously and actually had a chance to shine as a micro player. I believe nerfing blink is a step in that wrong direction for spectators.
Blink will remain spectacular for audiences still because it's always been the micro itself that was amazing to watch. There's an added 5 second delay after that amazing spectacle - but that would not be noticable to spectators at all.
If armies get run over more easily because blink isn't an option for another 5 seconds then it looks pretty dumb too. 5 seconds is huge.
So you cherry pick a vod of a random 4v4(?) game where the Protoss players do nothing but blink micro.
5 seconds is huge, yes, it makes blinking to enemy bases a much heavier commitment. But again, pure stalker armies are not the norm except in TvP all-ins - and I don't know if most people find that kind of play exciting.
Armies getting run over more easily because of the extra 5 cooldown on blink? That's just hyperbole.
@Dagger, tsk you call that Blink micro? I can't find the VoD though, but one of Puzzle's games vs Sheth in Code A was the one I had in mind, holy blinkmicro batman
Mothership Core vision radius decreased from 14 to 9
"We currently feel this would be a helpful change, but we’re worried that a vision radius decrease doesn’t really nerf the highest end Protoss players who are positioning the Mothership Core perfectly already. We’ll talk to professional Protoss players about this one once the test map goes live."
There's so much stupidity in this statement. The 14 vision radius is OP because it takes no positioning or difficulty to get the effect. They can see way further than their opponents without any risk to the mothership core. Why ask PROTOSS players? No one wants their race nerfed..
On February 11 2014 11:56 BisuDagger wrote: Blink is one of the cool, micro intensive skills in the game. It is a skill that is clear to see when done flawlessly. I'd be super saddened as a spectator to see it nerfed. It is definitely not the way to go.
The thing people forget sometimes, is that to some of us Starcraft is a spectator sport. And fixing balance issues wrong can sometimes hurt the experience. Hellbat drops era was one of the most exciting periods of SC2 as a viewer. Innovation was amazing to watch hitting several bases simultaneously and actually had a chance to shine as a micro player. I believe nerfing blink is a step in that wrong direction for spectators.
Blink will remain spectacular for audiences still because it's always been the micro itself that was amazing to watch. There's an added 5 second delay after that amazing spectacle - but that would not be noticable to spectators at all.
If armies get run over more easily because blink isn't an option for another 5 seconds then it looks pretty dumb too. 5 seconds is huge.
So you cherry pick a vod of a random 4v4(?) game where the Protoss players do nothing but blink micro.
5 seconds is huge, yes, it makes blinking to enemy bases a much heavier commitment. But again, pure stalker armies are not the norm except in TvP all-ins - and I don't know if most people find that kind of play exciting.
Armies getting run over more easily because of the extra 5 cooldown on blink? That's just hyperbole.
It is not a hyperbole. In SC2 battles happen very quickly, units die much faster, and damage output is great. Blinking away from a speedling attack only to have them catch up and have to wait a whole 5 seconds extra taking hits before blinking back again is not an exaggeration. I am by no means trying to convince you to see it my way. I am just stating how I'm going to view it as someone who has been spectating starcraft for nearly a decade.
Well when you see people saying things like 'oh that Oracle has 3hp, it would have been dead without the movement speed change', I mean you're talking sub 1 second time differential in that respect. but yet people are making out like a FIVE SECOND change in cooldown isn't at least potentially a big deal?
On February 11 2014 12:53 AnonymousSC2 wrote: Mothership Core vision radius decreased from 14 to 9
"We currently feel this would be a helpful change, but we’re worried that a vision radius decrease doesn’t really nerf the highest end Protoss players who are positioning the Mothership Core perfectly already. We’ll talk to professional Protoss players about this one once the test map goes live."
There's so much stupidity in this statement. The 14 vision radius is OP because it takes no positioning or difficulty to get the effect. They can see way further than their opponents without any risk to the mothership core. Why ask PROTOSS players? No one wants their race nerfed..
I think you've read this the wrong way around, they're saying that this might not have the impact it needs to because the kinds of players that are good at positioning their mothership cores are going to keep it from dying with 14 or 9 range regardless so it might not effect blink all ins as much as people think, this is why they have the extra blink nerf in there.
5 seconds cool to blink will most likely kill blink builds PvP, which aren't that good atm to begin with.
Have you been watching different PvP from everyone else?
I think most people tune out for PvP. It's a hard matchup to love.
I don't get that =/
It's the most varied matchup, lots of viable openers, and lately there have been a lot less build order auto wins as players adjust and account for new strats. You have everything from proxy rushes to crazy blink stalker battles to stargate openers to late game colossus/archon/tempest battles to 5 minute games to 30 minute games.
PvP is easily my favorite matchup now, we have come a VERY long way from the "4gate or die" days.
On February 11 2014 11:56 BisuDagger wrote: Blink is one of the cool, micro intensive skills in the game. It is a skill that is clear to see when done flawlessly. I'd be super saddened as a spectator to see it nerfed. It is definitely not the way to go.
The thing people forget sometimes, is that to some of us Starcraft is a spectator sport. And fixing balance issues wrong can sometimes hurt the experience. Hellbat drops era was one of the most exciting periods of SC2 as a viewer. Innovation was amazing to watch hitting several bases simultaneously and actually had a chance to shine as a micro player. I believe nerfing blink is a step in that wrong direction for spectators.
Blink will remain spectacular for audiences still because it's always been the micro itself that was amazing to watch. There's an added 5 second delay after that amazing spectacle - but that would not be noticable to spectators at all.
If armies get run over more easily because blink isn't an option for another 5 seconds then it looks pretty dumb too. 5 seconds is huge.
So you cherry pick a vod of a random 4v4(?) game where the Protoss players do nothing but blink micro.
5 seconds is huge, yes, it makes blinking to enemy bases a much heavier commitment. But again, pure stalker armies are not the norm except in TvP all-ins - and I don't know if most people find that kind of play exciting.
Armies getting run over more easily because of the extra 5 cooldown on blink? That's just hyperbole.
It is not a hyperbole. In SC2 battles happen very quickly, units die much faster, and damage output is great. Blinking away from a speedling attack only to have them catch up and have to wait a whole 5 seconds extra taking hits before blinking back again is not an exaggeration. I am by no means trying to convince you to see it my way. I am just stating how I'm going to view it as someone who has been spectating starcraft for nearly a decade.
As someone who has been spectating games with blink stalkers for as long as they have existed, speedlings wreck blinkstalkers regardless of 5 seconds. Protoss have tools in their arsenal to deal with speedlings that do not require 100% cooldown usage on blink stalkers. And that's why it's hyperbole to say it will ruin blink play for spectators. Protoss reaction to speedlings is either zealots, or aoe.
Neither am I trying to convince only you, per say, but presenting counter arguments to your stance on this public forum for the consideration of our fellow posters and readers.
On February 11 2014 12:18 Sc2Corpse wrote: Okay lets make already OP widow mines even more OP!
This won't help shit.
I like the Widow Mine change. They will be so much more effective versus Zealots, Immortals and Archons which at the moment wreck Mech armies. It will mean that Tier 3 deathballs will have to think twice about engaging a minefield reinforced by tanks through just a simple a-move.
Instead, they'll have to move Stalkers and an Observer in, take a few volleys to whittle down their Stalker count and eliminate the minefield before moving the rest of their army in.
Or just use obs/envision and Colossus. In the late game widow mines will obviously start to lose their effectiveness, but early and mid game, they should be serving the same role spider mines used to serve in BW, which is slowing the opponent down and buying Terran time.
On February 11 2014 11:56 BisuDagger wrote: Blink is one of the cool, micro intensive skills in the game. It is a skill that is clear to see when done flawlessly. I'd be super saddened as a spectator to see it nerfed. It is definitely not the way to go.
The thing people forget sometimes, is that to some of us Starcraft is a spectator sport. And fixing balance issues wrong can sometimes hurt the experience. Hellbat drops era was one of the most exciting periods of SC2 as a viewer. Innovation was amazing to watch hitting several bases simultaneously and actually had a chance to shine as a micro player. I believe nerfing blink is a step in that wrong direction for spectators.
Blink will remain spectacular for audiences still because it's always been the micro itself that was amazing to watch. There's an added 5 second delay after that amazing spectacle - but that would not be noticable to spectators at all.
If armies get run over more easily because blink isn't an option for another 5 seconds then it looks pretty dumb too. 5 seconds is huge.
So you cherry pick a vod of a random 4v4(?) game where the Protoss players do nothing but blink micro.
5 seconds is huge, yes, it makes blinking to enemy bases a much heavier commitment. But again, pure stalker armies are not the norm except in TvP all-ins - and I don't know if most people find that kind of play exciting.
Armies getting run over more easily because of the extra 5 cooldown on blink? That's just hyperbole.
It is not a hyperbole. In SC2 battles happen very quickly, units die much faster, and damage output is great. Blinking away from a speedling attack only to have them catch up and have to wait a whole 5 seconds extra taking hits before blinking back again is not an exaggeration. I am by no means trying to convince you to see it my way. I am just stating how I'm going to view it as someone who has been spectating starcraft for nearly a decade.
As someone who has been spectating games with blink stalkers for as long as they have existed, speedlings wreck blinkstalkers regardless of 5 seconds. Protoss have tools in their arsenal to deal with speedlings that do not require 100% cooldown usage on blink stalkers. And that's why it's hyperbole to say it will ruin blink play for spectators. Protoss reaction to speedlings is either zealots, or aoe.
Neither am I trying to convince only you, per say, but presenting counter arguments to your stance on this public forum for the consideration of our fellow posters and readers.
We shall see dear friend. I hope you're right if this change gets added. I'm such a fan of buffing the opposing races rather then nerfing the one race. I hate to see abilities weakened. When snipe became useless in WoL after that epic TvZ between July and MVP on metalopolis I died a little inside.
I really do agree like the first proposed WM nerf I don't think the FUll Nerf will go through. ..... I think 12-13 seconds MIGHT be ok even that might be a bit much....
On February 11 2014 11:56 BisuDagger wrote: Blink is one of the cool, micro intensive skills in the game. It is a skill that is clear to see when done flawlessly. I'd be super saddened as a spectator to see it nerfed. It is definitely not the way to go.
The thing people forget sometimes, is that to some of us Starcraft is a spectator sport. And fixing balance issues wrong can sometimes hurt the experience. Hellbat drops era was one of the most exciting periods of SC2 as a viewer. Innovation was amazing to watch hitting several bases simultaneously and actually had a chance to shine as a micro player. I believe nerfing blink is a step in that wrong direction for spectators.
Blink will remain spectacular for audiences still because it's always been the micro itself that was amazing to watch. There's an added 5 second delay after that amazing spectacle - but that would not be noticable to spectators at all.
If armies get run over more easily because blink isn't an option for another 5 seconds then it looks pretty dumb too. 5 seconds is huge.
So you cherry pick a vod of a random 4v4(?) game where the Protoss players do nothing but blink micro.
5 seconds is huge, yes, it makes blinking to enemy bases a much heavier commitment. But again, pure stalker armies are not the norm except in TvP all-ins - and I don't know if most people find that kind of play exciting.
Armies getting run over more easily because of the extra 5 cooldown on blink? That's just hyperbole.
It is not a hyperbole. In SC2 battles happen very quickly, units die much faster, and damage output is great. Blinking away from a speedling attack only to have them catch up and have to wait a whole 5 seconds extra taking hits before blinking back again is not an exaggeration. I am by no means trying to convince you to see it my way. I am just stating how I'm going to view it as someone who has been spectating starcraft for nearly a decade.
As someone who has been spectating games with blink stalkers for as long as they have existed, speedlings wreck blinkstalkers regardless of 5 seconds. Protoss have tools in their arsenal to deal with speedlings that do not require 100% cooldown usage on blink stalkers. And that's why it's hyperbole to say it will ruin blink play for spectators. Protoss reaction to speedlings is either zealots, or aoe.
Neither am I trying to convince only you, per say, but presenting counter arguments to your stance on this public forum for the consideration of our fellow posters and readers.
We shall see dear friend. I hope you're right if this change gets added. I'm such a fan of buffing the opposing races rather then nerfing the one race. I hate to see abilities weakened. When snipe became useless in WoL after that epic TvZ between July and MVP on metalopolis I died a little inside.
Can you guys stop having your reasonable and polite discussion? There's no place for that here.
It won't happen (and shouldn't happen by any second come to that). The last thing SC2 needs is a nerf of a cool skill intensive strategy/tactic across all match-ups. I don't believe Blizzard would be capable of so much stupidity at one time. Anyone, I am keen to play on the test map again - like I did with the last one. I do hope for a better quality of player though. With patch 2.1. you would run into total SC2 newbies which made some games a total waste of time (even if I did enjoy massing Tempests).
On February 11 2014 11:56 BisuDagger wrote: Blink is one of the cool, micro intensive skills in the game. It is a skill that is clear to see when done flawlessly. I'd be super saddened as a spectator to see it nerfed. It is definitely not the way to go.
The thing people forget sometimes, is that to some of us Starcraft is a spectator sport. And fixing balance issues wrong can sometimes hurt the experience. Hellbat drops era was one of the most exciting periods of SC2 as a viewer. Innovation was amazing to watch hitting several bases simultaneously and actually had a chance to shine as a micro player. I believe nerfing blink is a step in that wrong direction for spectators.
You have to be joking, the hellbat era was completely ruining TvT. That matchup was pure art in WoL and has become really good again in HotS since the nerf.
On February 11 2014 12:33 ArTiFaKs wrote: Everyone bitching about mech, and now looking at TvZ it's sooooooooooooooooo fucking boring now, just line up your units with static defense and wait 3 hours for the game to finish. So let's just hold off on all the complaining for now.
I'm not sure what TvZ you've been watching, but the mech that Flash and TY have been doing in Proleague against Zerg has been really fun to watch.
Blink nerf must not go through. Bilnk stalker isn't even a viable strategy on every map and on some map it is what it should be, a pressure and soft contain. 5 seconds is way too much, if you can't blink in and out, then the whole strategy will be scrapped.
just look at yesterday's rain PvZ, his blink stalker play was amazing, sniped at least 10 swarmhosts, just blink in and out when he saw the locusts are too far to protect the swarmhost.
It's nice to have one unit that you have to really micro to get the best of (along with Phoenixes).
It's not that I enjoy blink all-ins, in fact I'm probably the most vocal non-Terran against those. Just don't gut one of the few finesse units that Protoss have.
It won't make a difference with things like +2 blink stalker allins because of the critical mass of stalkers, but might make some of the cute harassment you can do with small numbers a bit weaker.
5 seconds cool to blink will most likely kill blink builds PvP, which aren't that good atm to begin with.
Have you been watching different PvP from everyone else?
I think most people tune out for PvP. It's a hard matchup to love.
I don't get that =/
It's the most varied matchup, lots of viable openers, and lately there have been a lot less build order auto wins as players adjust and account for new strats. You have everything from proxy rushes to crazy blink stalker battles to stargate openers to late game colossus/archon/tempest battles to 5 minute games to 30 minute games.
PvP is easily my favorite matchup now, we have come a VERY long way from the "4gate or die" days.
The design of most Protoss units and the way they interact with each other just isn't all that interesting to a lot of people. It doesn't matter to me how many openers there are or how long or short the games are.
5 seconds cool to blink will most likely kill blink builds PvP, which aren't that good atm to begin with.
Have you been watching different PvP from everyone else?
I think most people tune out for PvP. It's a hard matchup to love.
I don't get that =/
It's the most varied matchup, lots of viable openers, and lately there have been a lot less build order auto wins as players adjust and account for new strats. You have everything from proxy rushes to crazy blink stalker battles to stargate openers to late game colossus/archon/tempest battles to 5 minute games to 30 minute games.
PvP is easily my favorite matchup now, we have come a VERY long way from the "4gate or die" days.
The design of most Protoss units and the way they interact with each other just isn't all that interesting to a lot of people. It doesn't matter to me how many openers there are or how long or short the games are.
I guess its mostly protoss players that get the beauty of PvP once you move past the blind counter thing. How a player deals with being on the bad end of a build stick is great. I've seen players harass with 4 stalkers at a time to kill probes vs robo, and dt prism drops vs observer openings while expanding.
On maps that aren't chokey we get archon immortal chargelot, a mobile composition that can deny third bases and push and pull while harassing and dropping.
Even blink v blink micro battles are fantastic.
But you need to get past the hard counter and into the intricacy which a lot of casters dont introduce well. Its just as punishing a matchup as ZvZ but slower in pace early with positioning of TvT in the mid game when both players take 3rd and 4th bases. Its a very finesse based matchup and it doesnt come through when presented incorrectly. IMO anyway.
PvP is sick, literally it's Collosus lasers that can make it a bit shite to watch sometimes. Everything else I actually tend to really enjoy. Most Protoss units don't have the insane DPS of other races core comps, so the battles are a bit elongated sometimes (with the exception of laz0rs)
I've been calling PvP the most interesting matchup for a while now
Colossus-centric deathballs are almost a thing of the past. Chargelot immortal archon beats it, esp with glorious chargelot flanks. A sprinkling of tempests also dissuades Colossus armies. Protosses that abuse mobility and warp prisms often beat colossus players
On February 11 2014 13:33 lichter wrote: I've been calling PvP the most interesting matchup for a while now
Colossus-centric deathballs are almost a thing of the past. Chargelot immortal archon beats it, esp with glorious chargelot flanks. A sprinkling of tempests also dissuades Colossus armies. Protosses that abuse mobility and warp prisms often beat colossus players
I'm not yet ready to say that yet, we've seen some decent games recently, but sometimes on maps like Heavy Rain all you end up with are colossus tempest deathballs instead, it just seems to lack any mid game at all with canons being so good at fending off all types of protoss harassment.
5 seconds cool to blink will most likely kill blink builds PvP, which aren't that good atm to begin with.
Have you been watching different PvP from everyone else?
I think most people tune out for PvP. It's a hard matchup to love.
I don't get that =/
It's the most varied matchup, lots of viable openers, and lately there have been a lot less build order auto wins as players adjust and account for new strats. You have everything from proxy rushes to crazy blink stalker battles to stargate openers to late game colossus/archon/tempest battles to 5 minute games to 30 minute games.
PvP is easily my favorite matchup now, we have come a VERY long way from the "4gate or die" days.
The design of most Protoss units and the way they interact with each other just isn't all that interesting to a lot of people. It doesn't matter to me how many openers there are or how long or short the games are.
I guess its mostly protoss players that get the beauty of PvP once you move past the blind counter thing. How a player deals with being on the bad end of a build stick is great. I've seen players harass with 4 stalkers at a time to kill probes vs robo, and dt prism drops vs observer openings while expanding.
On maps that aren't chokey we get archon immortal chargelot, a mobile composition that can deny third bases and push and pull while harassing and dropping.
Even blink v blink micro battles are fantastic.
But you need to get past the hard counter and into the intricacy which a lot of casters dont introduce well. Its just as punishing a matchup as ZvZ but slower in pace early with positioning of TvT in the mid game when both players take 3rd and 4th bases. Its a very finesse based matchup and it doesnt come through when presented incorrectly. IMO anyway.
I'm not saying PvP isn't difficult or demanding, it very much is. Playing it against someone more experienced than you is usually an autoloss and playing it when I offrace as Protoss often makes me want to rip my hair out in frustration. That said, there isn't a stage of the game or army comp or whatever that I would come anywhere near to describing as "fantastic" because the units themselves and the armies you tend to make and fight against are just shit ass boring compared to anything I do with Terran, which became my main race a few months after I started playing SC2 (played Protoss initially as it was my main race in BW).
Here's a link to a video where Khaldor and Mana discuss the patch changes. Obviously Mana has Protoss point of view, but it's still good content from Khaldor (as usual).
On February 11 2014 13:15 ETisME wrote: Blink nerf must not go through. Bilnk stalker isn't even a viable strategy on every map and on some map it is what it should be, a pressure and soft contain. 5 seconds is way too much, if you can't blink in and out, then the whole strategy will be scrapped.
just look at yesterday's rain PvZ, his blink stalker play was amazing, sniped at least 10 swarmhosts, just blink in and out when he saw the locusts are too far to protect the swarmhost.
Why should it be viable on every map? God forbid Protoss has to choose a different cheese every once in a while..
On February 11 2014 13:17 Wombat_NI wrote: It's nice to have one unit that you have to really micro to get the best of (along with Phoenixes).
It's not that I enjoy blink all-ins, in fact I'm probably the most vocal non-Terran against those. Just don't gut one of the few finesse units that Protoss have.
It won't make a difference with things like +2 blink stalker allins because of the critical mass of stalkers, but might make some of the cute harassment you can do with small numbers a bit weaker.
We'll see how it works out when it goes through
I agree with blink, I don't think a direct nerf is needed since it awarded good micro. I would rather have something like having marauders shots reset the blink cooldown to 5. So protoss will lose 'some' stalkers each time they blink in. And terrans would be rewarded for targetting different stalkers with marauders.
On February 11 2014 12:33 ArTiFaKs wrote: Everyone bitching about mech, and now looking at TvZ it's sooooooooooooooooo fucking boring now, just line up your units with static defense and wait 3 hours for the game to finish. So let's just hold off on all the complaining for now.
I'm not sure what TvZ you've been watching, but the mech that Flash and TY have been doing in Proleague against Zerg has been really fun to watch.
He is probably talking about the Reality vs Soulkey game 1 from Proleague last night.
On February 11 2014 11:56 BisuDagger wrote: Blink is one of the cool, micro intensive skills in the game. It is a skill that is clear to see when done flawlessly. I'd be super saddened as a spectator to see it nerfed. It is definitely not the way to go.
The thing people forget sometimes, is that to some of us Starcraft is a spectator sport. And fixing balance issues wrong can sometimes hurt the experience. Hellbat drops era was one of the most exciting periods of SC2 as a viewer. Innovation was amazing to watch hitting several bases simultaneously and actually had a chance to shine as a micro player. I believe nerfing blink is a step in that wrong direction for spectators.
You have to be joking, the hellbat era was completely ruining TvT. That matchup was pure art in WoL and has become really good again in HotS since the nerf.
4 drops simultaneously wasn't epic to watch? I guess I'm spoiled by watching boxer develop drop play in starcraft 1 and thought I was finally seeing it pioneered for sc2 also. TvT could have been fixed without ruining the epic drop play hellbats offered. As I said in one of my other posts, I would rather strengthen the opponent then weaken the single unit.
5 seconds cool to blink will most likely kill blink builds PvP, which aren't that good atm to begin with.
Have you been watching different PvP from everyone else?
I think most people tune out for PvP. It's a hard matchup to love.
I don't get that =/
It's the most varied matchup, lots of viable openers, and lately there have been a lot less build order auto wins as players adjust and account for new strats. You have everything from proxy rushes to crazy blink stalker battles to stargate openers to late game colossus/archon/tempest battles to 5 minute games to 30 minute games.
PvP is easily my favorite matchup now, we have come a VERY long way from the "4gate or die" days.
The design of most Protoss units and the way they interact with each other just isn't all that interesting to a lot of people. It doesn't matter to me how many openers there are or how long or short the games are.
I guess its mostly protoss players that get the beauty of PvP once you move past the blind counter thing. How a player deals with being on the bad end of a build stick is great. I've seen players harass with 4 stalkers at a time to kill probes vs robo, and dt prism drops vs observer openings while expanding.
On maps that aren't chokey we get archon immortal chargelot, a mobile composition that can deny third bases and push and pull while harassing and dropping.
Even blink v blink micro battles are fantastic.
But you need to get past the hard counter and into the intricacy which a lot of casters dont introduce well. Its just as punishing a matchup as ZvZ but slower in pace early with positioning of TvT in the mid game when both players take 3rd and 4th bases. Its a very finesse based matchup and it doesnt come through when presented incorrectly. IMO anyway.
I totally agree. It's interesting how, as you learn more about the game, you get more annoyed with casters lol
On February 11 2014 12:33 ArTiFaKs wrote: Everyone bitching about mech, and now looking at TvZ it's sooooooooooooooooo fucking boring now, just line up your units with static defense and wait 3 hours for the game to finish. So let's just hold off on all the complaining for now.
I'm not sure what TvZ you've been watching, but the mech that Flash and TY have been doing in Proleague against Zerg has been really fun to watch.
He is probably talking about the Reality vs Soulkey game 1 from Proleague last night.
All play styles can be un-entertaining and painful, it depends how you play it. It's just too bad both Reality and Soulkey decided to make us suffer at the same time.
Surprised by the blink cool down change. Definitely did not see that one coming. The MSC vision range however was pretty obvious; I'm really not sure why Blizzard decided to wait on that one when it was obvious their previous changes would do nothing about the potency of current blink openings. At least they're kind of making up for it with such a quick response so soon after the previous balance changes.
On February 11 2014 11:50 Darkhoarse wrote: The thing is Protoss earlygame is getting hammered pretty hard here. I think just the msc nerf/widow mine buff should be enough, with the blink nerf slightly over the top. Either that or they should just do one of either the msc nerf/blink nerf. Not to mention that blink builds in PvP will start dying off, and we'll be seeing a TON of stargate play.
Hydra change is ok I guess I wish they just made them more durable, but I don't hate it. Tempest change I am unsure of but it doesn't seem completely game breaking.
I don't think it makes stargate play that much stronger - when you watch games currently, it's usually one blink to chase off that pesky oracle. Or blinking back individual stalkers against voids (more often the case it's just one giant blink forward to snipe it if possible). It just means the Protoss has to disengage for 5 seconds more with blink stalkers on retreat against void rays before they can execute blink micro again.
Same with phoenix, it's usually just one blink to chase them off. Phoenix and oracle are fast enough that currently blink isn't enough to chase them down.
And, both Protoss have access to stargate! Phoenix kind of hard counter oracles (oracles being light armored and unable to shoot air). So while game meta might shift, balance should not be an issue given its a mirror match up.
It makes stargate a better choice because it makes blink a weaker choice in general, and therefore less likely to be the initial build choice. The only build that has a build order advantage against stargate is blink.
"Weaker choice in general" is really vague. I pointed out why blink isn't a weaker choice by comparing the proposed nerf against blink's current interaction with each of the Protoss stargate unit.
It makes blink substantially weaker against fast expand builds of any kind, it makes it weaker to defend gateway pressure or all-ins with (since normally, if you defend right, blink finishes shortly after the attack starts and you use micro to barely hold it off), it makes it weaker against robo play, which, while rare, still occasionally happens. It makes blink a weaker opening against people going into Archon/chargelot/immortal midgames, it makes blink weaker vs. everything. It makes blink based attacks and all-ins weaker, and it makes it weaker against void rays.
As a zerg player, i wouldnt mind a nerf to swarm host turtle.. but everyone has to agree something would have to be done about the TvZ (mech raven/sky mech) and PvZ ( archon templar void ray and maybe tempest)...
The only zerg counter ever had to ravens in wol got nerfed to the ground... yep the infestor.
With all this in mind, i suggest this buff:
-Infestors deal additionnal damage against caster units. (ravens, templars, mothership core,sentries etc). It would help the zerg defend against sentry heavy mid game toss *all in*. It would also force the terran to spread his ravens and vikings more; making them more easy to pick off with vipers and the *new and improved* hydras. It would make it a lot easier for the terran to make micro mistakes just as it is for the zerg if he doesnt go swarm hosts.
And then with hydra vipers beeing more viable against a late game sky mech composition, the zerg would be more likely to put pressure all game with roach hydra. since with vipers and infestor, it would be alot more viable since raven clumps would be very risky.
Same can be said about ZvP. Ground armies get melted super cost innefficiently against toss max armies with templars and immortals/colosus. Ultras are ok but as soon as spotted, toss walls up, adjust his composition while warp prism harassing and has a 100% guaranteed super cost efficient battle on the first engagement, then can recall home and adjust compositon again.
Zerg needs a well rounded unit that can counter enemy spell casters from beeing overly massed. Ravens should be a support unit, not a massable unit. You should have 4-5 on your max army, not 12+.
Think about it.. Energy based units that can kill and *free units* is what creates 2hours stale mates games. In order for casters to remain support units and not be massed, every race needs a anti caster. You dont see mass ravens turtle against protoss do you?? In fact, TvP is never a turtle based game. Because both races have anti casters so their caster cant be massed, therefor there is no need to wait for energy to fight good battles once you are maxed out.
On February 11 2014 12:33 ArTiFaKs wrote: Everyone bitching about mech, and now looking at TvZ it's sooooooooooooooooo fucking boring now, just line up your units with static defense and wait 3 hours for the game to finish. So let's just hold off on all the complaining for now.
I'm not sure what TvZ you've been watching, but the mech that Flash and TY have been doing in Proleague against Zerg has been really fun to watch.
He is probably talking about the Reality vs Soulkey game 1 from Proleague last night.
All play styles can be un-entertaining and painful, it depends how you play it. It's just too bad both Reality and Soulkey decided to make us suffer at the same time.
I really liked how aggressive Soulkey was with his swarm hosts initially in the second game, doing hit and runs. That's one of the ways I think swarm hosts can be used that's cool to see. But then he decided to just turtle up again -_-
Thankfully, he had such a huge lead from his opening roach/bane attack that he was able to end the game more aggressively but yeah, this turtle nonsense is silly. I absolutely don't mind long games, but they can't just end up being two armies sitting around staring at each other for 1.5 hours waiting for someone to miss a PDD or a fungal.
On February 11 2014 13:43 pak150 wrote: Here's a link to a video where Khaldor and Mana discuss the patch changes. Obviously Mana has Protoss point of view, but it's still good content from Khaldor (as usual).
Yeah Mana is extremely biased. He thinks its ok for widowmine drops to kill 1 probe at a time? It's stupid. Very stupid.
On February 11 2014 13:43 pak150 wrote: Here's a link to a video where Khaldor and Mana discuss the patch changes. Obviously Mana has Protoss point of view, but it's still good content from Khaldor (as usual).
Yeah Mana is extremely biased. He thinks its ok for widowmine drops to kill 1 probe at a time? It's stupid. Very stupid.
I've never fully understood why Widow Mine drops should be even be a part of the game...
Terran players can never fully experience them either, since they don't kill a mass of SCV's in one shot, since they do 40 damage...
It was like BFH. It was never really an issue until Terrans started doing it to each other, then suddenly it became a big issue. Except it was always an issue. I don't know how many times I faced masses of Hellions in TvP trying to kill my workers, dropped or not. Then people do it in TvT, and suddenly it gets changed... it was imbalanced all a long.
On February 11 2014 13:43 pak150 wrote: Here's a link to a video where Khaldor and Mana discuss the patch changes. Obviously Mana has Protoss point of view, but it's still good content from Khaldor (as usual).
Yeah Mana is extremely biased. He thinks its ok for widowmine drops to kill 1 probe at a time? It's stupid. Very stupid.
I've never fully understood why Widow Mine drops should be even be a part of the game...
Terran players can never fully experience them either, since they don't kill a mass of SCV's in one shot, since they do 40 damage...
It was like BFH. It was never really an issue until Terrans started doing it to each other, then suddenly it became a big issue. Except it was always an issue. I don't know how many times I faced masses of Hellions in TvP trying to kill my workers, dropped or not. Then people do it in TvT, and suddenly it gets changed... it was imbalanced all a long.
On February 11 2014 11:56 BisuDagger wrote: Blink is one of the cool, micro intensive skills in the game. It is a skill that is clear to see when done flawlessly. I'd be super saddened as a spectator to see it nerfed. It is definitely not the way to go.
The thing people forget sometimes, is that to some of us Starcraft is a spectator sport. And fixing balance issues wrong can sometimes hurt the experience. Hellbat drops era was one of the most exciting periods of SC2 as a viewer. Innovation was amazing to watch hitting several bases simultaneously and actually had a chance to shine as a micro player. I believe nerfing blink is a step in that wrong direction for spectators.
You have to be joking, the hellbat era was completely ruining TvT. That matchup was pure art in WoL and has become really good again in HotS since the nerf.
4 drops simultaneously wasn't epic to watch? I guess I'm spoiled by watching boxer develop drop play in starcraft 1 and thought I was finally seeing it pioneered for sc2 also. TvT could have been fixed without ruining the epic drop play hellbats offered. As I said in one of my other posts, I would rather strengthen the opponent then weaken the single unit.
Yeah, I think the big issue with hellbat drops was that is pretty much always did damage unless you had 10-15 supply of units sitting right in the minerals lines. Harass defense should be able spotting and reacting and not having units sitting in the mineral lines.
marines drops are a good example, you need 1 or 2 static defense to hold off while your armies comes in. With hellbats, your army had pretty much 0 time to react because they just ignored static defense and kill your workers.
On February 11 2014 13:43 pak150 wrote: Here's a link to a video where Khaldor and Mana discuss the patch changes. Obviously Mana has Protoss point of view, but it's still good content from Khaldor (as usual).
Yeah Mana is extremely biased. He thinks its ok for widowmine drops to kill 1 probe at a time? It's stupid. Very stupid.
I've never fully understood why Widow Mine drops should be even be a part of the game...
Terran players can never fully experience them either, since they don't kill a mass of SCV's in one shot, since they do 40 damage...
It was like BFH. It was never really an issue until Terrans started doing it to each other, then suddenly it became a big issue. Except it was always an issue. I don't know how many times I faced masses of Hellions in TvP trying to kill my workers, dropped or not. Then people do it in TvT, and suddenly it gets changed... it was imbalanced all a long.
On February 11 2014 11:50 Darkhoarse wrote: The thing is Protoss earlygame is getting hammered pretty hard here. I think just the msc nerf/widow mine buff should be enough, with the blink nerf slightly over the top. Either that or they should just do one of either the msc nerf/blink nerf. Not to mention that blink builds in PvP will start dying off, and we'll be seeing a TON of stargate play.
Hydra change is ok I guess I wish they just made them more durable, but I don't hate it. Tempest change I am unsure of but it doesn't seem completely game breaking.
I don't think it makes stargate play that much stronger - when you watch games currently, it's usually one blink to chase off that pesky oracle. Or blinking back individual stalkers against voids (more often the case it's just one giant blink forward to snipe it if possible). It just means the Protoss has to disengage for 5 seconds more with blink stalkers on retreat against void rays before they can execute blink micro again.
Same with phoenix, it's usually just one blink to chase them off. Phoenix and oracle are fast enough that currently blink isn't enough to chase them down.
And, both Protoss have access to stargate! Phoenix kind of hard counter oracles (oracles being light armored and unable to shoot air). So while game meta might shift, balance should not be an issue given its a mirror match up.
It makes stargate a better choice because it makes blink a weaker choice in general, and therefore less likely to be the initial build choice. The only build that has a build order advantage against stargate is blink.
"Weaker choice in general" is really vague. I pointed out why blink isn't a weaker choice by comparing the proposed nerf against blink's current interaction with each of the Protoss stargate unit.
It makes blink substantially weaker against fast expand builds of any kind, it makes it weaker to defend gateway pressure or all-ins with (since normally, if you defend right, blink finishes shortly after the attack starts and you use micro to barely hold it off), it makes it weaker against robo play, which, while rare, still occasionally happens. It makes blink a weaker opening against people going into Archon/chargelot/immortal midgames, it makes blink weaker vs. everything. It makes blink based attacks and all-ins weaker, and it makes it weaker against void rays.
So yeah, it's a big hit.
And the nexus cannon just suddenly disappeared? Blink is still far superior to non-blink stalkers (in gateway pressure) even with the cooldown increased. Has blink ever been strong against charglot archon? Or even used against that composition? Chargelots negate a lot of blink mobility, unless used to near cliffs (which again means the 5 extra second is a non-issue).
I wouldn't deny that it's a nerf. But let's not make a mountain of a mole hill.
As it is right now, blight stalkers can only barely get away from stimmed concussive bio by running and blinking every time it comes off cooldown, and even still, if the terran remains in pursuit, they can usually snag a stalker per blink. Increasing the cooldown of blink will destroy this relationship, and will allow any group of blink stalkers caught out on the map to get chased and gunned down by concussive marauders. The blink nerf is a massive nerf that will affect many aspects of each matchup. The only phase blink seems to be a problem is the pre-stim/medivac phase of tvp.
On February 11 2014 14:46 Entropy137 wrote: As it is right now, blight stalkers can only barely get away from stimmed concussive bio by running and blinking every time it comes off cooldown, and even still, if the terran remains in pursuit, they can usually snag a stalker per blink. Increasing the cooldown of blink will destroy this relationship, and will allow any group of blink stalkers caught out on the map to get chased and gunned down by concussive marauders. The blink nerf is a massive nerf that will affect many aspects of each matchup. The only phase blink seems to be a problem is the pre-stim/medivac phase of tvp.
Now this seems like a really legitimate point. But I'm too tired to confirm if blink stalkers in the current patch do indeed barely get away, and heading to bed.
On February 11 2014 11:56 BisuDagger wrote: Blink is one of the cool, micro intensive skills in the game. It is a skill that is clear to see when done flawlessly. I'd be super saddened as a spectator to see it nerfed. It is definitely not the way to go.
The thing people forget sometimes, is that to some of us Starcraft is a spectator sport. And fixing balance issues wrong can sometimes hurt the experience. Hellbat drops era was one of the most exciting periods of SC2 as a viewer. Innovation was amazing to watch hitting several bases simultaneously and actually had a chance to shine as a micro player. I believe nerfing blink is a step in that wrong direction for spectators.
You have to be joking, the hellbat era was completely ruining TvT. That matchup was pure art in WoL and has become really good again in HotS since the nerf.
4 drops simultaneously wasn't epic to watch? I guess I'm spoiled by watching boxer develop drop play in starcraft 1 and thought I was finally seeing it pioneered for sc2 also. TvT could have been fixed without ruining the epic drop play hellbats offered. As I said in one of my other posts, I would rather strengthen the opponent then weaken the single unit.
Yeah, I think the big issue with hellbat drops was that is pretty much always did damage unless you had 10-15 supply of units sitting right in the minerals lines. Harass defense should be able spotting and reacting and not having units sitting in the mineral lines.
The big issue was that Hellbats had high HP and high damage output, with their drawback being immobility. Paired with a medivac solves that, and it has no weakness as a harassment unit. Unless you intercept the medivac it was going to do damage no matter what because it was impossible to kill fast enough.
The solution Blizzard chose was to reduce their high damage output, but it nerfed the strategy too hard because two in a 'vac could no longer do damage before SCVs could be pulled. It also nerfed the unit in other situations; they could not longer be used to counter zealots in TvP.
An odd but more reasonable solution for it, in my opinion, would have been to make medivacs unable to boost with hellbats in them. Nerfing their mobility is more in line with the purpose of hellbats (tanky high DPS unit with short range and movement).
On February 11 2014 11:56 BisuDagger wrote: Blink is one of the cool, micro intensive skills in the game. It is a skill that is clear to see when done flawlessly. I'd be super saddened as a spectator to see it nerfed. It is definitely not the way to go.
The thing people forget sometimes, is that to some of us Starcraft is a spectator sport. And fixing balance issues wrong can sometimes hurt the experience. Hellbat drops era was one of the most exciting periods of SC2 as a viewer. Innovation was amazing to watch hitting several bases simultaneously and actually had a chance to shine as a micro player. I believe nerfing blink is a step in that wrong direction for spectators.
You have to be joking, the hellbat era was completely ruining TvT. That matchup was pure art in WoL and has become really good again in HotS since the nerf.
4 drops simultaneously wasn't epic to watch? I guess I'm spoiled by watching boxer develop drop play in starcraft 1 and thought I was finally seeing it pioneered for sc2 also. TvT could have been fixed without ruining the epic drop play hellbats offered. As I said in one of my other posts, I would rather strengthen the opponent then weaken the single unit.
No, it wasn't epic to watch because hellbat drops combined with medivac boost turned the entire matchup into nothing but trying frantically to defend your mineral lines against something that could instantly kill a quarter of your workers if you made a mistake. It took the focus completely off of what makes TvT great, which is the battle for control of space out on the map with siege tanks and the way players focus on trying to circumvent or punch holes in enemy lines. Epic is as far from what hellbats turned TvT into as I can think of. The way Blizzard went about nerfing them was probably not the best solution, but I'll take nerfed hellbats over the way they used to be without a second thought.
On February 11 2014 14:46 Entropy137 wrote: As it is right now, blight stalkers can only barely get away from stimmed concussive bio by running and blinking every time it comes off cooldown, and even still, if the terran remains in pursuit, they can usually snag a stalker per blink. Increasing the cooldown of blink will destroy this relationship, and will allow any group of blink stalkers caught out on the map to get chased and gunned down by concussive marauders. The blink nerf is a massive nerf that will affect many aspects of each matchup. The only phase blink seems to be a problem is the pre-stim/medivac phase of tvp.
To be fair, having blink stalkers being always able to get away after targeting down a unit without any way for the terran to respond was kind of weird, especially when protoss has shield regen. Will have to see how it goes, obviously, we don't want protoss to have to lose 3-4 stalkers either. But maybe they will have to plan their retreat path where they can use the terrain.
As a Terran-biased spectator, I'm not sold on the Blink change. While I don't think it'll make Blink underpowered by any means, it does cut down on the unit's microability without really helping against PvT Blink "All In." Earlier someone proposed only allowing Stalkers to Blink one level up or down at a time and I think that would be a better catch-all solution.
On February 11 2014 13:43 pak150 wrote: Here's a link to a video where Khaldor and Mana discuss the patch changes. Obviously Mana has Protoss point of view, but it's still good content from Khaldor (as usual).
Yeah Mana is extremely biased. He thinks its ok for widowmine drops to kill 1 probe at a time? It's stupid. Very stupid.
It was like BFH. It was never really an issue until Terrans started doing it to each other, then suddenly it became a big issue. Except it was always an issue. I don't know how many times I faced masses of Hellions in TvP trying to kill my workers, dropped or not. Then people do it in TvT, and suddenly it gets changed... it was imbalanced all a long.
4Gate becomes too good in PvP, Protoss get the earliest attacking flying unit in the game with 14 range, PO, Time Warp, and Recall.
BFH becomes too good in TvT, Terrans get... nerfed BFH.
Sounds about right. (Not saying that they shouldn't have been nerfed, though.)
What's wrong with WM harass? WM drops aren't the most skill-intensive strategy in the game, but they certainly take more skill to execute from a Terran than Oracle flybys or Storm drops do from a Protoss, because invariably you end up separately controlling a group of Marines and two WMs who have to burrow in good spots asafp or they die to Stalkers/MSC/PO.
On February 11 2014 14:46 Entropy137 wrote: As it is right now, blight stalkers can only barely get away from stimmed concussive bio by running and blinking every time it comes off cooldown, and even still, if the terran remains in pursuit, they can usually snag a stalker per blink. Increasing the cooldown of blink will destroy this relationship, and will allow any group of blink stalkers caught out on the map to get chased and gunned down by concussive marauders. The blink nerf is a massive nerf that will affect many aspects of each matchup. The only phase blink seems to be a problem is the pre-stim/medivac phase of tvp.
To be fair, having blink stalkers being always able to get away after targeting down a unit without any way for the terran to respond was kind of weird, especially when protoss has shield regen.
Is that really that weird? Being able to retreat is a key part of being aggressive, if you can't retreat you have to guarantee that you can win any fight which is why both stim and speed medivacs exist in their current form.
On February 11 2014 14:46 Entropy137 wrote: As it is right now, blight stalkers can only barely get away from stimmed concussive bio by running and blinking every time it comes off cooldown, and even still, if the terran remains in pursuit, they can usually snag a stalker per blink. Increasing the cooldown of blink will destroy this relationship, and will allow any group of blink stalkers caught out on the map to get chased and gunned down by concussive marauders. The blink nerf is a massive nerf that will affect many aspects of each matchup. The only phase blink seems to be a problem is the pre-stim/medivac phase of tvp.
To be fair, having blink stalkers being always able to get away after targeting down a unit without any way for the terran to respond was kind of weird, especially when protoss has shield regen.
Is that really that weird? Being able to retreat is a key part of being aggressive, if you can't retreat you have to guarantee that you can win any fight which is why both stim and speed medivacs exist in their current form.
You are talking about doing damage without taking any damage being totally fair. I think that it is totally fair that you might lose some units if you are being aggressive. There should be defenders advantage and maybe toss players are too used to having total high ground vision basically for free with the MSC.
On February 11 2014 14:46 Entropy137 wrote: As it is right now, blight stalkers can only barely get away from stimmed concussive bio by running and blinking every time it comes off cooldown, and even still, if the terran remains in pursuit, they can usually snag a stalker per blink. Increasing the cooldown of blink will destroy this relationship, and will allow any group of blink stalkers caught out on the map to get chased and gunned down by concussive marauders. The blink nerf is a massive nerf that will affect many aspects of each matchup. The only phase blink seems to be a problem is the pre-stim/medivac phase of tvp.
To be fair, having blink stalkers being always able to get away after targeting down a unit without any way for the terran to respond was kind of weird, especially when protoss has shield regen.
Is that really that weird? Being able to retreat is a key part of being aggressive, if you can't retreat you have to guarantee that you can win any fight which is why both stim and speed medivacs exist in their current form.
If you don't want the Blink Stalker "All In" opening to be a COMMITMENT for the Protoss, then don't give it the game-ending power of a committed all-in.
If a Zerg goes for a Roach Nydus bust and it doesn't work, he's done. He can't just "retreat."
On February 11 2014 14:46 Entropy137 wrote: As it is right now, blight stalkers can only barely get away from stimmed concussive bio by running and blinking every time it comes off cooldown, and even still, if the terran remains in pursuit, they can usually snag a stalker per blink. Increasing the cooldown of blink will destroy this relationship, and will allow any group of blink stalkers caught out on the map to get chased and gunned down by concussive marauders. The blink nerf is a massive nerf that will affect many aspects of each matchup. The only phase blink seems to be a problem is the pre-stim/medivac phase of tvp.
To be fair, having blink stalkers being always able to get away after targeting down a unit without any way for the terran to respond was kind of weird, especially when protoss has shield regen.
Is that really that weird? Being able to retreat is a key part of being aggressive, if you can't retreat you have to guarantee that you can win any fight which is why both stim and speed medivacs exist in their current form.
It isn't a retreat though, it's guaranteed damage with a guarantee of no (permanent) damage in return. If you're out on the map with a group of units and you decide you want to try and snipe off an enemy unit or structure and then get out, there ought to be some risk involved in choosing to do so. Of course, units like stalkers are pretty shit in a straight up fight, which is why Protoss has so many get out of jail free cards like force fields, blink, and recall.
Blink stalkers are all that Protoss can really retreat from stimmed bio, it's another reason IMO that the MSC aka 'The Ultimate Bandaid' was introduced.
Regardless we'll see if it stays and what impact it will have. I just feel it's a dumb change, informed by legitimate complaints about Blink builds when it is NOT the main problem with said builds.
That said, I don't know wtf the balance team are doing anymore anyway. MSC vision change was what the majority wanted last patch and though it didn't make it in the fact that RIDICULOUS hydra gas reduction was even brought up...
On February 11 2014 14:46 Entropy137 wrote: As it is right now, blight stalkers can only barely get away from stimmed concussive bio by running and blinking every time it comes off cooldown, and even still, if the terran remains in pursuit, they can usually snag a stalker per blink. Increasing the cooldown of blink will destroy this relationship, and will allow any group of blink stalkers caught out on the map to get chased and gunned down by concussive marauders. The blink nerf is a massive nerf that will affect many aspects of each matchup. The only phase blink seems to be a problem is the pre-stim/medivac phase of tvp.
To be fair, having blink stalkers being always able to get away after targeting down a unit without any way for the terran to respond was kind of weird, especially when protoss has shield regen.
Is that really that weird? Being able to retreat is a key part of being aggressive, if you can't retreat you have to guarantee that you can win any fight which is why both stim and speed medivacs exist in their current form.
If you don't want the Blink Stalker "All In" opening to be a COMMITMENT for the Protoss, then don't give it the game-ending power of a committed all-in.
If a Zerg goes for a Roach Nydus bust and it doesn't work, he's done. He can't just "retreat."
No but if he goes for a burrow roach movement attack and gets forcefield, he can escape for example, there are plenty of examples in the game where abilities give you different ways of retreating, it's part of the way aggressive timings are meant to overlap.
if you guys are telling me you seriously believe that blink gets out "free" vs stim bio right now, I think you're kidding, it's pre-stim that's the problem, and where it's too strong, but this blink change affects both.
On February 11 2014 15:05 Wombat_NI wrote: That said, I don't know wtf the balance team are doing anymore anyway. MSC vision change was what the majority wanted last patch and though it didn't make it in the fact that RIDICULOUS hydra gas reduction was even brought up...
Balance is a lot more complicated that TL.net users think. If you don't try it, you'll never truly know how it will affect all the different matchups and their current metagames. I'm glad that they are using the balance test maps to try radical changes; at least it shows they are willing to try something.
On February 11 2014 14:46 Entropy137 wrote: As it is right now, blight stalkers can only barely get away from stimmed concussive bio by running and blinking every time it comes off cooldown, and even still, if the terran remains in pursuit, they can usually snag a stalker per blink. Increasing the cooldown of blink will destroy this relationship, and will allow any group of blink stalkers caught out on the map to get chased and gunned down by concussive marauders. The blink nerf is a massive nerf that will affect many aspects of each matchup. The only phase blink seems to be a problem is the pre-stim/medivac phase of tvp.
To be fair, having blink stalkers being always able to get away after targeting down a unit without any way for the terran to respond was kind of weird, especially when protoss has shield regen.
Is that really that weird? Being able to retreat is a key part of being aggressive, if you can't retreat you have to guarantee that you can win any fight which is why both stim and speed medivacs exist in their current form.
It isn't just about retreating, it is about taking no damage regardless of the action from your opponent. With marines, you can still get caught by forcefields. In TvZ, picking up has the risk of mutas picking the medivacs off.
On February 11 2014 14:46 Entropy137 wrote: As it is right now, blight stalkers can only barely get away from stimmed concussive bio by running and blinking every time it comes off cooldown, and even still, if the terran remains in pursuit, they can usually snag a stalker per blink. Increasing the cooldown of blink will destroy this relationship, and will allow any group of blink stalkers caught out on the map to get chased and gunned down by concussive marauders. The blink nerf is a massive nerf that will affect many aspects of each matchup. The only phase blink seems to be a problem is the pre-stim/medivac phase of tvp.
To be fair, having blink stalkers being always able to get away after targeting down a unit without any way for the terran to respond was kind of weird, especially when protoss has shield regen.
Is that really that weird? Being able to retreat is a key part of being aggressive, if you can't retreat you have to guarantee that you can win any fight which is why both stim and speed medivacs exist in their current form.
If you don't want the Blink Stalker "All In" opening to be a COMMITMENT for the Protoss, then don't give it the game-ending power of a committed all-in.
If a Zerg goes for a Roach Nydus bust and it doesn't work, he's done. He can't just "retreat."
No but if he goes for a burrow roach movement attack and gets forcefield, he can escape for example, there are plenty of examples in the game where abilities give you different ways of retreating, it's part of the way aggressive timings are meant to overlap.
if you guys are telling me you seriously believe that blink gets out "free" vs stim bio right now, I think you're kidding, it's pre-stim that's the problem, and where it's too strong, but this blink change affects both.
Are you seeing some games that I'm not where unscouted "burrow roach movement attack" pushes are killing Zergs? Cause I'm talking about actual strats. Any pressure that has a serious chance to kill the opponent has a serious economic drawback -- a Cloak Banshee opening has to do damage, a Baneling bust has to kill or do very serious damage, a Nydus Roach bust has to kill or do very serious damage.
edit: I already said I'd prefer it if you couldn't Blink two levels.
On February 11 2014 14:46 Entropy137 wrote: As it is right now, blight stalkers can only barely get away from stimmed concussive bio by running and blinking every time it comes off cooldown, and even still, if the terran remains in pursuit, they can usually snag a stalker per blink. Increasing the cooldown of blink will destroy this relationship, and will allow any group of blink stalkers caught out on the map to get chased and gunned down by concussive marauders. The blink nerf is a massive nerf that will affect many aspects of each matchup. The only phase blink seems to be a problem is the pre-stim/medivac phase of tvp.
To be fair, having blink stalkers being always able to get away after targeting down a unit without any way for the terran to respond was kind of weird, especially when protoss has shield regen.
Is that really that weird? Being able to retreat is a key part of being aggressive, if you can't retreat you have to guarantee that you can win any fight which is why both stim and speed medivacs exist in their current form.
If you don't want the Blink Stalker "All In" opening to be a COMMITMENT for the Protoss, then don't give it the game-ending power of a committed all-in.
If a Zerg goes for a Roach Nydus bust and it doesn't work, he's done. He can't just "retreat."
No but if he goes for a burrow roach movement attack and gets forcefield, he can escape for example, there are plenty of examples in the game where abilities give you different ways of retreating, it's part of the way aggressive timings are meant to overlap.
if you guys are telling me you seriously believe that blink gets out "free" vs stim bio right now, I think you're kidding, it's pre-stim that's the problem, and where it's too strong, but this blink change affects both.
But it is not guaranteed that yo can get away without losing anything. If toss has an observer you can bypass the FF but you still take damage. You were talking about how blink-stalkers should be able to escape without taking losses, basically you said that they should be able to do damage without taking damage which is totally stupid.
On February 11 2014 15:05 Wombat_NI wrote: That said, I don't know wtf the balance team are doing anymore anyway. MSC vision change was what the majority wanted last patch and though it didn't make it in the fact that RIDICULOUS hydra gas reduction was even brought up...
Balance is a lot more complicated that TL.net users think. If you don't try it, you'll never truly know how it will affect all the different matchups and their current metagames. I'm glad that they are using the balance test maps to try radical changes; at least it shows they are willing to try something.
It's only the balance test map, but even suggesting that hydra change was insane.
If they want to do radical, revert some previous patch changes that don't make sense in the moden era, but still remain for no good reason. Stim research time for one, gives Terrans an easier time holding certain allins, doesn't enable them to just kill the other races with stim timings given huge map distance.
Sorry to bitch continually btw :p I just find their approach annoying. Their fix to BL/Infestor was to give Protoss a tool that completely annihilates the comp to the degree that it's near useless now
On February 11 2014 15:05 Wombat_NI wrote: That said, I don't know wtf the balance team are doing anymore anyway. MSC vision change was what the majority wanted last patch and though it didn't make it in the fact that RIDICULOUS hydra gas reduction was even brought up...
Balance is a lot more complicated that TL.net users think. If you don't try it, you'll never truly know how it will affect all the different matchups and their current metagames. I'm glad that they are using the balance test maps to try radical changes; at least it shows they are willing to try something.
Sorry to bitch continually btw :p I just find their approach annoying. Their fix to BL/Infestor was to give Protoss a tool that completely annihilates the comp to the degree that it's near useless now
Weeelllll, that might not have been the best example, because, you know... BL/Infestor.
On February 11 2014 15:05 Wombat_NI wrote: That said, I don't know wtf the balance team are doing anymore anyway. MSC vision change was what the majority wanted last patch and though it didn't make it in the fact that RIDICULOUS hydra gas reduction was even brought up...
Balance is a lot more complicated that TL.net users think. If you don't try it, you'll never truly know how it will affect all the different matchups and their current metagames. I'm glad that they are using the balance test maps to try radical changes; at least it shows they are willing to try something.
Sorry to bitch continually btw :p I just find their approach annoying. Their fix to BL/Infestor was to give Protoss a tool that completely annihilates the comp to the degree that it's near useless now
Weeelllll, that might not have been the best example, because, you know... BL/Infestor.
Well no and yes. People may have hated that comp, myself included but they just made airtoss far too good against it rather than look to keep it in the game but make it less potent. Fungal rework was a start, I wanted them to try broodlings without collision/attack priority. After that maybe give Protoss an anti broodllord unit
On February 11 2014 15:05 Wombat_NI wrote: That said, I don't know wtf the balance team are doing anymore anyway. MSC vision change was what the majority wanted last patch and though it didn't make it in the fact that RIDICULOUS hydra gas reduction was even brought up...
Balance is a lot more complicated that TL.net users think. If you don't try it, you'll never truly know how it will affect all the different matchups and their current metagames. I'm glad that they are using the balance test maps to try radical changes; at least it shows they are willing to try something.
Sorry to bitch continually btw :p I just find their approach annoying. Their fix to BL/Infestor was to give Protoss a tool that completely annihilates the comp to the degree that it's near useless now
Weeelllll, that might not have been the best example, because, you know... BL/Infestor.
Well no and yes. People may have hated that comp, myself included but they just made airtoss far too good against it rather than look to keep it in the game but make it less potent. Fungal rework was a start, I wanted them to try broodlings without collision/attack priority. After that maybe give Protoss an anti broodllord unit
Yeah, but what about FG? Do you really miss fifteen Infestors chain-Fungalling everything in sight? I don't have a hard on for removing free units from the game the way some people do, but if the cost of Brood Lords being completely standard is mass Infestors being completely standard, I'm going to give it two pragmatic thumbs down.
Now if you want to see reworked BL/something else become standard, that's another story...
Fungal growth was retarded, specially the instacast version. Part of the problem that was underlooked IMO was quite how much broodlings screwed with pathing and targetting as well, coulda been at least tried out.
i think the widow mine buff will cause many more drops to happen in pvt. hope it won't kill zealot archon opening, by forcing you to go robo all the time for obs.
On February 11 2014 15:38 digmouse wrote: I don't know, but maybe we shouldn't have so many maps that Stalkers can blink in so easily in the first place.
Yes, so much this^ With different maps blink all-ins can be nerfed without changing the actual unit
On February 11 2014 15:38 digmouse wrote: I don't know, but maybe we shouldn't have so many maps that Stalkers can blink in so easily in the first place.
And there's the rub.
As a question, is the stalker's blink completely height independent? I.e. it doesn't matter if say you're 5 levels higher than the "low ground"? I assume it is.
On February 11 2014 15:38 digmouse wrote: I don't know, but maybe we shouldn't have so many maps that Stalkers can blink in so easily in the first place.
And there's the rub.
As a question, is the stalker's blink completely height independent? I.e. it doesn't matter if say you're 5 levels higher than the "low ground"? I assume it is.
afaik, in sc2 there's just higher and lower. you cannot actually have different hight lvls apart from that
On February 11 2014 15:38 digmouse wrote: I don't know, but maybe we shouldn't have so many maps that Stalkers can blink in so easily in the first place.
And there's the rub.
As a question, is the stalker's blink completely height independent? I.e. it doesn't matter if say you're 5 levels higher than the "low ground"? I assume it is.
afaik, in sc2 there's just higher and lower. you cannot actually have different hight lvls apart from that
What? There are definitely more then 2 height levels, reapers for instance need that "step" on Yeonsu for instance because they can only go up one level and part of the main is down lower then the natural is even. Stalkers can blink up regardless, they're not just limited to only 1 cliff level like the colossus or the reaper.
On February 11 2014 15:38 digmouse wrote: I don't know, but maybe we shouldn't have so many maps that Stalkers can blink in so easily in the first place.
And there's the rub.
As a question, is the stalker's blink completely height independent? I.e. it doesn't matter if say you're 5 levels higher than the "low ground"? I assume it is.
afaik, in sc2 there's just higher and lower. you cannot actually have different hight lvls apart from that
Since you can make cliffs too high for reapers to jump, one could give blink the same restriction.
On February 11 2014 15:38 digmouse wrote: I don't know, but maybe we shouldn't have so many maps that Stalkers can blink in so easily in the first place.
And there's the rub.
As a question, is the stalker's blink completely height independent? I.e. it doesn't matter if say you're 5 levels higher than the "low ground"? I assume it is.
afaik, in sc2 there's just higher and lower. you cannot actually have different hight lvls apart from that
Not true, for example Colossi and Reapers can only walk over cliffs of 1 level. e.g. Antiga Shipyard base was 2 levels higher than the paths.
On February 11 2014 15:38 digmouse wrote: I don't know, but maybe we shouldn't have so many maps that Stalkers can blink in so easily in the first place.
And there's the rub.
As a question, is the stalker's blink completely height independent? I.e. it doesn't matter if say you're 5 levels higher than the "low ground"? I assume it is.
afaik, in sc2 there's just higher and lower. you cannot actually have different hight lvls apart from that
What? There are definitely more then 2 height levels, reapers for instance need that "step" on Yeonsu for instance because they can only go up one level and part of the main is down lower then the natural is even. Stalkers can blink up regardless, they're not just limited to only 1 cliff level like the colossus or the reaper.
Teleportation isn't limited by gravity (reaper booster packs) nor flexibility (walking range of Colossus legs) so it makes sense that it is not bound by height levels.
On February 11 2014 15:38 digmouse wrote: I don't know, but maybe we shouldn't have so many maps that Stalkers can blink in so easily in the first place.
And there's the rub.
As a question, is the stalker's blink completely height independent? I.e. it doesn't matter if say you're 5 levels higher than the "low ground"? I assume it is.
afaik, in sc2 there's just higher and lower. you cannot actually have different hight lvls apart from that
What? There are definitely more then 2 height levels, reapers for instance need that "step" on Yeonsu for instance because they can only go up one level and part of the main is down lower then the natural is even. Stalkers can blink up regardless, they're not just limited to only 1 cliff level like the colossus or the reaper.
Teleportation isn't limited by gravity (reaper booster packs) nor flexibility (walking range of Colossus legs) so it makes sense that it is not bound by height levels.
Stalkers have to use extra computational power to conceptualize the trajectory of their teleportation when they are unable to see their destination.
On February 11 2014 15:38 digmouse wrote: I don't know, but maybe we shouldn't have so many maps that Stalkers can blink in so easily in the first place.
And there's the rub.
As a question, is the stalker's blink completely height independent? I.e. it doesn't matter if say you're 5 levels higher than the "low ground"? I assume it is.
afaik, in sc2 there's just higher and lower. you cannot actually have different hight lvls apart from that
Reapers can't double jump.
there are map elements that are not passable for certain units. I don't think they are hight lvls though since you can place an element right next to them which is passable and leads to the same plateau.
edit: this might have the effect of hight lvls but they aren't technically. you can still create a map where you go 3 ramps up and one down and you'll be right back on the lvl you originally started (ie no real hight lvl system)
just ignore what I said. I haven't used the editor since early WoL and I am not sure if I am confusing things or not. sorry.
Reapers need the extra platform to jump into the main on Yeonsu but Stalkers can blink in regardless if I remeber correctly (I don't play Blink that much on Yeonsu), Reapers can't jump into the main on Bel'Shir from the low ground below, they need to go through the nat but Stalkers can blink in directly.
On February 11 2014 14:46 Entropy137 wrote: As it is right now, blight stalkers can only barely get away from stimmed concussive bio by running and blinking every time it comes off cooldown, and even still, if the terran remains in pursuit, they can usually snag a stalker per blink. Increasing the cooldown of blink will destroy this relationship, and will allow any group of blink stalkers caught out on the map to get chased and gunned down by concussive marauders. The blink nerf is a massive nerf that will affect many aspects of each matchup. The only phase blink seems to be a problem is the pre-stim/medivac phase of tvp.
Now this seems like a really legitimate point. But I'm too tired to confirm if blink stalkers in the current patch do indeed barely get away, and heading to bed.
They have always barely gotten away for two stims worth or so. Past that it's not usually worth stimming anymore. But with 5 extra seconds of cooldown, yikes!
On February 11 2014 15:37 SCguineapig wrote: i think the widow mine buff will cause many more drops to happen in pvt. hope it won't kill zealot archon opening, by forcing you to go robo all the time for obs.
Even for templar/charge openings you still usually see a robo dropped pretty early on, I don't really think it will be an issue. Protoss players have always had to account for widow mine drops.
The hydra change is like nothing. Zerg anti-air is still too weak, void ray has still no real counter but spore/infest turtle behind wave of locusts. And they buff again skytoss. Hydra need +1 range vs air and bonus dommage vs air aswell being immune to pdd.
And about the SH, a lot including DK blaming zerg for being too defensive while they have just no other way to deal with deathball/sky. If you just nerf SH without nerfing deathball you just say : ok zerg you're the worse race for winning in the early/mid game in non mirror match up but now you have a timer : if T/P goes for camping deathball style you lose 100% past 18-20 min.
Reality would have 100% win vs the best zerg of the world without SH while he just camp and mass mech until he has critical number.
I must consider another changes: 1. Re-design of swarmhosts to kill turtling style 2. Give Zerg something to deal with late-game T mech army, especially, air. 3. Give Zerg something to deal with Protoss Deathballs
What I think SwarmHosts should've looked like even back from day1:
1 - Decrease cost of the unit - it's a Lair-tech hive unit - i.e. - the kind that requires an extra base in order to not be all-in with it 2 - Decrease the spawn-time period a bit - like maybe 2-3 seconds ?? (yeah, that's what I think that's probably necessary amount of time to reduce vulnerability without the upgrade to not make them useless without it) 3 - Remove the EL Upgrade.. Like seriously - just remove the upgrade.. No-one uses the unit without the upgrade, which means it IS the thing that makes it OP.. OR --> 3.a. - Reduce the amount of lifetime the EL upgrade gives to the locusts - make it 5 seconds instead of 10..
Once that is dealt with:
4 - Make Locusts spawn a bit further at the start - i.e. - at the "head" area from the SwarmHost instead from it's back (though that won't make sense, lore-wise, still - will give the ability to instantly unburrow and retreat them without the AI screwing up with it)
5 - This is a very small subtle change - a bit of UI improvement regarding the unit --> don't allow to use both burrowed and unburrowed SHs to be used on the same rally.. Or give some "tabbing" feel to it - just as the sieged and unsieged Tanks are ATM
This is a "suggestion" that I'd go with as far as engagements are concerned - assuming that Swarm-Hosts are dealt with 6 - Think that MAYBE, just maybe - increase the abduct cast range - like - increase it for 3 range or so, but add a small casting delay to it.. Viper should "stay still" while doing it - like a second or so - giving a small amount of time being vulnerable to get FB-ed or EMP-ed
6.a - Seriously - Make the Mothership being immune to spells.. Not the Core, but just the Mothership.. Like - feedbacking the Core in PvP or EMP-ing it in TvP is cool, but the Mothership itself should probably be immune to spells I think
If you buff the Viper's abduct range - then the SwarmHost can easily be nerfed - in terms increasing it's period of vulnerability a bit - without making Zerg necessarily too vulnerable and having nothing else to deal with the opponent's simultaneously.. The Zerg will still have the Viper as the "first-engaging" unit
A bit of a bonus: I'm surprised Protosses not talking about the PvZ impact on the nerf of blink.. Like - they seem far more concerned with the PvP..
But yah - to all the Terrans who say that the Blink-nerf isn't a big deal - please - know that will ruin PvZ Blink timings COMPLETELY and destroy all the things best blinkers can bring to us as viewers.. NOT ONLY THAT, but combine it with the Hydra buff and you get the idea.. yep - no PvZ gonna be played without the Colossus in the Protoss army composition.. Like - none at all
Good changes overall. I understand that they want to do something about hydras but imo their dps is fine. Maybe remove range upgrade and give them that range from the start instead. And perhaps slightly faster offcreep? Its so easy to clear creep in PvZ compared to TvZ.
The WM buff vs shield is ok I guess but as far as WM is concerned they should focus on finding a middle ground between pre nerf and post nerf WM that makes it good in TvZ again.
On February 11 2014 04:55 Adreme wrote: Wait they are finally going to test the vision change that people have been suggesting for months. I cant believe what I am reading, I mean they are doing it very begrudgingly but they are still doing it.
Note that they are TESTING it. That means when they KNOW it doesn't fit into what they want from the game, they're not gonna add it ever.
i wish they would at least try to find a new role for the hydralisk
changing the gas cost was a good idea but they needed to adjust the units damage and hp accordingly so it would get a slight net buff in the end but not be overpowered as it was in the previous map
that change was at least interesting as in it would open up new ways to play, new builds to explore etc
On February 11 2014 06:08 Existor wrote: And here is a banner!
God that's freakin' cool! I wish I had this as 1920 x 1080
You ain't getting that in 1920x1080, because the aspect ratio does not fit More like 1920x600
I like most of the changes btw. Especially mama-core vision and WM shield dmg buff. I agree though that the Blink nerf might be too harsh, 50% cooldown nerf is too much imo, it is not the blink itself that makes the blink-all-ins so tough to hold, it's the mothershipcore, its maphack-vision + timewarp PLUS the fact that you don't require a tech building to get it (meaning like robo or stargate for instance, I know that the cybernetics core is required) and that it's not much of an investment, so basically it's a nobrainer for P to get it. (Maybe increasing the cost a bit - escpecially the gas cost - would make it more of a decision for P to get it? I mean, this should be a game of choices and each choice should have its pros and cons. And given the fact that the core is a damn strong defensive - and offensive - see below - unit, I don't see why it shouldn't be more expensive)
Now, I don't want to whine too much, but a few thoughts on the mothership core. Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I got it, this unit was introduced to the game so that P become safer against all-ins / so that expand builds (especially in PvZ and PvP) become more viable. I think that is correct? Now, I would be totally OK with that, an easy to get defensive unit which allows you to play macro-focused. Totally fine with me. The fact which is totally breaking my balls is that this unit is not only defensive, but it can be used in a crapton of various all-ins as well, making them VERY strong. Now, from my perspective, designing a unit like that is just plain wrong, especially due to the fact that it is so low in the tech tree and so easy to get. So, why not try to change sth so that the mama-core becomes a pure defensive unit? For example, change its movement speed? P still could use defensive timewarps and PO and still could use recall by splitting a part of its army and recalling it to the 3rd nexus in a split-push situation, for example. This would especially nerf the mama-core's offensive ability in TvP and weaken the 2base immortal based PvZ all-ins without affecting the mama-core's defensive abilities. I would love to hear your thoughts on that.
Another suggestion I read a few pages back was reducing stim research time by a few seconds. Thinking back, the research time was mainly increased in order to help P hold the medivac stim / stim only pushes. I think that's about right? Now, P have the mothership core / the maps are much bigger, so why not revert this change? In TvP, P is pretty much untouchable within the first 7-8-9 minutes thanks to the mothership core, so why not making T's life a bit easier and helping them hold the plethora of P all-ins by reducing the stim research time a bit? Or would this affect TvZ too much? I honestly don't think so. Again, thoughts would be appreciated.
Right now, Zerg must be defensive, because of a possible gateway pressure. This will have same effect as Queens buff, Zergs will be again greedy as F**k, and this would mean, we will have even more SHs.
Do you really want this, SH in every game, in every matchup?
IF BLIZZARD IS NERFING P MID GAME, BUFFING Z MID GAME (hydras) they should also nerf SHs. Otherwise we will have another era of turtling Zergs.
Hydra buff will also make Z stronger agains mech, combined with SH it won't be viable again. GG
Mothership Core vision radius decreased from 14 to 9 ✓ Great.It's not as if this nerf can't be scaled back to some degree if this proves too harsh a change.
Blink cooldown increased from 10 to 15 ✓ Personally I always thought this was the more intuitive change from all those blink timing nerfs and talks about nerfs before, considering how much better it allows that 6 range and the decent shield+life of stalkers to scale than without it. If it's too harsh, they could always try 12 or so anyway. Ah, just a note, it does take away some micro potential, which isn't good. That's one big drawback to this approach.
Widow Mine splash damage component deals 40 + 40 shield damage I'm not sure if this is a good way to go about it or not except that I like that they're considering more vs shields bonus damage, but this sounds way to harsh at a glance. No vote on this right now though because I haven't put a lot of thought into it.
Tempest ground weapon damage increased from 30 to 30+30-to-structures × Yuck. No.
Hydralisk delay between attacks decreased from .83 to .75 × Yuck. NO! Bad Blizzard, wrong type of change! This would change them in one the worst ways possible. Increasing their rate of fire means making micro with them waste even more potential damage.
Please consider lowering the rate of fire and increasing the base damage instead, or something else that doesn't make micro a bad choice. D:< Plus, corruptors are still in much more need of a overhaul (and buff). e.g. faster movement and higher damage, maybe slightly lower rate of fire for more whooshing in&out of enemy range to fire and retreat in battle and an improvement to/ability swap for corruption.
On February 11 2014 18:25 TW wrote: Nerfing blink and stalkers will just break PvZ.
Right now, Zerg must be defensive, because of a possible gateway pressure. This will have same effect as Queens buff, Zergs will be again greedy as F**k, and this would mean, we will have even more SHs.
Do you really want this, SH in every game, in every matchup?
IF BLIZZARD IS NERFING P MID GAME, BUFFING Z MID GAME (hydras) they should also nerf SHs. Otherwise we will have another era of turtling Zergs.
Hydra buff will also make Z stronger agains mech, combined with SH it won't be viable again. GG
I am not sure about that. Since blink stalkers pressure vs zerg is mainly walking up to the zerg and trading while blinking the weakened stalkers back. I don't think stalkers blink a second time because they are usually dead by then. The problem with blinks vs terrans is that stalkers blink into the main (which protoss don't do as much vs zerg because the focus is usually the third), TW gets used, and by the time the bio engages, the stalkers can already blink back down 1 by 1. But we will see if this change will affect PvZ times
Although blink stalkers will be less mobile vs mutas and blinking forward will be a bigger risk.
if Protoss is surprised by hydras and has no counter - it's already almost over. gateway army just melts against them, and this buff (even such a small one) can make it even harder.
Blink: Hmm, not sure. Maybe a bit too much? Probably time will tell.
WM: Dunno, i dont see this somewhat effective in later stages (obs). So it basically buffs only marine medivac mine drop early? I like that its better to hold 1 base AI with that, you dont even need tank probably.
If you want give zerg and terran opportunity to harass weaken overcharge vs bio unit and remain it strong vs armored (PvP) imo. Players would play more than one 1base pressure build than HOPEFULLY (not only minemarinemedivac), which is actually good for lower league players, which suck at macro AND its interesting to watch at tournaments - pressure build into exp or allin. I mean 40x better than nexus first into superlategame or GOD that swarm host bullshit...
Tempest: Change swarmhost! It is ridilulously boring to watch, 1 game last for hour(s) and its obviously not balanced. Weaken locusts somehow, change movespeed of unborowed SH (they should be really slow if you break the line imo!). And i am sure there are more ways u can nerf it more or less. Tempest change is not needed i believe.
Hydras: Not sure. I mean, i like they are trying to force zergs to whatever is not swarm host comp, but hydras prolly need to stay alive longer? Time will tell i would say....
Overall... better test map then last 2-3 together and mostly because of the changes community (even pros) suggested.
On February 11 2014 18:55 maXX_CZ wrote: WM: Dunno, i dont see this somewhat effective in later stages (obs). So it basically buffs only marine medivac mine drop early?
Nope, it would also (re)make 4M viable or somewhat viable against Templar openings.
the biggest issue with blink is when the stalkers are used to blink offensively. You cant escape from receiving damage even if you are in full retreat. Nerf blink by disabling the stalker's attack for 3 seconds or so after the cooldown. Also, when is the collosus going to receive a damage nerf?
On February 11 2014 18:55 maXX_CZ wrote: WM: Dunno, i dont see this somewhat effective in later stages (obs). So it basically buffs only marine medivac mine drop early?
Nope, it would also (re)make 4M viable or somewhat viable against Templar openings.
No terran ever will rely on widow mines vs a protoss. As a harassment option, yep, but not as a component in your main army. Storm outranges WM, Colossi outrange WM, the additional gas will be taken out of medivac/viking/marauder production etc.
I'm really pissed that Blizzard people seem to be more interested in pulling out the nerf gun instead of addressing the game's real problems (NOT balance-wise, but freakin' gameplay-wise!) i.e. Swarm hosts, Mech turtle, Deathball-ish play.
The most action-packed matchup that this game has is ZvT, bio/mine vs. ling bling muta. Sorry, bros. Even in the 4M times w/ Innovation, his parade push would cause the casters to go mad for minutes and minutes of fighting. And I'm not talking about "Uhhh, they position their deathballs again, uhhh, now so close, uhhh, they back off" (which is 60-70% of your average TvP lategame cast), but about awesome micro and macro in a situation where the fighting basically never stops.
To all those people who actually enjoy seeing Swarm Hosts vs. Tempests (or Reality vs. Soulkey, The Draw) - you are very, very strange.
On February 11 2014 18:55 maXX_CZ wrote: WM: Dunno, i dont see this somewhat effective in later stages (obs). So it basically buffs only marine medivac mine drop early?
Nope, it would also (re)make 4M viable or somewhat viable against Templar openings.
No terran ever will rely on widow mines vs a protoss. As a harassment option, yep, but not as a component in your main army. Storm outranges WM, Colossi outrange WM, the additional gas will be taken out of medivac/viking/marauder production etc.
I'm really pissed that Blizzard people seem to be more interested in pulling out the nerf gun instead of addressing the game's real problems (NOT balance-wise, but freakin' gameplay-wise!) i.e. Swarm hosts, Mech turtle, Deathball-ish play.
The most action-packed matchup that this game has is ZvT, bio/mine vs. ling bling muta. Sorry, bros. Even in the 4M times w/ Innovation, his parade push would cause the casters to go mad for minutes and minutes of fighting. And I'm not talking about "Uhhh, they position their deathballs again, uhhh, now so close, uhhh, they back off" (which is 60-70% of your average TvP lategame cast), but about awesome micro and macro in a situation where the fighting basically never stops.
To all those people who actually enjoy seeing Swarm Hosts vs. Tempests (or Reality vs. Soulkey, The Draw) - you are very, very strange.
2 Storms for a mine? I'll take that. Collosi in a Templar opening? ZvT was getting 'stale' so DK nerfed Mines in a matchup that approached near perfect balance. He is sometimes not a smart man :-(
On February 11 2014 18:55 maXX_CZ wrote: WM: Dunno, i dont see this somewhat effective in later stages (obs). So it basically buffs only marine medivac mine drop early?
Nope, it would also (re)make 4M viable or somewhat viable against Templar openings.
No terran ever will rely on widow mines vs a protoss. As a harassment option, yep, but not as a component in your main army. Storm outranges WM, Colossi outrange WM, the additional gas will be taken out of medivac/viking/marauder production etc.
Why? Splash damage + zone control is what bio desperately needs against mass Zealots. Storm outranging Mines doesn't matter since you can spread them the way you would do vs Zerg; plus it takes 2 Storms to kill a Mine. Colossi or Stalkers outranging Mines doesn't matter since you only play them against Templar openings.
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
that mine hit against immortals is crazy good, a few immortals shield were completely gone
also the vision nerf is a bit too much for my taste.
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
It's cool to see that the Tempest change looks stupid on paper, but makes sense to me in the example you have given. The hydra change looks minimal to me and the msc and blink nerf are HUGE.
lets face it blink stalkers have been too cost effective. blink stalkers > roaches, blink stalkers > hydras, blink stalkers > zerglings, basically anything that isnt an ultralisk or swarmhost.
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
that mine hit against immortals is crazy good, a few immortals shield were completely gone
also the vision nerf is a bit too much for my taste.
I thought the buff to damage vs shields was only for the one target you directly hit, and not the splash as well?
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
This should be added in the OP..
Anyways from the GIF's..
>The MSC vision nerf is pretty good. >Whoa I think the blink decrease is too much. That cannot go through or at least just maybe 12 sec cd. Not 15 i think that would be too much >Thinking that widow mines normally don't set off against protoss deathball due to colossus and stalkers so the change will not be devastating. And it will only add to the effectiveness of WM vs toss means this could finally mean a area control unit that is not ghost that can be used vs toss. And widow mines will no longer be a harrassment unit anymore. This won't change much WM rarely hits protoss deathball anyways. >Hydra attack speed increase doesn't change much. Still it could be more powerful. > Well the tempest change hinders turtling a little. That is for sure but why don't just blizzard redesign SH instead of buffing tempest. It would be much better.
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
that mine hit against immortals is crazy good, a few immortals shield were completely gone
also the vision nerf is a bit too much for my taste.
I thought the buff to damage vs shields was only for the one target you directly hit, and not the splash as well?
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
that mine hit against immortals is crazy good, a few immortals shield were completely gone
also the vision nerf is a bit too much for my taste.
I thought the buff to damage vs shields was only for the one target you directly hit, and not the splash as well?
then the buff would actually be useless if that were the case since against toss widow-mines hardly ever triggers due to colossi and stalkers.
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
Great that you posted it here, it should open eyes to all those who are bitching about hydra buff, difference is really small and lets face it hydra needs some kind of a buff. The only change that is questionable is blink nerf but I think protoss are just overreatcting here as it shuts down one of their favourite all in strat.
On February 11 2014 18:55 maXX_CZ wrote: WM: Dunno, i dont see this somewhat effective in later stages (obs). So it basically buffs only marine medivac mine drop early?
Nope, it would also (re)make 4M viable or somewhat viable against Templar openings.
No terran ever will rely on widow mines vs a protoss. As a harassment option, yep, but not as a component in your main army. Storm outranges WM, Colossi outrange WM, the additional gas will be taken out of medivac/viking/marauder production etc.
Why? Splash damage + zone control is what bio desperately needs against mass Zealots. Storm outranging Mines doesn't matter since you can spread them the way you would do vs Zerg; plus it takes 2 Storms to kill a Mine. Colossi or Stalkers outranging Mines doesn't matter since you only play them against Templar openings.
Protoss has a auto-split (charge) which will ofc not ever work fine but will reduce the widow mine's efficiency due to the already weak damage distribution in the projectile's hit radius.
Then again, you're right, you can pre-spread your mines, but the protoss might just snipe them with long range colossus (assumend you have enough mines to spread, protoss will at least have colossus or templar tech available). If no colossus available (which is kind of unrealistic since early mine harass is much stronger and will enforce more robo openings), protoss can still fall back on his bases and turtle on 2-3 bases (or, just use one of the strengths of the race and go all-in). Yes, it takes two storms to kill a mine, but at the same time, storms are great for zoning out the bio army, which would make stalkers able to snipe the remaining hitpoints. But I think our argumentation goes too hard into detailed theorycrafting, we will have to see how the meta game develops. Then again, DK won't give the meta game time to develop, since this game appears to still be in a beta test. I think DK's goal should just be to keep the game interesteing (as I said repeatedly, address the swarm host/mech turtle/stupid long games without any excitement issue) and use LotV to change this in a greater scope. But ofc he won't do this
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
that mine hit against immortals is crazy good, a few immortals shield were completely gone
also the vision nerf is a bit too much for my taste.
I thought the buff to damage vs shields was only for the one target you directly hit, and not the splash as well?
Its only for the splash.
That has me thinking, is the splash damage considered a spell aswell? Or does the +40 shields ignore hardened shields regardless of being spell damage or not?
Many just whining without even having tried the new balance changes, So what if you cant go with your old build you have used for 2 decades? so what? Maybe it's time to try something new? And i'm pretty sure blink will work even with a 15s cd, its not out of the game like some here may think... But i'll have to admit that i didn't see the blink cd change coming. And as always, it's for testing purpose.
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
that mine hit against immortals is crazy good, a few immortals shield were completely gone
also the vision nerf is a bit too much for my taste.
I thought the buff to damage vs shields was only for the one target you directly hit, and not the splash as well?
Its only for the splash.
Couple of months later down the line and all we see is a different type of 1/1/1 timing.... zzz
On February 11 2014 20:02 MidnightZL wrote: Many just whining without even having tried the new balance changes, So what if you cant go with your old build you have used for 2 decades? so what? Maybe it's time to try something new? And i'm pretty sure blink will work even with a 15s cd, its not out of the game like some here may think... But i'll have to admit that i didn't see the blink cd change coming. And as always, it's for testing purpose.
Totally agree. Everyone must act in a good manner.
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
This should be added in the OP..
Anyways from the GIF's..
>The MSC vision nerf is pretty good. >Whoa I think the blink decrease is too much. That cannot go through or at least just maybe 12 sec cd. Not 15 i think that would be too much >Thinking that widow mines normally don't set off against protoss deathball due to colossus and stalkers so the change will not be devastating. And it will only add to the effectiveness of WM vs toss means this could finally mean a area control unit that is not ghost that can be used vs toss. And widow mines will no longer be a harrassment unit anymore. This won't change much WM rarely hits protoss deathball anyways. >Hydra attack speed increase doesn't change much. Still it could be more powerful. > Well the tempest change hinders turtling a little. That is for sure but why don't just blizzard redesign SH instead of buffing tempest. It would be much better.
I think WM might be way better then Hellbats in against chargelot archon strats, a couple of shots could absolutely devastate a group of chargelots. However late game you probably still will want to phase them out and get a mass of ghosts and vikings to support the bio army.
Also WM might be a lot better at shutting down zealot harass now in conjuncture with sim cities and static defense.
On February 11 2014 18:55 maXX_CZ wrote: WM: Dunno, i dont see this somewhat effective in later stages (obs). So it basically buffs only marine medivac mine drop early?
Nope, it would also (re)make 4M viable or somewhat viable against Templar openings.
No terran ever will rely on widow mines vs a protoss. As a harassment option, yep, but not as a component in your main army. Storm outranges WM, Colossi outrange WM, the additional gas will be taken out of medivac/viking/marauder production etc.
Why? Splash damage + zone control is what bio desperately needs against mass Zealots. Storm outranging Mines doesn't matter since you can spread them the way you would do vs Zerg; plus it takes 2 Storms to kill a Mine. Colossi or Stalkers outranging Mines doesn't matter since you only play them against Templar openings.
Protoss has a auto-split (charge) which will ofc not ever work fine but will reduce the widow mine's efficiency due to the already weak damage distribution in the projectile's hit radius.
Then again, you're right, you can pre-spread your mines, but the protoss might just snipe them with long range colossus (assumend you have enough mines to spread, protoss will at least have colossus or templar tech available). If no colossus available (which is kind of unrealistic since early mine harass is much stronger and will enforce more robo openings), protoss can still fall back on his bases and turtle on 2-3 bases (or, just use one of the strengths of the race and go all-in). Yes, it takes two storms to kill a mine, but at the same time, storms are great for zoning out the bio army, which would make stalkers able to snipe the remaining hitpoints. But I think our argumentation goes too hard into detailed theorycrafting, we will have to see how the meta game develops. Then again, DK won't give the meta game time to develop, since this game appears to still be in a beta test. I think DK's goal should just be to keep the game interesteing (as I said repeatedly, address the swarm host/mech turtle/stupid long games without any excitement issue) and use LotV to change this in a greater scope. But ofc he won't do this
No you are missing the window in which mines are used.
You can get a reactor on your factory after you have 3 rax + 1 SP up. If Toss opened storm, observers or at least anti-mine is hard to come by: Mines zone Protoss out.
Offcourse you'll transition out of them when they don't work anymore.
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
This should be added in the OP..
Anyways from the GIF's..
>The MSC vision nerf is pretty good. >Whoa I think the blink decrease is too much. That cannot go through or at least just maybe 12 sec cd. Not 15 i think that would be too much >Thinking that widow mines normally don't set off against protoss deathball due to colossus and stalkers so the change will not be devastating. And it will only add to the effectiveness of WM vs toss means this could finally mean a area control unit that is not ghost that can be used vs toss. And widow mines will no longer be a harrassment unit anymore. This won't change much WM rarely hits protoss deathball anyways. >Hydra attack speed increase doesn't change much. Still it could be more powerful. > Well the tempest change hinders turtling a little. That is for sure but why don't just blizzard redesign SH instead of buffing tempest. It would be much better.
I think WM might be way better then Hellbats in against chargelot archon strats, a couple of shots could absolutely devastate a group of chargelots. However late game you probably still will want to phase them out and get a mass of ghosts and vikings to support the bio army.
Also WM might be a lot better at shutting down zealot harass now in conjuncture with sim cities and static defense.
Uhm uh~uh .. Hellbat is way better since they don't have a a huge chance to blow your own marines and Hellbats are a guarantee to deal damage. Widow Mines will normally get outranged. but yeah this will work vs chargelot heavy comps.
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
This should be added in the OP..
Anyways from the GIF's..
>The MSC vision nerf is pretty good. >Whoa I think the blink decrease is too much. That cannot go through or at least just maybe 12 sec cd. Not 15 i think that would be too much >Thinking that widow mines normally don't set off against protoss deathball due to colossus and stalkers so the change will not be devastating. And it will only add to the effectiveness of WM vs toss means this could finally mean a area control unit that is not ghost that can be used vs toss. And widow mines will no longer be a harrassment unit anymore. This won't change much WM rarely hits protoss deathball anyways. >Hydra attack speed increase doesn't change much. Still it could be more powerful. > Well the tempest change hinders turtling a little. That is for sure but why don't just blizzard redesign SH instead of buffing tempest. It would be much better.
I think WM might be way better then Hellbats in against chargelot archon strats, a couple of shots could absolutely devastate a group of chargelots. However late game you probably still will want to phase them out and get a mass of ghosts and vikings to support the bio army.
Also WM might be a lot better at shutting down zealot harass now in conjuncture with sim cities and static defense.
Uhm uh~uh .. Hellbat is way better since they don't have a a huge chance to blow your own marines and Hellbats are a guarantee to deal damage. Widow Mines will normally get outranged. but yeah this will work vs chargelot heavy comps.
We're talking low hellbat count and bio armies which get micro-d here, in which hellbats are more of a liability.
On February 11 2014 18:55 maXX_CZ wrote: WM: Dunno, i dont see this somewhat effective in later stages (obs). So it basically buffs only marine medivac mine drop early?
Nope, it would also (re)make 4M viable or somewhat viable against Templar openings.
No terran ever will rely on widow mines vs a protoss. As a harassment option, yep, but not as a component in your main army. Storm outranges WM, Colossi outrange WM, the additional gas will be taken out of medivac/viking/marauder production etc.
Why? Splash damage + zone control is what bio desperately needs against mass Zealots. Storm outranging Mines doesn't matter since you can spread them the way you would do vs Zerg; plus it takes 2 Storms to kill a Mine. Colossi or Stalkers outranging Mines doesn't matter since you only play them against Templar openings.
Protoss has a auto-split (charge) which will ofc not ever work fine but will reduce the widow mine's efficiency due to the already weak damage distribution in the projectile's hit radius.
Then again, you're right, you can pre-spread your mines, but the protoss might just snipe them with long range colossus (assumend you have enough mines to spread, protoss will at least have colossus or templar tech available). If no colossus available (which is kind of unrealistic since early mine harass is much stronger and will enforce more robo openings), protoss can still fall back on his bases and turtle on 2-3 bases (or, just use one of the strengths of the race and go all-in). Yes, it takes two storms to kill a mine, but at the same time, storms are great for zoning out the bio army, which would make stalkers able to snipe the remaining hitpoints. But I think our argumentation goes too hard into detailed theorycrafting, we will have to see how the meta game develops. Then again, DK won't give the meta game time to develop, since this game appears to still be in a beta test. I think DK's goal should just be to keep the game interesteing (as I said repeatedly, address the swarm host/mech turtle/stupid long games without any excitement issue) and use LotV to change this in a greater scope. But ofc he won't do this
Personally I am not theorycrafting, I used to play 4M vs Templar before the Mine nerf and it worked decently. There are no Colossi on the field for several minuts when Protoss opens Templar, and robo for detection doesn't mean Protoss is forced to go Colossi afterwards (not to mention Oracles or Cannons protect against Mine drops too).
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
This should be added in the OP..
Anyways from the GIF's..
>The MSC vision nerf is pretty good. >Whoa I think the blink decrease is too much. That cannot go through or at least just maybe 12 sec cd. Not 15 i think that would be too much >Thinking that widow mines normally don't set off against protoss deathball due to colossus and stalkers so the change will not be devastating. And it will only add to the effectiveness of WM vs toss means this could finally mean a area control unit that is not ghost that can be used vs toss. And widow mines will no longer be a harrassment unit anymore. This won't change much WM rarely hits protoss deathball anyways. >Hydra attack speed increase doesn't change much. Still it could be more powerful. > Well the tempest change hinders turtling a little. That is for sure but why don't just blizzard redesign SH instead of buffing tempest. It would be much better.
I think WM might be way better then Hellbats in against chargelot archon strats, a couple of shots could absolutely devastate a group of chargelots. However late game you probably still will want to phase them out and get a mass of ghosts and vikings to support the bio army.
Also WM might be a lot better at shutting down zealot harass now in conjuncture with sim cities and static defense.
Uhm uh~uh .. Hellbat is way better since they don't have a a huge chance to blow your own marines and Hellbats are a guarantee to deal damage. Widow Mines will normally get outranged. but yeah this will work vs chargelot heavy comps.
Well, if you say, bait out a charge from all the zealots on top of a WM, the splash to your own units will be minimal while their army takes massive damage. And yes, regularly WM gets outranged hard by protoss, so what I said only affects that small window of time until protoss can transition into robo, obs, colossus and some stalkers. As in, this could maybe be a timing to kill the toss before the transition can happen, or just gain a small lead.
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
This should be added in the OP..
Anyways from the GIF's..
>The MSC vision nerf is pretty good. >Whoa I think the blink decrease is too much. That cannot go through or at least just maybe 12 sec cd. Not 15 i think that would be too much >Thinking that widow mines normally don't set off against protoss deathball due to colossus and stalkers so the change will not be devastating. And it will only add to the effectiveness of WM vs toss means this could finally mean a area control unit that is not ghost that can be used vs toss. And widow mines will no longer be a harrassment unit anymore. This won't change much WM rarely hits protoss deathball anyways. >Hydra attack speed increase doesn't change much. Still it could be more powerful. > Well the tempest change hinders turtling a little. That is for sure but why don't just blizzard redesign SH instead of buffing tempest. It would be much better.
I think WM might be way better then Hellbats in against chargelot archon strats, a couple of shots could absolutely devastate a group of chargelots. However late game you probably still will want to phase them out and get a mass of ghosts and vikings to support the bio army.
Also WM might be a lot better at shutting down zealot harass now in conjuncture with sim cities and static defense.
Uhm uh~uh .. Hellbat is way better since they don't have a a huge chance to blow your own marines and Hellbats are a guarantee to deal damage. Widow Mines will normally get outranged. but yeah this will work vs chargelot heavy comps.
We're talking low hellbat count and bio armies which get micro-d here, in which hellbats are more of a liability.
Oh ok i agree. Widow mines will help zone out. Maybe this will be a clever buff since this will force toss not to be so greedy with one tech and open robo all the time if not reuse oracle. So that toss doesn't take devastating hits from clumped mines.
I think this will be good. Since you know all terrans complain about is that they can't punish toss if they go greedy while if they do they get punished so easily. This will force protoss to not always have the economic advantage since they will need detection.
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
This should be added in the OP..
Anyways from the GIF's..
>The MSC vision nerf is pretty good. >Whoa I think the blink decrease is too much. That cannot go through or at least just maybe 12 sec cd. Not 15 i think that would be too much >Thinking that widow mines normally don't set off against protoss deathball due to colossus and stalkers so the change will not be devastating. And it will only add to the effectiveness of WM vs toss means this could finally mean a area control unit that is not ghost that can be used vs toss. And widow mines will no longer be a harrassment unit anymore. This won't change much WM rarely hits protoss deathball anyways. >Hydra attack speed increase doesn't change much. Still it could be more powerful. > Well the tempest change hinders turtling a little. That is for sure but why don't just blizzard redesign SH instead of buffing tempest. It would be much better.
I think WM might be way better then Hellbats in against chargelot archon strats, a couple of shots could absolutely devastate a group of chargelots. However late game you probably still will want to phase them out and get a mass of ghosts and vikings to support the bio army.
Also WM might be a lot better at shutting down zealot harass now in conjuncture with sim cities and static defense.
Uhm uh~uh .. Hellbat is way better since they don't have a a huge chance to blow your own marines and Hellbats are a guarantee to deal damage. Widow Mines will normally get outranged. but yeah this will work vs chargelot heavy comps.
Hellbats are really bad against Zealots/Archons/Storm. Even the current Mine outperforms them.
People who are complaining about the potential impact of the blink change tend to be the ones who dislike blink allins
With a big amount of stalkers, 10+ it's not actually going to make a big difference anyway because you blink ones at the front to the back and cooldown will reset. Especially the case of blink allins vs Zerg
What it does do is mess with Twilight PvP, things like the 4 stalker harass to snipe probes and general play when you split your stalkers from your main army. In short the stuff skilled players can do to separate themselves from the 60 APM, A-move heroes. Protoss needs more finesse/skill rewarding units, not nerfs to the one we have.
Even looking at the gif that MSC vision change is massive, you have a lot less intell as to what you'll be blinking up into
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
This should be added in the OP..
Anyways from the GIF's..
>The MSC vision nerf is pretty good. >Whoa I think the blink decrease is too much. That cannot go through or at least just maybe 12 sec cd. Not 15 i think that would be too much >Thinking that widow mines normally don't set off against protoss deathball due to colossus and stalkers so the change will not be devastating. And it will only add to the effectiveness of WM vs toss means this could finally mean a area control unit that is not ghost that can be used vs toss. And widow mines will no longer be a harrassment unit anymore. This won't change much WM rarely hits protoss deathball anyways. >Hydra attack speed increase doesn't change much. Still it could be more powerful. > Well the tempest change hinders turtling a little. That is for sure but why don't just blizzard redesign SH instead of buffing tempest. It would be much better.
I think WM might be way better then Hellbats in against chargelot archon strats, a couple of shots could absolutely devastate a group of chargelots. However late game you probably still will want to phase them out and get a mass of ghosts and vikings to support the bio army.
Also WM might be a lot better at shutting down zealot harass now in conjuncture with sim cities and static defense.
Uhm uh~uh .. Hellbat is way better since they don't have a a huge chance to blow your own marines and Hellbats are a guarantee to deal damage. Widow Mines will normally get outranged. but yeah this will work vs chargelot heavy comps.
Well, if you say, bait out a charge from all the zealots on top of a WM, the splash to your own units will be minimal while their army takes massive damage. And yes, regularly WM gets outranged hard by protoss, so what I said only affects that small window of time until protoss can transition into robo, obs, colossus and some stalkers. As in, this could maybe be a timing to kill the toss before the transition can happen, or just gain a small lead.
Good point. This will still help terran more vs toss. At least building a couple mines won't be stupid anymore.
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
This should be added in the OP..
Anyways from the GIF's..
>The MSC vision nerf is pretty good. >Whoa I think the blink decrease is too much. That cannot go through or at least just maybe 12 sec cd. Not 15 i think that would be too much >Thinking that widow mines normally don't set off against protoss deathball due to colossus and stalkers so the change will not be devastating. And it will only add to the effectiveness of WM vs toss means this could finally mean a area control unit that is not ghost that can be used vs toss. And widow mines will no longer be a harrassment unit anymore. This won't change much WM rarely hits protoss deathball anyways. >Hydra attack speed increase doesn't change much. Still it could be more powerful. > Well the tempest change hinders turtling a little. That is for sure but why don't just blizzard redesign SH instead of buffing tempest. It would be much better.
I think WM might be way better then Hellbats in against chargelot archon strats, a couple of shots could absolutely devastate a group of chargelots. However late game you probably still will want to phase them out and get a mass of ghosts and vikings to support the bio army.
Also WM might be a lot better at shutting down zealot harass now in conjuncture with sim cities and static defense.
Uhm uh~uh .. Hellbat is way better since they don't have a a huge chance to blow your own marines and Hellbats are a guarantee to deal damage. Widow Mines will normally get outranged. but yeah this will work vs chargelot heavy comps.
We're talking low hellbat count and bio armies which get micro-d here, in which hellbats are more of a liability.
Oh ok i agree. Widow mines will help zone out. Maybe this will be a clever buff since this will force toss not to be so greedy with one tech and open robo all the time if not reuse oracle. So that toss doesn't take devastating hits from clumped mines.
I think this will be good. Since you know all terrans complain about is that they can't punish toss if they go greedy while if they do they get punished so easily. This will force protoss to not always have the economic advantage since they will need detection.
Just my assumption though.
No - this allows Terran to far more easilly deny the third base AND/OR forces Immortal/Stalker production out of the Protoss player. And it helps vs unmicr'd zealot 1a's.
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
This should be added in the OP..
Anyways from the GIF's..
>The MSC vision nerf is pretty good. >Whoa I think the blink decrease is too much. That cannot go through or at least just maybe 12 sec cd. Not 15 i think that would be too much >Thinking that widow mines normally don't set off against protoss deathball due to colossus and stalkers so the change will not be devastating. And it will only add to the effectiveness of WM vs toss means this could finally mean a area control unit that is not ghost that can be used vs toss. And widow mines will no longer be a harrassment unit anymore. This won't change much WM rarely hits protoss deathball anyways. >Hydra attack speed increase doesn't change much. Still it could be more powerful. > Well the tempest change hinders turtling a little. That is for sure but why don't just blizzard redesign SH instead of buffing tempest. It would be much better.
I think WM might be way better then Hellbats in against chargelot archon strats, a couple of shots could absolutely devastate a group of chargelots. However late game you probably still will want to phase them out and get a mass of ghosts and vikings to support the bio army.
Also WM might be a lot better at shutting down zealot harass now in conjuncture with sim cities and static defense.
Uhm uh~uh .. Hellbat is way better since they don't have a a huge chance to blow your own marines and Hellbats are a guarantee to deal damage. Widow Mines will normally get outranged. but yeah this will work vs chargelot heavy comps.
We're talking low hellbat count and bio armies which get micro-d here, in which hellbats are more of a liability.
Oh ok i agree. Widow mines will help zone out. Maybe this will be a clever buff since this will force toss not to be so greedy with one tech and open robo all the time if not reuse oracle. So that toss doesn't take devastating hits from clumped mines.
I think this will be good. Since you know all terrans complain about is that they can't punish toss if they go greedy while if they do they get punished so easily. This will force protoss to not always have the economic advantage since they will need detection.
Just my assumption though.
No - this allows Terran to far more easilly deny the third base AND/OR forces Immortal/Stalker production out of the Protoss player. And it helps vs unmicr'd zealot 1a's.
Well what you are pointing out is what i was pointing out in the first paragraph i wrote.
On February 11 2014 20:17 shin_toss wrote: Lol if this is the only reason to shut the Z and T QQ'ers (that actually needs to l2p). I'm all for it
Don't check the stats bro :O!
because only the games of pro gamers matters? sure.
What exactly are you arguing?
You say David patches this just because Terran and Zerg players are qqing. I say you should take a look at the stats and see some change is warranted.
Are you gonna tell me progamer statistics are not indicative of balance problems?
im saying the number of progamers and games are very small compared to the rest of the sc2 population.
Should we balance by bronze level standards then?
Progames are the closest to perfection we can get, if you are going to argue that progames are not a good source for balance information I advise you to go to reddit or battlenet forums.
On February 11 2014 19:24 Destructicon wrote: Ok, stealing this from reddit. This is how the proposed nerfs would look in game. http://imgur.com/a/Wn9rN
This should be added in the OP..
Anyways from the GIF's..
>The MSC vision nerf is pretty good. >Whoa I think the blink decrease is too much. That cannot go through or at least just maybe 12 sec cd. Not 15 i think that would be too much >Thinking that widow mines normally don't set off against protoss deathball due to colossus and stalkers so the change will not be devastating. And it will only add to the effectiveness of WM vs toss means this could finally mean a area control unit that is not ghost that can be used vs toss. And widow mines will no longer be a harrassment unit anymore. This won't change much WM rarely hits protoss deathball anyways. >Hydra attack speed increase doesn't change much. Still it could be more powerful. > Well the tempest change hinders turtling a little. That is for sure but why don't just blizzard redesign SH instead of buffing tempest. It would be much better.
I think WM might be way better then Hellbats in against chargelot archon strats, a couple of shots could absolutely devastate a group of chargelots. However late game you probably still will want to phase them out and get a mass of ghosts and vikings to support the bio army.
Also WM might be a lot better at shutting down zealot harass now in conjuncture with sim cities and static defense.
Uhm uh~uh .. Hellbat is way better since they don't have a a huge chance to blow your own marines and Hellbats are a guarantee to deal damage. Widow Mines will normally get outranged. but yeah this will work vs chargelot heavy comps.
We're talking low hellbat count and bio armies which get micro-d here, in which hellbats are more of a liability.
Oh ok i agree. Widow mines will help zone out. Maybe this will be a clever buff since this will force toss not to be so greedy with one tech and open robo all the time if not reuse oracle. So that toss doesn't take devastating hits from clumped mines.
I think this will be good. Since you know all terrans complain about is that they can't punish toss if they go greedy while if they do they get punished so easily. This will force protoss to not always have the economic advantage since they will need detection.
Just my assumption though.
No - this allows Terran to far more easilly deny the third base AND/OR forces Immortal/Stalker production out of the Protoss player. And it helps vs unmicr'd zealot 1a's.
Well what you are pointing out is what i was pointing out in the first paragraph i wrote.
Sort of; it doesn't force extra tech per say, but it forces heavy commitments down the natural ramp. No more poking and forcefielding sections off if you risk losing all your zealots.
I think a better solution is for blink research to take an extra 30-60 seconds.
I don't really think this is an option as Blink together with Stim research are currently the longest researches in the game (except tier 2,3 unit upgrade.)
On February 11 2014 20:17 shin_toss wrote: Lol if this is the only reason to shut the Z and T QQ'ers (that actually needs to l2p). I'm all for it
Don't check the stats bro :O!
because only the games of pro gamers matters? sure.
What exactly are you arguing?
You say David patches this just because Terran and Zerg players are qqing. I say you should take a look at the stats and see some change is warranted.
Are you gonna tell me progamer statistics are not indicative of balance problems?
im saying the number of progamers and games are very small compared to the rest of the sc2 population.
Should we balance by bronze level standards then?
Progames are the closest to perfection we can get, if you are going to argue that progames are not a good source for balance information I advise you to go to reddit or battlenet forums.
sorry but not all players besides Progamers are bronze league. I get the MSC nerf but Seriously? Blink nerf and hydra buff (which is perfectly fine atm) at the same time? Even its just a test map its kinda ridiculous already. Stalker from a bad core unit to a potential trash unit .I won't even mention that blink plays require good timings and execution. Most z/t players complain about deathball, then collosus should be nerfed not stalkers -_-
Lol feels like sc2 isn't a strategy game anymore, people complain more abt stuff that are perfectly fine, instead of finding a way.
On February 11 2014 20:17 shin_toss wrote: Lol if this is the only reason to shut the Z and T QQ'ers (that actually needs to l2p). I'm all for it
Don't check the stats bro :O!
because only the games of pro gamers matters? sure.
What exactly are you arguing?
You say David patches this just because Terran and Zerg players are qqing. I say you should take a look at the stats and see some change is warranted.
Are you gonna tell me progamer statistics are not indicative of balance problems?
im saying the number of progamers and games are very small compared to the rest of the sc2 population.
Should we balance by bronze level standards then?
Progames are the closest to perfection we can get, if you are going to argue that progames are not a good source for balance information I advise you to go to reddit or battlenet forums.
sorry but not all players besides Progamers are bronze league. I get the MSC nerf but Seriously? Blink nerf and hydra buff (which is perfectly fine atm) at the same time? Even its just a test map its kinda ridiculous already. I won't even mention that blink plays require good timings and execution.
Lol feels like sc2 isn't a strategy game anymore, people complain more abt stuff that are perfectly fine, instead of finding a way.
The point is that if you balance around master league, diamond etc you are going to have a horribly imbalanced game for the best players in the world (progamers). You should work your way out of your low skill problems instead of asking specific balance for you. I do agree about the direct blink nerf: the msc nerf already covers the blink all-in vsT and the direct nerf just completely kills it vs Z (and it is already not that used).
Yeah blink is obviously perflectly fine in TvP. Almost every game sees a blink opening being on 1 base 2 bases or a fast 3rd, because it's safe and you can either all in or put lots of pressure or just fast tech without terran having a way to tell reliably. So nerfing the all-in part a bit would be cool, maybe they pushed it too far though. Blink is an incredibly good spell if used right, even in ZvP. And even if the CD is higher, you'll still be able to save each of your stalkers at least one time via blink micro which is still huge. We'll see if it goes through, but I don't feel like it's that awful of a change (nothing like the 25 gas hydra anyway). The mine change seems huge to me though, it would be a giant nerf to early chargelot archons plays. I'm afraid that adding buffs like that and the ghost change back to back they'll end up breaking the matchup as they did by adding protoss harass buffs back to back too..
On February 11 2014 20:17 shin_toss wrote: Lol if this is the only reason to shut the Z and T QQ'ers (that actually needs to l2p). I'm all for it
Don't check the stats bro :O!
because only the games of pro gamers matters? sure.
What exactly are you arguing?
You say David patches this just because Terran and Zerg players are qqing. I say you should take a look at the stats and see some change is warranted.
Are you gonna tell me progamer statistics are not indicative of balance problems?
im saying the number of progamers and games are very small compared to the rest of the sc2 population.
Should we balance by bronze level standards then?
Progames are the closest to perfection we can get, if you are going to argue that progames are not a good source for balance information I advise you to go to reddit or battlenet forums.
sorry but not all players besides Progamers are bronze league. I get the MSC nerf but Seriously? Blink nerf and hydra buff (which is perfectly fine atm) at the same time? Even its just a test map its kinda ridiculous already. Stalker from a bad core unit to a potential trash unit .I won't even mention that blink plays require good timings and execution. Most z/t players complain about deathball, then collosus should be nerfed not stalkers -_-
Lol feels like sc2 isn't a strategy game anymore, people complain more abt stuff that are perfectly fine, instead of finding a way.
The only thing I can pick up out of this is you being butthurt about losing your ladderpoints.
Protoss shows dominance at every level.
At levels below pro level, there's tons of other variables like execution that affect winrates.
Hydra isn't fine because it's underused and the lack of Zerg AA forces Swarmhost play.
Blink is not fine given how easy Blink all ins are, is the vision change enough, maybe. Nothing changes about stalkers in big engagements.
Collosi can't be nerfed because Protoss is badly designed.
Do you even understand what you are typing. Jeesz.
I don't agree on making blink a 1 level cliff height spell. It will make chasing small mutalisk flocks at home impossible, allowing mutalisk flocks to grow even faster and do more damage.
I also don't like seeing the only microable protoss tool to get nerfed even though I hate blink all-ins. Wouldn't delaying the blink upgrade a minute help? I don't agree on buffing the tempest, but I do agree with all other buffs/nerfs.
Swarm Hosts should be nerfed, as well as the mutalisk regen rate. One way to make mutalisks die less fast with the regen rate reverted is to allow queens to area heal, but ofcourse not too much and only after lair tech + an upgrade. This way flocks have to search for queens to get healed allowing the terrans and protosses the catch a breath for a moment. It will also help skyzerg survive a bit longer. In return the Swarm Host must be weakened, either reducing the locust spawn duration or their speed or making them energy based. I just hate watching games where they mass up certain units.
Of course I can be wrong since I'm just a spectator.
I'm going to love seeing a much more snipable MSC is that change goes through. It might be enough to challenge blink allins at my MMR in ladder.
Unsure about the blink change. Widow mine change huh? Maybe a boon for people that open mine drops. Tempest change IF and only IF they're right about EU style ZvP (I haven't even seen). I'll have to practice against friends to see if that hydra change is enough to make roach/hydra ZvT become a major player again. Otherwise I usually just play careful with bio tank and win.
On February 11 2014 21:07 Djangoobie wrote: I don't agree on making blink a 1 level cliff height spell. It will make chasing small mutalisk flocks at home impossible, allowing mutalisk flocks to grow even faster and do more damage.
I also don't like seeing the only microable protoss tool to get nerfed even though I hate blink all-ins. Wouldn't delaying the blink upgrade a minute help? I don't agree on buffing the tempest, but I do agree with all other buffs/nerfs.
Swarm Hosts should be nerfed, as well as the mutalisk regen rate. One way to make mutalisks die less fast with the regen rate reverted is to allow queens to area heal, but ofcourse not too much and only after lair tech + an upgrade. This way flocks have to search for queens to get healed allowing the terrans and protosses the catch a breath for a moment. It will also help skyzerg survive a bit longer. In return the Swarm Host must be weakened, either reducing the locust spawn duration or their speed or making them energy based. I just hate watching games where they mass up certain units.
Of course I can be wrong since I'm just a spectator.
The problem with nerfing muta and host is making Zerg midgame completely uncompetitive verse Protoss. That's why they buff the hydra. If Zerg is given a reliable option to stave off the Protoss, they can change other units.
Lol you realize that Hydra also attacks on ground, and Karpfen fail to comprehend, I'm not even saying to balance it on once particular level, my point is the word balance should apply to "all' skill level. If blink plays are easy, how much more roach/hyrdra plays that most of the time only involved attack-ground command.
yeah sure Roach/Hydra is fine vs their protoss counter parts. Jeez )
On February 11 2014 21:19 shin_toss wrote: Lol you realize that Hydra also attacks on ground, and Karpfen fail to comprehend, I'm not even saying to balance it on once particular level, my point is the word balance should apply to "all' skill level. If blink plays are easy, how much more roach/hyrdra plays that most of the time only involved attack-ground command.
yeah sure Roach/Hydra is fine vs their protoss counter parts. Jeez )
Balance at pro level applies to all skill levels - because in the most perfect situation acchievable the game is balanced.
If a gold toss loses vs a gold terran there's a thousand and one reasons that do not involve balance.
On February 11 2014 21:19 Wombat_NI wrote: Incidentally has Collosus EVER been changed? I've played the entirety of SC2 except the beta and genuinely cant think of a time it has been.
nop
Except for a mechanical 'bug' that didn't allow you to target highground collosi like youtarget highground air units.
MsC: good change, I'd have gone for 10 or 11, but I don't care too much. Don't think it is too important if the exact value is 9 or 11, just get rid of the 14range scout-all, super highground vision option.
Blink: Imo a bit over the top. Probably a good change for TvP and PvP, not sure about ZvP. Don't mind if blinktimings get weaker, Protoss has too many timingoptions anyways, but it will make stalkers weaker in macro ZvPs which is unjustified.
Widow Mine: No clue. Could range from still useless to totally broken imo. Mass mines blow up a lot of stuff very quickly, though one cool thing is that it adds overkill to the unit. Question: Does the 40vs shields scale like the normal damage (40/20/10) or is it really 40+40/20+40/10+40 with this patch?
Tempest: Sounds fine, values have to be tested.
Hydralisk: Uninspired change. Don't think it does a lot apart from statistically making hydras a bit stronger in the situations in which they are already used.
Finally a patch with the balls. I don't even talk about blink change, but think about tempest. Omg someone have think about a long (very long) battle where tempest shoots at spores for hours and because they cost nearly to nothing and the mineral bank will be huge they will be replaced nearly instantly? Think about all these spores walking on the creep, replacing each other, health bars in green, than in yellow, and finally in red. I dunno if i can imagine something more exciting than this, but I can clearly see artosis going nuts when a tempest shuts down a spore.
On February 11 2014 21:38 Big J wrote: MsC: good change, I'd have gone for 10 or 11, but I don't care too much. Don't think it is too important if the exact value is 9 or 11, just get rid of the 14range scout-all, super highground vision option.
I like 9 because it introduces choice between no extra investment and a basic 9 range vision, and resources conceded in robo + Observers resulting in less stalks but more vision (11) and some extra tech ready for the transition.
Widow Mine: No clue. Could range from still useless to totally broken imo. Mass mines blow up a lot of stuff very quickly, though one cool thing is that it adds overkill to the unit. Question: Does the 40vs shields scale like the normal damage (40/20/10) or is it really 40+40/20+40/10+40 with this patch?
Probably 40+40 | 20+20 | 10+10 from the way they formulated it.
On February 11 2014 21:19 Wombat_NI wrote: Incidentally has Collosus EVER been changed? I've played the entirety of SC2 except the beta and genuinely cant think of a time it has been.
nop
Except for a mechanical 'bug' that didn't allow you to target highground collosi like youtarget highground air units.
They had an attack speed buff and one or two damage nerfs. Colossi used to one-shot probes, if you can imagine how overpowered that was.
On February 11 2014 21:19 Wombat_NI wrote: Incidentally has Collosus EVER been changed? I've played the entirety of SC2 except the beta and genuinely cant think of a time it has been.
nop
Except for a mechanical 'bug' that didn't allow you to target highground collosi like youtarget highground air units.
They had an attack speed buff and one or two damage nerfs. Colossi used to one-shot probes, if you can imagine how overpowered that was.
To be honest I think Colossus should one shot probes. I still laugh at the fact that a Tank in siege mode doesnt 1-hit workers.
(not talking about game balance, more about the colossus being a building tall unit which shoots lasers that dont even kill puny workers)
On February 11 2014 21:19 Wombat_NI wrote: Incidentally has Collosus EVER been changed? I've played the entirety of SC2 except the beta and genuinely cant think of a time it has been.
nop
Except for a mechanical 'bug' that didn't allow you to target highground collosi like youtarget highground air units.
They had an attack speed buff and one or two damage nerfs. Colossi used to one-shot probes, if you can imagine how overpowered that was.
To put this into more of a perspective. I believe they made the colossous have the same dps but lower burst. They said something along "lings die to fast" or something
Honestly I wish they would make the Bare minimum changes to the game from this point get it to where its livable for the game and then watch the game progress with Players skill and just leave it alone like iloveoov stated.... Just build maps around Balance like if they simply put out maps that didn't encourage blink so much they wouldn't be Nerfing the bejesus out of Protoss to make sure that blink isn't so strong in the tournaments right now... Like 1 or 2 maps that encourage blink play would be good... but they made every single one a brutal situation with blink stalkers...... just about every single map you can attack from Differnt angles with blink
Edit: the One thing I think that woudl be Bare Minimum change to make the game livable is the MSC Vision nerf and they should honestly leave blink alone as long as they apply the above paragraphs suggestion of 1 or 2 maps that encourage a strong style of play and then Counter that with map mechanics.....
FINALLY trialing MSC vision changes. Wow that took a long time. Considering its the one thing everyone has been pointing out as an option to work on you'd have thought it'd be looked at sooner.
Blink change is probably too much. Honestly if you're just going to go that route, get rid of Stalkers and implement Dragoons. And its an incredibly lazy way to "fix" something that could be sorted out by map design.
Got the uncomfortable feeling Widow Mines are going to turn out to be completely broken with this change.
Tempest seems like just sticking a plaster on a huge wound. Its the wrong way to go about fixing the issue there.
Much prefer this Hydralisk change to the cost one. Have to see how it plays out.
On a side note: Proxy Tempest? Hillarious. X-D I need to try that out.
On February 11 2014 13:43 pak150 wrote: Here's a link to a video where Khaldor and Mana discuss the patch changes. Obviously Mana has Protoss point of view, but it's still good content from Khaldor (as usual).
Yeah Mana is extremely biased. He thinks its ok for widowmine drops to kill 1 probe at a time? It's stupid. Very stupid.
I've never fully understood why Widow Mine drops should be even be a part of the game...
Terran players can never fully experience them either, since they don't kill a mass of SCV's in one shot, since they do 40 damage...
It was like BFH. It was never really an issue until Terrans started doing it to each other, then suddenly it became a big issue. Except it was always an issue. I don't know how many times I faced masses of Hellions in TvP trying to kill my workers, dropped or not. Then people do it in TvT, and suddenly it gets changed... it was imbalanced all a long.
Also known as three Terrans going a combined 19-2 against zergs
So yeah, we got MMA in his prime versus Ret and Slush. Boxer vs Idra and Sheth, and MVP in his prime versus Machine and suddenly we conclude that TvZ is imbalanced?
FYI, those 2 games you note, were DRG taking games these same Terrans. And at that time, Terran was imbalanced in general, but it wasn't BFH that were the main problem versus Zerg.
Anyway, even Blizzard noted the problem with BFH in TvT and that was their reasoning for changing them.
as a master terran I really hate blink "allin", but I do NOT want to see blink nerfed in this way. Blink itself is a very cool ability that promotes micro, something I want more of in this game if anything, so this change is not warranted.
I much rather see buffs to terran instead. The wm change along with the vision reduction of msc might well be enough, id start with that and then do other changes if necessary at a later date. I actualy doubt it will be enough but I rather see many small patches than one huge one.
re tempest: I hate it. Look blizzard, you dont fix a horribly boring unit (swarmhost) by adding more boredom to another boring unit (tempest). People want the swarmhost fixed! Remove enduring locust and add another upgrade, my suggestion would be a speed upgrade to the actual swarmhost (not the locust). Make the swarmhost itself be able to move faster and burrow/unborrow faster ie promote multitasking. Then if need be consider nerfing tempest&voidrays&raven slightly to balance lategame tvz mech and lategame pvz. This means change swarmhost first, change other stuff down the line later if and only if there is any inbalance occuring as a result.
These seem like ok changes except the blink cool down. Blink micro is among the more interesting and entertaining game play elements that also lets players display their skill. Such an extreme change breaks blink stalker interactions in every other situation. The main thing affecting the all in is how easily the Msc grants high ground vision. Using hallucinations or getting an observer/stargate unit delays it or means less stalkers, and those versions have existed for a long time, they win some lose some and have never been seen as an issue before.
The change seems like they are playing the game of increase it to 15, then if they increase it to 12 everyone thinks it is reasonable and is just relieved it wasnt 15 instead of being angry that it was increased at all.
Watch this game between MC and MMA. It features a blink stalker all in, intense back and forth micro battles, made all the more thrilling with it being 3-2 to MMA in the series. So many times the stalkers blink out just before being destroyed. an increase in the cool down would mean MMA would have won the first time the stalkers blinked up and died before being able to blink out. If you watch the earlier games in the series, maybe oracle followed by void ray all in will become more popular. Which leads to the other point of how many 'all-ins' protoss can do. That is not bad or 'imbalanced' it simply stresses the importance of scouting and timing and works as the counterpart to extremely greedy play. Between reapers, scans or simply walking an scv over are terrans really struggling to scout? if so why not improve their scouting options.
I realise that is only one game, though I would far prefer increasing the options for the players rather than reducing them.
Can anyone remember what stopped Terran 111 I know this is hots now, but was it just a 'metagame' shift I genuinely cant remember. If it was then it is all the more strange that blizzard is making these drastic changes instead of letting the players figure things out with the tools they already have. Although I have recently realised that a pdd will block the photon overcharge shots, tanks fire faster and already start with siege. Even If things dont work, have fun trying out different tactics with what already exists instead of being consumed by thinking about what could be changed.
MsC nerf and widow mine buff alone will probably fix TvP, and the slight hydra boost should be enough to help Z stave off P air a little better. Digging these changes. I also like the Tempest vs. buildings buff, should give it some more interesting usages.
On February 11 2014 23:44 Startyr wrote: Can anyone remember what stopped Terran 111 I know this is hots now, but was it just a 'metagame' shift I genuinely cant remember. If it was then it is all the more strange that blizzard is making these drastic changes instead of letting the players figure things out with the tools they already have. Although I have recently realised that a pdd will block the photon overcharge shots, tanks fire faster and already start with siege. Even If things dont work, have fun trying out different tactics with what already exists instead of being consumed by thinking about what could be changed.
Larger maps, and especially how Photon Overcharge shuts Tanks down hard. You're behind so far on economy with the 1/1/1 he can almost just make only probes and amove over you.
On February 11 2014 23:44 Startyr wrote: Can anyone remember what stopped Terran 111 I know this is hots now, but was it just a 'metagame' shift I genuinely cant remember. If it was then it is all the more strange that blizzard is making these drastic changes instead of letting the players figure things out with the tools they already have. Although I have recently realised that a pdd will block the photon overcharge shots, tanks fire faster and already start with siege. Even If things dont work, have fun trying out different tactics with what already exists instead of being consumed by thinking about what could be changed.
They buffed the immortal range +1 so that the immortal doesn't dance behind the stalkers without ability to fire on the tanks. Also, the small maps that were great for 1/1/1 like Xel Naga Caverns were removed.
+ of course protoss players learned to defend it better of course, but it was not just metagame shift without Blizzard intervention.
On February 11 2014 23:35 Plansix wrote: Wow, that widow mine houses immortals shields. I could see that putting some wind to mechs sails.
It would be awesome to have the mine as a legitimate part of a mech army, especially against Protoss. From my play though, i just find them so fucking random that i can never justify their supply. I'd rather have almost any other mech or starport unit instead. Their slow build time also makes them less then ideal in a mid game situation.
I really hope they'll find a place with mech and not just as bio support.
IIRC maps and Immortal range buff(?) destroyed 1-1-1?
Not really what put the last nail in the coffin was the PO from MSC LOL You can NOT do enough damage to your opponent even if they don't scout it with PO out there.... it just is to stronk as apollo would say LOL
It would be awesome to have the mine as a legitimate part of a mech army, especially against Protoss. From my play though, i just find them so fucking random that i can never justify their supply. I'd rather have almost any other mech or starport unit instead. Their slow build time also makes them less then ideal in a mid game situation.
I really hope they'll find a place with mech and not just as bio support.
Slow Build time? LOL Preception is a bit off ma friend.... WM can be produced X2 so its like cutting Production time in half they produce quite fast actually LOL
I will say that with this WM buff against Toss I can see it being an AWESOME part of defending BLink all ins on the highground and Using them against STorm based openers where your Robo might be a little later than normal lol
It would be awesome to have the mine as a legitimate part of a mech army, especially against Protoss. From my play though, i just find them so fucking random that i can never justify their supply. I'd rather have almost any other mech or starport unit instead. Their slow build time also makes them less then ideal in a mid game situation.
I really hope they'll find a place with mech and not just as bio support.
Slow Build time? LOL Preception is a bit off ma friend.... WM can be produced X2 so its like cutting Production time in half they produce quite fast actually LOL
Huh?
They don't need a tech lab but they build almost as slow as a Tank. In comparison to Hellions they build slow so it's difficult to justify building them during mid game. Except maybe one or two if you suspect Oracles.
On February 12 2014 00:03 Deonto wrote: Widow mine change has the potential to be quite amazing. Might finally allow the Terran to play a bit greedy against toss.
Blizzard doesn't want to buff hydralisks because of PvZ. Their focus is hydralisks in ZvZ and ZvT in case you've missed.
Apparently I did miss that. I thought that the whole idea of having 100/25 Hydras was to fix the problem of Zerg not having enough AA early to mid game ZvP. My fault then.
With the New change it would be worth to reactor out WMs which would mean its 20 Second a WM lol yes they take 40 seconds out of Tech Lab or just out of Factory but Reactored you can pump out wms pretty quickly.....
On February 11 2014 21:19 shin_toss wrote: Lol you realize that Hydra also attacks on ground, and Karpfen fail to comprehend, I'm not even saying to balance it on once particular level, my point is the word balance should apply to "all' skill level. If blink plays are easy, how much more roach/hyrdra plays that most of the time only involved attack-ground command.
yeah sure Roach/Hydra is fine vs their protoss counter parts. Jeez )
We should also ride rainbow unicorns and be immortal and eternally happy but it is impossible. It's normal and good that some units require more micro/game sense to make them effective. It's like this in pretty much every RTS...heck, even in mobas it's the exact same. Take dota for example: earth spirit (who got heavily nerfed the last patch), had about 40% win rate including all skill levels but it went as high as 65-70% in very high level brackets because he was pretty hard for low skilled people but it became very fucking good once the players had a bit of skill.
You can't Balance a Game off of Bottom Tier brackets.... as many times as ppl say that it makes me cringe and puts a pit in my stomach thinking is the general populace this dull?
You can't balance a game off of someone with 20 apm and just clicks on stuff and watches fights LOL Trust me I used to be one of those in BW when i was like 9 LOL You can only balance a game off of those that can use units to their maximum efficiency but the way Blizzard made SC2 is that alot of times you can't as a human perform what blizzard has set out for maximum efficiency for units.... IE the Automation 2000 marines vs Banes not a single marine dies and kills like 40 banes LOL or where a relatively small group of lings massacres like 40 tanks... as a human you can only do so much so fast even if you are korean..... So balancing really should only come into play when a certain strategy is used with complete ease and the counterpart that is reacting is facing an EXTREME unsurmountable task that can only be accomplished if the otherside makes a mistake.... LOL which TvP feels like that ALOT especially with blink stalker.... I don't know if you watch many T players stream but most of the time when terran defend blink all in at high GM level its because Protoss MADE HUGE HUGE HUGE mistakes....
On February 11 2014 23:50 Kipsate wrote: IIRC maps and Immortal range buff(?) destroyed 1-1-1?
1-1-1 remains viable till the end of WoL on smaller maps and maps that have hard to defend natural choke, Protoss learnt how to defend it by refining the 1-Gate expand build to gain bigger econ advantage combined with the Immortal range buff, even before that there were pros successfully defended it with said opening refining and sometimes counter tech like Stargate. The Immortal change is a good example of how a small change can truly impact a matchup in a positive way without completely destroying a build.
It is not until HotS with Photon Overcharge 1-1-1 was given a nail in the coffin.
On February 12 2014 00:34 Pirfiktshon wrote: You can't Balance a Game off of Bottom Tier brackets.... as many times as ppl say that it makes me cringe and puts a pit in my stomach thinking is the general populace this dull?
You can't balance a game off of someone with 20 apm and just clicks on stuff and watches fights LOL Trust me I used to be one of those in BW when i was like 9 LOL You can only balance a game off of those that can use units to their maximum efficiency but the way Blizzard made SC2 is that alot of times you can't as a human perform what blizzard has set out for maximum efficiency for units.... IE the Automation 2000 marines vs Banes not a single marine dies and kills like 40 banes LOL or where a relatively small group of lings massacres like 40 tanks... as a human you can only do so much so fast even if you are korean..... So balancing really should only come into play when a certain strategy is used with complete ease and the counterpart that is reacting is facing an EXTREME unsurmountable task that can only be accomplished if the otherside makes a mistake.... LOL which TvP feels like that ALOT especially with blink stalker.... I don't know if you watch many T players stream but most of the time when terran defend blink all in at high GM level its because Protoss MADE HUGE HUGE HUGE mistakes....
Dude I really can't take you seriously with all those "LOL"'s
On February 12 2014 00:37 nimdil wrote: How many years do they need to balance this game...
The game is balanced. There are minor things here and there but overall Blizzard has the balance thing figured out. Most of these changes are in response to the Korean meta (msc+blink allins, wm not being strong enough, zerg AA bad etc.)
On February 12 2014 00:37 nimdil wrote: How many years do they need to balance this game...
The game is balanced. There are minor things here and there but overall Blizzard has the balance thing figured out. Most of these changes are in response to the Korean meta (msc+blink allins, wm not being strong enough, zerg AA bad etc.)
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
When I say the game is balanced, I say that the overall race win-rate on the ladder, which is very very close, probably as close as you can even get to being balanced. I do agree that SH's need a fix, and toss definitely needs a nerf, but the game is pretty balanced outside of the pro scene.
Dude I really can't take you seriously with all those "LOL"'s The game is balanced. There are minor things here and there but overall Blizzard has the balance thing figured out. Most of these changes are in response to the Korean meta (msc+blink allins, wm not being strong enough, zerg AA bad etc.)
And I can't take you serious because there is no way you can believe this and not be mentally challenged.....
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
When I say the game is balanced, I say that the overall race win-rate on the ladder, which is very very close, probably as close as you can even get to being balanced. I do agree that SH's need a fix, and toss definitely needs a nerf, but the game is pretty balanced outside of the pro scene.
The ladder is built to have balanced winrates, so it means nothing.
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
When I say the game is balanced, I say that the overall race win-rate on the ladder, which is very very close, probably as close as you can even get to being balanced. I do agree that SH's need a fix, and toss definitely needs a nerf, but the game is pretty balanced outside of the pro scene.
If you are taking win rates on ladder as evidence for balance, you don't understand how the ladder system works. You could give marines 15 damage and the ladder would eventually have a 50/50 win rate.
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
When I say the game is balanced, I say that the overall race win-rate on the ladder, which is very very close, probably as close as you can even get to being balanced. I do agree that SH's need a fix, and toss definitely needs a nerf, but the game is pretty balanced outside of the pro scene.
rofl ofc the overall race winrate on the ladder is close to 50%, that´s what the ladder system doesn, unless you are at the very ends of the skill spectrum. But that way fewer terrans than protoss or zerg are reaching GM and Master in every region, is no indicator for you?
On February 12 2014 00:37 nimdil wrote: How many years do they need to balance this game...
It has nothing to do with balance. Even if it is perfectly balanced, we are going to be incredibly bored in 6 months, so that we need a new balance patch again . Every race has 2 OP units is alot more interesting to play and watch than every unit (and the game) is perfectly balanced.
On February 11 2014 06:08 Existor wrote: And here is a banner!
God that's freakin' cool! I wish I had this as 1920 x 1080
You ain't getting that in 1920x1080, because the aspect ratio does not fit More like 1920x600
I like most of the changes btw. Especially mama-core vision and WM shield dmg buff. I agree though that the Blink nerf might be too harsh, 50% cooldown nerf is too much imo, it is not the blink itself that makes the blink-all-ins so tough to hold, it's the mothershipcore, its maphack-vision + timewarp PLUS the fact that you don't require a tech building to get it (meaning like robo or stargate for instance, I know that the cybernetics core is required) and that it's not much of an investment, so basically it's a nobrainer for P to get it. (Maybe increasing the cost a bit - escpecially the gas cost - would make it more of a decision for P to get it? I mean, this should be a game of choices and each choice should have its pros and cons. And given the fact that the core is a damn strong defensive - and offensive - see below - unit, I don't see why it shouldn't be more expensive)
Now, I don't want to whine too much, but a few thoughts on the mothership core. Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I got it, this unit was introduced to the game so that P become safer against all-ins / so that expand builds (especially in PvZ and PvP) become more viable. I think that is correct? Now, I would be totally OK with that, an easy to get defensive unit which allows you to play macro-focused. Totally fine with me. The fact which is totally breaking my balls is that this unit is not only defensive, but it can be used in a crapton of various all-ins as well, making them VERY strong. Now, from my perspective, designing a unit like that is just plain wrong, especially due to the fact that it is so low in the tech tree and so easy to get. So, why not try to change sth so that the mama-core becomes a pure defensive unit? For example, change its movement speed? P still could use defensive timewarps and PO and still could use recall by splitting a part of its army and recalling it to the 3rd nexus in a split-push situation, for example. This would especially nerf the mama-core's offensive ability in TvP and weaken the 2base immortal based PvZ all-ins without affecting the mama-core's defensive abilities. I would love to hear your thoughts on that.
Another suggestion I read a few pages back was reducing stim research time by a few seconds. Thinking back, the research time was mainly increased in order to help P hold the medivac stim / stim only pushes. I think that's about right? Now, P have the mothership core / the maps are much bigger, so why not revert this change? In TvP, P is pretty much untouchable within the first 7-8-9 minutes thanks to the mothership core, so why not making T's life a bit easier and helping them hold the plethora of P all-ins by reducing the stim research time a bit? Or would this affect TvZ too much? I honestly don't think so. Again, thoughts would be appreciated.
The ladder is built to have balanced winrates, so it means nothing.
rofl ofc the overall race winrate on the ladder is close to 50%, that´s what the ladder system doesn, unless you are at the very ends of the skill spectrum. But that way fewer terrans than protoss or zerg are reaching GM and Master in every region, is no indicator for you?
This is exactly why you can't just look at oh its 50% winrate on ladder give or take a few points in protoss favor LOL Racial distribution is more of a factor than anything if you have the same amount of Terrans as you do protoss and zergs in total of players yet you have 50% protoss in GM 35 % zerg in gm and 15% Terran that has to ring some bells and shoot off some buzzers....
It has nothing to do with balance. Even if it is perfectly balanced, we are going to be incredibly bored in 6 months, so that we need a new balance patch again . Every race has 2 OP units is alot more interesting to play and watch than every unit (and the game) is perfectly balanced.
The problem with doing this is that the race that suffers feels cheated and stops playing / watching so you start to decline in viewership and popularity of the game as a whole.... SC2 has been plagued with this metric since 2010 when it came out LOL Blizzard does things in the name of "Being Interesting to watch" but when you skew a match up hardcore in favor of one race when it was already slightly favored to them then you start getting what we have now CONSTANT decline and no increase of players / viewers..... it truly breaks my heart even though BW had small broken things players / maps could over come them with new strategies and better control / macro / micro but the way blizzard made sc2 they are in control of the meta and when players figure something out the Nerf guns come out instead of making things reasonable in the first place then just leaving the core alone and just build other things around it IE MAPS that change things......
You ain't getting that in 1920x1080, because the aspect ratio does not fit More like 1920x600
I like most of the changes btw. Especially mama-core vision and WM shield dmg buff. I agree though that the Blink nerf might be too harsh, 50% cooldown nerf is too much imo, it is not the blink itself that makes the blink-all-ins so tough to hold, it's the mothershipcore, its maphack-vision + timewarp PLUS the fact that you don't require a tech building to get it (meaning like robo or stargate for instance, I know that the cybernetics core is required) and that it's not much of an investment, so basically it's a nobrainer for P to get it. (Maybe increasing the cost a bit - escpecially the gas cost - would make it more of a decision for P to get it? I mean, this should be a game of choices and each choice should have its pros and cons. And given the fact that the core is a damn strong defensive - and offensive - see below - unit, I don't see why it shouldn't be more expensive)
Now, I don't want to whine too much, but a few thoughts on the mothership core. Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I got it, this unit was introduced to the game so that P become safer against all-ins / so that expand builds (especially in PvZ and PvP) become more viable. I think that is correct? Now, I would be totally OK with that, an easy to get defensive unit which allows you to play macro-focused. Totally fine with me. The fact which is totally breaking my balls is that this unit is not only defensive, but it can be used in a crapton of various all-ins as well, making them VERY strong. Now, from my perspective, designing a unit like that is just plain wrong, especially due to the fact that it is so low in the tech tree and so easy to get. So, why not try to change sth so that the mama-core becomes a pure defensive unit? For example, change its movement speed? P still could use defensive timewarps and PO and still could use recall by splitting a part of its army and recalling it to the 3rd nexus in a split-push situation, for example. This would especially nerf the mama-core's offensive ability in TvP and weaken the 2base immortal based PvZ all-ins without affecting the mama-core's defensive abilities. I would love to hear your thoughts on that.
Another suggestion I read a few pages back was reducing stim research time by a few seconds. Thinking back, the research time was mainly increased in order to help P hold the medivac stim / stim only pushes. I think that's about right? Now, P have the mothership core / the maps are much bigger, so why not revert this change? In TvP, P is pretty much untouchable within the first 7-8-9 minutes thanks to the mothership core, so why not making T's life a bit easier and helping them hold the plethora of P all-ins by reducing the stim research time a bit? Or would this affect TvZ too much? I honestly don't think so. Again, thoughts would be appreciated.
Honestly this analysis is well thought out the major problem is that DK LOVES the offensive aspect of the MSC and I was the one who suggested Reverting the STim reserach timing back because of the many things that have evolved in the game so yea DEFLY agree with that.... LOL
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
When I say the game is balanced, I say that the overall race win-rate on the ladder, which is very very close, probably as close as you can even get to being balanced. I do agree that SH's need a fix, and toss definitely needs a nerf, but the game is pretty balanced outside of the pro scene.
The ladder is built to have balanced winrates, so it means nothing.
...Yes, but because it's built to have balanced winrates, any racial imbalances will be clearly displayed because one race being overpowered or underpowered with respect to (an)other race(s) will be reflected in the matchup winrates. If the matchup-wide winrates are all close to 50% (which they are), then the game is pretty damn balanced.
Well, Kim the D claims that he can compute winrates "regardless of skill and race strength amirite olol". That might be the balanced winrates zelderan is referring to. I call bullshit on those winrates though, I would like to know how David Kim computes these.
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
When I say the game is balanced, I say that the overall race win-rate on the ladder, which is very very close, probably as close as you can even get to being balanced. I do agree that SH's need a fix, and toss definitely needs a nerf, but the game is pretty balanced outside of the pro scene.
The ladder is built to have balanced winrates, so it means nothing.
...Yes, but because it's built to have balanced winrates, any racial imbalances will be clearly displayed because one race being overpowered or underpowered with respect to (an)other race(s) will be reflected in the matchup winrates. If the matchup-wide winrates are all close to 50% (which they are), then the game is pretty damn balanced.
No, that is incorrect. In case of racial imbalances, the system will adjust for imbalances by matching the overpowered race with a increasingly stronger opponents until 50/50 parity is achieved.
At some point in every ladder session, you do play people close to your skill level. The MMR system seeks to find you harder and harder opponents until you lose, but isn't going to match a masters player against a silver leaguer just to make that happen. The system has to have some idea of how skilled players are or it wouldn't work at all.
On February 12 2014 00:34 Pirfiktshon wrote: You can't Balance a Game off of Bottom Tier brackets.... as many times as ppl say that it makes me cringe and puts a pit in my stomach thinking is the general populace this dull?
You can't balance a game off of someone with 20 apm and just clicks on stuff and watches fights LOL Trust me I used to be one of those in BW when i was like 9 LOL You can only balance a game off of those that can use units to their maximum efficiency but the way Blizzard made SC2 is that alot of times you can't as a human perform what blizzard has set out for maximum efficiency for units.... IE the Automation 2000 marines vs Banes not a single marine dies and kills like 40 banes LOL or where a relatively small group of lings massacres like 40 tanks... as a human you can only do so much so fast even if you are korean..... So balancing really should only come into play when a certain strategy is used with complete ease and the counterpart that is reacting is facing an EXTREME unsurmountable task that can only be accomplished if the otherside makes a mistake.... LOL which TvP feels like that ALOT especially with blink stalker.... I don't know if you watch many T players stream but most of the time when terran defend blink all in at high GM level its because Protoss MADE HUGE HUGE HUGE mistakes....
May I suggest some paragraph breaks and fewer LOL statements...
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
When I say the game is balanced, I say that the overall race win-rate on the ladder, which is very very close, probably as close as you can even get to being balanced. I do agree that SH's need a fix, and toss definitely needs a nerf, but the game is pretty balanced outside of the pro scene.
The ladder is built to have balanced winrates, so it means nothing.
...Yes, but because it's built to have balanced winrates, any racial imbalances will be clearly displayed because one race being overpowered or underpowered with respect to (an)other race(s) will be reflected in the matchup winrates. If the matchup-wide winrates are all close to 50% (which they are), then the game is pretty damn balanced.
Nope, because players of the overpowered race are carried beyond their true skill level, and balance winrates by losing to superior players they shouldn't be matched against on an even basis.
On February 12 2014 00:37 nimdil wrote: How many years do they need to balance this game...
The game is balanced. There are minor things here and there but overall Blizzard has the balance thing figured out. Most of these changes are in response to the Korean meta (msc+blink allins, wm not being strong enough, zerg AA bad etc.)
Balanced on what? Or just to answer your argument: *scratching head* no it is not. Simply said: no. No it isnt. And I can tell you why: it CANT be 100% balanced. The 3 races are too different from each other. The warpgate-mechanic, the larva mechanic, the mules. There are so many things that are TOTALLY different, so you can never 100% balance it. Just like, there will never be a 100% bugfree game while the code is several 100k lines big. It is just not possible. And moreover: Blizzard balances on winrates (wich are quite off atm, like 24% vor T in TvP when we look at Code A/Code S -> you wouldn't say it is just a minor balance thing). So they say, if a race has 50% winrate, it is balanced. Well that is ONE WAY you can say a game is balanced. But lets look how these 50% are reached. When a race or the current meta for a race, is inferior, pro-players work around that. Find another strat lets say. Maybe cheese, maybe something more complicated. And if a counter is more complicated or takes more effort than the initial tactics by an opponent, but overall it leads to 50% winrate, is it balanced. Is it balanced if countering a strat always takes more effort? How do you measure this "effort". APM? Thinking involved (how do you measure that)? For instance: Protoss have their warpin mechanics, so they can "beam in" Tier 1 armies wherever they want, whereas T has to move across the whole map. This is why so many P players can (successfully) play cheeses and allins and always could. So especially when it is about movement and macro, in early stages P could be called an easier race. But maybe because of the thinking process "which one is the right mix/composition of units" involved, and the perfect timing you need to hit, protoss is maybe balanced - even if it will never display in a chart (like APM). Similar things also happen in TvZ or Mirrormatches btw (where in ladder, I always curse my opponent for going for the eays tactics :D ) Current Problem in PvT is, that Protoss is very save in early game, and Protoss lategame (with colossi, MSC, Storms etc) is very very hard to break/takes more effort for the T it feels. Only in Midgame it can be easily broken (thats why we see so many SCV Pulls in midgame). And if you play cautious as T, you may be behind very fast - cause Toss can play greedy and still is in no real danger (Overcharge etc). But you cannot play greedy as T as well, cause Toss has many ways of punishing that (Oracle = almost always several kills if controlled, Blink-Allin etc). This is not intented to be a whine btw, this just points out why Pro Teams in Proleague don't nominate many Terrans (besides the 3-4 we see (Maru,TY, Flash..) who are the only ones able to deal with P. And there is also a reason, why there are so many eliminated T in Code A -> S. I do NOT say this game is inbalanced, it is Blizzards call to make and that of the Pro-Gamers. And maybe it is just the latter ones, we need to learn from. Hope they can find ways to deal with this, non-pro's can do as well, or ladder will get more and more frustrating (getting killed by a player with a third of APM (yeah, i know, APM doesnt say anything, but to me it shows of the effort (at least partially) put into the game) because of one better engagement or whatever. Game should get more like BW again: getting a lead through many small advantages in play and finish opponent off, not losing all the lead through a single stupid fight (that is over far too fast often). Or these current 45 min games... oh my...
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
When I say the game is balanced, I say that the overall race win-rate on the ladder, which is very very close, probably as close as you can even get to being balanced. I do agree that SH's need a fix, and toss definitely needs a nerf, but the game is pretty balanced outside of the pro scene.
The ladder is built to have balanced winrates, so it means nothing.
...Yes, but because it's built to have balanced winrates, any racial imbalances will be clearly displayed because one race being overpowered or underpowered with respect to (an)other race(s) will be reflected in the matchup winrates. If the matchup-wide winrates are all close to 50% (which they are), then the game is pretty damn balanced.
Nope, because players of the overpowered race are carried beyond their true skill level, and balance winrates by losing to superior players they shouldn't be matched against on an even basis.
That is basically what the problem with winrates is: they just show a part of the equation. But what, if it takes a better player for one race to reach that 50% compared to the other race. That is the problem we are seeing more and more. One player outplaying the other, but still losing in the end. Or generally the feeling, that one player plays it superiour, does more for the game... and still it is closer in the end than it "should"(personal feelings, attention) be.
On February 12 2014 01:53 Plansix wrote: At some point in every ladder session, you do play people close to your skill level. The MMR system seeks to find you harder and harder opponents until you lose, but isn't going to match a masters player against a silver leaguer just to make that happen. The system has to have some idea of how skilled players are or it wouldn't work at all.
It doesn't. Cause the MMR is based on the assumption that the races are balanced on that level as well - which they aren't. So it can always happen, that a one trick pony player, who has no clue about the game and only has a third of your apm or whatever, kills you with his allin/cheese which he learned to hide well (and you are no pro, so you cannot scout everything (btw even pro's are unaware of many cheeses)). So when I lose, and do some replay analyzis, just like day9 tought me and many other players and casters and whatever I've learned over the past years, I see lots of players who do just the one thing right and me doing lots of things better, faster, etc but in the end I lose of maybe one misclick (which they count on, and which can happen, cause I'm rusty, cause frustration led to me not playing a lot anymore). So the MMR system does help, but it isn't the real thing either
On February 12 2014 01:53 Plansix wrote: At some point in every ladder session, you do play people close to your skill level. The MMR system seeks to find you harder and harder opponents until you lose, but isn't going to match a masters player against a silver leaguer just to make that happen. The system has to have some idea of how skilled players are or it wouldn't work at all.
Yes it will, if you keep winning the system will promote you until you end up in a league with players that you can be expected to beat roughly 50% of the time. It is true that you may initially play against players either below or above your level, but over time it will even out.
The only place on ladder where any observations about balance can be made is the absolute top of GM.
Well, Kim the D claims that he can compute winrates "regardless of skill and race strength amirite olol". That might be the balanced winrates zelderan is referring to. I call bullshit on those winrates though, I would like to know how David Kim computes these.
I was going to write this in my last post but I figured I wouldn't hahahaha Honestly there is no TRUE way to do that.... you could say well any match that is outside of a given league... so Silver vs Silver..... or possibly in the same percentage of a league like top 10% of Masters vs top 10% of masters..... Which doesn't work anyway because of what DWF pointed out ... if you are playing the race that puts you on a pedastool than it will raise you up past what your true skill level is.... which OUR definition of skill level is measured in Multitasking Micro macro decision making and game sense....
Edit: OH and Scouting ability.... which plays into EVERYTHING.....
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
When I say the game is balanced, I say that the overall race win-rate on the ladder, which is very very close, probably as close as you can even get to being balanced. I do agree that SH's need a fix, and toss definitely needs a nerf, but the game is pretty balanced outside of the pro scene.
The ladder is built to have balanced winrates, so it means nothing.
...Yes, but because it's built to have balanced winrates, any racial imbalances will be clearly displayed because one race being overpowered or underpowered with respect to (an)other race(s) will be reflected in the matchup winrates. If the matchup-wide winrates are all close to 50% (which they are), then the game is pretty damn balanced.
Nope, because players of the overpowered race are carried beyond their true skill level, and balance winrates by losing to superior players they shouldn't be matched against on an even basis.
...But this isn't the case, because your artificially inflated skill level will put you up against better players of BOTH other races, thus leading to a situation where winrates within matchups will be skewed to bring a racial population to 50%. The only way this isn't the case is if a race is completely equally overpowered in both matchups.
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
When I say the game is balanced, I say that the overall race win-rate on the ladder, which is very very close, probably as close as you can even get to being balanced. I do agree that SH's need a fix, and toss definitely needs a nerf, but the game is pretty balanced outside of the pro scene.
The ladder is built to have balanced winrates, so it means nothing.
...Yes, but because it's built to have balanced winrates, any racial imbalances will be clearly displayed because one race being overpowered or underpowered with respect to (an)other race(s) will be reflected in the matchup winrates. If the matchup-wide winrates are all close to 50% (which they are), then the game is pretty damn balanced.
Nope, because players of the overpowered race are carried beyond their true skill level, and balance winrates by losing to superior players they shouldn't be matched against on an even basis.
...But this isn't the case, because your artificially inflated skill level will put you up against better players of BOTH other races, thus leading to a situation where winrates within matchups will be skewed to bring a racial population to 50%. The only way this isn't the case is if a race is completely equally overpowered in both matchups.
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
When I say the game is balanced, I say that the overall race win-rate on the ladder, which is very very close, probably as close as you can even get to being balanced. I do agree that SH's need a fix, and toss definitely needs a nerf, but the game is pretty balanced outside of the pro scene.
The ladder is built to have balanced winrates, so it means nothing.
...Yes, but because it's built to have balanced winrates, any racial imbalances will be clearly displayed because one race being overpowered or underpowered with respect to (an)other race(s) will be reflected in the matchup winrates. If the matchup-wide winrates are all close to 50% (which they are), then the game is pretty damn balanced.
Nope, because players of the overpowered race are carried beyond their true skill level, and balance winrates by losing to superior players they shouldn't be matched against on an even basis.
...But this isn't the case, because your artificially inflated skill level will put you up against better players of BOTH other races, thus leading to a situation where winrates within matchups will be skewed to bring a racial population to 50%. The only way this isn't the case is if a race is completely equally overpowered in both matchups.
or underpowered. mind you
True. The main point is though that a race has to have equal power relations with both of the other races for imbalances to not be reflected in the winrates.
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
When I say the game is balanced, I say that the overall race win-rate on the ladder, which is very very close, probably as close as you can even get to being balanced. I do agree that SH's need a fix, and toss definitely needs a nerf, but the game is pretty balanced outside of the pro scene.
The ladder is built to have balanced winrates, so it means nothing.
...Yes, but because it's built to have balanced winrates, any racial imbalances will be clearly displayed because one race being overpowered or underpowered with respect to (an)other race(s) will be reflected in the matchup winrates. If the matchup-wide winrates are all close to 50% (which they are), then the game is pretty damn balanced.
Nope, because players of the overpowered race are carried beyond their true skill level, and balance winrates by losing to superior players they shouldn't be matched against on an even basis.
...But this isn't the case, because your artificially inflated skill level will put you up against better players of BOTH other races, thus leading to a situation where winrates within matchups will be skewed to bring a racial population to 50%. The only way this isn't the case is if a race is completely equally overpowered in both matchups.
If a race is OP and the other two are not, it will likely be OP against both of them. Even if you lose more vs one of the other two races, overall increased win rates will put you into brackets with players you would not otherwise be playing against.
Please stop saying the ladder having even winrates is indicative of good balance, it's nonsense.
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
When I say the game is balanced, I say that the overall race win-rate on the ladder, which is very very close, probably as close as you can even get to being balanced. I do agree that SH's need a fix, and toss definitely needs a nerf, but the game is pretty balanced outside of the pro scene.
The ladder is built to have balanced winrates, so it means nothing.
...Yes, but because it's built to have balanced winrates, any racial imbalances will be clearly displayed because one race being overpowered or underpowered with respect to (an)other race(s) will be reflected in the matchup winrates. If the matchup-wide winrates are all close to 50% (which they are), then the game is pretty damn balanced.
Nope, because players of the overpowered race are carried beyond their true skill level, and balance winrates by losing to superior players they shouldn't be matched against on an even basis.
...But this isn't the case, because your artificially inflated skill level will put you up against better players of BOTH other races, thus leading to a situation where winrates within matchups will be skewed to bring a racial population to 50%. The only way this isn't the case is if a race is completely equally overpowered in both matchups.
Yes, that's what we're saying here. If a race was so OP that it completely crushes the other 2 equally easily, there would be no way of knowing from the general winrates. One way to go is to look at GM race representation, I think.
If a race is OP and the other two are not, it will likely be OP against both of them. Even if you lose more vs one of the other two races, overall increased win rates will put into brackets with players you would not otherwise be playing against.
Please stop saying the ladder having even winrates is indicative of good balance, it's nonsense.
I know it's not really the flavour of the month, but with some things you have to go with your gut rather than use statistics which are proving increasingly difficult to use. For example, the weeklies have a lot of Korean big hitters stomping mediocre foreign players in the early rounds, which can disguise say, an issue with TvP winrates by creating a bunch of TvP victories when in reality it's that the Korean Terran is just far better than their P opponent.
Not to say disregard statistics entirely, but sometimes just watch the games and some issues are patently obvious from even relatively small sample sizes.
On February 12 2014 02:23 Wombat_NI wrote: I know it's not really the flavour of the month, but with some things you have to go with your gut rather than use statistics which are proving increasingly difficult to use. For example, the weeklies have a lot of Korean big hitters stomping mediocre foreign players in the early rounds, which can disguise say, an issue with TvP winrates by creating a bunch of TvP victories when in reality it's that the Korean Terran is just far better than their P opponent.
Not to say disregard statistics entirely, but sometimes just watch the games and some issues are patently obvious from even relatively small sample sizes.
Quibbling over which meaningless statistic is better than another is like chocolate. It will always be a flavor around here.
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
When I say the game is balanced, I say that the overall race win-rate on the ladder, which is very very close, probably as close as you can even get to being balanced. I do agree that SH's need a fix, and toss definitely needs a nerf, but the game is pretty balanced outside of the pro scene.
The ladder is built to have balanced winrates, so it means nothing.
...Yes, but because it's built to have balanced winrates, any racial imbalances will be clearly displayed because one race being overpowered or underpowered with respect to (an)other race(s) will be reflected in the matchup winrates. If the matchup-wide winrates are all close to 50% (which they are), then the game is pretty damn balanced.
Nope, because players of the overpowered race are carried beyond their true skill level, and balance winrates by losing to superior players they shouldn't be matched against on an even basis.
...But this isn't the case, because your artificially inflated skill level will put you up against better players of BOTH other races, thus leading to a situation where winrates within matchups will be skewed to bring a racial population to 50%. The only way this isn't the case is if a race is completely equally overpowered in both matchups.
or underpowered. mind you
True. The main point is though that a race has to have equal power relations with both of the other races for imbalances to not be reflected in the winrates.
you are 100% right. I just wanted to say, winrates alone would not uncover if a race was generally OP or UP from the very beginning. There have to other stats to prove, that one race cannot be played with less or more effort to win 50%, -> which leads us to the discussion again, that it was always possible that one race was OP overall and other races' players had to play harder to reach that 50% (or the other way round with UP)
Im sorry but how can you say the game is balanced when all we see is pvp finals with the ocasional zerg? No, the game is not balanced and thats why protoss is getting a well overdue nerf. Now all we need is a fix for swarmhosts vipers and ravens and the game will be good again.
When I say the game is balanced, I say that the overall race win-rate on the ladder, which is very very close, probably as close as you can even get to being balanced. I do agree that SH's need a fix, and toss definitely needs a nerf, but the game is pretty balanced outside of the pro scene.
The ladder is built to have balanced winrates, so it means nothing.
...Yes, but because it's built to have balanced winrates, any racial imbalances will be clearly displayed because one race being overpowered or underpowered with respect to (an)other race(s) will be reflected in the matchup winrates. If the matchup-wide winrates are all close to 50% (which they are), then the game is pretty damn balanced.
Nope, because players of the overpowered race are carried beyond their true skill level, and balance winrates by losing to superior players they shouldn't be matched against on an even basis.
...But this isn't the case, because your artificially inflated skill level will put you up against better players of BOTH other races, thus leading to a situation where winrates within matchups will be skewed to bring a racial population to 50%. The only way this isn't the case is if a race is completely equally overpowered in both matchups.
Yes, that's what we're saying here. If a race was so OP that it completely crushes the other 2 equally easily, there would be no way of knowing from the general winrates. One way to go is to look at GM race representation, I think.
True (and it is good that way). And that is why Blizzard fixes always one MU at a time.
It's almost like Blizzard needs to rely on both what is going on in the professional scene and watch the ladder for any potential trends. No one source of information is going to give them the complete picture , but they can't just ignore any source if information either.
On February 12 2014 02:30 Plansix wrote: It's almost like Blizzard needs to rely on both what is going on in the professional scene and watch the ladder for any potential trends. No one source of information is going to give them the complete picture , but they can't just ignore any source if information either.
yeah. It is also that EU GM games look a lot different than KR GM Games
On February 12 2014 02:30 Plansix wrote: It's almost like Blizzard needs to rely on both what is going on in the professional scene and watch the ladder for any potential trends. No one source of information is going to give them the complete picture , but they can't just ignore any source if information either.
yeah. It is also that EU GM games look a lot different than KR GM Games
GM has always been a questionable way to view balance because it's such a small sample set and players own multiple accounts. Watch region is going to have its own reasons for being for having the players it has in it. And those reasons may not reflect on balance at all.
On February 12 2014 02:30 Plansix wrote: It's almost like Blizzard needs to rely on both what is going on in the professional scene and watch the ladder for any potential trends. No one source of information is going to give them the complete picture , but they can't just ignore any source if information either.
yeah. It is also that EU GM games look a lot different than KR GM Games
GM has always been a questionable way to view balance because it's such a small sample set and players own multiple accounts.
And still we have Protoss > Zerg > Terran on all servers for months, and with fairly similar percentages.
On February 12 2014 02:30 Plansix wrote: It's almost like Blizzard needs to rely on both what is going on in the professional scene and watch the ladder for any potential trends. No one source of information is going to give them the complete picture , but they can't just ignore any source if information either.
yeah. It is also that EU GM games look a lot different than KR GM Games
GM has always been a questionable way to view balance because it's such a small sample set and players own multiple accounts.
And still we have Protoss > Zerg > Terran on all servers for months, and with fairly similar percentages.
If the same number of very skilled players are playing the game, it wouldn't really change that much from season to season. There is a good chance that it won't change that much, even if this patch goes through with every change.
The biggest issue I have with most of their balance changes is that they don't try to patch out specific scenarios.
For example, Blink is a big problem in PvT, so they think to nerf MSC, Blink and buff mines. Well, great, but now PvP suffers very badly because of the Blink nerf, and now Stargate vs Stargate will be way too common and coinflippy. PvP was already in a great spot, but it will be ruined as a side-effect.
Swarm Hosts are a problem overall, so they buff Tempests not noticing that Tempests vs Bunkers will be insane, way harder to hold than Blink ever was for Terran. It also does not address SH vs Mech and the overall problem that the unit requires very little skill to get utility and makes for very boring, defensive games.
I am not sure I understand their direction with these changes because they break just as muchas they fix. Just make blink a longer research time (by like 15 seconds), make time warp harder to access in the early game or overall, make Swarm Hosts require more attention (faster locust respawn time when unburrowed, best case their current respawn rate), give Hydras more HP with slightly longer build time.
On February 12 2014 03:09 SidewinderSC2 wrote: The biggest issue I have with most of their balance changes is that they don't try to patch out specific scenarios.
For example, Blink is a big problem in PvT, so they think to nerf MSC, Blink and buff mines. Well, great, but now PvP suffers very badly because of the Blink nerf, and now Stargate vs Stargate will be way too common and coinflippy. PvP was already in a great spot, but it will be ruined as a side-effect.
Swarm Hosts are a problem overall, so they buff Tempests not noticing that Tempests vs Bunkers will be insane, way harder to hold than Blink ever was for Terran. It also does not address SH vs Mech and the overall problem that the unit requires very little skill to get utility and makes for very boring, defensive games.
I am not sure I understand their direction with these changes because they break just as muchas they fix. Just make blink a longer research time (by like 15 seconds), make time warp harder to access in the early game or overall, make Swarm Hosts require more attention (faster locust respawn time when unburrowed, best case their current respawn rate), give Hydras more HP with slightly longer build time.
PvP will always be balanced. PvT is completely broken. That is why they are making these changes. Period. PvP of course will change, but it will be balanced no matter what blizzard does to toss. They need to fix the issues with the other matchups.
in regards to Tempests vs Bunkers:
lolwat? The tempest change will most significantly affect swarmhosts by (hopefully) eating away at their protective wall of static D. PvT it will have almost no affect. No toss in their right mind will go for a tempest rush to attack a bunkered terran; no terran in their right mind is going to lose to a rushed tempest. It is like rushing battlecruisers on one base: just bad most of the time. mid-game tempests aren't going to be any good vs bio, and late-mid to late game terran will have vikings anyway if not for tempests then for colosi.
On February 12 2014 03:09 SidewinderSC2 wrote: The biggest issue I have with most of their balance changes is that they don't try to patch out specific scenarios.
For example, Blink is a big problem in PvT, so they think to nerf MSC, Blink and buff mines. Well, great, but now PvP suffers very badly because of the Blink nerf, and now Stargate vs Stargate will be way too common and coinflippy. PvP was already in a great spot, but it will be ruined as a side-effect.
Swarm Hosts are a problem overall, so they buff Tempests not noticing that Tempests vs Bunkers will be insane, way harder to hold than Blink ever was for Terran. It also does not address SH vs Mech and the overall problem that the unit requires very little skill to get utility and makes for very boring, defensive games.
I am not sure I understand their direction with these changes because they break just as muchas they fix. Just make blink a longer research time (by like 15 seconds), make time warp harder to access in the early game or overall, make Swarm Hosts require more attention (faster locust respawn time when unburrowed, best case their current respawn rate), give Hydras more HP with slightly longer build time.
PvP will always be balanced. PvT is completely broken. That is why they are making these changes. Period. PvP of course will change, but it will be balanced no matter what blizzard does to toss. They need to fix the issues with the other matchups.
in regards to Tempests vs Bunkers:
lolwat? The tempest change will most significantly affect swarmhosts by (hopefully) eating away at their protective wall of static D. PvT it will have almost no affect. No toss in their right mind will go for a tempest rush to attack a bunkered terran; no terran in their right mind is going to lose to a rushed tempest. It is like rushing battlecruisers on one base: just bad most of the time. mid-game tempests aren't going to be any good vs bio, and late-mid to late game terran will have vikings anyway if not for tempests then for colosi.
Actually, proxy tempest builds are better than you would think. Sure they don't deal that much damage, but theres no way a marine could ever hit them. Which also means that this doesnt mean anything in PvT. Not because you can't do it, but because the marines can't fight back. Regardless of the Tempest's damage the bunker, or turrets, or whatever, should never be able to hit an offensive proxy tempest. You would need air units of some kind to combat this.
On February 12 2014 03:09 SidewinderSC2 wrote: The biggest issue I have with most of their balance changes is that they don't try to patch out specific scenarios.
For example, Blink is a big problem in PvT, so they think to nerf MSC, Blink and buff mines. Well, great, but now PvP suffers very badly because of the Blink nerf, and now Stargate vs Stargate will be way too common and coinflippy. PvP was already in a great spot, but it will be ruined as a side-effect.
Swarm Hosts are a problem overall, so they buff Tempests not noticing that Tempests vs Bunkers will be insane, way harder to hold than Blink ever was for Terran. It also does not address SH vs Mech and the overall problem that the unit requires very little skill to get utility and makes for very boring, defensive games.
I am not sure I understand their direction with these changes because they break just as muchas they fix. Just make blink a longer research time (by like 15 seconds), make time warp harder to access in the early game or overall, make Swarm Hosts require more attention (faster locust respawn time when unburrowed, best case their current respawn rate), give Hydras more HP with slightly longer build time.
PvP will always be balanced. PvT is completely broken. That is why they are making these changes. Period. PvP of course will change, but it will be balanced no matter what blizzard does to toss. They need to fix the issues with the other matchups.
in regards to Tempests vs Bunkers:
lolwat? The tempest change will most significantly affect swarmhosts by (hopefully) eating away at their protective wall of static D. PvT it will have almost no affect. No toss in their right mind will go for a tempest rush to attack a bunkered terran; no terran in their right mind is going to lose to a rushed tempest. It is like rushing battlecruisers on one base: just bad most of the time. mid-game tempests aren't going to be any good vs bio, and late-mid to late game terran will have vikings anyway if not for tempests then for colosi.
PvP will always be balanced? Is your logic that Protoss wins 50% of the time? the reason not everyone opens Stargate in PvP is because it is really hard to stay on top of a good Blink build with it. Tell me why people wouldn't open Stargate every game in PvP. Phoenix vs Phoenix is even dumber than Muta vs Muta, so, yes, it will be imbalanced because one option will clearly be better than everything else.
You also realize that with the buff, Tempests will kill an infinite amount of bunkers because they will never get hit by anything, and it will happen so quickly that any amount of Stalkers will walk over the unprotected Marine force at any time before stim. the only reason Terran doesn't die to a straightforward gateway rush is becuase they have bunkers, but if you can kill the bunkers in no time and cancel stim with the tempests without taking any damage, what now? Not to mention any reactor, tech lab or depot is dead in like 5 seconds.. the terran will lose all of their important buildings and never be able to hit the tempests.
On February 12 2014 03:09 SidewinderSC2 wrote: The biggest issue I have with most of their balance changes is that they don't try to patch out specific scenarios.
For example, Blink is a big problem in PvT, so they think to nerf MSC, Blink and buff mines. Well, great, but now PvP suffers very badly because of the Blink nerf, and now Stargate vs Stargate will be way too common and coinflippy. PvP was already in a great spot, but it will be ruined as a side-effect.
Swarm Hosts are a problem overall, so they buff Tempests not noticing that Tempests vs Bunkers will be insane, way harder to hold than Blink ever was for Terran. It also does not address SH vs Mech and the overall problem that the unit requires very little skill to get utility and makes for very boring, defensive games.
I am not sure I understand their direction with these changes because they break just as muchas they fix. Just make blink a longer research time (by like 15 seconds), make time warp harder to access in the early game or overall, make Swarm Hosts require more attention (faster locust respawn time when unburrowed, best case their current respawn rate), give Hydras more HP with slightly longer build time.
PvP will always be balanced. PvT is completely broken. That is why they are making these changes. Period. PvP of course will change, but it will be balanced no matter what blizzard does to toss. They need to fix the issues with the other matchups.
in regards to Tempests vs Bunkers:
lolwat? The tempest change will most significantly affect swarmhosts by (hopefully) eating away at their protective wall of static D. PvT it will have almost no affect. No toss in their right mind will go for a tempest rush to attack a bunkered terran; no terran in their right mind is going to lose to a rushed tempest. It is like rushing battlecruisers on one base: just bad most of the time. mid-game tempests aren't going to be any good vs bio, and late-mid to late game terran will have vikings anyway if not for tempests then for colosi.
Actually, proxy tempest builds are better than you would think. Sure they don't deal that much damage, but theres no way a marine could ever hit them. Which also means that this doesnt mean anything in PvT. Not because you can't do it, but because the marines can't fight back. Regardless of the Tempest's damage the bunker, or turrets, or whatever, should never be able to hit an offensive proxy tempest. You would need air units of some kind to combat this.
I seen players like DeMuslim and Thorzain losing to this kind of retarded cheese too. Buffing tempest would be the most retarded thing to do.
On February 12 2014 03:31 Loccstana wrote: I seen players like DeMuslim and Thorzain losing to this kind of retarded cheese too. Buffing tempest would be the most retarded thing to do.
The only reason a Pro loses to this strategy is, they aren't used to it and don't knwo what to do against it. I'm sure when the buff goes through it will take one or two week till the build is figured out and than you won't ever see it again on prolevel...
On February 12 2014 03:09 SidewinderSC2 wrote: The biggest issue I have with most of their balance changes is that they don't try to patch out specific scenarios.
For example, Blink is a big problem in PvT, so they think to nerf MSC, Blink and buff mines. Well, great, but now PvP suffers very badly because of the Blink nerf, and now Stargate vs Stargate will be way too common and coinflippy. PvP was already in a great spot, but it will be ruined as a side-effect.
Swarm Hosts are a problem overall, so they buff Tempests not noticing that Tempests vs Bunkers will be insane, way harder to hold than Blink ever was for Terran. It also does not address SH vs Mech and the overall problem that the unit requires very little skill to get utility and makes for very boring, defensive games.
I am not sure I understand their direction with these changes because they break just as muchas they fix. Just make blink a longer research time (by like 15 seconds), make time warp harder to access in the early game or overall, make Swarm Hosts require more attention (faster locust respawn time when unburrowed, best case their current respawn rate), give Hydras more HP with slightly longer build time.
PvP will always be balanced. PvT is completely broken. That is why they are making these changes. Period. PvP of course will change, but it will be balanced no matter what blizzard does to toss. They need to fix the issues with the other matchups.
in regards to Tempests vs Bunkers:
lolwat? The tempest change will most significantly affect swarmhosts by (hopefully) eating away at their protective wall of static D. PvT it will have almost no affect. No toss in their right mind will go for a tempest rush to attack a bunkered terran; no terran in their right mind is going to lose to a rushed tempest. It is like rushing battlecruisers on one base: just bad most of the time. mid-game tempests aren't going to be any good vs bio, and late-mid to late game terran will have vikings anyway if not for tempests then for colosi.
Actually, proxy tempest builds are better than you would think. Sure they don't deal that much damage, but theres no way a marine could ever hit them. Which also means that this doesnt mean anything in PvT. Not because you can't do it, but because the marines can't fight back. Regardless of the Tempest's damage the bunker, or turrets, or whatever, should never be able to hit an offensive proxy tempest. You would need air units of some kind to combat this.
I seen players like DeMuslim and Thorzain losing to this kind of retarded cheese too. Buffing tempest would be the most retarded thing to do.
This particular buff has barely any effect on this build anyways, no building should ever be able to hit a tempest. I guess it would be harder to stall with structures if they died quicker, but you have to get air units out or you will lose regardless of what damage Tempests deal to structures.
On February 12 2014 03:31 Loccstana wrote: I seen players like DeMuslim and Thorzain losing to this kind of retarded cheese too. Buffing tempest would be the most retarded thing to do.
The only reason a Pro loses to this strategy is, they aren't used to it and don't knwo what to do against it. I'm sure when the buff goes through it will take one or two week till the build is figured out and than you won't ever see it again on prolevel...
So how do you stop 2 tempests from killing every add-on and supply depot in a couple of shots? No stim, single-file marines, no bunkers... a simple gateway force walks in at any time Terran has no bunkers and no stim, or just no supply because of so many missing depots.
PvP will always be balanced? Is your logic that Protoss wins 50% of the time? the reason not everyone opens Stargate in PvP is because it is really hard to stay on top of a good Blink build with it. Tell me why people wouldn't open Stargate every game in PvP. Phoenix vs Phoenix is even dumber than Muta vs Muta, so, yes, it will be imbalanced because one option will clearly be better than everything else.
Woah-Kay (roflmao) that is not an imbalance. That is called a build-order-loss. Just so you know, protoss is not the only one that has these. They exist in every matchup, toss are not special snowflakes when it comes to these. I guess if you want to blame losing pvp on protoss being too op you can though :\
You also realize that with the buff, Tempests will kill an infinite amount of bunkers because they will never get hit by anything, and it will happen so quickly that any amount of Stalkers will walk over the unprotected Marine force at any time before stim. the only reason Terran doesn't die to a straightforward gateway rush is becuase they have bunkers, but if you can kill the bunkers in no time and cancel stim with the tempests without taking any damage, what now? Not to mention any reactor, tech lab or depot is dead in like 5 seconds.. the terran will lose all of their important buildings and never be able to hit the tempests.
My bad, didn't know you could rush tier 3, still 4 gate on time and not make it look fishy at all by say expanding. Yup.
On February 12 2014 03:31 Loccstana wrote: I seen players like DeMuslim and Thorzain losing to this kind of retarded cheese too. Buffing tempest would be the most retarded thing to do.
The only reason a Pro loses to this strategy is, they aren't used to it and don't knwo what to do against it. I'm sure when the buff goes through it will take one or two week till the build is figured out and than you won't ever see it again on prolevel...
So how do you stop 2 tempests from killing every add-on and supply depot in a couple of shots? No stim, single-file marines, no bunkers... a simple gateway force walks in at any time Terran has no bunkers and no stim, or just no supply because of so many missing depots.
Dont position your valuable addons at the border of your main! Mostly foreigners are prone to place their stim rax in the most retarded places. Always think about "what if..." and then at least place the stim rax safely near your CC or the map edge.
If that doenst help/work, then the allin or the map will get fixed.
On February 12 2014 03:31 Loccstana wrote: I seen players like DeMuslim and Thorzain losing to this kind of retarded cheese too. Buffing tempest would be the most retarded thing to do.
The only reason a Pro loses to this strategy is, they aren't used to it and don't knwo what to do against it. I'm sure when the buff goes through it will take one or two week till the build is figured out and than you won't ever see it again on prolevel...
So how do you stop 2 tempests from killing every add-on and supply depot in a couple of shots? No stim, single-file marines, no bunkers... a simple gateway force walks in at any time Terran has no bunkers and no stim, or just no supply because of so many missing depots.
The same way Protoss deal with proxy Thor, scout it and respond. Come on, that's two units that cost 600/400 and have excessive built times. Hell, the fleet beacon cost 300/200. If you don't have some sort of tech by that point, you're doing something wrong.
On February 12 2014 03:31 Loccstana wrote: I seen players like DeMuslim and Thorzain losing to this kind of retarded cheese too. Buffing tempest would be the most retarded thing to do.
The only reason a Pro loses to this strategy is, they aren't used to it and don't knwo what to do against it. I'm sure when the buff goes through it will take one or two week till the build is figured out and than you won't ever see it again on prolevel...
So how do you stop 2 tempests from killing every add-on and supply depot in a couple of shots? No stim, single-file marines, no bunkers... a simple gateway force walks in at any time Terran has no bunkers and no stim, or just no supply because of so many missing depots.
The same way Protoss deal with proxy Thor, scout it and respond. Come on, that's two units that cost 600/400 and have excessive built times. Hell, the fleet beacon cost 300/200. If you don't have some sort of tech by that point, you're doing something wrong.
Yeah, not sure how the Terran doesn't have stim done when TWO tempests are out. They are missing like 10 stalkers worth from their army, pretty sure 10 stalkers would take structures out much faster.
The blink stalkers timings now start with like 10-12 stalker at most, with 2 tempests, you are looking at 2-3 stalker a max. I think even without stim and bunkers, the bio would do fine. Hell, even 3CC build would have enough to hold.
On February 12 2014 03:09 SidewinderSC2 wrote: The biggest issue I have with most of their balance changes is that they don't try to patch out specific scenarios.
For example, Blink is a big problem in PvT, so they think to nerf MSC, Blink and buff mines. Well, great, but now PvP suffers very badly because of the Blink nerf, and now Stargate vs Stargate will be way too common and coinflippy. PvP was already in a great spot, but it will be ruined as a side-effect.
Swarm Hosts are a problem overall, so they buff Tempests not noticing that Tempests vs Bunkers will be insane, way harder to hold than Blink ever was for Terran. It also does not address SH vs Mech and the overall problem that the unit requires very little skill to get utility and makes for very boring, defensive games.
I am not sure I understand their direction with these changes because they break just as muchas they fix. Just make blink a longer research time (by like 15 seconds), make time warp harder to access in the early game or overall, make Swarm Hosts require more attention (faster locust respawn time when unburrowed, best case their current respawn rate), give Hydras more HP with slightly longer build time.
PvP will always be balanced. PvT is completely broken. That is why they are making these changes. Period. PvP of course will change, but it will be balanced no matter what blizzard does to toss. They need to fix the issues with the other matchups.
in regards to Tempests vs Bunkers:
lolwat? The tempest change will most significantly affect swarmhosts by (hopefully) eating away at their protective wall of static D. PvT it will have almost no affect. No toss in their right mind will go for a tempest rush to attack a bunkered terran; no terran in their right mind is going to lose to a rushed tempest. It is like rushing battlecruisers on one base: just bad most of the time. mid-game tempests aren't going to be any good vs bio, and late-mid to late game terran will have vikings anyway if not for tempests then for colosi.
Actually, proxy tempest builds are better than you would think. Sure they don't deal that much damage, but theres no way a marine could ever hit them. Which also means that this doesnt mean anything in PvT. Not because you can't do it, but because the marines can't fight back. Regardless of the Tempest's damage the bunker, or turrets, or whatever, should never be able to hit an offensive proxy tempest. You would need air units of some kind to combat this.
I seen players like DeMuslim and Thorzain losing to this kind of retarded cheese too. Buffing tempest would be the most retarded thing to do.
To be fair I've also seen Thorzain lose to Sjow playing Protoss
On February 12 2014 01:53 Plansix wrote: At some point in every ladder session, you do play people close to your skill level. The MMR system seeks to find you harder and harder opponents until you lose, but isn't going to match a masters player against a silver leaguer just to make that happen. The system has to have some idea of how skilled players are or it wouldn't work at all.
FYI ever since MMR has implemented, I kind of feel like the gap of skill level in opponents you face in ladder has greatly increased. Reason for this is, let's say I often stop playing for 3day~week and then theoretically since my MMR decays I should be matching against someone whos slightly worse than week ago right? In reality it's yes and no. I've been hitting GM more and more frequently than past seasons because some of those GMs have not played for may be ~2weeks or so that their MMR decays so much enough to match my decayed MMR.
I go to KR server, my rank there is like 75th master with 700bonus pool since I just played placement and left it for months. I randomly felt like playing on KR and boom 2nd opponent I play against is KR GM whos legitmately playing his race and not lossbotting.
On February 12 2014 03:09 SidewinderSC2 wrote: The biggest issue I have with most of their balance changes is that they don't try to patch out specific scenarios.
For example, Blink is a big problem in PvT, so they think to nerf MSC, Blink and buff mines. Well, great, but now PvP suffers very badly because of the Blink nerf, and now Stargate vs Stargate will be way too common and coinflippy. PvP was already in a great spot, but it will be ruined as a side-effect.
Swarm Hosts are a problem overall, so they buff Tempests not noticing that Tempests vs Bunkers will be insane, way harder to hold than Blink ever was for Terran. It also does not address SH vs Mech and the overall problem that the unit requires very little skill to get utility and makes for very boring, defensive games.
I am not sure I understand their direction with these changes because they break just as muchas they fix. Just make blink a longer research time (by like 15 seconds), make time warp harder to access in the early game or overall, make Swarm Hosts require more attention (faster locust respawn time when unburrowed, best case their current respawn rate), give Hydras more HP with slightly longer build time.
PvP will always be balanced. PvT is completely broken. That is why they are making these changes. Period. PvP of course will change, but it will be balanced no matter what blizzard does to toss. They need to fix the issues with the other matchups.
in regards to Tempests vs Bunkers:
lolwat? The tempest change will most significantly affect swarmhosts by (hopefully) eating away at their protective wall of static D. PvT it will have almost no affect. No toss in their right mind will go for a tempest rush to attack a bunkered terran; no terran in their right mind is going to lose to a rushed tempest. It is like rushing battlecruisers on one base: just bad most of the time. mid-game tempests aren't going to be any good vs bio, and late-mid to late game terran will have vikings anyway if not for tempests then for colosi.
Actually, proxy tempest builds are better than you would think. Sure they don't deal that much damage, but theres no way a marine could ever hit them. Which also means that this doesnt mean anything in PvT. Not because you can't do it, but because the marines can't fight back. Regardless of the Tempest's damage the bunker, or turrets, or whatever, should never be able to hit an offensive proxy tempest. You would need air units of some kind to combat this.
I seen players like DeMuslim and Thorzain losing to this kind of retarded cheese too. Buffing tempest would be the most retarded thing to do.
To be fair I've also seen Thorzain lose to Sjow playing Protoss
He also lost once to Vibe's bronze league brother doing an 8 pool.
On February 12 2014 03:09 SidewinderSC2 wrote: The biggest issue I have with most of their balance changes is that they don't try to patch out specific scenarios.
For example, Blink is a big problem in PvT, so they think to nerf MSC, Blink and buff mines. Well, great, but now PvP suffers very badly because of the Blink nerf, and now Stargate vs Stargate will be way too common and coinflippy. PvP was already in a great spot, but it will be ruined as a side-effect.
Swarm Hosts are a problem overall, so they buff Tempests not noticing that Tempests vs Bunkers will be insane, way harder to hold than Blink ever was for Terran. It also does not address SH vs Mech and the overall problem that the unit requires very little skill to get utility and makes for very boring, defensive games.
I am not sure I understand their direction with these changes because they break just as muchas they fix. Just make blink a longer research time (by like 15 seconds), make time warp harder to access in the early game or overall, make Swarm Hosts require more attention (faster locust respawn time when unburrowed, best case their current respawn rate), give Hydras more HP with slightly longer build time.
PvP will always be balanced. PvT is completely broken. That is why they are making these changes. Period. PvP of course will change, but it will be balanced no matter what blizzard does to toss. They need to fix the issues with the other matchups.
in regards to Tempests vs Bunkers:
lolwat? The tempest change will most significantly affect swarmhosts by (hopefully) eating away at their protective wall of static D. PvT it will have almost no affect. No toss in their right mind will go for a tempest rush to attack a bunkered terran; no terran in their right mind is going to lose to a rushed tempest. It is like rushing battlecruisers on one base: just bad most of the time. mid-game tempests aren't going to be any good vs bio, and late-mid to late game terran will have vikings anyway if not for tempests then for colosi.
Actually, proxy tempest builds are better than you would think. Sure they don't deal that much damage, but theres no way a marine could ever hit them. Which also means that this doesnt mean anything in PvT. Not because you can't do it, but because the marines can't fight back. Regardless of the Tempest's damage the bunker, or turrets, or whatever, should never be able to hit an offensive proxy tempest. You would need air units of some kind to combat this.
I seen players like DeMuslim and Thorzain losing to this kind of retarded cheese too. Buffing tempest would be the most retarded thing to do.
To be fair I've also seen Thorzain lose to Sjow playing Protoss
He also lost once to Vibe's bronze league brother doing an 8 pool.
I think we can safely say that every game demuslim streams might not be his highest level play.
On February 12 2014 04:27 Faust852 wrote: I would prefer some nerf in the SH tho.
Day 9 seems to be asking a lot of questions about how to fix the swarm host on twitter and on his stream. I wouldn't be shocked if Blizzard asked him for some ideas and he is crowding sourcing it.
On February 12 2014 04:27 Faust852 wrote: I would prefer some nerf in the SH tho.
Day 9 seems to be asking a lot of questions about how to fix the swarm host on twitter and on his stream. I wouldn't be shocked if Blizzard asked him for some ideas and he is crowding sourcing it.
remove locust, make it a ~9-11range GtA, GtG low-mid damage siege weapon. Keep the free unit feel by letting it shoot flying locusts that return to the swarm host, but are invincible. And if burrowed, those flying locusts circle the Swarm Host and protect it (by rapidly attacking enemys close to the SH).
Helps with air and if properly done helps with roaches, helps with mech, helps with VR if you throw in some extra to armored.
Give us Lurkers. We always have Vipers to deal with tanks if they become fashionable again. Lurkers would be nice to have vs T, P and Z while swarm hosts only useful vs P and mech T. Lurkers will be useful in all match ups.
I think I would prefer 10hp to Hydras vs the attack damage. Its usually storm that does you in. You can always get some banes if your roaches can survive long enough for the zealots to die.
On February 12 2014 04:27 Faust852 wrote: I would prefer some nerf in the SH tho.
Day 9 seems to be asking a lot of questions about how to fix the swarm host on twitter and on his stream. I wouldn't be shocked if Blizzard asked him for some ideas and he is crowding sourcing it.
What, Day9 is being critical of the game? Well at least that's one of the harbingers of the apocalypse down, going to start really shitting myself if a foreigner wins a major tournament anytime soon.
Actually to be fair, he's really just canvassing opinion from others, possibly to reflect a deep unease in his psyche at having witnessed one too many Shost games. I've always felt Day hasn't really used his position of potential influence as much as he could have possibly. It's hard to know what his real opinions are on the game/balance, but he's surely had more private qualms with aspects of the game in the previous 3 years than he's ever expressed, at least publicly.
I would cancel blink nerf, as the spell Never been the problem. The problem being the cost of the All in due not needing obs Like in WoL. With the vision nerf, the blink All in Will hit early on and its Still hard to stop
I would remove the MSC from the game. Give PO to nexus directly for cost of their own mana. (saw someone post This idea before in some of these threads).
ps. Really pain in the ass to post With phone... Damn autocorrect....
On February 12 2014 04:27 Faust852 wrote: I would prefer some nerf in the SH tho.
Day 9 seems to be asking a lot of questions about how to fix the swarm host on twitter and on his stream. I wouldn't be shocked if Blizzard asked him for some ideas and he is crowding sourcing it.
What, Day9 is being critical of the game? Well at least that's one of the harbingers of the apocalypse down, going to start really shitting myself if a foreigner wins a major tournament anytime soon.
Actually to be fair, he's really just canvassing opinion from others, possibly to reflect a deep unease in his psyche at having witnessed one too many Shost games. I've always felt Day hasn't really used his position of potential influence as much as he could have possibly. It's hard to know what his real opinions are on the game/balance, but he's surely had more private qualms with aspects of the game in the previous 3 years than he's ever expressed, at least publicly.
He is of the philosophy that complaining rarely if ever accomplishes anything, and will focus pretty much exclusively on what you can do with what happens to be available. It's an attitude I can certainly respect and commend, but I feel like he's taken it to an extreme, where he refuses to acknowledge imbalance or design issues even as possibilities. Perhaps it's to maintain an image, perhaps he sees himself as a counterbalance to the sometimes rather gloom and doom laden community, perhaps he truly thinks the game is that awesome, though I sincerely doubt that.
One thing he is not though, and that's stupid. The writing is on the wall, any idiot can see what will happen in the long run if SH turtle becomes standard meta. If he and people like TB(who has been outspoken about this, to his credit) and other influential people in the scene would be more vocal about stuff like this, it might help. Probably not, but we're kind of grasping for straws at this point.
If the MSC vision nerf is not enough to fix blink play the next thing to look at should not be blink but the timewarp spell instead. This spell plays a huge role in the strength of these all ins. SCVs are not able to connect to the stalkers, and bio is not able to micro. This is obviously very bad.
I would love to see this spell removed and replaced by something else. It's far to similar to forcefields anyway, and far to easy to execute.
The Energize spell from the beta would be a interesting replacement. The MSC would be able to fill up the energy of a caster by a certain amount for a certain amount of its own energy. The numbers should be playtested obviously.
This would help toss in certain key aspects:
-A few extra forcefields basically replace the function of timewarp. They might even be better in certain situations.
-The energy could be used to scout with hallucination
-It would help HT play. This might be especially important if you keep the recent Ghost change and a possible Hydra buff in mind.
These change would make blink all ins less deadly for sure, while toss gains valuable other options.
On February 12 2014 03:09 SidewinderSC2 wrote: The biggest issue I have with most of their balance changes is that they don't try to patch out specific scenarios.
For example, Blink is a big problem in PvT, so they think to nerf MSC, Blink and buff mines. Well, great, but now PvP suffers very badly because of the Blink nerf, and now Stargate vs Stargate will be way too common and coinflippy. PvP was already in a great spot, but it will be ruined as a side-effect.
Swarm Hosts are a problem overall, so they buff Tempests not noticing that Tempests vs Bunkers will be insane, way harder to hold than Blink ever was for Terran. It also does not address SH vs Mech and the overall problem that the unit requires very little skill to get utility and makes for very boring, defensive games.
I am not sure I understand their direction with these changes because they break just as muchas they fix. Just make blink a longer research time (by like 15 seconds), make time warp harder to access in the early game or overall, make Swarm Hosts require more attention (faster locust respawn time when unburrowed, best case their current respawn rate), give Hydras more HP with slightly longer build time.
PvP will always be balanced. PvT is completely broken. That is why they are making these changes. Period. PvP of course will change, but it will be balanced no matter what blizzard does to toss. They need to fix the issues with the other matchups.
in regards to Tempests vs Bunkers:
lolwat? The tempest change will most significantly affect swarmhosts by (hopefully) eating away at their protective wall of static D. PvT it will have almost no affect. No toss in their right mind will go for a tempest rush to attack a bunkered terran; no terran in their right mind is going to lose to a rushed tempest. It is like rushing battlecruisers on one base: just bad most of the time. mid-game tempests aren't going to be any good vs bio, and late-mid to late game terran will have vikings anyway if not for tempests then for colosi.
PvP will always be balanced? Is your logic that Protoss wins 50% of the time? the reason not everyone opens Stargate in PvP is because it is really hard to stay on top of a good Blink build with it. Tell me why people wouldn't open Stargate every game in PvP. Phoenix vs Phoenix is even dumber than Muta vs Muta, so, yes, it will be imbalanced because one option will clearly be better than everything else.
You also realize that with the buff, Tempests will kill an infinite amount of bunkers because they will never get hit by anything, and it will happen so quickly that any amount of Stalkers will walk over the unprotected Marine force at any time before stim. the only reason Terran doesn't die to a straightforward gateway rush is becuase they have bunkers, but if you can kill the bunkers in no time and cancel stim with the tempests without taking any damage, what now? Not to mention any reactor, tech lab or depot is dead in like 5 seconds.. the terran will lose all of their important buildings and never be able to hit the tempests.
what the hell, are we really talking about PvP balance now? I mean for real, you argue that some builds are harder to pull of then others and some counter others? And say MIRROR isnt balanced anymore? Where were u guys, when a 35 APM requiring 4Gate, DT Rush, Blink allin, Immortal rush whatever killed the way terrans left and right because they didn't learn yet how to adapt? Lets just say, mirrors are always balanced and will always be, if there is a stronger build than any other, every opening should go for it (already do, since no Toss will ever open Nex first). Talking about build orders and adaptions. If there are builds not possible anymore, then don't make them, or don't complain about build order losses. I don't argue why I don't have a chance against a blink allin with a CC First, Rax CC Build. In Mirrors there is no real inbalance, only build order losses
On February 12 2014 04:27 Faust852 wrote: I would prefer some nerf in the SH tho.
Day 9 seems to be asking a lot of questions about how to fix the swarm host on twitter and on his stream. I wouldn't be shocked if Blizzard asked him for some ideas and he is crowding sourcing it.
What, Day9 is being critical of the game? Well at least that's one of the harbingers of the apocalypse down, going to start really shitting myself if a foreigner wins a major tournament anytime soon.
Actually to be fair, he's really just canvassing opinion from others, possibly to reflect a deep unease in his psyche at having witnessed one too many Shost games. I've always felt Day hasn't really used his position of potential influence as much as he could have possibly. It's hard to know what his real opinions are on the game/balance, but he's surely had more private qualms with aspects of the game in the previous 3 years than he's ever expressed, at least publicly.
He is of the philosophy that complaining rarely if ever accomplishes anything, and will focus pretty much exclusively on what you can do with what happens to be available. It's an attitude I can certainly respect and commend, but I feel like he's taken it to an extreme, where he refuses to acknowledge imbalance or design issues even as possibilities. Perhaps it's to maintain an image, perhaps he sees himself as a counterbalance to the sometimes rather gloom and doom laden community, perhaps he truly thinks the game is that awesome, though I sincerely doubt that.
One thing he is not though, and that's stupid. The writing is on the wall, any idiot can see what will happen in the long run if SH turtle becomes standard meta. If he and people like TB(who has been outspoken about this, to his credit) and other influential people in the scene would be more vocal about stuff like this, it might help. Probably not, but we're kind of grasping for straws at this point.
Noone's grasping for straws. The game is pretty amazing overall. TvP balance is a balance problem, ZvP and TvZ having a little too many stalemate or near stalemate situations has to be watched and should be adressed if it continues. None of those is a major concern.
I'm happy to see Blizzards balance team leaving its comfort zone and increasing their communication with us. Please keep that spirit up for as long as you can!
On February 12 2014 04:27 Faust852 wrote: I would prefer some nerf in the SH tho.
Day 9 seems to be asking a lot of questions about how to fix the swarm host on twitter and on his stream. I wouldn't be shocked if Blizzard asked him for some ideas and he is crowding sourcing it.
What, Day9 is being critical of the game? Well at least that's one of the harbingers of the apocalypse down, going to start really shitting myself if a foreigner wins a major tournament anytime soon.
Actually to be fair, he's really just canvassing opinion from others, possibly to reflect a deep unease in his psyche at having witnessed one too many Shost games. I've always felt Day hasn't really used his position of potential influence as much as he could have possibly. It's hard to know what his real opinions are on the game/balance, but he's surely had more private qualms with aspects of the game in the previous 3 years than he's ever expressed, at least publicly.
He is of the philosophy that complaining rarely if ever accomplishes anything, and will focus pretty much exclusively on what you can do with what happens to be available. It's an attitude I can certainly respect and commend, but I feel like he's taken it to an extreme, where he refuses to acknowledge imbalance or design issues even as possibilities. Perhaps it's to maintain an image, perhaps he sees himself as a counterbalance to the sometimes rather gloom and doom laden community, perhaps he truly thinks the game is that awesome, though I sincerely doubt that.
One thing he is not though, and that's stupid. The writing is on the wall, any idiot can see what will happen in the long run if SH turtle becomes standard meta. If he and people like TB(who has been outspoken about this, to his credit) and other influential people in the scene would be more vocal about stuff like this, it might help. Probably not, but we're kind of grasping for straws at this point.
Noone's grasping for straws. The game is pretty amazing overall. TvP balance is a balance problem, ZvP and TvZ having a little too many stalemate or near stalemate situations has to be watched and should be adressed if it continues. None of those is a major concern.
Absolutely agree. It is also quite amazing how the viewernumbers grow while this epic turtle games are going on. While SK v Reality was going on the number reached 28000 and while stephano was playing firecake for 2:40 h with nearly pure SH vs SH to number also grew steadily. These long SH games also do not look that boring from the players perspective. If you watch Stephano play you really see that he is doing a lot at several different places. A lot of the frustration also has to do with the fact that neither a lot of pro players nor the casters have a real clue what to do and what is going on in the later stages of these games.
On February 12 2014 04:27 Faust852 wrote: I would prefer some nerf in the SH tho.
Day 9 seems to be asking a lot of questions about how to fix the swarm host on twitter and on his stream. I wouldn't be shocked if Blizzard asked him for some ideas and he is crowding sourcing it.
What, Day9 is being critical of the game? Well at least that's one of the harbingers of the apocalypse down, going to start really shitting myself if a foreigner wins a major tournament anytime soon.
Actually to be fair, he's really just canvassing opinion from others, possibly to reflect a deep unease in his psyche at having witnessed one too many Shost games. I've always felt Day hasn't really used his position of potential influence as much as he could have possibly. It's hard to know what his real opinions are on the game/balance, but he's surely had more private qualms with aspects of the game in the previous 3 years than he's ever expressed, at least publicly.
He is of the philosophy that complaining rarely if ever accomplishes anything, and will focus pretty much exclusively on what you can do with what happens to be available. It's an attitude I can certainly respect and commend, but I feel like he's taken it to an extreme, where he refuses to acknowledge imbalance or design issues even as possibilities. Perhaps it's to maintain an image, perhaps he sees himself as a counterbalance to the sometimes rather gloom and doom laden community, perhaps he truly thinks the game is that awesome, though I sincerely doubt that.
One thing he is not though, and that's stupid. The writing is on the wall, any idiot can see what will happen in the long run if SH turtle becomes standard meta. If he and people like TB(who has been outspoken about this, to his credit) and other influential people in the scene would be more vocal about stuff like this, it might help. Probably not, but we're kind of grasping for straws at this point.
Noone's grasping for straws. The game is pretty amazing overall. TvP balance is a balance problem, ZvP and TvZ having a little too many stalemate or near stalemate situations has to be watched and should be adressed if it continues. None of those is a major concern.
Absolutely agree. It is also quite amazing how the viewernumbers grow while this epic turtle games are going on. While SK v Reality was going on the number reached 28000 and while stephano was playing firecake for 2:40 h with nearly pure SH vs SH to number also grew steadily. These long SH games also do not look that boring from the players perspective. If you watch Stephano play you really see that he is doing a lot at several different places. A lot of the frustration also has to do with the fact that neither a lot of pro players nor the casters have a real clue what to do and what is going on in the later stages of these games.
Once the novelty wears off and people realize that it's (maybe) worse than BL/Infestor viewer numbers will plummet again lol.
However, I also agree that overall the game is in a pretty good place, and the changes proposed here could spice things up even more.
On February 12 2014 04:27 Faust852 wrote: I would prefer some nerf in the SH tho.
Day 9 seems to be asking a lot of questions about how to fix the swarm host on twitter and on his stream. I wouldn't be shocked if Blizzard asked him for some ideas and he is crowding sourcing it.
What, Day9 is being critical of the game? Well at least that's one of the harbingers of the apocalypse down, going to start really shitting myself if a foreigner wins a major tournament anytime soon.
Actually to be fair, he's really just canvassing opinion from others, possibly to reflect a deep unease in his psyche at having witnessed one too many Shost games. I've always felt Day hasn't really used his position of potential influence as much as he could have possibly. It's hard to know what his real opinions are on the game/balance, but he's surely had more private qualms with aspects of the game in the previous 3 years than he's ever expressed, at least publicly.
He is of the philosophy that complaining rarely if ever accomplishes anything, and will focus pretty much exclusively on what you can do with what happens to be available. It's an attitude I can certainly respect and commend, but I feel like he's taken it to an extreme, where he refuses to acknowledge imbalance or design issues even as possibilities. Perhaps it's to maintain an image, perhaps he sees himself as a counterbalance to the sometimes rather gloom and doom laden community, perhaps he truly thinks the game is that awesome, though I sincerely doubt that.
One thing he is not though, and that's stupid. The writing is on the wall, any idiot can see what will happen in the long run if SH turtle becomes standard meta. If he and people like TB(who has been outspoken about this, to his credit) and other influential people in the scene would be more vocal about stuff like this, it might help. Probably not, but we're kind of grasping for straws at this point.
It's 100% a great attitude to have when playing the game, really helps you improve and is generally a positive mentality to have, better than mine for sure. I just think he's previously held his tongue when perhaps he shouldn't have, indeed quite a few of the bigger personalities I believe this is true of to a degree. No beef with them, it is their livelihood after all!
On February 12 2014 04:27 Faust852 wrote: I would prefer some nerf in the SH tho.
Day 9 seems to be asking a lot of questions about how to fix the swarm host on twitter and on his stream. I wouldn't be shocked if Blizzard asked him for some ideas and he is crowding sourcing it.
What, Day9 is being critical of the game? Well at least that's one of the harbingers of the apocalypse down, going to start really shitting myself if a foreigner wins a major tournament anytime soon.
Actually to be fair, he's really just canvassing opinion from others, possibly to reflect a deep unease in his psyche at having witnessed one too many Shost games. I've always felt Day hasn't really used his position of potential influence as much as he could have possibly. It's hard to know what his real opinions are on the game/balance, but he's surely had more private qualms with aspects of the game in the previous 3 years than he's ever expressed, at least publicly.
He is of the philosophy that complaining rarely if ever accomplishes anything, and will focus pretty much exclusively on what you can do with what happens to be available. It's an attitude I can certainly respect and commend, but I feel like he's taken it to an extreme, where he refuses to acknowledge imbalance or design issues even as possibilities. Perhaps it's to maintain an image, perhaps he sees himself as a counterbalance to the sometimes rather gloom and doom laden community, perhaps he truly thinks the game is that awesome, though I sincerely doubt that.
One thing he is not though, and that's stupid. The writing is on the wall, any idiot can see what will happen in the long run if SH turtle becomes standard meta. If he and people like TB(who has been outspoken about this, to his credit) and other influential people in the scene would be more vocal about stuff like this, it might help. Probably not, but we're kind of grasping for straws at this point.
Noone's grasping for straws. The game is pretty amazing overall. TvP balance is a balance problem, ZvP and TvZ having a little too many stalemate or near stalemate situations has to be watched and should be adressed if it continues. None of those is a major concern.
Absolutely agree. It is also quite amazing how the viewernumbers grow while this epic turtle games are going on. While SK v Reality was going on the number reached 28000 and while stephano was playing firecake for 2:40 h with nearly pure SH vs SH to number also grew steadily. These long SH games also do not look that boring from the players perspective. If you watch Stephano play you really see that he is doing a lot at several different places. A lot of the frustration also has to do with the fact that neither a lot of pro players nor the casters have a real clue what to do and what is going on in the later stages of these games.
Well the good thing is you probably won't see SH turtle in ZvZ.
On February 12 2014 04:27 Faust852 wrote: I would prefer some nerf in the SH tho.
Day 9 seems to be asking a lot of questions about how to fix the swarm host on twitter and on his stream. I wouldn't be shocked if Blizzard asked him for some ideas and he is crowding sourcing it.
What, Day9 is being critical of the game? Well at least that's one of the harbingers of the apocalypse down, going to start really shitting myself if a foreigner wins a major tournament anytime soon.
Actually to be fair, he's really just canvassing opinion from others, possibly to reflect a deep unease in his psyche at having witnessed one too many Shost games. I've always felt Day hasn't really used his position of potential influence as much as he could have possibly. It's hard to know what his real opinions are on the game/balance, but he's surely had more private qualms with aspects of the game in the previous 3 years than he's ever expressed, at least publicly.
He is of the philosophy that complaining rarely if ever accomplishes anything, and will focus pretty much exclusively on what you can do with what happens to be available. It's an attitude I can certainly respect and commend, but I feel like he's taken it to an extreme, where he refuses to acknowledge imbalance or design issues even as possibilities. Perhaps it's to maintain an image, perhaps he sees himself as a counterbalance to the sometimes rather gloom and doom laden community, perhaps he truly thinks the game is that awesome, though I sincerely doubt that.
One thing he is not though, and that's stupid. The writing is on the wall, any idiot can see what will happen in the long run if SH turtle becomes standard meta. If he and people like TB(who has been outspoken about this, to his credit) and other influential people in the scene would be more vocal about stuff like this, it might help. Probably not, but we're kind of grasping for straws at this point.
Noone's grasping for straws. The game is pretty amazing overall. TvP balance is a balance problem, ZvP and TvZ having a little too many stalemate or near stalemate situations has to be watched and should be adressed if it continues. None of those is a major concern.
Absolutely agree. It is also quite amazing how the viewernumbers grow while this epic turtle games are going on. While SK v Reality was going on the number reached 28000 and while stephano was playing firecake for 2:40 h with nearly pure SH vs SH to number also grew steadily. These long SH games also do not look that boring from the players perspective. If you watch Stephano play you really see that he is doing a lot at several different places. A lot of the frustration also has to do with the fact that neither a lot of pro players nor the casters have a real clue what to do and what is going on in the later stages of these games.
Once the novelty wears off and people realize that it's (maybe) worse than BL/Infestor viewer numbers will plummet again lol.
However, I also agree that overall the game is in a pretty good place, and the changes proposed here could spice things up even more.
SH is not even close to being BL/infestor at all..... fungle and upgraded infested marines were the issue that made the combo op.
SH turtle is really the only thing zerg has against the ultimate late game sky toss/temp/colossi army.
On February 12 2014 04:27 Faust852 wrote: I would prefer some nerf in the SH tho.
Day 9 seems to be asking a lot of questions about how to fix the swarm host on twitter and on his stream. I wouldn't be shocked if Blizzard asked him for some ideas and he is crowding sourcing it.
What, Day9 is being critical of the game? Well at least that's one of the harbingers of the apocalypse down, going to start really shitting myself if a foreigner wins a major tournament anytime soon.
Actually to be fair, he's really just canvassing opinion from others, possibly to reflect a deep unease in his psyche at having witnessed one too many Shost games. I've always felt Day hasn't really used his position of potential influence as much as he could have possibly. It's hard to know what his real opinions are on the game/balance, but he's surely had more private qualms with aspects of the game in the previous 3 years than he's ever expressed, at least publicly.
He is of the philosophy that complaining rarely if ever accomplishes anything, and will focus pretty much exclusively on what you can do with what happens to be available. It's an attitude I can certainly respect and commend, but I feel like he's taken it to an extreme, where he refuses to acknowledge imbalance or design issues even as possibilities. Perhaps it's to maintain an image, perhaps he sees himself as a counterbalance to the sometimes rather gloom and doom laden community, perhaps he truly thinks the game is that awesome, though I sincerely doubt that.
One thing he is not though, and that's stupid. The writing is on the wall, any idiot can see what will happen in the long run if SH turtle becomes standard meta. If he and people like TB(who has been outspoken about this, to his credit) and other influential people in the scene would be more vocal about stuff like this, it might help. Probably not, but we're kind of grasping for straws at this point.
Noone's grasping for straws. The game is pretty amazing overall. TvP balance is a balance problem, ZvP and TvZ having a little too many stalemate or near stalemate situations has to be watched and should be adressed if it continues. None of those is a major concern.
This is almost criminally naive, not to mention somewhat difficult to take seriously due to the rampant fanboyism.
On February 12 2014 04:27 Faust852 wrote: I would prefer some nerf in the SH tho.
Day 9 seems to be asking a lot of questions about how to fix the swarm host on twitter and on his stream. I wouldn't be shocked if Blizzard asked him for some ideas and he is crowding sourcing it.
What, Day9 is being critical of the game? Well at least that's one of the harbingers of the apocalypse down, going to start really shitting myself if a foreigner wins a major tournament anytime soon.
Actually to be fair, he's really just canvassing opinion from others, possibly to reflect a deep unease in his psyche at having witnessed one too many Shost games. I've always felt Day hasn't really used his position of potential influence as much as he could have possibly. It's hard to know what his real opinions are on the game/balance, but he's surely had more private qualms with aspects of the game in the previous 3 years than he's ever expressed, at least publicly.
He is of the philosophy that complaining rarely if ever accomplishes anything, and will focus pretty much exclusively on what you can do with what happens to be available. It's an attitude I can certainly respect and commend, but I feel like he's taken it to an extreme, where he refuses to acknowledge imbalance or design issues even as possibilities. Perhaps it's to maintain an image, perhaps he sees himself as a counterbalance to the sometimes rather gloom and doom laden community, perhaps he truly thinks the game is that awesome, though I sincerely doubt that.
One thing he is not though, and that's stupid. The writing is on the wall, any idiot can see what will happen in the long run if SH turtle becomes standard meta. If he and people like TB(who has been outspoken about this, to his credit) and other influential people in the scene would be more vocal about stuff like this, it might help. Probably not, but we're kind of grasping for straws at this point.
Noone's grasping for straws. The game is pretty amazing overall. TvP balance is a balance problem, ZvP and TvZ having a little too many stalemate or near stalemate situations has to be watched and should be adressed if it continues. None of those is a major concern.
Absolutely agree. It is also quite amazing how the viewernumbers grow while this epic turtle games are going on. While SK v Reality was going on the number reached 28000 and while stephano was playing firecake for 2:40 h with nearly pure SH vs SH to number also grew steadily. These long SH games also do not look that boring from the players perspective. If you watch Stephano play you really see that he is doing a lot at several different places. A lot of the frustration also has to do with the fact that neither a lot of pro players nor the casters have a real clue what to do and what is going on in the later stages of these games.
Well the good thing is you probably won't see SH turtle in ZvZ.
Maybe you should tune in to Stephano's stream some time...
On February 12 2014 04:27 Faust852 wrote: I would prefer some nerf in the SH tho.
Day 9 seems to be asking a lot of questions about how to fix the swarm host on twitter and on his stream. I wouldn't be shocked if Blizzard asked him for some ideas and he is crowding sourcing it.
What, Day9 is being critical of the game? Well at least that's one of the harbingers of the apocalypse down, going to start really shitting myself if a foreigner wins a major tournament anytime soon.
Actually to be fair, he's really just canvassing opinion from others, possibly to reflect a deep unease in his psyche at having witnessed one too many Shost games. I've always felt Day hasn't really used his position of potential influence as much as he could have possibly. It's hard to know what his real opinions are on the game/balance, but he's surely had more private qualms with aspects of the game in the previous 3 years than he's ever expressed, at least publicly.
He is of the philosophy that complaining rarely if ever accomplishes anything, and will focus pretty much exclusively on what you can do with what happens to be available. It's an attitude I can certainly respect and commend, but I feel like he's taken it to an extreme, where he refuses to acknowledge imbalance or design issues even as possibilities. Perhaps it's to maintain an image, perhaps he sees himself as a counterbalance to the sometimes rather gloom and doom laden community, perhaps he truly thinks the game is that awesome, though I sincerely doubt that.
One thing he is not though, and that's stupid. The writing is on the wall, any idiot can see what will happen in the long run if SH turtle becomes standard meta. If he and people like TB(who has been outspoken about this, to his credit) and other influential people in the scene would be more vocal about stuff like this, it might help. Probably not, but we're kind of grasping for straws at this point.
Noone's grasping for straws. The game is pretty amazing overall. TvP balance is a balance problem, ZvP and TvZ having a little too many stalemate or near stalemate situations has to be watched and should be adressed if it continues. None of those is a major concern.
Absolutely agree. It is also quite amazing how the viewernumbers grow while this epic turtle games are going on. While SK v Reality was going on the number reached 28000 and while stephano was playing firecake for 2:40 h with nearly pure SH vs SH to number also grew steadily. These long SH games also do not look that boring from the players perspective. If you watch Stephano play you really see that he is doing a lot at several different places. A lot of the frustration also has to do with the fact that neither a lot of pro players nor the casters have a real clue what to do and what is going on in the later stages of these games.
Once the novelty wears off and people realize that it's (maybe) worse than BL/Infestor viewer numbers will plummet again lol.
However, I also agree that overall the game is in a pretty good place, and the changes proposed here could spice things up even more.
SH is not even close to being BL/infestor at all..... fungle and upgraded infested marines were the issue that made the combo op.
SH turtle is really the only thing zerg has against the ultimate late game sky toss/temp/colossi army.
That's why I said (maybe). But, when you're regularly getting 1.5 hour long games with Swarm Host turtle...it's approaching the same point as BL/Infestor in terms of "I cannot be fucked to watch this snoozefest"
I definitely agree with Protoss being the strongest race right now. I agree that winrates aren't such a reliable source of intel given various parameters like (Korean v Non-Korean, the fact that we're held to 50% wr, and the fact that there's no way to quantify micro even though, for Terran, it is indispensable and for P and Z it's just desired, advantageous, or helpful). There's no way to have different races and have a perfectly balanced game. Meanwhile, "The game is really balanced"-Blizzard. I feel like DK and the gang need to hit step one of a 12step program "Admitting you have a problem".
I believe you have to balance the game from the top(pro) down AND from the bottom(bronze) up. Right, now Terran is balanced from the top(pro) down. This means you're taking correct and constant terran micro as a given. From Plat down, It is very much not a given. For example: all armies in the game clump up after they are moved. But Zerg armies work great clumped up because they are so fast and/or powerful that it rolls anything in it's way. You just don't have to split Swarmhosts, Ultras, broodlords, zerg/banes (to the same degree as marines), etc. And, the protoss ball works best clumped up. But, as a terran player, you have to constantly split up your army or that one fungal/colossus swipe/storm/baneling a-move/ling surround/forcefield will erase your army in seconds. Meanwhile protoss' are storming and time-warping their own units over and over again with no consequences and zergs just mass what ever unit they want and send it across the map... This means that the game is balanced with correct terran splitting and kiting constantly as a given while Z and P remain cost-efficient given a minimum of the micromanaging of units.
It feels like Terran players are playing chess while everyone else is playing checkers... and winning.
Blizzard should host online tournaments on these maps, for like $100, get some volunteer community casters, whatever pros want to play in it. Pretty sure it would make their tests way better, and make people more aware and interested in trying the test map.
On February 12 2014 03:09 SidewinderSC2 wrote: The biggest issue I have with most of their balance changes is that they don't try to patch out specific scenarios.
For example, Blink is a big problem in PvT, so they think to nerf MSC, Blink and buff mines. Well, great, but now PvP suffers very badly because of the Blink nerf, and now Stargate vs Stargate will be way too common and coinflippy. PvP was already in a great spot, but it will be ruined as a side-effect.
Swarm Hosts are a problem overall, so they buff Tempests not noticing that Tempests vs Bunkers will be insane, way harder to hold than Blink ever was for Terran. It also does not address SH vs Mech and the overall problem that the unit requires very little skill to get utility and makes for very boring, defensive games.
I am not sure I understand their direction with these changes because they break just as muchas they fix. Just make blink a longer research time (by like 15 seconds), make time warp harder to access in the early game or overall, make Swarm Hosts require more attention (faster locust respawn time when unburrowed, best case their current respawn rate), give Hydras more HP with slightly longer build time.
PvP will always be balanced. PvT is completely broken. That is why they are making these changes. Period. PvP of course will change, but it will be balanced no matter what blizzard does to toss. They need to fix the issues with the other matchups.
in regards to Tempests vs Bunkers:
lolwat? The tempest change will most significantly affect swarmhosts by (hopefully) eating away at their protective wall of static D. PvT it will have almost no affect. No toss in their right mind will go for a tempest rush to attack a bunkered terran; no terran in their right mind is going to lose to a rushed tempest. It is like rushing battlecruisers on one base: just bad most of the time. mid-game tempests aren't going to be any good vs bio, and late-mid to late game terran will have vikings anyway if not for tempests then for colosi.
Actually, proxy tempest builds are better than you would think. Sure they don't deal that much damage, but theres no way a marine could ever hit them. Which also means that this doesnt mean anything in PvT. Not because you can't do it, but because the marines can't fight back. Regardless of the Tempest's damage the bunker, or turrets, or whatever, should never be able to hit an offensive proxy tempest. You would need air units of some kind to combat this.
I seen players like DeMuslim and Thorzain losing to this kind of retarded cheese too. Buffing tempest would be the most retarded thing to do.
To be fair I've also seen Thorzain lose to Sjow playing Protoss
Sjow knows what (builds as well as the execution) work the best against Terran. It's not fair to imply anything about Thorzain's skill based on that.
To reply to the previous poster about Demulism and Thorzain losing to proxy tempests - it's just the wtf factor of something so far out the left field. Doubt they would fall for it again, since they could have moved their structures away from the dead-space where the tempests are camped and still be relatively fine (depending on how much damage they took in the process, of course).
I don't care if swarmhost aren't OP, I don't want to see them in the game like they are, they aren't fun to watch OR play against (somewhat fun to use though).
On February 12 2014 03:09 SidewinderSC2 wrote: The biggest issue I have with most of their balance changes is that they don't try to patch out specific scenarios.
For example, Blink is a big problem in PvT, so they think to nerf MSC, Blink and buff mines. Well, great, but now PvP suffers very badly because of the Blink nerf, and now Stargate vs Stargate will be way too common and coinflippy. PvP was already in a great spot, but it will be ruined as a side-effect.
Swarm Hosts are a problem overall, so they buff Tempests not noticing that Tempests vs Bunkers will be insane, way harder to hold than Blink ever was for Terran. It also does not address SH vs Mech and the overall problem that the unit requires very little skill to get utility and makes for very boring, defensive games.
I am not sure I understand their direction with these changes because they break just as muchas they fix. Just make blink a longer research time (by like 15 seconds), make time warp harder to access in the early game or overall, make Swarm Hosts require more attention (faster locust respawn time when unburrowed, best case their current respawn rate), give Hydras more HP with slightly longer build time.
PvP will always be balanced. PvT is completely broken. That is why they are making these changes. Period. PvP of course will change, but it will be balanced no matter what blizzard does to toss. They need to fix the issues with the other matchups.
in regards to Tempests vs Bunkers:
lolwat? The tempest change will most significantly affect swarmhosts by (hopefully) eating away at their protective wall of static D. PvT it will have almost no affect. No toss in their right mind will go for a tempest rush to attack a bunkered terran; no terran in their right mind is going to lose to a rushed tempest. It is like rushing battlecruisers on one base: just bad most of the time. mid-game tempests aren't going to be any good vs bio, and late-mid to late game terran will have vikings anyway if not for tempests then for colosi.
Actually, proxy tempest builds are better than you would think. Sure they don't deal that much damage, but theres no way a marine could ever hit them. Which also means that this doesnt mean anything in PvT. Not because you can't do it, but because the marines can't fight back. Regardless of the Tempest's damage the bunker, or turrets, or whatever, should never be able to hit an offensive proxy tempest. You would need air units of some kind to combat this.
I seen players like DeMuslim and Thorzain losing to this kind of retarded cheese too. Buffing tempest would be the most retarded thing to do.
To be fair I've also seen Thorzain lose to Sjow playing Protoss
Sjow knows what (builds as well as the execution) work the best against Terran. It's not fair to imply anything about Thorzain's skill based on that.
To reply to the previous poster about Demulism and Thorzain losing to proxy tempests - it's just the wtf factor of something so far out the left field. Doubt they would fall for it again, since they could have moved their structures away from the dead-space where the tempests are camped and still be relatively fine (depending on how much damage they took in the process, of course).
Or even just an scv pull in response might work.
/edit
And proper scouting.
Sjow also switched to Protoss for a bit and played it, and only switched back because of how frustrated he was with PvP....
On February 12 2014 13:14 Wombat_NI wrote: He has a point, like or loathe them Blink Stalkers are close to the most microable and skill-scaling unit Protoss have.
He has the kernel of a point, wrapped in a cocoon of an onion of encasings of non-points. Protoss do not routinely get nerfs to interesting things. Phoenixes and Warp Prisms both got buffed in/around HOTS. High Templar hasn't been touched. This nerf is only being considered as a measure of last resort, and although I think we'll come to that last resort, I don't think this is the nerf DK will end up going with. (I hope not, anyway!)
Why is it okay to increase widow mine shield damage? lol I swear this is one of the dumbest things I have ever read. I hope it doesn't go though. I hate widow mines for how inexpensive they are and their damage output is just insane. If any changes they need to be nerfed imo. Sure they have a huge cool down and can be sniped by some units but when you can make 2 at a time does it really matter? It should require a tech lab and not be able to be produced with a reactor. Just my thoughts.
On February 12 2014 03:09 SidewinderSC2 wrote: The biggest issue I have with most of their balance changes is that they don't try to patch out specific scenarios.
For example, Blink is a big problem in PvT, so they think to nerf MSC, Blink and buff mines. Well, great, but now PvP suffers very badly because of the Blink nerf, and now Stargate vs Stargate will be way too common and coinflippy. PvP was already in a great spot, but it will be ruined as a side-effect.
Swarm Hosts are a problem overall, so they buff Tempests not noticing that Tempests vs Bunkers will be insane, way harder to hold than Blink ever was for Terran. It also does not address SH vs Mech and the overall problem that the unit requires very little skill to get utility and makes for very boring, defensive games.
I am not sure I understand their direction with these changes because they break just as muchas they fix. Just make blink a longer research time (by like 15 seconds), make time warp harder to access in the early game or overall, make Swarm Hosts require more attention (faster locust respawn time when unburrowed, best case their current respawn rate), give Hydras more HP with slightly longer build time.
PvP will always be balanced. PvT is completely broken. That is why they are making these changes. Period. PvP of course will change, but it will be balanced no matter what blizzard does to toss. They need to fix the issues with the other matchups.
in regards to Tempests vs Bunkers:
lolwat? The tempest change will most significantly affect swarmhosts by (hopefully) eating away at their protective wall of static D. PvT it will have almost no affect. No toss in their right mind will go for a tempest rush to attack a bunkered terran; no terran in their right mind is going to lose to a rushed tempest. It is like rushing battlecruisers on one base: just bad most of the time. mid-game tempests aren't going to be any good vs bio, and late-mid to late game terran will have vikings anyway if not for tempests then for colosi.
Actually, proxy tempest builds are better than you would think. Sure they don't deal that much damage, but theres no way a marine could ever hit them. Which also means that this doesnt mean anything in PvT. Not because you can't do it, but because the marines can't fight back. Regardless of the Tempest's damage the bunker, or turrets, or whatever, should never be able to hit an offensive proxy tempest. You would need air units of some kind to combat this.
I seen players like DeMuslim and Thorzain losing to this kind of retarded cheese too. Buffing tempest would be the most retarded thing to do.
To be fair I've also seen Thorzain lose to Sjow playing Protoss
Sjow knows what (builds as well as the execution) work the best against Terran. It's not fair to imply anything about Thorzain's skill based on that.
To reply to the previous poster about Demulism and Thorzain losing to proxy tempests - it's just the wtf factor of something so far out the left field. Doubt they would fall for it again, since they could have moved their structures away from the dead-space where the tempests are camped and still be relatively fine (depending on how much damage they took in the process, of course).
Or even just an scv pull in response might work.
/edit
And proper scouting.
Sjow also switched to Protoss for a bit and played it, and only switched back because of how frustrated he was with PvP....
Because he knows PvT, doesn't mean he knows PvP. Protoss on TL are saying that PvP is in a great place rightnow - including TL writers. And I agree, PvP is great (Korean PvP, that is).
On February 12 2014 13:30 Loccstana wrote: make it so that everytime a stalker blinks, it loses 20 hp like stim. problem solved.
Stim is primarily offensive, whereas Blink is primarily defensive. Logically, if there's going to be a drawback, it should be some kind of temporary attack penalty. But Stalkers' attack sucks plenty enough already in all cases but Blink all-in, so... probably not.
On February 12 2014 13:30 inSighTsc2 wrote: Why is it okay to increase widow mine shield damage? lol I swear this is one of the dumbest things I have ever read. I hope it doesn't go though. I hate widow mines for how inexpensive they are and their damage output is just insane. If any changes they need to be nerfed imo. Sure they have a huge cool down and can be sniped by some units but when you can make 2 at a time does it really matter? It should require a tech lab and not be able to be produced with a reactor. Just my thoughts.
Someone tell David Kim, Zerg can make fifty of any unit at a time! All Zerg units need a nerf!
On February 12 2014 03:09 SidewinderSC2 wrote: The biggest issue I have with most of their balance changes is that they don't try to patch out specific scenarios.
For example, Blink is a big problem in PvT, so they think to nerf MSC, Blink and buff mines. Well, great, but now PvP suffers very badly because of the Blink nerf, and now Stargate vs Stargate will be way too common and coinflippy. PvP was already in a great spot, but it will be ruined as a side-effect.
Swarm Hosts are a problem overall, so they buff Tempests not noticing that Tempests vs Bunkers will be insane, way harder to hold than Blink ever was for Terran. It also does not address SH vs Mech and the overall problem that the unit requires very little skill to get utility and makes for very boring, defensive games.
I am not sure I understand their direction with these changes because they break just as muchas they fix. Just make blink a longer research time (by like 15 seconds), make time warp harder to access in the early game or overall, make Swarm Hosts require more attention (faster locust respawn time when unburrowed, best case their current respawn rate), give Hydras more HP with slightly longer build time.
PvP will always be balanced. PvT is completely broken. That is why they are making these changes. Period. PvP of course will change, but it will be balanced no matter what blizzard does to toss. They need to fix the issues with the other matchups.
in regards to Tempests vs Bunkers:
lolwat? The tempest change will most significantly affect swarmhosts by (hopefully) eating away at their protective wall of static D. PvT it will have almost no affect. No toss in their right mind will go for a tempest rush to attack a bunkered terran; no terran in their right mind is going to lose to a rushed tempest. It is like rushing battlecruisers on one base: just bad most of the time. mid-game tempests aren't going to be any good vs bio, and late-mid to late game terran will have vikings anyway if not for tempests then for colosi.
Actually, proxy tempest builds are better than you would think. Sure they don't deal that much damage, but theres no way a marine could ever hit them. Which also means that this doesnt mean anything in PvT. Not because you can't do it, but because the marines can't fight back. Regardless of the Tempest's damage the bunker, or turrets, or whatever, should never be able to hit an offensive proxy tempest. You would need air units of some kind to combat this.
I seen players like DeMuslim and Thorzain losing to this kind of retarded cheese too. Buffing tempest would be the most retarded thing to do.
To be fair I've also seen Thorzain lose to Sjow playing Protoss
Sjow knows what (builds as well as the execution) work the best against Terran. It's not fair to imply anything about Thorzain's skill based on that.
To reply to the previous poster about Demulism and Thorzain losing to proxy tempests - it's just the wtf factor of something so far out the left field. Doubt they would fall for it again, since they could have moved their structures away from the dead-space where the tempests are camped and still be relatively fine (depending on how much damage they took in the process, of course).
Or even just an scv pull in response might work.
/edit
And proper scouting.
Off the wall stuff can work against a pro player though, for instance once I watched Demuslim beat Scarlett with a mass viking build that kept her permanently supply blocked and she clearly had no idea what to do against it. Now, if he tried to do it a few more times you can bet she'd work out how to beat it because it's not really a legit strategy.
On February 12 2014 11:13 Jerubaal wrote: Flat nerfs to anything interesting Protoss can do.
Flat buffs to things that aren't remotely interesting or viable.
Flat buffs Zerg.
Pretty much par for course, I'd say.
They've been randomly buffing Protoss since HotS came out; warp prisms, oracles. So no, this is a good change of direction.
Yeah, they've been buffing them because their potential has been maxed out.
A lot of Protoss will tell you this same thing: It has nothing to do with balance or what's happening right now, it's what's going to happen months or years from now. We got told the entirety of WoL that Protoss was OP or balanced and consequently every interesting and dynamic strategy Protoss had was gutted. Finally, when all the timings were discovered, when all the all-ins were figured out and when everyone learned how to play, it turned out Protoss was garbage-tier, especially against Zerg. So when I see this patch, forgive my sense of deja vu.
Or maybe they will just keep changing things so the game never settles.
Watching ProLeague last night I looked for times where a third blink was really needed. The first blink is whenever the player decides and 5 seconds isn't that long in most game situations to wait for the second. With the nerf, that second blink could be used to get out after doing damage instead of how they currently use it to get into a better location to do game ending damage.
On February 12 2014 13:14 Wombat_NI wrote: He has a point, like or loathe them Blink Stalkers are close to the most microable and skill-scaling unit Protoss have.
He has the kernel of a point, wrapped in a cocoon of an onion of encasings of non-points. Protoss do not routinely get nerfs to interesting things. Phoenixes and Warp Prisms both got buffed in/around HOTS. High Templar hasn't been touched. This nerf is only being considered as a measure of last resort, and although I think we'll come to that last resort, I don't think this is the nerf DK will end up going with. (I hope not, anyway!)
Well yeah, it's not so much Protoss get nerfs to make them less interesting, more they don't really get tweaks to make their units more microable and rewarding to play. Phoenixes are close to the perfect harass unit that exists in SC2 so at least we have that, with other cute things like lifting your own units to save them.
Speaking purely hypothetically, how would pre-snipe nerf Ghostmech fare against Swarmhost turtling? Snipe range is 11 right?
On February 12 2014 11:13 Jerubaal wrote: Flat nerfs to anything interesting Protoss can do.
Flat buffs to things that aren't remotely interesting or viable.
Flat buffs Zerg.
Pretty much par for course, I'd say.
They've been randomly buffing Protoss since HotS came out; warp prisms, oracles. So no, this is a good change of direction.
Yeah, they've been buffing them because their potential has been maxed out.
A lot of Protoss will tell you this same thing: It has nothing to do with balance or what's happening right now, it's what's going to happen months or years from now. We got told the entirety of WoL that Protoss was OP or balanced and consequently every interesting and dynamic strategy Protoss had was gutted. Finally, when all the timings were discovered, when all the all-ins were figured out and when everyone learned how to play, it turned out Protoss was garbage-tier, especially against Zerg. So when I see this patch, forgive my sense of deja vu.
Or maybe they will just keep changing things so the game never settles.
So many false statements. Protoss all-ins figured out? Please. As in Parting's Immortal Sentry allin that to this day he still says is practically unbeatable? Or how about at the end of WoL, when NaNiwa killed Flash twice in an MLG with Immortal busts that we still see today? Potential maxed out? Right, they buffed the Oracle because Protoss was solved and struggling. Oh wait, how many games did we see Terrans lose to proxy Oracle builds? Too many to count. There there's the issue of lategame PvT.
Players aren't magically going to figure out how to hold the ridiculous amount of allins Protoss have in the coming months or years, don't fall into this trap of "just wait." Protoss is dominating every server, foreigner Zergs and Protosses regularly take games off Koreans yet Terrans seldom do. You're right that Protoss struggled at the end WoL vs Zerg, but not due to people "learning how to play", but due to the power of the Infestor. TvP certainly wasn't Terran favoured.
On February 12 2014 11:13 Jerubaal wrote: Flat nerfs to anything interesting Protoss can do.
Flat buffs to things that aren't remotely interesting or viable.
Flat buffs Zerg.
Pretty much par for course, I'd say.
They've been randomly buffing Protoss since HotS came out; warp prisms, oracles. So no, this is a good change of direction.
Yeah, they've been buffing them because their potential has been maxed out.
A lot of Protoss will tell you this same thing: It has nothing to do with balance or what's happening right now, it's what's going to happen months or years from now. We got told the entirety of WoL that Protoss was OP or balanced and consequently every interesting and dynamic strategy Protoss had was gutted. Finally, when all the timings were discovered, when all the all-ins were figured out and when everyone learned how to play, it turned out Protoss was garbage-tier, especially against Zerg. So when I see this patch, forgive my sense of deja vu.
Or maybe they will just keep changing things so the game never settles.
On February 12 2014 15:08 Angeloidus wrote: The question is, does these changes make the game more balanced or will it still be imbalanced (while in favour of another race)?
I think all those small changes (when combined) will make the situation better but protoss simply has an advantage over terran by design in Hots.
I don't think we will ever be able to play as greedy as we could in WoL (like gasless expo etc) and this makes all later terran timings weaker by default.
Also, from watching Meta with Artosis, all guys there agreed that the main problem is the difference in amount of openings protoss has and how defensive terran must be in a time we could play greedy in WoL.
Even 2 base blink isn't just 2 base blink. It could be just a complete fake off 1 gate, or slight 3 gate pressure into tech, 5-7 gate heavy commitment or simply a fast third with blink to help defend drops (like Parting vs. Flash).
Since you are stuck in your base it is very hard to say which of those is actually happening and which variant is protoss doing.
Other openings like oracle also have more than 1 variant.
So stuff like that wont change, but hopefully buffs to mine and nerfs to protoss early game aggression and scouting (MSC vision reduction) will eventually give terrans more openings which are harder for protoss to scout and therefore even out the playing field.
On February 12 2014 20:33 Afterstar wrote: No need to nerf blink cooldown, I think I would rather see the mothership core vision reduced to 5(same as attack range).
This will solve a lot of the problems for TvP without affecting other matchups.
Doesn't this affect mcores scouting ability in pvp?
On February 12 2014 20:33 Afterstar wrote: No need to nerf blink cooldown, I think I would rather see the mothership core vision reduced to 5(same as attack range).
This will solve a lot of the problems for TvP without affecting other matchups.
Doesn't this affect mcores scouting ability in pvp?
Protoss has various other ways to scout that are easily accessible, mscore doesn't have to be a hero unit that does everything. I would rather they nerf its vision affecting largely TvP rather than nerf blink cooldown that affects stalkers greatly for all matchups.
Mothership Core vision radius decreased from 14 to 9
Good change, should be done long time ago.
Blink cooldown increased from 10 to 15
We have 8 seconds cooldown right now, because we play in faster mode (or even 7,5 not sure, somone should count it properly) which is too low, should be 11-12 seconds of REAL time, lets talk about real seconds not ingame ! I dont care how does it affect PVP or PVZ, from TVP point of view i see it completly imbalanced as it is now. Something has to be done about it, seeing pro players losing in decent tournaments everytime to blink-all in, it isnt funny to watch, even if they know about it much eariler, prepare bunkers, place some mines, cut scv production - they still lose, one base or two base doesnt matter - its too strong, doesnt require any skills at all, dont tell me blinking backward using 2 buttons is difficult.
I understand its hard to change such thinks as blink, after 4 years it has been like that BUT it is necessary. Ask youself, why terrans players after scouting that twilight council is reasarching something overreact so badly - clearly sh... their pants? Because its the only protos all-in build, while executed properly, cannot be defended !
I asume its not gonna be fixed, because community of protos players doesnt agree (why any protos player would agree on making his race weaker? lol), and David Kim wont take the risk. You will see in the near futhure, how badly terran does in CODE S and other decent events, remember my words.
Good change, im still waiting to buff tanks with + shield damage - one small tweak and we could see mech in TVP. Its boring to see only bio played in this matchup.
Tempest ground weapon damage increased from 30 to 30+30-to-structures
This is one of the changes that does nothing, its just to give protos something while nerfing the other things, so kids wont cry too much on forums - nice move.
Hydralisk delay between attacks decreased from .83 to .75
Maybe it could help in ZVP a little bit, but in ZVT while Terran is turtling not gonna work at all, Hydralisk will die same fast to tanks as it is now. Zergs need buff on sky units, like Corruptor or Broodlord, or give Mutalisk separate attack vs air units.
Ps: fix swarmhost and photon overcharge - thanks
Edit: adding calculations done by Grumbels:
Game speed is x1.4, so a 10 second blink cooldown becomes 10 / 1.4 = ~7.15 seconds
Players aren't magically going to figure out how to hold the ridiculous amount of allins Protoss have in the coming months or years, don't fall into this trap of "just wait." Protoss is dominating every server, foreigner Zergs and Protosses regularly take games off Koreans yet Terrans seldom do. You're right that Protoss struggled at the end WoL vs Zerg, but not due to people "learning how to play", but due to the power of the Infestor. TvP certainly wasn't Terran favoured.
There is still some truth in that, generally Macro races will take more time to master, since you need to figure out how to defend all the allins, but once no more pop up for some time, it will swing in favour of the macro race. Just look at Terran in BW.
Players aren't magically going to figure out how to hold the ridiculous amount of allins Protoss have in the coming months or years, don't fall into this trap of "just wait." Protoss is dominating every server, foreigner Zergs and Protosses regularly take games off Koreans yet Terrans seldom do. You're right that Protoss struggled at the end WoL vs Zerg, but not due to people "learning how to play", but due to the power of the Infestor. TvP certainly wasn't Terran favoured.
There is still some truth in that, generally Macro races will take more time to master, since you need to figure out how to defend all the allins, but once no more pop up for some time, it will swing in favour of the macro race. Just look at Terran in BW.
If one race is considered "macro" and the other one isn't there is something terribly wrong with balance.
well its no fault of protoss but the race is built around having extremely potent all ins with the mechanics that surround it..... Can Speed up Tech / Speed up unit production and can Warp units anywhere on the map.... Incidentally The warp in mechanic is the absolute strongest mechanic in the game...... It Deletes the travel distance of a unit which translates into faster production time when attacking more specifically... so its the strongest Aggressive mechanic in the game i should say....
They also have a lot of Overlapping roles of units that have to be dealt with in different ways which also makes it extremely powerful....
With the exception to the blink cool down change, I think the overall suggested changes are decent to be first tested out. They all seems quite logical. Tempest might become a good siege unit that forces engagement who knows what it can bring us. Even if players do proxy stargate tempest rush, it would be interesting to watch.
Really looking forward to the widow mine buff, this is the first step in bringing mech to TvP. Mine/Tank/Viking/Raven
On February 13 2014 00:05 Pirfiktshon wrote: well its no fault of protoss but the race is built around having extremely potent all ins with the mechanics that surround it..... Can Speed up Tech / Speed up unit production and can Warp units anywhere on the map.... Incidentally The warp in mechanic is the absolute strongest mechanic in the game...... It Deletes the travel distance of a unit which translates into faster production time when attacking more specifically... so its the strongest Aggressive mechanic in the game i should say....
They also have a lot of Overlapping roles of units that have to be dealt with in different ways which also makes it extremely powerful....
It's not that easy. Zerg has always had some of the fastest units in the game with short production times under 30seconds. For their allins they need only like 1-2 extra tech buildings/upgrades which is hard to scout to begin with, and on top of that they burst produce so that you can't scout an army-build up very easily. Add to that that banelings can be morphed in close proximity with 80splash to buildings. Yet Zergs did not really have very powerful allins before their opponents started playing more economy based styles. And actually, same thing goes for Protoss against Terran. In the old days of TvP 2-3rax or 1-1-1 openings of Terran were all pretty good against all the Protoss cheeses, regardless warpgate or chronoboost.
Like 95% of the allins/rushes/cheeses/timings are metagame and BO reliant. The only exceptions to those are usually the ones that are near broken to begin with (Immortal/Sentry, Blink allin, Roach/baneling...)
They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
On February 12 2014 13:14 Wombat_NI wrote: He has a point, like or loathe them Blink Stalkers are close to the most microable and skill-scaling unit Protoss have.
He has the kernel of a point, wrapped in a cocoon of an onion of encasings of non-points. Protoss do not routinely get nerfs to interesting things. Phoenixes and Warp Prisms both got buffed in/around HOTS. High Templar hasn't been touched. This nerf is only being considered as a measure of last resort, and although I think we'll come to that last resort, I don't think this is the nerf DK will end up going with. (I hope not, anyway!)
Well yeah, it's not so much Protoss get nerfs to make them less interesting, more they don't really get tweaks to make their units more microable and rewarding to play. Phoenixes are close to the perfect harass unit that exists in SC2 so at least we have that, with other cute things like lifting your own units to save them.
Speaking purely hypothetically, how would pre-snipe nerf Ghostmech fare against Swarmhost turtling? Snipe range is 11 right?
Well. Hard to say. Depends on if Zerg adapts to it, I don't think it'd work (cloak won't work, and you still need to get close)
On February 13 2014 00:25 b0ub0u wrote: They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
No Energy + Shields and no regeneration for 20s for warpgated units, researching Warpgate increases Gateway Build time to the same speed as warpgate, Khaydarin Amulet could get back, or we get a research at Twilight/Robobay for ~250/250/120 that gives full strenght warp ins.
No changes to late game, early game warp weakened, trade of between warpin and gateways.
On February 13 2014 00:05 Pirfiktshon wrote: well its no fault of protoss but the race is built around having extremely potent all ins with the mechanics that surround it..... Can Speed up Tech / Speed up unit production and can Warp units anywhere on the map.... Incidentally The warp in mechanic is the absolute strongest mechanic in the game...... It Deletes the travel distance of a unit which translates into faster production time when attacking more specifically... so its the strongest Aggressive mechanic in the game i should say....
They also have a lot of Overlapping roles of units that have to be dealt with in different ways which also makes it extremely powerful....
It's not that easy. Zerg has always had some of the fastest units in the game with short production times under 30seconds. For their allins they need only like 1-2 extra tech buildings/upgrades which is hard to scout to begin with, and on top of that they burst produce so that you can't scout an army-build up very easily. Add to that that banelings can be morphed in close proximity with 80splash to buildings. Yet Zergs did not really have very powerful allins before their opponents started playing more economy based styles. And actually, same thing goes for Protoss against Terran. In the old days of TvP 2-3rax or 1-1-1 openings of Terran were all pretty good against all the Protoss cheeses, regardless warpgate or chronoboost.
Like 95% of the allins/rushes/cheeses/timings are metagame and BO reliant. The only exceptions to those are usually the ones that are near broken to begin with (Immortal/Sentry, Blink allin, Roach/baneling...)
Actually, Daedulus showed us that Zerg all ins/aggression are weak because of natural chokes which lets Terran and Protoss to wall off/bunker. If it wasn't for that, mass Zergs would dominate like you said due to production speed and mobility. That is why Zerg usually have map control early game, they only thing holding them back is the wall.
On February 13 2014 00:25 b0ub0u wrote: They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I guess it depends whether Protoss product is limited by building time or resources, I think it is the latter for most cases unless the building time is drastically different. I guess some timings should be affected
On February 12 2014 20:33 Afterstar wrote: No need to nerf blink cooldown, I think I would rather see the mothership core vision reduced to 5(same as attack range).
This will solve a lot of the problems for TvP without affecting other matchups.
Doesn't this affect mcores scouting ability in pvp?
how about using probes and observers MSC was designed to be a defensive unit - at least initial
On February 12 2014 20:33 Afterstar wrote: No need to nerf blink cooldown, I think I would rather see the mothership core vision reduced to 5(same as attack range).
This will solve a lot of the problems for TvP without affecting other matchups.
Doesn't this affect mcores scouting ability in pvp?
how about using probes and observers MSC was designed to be a defensive unit - at least initial
There's a gap in scouting between Stalker popping and Obs/Oracle/Phoenix reaching the opponents base. You cannot intelligently determine your tech, and people used the MSC to do exactly that.
They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I think this could be cool as in a Race feature and could definitely be used for the campaign for LotV, but from a pure multiplayer standpoint, Warp Gate tech is one of the mechanics that really differentiate the Protoss race from the rest, which is even more important.
They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I think this could be cool as in a Race feature and could definitely be used for the campaign for LotV, but from a pure multiplayer standpoint, Warp Gate tech is one of the mechanics that really differentiate the Protoss race from the rest, which is even more important.
Sure it differentiates them, but is it in a positive way? And Protoss had a "queuing production" too in SC1, and it did not make them similar to Terran for all that.
Well you made a good point about that fact of early builds that helped defend such things... but now Protoss can just defend with F Click on Nexus against alot of those builds... So its impossible to try to play one of those styles or really its a HUGE Gamble one that never pays off for the terran player.... Honestly if that was the problem in PvP they should have made a unit an early scout role not an everything role Defensive / Offensive / Scout which is not just a little about that role but A FRICK TON of each role.... lol Honestly I think thats what they should turn the MSC into is a cheap scouting unit so that they can react to their Protoss opponent... and not have the insane spells it has now....
Sure it differentiates them, but is it in a positive way? And Protoss had a "queuing production" too in SC1, and it did not make them similar to Terran for all that.
I do think it is in a positive way, however there's been a ton of trouble with it, for sure.
On February 12 2014 20:33 Afterstar wrote: No need to nerf blink cooldown, I think I would rather see the mothership core vision reduced to 5(same as attack range).
This will solve a lot of the problems for TvP without affecting other matchups.
Doesn't this affect mcores scouting ability in pvp?
how about using probes and observers MSC was designed to be a defensive unit - at least initial
Yea you send a Probe in that dies to a Stalker, then you send an Observer in and an Oracle flies into your base! Great scouting!
Warpgate is more potent now than it has ever been, the advantage of cutting reinforcement travel time in an era with maps a hell of a lot bigger than early WoL is much more pronounced.
I know you people hate Protoss but the guy who laid out the following pattern: 1. Protoss has a ton of allins that beat people a lot. 2. People figure out responses to most of the Protoss timings. 3. Protoss sucks, or is limited to a very few allins that are consistently good. The Immortal/Sentry was one of these, an all-in so good that I really disliked what it did for the game, but the only real reliable 2 base allin Protoss had that didn't require a scouting denial.
I tend to agree. Protoss is just a gimmicky race that annoys people a lot, but for those of us who would like to play a more stable and mechanical style, it's just not really as effective as either turtling or all-inning.
PvT was worse than this though, because some of the allins require total different responses [i]and[/i/] could be hard to scout.
Plenty of Korean protosses have complained about this, how they felt they could not play a safe, standard style and had to resort to gimmicks and all ins to be viable. The most common complaint has been that there is no good way go truly express their skill through mechanical play. Ironically, swarm host turtle is probably the hardest thing for a protoss to play against, and acts sort of as a way to separate the chaff from the wheat.
The all ins kind of have to be strong, but there is something that just fundamentally feels wrong when a 2 base push gets scouted several minutes in advance, every correct preparation is taken, and yet the protoss just walks across the map and proceeds to crush the opponent.
Plenty of Korean protosses have complained about this, how they felt they could not play a safe, standard style and had to resort to gimmicks and all ins to be viable. The most common complaint has been that there is no good way go truly express their skill through mechanical play. Ironically, swarm host turtle is probably the hardest thing for a protoss to play against, and acts sort of as a way to separate the chaff from the wheat.
The all ins kind of have to be strong, but there is something that just fundamentally feels wrong when a 2 base push gets scouted several minutes in advance, every correct preparation is taken, and yet the protoss just walks across the map and proceeds to crush the opponent.
Pretty much this I took issue with this in PvZ especially but I completely feel for the protoss that express themselves in that way.. They are playing a race they love and wish to have the ability to express their ability in their play which they can to a very small extent... most of the time the playing agianst protoss is more of a "Suicide Squeeze" method where its a forced point where HAVING the actual specific unit means more than your actual micro with that unit.... For instance Colo your opponent gets 4 Colo with blink stalkers if you don't have Vikings you auto lose to that because vikings are your only answer well if your opponent plays the 2 Base Blink stalker Forces you to react to that and Rushes colo while containing you with good micro you go to counter and BAM your met with a wall of colo and are forced to GG out. Same with the DT / Archon rush you take any damage from the DT because you were harassed with a 10/10/10 into DT and didn't have time to scout for it you finally deal with the DT then Bam Archon Zlot combo knocking at your door which is actually what gave Maru his first loss in PL minus the 10/10/10 pressure LOL
Sorry for the rant here but it stresses my point that protoss is more of the units you have and not about how you can control them... whereas terran is about how you can control the units you have and less about what you have.... because you can have vikings but you put them in a bad spot and BAM you lose them against Blink stalker or even your bio force against STorm which we see quite often they get backed into a corner and T Click you lost your army LOL classic case of more of protoss having the unit vs Terrans control....
Edit: I should kinda make my point a little more clear because protoss players are probably reading this with Flame in their eyes.... It Does matter hwo you control your army.... BUT the Ceiling for that control is very low which is why PvP is so volatile because you can lose to someone that is considerably worse than you in PvP because he zigged (DT Rushed) and you zagged ( 4 Gate Blink Stalker ) LOL
They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I think this could be cool as in a Race feature and could definitely be used for the campaign for LotV, but from a pure multiplayer standpoint, Warp Gate tech is one of the mechanics that really differentiate the Protoss race from the rest, which is even more important.
Sure it differentiates them, but is it in a positive way? And Protoss had a "queuing production" too in SC1, and it did not make them similar to Terran for all that.
It did not make them a better race than SC2 Protoss either.
The game still isn't quite as figured out as WoL, but this was most neatly seen in PvZ at the height of Stephano's powers. I remember Bo7s where MC would literally have to do a different build every game and hope to surprise Steph, who was opening pretty much the same every game.
Protoss has a lot of opening gambits now that throw vT into flux, but back in the day you could open 1 Rax Gasless pretty much every game and just play out a macro game as Terran and the build divergence occurred later on up the tree. Now Terrans have to factor in a lot of all-ins that are hitting at timings that 1 Rax Gasless doesn't deal that well with, as well as having Protoss with the MSC's defensive capability.
PvT was a lot better in WoL IMO, at the top Korean level it was amazing at times to watch guys like Taeja, Polt, MKP, Bomber et al duke it out with Rain, Parting, HerO and the likes.
They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I think this could be cool as in a Race feature and could definitely be used for the campaign for LotV, but from a pure multiplayer standpoint, Warp Gate tech is one of the mechanics that really differentiate the Protoss race from the rest, which is even more important.
Sure it differentiates them, but is it in a positive way? And Protoss had a "queuing production" too in SC1, and it did not make them similar to Terran for all that.
It did not make them a better race than SC2 Protoss either.
The game still isn't quite as figured out as WoL, but this was most neatly seen in PvZ at the height of Stephano's powers. I remember Bo7s where MC would literally have to do a different build every game and hope to surprise Steph, who was opening pretty much the same every game.
Protoss has a lot of opening gambits now that throw vT into flux, but back in the day you could open 1 Rax Gasless pretty much every game and just play out a macro game as Terran and the build divergence occurred later on up the tree. Now Terrans have to factor in a lot of all-ins that are hitting at timings that 1 Rax Gasless doesn't deal that well with, as well as having Protoss with the MSC's defensive capability.
PvT was a lot better in WoL IMO, at the top Korean level it was amazing at times to watch guys like Taeja, Polt, MKP, Bomber et al duke it out with Rain, Parting, HerO and the likes.
100% agree... one thing i would like to point out as well is that I don't think any terran here would have a problem with the amount of all ins if we had a crutch like Protoss has in PvP... think about it they wanted to fix PvP so taht you could safely expand.... well all those all ins that crush your protoss opponent when they expand just so happen to have a HUGE Detriment to the Terran builds.... it just so happens that Terrans are trying to use macro builds because aggressive openers don't work and hoping for the best.... Think about that for a second... What they tried fixing in PvP they then created in TvP but basically is saying that the Terran side can't have any viable all ins which gives all the cards to the P player....
They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I think this could be cool as in a Race feature and could definitely be used for the campaign for LotV, but from a pure multiplayer standpoint, Warp Gate tech is one of the mechanics that really differentiate the Protoss race from the rest, which is even more important.
Sure it differentiates them, but is it in a positive way? And Protoss had a "queuing production" too in SC1, and it did not make them similar to Terran for all that.
It did not make them a better race than SC2 Protoss either.
Unsure where you want to go with that sentence?
That I actually think that warpgate production makes them a little more different from Terran, while I don't think the main reason why Protoss balls up or allins stems from something like warpgate, but rather from "untradeable" expensive, lots of survival, little damage output units like the stalker, the dragoon, the immortal, the scout, the Archon...
On February 13 2014 01:44 Wombat_NI wrote: The game still isn't quite as figured out as WoL, but this was most neatly seen in PvZ at the height of Stephano's powers. I remember Bo7s where MC would literally have to do a different build every game and hope to surprise Steph, who was opening pretty much the same every game.
Protoss has a lot of opening gambits now that throw vT into flux, but back in the day you could open 1 Rax Gasless pretty much every game and just play out a macro game as Terran and the build divergence occurred later on up the tree. Now Terrans have to factor in a lot of all-ins that are hitting at timings that 1 Rax Gasless doesn't deal that well with, as well as having Protoss with the MSC's defensive capability.
PvT was a lot better in WoL IMO, at the top Korean level it was amazing at times to watch guys like Taeja, Polt, MKP, Bomber et al duke it out with Rain, Parting, HerO and the likes.
I don't think, say, PvX can be figured out in HotS, because protoss is so versatile with so many "extreme" units, it feels like there are always new builds to try. I think protoss is now less neutered than in late WoL, when they had very few options you really had to respect. It's actually something I like about the design, it makes watching players such as San quite fun, since you're always wondering what he'll do next.
It leads to many broken situations unfortunately, and since protoss is so badly designed in general I feel like it hurts as much as it helps.
They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I think this could be cool as in a Race feature and could definitely be used for the campaign for LotV, but from a pure multiplayer standpoint, Warp Gate tech is one of the mechanics that really differentiate the Protoss race from the rest, which is even more important.
Sure it differentiates them, but is it in a positive way? And Protoss had a "queuing production" too in SC1, and it did not make them similar to Terran for all that.
It did not make them a better race than SC2 Protoss either.
Unsure where you want to go with that sentence?
That I actually think that warpgate production makes them a little more different from Terran, while I don't think the main reason why Protoss balls up or allins stems from something like warpgate, but rather from "untradeable" expensive, lots of survival, little damage output units like the stalker, the dragoon, the immortal, the scout, the Archon...
Warpgate does further differentiate Protoss from Terran, but you would not call Protoss "Terran 2.0" even if gate production was the rule; the units are different enough to create clear distinctions between the two races.
Warpgate has some influence on the "deathbally" aspect of Protoss but you could indeed break the deathball even with Warpgate still in the game as the normal gate production.
But as for Protoss having so many all-ins, that's 100% a byproduct of Warpgate. There's not a single post 5 minuts all-in that doesn't rely on the "instant gate units reinforcement + build/keep building your attack near your opponent's base" mechanic (even if you bring some "tech units" such as Immortals or Colossi which were normally produced in your base). No doubt Protoss would still have some all-ins even without Warpgate—as Terran and Zerg have some without the instant reinforcement—but most would be erased.
They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I think this could be cool as in a Race feature and could definitely be used for the campaign for LotV, but from a pure multiplayer standpoint, Warp Gate tech is one of the mechanics that really differentiate the Protoss race from the rest, which is even more important.
Sure it differentiates them, but is it in a positive way? And Protoss had a "queuing production" too in SC1, and it did not make them similar to Terran for all that.
It did not make them a better race than SC2 Protoss either.
Unsure where you want to go with that sentence?
That I actually think that warpgate production makes them a little more different from Terran, while I don't think the main reason why Protoss balls up or allins stems from something like warpgate, but rather from "untradeable" expensive, lots of survival, little damage output units like the stalker, the dragoon, the immortal, the scout, the Archon...
The immortal? Holy shit.
You mean the unit that owns 5 siege tanks single-handedly and survives with only shield damage?
Low damage output indeed.
And I'm not even gonna get started about the Archon.
They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I think this could be cool as in a Race feature and could definitely be used for the campaign for LotV, but from a pure multiplayer standpoint, Warp Gate tech is one of the mechanics that really differentiate the Protoss race from the rest, which is even more important.
Sure it differentiates them, but is it in a positive way? And Protoss had a "queuing production" too in SC1, and it did not make them similar to Terran for all that.
It did not make them a better race than SC2 Protoss either.
Unsure where you want to go with that sentence?
That I actually think that warpgate production makes them a little more different from Terran, while I don't think the main reason why Protoss balls up or allins stems from something like warpgate, but rather from "untradeable" expensive, lots of survival, little damage output units like the stalker, the dragoon, the immortal, the scout, the Archon...
The immortal? Holy shit.
You mean the unit that owns 5 siege tanks single-handedly and survives with only shield damage?
Low damage output indeed.
And I'm not even gonna get started about the Archon.
I assumed he was talking about non-Armored units for the Immortal, because my Marauders or Tanks sure don't think they have little damage output indeed.
If they want to buff Hydra vs T they should buff health.
Health buff = good vs Terran Attack buff = good vs Protoss.
On the same line of thoughts, they should slightly decrease Swarm Host attack and Increase swarms' health if they want to make the unit useful vs Terran.
They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I think this could be cool as in a Race feature and could definitely be used for the campaign for LotV, but from a pure multiplayer standpoint, Warp Gate tech is one of the mechanics that really differentiate the Protoss race from the rest, which is even more important.
Sure it differentiates them, but is it in a positive way? And Protoss had a "queuing production" too in SC1, and it did not make them similar to Terran for all that.
It did not make them a better race than SC2 Protoss either.
Unsure where you want to go with that sentence?
That I actually think that warpgate production makes them a little more different from Terran, while I don't think the main reason why Protoss balls up or allins stems from something like warpgate, but rather from "untradeable" expensive, lots of survival, little damage output units like the stalker, the dragoon, the immortal, the scout, the Archon...
The immortal? Holy shit.
You mean the unit that owns 5 siege tanks single-handedly and survives with only shield damage?
Low damage output indeed.
And I'm not even gonna get started about the Archon.
Immortal: 14-35dps for 250/100/4
2*Marauder: 20-40dps for 200/50/4 4*Marine: 42dps for 200/0/4 2*Zealot: 27dps for 200/0/4 8*zergling: 57.6dps for 200/0/4
The Immortal is a bad damage dealer for its price, it's barely over average against armored. Point is that it has 200life + 100hardened shields.
Now - mobility issues aside which is the next problem a lot of Protoss problems have and why you don't go over the map with them - what would you rather use against something that doesn't shoot back like workers: - Immortals - who gain nothing from their high HP in that situation, since the opponent isn't fighting back and when he is you have to run anyways - something cheaper with higher dps
You know, the game is made in a way that you can have marines or banelings dropped into your mineral line and you can react to their damage output. Guess which units won't be worth dropping. The ones with lower damage output which do even less if your opponent is on top of his defense. That's one of the main problems with Protoss harassment play. You can give dragoons all the blink in the world, they will still only kill very few SCVs before they have to retreat if you harass with them. Meanwhile zerg suicides 15zerglings without doing anything 2-3times, but when they hit the opponent, oh man does he bleed.
They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I think this could be cool as in a Race feature and could definitely be used for the campaign for LotV, but from a pure multiplayer standpoint, Warp Gate tech is one of the mechanics that really differentiate the Protoss race from the rest, which is even more important.
Sure it differentiates them, but is it in a positive way? And Protoss had a "queuing production" too in SC1, and it did not make them similar to Terran for all that.
It did not make them a better race than SC2 Protoss either.
Unsure where you want to go with that sentence?
That I actually think that warpgate production makes them a little more different from Terran, while I don't think the main reason why Protoss balls up or allins stems from something like warpgate, but rather from "untradeable" expensive, lots of survival, little damage output units like the stalker, the dragoon, the immortal, the scout, the Archon...
The immortal? Holy shit.
You mean the unit that owns 5 siege tanks single-handedly and survives with only shield damage?
Low damage output indeed.
And I'm not even gonna get started about the Archon.
Immortal: 14-35dps for 250/100/4
2*Marauder: 20-40dps for 200/50/4 4*Marine: 42dps for 200/0/4 2*Zealot: 27dps for 200/0/4 8*zergling: 57.6dps for 200/0/4
The Immortal is a bad damage dealer for its price, it's barely over average against armored. Point is that it has 200life + 100hardened shields.
That is a simplistic way of looking at units. In a real game, you have to account for survivability to. For example, a marine or a zergling have high DPS, but they will most likely die very fast, effectively having little time to do their DPS. An Immortal, Archon, Tank (due to range), etc have lower DPS but survive much longer thus still being very good dmg dealers.
The Immortal with it's above average DPS against armored and super high survivability makes it a FANTASTIC DMG dealer to armored units.
They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I think this could be cool as in a Race feature and could definitely be used for the campaign for LotV, but from a pure multiplayer standpoint, Warp Gate tech is one of the mechanics that really differentiate the Protoss race from the rest, which is even more important.
Sure it differentiates them, but is it in a positive way? And Protoss had a "queuing production" too in SC1, and it did not make them similar to Terran for all that.
It did not make them a better race than SC2 Protoss either.
Unsure where you want to go with that sentence?
That I actually think that warpgate production makes them a little more different from Terran, while I don't think the main reason why Protoss balls up or allins stems from something like warpgate, but rather from "untradeable" expensive, lots of survival, little damage output units like the stalker, the dragoon, the immortal, the scout, the Archon...
The immortal? Holy shit.
You mean the unit that owns 5 siege tanks single-handedly and survives with only shield damage?
Low damage output indeed.
And I'm not even gonna get started about the Archon.
Immortal: 14-35dps for 250/100/4
2*Marauder: 20-40dps for 200/50/4 4*Marine: 42dps for 200/0/4 2*Zealot: 27dps for 200/0/4 8*zergling: 57.6dps for 200/0/4
The Immortal is a bad damage dealer for its price, it's barely over average against armored. Point is that it has 200life + 100hardened shields.
Now - mobility issues aside which is the next problem a lot of Protoss problems have and why you don't go over the map with them - what would you rather use against something that doesn't shoot back like workers: - Immortals - who gain nothing from their high HP in that situation, since the opponent isn't fighting back and when he is you have to run anyways - something cheaper with higher dps
You know, the game is made in a way that you can have marines or banelings dropped into your mineral line and you can react to their damage output. Guess which units won't be worth dropping. The ones with lower damage output which do even less if your opponent is on top of his defense. That's one of the main problems with Protoss harassment play. You can give dragoons all the blink in the world, they will still only kill very few SCVs before they have to retreat if you harass with them. Meanwhile zerg suicides 15zerglings without doing anything 2-3times, but when they hit the opponent, oh man does he bleed.
That is a ridiculous way to look at it. Especially when I specifically mentioned its unmatched ability to survive vs tanks. A key thing about most protoss units is that they have high survivability, not high dps. This is TL.net in a nutshell - only argue against one part of someones argument and leave out the other parts which were needed to make a point in the first place.
And what about the archon? You conveniently forgot to comment on that. Why don't you show me some calculations about the poor damage output of the archon while ignoring the fact that it does splash damage and has 350hp.
They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I think this could be cool as in a Race feature and could definitely be used for the campaign for LotV, but from a pure multiplayer standpoint, Warp Gate tech is one of the mechanics that really differentiate the Protoss race from the rest, which is even more important.
Sure it differentiates them, but is it in a positive way? And Protoss had a "queuing production" too in SC1, and it did not make them similar to Terran for all that.
It did not make them a better race than SC2 Protoss either.
Unsure where you want to go with that sentence?
That I actually think that warpgate production makes them a little more different from Terran, while I don't think the main reason why Protoss balls up or allins stems from something like warpgate, but rather from "untradeable" expensive, lots of survival, little damage output units like the stalker, the dragoon, the immortal, the scout, the Archon...
The immortal? Holy shit.
You mean the unit that owns 5 siege tanks single-handedly and survives with only shield damage?
Low damage output indeed.
And I'm not even gonna get started about the Archon.
Immortal: 14-35dps for 250/100/4
2*Marauder: 20-40dps for 200/50/4 4*Marine: 42dps for 200/0/4 2*Zealot: 27dps for 200/0/4 8*zergling: 57.6dps for 200/0/4
The Immortal is a bad damage dealer for its price, it's barely over average against armored. Point is that it has 200life + 100hardened shields.
Now - mobility issues aside which is the next problem a lot of Protoss problems have and why you don't go over the map with them - what would you rather use against something that doesn't shoot back like workers: - Immortals - who gain nothing from their high HP in that situation, since the opponent isn't fighting back and when he is you have to run anyways - something cheaper with higher dps
You know, the game is made in a way that you can have marines or banelings dropped into your mineral line and you can react to their damage output. Guess which units won't be worth dropping. The ones with lower damage output which do even less if your opponent is on top of his defense. That's one of the main problems with Protoss harassment play. You can give dragoons all the blink in the world, they will still only kill very few SCVs before they have to retreat if you harass with them. Meanwhile zerg suicides 15zerglings without doing anything 2-3times, but when they hit the opponent, oh man does he bleed.
That is a ridiculous way to look at it. Especially when I specifically mentioned its unmatched ability to survive vs tanks. A key thing about most protoss units is that they have high survivability, not high dps. This is TL.net in a nutshell - only argue against one part of someones argument and leave out the other parts which were needed to make a point in the first place.
And what about the archon? You conveniently forgot to comment on that. Why don't you show me some calculations about the poor damage output of the archon while ignoring the fact that it does splash damage and has 350hp.
You can go around in circles with this forever. It's 100/300 at the cheapest, it can be EMP'd for 100 damage, has 10 hp once you get through the shields (and shields aren't generally upgraded), tanks have splash too but that's always ignored, archons can be kited and are short range, etc. etc.
Everyone needs to stop comparing units in a vacuum. Seriously, knock it off, it isn't helpful to anyone.
Archons and Immortals are pretty big though, which helps to mitigate splash damage in general + EMPs. Ghostmech should be better against them than it actually ends up being, specially since the EMP radius nerf.
On February 12 2014 13:14 Wombat_NI wrote: He has a point, like or loathe them Blink Stalkers are close to the most microable and skill-scaling unit Protoss have.
He has the kernel of a point, wrapped in a cocoon of an onion of encasings of non-points. Protoss do not routinely get nerfs to interesting things. Phoenixes and Warp Prisms both got buffed in/around HOTS. High Templar hasn't been touched. This nerf is only being considered as a measure of last resort, and although I think we'll come to that last resort, I don't think this is the nerf DK will end up going with. (I hope not, anyway!)
Well yeah, it's not so much Protoss get nerfs to make them less interesting, more they don't really get tweaks to make their units more microable and rewarding to play. Phoenixes are close to the perfect harass unit that exists in SC2 so at least we have that, with other cute things like lifting your own units to save them.
Speaking purely hypothetically, how would pre-snipe nerf Ghostmech fare against Swarmhost turtling? Snipe range is 11 right?
Pre-nerf snipe was only good aginst broods and ultras due to their relatively fewer numbers and larger size. I don't think it would have much impact against the locusts that swamhosts produce. Tanks with 13 range can barely get into range with seige mode, I don't think the 10 range on snipe can really threaten swarmhosts very easily. Oh yeah its 10 range btw.
Snipe vs swarm hosts would be almost impossible even if it would oneshot them. Zerg will have spores everywhere, fungal and abduct would fuck the ghosts up no end. You'd just lose a bunch of ghosts for very little gain.
I suppose some kind of mass ghost/raven attack with a tonne of PDDs to soak damage could happen, but it doesn't seem very plausible.
On February 12 2014 13:14 Wombat_NI wrote: He has a point, like or loathe them Blink Stalkers are close to the most microable and skill-scaling unit Protoss have.
He has the kernel of a point, wrapped in a cocoon of an onion of encasings of non-points. Protoss do not routinely get nerfs to interesting things. Phoenixes and Warp Prisms both got buffed in/around HOTS. High Templar hasn't been touched. This nerf is only being considered as a measure of last resort, and although I think we'll come to that last resort, I don't think this is the nerf DK will end up going with. (I hope not, anyway!)
Well yeah, it's not so much Protoss get nerfs to make them less interesting, more they don't really get tweaks to make their units more microable and rewarding to play. Phoenixes are close to the perfect harass unit that exists in SC2 so at least we have that, with other cute things like lifting your own units to save them.
Speaking purely hypothetically, how would pre-snipe nerf Ghostmech fare against Swarmhost turtling? Snipe range is 11 right?
Pre-nerf snipe was only good aginst broods and ultras due to their relatively fewer numbers and larger size. I don't think it would have much impact against the locusts that swamhosts produce. Tanks with 13 range can barely get into range with seige mode, I don't think the 10 range on snipe can really threaten swarmhosts very easily. Oh yeah its 10 range btw.
Might be able to nuke the swarmhosts using some cloaked ghosts to snipe overseers that try to spot the ghosts, or at least nuke the static defenses.
They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I think this could be cool as in a Race feature and could definitely be used for the campaign for LotV, but from a pure multiplayer standpoint, Warp Gate tech is one of the mechanics that really differentiate the Protoss race from the rest, which is even more important.
Sure it differentiates them, but is it in a positive way? And Protoss had a "queuing production" too in SC1, and it did not make them similar to Terran for all that.
It did not make them a better race than SC2 Protoss either.
Unsure where you want to go with that sentence?
That I actually think that warpgate production makes them a little more different from Terran, while I don't think the main reason why Protoss balls up or allins stems from something like warpgate, but rather from "untradeable" expensive, lots of survival, little damage output units like the stalker, the dragoon, the immortal, the scout, the Archon...
The immortal? Holy shit.
You mean the unit that owns 5 siege tanks single-handedly and survives with only shield damage?
Low damage output indeed.
And I'm not even gonna get started about the Archon.
Immortal: 14-35dps for 250/100/4
2*Marauder: 20-40dps for 200/50/4 4*Marine: 42dps for 200/0/4 2*Zealot: 27dps for 200/0/4 8*zergling: 57.6dps for 200/0/4
The Immortal is a bad damage dealer for its price, it's barely over average against armored. Point is that it has 200life + 100hardened shields.
Now - mobility issues aside which is the next problem a lot of Protoss problems have and why you don't go over the map with them - what would you rather use against something that doesn't shoot back like workers: - Immortals - who gain nothing from their high HP in that situation, since the opponent isn't fighting back and when he is you have to run anyways - something cheaper with higher dps
You know, the game is made in a way that you can have marines or banelings dropped into your mineral line and you can react to their damage output. Guess which units won't be worth dropping. The ones with lower damage output which do even less if your opponent is on top of his defense. That's one of the main problems with Protoss harassment play. You can give dragoons all the blink in the world, they will still only kill very few SCVs before they have to retreat if you harass with them. Meanwhile zerg suicides 15zerglings without doing anything 2-3times, but when they hit the opponent, oh man does he bleed.
That is a ridiculous way to look at it. Especially when I specifically mentioned its unmatched ability to survive vs tanks. A key thing about most protoss units is that they have high survivability, not high dps. This is TL.net in a nutshell - only argue against one part of someones argument and leave out the other parts which were needed to make a point in the first place.
And what about the archon? You conveniently forgot to comment on that. Why don't you show me some calculations about the poor damage output of the archon while ignoring the fact that it does splash damage and has 350hp.
Oh, I like how you changed his name to "Big N00B" in the quote just because you disagree with him.
He said that Immortals have low damage output for their cost, you attacked him and stated how 1 Immortal kills 5 Siege Tanks which doesn't have anything to do with Immortals "godly" dps, but with the fact that it is actually "immortal" against Siege Tanks. On the other hand, Immortals are quite bad against Zerglings, Zealots, Marines etc. so I don't see your point where you pick Immortal and say how it amazingly handles units that it is supposed to counter.
Then you are saying how "this is a ridiculous way to look at it" and how "this is TL.net in a nutshell" which sounds quite quite ironic from your previous post, I must say.
On February 13 2014 06:48 Squat wrote: Snipe vs swarm hosts would be almost impossible even if it would oneshot them. Zerg will have spores everywhere, fungal and abduct would fuck the ghosts up no end. You'd just lose a bunch of ghosts for very little gain.
I suppose some kind of mass ghost/raven attack with a tonne of PDDs to soak damage could happen, but it doesn't seem very plausible.
Who cares about plausible, it'd be so damn cool to see Ghosts again Having their old snipe would give them more offensive whack and make them worth getting to at least try to use nukes to force the Z to root and have to re-manouvere, increasing the chances they screw up. I dunno, I just have an irrational hardon for Ghostmech, that shit was cool man.
I'd be interested to hear any theories as to quite why snipe was nerfed so relatively quickly, likewise with things like Thors. It's not that they were/weren't broken but the balance team moved really damn fast to change them. My personal view is that it was to fit their idea of asymmetric design, in that Protoss/Zerg are 'supposed' to have stronger endgame comps, but I'm not sure.
On February 13 2014 06:50 wUndertUnge wrote: What if there was no autospawn for locusts?
What if there was no autoshoot for units? Making the unit stupidly awkward to use is not a good solution.
As for snipe vs zerg, I'd be all for it, I was just expressing my doubts that even with a damage buff it would be very useful against swarm hosts. Fuck it, let's give them a portable nuke launcher a la Starship Troopers. We have the weapons, we have the technology, we have the raven count!
There is no swarmhost tutle in ZvT. It's the Terran who does turtling. You don't have to break through swarmhost, you just have to defend. If you defended and taken 5 bases, you have won.
Ghosts versus infestors was conceptually quite nice. Ghosts would use snipe to kill patrolling overseers, nukes to deal with spore crawler defense, cloak to avoid various things, all to get the desired EMP hits off. It's like a clever tactical element in the game that rewards players with finesse. Very starship troopers-like, really.
On February 13 2014 07:32 Wombat_NI wrote: Need I remind anyone of THAT Gumiho game vs Life on iirc Entombed Valley?
Yep, I remember it, Gumiho had a snipe build prepared specifically for the style Life was using at the time, and also took precautions against burrowed infestor runbys. As a result Life sacrificed early eco for aggression, got no damage done, fell behind in eco and then got beaten to a pulp over the course of 10-15 minutes, was quite beautiful.
On February 13 2014 00:25 b0ub0u wrote: They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I agree but I would like to take a suggestion Toastysc2 made in another thread: Have energy units spawn without energy if warp gates are used and I would like to ad that units with a cool down mechanic would be warped in with the cool down active. This will not solve everything obviously but I wouldn't even apply this for the sake of nervs but just to make Protoss more interesting and have them a little extra to do/ consider.
On February 13 2014 06:48 Squat wrote: I'd be interested to hear any theories as to quite why snipe was nerfed so relatively quickly, likewise with things like Thors.
There was a famous Blizzcon finals, I think it was 2012 where Nestea's broodlord army got owned by an army of MVP Ghosts. MVP used a little mech, but mostly ghosts and sniped everything Nestea had.
This strategy had been gaining in popularity up until that point and I think that game was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ghost snipe was nerfed shortly thereafter.
On February 13 2014 00:25 b0ub0u wrote: They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I agree but I would like to take a suggestion Toastysc2 made in another thread: Have energy units spawn without energy if warp gates are used and I would like to ad that units with a cool down mechanic would be warped in with the cool down active. This will not solve everything obviously but I wouldn't even apply this for the sake of nervs but just to make Protoss more interesting and have them a little extra to do/ consider.
There's multiple options; A - No Energy B - No Shields (+ Regen for 20s) C - Abilities on cooldown (doesn't affect early game warpgate tho; Charge and Blink are both research) D - After WG is reseached, Gateways produce units faster than warpgates (this, in fact, is a buff to Protoss) E - Extra cost to WG warp in F - Twilight/Fleet Beacon (depending on how late you want it in the game) research for Energy+Shields at warp in G - If you don't do F, we can add Khaydarin Amulet back into the game :D! H - We can exclude these negative benefits at Warp Prism I - We can make units warping in take extra damage / take longer to produce
This all weakens Warp Gate as an offensive mechanic, but strenghtens Gateways. This also allows for room to potentially buff certain Gateway units and rebalance/design Protoss as a race without causing tooooo much damage. Just a trade-off between Warpgate and Gateway is a hugely interesting change!!
On February 13 2014 06:48 Squat wrote: I'd be interested to hear any theories as to quite why snipe was nerfed so relatively quickly, likewise with things like Thors.
There was a famous Blizzcon finals, I think it was 2012 where Nestea's broodlord army got owned by an army of MVP Ghosts. MVP used a little mech, but mostly ghosts and sniped everything Nestea had.
This strategy had been gaining in popularity up until that point and I think that game was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ghost snipe was nerfed shortly thereafter.
Oh that is well known, but I mean you had BL/Infestor for what 6+ months of the game?
The difference in time it took to address both was absolutely insane
On February 13 2014 06:48 Squat wrote: I'd be interested to hear any theories as to quite why snipe was nerfed so relatively quickly, likewise with things like Thors.
There was a famous Blizzcon finals, I think it was 2012 where Nestea's broodlord army got owned by an army of MVP Ghosts. MVP used a little mech, but mostly ghosts and sniped everything Nestea had.
This strategy had been gaining in popularity up until that point and I think that game was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ghost snipe was nerfed shortly thereafter.
Ghost snipe was bad for the same reason that infested terran spam was bad: trading energy for resources, while still being able to save your spellcasters and retreat to a defensive position. It's also the same reason that swarm hosts can be quite annoying.
On February 13 2014 06:48 Squat wrote: I'd be interested to hear any theories as to quite why snipe was nerfed so relatively quickly, likewise with things like Thors.
There was a famous Blizzcon finals, I think it was 2012 where Nestea's broodlord army got owned by an army of MVP Ghosts. MVP used a little mech, but mostly ghosts and sniped everything Nestea had.
This strategy had been gaining in popularity up until that point and I think that game was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ghost snipe was nerfed shortly thereafter.
That is not true.
MVP Revolutionarised TvZ by suddenly giving Terran an incredible lategame option to combat Zerg T3. The nerf came in almost instantly after this game, I think it was given 2 weeks?
It was a huge kneejerk reaction; because of the game. Shakuras was the most Terran favored map in the pool, very easy to split, Nestea didn't control his army well, it was a strategy that was never seen before. Meanwhile Snipe was nerfed from 45 damage to 25 damage - becoming effectively useless because regular Ghost DPS was higher. Loads of people including me vouched for something like 30 v Massive, 45 flat, 50 v Psionic. Ghost at the time started using Snipe vs Zealots and we also saw Snipe used vs Banelings every now and then.
In the end, Blizzard nerfed a cool ability through the ground while there was almost no data backing it up - and never even considered reverting said nerf. Currently, Snipe is only used against High Templar: Ghost are such a niche unit they actually have only one reason to be in the game; Checking High Templar.
On February 13 2014 06:48 Squat wrote: I'd be interested to hear any theories as to quite why snipe was nerfed so relatively quickly, likewise with things like Thors.
There was a famous Blizzcon finals, I think it was 2012 where Nestea's broodlord army got owned by an army of MVP Ghosts. MVP used a little mech, but mostly ghosts and sniped everything Nestea had.
This strategy had been gaining in popularity up until that point and I think that game was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ghost snipe was nerfed shortly thereafter.
Oh that is well known, but I mean you had BL/Infestor for what 6+ months of the game?
The difference in time it took to address both was absolutely insane
BL Infestor was never adressed.
Blizzard has a history of instantly nerfing Terran and waiting months with the other races... (see now, Protoss has been dominating for 2 months xD)
Here is the game. You can see Nestea MASSIVELY fucking up. No Overseers, using Infested Terrans instead of fungal, Those broodlords would probably have died even without Snipe.
On February 13 2014 06:48 Squat wrote: I'd be interested to hear any theories as to quite why snipe was nerfed so relatively quickly, likewise with things like Thors.
There was a famous Blizzcon finals, I think it was 2012 where Nestea's broodlord army got owned by an army of MVP Ghosts. MVP used a little mech, but mostly ghosts and sniped everything Nestea had.
This strategy had been gaining in popularity up until that point and I think that game was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ghost snipe was nerfed shortly thereafter.
Oh that is well known, but I mean you had BL/Infestor for what 6+ months of the game?
The difference in time it took to address both was absolutely insane
BL Infestor was never adressed.
Blizzard has a history of instantly nerfing Terran and waiting months with the other races... (see now, Protoss has been dominating for 2 months xD)
To be fair they did wait several months until they started to apply the first terran nerfs in HoTS.
On February 13 2014 06:48 Squat wrote: I'd be interested to hear any theories as to quite why snipe was nerfed so relatively quickly, likewise with things like Thors.
There was a famous Blizzcon finals, I think it was 2012 where Nestea's broodlord army got owned by an army of MVP Ghosts. MVP used a little mech, but mostly ghosts and sniped everything Nestea had.
This strategy had been gaining in popularity up until that point and I think that game was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ghost snipe was nerfed shortly thereafter.
Oh that is well known, but I mean you had BL/Infestor for what 6+ months of the game?
The difference in time it took to address both was absolutely insane
BL Infestor was never adressed.
Blizzard has a history of instantly nerfing Terran and waiting months with the other races... (see now, Protoss has been dominating for 2 months xD)
To be fair they did wait several months until they started to apply the first terran nerfs in HoTS.
Which nerfs? Hellbats got nerfed for TvT and Mines because ZvT was getting stale (swarmhost v mech is way more fun!)? Or am I missing one?
Balance early HotS wasn't that bad and the metagame was still a mess at the time.
They should create benefits of not turning all your gates into warpgates.
Let`s say with gateways units would be a little faster to built but you can`t warp-in. You build like a terran. With warpgates you would have the warp-in but the build time is a little bit slower.
That would make interesting choices for the Protoss to make.
I think this could be cool as in a Race feature and could definitely be used for the campaign for LotV, but from a pure multiplayer standpoint, Warp Gate tech is one of the mechanics that really differentiate the Protoss race from the rest, which is even more important.
Sure it differentiates them, but is it in a positive way? And Protoss had a "queuing production" too in SC1, and it did not make them similar to Terran for all that.
It did not make them a better race than SC2 Protoss either.
Unsure where you want to go with that sentence?
That I actually think that warpgate production makes them a little more different from Terran, while I don't think the main reason why Protoss balls up or allins stems from something like warpgate, but rather from "untradeable" expensive, lots of survival, little damage output units like the stalker, the dragoon, the immortal, the scout, the Archon...
The immortal? Holy shit.
You mean the unit that owns 5 siege tanks single-handedly and survives with only shield damage?
Low damage output indeed.
And I'm not even gonna get started about the Archon.
Immortal: 14-35dps for 250/100/4
2*Marauder: 20-40dps for 200/50/4 4*Marine: 42dps for 200/0/4 2*Zealot: 27dps for 200/0/4 8*zergling: 57.6dps for 200/0/4
The Immortal is a bad damage dealer for its price, it's barely over average against armored. Point is that it has 200life + 100hardened shields.
Now - mobility issues aside which is the next problem a lot of Protoss problems have and why you don't go over the map with them - what would you rather use against something that doesn't shoot back like workers: - Immortals - who gain nothing from their high HP in that situation, since the opponent isn't fighting back and when he is you have to run anyways - something cheaper with higher dps
You know, the game is made in a way that you can have marines or banelings dropped into your mineral line and you can react to their damage output. Guess which units won't be worth dropping. The ones with lower damage output which do even less if your opponent is on top of his defense. That's one of the main problems with Protoss harassment play. You can give dragoons all the blink in the world, they will still only kill very few SCVs before they have to retreat if you harass with them. Meanwhile zerg suicides 15zerglings without doing anything 2-3times, but when they hit the opponent, oh man does he bleed.
That is a ridiculous way to look at it. Especially when I specifically mentioned its unmatched ability to survive vs tanks. A key thing about most protoss units is that they have high survivability, not high dps. This is TL.net in a nutshell - only argue against one part of someones argument and leave out the other parts which were needed to make a point in the first place.
And what about the archon? You conveniently forgot to comment on that. Why don't you show me some calculations about the poor damage output of the archon while ignoring the fact that it does splash damage and has 350hp.
Oh, I like how you changed his name to "Big N00B" in the quote just because you disagree with him.
He said that Immortals have low damage output for their cost, you attacked him and stated how 1 Immortal kills 5 Siege Tanks which doesn't have anything to do with Immortals "godly" dps, but with the fact that it is actually "immortal" against Siege Tanks. On the other hand, Immortals are quite bad against Zerglings, Zealots, Marines etc. so I don't see your point where you pick Immortal and say how it amazingly handles units that it is supposed to counter.
Then you are saying how "this is a ridiculous way to look at it" and how "this is TL.net in a nutshell" which sounds quite quite ironic from your previous post, I must say.
I didn't do that because I just disagree with him. I did it because he was outright wrong, and so are you.
The original statement that caught my attention was: "The Immortal is a bad damage dealer for its price, it's barely over average against armored." This is an outright incorrect statement. In fact, it is a quite empty statement. It doesn't say anything.
Even if you follow it up with the sentence: "Point is that it has 200life + 100hardened shields." It still doesn't make things better.
In reality both things can be true. If microed correctly it can fuck up a lot of armored units. Disregard "dps" health and other unimportant things. If used correctly vs terran it can in some situations kill a lot of mech. In some other situations it can be EMP'd, focus fired by marines, surrouned by lings or hit by a widow mine only to be shelled to death by 10 tanks. It is not as simple as a situation where you input resources and get "dps" or "cost effectiveness" as output. It takes skill to use, it has to fit into your strategy and tactics and there are a ton of opportunities to be creative with it by using warp prisms. It is a unit in a real time strategy game.
On February 13 2014 06:48 Squat wrote: I'd be interested to hear any theories as to quite why snipe was nerfed so relatively quickly, likewise with things like Thors.
There was a famous Blizzcon finals, I think it was 2012 where Nestea's broodlord army got owned by an army of MVP Ghosts. MVP used a little mech, but mostly ghosts and sniped everything Nestea had.
This strategy had been gaining in popularity up until that point and I think that game was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ghost snipe was nerfed shortly thereafter.
Oh that is well known, but I mean you had BL/Infestor for what 6+ months of the game?
The difference in time it took to address both was absolutely insane
BL Infestor was never adressed.
Blizzard has a history of instantly nerfing Terran and waiting months with the other races... (see now, Protoss has been dominating for 2 months xD)
Yes but I'm asking WHY people think this might be the case. Is it because Terran isn't really 'meant' in Blizzard's eyes to have a kind of deadly Tier 3 composition of that potency without hardcore turtling into Sky Terran?
We hear quite a lot that they like asymmetric design, so is it that they want to force Terrans to fit into their conception of what their race 'should' be doing or what?
I've always find it maddening, sometimes Terran have things and timings that were legitimately close to broken, other times they figure something out and it's nearly instantly nerfed, not even giving the other races a chance to work out solutions to it.
On February 13 2014 06:48 Squat wrote: I'd be interested to hear any theories as to quite why snipe was nerfed so relatively quickly, likewise with things like Thors.
There was a famous Blizzcon finals, I think it was 2012 where Nestea's broodlord army got owned by an army of MVP Ghosts. MVP used a little mech, but mostly ghosts and sniped everything Nestea had.
This strategy had been gaining in popularity up until that point and I think that game was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ghost snipe was nerfed shortly thereafter.
Oh that is well known, but I mean you had BL/Infestor for what 6+ months of the game?
The difference in time it took to address both was absolutely insane
BL Infestor was never adressed.
Blizzard has a history of instantly nerfing Terran and waiting months with the other races... (see now, Protoss has been dominating for 2 months xD)
Yes but I'm asking WHY people think this might be the case. Is it because Terran isn't really 'meant' in Blizzard's eyes to have a kind of deadly Tier 3 composition of that potency without hardcore turtling into Sky Terran?
We hear quite a lot that they like asymmetric design, so is it that they want to force Terrans to fit into their conception of what their race 'should' be doing or what?
I've always find it maddening, sometimes Terran have things and timings that were legitimately close to broken, other times they figure something out and it's nearly instantly nerfed, not even giving the other races a chance to work out solutions to it.
That's what I dislike. We've seen lots of things Terran nerfed to shreds way too early, or if they were, in different circumstances. Siege Tanks were balanced on Steppes of War for christs sake.
We also have to keep in mind defending against a certain attack is always learned after said attack has been exploited for some time. There's always a small time in which the other races need to learn how to hold of a new Timing. We can see it with pre-queen buff hellions, Zerg before the recent mine nerf, that Ghost patch, blueflame, etcetera. Blizzard has historically been too fast with adjusting stats to 'fix' said offensive manouvers leaving Terran in an awkward spot:
After 4 years of SC2, Terran has never had an effective lategame composition that did not require mass turtling and the opponent messing up. Terran has always been put on a timer because the T3 tech was way too weak. IMO, that is one of the reasons Terran is so weak now. While early game gets shorter and less exploitable by bigger maps, adapting opponents and defensive units, Terran hasn't had that buff to Lategame to make up for it, leaving Terran in a very awkward spot of having to go almost all in at midgame to stand a chance. Every Terran build relies on shutting the game down on 3 bases, on more, you usually are reasonably behind.
On February 13 2014 06:48 Squat wrote: I'd be interested to hear any theories as to quite why snipe was nerfed so relatively quickly, likewise with things like Thors.
There was a famous Blizzcon finals, I think it was 2012 where Nestea's broodlord army got owned by an army of MVP Ghosts. MVP used a little mech, but mostly ghosts and sniped everything Nestea had.
This strategy had been gaining in popularity up until that point and I think that game was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ghost snipe was nerfed shortly thereafter.
Oh that is well known, but I mean you had BL/Infestor for what 6+ months of the game?
The difference in time it took to address both was absolutely insane
BL Infestor was never adressed.
Blizzard has a history of instantly nerfing Terran and waiting months with the other races... (see now, Protoss has been dominating for 2 months xD)
To be fair they did wait several months until they started to apply the first terran nerfs in HoTS.
Which nerfs? Hellbats got nerfed for TvT and Mines because ZvT was getting stale (swarmhost v mech is way more fun!)? Or am I missing one?
Balance early HotS wasn't that bad and the metagame was still a mess at the time.
HoTS was released on the 12th of March, Hellbat patch hits on July 11th, 4 months after release and WM nerf in November the 11th, 4 more months later. That's a far cry from instantly nerfing terran, like you said. I didn't comment on weather they where justified or not, just that Blizzard did wait a while.
Of course the did massively fuck up with the WM nerf patch, the same patch that also buffed oracles, no one in his right mind can deny this.
On February 13 2014 08:11 SC2Toastie wrote: Wow you are aggressive 0.0
Immortal DPS is average for it's cost, whatever way you turn it. You pay for Anti-Armored and for high survivability vs high damage low speed attacks.
Did you know Broodlords own Tanks too? And Banshees, and Void Rays? Every unit can "fuck up" another unit it hardly takes damage from?!
Aggressive?
I don't think you understood my post completely. Read it again and explain to me how DPS is a good way to compare units.
DPS doesn't matter when 1 immortal can kill 5 tanks and then regenerate its shields and come out unharmed or when surrounded by lings and killed in 2 seconds taking 2 lings with it to death.
To say that the immortal has "barely above average dps vs armored" is misleading unless you just compare raw unit stats.
Yeah I kind of agree it's like Blizzard think that Terran's microability and movability and general mechanical scaling cannot be allied to the kind of lategame, easy-to-use comps that the other races can obtain relatively easily, and if they see any chance of that happening they snuff it out ahead of time.
On February 13 2014 06:48 Squat wrote: I'd be interested to hear any theories as to quite why snipe was nerfed so relatively quickly, likewise with things like Thors.
There was a famous Blizzcon finals, I think it was 2012 where Nestea's broodlord army got owned by an army of MVP Ghosts. MVP used a little mech, but mostly ghosts and sniped everything Nestea had.
This strategy had been gaining in popularity up until that point and I think that game was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ghost snipe was nerfed shortly thereafter.
Oh that is well known, but I mean you had BL/Infestor for what 6+ months of the game?
The difference in time it took to address both was absolutely insane
BL Infestor was never adressed.
Blizzard has a history of instantly nerfing Terran and waiting months with the other races... (see now, Protoss has been dominating for 2 months xD)
To be fair they did wait several months until they started to apply the first terran nerfs in HoTS.
Which nerfs? Hellbats got nerfed for TvT and Mines because ZvT was getting stale (swarmhost v mech is way more fun!)? Or am I missing one?
Balance early HotS wasn't that bad and the metagame was still a mess at the time.
HoTS was released on the 12th of March, Hellbat patch hits on July 11th, 4 months after release and WM nerf in November the 11th, 4 more months later. That's a far cry from instantly nerfing terran, like you said. I didn't comment on weather they where justified or not, just that Blizzard did wait a while.
Of course the did massively fuck up with the WM nerf patch, the same patch that also buffed oracles, no one in his right mind can deny this.
The reason of said patch is important in determining whether it was 'late' or not. As neither patch was aimed to fix an imbalance, these are not the right examples.
I was talking more about WOL tho, with constant Terran nerfs that followed really fast... A lot of those nerfs could probably be reverted without problems nowaday
On February 13 2014 08:11 SC2Toastie wrote: Wow you are aggressive 0.0
Immortal DPS is average for it's cost, whatever way you turn it. You pay for Anti-Armored and for high survivability vs high damage low speed attacks.
Did you know Broodlords own Tanks too? And Banshees, and Void Rays? Every unit can "fuck up" another unit it hardly takes damage from?!
Aggressive?
I don't think you understood my post completely. Read it again and explain to me how DPS is a good way to compare units.
DPS doesn't matter when 1 immortal can kill 5 tanks and then regenerate its shields and come out unharmed or when surrounded by lings and killed in 2 seconds taking 2 lings with it to death.
To say that the immortal has "barely above average dps vs armored" is misleading unless you just compare raw unit stats.
On February 14 2014 xx:xx one-one-one wrote: I didn't do that because I just disagree with him. I did it because he was outright wrong, and so are you. This is what makes his analysis too simplistic.
That is.
And his statement is right. It doesn't talk about all situations, but it is right.
On February 13 2014 08:11 SC2Toastie wrote: Wow you are aggressive 0.0
Immortal DPS is average for it's cost, whatever way you turn it. You pay for Anti-Armored and for high survivability vs high damage low speed attacks.
Did you know Broodlords own Tanks too? And Banshees, and Void Rays? Every unit can "fuck up" another unit it hardly takes damage from?!
Aggressive?
I don't think you understood my post completely. Read it again and explain to me how DPS is a good way to compare units.
DPS doesn't matter when 1 immortal can kill 5 tanks and then regenerate its shields and come out unharmed or when surrounded by lings and killed in 2 seconds taking 2 lings with it to death.
To say that the immortal has "barely above average dps vs armored" is misleading unless you just compare raw unit stats.
On February 14 2014 xx:xx one-one-one wrote: I didn't do that because I just disagree with him. I did it because he was outright wrong, and so are you. This is what makes his analysis too simplistic.
That is.
And his statement is right. It doesn't talk about all situations, but it is right.
It is wrong.
But it is nice that you seem to agree. Then you can be friends. It is nice to have friends.
On February 13 2014 06:48 Squat wrote: I'd be interested to hear any theories as to quite why snipe was nerfed so relatively quickly, likewise with things like Thors.
There was a famous Blizzcon finals, I think it was 2012 where Nestea's broodlord army got owned by an army of MVP Ghosts. MVP used a little mech, but mostly ghosts and sniped everything Nestea had.
This strategy had been gaining in popularity up until that point and I think that game was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ghost snipe was nerfed shortly thereafter.
Oh that is well known, but I mean you had BL/Infestor for what 6+ months of the game?
The difference in time it took to address both was absolutely insane
BL Infestor was never adressed.
Blizzard has a history of instantly nerfing Terran and waiting months with the other races... (see now, Protoss has been dominating for 2 months xD)
To be fair they did wait several months until they started to apply the first terran nerfs in HoTS.
Which nerfs? Hellbats got nerfed for TvT and Mines because ZvT was getting stale (swarmhost v mech is way more fun!)? Or am I missing one?
Balance early HotS wasn't that bad and the metagame was still a mess at the time.
HoTS was released on the 12th of March, Hellbat patch hits on July 11th, 4 months after release and WM nerf in November the 11th, 4 more months later. That's a far cry from instantly nerfing terran, like you said. I didn't comment on weather they where justified or not, just that Blizzard did wait a while.
Of course the did massively fuck up with the WM nerf patch, the same patch that also buffed oracles, no one in his right mind can deny this.
The reason of said patch is important in determining whether it was 'late' or not. As neither patch was aimed to fix an imbalance, these are not the right examples.
I was talking more about WOL tho, with constant Terran nerfs that followed really fast... A lot of those nerfs could probably be reverted without problems nowaday
Nerfs that I believe could potentially be reverted given the current state of the game and map design.
1. Stim research time. Gives Terran extra chance of holding the Blink allins especially, shouldn't be too broken given the travel distance increases in average, plus the new tools that other races have to play with nowadays. 2. Snipe. For no reason other than it was fucking cool. 3. EMP Radius - I'm definitely wavering on this one, it COULD be over-the-top but it was a nerf for a different era. It's actually the radius being its current size that IMO still means Mech with a sprinkling of Ghosts isn't potent due to the sheer size of Archons and Immortals.
Probably others. I'm all for changing the game and patching, I just don't get why to my knowledge no patch ever actually looks at removing the actions of previous ones.
Actually NO - took forever for Blizz to nerf Terran in WoL
Please don't do that.. If it's something that wasn't right and not true is that - that Terran was nerfed instantly.. Took forever and there were tons of games for each nerf of Terran to finally come out.. That MVP vs Nestea mass Ghost was like at least 3 months after the first game when Terrans started to use mass Ghosts - and not just in TvZ (vs everything Zerg can have), but cause of IMBA EMP in TvP as well.. With Thorzain starting first that trend I think
IT IS TRUE that Terran is in a bad shape now in HotS, but please don't bash Zerg cause 90% of Terran's problems both in WoL, as well as now in HotS are mainly addressed to vs P
BUT - it's so painful to hear butthurt Terrans feeling bad cause of Zerg, cause let's be honest - that's so BM and so unfair at least.. Almost too egoistic.. As for the Snipe nerf itself - no Zerg wanted to nerf the ability to oblivion, all they were saying is that at least snipe shouldn't be used vs both - BLs and Ultralisks, and it should do less damage vs at least one of them.. It wasn't Zerg's "asking" fault that Blizzard did an overnerf
AND - the infamous BL/Infestor was rarely a TvZ's problem, or if it was - it was only cause of fungal, not cause of ITs, not cause of BLs.. It was mainly a problem of PvZ.. I can understand Protoss players doing the "took forever to nerf Zerg in WoL" statements, but that's so egoistic and so unfair to be done by Terrans
On February 13 2014 09:24 VArsovskiSC wrote: Actually NO - took forever for Blizz to nerf Terran in WoL
Please don't do that.. If it's something that wasn't right and not true is that - that Terran was nerfed instantly.. Took forever and there were tons of games for each nerf of Terran to finally come out.. That MVP vs Nestea mass Ghost was like at least 3 months after the first game when Terrans started to use mass Ghosts - and not just in TvZ (vs everything Zerg can have), but cause of IMBA EMP in TvP as well.. With Thorzain starting first that trend I think
IT IS TRUE that Terran is in a bad shape now in HotS, but please don't bash Zerg cause 90% of Terran's problems both in WoL, as well as now in HotS are mainly addressed to vs P
BUT - it's so painful to hear butthurt Terrans feeling bad cause of Zerg, cause let's be honest - that's so BM and so unfair at least.. Almost too egoistic.. As for the Snipe nerf itself - no Zerg wanted to nerf the ability to oblivion, all they were saying is that at least snipe shouldn't be used vs both - BLs and Ultralisks, and it should do less damage vs at least one of them.. It wasn't Zerg's "asking" fault that Blizzard did an overnerf
AND - the infamous BL/Infestor was rarely a TvZ's problem, or if it was - it was only cause of fungal, not cause of ITs, not cause of BLs.. It was mainly a problem of PvZ.. I can understand Protoss players doing the "took forever to nerf Zerg in WoL" statements, but that's so egoistic and so unfair to be done by Terrans
That's some fascinating revisionism you've managed.
On February 13 2014 00:59 ejozl wrote: [quote] I think this could be cool as in a Race feature and could definitely be used for the campaign for LotV, but from a pure multiplayer standpoint, Warp Gate tech is one of the mechanics that really differentiate the Protoss race from the rest, which is even more important.
Sure it differentiates them, but is it in a positive way? And Protoss had a "queuing production" too in SC1, and it did not make them similar to Terran for all that.
It did not make them a better race than SC2 Protoss either.
Unsure where you want to go with that sentence?
That I actually think that warpgate production makes them a little more different from Terran, while I don't think the main reason why Protoss balls up or allins stems from something like warpgate, but rather from "untradeable" expensive, lots of survival, little damage output units like the stalker, the dragoon, the immortal, the scout, the Archon...
The immortal? Holy shit.
You mean the unit that owns 5 siege tanks single-handedly and survives with only shield damage?
Low damage output indeed.
And I'm not even gonna get started about the Archon.
Immortal: 14-35dps for 250/100/4
2*Marauder: 20-40dps for 200/50/4 4*Marine: 42dps for 200/0/4 2*Zealot: 27dps for 200/0/4 8*zergling: 57.6dps for 200/0/4
The Immortal is a bad damage dealer for its price, it's barely over average against armored. Point is that it has 200life + 100hardened shields.
Now - mobility issues aside which is the next problem a lot of Protoss problems have and why you don't go over the map with them - what would you rather use against something that doesn't shoot back like workers: - Immortals - who gain nothing from their high HP in that situation, since the opponent isn't fighting back and when he is you have to run anyways - something cheaper with higher dps
You know, the game is made in a way that you can have marines or banelings dropped into your mineral line and you can react to their damage output. Guess which units won't be worth dropping. The ones with lower damage output which do even less if your opponent is on top of his defense. That's one of the main problems with Protoss harassment play. You can give dragoons all the blink in the world, they will still only kill very few SCVs before they have to retreat if you harass with them. Meanwhile zerg suicides 15zerglings without doing anything 2-3times, but when they hit the opponent, oh man does he bleed.
That is a ridiculous way to look at it. Especially when I specifically mentioned its unmatched ability to survive vs tanks. A key thing about most protoss units is that they have high survivability, not high dps. This is TL.net in a nutshell - only argue against one part of someones argument and leave out the other parts which were needed to make a point in the first place.
And what about the archon? You conveniently forgot to comment on that. Why don't you show me some calculations about the poor damage output of the archon while ignoring the fact that it does splash damage and has 350hp.
Oh, I like how you changed his name to "Big N00B" in the quote just because you disagree with him.
He said that Immortals have low damage output for their cost, you attacked him and stated how 1 Immortal kills 5 Siege Tanks which doesn't have anything to do with Immortals "godly" dps, but with the fact that it is actually "immortal" against Siege Tanks. On the other hand, Immortals are quite bad against Zerglings, Zealots, Marines etc. so I don't see your point where you pick Immortal and say how it amazingly handles units that it is supposed to counter.
Then you are saying how "this is a ridiculous way to look at it" and how "this is TL.net in a nutshell" which sounds quite quite ironic from your previous post, I must say.
I didn't do that because I just disagree with him. I did it because he was outright wrong, and so are you.
The original statement that caught my attention was: "The Immortal is a bad damage dealer for its price, it's barely over average against armored." This is an outright incorrect statement. In fact, it is a quite empty statement. It doesn't say anything.
Even if you follow it up with the sentence: "Point is that it has 200life + 100hardened shields." It still doesn't make things better.
In reality both things can be true. If microed correctly it can fuck up a lot of armored units. Disregard "dps" health and other unimportant things. If used correctly vs terran it can in some situations kill a lot of mech. In some other situations it can be EMP'd, focus fired by marines, surrouned by lings or hit by a widow mine only to be shelled to death by 10 tanks. It is not as simple as a situation where you input resources and get "dps" or "cost effectiveness" as output. It takes skill to use, it has to fit into your strategy and tactics and there are a ton of opportunities to be creative with it by using warp prisms. It is a unit in a real time strategy game.
This is what makes his analysis too simplistic.
"I did it because he was outright wrong, and so are you." "in reality both things can be true" Now this is what I don't get, it seems to me that you are constantly contradicting yourself with your statements if I understood this correctly.
Of course that it is too simplistic saying that Immortals aren't good damage dealers, but it really depends on the scenario. The way he used it, he is correct, he stated that most of the Protoss units have high HP and low DPS for their cost and he was comparing DPS of the Immortal with other units of the same cost. That by itself doesn't mean much, but it is still completely correct.
He also pointed out why Immortal shield doesn't matter in some situations, and those are if you are going to use Warp Prism for Drops, you won't be dropping Immortals to kill workers, but Zealots that have a lot better DPS against workers for the same cost.
There are a lot of situation where you can use your analogy, for example, Hydralisks are quite useless against big number of Siege Tanks, they won't even come near, that still doesn't mean that Hydras don't have solid DPS for their cost(~14 dps per Hydra I think but don't quote me on this).
All in all, he was looking at the units in the vacuum, but his statement was completely correct. If you are going to bash his statement, then yours of "1 Immortal kills 5 Siege Tanks" really isn't better at all.
I kind of want to see what happened in Brood War. Blizzard says OKAY WERE DONE HERE and just leaves the game alone for 10 years. Let map makers and metagame figure it out.
The metagame evolves so quickly especially nowadays when information sharing is so much easier (there were no Day9 dailies and Youtube tutorials back then, pros could not as easily send each other replays and watch VoDs). We need to give people some time to learn how to react to things. It's much easier to create a new cheese or strategy than to learn how to stop it effectively.
Map making is also a VERY powerful balance tool. Just look at Daedalus. Once Zergs figured out that the only option was for Protoss to go balls out cheese they started going 14/14 and winning every game. It was in fact the only balance tool used in BW once the last patch hit in like 2001 (or whatever, not sure when exact date was).
Blizzard's approach with SC2 seems to be "nerf the build du jour" without really allowing people to figure out alternatives. As soon as something becomes standard, Blizzard decides it needs a nerf. If they just left the game alone, people would eventually figure out things to do, out of necessity. Like they did in Brood War. SC2 has no Bisu, has no Savior... just a bunch of guys playing standard until Blizzard changes standard by nerfing something into the ground.
On February 13 2014 09:41 DinoMight wrote: I kind of want to see what happened in Brood War. Blizzard says OKAY WERE DONE HERE and just leaves the game alone for 10 years. Let map makers and metagame figure it out.
The metagame evolves so quickly especially nowadays when information sharing is so much easier (there were no Day9 dailies and Youtube tutorials back then, pros could not as easily send each other replays and watch VoDs). We need to give people some time to learn how to react to things. It's much easier to create a new cheese or strategy than to learn how to stop it effectively.
Map making is also a VERY powerful balance tool. Just look at Daedalus. Once Zergs figured out that the only option was for Protoss to go balls out cheese they started going 14/14 and winning every game. It was in fact the only balance tool used in BW once the last patch hit in like 2001 (or whatever, not sure when exact date was).
Blizzard's approach with SC2 seems to be "nerf the build du jour" without really allowing people to figure out alternatives. As soon as something becomes standard, Blizzard decides it needs a nerf. If they just left the game alone, people would eventually figure out things to do, out of necessity. Like they did in Brood War. SC2 has no Bisu, has no Savior... just a bunch of guys playing standard until Blizzard changes standard by nerfing something into the ground.
While I do agree with your points for the long term. Right now it just isn't possible because of the fact that there's still another expansion coming. With the prospect of having another wave of balancing issues after the last expansion, I doubt it would be wise to leave the game as it is in the meanwhile. The playerbase has to be pampered with short term fixes to prevent them from leaving the game before LotV hits. Once the dust clears after the initial year of balancing after the release of LotV, then your scenario might become desirable.
On February 13 2014 08:11 SC2Toastie wrote: Wow you are aggressive 0.0
Immortal DPS is average for it's cost, whatever way you turn it. You pay for Anti-Armored and for high survivability vs high damage low speed attacks.
Did you know Broodlords own Tanks too? And Banshees, and Void Rays? Every unit can "fuck up" another unit it hardly takes damage from?!
Aggressive?
I don't think you understood my post completely. Read it again and explain to me how DPS is a good way to compare units.
DPS doesn't matter when 1 immortal can kill 5 tanks and then regenerate its shields and come out unharmed or when surrounded by lings and killed in 2 seconds taking 2 lings with it to death.
To say that the immortal has "barely above average dps vs armored" is misleading unless you just compare raw unit stats.
On February 14 2014 xx:xx one-one-one wrote: I didn't do that because I just disagree with him. I did it because he was outright wrong, and so are you. This is what makes his analysis too simplistic.
That is.
And his statement is right. It doesn't talk about all situations, but it is right.
It is wrong.
But it is nice that you seem to agree. Then you can be friends. It is nice to have friends.
The Immortal is a bad damage dealer for its price, it's barely over average against armored. Point is that it has 200life + 100hardened shields.
He literally says the damage for it's cost is quite low, BUT IT HAS HIGH SURVIVABILITY. So, can you now please explain to us what is wrong about the statement "Immortal DPS is quite low for it's cost". He doesn't consider other factors in said statement, so nor should you if you want to break that statement.
Please go be popular and nasty on Reddit, people are supposed to be respectful to each other over here. And you are clearly not.
On February 13 2014 09:41 DinoMight wrote: I kind of want to see what happened in Brood War. Blizzard says OKAY WERE DONE HERE and just leaves the game alone for 10 years. Let map makers and metagame figure it out.
The metagame evolves so quickly especially nowadays when information sharing is so much easier (there were no Day9 dailies and Youtube tutorials back then, pros could not as easily send each other replays and watch VoDs). We need to give people some time to learn how to react to things. It's much easier to create a new cheese or strategy than to learn how to stop it effectively.
Map making is also a VERY powerful balance tool. Just look at Daedalus. Once Zergs figured out that the only option was for Protoss to go balls out cheese they started going 14/14 and winning every game. It was in fact the only balance tool used in BW once the last patch hit in like 2001 (or whatever, not sure when exact date was).
Blizzard's approach with SC2 seems to be "nerf the build du jour" without really allowing people to figure out alternatives. As soon as something becomes standard, Blizzard decides it needs a nerf. If they just left the game alone, people would eventually figure out things to do, out of necessity. Like they did in Brood War. SC2 has no Bisu, has no Savior... just a bunch of guys playing standard until Blizzard changes standard by nerfing something into the ground.
It is not as easy as you think.
Blizzard left Brood Lords + Infestors in WoL go on for 6 months, not a single Protoss/Terran said it was fine, hell, even Zergs were saying how it is boring, not Zergy and how it isn't fine. The game was disgustingly stale, nothing changed in those 6 months. I mean sure, Terran and Protoss players tried something but they didn't do much.
So, on the one hand, we have players like you that would like Blizzard to leave the game alone, and on the other hand there are bunch of players that are screaming at Blizzard how they didn't touch the game for 6 months. Sometimes, it is pretty obvious that something has to be done, it was obvious when Terran had their dominance in WoL, it was obvious when Zerg was in Brood Lord + Infestor era, it is obvious now with mass Ravens, Swarm Hosts and Deathballs in PvT and all those stale games.
It is SC2, not BW, maps can make a difference but probably won't change much. And beside, they can do that, but they have to finish LotV first, with another wave of new units, then they can balance the game out and leave it like they did with BW.
On February 13 2014 06:48 Squat wrote: I'd be interested to hear any theories as to quite why snipe was nerfed so relatively quickly, likewise with things like Thors.
There was a famous Blizzcon finals, I think it was 2012 where Nestea's broodlord army got owned by an army of MVP Ghosts. MVP used a little mech, but mostly ghosts and sniped everything Nestea had.
This strategy had been gaining in popularity up until that point and I think that game was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ghost snipe was nerfed shortly thereafter.
Oh that is well known, but I mean you had BL/Infestor for what 6+ months of the game?
The difference in time it took to address both was absolutely insane
BL Infestor was never adressed.
Blizzard has a history of instantly nerfing Terran and waiting months with the other races... (see now, Protoss has been dominating for 2 months xD)
To be fair they did wait several months until they started to apply the first terran nerfs in HoTS.
Which nerfs? Hellbats got nerfed for TvT and Mines because ZvT was getting stale (swarmhost v mech is way more fun!)? Or am I missing one?
Balance early HotS wasn't that bad and the metagame was still a mess at the time.
HoTS was released on the 12th of March, Hellbat patch hits on July 11th, 4 months after release and WM nerf in November the 11th, 4 more months later. That's a far cry from instantly nerfing terran, like you said. I didn't comment on weather they where justified or not, just that Blizzard did wait a while.
Of course the did massively fuck up with the WM nerf patch, the same patch that also buffed oracles, no one in his right mind can deny this.
The reason of said patch is important in determining whether it was 'late' or not. As neither patch was aimed to fix an imbalance, these are not the right examples.
I was talking more about WOL tho, with constant Terran nerfs that followed really fast... A lot of those nerfs could probably be reverted without problems nowaday
Nerfs that I believe could potentially be reverted given the current state of the game and map design.
1. Stim research time. Gives Terran extra chance of holding the Blink allins especially, shouldn't be too broken given the travel distance increases in average, plus the new tools that other races have to play with nowadays. 2. Snipe. For no reason other than it was fucking cool. 3. EMP Radius - I'm definitely wavering on this one, it COULD be over-the-top but it was a nerf for a different era. It's actually the radius being its current size that IMO still means Mech with a sprinkling of Ghosts isn't potent due to the sheer size of Archons and Immortals.
Probably others. I'm all for changing the game and patching, I just don't get why to my knowledge no patch ever actually looks at removing the actions of previous ones.
Nope, Blizzard does for some reason refuse to admit they made mistakes. Ghost Snipe (A SNIPE ABILITY) doesn't kill the unit in the game with the lowest HP (bar Changeling) in one shot. Nice Snipe bro!
On February 13 2014 09:41 DinoMight wrote: I kind of want to see what happened in Brood War. Blizzard says OKAY WERE DONE HERE and just leaves the game alone for 10 years. Let map makers and metagame figure it out.
The metagame evolves so quickly especially nowadays when information sharing is so much easier (there were no Day9 dailies and Youtube tutorials back then, pros could not as easily send each other replays and watch VoDs). We need to give people some time to learn how to react to things. It's much easier to create a new cheese or strategy than to learn how to stop it effectively.
Map making is also a VERY powerful balance tool. Just look at Daedalus. Once Zergs figured out that the only option was for Protoss to go balls out cheese they started going 14/14 and winning every game. It was in fact the only balance tool used in BW once the last patch hit in like 2001 (or whatever, not sure when exact date was).
Blizzard's approach with SC2 seems to be "nerf the build du jour" without really allowing people to figure out alternatives. As soon as something becomes standard, Blizzard decides it needs a nerf. If they just left the game alone, people would eventually figure out things to do, out of necessity. Like they did in Brood War. SC2 has no Bisu, has no Savior... just a bunch of guys playing standard until Blizzard changes standard by nerfing something into the ground.
It is SC2, not BW, maps can make a difference but probably won't change much. And beside, they can do that, but they have to finish LotV first, with another wave of new units, then they can balance the game out and leave it like they did with BW.
I don't think maps can do it. There's very little to vary with, as the economy only requires 3 bases to deathball, Naturals need to be easy to acquire for Protoss, and a third too far away forces Protoss to 2 base all in. The game is currently balanced around these kinds of maps and with the economy system we have, deathballs are near unfixable by maps.
Map making in SC2 is highly restricted, there are so many limiting factors. Making good maps for this game has to be a fucking nightmare. Trying to balance through maps is not something we should rely upon, every map needs to have a set of quite inflexible features not to be broken, mostly because protoss was cobbled together during a lunch break.
I don't think maps can do it. There's very little to vary with, as the economy only requires 3 bases to deathball, Naturals need to be easy to acquire for Protoss, and a third too far away forces Protoss to 2 base all in. The game is currently balanced around these kinds of maps and with the economy system we have, deathballs are near unfixable by maps.
If we really wanted to encourage mass expanding we could just have more bases but only say 4 minerals and 1 gas per base, although it'd probably slow the game waaaay down. But then instead of 3 base being max, it'd be 6 base!
I think it's still something we could play around with those, having more maps that have 1/2 bases or less minerals but more gas or lots of minerals but almost no gas etc etc etc.
I don't think maps can do it. There's very little to vary with, as the economy only requires 3 bases to deathball, Naturals need to be easy to acquire for Protoss, and a third too far away forces Protoss to 2 base all in. The game is currently balanced around these kinds of maps and with the economy system we have, deathballs are near unfixable by maps.
If we really wanted to encourage mass expanding we could just have more bases but only say 4 minerals and 1 gas per base, although it'd probably slow the game waaaay down. But then instead of 3 base being max, it'd be 6 base!
I think it's still something we could play around with those, having more maps that have 1/2 bases or less minerals but more gas or lots of minerals but almost no gas etc etc etc.
On February 13 2014 06:48 Squat wrote: I'd be interested to hear any theories as to quite why snipe was nerfed so relatively quickly, likewise with things like Thors.
There was a famous Blizzcon finals, I think it was 2012 where Nestea's broodlord army got owned by an army of MVP Ghosts. MVP used a little mech, but mostly ghosts and sniped everything Nestea had.
This strategy had been gaining in popularity up until that point and I think that game was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ghost snipe was nerfed shortly thereafter.
Oh that is well known, but I mean you had BL/Infestor for what 6+ months of the game?
The difference in time it took to address both was absolutely insane
BL Infestor was never adressed.
Blizzard has a history of instantly nerfing Terran and waiting months with the other races... (see now, Protoss has been dominating for 2 months xD)
To be fair they did wait several months until they started to apply the first terran nerfs in HoTS.
Which nerfs? Hellbats got nerfed for TvT and Mines because ZvT was getting stale (swarmhost v mech is way more fun!)? Or am I missing one?
Balance early HotS wasn't that bad and the metagame was still a mess at the time.
HoTS was released on the 12th of March, Hellbat patch hits on July 11th, 4 months after release and WM nerf in November the 11th, 4 more months later. That's a far cry from instantly nerfing terran, like you said. I didn't comment on weather they where justified or not, just that Blizzard did wait a while.
Of course the did massively fuck up with the WM nerf patch, the same patch that also buffed oracles, no one in his right mind can deny this.
The reason of said patch is important in determining whether it was 'late' or not. As neither patch was aimed to fix an imbalance, these are not the right examples.
I was talking more about WOL tho, with constant Terran nerfs that followed really fast... A lot of those nerfs could probably be reverted without problems nowaday
Nerfs that I believe could potentially be reverted given the current state of the game and map design.
1. Stim research time. Gives Terran extra chance of holding the Blink allins especially, shouldn't be too broken given the travel distance increases in average, plus the new tools that other races have to play with nowadays. 2. Snipe. For no reason other than it was fucking cool. 3. EMP Radius - I'm definitely wavering on this one, it COULD be over-the-top but it was a nerf for a different era. It's actually the radius being its current size that IMO still means Mech with a sprinkling of Ghosts isn't potent due to the sheer size of Archons and Immortals.
Probably others. I'm all for changing the game and patching, I just don't get why to my knowledge no patch ever actually looks at removing the actions of previous ones.
Nope, Blizzard does for some reason refuse to admit they made mistakes. Ghost Snipe (A SNIPE ABILITY) doesn't kill the unit in the game with the lowest HP (bar Changeling) in one shot. Nice Snipe bro!
Correct! Snipe should be able to kill any unit in one shot, then ricochet around the map killing everything, then leave the video game realm of starcraft through the computer monitor to headshot any zerg or protoss players in real life. The snipe bullet then explodes, disintegrating their bodies. Sounds like something that DK would dig.
There was a famous Blizzcon finals, I think it was 2012 where Nestea's broodlord army got owned by an army of MVP Ghosts. MVP used a little mech, but mostly ghosts and sniped everything Nestea had.
This strategy had been gaining in popularity up until that point and I think that game was the straw that broke the camel's back. Ghost snipe was nerfed shortly thereafter.
Oh that is well known, but I mean you had BL/Infestor for what 6+ months of the game?
The difference in time it took to address both was absolutely insane
BL Infestor was never adressed.
Blizzard has a history of instantly nerfing Terran and waiting months with the other races... (see now, Protoss has been dominating for 2 months xD)
To be fair they did wait several months until they started to apply the first terran nerfs in HoTS.
Which nerfs? Hellbats got nerfed for TvT and Mines because ZvT was getting stale (swarmhost v mech is way more fun!)? Or am I missing one?
Balance early HotS wasn't that bad and the metagame was still a mess at the time.
HoTS was released on the 12th of March, Hellbat patch hits on July 11th, 4 months after release and WM nerf in November the 11th, 4 more months later. That's a far cry from instantly nerfing terran, like you said. I didn't comment on weather they where justified or not, just that Blizzard did wait a while.
Of course the did massively fuck up with the WM nerf patch, the same patch that also buffed oracles, no one in his right mind can deny this.
The reason of said patch is important in determining whether it was 'late' or not. As neither patch was aimed to fix an imbalance, these are not the right examples.
I was talking more about WOL tho, with constant Terran nerfs that followed really fast... A lot of those nerfs could probably be reverted without problems nowaday
Nerfs that I believe could potentially be reverted given the current state of the game and map design.
1. Stim research time. Gives Terran extra chance of holding the Blink allins especially, shouldn't be too broken given the travel distance increases in average, plus the new tools that other races have to play with nowadays. 2. Snipe. For no reason other than it was fucking cool. 3. EMP Radius - I'm definitely wavering on this one, it COULD be over-the-top but it was a nerf for a different era. It's actually the radius being its current size that IMO still means Mech with a sprinkling of Ghosts isn't potent due to the sheer size of Archons and Immortals.
Probably others. I'm all for changing the game and patching, I just don't get why to my knowledge no patch ever actually looks at removing the actions of previous ones.
Nope, Blizzard does for some reason refuse to admit they made mistakes. Ghost Snipe (A SNIPE ABILITY) doesn't kill the unit in the game with the lowest HP (bar Changeling) in one shot. Nice Snipe bro!
Correct! Snipe should be able to kill any unit in one shot, then ricochet around the map killing everything, then leave the video game realm of starcraft through the computer monitor to headshot any zerg or protoss players in real life. The snipe bullet then explodes, disintegrating their bodies. Sounds like something that DK would dig.
The sarcasm really helps.
TBH, I really liked ghosts when snipe did 45 damage, it was a lot of fun watching ghost rushes in TvT because snipe one shotted marines before combat shields. Snipe would be a lot better doing 45 flat -20 vs. massive: you'd still solve the problem of sniping broods and ultras to death but it would still be useful against things like banelings or high templar/infestors etc. Snipe was worth using vs. zealots and marauders too. But ghosts are extremely expensive, and as long as broodlords or ultras aren't dealt with by snipe, snipe would never be enough to win on its own.
On February 13 2014 07:49 Wombat_NI wrote: [quote] Oh that is well known, but I mean you had BL/Infestor for what 6+ months of the game?
The difference in time it took to address both was absolutely insane
BL Infestor was never adressed.
Blizzard has a history of instantly nerfing Terran and waiting months with the other races... (see now, Protoss has been dominating for 2 months xD)
To be fair they did wait several months until they started to apply the first terran nerfs in HoTS.
Which nerfs? Hellbats got nerfed for TvT and Mines because ZvT was getting stale (swarmhost v mech is way more fun!)? Or am I missing one?
Balance early HotS wasn't that bad and the metagame was still a mess at the time.
HoTS was released on the 12th of March, Hellbat patch hits on July 11th, 4 months after release and WM nerf in November the 11th, 4 more months later. That's a far cry from instantly nerfing terran, like you said. I didn't comment on weather they where justified or not, just that Blizzard did wait a while.
Of course the did massively fuck up with the WM nerf patch, the same patch that also buffed oracles, no one in his right mind can deny this.
The reason of said patch is important in determining whether it was 'late' or not. As neither patch was aimed to fix an imbalance, these are not the right examples.
I was talking more about WOL tho, with constant Terran nerfs that followed really fast... A lot of those nerfs could probably be reverted without problems nowaday
Nerfs that I believe could potentially be reverted given the current state of the game and map design.
1. Stim research time. Gives Terran extra chance of holding the Blink allins especially, shouldn't be too broken given the travel distance increases in average, plus the new tools that other races have to play with nowadays. 2. Snipe. For no reason other than it was fucking cool. 3. EMP Radius - I'm definitely wavering on this one, it COULD be over-the-top but it was a nerf for a different era. It's actually the radius being its current size that IMO still means Mech with a sprinkling of Ghosts isn't potent due to the sheer size of Archons and Immortals.
Probably others. I'm all for changing the game and patching, I just don't get why to my knowledge no patch ever actually looks at removing the actions of previous ones.
Nope, Blizzard does for some reason refuse to admit they made mistakes. Ghost Snipe (A SNIPE ABILITY) doesn't kill the unit in the game with the lowest HP (bar Changeling) in one shot. Nice Snipe bro!
Correct! Snipe should be able to kill any unit in one shot, then ricochet around the map killing everything, then leave the video game realm of starcraft through the computer monitor to headshot any zerg or protoss players in real life. The snipe bullet then explodes, disintegrating their bodies. Sounds like something that DK would dig.
The sarcasm really helps.
TBH, I really liked ghosts when snipe did 45 damage, it was a lot of fun watching ghost rushes in TvT because snipe one shotted marines before combat shields. Snipe would be a lot better doing 45 flat -20 vs. massive: you'd still solve the problem of sniping broods and ultras to death but it would still be useful against things like banelings or high templar/infestors etc. Snipe was worth using vs. zealots and marauders too. But ghosts are extremely expensive, and as long as broodlords or ultras aren't dealt with by snipe, snipe would never be enough to win on its own.
Snipe was also only overpowered on Shakuras, because you needed Tank Ghost (Turret Planetary) to defend, it's super weak against counter attacks. Nowadays Hosts could deal with it too.
45-20massive+5Psionic would be really sweet.
I think it is silly an ability called Snipe actually snipes nothing.
On February 13 2014 09:41 DinoMight wrote: I kind of want to see what happened in Brood War. Blizzard says OKAY WERE DONE HERE and just leaves the game alone for 10 years. Let map makers and metagame figure it out.
The metagame evolves so quickly especially nowadays when information sharing is so much easier (there were no Day9 dailies and Youtube tutorials back then, pros could not as easily send each other replays and watch VoDs). We need to give people some time to learn how to react to things. It's much easier to create a new cheese or strategy than to learn how to stop it effectively.
Map making is also a VERY powerful balance tool. Just look at Daedalus. Once Zergs figured out that the only option was for Protoss to go balls out cheese they started going 14/14 and winning every game. It was in fact the only balance tool used in BW once the last patch hit in like 2001 (or whatever, not sure when exact date was).
Blizzard's approach with SC2 seems to be "nerf the build du jour" without really allowing people to figure out alternatives. As soon as something becomes standard, Blizzard decides it needs a nerf. If they just left the game alone, people would eventually figure out things to do, out of necessity. Like they did in Brood War. SC2 has no Bisu, has no Savior... just a bunch of guys playing standard until Blizzard changes standard by nerfing something into the ground.
It is SC2, not BW, maps can make a difference but probably won't change much. And beside, they can do that, but they have to finish LotV first, with another wave of new units, then they can balance the game out and leave it like they did with BW.
I don't think maps can do it. There's very little to vary with, as the economy only requires 3 bases to deathball, Naturals need to be easy to acquire for Protoss, and a third too far away forces Protoss to 2 base all in. The game is currently balanced around these kinds of maps and with the economy system we have, deathballs are near unfixable by maps.
Well as I said, they won't change much, but to be honest even in SC2 maps can change things, remember those crazy Kespa maps where people were seeing mass Reapers or rushing Nyduses? Then some other common maps like Whirlwind were really big and spread out that just going for a Deathball was never optimal because players would destroy you with multi-prong attacks and run-bys.
It is just the thing that maps doesn't have the same impact on the strategy as they had in BW.
Well as I said, they won't change much, but to be honest even in SC2 maps can change things, remember those crazy Kespa maps where people were seeing mass Reapers or rushing Nyduses? Then some other common maps like Whirlwind were really big and spread out that just going for a Deathball was never optimal because players would destroy you with multi-prong attacks and run-bys.
It is just the thing that maps doesn't have the same impact on the strategy as they had in BW.
I think it makes even more impact in SC2 that's why map making is so troublesome.
On February 13 2014 09:41 DinoMight wrote: I kind of want to see what happened in Brood War. Blizzard says OKAY WERE DONE HERE and just leaves the game alone for 10 years. Let map makers and metagame figure it out.
The metagame evolves so quickly especially nowadays when information sharing is so much easier (there were no Day9 dailies and Youtube tutorials back then, pros could not as easily send each other replays and watch VoDs). We need to give people some time to learn how to react to things. It's much easier to create a new cheese or strategy than to learn how to stop it effectively.
Map making is also a VERY powerful balance tool. Just look at Daedalus. Once Zergs figured out that the only option was for Protoss to go balls out cheese they started going 14/14 and winning every game. It was in fact the only balance tool used in BW once the last patch hit in like 2001 (or whatever, not sure when exact date was).
Blizzard's approach with SC2 seems to be "nerf the build du jour" without really allowing people to figure out alternatives. As soon as something becomes standard, Blizzard decides it needs a nerf. If they just left the game alone, people would eventually figure out things to do, out of necessity. Like they did in Brood War. SC2 has no Bisu, has no Savior... just a bunch of guys playing standard until Blizzard changes standard by nerfing something into the ground.
It is SC2, not BW, maps can make a difference but probably won't change much. And beside, they can do that, but they have to finish LotV first, with another wave of new units, then they can balance the game out and leave it like they did with BW.
I don't think maps can do it. There's very little to vary with, as the economy only requires 3 bases to deathball, Naturals need to be easy to acquire for Protoss, and a third too far away forces Protoss to 2 base all in. The game is currently balanced around these kinds of maps and with the economy system we have, deathballs are near unfixable by maps.
Well as I said, they won't change much, but to be honest even in SC2 maps can change things, remember those crazy Kespa maps where people were seeing mass Reapers or rushing Nyduses? Then some other common maps like Whirlwind were really big and spread out that just going for a Deathball was never optimal because players would destroy you with multi-prong attacks and run-bys.
It is just the thing that maps doesn't have the same impact on the strategy as they had in BW.
That's a result of the poor design of the protoss race. Being balanced around forcefield (it's not even warp gates) means that protoss needs to be able to reliably use forcefields to hold their bases: gateway units aren't strong enough without them to accomplish pretty much anything. If you made it so forcefield wasn't necessary by buffing gateway units, you could get more map variance. Pushing warp gate back to late game tech (make it require a templar archives or a fleet beacon to research it or something) and reversing production times between gateways and warp gates (warp gates currently produce 10% faster, switch that around) would probably solve that problem entirely.
You could then make colossus a little bit weaker since gateway units are stronger, which would make the protoss army less reliant on having to stay in a big ball.
Do you mean holding the third? Or expanding in general? If the latter, this is demonstrably untrue. Heck, Daedalus Point was as bad for Terran as for Protoss. A choke or ramp to the second is as necessary for T against Z as for P.
As for FF and GW units, you may be right. But, no GW units are strong enough to hold off Banelings or massive Ling surrounds without FF. You'd buff them so much they could be OP when massed or at any stage of the MU vs Terran.
It's not as easy as tossing around numbers and dreaming up our ideal Protoss (or SC for that matter).
I 100% agree on the Colossus though. I wish it is tweaked for LOTV. If anything so as to help SG play.
On February 13 2014 11:21 aZealot wrote: Do you mean holding the third? Or expanding in general? If the latter, this is demonstrably untrue. Heck, Daedalus Point was as bad for Terran as for Protoss. A choke or ramp to the second is as necessary for T against Z as for P.
As for FF and GW units, you may be right. But, no GW units are strong enough to hold off Banelings or massive Ling surrounds without FF. You'd buff them so much they could be OP when massed or at any stage of the MU vs Terran.
It's not as easy as tossing around numbers and dreaming up our ideal Protoss (or SC for that matter).
I 100% agree on the Colossus though. I wish it is tweaked for LOTV. If anything so as to help SG play.
For terran, Daedalus point had a lot to do with the distance from the main to the natural as well, it's not just the ramp size. On maps where you can't wall off a choke, you can usually do a partial wall from the nexus to the ramp or something to prevent units from running past, and rely on good sim city for defense. On Daedalus point, because the distance is so huge, you can't even attempt it.
On February 13 2014 09:41 DinoMight wrote: I kind of want to see what happened in Brood War. Blizzard says OKAY WERE DONE HERE and just leaves the game alone for 10 years. Let map makers and metagame figure it out.
The metagame evolves so quickly especially nowadays when information sharing is so much easier (there were no Day9 dailies and Youtube tutorials back then, pros could not as easily send each other replays and watch VoDs). We need to give people some time to learn how to react to things. It's much easier to create a new cheese or strategy than to learn how to stop it effectively.
Map making is also a VERY powerful balance tool. Just look at Daedalus. Once Zergs figured out that the only option was for Protoss to go balls out cheese they started going 14/14 and winning every game. It was in fact the only balance tool used in BW once the last patch hit in like 2001 (or whatever, not sure when exact date was).
Blizzard's approach with SC2 seems to be "nerf the build du jour" without really allowing people to figure out alternatives. As soon as something becomes standard, Blizzard decides it needs a nerf. If they just left the game alone, people would eventually figure out things to do, out of necessity. Like they did in Brood War. SC2 has no Bisu, has no Savior... just a bunch of guys playing standard until Blizzard changes standard by nerfing something into the ground.
Actually, doesn't information sharing make it easier to learn how to stop the cheese? Hell, almost everyone on TL knows what should be done vs blink all-ins and immortal sentries all-in. The execution and the margin of error is the problem.
The competitive environment for BW was very different. With PL being the most dominate tournament, maps and race balance didn't have a huge impact and could be more flexible. Daedulus would be an ok map for PL, simply because it would mostly be ZvZ and maybe some snipe P builds like Ruin's. But when put in Code A, we saw what happened.
On February 13 2014 11:21 aZealot wrote: Do you mean holding the third? Or expanding in general? If the latter, this is demonstrably untrue. Heck, Daedalus Point was as bad for Terran as for Protoss. A choke or ramp to the second is as necessary for T against Z as for P.
As for FF and GW units, you may be right. But, no GW units are strong enough to hold off Banelings or massive Ling surrounds without FF. You'd buff them so much they could be OP when massed or at any stage of the MU vs Terran.
It's not as easy as tossing around numbers and dreaming up our ideal Protoss (or SC for that matter).
I 100% agree on the Colossus though. I wish it is tweaked for LOTV. If anything so as to help SG play.
For terran, Daedalus point had a lot to do with the distance from the main to the natural as well, it's not just the ramp size. On maps where you can't wall off a choke, you can usually do a partial wall from the nexus to the ramp or something to prevent units from running past, and rely on good sim city for defense. On Daedalus point, because the distance is so huge, you can't even attempt it.
But, it's not just Daedalus, is it? Given a completely open natural T would be in the same trouble as P is vs mass Zerg armies. Maybe not to the same extent, but that would be because of bunkers, Tanks, Mines and a core army comprised of ranged units. Heck, even maps with larger ramps than usual to the natural (like Akilon) were often susceptible to busts.
You can't do away with the narrow ramp to the main or a defensible natural in Starcraft.
The same feature even seems to hold true of some of the BW maps I have just been looking. Now, I don't know much about BW map making at all (other than the phrase, "BW was balanced through maps" which, when you think about it, doesn't really say anything worthwhile - especially when the data still indicates strong swings in racial win rates) but some of these maps, and these appear to be the better known maps (as far as I know) appear to share the same traits.
This has a main on the high ground with a ramp leading to a natural that is in a choke and which has a large bridge leading into it. The third is relatively close and itself is on the high ground with two ramps into it.
Here the main is on the low ground but well within a choke. The natural is very close and itself situated within a choke.
I chose these maps from the TL BW map database. They also appear to have been in recent use so I expect that they are well known and popular BW maps, and being of recent use would reflect the current meta for BW maps (at least this is my uneducated assumption). Certainly, Fighting Spirit which I have played with StarBow is as I described (as is Texas).
(I looked at about 6 maps which all looked the same with respect to the layout of the main and natural.)
So, I have to question if the Sentry and FF are really as restrictive to map making as we think it is. The basic SC2 map layout seems to be similar to that accepted for BW as the basic layout for the main and natural. This way, all races start equal.
Sure, you can argue that the third etc for SC2 should not be too close or too defensible. I'd like to see the location of the third played with, as with different resource allocations for the natural and third (but the main should be standard, I think). But, I do not think there is a hard requirement for the map to be FF friendly for P. I know, as a Protoss, moving out on an open map means I have to be vigilant and scout ahead with MSC or Hallu and hug walls. For Z, for example, it means opportunity to poke and press and harry the enemy as it moves across the map. That leads to decisions and tension and good game play.
On February 13 2014 11:21 aZealot wrote: Do you mean holding the third? Or expanding in general? If the latter, this is demonstrably untrue. Heck, Daedalus Point was as bad for Terran as for Protoss. A choke or ramp to the second is as necessary for T against Z as for P.
As for FF and GW units, you may be right. But, no GW units are strong enough to hold off Banelings or massive Ling surrounds without FF. You'd buff them so much they could be OP when massed or at any stage of the MU vs Terran.
It's not as easy as tossing around numbers and dreaming up our ideal Protoss (or SC for that matter).
I 100% agree on the Colossus though. I wish it is tweaked for LOTV. If anything so as to help SG play.
For terran, Daedalus point had a lot to do with the distance from the main to the natural as well, it's not just the ramp size. On maps where you can't wall off a choke, you can usually do a partial wall from the nexus to the ramp or something to prevent units from running past, and rely on good sim city for defense. On Daedalus point, because the distance is so huge, you can't even attempt it.
But, it's not just Daedalus, is it? Given a completely open natural T would be in the same trouble as P is vs mass Zerg armies. Maybe not to the same extent, but that would be because of bunkers, Tanks, Mines and a core army comprised of ranged units. Heck, even maps with larger ramps than usual to the natural (like Akilon) were often susceptible to busts.
Queens having 5 range makes the old Daedalus Zerg-favored, not really the map layout. Terran has an opening (Reactor Hellion expand) which fits the map, but it falls behind normal Zerg play since Zergs no longer need to slow down their development as much as before. Hell, Zergs were the ones who didn't like maps with a wide open natural (Xel'Naga Caverns, Metalopolis) because of the Hellion pressure before the Queen patch.
For the first time ever, I turned off GSL after watching Soulkey SH turtling style. I don't know how the game ended but I don't care. In fact, I am not gonna watch any PvZ until they fix SH.
This is how SC2 is losing viewership. Just look at the chat, I am not alone.
So to maintain the viewership, they should redesign SH
Not gonna lie, I was like "not this bullshit again" when the Swarm hosts came out. I understand Zerg needs some sort of way to pressure turtle-ing players, but as it currently stands they're too good. Especially when Locusts last 25 secs and the cooldown is 25 secs on the SH. It's literally a constant stream. There needs to be a brief amount of time where there are no Locusts whatsoever from a given swarm host.
So to maintain the viewership, they should redesign SH
Not gonna lie, I was like "not this bullshit again" when the Swarm hosts came out. I understand Zerg needs some sort of way to pressure turtle-ing players, but as it currently stands they're too good. Especially when Locusts last 25 secs and the cooldown is 25 secs on the SH. It's literally a constant stream. There needs to be a brief amount of time where there are no Locusts whatsoever from a given swarm host.
TBH SH isn't a good unit but instead it is very bad.. That's why you have to make like at least 15 of them, and another 200/200 to invest into the upgrade.. So yah - the mere very high cost for the unit actually forces the turtle cause otherwise the unit is too expensive, it simply is far too high cost and forces the passiveness in playstyle in order to make them pay off
IMO Blizz should consider reducing the cost of the unit for reduction of their overall performance in greater numbers.. The simplest way to reduce the SH performance is just remove the EL upgrade.. But yah - SH as a unit is far too expensive and it basically makes Zerg go all-in for quite a while when going for them
I think one of the fundamental problems with Zerg right now is the presumption of their remax potential. That's not to say it doesn't exist; it does, but such a presumption requires the Zerg to trade at least on par or close to with the opposing forces; otherwise remaxing doesn't exactly benefit the Zerg in any way. That's a bit of an issue with Protoss and Terran mech.
From what I've watched, Protoss with sufficient forcefields and minimal AoE--that is, three colossi, four high templars, which are about the norm--can easily decimate Zerg's roach-hydra, roach-hydra-corrupter, ling-bane-muta, really any ground-based compositions, without taking heavy losses, even if colossi usually are the first to go with any corrupter-heavy composition.
Similarly, tanks can be monstrous against ling-bane sans muta or roach-hydra without vipers. If a Terran can turtle into a maxed army of mech on 2-3 bases, then they will almost always have the defender's advantage--so long as the tanks remain properly sieged. A Zerg player who only eliminates half of a mech force would return only to find vikings and ravens that zone out mutalisks. Once a critical mass of ravens is achieved, which is becoming increasingly feasible, though not always, no amount of trading will get through PDDs.
There's making units trade efficiently, like marines via splitting and kiting, banelings counter-splitting, mutalisk magic-boxing versus thor-baiting. Then there's extreme efficiency, like forcefields, where even just cordoning off mere sections of a map can leave the entire army susceptible to AoE, and absolute forcefield surrounds just massacre anything unfortunate enough to get caught. Or like PDDs, where the number of Zerg units that can strike past its defenses is infestors. Despite being the swarm, Zerg seems like the least benefited when it comes to maxing out an army.
That's why the Zerg are obligated to have the swarm host. The Zerg doesn't NEED swarm hosts per se--I'm sure most Zerg would more than happily trade the swarm host for most any other unit equivalent--but with their current arsenal, its their only way to reliably trade up. Otherwise, the only way for Zerg to trade with any other composition is through superior positioning--which, while still entirely possible, doesn't come easy, and comes at the mercy of Protoss deathballs and Terran mech advantages.
On February 15 2014 09:42 Spect8rCraft wrote: I think one of the fundamental problems with Zerg right now is the presumption of their remax potential. That's not to say it doesn't exist; it does, but such a presumption requires the Zerg to trade at least on par or close to with the opposing forces; otherwise remaxing doesn't exactly benefit the Zerg in any way. That's a bit of an issue with Protoss and Terran mech.
From what I've watched, Protoss with sufficient forcefields and minimal AoE--that is, three colossi, four high templars, which are about the norm--can easily decimate Zerg's roach-hydra, roach-hydra-corrupter, ling-bane-muta, really any ground-based compositions, without taking heavy losses, even if colossi usually are the first to go with any corrupter-heavy composition.
Similarly, tanks can be monstrous against ling-bane sans muta or roach-hydra without vipers. If a Terran can turtle into a maxed army of mech on 2-3 bases, then they will almost always have the defender's advantage--so long as the tanks remain properly sieged. A Zerg player who only eliminates half of a mech force would return only to find vikings and ravens that zone out mutalisks. Once a critical mass of ravens is achieved, which is becoming increasingly feasible, though not always, no amount of trading will get through PDDs.
There's making units trade efficiently, like marines via splitting and kiting, banelings counter-splitting, mutalisk magic-boxing versus thor-baiting. Then there's extreme efficiency, like forcefields, where even just cordoning off mere sections of a map can leave the entire army susceptible to AoE, and absolute forcefield surrounds just massacre anything unfortunate enough to get caught. Or like PDDs, where the number of Zerg units that can strike past its defenses is infestors. Despite being the swarm, Zerg seems like the least benefited when it comes to maxing out an army.
That's why the Zerg are obligated to have the swarm host. The Zerg doesn't NEED swarm hosts per se--I'm sure most Zerg would more than happily trade the swarm host for most any other unit equivalent--but with their current arsenal, its their only way to reliably trade up. Otherwise, the only way for Zerg to trade with any other composition is through superior positioning--which, while still entirely possible, doesn't come easy, and comes at the mercy of Protoss deathballs and Terran mech advantages.
Uh, you left out ultras/BL/vipers, aka the tier 3 tech, ofc the Zerg trades worse in these situations lol. Keep in mind Zerg has mobile static defense which encourages the heavy massing of these structures and also typically has a superior economy. Doesn't play even remotely as lopsided as you make it sound...
So to maintain the viewership, they should redesign SH
Not gonna lie, I was like "not this bullshit again" when the Swarm hosts came out. I understand Zerg needs some sort of way to pressure turtle-ing players, but as it currently stands they're too good. Especially when Locusts last 25 secs and the cooldown is 25 secs on the SH. It's literally a constant stream. There needs to be a brief amount of time where there are no Locusts whatsoever from a given swarm host.
TBH SH isn't a good unit but instead it is very bad.. That's why you have to make like at least 15 of them, and another 200/200 to invest into the upgrade.. So yah - the mere very high cost for the unit actually forces the turtle cause otherwise the unit is too expensive, it simply is far too high cost and forces the passiveness in playstyle in order to make them pay off
IMO Blizz should consider reducing the cost of the unit for reduction of their overall performance in greater numbers.. The simplest way to reduce the SH performance is just remove the EL upgrade.. But yah - SH as a unit is far too expensive and it basically makes Zerg go all-in for quite a while when going for them
Removing upgrade means they won't be as effective at siege, which is their intention. I'd sooner see a longer cool down, or a shift in cost to like 75/225.
On February 15 2014 09:42 Spect8rCraft wrote: I think one of the fundamental problems with Zerg right now is the presumption of their remax potential. That's not to say it doesn't exist; it does, but such a presumption requires the Zerg to trade at least on par or close to with the opposing forces; otherwise remaxing doesn't exactly benefit the Zerg in any way. That's a bit of an issue with Protoss and Terran mech.
From what I've watched, Protoss with sufficient forcefields and minimal AoE--that is, three colossi, four high templars, which are about the norm--can easily decimate Zerg's roach-hydra, roach-hydra-corrupter, ling-bane-muta, really any ground-based compositions, without taking heavy losses, even if colossi usually are the first to go with any corrupter-heavy composition.
Similarly, tanks can be monstrous against ling-bane sans muta or roach-hydra without vipers. If a Terran can turtle into a maxed army of mech on 2-3 bases, then they will almost always have the defender's advantage--so long as the tanks remain properly sieged. A Zerg player who only eliminates half of a mech force would return only to find vikings and ravens that zone out mutalisks. Once a critical mass of ravens is achieved, which is becoming increasingly feasible, though not always, no amount of trading will get through PDDs.
There's making units trade efficiently, like marines via splitting and kiting, banelings counter-splitting, mutalisk magic-boxing versus thor-baiting. Then there's extreme efficiency, like forcefields, where even just cordoning off mere sections of a map can leave the entire army susceptible to AoE, and absolute forcefield surrounds just massacre anything unfortunate enough to get caught. Or like PDDs, where the number of Zerg units that can strike past its defenses is infestors. Despite being the swarm, Zerg seems like the least benefited when it comes to maxing out an army.
That's why the Zerg are obligated to have the swarm host. The Zerg doesn't NEED swarm hosts per se--I'm sure most Zerg would more than happily trade the swarm host for most any other unit equivalent--but with their current arsenal, its their only way to reliably trade up. Otherwise, the only way for Zerg to trade with any other composition is through superior positioning--which, while still entirely possible, doesn't come easy, and comes at the mercy of Protoss deathballs and Terran mech advantages.
Uh, you left out ultras/BL/vipers, aka the tier 3 tech, ofc the Zerg trades worse in these situations lol. Keep in mind Zerg has mobile static defense which encourages the heavy massing of these structures and also typically has a superior economy. Doesn't play even remotely as lopsided as you make it sound...
Sorry, didn't mean to come off as lopsided. You're right, brood lords, ultralisks and vipers can often tip the scales in Zerg's favor. I think ultralisks can be pretty resilient against Protoss compositions that don't include void rays, but the Zerg would have to plan fairly ahead in advance to get the melee upgrades to make ultralisks efficient enough to try to trade against archons, which will undoubtedly be at 3 attack by that point. Brood lords are more of a peculiar late-game timing attack, as once they are identified, Terrans will begin to stock up on vikings (or whatever counters brood lords these days) and Protoss will get that abominable tempest--if they have the proper infrastructure, otherwise brood lords can become a more serious threat. Vipers generally make good on what they do best, despite feedbacks and vikings. Along with timings, anti-timings, good flanks and positioning, snipes and harassment, Zerg can win games with sufficient frequency. There's no denying that, and recent winrates support the lack of extreme or even prevalent lopsidedness.
Even so, what you suggest in the latter sentence doesn't necessarily make Zergs win games, it just makes them not lose them (if it makes any sense). Superior economy with theoretically instant army production is balanced against weaker units (however that's compared; I've always felt that Zerg units don't trade well in even fights when army supply increases, doubly so when compositions are involved). Pre-max timings where Zerg can get an army supply advantage offer a significant number of victories for Zerg. Mobile defense doesn't mean you can attack armies or even bases with them; it just means the opponent can't attack in Zerg's parts of the map without clearing out the defense first--which essentially flashes a red light as to where that army is relative to Zerg's. Defenses don't go towards the opponent's army, the opponent's army comes towards the defense, where vipers can pick it apart.
In other words, if the Protoss plays macro and the Zerg plays macro, the best case scenario is that the Zerg is slightly the underdog or on par in terms of composition (muta-corrupter can trade okay against pheonix and/or void-ray compositions, given proper micro; muta-ling-bane is still very viable against bio; roach-hydra varies against immortal-centered compositions that don't involve a Soul); I think these games are preferable because they're more action-packed and don't take an hour minimum (hyperbole, of course, but not by much). The worst is that the enemy deathball is or becomes virtually unassailable, and Zerg's first response is to "not die". To "not die" is to macro up, get up swarm hosts, litter the map in creep and defenses, and play the starvation game to win. Then comes the verdict: either one side screws up and loses their army--either by being out of position or by attrition, sometimes by poor army composition--or both players stabilize into a sort of end-game situation, which is when the prior verdict happens so slowly--or not even at all--that games go on... and on... and on. Soulkey vs. Reality and MaNa vs. FireCake are both indicative of the latter.
On February 15 2014 09:42 Spect8rCraft wrote: I think one of the fundamental problems with Zerg right now is the presumption of their remax potential. That's not to say it doesn't exist; it does, but such a presumption requires the Zerg to trade at least on par or close to with the opposing forces; otherwise remaxing doesn't exactly benefit the Zerg in any way. That's a bit of an issue with Protoss and Terran mech.
From what I've watched, Protoss with sufficient forcefields and minimal AoE--that is, three colossi, four high templars, which are about the norm--can easily decimate Zerg's roach-hydra, roach-hydra-corrupter, ling-bane-muta, really any ground-based compositions, without taking heavy losses, even if colossi usually are the first to go with any corrupter-heavy composition.
Similarly, tanks can be monstrous against ling-bane sans muta or roach-hydra without vipers. If a Terran can turtle into a maxed army of mech on 2-3 bases, then they will almost always have the defender's advantage--so long as the tanks remain properly sieged. A Zerg player who only eliminates half of a mech force would return only to find vikings and ravens that zone out mutalisks. Once a critical mass of ravens is achieved, which is becoming increasingly feasible, though not always, no amount of trading will get through PDDs.
There's making units trade efficiently, like marines via splitting and kiting, banelings counter-splitting, mutalisk magic-boxing versus thor-baiting. Then there's extreme efficiency, like forcefields, where even just cordoning off mere sections of a map can leave the entire army susceptible to AoE, and absolute forcefield surrounds just massacre anything unfortunate enough to get caught. Or like PDDs, where the number of Zerg units that can strike past its defenses is infestors. Despite being the swarm, Zerg seems like the least benefited when it comes to maxing out an army.
That's why the Zerg are obligated to have the swarm host. The Zerg doesn't NEED swarm hosts per se--I'm sure most Zerg would more than happily trade the swarm host for most any other unit equivalent--but with their current arsenal, its their only way to reliably trade up. Otherwise, the only way for Zerg to trade with any other composition is through superior positioning--which, while still entirely possible, doesn't come easy, and comes at the mercy of Protoss deathballs and Terran mech advantages.
Uh, you left out ultras/BL/vipers, aka the tier 3 tech, ofc the Zerg trades worse in these situations lol. Keep in mind Zerg has mobile static defense which encourages the heavy massing of these structures and also typically has a superior economy. Doesn't play even remotely as lopsided as you make it sound...
Sorry, didn't mean to come off as lopsided. You're right, brood lords, ultralisks and vipers can often tip the scales in Zerg's favor. I think ultralisks can be pretty resilient against Protoss compositions that don't include void rays, but the Zerg would have to plan fairly ahead in advance to get the melee upgrades to make ultralisks efficient enough to try to trade against archons, which will undoubtedly be at 3 attack by that point. Brood lords are more of a peculiar late-game timing attack, as once they are identified, Terrans will begin to stock up on vikings (or whatever counters brood lords these days) and Protoss will get that abominable tempest--if they have the proper infrastructure, otherwise brood lords can become a more serious threat. Vipers generally make good on what they do best, despite feedbacks and vikings. Along with timings, anti-timings, good flanks and positioning, snipes and harassment, Zerg can win games with sufficient frequency. There's no denying that, and recent winrates support the lack of extreme or even prevalent lopsidedness.
Even so, what you suggest in the latter sentence doesn't necessarily make Zergs win games, it just makes them not lose them (if it makes any sense). Superior economy with theoretically instant army production is balanced against weaker units (however that's compared; I've always felt that Zerg units don't trade well in even fights when army supply increases, doubly so when compositions are involved). Pre-max timings where Zerg can get an army supply advantage offer a significant number of victories for Zerg. Mobile defense doesn't mean you can attack armies or even bases with them; it just means the opponent can't attack in Zerg's parts of the map without clearing out the defense first--which essentially flashes a red light as to where that army is relative to Zerg's. Defenses don't go towards the opponent's army, the opponent's army comes towards the defense, where vipers can pick it apart.
In other words, if the Protoss plays macro and the Zerg plays macro, the best case scenario is that the Zerg is slightly the underdog or on par in terms of composition (muta-corrupter can trade okay against pheonix and/or void-ray compositions, given proper micro; muta-ling-bane is still very viable against bio; roach-hydra varies against immortal-centered compositions that don't involve a Soul); I think these games are preferable because they're more action-packed and don't take an hour minimum (hyperbole, of course, but not by much). The worst is that the enemy deathball is or becomes virtually unassailable, and Zerg's first response is to "not die". To "not die" is to macro up, get up swarm hosts, litter the map in creep and defenses, and play the starvation game to win. Then comes the verdict: either one side screws up and loses their army--either by being out of position or by attrition, sometimes by poor army composition--or both players stabilize into a sort of end-game situation, which is when the prior verdict happens so slowly--or not even at all--that games go on... and on... and on. Soulkey vs. Reality and MaNa vs. FireCake are both indicative of the latter.
I still don't really see your scenario at all. Ultras trade fine vs archons w/o any attack upgrades after the huge buff in HOTS, getting significant more dmg vs light or psionic than a +3 ultra would have in WOL. If you want to keep playing this "macro up never attack" style then maybe Zerg could "at best be on par" but in reality Zerg has little incentive to macro beyond the 3 base economy because the returns are so incredibly marginal in terms of said economy. Zerg still has tons of capability to abuse mobility, attack where the deathball isn't, and then if the deathball just tries to counter you, that's when the static D comes into place. I just completely disagree with your assessment of the swarm host.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fMN6JIr.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/pqe8NzA.gif)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/S1KaHD7.gif)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Wp2waeJ.gif)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ld2vXT3.gif)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dFAqzOM.gif)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/K582qDG.gif)
.
. No real idea, need to test it.
.
