|
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/14766600/call-to-action-july-11-balance-testing-7-11-2014
We’ve just published a new version of the Balance Test Map to the StarCraft II Custom Games list titled "(2)OvergrowthLE (2.1.3 Balance v1.0)". In this new version, we’ll be testing changes to the Widow Mine’s splash damage, the Thor’s AA prioritization, and we’ll be decreasing the duration of the Mothership Core’s Time Warp ability. During this testing phase, please keep in mind that none of the changes listed below are final. Our plan is to first explore how each change impacts the game and potentially test additional changes after reviewing your feedback. Let's have a look at the full list of changes you'll be testing in this version:
Terran
Widow Mine Splash radius increased from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5 Thor Changed to prioritize their AA weapon over the AG weapon
Protoss
Mothership Core Time Warp duration decreased from 30 to 15 seconds
Balance Testing Extension Mod
We’ve also updated the Extension Mod for balance testing, so that you can try your hand with these changes on maps other than Overgrowth. Those of you who are interested in trying out the Extension Mod can use the following steps to get a game started:
Navigate to Browse Maps on the Custom Games menu, Select a map and click the Create with Mod button in the lower right corner, Choose to sort by Blizzard Mods from the dropdown list at the top of the screen. Select the “Balance Test Mod” Extension from the list and then hit Create Game.
If you're interested in the StarCraft II Balance Team's reasoning behind each change, you can check out David Kim's initial and recent forum posts on the topic.
We’d like to remind you that feedback based on playtesting is the most helpful information you can share with us at this time. We kindly ask that you spend some time playing games on the test map before offering your thoughts on the changes listed above.
As always, thank you for your continued feedback and support. We’d like to restate that none of the changes listed above are final. Once you feel you’ve had enough time to test thoroughly, we welcome you to share your feedback.
Visual Presentations of the Changes (gif)
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/ctVny
|
|
On July 12 2014 11:39 Exarl25 wrote: Goodbye Probes. They deserve it! Bastards tried to steal my car!
|
I'm low diamond/platinum protoss on Europe, if anyone wants to test this map with me, feel free to PM
|
On July 12 2014 11:39 Exarl25 wrote: Goodbye Probes. Drones too right?
|
A bit sad that they didn't make any changes to this balance map, especially the time warp nerf.
I can see why they don't want to add an upgrade for it or change its mechanics since it has a lot of potential (can be used aggressively or defensively).
But it certainly can be made better, too many spells are lacking clear indication of which unit casted that spell. As in the caster lacks a clear indicator that it casted that spell.
Some examples are: sentries and forcefields. ghost and emps. ht and storm/feedback. mothershipcore and timewarp. oracle and revelation. Viper and binding clouds.
This issue really needs to be fixed because we want to see casters casting spells, not just spells going off everywhere.
|
I hope they don't buff the widow mine like that, its kinda stupid how a 75/25 unit has so much damage potential, compare it to a roach and yeah...just lazy balancing but no doubt terran needs something though.
|
On July 12 2014 12:06 VegaMatt wrote: I hope they don't buff the widow mine like that, its kinda stupid how a 75/25 unit has so much damage potential, compare it to a roach and yeah...just lazy balancing but no doubt terran needs something though.
Potential... being the key word...
|
|
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..)
|
Not to mention... if you took a different perspective and looked at DPS, suddenly that roach looks like a stimmed Jim Raynor from arcade Special Forces.
|
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.
|
On July 12 2014 11:46 ETisME wrote: too many spells are lacking clear indication of which unit casted that spell. As in the caster lacks a clear indicator that it casted that spell.
This issue really needs to be fixed because we want to see casters casting spells, not just spells going off everywhere.
Isn't that every spell except fungal, abduct and seeker missile?
|
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.
So, what's the gripe here? You think tanks would be too strong in TvT if they were buffed? Bio spam would be less effective? Games would turn into positional wars and/or turtles? Is that the fear?
Maybe that's not what your concern is (and if it isn't, please clarify); but if it is well man, I've gotta disagree. TvT was fantastic in BW and tanks shit all over infantry in that one. I think SC2 needs something to mix up the strats. I'd love to see more TvT mech to air strats. I'm tired of bio, bio, bio in every tournament or every game I play on b.net.
Tweaking mines, Thors, and the MC are silly changes. Mines are boring and only facilitate more MMMWM (bio) play (yawn). Thor targeting is ridiculous - where's the micro? That's part of the game! And the MC nerf? Please, all the damage is done in the first 5-10 seconds.
Terran needs a complete overhaul. I agree with those who want to see a tank buff.
|
I'd love for them to test faster widow mine build time. It would be nice to have some new cutesy little openings to toy around with.
|
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.
yes it would change tvt where tanks are pretty decent but honestly I would say around 80% of the ppl go bio in tvt cause its so much easier 2 just doom drop rather than play meck right now so buffing tanks would not be the worst thing....problem with tanks is they are rly bad in low numbers but pretty good once u get a critical mass
BEST change imo 2 limit impact in tvt tho would be significantly reduce the amount of friend fire they do.....when u are fighting zeelots or lings with tanks you are usually doing more dmg to ur own units than the enemy (esp against zeelots)
|
Computer bugged out, double post happened sorry.
|
I really get annoyed hearing the argument on why people don't want things changed "it will hurt the mirror match up" Frankly who cares? It's mirror not 1 side has a advantage, boo hoo you will have to change a certain style, I think balance between the non mirror match ups are a lot more important to balance and have a fair game, than to worry what effects it may have in the Mirror match up. IMO.
I'm not sure what fixation David Kim has with the widow mine to constantly change it, why can't he try something new in a test map with something like tanks that almost everyone agrees would be neat to see them not suck.
|
On July 12 2014 12:59 klipik12 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 11:46 ETisME wrote: too many spells are lacking clear indication of which unit casted that spell. As in the caster lacks a clear indicator that it casted that spell.
This issue really needs to be fixed because we want to see casters casting spells, not just spells going off everywhere. Isn't that every spell except fungal, abduct and seeker missile? Guardian shield, Yamato, infested terran, auto turrets and phoenix lift and Oracle other two spells are great.
|
need to get rid of the energy for battle cruiser and add cooltime for yamato cannon so that terran can get tier 3 units and composition in the late game vs protoss also please nerf photon overcharge..
|
On July 12 2014 13:59 neverlose9999 wrote: need to get rid of the energy for battle cruiser and add cooltime for yamato cannon so that terran can get tier 3 units and composition in the late game vs protoss also please nerf photon overcharge..
I think that would be one of the best things for Terran, allowing them to go into sky terran in the late game, Energy on most terran units is BS and makes them crap vs Protoss. I would love to see sky toss vs sky terran that would be a sick and fun late game to watch.
|
On July 12 2014 11:33 geokilla wrote:
Thor Changed to prioritize their AA weapon over the AG weapon
I remember when they made the opposite of this change in wings because thors were prioritizing medivacs over things that were hitting them... At least they took out some of the other silly proposed changes they had from 2 weeks ago.
|
I liked it when zerg had to tiptoe arround mines, not just ignore them. Now it is 1 Mine per Marine or like Demuslim, using no mines at all but throw marauders into the banes and add thors to hurt mutas. Most of the newer maps (the one with the 2-Rock tunnel between possible naturals) are too big for tanks and lack cliffs and chokes to set up siege lines of 3 Tanks to make it hard for any army to storm that possition (like in BW). In HotS you can have 1 Siege line, size depending on tank ccount. If you ever split up, tanks are gone, everyone has " jeadong mutas" now and protoss units can ignore them anyway. I think the Siege Tank buff would be funny.
|
Sigh, no love for other factory units or even the BC?
|
it s great to see that they try everything to kill High Templar openings and increase the randomness of the game
|
sure lets make the game all about eather or not you can react within a 1-2s interval. sounds like a good way to balance a game... oh wait, no it isnt. Fancy that.
|
As if mines need to be buffed...It's already a reusable burrowed baneling and even one in a mineral line can end a game instantly.
|
On July 12 2014 16:56 myRZeth wrote: it s great to see that they try everything to kill High Templar openings and increase the randomness of the game bigger splash damage from wm increase the randomness pretty big.
|
Oh I wanna add:
Big shout out to Blizzard making it super easy to test Balance ! and Add the Lazybod Mod method for all maps. That really helps out a lot for people like me who are too lazy and stupid to work with galaxy editor !
|
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.
Make the tank able to rotate its turret while moving, BW style.
|
Italy12246 Posts
Why can't the just buff actual lategame Terran units is beyond me...
|
On July 12 2014 18:28 Teoita wrote: Why can't the just buff actual lategame Terran units is beyond me... After 4 years neglecting siege tanks or mech play in general, and just buffing or adding synergies for bio, I do not think they really care about terran lategame.
|
On July 12 2014 16:56 myRZeth wrote: it s great to see that they try everything to kill High Templar openings and increase the randomness of the game Yeah ofc straight HT build should be viable, please give Z straight to Vipers safe build order please.
Really gets disgusted by how HT builds eradicated everything terran tried to do and then when WM gets a buff Rain is going whiney mode. Seriously, most often balance patches gets the mos radical effect straight away and then falls off when the races adapt. The T WM buff has basically not changed a thing regarding the win/lose ratio of TvP. All it did was that protoss has to win in a different way, try a bit harder.
|
Italy12246 Posts
The issue isn't that the win rates have changed, but that colossus builds just force you to sit there and do fuck all for 15 minutes and then amove to victory with 3/3. Alternatively, you can sit there and do fuck all for another 15 minutes.
The WM buff made the matchup incredibly boring and stale while also keeping the win rates roughly the same. Good idea eh?
oh also, teching straight to Vipers is perfectly viable in ZvP.
|
cant find the map.. help anyone?
|
widow mine splash radius increase is so hilarious that it makes me wanna permanently stop playing this game.. awesome idea david kim, just absolutely grand!
i love it i love it i love it i love it i love it i love it....
2 sec, hanging myself in my livinroom
|
I'm terran, and I'm definitely against the widow mine buff.
I think the problem with widow mines is that as a terran, it's a very small tech path commitment to make a couple of widow mines. In TvP for example the factory is likely idling most of the game anyway so you might as well churn a couple out. The response it requires however, early game detection and ranged units, requires a pretty big commitment from both zergs and protosses. A couple of stalkers, a robo bay and observers for protoss narrows down their potential counterplay pretty grossly.
|
On July 12 2014 18:35 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 18:28 Teoita wrote: Why can't the just buff actual lategame Terran units is beyond me... After 4 years neglecting siege tanks or mech play in general, and just buffing or adding synergies for bio, I do not think they really care about terran lategame.
They did buff the tank though ... no longer needs armory for siege-mode in Hots and the rate of fire is quicker. Not enough to make tanks the meta in TvZ and TvP though I guess although Bomber has shown that tanks are still viable, you just need a lot of them and good positioning.
|
On July 12 2014 13:37 LingBlingBling wrote: I really get annoyed hearing the argument on why people don't want things changed "it will hurt the mirror match up" Frankly who cares? It's mirror not 1 side has a advantage, boo hoo you will have to change a certain style, I think balance between the non mirror match ups are a lot more important to balance and have a fair game, than to worry what effects it may have in the Mirror match up. IMO.
I'm not sure what fixation David Kim has with the widow mine to constantly change it, why can't he try something new in a test map with something like tanks that almost everyone agrees would be neat to see them not suck. Mirror matchups must not have a single OP strategy either or both sides always play the same thing because they have no other option.
I understand Blizzard's concern about the Widow Mine as it is a new unit and not as tried yet as the original WOL units.
|
wow the widowmine buff is not very subtle. RIP my zerglings
|
On July 12 2014 18:28 Teoita wrote: Why can't the just buff actual lategame Terran units is beyond me... Me too. But that doesn't mean that there is no good explanation.
|
widowmine is just a crappy designed unit, buffing it till terran is back to early WoL just to nerf all other terran units again won't solve a thing. blizzard just needs to stop trying so hard to make their horrible HotS units work (widowmine, swarmhost, oracle, msc)
|
sad they put the same crap changes in.On July 12 2014 13:41 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 12:59 klipik12 wrote:On July 12 2014 11:46 ETisME wrote: too many spells are lacking clear indication of which unit casted that spell. As in the caster lacks a clear indicator that it casted that spell.
This issue really needs to be fixed because we want to see casters casting spells, not just spells going off everywhere. Isn't that every spell except fungal, abduct and seeker missile? Guardian shield, Yamato, infested terran, auto turrets and phoenix lift and Oracle other two spells are great. All ghost and ht spells have a specific animation as well
|
I rather feel Blizz is doing the same as in WoL. Makes the game worse from patch to patch until next addon with intent.
|
On July 12 2014 13:59 neverlose9999 wrote: need to get rid of the energy for battle cruiser and add cooltime for yamato cannon so that terran can get tier 3 units and composition in the late game vs protoss also please nerf photon overcharge..
Not going to happen, air is privileged to toss and protoss only, DK will make sure of that. Nice idea though would make the game way more interesting!
|
On July 12 2014 19:34 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: wow the widowmine buff is not very subtle. RIP my zerglings
not to mention all those gascostly banelings T_T even when you target the mines with your banelings, you will lose some before they arrive just to trade gasinefficient anyway. now you will lose even more rolling on your way to the terran army.
|
On July 12 2014 19:27 Radicalness wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 18:35 Godwrath wrote:On July 12 2014 18:28 Teoita wrote: Why can't the just buff actual lategame Terran units is beyond me... After 4 years neglecting siege tanks or mech play in general, and just buffing or adding synergies for bio, I do not think they really care about terran lategame. They did buff the tank though ... no longer needs armory for siege-mode in Hots and the rate of fire is quicker. Not enough to make tanks the meta in TvZ and TvP though I guess although Bomber has shown that tanks are still viable, you just need a lot of them and good positioning. Tanks never required armory for siege mode. And the rate of fire was definitly not what the tank needed (still doing subpar damage against everything, including even shields of armored units). Bomber uses tanks because he hates dying to speed roach aggression, and even though i am a huge fan, he has a much easier time controlling tanks than mines.
|
They better change the volume of the victory animation, they are so loud as if I watch ads of a userstream. I always get heart attack and no fun/motivation to get another heart attack.
|
So within an radius the same as a Psionic Storm this new Sentinel Missile now kill Zerglings, Banelings, Sentries, High Templars, Observers, Drones, then within a radius of Fungal Growth it kills Probes, all instantly. Then it further tickles units in an even larger radius. Seems pretty good for a 75/25 unit. Expect Terran Storm Drops on everything.
|
On July 12 2014 11:45 geokilla wrote:Drones too right? and let's just pretend there will be TvTs after the patch, so goodbye SCVs
|
On July 12 2014 13:03 Mjolnir wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 12:34 EngrishTeacher wrote: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. So, what's the gripe here? You think tanks would be too strong in TvT if they were buffed? Bio spam would be less effective? Games would turn into positional wars and/or turtles? Is that the fear? Maybe that's not what your concern is (and if it isn't, please clarify); but if it is well man, I've gotta disagree. TvT was fantastic in BW and tanks shit all over infantry in that one. I think SC2 needs something to mix up the strats. I'd love to see more TvT mech to air strats. I'm tired of bio, bio, bio in every tournament or every game I play on b.net. Tweaking mines, Thors, and the MC are silly changes. Mines are boring and only facilitate more MMMWM (bio) play (yawn). Thor targeting is ridiculous - where's the micro? That's part of the game! And the MC nerf? Please, all the damage is done in the first 5-10 seconds. Terran needs a complete overhaul. I agree with those who want to see a tank buff.
Yes, but mech was exciting in BW because how hard to play it was with non-unlimited unit select and non-mulitple building select and so on
Mech in SC2 is mostly just horrible
|
Well, TW change does not matter that much as many mentioned After 5-10 sec its' damage already have been done but decreasing duration still makes sense to me as 30 sec felt too long. Thor - again small change which won't make a big splash in games I feel. Also I'm not sure if I like removing the "control aspect" to target fire mutalisks during fights even if it would help terrans for more room to micro their other forces. WM - of course the biggest change. Right now I feel like mines (before this patch) deal too little damage vs Z, especially mutas and lings/blings to remain cost effective. On the hand mines deals with charegelot/ht style a little to well which led P to almost exclusively use colo openings. I believe that good change would be to buff slightly WM splash dmg and on the same time reduce bonus vs shield. It's hard to be specific but that's what test maps are for, right ? After giving it a thought: - WM base dmg: 125 -> 150 that way it will always kill at least one zealot/stalker/oracle with one hit but won't affect muta/ling/bling at all. - Splash radius: 1.5/2/2.5 with dmg somewhere where it is now. I don't know exact numbers neither was able to find them on liquipedia. - No bonus vs shield increased radius should help vs mass zealots and zergs generally. If not, we can increase dmg from splash so chargelot/ht won't be OP and TvZ should not be affected AFAIK splash dmg currently is higher than hp of ling/bling.
Also as almost everyone I'm looking forward for some tank buff. I'd suggest: Siege mode dmg: from 35 vs light/50 vs armored to 40 vs light/50 vs armored That way: - Zealot will be killed in 4 hits instead of 5 Rest P units won't be affected (aside from probes ;P)
- Marines (with or without CC) will be killed in 2 hits exactly as before. Difference is only when upgrades come to play and marines stim: buffed tank with +3 attack vs Marine with +3 armor needs 1 shot to kill a marine. It is obviously a nerf to bio in TvT but not as severe. However it may also lead bio player vs mech to actually change their comp a bit, as mech player will acquire more tanks and upgrades, to marauder heavy who are not affected by this buff.
- Baneling has 30HP so it will die in one shot regardless - Zergling Right now there is only one relationship between ling and tank, where lings have +X armor and tanks have no upgrades then ling are killed in 2 shots instead of 1. In every other circumstance tanks one shot lings. After the buff tanks will one shot lings always which is a buff to tanks but at least needed as right now tanks are just obliterated by mass lings.
Also I'd like to see some changes to Hellbats like: - Remove bio tag BUT buff HP slightly to compensate (+10-15 ?) - Maybe slightly buff dmg (+2-5 ?) BUT reduce speed That way: no healing from medivacs -> nerf to hellbat with bio and to hellbat drops but better vs Archons more HP -> straight buff to mech power (I know that you can of course drop with mech but meching player also want to have vikings so he has to choose between medivacs and vikings) dmg/speed -> more distinguishable from hellion My 2 cents
|
On July 12 2014 20:16 Rollora wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 11:45 geokilla wrote:On July 12 2014 11:39 Exarl25 wrote: Goodbye Probes. Drones too right? and let's just pretend there will be TvTs after the patch, so goodbye SCVs 45 hp means the 2nd radius wont oneshot
|
On July 12 2014 20:16 Rollora wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 11:45 geokilla wrote:On July 12 2014 11:39 Exarl25 wrote: Goodbye Probes. Drones too right? and let's just pretend there will be TvTs after the patch, so goodbye SCVs
With that radius it doesn't even have to be TvT for that. And goodbye Marines as well.
|
Italy12246 Posts
On July 12 2014 20:09 ejozl wrote: So within an radius the same as a Psionic Storm this new Sentinel Missile now kill Zerglings, Banelings, Sentries, High Templars, Observers, Drones, then within a radius of Fungal Growth it kills Probes, all instantly. Then it further tickles units in an even larger radius. Seems pretty good for a 75/25 unit. Expect Terran Storm Drops on everything.
Also zealots and stalkers because they get +shield bonus damage.
|
On July 12 2014 20:49 Teoita wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 20:09 ejozl wrote: So within an radius the same as a Psionic Storm this new Sentinel Missile now kill Zerglings, Banelings, Sentries, High Templars, Observers, Drones, then within a radius of Fungal Growth it kills Probes, all instantly. Then it further tickles units in an even larger radius. Seems pretty good for a 75/25 unit. Expect Terran Storm Drops on everything. Also zealots and stalkers because they get +shield bonus damage. Yes, but that's only the main target. Didn't want to add all the non-changed stuff.
|
Italy12246 Posts
On July 12 2014 20:52 ejozl wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 20:49 Teoita wrote:On July 12 2014 20:09 ejozl wrote: So within an radius the same as a Psionic Storm this new Sentinel Missile now kill Zerglings, Banelings, Sentries, High Templars, Observers, Drones, then within a radius of Fungal Growth it kills Probes, all instantly. Then it further tickles units in an even larger radius. Seems pretty good for a 75/25 unit. Expect Terran Storm Drops on everything. Also zealots and stalkers because they get +shield bonus damage. Yes, but that's only the main target. Didn't want to add all the non-changed stuff.
Ah fair enough. Still a pretty good midgame unit...
|
On July 12 2014 20:18 egrimm wrote:Well, ... Also I'm not sure if I like removing the "control aspect" to target fire mutalisks during fights even if it would help terrans for more room to micro their other forces ... Also I'd like to see some changes to Hellbats like: - Remove bio tag BUT buff HP slightly to compensate (+10-15 ?) - Maybe slightly buff dmg (+2-5 ?) BUT reduce speed ... My 2 cents The control aspect of the Thor has not been changed - it has just been made more sensible. T gets Thors against Z mostly, and they do it to counter mutalisks. Hence it is ridiculous that it shoots at ground forces instead. Now you can control it to shoot ground forces when you want to, the most common case of shooting mutalisks is the default. In TvT I assume that it will shoot at ground forces (ie. siege tanks) if nothing in the air is attacking it.
Slower hellbats - have you seen how they waddle around now? I don't think that I would ever build one again if they got slower, and no, transforming, moving, transforming to make up for lack of speed would not be viable in a battle.
Also I don't like people wanting tank buffs against bio who think that the TvT mirror match-up is irrelevant when considering the buffs. The TvT matchup is one of the most interesting, buff tanks and it will be mech v mech only - and we have another matchup where T is pigeon holed into one strategy. TvT is the only T match-up where we get to see nearly every T unit used, including cattlebruisers.
|
Italy12246 Posts
Buffing tanks doesnt imply making bio not viable in TvT. In fact, bio has mostly been slightly stronger than Mech, so i think there's lots of room to improve tanks in other matchups, while keeping bio viable.
|
The mine buff is so idiotic on its current form it hurts my soul. I remember the mine being a "stale and imbalanced unit" with 1.75 radius, so I don't understand how they can think this buff could be alright -I kinda guess they're testing it so that nobody cries when the buff is reduced, but anyway. And still nothing done about +shields damage, because those mines will definitely bury templars openings (not to mention mine drops which will become speed oracle 2.0).
Edit : I'd rather see a buff that's targetting TvZ especially, something like :
- primary target damage remains the same. - 0-1.25 : 40 (+40). - 1.25-1.5 : 30(+30). - 1.5-1.75 : 20(+20).
One shots probes again in a 1.75 radius like it did at the beginning of HotS, and one shots banelings in a 1.5 radius (0.25 short of the original 1.75 that was very strong). 1.75 radius for such a cheap unit is already very large ! 2.5 is HUGE !
|
On July 12 2014 21:17 [PkF] Wire wrote: The mine buff is so idiotic on its current form it hurts my soul. I remember the mine being a "stale and imbalanced unit" with 1.75 radius, so I don't understand how they can think this buff could be alright -I kinda guess they're testing it so that nobody cries when the buff is reduced, but anyway. And still nothing done about +shields damage, because those mines will definitely bury templars openings (not to mention mine drops which will become speed oracle 2.0). WMs was not imbalanced, it was "stale". Whatever "stale" means. The WM is still weaker than before and protoss did well in the past right?
|
Italy12246 Posts
Considering the +shield bonus that was added to it, after this buff the mine will be at its strongest in PvT. Again, protoss are doing fine because mines are worthless vs colossus while making templar builds absolutely not viable.
No idea about TvZ though.
|
On July 12 2014 21:30 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 21:17 [PkF] Wire wrote: The mine buff is so idiotic on its current form it hurts my soul. I remember the mine being a "stale and imbalanced unit" with 1.75 radius, so I don't understand how they can think this buff could be alright -I kinda guess they're testing it so that nobody cries when the buff is reduced, but anyway. And still nothing done about +shields damage, because those mines will definitely bury templars openings (not to mention mine drops which will become speed oracle 2.0). WMs was not imbalanced, it was "stale". Whatever "stale" means. The WM is still weaker than before and protoss did well in the past right?
Pardon me but with the buff the widow mine would be far better than before in TvP thanks to the absurd +shields damage (one shots probes in 2 radius + damage in 2.5 radius). Original mine did 40 flat damage in a 1.75 radius (which was fine to me, when I say "stale and imbalanced" I only repeat what people used to say about it).
|
On July 12 2014 21:35 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 21:30 Faust852 wrote:On July 12 2014 21:17 [PkF] Wire wrote: The mine buff is so idiotic on its current form it hurts my soul. I remember the mine being a "stale and imbalanced unit" with 1.75 radius, so I don't understand how they can think this buff could be alright -I kinda guess they're testing it so that nobody cries when the buff is reduced, but anyway. And still nothing done about +shields damage, because those mines will definitely bury templars openings (not to mention mine drops which will become speed oracle 2.0). WMs was not imbalanced, it was "stale". Whatever "stale" means. The WM is still weaker than before and protoss did well in the past right? Pardon me but with the buff the widow mine would be far better than before in TvP thanks to the absurd +shields damage (one shots probes in 2 radius + damage in 2.5 radius). Original mine did 40 flat damage in a 1.75 radius (which was fine to me, when I say "stale and imbalanced" I only repeat what people used to say about it).
On July 09 2014 09:08 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +- Widow Mine splash radius increase
This will allow Terran to be stronger in the mid/late games in both matchups. We’ve also seen feedback that the Widow Mine splash radius increase doesn’t buff late game Terran, however we feel that this type of mid-game buff also carries over into a late game buff.
Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5.
Good. Very good. Well, let's recap the different states of the Mine throughout HotS: 1 = Original Mine 2 = Post-nerf Mine after patch 2.0.12 3 = Mine after +shields buff 4 = Mine with the proposed change Against Zerg specifically (comparison between the original Mine and the proposed one): The critical one-shot of banes in the current secondary area (from 1.25 to 1.5) is here again. That's perfect. For the rest, we'll have to see if the average amount of damage in the extra area (from 1.75 to 2.5) is adequate. Additionally, people shouldn't forget that Mines deal friendly fire, and Terran has to deal with that too. ForGG may not be pleased with that aspect. Against Protoss specifically (comparison between the original Mine and the proposed one): * Depending on the amount of shield left. ** Probes are one-shot. The positive points: - Mine drops and thus 1-1-1 builds would be a powerful early game threat anew. Those Mines would be even more deadly than the original ones for Protoss' mineral lines (they would kill Probes in one shot up to 2 radius, instead of 1.75 at the beginning of HotS), but of course Protoss have mastered the defence of such attacks since then and would deal with it better. That being said, sloppiness would be heavily punished and that's a good thing (risky builds without detection in time would also suffer more). By repercussion, Protoss might have to concede Cannons in their mineral lines and maybe some extra stalks if they can't rule out a Mine drop, thus toning down their builds a bit. That's a good point.
- 7g blink would die. You can't all-in without detection if a Mine reaching your mineral line threatens to kill 10 Probes every 40 seconds. Someone explained that recently in some lengthy post; can't remember where though. Oh well.
- Drops with Mines would be more powerful in midgame. There may be more incentive for Terran to use Mines against blink/colo (while they're currently mostly useless against that style).
- Mines might now be useful in lategame? Written with a big question mark, but they might have some use to hold the scenario of a quick Zealots/Archons remax.
The negative point: Protoss will be further pushed away from Templar openings, a style allowing better distinction and producing better games than the dreadful blink colo dual forge boredom. Another problem to consider is that Blizzard tends to propose a bigger change for their test maps compared with the actual values they aim for. For instance, they had initially announced a reduction of the Mine radius to 1.1 (!) to sweeten the pill. Show nested quote +- Thor Attack priority changed to use AA weapon first
Because Thors are mostly core against Zerg, and the AA weapon is the preferred weapon when using Thors, we’d like to try this change.
Will be practical/useful in some situations and a pain in others, so we'll have to see. As for aberrant priorities, how about 25 Vikings in autopilot don't shoot at the first Observer they see while your bio evaporates to the 6 colos behind? Show nested quote +- Time Warp duration decreased from 30 to 15
We’d like to try out this change for 3 reasons: Reduce the strength of various all-ins that combo with offensive Time Warps, reduce general Protoss main army strength, and hopefully increase micro opportunities against the spell.
Why not, but in most situations the trapped units will already be dead in the span of the first 15 seconds (no idea what kind of micro they expect against Time Warp other than right clicking trapped units out of the area), so in many scenarii this is mostly cosmetic as far as TvP goes. A reduced radius or a lesser slowing would be better tracks to explore. Implementing a cast point and a casting backswing animation to the MSC so it doesn't instantly cast its spells (except Recall given the use) would also be nice. That being said, there are situations in which this change would come in handy, and all in all it cannot hurt (in TvP) so OK.
WM will now kill about 2 probes more with the additional range. Won't really change shit against zealot since 40 HPs isn't that much. Protoss are currently OP against terran and terran need better harassment options. Everything looks good on paper with this patch.
|
On July 12 2014 20:59 DeadByDawn wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 20:18 egrimm wrote:Well, ... Also I'm not sure if I like removing the "control aspect" to target fire mutalisks during fights even if it would help terrans for more room to micro their other forces ... Also I'd like to see some changes to Hellbats like: - Remove bio tag BUT buff HP slightly to compensate (+10-15 ?) - Maybe slightly buff dmg (+2-5 ?) BUT reduce speed ... My 2 cents Also I don't like people wanting tank buffs against bio who think that the TvT mirror match-up is irrelevant when considering the buffs. The TvT matchup is one of the most interesting, buff tanks and it will be mech v mech only - and we have another matchup where T is pigeon holed into one strategy. TvT is the only T match-up where we get to see nearly every T unit used, including cattlebruisers.
It will be mech vs mech anyway as soon as mech gets okay to play in any other matchup. People just use Bio, because its all they do anyway. No reason to learn mech if its only for 1/10th of your games. Mech is just stronger especially since the air transition is now essential upgrade free and the thor only has to fear yamatos otherwise you can stay ground only.
|
On July 12 2014 21:39 FeyFey wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 20:59 DeadByDawn wrote:On July 12 2014 20:18 egrimm wrote:Well, ... Also I'm not sure if I like removing the "control aspect" to target fire mutalisks during fights even if it would help terrans for more room to micro their other forces ... Also I'd like to see some changes to Hellbats like: - Remove bio tag BUT buff HP slightly to compensate (+10-15 ?) - Maybe slightly buff dmg (+2-5 ?) BUT reduce speed ... My 2 cents Also I don't like people wanting tank buffs against bio who think that the TvT mirror match-up is irrelevant when considering the buffs. The TvT matchup is one of the most interesting, buff tanks and it will be mech v mech only - and we have another matchup where T is pigeon holed into one strategy. TvT is the only T match-up where we get to see nearly every T unit used, including cattlebruisers. It will be mech vs mech anyway as soon as mech gets okay to play in any other matchup. People just use Bio, because its all they do anyway. No reason to learn mech if its only for 1/10th of your games. Mech is just stronger especially since the air transition is now essential upgrade free and the thor only has to fear yamatos otherwise you can stay ground only.
I firmly believe mech is already much stornger than bio in TvT. There might be a slight edge for bio at the very top level of control (best koreans). But bellow that, even top foreigner terrans usually favor mech in TvT.
|
If 40 HPs isn't that much, please make storm 120 damage. This is stupid. And 2 more probes early game is important ! I think you're underestimating how deadly the combination of this buff + shields damage could be (then again, it's good to see it tested).
|
On July 12 2014 21:42 [PkF] Wire wrote: If 40 HPs isn't that much, please make storm 120 damage. This is stupid. And 2 more probes early game is important ! I think you're underestimating how deadly this combination of this buff + shields damage could be (then again, it's good to see it tested).
Yeah you might have to learn to micro your units. Sad Zaelot.
|
Italy12246 Posts
On July 12 2014 21:39 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 21:35 [PkF] Wire wrote:On July 12 2014 21:30 Faust852 wrote:On July 12 2014 21:17 [PkF] Wire wrote: The mine buff is so idiotic on its current form it hurts my soul. I remember the mine being a "stale and imbalanced unit" with 1.75 radius, so I don't understand how they can think this buff could be alright -I kinda guess they're testing it so that nobody cries when the buff is reduced, but anyway. And still nothing done about +shields damage, because those mines will definitely bury templars openings (not to mention mine drops which will become speed oracle 2.0). WMs was not imbalanced, it was "stale". Whatever "stale" means. The WM is still weaker than before and protoss did well in the past right? Pardon me but with the buff the widow mine would be far better than before in TvP thanks to the absurd +shields damage (one shots probes in 2 radius + damage in 2.5 radius). Original mine did 40 flat damage in a 1.75 radius (which was fine to me, when I say "stale and imbalanced" I only repeat what people used to say about it). Show nested quote +On July 09 2014 09:08 TheDwf wrote:- Widow Mine splash radius increase
This will allow Terran to be stronger in the mid/late games in both matchups. We’ve also seen feedback that the Widow Mine splash radius increase doesn’t buff late game Terran, however we feel that this type of mid-game buff also carries over into a late game buff.
Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5.
Good. Very good. Well, let's recap the different states of the Mine throughout HotS: 1 = Original Mine 2 = Post-nerf Mine after patch 2.0.12 3 = Mine after +shields buff 4 = Mine with the proposed change Against Zerg specifically (comparison between the original Mine and the proposed one): The critical one-shot of banes in the current secondary area (from 1.25 to 1.5) is here again. That's perfect. For the rest, we'll have to see if the average amount of damage in the extra area (from 1.75 to 2.5) is adequate. Additionally, people shouldn't forget that Mines deal friendly fire, and Terran has to deal with that too. ForGG may not be pleased with that aspect. Against Protoss specifically (comparison between the original Mine and the proposed one): * Depending on the amount of shield left. ** Probes are one-shot. The positive points: - Mine drops and thus 1-1-1 builds would be a powerful early game threat anew. Those Mines would be even more deadly than the original ones for Protoss' mineral lines (they would kill Probes in one shot up to 2 radius, instead of 1.75 at the beginning of HotS), but of course Protoss have mastered the defence of such attacks since then and would deal with it better. That being said, sloppiness would be heavily punished and that's a good thing (risky builds without detection in time would also suffer more). By repercussion, Protoss might have to concede Cannons in their mineral lines and maybe some extra stalks if they can't rule out a Mine drop, thus toning down their builds a bit. That's a good point.
- 7g blink would die. You can't all-in without detection if a Mine reaching your mineral line threatens to kill 10 Probes every 40 seconds. Someone explained that recently in some lengthy post; can't remember where though. Oh well.
- Drops with Mines would be more powerful in midgame. There may be more incentive for Terran to use Mines against blink/colo (while they're currently mostly useless against that style).
- Mines might now be useful in lategame? Written with a big question mark, but they might have some use to hold the scenario of a quick Zealots/Archons remax.
The negative point: Protoss will be further pushed away from Templar openings, a style allowing better distinction and producing better games than the dreadful blink colo dual forge boredom. Another problem to consider is that Blizzard tends to propose a bigger change for their test maps compared with the actual values they aim for. For instance, they had initially announced a reduction of the Mine radius to 1.1 (!) to sweeten the pill. - Thor Attack priority changed to use AA weapon first
Because Thors are mostly core against Zerg, and the AA weapon is the preferred weapon when using Thors, we’d like to try this change.
Will be practical/useful in some situations and a pain in others, so we'll have to see. As for aberrant priorities, how about 25 Vikings in autopilot don't shoot at the first Observer they see while your bio evaporates to the 6 colos behind? - Time Warp duration decreased from 30 to 15
We’d like to try out this change for 3 reasons: Reduce the strength of various all-ins that combo with offensive Time Warps, reduce general Protoss main army strength, and hopefully increase micro opportunities against the spell.
Why not, but in most situations the trapped units will already be dead in the span of the first 15 seconds (no idea what kind of micro they expect against Time Warp other than right clicking trapped units out of the area), so in many scenarii this is mostly cosmetic as far as TvP goes. A reduced radius or a lesser slowing would be better tracks to explore. Implementing a cast point and a casting backswing animation to the MSC so it doesn't instantly cast its spells (except Recall given the use) would also be nice. That being said, there are situations in which this change would come in handy, and all in all it cannot hurt (in TvP) so OK. WM will now kill about 2 probes more with the additional range. Won't really change shit against zealot since 40 HPs isn't that much. Protoss are currently OP against terran and terran need better harassment options. Everything looks good on paper with this patch.
Imo terran doesnt need better harassment options as much as a lategame that isn't considerably worse than the Protoss. Their ideal maxed army of 20ghosts/20vikings/whatever else is too hard to obtain considering it isnt even that strong (by then the Protoss can easily afford Tempest/archon/colossus/templar so yeah).
On July 12 2014 21:44 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 21:42 [PkF] Wire wrote: If 40 HPs isn't that much, please make storm 120 damage. This is stupid. And 2 more probes early game is important ! I think you're underestimating how deadly this combination of this buff + shields damage could be (then again, it's good to see it tested). Yeah you might have to learn to micro your units. Sad Zaelot.
No, the only thing that is going to happen is that PvT will become even more boring than it is today.
|
Any Terrans streaming to show the new mine?
|
Well, with that buff Protoss will be now forced to open defensive double forge colossi. I don't know if that's a bad thing since that's mostly already the case, but I'd have hoped for a more intelligent buff (buff mine for TvZ only, give T lategame some love : 150/150 ghosts could be tested for instance).
|
This WM buff in its current form won't go through, although we are talking about the people who buffed the Oracle for no good reason. For its cost it will become way to effective and just be more of a gimmick unit than it already is. Blizzard should focus on late game Terran by buffing tier 3 units, they shouldn't focus on the early/mid game by buffing the WM.
|
Blizz actually went ahead and decided to test this, despite it not fixing a damn thing with PvT?
When will they figure out the main problem with PvT is the T lategame, which doesn't exist.
As for the Time Warp "nerf" that doesn't do a thing either, TW is still stupid in PvT and PvP. They need to make a researchable tech, either at the Cyber Core or the Twilight Council, preferably Twilight so we have to choose between Blink and TW.
|
I also really really disagree with maintaining the high extra bonus splash vs shield. If he wants to make Mines better late game vs toss, then why not simply make it part of the drilling claws upgrade which btw is kinda overpriced anyway (and yes an upgrade can do two things)
|
WM was nerfed because it was too strong versus zerg cause the units makes huge damages for a ridiculous prize, and come way too soon. All pre-nerf TvZ was just : rally MMM on the zerg base, and he slowly dies.
But now WM are too nerfed and T struggle in the mid/lategame.
I think the best solution is to simply scale WM radius with Bio upgrades to fix the mid/late game Terran issues, without giving Terran too much power in the early game where Terrans are already strong enough in TvZ. Ex (value are just examples) 0 upgrades : radius 1.25/1.5/1.75 +1 : 1.40/1.65/2.0 +2 : 1.55/1.80/2.25 +3 : 1.70/1.90/2.5
I think for TvP a +25 vs shield for tank worth to be test cause it will : 3 shot stalker instead of 4 shots. 5 Shot archons instead of 7 shot.
|
Hmm, as I was reading this, something came to mind. What if instead they kept the 125+35 initial target, but removed the + vs shield damage to the splash and added a stun effect to units hit by the Missile. This way it's not terrible vs big Health Protoss units. It would give Terrans time to Micro without outright dying to terrible, terrible damage and make the Mine a much more positional unit as a whole. By Stun I don't mean Fungal root, I mean the unit literally sits there doing nothing.
Edit: It also makes the unit good together with Tanks, instead of overlapping with it.
|
On July 12 2014 22:36 ejozl wrote: Hmm, as I was reading this, something came to mind. What if instead they kept the 125+35 initial target, but removed the + vs shield damage to the splash and added a stun effect to units hit by the Missile. This way it's not terrible vs big Health Protoss units. It would give Terrans time to Micro without outright dying to terrible, terrible damage and make the Mine a much more positional unit as a whole. By Stun I don't mean Fungal root, I mean the unit literally sits there doing nothing.
Edit: It also makes the unit good together with Tanks, instead of overlapping with it.
A stun effect?? lol this isnt league of legends. plus timewarp is already considered a powerful spell as a slow effect, now a stun? nah
|
On July 12 2014 17:29 User15937 wrote: As if mines need to be buffed...It's already a reusable burrowed baneling and even one in a mineral line can end a game instantly.
if you lose to one burrowed mine then you are doing something very terribly wrong and would probably die to a single cloaked banshee anyway.
|
Blizzard is so bad at balancing this game. Mines were nerfed for a reason - they were just too cost efficient. Now with proposed changes its gonna be same story again - rally MMM to victory. But I guess we should be happy that medivac change didnt make it, that one was the most stupid.
|
On July 12 2014 21:44 Teoita wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 21:39 Faust852 wrote:On July 12 2014 21:35 [PkF] Wire wrote:On July 12 2014 21:30 Faust852 wrote:On July 12 2014 21:17 [PkF] Wire wrote: The mine buff is so idiotic on its current form it hurts my soul. I remember the mine being a "stale and imbalanced unit" with 1.75 radius, so I don't understand how they can think this buff could be alright -I kinda guess they're testing it so that nobody cries when the buff is reduced, but anyway. And still nothing done about +shields damage, because those mines will definitely bury templars openings (not to mention mine drops which will become speed oracle 2.0). WMs was not imbalanced, it was "stale". Whatever "stale" means. The WM is still weaker than before and protoss did well in the past right? Pardon me but with the buff the widow mine would be far better than before in TvP thanks to the absurd +shields damage (one shots probes in 2 radius + damage in 2.5 radius). Original mine did 40 flat damage in a 1.75 radius (which was fine to me, when I say "stale and imbalanced" I only repeat what people used to say about it). On July 09 2014 09:08 TheDwf wrote:- Widow Mine splash radius increase
This will allow Terran to be stronger in the mid/late games in both matchups. We’ve also seen feedback that the Widow Mine splash radius increase doesn’t buff late game Terran, however we feel that this type of mid-game buff also carries over into a late game buff.
Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5.
Good. Very good. Well, let's recap the different states of the Mine throughout HotS: 1 = Original Mine 2 = Post-nerf Mine after patch 2.0.12 3 = Mine after +shields buff 4 = Mine with the proposed change Against Zerg specifically (comparison between the original Mine and the proposed one): The critical one-shot of banes in the current secondary area (from 1.25 to 1.5) is here again. That's perfect. For the rest, we'll have to see if the average amount of damage in the extra area (from 1.75 to 2.5) is adequate. Additionally, people shouldn't forget that Mines deal friendly fire, and Terran has to deal with that too. ForGG may not be pleased with that aspect. Against Protoss specifically (comparison between the original Mine and the proposed one): * Depending on the amount of shield left. ** Probes are one-shot. The positive points: - Mine drops and thus 1-1-1 builds would be a powerful early game threat anew. Those Mines would be even more deadly than the original ones for Protoss' mineral lines (they would kill Probes in one shot up to 2 radius, instead of 1.75 at the beginning of HotS), but of course Protoss have mastered the defence of such attacks since then and would deal with it better. That being said, sloppiness would be heavily punished and that's a good thing (risky builds without detection in time would also suffer more). By repercussion, Protoss might have to concede Cannons in their mineral lines and maybe some extra stalks if they can't rule out a Mine drop, thus toning down their builds a bit. That's a good point.
- 7g blink would die. You can't all-in without detection if a Mine reaching your mineral line threatens to kill 10 Probes every 40 seconds. Someone explained that recently in some lengthy post; can't remember where though. Oh well.
- Drops with Mines would be more powerful in midgame. There may be more incentive for Terran to use Mines against blink/colo (while they're currently mostly useless against that style).
- Mines might now be useful in lategame? Written with a big question mark, but they might have some use to hold the scenario of a quick Zealots/Archons remax.
The negative point: Protoss will be further pushed away from Templar openings, a style allowing better distinction and producing better games than the dreadful blink colo dual forge boredom. Another problem to consider is that Blizzard tends to propose a bigger change for their test maps compared with the actual values they aim for. For instance, they had initially announced a reduction of the Mine radius to 1.1 (!) to sweeten the pill. - Thor Attack priority changed to use AA weapon first
Because Thors are mostly core against Zerg, and the AA weapon is the preferred weapon when using Thors, we’d like to try this change.
Will be practical/useful in some situations and a pain in others, so we'll have to see. As for aberrant priorities, how about 25 Vikings in autopilot don't shoot at the first Observer they see while your bio evaporates to the 6 colos behind? - Time Warp duration decreased from 30 to 15
We’d like to try out this change for 3 reasons: Reduce the strength of various all-ins that combo with offensive Time Warps, reduce general Protoss main army strength, and hopefully increase micro opportunities against the spell.
Why not, but in most situations the trapped units will already be dead in the span of the first 15 seconds (no idea what kind of micro they expect against Time Warp other than right clicking trapped units out of the area), so in many scenarii this is mostly cosmetic as far as TvP goes. A reduced radius or a lesser slowing would be better tracks to explore. Implementing a cast point and a casting backswing animation to the MSC so it doesn't instantly cast its spells (except Recall given the use) would also be nice. That being said, there are situations in which this change would come in handy, and all in all it cannot hurt (in TvP) so OK. WM will now kill about 2 probes more with the additional range. Won't really change shit against zealot since 40 HPs isn't that much. Protoss are currently OP against terran and terran need better harassment options. Everything looks good on paper with this patch. Imo terran doesnt need better harassment options as much as a lategame that isn't considerably worse than the Protoss. Their ideal maxed army of 20ghosts/20vikings/whatever else is too hard to obtain considering it isnt even that strong (by then the Protoss can easily afford Tempest/archon/colossus/templar so yeah). Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 21:44 Faust852 wrote:On July 12 2014 21:42 [PkF] Wire wrote: If 40 HPs isn't that much, please make storm 120 damage. This is stupid. And 2 more probes early game is important ! I think you're underestimating how deadly this combination of this buff + shields damage could be (then again, it's good to see it tested). Yeah you might have to learn to micro your units. Sad Zaelot. No, the only thing that is going to happen is that PvT will become even more boring than it is today.
Only for the protoss maybe. I'd enjoy that very much.
|
On July 12 2014 21:47 gneGne wrote:Any Terrans streaming to show the new mine?
Oh, did you mean "good Terran" ?
|
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.
|
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. http://www.twitch.tv/dragon/b/545609734?t=2h14m05s
|
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.
I laughed quite hard, thank you.
|
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.
the only good tank buff for tvz would be to scale back the muta regen buff, which blizzard can't really do
a tank tvp buff is as simple as giving them +damage to shields.
|
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.
Still playing WoL eh?
|
On July 12 2014 23:42 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +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. http://www.twitch.tv/dragon/b/545609734?t=2h14m05s
lol. Case closed
|
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.
Nice bait.
|
On July 12 2014 12:06 VegaMatt wrote: I hope they don't buff the widow mine like that, its kinda stupid how a 75/25 unit has so much damage potential, compare it to a roach and yeah...just lazy balancing but no doubt terran needs something though. Yeah its crazy! can you imagine it that one unit could be instant gg... *cough* DT, oracle *cough*
perhaps adapt or play with it for a while...
|
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.
This is true, Protoss generally just GG out when they opened without a robo and scout that i took an early gas.
|
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.
The troll meta has come a long way hasn't it? You almost had me
|
I hate the widow mine, but then again, I also hate the swarmhost, the mothership core and especially the tempest.
The widow mine could, actually have been a cool unit - it just sucks that its so easily accessible for every terran build. Think about it. Every terran builds a factory, 50 for a reactor isnt much, there arent any upgrades involved in this unit. Its in NO way a unit terran has to invest anything more than the recources to produce it.
It really sucks that blizzard is unwilling to follow a more upgrade heavy path. Oracle and Widow mine dont even benefit from dmg upgrades. The oracle could have been fixed, coming out as a weaker unit however beeing more powerful than it is now with an upgrade. If a player has to dedicate more recources to a specific unit, then the game becomes much less random for your opponent because tech switching will become much less efficient. Everyone hates the, "Surprise oracle, lol now its chargelot"
The Cloak upgrade for the banshee, is a perfect example of something that is good (but sadly Overcharge came and kicked any strategy revolving around heavy harrasment in the balls) Terran can of course attack with an uncloaked banshee, but that is a lot weaker - now its a choice. Knowing blizzard though, they will just remove the cloak upgrade, thinking it will promote banshee play in a way thats interesting for the game.
Everything blizzard has done is going away from upgrades, Air ups for terran, Raven, Templar, Tanks, Voidray speed, roach burrow etc.
|
The widow mine could, actually have been a cool unit - it just sucks that its so easily accessible for every terran build. Think about it. Every terran builds a factory, 50 for a reactor isnt much, there arent any upgrades involved in this unit. Its in NO way a unit terran has to invest anything more than the recources to produce it.
You haven't actually played terran in HOTS right?
1) The real cost of getting a reactor is the BT. Getting out lots of Widow Mines fast isn't very easily actually. 2) Widow Mines have an upgrade.
|
I very much agree with Weikor
|
Widow Mine change won't do anything against Zerg when they are not even give a chance to fire. Just look at Apocalypse vs Suppy.
|
On July 12 2014 13:59 neverlose9999 wrote: need to get rid of the energy for battle cruiser and add cooltime for yamato cannon so that terran can get tier 3 units and composition in the late game vs protoss also please nerf photon overcharge..
Don't you think one nerf to mothership core per patch is enough?
|
On July 13 2014 01:53 geokilla wrote: Widow Mine change won't do anything against Zerg when they are not even give a chance to fire. Just look at Apocalypse vs Suppy.
It's because apo put his mines IN FRONT of his army so bane got them, you need to put them on the sides and spread them a little.
|
On July 13 2014 02:06 varsovie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 13:59 neverlose9999 wrote: need to get rid of the energy for battle cruiser and add cooltime for yamato cannon so that terran can get tier 3 units and composition in the late game vs protoss also please nerf photon overcharge.. Don't you think one nerf to mothership core per patch is enough?
In theory yes, but this change was really absurdly small.
For example overcharge damage could be changed from 20 overall to 10 + 30 vs shields. Would be a little weaker in PvP than it is now (killing stalkers in 10 shots instead of 8, killing zealots in 11 shots instead of 8) but would allow more aggression in non-mirrors.
Or if Time Warp is the important nerf, leave it as it is on the Mothership, but add a new MSC version that only slows by 25%.
|
On July 12 2014 20:59 DeadByDawn wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 20:18 egrimm wrote:Well, ... Also I'm not sure if I like removing the "control aspect" to target fire mutalisks during fights even if it would help terrans for more room to micro their other forces ... Also I'd like to see some changes to Hellbats like: - Remove bio tag BUT buff HP slightly to compensate (+10-15 ?) - Maybe slightly buff dmg (+2-5 ?) BUT reduce speed ... My 2 cents The control aspect of the Thor has not been changed - it has just been made more sensible. T gets Thors against Z mostly, and they do it to counter mutalisks. Hence it is ridiculous that it shoots at ground forces instead. Now you can control it to shoot ground forces when you want to, the most common case of shooting mutalisks is the default. In TvT I assume that it will shoot at ground forces (ie. siege tanks) if nothing in the air is attacking it. Slower hellbats - have you seen how they waddle around now? I don't think that I would ever build one again if they got slower, and no, transforming, moving, transforming to make up for lack of speed would not be viable in a battle. Also I don't like people wanting tank buffs against bio who think that the TvT mirror match-up is irrelevant when considering the buffs. The TvT matchup is one of the most interesting, buff tanks and it will be mech v mech only - and we have another matchup where T is pigeon holed into one strategy. TvT is the only T match-up where we get to see nearly every T unit used, including cattlebruisers.
I partly agree about Thor, I was refering to quiet common demand from people to keep more micro for units instead of dumbing them down other question is how Thors will fare against corruptors, phoenixes or overlords added to Z's army ? Will they target them over ground army too ? Again it's so small change that I don't even mind
Hellbats speed right now is equal to marauder, zealot or marine to name a few. I would not consider that very slow as it is standard speed for most sc2 units. I think that more tanky and stronger hellbat but slightly slower to compensate would be more proper addition to mech composition. However I do not claim that it is for sure, it's something I'd like to see tested on test map
I never said I want buffed tanks against bio in TvT! quiet the contrary Buff to dmg vs light units form 35 to 40 practically won't change amount of hits needed to kill a marine but would help against zealots and zerglings. So as Teoita said, there is still some room for tank buff which would not cause TvT bio unviable. However I only calculated base dmg because I'm not sure how exactly tank splash works, can't find it
|
On July 13 2014 02:07 varsovie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 01:53 geokilla wrote: Widow Mine change won't do anything against Zerg when they are not even give a chance to fire. Just look at Apocalypse vs Suppy. It's because apo put his mines IN FRONT of his army so bane got them, you need to put them on the sides and spread them a little. In game 2 King Sejong, the Mines did more friendly fire than it did kill the Swarm.
|
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.
|
Canada13372 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.
|
I kinda agree, but we're talking about buffing the widow mine even in comparison to its original state : a "strong unit" made a tad stronger has at least to be carefully monitored. I'm actually quite worried about the friendly fire aspect which will be even more dangerous with a bigger radius ; I'd have been far more comfortable with a revert to the original state (while keeping the +shields damage) but Blizzard seems to think going back to the point where things looked promising can't be a good idea and prefers to add layers of mistaken bandaid patches over another.
|
On July 13 2014 07:31 [PkF] Wire wrote: I kinda agree, but we're talking about buffing the widow mine even in comparison to its original state : a "strong unit" made a tad stronger has at least to be carefully monitored. I'm actually quite worried about the friendly fire aspect which will be even more dangerous with a bigger radius ; I'd have been far more comfortable with a revert to the original state (while keeping the +shields damage) but Blizzard seems to think going back to the point where things looked promising can't be a good idea and prefers to add layers of mistaken bandaid patches over another.
Well it oneshots Banelings in a lower area. That might be an important variable. And yeh, then there is the friendly fire radius being increased. I clearly remember the months before the nerf where I found it difficult to use mines optimally becasue I would suffer a lot from friendly fire. But I think at that point in time, terrans had generally been a bit spoiled. During the first months of HOTS, it was quite easy to just build widow mines, drop everywhere and win without really having proper splitting control. But then zergs got overseer buff and overall learned to play vs the Mine, and terrans suddenly had to work for their victories as well.
Thus, over the last 6 motnhs every terran has had insane focus on battle micro since we couldn't rely on AOE anymore. So I actually think that the dynamic that will be created here will work well. Zerg now feels a punishment for just righclicking lings into marines. They need to split them properly now. And if they do drag mines in bio units without bio units splititng properly, there is a big reward for the zerg, which is fine IMO.
|
|
On July 13 2014 07:38 Hider wrote: Well it oneshots Banelings in a lower area. That might be an important variable.
Which I keep saying is a mistake : with the complex combination of the first nerf, the intermediate +shields damage and this buff, we'll end up with the mine that killed templar openings without fully restoring Terran chances in TvZ.
|
On July 13 2014 07:42 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 07:38 Hider wrote: Well it oneshots Banelings in a lower area. That might be an important variable.
Which I keep saying is a mistake : with the complex combination of the first nerf, the intermediate +shields damage and this buff, we'll end up with the mine that killed templar openings without fully restoring Terran chances in TvZ.
Yeh so I just added a bit extra text to my post. I am not 100% sure of this subject either. But all I want for the mine in TvZ is to punish a zerg that is rightcliking/amoving his entire army.
Balancewise, I think there is room to buff the Thor if there still are lategame issues. I don't believe the Mine needs to be the only unit we look at here.
For TvP, I wonder if it's blizzards attention to make the Mine so "imbalanced" vs someone walking into them in a straight up battle that the protoss can never get away with that, and thus needs to kill them before the battle.
I don't know how that wll work out well. I fear Psy Storm/Collosus will still kill Viking/Widow Mine quite easily.
|
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.
increase damage to shields and nerf ultralisk
|
On July 13 2014 07:44 Hider wrote: For TvP, I wonder if it's blizzards attention to make the Mine so "imbalanced" vs someone walking into them in a straight up battle that the protoss can never get away with that, and thus needs to kill them before the battle.
I don't know how that wll work out well. I fear Psy Storm/Collosus will still kill Viking/Widow Mine quite easily.
Don't get me wrong, that could be a great thing. But David Kim never mentioned in any of his posts any intention to (if needed) tamper with +shields damage ; it looks like he's just trying to make the mine worth using again in TvZ without thinking of the consequences in TvP (-> colossi-less styles buried for some time ; which could be good by the way, we could organize a funeral).
The problem with balance test maps is that it's quite worthless for a "bad" player like me (lowish master) to test them because my adaptation to the changes will be far from optimal. I hope there's going to be some XMG hosted tournament like the last times so that we can see what the changes could look like in the hands of pros.
|
I think the tank should get an armor bonus when not in siege mode, do make tank pushes much more viable.
More importantly, and a grounded viking should benefit from medivac healing. That'd be really good in lategame TvP.
|
On July 12 2014 13:03 Mjolnir wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 12:34 EngrishTeacher wrote: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. So, what's the gripe here? You think tanks would be too strong in TvT if they were buffed? Bio spam would be less effective? Games would turn into positional wars and/or turtles? Is that the fear? Maybe that's not what your concern is (and if it isn't, please clarify); but if it is well man, I've gotta disagree. TvT was fantastic in BW and tanks shit all over infantry in that one. I think SC2 needs something to mix up the strats. I'd love to see more TvT mech to air strats. I'm tired of bio, bio, bio in every tournament or every game I play on b.net. Tweaking mines, Thors, and the MC are silly changes. Mines are boring and only facilitate more MMMWM (bio) play (yawn). Thor targeting is ridiculous - where's the micro? That's part of the game! And the MC nerf? Please, all the damage is done in the first 5-10 seconds. Terran needs a complete overhaul. I agree with those who want to see a tank buff.
I agree. Tanks need a buff, the thor AA prioritization is grounded in good intentions and can be much more useful against Mutas, but that's basically it. Still doesn't prevent a Thor from being magic boxed to death though. I'd rather see mech based TvT something akin to BW back in the day TBH anyway.
They should have nerfed the effectiveness of TW to have a reduced slow from what it is now instead of duration.
|
They should just nerf seeker missile and make it always hit. This would counter mutalisks and make ravens reliable. Also it requires alot of quick split micro from the zerg. PDD needs severe nerfs or removal/replacement, mass ravens can make themselvs basically invulnerable to the only kind of attacks that can damage them, which is a design flaw by itself.
This alone would be a better move than buffing mines.
|
On July 13 2014 08:04 hfsrj wrote: I think the tank should get an armor bonus when not in siege mode, do make tank pushes much more viable.
More importantly, and a grounded viking should benefit from medivac healing. That'd be really good in lategame TvP. I don't think that the first is justified and the second would be even weirder than Hellbats being healed by Medivacs.
I would like the tank to unsiege much faster so that you can shoot close units or retreat a little easier. Also, I would like the damage output and health of Vikings slightly increased when landed.
|
On July 13 2014 08:50 DeadByDawn wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 08:04 hfsrj wrote: I think the tank should get an armor bonus when not in siege mode, do make tank pushes much more viable.
More importantly, and a grounded viking should benefit from medivac healing. That'd be really good in lategame TvP. I don't think that the first is justified and the second would be even weirder than Hellbats being healed by Medivacs. I would like the tank to unsiege much faster so that you can shoot close units or retreat a little easier. Also, I would like the damage output and health of Vikings slightly increased when landed.
Hmm Tanks can unsiege faster and both of the Vikings transformations can be faster as well. I don't think we have to make either unit stronger when amoved.
|
On July 13 2014 08:41 LSN wrote: They should just nerf seeker missile and make it always hit. This would counter mutalisks and make ravens reliable. Also it requires alot of quick split micro from the zerg. PDD needs severe nerfs or removal/replacement, mass ravens can make themselvs basically invulnerable to the only kind of attacks that can damage them, which is a design flaw by itself.
This alone would be a better move than buffing mines.
Yeah lets nerf the only good tier2/tier 3 Unit Terran has....that would be a big nerf, Terran does not need a crappy dmg seeker that always hits.
|
On July 13 2014 08:50 DeadByDawn wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 08:04 hfsrj wrote: I think the tank should get an armor bonus when not in siege mode, do make tank pushes much more viable.
More importantly, and a grounded viking should benefit from medivac healing. That'd be really good in lategame TvP. I don't think that the first is justified and the second would be even weirder than Hellbats being healed by Medivacs. I would like the tank to unsiege much faster so that you can shoot close units or retreat a little easier. Also, I would like the damage output and health of Vikings slightly increased when landed.
That's not weird at all. I've always thought of Medics/Medivacs as combat engineers. Surely having those on the battlefield is a lot more practical given that any wound that takes a soldier out of commission is also likely to have left him with giant holes in his combat armor. Repairing the armor must be a much higher priority.
The "bio" tag is easy enough to explain - walker suits all have similar parts and designs. It's not hard for an engineer to branch off from repairing marines to marauders to hellbats to vikings. Ghosts and Reapers are the odd men out... but... you know... whatever.
|
On July 13 2014 08:41 LSN wrote: They should just nerf seeker missile and make it always hit. This would counter mutalisks and make ravens reliable. Also it requires alot of quick split micro from the zerg. PDD needs severe nerfs or removal/replacement, mass ravens can make themselvs basically invulnerable to the only kind of attacks that can damage them, which is a design flaw by itself.
This alone would be a better move than buffing mines. You publicly admitted that you don't play the game. Why would you nerf something that is never seen but at a lower level. Since you don't play the game, the only game you can have as a reference in the last 3 months is Flash vs Life which was an awesome game. I don't get you want that nerf so much when it's really not something that cause problem. At all.
|
On July 13 2014 09:49 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 08:41 LSN wrote: They should just nerf seeker missile and make it always hit. This would counter mutalisks and make ravens reliable. Also it requires alot of quick split micro from the zerg. PDD needs severe nerfs or removal/replacement, mass ravens can make themselvs basically invulnerable to the only kind of attacks that can damage them, which is a design flaw by itself.
This alone would be a better move than buffing mines. You publicly admitted that you don't play the game. Why would you nerf something that is never seen but at a lower level. Since you don't play the game, the only game you can have as a reference in the last 3 months is Flash vs Life which was an awesome game. I don't get you want that nerf so much when it's really not something that cause problem. At all.
PDD is one of the dumbest things in the game. Get rid of that !@#$%^&* and balance mech around being good in it iself instead of relying on stupid spellcasters.
|
On July 13 2014 10:34 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 09:49 Faust852 wrote:On July 13 2014 08:41 LSN wrote: They should just nerf seeker missile and make it always hit. This would counter mutalisks and make ravens reliable. Also it requires alot of quick split micro from the zerg. PDD needs severe nerfs or removal/replacement, mass ravens can make themselvs basically invulnerable to the only kind of attacks that can damage them, which is a design flaw by itself.
This alone would be a better move than buffing mines. You publicly admitted that you don't play the game. Why would you nerf something that is never seen but at a lower level. Since you don't play the game, the only game you can have as a reference in the last 3 months is Flash vs Life which was an awesome game. I don't get you want that nerf so much when it's really not something that cause problem. At all. PDD is one of the dumbest things in the game. Get rid of that !@#$%^&* and balance mech around being good in it iself instead of relying on stupid spellcasters.
These kind of change are impossible before lotv. And I really like the PDD, it might lead to some sick play. I remember a couple of weeks ago, I don't remember who, a terran who used an early PDD to drop on the head of 12 stalkers with 2 medivacs. That was sick. PDD also is the sole unit that allow you to still do some 1/1/1 1 base allin.
|
On July 13 2014 10:44 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 10:34 Hider wrote:On July 13 2014 09:49 Faust852 wrote:On July 13 2014 08:41 LSN wrote: They should just nerf seeker missile and make it always hit. This would counter mutalisks and make ravens reliable. Also it requires alot of quick split micro from the zerg. PDD needs severe nerfs or removal/replacement, mass ravens can make themselvs basically invulnerable to the only kind of attacks that can damage them, which is a design flaw by itself.
This alone would be a better move than buffing mines. You publicly admitted that you don't play the game. Why would you nerf something that is never seen but at a lower level. Since you don't play the game, the only game you can have as a reference in the last 3 months is Flash vs Life which was an awesome game. I don't get you want that nerf so much when it's really not something that cause problem. At all. PDD is one of the dumbest things in the game. Get rid of that !@#$%^&* and balance mech around being good in it iself instead of relying on stupid spellcasters. These kind of change are impossible before lotv. And I really like the PDD, it might lead to some sick play. I remember a couple of weeks ago, I don't remember who, a terran who used an early PDD to drop on the head of 12 stalkers with 2 medivacs. That was sick. PDD also is the sole unit that allow you to still do some 1/1/1 1 base allin.
Tbh, your probably one of the few who enjoy it then. Sometimes you also see Collosus-drop play micro, which can be cool, but doesn't mean that unit is welldesigned.
|
The widow mine change is absolutely ridiculous. If they don't go and nerf back the +shield damage on the mines, the new mine radius is going to be absurd. It will be stronger against protoss than the pre-nerf mine at 1.75 radius splash. New mine one shots probes in a 2 radius (over current 1.5, and pre-nerf 1.75). That's nothing short of insane. It also one shots sentry / templar in a radius of 1.5 (over current 1.25). Needless to say, if this change goes through, welcome to widow mine drops in PvT every single game. You'll basically be able to one shot the whole mineral line with a single mine. If they actually want to change the mine, they need to unbuff the +shield damage on splash.
|
On July 13 2014 10:34 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 09:49 Faust852 wrote:On July 13 2014 08:41 LSN wrote: They should just nerf seeker missile and make it always hit. This would counter mutalisks and make ravens reliable. Also it requires alot of quick split micro from the zerg. PDD needs severe nerfs or removal/replacement, mass ravens can make themselvs basically invulnerable to the only kind of attacks that can damage them, which is a design flaw by itself.
This alone would be a better move than buffing mines. You publicly admitted that you don't play the game. Why would you nerf something that is never seen but at a lower level. Since you don't play the game, the only game you can have as a reference in the last 3 months is Flash vs Life which was an awesome game. I don't get you want that nerf so much when it's really not something that cause problem. At all. PDD is one of the dumbest things in the game. Get rid of that !@#$%^&* and balance mech around being good in it iself instead of relying on stupid spellcasters.
The thing is that ravens will always be an integral part of the mech army due to being a detector and providing abilities that cover the weakness of the mech army. Just like the science vessel in BW. With the science vessel shutting down mutalisks, defilers and so forth, the mech army would be literally shat on.
But one thing for sure is that the abilities should be tweaked somewhat.
|
I hope the balance team at Blizzard is reading this thread, and what people are saying about tanks. Something needs to be done about the tanks.
I'm not sure what fixation David Kim has with the widow mine to constantly change it, why can't he try something new in a test map with something like tanks that almost everyone agrees would be neat to see them not suck.
Agree.
|
On July 13 2014 12:03 MadSoju wrote:I hope the balance team at Blizzard is reading this thread, and what people are saying about tanks. Something needs to be done about the tanks. Show nested quote +I'm not sure what fixation David Kim has with the widow mine to constantly change it, why can't he try something new in a test map with something like tanks that almost everyone agrees would be neat to see them not suck. Agree.
STOPPPPIT! JUST STOPIT! -mikeditka
seriously tho - enough about tanks.. you cant use them in tvz vs ling/bling/muta unless they fix mutas.. so stop talking about it..all this nonsense about tanks is gonna make them do another retarded random buff that won't help anything.. they have to get back to at least 1 unit composition that can actually trade in a balanced fashion (which we have seen in bio/mine, not bio/tank). pls and thx enough w the tank cry
|
Would've liked to see a change to Photon Overcharge energy cost instead (increase to 125/150). Its a start tho.
|
On July 13 2014 12:28 DomeGetta wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 12:03 MadSoju wrote:I hope the balance team at Blizzard is reading this thread, and what people are saying about tanks. Something needs to be done about the tanks. I'm not sure what fixation David Kim has with the widow mine to constantly change it, why can't he try something new in a test map with something like tanks that almost everyone agrees would be neat to see them not suck. Agree. STOPPPPIT! JUST STOPIT! -mikeditka seriously tho - enough about tanks.. you cant use them in tvz vs ling/bling/muta unless they fix mutas.. so stop talking about it..all this nonsense about tanks is gonna make them do another retarded random buff that won't help anything.. they have to get back to at least 1 unit composition that can actually trade in a balanced fashion (which we have seen in bio/mine, not bio/tank). pls and thx enough w the tank cry
I really don't see them buffing tanks. David Kim obviously wants see the Window Mine being used. I mean after all it is a HoTs unit, why would they buff an older unit to be used and make the mine even more less common.
|
On July 13 2014 12:58 RoninColt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 12:28 DomeGetta wrote:On July 13 2014 12:03 MadSoju wrote:I hope the balance team at Blizzard is reading this thread, and what people are saying about tanks. Something needs to be done about the tanks. I'm not sure what fixation David Kim has with the widow mine to constantly change it, why can't he try something new in a test map with something like tanks that almost everyone agrees would be neat to see them not suck. Agree. STOPPPPIT! JUST STOPIT! -mikeditka seriously tho - enough about tanks.. you cant use them in tvz vs ling/bling/muta unless they fix mutas.. so stop talking about it..all this nonsense about tanks is gonna make them do another retarded random buff that won't help anything.. they have to get back to at least 1 unit composition that can actually trade in a balanced fashion (which we have seen in bio/mine, not bio/tank). pls and thx enough w the tank cry I really don't see them buffing tanks. David Kim obviously wants see the Window Mine being used. I mean after all it is a HoTs unit, why would they buff an older unit to be used and make the mine even more less common. '
That's some pretty stupid marketing IMO if they buff failed HOTS units just so they are used more and can pat them self's on the back and say they did a good dev job. I rather see them fix core Issues rather than buffing crap just for the sake it's a failed new unit poorly designed and they want to see more use out of it. Like the useless Oracal Buff cuz they wanted to see it in late game, dumb moves like that is what makes balance horrid in the long run.
|
Period , zerg carapace upgrades adding armor to buildings, the best fix to zerg match up
|
On July 13 2014 13:06 LingBlingBling wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 12:58 RoninColt wrote:On July 13 2014 12:28 DomeGetta wrote:On July 13 2014 12:03 MadSoju wrote:I hope the balance team at Blizzard is reading this thread, and what people are saying about tanks. Something needs to be done about the tanks. I'm not sure what fixation David Kim has with the widow mine to constantly change it, why can't he try something new in a test map with something like tanks that almost everyone agrees would be neat to see them not suck. Agree. STOPPPPIT! JUST STOPIT! -mikeditka seriously tho - enough about tanks.. you cant use them in tvz vs ling/bling/muta unless they fix mutas.. so stop talking about it..all this nonsense about tanks is gonna make them do another retarded random buff that won't help anything.. they have to get back to at least 1 unit composition that can actually trade in a balanced fashion (which we have seen in bio/mine, not bio/tank). pls and thx enough w the tank cry I really don't see them buffing tanks. David Kim obviously wants see the Window Mine being used. I mean after all it is a HoTs unit, why would they buff an older unit to be used and make the mine even more less common. ' That's some pretty stupid marketing IMO if they buff failed HOTS units just so they are used more and can pat them self's on the back and say they did a good dev job. I rather see them fix core Issues rather than buffing crap just for the sake it's a failed new unit poorly designed and they want to see more use out of it. Like the useless Oracal Buff cuz they wanted to see it in late game, dumb moves like that is what makes balance horrid in the long run.
Yea, but it's pretty clear that's what he wants. Why else would he come up with the Medivac buff? Drop play has decreased sense players have adapted to defending them better, and he's said in interviews this is the style of play him and viewers like to see.
The way I see it is he's trying to balance the game to play out in his own image.
|
On July 13 2014 12:03 MadSoju wrote:I hope the balance team at Blizzard is reading this thread, and what people are saying about tanks. Something needs to be done about the tanks. Show nested quote +I'm not sure what fixation David Kim has with the widow mine to constantly change it, why can't he try something new in a test map with something like tanks that almost everyone agrees would be neat to see them not suck. Agree. What if the tank itself isn't the problem though?
As people have said before, tanks are fine in TvT.
As someone else said, tanks would be fine in TvZ, but they get tactically wrecked by mutas. A large muta cloud can move in, pick them off, pull out and regen, repeat. So really the key to making tanks viable in TvZ is to buff Terran's anti-muta capabilities (or nerf muta regen, but...ZvP/ZvZ). The Thor and mine buffs are a stealth buff to tank play in TvZ (but maybe not big enough). At least tanks are still the go-to vs zerg missile style, and we do see mech games vs zerg now and then.
What about TvP? It's like TvZ only moreso. It's probably too hard to fix before LotV because the best unit against the tank-murderers (Ghosts) are on a different tech path and are just as gas intensive, so we probably won't see a tank/ghost composition unless the Terran has basically won the game, and probably not even then since bio is still pretty good when you're winning.
A lot of the previously suggested buffs to tanks (e.g. damage vs shields) won't really make tanks viable as long as chargelots can reliably get on top of them and immortals only take 10 damage from tanks while also doing 50 damage a shot. Making the tank cheaper/less supply/build faster is nice but I'd kind of like if tanks actually killed some stuff before being killed by an immortal (or by it's buddy tank a few steps away). An HP buff would be better, but that might be too good in TvZ/TvT....maybe an HP buff plus an armor nerf? Seems a little dubious.
Tanks have already been buffed once damage wise. The problem isn't that tanks can't kill Protoss/Zerg generally. The problem is there are certain Protoss/Zerg units that completely murder tanks, and Terran can't stop that from happening once the opponent decides to use them.
If I were going to experiment with "tank" buffs in TvP I might try:
1) Changing immortal shots to be projectiles. PDD now increases tank survivability too. And good luck landing feedback on a PDD behind sieged tanks!
2) Buff mines to help deter chargelots--oh wait... (Seriously though, weren't mines and vultures critical to supporting tank play in BW TvP?)
Any other suggestions for non-tank "tank" buffs?
|
Mexico2170 Posts
i don't even know why they buffed mutalisk in the first place, thy recieved 3 unnecesarry buffs... well i think maybe i know why..the widow mine.
If they changed the widow mine and the mutalisk, tanks would be viable once again.
|
Just remove the freaking hardened shield ability, everybody knows it's blatantly stupid. Increase Immortal's health or shield to make up for it if needed.
|
On July 13 2014 12:03 MadSoju wrote:I hope the balance team at Blizzard is reading this thread, and what people are saying about tanks. Something needs to be done about the tanks. Show nested quote +I'm not sure what fixation David Kim has with the widow mine to constantly change it, why can't he try something new in a test map with something like tanks that almost everyone agrees would be neat to see them not suck. Agree.
The Widow Mine is the unit that is perfect for a TvP and TvZ adjustment because it helps both those matchups fairly equally. (well not equally but close enough) whereas you could the buff the tank all day everyday and it would still be a niche buff in TvP.
|
On July 13 2014 15:43 HallofPain wrote: Just remove the freaking hardened shield ability, everybody knows it's blatantly stupid. Increase Immortal's health or shield to make up for it if needed.
Yes - there are very easy fixes, only not considered ATM:
1 - buff Viking - vs both Light units and Shields 2 - buff Tank range - up to 14 (see how it goes, Marines are chargeable enough in TvT, there won't be a big change, but will allow Terran to "shell away" Nexus even with MSC PO casted, in other words - puts a clock on Protoss passive defensive play) 3 - nerf something Protoss has - maybe Tempests, maybe Voidrays IDK, those seem to have enough "maneuvering space" for nerfs 4 - reduce Unsiege (yes, unsiegeing animation time, but keep the siege-ing the same) - it will mean you'll still lose your tanks if not sieged up on time (caught offguard), only you might save a bit more, (however won't matter in TvT much cause tanks either way are moving slow), but it would help vs Immortals
In general anything that would change the army vs army play rather than going back to HotS mine 1.0 which obliterated mineral lines in 2 shots..
Speaking of which - that is a bit funky to "boil over":
Faust's post says mines will be even worse vs Probe-line from the beginning of HotS (which I find it scary, and bad for the gameplay, lol), whilest the reddit "meme" says it will be a "meh" change.. w.t.f.
But yes - if it indeed does bring Zoo Zoo Terran back - it's bad for the gameplay.. PERIOD
|
On July 13 2014 16:36 VArsovskiSC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 15:43 HallofPain wrote: Just remove the freaking hardened shield ability, everybody knows it's blatantly stupid. Increase Immortal's health or shield to make up for it if needed. Yes - there are very easy fixes, only not considered ATM: 1 - buff Viking - vs both Light units and Shields 2 - buff Tank range - up to 14 (see how it goes, Marines are chargeable enough in TvT, there won't be a big change, but will allow Terran to "shell away" Nexus even with MSC PO casted, in other words - puts a clock on Protoss passive defensive play) 3 - nerf something Protoss has - maybe Tempests, maybe Voidrays IDK, those seem to have enough "maneuvering space" for nerfs In general anything that would change the army vs army play rather than going back to HotS mine 1.0 which obliterated mineral lines in 2 shots.. Now - this is a bit funky to "boil over": Faust's post says mines will be even worse vs Probe-line from the beginning of HotS (which I find it scary, and bad for the gameplay, lol), whilest the reddit "meme" says it will be a "meh" change.. w.t.f. But yes - if it indeed does bring Zoo Zoo Terran back - it's bad for the gameplay.. PERIOD
Whats going to happen is exactly the same thing that happened to oracles and speed medivacs is that they get used very heavily for about 2 months then everyone is used to them so then the harass is more of a niche then a standard.
|
On July 13 2014 16:41 Adreme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 16:36 VArsovskiSC wrote:On July 13 2014 15:43 HallofPain wrote: Just remove the freaking hardened shield ability, everybody knows it's blatantly stupid. Increase Immortal's health or shield to make up for it if needed. Yes - there are very easy fixes, only not considered ATM: 1 - buff Viking - vs both Light units and Shields 2 - buff Tank range - up to 14 (see how it goes, Marines are chargeable enough in TvT, there won't be a big change, but will allow Terran to "shell away" Nexus even with MSC PO casted, in other words - puts a clock on Protoss passive defensive play) 3 - nerf something Protoss has - maybe Tempests, maybe Voidrays IDK, those seem to have enough "maneuvering space" for nerfs In general anything that would change the army vs army play rather than going back to HotS mine 1.0 which obliterated mineral lines in 2 shots.. Now - this is a bit funky to "boil over": Faust's post says mines will be even worse vs Probe-line from the beginning of HotS (which I find it scary, and bad for the gameplay, lol), whilest the reddit "meme" says it will be a "meh" change.. w.t.f. But yes - if it indeed does bring Zoo Zoo Terran back - it's bad for the gameplay.. PERIOD Whats going to happen is exactly the same thing that happened to oracles and speed medivacs is that they get used very heavily for about 2 months then everyone is used to them so then the harass is more of a niche then a standard.
MAYBE.. IDK.. - still the point is - better to prefer that the both opposing sides are in a good spot, rather than both being in a bad one.. It's just no good to see a good percentage of games instantly end at the 10 minute mark in one swoop move..
AND - added a 4th option - think that one might adress some of the problems too.. Regardless - there are other ways to do it rather than buff the harassment potential (which already is far too good) for Terran.. That was my point though..
AND - also - no-one, literally NO-ONE has tried/tested the new Hellbat buff vs Protoss.. And even if HBs themselves are bad vs P - no-one tested them in combo with WMs.. We don't even know how HB/WM opener fairs vs Protoss, and yet we buff it further..
Lest to say that it's already game-winning timing vs Zerg
|
What about thors? Those gigantic junks cost 6 food 300/200 and just get slaughtered by something 4 food 250/100? Does Toss really need something that hard counters Thor anyway? Thors are not hard to deal with at all without immortals.
|
On July 13 2014 16:51 HallofPain wrote: What about thors? Those gigantic junks cost 6 food 300/200 and just get slaughtered by something 4 food 250/100? Does Toss really need something that hard counters Thor anyway? Thors are not hard to deal with at all without immortals. Terran will mech all day long if P does not have Immortal. Only this one unit can deal vs mech not pretty bad.
|
Mech's strength is straight up engagement, weakness is mobility and anti-air. In TvP Mech's only strength becomes its weakness as well cuz they can't even fight Toss head up.
|
|
On July 13 2014 16:51 HallofPain wrote: What about thors? Those gigantic junks cost 6 food 300/200 and just get slaughtered by something 4 food 250/100? Does Toss really need something that hard counters Thor anyway? Thors are not hard to deal with at all without immortals. OMG, I quoted the wrong guy in my previous post lol.. I was refering to the other guy who said "is there another way to buff tanks ?" or sth like that on the finishing sentence in the post..
There IS a workaround for everything though.. the point is it might make things more complicated or so:
Considering like a "small" fix:
1 - Thors take only 66% magic damage (i.e. negate 1/3) 2 - Immortal shots are now magical..
Things like that can easily fix the situation (though not good myself about those cause not good at the editor, lol, not good to know if those things are possible, cause pretty sure that they balance the game out through the editor )
BUT - the key I think is that mech's weakness isn't cause of how mech works, but rather cause of how Protoss works.. Protoss (as opposed to Zerg for ex.) - have a VERY STRONG BACKDOOR.. That being said - mech problem is the harassment which will come in the form of multiple Zealot/Storm/DT-warps/drops.. Lest that's what happened the last time mech was used in a TvP (think it was MMA vs HerO, HerO harassed the sh*t out of him that game, but he was also caught offguard with Tanks unsieged at the middle of the map, so I/we DK)
Most of the time I got to play mech I was facing air units like Voidrays and Carriers, and as Protoss if I see Terran go mech I do the same.., so.. IDK
AND - another relatively important point is that Mech is DEPENDABLE on the map layout overall
|
On July 13 2014 17:23 HallofPain wrote: Mech's strength is straight up engagement, weakness is mobility and anti-air. In TvP Mech's only strength becomes its weakness as well cuz they can't even fight Toss head up.
Dude.. mech trashes gateway units. the problem is the immortal. I would much rather have a 300hp / 50shield immortal that costs a little less and does 30plain dmg,
Or perhaps Gatway units produce 5-10sec faster than warpgate so you pretty much have to engage and wear mech down instead of just a moving into everything.
Or something like tanks do 70dmg to massive like in broodwar. whatever. The game does not feel funny, and i've stopped playing for a reason. Im aware of the hypocrasy of i've stopped playing, but havent stopped discussing the game, well its just my honest opinion. Period
|
On July 13 2014 16:59 Dingodile wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 16:51 HallofPain wrote: What about thors? Those gigantic junks cost 6 food 300/200 and just get slaughtered by something 4 food 250/100? Does Toss really need something that hard counters Thor anyway? Thors are not hard to deal with at all without immortals. Terran will mech all day long if P does not have Immortal. Only this one unit can deal vs mech not pretty bad.
Immortals aren't even good in the lategame against a good Mech players, since both Ravens and Ghosts just take their shields so fast that it's a plain slaughter.
Immortals are only the lazyass superimbalanced "hey I don't want to play anymore, 1A" option that Protoss has against Mech from the earlygame to latemidgame and wins a massive amount of games, without the Protoss players even having developed sharp timings for it yet. (or most Protoss even knowing how you actually want to play against Mech - well, I guess when even a comparabily weak midgame timing wins you most games, why even try to learn something that is actually unbeatable for Mech, but may be hard...)
|
Personally, I think that if you're going to nerf hardened shield, nerf it by only making it affect the base damage of the units, but not upgrade damage. Then you could also have the shield upgrades work on the upgrade damage. So +1 tanks would deal 15 damage to hardened shield, or 14 damage against +1 shield Immortals. +2 tanks would be 20 damage, +3 tanks would be 25 damage. +1 Thors would be 13 damage x2, +2 16 damage x2, +3 19 damage x2.
This would make mech viable in macro games but still give Protoss a strong counter unit to early game all-in attacks with half the SCVs pulled for repairs.
You can't really nerf Photon Overcharge without breaking PvP. It barely deters phoenixes from slaughtering probes as it is, a change to 10+10 shields would turn PvP into "whoever expands first loses" again. You need 3 cannons in a mineral line to prevent phoenixes from constantly picking off your gas probes and you just can't afford to waste that many resources when trying to expand in the mirror. Warpgates mean no defender's advantage and if you try to expand while wasting that many resources on static defense that doesn't contribute you're going to get steamrolled. None of the Protoss force multipliers work against phoenixes, you can't make sentries because the phoenix easily pick them off in seconds even if they're in the middle of your army, remember it takes 18 stalker hits to kill a phoenix. Leaving some stalkers in your main doesn't work to protect your probes either, they can just flyby and pick a few off, taking very little damage. Even a nerf to the energy cost would probably break this matchup, it's very common for Protoss to overcharge the main twice in succession to keep phoenix out until their expansion's production ramps up and their extra gates finish.
|
There is no early game all-in available for Terran. There needs something that forces Toss to play less greedy and scout. The 50 damage against armor units is already more than enough imo, no need to cap the damage taken to 10.
|
Could someone please explain for once that "can't break PvP" argument for me. Like, break down the current metagame for me, that it so great?
Because what I see from current PvPs it is one of the following -) 1gate-->blink-->semiallinish to allinish aggression -) 1gate-->Stargate-->reactive 1base play or allin -) 1gate-->DT-->semiallinish to allinish aggression -) 3gate-->allin
And in WoL it was something like: -) defensive robo-->expand -) offensive blink+obs-->semiallinish to allinish aggression -) 3-4 gateway allin -) DTs
I don't really get what the problem would be if you couldn't 1gate-->blink allin anymore. Great, you would now have to use the weaker 3-4gate as your 1base allin. You couldn't coinflip DTs as often, since the metagame would be more oracle and robo focused if you can't get a ridiculous early blink, great. Like, a nerf to the PO would probably only shift the metagame from the one 1base builds to the others. It's not like we have any forms of early macro builds that need the PO. Those 1gate expands have very quickly fallen out of style and are currently nearly nonexistant, given that they lose to basically every tech opening or at least are forced into a nexus cancel if the other side executes properly.
|
I never understood the concern about breaking PvP, yet I hear it all the time. The matchup will always have a 50% winrate, therefore it should come secondary to non-mirror matchups... Right?
The primary goal of the balance team should be to equalize the winrates across all matchups because that's most fair to progamers whose livelihoods depend on balance. Yet I frequently hear protoss whining that PvP would not be fun enough if PO was changed.
Is that seriously supposed to be a compelling argument? First world Protoss problems I guess
|
On July 13 2014 19:02 eightym wrote:I never understood the concern about breaking PvP, yet I hear it all the time. The matchup will always have a 50% winrate, therefore it should come secondary to non-mirror matchups... Right? The primary goal of the balance team should be to equalize the winrates across all matchups because that's most fair to progamers whose livelihoods depend on balance. Yet I frequently hear protoss whining that PvP would not be fun enough if PO was changed. Is that seriously supposed to be a compelling argument? First world Protoss problems I guess
MU still needs to be fun to play. And there is no real fix for PO where we just marginally nerfs it whereafter it functions perfectly in TvP and ZvP. I think the current version is the lesser of other evils.
|
On July 13 2014 19:16 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 19:02 eightym wrote:I never understood the concern about breaking PvP, yet I hear it all the time. The matchup will always have a 50% winrate, therefore it should come secondary to non-mirror matchups... Right? The primary goal of the balance team should be to equalize the winrates across all matchups because that's most fair to progamers whose livelihoods depend on balance. Yet I frequently hear protoss whining that PvP would not be fun enough if PO was changed. Is that seriously supposed to be a compelling argument? First world Protoss problems I guess MU still needs to be fun to play. And there is no real fix for PO where we just marginally nerfs it whereafter it functions perfectly in TvP and ZvP. I think the current version is the lesser of other evils. Indeed. But i still think we can make the matchup funnier if we had for example buildtime fixes. Lower the buildtimes a little so you still have a chance to catchup if you fall behind, lower the buildtimes so you actually can trade cost inefficiently if you're ahead and same the other way around.
Its like they've painted themselves into a corner where you have two strategies that work, and dont fix things with making other strategies fail a little more
|
I would also prefer a buff to tank. They just simply feel more awesome and kick ass yet they suck vs muta ling bling. Mine should be buffed a little just to make it another option, create some variance unit composition wise in the MU but tank should still be the go to unit. Problem with buffing the tank is that in TvT I already feel that mech is slightly better than bio so after any buff we would see mech vs mech all the time :/ But if we were to look at TvZ only I think that siege time decrease alongside thor AA buff (making is something like with widow mine attack - the further from the center of the hit, the less damage) so that mutas dont just shit on thors. That should make marine, thor, tank completly viable vs zerg and that composition just looks fricken badass. As for tank in TvP I think we won't get anything till LotV
|
On July 13 2014 18:49 Big J wrote: Could someone please explain for once that "can't break PvP" argument for me. Like, break down the current metagame for me, that it so great?
Because what I see from current PvPs it is one of the following -) 1gate-->blink-->semiallinish to allinish aggression -) 1gate-->Stargate-->reactive 1base play or allin -) 1gate-->DT-->semiallinish to allinish aggression -) 3gate-->allin
And in WoL it was something like: -) defensive robo-->expand -) offensive blink+obs-->semiallinish to allinish aggression -) 3-4 gateway allin -) DTs
I don't really get what the problem would be if you couldn't 1gate-->blink allin anymore. Great, you would now have to use the weaker 3-4gate as your 1base allin. You couldn't coinflip DTs as often, since the metagame would be more oracle and robo focused if you can't get a ridiculous early blink, great. Like, a nerf to the PO would probably only shift the metagame from the one 1base builds to the others. It's not like we have any forms of early macro builds that need the PO. Those 1gate expands have very quickly fallen out of style and are currently nearly nonexistant, given that they lose to basically every tech opening or at least are forced into a nexus cancel if the other side executes properly. Well that sh*t PvP state you're talking about is already the exact result of nerfing the MSC few times before.. It will be even shittier if it does get nerfed more
|
On July 13 2014 19:02 eightym wrote:I never understood the concern about breaking PvP, yet I hear it all the time. The matchup will always have a 50% winrate, therefore it should come secondary to non-mirror matchups... Right? The primary goal of the balance team should be to equalize the winrates across all matchups because that's most fair to progamers whose livelihoods depend on balance. Yet I frequently hear protoss whining that PvP would not be fun enough if PO was changed. Is that seriously supposed to be a compelling argument? First world Protoss problems I guess Wrong - in WoL PvP was who expands first loses the game.. Now it's looking like that more and more, and that's exactly MSC nerf's fault.. Now it's OK-ish, but further nerfs to the MSC will make PvP as was in WoL before
That's the EXACT SAME REASON why Terrans are hesitant to think that buffing the Tank further would be better than buffing the WM let's BH
EDIT: Sorry for the double-post, but understand that one as is, it's necessary for P to have some defender's advantage if not vs T, surely vs BOTH - P and vs Z - it's really essential overall
|
I hope this patch is released ASAP cause I am tired of watching TvZs where Z makes like 70 banelings and rolls over T.
See MMA - Ragnarok at Dragon.
After patch at least it wont be auto win for Zs.
|
I thought that the Starbow solution of allowing you to cast chronoboost on cannons for a defensive boost (faster attack speed) was nice. It gives further integration of race mechanics, and it puts a cost on defensive utility that's more real than having to use energy on the MsC.
And would it be crazy to turn the Cybernetics Core into a shield battery? It has a similar look and you're only going to build one anyway so it can hardly break the game.
Protoss needs a defender's advantage that's not based on photon overcharge or wall-offs.
|
On July 13 2014 22:17 Grumbels wrote: I thought that the Starbow solution of allowing you to cast chronoboost on cannons for a defensive boost (faster attack speed) was nice. It gives further integration of race mechanics, and it puts a cost on defensive utility that's more real than having to use energy on the MsC.
And would it be crazy to turn the Cybernetics Core into a shield battery? It has a similar look and you're only going to build one anyway so it can hardly break the game.
Protoss needs a defender's advantage that's not based on photon overcharge or wall-offs. and not totally mitigate aggression.
|
PO is the worst solution that can be imagined. It's basically "pause game" button. Even normal static defenses are more interesting to watch than this, because you have to crush or avoid them and with PO you just have to wait.. Not too surprising since it was designed by the same folks who came up with the SH as the solution to stalemate in a late game. + Show Spoiler + I just don't know whats going on. If they want to make early PvP more stable than there is no better solution than shield battery. It feels like David Kim is jealous about how well BW was made and pretend that his solutions are far more superior to the BW mechanics
|
I think we shouldn't be too harsh on David Kim, I think there are a few things done well and a few things done wrong in HotS for Terran. One of the things he did wrong was being to harsh with the nerfs on terran in the beginning, which ended up with Terrans being where they are now. For example, Hellbats were really strong (arguably too strong yes) but then they were nerfed to being straight up useless. Mines were nerfed as well not to being useless but not strong enough anymore to really fulfil their main purpose, namely destroying huge clumps of a-moved units so mines could function as a zoning unit/reinforcement point. This mine nerf forces terran to do a lot of damage with their first medivac drops (before muta) or they would get behind eventually. All the while the initial "mine problem" might have been fixed entirely with the overseer speed buff, which helped the Zerg to never totally lose their muta flock if handled with good micro. I think that PvT balance indirectly got disturbed by this focus on fixing ZvT.
What was done right in HotS was firstly the medivac boost ability which sped up the game and made it rewarding for good multitaskers to display their skill. Secondly the Hellbat unit, which actually made the transition to mech in TvT and ZvT possible and fun. Thirdly, accompanied by the medivac boost, the widow mines made for an even more dynamic and fast bioplay in ZvT which didn't rely on the slow moving tanks which only make sense in greater numbers requiring the Terran to build up for a longer time.
All in all, I think HotS sometimes is a great game but can be an even greater game in potential if more tech paths came to be available for Terran. I really want to know opinions of Zergs and Protoss too. Personally I still think the Terran match ups are still the most enjoyable despite the small amount of variation in tech paths, their early and mid game are really fun.
|
Italy12246 Posts
On July 13 2014 18:49 Big J wrote: Could someone please explain for once that "can't break PvP" argument for me. Like, break down the current metagame for me, that it so great?
Because what I see from current PvPs it is one of the following -) 1gate-->blink-->semiallinish to allinish aggression -) 1gate-->Stargate-->reactive 1base play or allin -) 1gate-->DT-->semiallinish to allinish aggression -) 3gate-->allin
And in WoL it was something like: -) defensive robo-->expand -) offensive blink+obs-->semiallinish to allinish aggression -) 3-4 gateway allin -) DTs
I don't really get what the problem would be if you couldn't 1gate-->blink allin anymore. Great, you would now have to use the weaker 3-4gate as your 1base allin. You couldn't coinflip DTs as often, since the metagame would be more oracle and robo focused if you can't get a ridiculous early blink, great. Like, a nerf to the PO would probably only shift the metagame from the one 1base builds to the others. It's not like we have any forms of early macro builds that need the PO. Those 1gate expands have very quickly fallen out of style and are currently nearly nonexistant, given that they lose to basically every tech opening or at least are forced into a nexus cancel if the other side executes properly.
There is a huge amount of variation in there. All the builds you listed can be played either as a lighter pressure, a committed allin, or just an aggressive timing, depending on follow up tech, risks taken (going robo vs not going robo, going sentry first to scout, number of early game units before tech, etc), and most importantly constant probe production. It's not as simple as picking one tech path, the way that tech path is played also heavily changes the outcome of a game. In fact, modern blink builds are on average very defensive.
The issue with phasing out blink is that, out of those, it's the most reliable build, because the success of the aggression is determined more by both players' execution, rather than some random bo decision/early game counter. Stargate mirrors as a counter example are coinflippy as fuck, (and also very boring to play) as the player that decides to skip oracle for phoenix will come out miles ahead of oracle first builds, the player that gambles and skips a robo is usually ahead vs whoever starts a robo, etc.
Finally, being forced into stargate mirrors (the second most reliable build in terms of execution vs bo hard counters) is incredibly obnoxious because of how it plays out.
The issue with PO in PvP is that it gives the defending player some semblance of defender's advantage, which has been lacking for Protoss forever. Since the oracle buff it doesnt allow for a straight up fast expansion to be defended, but at least the game can stabilize considerably more easily, hence why, for example, blink builds are only used to pressure and delay the nexus of a Stargate player, rather than being a straight up bo win after jumping past a forcefield on a ramp like it used to be in WoL.
|
On July 13 2014 20:17 VArsovskiSC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 19:02 eightym wrote:I never understood the concern about breaking PvP, yet I hear it all the time. The matchup will always have a 50% winrate, therefore it should come secondary to non-mirror matchups... Right? The primary goal of the balance team should be to equalize the winrates across all matchups because that's most fair to progamers whose livelihoods depend on balance. Yet I frequently hear protoss whining that PvP would not be fun enough if PO was changed. Is that seriously supposed to be a compelling argument? First world Protoss problems I guess Wrong - in WoL PvP was who expands first loses the game.. Now it's looking like that more and more, and that's exactly MSC nerf's fault.. Now it's OK-ish, but further nerfs to the MSC will make PvP as was in WoL before That's the EXACT SAME REASON why Terrans are hesitant to think that buffing the Tank further would be better than buffing the WM let's BH EDIT: Sorry for the double-post, but understand that one as is, it's necessary for P to have some defender's advantage if not vs T, surely vs BOTH - P and vs Z - it's really essential overall
You say "wrong" without specifying what is wrong. Pray tell, where did I say something wrong? And lets argue with one person at a time here (I never said tank shouldn't be buffed and haven't seen many Terrans claim that either).
I know PvP wasn't fun in WoL, but the current state of TvP is even less fun and less fair. I know this way of thinking will never be adopted by others, but:
Why should Protoss having "fun" be more important than TvP being balanced? That seems to be the crux of your argument.
|
Italy12246 Posts
On July 13 2014 20:17 VArsovskiSC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 19:02 eightym wrote:I never understood the concern about breaking PvP, yet I hear it all the time. The matchup will always have a 50% winrate, therefore it should come secondary to non-mirror matchups... Right? The primary goal of the balance team should be to equalize the winrates across all matchups because that's most fair to progamers whose livelihoods depend on balance. Yet I frequently hear protoss whining that PvP would not be fun enough if PO was changed. Is that seriously supposed to be a compelling argument? First world Protoss problems I guess Wrong - in WoL PvP was who expands first loses the game.. Now it's looking like that more and more, and that's exactly MSC nerf's fault.. Now it's OK-ish, but further nerfs to the MSC will make PvP as was in WoL before That's the EXACT SAME REASON why Terrans are hesitant to think that buffing the Tank further would be better than buffing the WM let's BH EDIT: Sorry for the double-post, but understand that one as is, it's necessary for P to have some defender's advantage if not vs T, surely vs BOTH - P and vs Z - it's really essential overall
Incorrect. Eventually in WoL players figured out how to expand relatively safely (thanks to robo expands), and now the same is kind of happending too (blink/stargate+robo expands). The mothership core has little to do with the inherent volatility of the matchup imo; in fact, removing its defensive capabilities makes the match up even more volatile (think early WoL).
|
On July 14 2014 00:47 Teoita wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2014 18:49 Big J wrote: Could someone please explain for once that "can't break PvP" argument for me. Like, break down the current metagame for me, that it so great?
Because what I see from current PvPs it is one of the following -) 1gate-->blink-->semiallinish to allinish aggression -) 1gate-->Stargate-->reactive 1base play or allin -) 1gate-->DT-->semiallinish to allinish aggression -) 3gate-->allin
And in WoL it was something like: -) defensive robo-->expand -) offensive blink+obs-->semiallinish to allinish aggression -) 3-4 gateway allin -) DTs
I don't really get what the problem would be if you couldn't 1gate-->blink allin anymore. Great, you would now have to use the weaker 3-4gate as your 1base allin. You couldn't coinflip DTs as often, since the metagame would be more oracle and robo focused if you can't get a ridiculous early blink, great. Like, a nerf to the PO would probably only shift the metagame from the one 1base builds to the others. It's not like we have any forms of early macro builds that need the PO. Those 1gate expands have very quickly fallen out of style and are currently nearly nonexistant, given that they lose to basically every tech opening or at least are forced into a nexus cancel if the other side executes properly. There is a huge amount of variation in there. All the builds you listed can be played either as a lighter pressure, a committed allin, or just an aggressive timing, depending on follow up tech, risks taken (going robo vs not going robo, going sentry first to scout, number of early game units before tech, etc), and most importantly constant probe production. It's not as simple as picking one tech path, the way that tech path is played also heavily changes the outcome of a game. In fact, modern blink builds are on average very defensive. The issue with phasing out blink is that, out of those, it's the most reliable build, because the success of the aggression is determined more by both players' execution, rather than some random bo decision/early game counter. Stargate mirrors as a counter example are coinflippy as fuck, (and also very boring to play) as the player that decides to skip oracle for phoenix will come out miles ahead of oracle first builds, the player that gambles and skips a robo is usually ahead vs whoever starts a robo, etc. Finally, being forced into stargate mirrors (the second most reliable build in terms of execution vs bo hard counters) is incredibly obnoxious because of how it plays out. The issue with PO in PvP is that it gives the defending player some semblance of defender's advantage, which has been lacking for Protoss forever. Since the oracle buff it doesnt allow for a straight up fast expansion to be defended, but at least the game can stabilize considerably more easily, hence why, for example, blink builds are only used to pressure and delay the nexus of a Stargate player, rather than being a straight up bo win after jumping past a forcefield on a ramp like it used to be in WoL.
Just talking theoretically, since I believe the PO should stay as it is due to PvZ, wouldn't phasing out PO also hit Stargate/Oracle and DT builds?
What you say makes sense for phasing out blink builds, but that's not the point of nerfing PO, isn't it? Going for Oracles, DTs and Blink off of 1gateway would all be much weaker, given the possibility of gateway pressure. So it's not like you lose all counters to Stargate openings, since you could just kill a stargate player with a 3-4gate, while an Oracle/Phoenix opening isn't that strong against something like a 3gate-->blink either, isn't it? Wouldn't the matchup then stabilize around something like 1-3gate+robotics and blink+3gate builds, maybe with a 2gate stalker pressure opening just to punish someone who attempts to still go for 5-7min DTs/Stargates/blink?
|
The biggest Terran balance error was made before the WoL beta, and that was making marines so godlike amazing that simply making every other Terran unit suck wasn't enough to make up for it. They then had to cripple Terran production as well, (the barracks and starport convert resources into units at half the rate of a warpgate/stargate) and that STILL wasn't enough, as various marine cheeses utterly dominated early WoL.
Remember, before the recent hydra buff, the marine, a 50 mineral unit, did the same DPS as 100/50 hydralisks.
|
On July 12 2014 13:03 Mjolnir wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2014 12:34 EngrishTeacher wrote: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. So, what's the gripe here? You think tanks would be too strong in TvT if they were buffed? Bio spam would be less effective? Games would turn into positional wars and/or turtles? Is that the fear? Maybe that's not what your concern is (and if it isn't, please clarify); but if it is well man, I've gotta disagree. TvT was fantastic in BW and tanks shit all over infantry in that one. I think SC2 needs something to mix up the strats. I'd love to see more TvT mech to air strats. I'm tired of bio, bio, bio in every tournament or every game I play on b.net. Tweaking mines, Thors, and the MC are silly changes. Mines are boring and only facilitate more MMMWM (bio) play (yawn). Thor targeting is ridiculous - where's the micro? That's part of the game! And the MC nerf? Please, all the damage is done in the first 5-10 seconds. Terran needs a complete overhaul. I agree with those who want to see a tank buff.
Not even just BW, WoL had some legit TvT with Marine/Tank vs Marine Tank. That was so damn tactical I had my fair share of amazing games.
|
IMO, I'm all for tanks/thors buffs in terms of building time/cost/supply reduction. The mechanics of Terrans in SC2 leads the race to have the most faster tech-paths as well as the biggest vulnerability to tech-switch/remax.
With some changes like that for mech/air, it encourages aggressive play and trade-army, (although it may need some raven nerf, which IMO is already needed, and/or some buff to anti-bio units). Which terrans are already used to, it could also make biomech compositions more viable, while not creating by mistake some imbalances timings. In terms of late-late game, against P it'll make the terran play like a zerg, while TvZ will be around 50/50 brute force/multitask based games.
It may not be the best way to improve terran match-ups, but it is the most easy way, I don't want bio to be = mech, but it could lead to bio-mech more easily usable. While pure-mech would work more like BW.
It's that or make Mech/sky units uber-strong but upgrades for more expensive and/or long to build.
|
Italy12246 Posts
On July 14 2014 01:42 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2014 00:47 Teoita wrote:On July 13 2014 18:49 Big J wrote: Could someone please explain for once that "can't break PvP" argument for me. Like, break down the current metagame for me, that it so great?
Because what I see from current PvPs it is one of the following -) 1gate-->blink-->semiallinish to allinish aggression -) 1gate-->Stargate-->reactive 1base play or allin -) 1gate-->DT-->semiallinish to allinish aggression -) 3gate-->allin
And in WoL it was something like: -) defensive robo-->expand -) offensive blink+obs-->semiallinish to allinish aggression -) 3-4 gateway allin -) DTs
I don't really get what the problem would be if you couldn't 1gate-->blink allin anymore. Great, you would now have to use the weaker 3-4gate as your 1base allin. You couldn't coinflip DTs as often, since the metagame would be more oracle and robo focused if you can't get a ridiculous early blink, great. Like, a nerf to the PO would probably only shift the metagame from the one 1base builds to the others. It's not like we have any forms of early macro builds that need the PO. Those 1gate expands have very quickly fallen out of style and are currently nearly nonexistant, given that they lose to basically every tech opening or at least are forced into a nexus cancel if the other side executes properly. There is a huge amount of variation in there. All the builds you listed can be played either as a lighter pressure, a committed allin, or just an aggressive timing, depending on follow up tech, risks taken (going robo vs not going robo, going sentry first to scout, number of early game units before tech, etc), and most importantly constant probe production. It's not as simple as picking one tech path, the way that tech path is played also heavily changes the outcome of a game. In fact, modern blink builds are on average very defensive. The issue with phasing out blink is that, out of those, it's the most reliable build, because the success of the aggression is determined more by both players' execution, rather than some random bo decision/early game counter. Stargate mirrors as a counter example are coinflippy as fuck, (and also very boring to play) as the player that decides to skip oracle for phoenix will come out miles ahead of oracle first builds, the player that gambles and skips a robo is usually ahead vs whoever starts a robo, etc. Finally, being forced into stargate mirrors (the second most reliable build in terms of execution vs bo hard counters) is incredibly obnoxious because of how it plays out. The issue with PO in PvP is that it gives the defending player some semblance of defender's advantage, which has been lacking for Protoss forever. Since the oracle buff it doesnt allow for a straight up fast expansion to be defended, but at least the game can stabilize considerably more easily, hence why, for example, blink builds are only used to pressure and delay the nexus of a Stargate player, rather than being a straight up bo win after jumping past a forcefield on a ramp like it used to be in WoL. Just talking theoretically, since I believe the PO should stay as it is due to PvZ, wouldn't phasing out PO also hit Stargate/Oracle and DT builds? What you say makes sense for phasing out blink builds, but that's not the point of nerfing PO, isn't it? Going for Oracles, DTs and Blink off of 1gateway would all be much weaker, given the possibility of gateway pressure. So it's not like you lose all counters to Stargate openings, since you could just kill a stargate player with a 3-4gate, while an Oracle/Phoenix opening isn't that strong against something like a 3gate-->blink either, isn't it? Wouldn't the matchup then stabilize around something like 1-3gate+robotics and blink+3gate builds, maybe with a 2gate stalker pressure opening just to punish someone who attempts to still go for 5-7min DTs/Stargates/blink?
The annoying thing is that a safe build like 3gate > blink is still actually behind against a greedy stargate opener because blink is so late (and your safe 3 gate is useless if the opponent opens greedy). Same goes for every build really. The function of PO is to remove the coinflippiness due to how greedy someone is in the early game (to a certain extent ofc), not to remove the counters between tech that have always existed.
It's kind of hard to predict exactly how the game would settle in the long run of course, but my first reaction to an overcharge nerf is immediately "well, blink pressure is now weaker, and you can never know exactly how greedy/safe you can play".
I focused on blink builds because that's where your post was most lacking. I could have worded the whole thing much better
|
The whole pvp defenders advantage could have been corrected much easier by implementing a better highground advantage instead of getting a unit which just affects every other matchup negatively imo. And I dont like Blizzards approach on design either. Why dont they try to make some units actually useful and more diverse and well rounded instead of forcing players to play a certain style? Mech still is garbage after so many years of complaining. Carrier is still a piece of junk compared to BW and its awesome microbility it had there. It has been said like over a million times on this forum and on theirs but Blizzard keeps ignoring these voices and let every other unit extinct in the game. I can already think what they will add in lotv. Just other gimmick units with niche roles but nothing that will divert to other playstyle other than MMMM and other deathball compositions.
|
Italy12246 Posts
I think it would be just fine if they just reverted stim to 140 seconds, that way terran would have an aggressive stim-only timing, a harassment based opening (hellion/marine is actually really strong), and the standard 3rax medivac.
Unfortunately they are stubborn as hell and never revert their previous changes
|
On July 14 2014 02:02 Xequecal wrote: The biggest Terran balance error was made before the WoL beta, and that was making marines so godlike amazing that simply making every other Terran unit suck wasn't enough to make up for it. They then had to cripple Terran production as well, (the barracks and starport convert resources into units at half the rate of a warpgate/stargate) and that STILL wasn't enough, as various marine cheeses utterly dominated early WoL.
Remember, before the recent hydra buff, the marine, a 50 mineral unit, did the same DPS as 100/50 hydralisks.
The biggest error was not making other units scale with mechanical skill the way the Marine does.
Seriously, how low are your standards? The Marine makes TvZ what it is (the best MU) single handed.
|
On July 14 2014 02:26 Teoita wrote:I think it would be just fine if they just reverted stim to 140 seconds, that way terran would have an aggressive stim-only timing, a harassment based opening (hellion/marine is actually really strong), and the standard 3rax medivac. Unfortunately they are stubborn as hell and never revert their previous changes
Fully agree!! They should have reverted it with the coming of Photon Overcharge. Still, we have to test it in practice (especially against zerg?), but overall early stim timings will rarely kill but may create opportunities to stim in and kill probes/sentries/drones effectively, in other words trade tiny groups of marines away for economy. The same as zerg can do with speed lings.
|
Personally I would like Photon Overcharge Range Nerf.
It would open up Marine Tank Timings against Protoss. Not only that but, with a Tech factory a Terran can then research Drilling claws, and this will provide a more solid Mid Game against Protoss.
I miss Tanks
|
On July 14 2014 02:26 Teoita wrote:I think it would be just fine if they just reverted stim to 140 seconds, that way terran would have an aggressive stim-only timing, a harassment based opening (hellion/marine is actually really strong), and the standard 3rax medivac. Unfortunately they are stubborn as hell and never revert their previous changes
This, exactly this. When are they going to understand that evolutions of the game sometimes require revert of changes that were once needed, but now obsolete (or that blatant mistakes like oracle speed buff should be corrected asap, but whatever) ?
|
Hmm, I was very much appalled at the oracle speed buff too at first. Now I think most good players can really minimalise damage against oracles, but very good protoss players can still show off really good oracle movement. Remember too that oracles are only really good those first minutes of the game or at most as support in early-mid game push. Later on they only function for tagging medivac drops.
|
On July 14 2014 03:49 gneGne wrote: Hmm, I was very much appalled at the oracle speed buff too at first. Now I think most good players can really minimalise damage against oracles, but very good protoss players can still show off really good oracle movement. Remember too that oracles are only really good those first minutes of the game or at most as support in early-mid game push. Later on they only function for tagging medivac drops.
That's a sick ability. You can tag muta could, terran armies and drops. But it is still way too stong early game.
|
The whole pvp defenders advantage could have been corrected much easier by implementing a better highground advantage instead of getting a unit which just affects every other matchup negatively imo.
How would this help protosses take an expansion on maps where there are no ramp from natural to the "outside"?
|
On July 14 2014 04:47 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +The whole pvp defenders advantage could have been corrected much easier by implementing a better highground advantage instead of getting a unit which just affects every other matchup negatively imo. How would this help protosses take an expansion on maps where there are no ramp from natural to the "outside"? PvP Defender's Advantage can be corrected by removing Warp Gates, removing Blink and redesigning the Stalker to be more like the Brood War Dragoon.
Unit high ground advantage is also a good idea. It's rather lame when the only benefit it offers is concealing vision to those on the low ground. Not only is that benefit negated entirely by a single unit with high ground vision which is in almost all situations but it makes the high ground on most maps rather pointless.
As for helping Protosses take an expansion, I think we need the return of Shield Batteries, either as a replacement for Forcefield on Sentries or as a spell that the Mothership Core can cast instead of Photon Overcharge.
|
On July 14 2014 04:34 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2014 03:49 gneGne wrote: Hmm, I was very much appalled at the oracle speed buff too at first. Now I think most good players can really minimalise damage against oracles, but very good protoss players can still show off really good oracle movement. Remember too that oracles are only really good those first minutes of the game or at most as support in early-mid game push. Later on they only function for tagging medivac drops. That's a sick ability. You can tag muta could, terran armies and drops. But it is still way too stong early game.
You can use the vision ability just with tempest, otherwise is just a waste of money/build time. You can use it that way if your first oracle survives to the mid and late game. You won't be making oracles to get vision of terrans as you'll get observers(1/3 of psi used, no energy needed, the terran doesn't know that his units are ion your vision) You won't be making oracles vs mutas as you will be cronoboosting out phoenixes to not die... and when you have phoenixes you don't really need vision on mutas.
|
On July 14 2014 04:47 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +The whole pvp defenders advantage could have been corrected much easier by implementing a better highground advantage instead of getting a unit which just affects every other matchup negatively imo. How would this help protosses take an expansion on maps where there are no ramp from natural to the "outside"? Not at all and I never claimed it would. However protoss in sc2 ruins mapdesign in general though, so it doesnt really matter.
|
On July 14 2014 07:14 Clbull wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2014 04:47 Hider wrote:The whole pvp defenders advantage could have been corrected much easier by implementing a better highground advantage instead of getting a unit which just affects every other matchup negatively imo. How would this help protosses take an expansion on maps where there are no ramp from natural to the "outside"? PvP Defender's Advantage can be corrected by removing Warp Gates, removing Blink and redesigning the Stalker to be more like the Brood War Dragoon. Unit high ground advantage is also a good idea. It's rather lame when the only benefit it offers is concealing vision to those on the low ground. Not only is that benefit negated entirely by a single unit with high ground vision which is in almost all situations but it makes the high ground on most maps rather pointless. As for helping Protosses take an expansion, I think we need the return of Shield Batteries, either as a replacement for Forcefield on Sentries or as a spell that the Mothership Core can cast instead of Photon Overcharge. Or you know, instead of tinkering with all the mechanics in the game, you could just do it like in TvT and give each race a core defensive unit that is somewhat static and has 13range like the tank. Oh wait, that's what the MsC provides. Well done blizzard!
|
I get a kick out of the crying and complaining in this thread when the win rates of each race aren't that unbalanced. People are acting like Blizz should take more extreme measures to fix a nearly nonexistent issue.
|
Well, most people would agree Terran is in a difficult spot right now and action is probably needed right now if we want to see other Terrans than the cream of the crop do something in tourneys. But you're right, this situation would never have occurred if people weren't crying like babies everytime something really strong arises : the widow mine would never have got nerfed and we would have stayed in the very promising pre-infamous patch 2.0.12 state of the game for much longer. I hope that with this patch we reach again a quite sound state of the game and just, at last, leave the game be and let progamers try things and figure out solutions for some fucking time.
|
On July 14 2014 07:44 ClanRH.TV wrote: I get a kick out of the crying and complaining in this thread when the win rates of each race aren't that unbalanced. People are acting like Blizz should take more extreme measures to fix a nearly nonexistent issue.
The problems here go way past the idea of win rates.
If the game is so balanced, then why is still not fun to play for so many people?
You need a balanced and well designed game. The opposite could be true as well, you can have a game that is very fun to play, but horribly balanced.
|
We're not here to discuss design, we're here to discuss balance. Blizzard won't redesign the game in the middle of HotS, nor should they. If the game is not fun to play or watch for you in its actual state, well, you could always not do it.
As to the winrates, it has been explained several times why they don't necessarily reflect the state of the game. I would agree with you that the imbalance isn't as great as terrans would have us believe it is, but even you aren't arguing that it isn't there, so that's not the same thing as "a nearly nonexistent issue", and it's dishonest for you to say that it is.
|
I have to laugh at the gif in the OP.. It's a total "the absolute best case scenario" for Terran illustration, but who the hell is clumping their units like that vs mines?
In what leagues are zergs still running their clumped up lings and banelings into a mine field? Bronze and Silver?
Are there players clumping up their probes on top of mines regularly for some reason?
|
I think whenever the question of balance comes up a lot of people let their imagination run wild in coming up with ideas for changes, I know I am one.
When it comes to it, for any problems that you are having a solution already exists within the game.
As for fun, its the nature of the system that someone loses, welcome the losses and take them as opportunities to learn, welcome the wins and still look at what you could have done better. Don't just repeat what you are already good at and make the same mistakes again and again and start thinking the game is unfair.
Or just enjoy the starcraft 2 content and play what ever game you find fun, dont let others convince you that you shouldn't be having fun and that something is imbalanced.
As for profesional play when balance comes up I think a lot of the time the skill of the players involved is ignored, there are no balance problems, one of the players played better/smarter.
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster and treat those two impostors just the same..
|
On July 12 2014 11:41 neoghaleon55 wrote:They deserve it! Bastards tried to steal my car!
Was it a Dune Buggy with a flamethrower on top? Because I can confirm that was a total loss, killed by a local Stalker.
Too bad too, because if you didn't know, it was a Transformer.
|
So...Terran just won a tournament. Do we still need that buff? hehehe
|
onOn July 14 2014 13:46 neoghaleon55 wrote: So...Terran just won a tournament. Do we still need that buff? hehehe
Yes! Because Terran should be winning all the tournaments. Everyone one of them, in a TvT coming from a TvT semifinals.....
It sounds stupid but that is what a lot of people here want to see apparently. I personally don't get it.
|
I really loved Red Bull Battlegrounds, but it can't be compared to other major tournaments in terms of the amount of skilled players.
|
On July 14 2014 17:24 MrLightning wrote:on Show nested quote +On July 14 2014 13:46 neoghaleon55 wrote: So...Terran just won a tournament. Do we still need that buff? hehehe Yes! Because Terran should be winning all the tournaments. Everyone one of them, in a TvT coming from a TvT semifinals..... It sounds stupid but that is what a lot of people here want to see apparently. I personally don't get it.
yes, two top level korean terrans, who wouldn't have had a shot in a more stacked tournament, should have completely lost vs a bunch of foreigners.
|
I think that when David Kim referred to Terran struggling a little bit at the highest level, he meant based on the results of the GSL Code S and basically only having Maru there to represent an entire race for quite a long period of time. I don't think that he was looking at the WCS America quarterfinals at the time.
In other words - who knew that Bomber would win against Vibe, and that Polt could win against Huk - it doesn't say much about balance.
|
On July 13 2014 04:01 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +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. I agree they shouldn't do much better vs T bio but If you just buff the direct damage and leave the splash as is marines aren't affected much. Or put in an armoury limited upgrade to that effect. Suddenly tanks can hurt ultras and heavily armoured protossy type things in the later game.
But reducing those muta buffs would be better both for tanks lifespans and the ugly mass muta vs protoss strats.
|
Regen mutas and Vipers just say no to Siege Tanks unfortunately. Zerg have also vastly improved their creep spreed since the Marine/Tank WoL days, making sieging up more difficult as well.
Mutalisk Regeneration basically means the Mutas can snipe the Tanks for free as any Marine fire they take will just regenerate. I suppose you could try planting Mines next to your Tanks but that is a lot of supply going into a static location. Then there's Blinding Cloud and Abduct that just turn Tanks into anchored paperweights.
I suppose one could opt that a Tank in Siege Mode cannot be abducted, after all it IS bolted to the damn ground. Blinding Cloud could do with a static range reduction (-5 or -6) or a percentage (-50%) so that Tanks are not as hard countered. Mostly though Tanks just lack raw firepower compared to the more easily massed and mobile Widow Mine (sad I know).
I wonder if a range increase (to 15 or 16) with a higher impact (not splash) damage could migitate this a bit. If Tanks could fire even further away, you could Siege up earlier and Zerg would have to cover more ground before they can get to the Tanks.
Still, I fear the Siege Tank will only be seen in Mech play and TvT.
|
On July 14 2014 23:32 Thezzy wrote: Regen mutas and Vipers just say no to Siege Tanks unfortunately. Zerg have also vastly improved their creep spreed since the Marine/Tank WoL days, making sieging up more difficult as well.
Mutalisk Regeneration basically means the Mutas can snipe the Tanks for free as any Marine fire they take will just regenerate. I suppose you could try planting Mines next to your Tanks but that is a lot of supply going into a static location. Then there's Blinding Cloud and Abduct that just turn Tanks into anchored paperweights.
I suppose one could opt that a Tank in Siege Mode cannot be abducted, after all it IS bolted to the damn ground. Blinding Cloud could do with a static range reduction (-5 or -6) or a percentage (-50%) so that Tanks are not as hard countered. Mostly though Tanks just lack raw firepower compared to the more easily massed and mobile Widow Mine (sad I know).
I wonder if a range increase (to 15 or 16) with a higher impact (not splash) damage could migitate this a bit. If Tanks could fire even further away, you could Siege up earlier and Zerg would have to cover more ground before they can get to the Tanks.
Still, I fear the Siege Tank will only be seen in Mech play and TvT. It's more complicated than that.. Buffing Siege-Tank range may make mech better, but it may break the game (16 is w.t.f., 15 is strong, 14 is a good start because Tanks could outsiege even PO on some maps if Tanks guarded well)
However - problem with Tanks aren't tanks themselves - Problem with Tanks is that there isn't a good synergy unit that goes with them.. The closest ones are Vikings, but they can't guard them.. I think that it should've been the Raven that does exactly that, but that too doesn't guard tanks in terms of defending them just enough.. Ravens are like - too much of an investment to "overguard" (by overguard I meant of placing the PDDs in front of them0) your tanks that you may or may not have..
And on top of that - there's that "fireworks" Ravens have.. So yes - Terran needs to be a bit more synergetic and quite a bit less destructive (at least with the "support" units I mean), and maybe Protoss should be a bit less synergetic and a bit more destructive, lol..
Terran units have far too much destructive power (each one of them, except maybe some specialized for a certain situation only units - like the Viking or the Ghost) but they suck at synergy, so the best thing you can do is "split" and "micro" and hope that the opponent doesn't restrict you well enough so you could "outmicro" him there..
Here's a very simple small example - think about swapping HSM for the Timewarp for example for a second - see how much synergy mech would get from their air support without in the same time having that "snowball" potential of the larger groups of Ravens..
Like - seriously Blizz has to think to give some CC units to Terran that won't be destructive, and mech will live IMO once again.. Like - far too much of Terran things is designed to deal obscene amounts of damage for a unit for it's own cost, therefore each of them should've had limits and cons too..
At least that's what I'd do if I were in their place (for a start in LotV for ex.) - Protossize Terran support units, and Terranize Protoss support units (if it even makes sense, I mean it does make perfect sense to me, but for the rest IDK lol)
|
On July 14 2014 09:04 NKexquisite wrote: I have to laugh at the gif in the OP.. It's a total "the absolute best case scenario" for Terran illustration, but who the hell is clumping their units like that vs mines?
In what leagues are zergs still running their clumped up lings and banelings into a mine field? Bronze and Silver?
Are there players clumping up their probes on top of mines regularly for some reason? To be fair even then in the unrealistically good case there's not a whole lot in it..
|
I agree they shouldn't do much better vs T bio but If you just buff the direct damage and leave the splash as is marines aren't affected much. Or put in an armoury limited upgrade to that effect. Suddenly tanks can hurt ultras and heavily armoured protossy type things in the later game.
It's probably gonna affect Marines more than anything else as it will oneshot stimmed Marines.
|
On July 14 2014 17:24 MrLightning wrote:on Show nested quote +On July 14 2014 13:46 neoghaleon55 wrote: So...Terran just won a tournament. Do we still need that buff? hehehe Yes! Because Terran should be winning all the tournaments. Everyone one of them, in a TvT coming from a TvT semifinals..... It sounds stupid but that is what a lot of people here want to see apparently. I personally don't get it.
Seriously that kind of comment is just pointless. If you look at player pool of Redbull battleground you have only extremely weak players in overall and you have in the middle of all that Bomber and Polt. *
0 koreans protoss, 2 korean zergs but do you even know who is Gamja? Yeah me neither. The only non-terran that could have a chance was violet but he played relatively poorly in this tournament and is not back to a decent level to compete with bomber or polt.
So yes a terran won this tournament and it was a TvT finals. But another final would have been a huge upset seeing the enormous gap between Bomber and Polt skill and the rest of the players at that tournament.
Maybe we can judge balance on tournaments when we would have decent opponents to top terrans players heh?
I think David Kim is waiting to see how code A will go because that's a hell of a stacked tournament and we will see if Terrans is back in shape or will get destroyed.
Basically we will have the begining of an answer in 2 weeks.
|
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/13467286659
Thank you for helping us playtest the current test map. From our own testing and the feedback we’ve gathered so far, here are our current thoughts on the changes:
Thor AA prioritization change This is a good change that’s simple and clean. It’s a minor improvement to players who aren’t able to micro Thors against Mutalisks in combat, and the general usage makes more sense with this change.
Time Warp duration decrease The effects of this change definitely seem noticeable, but we’d like to push this nerf slightly further.
Widow Mine splash radius increase The splash radius of 2 seems too much against Protoss worker lines. Also, we wonder if the full damage against Zerg being only an increase of 0.25 is too little.
So we’d like to make further adjustments and see if we can push some of these changes as much as possible. The changes we’d like to try next on the balance test map are:
Widow Mine Widow Mine going back to full splash damage and a 1.75 radius. (But they would still keep the +shields damage)
This lessens its power against Probes, returns the Widow Mine to how it used to be against Zerg, and provides big improvements against Protoss armies in the mid and late game.
Time Warp Duration decreased to 10 seconds.
Obviously, these are just balance test map changes and part of the ongoing testing process. Nothing is final yet, so please share your thoughts after having playtested the current balance test map changes as well as the upcoming changes detailed in this post.
Thank you.
|
So the WM will do full damage at max radius, and against toss it will be 40+40? That will definitely hurt. hehe
|
|
|
|