EPTIt seems right now that the common opinion is the SH has just been removed from the game, but 2 months ago Pros' opinion was kind of different...
HotS Balance Update - April 9 - Page 17
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Gwavajuice
France1810 Posts
It seems right now that the common opinion is the SH has just been removed from the game, but 2 months ago Pros' opinion was kind of different... | ||
|
Dwayn
Germany949 Posts
| ||
|
Gwavajuice
France1810 Posts
On April 15 2015 10:29 Dwayn wrote: Harrasing late game seems pretty weak in general. Early game harras is far more impactful, if for example the point of harras is to prevent or delay a terran getting his mech deathball, I don't see SHs being useful. Especially because the new SH seems very 1-dimensional, unlike for example mutas. I dare to disagree, most of late game situations are about denying opponent's new bases while getting new bases yourself. Harassing and putting pressure on several places on the map is then extremely important. That's why you see warp prisms, medivacs, hellions unbyes, ling runbyes a lot. Arguably, medivacs and warp prisms do a better job at this than speed ling, that's why another late game harassing option whould benefit a lot to the zergs. Anyway that's not my point, at all. My point is how something that has been on test for 4 month, on which pros have given their opinion, which blizzard has advertised and called to action to test several times, can, in the end, be so negatively welcomed. It's like before patch 80% people think say it's good (you still have 62% of people having a positive opinion on the pool in the OP of this thread) and suddenly, when patch is live 100% say it's crap and zerg can't deal with late game mech and protoss deathball. Wether there is something beyond my understanding or at one point people lacked smartness... It's scarry because everybody is about "blizzard should listen the community" but when they do, nobody is happy (dreampool, this patch, ...) | ||
|
RaFox17
Finland4581 Posts
On April 15 2015 16:21 Gwavajuice wrote: I dare to disagree, most of late game situations are about denying opponent's new bases while getting new bases yourself. Harassing and putting pressure on several places on the map is then extremely important. That's why you see warp prisms, medivacs, hellions unbyes, ling runbyes a lot. Arguably, medivacs and warp prisms do a better job at this than speed ling, that's why another late game harassing option whould benefit a lot to the zergs. Anyway that's not my point, at all. My point is how something that has been on test for 4 month, on which pros have given their opinion, which blizzard has advertised and called to action to test several times, can, in the end, be so negatively welcomed. It's like before patch 80% people think say it's good (you still have 62% of people having a positive opinion on the pool in the OP of this thread) and suddenly, when patch is live 100% say it's crap and zerg can't deal with late game mech and protoss deathball. Wether there is something beyond my understanding or at one point people lacked smartness... It's scarry because everybody is about "blizzard should listen the community" but when they do, nobody is happy (dreampool, this patch, ...) Most people who dislike SH are/were happy about this patch. Most zerg´s i would say were scared of this patch and how badly it could fuck zerg over. People also overestimated the effects of the PDD nerf. It simply changed it from utterly broken into effective and strong weapon for terran. | ||
|
starslayer
United States696 Posts
also i find it kinda sad that so many zerg just gave up when the patch went through, i think the Sh can still be effective just not massed anymore. Im thinking 8 max which is around 16 free units that can crash into CCs and such and then have units ready for the push to come within that min. I have faith someone will figure it out we just need some positivity rather then the sky is falling every time a buff or nerf happens and this goes for each race. | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18507 Posts
In huge battles it is impossible to dodge from fungal anyway so why haven't they started using them more? I guess its like BW where we had to wait for savior who really showed us defiler usage | ||
|
starslayer
United States696 Posts
On April 15 2015 16:51 sharkie wrote: what I would wish from zergs is more infestor usage in general... In huge battles it is impossible to dodge from fungal anyway so why haven't they started using them more? I guess its like BW where we had to wait for savior who really showed us defiler usage agreed also think its time to maybe bring back infested terran upgrades every race has so many tools to deal with them i think it might be ok maybe scaled back a bit but no upgrades and harder fungle has made the infestor almost pointless. Also i suggested way back at the beginning of hots cause i hated the SH that they should just remove upgrades to locust cause i knew they would become a problem really wish they tried that before the change but whatever, its done | ||
|
RaFox17
Finland4581 Posts
On April 15 2015 16:51 sharkie wrote: what I would wish from zergs is more infestor usage in general... In huge battles it is impossible to dodge from fungal anyway so why haven't they started using them more? I guess its like BW where we had to wait for savior who really showed us defiler usage I think we saw a lot of fungals in WOL  The downside with infestors are that fungal does no damage to mech unless you can chain fungal fleet of ravens. Infestors are useful but against defensive mech i don´t think they are the answer. Having some infestors in your army is never a bad though. | ||
|
Salteador Neo
Andorra5591 Posts
| ||
|
sharkie
Austria18507 Posts
On April 15 2015 16:59 RaFox17 wrote: I think we saw a lot of fungals in WOL The downside with infestors are that fungal does no damage to mech unless you can chain fungal fleet of ravens. Infestors are useful but against defensive mech i don´t think they are the answer. Having some infestors in your army is never a bad though.Yes we saw fungal back then when it was overpowered and now we see it almost never even though zergs would profit so much with it. Blink stalkers wouldnt be able to blink, marines wouldnt be able to split. I can see so many uses for infestors - I am just no progamer who has the mechanics to use them efficiently. I dont know why no coach encourages his players to use them more in their games Plague didn't do critical damage in its first spell either, you had to cast plague over and over again for mech to really weaken. On April 15 2015 16:59 Salteador Neo wrote: The new defiler is the viper, not the infestor. It even has consume (dealing damage to buildings) to get max energy for free, both blinding cloud and abduct are solid good abilities. Extremely underused units because zergs could just mass SH all day and force engagements with free units for most of the game. Yeah viper is definitely the pendant for defilers in SC2 but you need Hive for it, you can get infestors much quicker and easier. | ||
|
RaFox17
Finland4581 Posts
On April 15 2015 17:08 sharkie wrote: Yes we saw fungal back then when it was overpowered and now we see it almost never even though zergs would profit so much with it. Blink stalkers wouldnt be able to blink, marines wouldnt be able to split. I can see so many uses for infestors - I am just no progamer who has the mechanics to use them efficiently. I dont know why no coach encourages his players to use them more in their games Plague didn't do critical damage in its first spell either, you had to cast plague over and over again for mech to really weaken. Yeah viper is definitely the pendant for defilers in SC2 but you need Hive for it, you can get infestors much quicker and easier. I think that the problem of using the against blink stalkers is that stalkers snowball really quickly and if you invest in infestors you run a risk of dying before they are out or having them out and everything else is dead. Same against bio terran. Zerg is often always close to defeat when defending his fourth and needs every baneling and muta he can get. Same with getting to 3-3, you must make sure you won´t die before that. When the game gets longer i do agree that against bio infestor ling/bling would be better or even infestor/ultra/bling would be good. | ||
|
ETisME
12497 Posts
On April 15 2015 17:15 RaFox17 wrote: I think that the problem of using the against blink stalkers is that stalkers snowball really quickly and if you invest in infestors you run a risk of dying before they are out or having them out and everything else is dead. Same against bio terran. Zerg is often always close to defeat when defending his fourth and needs every baneling and muta he can get. Same with getting to 3-3, you must make sure you won´t die before that. When the game gets longer i do agree that against bio infestor ling/bling would be better or even infestor/ultra/bling would be good. I cant rmb who I watched, I think it was snute or tlo who said infestors are just not useful. In wol they were strong is because the time they came out, the terran wouldnt have that many medivacs. In hots, they are out too late when there are so many medivacs out and the fungal is so dodgable. It's far better to get muta Instead | ||
|
Stolker
United States96 Posts
On April 15 2015 16:59 Salteador Neo wrote: The new defiler is the viper, not the infestor. It even has consume (dealing damage to buildings) to get max energy for free, both blinding cloud and abduct are solid good abilities. Extremely underused units because zergs could just mass SH all day and force engagements with free units for most of the game. Well yes, you see but no. When terran has couple of thors and some vikings then you what? cloak it? | ||
|
FaiFai
Peru53 Posts
On April 15 2015 16:43 starslayer wrote: i was thinking or at least hoping zerg would try out more drop play but the investment is so much with OL speed and drop upgrade. So do any of you think it would be worth trying to combined OL speed and drops into one upgrade and have it at lair tech. Obviously it doesnt do that much for late game but the idea it to maybe have a better mid game which always you to over run the terran or toss. just theorycrafting here but I think it would be cool and might add some more dynamic play for zerg also maybe making nydus like 100/50 or something and 8-10 armor once popped. Idk i think it would be cool but would love to hear from so good zerg on these ideas. also i find it kinda sad that so many zerg just gave up when the patch went through, i think the Sh can still be effective just not massed anymore. Im thinking 8 max which is around 16 free units that can crash into CCs and such and then have units ready for the push to come within that min. I have faith someone will figure it out we just need some positivity rather then the sky is falling every time a buff or nerf happens and this goes for each race. I think they gave up bcoz more than the patch by itself was for a group of things like zergs having better army in numbers and upgrades lossing to a forcefields or lossing to a 0 apm unit widow mine, even the zerg player played better for example the final wcs of hydra vs polt, many just accepted the units and trying to deal them, but now the icing on the cake was this patch where more than the change of SH,that everyone is agree that they should changed or deleted, this change make them useless , but doesnt receive nothing to replace the role of SH in the late game zerg, the buff of vipers is pfffffffff, is like making zerlings useless but buffing hydras, and is not that now a late game is unwinable, is that before was hard , and now is even more harder, to be fair the patch was discouraging and disheartening for many zergs, it would been prefer that in the infestation pit make an upgrade to make the hydras and roaches more stronger to replace the role of SH, =P. | ||
|
FaiFai
Peru53 Posts
On April 14 2015 04:21 darkness wrote: Ok, I'll have the decency to say that zerg needs some kind of buff to compensate for their swarm host. Other than mass mutalisks, zerg indeed seems to be weak. Or is that what Blizzard intends? To make HotS unplayable so people can play LotV? i don think blizzard want to make HOTS unplayable, or unplayable for zerg players specifically, bcoz terran and protoss are happy, the only unhappy now are the zergs, i think blizzard a long time ago wanted make these changes but they was afraid to affect a lot their precious pro scene, but now with LOTV close to come out is like they doesnt care what happen with HOTS, if the patch affect positive or negative, | ||
|
Lunareste
United States3596 Posts
On April 15 2015 16:59 starslayer wrote: agreed also think its time to maybe bring back infested terran upgrades every race has so many tools to deal with them i think it might be ok maybe scaled back a bit but no upgrades and harder fungle has made the infestor almost pointless. Also i suggested way back at the beginning of hots cause i hated the SH that they should just remove upgrades to locust cause i knew they would become a problem really wish they tried that before the change but whatever, its done no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no free units should not be cost effective EVER | ||
|
RaFox17
Finland4581 Posts
On April 16 2015 09:55 Lunareste wrote: no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no free units should not be cost effective EVER That means free units should never do any damage. Free or not, give zerg tools in the late game. | ||
Liquid`Snute
Norway839 Posts
On April 16 2015 09:55 Lunareste wrote: no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no free units should not be cost effective EVER ranged units trade freely. 4 marines produce a completely free trade vs a single zergling even if the zerg paid 25 minerals for it. infestors and broodlords spawning timed zombies and so-called 'free units' shouldn't be considered problematic in itself - they're just projectiles. it would be funny if the tempest shot was made into a clickable unit, maybe everyone would freak out then? :p the issues will always lie with range, damage over time and the survival ability of the caster unit. if the most expensive units in the game, including energy-based spellcasters, don't take better trades than the most primitive of units, what's the point of having army diversity and a tech tree? energy units are fantastic for the game, they create opportunities, weaknesses and timing windows. storm is great, fungal is great, infested terrans are great, raven waves are great. of course you can put the individual units and abilities up for debate. each race also has an endgame damage dealer which is capable of taking completely free trades: Z (swarm host), P (tempest), T (yamato cannon) and of course it's debatable if these units and the potential unit combinations should be in. but i don't think it's sensible to talk about 'free units' - it's about range, dot and unit retention. and imo, high technology units do have a place in the game and deserve at least some respect. technology play should be fun to watch in rts if the units are well designed. so if you think of all the situations that people are upset about: the times when neither player can interact with the other. units that cause bleeding over time aren't bad for spectators by design imo, units that cause infinite invulnerability are. the ultimate example of this terrible design would be the orbital liftoff in combination with raven, viking and pdd. (lillekanin vs zhugeliang game - although that game too did have a solution with its vipers). that's also one part that i don't like about the new host - they're really easy to maneuver around and almost indestructible, if not for their downtime weakness. but now they at least suffer a bit from the muta cloud problem in zvt - hosts and mutas, as amazing as they are over time at taking free trades and staying alive, are not omnipresent and can be bypassed/brute-forced by big frontal attacks. i think the idea of nerfing pdd was good. the swarm host change is good too - because it increased the bleeding effect and lessened its survival at least a little bit. some units should take better trades by design and it would be completely backwards if units would perform worse for the minerals/gas you put into it as the game progressed  but it's also problematic if energy or burst damage is so abundant that neither player can interact with the other in a sensible way. the worst thing that can happen to endgames in rts - besides raw imbalance - is when two players use accumulated energy abilities with close to zero effect and when their primary damage over time armies (or, burst damage armies for that matter,) can't interact with each other. slowly charged energy units and their ability to bleed the opponent down or produce meaningful fights are extremely important to rts with free-trading ranged units. this patch was an okay step for sc2's maxed-out department. if problems are at max or below it, time will tell.maxed out compositions as part of starcraft2 are a real thing in the game and it should not be neglected for legacy as much as everybody loves the idea of sub-200, creating a meaningful game at max is just as important. 200/200 has been part of sc2 forever and still will be for the remainder of heart of the swarm. one could argue that all siege and energy units above a certain threshold should consume resources (pay to shoot), but i'm not sure if people would like that. bleed can be taken too far, something something carrier/tempest identity crisis something ... game design is hard o< | ||
|
Endoplasmic
1 Post
Even as a harass unit lets take a look: 5 SHs harras a base Cost: 500 minerals, 1000 gas, 20 SUPPLY, can only harass every 60 seconds and Locusts have a timed life as well (which is enough time to reposition army and screw over any more harass) Compared to Medivac full of marines: Cost: 500 minerals, 100 gas, 10 SUPPLY, can fly around and harass adequately until you have muta's, which you wont have because all your gas is spent on SHs. It costs a 10th of the gas and HALF the supply to even harass "equally". A great example is a game I tried where I had ~8 SHs. That's 40 supply + 80 drones = 120 supply. That gives me 80 supply of actual army. Sure, I successfully took down a Protoss expansion... while they waltzed their death ball through all 4 of my bases and an 80 supply roach/hydra army before my second wave of Locusts were ready. I have no answer to mech anymore except muta timings which involve hiding my muta's praying for no scout and trading inefficiently with a mech death ball. Again, I'm more surprised at the lack of foresight of Blizzard in making these changes than anything else... I'm starting to think they just moved their Diablo III team over to screw over HotS so people will be forced to buy LotV when it comes out.... Agree? Haha (It clearly worked in favor for Diablo RoS) | ||
|
NEEDZMOAR
Sweden1277 Posts
On April 14 2015 23:05 JCoto wrote: I think you are diverging a bit too much now, and pointing towards a BW-part 2 of SC2. Now focusing on the SwarmHost topic, the cost of them now makes them really unviable and uncomfortable to go as fighters to keep up with mech. MarineLord vs Stephano (a very experienced SwarmHost player) yesterday at qualifier showed it quite well. The new SH is a god-like DPS harass, but simply inefficent as a core unit. Any Zerg player with half a brain would go with a flock of mutas over 6-8 SH to harass, considering their cost. Mutas and Locusts have the same counters. Also new locust fucntionality is nothign but Broodlord imitation. They move at 1.88 speed (slightly faster than BL, ideal BroodLord speed, BL campaign speed), and drop units with decent DPS against lines of static units, since mobile units can just ran away. Flying locusts weren't a bad idea. We simply need the Campaign SwarmHost unit approach (less DPS, more spammeable locusts, more mobile). Flying locusts with an air-to-ground attack and bonus speed would be better since they are quite harder to counter than ground ones (Colossus out, Hellbats out, Tanks out), but at the same time less hardcountering since they don't cause friendly fire on tanks and also would deal far less damage. Support DPS (Not capital), mobility, safety of use, antiturtle mechanic, reasonable cost... that things would make a "core" unit for Zerg. We need to remove "terrible terrible damage" and very high risk/potential efficiency from the design of most units, at least the ones we want to be quite standard. Regarding your BW-part 2 suggestions: Turtle mech happens because econ wise, there is no problem with it (not like in BW, where you could just get a big advantage over turtles by expanding since workers don't pair). The goliath you are talking about is the Viking (almost same stats in everything) and the Valkyrie is the Thor, which is also very useful at soaking damage and countering Ultralisks. So old units are 80% present. And Valkyries weren't very common in BW. Econ is the change we need for LotV and BW one is a natural antiturtle plus having very interesting perks (easier comebacks, expander advantage). Protoss Deathball happens because no-deathballing is shit or suicide, considering the DPS/efficiency of the gateway army. The design of some units (Colossus, Void Rays) and the dependence on AoE and Forcefields also helps the deathball even more. Also because units tend to move quite slowly, resulting in a handicapped clumped army . VoidRays were transformed into deathball units with their speed upgrade removal and the DPS increase in HotS. However, I wouldn't call a Phoenix/Gateway army a Deathball, for example. But Phoenix/Colossus is. Protoss was not given very flexible units, they left inneficient ones to compensate with the need of extreme hardcountering units. We need some rework in that aspect. BTW, if you look at LotV streams, Protoss is nothing deathball now. Dragoons are pointless in SC2, we have stalkers that can use blink (having a very skill-demanding mechanic that allows them to survive and keep the global DPS up since they don't die) and Immortals. In any case, buff Stalker's DPS (which is quite shitty) and rework the immortal to be flexible and not so hardcountering. Stalker stats are not very different from Dragoon's ones except on vs armored, were Stalkers are weaker, and a bit less of HP. The problem of the Gateway army is vs light masseable units (lings, marines). That's why we are going to have Adepts in. I agree with alot of what you are saying, imo the key to fixing deathballing and turtling is implementing Zeromus economy changes. And yeah if adepts could get a buff to work as a core army unit, that would be way better than implementing dragoons and basically what im asking for. | ||
| ||
