EPTCommunity Feedback - December 4 - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
highsis
259 Posts
| ||
|
Sapphire.lux
Romania2620 Posts
On December 05 2015 04:17 Big J wrote: Because this is a pretty insane number they are proposing? "Hey guys, by the way adepts now deal flat 23 damage." sounds fair right? It sounds insane but it's not like there are lots of Thors out there and it will break the game. And IMO the Thor is such a slow and expensive unit that a stronger anti air would hardly make it the use every time kind of thing. Besides, Void Rays can focus fire shit super fast, Carriers have insane range and fire and forget interceptors, BL have broodlings that restrict movement, and air armies just suck in SC2  .It could be a big change in numbers but unless mass Thors becomes a thing, i can hardly see much problems with it. Expect a Hellbat buff next fallowed by "we tried to buff mech but it doesn't work" )FIX THE TANK BLIZZARD!!! | ||
|
IceBerrY
Germany220 Posts
On December 05 2015 04:01 Gullis wrote: We think the main cool factor of this unit is that it’s rarely seen. haha what xD That really is the worst "cool factor" ever. Ever. I don´t like the Carrier, i think the mechanic is really dull, but whatever. Not sure about the other tweaks yet, pylon overcharge really feels too spammable as of yet. Increasing its duration doesn´t sound exiting neither, kind of a tough call to make. | ||
banjoetheredskin
United States744 Posts
| ||
|
HomeWorld
Romania903 Posts
I really do not understand this "cautious" apporach; test small random changes and hope it will turn ok. Also, I have yet to understand why almost the entirety of beta was lost on promoting weird economy changes and have those reverted later on, or in the end, being toned down, while little attention was given to the actual existing and new units and their impact on the game. "The Ravager", this unit is too much too early, in any match-up. Reaper, cool detonation sound bro, no use past very early game. As for disruptor in PvP, screw it, it's a mirror match-up, leave it for later. Don't mess with a unit for the sake of mirror match-up and have it become useless or way too powerful against the other races. | ||
|
DuB phool
United States1003 Posts
I had this idea where forcefields cause a disruptor shot to reverse direction with double velocity and be momentarily uncontrollable. Disruptor pinball >>>>> disruptor tennis. Right? RIGHT??? | ||
|
Sapphire.lux
Romania2620 Posts
On December 05 2015 04:52 DuB phool wrote: So. I had this idea where forcefields cause a disruptor shot to reverse direction with double velocity and be momentarily uncontrollable. Disruptor pinball >>>>> disruptor tennis. Right? RIGHT??? It would fit Protoss really well IMO | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3552 Posts
On December 05 2015 04:52 DuB phool wrote: So. I had this idea where forcefields cause a disruptor shot to reverse direction with double velocity and be momentarily uncontrollable. Disruptor pinball >>>>> disruptor tennis. Right? RIGHT??? lol, I would love to play that on the Arcade  | ||
|
Dodgin
Canada39254 Posts
On December 05 2015 04:43 highsis wrote: Parasitic bomb is a joke. Mark my words. We will have in a few months Zerg dominating late games with parasitic bomb. It's even stronger than WOL's late zerg. I think the reason it hasn't been commented on is because lotv games rarely get to that stage, at least in my experience of never having seen a viper built in 140~ games. | ||
|
CannonsNCarriers
United States638 Posts
| ||
|
xtorn
4067 Posts
On December 05 2015 04:01 Gullis wrote: We think the main cool factor of this unit is that it’s rarely seen. haha what xD I facepalmed at that as well. What an exciting factor! | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20344 Posts
We think the main cool factor of this unit is that it’s rarely seen. screaming internally | ||
|
heishe
Germany2284 Posts
On December 05 2015 04:49 HomeWorld wrote: Oh well, this community feedback follows the general direction set by previous ones, small changes (or at least the intent) that make no sense, here and there, while overlooking very huge issues this game faces so far, for example: invincible not target-able (and if i've observed correctly, surrounding it with buildings is useless, units will emerge beyond) nydus worm; viper parasite bomb which pretty much (when vipers number is sufficiently high) guarantees full enemy air force wipe-out (no matter how hard you try to micro the afflicted units); no real ground based counter to any race late game air based blobs; cyclone being pretty much useless beyond early game (except some rare occasions) and so forth. I really do not understand this "cautious" apporach; test small random changes and hope it will turn ok. Also, I have yet to understand why almost the entirety of beta was lost on promoting weird economy changes and have those reverted later on, or in the end, being toned down, while little attention was given to the actual existing and new units and their impact on the game. "The Ravager", this unit is too much too early, in any match-up. Reaper, cool detonation sound bro, no use past very early game. As for disruptor in PvP, screw it, it's a mirror match-up, leave it for later. Don't mess with a unit for the sake of mirror match-up and have it become useless or way too powerful against the other races. Except those are not genuinely huge issues and players probably just haven't figured out how to deal with it correctly. For example, Nydus all ins are no problem if you actually prioritize your economy correctly: You just have to have enough stuff to defend vs them. But many players get caught off guard or were too greedy before and then complain when their wall doesn't save them. I mean, your perspective is kind of funny, because the entire reason for wanting to kill a nydus before units come out is because you have no way to deal with them once the units arrive. This just should never be case, and you have to adapt your openings and game progression to survive vs nydus all ins, not ask Blizzard for letting you kill Nydus so you don't have to deal with the units that come through them. I'm obviously biased since I'm Zerg but every time I win a game and look at the replay my reaction is the same: People just play like they've played for 5 years instead of genuinely trying to change up their playstyle and then complain when it doesn't work. People were just used for 5 years that Zerg doesn't do anything too aggressive until its a full scale all in or mid game with mutas or other more aggressive units arrives, and thus haven't learned to scout and react to opponents eco when it's clear they're going to do a timing attack, and then scale back of getting upgrades or new CCs and SCVs, and make more units instead, or changing up unit compositions to deal with it. People literally just blindly build their favorite unit composition while trying to turtle and then complain when it doesn't work. Or they try blatantly greedy opening and then complain when they don't have enough units when a push arrives. Same goes for parasitic bomb: Whoops! I make 100 supply air units and my opponent beats it with only a couple of vipers! Guess parasitic bomb is imba! I hope you don't switch to Zerg, make mass mutas and corruptors and then complain that they're countered by a miniscule amount of Thors compared to your army. I have yet to be pointed to a single replay where a Zerg does something that is considered imba right now, wins and I can say "yup, not much the T/P could've done there" or "short of amazing robot like micro nothing could be changed in the outcome here". Instead I always see giant mistakes which the all players make (ALL of them, including most pros) which could be alleviated by simple change of decision making. But instead they just try to copy all BOs of pros they knew in the past, without actually thinking about why they're doing what they're doing. And as a result Zerg dominates, because Zerg players have been learning this skill since the very beginning when SC2 came out. To scout opponents eco, interpret it, and react to it in just the right manner that you have an econ advantage while also not dying to aggression. And the other two races now need to figure this out vs Zerg, but haven't. | ||
|
Sapphire.lux
Romania2620 Posts
On December 05 2015 03:41 eviltomahawk wrote: Carrier build time We believe that we over-nerfed the Carrier during the beta. Due to how strong Carriers were with their new ability, we believe the stat nerf was good. However, we do wonder if we can reduce Carrier build time again so that we can have more Carrier play in Protoss matchups. We think the main cool factor of this unit is that it’s rarely seen. The main cool factor is, or should be, that it's a big capital ship that relies on micro to be effective, unlike Tempests, BLs or BCs. The only thing that amazes me more then how they got the Carrier wrong is how they got the Siege Tank wrong. | ||
|
p68
100 Posts
Now, if Blizzard could stop being so obstinate about improving the siege tank, that'd be great. We need to continue this dialogue and continue to pester them about this. I'm surprised to see no feedback about the cyclone, given how underutilized it is. | ||
|
coolman123123
146 Posts
| ||
|
HeroMystic
United States1217 Posts
On December 05 2015 05:15 p68 wrote: The Thor buff is a nice step in the right direction, although being as cumbersome as it is remains a challenge. I wish they'd consider giving us Thor-minis, that are weaker, but smaller and cheaper. Now, people would usually say this is the Goliath, but they gave us Warhounds instead. | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On December 05 2015 03:41 eviltomahawk wrote: Disruptors in PvP While we agree with you guys in that the new PvP is very exciting at the moment, we did wonder if we should eventually tune the +shields damage down a little bit so that the Disruptor continues to 1-shot units like Zealots and Stalkers, but doesn’t 1-shot other Disruptors. This would naturally buff certain Protoss ground units against the Disruptor as well, potentially lending more diversity to unit compositions in PvP. Sounds very reasonable. I'd hold off just a bit because we've only seen one remotely high-level PvP so far, and it's possible that other units (like Phoenixes) will find their way into the meta without any changes. Thor With the new units and new unit changes coming into the game, we do agree with you guys that the Thor could use a pass. There look to be situations where players need better counters to air, so we wonder if the best move here is to up the Thor’s damage against armored air units, such as going to flat damage on the AA weapon. YES! Now we're getting somewhere. A) Thors suck. B) Mech anti-air sucks. C) We're tired of air blobs countering air blobs. This has the potential to fix all three problems in one go. Pylon Overcharge We’re wondering if we can go ahead with increasing the energy cost to 50 for this, while also increasing the duration on this ability. When we analyzed Protoss games so far, it looked to us that the results of most games wouldn’t have changed drastically even with this change. We believe this change could improve the game because it would reward players that are being offensive against Protoss for utilizing good positioning as Overcharge won’t be able to cover as much ground as it does now. We are considering moving forward with this change sooner than we expected, so please give us your thoughts. Are Protoss struggling to hold off early aggression (unrelated to Zerg strength)? That's the only plausible justification for not removing/nerfing PO, which the least there is of in SC2, the better off SC2 will be. So far I haven't seen that to be the case. So... why the duration buff? Carrier build time We believe that we over-nerfed the Carrier during the beta. Due to how strong Carriers were with their new ability, we believe the stat nerf was good. However, we do wonder if we can reduce Carrier build time again so that we can have more Carrier play in Protoss matchups. We think the main cool factor of this unit is that it’s rarely seen. This is so confusing on so many levels. The main cool factor of this unit is that it's rarely seen. So you want to make it better. So it will be more often seen. Which will remove the cool factor of novelty, replacing it with the cool factor of... air deathballs? Look guys, the Carrier right now is a shit version of the Liberator, and by "shit" I don't mean UP, I mean the design is shit. The Liberator sieges an area, but to do so it enters an immobile state and places itself next to danger. This is interesting. It means risk/reward. The Carrier sieges an area from 20 range away and flies off to do its thing. This is not interesting. I don't have a good idea of what direction to take the Carrier in right now, maybe others here do, but in waiting for a good idea I'd prefer Carriers stay as useless as possible. Zerg Strength in general We definitely hear your feedback about Zerg being stronger, and in the games we play ourselves, we can see that a bit. However, in the highest level games that happened so far, granted there haven’t been a large number of games yet at the pro level, what we’re seeing is a bit different. This might be because the strategies against things like Ravagers or Lurker based compositions haven’t fully developed yet, and it could also be because there is some balance issue. We’ve seen plenty of times in the past where players like us have some issue, but once pro players show us the way, we perform much better. We just don’t know for certain yet, but we could definitely test things like nerfing the damage of Corrosive Bile, timing of when Lurkers are available, etc. on the Balance test map. Let’s just get discussions going on potential changes that we could be exploring. Ravagers come out too early is the first problem. (They may need other nerfs, they may not, but this is the first thing to look at.) Invulnerable Nydus should not exist. Even if it turns out to be not completely unstoppable, only almost entirely unstoppable, ask yourself: what sort of gameplay will actually come out of it? BO wins. Do we like BO wins? Would we rather pros BO win against each other, or play action-packed games where they both have opportunities for comebacks? Just think about that for a minute. I don't see any upside to Invulnerable Nydus existing. Parasitic Bomb is a very bad spell. It needs a very hard nerfing, and Hydras should get an anti-air buff to compensate. Ultras are still ridiculous. We're not seeing any games with them yet, same as Parasitic Bomb, because the games aren't going that far. But the GSL pre-season is going to show just how ludicrous Zerg lategame has become. There's one thing people don't really talk about, and it's that with every expansion, average map size gets bigger. This is an inherent buff to Zerg. It's a huge buff. It means that in the late game, a Terran or Protoss has a lot more ground to cover on creep, which is dangerous vs speedy Zerg units and it means they have to spend more time clearing creep before they can even engage, AND it means that a Zerg has a lot more time to react/tech switch to counter the army of his opponent. Couple that with significant buffs to Zerg lategame air (cannot be countered by other races' air now) and lategame ground (Ultras no longer countered by micro), how is that ever going to work out? Balance test map update We want to get your feedback on adding all the above balance changes to the Balance Test Map. We’re not saying these changes will go into the game for certain, we just wonder if it’ll be better if we can see some of these changes in action earlier on in case something turns out to be an issue that we need to act on sooner rather than later. As we mentioned towards the end of the beta, our current thought for Balance Test Maps and balance testing in Legacy of the Void is to more aggressively test different options even before we know that they are issues for certain. In this way, we can be more prepared to act quickly if needed. If there turns out to be no need for the change, we can simply remove the change we’re testing in the Balance Test Map and go on to other potential changes. We want to get discussions going because this would be a big change from how the Balance Test Maps were done in Heart of the Swarm. In Heart of the Swarm, we only began testing issues once we were fairly certain that the issue was truly problematic. With Legacy of the Void, we want to get a head start. Thank you for continuing to help make the game better. Let’s continue this collaboration and get constructive discussions going on these topics so that we can do what’s best for the game." HOLY FUCK, YES. Thank you Blizzard. Thank you, thank you, thank you. This is what many of us have been asking for for a long, long time. This may be the most important change to come out of this update. I'm shocked speechless. This is very good news. | ||
|
StarscreamG1
Portugal1653 Posts
| ||
|
PinoKotsBeer
Netherlands1387 Posts
| ||
| ||
