|
On March 01 2014 03:07 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2014 02:36 ssxsilver wrote:On March 01 2014 01:40 ETisME wrote:On March 01 2014 01:04 submarine wrote:On February 28 2014 21:09 ETisME wrote:On February 28 2014 20:34 submarine wrote:On February 28 2014 07:36 ssxsilver wrote:On February 27 2014 19:18 submarine wrote:On February 27 2014 16:16 ssxsilver wrote:On February 27 2014 14:12 GinDo wrote:
[quote]
Maybe they should have considered a mineral reduction from 100 to 75? Or go with what so many pros have been asking for in +1 armor or +10ish HP. I don't understand why this suggestion pops up everywhere. Against which unit exactly would 1 Armor or 10 HP make any difference? This would be the most boring change ever. The hydra is a squishy unit that deals a lot of damage and needs other units in front to tank. That's its role. Buffing its tanking ability would make them a little bit better in direct trades, but would not at all help them to fill their intended role. Zerg has the perfect units to put in front of the Hydra. Right now they just don't do enough damage to be really worth it. I like this purposed change. The next thing i would change if they are still underused after the patch is: -Increase the base range to 6. -Add a hive requirement for the range increase upgrade. Because their DPS has never been an issue. By that same argument, there's no point to combat shields and you might as well give marines +1 attack or something instead. Obviously I'm speaking secondhand when I say it's what a lot of pros want, but those that do give feedback seem to come to the same consensus, the problem occurs once the game gets to the deathball stage. At that point, hydras can't effectively function as AA, because they die instantly to critical mass AOE. Wow, what an explanation. Believe me, if marines did 12 DMG per shot and had only 35 HP they still would be used. Units are always a compromise. If a Unit has strong characteristics good and bad, it will still be used. Just think of the reaver in BW. Hydras good characteristic, dealing damage fast, is just not strong enough to make it worth to deal with their weaknesses. If you take away defining features like the "squishiness" of hydras units become bland. Marines for example do so much damage that players have learned to deal with the units weaknesses, because its worth it. More DPS for the Hydra is a good change. Hydras will be better in their role as damagedealer while other units should always be there to soak up damage. Hydras need protection, and zerg has so many units that can provide exactly that. They are different. Hydra is an optional tech path, while marine is core for bio. And Marines are cost efficient with their cheap cost (especially due to not needing gas) and has more than enough durability to deal great dps with medivac support. But just like hydra, you cant use them if they are too glass cannon, mainly talking about late game pvt where Marines just melt too quickly. Hydras requires two upgrade which makes them expensive investment to use and has a very small presence in a deathball combat except when zerg is tanking with free units. If you make Hydras a strong enough as damagedealer zergs will find a way to use them. of cause, that would depends on how strong you are buffing it to be. the main point of my argument is that both units are extremely different and should not be compared at all. I'm not making a 1:1 comparison. I'm using the combat shields upgrade in reference to balancing out a unit's glass cannon nature. Of course you can break them with having them 1 shot everything or giving them zergling speed, but my point was any slight damage boost is trivial because they're still way to fragile once all the upgrades set in/the game reaches a certain point. HotS helps hydras with the additional speed upgrade (another way to mitigate AOE), but given how lategame P/TvZ turns out, it's not a stretch to say they need a little bit more help. Thing with buffing their health/armor is that you create a unit that overlaps with the roach, which is already a well tanking mid-ranged unit. You are currently exclusively building hydras when you need their antiair or when you have enough buffer for them already. If you buff their tanking by a reasonable amount, the line between roaches and hydras becomes very thin, pushing hydras into the role of roaches and leaving roaches with nothing left. If however, you buff hydras advantages (antiair/dps) and leave their weaknesses (HP/cost/tech) and possibly even buff the roaches strengths (HP/armor/regeneration) and emphasize their weaknesses (dps/no antiair/range) the situation would become even more clear and give both units useful roles. It makes mixing those units more rewarding for a player (less monoroach or monohydra play, dependend on what the opponent has teched) and gives more room for micro - such as targeting/flanking Hydralisks. I'd say, current roach/hydra play is a little bit dull, because it's such a homogenous mass and most of the time you are good with building the one, but not the other unit - and eventually you switch out of either anyways, since this kind of composition has little use in the lategame. It's currently not required for the opponent to find ways to kill hydras first in the combat - and there is little reward for the zerg player if he positions and microes really well to keep hydras alive.
Oh no. I definitely agree with you that -ideally- having clear roles for each unit is better, but the point I keep going back to (which you yourself highlight) is that it just doesn't work once the game reaches that dreaded late game stage. Reasons rehashed from several posters. I don't know whether buffing their DPS or their survivability is the answer, but a lot of pros tend to side with the latter and I'm inclined to agree with them. Just from my spectator's POV, I'd rather have fights extend a bit longer as opposed to the giant blob vs blob shenanigans.
|
I think, a mod has to change the title of the thread to "Next Balance Patch the 1st of March" - since the patch wont be out today and so the title is missleading ;D Would be great
Now my view on the patch: Looks great, Protoss definitely a lil too strong now, but with these changes it will change a lot I think :D lets see , gl hf for all tomorrow :D
|
On March 01 2014 03:51 AndaGalant wrote:
I think, a mod has to change the title of the thread to "Next Balance Patch the 1st of March" - since the patch wont be out today and so the title is missleading ;D Would be great
Now my view on the patch: Looks great, Protoss definitely a lil too strong now, but with these changes it will change a lot I think :D lets see , gl hf for all tomorrow :D
It is only for Europe the patch is delayed. For the rest of the realms the patch will be live today.
|
On March 01 2014 04:34 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2014 03:51 AndaGalant wrote:
I think, a mod has to change the title of the thread to "Next Balance Patch the 1st of March" - since the patch wont be out today and so the title is missleading ;D Would be great
Now my view on the patch: Looks great, Protoss definitely a lil too strong now, but with these changes it will change a lot I think :D lets see , gl hf for all tomorrow :D It is only for Europe the patch is delayed. For the rest of the realms the patch will be live today.
today is already half over. I wonder what they are waiting for
|
Buffing the hydra DPS is exactly the right idea, which fits well with their current usage.
|
Patch is live in the US. I did not notice any download but the stats for widow mines have changed.
|
On March 01 2014 05:03 MockHamill wrote:
Patch is live in the US. I did not notice any download but the stats for widow mines have changed.
They've changed back back-end so these balance patches don't require a download. Forget when exactly that changed.
|
Widow Mine Change: Good, Mothership Core Change: Good, Hydralisk Change: Bad imo (partially in its sheer pointlessness).
|
Mech may finally be somewhat viable in TvP.
I have only tested a couple TvP games but it seems like Protoss can no longer A-move straight into mass siege tanks protected by lots of widow mines, some hellbats and some vikings. Now Protoss actually have do some micro or try to outflank a sieged up Terran mech army like it should always have worked.
Air transitions are also a bit easier to deal with since widow mines can buy you time until you get your Viking count up. Ghosts are still more supply efficient compared to Widow mines but I think it is better to wait until you are near maxing out before you start to replace some of your widow mines with Ghosts.
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
On March 01 2014 05:03 MockHamill wrote:
Patch is live in the US. I did not notice any download but the stats for widow mines have changed.
Balance patches usually are installed on server-side.
You're downloading only client-patches.
|
On March 01 2014 03:31 ssxsilver wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2014 03:07 Big J wrote:On March 01 2014 02:36 ssxsilver wrote:On March 01 2014 01:40 ETisME wrote:On March 01 2014 01:04 submarine wrote:On February 28 2014 21:09 ETisME wrote:On February 28 2014 20:34 submarine wrote:On February 28 2014 07:36 ssxsilver wrote:On February 27 2014 19:18 submarine wrote:On February 27 2014 16:16 ssxsilver wrote:
[quote]
Or go with what so many pros have been asking for in +1 armor or +10ish HP. I don't understand why this suggestion pops up everywhere. Against which unit exactly would 1 Armor or 10 HP make any difference? This would be the most boring change ever. The hydra is a squishy unit that deals a lot of damage and needs other units in front to tank. That's its role. Buffing its tanking ability would make them a little bit better in direct trades, but would not at all help them to fill their intended role. Zerg has the perfect units to put in front of the Hydra. Right now they just don't do enough damage to be really worth it. I like this purposed change. The next thing i would change if they are still underused after the patch is: -Increase the base range to 6. -Add a hive requirement for the range increase upgrade. Because their DPS has never been an issue. By that same argument, there's no point to combat shields and you might as well give marines +1 attack or something instead. Obviously I'm speaking secondhand when I say it's what a lot of pros want, but those that do give feedback seem to come to the same consensus, the problem occurs once the game gets to the deathball stage. At that point, hydras can't effectively function as AA, because they die instantly to critical mass AOE. Wow, what an explanation. Believe me, if marines did 12 DMG per shot and had only 35 HP they still would be used. Units are always a compromise. If a Unit has strong characteristics good and bad, it will still be used. Just think of the reaver in BW. Hydras good characteristic, dealing damage fast, is just not strong enough to make it worth to deal with their weaknesses. If you take away defining features like the "squishiness" of hydras units become bland. Marines for example do so much damage that players have learned to deal with the units weaknesses, because its worth it. More DPS for the Hydra is a good change. Hydras will be better in their role as damagedealer while other units should always be there to soak up damage. Hydras need protection, and zerg has so many units that can provide exactly that. They are different. Hydra is an optional tech path, while marine is core for bio. And Marines are cost efficient with their cheap cost (especially due to not needing gas) and has more than enough durability to deal great dps with medivac support. But just like hydra, you cant use them if they are too glass cannon, mainly talking about late game pvt where Marines just melt too quickly. Hydras requires two upgrade which makes them expensive investment to use and has a very small presence in a deathball combat except when zerg is tanking with free units. If you make Hydras a strong enough as damagedealer zergs will find a way to use them. of cause, that would depends on how strong you are buffing it to be. the main point of my argument is that both units are extremely different and should not be compared at all. I'm not making a 1:1 comparison. I'm using the combat shields upgrade in reference to balancing out a unit's glass cannon nature. Of course you can break them with having them 1 shot everything or giving them zergling speed, but my point was any slight damage boost is trivial because they're still way to fragile once all the upgrades set in/the game reaches a certain point. HotS helps hydras with the additional speed upgrade (another way to mitigate AOE), but given how lategame P/TvZ turns out, it's not a stretch to say they need a little bit more help. Thing with buffing their health/armor is that you create a unit that overlaps with the roach, which is already a well tanking mid-ranged unit. You are currently exclusively building hydras when you need their antiair or when you have enough buffer for them already. If you buff their tanking by a reasonable amount, the line between roaches and hydras becomes very thin, pushing hydras into the role of roaches and leaving roaches with nothing left. If however, you buff hydras advantages (antiair/dps) and leave their weaknesses (HP/cost/tech) and possibly even buff the roaches strengths (HP/armor/regeneration) and emphasize their weaknesses (dps/no antiair/range) the situation would become even more clear and give both units useful roles. It makes mixing those units more rewarding for a player (less monoroach or monohydra play, dependend on what the opponent has teched) and gives more room for micro - such as targeting/flanking Hydralisks. I'd say, current roach/hydra play is a little bit dull, because it's such a homogenous mass and most of the time you are good with building the one, but not the other unit - and eventually you switch out of either anyways, since this kind of composition has little use in the lategame. It's currently not required for the opponent to find ways to kill hydras first in the combat - and there is little reward for the zerg player if he positions and microes really well to keep hydras alive. Oh no. I definitely agree with you that -ideally- having clear roles for each unit is better, but the point I keep going back to (which you yourself highlight) is that it just doesn't work once the game reaches that dreaded late game stage. Reasons rehashed from several posters. I don't know whether buffing their DPS or their survivability is the answer, but a lot of pros tend to side with the latter and I'm inclined to agree with them. Just from my spectator's POV, I'd rather have fights extend a bit longer as opposed to the giant blob vs blob shenanigans.
I absolutely agree with BigJ's post. Roaches and Hydras currently are already a little bit too similar. Ideally I would have preferred a change to the range upgrade instead of the DPS buff. Increase the base range of Hydras to 6 and add a hive requirement for the +1 range upgrade. Hydras with range 7 could be pretty interesting. This buff would not only help with AOE but it would especially be helpful in the anti air role. Nonetheless DPS buff is also a step in the right direction.
|
So the patch is already live?
|
On March 01 2014 03:31 ssxsilver wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2014 03:07 Big J wrote:On March 01 2014 02:36 ssxsilver wrote:On March 01 2014 01:40 ETisME wrote:On March 01 2014 01:04 submarine wrote:On February 28 2014 21:09 ETisME wrote:On February 28 2014 20:34 submarine wrote:On February 28 2014 07:36 ssxsilver wrote:On February 27 2014 19:18 submarine wrote:On February 27 2014 16:16 ssxsilver wrote:
[quote]
Or go with what so many pros have been asking for in +1 armor or +10ish HP. I don't understand why this suggestion pops up everywhere. Against which unit exactly would 1 Armor or 10 HP make any difference? This would be the most boring change ever. The hydra is a squishy unit that deals a lot of damage and needs other units in front to tank. That's its role. Buffing its tanking ability would make them a little bit better in direct trades, but would not at all help them to fill their intended role. Zerg has the perfect units to put in front of the Hydra. Right now they just don't do enough damage to be really worth it. I like this purposed change. The next thing i would change if they are still underused after the patch is: -Increase the base range to 6. -Add a hive requirement for the range increase upgrade. Because their DPS has never been an issue. By that same argument, there's no point to combat shields and you might as well give marines +1 attack or something instead. Obviously I'm speaking secondhand when I say it's what a lot of pros want, but those that do give feedback seem to come to the same consensus, the problem occurs once the game gets to the deathball stage. At that point, hydras can't effectively function as AA, because they die instantly to critical mass AOE. Wow, what an explanation. Believe me, if marines did 12 DMG per shot and had only 35 HP they still would be used. Units are always a compromise. If a Unit has strong characteristics good and bad, it will still be used. Just think of the reaver in BW. Hydras good characteristic, dealing damage fast, is just not strong enough to make it worth to deal with their weaknesses. If you take away defining features like the "squishiness" of hydras units become bland. Marines for example do so much damage that players have learned to deal with the units weaknesses, because its worth it. More DPS for the Hydra is a good change. Hydras will be better in their role as damagedealer while other units should always be there to soak up damage. Hydras need protection, and zerg has so many units that can provide exactly that. They are different. Hydra is an optional tech path, while marine is core for bio. And Marines are cost efficient with their cheap cost (especially due to not needing gas) and has more than enough durability to deal great dps with medivac support. But just like hydra, you cant use them if they are too glass cannon, mainly talking about late game pvt where Marines just melt too quickly. Hydras requires two upgrade which makes them expensive investment to use and has a very small presence in a deathball combat except when zerg is tanking with free units. If you make Hydras a strong enough as damagedealer zergs will find a way to use them. of cause, that would depends on how strong you are buffing it to be. the main point of my argument is that both units are extremely different and should not be compared at all. I'm not making a 1:1 comparison. I'm using the combat shields upgrade in reference to balancing out a unit's glass cannon nature. Of course you can break them with having them 1 shot everything or giving them zergling speed, but my point was any slight damage boost is trivial because they're still way to fragile once all the upgrades set in/the game reaches a certain point. HotS helps hydras with the additional speed upgrade (another way to mitigate AOE), but given how lategame P/TvZ turns out, it's not a stretch to say they need a little bit more help. Thing with buffing their health/armor is that you create a unit that overlaps with the roach, which is already a well tanking mid-ranged unit. You are currently exclusively building hydras when you need their antiair or when you have enough buffer for them already. If you buff their tanking by a reasonable amount, the line between roaches and hydras becomes very thin, pushing hydras into the role of roaches and leaving roaches with nothing left. If however, you buff hydras advantages (antiair/dps) and leave their weaknesses (HP/cost/tech) and possibly even buff the roaches strengths (HP/armor/regeneration) and emphasize their weaknesses (dps/no antiair/range) the situation would become even more clear and give both units useful roles. It makes mixing those units more rewarding for a player (less monoroach or monohydra play, dependend on what the opponent has teched) and gives more room for micro - such as targeting/flanking Hydralisks. I'd say, current roach/hydra play is a little bit dull, because it's such a homogenous mass and most of the time you are good with building the one, but not the other unit - and eventually you switch out of either anyways, since this kind of composition has little use in the lategame. It's currently not required for the opponent to find ways to kill hydras first in the combat - and there is little reward for the zerg player if he positions and microes really well to keep hydras alive. Oh no. I definitely agree with you that -ideally- having clear roles for each unit is better, but the point I keep going back to (which you yourself highlight) is that it just doesn't work once the game reaches that dreaded late game stage. Reasons rehashed from several posters. I don't know whether buffing their DPS or their survivability is the answer, but a lot of pros tend to side with the latter and I'm inclined to agree with them. Just from my spectator's POV, I'd rather have fights extend a bit longer as opposed to the giant blob vs blob shenanigans.
neither of them is going to work without breaking the midgame.
The standard problem of that composition is that roaches are balanced around 50res/supply and hydras are 75res/supply, which is just such a cheap composition that it is going to be supplyinefficient on its own against units like Colossus (83res/supply), high templar (100res/supply) and so on and so on.
So either roach/hydra has to implement a decent amount of higher tech "support" units [1] later on or has to focus around very mobility/trading based play so that such scenarios are very hard to reach [2].
[1] is kind of what we have right now, just that the main problem is that - apart from Vipers - all other units need everything as support but roach/hydra (SHs need statics and more SHs; Broodlords need mass Corruptors; Infestors need other units that protect them; ultralisks and roaches overlap in role and counters). So basically, the moment you start transitioning into something that is not roach/hydra/viper, you have to transition further into ways to keep those units alive. Imo the main problem is that zerg does not have a siege unit that you can sprinkle in, since BLs need AtA support against Tempests and Viking/Ravens and SHs... well, we know how those games go. They do nothing if you sprinkle them in for siege reasons and don't help you at all sniping certain units, which is a keycomponent you usually want from a siege unit.
Imo, this problem is only solveable if you design units that work better with roach/hydra/viper alone, e.g. a plain ~10range GtG siege unit. Or you introduce artificial solutions so that midgame (cheap) roach/hydra play stays untouched and does not become imbalanced, but lategame you can have more of those units, e.g. a Hive upgrade that makes roaches go to 1.5supply in the lategame.
[2] Yeah, buffing helps with the trading, but that's not really the problem - neither should it be the intention to make it possible to run into Siege lines/PFs and colossi/FFs/Storms. The main problem is to get some of the roach/hydra where it hurts and around the choke points behind which T/P is going to sit in the phases of the game where R/H or R/H/V can trade well. Imo the main problem here is that the moment you toy around with drops/OL speed so much that you can use them for multipronged harass, it's going to break doomdrops, since all OLs are dropships (and they are dirtcheap and accessible in high numbers easily/early). The Tunneling Claws stuff definitely has helped, as we can also see on the prolevel. But at the end of the day its still just units moving through the same guarded entrances as always.
Imo, I'd like it if they would finally implement a normalattacking T2.5-T3 longranged Zerg unit (and sorry, that is not a lurker). The ones we had/have - Infestor with up to 8 3/3 ITs for 2supply and 9range NP as "siegelike" weapon; SH which I wrote about already... not a good unit to mix into your composition and questionable if a good unit at all - are not units that really play well with the other stuff from that techpath.
|
can anyone explain the widow-mine change to me? I feel like nothing has changed...
the tooltip is btw wrong, it says only +35 dmg to shields
|
That is the single target damage. That remains unchanged. The change is in the splash damage (+shield) as noted in the OP.
|
when does this go live cause its march 1st soon and still no patch. maybe they decided to not cripple protoss hehe
|
On March 01 2014 11:02 SonGoku wrote:
can anyone explain the widow-mine change to me? I feel like nothing has changed...
the tooltip is btw wrong, it says only +35 dmg to shields
The widow-mine does 125 Damage + 35 dmg to shield on the primary target. (The unit that the mine explodes on)
Now the buff is only on the splash damage and only on shield.
Splash Damage:
Used to be (NO shield damage):
1.25 radius, 40 splash damage
1.25 to 1.5 radius, 20 damage
1.5 to 1.75, 10 damage
Now:
1.25 radius, splash damage will increase from 40 to 40 +40 vs. shields.
1.25 to 1.5 radius, splash damage will increase from 20 to 20 +20 vs. shields.
1.5 to 1.75 radius, splash damage will increase from 10 to 10 +10 vs. shields.
Ingame Gif demo:
+ Show Spoiler +
I have tried and won a game going MECH!!! I think mech is actually really viable now.
|
Ok my fault!
But still, I dont really feel like it has changed a lot. Maybe because I dont really have played mines in tvp often, but I watched some Rotterdam stream today and he said something like "sometimes it does nothing but sometimes it can be game-winning".
In wich cases is the mine buff game winning? Drop into eco?
edit: thanks for the gif, that looks good!
|
|
|
On March 01 2014 12:00 SwiftRH wrote:
when does this go live cause its march 1st soon and still no patch. maybe they decided to not cripple protoss hehe
It is live in NA. Head banging Hydras are mean. I have not run into mines yet. MSC vision nerf takes getting used to. It's big.
It will go live in EU after the last WCS group E matches.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Wp2waeJ.gif)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ld2vXT3.gif)
