|
On July 22 2014 16:21 VArsovskiSC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 16:07 Hider wrote:
Did you intentionally not mention "AMAZING WIDOW MINE SHOT"?
Wel, they actually became quite rare as zergs improved their play. It definitely wasn't quite often in the September-November period we would see Widow Mines suddenly just hit like 7 Banelings or something like that. Well - that SHOULD actually be/remain like that.. BOTH Storms and Fungals come out from a 150 gas unit, while you wanna "even out" those with a unit that costs only 25 gas, no offense
There are differences though.
A mine can be picked off easily before it shoots, due to the siege mechanic+the shot delay.
A mine can be triggered (unless the Terran is really good in retargeting and unburrowing, which you cannot do consistently).
A mine can be fully avoided by running out of its range again (while storms can never be fully avoided, you are going to be hit by 2+ ticks of it usually)
A mine only has 5range, which is so little that a good amount of ranged units can just a-move it without triggering it.
A mine cannot store multiple shots.
That said, I think the mine is a reasonably balanced unit right now. A mine is costefficient when it hits 1baneling+1zergling, or 1zealot, which is nearly guaranteed. On average they kill much more stuff near instantly, while still tanking damage afterwards, sometimes even surviving and damaging other units.
If Terran has trouble with these kinds of bigger masses of units, then there is either an economy problem behind it, that makes Terran not have enough stuff or a crowd control problem, that would require changes to their bigger splash dealers.
However, the mine with its one-hit-kill 120(+40) damage for little money simply cannot be treated like a crowd control unit imo, since it is also has a strong mechanic against single opponents and is lacking the range.
|
That said, I think the mine is a reasonably balanced unit right now. A mine is costefficient when it hits 1baneling+1zergling, or 1zealot, which is nearly guaranteed. On average they kill much more stuff near instantly, while still tanking damage afterwards, sometimes even surviving and damaging other units.
Yes, it's reasonable balanced if races had similar production efficiency. But just like protoss in PvZ needs some "imba"-abilities/units vs zerg, so does terran need a unit that can make terran more cost-effective than it currently is.
Some people talk about buffing Ghost, Ravens, Siege Tanks, BC's etc. to improve terran cost-efficiecny (instead of WM), however there are two problems here;
1) No real obvoius variables to tweak on in order to make them a viable part of your bio-composition in both TvZ and TvP while maintaining balance in other mathchups (TvT and mech vs zerg).
2) While they will make gameplay more diverse, these units often times lead to very stale situations and people will get tired of watching them too often if they become "standard". Siege Tank works well when it can be used aggressively. For instance, I absolutely love using it in TvT, it just works perfectly there now that mech has an easier time moving out (relative to WOL). But vs Muta/bling, it's always just gonna be a turtle/timing attack oriented unit.
For Siege tank/bio symmetry I believe there is no real fix in HOTS. Your just always gonna prefer either 4M or complete mech. But in LOTV I would so much love to see the following;
- Swarm Host becomes more like a Lurker in two ways: 1) Much much lower effective range of the unit, so that Siege Tanks can outrange lurkers in Siege mode. 2) Swarm Host is a ton stronger in close up battles.
- Raven gets reworked a bit so PDD isn't this super good scaly ability while it has other abilities which work better with bio play.
With those two changes, I think bio might wanna mix in Siege Tanks as they now offer something unique vs Zerg that widow mines doens't (outranges SH). I think lots of people like the Lurker vs Siege Tank dynamic from BW, and I definitely think parts of that could be implemented into Sc2 with some adjustments.
Then you would have two types of bio compositions:
1) 4M (vs Muta/bling)
2) Bio/Tank vs Swarm Host focussed play
And if mech also could be somewhat entertaining to play in the same instance (since Swarm Hosts gets redesigned anyway), that would just be so incredible awesome for the matchup.
|
On July 22 2014 16:35 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 16:21 VArsovskiSC wrote:On July 22 2014 16:07 Hider wrote:
Did you intentionally not mention "AMAZING WIDOW MINE SHOT"?
Wel, they actually became quite rare as zergs improved their play. It definitely wasn't quite often in the September-November period we would see Widow Mines suddenly just hit like 7 Banelings or something like that. Well - that SHOULD actually be/remain like that.. BOTH Storms and Fungals come out from a 150 gas unit, while you wanna "even out" those with a unit that costs only 25 gas, no offense There are differences though. A mine can be picked off easily before it shoots, due to the siege mechanic+the shot delay. A mine can be triggered (unless the Terran is really good in retargeting and unburrowing, which you cannot do consistently). A mine can be fully avoided by running out of its range again (while storms can never be fully avoided, you are going to be hit by 2+ ticks of it usually) A mine only has 5range, which is so little that a good amount of ranged units can just a-move it without triggering it. A mine cannot store multiple shots. That said, I think the mine is a reasonably balanced unit right now. A mine is costefficient when it hits 1baneling+1zergling, or 1zealot, which is nearly guaranteed. On average they kill much more stuff near instantly, while still tanking damage afterwards, sometimes even surviving and damaging other units. If Terran has trouble with these kinds of bigger masses of units, then there is either an economy problem behind it, that makes Terran not have enough stuff or a crowd control problem, that would require changes to their bigger splash dealers. However, the mine with its one-hit-kill 120(+40) damage for little money simply cannot be treated like a crowd control unit imo, since it is also has a strong mechanic against single opponents and is lacking the range.
Widow Mines go well with tanks, marauders, maybe a vikings that are landed and spread out, certainly not an air ball, and thors. The splash damage is something these units can take, if forced to fight the enemy while burrowing mines. Mines and marines can actually be very bad for Terran unless they stay well away from their own mines. The splash radius nerf actually helped Terran in that regard, even though it's possible that the game wasn't settled at a point where Z or P could intelligently abuse mines own mechanic against T.
A 75-25 killing a single zealot isn't cost efficient in my mind. Gas has a much higher weight of value than minerals. Not sure what the ratio of value is, but it's definitely a premium resource of the two.
When dealing with later game P or Z, the extra speed burrow is a MUST have in order to use mines offensively at all. The unupgraded version can be useful for zoning still, if you put them in large flocks in specific areas, but there's almost no value in them when trying to attack and enemy army or base. When using mines offensively against an army, it is also a must that you have about 12+ of the things. Units that are unable to fire on your front lines will still find these mines a tasty snack as you try to micro them into an enemy army. Any splash units that can be pulled to deal with mines also can trump them, as in a few banes or archons.
Sometimes I'll have about 3-4 factories with reactors going at once. Seems like the only reasonable way to keep production up at the rate they're lost when sniped continuously by zerg or protoss.
As far as a true zoning/control unit for map control, they really have a desired and important synergy with bunkers and/or siege tank. They can't be tripped by a single unit if that unit is taken out before the thing fires, so a reasonably sized force is required to bust that area, which means either the entire army moves there or they take losses in a smaller force attempting to dislodge it, which can trade favorably for terran. It's possible that this could be valuable in either case, since if the army of P or Z really wants it out of the way, you're controlling where they're going, and you can move in and set up for a good position behind them.
|
i dont think you can compare fungal and widow mines too well...
i feel fungal being a spell, and widow mines being a unit, makes the interaction and nuances too different to really compare cost/effect etc..
|
On July 22 2014 17:14 worosei wrote:
i dont think you can compare fungal and widow mines too well...
i feel fungal being a spell, and widow mines being a unit, makes the interaction and nuances too different to really compare cost/effect etc..
This post actually gave me an idea:
What if WM was changed so that it would become a caster now with energy, so essentially you would need to micro it, but on the other hand it would be able to shoot out like 3 or 4 rockets one after another if with full energy?
To strong, to hard to micro, what are your opinions?
good day, svizcy
|
On July 22 2014 16:50 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +That said, I think the mine is a reasonably balanced unit right now. A mine is costefficient when it hits 1baneling+1zergling, or 1zealot, which is nearly guaranteed. On average they kill much more stuff near instantly, while still tanking damage afterwards, sometimes even surviving and damaging other units. Yes, it's reasonable balanced if races had similar production efficiency. But just like protoss in PvZ needs some "imba"-abilities/units vs zerg, so does terran need a unit that can make terran more cost-effective than it currently is.
Terran just needs the same amount of mining. They just need to be capable to match a 4th with a 4th and spend the whole money they get, not just the 4-5 of 8gas geysers.
For that, Zergs capabilities to lock Terran on fewer bases should get tuned down and Terrans gas units need to serve a bigger purpose, regardless of playing bio or mech.
Protoss doesn't have "imba" abilities either. There is a massively different supply-mechanic in that matchup, that allows Protoss to mass its basic units while the Zerg eventually has to get rid of his Roaches/Zerglings, else at max its going to be a blink stalker per roach or 1immortal per 2roaches. But the same just doesn't apply to bio TvZ, there it is actually the reverse, which will forever stay a problem, unless the Terran can eventually mix in his own 100resource/supply units.
I think that balancing around an eternal midgame of trades is neither possible - the pushes are either going to be slightly too strong, or, more probable, they are still going to get figured out eventually - nor desirable - because then people are just going to do the same thing for 20,25,30mins, which does get old, regardless of how good it looks.
I think the only way to really balance a game that complex for a long timeframe is to create some forms of counter-rotation. E.g. Terran eventually gets too many tanks/mines for banelings to get the hits on the marines, but then the marine count becomes lower, zerg can build more mutas, but then the Terran doesn't need as many tanks and switch more into thors, which then allows the zerg to mix in more ultras, which allows the Terran to go for the marauders, which forces the Zerg to trade his ultras off fast enough and go back into zerglings/banelings/mutas, etc...
This kind of rotation has been very weak in TvZ for a long time (like in years) now, and it shows in the form of Terran often having no answers to lategame Zerg and everything getting balanced around aggression that feels initially imbalanced, but after a while starts to get figured out and then Terran is fucked again because they are still lacking the units that can force the Zerg to change up his maxed composition (or those units just cannot be reached fast enough, like ravens).
For Siege tank/bio symmetry I believe there is no real fix in HOTS. Your just always gonna prefer either 4M or complete mech.
Imo this is a mutalisk problem. Back when mutalisks actually died, it was pretty risky to take down a tank, because you'd be weak in terms of combating and harassing for a long time. These days, you can gladly trade a mutalisk or two for a tank, because that's literally all the damage you take.
That, and the simple fact that (low-mid amounts of) tanks are a much better counter to infestors than to banelings/ultras, but infestors aren't required anymore. So in WoL you knew there would eventually be a unit on the field that the tank was good against, while in HotS when you see tanks as Zerg, you just look at them and ask your opponent: "what is this supposed to do for you?"
|
Protoss doesn't have "imba" abilities either. There is a massively different supply-mechanic in that matchup, that allows Protoss to mass its basic units while the Zerg eventually has to get rid of his Roaches/Zerglings, else at max its going to be a blink stalker per roach or 1immortal per 2roaches. But the same just doesn't apply to bio TvZ, there it is actually the reverse, which will forever stay a problem, unless the Terran can eventually mix in his own 100resource/supply units.
Forcefields can be pretty insane.
the pushes are either going to be slightly too strong, or, more probable, they are still going to get figured out eventually
Would be true if creep spread didn't exist. However, the fact it has such an important effect on defenders advantage makes it quite easy to have games that go on.
The only situations currently where we see games ending quickly is
1) Terran gets ahead early game and then snowballs
2) Zerg does a roach/hydra timing and wins
3) Terran overextends in the midgame on creep and gets too much behind and can be overrun offcreep.
But if both players just get slightly behind in midgame, then it's quite rarely that the game just suddenly ends.
Terran, however, does need a bit of a comeback unit in order to reward more back-and-forth. And stronger widow mine can help take down larger zerg armies that are poorly microed. And I don't see much risk in buffing the Widow Mine here, especially since we knew that it worked previously.
I think the only way to really balance a game that complex for a long timeframe is to create some forms of counter-rotation. E.g. Terran eventually gets too many tanks/mines for banelings to get the hits on the marines, but then the marine count becomes lower, zerg can build more mutas, but then the Terran doesn't need as many tanks and switch more into thors, which then allows the zerg to mix in more ultras, which allows the Terran to go for the marauders, which forces the Zerg to trade his ultras off fast enough and go back into zerglings/banelings/mutas, etc...
This kind of rotation has been very weak in TvZ for a long time (like in years) now, and it shows in the form of Terran often having no answers to lategame Zerg and everything getting balanced around aggression that feels initially imbalanced, but after a while starts to get figured out and then Terran is fucked again because they are still lacking the units that can force the Zerg to change up his maxed composition (or those units just cannot be reached fast enough, like ravens).
Would be desireable to work on that for LOTV.
I guess it's possible that you can nerf Mutas and then Siege tanks + bio become viable, however, then I thikn it will just end up being a superior composition relative to 4M. I don't really feel that Siege tanks and Widow Mines complement each other enough in order to create that interesting a dynamic.
Thus, in my opinion I prefer the option of balacing bio around 4M as that IMO creates much faster faced gameplay than Siege Tank + bio. I think the better solution is to give zerg some kind of unit which Tanks are really good vs and mines/bio suffer against. Not sure infestor can be that unit, I prefer to make the Swarm Host more Lurker-oriented as I pointed out in my previous post.
|
On July 22 2014 17:23 Svizcy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 17:14 worosei wrote:
i dont think you can compare fungal and widow mines too well...
i feel fungal being a spell, and widow mines being a unit, makes the interaction and nuances too different to really compare cost/effect etc.. This post actually gave me an idea: What if WM was changed so that it would become a caster now with energy, so essentially you would need to micro it, but on the other hand it would be able to shoot out like 3 or 4 rockets one after another if with full energy? To strong, to hard to micro, what are your opinions? good day, svizcy
It would just be another thing that will be feedbacked by templars. Like Medivacs, ghosts, BCs, Ravens (and back then, Thor... for no reason at all)
We have enough caster units already :/
|
Imo. The easiest way to create good interaction between mine and tank would be to buff bunkers (via modification of the bunk upgrade) and maybe allow HB in bunks. That and of course buff tanks a little, not in brute power, but cost/supply etc... (I personally love the range buff someone mentioned earlier).
|
On July 22 2014 18:43 Hider wrote:
Thus, in my opinion I prefer the option of balacing bio around 4M as that IMO creates much faster faced gameplay than Siege Tank + bio. I think the better solution is to give zerg some kind of unit which Tanks are really good vs and mines/bio suffer against. Not sure infestor can be that unit, I prefer to make the Swarm Host more Lurker-oriented as I pointed out in my previous post.
Tanks are good vs roach/hydra (can still get a slight improvement imo). Problem is that bio with marauders is too good against everything and also roach/hydra still. I pretty much am sure that the marauder should get removed in lotv. This would help alot to create weaknesses for bio while keeping the marine as it is. It can be reintroduced in lategame or bio can get smth new.
|
Tanks are good vs roach/hydra (can still get a slight improvement imo).
True, but the interaction just isn't that exciting. Basically it's just turtle with bio/tank untill you have critical mass, siege up and 1ta. Further, blinding cloud/abduct interaction vs Siege tank is also lame.
I think a better interaction vs Swarm host and siege tank would be a ton more fun to watch and play.
Zerg would then be more in the defensive and wouldn't have map control in the same way as he has with Muta/bling or Roach/hydra. This way you could be more aggressive with Tanks and biological units in the midgame and use tanks to break zerg defensive position rather than to use tanks to turtle.
But instead, SH makes it possible for zerg to be really cost-effective vs heavy bio compositions in straight up engagements. So the terran is rewarded for sieging up to kill swarm hosts (and SH/locusts didn't have range to kill Siege tanks in siege mode).
As a response to the Siege Tank attacking the Swarm Host, the zerg could even resposition his Swarm Hosts to go further back when the terran sieged up. That would create a dynamic microinteraction.
Further, it would also create a bigger role for the Raven (as detector) along with the bio/tank army (though it's abilities still need to be changed a bit tbh).
I pretty much am sure that the marauder should get removed in lotv.
Please no.. Pure Marines in them selves are way too vulnerable against AOE, which creates too much splitsecond-oriented micro. Marauder has an important role in serving tank-shots.
The weakness of Roach/hydra is supply efficiency. In the midgame when it maxes out (and terran is at like 150-160 supply), it's really really strong and all terran can do is too turtle. Contrary to common belief, Siege Tank in BW was never about turtling, but about breaking defensive positions.
|
squirtle says it correctly,
even if t needs a buff vs banes etc and perhaps vs protoss, making the mines strong makes protoss just go colossus EVERY GAME ... then all falme "p always go deathball" but we FORCED to do it, because blizzad just removed the zealot/ht playstyle COMPLETLY from teh game (unplayable vs that strong mines + some hellbats )
its sad seeing strats removed by patched instead of buff something that would still allow p to play both strategys but makes terran overall stronger (cause mines then are rly useless vs colossi strats anyways)
what i see is that it can work vs z but it not helps terran vs p, just makes the games more boring
|
If this time warp nerf goes in, then you'd better fix the mothership too. It's useless now. Yes, it provides cloak but it's easy to snipe, and cost isn't justified anymore.
|
how many times did they patch this game already?
|
Seeing all these pro responses just makes me wonder how David Kim is coming up with these changes. Nothing even remotely suggests he is listening to the pros specific complaints.
|
i dont get all the discussion about nerfing or not nerfing marines slightly in the early game. early game marines are fine now (they were always fine, just horrible maps and OP rax before depot + OP bunker build time happened, no problem with marines themselves).
just nerf them in midgame = nerf one of the things that makes marines so insanely cost effective: medivacs, stim, combat shield. thats it. then finally there is room to buff stuff that works good with marines like tanks and buff lategame T. this would also make bio into biomech or mech or bioair or air or airmech whatever as a transition much easier with nerfed marines and buffed lategame units. some lategame units like BC/raven doesnt even need buffs itself but just faster build time. tanks need a buff, thors maybe need a slight speedbuff.
--> slightly nerf midgame marines and buff T lategame (dmg, buildtime, whatever)
|
On July 22 2014 23:13 Boonbag wrote:
how many times did they patch this game already?
19times. But ~57.9% of those patches are just minor bug fixes etc.
Balance patches: 8 in 1.5years. So much less frequently than most other RTS games (that on top of that do not need to be well balanced because they aren't esports), though of course HotS builds upon WoL, while a new game often builds upon nothing.
Happy?
|
On July 22 2014 19:40 Drake wrote:
squirtle says it correctly,
even if t needs a buff vs banes etc and perhaps vs protoss, making the mines strong makes protoss just go colossus EVERY GAME ... then all falme "p always go deathball" but we FORCED to do it, because blizzad just removed the zealot/ht playstyle COMPLETLY from teh game (unplayable vs that strong mines + some hellbats )
its sad seeing strats removed by patched instead of buff something that would still allow p to play both strategys but makes terran overall stronger (cause mines then are rly useless vs colossi strats anyways)
what i see is that it can work vs z but it not helps terran vs p, just makes the games more boring
P were going deathball in WoL all that time before WM was ever introduced.
On July 23 2014 00:51 Decendos wrote:
i dont get all the discussion about nerfing or not nerfing marines slightly in the early game. early game marines are fine now (they were always fine, just horrible maps and OP rax before depot + OP bunker build time happened, no problem with marines themselves).
just nerf them in midgame = nerf one of the things that makes marines so insanely cost effective: medivacs, stim, combat shield. thats it. then finally there is room to buff stuff that works good with marines like tanks and buff lategame T. this would also make bio into biomech or mech or bioair or air or airmech whatever as a transition much easier with nerfed marines and buffed lategame units. some lategame units like BC/raven doesnt even need buffs itself but just faster build time. tanks need a buff, thors maybe need a slight speedbuff.
--> slightly nerf midgame marines and buff T lategame (dmg, buildtime, whatever)
I don't get why people think that marines are too good. If they weren't able to get better over the course of the game with stim, and then with medivac, every terran would start with bio and tech switch into mech after, or just go straight mech. In other words, those units would be almost completely abandoned.
Like some pros pointed out, the entire problem of WM is that it kills T's own forces practically as well as it kills the enemy. The fact that it's a projectile weapon that tracks a target is a huge problem with splash radius precisely because it means that sling or mutas can pull those mines into your own forces. If you sit at a safe distance, your mines get picked off by mutas. If you try to stay close to protect them, they get pulled into your own army.
If WM was just a bouncing betty style explosive, it would be better.
|
On July 23 2014 02:36 Socup wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 19:40 Drake wrote:
squirtle says it correctly,
even if t needs a buff vs banes etc and perhaps vs protoss, making the mines strong makes protoss just go colossus EVERY GAME ... then all falme "p always go deathball" but we FORCED to do it, because blizzad just removed the zealot/ht playstyle COMPLETLY from teh game (unplayable vs that strong mines + some hellbats )
its sad seeing strats removed by patched instead of buff something that would still allow p to play both strategys but makes terran overall stronger (cause mines then are rly useless vs colossi strats anyways)
what i see is that it can work vs z but it not helps terran vs p, just makes the games more boring P were going deathball in WoL all that time before WM was ever introduced. Show nested quote +On July 23 2014 00:51 Decendos wrote:
i dont get all the discussion about nerfing or not nerfing marines slightly in the early game. early game marines are fine now (they were always fine, just horrible maps and OP rax before depot + OP bunker build time happened, no problem with marines themselves).
just nerf them in midgame = nerf one of the things that makes marines so insanely cost effective: medivacs, stim, combat shield. thats it. then finally there is room to buff stuff that works good with marines like tanks and buff lategame T. this would also make bio into biomech or mech or bioair or air or airmech whatever as a transition much easier with nerfed marines and buffed lategame units. some lategame units like BC/raven doesnt even need buffs itself but just faster build time. tanks need a buff, thors maybe need a slight speedbuff.
--> slightly nerf midgame marines and buff T lategame (dmg, buildtime, whatever) I don't get why people think that marines are too good. If they weren't able to get better over the course of the game with stim, and then with medivac, every terran would start with bio and tech switch into mech after, or just go straight mech. In other words, those units would be almost completely abandoned. Like some pros pointed out, the entire problem of WM is that it kills T's own forces practically as well as it kills the enemy. The fact that it's a projectile weapon that tracks a target is a huge problem with splash radius precisely because it means that sling or mutas can pull those mines into your own forces. If you sit at a safe distance, your mines get picked off by mutas. If you try to stay close to protect them, they get pulled into your own army. If WM was just a bouncing betty style explosive, it would be better.
wheres the problem of switching from bio to mech or biomech or going straight mech. thats basically all T players want: more diversity and a better lategame. its pretty stupid to say "i want to play MMMM all game long and win vs everything the opponent throws at me". its much more fun and strategic if T has to transition and scout but to do that T needs better lategame to be able to transition.
|
On July 22 2014 07:55 VArsovskiSC wrote:
*massive post snipped. it's on page 16.*
Much better use of quotation marks :D.
And I never thought of it that way. It kind of makes sense. You can do the ghost/HT dance which forces protoss to do stuff, baiting zealot charges forces protoss to do stuff, baiting forcefields forces protoss to do stuff, but you can't force protoss to do anything with their collosus.
It's way more beneficial to leave them firing when they're being targeted by vikings since vikings have such range that they will die anyway or you lose too much DPS. So leaving them be and focussing the vikings with your stalkers is your best bet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
