|
On May 01 2014 02:58 DomeGetta wrote:
Sorry but this is pretty ridiculous.
Neither of these things are going to balance the game - I love how so many people vote for the helion HB transform - It actually makes me lol - it's definitely all zerg players lolling at it saying please yes please another useless mech buff! As if now meching will be more viable because you don't have to get the transform upgrade? Seriously, that's the problem with mech? Even the upgrade cost is inconsequential nonsense - it takes about 10 in game seconds to mine that much..
Tvz: lets see - pre mine nerf but post hellbat nerf and overseer buff it was statistically balanced ( as acknowledged by Blizzard) - You were urged not to patch the game while it was statistically balanced (by people other than zergs that didn't want to learn how to micro) but you did anyway to fix a "stale metagame" and now you got what so many people said you would and what you asked another imbalanced match-up. Think about it logically - you took away the only viable composition that has demonstrated capability to win games at the highest level of play through reducing the damage output of a core unit of it by 50%. What did you think was going to happen? Now your answer to fix it is to change 2 totally unrelated things? How does transformation servos help even bio/hellbat?
This one is so easy its ridiculous - you already have the solution you just broke it - man up and admit your mistake.
Tvp - yess please transform servos the answer we've been waiting for. Nothing on strengthening Terrans' early game defense or weakening / limiting Protoss' early game options? It's obvious that the warp gate mechanic and the adv it provides late game isn't going to be fixed but you could at least take away the ridiculous adv that the race has in early game by forcing T to prepare for a multitude of cheese and allowing P to choose whether to exploit those or to fake them and greed out. There are COUNTLESS pro level games that highlight this. Why is this necessary for the game?
Why refuse to address these things and in place of them throw out totally unrelated "buffs" (tanks/servos/bio up cost??)
If you aren't going to fix them at least man up and respond to your position on them specifically and why you think they are actually beneficial to the game at present.
The patch notes were quite specific on how the Transformation Servos removal helps TvZ.
There's a growing number of pros talking about TvP favoring T at the moment, even if results don't reflect it quite as obviously. If we're going to take feedback from pros then we should take it not just when it suits the argument we want to make.
Therefore I'm okay with Blizzard waiting a little on TvP.
|
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong.
I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno.
Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
|
On May 01 2014 03:20 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 03:18 TheDwf wrote:On May 01 2014 03:16 Hider wrote:
In Inno vs life g3, Innovation went for double ebay before 2nd and 3rd rax, which obv means that Life can take a 4th on a map like Frosts very early. Zerg can take a quick fourth if Terran goes for triple OC regardless of +2 rax or +2 EBs first. Well the context here is that Life easily reflected aggression from Innovation while having high worker count. Doing that is a lot harder vs non double ebay builds since the 2 Medivac timing attack comes later. The way zerg works they can always take bases fast as long as they just sascrifice worker count, however there is always a tradeoff. Taking a quick 4th against nongreedy teran builds isn't really benefical in most situations.
Life easily blocked the agression because Bogus went 8 Hellions. Getting extra Hellions delays the Medivac timing while the Spire timing is unchanged; if your Medivac push/drop hits when mutas are already there you can't do anything. It's even worse if Terran went rax 11 3 Reapers instead of 2 with rax 12 but I don't remember how many Reapers he had.
|
On May 01 2014 03:29 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 03:20 Hider wrote:On May 01 2014 03:18 TheDwf wrote:On May 01 2014 03:16 Hider wrote:
In Inno vs life g3, Innovation went for double ebay before 2nd and 3rd rax, which obv means that Life can take a 4th on a map like Frosts very early. Zerg can take a quick fourth if Terran goes for triple OC regardless of +2 rax or +2 EBs first. Well the context here is that Life easily reflected aggression from Innovation while having high worker count. Doing that is a lot harder vs non double ebay builds since the 2 Medivac timing attack comes later. The way zerg works they can always take bases fast as long as they just sascrifice worker count, however there is always a tradeoff. Taking a quick 4th against nongreedy teran builds isn't really benefical in most situations. Life easily blocked the agression because Bogus went 8 Hellions. Getting extra Hellions delays the Medivac timing while the Spire timing is unchanged; if your Medivac push/drop hits when mutas are already there you can't do anything. It's even worse if Terran went rax 11 3 Reapers instead of 2 with rax 12 but I don't remember how many Reapers he had.
It also should be noted that any push terran tries gets much weaker when you spawn cross positions on Frost. Terran suffers when all your units walk from your main base slowly, without the help of creep or warp ins.
|
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
|
On May 01 2014 03:23 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 02:58 DomeGetta wrote:
Sorry but this is pretty ridiculous.
Neither of these things are going to balance the game - I love how so many people vote for the helion HB transform - It actually makes me lol - it's definitely all zerg players lolling at it saying please yes please another useless mech buff! As if now meching will be more viable because you don't have to get the transform upgrade? Seriously, that's the problem with mech? Even the upgrade cost is inconsequential nonsense - it takes about 10 in game seconds to mine that much..
Tvz: lets see - pre mine nerf but post hellbat nerf and overseer buff it was statistically balanced ( as acknowledged by Blizzard) - You were urged not to patch the game while it was statistically balanced (by people other than zergs that didn't want to learn how to micro) but you did anyway to fix a "stale metagame" and now you got what so many people said you would and what you asked another imbalanced match-up. Think about it logically - you took away the only viable composition that has demonstrated capability to win games at the highest level of play through reducing the damage output of a core unit of it by 50%. What did you think was going to happen? Now your answer to fix it is to change 2 totally unrelated things? How does transformation servos help even bio/hellbat?
This one is so easy its ridiculous - you already have the solution you just broke it - man up and admit your mistake.
Tvp - yess please transform servos the answer we've been waiting for. Nothing on strengthening Terrans' early game defense or weakening / limiting Protoss' early game options? It's obvious that the warp gate mechanic and the adv it provides late game isn't going to be fixed but you could at least take away the ridiculous adv that the race has in early game by forcing T to prepare for a multitude of cheese and allowing P to choose whether to exploit those or to fake them and greed out. There are COUNTLESS pro level games that highlight this. Why is this necessary for the game?
Why refuse to address these things and in place of them throw out totally unrelated "buffs" (tanks/servos/bio up cost??)
If you aren't going to fix them at least man up and respond to your position on them specifically and why you think they are actually beneficial to the game at present.
The patch notes were quite specific on how the Transformation Servos removal helps TvZ. There's a growing number of pros talking about TvP favoring T at the moment, even if results don't reflect it quite as obviously. If we're going to take feedback from pros then we should take it not just when it suits the argument we want to make. Therefore I'm okay with Blizzard waiting a little on TvP.
Yes - because if you choose to open helion harass and dont lose any 6 hellbats instead of helions will certainly compensate for 50% less effective mines - very astute.
And to your second point - stats not opinions should be what dictate patches (actual imbalance vs. stale metagame)
|
I want to see experimentation with creep recedement, Siege Tank damage and stim upgrade duration.
|
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote:
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong.
I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno.
Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
|
On May 01 2014 04:53 Zenbrez wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote:
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong.
I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno.
Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?). Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that. This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information.
This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
|
On May 01 2014 04:59 DomeGetta wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 04:53 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote:
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong.
I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno.
Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?). Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it. If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games. It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
|
On May 01 2014 05:02 Zenbrez wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 04:59 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 04:53 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote:
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong.
I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno.
Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?). Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it. If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games. It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage. Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
|
On May 01 2014 03:29 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 03:20 Hider wrote:On May 01 2014 03:18 TheDwf wrote:On May 01 2014 03:16 Hider wrote:
In Inno vs life g3, Innovation went for double ebay before 2nd and 3rd rax, which obv means that Life can take a 4th on a map like Frosts very early. Zerg can take a quick fourth if Terran goes for triple OC regardless of +2 rax or +2 EBs first. Well the context here is that Life easily reflected aggression from Innovation while having high worker count. Doing that is a lot harder vs non double ebay builds since the 2 Medivac timing attack comes later. The way zerg works they can always take bases fast as long as they just sascrifice worker count, however there is always a tradeoff. Taking a quick 4th against nongreedy teran builds isn't really benefical in most situations. Life easily blocked the agression because Bogus went 8 Hellions. Getting extra Hellions delays the Medivac timing while the Spire timing is unchanged; if your Medivac push/drop hits when mutas are already there you can't do anything. It's even worse if Terran went rax 11 3 Reapers instead of 2 with rax 12 but I don't remember how many Reapers he had.
Rewatched the game. I don't think the 8 hellions hurt him at all had he followed it up correctly.. Sure it delayed his timing, but given how cost-effective they were, I think he would have been in a worse position with only the standard 6 hellions. It definitely seemed to catch Life off guard a bit that he couldn't just defend with Lings.
But the problem (as I see it), was that he didn't adjust correctly. Perhaps he thought the initial 8 hellions had done so much damage that he could just kill him with follow up-attack. But given that it was delayed + he landed his 3rd OC and used Hellions to prevent counterattacks from Life (so he could safely mine from the 3rd), he way overcommited with his Medivac timing.
Maybe he thought Life was on 80 drones (which would imply Mutas around 13 minute mark), but in fact he was just on 69 workers to the 63 of Innovation, and Innovation would have been in decent shape had he just send in his medivacs + marins to clear up creep and then went back home and follow up with 2/2 timing.
Anyway, my point was that, that game was a very poor example to attempt to argue that terran needs a buff early game. I definitely feel that TvZ is gonna be a alot more volatile if terran can transform Hellbats for free.
|
|
|
Most reasonable people agree the widow mine in TvZ right now is pretty worthless and should get a revert. Someone should make a poll lol
edit: i made a poll:
Poll: Widow mine nerf revert for TvZYes (27) 64% No (15) 36% 42 total votes Your vote: Widow mine nerf revert for TvZ (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
|
On May 01 2014 05:05 DomeGetta wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:02 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 04:59 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 04:53 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote:
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong.
I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno.
Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?). Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it. If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games. It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage. Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate. So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you. Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever. What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
|
On May 01 2014 05:02 Zenbrez wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 04:59 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 04:53 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote:
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong.
I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno.
Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?). Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it. If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games. It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage. Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
You know the month before the nerf, there was exactly 50% winrate in TvZ ?
|
On May 01 2014 05:15 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:02 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 04:59 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 04:53 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote:
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong.
I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno.
Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?). Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it. If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games. It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage. Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate. You know the month before the nerf, there was exactly 50% winrate in TvZ ?
Yes, read my above post. That's because all terrans were doing was 3CC 2ebay. If zergs did roach bane all in, they won. If they tried to macro, they lost most of the time. It's like nobody remembers what they watched a year ago. It was agonizing because tvz had become a slaughter one way or the other (mine power or roach allin)
|
On May 01 2014 04:53 Zenbrez wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote:
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of !@#$%^&*, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong.
I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno.
Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?). Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that. This man gets it.
Eh TvZ win/rates were below 50% according to Aliguac while terran were still significiantly underrepresented. This roughly implies that top 0.8% terran were losing against top 1% zergs.
From a balanceperspective - nerfing terran in that matchup made little sense.
I personally had the "pleausre" of offracing zerg a bit last week, and honestly playing vs Widow Mines feel dumb. You basically just amove your whole army in as zerglings almost always detonate all the Widow Mines.
Maybe you right click a bit with the zerglings so they injure the terrans army more than your own.
Maybe you do a bit of baneling spreading, and maybe you FF Medivacs a bit with Mutalisks, but neither of these micro tricks are really neccasasry in order to win at this level.
Meanwhile my diamond terran opponents were trying to micro their assess off, but it was very rarely enough as I simply had a lot more stuff and terrans AOE is too weak.
|
And once again, blizzard demonstrates how out of touch with reality they are by making zero changes to the actual problems.
|
On May 01 2014 04:50 DomeGetta wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 03:23 DinoMight wrote:On May 01 2014 02:58 DomeGetta wrote:
Sorry but this is pretty ridiculous.
Neither of these things are going to balance the game - I love how so many people vote for the helion HB transform - It actually makes me lol - it's definitely all zerg players lolling at it saying please yes please another useless mech buff! As if now meching will be more viable because you don't have to get the transform upgrade? Seriously, that's the problem with mech? Even the upgrade cost is inconsequential nonsense - it takes about 10 in game seconds to mine that much..
Tvz: lets see - pre mine nerf but post hellbat nerf and overseer buff it was statistically balanced ( as acknowledged by Blizzard) - You were urged not to patch the game while it was statistically balanced (by people other than zergs that didn't want to learn how to micro) but you did anyway to fix a "stale metagame" and now you got what so many people said you would and what you asked another imbalanced match-up. Think about it logically - you took away the only viable composition that has demonstrated capability to win games at the highest level of play through reducing the damage output of a core unit of it by 50%. What did you think was going to happen? Now your answer to fix it is to change 2 totally unrelated things? How does transformation servos help even bio/hellbat?
This one is so easy its ridiculous - you already have the solution you just broke it - man up and admit your mistake.
Tvp - yess please transform servos the answer we've been waiting for. Nothing on strengthening Terrans' early game defense or weakening / limiting Protoss' early game options? It's obvious that the warp gate mechanic and the adv it provides late game isn't going to be fixed but you could at least take away the ridiculous adv that the race has in early game by forcing T to prepare for a multitude of cheese and allowing P to choose whether to exploit those or to fake them and greed out. There are COUNTLESS pro level games that highlight this. Why is this necessary for the game?
Why refuse to address these things and in place of them throw out totally unrelated "buffs" (tanks/servos/bio up cost??)
If you aren't going to fix them at least man up and respond to your position on them specifically and why you think they are actually beneficial to the game at present.
The patch notes were quite specific on how the Transformation Servos removal helps TvZ. There's a growing number of pros talking about TvP favoring T at the moment, even if results don't reflect it quite as obviously. If we're going to take feedback from pros then we should take it not just when it suits the argument we want to make. Therefore I'm okay with Blizzard waiting a little on TvP. Yes - because if you choose to open helion harass and dont lose any 6 hellbats instead of helions will certainly compensate for 50% less effective mines - very astute. And to your second point - stats not opinions should be what dictate patches (actual imbalance vs. stale metagame)
yes but don't tell me that 6 extra Hellbats for a 2 base Hellbat + bio timing push pre Muta is not scary for the zerg.
I find it funny how fast people dismiss changes in the game like that without even trying the balance maps or anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
