|
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/20042934163
"Hello everyone! This week, we’re going over fewer topics as it’s a short week with the upcoming holiday, so let’s get right into it.
Response to Feedback: “Co-op Missions are too easy”
Our designers are hard at work discussing/testing/iterating on a way to satisfy those of you who are looking for a greater challenge from Co-op Missions. We’re definitely looking to add more challenging ways to play this mode in the near future. We also wanted to say thank you for your input, and that your suggestions are being discussed as well. We will provide you with more details once we know more.
We also want to reinforce that this is a game mode designed for everyone. So far, most of the feedback has been focused on making the mode more difficult. We've also seen a few discussions asking for more variety in Co-op Missions. Suggestions like this are exceptionally valuable because they improve the overall experience of Co-op Missions. We look forward to hearing more of your thoughts in areas like this as well.
Siege Tanks in Medivacs
Some of you out there have been pointing out concerns in this area, and we’re currently watching this interaction. The potential issue with Siege Tank pickup is that Terran play seems to have become more heavily bio favored because of it. We believe this is happening because previously, bio had the advantage of mobility and the disadvantage of being less powerful versus mech in a heads-up fight. Mech has the strong front line, but its composition isn’t mobile. Right now, due to Siege mode Tanks being so easy to relocate at a high pace (bio compositions naturally have a lot of Medivacs), we’re seeing bio compositions simply never engage against a full mech army. This essentially removes the main advantage that the mech player has over bio.
If this turns out to be the case, we wonder if it’s better to have Siege Tank pickup cause the unit to un-Siege. We’re not 100% sure that this interaction is correct right now, so we’ll keep a close watch in this area. Your thoughts regarding this are greatly welcome since nothing is decided on this front yet.
F2 selecting Disruptor shots
Thank you for your feedback here, and we agree that F2 shouldn’t select the Disruptor shots. We will get this fixed soon.
Dusk Towers Stalker issue
Thank you for your feedback illustrating how Stalkers can blink from the 3rd location to the natural location on Dusk Towers. We’ll get this fixed soon as well.
Bunker upgrade change
We agree with your feedback that this upgrade could use a redesign to something more interesting such as the popular suggestion of making them individual upgrades. We don’t think it’s such a pressing issue that it will break the game if we don’t fix it, so we‘re going to take our time working on this change. But we can get discussions going in terms of what might be the most interesting thing to do here, and work on it over time. Thanks for this suggestion and please continue discussing how we could best address the Bunker upgrade.
Burrow/Unburrow test map
We noticed that there’s some mix up with what exactly needs to be tested with this change. Some players are saying it should work like how Terran mode switches work, and others are saying that they still need to be in different sub groups. We wanted to clarify that the version we’d like to test in the next test map is the same as how the Terran mode switches work. We believe there’s less reason to have the two abilities on two different hotkeys if they are on different sub-groups and players need to tab through anyways before issuing orders. We’re planning on having this test map up next week, so please let us know how it feels after you test it out.
We also just wanted to thank everyone for having such constructive discussions and helping to create a more positive community experience around StarCraft II. Like we mentioned before, maintaining this is extremely important, especially at the start of a new game because many new gamers will visit sites such as the Battle.net forums, Teamliquid, or Reddit to check out the game and community. We’re very proud of everyone in that we have been able to work towards having such positivity and constructive discussions going, not only because it’s just great for the development of the game going forward, but also because people who aren’t so in tune with community topics will get a better idea of where the game is at. Let’s continue the constructive and positive discussions as we continue working on StarCraft II. Thanks, everyone!"
|
bye bye tank drops and hello to dying to zerg early pushes
|
the SC2-improvement machine is working... so curious to see how SC2 will be looking within 1year or so...
for the effort... for the whole SC2 improvement... thank you.
|
Katowice25012 Posts
something something bunker build time
|
On November 26 2015 04:54 Noonius wrote:
bye bye tank drops and hello to dying to zerg early pushes
You can totally die to those even with tank drops in the game.
|
Lol Bunker change. Never change Blizzard 
|
On November 26 2015 04:58 pieroog wrote:
for the effort... for the whole SC2 improvement... thank you.
ditto.Thanks for all the transparency and hard work!
|
What's up with the bunkers?
|
On November 26 2015 04:59 Heyoka wrote:
something something bunker build time
Exactly my thoughts :D
|
Have you guys ever seen a game where the bunker upgrade was researched?
|
Stalkers always find a way...
|
On November 26 2015 04:54 Noonius wrote:
bye bye tank drops and hello to dying to zerg early pushes
As long as the pickup mechanic remains in place in some form, I think it will still be useful early game vs Zerg. The main benefit is saving a siege tank or dodging Ravager shots, and the proposed change would still allow that to happen. What it would change, thankfully, is the nonsense in TvT where you carry your Tanks around at all times.
|
Allowing tanks to be picked up and having them transform back to normal mode in the air does away with a lot of the obnoxiousness of mid game battles, however having positions sieged is still a problem because the tanks are too hard to kill. The strength of early tank drops or cliff sieges in LoTV right now is that the aggressive player isn't losing their tanks. Since the tanks don't die, the defending player has no opportunity to strike back.
Look at the design of the siege tank. Does it need to be picked up by medivacs while in siege mode? Just think about that one question.
edit: Talking about tvt.
In tvz right now tankivacs are needed, and I don't like that either, but its a less clean solution. If banshees are buffed then banshee rushes get too strong in tvt and tvp, if liberators get buffed then... well... we've done that.
|
Nothing on balance, just a nerf for TvT?
|
We also want to reinforce that this is a game mode designed for everyone.
With different difficulties I don't see what they mean with this:p
|
Yes guys, please take your time with the bunker change.
The blink thing on Dusk Towers is insane. Blizzard is still so bad at making maps. Do they even do QA on their maps? Did they not learn about blinking into in-base nats after Delta Quadrant five years ago like the rest of us?
|
On November 26 2015 04:41 eviltomahawk wrote:
Bunker upgrade change
We agree with your feedback that this upgrade could use a redesign to something more interesting such as the popular suggestion of making them individual upgrades. We don’t think it’s such a pressing issue that it will break the game if we don’t fix it, so we‘re going to take our time working on this change. But we can get discussions going in terms of what might be the most interesting thing to do here, and work on it over time. Thanks for this suggestion and please continue discussing how we could best address the Bunker upgrade.
What is this "Individual upgrades" that Blizzard is talking about?
Also I'd be totally fine with them just getting rid of the upgrade completely. Terran has too many upgrades/research anyway.
|
I have had this in mind a while now, picking up siege tanks should definitely unsiege them. I didn't like how it actually turned out. Now it's going to become more of a retreat mechanism, which is good.
|
On November 26 2015 05:41 HeroMystic wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 04:41 eviltomahawk wrote:
Bunker upgrade change
We agree with your feedback that this upgrade could use a redesign to something more interesting such as the popular suggestion of making them individual upgrades. We don’t think it’s such a pressing issue that it will break the game if we don’t fix it, so we‘re going to take our time working on this change. But we can get discussions going in terms of what might be the most interesting thing to do here, and work on it over time. Thanks for this suggestion and please continue discussing how we could best address the Bunker upgrade.
What is this "Individual upgrades" that Blizzard is talking about? Also I'd be totally fine with them just getting rid of the upgrade completely. Terran has too many upgrades/research anyway.
I bet they mean that you select a bunker, and upgrade it individually. Perhaps something in the area of 25/25 cost and 20 sec to upgrade your bunker. I like it.
However, a lot of blizzards post was very hard to understand. I have no idea what section under "Burrow/Unburrow test map" was about. They should take their time to formulate themselves clearly.
|
|
|
LMAO bunker change.
At this point the only useful bunker change would be one that allows you to salvage it faster than Ravagers can kill it...
Flying Tanks are STUPID. That more than anything should be the driver for a change. But the reasoning for their change is quite dumb. They're changing it because Bio > Mech. Ok thanks, we've known that for 5 years now. And especially with the LotV economy changes and having to defend more bases/angles.. what did they expect??
Blizzard continues to keep their head up their own asses when it comes to addressing issues that have been voiced OVER AND OVER AND OVER by the community:
- Zerg is OP as fuck, nerf Zerg (this isn't simply balance whine, they're 45% of Masters....)
- Corrosive Bile is too strong
- Lurkers are too strong
- Parasitic bomb is too strong
- Ultras are too strong
- Terran has 1 viable build vs Zerg otherwise they die to Ravagers
- Colos are too weak
- Early aggression is nonexistent. Greed can only be countered by more greed. Please fix this
|
Pick up a tank is the only way to dodge the bile shots and defend against roaches/ravager pushes.
It's hard because you have to nerf mobility of the tank drops in TvT without touching on the other matchups.
If you feel concern about TvT, reapers are a plague in TvT too, please do something. 
Thanks for your feedbacks.
glhf♪
|
On November 26 2015 05:41 HeroMystic wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 04:41 eviltomahawk wrote:
Bunker upgrade change
We agree with your feedback that this upgrade could use a redesign to something more interesting such as the popular suggestion of making them individual upgrades. We don’t think it’s such a pressing issue that it will break the game if we don’t fix it, so we‘re going to take our time working on this change. But we can get discussions going in terms of what might be the most interesting thing to do here, and work on it over time. Thanks for this suggestion and please continue discussing how we could best address the Bunker upgrade.
What is this "Individual upgrades" that Blizzard is talking about? Also I'd be totally fine with them just getting rid of the upgrade completely. Terran has too many upgrades/research anyway.
It was brought up on a channel, maybe BaseTradeTV at some point that a suggestion was floating around to make Neosteel Frame an individual upgrade like overlord drop is for an overlord. This means that you could invest in transforming a specific bunker into a higher capacity bunker. A change that I think would be a really cool change for a currently worthless upgrade
|
On November 26 2015 05:56 chipmonklord17 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 05:41 HeroMystic wrote:On November 26 2015 04:41 eviltomahawk wrote:
Bunker upgrade change
We agree with your feedback that this upgrade could use a redesign to something more interesting such as the popular suggestion of making them individual upgrades. We don’t think it’s such a pressing issue that it will break the game if we don’t fix it, so we‘re going to take our time working on this change. But we can get discussions going in terms of what might be the most interesting thing to do here, and work on it over time. Thanks for this suggestion and please continue discussing how we could best address the Bunker upgrade.
What is this "Individual upgrades" that Blizzard is talking about? Also I'd be totally fine with them just getting rid of the upgrade completely. Terran has too many upgrades/research anyway. It was brought up on a channel, maybe BaseTradeTV at some point that a suggestion was floating around to make Neosteal Frame an individual upgrade like overlord drop is for an overlord. This means that you could invest in transforming a specific bunker into a higher capacity bunker. A change that I think would be a really cool change for a currently worthless upgrade
Overlord drop is an individual upgrade now 
|
On November 26 2015 05:53 insitelol wrote:
L I B E R A T O R S
nah.. B U N K E R S
|
If they nerf th medivac+tank pickup, I hope that'll give them more room to buff the tank in more direct ways, like increasing its damage or splash.
|
Hellow everybody, my english is not perfect i know, but i wanted to give my opinion concerning mech tvt/drop tank
I think that mech is really bad right now for two reason :
-The first one is that lotv is obviously way more dynamic when it comes to expanding, as a mech player you always need alot of turret/and a big army (around 170+ pop) to secure a 4th base quite safely , on lotv the timing of the 4th is way earlier than this supply cap, this reason is already a big buff to bio play for the whole game, when it will come to expand even more bio will have the advantage obviously, but for air transition it will be also be a big deal right
-The second one is that in the past you had to scout well and adapt to the mech air army, making tech lab to kill the ground with banshee or some reactor to take back heavily air control with viking, since lotv you just have to make some reactor and you will be able to kill mech army (ground+air) with viking liberator and just finish the game, if your opponent have a big air army since the start he wont be able to expand and take control of the game
So drop tank in my opinion almost doesn't affect bio vs mech at all, your idea that it helps escaping from big fight with your tank is not realistic, everytime you fight as mech vs bio tank u'll have the viking advantage and will kill every medic that will try to come close to the fight
Concerning tvt bio vs bio it gives a really weird dynamic but i dont have an opinion yet concerning that, maybe it's giving good game maybe not we will see
Bunker upgrade : great idea finally, take care of not giving us something too strong
Balance overall doesnt look bad especially with this really weird and probably bad map pool ( most pro think that zerg is too good vs protoss)
Co-op missions are awesome i really think you should give us really hardcore brutal missions, and a way bigger range of mission anyway (15-20 to start maybe?)
|
On November 26 2015 05:56 DinoMight wrote:
LMAO bunker change.
At this point the only useful bunker change would be one that allows you to salvage it faster than Ravagers can kill it...
Flying Tanks are STUPID. That more than anything should be the driver for a change. But the reasoning for their change is quite dumb. They're changing it because Bio > Mech. Ok thanks, we've known that for 5 years now. And especially with the LotV economy changes and having to defend more bases/angles.. what did they expect??
Blizzard continues to keep their head up their own asses when it comes to addressing issues that have been voiced OVER AND OVER AND OVER by the community:
- Zerg is OP as fuck, nerf Zerg (this isn't simply balance whine, they're 45% of Masters....)
- Corrosive Bile is too strong
- Lurkers are too strong
- Parasitic bomb is too strong
- Ultras are too strong
- Terran has 1 viable build vs Zerg otherwise they die to Ravagers
- Colos are too weak
- Early aggression is nonexistent. Greed can only be countered by more greed. Please fix this
Man am I glad you aren't in charge of balance lol. Terran is fine, only race that has a right to complain about balance right now is Protoss.
Seriously try bio + liberator compositions, their very good . Mech though is weak and I am fine with that because turtle mech should never be viable.
You need to start scouting for when Hive starts so you can start a transition into Liberators (if for some reason you aren't making them already) and adding in some ghosts. It's nice, Terran can't stay MMM all game long and have to do transitions like all the other races.
|
I'm glad they are seeing the problem with mech vs bio due to flying Tanks in TvT.
But, what about there being f all mech in all the other MUs? Get on it Blizz and don't take 4 years like usual.
EDIT: about the proposed change of having tanks un-siege when picked up, it sound good but it's impossible to tell without seeing it in play. Make a test map please.
|
On November 26 2015 06:08 Sapphire.lux wrote:
I'm glad they are seeing the problem with mech vs bio due to flying Tanks in TvT.
But, what about there being f all mech in all the other MUs? Get on it Blizz and don't take 4 years like usual.
EDIT: about the proposed change of having tanks un-siege when picked up, it sound good but it's impossible to tell without seeing it in play. Make a test map please.
After every expansion mech is weak again and Blizzard has to specifically address it. And every time they introduce new units they work best with bio.
For your edit, this version of the tank pick-up is similar to Starbow's, it's strictly weaker than the current iteration and as far as I know didn't lead to any glaring issues in a game more sensitive to hyper mobility.
On November 26 2015 05:59 cheekymonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 05:56 chipmonklord17 wrote:On November 26 2015 05:41 HeroMystic wrote:On November 26 2015 04:41 eviltomahawk wrote:
Bunker upgrade change
We agree with your feedback that this upgrade could use a redesign to something more interesting such as the popular suggestion of making them individual upgrades. We don’t think it’s such a pressing issue that it will break the game if we don’t fix it, so we‘re going to take our time working on this change. But we can get discussions going in terms of what might be the most interesting thing to do here, and work on it over time. Thanks for this suggestion and please continue discussing how we could best address the Bunker upgrade.
What is this "Individual upgrades" that Blizzard is talking about? Also I'd be totally fine with them just getting rid of the upgrade completely. Terran has too many upgrades/research anyway. It was brought up on a channel, maybe BaseTradeTV at some point that a suggestion was floating around to make Neosteal Frame an individual upgrade like overlord drop is for an overlord. This means that you could invest in transforming a specific bunker into a higher capacity bunker. A change that I think would be a really cool change for a currently worthless upgrade Overlord drop is an individual upgrade now
And the way that Blizzard works, if they have a successful model for a certain type of change they'll be more likely to add it to other parts of the game. I think it's partly because they have to create some coding resources and so on.
|
United States12235 Posts
On November 26 2015 05:32 Gullis wrote:
We also want to reinforce that this is a game mode designed for everyone.
With different difficulties I don't see what they mean with this:p
There's a wrench thrown in with Commander XP because the co-op missions actually get easier the higher your level. Is it possible to beat Brutal co-op missions at level 1? If you're very good, it's hard, but yes. Is it possible at level 15? Considerably easier, and for some lower-skilled players, this can mean the difference between impossible and possible. Maybe it makes sense to have a higher difficulty like Brutal+ that requires you to be level 15 and is tuned to that level, or maybe in the designers' eyes that's what the current Brutal difficulty target already represents.
|
So instead of flying tanks in one mode what they want to do is tanks magically changing their mode mid air AND faster than on ground. Finally, this makes perfect sense.
I'd also want to point out they want to remove the only gameplay change they added to Terrans in LotV. And with everything more deadly and more mobile, what we REALLY need is old, immobile, shitty tank. Fantastic.
|
These things make my week!! It is really funny to read some comments, specially te ones from BNet.
Honestly it seems LotV will take a loonnngggg time be in a real good spot as it deserves.
|
On November 26 2015 05:52 cheekymonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 05:41 HeroMystic wrote:On November 26 2015 04:41 eviltomahawk wrote:
Bunker upgrade change
We agree with your feedback that this upgrade could use a redesign to something more interesting such as the popular suggestion of making them individual upgrades. We don’t think it’s such a pressing issue that it will break the game if we don’t fix it, so we‘re going to take our time working on this change. But we can get discussions going in terms of what might be the most interesting thing to do here, and work on it over time. Thanks for this suggestion and please continue discussing how we could best address the Bunker upgrade.
What is this "Individual upgrades" that Blizzard is talking about? Also I'd be totally fine with them just getting rid of the upgrade completely. Terran has too many upgrades/research anyway. I bet they mean that you select a bunker, and upgrade it individually. Perhaps something in the area of 25/25 cost and 20 sec to upgrade your bunker. I like it. However, a lot of blizzards post was very hard to understand. I have no idea what section under "Burrow/Unburrow test map" was about. They should take their time to formulate themselves clearly.
Currently, Burrow and Unburrow use the same hotkey and location on grid, This makes it very awkward to burrow or unburrow units in control groups, or in your selection overall. Try it out in a unit tester, it's awkward af
|
Revert the siege tank to greatness:
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Siege_Tank_(Heart_of_the_Swarm)#Patch_Changes
- increase life from 150 to 160 if overkill is implemented
- siege mode damage changed from 35 (+15 armoured) to 60 (70 if overkill is implemented)
- siege mode upgrade damage changed from +3 (+2 armoured) to +4 (+5 if overkill is implemented)
- attack cooldown increased from 2.8 to 3.0 (i.e. takes longer -- note, these are old Blizzard time seconds)
- unsieges upon medivac pickup
If a nerf is necessary, first look into increasing the attack cooldown. Reducing life can come second, but keep its high damage! A strong siege tank is awesome and makes it a unique unit.
|
On November 26 2015 06:42 Excalibur_Z wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 05:32 Gullis wrote:
We also want to reinforce that this is a game mode designed for everyone.
With different difficulties I don't see what they mean with this:p There's a wrench thrown in with Commander XP because the co-op missions actually get easier the higher your level. Is it possible to beat Brutal co-op missions at level 1? If you're very good, it's hard, but yes. Is it possible at level 15? Considerably easier, and for some lower-skilled players, this can mean the difference between impossible and possible. Maybe it makes sense to have a higher difficulty like Brutal+ that requires you to be level 15 and is tuned to that level, or maybe in the designers' eyes that's what the current Brutal difficulty target already represents.
I think they should simply add a lot of bonus missions to every map. You don't have to do them, but you can if you are good enough. Maybe also some form of achievements which require you to micro especially well, macro especially well, do a mission extremely fast, whatever.
That way you can focus more on interesting mission designs and worry less about difficulty for the top players.
With that being said i played this with a friend who isn't into sc2 all that much and we beat the brutal missions fairly early on (lvl 7?) pretty handily.
So there surely is still work to do on the general difficulty level too.
|
On November 26 2015 06:42 Excalibur_Z wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 05:32 Gullis wrote:
We also want to reinforce that this is a game mode designed for everyone.
With different difficulties I don't see what they mean with this:p There's a wrench thrown in with Commander XP because the co-op missions actually get easier the higher your level. Is it possible to beat Brutal co-op missions at level 1? If you're very good, it's hard, but yes. Is it possible at level 15? Considerably easier, and for some lower-skilled players, this can mean the difference between impossible and possible. Maybe it makes sense to have a higher difficulty like Brutal+ that requires you to be level 15 and is tuned to that level, or maybe in the designers' eyes that's what the current Brutal difficulty target already represents.
I'm not very good but I started out on Brutal with all commanders at lv 1. Only Zagara was tough and took me two tries.
|
Removing tankivacs would shatter tvz completely when it's already in a tenuous state. I hope they realize that, especially when zerg is dominating everyone wings of liberty terran style.
On November 26 2015 05:56 chipmonklord17 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 05:41 HeroMystic wrote:On November 26 2015 04:41 eviltomahawk wrote:
Bunker upgrade change
We agree with your feedback that this upgrade could use a redesign to something more interesting such as the popular suggestion of making them individual upgrades. We don’t think it’s such a pressing issue that it will break the game if we don’t fix it, so we‘re going to take our time working on this change. But we can get discussions going in terms of what might be the most interesting thing to do here, and work on it over time. Thanks for this suggestion and please continue discussing how we could best address the Bunker upgrade.
What is this "Individual upgrades" that Blizzard is talking about? Also I'd be totally fine with them just getting rid of the upgrade completely. Terran has too many upgrades/research anyway. It was brought up on a channel, maybe BaseTradeTV at some point that a suggestion was floating around to make Neosteel Frame an individual upgrade like overlord drop is for an overlord. This means that you could invest in transforming a specific bunker into a higher capacity bunker. A change that I think would be a really cool change for a currently worthless upgrade
This suggestion isn't actually new, it's been floating around since hots beta.
|
On November 26 2015 06:33 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 06:08 Sapphire.lux wrote:
I'm glad they are seeing the problem with mech vs bio due to flying Tanks in TvT.
But, what about there being f all mech in all the other MUs? Get on it Blizz and don't take 4 years like usual.
EDIT: about the proposed change of having tanks un-siege when picked up, it sound good but it's impossible to tell without seeing it in play. Make a test map please. After every expansion mech is weak again and Blizzard has to specifically address it. And every time they introduce new units they work best with bio. For your edit, this version of the tank pick-up is similar to Starbow's, it's strictly weaker than the current iteration and as far as I know didn't lead to any glaring issues in a game more sensitive to hyper mobility. Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 05:59 cheekymonkey wrote:On November 26 2015 05:56 chipmonklord17 wrote:On November 26 2015 05:41 HeroMystic wrote:On November 26 2015 04:41 eviltomahawk wrote:
Bunker upgrade change
We agree with your feedback that this upgrade could use a redesign to something more interesting such as the popular suggestion of making them individual upgrades. We don’t think it’s such a pressing issue that it will break the game if we don’t fix it, so we‘re going to take our time working on this change. But we can get discussions going in terms of what might be the most interesting thing to do here, and work on it over time. Thanks for this suggestion and please continue discussing how we could best address the Bunker upgrade.
What is this "Individual upgrades" that Blizzard is talking about? Also I'd be totally fine with them just getting rid of the upgrade completely. Terran has too many upgrades/research anyway. It was brought up on a channel, maybe BaseTradeTV at some point that a suggestion was floating around to make Neosteal Frame an individual upgrade like overlord drop is for an overlord. This means that you could invest in transforming a specific bunker into a higher capacity bunker. A change that I think would be a really cool change for a currently worthless upgrade Overlord drop is an individual upgrade now And the way that Blizzard works, if they have a successful model for a certain type of change they'll be more likely to add it to other parts of the game. I think it's partly because they have to create some coding resources and so on.
I think that part of the problem with mech is that Blizz doesn't always know how to read games. By that i mean that in both HOTS and LOTV BETAs, lots of Terrans were experimenting, and since mech was the intended new thing for terran, obviously there was lots and lots of mech. When the game comes out though, players start playing for money and they do what they think actually works. So DK and friends are in limbo: "we saw mech in BETA so why not now? Are players lazy? Is bio to strong? let's just wait 3 weeks, 3 months, one year, etc".
|
Blizzard....
-Nydus worm needs a hot fix asap it's going to keep ruining a ton of games in every match-up
-Ravagers need armored tag or something, this unit is reaching broodlord+infestor levels of non sense at the moment
-Parasitic bomb...yeah...this is going to ruin some of the first tournaments as well
-pylon cannon needs to be 50 energy
-8 armor ultra...this needs to go as well
There's a lot more i could list but those are the main perpetrators of "imbalance" or things that need to be looked at / hotfixed (nydus worms) asap. You'll notice most of those are Zerg things...it is no wonder why Zerg is over represented right now and Zerg feels to be too easy to play at the moment.
|
On November 26 2015 06:58 purakushi wrote:Revert the siege tank to greatness: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Siege_Tank_(Heart_of_the_Swarm)#Patch_Changes- increase life from 150 to 160 if overkill is implemented - siege mode damage changed from 35 (+15 armoured) to 60 (70 if overkill is implemented) - siege mode upgrade damage changed from +3 (+2 armoured) to +4 (+5 if overkill is implemented) - attack cooldown increased from 2.8 to 3.0 (i.e. takes longer -- note, these are old Blizzard time seconds) - unsieges upon medivac pickup If a nerf is necessary, first look into increasing the attack cooldown. Reducing life can come second, but keep its high damage! A strong siege tank is awesome and makes it a unique unit.
You don't buff and nerf a unit at the same time.
They simply need to buff the siege tank back to it's original "can kill things" status and tweak from there. Otherwise here we go again - another few years of watching 99% bio play at professional level.
|
On November 26 2015 06:08 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 05:56 DinoMight wrote:
LMAO bunker change.
At this point the only useful bunker change would be one that allows you to salvage it faster than Ravagers can kill it...
Flying Tanks are STUPID. That more than anything should be the driver for a change. But the reasoning for their change is quite dumb. They're changing it because Bio > Mech. Ok thanks, we've known that for 5 years now. And especially with the LotV economy changes and having to defend more bases/angles.. what did they expect??
Blizzard continues to keep their head up their own asses when it comes to addressing issues that have been voiced OVER AND OVER AND OVER by the community:
- Zerg is OP as fuck, nerf Zerg (this isn't simply balance whine, they're 45% of Masters....)
- Corrosive Bile is too strong
- Lurkers are too strong
- Parasitic bomb is too strong
- Ultras are too strong
- Terran has 1 viable build vs Zerg otherwise they die to Ravagers
- Colos are too weak
- Early aggression is nonexistent. Greed can only be countered by more greed. Please fix this
Man am I glad you aren't in charge of balance lol. Terran is fine, only race that has a right to complain about balance right now is Protoss. Seriously try bio + liberator compositions, their very good . Mech though is weak and I am fine with that because turtle mech should never be viable. You need to start scouting for when Hive starts so you can start a transition into Liberators (if for some reason you aren't making them already) and adding in some ghosts. It's nice, Terran can't stay MMM all game long and have to do transitions like all the other races.
One Parasitic Bomb can kill literally every single Liberator.
You're telling me Terrans should be able to pick out the infected Liberator out of a clump of 10 of them and split it while microing their bio vs Ultra Ling Bane?
Parasitic bomb. Is too strong.
It shouldn't stack, and the infected unit should be easier to identify. This is so straightforward... they had it in BW.
|
yep, uninformed or unskilled people saying blizzard is improving the right things, rest of people that play this game and know whats good or what is wrong is complaining, fucking hell, at this point if it were up to me id make blizzards balance team go somewhere else, totally clueless, totally arrogant, totally wrong...
|
I see a few people are complaining about zerg here are my thoughts on it.
The lurker is very strong I agree, It provides zerg with a very different style of unit and I think players haven't worked out how to play against it. With the changes to the larva system lurkers are a very larva efficent unit that control space very well. It's an iconic unit, it does it's job well and it is a lot of fun to play, intelligent use of lurkers is great to watch.
I don't think it is too strong because it is a pretty expensive unit, pretty much tier 3 in that the hydra den needs to be upgraded and then you need to morph the unit from the hydra. There is a long transition period in which you can take advantage of a zerg going this route.
Parasitic Bomb provides zerg with the solutions to mass air turtle that it didn't have before. Perhaps it is a mistake putting this spell on the viper as it has too much utility? Maybe this spell should be on the infestor? Maybe it should be researchable?
I personally don't do ravager busts so I can't speak to that but if it is truly insane then toning down the bile vs buildings sounds like a simple fix? I have only seen Soulkey do this build vs Maru and he was already massively ahead in that game but the damage to the bunker was a bit crazy.
I don't really know what the problem with Nydus wurm is
I'm losing a lot to a lot of different stuff from all 3 races as I try and figure this game out so I don't know if anything is "too strong/too weak" or if i'm just playing bad. let's wait for DH and then see what happens.
|
The potential issue with Siege Tank pickup is that Terran play seems to have become more heavily bio favored because of it. We believe this is happening because previously, bio had the advantage of mobility and the disadvantage of being less powerful versus mech in a heads-up fight. Mech has the strong front line, but its composition isn’t mobile. Right now, due to Siege mode Tanks being so easy to relocate at a high pace (bio compositions naturally have a lot of Medivacs), we’re seeing bio compositions simply never engage against a full mech army. This essentially removes the main advantage that the mech player has over bio.
Can anybody explain this part? It just doesnt make any sense to me.
Why does Siege Tanks being easy to relocate make Bio compositions never engage with them? Shouldnt it make it easier for the mech player to force an engagement because they are now easier to relocate?
Why does Siege Tanks being easy to relocate remove the advantages of mech? It just doesnt make any sense... Shouldnt it just give mech even more advantages? More mobility is a buff, is it not?
What are they trying to say???
|
On November 26 2015 07:49 RoomOfMush wrote:Show nested quote +The potential issue with Siege Tank pickup is that Terran play seems to have become more heavily bio favored because of it. We believe this is happening because previously, bio had the advantage of mobility and the disadvantage of being less powerful versus mech in a heads-up fight. Mech has the strong front line, but its composition isn’t mobile. Right now, due to Siege mode Tanks being so easy to relocate at a high pace (bio compositions naturally have a lot of Medivacs), we’re seeing bio compositions simply never engage against a full mech army. This essentially removes the main advantage that the mech player has over bio. Can anybody explain this part? It just doesnt make any sense to me. Why does Siege Tanks being easy to relocate make Bio compositions never engage with them? Shouldnt it make it easier for the mech player to force an engagement because they are now easier to relocate? Why does Siege Tanks being easy to relocate remove the advantages of mech? It just doesnt make any sense... Shouldnt it just give mech even more advantages? More mobility is a buff, is it not? What are they trying to say???
I believe they are talking about the bio player's tanks. I don't think the bio side is ever just pure bio, they have a few tanks
|
On November 26 2015 07:49 RoomOfMush wrote:Show nested quote +The potential issue with Siege Tank pickup is that Terran play seems to have become more heavily bio favored because of it. We believe this is happening because previously, bio had the advantage of mobility and the disadvantage of being less powerful versus mech in a heads-up fight. Mech has the strong front line, but its composition isn’t mobile. Right now, due to Siege mode Tanks being so easy to relocate at a high pace (bio compositions naturally have a lot of Medivacs), we’re seeing bio compositions simply never engage against a full mech army. This essentially removes the main advantage that the mech player has over bio. Can anybody explain this part? It just doesnt make any sense to me. Why does Siege Tanks being easy to relocate make Bio compositions never engage with them? Shouldnt it make it easier for the mech player to force an engagement because they are now easier to relocate? Why does Siege Tanks being easy to relocate remove the advantages of mech? It just doesnt make any sense... Shouldnt it just give mech even more advantages? More mobility is a buff, is it not? What are they trying to say???
Bio Tank uses lots of medivacs, mech does not.
|
On November 26 2015 07:38 PepperMintTea wrote:
I don't really know what the problem with Nydus wurm is
There is just very little counter-play to Nydus worms. You either have enough units or you don't, static defense + sim city are nearly useless against Nydus play. This forces Terrans into certain builds to not die to Nydus timings (which may not be particularly good against any other build), decreasing the variety of openings that can be used against Zerg.
|
On November 26 2015 07:17 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 06:33 Grumbels wrote:On November 26 2015 06:08 Sapphire.lux wrote:
I'm glad they are seeing the problem with mech vs bio due to flying Tanks in TvT.
But, what about there being f all mech in all the other MUs? Get on it Blizz and don't take 4 years like usual.
EDIT: about the proposed change of having tanks un-siege when picked up, it sound good but it's impossible to tell without seeing it in play. Make a test map please. After every expansion mech is weak again and Blizzard has to specifically address it. And every time they introduce new units they work best with bio. For your edit, this version of the tank pick-up is similar to Starbow's, it's strictly weaker than the current iteration and as far as I know didn't lead to any glaring issues in a game more sensitive to hyper mobility. On November 26 2015 05:59 cheekymonkey wrote:On November 26 2015 05:56 chipmonklord17 wrote:On November 26 2015 05:41 HeroMystic wrote:On November 26 2015 04:41 eviltomahawk wrote:
Bunker upgrade change
We agree with your feedback that this upgrade could use a redesign to something more interesting such as the popular suggestion of making them individual upgrades. We don’t think it’s such a pressing issue that it will break the game if we don’t fix it, so we‘re going to take our time working on this change. But we can get discussions going in terms of what might be the most interesting thing to do here, and work on it over time. Thanks for this suggestion and please continue discussing how we could best address the Bunker upgrade.
What is this "Individual upgrades" that Blizzard is talking about? Also I'd be totally fine with them just getting rid of the upgrade completely. Terran has too many upgrades/research anyway. It was brought up on a channel, maybe BaseTradeTV at some point that a suggestion was floating around to make Neosteal Frame an individual upgrade like overlord drop is for an overlord. This means that you could invest in transforming a specific bunker into a higher capacity bunker. A change that I think would be a really cool change for a currently worthless upgrade Overlord drop is an individual upgrade now And the way that Blizzard works, if they have a successful model for a certain type of change they'll be more likely to add it to other parts of the game. I think it's partly because they have to create some coding resources and so on. I think that part of the problem with mech is that Blizz doesn't always know how to read games. By that i mean that in both HOTS and LOTV BETAs, lots of Terrans were experimenting, and since mech was the intended new thing for terran, obviously there was lots and lots of mech. When the game comes out though, players start playing for money and they do what they think actually works. So DK and friends are in limbo: "we saw mech in BETA so why not now? Are players lazy? Is bio to strong? let's just wait 3 weeks, 3 months, one year, etc".
I just think it's funny:
- widow mines and hellbats added to factory -> bio too strong in TvZ
- siege tank pick-up added for medivacs -> bio too strong in TvT
- liberator added to starport -> bio too strong in TvP
mech never gets a break
|
I like the idea of bunkers being individually upgraded, perhaps the upgrade could add a turret or something similar to the bunker, meaning that Terran could have some form of static defense without having to commit supply to it. The upgrade cost could be expensive and take a long time to upgrade.
Another potential idea for the upgrade, still being individually upgraded could be spiked, deal damage to attacker upon activation. This would provide more micro opportunities for Terran, and would add another element to defensive play.
Obviously these upgrades would be better tuned for the mid - late game, so either having some form or armory requirement or costly + lengthy upgrade time.
|
Can we get a hotkey for "activate autocasting" on building interceptors ?
|
On November 26 2015 08:29 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 07:17 Sapphire.lux wrote:On November 26 2015 06:33 Grumbels wrote:On November 26 2015 06:08 Sapphire.lux wrote:
I'm glad they are seeing the problem with mech vs bio due to flying Tanks in TvT.
But, what about there being f all mech in all the other MUs? Get on it Blizz and don't take 4 years like usual.
EDIT: about the proposed change of having tanks un-siege when picked up, it sound good but it's impossible to tell without seeing it in play. Make a test map please. After every expansion mech is weak again and Blizzard has to specifically address it. And every time they introduce new units they work best with bio. For your edit, this version of the tank pick-up is similar to Starbow's, it's strictly weaker than the current iteration and as far as I know didn't lead to any glaring issues in a game more sensitive to hyper mobility. On November 26 2015 05:59 cheekymonkey wrote:On November 26 2015 05:56 chipmonklord17 wrote:On November 26 2015 05:41 HeroMystic wrote:On November 26 2015 04:41 eviltomahawk wrote:
Bunker upgrade change
We agree with your feedback that this upgrade could use a redesign to something more interesting such as the popular suggestion of making them individual upgrades. We don’t think it’s such a pressing issue that it will break the game if we don’t fix it, so we‘re going to take our time working on this change. But we can get discussions going in terms of what might be the most interesting thing to do here, and work on it over time. Thanks for this suggestion and please continue discussing how we could best address the Bunker upgrade.
What is this "Individual upgrades" that Blizzard is talking about? Also I'd be totally fine with them just getting rid of the upgrade completely. Terran has too many upgrades/research anyway. It was brought up on a channel, maybe BaseTradeTV at some point that a suggestion was floating around to make Neosteal Frame an individual upgrade like overlord drop is for an overlord. This means that you could invest in transforming a specific bunker into a higher capacity bunker. A change that I think would be a really cool change for a currently worthless upgrade Overlord drop is an individual upgrade now And the way that Blizzard works, if they have a successful model for a certain type of change they'll be more likely to add it to other parts of the game. I think it's partly because they have to create some coding resources and so on. I think that part of the problem with mech is that Blizz doesn't always know how to read games. By that i mean that in both HOTS and LOTV BETAs, lots of Terrans were experimenting, and since mech was the intended new thing for terran, obviously there was lots and lots of mech. When the game comes out though, players start playing for money and they do what they think actually works. So DK and friends are in limbo: "we saw mech in BETA so why not now? Are players lazy? Is bio to strong? let's just wait 3 weeks, 3 months, one year, etc". I just think it's funny: - widow mines and hellbats added to factory -> bio too strong in TvZ - siege tank pick-up added for medivacs -> bio too strong in TvT - liberator added to starport -> bio too strong in TvP mech never gets a break
It's because Mech doesn't have a strong, versatile, massable unit like the Marine. Hellbats are massable, but not versatile nor strong (Especially without medivacs). Widow mines are massable but very niche. Tanks are strong but not versatile and massable. Thors are strong and versatile but they sure as fuck isn't massable.
Cyclones are Cyclones.
|
For Co-op missions perhaps the difficulties could scale more, personally I have no trouble playing brutal missions whether it be campaign or co-op.
I wouldn't even describe Brutal to be difficult in that sense. From my experiences at this difficulty most of the challenge is just figuring out the correct unit composition to counter the AI's unit composition.
I think Brutal difficulty should force the AI to go through the cycle of compositions more accurately as players would in a multiplayer 1v1 game. Although one could argue they do do this at the moment, I would argue that they seem to do it very casually, and what I mean by this is say it was mid way through a mission, the AI may have built stalkers and colossus for example. The difference between the Brutal AI and a good player is that a good player knows that they need to prioritize keeping their colossus alive, which may mean pulling it back when it is targeted or targeting units which target the colossus. The AI doesn't seem to do this and it would be cool to see the AI micro more effectively for Brutal mode.
Other than that I agree that the level of difficulty should scale a bit more. Easy can remain the same if necessary but the other options should be more difficult I feel.
|
On November 26 2015 05:11 b0ub0u wrote:
Have you guys ever seen a game where the bunker upgrade was researched?
MVP did a build centered around rushing neosteel frame and containing protoss on 2 bases with bunkers and tanks. It was glorious.
|
On November 26 2015 06:08 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 05:56 DinoMight wrote:
LMAO bunker change.
At this point the only useful bunker change would be one that allows you to salvage it faster than Ravagers can kill it...
Flying Tanks are STUPID. That more than anything should be the driver for a change. But the reasoning for their change is quite dumb. They're changing it because Bio > Mech. Ok thanks, we've known that for 5 years now. And especially with the LotV economy changes and having to defend more bases/angles.. what did they expect??
Blizzard continues to keep their head up their own asses when it comes to addressing issues that have been voiced OVER AND OVER AND OVER by the community:
- Zerg is OP as fuck, nerf Zerg (this isn't simply balance whine, they're 45% of Masters....)
- Corrosive Bile is too strong
- Lurkers are too strong
- Parasitic bomb is too strong
- Ultras are too strong
- Terran has 1 viable build vs Zerg otherwise they die to Ravagers
- Colos are too weak
- Early aggression is nonexistent. Greed can only be countered by more greed. Please fix this
Man am I glad you aren't in charge of balance lol. Terran is fine, only race that has a right to complain about balance right now is Protoss. Seriously try bio + liberator compositions, their very good . Mech though is weak and I am fine with that because turtle mech should never be viable. You need to start scouting for when Hive starts so you can start a transition into Liberators (if for some reason you aren't making them already) and adding in some ghosts. It's nice, Terran can't stay MMM all game long and have to do transitions like all the other races.
Simply because terran isn't getting as rekt as hard compared to protoss doesn't make TvZ "fine".
|
On November 26 2015 08:38 [PkF] Wire wrote:
Can we get a hotkey for "activate autocasting" on building interceptors ?
'Alt+hotkey' toggles autocasting and I believe it defaults to toggling abilities on in groups with mixed states.
|
On November 26 2015 09:10 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 08:38 [PkF] Wire wrote:
Can we get a hotkey for "activate autocasting" on building interceptors ? 'Alt+hotkey' toggles autocasting and I believe it defaults to toggling abilities on in groups with mixed states.
Hey that's nice, I didn't know that. I'll try it -I use carriers a lot
|
I think they need an "insane" mode on the campaign missions. Brutal is good, but I think they could take it one step further and make the mission nearly impossible.
|
IMO the early game zerg need to be nerfed a bit.
I am a random player and I feel Terran is the weakest right now, then Protoss and Zerg. (I am only a master scrub so you can disregard my point of view)
Moreover I used to love to play Terran but on Lotv it became the less funny race to play of the three. I think I just doesn't like Terran new addition to the game.
|
I'm sorry to hear that the only thing on their radar regarding the siege tank is nerfing it without considering a different way of making it strong. The Terran universe continues to revolve around bio. Bio, bio, bio.
|
Keep in mind that Protoss and Zerg got new tiers 1, core unit in this expansion when Terran was the race struggling the most with the early game in HotS. Can someone explain me why?
|
i'll never understand about ppl complaining zerg being the op race when terran actually win 90% of tournaments with a lot of tvt finals lol... zerg can't be nerfed, otherwise no z will win a zvt anymore... I just think that they need to make a little buff to protoss and wait for zvt balance, even if its t favored at highest level, maybe z just need to find a way... I will only nerf the reaper bomb, 3 rax reaper into 3 cc openin actually too strong
|
On November 26 2015 06:45 lelfreg wrote:
So instead of flying tanks in one mode what they want to do is tanks magically changing their mode mid air AND faster than on ground. Finally, this makes perfect sense.
I'd also want to point out they want to remove the only gameplay change they added to Terrans in LotV. And with everything more deadly and more mobile, what we REALLY need is old, immobile, shitty tank. Fantastic.
THATS ACTUALLY NOT TRUE! They made marauders weaker now! and at the same time they made ultras stronger #becausewhynot. I do think ultras needed a SLIGHTbuff. But nerfing bios counter to it and simultaneously adding more armor to an ultra is absurd.
|
On November 26 2015 10:10 K)Vincent wrote:
i'll never understand about ppl complaining zerg being the op race when terran actually win 90% of tournaments with a lot of tvt finals lol... zerg can't be nerfed, otherwise no z will win a zvt anymore... I just think that they need to make a little buff to protoss and wait for zvt balance, even if its t favored at highest level, maybe z just need to find a way... I will only nerf the reaper bomb, 3 rax reaper into 3 cc openin actually too strong
First off, that statistic is so off. There wasn't even terran top 4 at blizzcon. 1 in top 8. 2nd of all, terran has highest skill cap so the top top top players who are mechanically perfect (innovation) or know build orders down to the second (taeja) can do very well in tournaments, but notice that there are only a few terrans that consistently show at the top
|
we are talking about LoTV dude, lol
|
On November 26 2015 06:58 purakushi wrote:Revert the siege tank to greatness: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Siege_Tank_(Heart_of_the_Swarm)#Patch_Changes- increase life from 150 to 160 if overkill is implemented - siege mode damage changed from 35 (+15 armoured) to 60 (70 if overkill is implemented) - siege mode upgrade damage changed from +3 (+2 armoured) to +4 (+5 if overkill is implemented) - attack cooldown increased from 2.8 to 3.0 (i.e. takes longer -- note, these are old Blizzard time seconds) - unsieges upon medivac pickup If a nerf is necessary, first look into increasing the attack cooldown. Reducing life can come second, but keep its high damage! A strong siege tank is awesome and makes it a unique unit.
Have you seen what a 3/3 tank ball does to anything bio.....it is disgusting, in mass tanks are super strong, there is no good way to buff them in smaller numbers without making them stupid in large numbers
|
On November 26 2015 10:19 K)Vincent wrote:
we are talking about LoTV dude, lol
When the liquipedia page says TBD it means 'to be determined' not 'Terran Based Destruction'
|
On November 26 2015 10:19 K)Vincent wrote:
we are talking about LoTV dude, lol
Then where are you getting the TERANS WIN 90% OF TOURRNEYs? There haven't been any LOTV tournaments!!!!surely you cant be talking about the automated ones, if you are basing balance off of those then you are fucking retarded
|
On November 26 2015 08:52 royalroadweed wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 05:11 b0ub0u wrote:
Have you guys ever seen a game where the bunker upgrade was researched? MVP did a build centered around rushing neosteel frame and containing protoss on 2 bases with bunkers and tanks. It was glorious.
I thought it was jjakji.
|
wow, bunkers can fit 6 cargo with an upgrade... who knew. I should start messing around with random on 2v2 so I play more terran.
|
Like we mentioned before, maintaining this is extremely important, especially at the start of a new game because many new gamers will visit sites such as the Battle.net forums, Teamliquid, or Reddit to check out the game and community.
Well.. Sometimes in life, the people with the stick have to lend or otherwise make value of his tool in commune with the ones without that tool.
Before I say how spineless these nerds are.
Maybe... Criticism has changed over the course of 5years of sc2.. since the decadent decline of an initial userbase (which would be argued of ever having had an influx of population by naysayers, "starcraft was never as big as X, its for hardcore people. Yah") the condition of most of the criticism from early on since then HAS been very constructive. I would argue with the announcement of LoTV More than enough of any users mind was set on Liberating SC2 from shackles and confinements of a multitude of problems never having been addressed.
Lots of good ideas were beat down by a segregated community, and lots of ideas blizzard threw into the game were complacently adopted. Much like the spine of the developers asking for you to choose a mild tone, and bare only constructive content lacking your emotional rating... The community to let their rubber arm go even further... How a community adopted a total revision of one unit like the swarmhost 2years into development because it was claimed from beta testing in LoTV it was a liked a lot more by the dev crew and took the game away from stalemates... may be true.. but without much of a whiplash the community took it. a lot of the time SH fall to the wayside unless cleverly timed in unique circumstances.
Now what tilted me.. and all the above can be disreguarded... and I did not mean to attack individuals calling people spineless. just attributing the notion that a large group of people with so much devotion to any part of SC2 took the careless procedure of Blizzard Development to allow them to get mad, or negatively tilted against aspects of 'a game'. hearing people rage on stream.. lol. The community has taken a lot of flack from blizzard turning the cheek all too often,
they want our feedback, but they want to look pretty and appealing to new comers.. Im pretty sure if their ducks were in order this kind of statement would be a useless piece of text in a 'community update', and it is. but they've inserted it as a way to conduct something... feedback isnt a matter of conducting and organizing it by giving broadstatements to people to filter their attitude, a good listener doesnt ask someone to speak this way, or that way, or dont get emotional when you're telling about this thing that bothers you, it doesnt look good to the people in the hallway waiting to see me...
Its horseshit blizzard.. you're treating a corral of players from 12-50years old like the same idiot that needs to be retold shit over and over. and its stuck inside "insider information". Seems like a big generalization of a vast demographic..
It's horse shit. people should be mad if they're mad at something they bought with whatever amount of time sinked into it wasted away staring at a monitor Zero Income.
I bought shoes and the middle of the sole detached from the glue. Middle of a run and it perpetuated a cramp in the arch of my foot for 15km...
not mad? naw i cant be, i gotta be constructive. SHOE MAKER! next time you gloe a shoe, DOUBLE Check and make sure MINE is GOOD... Sincerely Runner with leg splints..
Stop letting their bullshit fool you till the end of this train. Play it unattached to the direction the games going, Train your on rides on rails not road. Sooner you get outside and away from their BS the sooner you'll get to increase your baseline happiness.
They instigate their own drama. community updates are #hype joke of 2016.
Check out crowdfunded star citizen updates. They're interesting, along with that when done reading, a feeling of excitement with the direction they're heading feels right for a game still being designed.
I want to add this video to illustrate how silly things are.
+ Show Spoiler +Feels appropriate to ammend this... main
|
Neosteel Frame is the forgotten upgrade.
|
How about a compromise here - if sieged tank can still be picked up by medivac but must be dropped UNsieged, how about increase the capacity to TWO tanks - which means that one medivac can pick up TWO sieged tanks instead of one? As a matter of fact, a medivac can always carry two tanks, so what's the difference if it's allowed to pick up two sieged tanks - or should I say, RESCUE?
|
So many things on the to-do list. But yeah, lets talk about bunkers....
|
On November 26 2015 09:53 wjat wrote:
Keep in mind that Protoss and Zerg got new tiers 1, core unit in this expansion when Terran was the race struggling the most with the early game in HotS. Can someone explain me why?
the Herc was to strong and thats why we got dem reaper grenades. And those deny Zerg aggression pretty well, or atleast channel them into the form of Roaches. And well here comes the Marauder change into play haha. But yeah ... at some point Ravagers turn into free banelings. Which owns the t2 of terran a little. They should make the micro a bit harder, by making Ravagers slower the Roaches muahaha.
Also scrap the Siege tank Medivac idea ... Static units against Zerg and Toss are blerg. Give us hover siege mode research ! Since every race has longer ranged air units it shouldn't be to much of an issue.
|
Nothing about Ravagers or Nydus worm.
|
On November 26 2015 10:22 WhaleOFaTale wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 06:58 purakushi wrote:Revert the siege tank to greatness: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Siege_Tank_(Heart_of_the_Swarm)#Patch_Changes- increase life from 150 to 160 if overkill is implemented - siege mode damage changed from 35 (+15 armoured) to 60 (70 if overkill is implemented) - siege mode upgrade damage changed from +3 (+2 armoured) to +4 (+5 if overkill is implemented) - attack cooldown increased from 2.8 to 3.0 (i.e. takes longer -- note, these are old Blizzard time seconds) - unsieges upon medivac pickup If a nerf is necessary, first look into increasing the attack cooldown. Reducing life can come second, but keep its high damage! A strong siege tank is awesome and makes it a unique unit. Have you seen what a 3/3 tank ball does to anything bio.....it is disgusting, in mass tanks are super strong, there is no good way to buff them in smaller numbers without making them stupid in large numbers
Even if buffed in the way as suggested, a large number of tanks with lots of turrets around can still be crashed by a few broodlords or tempests in late game. And in LotV turtling will no longer be an option.
|
On November 26 2015 15:48 TedCruz2016 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 10:22 WhaleOFaTale wrote:On November 26 2015 06:58 purakushi wrote:Revert the siege tank to greatness: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Siege_Tank_(Heart_of_the_Swarm)#Patch_Changes- increase life from 150 to 160 if overkill is implemented - siege mode damage changed from 35 (+15 armoured) to 60 (70 if overkill is implemented) - siege mode upgrade damage changed from +3 (+2 armoured) to +4 (+5 if overkill is implemented) - attack cooldown increased from 2.8 to 3.0 (i.e. takes longer -- note, these are old Blizzard time seconds) - unsieges upon medivac pickup If a nerf is necessary, first look into increasing the attack cooldown. Reducing life can come second, but keep its high damage! A strong siege tank is awesome and makes it a unique unit. Have you seen what a 3/3 tank ball does to anything bio.....it is disgusting, in mass tanks are super strong, there is no good way to buff them in smaller numbers without making them stupid in large numbers Even if buffed in the way as suggested, a large number of tanks with lots of turrets around can still be crashed by a few broodlords or tempests in late game. And in LotV turtling will no longer be an option.
Naturally if T has no air support. Ultras can also be killed by one banshee. Making big changes this early is not wise in my opinion.
|
On November 26 2015 15:48 TedCruz2016 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 10:22 WhaleOFaTale wrote:On November 26 2015 06:58 purakushi wrote:Revert the siege tank to greatness: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Siege_Tank_(Heart_of_the_Swarm)#Patch_Changes- increase life from 150 to 160 if overkill is implemented - siege mode damage changed from 35 (+15 armoured) to 60 (70 if overkill is implemented) - siege mode upgrade damage changed from +3 (+2 armoured) to +4 (+5 if overkill is implemented) - attack cooldown increased from 2.8 to 3.0 (i.e. takes longer -- note, these are old Blizzard time seconds) - unsieges upon medivac pickup If a nerf is necessary, first look into increasing the attack cooldown. Reducing life can come second, but keep its high damage! A strong siege tank is awesome and makes it a unique unit. Have you seen what a 3/3 tank ball does to anything bio.....it is disgusting, in mass tanks are super strong, there is no good way to buff them in smaller numbers without making them stupid in large numbers Even if buffed in the way as suggested, a large number of tanks with lots of turrets around can still be crashed by a few broodlords or tempests in late game. And in LotV turtling will no longer be an option.
I don't think the tank needs to be buffed considering they are so good in tvt. the problem are the insane hardcounters p and z have. Making blinding cloud reduce the range of affected units by 6 would do a ton for tank viability in tvz
|
On November 26 2015 15:53 RaFox17 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 15:48 TedCruz2016 wrote:On November 26 2015 10:22 WhaleOFaTale wrote:On November 26 2015 06:58 purakushi wrote:Revert the siege tank to greatness: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Siege_Tank_(Heart_of_the_Swarm)#Patch_Changes- increase life from 150 to 160 if overkill is implemented - siege mode damage changed from 35 (+15 armoured) to 60 (70 if overkill is implemented) - siege mode upgrade damage changed from +3 (+2 armoured) to +4 (+5 if overkill is implemented) - attack cooldown increased from 2.8 to 3.0 (i.e. takes longer -- note, these are old Blizzard time seconds) - unsieges upon medivac pickup If a nerf is necessary, first look into increasing the attack cooldown. Reducing life can come second, but keep its high damage! A strong siege tank is awesome and makes it a unique unit. Have you seen what a 3/3 tank ball does to anything bio.....it is disgusting, in mass tanks are super strong, there is no good way to buff them in smaller numbers without making them stupid in large numbers Even if buffed in the way as suggested, a large number of tanks with lots of turrets around can still be crashed by a few broodlords or tempests in late game. And in LotV turtling will no longer be an option. Naturally if T has no air support. Ultras can also be killed by one banshee. Making big changes this early is not wise in my opinion.
This is exactly the time! Later tournaments start rolling.
|
On November 26 2015 15:53 RaFox17 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 15:48 TedCruz2016 wrote:On November 26 2015 10:22 WhaleOFaTale wrote:On November 26 2015 06:58 purakushi wrote:Revert the siege tank to greatness: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Siege_Tank_(Heart_of_the_Swarm)#Patch_Changes- increase life from 150 to 160 if overkill is implemented - siege mode damage changed from 35 (+15 armoured) to 60 (70 if overkill is implemented) - siege mode upgrade damage changed from +3 (+2 armoured) to +4 (+5 if overkill is implemented) - attack cooldown increased from 2.8 to 3.0 (i.e. takes longer -- note, these are old Blizzard time seconds) - unsieges upon medivac pickup If a nerf is necessary, first look into increasing the attack cooldown. Reducing life can come second, but keep its high damage! A strong siege tank is awesome and makes it a unique unit. Have you seen what a 3/3 tank ball does to anything bio.....it is disgusting, in mass tanks are super strong, there is no good way to buff them in smaller numbers without making them stupid in large numbers Even if buffed in the way as suggested, a large number of tanks with lots of turrets around can still be crashed by a few broodlords or tempests in late game. And in LotV turtling will no longer be an option. Naturally if T has no air support. Ultras can also be killed by one banshee. Making big changes this early is not wise in my opinion.
Then how about other hard counters of P's and Z's? Vipers, ravagers, disruptors, even adepts can destroy a cluster of sieged tanks. There's simply no positional play in such cases. Tanks could be dropped unsieged, but being picked up when sieged is a must for their survival.
|
Austria24417 Posts
I'd like it if they addressed the issue with protoss having no chance whatsoever and PvP being a terrible disruptor clusterfuck before they worry about whether or not the bunker upgrade needs a change. Weak update 
|
Fiddler's Green42661 Posts
Bunker changes are a hallowed tradition of balancing in SC2, how dare you imply otherwise Olli
|
Australia18228 Posts
No more Disruptor F2 into suicide
|
ffs I just hope they man up and buff tanks already if they are going to remove the whole tanks medivac thing. The tank really need something done with it as it stand. imo keep splash the same but increase single target damage is the way to go but hard to say
|
Why dont give the tank the same buff given to the ultra? Putting them with a flat damage of 50? Would be stronger vs marines, chargelots and zerglings, without making them OP vs counters like marauders or immortals. Lets test it please.
|
Wish they'd do more testing of potential balance changes via test maps, so people can try stuff out. With ingame chat it should be easier than ever to find people for some test games on those maps.
Telling us stuff on a weekly basis is just blabla to me, no real value aside from trying to keep players at bay.
|
On November 26 2015 05:02 Dumbledore wrote:
What's up with the bunkers?
Yea I am wondering what they want to change with bunkers...
I think that would be a terrible idea to remove siege tanks drops.
Anyway mech has no future since that has always been lame against toss, against terran during WOL we were only watching marines tanks vs marines tanks.
On HOTS in tvt we could see that and tvz. This games were great but sometimes so boring because turteling mech vs turteling swarm hosts ( before the nerf )
But in LOTV with ravagers, vipers and mech upgrades split, mech is no more viable. And thors are almost completely useless right now.
|
I have been talking to other old semi-pro NA players and some other active P players and none of us can figure out why the colo was nerfed so heavily. If you somehow missed it by this point the fully upgraded colo in LotV does the same damage as a base dmg colo in HotS (I believe? - 12+1 vs 15+2 damage and 10.2 vs 18.2dps)
?????????
|
On November 26 2015 20:31 -Kyo- wrote:
I have been talking to other old semi-pro NA players and some other active P players and none of us can figure out why the colo was nerfed so heavily. If you somehow missed it by this point the fully upgraded colo in LotV does the same damage as a base dmg colo in HotS (I believe? - 12+1 vs 15+2 damage and 10.2 vs 18.2dps)
?????????
I don't understand why they nerfed them so heavily, but maybe to force protoss players to use disruptors instead.
But not sure though
|
On November 26 2015 20:31 -Kyo- wrote:
I have been talking to other old semi-pro NA players and some other active P players and none of us can figure out why the colo was nerfed so heavily. If you somehow missed it by this point the fully upgraded colo in LotV does the same damage as a base dmg colo in HotS (I believe? - 12+1 vs 15+2 damage and 10.2 vs 18.2dps)
?????????
I guess they just removed it from the game without actually removing it, which is really weird indeed..
|
On November 26 2015 20:31 -Kyo- wrote:
I have been talking to other old semi-pro NA players and some other active P players and none of us can figure out why the colo was nerfed so heavily. If you somehow missed it by this point the fully upgraded colo in LotV does the same damage as a base dmg colo in HotS (I believe? - 12+1 vs 15+2 damage and 10.2 vs 18.2dps)
?????????
Because it's a terrible unit that leads to terrible deathball gameplay that Protoss has been cursed with since WOL. I guess they did not remove it for marketing reasons.
|
Why did they make the lings attack faster?
|
Dominican Republic614 Posts
On November 26 2015 04:41 eviltomahawk wrote:http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/20042934163Dusk Towers Stalker issueThank you for your feedback illustrating how Stalkers can blink from the 3rd location to the natural location on Dusk Towers. We’ll get this fixed soon as well.
this is something i dont quite get, and this is the reason why SC2 is so borring at times to watch, in BW there were maps were zerg could not let the protoss take a 3rd, because the map was favored towards zerg...
why would you like to remove this option when is part of the map gameplay?
|
My thoughts on coop.
Yes, coop is too easy. But the problem with coop is not that it's too easy.
It is not clear to me what the point of coop is and why anyone would continue to play it after a few games just to experience all the maps.
It is not tied to any interesting rewards. It is EXTREMELY FORMULAIC, with every map having exactly 1 base and 1 natural with a rock (why is there a rock?!). The first unit wave comes at the exact same time on every map. The only strategy is to mass 1 or 2 types of units. For example, for Kerrigan, your only strategy is to mass hydras (and maybe a few ultras) with lings as the mineral dump. You MUST always get hydras, no exceptions, because the AI will use air units and there's only 2 units that attack air, hydra and mutas, but mutas are weak, extremely expensive and useless in coop, making hydras a necessity in every situation, no matter what.
There are only 5 mission types and Void Shards are already overused, it appears in 2 LotV campaign missions, while the kill X stationary things appears in several LotV missions. The extreme overuse of this killing X things mission type has just gotten tedious in both campaign and coop.
Coop also feels like a grind. It's not fun after a while. And it's not clear how to fix this.
First, it needs to be fun, not just formulaic. More units are needed. More bases are needed. And not just more new maps, fix the current maps with more bases because they are currently a tedious bore. Every map should be different. What we have now is every map has the exact same formula, deviating only in the objective, the bases are the same, the timing of attack waves are the same. There needs to be more asymmetry.
Second, there needs to be a point in playing. What is the point of this mode? There's no good rewards, no leaderboards, no competitive elements. Maybe add some sort of leaderboard? What this leaderboard ranks can depend on the objective (e.g. for Void Thrasher it could be time to complete map, for Oblivion Express it can be the time that the trains spent alive, etc.)
I would be shocked if the retention of players in coop is anything more than abysmal.
Lastly, the coop page has strange and inconsistent UI. The dialog button on the coop page with that diagonal slant looks weird and doesn't appear anywhere else in the B.net UI, why not just use the normal, rectangular, non-slanted dialog button, like everywhere else? On the score screen after the game, you can't right-click your partner's name like you can in every other part of the UI, you can't chat with your partner because there is no whisper functionality. Add whisper functionality, and make the player name consistent with the rest of the UI, i.e. able to be right-clicked to bring up the context menu. And please add an option to turn off the annoying floating tooltip that says the unit's name on mouse-over.
|
Remove the fucking Siege tank pick up and buff the Siege tank. How stubborn can they be about this?
|
For the love of God add more co-op missions, a new difficulty, and 5 more commander levels.
Also, co-op campaign and rush Nova min-campaign pls
:D
On November 26 2015 23:18 paralleluniverse wrote:
My thoughts on coop.
Yes, coop is too easy. But the problem with coop is not that it's too easy.
It is not clear to me what the point of coop is and why anyone would continue to play it after a few games just to experience all the maps.
It is not tied to any interesting rewards. It is EXTREMELY FORMULAIC, with every map having exactly 1 base and 1 natural with a rock (why is there a rock?!). The first unit wave comes at the exact same time on every map. The only strategy is to mass 1 or 2 types of units. For example, for Kerrigan, your only strategy is to mass hydras (and maybe a few ultras) with lings as the mineral dump. You MUST always get hydras, no exceptions, because the AI will use air units and there's only 2 units that attack air, hydra and mutas, but mutas are weak, extremely expensive and useless in coop, making hydras a necessity in every situation, no matter what.
There are only 5 mission types and Void Shards are already overused, it appears in 2 LotV campaign missions, while the kill X stationary things appears in several LotV missions. The extreme overuse of this killing X things mission type has just gotten tedious in both campaign and coop.
Coop also feels like a grind. It's not fun after a while. And it's not clear how to fix this.
First, it needs to be fun, not just formulaic. More units are needed. More bases are needed. And not just more new maps, fix the current maps with more bases because they are currently a tedious bore. Every map should be different. What we have now is every map has the exact same formula, deviating only in the objective, the bases are the same, the timing of attack waves are the same. There needs to be more asymmetry.
Second, there needs to be a point in playing. What is the point of this mode? There's no good rewards, no leaderboards, no competitive elements. Maybe add some sort of leaderboard? What this leaderboard ranks can depend on the objective (e.g. for Void Thrasher it could be time to complete map, for Oblivion Express it can be the time that the trains spent alive, etc.)
I would be shocked if the retention of players in coop is anything more than abysmal.
Lastly, the coop page has strange and inconsistent UI. The dialog button on the coop page with that diagonal slant looks weird and doesn't appear anywhere else in the B.net UI, why not just use the normal, rectangular, non-slanted dialog button, like everywhere else? On the score screen after the game, you can't right-click your partner's name like you can in every other part of the UI, you can't chat with your partner because there is no whisper functionality. Add whisper functionality, and make the player name consistent with the rest of the UI, i.e. able to be right-clicked to bring up the context menu. And please add an option to turn off the annoying floating tooltip that says the unit's name on mouse-over.
You know, as someone who really enjoys co-op, I never really thought of it as potentially "repetitive" or a "grind." But I can definitely see how the lack of rewards and mission variety would turn someone off. Overall I think some type of leaderboard (or just basic rewards like more portraits) is a fantastic idea.
|
F2 should also ignore some units, for example if you want to hold a Xelnaga tower, you could leave a unit there in hold position and F2 ignore units that are in hold
|
Jesus Christ Blizzard and their goddamn bunker changes
|
Yes - This is exactly what is wrong with the game at the moment!!! - Are they sure they are on the same patch the rest of us are using ?
I think it's weird, how blizzard operates in this regard.. Every time something is being misused, the way they don't want in a certain MU, they want to change it for the worse, against the rest of the MU's.
|
Got to change the bunkers. That is the most important issue in every SC2 edition.
|
Improve F2 key functionality for Protoss deathball. Seems legit.
|
Most serious bug in co-op mode: your partner's name gets displayed during loading screens as their REAL NAME. What???
|
Did they fix the bug where robotics facilities aren't animated properly (closed robo appearance) when building units? It seems to be a LotV chronoboost bug, never used to happen in HotS as far as I know.
|
On November 26 2015 23:24 usopsama wrote:
Remove the fucking Siege tank pick up and buff the Siege tank. How stubborn can they be about this?
If so, say goodbye to siege tank forever in TvZ and TvP.
|
On November 27 2015 14:03 TedCruz2016 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 23:24 usopsama wrote:
Remove the fucking Siege tank pick up and buff the Siege tank. How stubborn can they be about this? If so, say goodbye to siege tank forever in TvZ and TvP.
exact !
|
On November 27 2015 01:13 Kon-Tiki wrote:
Jesus Christ Blizzard and their goddamn bunker changes
If you remove medivac pick up for sieged tanks now what's going to stop the ravager / disruptor shots from killing your tanks and getting away? Ravager pushes are already invalidating liberator, hellion, bio+bunker, and the odd widow mine openers, if they invalidated tank openers too what's the terran supposed to do against the early zerg push? Even if you play super safe every game and never third cc early (assuming you can consistently hold zerg pushes this way), the zerg just runs away with the game with econ when he scouts it.
|
Ultras 2 strong... lurkers 2 strong... liberators 2 strong...
|
I like how if the Siege Tank gets unsieged after being picked up it will be even easier for Zerg to do early Ravager pushes. Not that im happy with the current pick up situation (it messes TvT up) but this is not gonna solve all the problems. Ravager is just another unit that is excellent vs tanks :-/
|
On November 27 2015 14:32 Caihead wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2015 01:13 Kon-Tiki wrote:
Jesus Christ Blizzard and their goddamn bunker changes If you remove medivac pick up for sieged tanks now what's going to stop the ravager / disruptor shots from killing your tanks and getting away? Ravager pushes are already invalidating liberator, hellion, bio+bunker, and the odd widow mine openers, if they invalidated tank openers too what's the terran supposed to do against the early zerg push? Even if you play super safe every game and never third cc early (assuming you can consistently hold zerg pushes this way), the zerg just runs away with the game with econ when he scouts it.
100% agree with that and very good analysis
|
On November 27 2015 17:56 junkdrop wrote:
Ultras 2 strong... lurkers 2 strong... liberators 2 strong...
No No, it's all only a bunker problem.. . that will fix everything.
|
On November 28 2015 03:56 bObA wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2015 14:32 Caihead wrote:On November 27 2015 01:13 Kon-Tiki wrote:
Jesus Christ Blizzard and their goddamn bunker changes If you remove medivac pick up for sieged tanks now what's going to stop the ravager / disruptor shots from killing your tanks and getting away? Ravager pushes are already invalidating liberator, hellion, bio+bunker, and the odd widow mine openers, if they invalidated tank openers too what's the terran supposed to do against the early zerg push? Even if you play super safe every game and never third cc early (assuming you can consistently hold zerg pushes this way), the zerg just runs away with the game with econ when he scouts it. 100% agree with that and very good analysis
Is it not for picking up sieged tanks and unloading them unsieged?
|
On November 27 2015 00:27 ColterTV wrote:
F2 should also ignore some units, for example if you want to hold a Xelnaga tower, you could leave a unit there in hold position and F2 ignore units that are in hold
For the love of GOD blizzard make F2 select IDLE units. F1 selects IDLE workers.
|
On November 28 2015 08:02 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2015 03:56 bObA wrote:On November 27 2015 14:32 Caihead wrote:On November 27 2015 01:13 Kon-Tiki wrote:
Jesus Christ Blizzard and their goddamn bunker changes If you remove medivac pick up for sieged tanks now what's going to stop the ravager / disruptor shots from killing your tanks and getting away? Ravager pushes are already invalidating liberator, hellion, bio+bunker, and the odd widow mine openers, if they invalidated tank openers too what's the terran supposed to do against the early zerg push? Even if you play super safe every game and never third cc early (assuming you can consistently hold zerg pushes this way), the zerg just runs away with the game with econ when he scouts it. 100% agree with that and very good analysis Is it not for picking up sieged tanks and unloading them unsieged?
What's stopping the zerg from just forcing unsieges and killing a lot with their army? The siege tank pickup also gives a way for tanks to remain viable in the face of vipers. Thanks to parasitic bomb, vikings to counter vipers are worse than ever too. Parasitic bomb and blinding cloud synergy goes through the roof before you even consider ravagers.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
On November 27 2015 06:35 Haighstrom wrote:
Most serious bug in co-op mode: your partner's name gets displayed during loading screens as their REAL NAME. What???
Real?
|
On November 29 2015 14:22 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2015 06:35 Haighstrom wrote:
Most serious bug in co-op mode: your partner's name gets displayed during loading screens as their REAL NAME. What??? Real?
Only happens if you play with people that you befriended from Battle.net (shows their real name) instead of SC2 (shows their tag).
|
It's pretty simple reason why Terran is simply (dumb) right now - Cyclone is designed to be a 2 base gas unit but requires 3 base gas for it's cost
In other words - reduce Cyclone's gas cost OR - if you're still in the experimenting phase - then make Mules mine gas as well (as 4th worker).. Another way to maybe fix that is make it a Reactor unit but that might be a bit too much for start tho
Bio is still be viable even with Cyclone reduced cost because Terran still flows A LOT of minerals over gas lol
My concern so far is lategame PvP tho - seems to be once again a Tempest festival all over - so might wanna look at that tho
|
On November 26 2015 10:10 K)Vincent wrote:
i'll never understand about ppl complaining zerg being the op race when terran actually win 90% of tournaments with a lot of tvt finals lol... zerg can't be nerfed, otherwise no z will win a zvt anymore... I just think that they need to make a little buff to protoss and wait for zvt balance, even if its t favored at highest level, maybe z just need to find a way... I will only nerf the reaper bomb, 3 rax reaper into 3 cc openin actually too strong are you kidding? its been ONE major tournament and bunny happy, didnt won a single tvz. 28% tvz winrate in dreamhack. and people like Ty + bomber didnt have a chance. Zerg are to strong at the moment in many aspects of the game. nudys all inn, ravager counters everything, ultralisk litterally unkillable ( ofc u can kill whit ghost whit new snipe but how fast can terran tech change compared to zerg?)
pleease link me ONE tournament where a terran beats a zerg. in a final.
|
On November 29 2015 23:33 MiCroLiFe wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2015 10:10 K)Vincent wrote:
i'll never understand about ppl complaining zerg being the op race when terran actually win 90% of tournaments with a lot of tvt finals lol... zerg can't be nerfed, otherwise no z will win a zvt anymore... I just think that they need to make a little buff to protoss and wait for zvt balance, even if its t favored at highest level, maybe z just need to find a way... I will only nerf the reaper bomb, 3 rax reaper into 3 cc openin actually too strong are you kidding? its been ONE major tournament and bunny happy, didnt won a single tvz. 28% tvz winrate in dreamhack. and people like Ty + bomber didnt have a chance. Zerg are to strong at the moment in many aspects of the game. nudys all inn, ravager counters everything, ultralisk litterally unkillable ( ofc u can kill whit ghost whit new snipe but how fast can terran tech change compared to zerg?) pleease link me ONE tournament where a terran beats a zerg. in a final.
Maru beat Soulkey in an olimo league final
|
On November 29 2015 23:34 PepperMintTea wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2015 23:33 MiCroLiFe wrote:On November 26 2015 10:10 K)Vincent wrote:
i'll never understand about ppl complaining zerg being the op race when terran actually win 90% of tournaments with a lot of tvt finals lol... zerg can't be nerfed, otherwise no z will win a zvt anymore... I just think that they need to make a little buff to protoss and wait for zvt balance, even if its t favored at highest level, maybe z just need to find a way... I will only nerf the reaper bomb, 3 rax reaper into 3 cc openin actually too strong are you kidding? its been ONE major tournament and bunny happy, didnt won a single tvz. 28% tvz winrate in dreamhack. and people like Ty + bomber didnt have a chance. Zerg are to strong at the moment in many aspects of the game. nudys all inn, ravager counters everything, ultralisk litterally unkillable ( ofc u can kill whit ghost whit new snipe but how fast can terran tech change compared to zerg?) pleease link me ONE tournament where a terran beats a zerg. in a final. Maru beat Soulkey in an olimo league final i thoguht soulkey did comeback for like 1 week ago? ofc hes beaten. rusty as hell
|
On November 29 2015 23:41 MiCroLiFe wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2015 23:34 PepperMintTea wrote:On November 29 2015 23:33 MiCroLiFe wrote:On November 26 2015 10:10 K)Vincent wrote:
i'll never understand about ppl complaining zerg being the op race when terran actually win 90% of tournaments with a lot of tvt finals lol... zerg can't be nerfed, otherwise no z will win a zvt anymore... I just think that they need to make a little buff to protoss and wait for zvt balance, even if its t favored at highest level, maybe z just need to find a way... I will only nerf the reaper bomb, 3 rax reaper into 3 cc openin actually too strong are you kidding? its been ONE major tournament and bunny happy, didnt won a single tvz. 28% tvz winrate in dreamhack. and people like Ty + bomber didnt have a chance. Zerg are to strong at the moment in many aspects of the game. nudys all inn, ravager counters everything, ultralisk litterally unkillable ( ofc u can kill whit ghost whit new snipe but how fast can terran tech change compared to zerg?) pleease link me ONE tournament where a terran beats a zerg. in a final. Maru beat Soulkey in an olimo league final i thoguht soulkey did comeback for like 1 week ago? ofc hes beaten. rusty as hell
well you asked for a final where Terran beat Zerg and there you go. It was a pretty good series ended 3-2 to Maru
|
Also important to note, something no one I've seen here point out, all of the foreign Terrans placed last in their group - except when there wasn't a foreign Terran or there was a foreign Terran beneath them.
The only Korean players who weren't able to place first in their group were TY and Bomber (TY placed 2nd and Bomber placed 3rd respectively).
There wasn't a single Terran made it past the round of 8, Korean or otherwise.
Not to mention that for anyone actually competent at the game can notice that the way the protoss or zerg were playing seemed extremely suboptimal in their XvT games. Yet they still dominate in XvT games.
I agree completely. Ultralisk armour, parasitic bomb, nydus and ravagers needs to be toned down. Adept needs to be toned down at least early game. For Ravagers I am not sure if they are too strong in general or if they just should be moved to Lair.
|
Doesn't Terran need the tank pick-up to have any chance at all vs Ravager rushes? You need something mobile enough to dodge the ridiculously powerful spell they have.
|
On November 30 2015 00:42 NKexquisite wrote:
Doesn't Terran need the tank pick-up to have any chance at all vs Ravager rushes? You need something mobile enough to dodge the ridiculously powerful spell they have.
Tank pickup is actually quite bad vs Ravagers. The only counter at that time is banshees but typically you can only get a single banshee out against a fast Ravager rush. Which is one of the reasons why I think moving Ravagers to Lair would be a good idea.
|
On November 30 2015 02:52 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2015 00:42 NKexquisite wrote:
Doesn't Terran need the tank pick-up to have any chance at all vs Ravager rushes? You need something mobile enough to dodge the ridiculously powerful spell they have. Tank pickup is actually quite bad vs Ravagers. The only counter at that time is banshees but typically you can only get a single banshee out against a fast Ravager rush. Which is one of the reasons why I think moving Ravagers to Lair would be a good idea.
Ravager should be correctly categorized as armored unit and its regular attack should be nerfed. Just make it a caster like high templar.
|
I truly hope there were and will continue to be 3 60 minute long meetings each week about how to best address a bunker upgrade in terms of its impact on early TvT, endgame TvZ win rates and of course the "feel of the game" itself. It's probably the best moment to think about game design hard for a moment. The bunker upgrade.
|
I can't believe that parasitic bomb wasn't addressed. It stronger than its broodwar counterpart irradiate. That makes no sense given smart casting.
|
Yes, I am so glad we are finally talking about the bunker upgrade change to make LOTV more fun. I always thought that upgrade was a wasted one and rarely ever used. So some change to this would be great and would go a long way to fixing the major balance issues we are currently seeing in LOTV.
The sooner we can get the pros playing and testing this change, the better. Cant wait for those surprise bunker rushes and terrans holding the myriad of all in via the new bunker change...Cant wait!! Really excited for this bunker change guys!!
|
I'm not certain about numbers, but the easiest change for Parasitic Bomb is to mark the target red. It can be split from the group quicker if you have fast hands/reaction. Of course, a stack of mutas would be hard but larger objects like vray/carriers might be doable by even regular folks.
|
This bunker sarcasm is really beating a dead horse by now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
