On July 16 2014 20:59 Liquid`Ret wrote: Thor change is so bad, it removes micro from the equation, why anyone would ever want to make the game less fun to play / remove micro :/
I think Terran already needs too much micro. Maybe nothing more for high class terran like Maru or Taeja etc. But pretty useful for who less than master.
On July 16 2014 23:32 Shuffleblade wrote: I wonder if the Thor is going to fire at medivacs or overlords, that would be quite a good change actually. Makes Thor possible to counter-play.
isn't the real problem against protoss their multitude of unscoutable stupid aggressive builds? the majority of my TvPs i'm facing some sort of near unscoutable aggression.
on the contrary, i'm not having major problems in late game, except terran's army seems to be harder to control, but it's still fun.
the only thing that really pisses me off is how protoss can literally build no defensive units and still pin me to my base and make me guess which stupid shit is coming for me.
this patch won't do anything to improve my TvP experience
You can refine your gameplay a bit. I stopped having deadly trouble with the random all ins or cheeses by going rax, OC, CC, rax, rax. There's enough production if it turns out to be a push, enough critical mass if its an oracle, etc.
On July 16 2014 09:15 Perdac Curall wrote: This is just ridiculous. David Kim should be fired as he obviously isn't taking this seriously and is doing things by the seat of his pants. Whatever happened to the even-handed, patient Blizzard I used to know and love. The one with incremental patches that slowly strengthened or weakened things, in order to avoid jarring, balance tilting patches like this. Granted this is not yet a patch, but judging by the comments above, the previous already-pushing-too-far changes he proposed don't do enough to weaken Protoss and strengthen Terran. Did no one at Blizzard see Maru vs. herO in ProLeague last week?
Creative, aggressive Terran play that tore Protoss apart, without any buffs or nerfs. What, is herO a chobo Protoss? We are going back to WoL all over again. Whiny, uncreative Terrans lose on ladder, and then write articles completely overreacting to the "unbalanced" situation because they can't keep doing the same thing they have always done since WoL and crush face 100% of the time. Protoss should have no way of defending against early Terran aggression, and they can't have any early aggression of their own. Then the game is balanced, just like WoL was.
R.I.P Golden Age of SC2
Creative? Aggressive? This was the most standard 14CC opening there is in the game. Maru did a *very very simple* 2 medivac drop in the main with his first 2 medivacs. Hero defended with..... 5 stalkers? Then gets caught with his entire army our of position for a nexus snipe (BARELY). This is a TERRIBLE example of Terran being competitive in the matchup. Lets not even get into the fact that you picked an example using the very best Terran in the world.
Hero played *awful* and the announcers even said so. Put the volume up next time you watch the game.
Played "awful"? Korean commentators disagree.
Pigbaby completely shut down Taeja in the quarter finals WCS AMERICA. What is Taeja suppose to do and given that Taeja was considered heavily favored in this matchup.
1) The discussion was about the game between Maru vs herO.
2) So, just because Pigbaby appeared to "completely shut down Taeja", that is somehow a justification for another patch?
When a strategy game is about unit countering another unit (and that's the path we are going btw), then that's the point at which the game becomes dull and boring. Instead, each unit should have a unique set of attributes and traits, focused on micro-bility, which allows a rich set of strategies to be developed that are tailored to the player's personality behind the race. Unfortunately, we continue to see this sad state of patch-fest game which are targeted to change behaviors of certain units against targeted objectives (e.g. widow mine vs shield). It's incredibly sad that many of you do not realize that this directly impacts the level of innovative plays from the players' strategic making process. Yet, we wonder why there are so many who feel that the balance is the #1 issue affecting the popularity of SC2.
I seem to recall muta counters tank in brood war. Also lurker counters marine/firebat and vulture, zergling and zealot, and can soft counter goons. Defiler countered late game deathball army greatly with it's op 125 damage plague spell that hit HP through shields, even. It was one of the anti-clump-your-units-in-a-ball-to-have-infinite-point-DPS tools zerg had, and seemed to have a big range too.
Let's see, siege tank countered goliaths, hydras countered most air units, archons countered ling or muta HARD, and reaver or siege tank countered hydra. The last two are hard or soft counter depending on the micro and baiting by the person being hit by scarabs or arclite.
Brood war had counter units, too. Every RTS functions on counter units, and even in real life we function in war on counter units. AA missiles vs that jet with the big bomb on it, AT warheads or recoiless rifles vs tanks, etc.
You can't look for strategy much in a game where it doesn't matter what you make or where you send it.
You either missed my point completely or are going about this the wrong way. You can use mutas to counter tanks, but the difference here is that muta in BW wasn't designed specifically to deal with tanks. There is a difference between window mine having dmg vs. shield and a flock of mutas shooting down at unprotected tanks. Why would window mines have a special dmg vs shield? The balance team is giving you incentives to use widow mines vs. Protoss. The decision is already half-way made by the balance team on how Terran strategies should look like against Protoss units. Continue this pattern of balancing the game, then I guarantee you that the interest of the game will continue to slide.
On July 16 2014 20:59 Liquid`Ret wrote: Thor change is so bad, it removes micro from the equation, why anyone would ever want to make the game less fun to play / remove micro :/
I think Terran already needs too much micro. Maybe nothing more for high class terran like Maru or Taeja etc. But pretty useful for who less than master.
Yep and I think terrans needs too less macro to compensate that.
Oh I remember now, because Immortal is a good counter to Siege Tanks... and then they could have put a +Shield Bonus Damage on the Siege Tanks instead Widow Mines, so they can be effective against Protoss but still Immortals counter them with their own ability.
But not, the idea is "Go full Widow Mines every MU plox, it is fun to see random explosions everywhere"
On July 16 2014 23:32 Shuffleblade wrote: I wonder if the Thor is going to fire at medivacs or overlords, that would be quite a good change actually. Makes Thor possible to counter-play.
Pretty sure they will still attack anything that is attacking them, first.
On July 16 2014 23:06 Tyrhanius wrote: The real problem of WM is they required no tech and does the same dommage in early, mid, lategame, ignore armor.
Imagine if zerg had banelings speed for free without lair and they do the same dommage as +3 banelings...
The WM story was just : the WM was just too strong on early/mid game and kill the zerg who has to suffer and endless rally point of 4MM. Zerg has to spend so many gaz for baneling mutas overseer/upgrades (if you see old TvZ, Zerg never got hive/3/3 tech.
WM should make dammage based on bio upgrades to be more balanced.
Aslo if you make 4M more powerful in the late game you should consider buffing Z hatchery. In late game T can secure expansion with 1PF with upgraded range and armor and make extra CC having 3000 incoming with a single expansion. Z on the other side got is buimding weaker and weaker as the Unit DPS increase. How many times T/P just focus a building with 10 supply army and kill it no matter Z come to defend with his whole army.
BAHAHAHA....
That analogy isn't even close. Widow Mines do NO damage while not burrowed. If you cant see the very obvious ground distortion pattern of a burrowed widow mine, you deserve to lose. If you can't tell your army to run away from or focus down the widow mines before they finish moving at 2.81 speed into position taking 3 whole game seconds to burrow, where you can deal with them, you deserve to lose. If you can't get one observer out, you deserve to lose. If you cant find a terran who puts all his WMs in a clump and just go blow them all completely to hell with three banes, you deserve to lose.
Widow mines are so easy to deal with.
On July 16 2014 22:51 SatedSC2 wrote: If Protoss has to lead with Colossi to get rid of Widow Mines before being able to flood in with Chargelots then they leave their Colossi vulnerable to being sniped by Vikings that are also protected by the Mine field. It's not like you can blink Stalkers into the Mine field to shoot at the Vikings or get Templar into position to Storm them. The other option for Protoss would be to split their Chargelot's properly, which would surely be an improvement on Chargelots a-moving on ahead of the rest of the Protoss army like they currently seem to do (especially at lower levels)..?
EDIT:
It also makes PvT more positional than it already is. Terran can't get caught out of position without their Widow Mines burrowed else Chargelots will get on top of their Bio before the Mines can burrow. On the flip-side, if Protoss cedes position cheaply then it's going to be hard for them to break through the Terran with brute force, which allows the Terran to stage a slow push in much the same way they do against Zergling/Baneling in TvZ..?
Obviously I don't play Terran so I don't really know :S Just seemed like a neat idea to improve the cack-handed +Shields modification that Mines have at the moment
Actually, that is exactly what you do, blink 4 stalkers right under the vikings and the minefield kills the vikings. If they have like 2-3 vikings then you don't need to worry. If its a large ball of vikings, sacrificing 4 stalkers to kill them all is a huge advantage for a protoss.
On July 16 2014 22:47 sick_transit wrote: I think Blizzard had forgotten what mines did to the game at HoTS release: no tanks. Seriously, the siege tank pretty much disappeared from the game and as a result there was a huge outcry. Also, the comparatively much greater use of mines (than present) seemed boring and arbitrary and tended to reduce exciting direct engagements between zerg and terran armies. I feel like the game is a lot better now than it was with the original mine. I think mine as it is now is pretty perfect actually in terms of watchability of the game.
I have no problem with buffing terran/nerfing zerg or protoss, I just which they could find a better way to do it than mines.
I tend to lose when I try using siege tanks TvP anyway, even after the WM nerf. What's your point? They actually might be more powerful against P if they didn't have smartfire. Getting rid of a tiny chunk of P's army for sure is more helpful than slightly damaging and splashing those chargelots and then getting fuskered by them standing on your tanks and stalker/immortal/colossus/storm all dealing damage as well.
On July 16 2014 20:59 Liquid`Ret wrote: Thor change is so bad, it removes micro from the equation, why anyone would ever want to make the game less fun to play / remove micro :/
if both this change and the widow mine change makes it in, we'll now have stronger widow mines that cant be picked off by muta flocks because thor will auto-shoot mutas in the face
Obviously I'm not expert here but maybe they assumed that it would be nice if thor remained useful while terran player will micro marines?
Air priority is screwing me when using Thor TvZ. Those overseers or overlords don't have to be in front of a ling/bling/roach army. If Thor targets them first because ground is 8 range away and these bait ols are 9 range away, thor's shooting those things with javelins doing no ground damage. If Thor targets a ground unit, it dies quickly and then the bait ols are being shot by the Thor, so it stops doing ground damage. "But why are you using Thor vs zerg ground army?" They used to be good, exceptional for soaking up bane hits to protect marines, but they do use up that gas float that tends to accumulate from using bio, as well as putting something high power on the field. Additionally, they do stop mutas, but zerg tech switches into full ground easily enough. T's sometimes complain about not being able to remax fast enough vs Z, throwing a few Thors in can help that issue.
On July 16 2014 22:02 gneGne wrote: Im happy DK decided to try reverting the widow mine nerfs. This will probably lead to more epic late game TvZ's instead of the inability to pressure zergs, making them able to mass up so much gas to build insane amounts of banes.
Against Protoss I am not sure if the new widow mines might be too effective against pure templar builds. Nonetheless, we weren't seeing a lot of templar builds during the nerfed widow mine period either because of the succes of the Colossus builds. The new mines will come in handy against those pesky late game zealots. I am curious to see PvT in the future.
Did you forget that the Widow Mine was buffed against Protoss in patch 2.1, which was after it's splash-damage was nerfed in patch 2.0.12? That's why Templar openings are significantly weaker than Colossus openings at the moment; buffing the Widow Mine further in the early/mid game will only make the situation worse.
Patch 2.1 Widow Mine splash damage increased from 40 to 40 +40 shields
Up to 1.25 radius, splash damage will increase from 40 to 40 +40 vs. shields.
From 1.25 to 1.5 radius, splash damage will increase from 20 to 20 +20 vs. shields.
From 1.5 to 1.75 radius, splash damage will increase from 10 to 10 +10 vs. shields.
T will have a way to punish protoss for having every single unit comp in the army, or P will have to micro templar well and possibly sacrifice some other portion of their army to do it? Must complain instead of consider it fair in light of all the micro T has to do to survive storms, colossus, and all the other garbage of P.
Seriously though, putting more choices into the game and making P require to micro some units and possibly lose another portion of their army puts P into the same position as T and Z; P has to make choices now of what actions to do, rather than roll with a deathball and spam storms.
isn't the real problem against protoss their multitude of unscoutable stupid aggressive builds? the majority of my TvPs i'm facing some sort of near unscoutable aggression.
on the contrary, i'm not having major problems in late game, except terran's army seems to be harder to control, but it's still fun.
the only thing that really pisses me off is how protoss can literally build no defensive units and still pin me to my base and make me guess which stupid shit is coming for me.
this patch won't do anything to improve my TvP experience
You can refine your gameplay a bit. I stopped having deadly trouble with the random all ins or cheeses by going rax, OC, CC, rax, rax. There's enough production if it turns out to be a push, enough critical mass if its an oracle, etc.
On July 16 2014 14:21 jellyjello wrote:
On July 16 2014 12:26 yeaitooted wrote:
On July 16 2014 12:15 jellyjello wrote:
On July 16 2014 09:48 Iron_ wrote:
On July 16 2014 09:15 Perdac Curall wrote: This is just ridiculous. David Kim should be fired as he obviously isn't taking this seriously and is doing things by the seat of his pants. Whatever happened to the even-handed, patient Blizzard I used to know and love. The one with incremental patches that slowly strengthened or weakened things, in order to avoid jarring, balance tilting patches like this. Granted this is not yet a patch, but judging by the comments above, the previous already-pushing-too-far changes he proposed don't do enough to weaken Protoss and strengthen Terran. Did no one at Blizzard see Maru vs. herO in ProLeague last week?
Creative, aggressive Terran play that tore Protoss apart, without any buffs or nerfs. What, is herO a chobo Protoss? We are going back to WoL all over again. Whiny, uncreative Terrans lose on ladder, and then write articles completely overreacting to the "unbalanced" situation because they can't keep doing the same thing they have always done since WoL and crush face 100% of the time. Protoss should have no way of defending against early Terran aggression, and they can't have any early aggression of their own. Then the game is balanced, just like WoL was.
R.I.P Golden Age of SC2
Creative? Aggressive? This was the most standard 14CC opening there is in the game. Maru did a *very very simple* 2 medivac drop in the main with his first 2 medivacs. Hero defended with..... 5 stalkers? Then gets caught with his entire army our of position for a nexus snipe (BARELY). This is a TERRIBLE example of Terran being competitive in the matchup. Lets not even get into the fact that you picked an example using the very best Terran in the world.
Hero played *awful* and the announcers even said so. Put the volume up next time you watch the game.
Played "awful"? Korean commentators disagree.
Pigbaby completely shut down Taeja in the quarter finals WCS AMERICA. What is Taeja suppose to do and given that Taeja was considered heavily favored in this matchup.
1) The discussion was about the game between Maru vs herO.
2) So, just because Pigbaby appeared to "completely shut down Taeja", that is somehow a justification for another patch?
When a strategy game is about unit countering another unit (and that's the path we are going btw), then that's the point at which the game becomes dull and boring. Instead, each unit should have a unique set of attributes and traits, focused on micro-bility, which allows a rich set of strategies to be developed that are tailored to the player's personality behind the race. Unfortunately, we continue to see this sad state of patch-fest game which are targeted to change behaviors of certain units against targeted objectives (e.g. widow mine vs shield). It's incredibly sad that many of you do not realize that this directly impacts the level of innovative plays from the players' strategic making process. Yet, we wonder why there are so many who feel that the balance is the #1 issue affecting the popularity of SC2.
I seem to recall muta counters tank in brood war. Also lurker counters marine/firebat and vulture, zergling and zealot, and can soft counter goons. Defiler countered late game deathball army greatly with it's op 125 damage plague spell that hit HP through shields, even. It was one of the anti-clump-your-units-in-a-ball-to-have-infinite-point-DPS tools zerg had, and seemed to have a big range too.
Let's see, siege tank countered goliaths, hydras countered most air units, archons countered ling or muta HARD, and reaver or siege tank countered hydra. The last two are hard or soft counter depending on the micro and baiting by the person being hit by scarabs or arclite.
Brood war had counter units, too. Every RTS functions on counter units, and even in real life we function in war on counter units. AA missiles vs that jet with the big bomb on it, AT warheads or recoiless rifles vs tanks, etc.
You can't look for strategy much in a game where it doesn't matter what you make or where you send it.
You either missed my point completely or are going about this the wrong way. You can use mutas to counter tanks, but the difference here is that muta in BW wasn't designed specifically to deal with tanks. There is a difference between window mine having dmg vs. shield and a flock of mutas shooting down at unprotected tanks. Why would window mines have a special dmg vs shield? The balance team is giving you incentives to use widow mines vs. Protoss. The decision is already half-way made by the balance team on how Terran strategies should look like against Protoss units. Continue this pattern of balancing the game, then I guarantee you that the interest of the game will continue to slide.
Which difference does it make whether a mine does +vs shields in SC2, a Science Vessel getting rid of shields in broodwar? These things have always existed in RTS games. Designers and balancers have always created units with certain intentions in mind. Given the nature of mines: no steady attack with high burst and low dps it only makes sense to increase said burst against Protoss, since Protoss units have increased health in comparison to other races. +vs shields might not be the most elegant way to do that, but it gets the job done.
On July 16 2014 22:47 sick_transit wrote: I think Blizzard had forgotten what mines did to the game at HoTS release: no tanks. Seriously, the siege tank pretty much disappeared from the game and as a result there was a huge outcry. Also, the comparatively much greater use of mines (than present) seemed boring and arbitrary and tended to reduce exciting direct engagements between zerg and terran armies. I feel like the game is a lot better now than it was with the original mine. I think mine as it is now is pretty perfect actually in terms of watchability of the game.
I have no problem with buffing terran/nerfing zerg or protoss, I just which they could find a better way to do it than mines.
As the Tempest replaced the Carrier...the Widow Mine has replaced the Siege Tank...
Next in LOTV, the Marine, Zealot, Ultralisk and Zergling will be replaced! Then, there shall be no viable iconic SC2 units left!
Back in the Beta, I wrote this regarding the Widow Mine (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2-hots/378373-how-to-make-mech-and-stargate-play-viable) :
The power of Mech should not come from the Widow Mine, it should come from the Siege Tank. The Siege Tank should hit hard, not the Widow Mine. If Siege Tanks do enough damage then Mech will work. If they don't, then we'll constantly be looking for something that will do big damage and that we can combine with Siege Tanks so we can say "See Siege Tanks work when you use them with X!" X being the very hard hitting Warhound that was removed or Widow Mine. And in both cases, the Widow Mine and Warhound are better used alone or with other Terran play styles, than in conjunction with Siege Tanks in TvP.
Mass widow mines vs protoss was already too good vs protoss even before shields patch. People havent explored the viking/scan widow mine which is nearly unbeatable vs protoss
IF this patch goes through pvt will be a disaster for protoss.
Note that guardian shield and force field both last for 15 seconds. I can understand nerfing time warp to 15 seconds for continuity, but 10 seconds is overkill. Also, nerfing time warp means that there is even less energy tension for using photon overcharge.
While I don't think that Blizzard should add arbitrary micro to thors, (and I therefore agree with the proposed change), it should be noted this only makes terran stronger in larger army battles where you 1) run into execution difficulties for targeting mutalisks with thors and 2) there are zerg units other than mutalisks to begin with. Maybe that's good, perhaps it'll prevent mutalisks from snowballing as much because thors can be adequate late-game anti-air, forcing the zerg to trade mutalisks out of his army earlier on.
isn't the real problem against protoss their multitude of unscoutable stupid aggressive builds? the majority of my TvPs i'm facing some sort of near unscoutable aggression.
on the contrary, i'm not having major problems in late game, except terran's army seems to be harder to control, but it's still fun.
the only thing that really pisses me off is how protoss can literally build no defensive units and still pin me to my base and make me guess which stupid shit is coming for me.
this patch won't do anything to improve my TvP experience
You can refine your gameplay a bit. I stopped having deadly trouble with the random all ins or cheeses by going rax, OC, CC, rax, rax. There's enough production if it turns out to be a push, enough critical mass if its an oracle, etc.
On July 16 2014 14:21 jellyjello wrote:
On July 16 2014 12:26 yeaitooted wrote:
On July 16 2014 12:15 jellyjello wrote:
On July 16 2014 09:48 Iron_ wrote:
On July 16 2014 09:15 Perdac Curall wrote: This is just ridiculous. David Kim should be fired as he obviously isn't taking this seriously and is doing things by the seat of his pants. Whatever happened to the even-handed, patient Blizzard I used to know and love. The one with incremental patches that slowly strengthened or weakened things, in order to avoid jarring, balance tilting patches like this. Granted this is not yet a patch, but judging by the comments above, the previous already-pushing-too-far changes he proposed don't do enough to weaken Protoss and strengthen Terran. Did no one at Blizzard see Maru vs. herO in ProLeague last week?
Creative, aggressive Terran play that tore Protoss apart, without any buffs or nerfs. What, is herO a chobo Protoss? We are going back to WoL all over again. Whiny, uncreative Terrans lose on ladder, and then write articles completely overreacting to the "unbalanced" situation because they can't keep doing the same thing they have always done since WoL and crush face 100% of the time. Protoss should have no way of defending against early Terran aggression, and they can't have any early aggression of their own. Then the game is balanced, just like WoL was.
R.I.P Golden Age of SC2
Creative? Aggressive? This was the most standard 14CC opening there is in the game. Maru did a *very very simple* 2 medivac drop in the main with his first 2 medivacs. Hero defended with..... 5 stalkers? Then gets caught with his entire army our of position for a nexus snipe (BARELY). This is a TERRIBLE example of Terran being competitive in the matchup. Lets not even get into the fact that you picked an example using the very best Terran in the world.
Hero played *awful* and the announcers even said so. Put the volume up next time you watch the game.
Played "awful"? Korean commentators disagree.
Pigbaby completely shut down Taeja in the quarter finals WCS AMERICA. What is Taeja suppose to do and given that Taeja was considered heavily favored in this matchup.
1) The discussion was about the game between Maru vs herO.
2) So, just because Pigbaby appeared to "completely shut down Taeja", that is somehow a justification for another patch?
When a strategy game is about unit countering another unit (and that's the path we are going btw), then that's the point at which the game becomes dull and boring. Instead, each unit should have a unique set of attributes and traits, focused on micro-bility, which allows a rich set of strategies to be developed that are tailored to the player's personality behind the race. Unfortunately, we continue to see this sad state of patch-fest game which are targeted to change behaviors of certain units against targeted objectives (e.g. widow mine vs shield). It's incredibly sad that many of you do not realize that this directly impacts the level of innovative plays from the players' strategic making process. Yet, we wonder why there are so many who feel that the balance is the #1 issue affecting the popularity of SC2.
I seem to recall muta counters tank in brood war. Also lurker counters marine/firebat and vulture, zergling and zealot, and can soft counter goons. Defiler countered late game deathball army greatly with it's op 125 damage plague spell that hit HP through shields, even. It was one of the anti-clump-your-units-in-a-ball-to-have-infinite-point-DPS tools zerg had, and seemed to have a big range too.
Let's see, siege tank countered goliaths, hydras countered most air units, archons countered ling or muta HARD, and reaver or siege tank countered hydra. The last two are hard or soft counter depending on the micro and baiting by the person being hit by scarabs or arclite.
Brood war had counter units, too. Every RTS functions on counter units, and even in real life we function in war on counter units. AA missiles vs that jet with the big bomb on it, AT warheads or recoiless rifles vs tanks, etc.
You can't look for strategy much in a game where it doesn't matter what you make or where you send it.
You either missed my point completely or are going about this the wrong way. You can use mutas to counter tanks, but the difference here is that muta in BW wasn't designed specifically to deal with tanks. There is a difference between window mine having dmg vs. shield and a flock of mutas shooting down at unprotected tanks. Why would window mines have a special dmg vs shield? The balance team is giving you incentives to use widow mines vs. Protoss. The decision is already half-way made by the balance team on how Terran strategies should look like against Protoss units. Continue this pattern of balancing the game, then I guarantee you that the interest of the game will continue to slide.
Which difference does it make whether a mine does +vs shields in SC2, a Science Vessel getting rid of shields in broodwar? These things have always existed in RTS games. Designers and balancers have always created units with certain intentions in mind. Given the nature of mines: no steady attack with high burst and low dps it only makes sense to increase said burst against Protoss, since Protoss units have increased health in comparison to other races. +vs shields might not be the most elegant way to do that, but it gets the job done.
Mines in PvT don't actually do their job, imo, because they dont get used. They simply make a midgame tech tree not viable. The end result is that templar midgames dont exist, so mines are never built because they are (and will remain) useless vs colossi.
At least in Brood War archons were immune to mines. Too bad that's not a good solution for Starcraft 2 because mines have to be able to attack air, and as such hover unit immunity is ridiculous.
isn't the real problem against protoss their multitude of unscoutable stupid aggressive builds? the majority of my TvPs i'm facing some sort of near unscoutable aggression.
on the contrary, i'm not having major problems in late game, except terran's army seems to be harder to control, but it's still fun.
the only thing that really pisses me off is how protoss can literally build no defensive units and still pin me to my base and make me guess which stupid shit is coming for me.
this patch won't do anything to improve my TvP experience
You can refine your gameplay a bit. I stopped having deadly trouble with the random all ins or cheeses by going rax, OC, CC, rax, rax. There's enough production if it turns out to be a push, enough critical mass if its an oracle, etc.
On July 16 2014 14:21 jellyjello wrote:
On July 16 2014 12:26 yeaitooted wrote:
On July 16 2014 12:15 jellyjello wrote:
On July 16 2014 09:48 Iron_ wrote:
On July 16 2014 09:15 Perdac Curall wrote: This is just ridiculous. David Kim should be fired as he obviously isn't taking this seriously and is doing things by the seat of his pants. Whatever happened to the even-handed, patient Blizzard I used to know and love. The one with incremental patches that slowly strengthened or weakened things, in order to avoid jarring, balance tilting patches like this. Granted this is not yet a patch, but judging by the comments above, the previous already-pushing-too-far changes he proposed don't do enough to weaken Protoss and strengthen Terran. Did no one at Blizzard see Maru vs. herO in ProLeague last week?
Creative, aggressive Terran play that tore Protoss apart, without any buffs or nerfs. What, is herO a chobo Protoss? We are going back to WoL all over again. Whiny, uncreative Terrans lose on ladder, and then write articles completely overreacting to the "unbalanced" situation because they can't keep doing the same thing they have always done since WoL and crush face 100% of the time. Protoss should have no way of defending against early Terran aggression, and they can't have any early aggression of their own. Then the game is balanced, just like WoL was.
R.I.P Golden Age of SC2
Creative? Aggressive? This was the most standard 14CC opening there is in the game. Maru did a *very very simple* 2 medivac drop in the main with his first 2 medivacs. Hero defended with..... 5 stalkers? Then gets caught with his entire army our of position for a nexus snipe (BARELY). This is a TERRIBLE example of Terran being competitive in the matchup. Lets not even get into the fact that you picked an example using the very best Terran in the world.
Hero played *awful* and the announcers even said so. Put the volume up next time you watch the game.
Played "awful"? Korean commentators disagree.
Pigbaby completely shut down Taeja in the quarter finals WCS AMERICA. What is Taeja suppose to do and given that Taeja was considered heavily favored in this matchup.
1) The discussion was about the game between Maru vs herO.
2) So, just because Pigbaby appeared to "completely shut down Taeja", that is somehow a justification for another patch?
When a strategy game is about unit countering another unit (and that's the path we are going btw), then that's the point at which the game becomes dull and boring. Instead, each unit should have a unique set of attributes and traits, focused on micro-bility, which allows a rich set of strategies to be developed that are tailored to the player's personality behind the race. Unfortunately, we continue to see this sad state of patch-fest game which are targeted to change behaviors of certain units against targeted objectives (e.g. widow mine vs shield). It's incredibly sad that many of you do not realize that this directly impacts the level of innovative plays from the players' strategic making process. Yet, we wonder why there are so many who feel that the balance is the #1 issue affecting the popularity of SC2.
I seem to recall muta counters tank in brood war. Also lurker counters marine/firebat and vulture, zergling and zealot, and can soft counter goons. Defiler countered late game deathball army greatly with it's op 125 damage plague spell that hit HP through shields, even. It was one of the anti-clump-your-units-in-a-ball-to-have-infinite-point-DPS tools zerg had, and seemed to have a big range too.
Let's see, siege tank countered goliaths, hydras countered most air units, archons countered ling or muta HARD, and reaver or siege tank countered hydra. The last two are hard or soft counter depending on the micro and baiting by the person being hit by scarabs or arclite.
Brood war had counter units, too. Every RTS functions on counter units, and even in real life we function in war on counter units. AA missiles vs that jet with the big bomb on it, AT warheads or recoiless rifles vs tanks, etc.
You can't look for strategy much in a game where it doesn't matter what you make or where you send it.
You either missed my point completely or are going about this the wrong way. You can use mutas to counter tanks, but the difference here is that muta in BW wasn't designed specifically to deal with tanks. There is a difference between window mine having dmg vs. shield and a flock of mutas shooting down at unprotected tanks. Why would window mines have a special dmg vs shield? The balance team is giving you incentives to use widow mines vs. Protoss. The decision is already half-way made by the balance team on how Terran strategies should look like against Protoss units. Continue this pattern of balancing the game, then I guarantee you that the interest of the game will continue to slide.
Which difference does it make whether a mine does +vs shields in SC2, a Science Vessel getting rid of shields in broodwar? These things have always existed in RTS games. Designers and balancers have always created units with certain intentions in mind. Given the nature of mines: no steady attack with high burst and low dps it only makes sense to increase said burst against Protoss, since Protoss units have increased health in comparison to other races. +vs shields might not be the most elegant way to do that, but it gets the job done.
Mines in PvT don't actually do their job, imo, because they dont get used. They simply make a midgame tech tree not viable. The end result is that templar midgames dont exist, so mines are never built because they are (and will remain) useless vs colossi.
On July 17 2014 01:48 gneGne wrote: Its kind of funny in my eyes that a lot of people disapprove of the widow mine change, yet approve of the time warp change which seems so random.
People tend to vote against major change that would force them to play better. Time Warp change almost nothing since a fight finish in less than 10s, so they vote yes because they don't give a fuck, but against WM you will need to micro again and stuff so yeah.
isn't the real problem against protoss their multitude of unscoutable stupid aggressive builds? the majority of my TvPs i'm facing some sort of near unscoutable aggression.
on the contrary, i'm not having major problems in late game, except terran's army seems to be harder to control, but it's still fun.
the only thing that really pisses me off is how protoss can literally build no defensive units and still pin me to my base and make me guess which stupid shit is coming for me.
this patch won't do anything to improve my TvP experience
You can refine your gameplay a bit. I stopped having deadly trouble with the random all ins or cheeses by going rax, OC, CC, rax, rax. There's enough production if it turns out to be a push, enough critical mass if its an oracle, etc.
On July 16 2014 14:21 jellyjello wrote:
On July 16 2014 12:26 yeaitooted wrote:
On July 16 2014 12:15 jellyjello wrote:
On July 16 2014 09:48 Iron_ wrote:
On July 16 2014 09:15 Perdac Curall wrote: This is just ridiculous. David Kim should be fired as he obviously isn't taking this seriously and is doing things by the seat of his pants. Whatever happened to the even-handed, patient Blizzard I used to know and love. The one with incremental patches that slowly strengthened or weakened things, in order to avoid jarring, balance tilting patches like this. Granted this is not yet a patch, but judging by the comments above, the previous already-pushing-too-far changes he proposed don't do enough to weaken Protoss and strengthen Terran. Did no one at Blizzard see Maru vs. herO in ProLeague last week?
Creative, aggressive Terran play that tore Protoss apart, without any buffs or nerfs. What, is herO a chobo Protoss? We are going back to WoL all over again. Whiny, uncreative Terrans lose on ladder, and then write articles completely overreacting to the "unbalanced" situation because they can't keep doing the same thing they have always done since WoL and crush face 100% of the time. Protoss should have no way of defending against early Terran aggression, and they can't have any early aggression of their own. Then the game is balanced, just like WoL was.
R.I.P Golden Age of SC2
Creative? Aggressive? This was the most standard 14CC opening there is in the game. Maru did a *very very simple* 2 medivac drop in the main with his first 2 medivacs. Hero defended with..... 5 stalkers? Then gets caught with his entire army our of position for a nexus snipe (BARELY). This is a TERRIBLE example of Terran being competitive in the matchup. Lets not even get into the fact that you picked an example using the very best Terran in the world.
Hero played *awful* and the announcers even said so. Put the volume up next time you watch the game.
Played "awful"? Korean commentators disagree.
Pigbaby completely shut down Taeja in the quarter finals WCS AMERICA. What is Taeja suppose to do and given that Taeja was considered heavily favored in this matchup.
1) The discussion was about the game between Maru vs herO.
2) So, just because Pigbaby appeared to "completely shut down Taeja", that is somehow a justification for another patch?
When a strategy game is about unit countering another unit (and that's the path we are going btw), then that's the point at which the game becomes dull and boring. Instead, each unit should have a unique set of attributes and traits, focused on micro-bility, which allows a rich set of strategies to be developed that are tailored to the player's personality behind the race. Unfortunately, we continue to see this sad state of patch-fest game which are targeted to change behaviors of certain units against targeted objectives (e.g. widow mine vs shield). It's incredibly sad that many of you do not realize that this directly impacts the level of innovative plays from the players' strategic making process. Yet, we wonder why there are so many who feel that the balance is the #1 issue affecting the popularity of SC2.
I seem to recall muta counters tank in brood war. Also lurker counters marine/firebat and vulture, zergling and zealot, and can soft counter goons. Defiler countered late game deathball army greatly with it's op 125 damage plague spell that hit HP through shields, even. It was one of the anti-clump-your-units-in-a-ball-to-have-infinite-point-DPS tools zerg had, and seemed to have a big range too.
Let's see, siege tank countered goliaths, hydras countered most air units, archons countered ling or muta HARD, and reaver or siege tank countered hydra. The last two are hard or soft counter depending on the micro and baiting by the person being hit by scarabs or arclite.
Brood war had counter units, too. Every RTS functions on counter units, and even in real life we function in war on counter units. AA missiles vs that jet with the big bomb on it, AT warheads or recoiless rifles vs tanks, etc.
You can't look for strategy much in a game where it doesn't matter what you make or where you send it.
You either missed my point completely or are going about this the wrong way. You can use mutas to counter tanks, but the difference here is that muta in BW wasn't designed specifically to deal with tanks. There is a difference between window mine having dmg vs. shield and a flock of mutas shooting down at unprotected tanks. Why would window mines have a special dmg vs shield? The balance team is giving you incentives to use widow mines vs. Protoss. The decision is already half-way made by the balance team on how Terran strategies should look like against Protoss units. Continue this pattern of balancing the game, then I guarantee you that the interest of the game will continue to slide.
Which difference does it make whether a mine does +vs shields in SC2, a Science Vessel getting rid of shields in broodwar? These things have always existed in RTS games. Designers and balancers have always created units with certain intentions in mind. Given the nature of mines: no steady attack with high burst and low dps it only makes sense to increase said burst against Protoss, since Protoss units have increased health in comparison to other races. +vs shields might not be the most elegant way to do that, but it gets the job done.
Mines in PvT don't actually do their job, imo, because they dont get used. They simply make a midgame tech tree not viable. The end result is that templar midgames dont exist, so mines are never built because they are (and will remain) useless vs colossi.
I think they are actually pretty nifty when you try to Mech. They are really capable of doing a lot jobs then like anti-immortal or anti-air. They are pretty redundand though when you play bio and dont have those problems to begin with, that's true. Unless of course you play against such a Templar opening.
125
EPT
