|
On July 12 2014 23:36 Xequecal wrote:
Why does Protoss have to always be the race that dies instantly even if caught without detection for literally a few seconds? Terran and Zerg are hurt by unscouted dark templar, but they don't lose the game instantly. Protoss loses instantly to cloak banshee or mine drop even if you have an observer 50% of the way produced when it hits.
Can't tell if trolling......
|
If he isnt is it really worth an answer?
|
If you lose vs cloak banshee or a widow mine drop, then u deserve it 
|
On July 12 2014 12:34 EngrishTeacher wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 12:32 Twine wrote:
I really think they should buff tanks (building time and damages) instead of mines. It would maybe make TvP interesting with tanks bio against colossus and mines bio vs hts chargelots. And, tanks are less of a random unit than mines.
As for the TW change ... Hell, it's about time.
I'm curious to see how the AA priority will work in TvT (focusins vikings/medivacs instead of tanks, etc..) Really tired of hearing this argument when people fail to consider TvT. Please do post a viable and not-completely-quirky solution that limits the tank buffs to vs. P and Z only.
A weak buff would be to go for 50 damage -15 to light. Would affect Archons Ghosts and Queens. Though back to 50 damage would work as well and encourage marine splitting in TvT, right now its just a-move into exposed siege tanks and you fall really behind, if the tanks would get a few more Marines it would be helpful.
Pure Bio usually doom drops on top of tanks anyway.
The more extreme version would be to add damage reduction against Explosion damage(not acid or psy) to Combat shields, which would only affect Terran splash in all matchups.
But yeah Marines are already pretty damn good unless its splash. Which low hp units should die to. And we wouldn't see Tank Viking in TvT anyway because of the map sizes nowadays.
|
Though back to 50 damage would work as well and encourage marine splitting in TvT, right now its just a-move into exposed siege tanks and you fall really behind, if the tanks would get a few more Marines it would be helpful.
??? No Tanks are fine vs Marines. Don't buff them please.
|
On July 12 2014 23:36 Xequecal wrote:
Why does Protoss have to always be the race that dies instantly even if caught without detection for literally a few seconds? Terran and Zerg are hurt by unscouted dark templar, but they don't lose the game instantly. Protoss loses instantly to cloak banshee or mine drop even if you have an observer 50% of the way produced when it hits.
It's because of the fact that Protoss is based upon BO wins and losses as openers.. And if that phase does get passed - the Protoss games then become awesome..
Terran are the exact opposite of that - they never - simply never lose to a BO loss (unless being too greedy, but if it happens - it's 100% deserved), but they do lose in the phase after if they don't see the opponent's army composition or what tech the opponent is going for
Zerg's a bit more consisted of both - they can or not lose due to a BO as well as win or lose due to army comp later on.. What I have as a problem however is how Zergs never build a single Overseer or a Spore blindly to prevent stupid loses (pontentially), lol.. Like that 100 mineral investment will pay off far more than losing at least 4-5 Drones
But yah - it's due to the fact that out of all the races - Protoss is the most dependent of BO
|
Here is the reddit test of the new change for whom don't see it :
http://imgur.com/a/ctVny
This doesn't seem to be OP. I'm a bit surprised this seems to have very little difference for the widow mine drop.
|
On July 13 2014 04:06 Tyrhanius wrote:Here is the reddit test of the new change for whom don't see it : http://imgur.com/a/ctVnyThis doesn't seem to be OP. I'm a bit surprised this seems to have very little difference for the widow mine drop.
Thanks for the comparison. It doesn't seem too bad to be honest, especially that Probe illustration where an active mine only takes out one additional probe in a mildly saturated base. Seems like a good change if it goes through, since players are way more adept at splitting and handling mines in general now.
|
On July 13 2014 04:06 Tyrhanius wrote:Here is the reddit test of the new change for whom don't see it : http://imgur.com/a/ctVnyThis doesn't seem to be OP. I'm a bit surprised this seems to have very little difference for the widow mine drop.
Yeah seems ok. Thx for sharing. Should only have a big impact if units are really clumped together. But the TimeWarp change looks like it does absolutely nothing. Looking forward for the change. But I have a feeling they really need protection in form of tanks firing from behind more than ever (when playing Mech).
|
On July 13 2014 04:10 Novacute wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 04:06 Tyrhanius wrote:Here is the reddit test of the new change for whom don't see it : http://imgur.com/a/ctVnyThis doesn't seem to be OP. I'm a bit surprised this seems to have very little difference for the widow mine drop. Thanks for the comparison. It doesn't seem too bad to be honest, especially that Probe illustration where an active mine only takes out one additional probe in a mildly saturated base. Seems like a good change if it goes through, since players are way more adept at splitting and handling mines in general now.
Are you really SURE that that are the changes ?
Well I guess it's fine to get that buff lol.. I guess I overreacted, but didn't see that nearly only the outer radiuses were increased as opposed to the inner ones though.. Still not persuaded enough that the Hellbat buff has "gone in" enough for the Zerg players to handle another obstacle real soon
|
On July 13 2014 04:06 Tyrhanius wrote:Here is the reddit test of the new change for whom don't see it : http://imgur.com/a/ctVnyThis doesn't seem to be OP. I'm a bit surprised this seems to have very little difference for the widow mine drop.
Surprised me too. On paper it looks stupid strong. But looking at the gifs, its kind of underwhelming actually.
|
On July 12 2014 12:34 EngrishTeacher wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 12:32 Twine wrote:
I really think they should buff tanks (building time and damages) instead of mines. It would maybe make TvP interesting with tanks bio against colossus and mines bio vs hts chargelots. And, tanks are less of a random unit than mines.
As for the TW change ... Hell, it's about time.
I'm curious to see how the AA priority will work in TvT (focusins vikings/medivacs instead of tanks, etc..) Really tired of hearing this argument when people fail to consider TvT. Please do post a viable and not-completely-quirky solution that limits the tank buffs to vs. P and Z only.
Really tired of hearing THIS argument from Terrans. The balance of TvT will remain the same regardless of what happens to the tank. If TvT becomes more one dimensional with a tank buff, but TvZ and TvP become much more dynamic, then that's a change worth doing.
Mirrors are the LEAST important MU's. Their priority should be LAST.
|
why do they keep doing these?
all it seems to do is to enforce the current tactics that currently "are" working.
WHy not completely throw off the meta game with a buff to siege tanks dmg/thors mvspeed/air dmg ?
do something completely crazy.
the game is boring as it plays out the same fucking way each and every other game.
I cant believe people still watch this "mmmm attacking, oh protoss has colossus terran looses"
|
On July 13 2014 04:06 Tyrhanius wrote:Here is the reddit test of the new change for whom don't see it : http://imgur.com/a/ctVnyThis doesn't seem to be OP. I'm a bit surprised this seems to have very little difference for the widow mine drop.
Wow, that really is a pretty small change, actually  It's a help for Terrans, but mines aren't going to be rofl-stomping the enemy army anytime soon. Mine drops are still going to be underwhelming, and baneling blobs will still be strong.
|
On July 13 2014 06:34 Izerman wrote:
why do they keep doing these?
all it seems to do is to enforce the current tactics that currently "are" working.
WHy not completely throw off the meta game with a buff to siege tanks dmg/thors mvspeed/air dmg ?
do something completely crazy.
the game is boring as it plays out the same fucking way each and every other game.
I cant believe people still watch this "mmmm attacking, oh protoss has colossus terran looses"
Doing a "crazy change" does not fix the issue long term, it's just replacing one meta with another. It's only useful if Blizzard commits to constantly changing everything up, which of course will lead to mutiny from the Korean scene.
|
On July 13 2014 06:55 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 06:34 Izerman wrote:
why do they keep doing these?
all it seems to do is to enforce the current tactics that currently "are" working.
WHy not completely throw off the meta game with a buff to siege tanks dmg/thors mvspeed/air dmg ?
do something completely crazy.
the game is boring as it plays out the same fucking way each and every other game.
I cant believe people still watch this "mmmm attacking, oh protoss has colossus terran looses"
Doing a "crazy change" does not fix the issue long term, it's just replacing one meta with another. It's only useful if Blizzard commits to constantly changing everything up, which of course will lead to mutiny from the Korean scene.
I still cannot believe they are not willing to test +shield damage to for Siege Tanks. At this point in time I don't even care whether it's gonna result in turtlemech. TvP bio at pro level is really bad atm. so why on earth just not shake up the meta a bit, and make your customers happy?
|
I don't think it's the kind of change you can get a good idea of what it'll do on gifs. 1.75 radius mine was a hot topic about imbalance for very long and spawned many patches so I'll wait until I've seen some high level parade style TvZs before saying that buff is fine (and I'm still convinced the buff shouldn't go without a +shields decrease : that gif lacks a mine shot on chargelots).
|
On July 13 2014 07:03 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I don't think it's the kind of change you can get a good idea of what it'll do on gifs. 1.75 radius mine was a hot topic about imbalance for very long and spawned many patches so I'll wait until I've seen some high level parade style TvZs before saying that buff is fine (and I'm still convinced the buff shouldn't go without a +shields decrease : that gif lacks a mine shot on chargelots).
Yeh it was a hot topic and then zergs figured it out and it became an apparent "strong unit" to balance out zergs faster production.
However, then a brilliant idea hit David Kim: "wouldn't the matchup be even cooler if terrans mixed in both Siege tanks and Widow Mines?". So he nerfed the Widow Mine and buffed the Siege tanks, but obviously failed at the accomplished goal, and is now looking to correct his mistake.
Let's not overanalyze balance implications for TvZ here. On almost every single metric where you looked at the balance months prior to the nerf, the matchup was pretty balanced. Now, we know that the matchup isn't working and that terran is in desperate need of an AOE-ability. A buff to the Mine is welcomed and this doesn't look like it's gonna be such a big buff that it will break the game.
|
widow mine buff is kinda ridiculous. This wont make terran stronger in the late but end more games easily in the mid for terrans. Exactly what is not needed.
|
Canada13424 Posts
I edited the GIF provided by Tyrhanius into the OP. If you know who made it on Reddit, I will credit them fully but I do not know who it was.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
