EPTAs of now I think roach ravager is really too powerful in straight up fight, limiting the options for terran and protoss in early game.
LotV post-DH reactions - Page 11
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ETisME
12329 Posts
As of now I think roach ravager is really too powerful in straight up fight, limiting the options for terran and protoss in early game. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On November 30 2015 09:48 ETisME wrote: To add to my comments from a few pages ago, I really think a small nerf to roach hp can do wonders. As of now I think roach ravager is really too powerful in straight up fight, limiting the options for terran and protoss Well, I would like to see it nerfed (~10HP) and burrow micro ability increased through lower burrow delay and a tiny instant heal (~5HP) when you burrow instead of the increased increased regneration through tunneling claws. I dunno, haven't seen all TvZs but I remember one fight where Bomber (admittetly probably a favorite against most Zergs he played) pretty much steamrolled the roach/ravager/hydra army with a mainly marine army. I think the eventual strenght of the composition is fine. It looks like it matches up with bio-compositions if both of them are well-microed around the corrosive biles once the Terran has a good amount of (re-)production capability. The timing - as with all roach timings - might be too strong or too restricting though in LotV and cause Zerg to get leads where they shouldn't. Dunno, that's always such a hard call to make when the success of one side is often rooted in just playing much more sledgehammer than the other. | ||
|
Kenny_mk
50 Posts
For the PvP at least, i remember Parting or showtime losing like 20-25 supply to a disruptor shots(it was rare!that much loss only on one side happenned only once i think), and not engaging afterwards. Well all french casters on the moment were SHOCKED he did'nt engaged afterwards, they understood the stress of losing the fireball war was strong, but most said he still should, and while some casters may not be the best players (while amazing casters!) those one were really solid players, i think he should done that too,it's just he was'nt seeing the game and prefered to make it last. BUT he instantly lose position, so please don't say you need to lose 50 60 supply to lose position cause that's just wrong,losing 50 60 supply is so much, before lotv that's just was THE final fight who was the game.. And i think faster economy is really good and get this game near your (well not maybe you) holy BW,we are'nt losing the early phase for me at all. Everything is a bit faster but i personnally handle it and im not a good player (i mean come on guys im a toss) it might be hard for low gold and lower cause that's means their game might be dicted by luck (will they notice this liberator/adept soon enough? will they lose to disruptor?) but hey, top gold is something everyone can achieve if they like the game and play enough, and for the other well.. Starcraft 2 will never get a super popularity, so at least it have to be fun to watch, so it still lives, does'nt matter for me if the game is a bit more hardcore (and it shou'ld'nt be since there is less game with barely more than 2 fight, where a newb player can, for example , move command in the fight and just lose a 10 min macro game cause of this!) And this relate to the question about maxed pop, we barely saw them,meaning players were trading, meaning good games. | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On November 30 2015 10:25 Kenny_mk wrote: To answer the last answer from page 10 (actually lazy sorry) you people are for me simply not telling the truth and not knowing what you want For the PvP at least, i remember Parting or showtime losing like 20-25 supply to a disruptor shots(it was rare!that much loss only on one side happenned only once i think), and not engaging afterwards. Well all french casters on the moment were SHOCKED he did'nt engaged afterwards, they understood the stress of losing the fireball war was strong, but most said he still should, and while some casters may not be the best players (while amazing casters!) those one were really solid players, i think he should done that too,it's just he was'nt seeing the game and prefered to make it last. BUT he instantly lose position, so please don't say you need to lose 50 60 supply to lose position cause that's just wrong,losing 50 60 supply is so much, before lotv that's just was THE final fight who was the game.. And i think faster economy is really good and get this game near your (well not maybe you) holy BW,we are'nt losing the early phase for me at all. Everything is a bit faster but i personnally handle it and im not a good player (i mean come on guys im a toss) it might be hard for low gold and lower cause that's means their game might be dicted by luck (will they notice this liberator/adept soon enough? will they lose to disruptor?) but hey, top gold is something everyone can achieve if they like the game and play enough, and for the other well.. Starcraft 2 will never get a super popularity, so at least it have to be fun to watch, so it still lives, does'nt matter for me if the game is a bit more hardcore (and it shou'ld'nt be since there is less game with barely more than 2 fight, where a newb player can, for example , move command in the fight and just lose a 10 min macro game cause of this!) And this relate to the question about maxed pop, we barely saw them,meaning players were trading, meaning good games. He didn't lose map position at all, he just didn't engage. Big difference. Trading does not equate to good games. Fun to watch maybe, but I frankly find it rather dull unless there's a good deal of thought behind the trading. We're not complaining that the game is unplayable, merely that decision making has been heavily dumbed down due to pacing. The design moved in the wrong direction. | ||
|
alexanderzero
United States659 Posts
Lurkers, Ravagers, Liberators, Disruptors. Parting's comeback against Solar in game 4 of the finals never would have happened in heart of the swarm, and it was a well controlled slow push across the map too which was pretty awesome to watch. Legacy of the Void is the first iteration of SC2 that feels like a true sequel to Brood War. | ||
|
ledarsi
United States475 Posts
Can we get siege tanks back now Blizzard? | ||
|
ShambhalaWar
United States930 Posts
The unit makes really big plays possible. It's not like throwing a maxed army against a maxed army, and then 60 bane destroy bio because someone couldn't split in time, that's not something I enjoy watching, and the game completely ends right there. It's hard to land 3 disruptor shots at one (which could be game ending), but many times it's just one disruptor shot going off at a time. It's like trading big blows in boxing, a dynamic that creates some big moments and a great back and forth. I wish every race had a unit that could make big explosive blows like that, big blows that aren't always knockouts, and sometimes they are. | ||
|
Sogetsu
514 Posts
But I still will wait 2 more months. HotS looked awesome at first, with so many posibilities, so many new things, and then it fall in a hole with really boring games and the same thing over and over. What make Disruptor look good right now (because it is not being abused with Collossi behind for now), is that it requires micro from both sides instead only one (contrasting with Widow Mines for example). Let's hope the game get better and better in the opposite direction to HotS | ||
|
ledarsi
United States475 Posts
Lurkers and Siege Tanks should have a similar effect, but behave very differently. Lurkers are invisible, and Siege Tanks are immobile but with longer range. | ||
|
therabit
795 Posts
| ||
|
KOtical
Germany451 Posts
- TvT went from best Mirror matchup to worst imo. Doom Drops with siege tanks + bio killed all the good positional fighting from previous games. Matchup seems kinda to fast to die now. Early Reapers seemed also a bit to strong (Bomber vs TY) - PvP its the other way around, stalker + disruptor makes very weird and worn out games. Its good that its not to fast to die like in previous games, but it looked kinda boring. and even after a good disruptor shot its hard to kill the enemy. - TvP i still feel like adepts are a bit to strong, also disruptors. On terran side i feel like the liberator also needs some tweaks, in high number 6+ it looked to strong. - ZvP lurker timing push seemed super strong, i dont think there is a proper counter to that timing on protoss side. Adepts also a bit to strong here imo - ZvT cant say much about havent seen many games played out... | ||
|
b_unnies
3579 Posts
I prefer deathballs, I don't like how the economy makes it harder to max, and colossus is my favorite unit. I find turtling till 200/200 to be a lot better than short micro games, and that's why I like P the most in sc2 and I loved TvP in BW. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
| ||
|
MiCroLiFe
Norway264 Posts
On November 29 2015 06:42 MockHamill wrote: I am really impressed by the Zerg players especially in TvZ. That match up is so hard but somehow they still managed to win against all odds! Terran seem too strong though. I really hope Blizzard think long and hard before improving the bunker upgrade. Maybe they could tone down Liberators and improve Ravagers somehow? Terran seems to strong? whit 28% winrate vs zerg in DH? 2 best eu terrans had no chance. | ||
|
Wrath
3174 Posts
On November 30 2015 18:21 MiCroLiFe wrote: Terran seems to strong? whit 28% winrate vs zerg in DH? 2 best eu terrans had no chance. It is way way way too early to start pumping statistics. At the start of BW, Terran did not make it out of Ro16 in OSL until Boxer came and started making out build. Stop complaining about Balance the first month the game is out. | ||
|
Kenny_mk
50 Posts
On November 30 2015 12:44 Whitewing wrote: He didn't lose map position at all, he just didn't engage. Big difference. Trading does not equate to good games. Fun to watch maybe, but I frankly find it rather dull unless there's a good deal of thought behind the trading. We're not complaining that the game is unplayable, merely that decision making has been heavily dumbed down due to pacing. The design moved in the wrong direction. I don't feel like decision making has been dumbed down... In PvP before there was'nt almost no decision either than when i engage this big fight maybe now so i can take 2 more hit with colossi on the zealot And for me it's the other player that did'nt engage,not the other way around,it was up to him since he just did damage,we might not talk about the same game lol cause the player who lost supply lost position, and if this (your version)happenned then there is no wonder why parting won,cause even at my level a loss of 20 25 supply means im gonna engage! (in PvP or a almost equal situation at least) And Deacon_frost, aside PvZ which is hell for me too (i hope there will be some patch or some strong bo,i think players like us should rely more on, stargate with things like stasis ward) i don't understand what you says.. Having something to drop which effectively hurt the terran is like reeeaaally good after all those game loses to drops (since it is much harder to defend them)and in PvP (maybe my best match-up atm) i personally still doing really good with Stargate phoenix into Robo since new overcharge allow us to defend stalkers rushes more easily...Unless you are GM i think you don't have to play stalkers-Disruptors like the pro, and like i said, i hope this style will change as the meta evolve in the pro-scene.. | ||
|
Salteador Neo
Andorra5591 Posts
On November 30 2015 06:51 FabledIntegral wrote: - Lurker needs -1 range, but +5 to light. Maybe also make them burrow slightly slower. - Immortal needs some sort of buff. - Ravager needs a slight nerf, perhaps -1 range and they start of slow, and "roach speed" gives speed to both roaches and ravagers - Liberators need a slight nerf, whether it's ROF or something else - Siege tanks still should not be picked up from a medivac, more from a gameplay perspective. All for buffing them damage wise or some other facet after nerfing this. Agreed on pretty much everything. Specially on the lurker damage, I would love to see the base damage reduced a bit and given some bonus damage against either light or bio. That way it counters masses of lings/marines/zealots even better but doesn't do as well against stalkers/roaches/mech. Ravager needs to be armored asap, (get +1 armor maybe?) and then some nerf like you said. Since most people agree it comes too early in the game for such a powerful unit, I would suggest adding an upgrade on the roach warren that allows roaches to morph into them. Either that or a "Ravager Den" building that unlocks as soon as you have a Roach Warren. Not sure about the Immortal, I think it's fine atm as long as ravager gets the armored tag. After watching DH, I'm positive the best new units are the protoss and the worst are the terran. Both design and fun wise. Disruptor shots are exciting :D | ||
|
Salteador Neo
Andorra5591 Posts
| ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On November 30 2015 18:34 Kenny_mk wrote: I don't feel like decision making has been dumbed down... In PvP before there was'nt almost no decision either than when i engage this big fight maybe now so i can take 2 more hit with colossi on the zealot And for me it's the other player that did'nt engage,not the other way around,it was up to him since he just did damage,we might not talk about the same game lol cause the player who lost supply lost position, and if this (your version)happenned then there is no wonder why parting won,cause even at my level a loss of 20 25 supply means im gonna engage! (in PvP or a almost equal situation at least) And Deacon_frost, aside PvZ which is hell for me too (i hope there will be some patch or some strong bo,i think players like us should rely more on, stargate with things like stasis ward) i don't understand what you says.. Having something to drop which effectively hurt the terran is like reeeaaally good after all those game loses to drops (since it is much harder to defend them)and in PvP (maybe my best match-up atm) i personally still doing really good with Stargate phoenix into Robo since new overcharge allow us to defend stalkers rushes more easily...Unless you are GM i think you don't have to play stalkers-Disruptors like the pro, and like i said, i hope this style will change as the meta evolve in the pro-scene.. People have different styles and tastes. Right now the game is bad for me to play and I hate the map pool with an endless rage. I also feel like an idiot when I have to build pylons for defense... that's the most stupid thing in SC2 I have encountered and I played against mass warhounds. Also slower start would be cool(maybe 10 workers?) | ||
|
summerloud
Austria1201 Posts
On November 30 2015 01:40 neptunusfisk wrote: so changing the rules in starcraft is equivalent to changing a player in football what is changing a player in starcraft equivalent to then? and what are the meta changes in football and chess equivalent to? i think we can both arrive at the conclusion that your statement is even more absurd than the one you claim to be absurd changing a player in starcraft is equivalent to changing the coach in football, that should be really obvious from my analogy if you think about it for 2 seconds | ||
| ||
