|
On December 14 2015 07:08 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2015 23:50 cop354g wrote:
Fact is, that terran has always been really out of place-race in SC2. Zerg and protoss are far more suited to the fast pace nature of SC2 because of superior mechanics. Terran is extremely inflexible, clunky, and horribly slow race. Its so much easier for especially Zerg to be constantly mobile and take the map while terran is forced to turtle inside 2-3base and every time terran moves out its 100% gamble. Drops are not effective at all in sc2 because defences are so good and terran has hard time fightning straight up so whats left for terran?
Terran issues are biggest in Lotv than ever before with new additions to other races, terrans got just a bone. Terran is the slow race? Go back to 2015 PvT and watch any good Terran run circles around Protoss who have no way to break up their deathball. Terran has plenty of problems but bio is one of, if not the, most mobile composition in the game.
I think I know what he/she means by "slow". Terran just "feels" more like you're tied down and there's more to keep track of, IMO.
The little things add up. Protoss just needs a single worker to build buildings and drones become buildings, so there's less worker management as far as macro and sim city are concerned. Now, of course there's a disadvantage to each, but mechanically, it's not as cumbersome to deal with. Terran buildings also just take up so much space (and add-ons make this worse!) and it's easier to create an accidental clusterfuck, IMO. And speaking of add-ons, add-on management is an example of another extra little thing you have to worry about. Your unit production stops while add-ons are being built and you'll swap buildings to trade add-ons pretty regularly.
Now, let's talk units. Terran has a lot of units with different "modes". Hellion/hellbat, viking transformations, Liberator, widow mine, and the siege tank.
Three of these units need to be 100% immobilized to perform a specific function. Do not underestimate how cumbersome and annoying this is to manage! Zerg has lurkers to manage, while Protoss has zero units that become 100% immobilized to function (please correct me if I'm wrong). In fact, Disruptors have great move speed, Colossi can traverse cliffs and don't collide with other ground units, and Tempests are air units. The latter two, despite having slow movement speed, are less of a chore to manage.
Lastly, I'll just comment about unit production overall. I don't think Terran has any advantages here (besides reactors, I guess?). Warpgates shouldn't need an explanation, and while it is a disadvantage to have to produce workers and army from the same building for Zerg, I believe this is strongly outweighed by the flexibility and ease of building management it provides, as far as chores are concerned.
Now, of course every race has their advantages and disadvantages and "chores" they have to worry about. That's a given. But I'm convinced that Terran's just more cumbersome to manage, if you look at the bigger picture.
|
On December 15 2015 03:07 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2015 03:04 WrathSCII wrote:On December 15 2015 02:54 Xequecal wrote:
Well, you could make Tempests.....oh wait Zerg has Vipers, all air is useless. Ah come on! Tempests 450 HP and PB does 70. For real! It does 90 and it stacks. Which makes it very powerful against air, to say the least
While PB is OP as hell imo, tempests really shouldn't have large issues with it. They are very strong, and if you just tell them to attack a viper, they will do from large range, which is good point one (so more vipers die before they can cast), and this also means they automatically drift further apart. If you do the same with voidrays, they will be horribly clumped, and they will all die in 4 seconds.
As terran I nowadays vs zerg always go for battlecruisers. They have alot less range than tempests, so they stack more, but with their HP they can handle quite a bit. Although they definately are still affected quite a bit by PB. On the other hand it is really pleasing to see Vipers trying to run for safety while Yamato cannon is powering up. You can run, but you can't hide  .
|
You can shift-click a worker back to mining after constructing something, so it doesn't take any more attention than Protoss. Zerg actually has the hardest job here because you have to account for the fact that the worker is permanently gone. You also have two seperate rally points (worker/units) and have to deal with spreading creep as well.
Protoss has to constantly deal with their short range units (Zealot/Adept) getting stuck behind their longer range units (Stalkers/Immortals) and not contributing to the fight. Also Sentries have longer attack range than Guardian Shield range and don't cover melee units unless manually microed forward. And don't get me started on the stupidity that Barrier is.
Terran bio all has the same attack range and same move speed. You lose a little Marine DPS if you stutter step them at the cadence of Marauders in one ball but that's all you lose, you don't have units that can't shoot at their targets because they're stuck or out of range.
|
On December 15 2015 03:07 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2015 03:04 WrathSCII wrote:On December 15 2015 02:54 Xequecal wrote:
Well, you could make Tempests.....oh wait Zerg has Vipers, all air is useless. Ah come on! Tempests 450 HP and PB does 70. For real! It does 90 and it stacks. Which makes it very powerful against air, to say the least
But 90 is not that much. Even if you could perfectly stack 3-4 so they affect each of those Tempests over their full duration, that's still worse than just having the same gas/supply in consistent anti-air units. Or just abducting the Tempests to begin with. (yeah, you can abduct+parasitic bomb with a single 200 energy viper, but even with the energy regeneration it takes a very slow game to actually use that; and then your opponent's, lower supply energy units should play a major factor in as well)
I don't think the problem with the PB is Capital Ships. It's rather that it is too good against smaller/lower HP air units which will stack very hard naturally because they have a smaller separation radius and occur in larger numbers which makes it too hard, or even impossible, to spread them properly. And you can't just skip on those units. Not even in a slow game, because they fulfill important roles in many scenarios that you can basically force as zerg, mainly through broodlords.
|
On December 14 2015 17:36 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2015 15:46 BronzeKnee wrote:On December 13 2015 05:07 DemigodcelpH wrote:
Parasitic Bomb needs immediate nerfs, and Photon Overcharge does not need "compensation". It's spammable and needs a straight nerf. I don't like Photon Overcharge at all, but Protoss is seriously hurting right now and needs it to just stay in the game early. So Protoss does need compensation of some sort if it is going to be nerfed. Yes, but they need real compensation. To be fair, maybe (initially) the Photon Overcharge needs compensation too, but it is a bandaid for the real problem. To be fair, I am not a toss player, and I don't know their exact problems really. Few days ago I saw Harstem fight Polt with purely gateway units vs terran who besides MMM also had ghosts and liberators. Sure in the end he lost, but I don't think we can with adepts really say their gateway units are shit. Maybe give zealots instead of their stupid damage on impact with charge, high armor when charge is activated for a flat few seconds or so. Or hell, just reboost Colossus to where it used to be. At the same time I am also not really a fan of the adepts who murder an entire mineral line in a few seconds and teleport around. Unless you got your Cyclone in the right position, and you completely ruin the day of the protoss. Quite frankly, if with whatever option that adept drop is nerfed, I don't think regarding PvT openings protoss will suffer that much, for starters it might make air openings viable again. Right now I just always make sure I got a cyclone, since otherwise adept drop pretty much kills me instantly. However it also means that everytime I see an oracle it is generally easy kill for my Cyclone. And then the problem is of course everything is connected. As terran I could possibly agree that the Cyclone is as early unit on the strong side. Nerfing it would help protoss with the early harrasment, but at the same time Cyclone is really not in a position to be nerfed. I don't think that lockon is ever going to be a good idea. Anyway back to the original point: I don't see the photon overcharge as something any race, including protoss, should be happy about. It is just to hide the real problems. If it were up to me I would even remove the entire MsC. Make sure they don't need to rely on their supply depots doing terrible damage, and if they need something against lategame drops/runbys, add an upgrade, we can call it photon overcharge, which boosts photon cannons. That said, I have my doubts if the solution to flanks/runbys/drops should be that you just make some static defense and go back your deathball.
In regards to the Cyclone and Adepts, I like them both in the matchup, but feel they are a bit too one dimensional. Cyclones just shut everything down defensively too easily, but aren't great beyond stopping harass. The Adept is a bit too good early, maybe more of it's attack speed should be moved to the upgrade.
It would neat if Cyclones were toned down a bit early and then give some kind of upgrade to make them more effect late., Like an upgrade that allowed them to go into a Siege Mode and bombard a specific area of the map with rockets from a distance of ~12. They would lock down like a Siege Tank and then slowly shoot rockets at random spots in the AOE indefinitely. The rockets wouldn't deal huge damage, but it could be neat harrass for hitting minerals lines or creating a no man's land in front a Siege line. Probably overlaps too much with Liberators though.
I think I'll write a long article on this, but SC2 right now is suffering from a lack of cohesive design ideas. Blizzard wants there to be action all over the map. But they also want you to have tons of unit abilities to micro. Those are mutually exclusive concepts. You can't be everywhere at once to micro these abilities. Fancy abilities work in League of Legends because you control a single unit, but they only work well in an RTS if you have deathballs. Years of creating the custom map Coming of the Horde for WC3 gives me extensive experience in that area.
SC2 needs to decide what it wants to be.
It is no wonder that Zerg with such basic units that don't have many abilities (Lings, Roaches, Hydras, Lurkers and Ravagers) and don't require much micro are destroying Protoss, which has increasingly become reliant on abilities. Even the best players would struggle to land Disruptor shots if a Zerg player splits their army into two groups and attacks different locations. And God forbid they split it into three or more groups, then even the pros are screwed. The Protoss units without micro are too weak against Zerg units without micro at the moment.
Reverting the Colossus nerf is a great idea to help solve that problem.
Finally, to return to Photon Overcharge, it is a bandaid. But I don't know how I'll stop Liberator harass and early Terran or the variety of early Zerg timings without it. My units just aren't good enough early to stand toe to toe with Ravagers and the like. And I can't produce super expensive units early because I have to expand. In HOTS and WOL Protoss would expand the slowest of the three races, and for a reason: Protoss needed certain units to do so safely.
I predicted the economic changes would hurt Protoss the most, and it is coming true.
|
On December 15 2015 03:34 Xequecal wrote:
You can shift-click a worker back to mining after constructing something, so it doesn't take any more attention than Protoss.
This isn't strictly true. You have to shift click them back like protoss, but protoss can do it all with a single probe. So Terran has to go grab N SCVs to make N buildings, give the build commands, shift queue back. Protoss has to grab 1 probe to make N buildings, give the build commands, and shift queue back. Zerg has to grab N workers, and give the build commands, but no shift queue back (although I guess you could add the 4 s d [N times] to make new drones).
The difference isn't necessarily very significant, but there is, at least, a difference.
|
On December 15 2015 03:59 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2015 03:07 The_Red_Viper wrote:On December 15 2015 03:04 WrathSCII wrote:On December 15 2015 02:54 Xequecal wrote:
Well, you could make Tempests.....oh wait Zerg has Vipers, all air is useless. Ah come on! Tempests 450 HP and PB does 70. For real! It does 90 and it stacks. Which makes it very powerful against air, to say the least But 90 is not that much. Even if you could perfectly stack 3-4 so they affect each of those Tempests over their full duration, that's still worse than just having the same gas/supply in consistent anti-air units. Or just abducting the Tempests to begin with. (yeah, you can abduct+parasitic bomb with a single 200 energy viper, but even with the energy regeneration it takes a very slow game to actually use that; and then your opponent's, lower supply energy units should play a major factor in as well) I don't think the problem with the PB is Capital Ships. It's rather that it is too good against smaller/lower HP air units which will stack very hard naturally because they have a smaller separation radius and occur in larger numbers which makes it too hard, or even impossible, to spread them properly. And you can't just skip on those units. Not even in a slow game, because they fulfill important roles in many scenarios that you can basically force as zerg, mainly through broodlords.
Nah sure. Against bigger ships it isn't nearly as strong naturally.
I don't know how strong it really is there (not enough experience with it), i just assumed it still might be pretty good. (not that it kills everything, but that doesn'thave to be the point imo)
|
On December 15 2015 04:06 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2015 03:59 Big J wrote:On December 15 2015 03:07 The_Red_Viper wrote:On December 15 2015 03:04 WrathSCII wrote:On December 15 2015 02:54 Xequecal wrote:
Well, you could make Tempests.....oh wait Zerg has Vipers, all air is useless. Ah come on! Tempests 450 HP and PB does 70. For real! It does 90 and it stacks. Which makes it very powerful against air, to say the least But 90 is not that much. Even if you could perfectly stack 3-4 so they affect each of those Tempests over their full duration, that's still worse than just having the same gas/supply in consistent anti-air units. Or just abducting the Tempests to begin with. (yeah, you can abduct+parasitic bomb with a single 200 energy viper, but even with the energy regeneration it takes a very slow game to actually use that; and then your opponent's, lower supply energy units should play a major factor in as well) I don't think the problem with the PB is Capital Ships. It's rather that it is too good against smaller/lower HP air units which will stack very hard naturally because they have a smaller separation radius and occur in larger numbers which makes it too hard, or even impossible, to spread them properly. And you can't just skip on those units. Not even in a slow game, because they fulfill important roles in many scenarios that you can basically force as zerg, mainly through broodlords. Nah sure. Against bigger ships it isn't nearly as strong naturally. I don't know how strong it really is there (not enough experience with it), i just assumed it still might be pretty good. (not that it kills everything, but that doesn't have to be the point imo)
Right now Zerg just has too many options. Roach/Hydra/Ravager/Lurker can crush Protoss alone, but if they struggle a bit not only can they do a big swap into Ling/Muta to punish the type of Protoss army that could stand up to Roach/Hydra/Ravager/Lurker, but they could also add in Infestors or Vipers and use their spells to decimate said Protoss army.
So basically Protoss has to build an army of everything, and at no point can they say "well I'm really going to punish Roach/Hydra/Ravager army with Adepts/Immortals/Sentries and then win the game" because the Zerg could easily remax on Mutas and destroy said Protoss army, and Protoss doesn't have the ability to remax quickly and counter that Zerg army.
|
In regards to the Cyclone and Adepts, I like them both in the matchup, but feel they are a bit too one dimensional. Cyclones just shut everything down defensively too easily, but aren't great beyond stopping harass. The Adept is a bit too good early, maybe more of it's attack speed should be moved to the upgrade.
I think it would neat if Cyclones were toned down a bit early, but then given an upgrade that allowed them to go into a Siege Mode and bombard an area of the map with rockets from a distance of say 12. They would lock down like a Siege Tank and then slowlyshoot rockets at random spots in the AOE indefinitely. The rockets wouldn't deal huge damage, but it could be neat harrass for hitting minerals lines or creating a no man's land in front a Siege line.
What you describe is the only thing I like about the Cyclone. Its placement in the techtree makes it so that it creates a good metagame dynamic in which you can shut down someone for blindly rushing you, with the tradeoff that you take a disadvantage against someone who is just greedy if you make that investment. I find it nonesensical that if you are making defensive moves that are already punishable through a good read and economical play you should additionally be vulnerable to certain offensive plays (except bad execution of course). The early game punishment to playing defensive should still be playing economic, not "that other attack I can dice-roll".
|
On December 15 2015 03:34 Xequecal wrote:
You can shift-click a worker back to mining after constructing something, so it doesn't take any more attention than Protoss. Zerg actually has the hardest job here because you have to account for the fact that the worker is permanently gone. You also have two seperate rally points (worker/units) and have to deal with spreading creep as well.
I think Zerg may have had a much harder time, but now that the game tells you how many drones are mining and on gas, it's really not a big deal anymore. Two rally points is actually a benefit to help keep workers and army separate, and doesn't require much attention. Injects are really the obnoxious mechanic they have to worry about, but at least they've gotten some quality-of-life improvements in that respect (as have Protoss with their weaker, but easier to manage chrono boost). All-in-all, there's a net gain in time and energy from not having to fumble around with multiple, unique production facilities. Creep spread is something else to keep them busy for sure, but that serves a purpose beyond macro, giving them the best, consistent vision of the map the game has to offer, along with overlord spread. Keep in mind that, although the other races don't have creep, they still have to scout and have good map awareness. You may mention scans here, but they come at an opportunity cost which Terran are balanced around (mules), and you're taking a shot in the dark if you're scanning anything but an enemy base.
Overall, I'm well aware of the mechanics you mentioned here. Not all mechanics are created equal and they're not intended to be. But I'm describing why I think Terran is particularly cumbersome, despite each race having something different to worry about. I wouldn't recommend Terran to brand new players for any reasons other than familiarity because they're human.
This isn't intended to be a "whine", per-se. I'm just communicating why I have a harder time playing Terran than the other two races.
|
Personally I don't feel like the downside of making one is significant enough. On the other hand, something like that is pretty much needed due to the ton of gimmicky stuff toss has which will destroy your mineral line, but it is a bandaid to solve a problem which shouldn't have been there in the first place.
On December 15 2015 04:00 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2015 17:36 Sissors wrote:On December 14 2015 15:46 BronzeKnee wrote:On December 13 2015 05:07 DemigodcelpH wrote:
Parasitic Bomb needs immediate nerfs, and Photon Overcharge does not need "compensation". It's spammable and needs a straight nerf. I don't like Photon Overcharge at all, but Protoss is seriously hurting right now and needs it to just stay in the game early. So Protoss does need compensation of some sort if it is going to be nerfed. Yes, but they need real compensation. To be fair, maybe (initially) the Photon Overcharge needs compensation too, but it is a bandaid for the real problem. To be fair, I am not a toss player, and I don't know their exact problems really. Few days ago I saw Harstem fight Polt with purely gateway units vs terran who besides MMM also had ghosts and liberators. Sure in the end he lost, but I don't think we can with adepts really say their gateway units are shit. Maybe give zealots instead of their stupid damage on impact with charge, high armor when charge is activated for a flat few seconds or so. Or hell, just reboost Colossus to where it used to be. At the same time I am also not really a fan of the adepts who murder an entire mineral line in a few seconds and teleport around. Unless you got your Cyclone in the right position, and you completely ruin the day of the protoss. Quite frankly, if with whatever option that adept drop is nerfed, I don't think regarding PvT openings protoss will suffer that much, for starters it might make air openings viable again. Right now I just always make sure I got a cyclone, since otherwise adept drop pretty much kills me instantly. However it also means that everytime I see an oracle it is generally easy kill for my Cyclone. And then the problem is of course everything is connected. As terran I could possibly agree that the Cyclone is as early unit on the strong side. Nerfing it would help protoss with the early harrasment, but at the same time Cyclone is really not in a position to be nerfed. I don't think that lockon is ever going to be a good idea. Anyway back to the original point: I don't see the photon overcharge as something any race, including protoss, should be happy about. It is just to hide the real problems. If it were up to me I would even remove the entire MsC. Make sure they don't need to rely on their supply depots doing terrible damage, and if they need something against lategame drops/runbys, add an upgrade, we can call it photon overcharge, which boosts photon cannons. That said, I have my doubts if the solution to flanks/runbys/drops should be that you just make some static defense and go back your deathball. But I don't know how I'll stop Liberator harass and early Terran or the variety of early Zerg timings without it. My units just aren't good enough early to stand toe to toe with Ravagers and the like.
Delete Liberator, make siege tank more like it, give its anti air attack to the cyclone. Of course not going to happen, and leaves us with a ton of other issues, however:
As a toss, imagine you don't have blink stalkers (because they are cheating). You have to go up a ramp, which is covered by three siege tanks. What do you do? Probably laugh and send a few random units. If the ramp isn't blocked literally everything protoss has will kill them (with the exception of sentry, and maybe stalkers because we didnt include blink). Now same scenario, but we got three liberators covering the ramp. There is no way in hell you are going up that ramp with anything before you took care of them.
Anyway I fully agree we got too many abilities. Of course it depends for what you want in a game, but I feel the strategy part, and even the tactics part, is getting less and less relevant, while it is more becoming a moba with more units. Quite frankly in lets say half a year it will probably be better, but it will still be one problem which was caused when trying to solve another problem being solved by something which causes yet another issue.
Btw since I am not terran it is a bit theory crafting, but I wouldn't be surprised when zerg start figuring out they can also use Nydus worm late game, that they will do even better. Imagine you have your maxed army, and a nydus appears in your main. If you recall your entire army the zerg will kill at least one expo. If you recall half your army you are split up. If you go for the basetrade he goes for his initial plan: Send through 1-2 ultras, 2 queens, and 20 cracklings. Your base is gone, covered in creep (those queens were there for a reason), and he still has the majority of his army to defend.
Against terran it would probably be even more effective. (With as only good news you can at least save part of your buildings).
|
On December 15 2015 05:26 Sissors wrote:Personally I don't feel like the downside of making one is significant enough. On the other hand, something like that is pretty much needed due to the ton of gimmicky stuff toss has which will destroy your mineral line, but it is a bandaid to solve a problem which shouldn't have been there in the first place. Show nested quote +On December 15 2015 04:00 BronzeKnee wrote:On December 14 2015 17:36 Sissors wrote:On December 14 2015 15:46 BronzeKnee wrote:On December 13 2015 05:07 DemigodcelpH wrote:
Parasitic Bomb needs immediate nerfs, and Photon Overcharge does not need "compensation". It's spammable and needs a straight nerf. I don't like Photon Overcharge at all, but Protoss is seriously hurting right now and needs it to just stay in the game early. So Protoss does need compensation of some sort if it is going to be nerfed. Yes, but they need real compensation. To be fair, maybe (initially) the Photon Overcharge needs compensation too, but it is a bandaid for the real problem. To be fair, I am not a toss player, and I don't know their exact problems really. Few days ago I saw Harstem fight Polt with purely gateway units vs terran who besides MMM also had ghosts and liberators. Sure in the end he lost, but I don't think we can with adepts really say their gateway units are shit. Maybe give zealots instead of their stupid damage on impact with charge, high armor when charge is activated for a flat few seconds or so. Or hell, just reboost Colossus to where it used to be. At the same time I am also not really a fan of the adepts who murder an entire mineral line in a few seconds and teleport around. Unless you got your Cyclone in the right position, and you completely ruin the day of the protoss. Quite frankly, if with whatever option that adept drop is nerfed, I don't think regarding PvT openings protoss will suffer that much, for starters it might make air openings viable again. Right now I just always make sure I got a cyclone, since otherwise adept drop pretty much kills me instantly. However it also means that everytime I see an oracle it is generally easy kill for my Cyclone. And then the problem is of course everything is connected. As terran I could possibly agree that the Cyclone is as early unit on the strong side. Nerfing it would help protoss with the early harrasment, but at the same time Cyclone is really not in a position to be nerfed. I don't think that lockon is ever going to be a good idea. Anyway back to the original point: I don't see the photon overcharge as something any race, including protoss, should be happy about. It is just to hide the real problems. If it were up to me I would even remove the entire MsC. Make sure they don't need to rely on their supply depots doing terrible damage, and if they need something against lategame drops/runbys, add an upgrade, we can call it photon overcharge, which boosts photon cannons. That said, I have my doubts if the solution to flanks/runbys/drops should be that you just make some static defense and go back your deathball. But I don't know how I'll stop Liberator harass and early Terran or the variety of early Zerg timings without it. My units just aren't good enough early to stand toe to toe with Ravagers and the like. Delete Liberator, make siege tank more like it, give its anti air attack to the cyclone. Of course not going to happen, and leaves us with a ton of other issues, however: As a toss, imagine you don't have blink stalkers (because they are cheating). You have to go up a ramp, which is covered by three siege tanks. What do you do? Probably laugh and send a few random units. If the ramp isn't blocked literally everything protoss has will kill them (with the exception of sentry, and maybe stalkers because we didnt include blink). Now same scenario, but we got three liberators covering the ramp. There is no way in hell you are going up that ramp with anything before you took care of them. Anyway I fully agree we got too many abilities. Of course it depends for what you want in a game, but I feel the strategy part, and even the tactics part, is getting less and less relevant, while it is more becoming a moba with more units. Quite frankly in lets say half a year it will probably be better, but it will still be one problem which was caused when trying to solve another problem being solved by something which causes yet another issue. Btw since I am not terran it is a bit theory crafting, but I wouldn't be surprised when zerg start figuring out they can also use Nydus worm late game, that they will do even better. Imagine you have your maxed army, and a nydus appears in your main. If you recall your entire army the zerg will kill at least one expo. If you recall half your army you are split up. If you go for the basetrade he goes for his initial plan: Send through 1-2 ultras, 2 queens, and 20 cracklings. Your base is gone, covered in creep (those queens were there for a reason), and he still has the majority of his army to defend. Against terran it would probably be even more effective. (With as only good news you can at least save part of your buildings).
Gonna be honest, I like the Liberator in concept and it's one of the few units made decently in execution. Clear advantages, clear weaknesses. It doesn't need to be deleted. The numbers just need to be tweaked.
-Require a Tech Lab for Liberator (it's insane that it doesn't).
-Lower Liberator AtG damage.
-Make upgrades allow Liberators to scale well into the lategame.
If Tanks are buffed, you would have the single target damage of the Liberator and the splash damage of the tanks synergizing wonderfully.
|
I don't think reactored is that bad if you consider its air-to-air role, I think being tech-labbed might be too much for that (or maybe not). Forcing a (max 100/100) resource for anti ground attack like in beta is also an option, although in principle until you really get late game, the only reason the liberator is used early on is the ability to destroy a mineral line. Ideally I would like to have it useful for defensive purposes, but not as good vs mineral lines. I don't really think that is possible however, so then I guess the defensive purposes will have to go.
In general with the cost price of the liberator I don't think the reactor is that big a deal anyway.
|
On December 15 2015 04:24 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +In regards to the Cyclone and Adepts, I like them both in the matchup, but feel they are a bit too one dimensional. Cyclones just shut everything down defensively too easily, but aren't great beyond stopping harass. The Adept is a bit too good early, maybe more of it's attack speed should be moved to the upgrade.
I think it would neat if Cyclones were toned down a bit early, but then given an upgrade that allowed them to go into a Siege Mode and bombard an area of the map with rockets from a distance of say 12. They would lock down like a Siege Tank and then slowly shoot rockets at random spots in the AOE indefinitely. The rockets wouldn't deal huge damage, but it could be neat harrass for hitting minerals lines or creating a no man's land in front a Siege line. What you describe is the only thing I like about the Cyclone. Its placement in the techtree makes it so that it creates a good metagame dynamic in which you can shut down someone for blindly rushing you, with the tradeoff that you take a disadvantage against someone who is just greedy if you make that investment. I find it nonesensical that if you are making defensive moves that are already punishable through a good read and economical play you should additionally be vulnerable to certain offensive plays (except bad execution of course). The early game punishment to playing defensive should still be playing economic, not "that other attack I can dice-roll".
We absolutely don't want a rock-paper-scissors dynamic, or a situation where if you build X, you are safe. We want skill to be involved here, and that was what I was advocating for.
It isn't that we can't have defensive units that can hold off harassment or attacks, it is that they should require skill to use, just as the offensive tools should. The Cyclone shuts everything down without much skill, much like Pylon Overcharge which is why they both should be changed.
I also think you are unfairly targeting aggressive play when it comes to luck and "dice rolls." I watched State open Nexus first versus Zerg yesterday and fall way behind versus a 12 pool. So dice rolling comes in all forms, in fact the entire game is dice rolling. If safe play beats aggressive dice rolling, and economic dice rolling beats safe play, what is safe play then? It is a dice roll, because if you opponent plays very economically, you lose.
If someone sees a Stargate and thinks their opponent is going to use it aggressively, they'll throw down Spore Crawlers and Drone. Every once in a while I just 7 Gate off a scouted Stargate (without making anything from the Stargate), because Zergs so often do that, and with great success. Both players rolled the dice.
And therefore the game is about making reads and reacting to them, not blindly selecting a strategy. But my point is that just because you make the right read and prepare defenses, doesn't mean it should be devoid of micro and skill in defending. Certain champions in LoL essentially hard counter other ones, but the player with the countered champion can mitigate the affects by playing well.
|
On December 15 2015 08:11 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2015 04:24 Big J wrote:In regards to the Cyclone and Adepts, I like them both in the matchup, but feel they are a bit too one dimensional. Cyclones just shut everything down defensively too easily, but aren't great beyond stopping harass. The Adept is a bit too good early, maybe more of it's attack speed should be moved to the upgrade.
I think it would neat if Cyclones were toned down a bit early, but then given an upgrade that allowed them to go into a Siege Mode and bombard an area of the map with rockets from a distance of say 12. They would lock down like a Siege Tank and then slowly shoot rockets at random spots in the AOE indefinitely. The rockets wouldn't deal huge damage, but it could be neat harrass for hitting minerals lines or creating a no man's land in front a Siege line. What you describe is the only thing I like about the Cyclone. Its placement in the techtree makes it so that it creates a good metagame dynamic in which you can shut down someone for blindly rushing you, with the tradeoff that you take a disadvantage against someone who is just greedy if you make that investment. I find it nonesensical that if you are making defensive moves that are already punishable through a good read and economical play you should additionally be vulnerable to certain offensive plays (except bad execution of course). The early game punishment to playing defensive should still be playing economic, not "that other attack I can dice-roll". We absolutely don't want a rock-paper-scissors dynamic, or a situation where if you build X, you are safe. We want skill to be involved here, and that was what I was advocating for.
Well I think we disagree on a fundamental level here. I'm fully for having X that makes you safe in the game if it comes for a cost that can be abused. I absolutely hate it that in this game my opponent's can decide at any minute in the early game to try and win, completely disregarding what situation the game is actually in. That's how a metagame - i.e. strategical interaction - is created. I do something that costs me money, you abuse that by expanding faster and getting an advantage. Or I don't take that investment and play greedy and you punish that by doing damage.
And yes, we want it to be about skill. Attacking despite your opponent having X is the epitome of lacking skill.
And furthermore I think the cyclone requires quite some skill to use properly in those low economy situations. There is a ton that can go wrong, you need to babysit it to begin with, if it locks-on wrong that makes it a lot harder, it needs to be at the right place to begin with and you only need a few seconds to make an oracle pay off or get a big warp-in of adepts of. Also the vision requirement of lock-on makes it so that very frequently skilled players can escape the cyclone. The unit is pretty much useless against all other units on a-move.
Not to mention, that I don't even think that the Cyclone really deals with everything that well. Protoss is allinning left and right against Terran, it can't be thaaaaat good to begin with if that is still a thing or everyone would have caught on to it.
|
Ultras: "you need to end the game before X unit comes out" should never be considered game balance. It implies that winning is a choice, and that prior to the unit being made the opposition was not trying to win. Game balance should mean, both players can deal no damage, and still be on equal footing.
|
On December 17 2015 03:19 nottapro wrote:
Ultras: "you need to end the game before X unit comes out" should never be considered game balance. It implies that winning is a choice, and that prior to the unit being made the opposition was not trying to win. Game balance should mean, both players can deal no damage, and still be on equal footing.
Agreed, but this same argument has been used a million times for this game already - the most common response to Zerg being completely unable to beat an endgame toss deathball or skytoss was 'dont let them get there'
In any case, there are a couple things that need to be sorted out - is a late game ultra-gas heavy melee unit really too strong, or are Terran players trying to use the same old strategies of MMM spam and complaining that they don't work?
It's probably a little bit of both, but don't expect them to nerf ultras in the way that you want - more likely they'll make you use ghosts more with a buff to their anti-ultralisk capabilities (maybe + massive damage on snipe or something).
Blizzard is done with MMM being able to efficiently deal with every single unit Zerg has, so that's not coming back.
Also I think BCs should receive a hefty buff - more damage per shot with a slower ROF would be ideal. I think it's sillly that they pepper little blasters which suffer badly from high armor count - they should be an ideal counter to Ultralisks.
But they have to make sure that they don't tip the air war too heavily in favor of skyterran vs Zerg - where their higher damage per shot means they poop on corruptor/muta/viper too easily.
Could probably just buff their ATG while keeping their ATA the same.
Also, re: parasitic bomb - yeah that one is going to pretty much stay. Any nerf will be minor, but they should probably buff Infestors so that they're not so shitty - right now they're just not worth their cost + APM requirement to use.
Also this game suffers from purity issues - there are simply too many units because they needed new units to sell expansions. Swarm Hosts are simply not needed in the game and should be removed. Cyclones should be removed as well, and at least one Protoss unit should be removed (oracle or tempest) with the necessary balance changes after the fact.
|
On December 15 2015 04:15 BronzeKnee wrote:
in Infestors or Vipers and use their spells to decimate said Protoss army.
When you write stuff like that you lose all credibility. 'Infestors or Vipers' aren't 'decimating' any protoss army. Maybe Vipers if you massed 15 phoenixes, but Infestors Are Not Good and you aren't being 'decimated' by blinding cloud.
|
Ravagers infestors ultras are totally imba.
Just watched the SSL qualifier day 1 Maru vs Byul, that's really sad to see how the game is broken.
Nerf marauders and buff ultras is a very bad decision. Ultras are unkillable.
Anyway only ravagers infestors are pretty good, but with invincible ultras it is disgusting.
They also have to give ghost a one shot snipe because with channling they dont have time to kill ultras fast enough before to get fungal or raped by banelings/ultras/zerglings
|
If only maru made more (bio) ghosts, to counter the counter to bio. split/micro stutterstep and do snipe, thats all it takes for maru. Ultras with banelings need how much micro?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
