EPTCommunity Feedback Update - January 15 - Page 7
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Thinh123456
70 Posts
| ||
|
JW_DTLA
242 Posts
My guess: they don't even touch Tankivacs. This talk goes nowhere. But the adept -1 damage nerf goes through as it should have 6 months ago. | ||
|
Deathstar
9150 Posts
However, the tank can be changed in other ways. At a minimal it must do more damage. It is currently a pathetic positional unit. Tankivac was a hell Mary attempt at creativity and it shows these designers don't know what they're doing. | ||
|
ProBell
Thailand145 Posts
| ||
|
Hurricaned
France126 Posts
| ||
|
Penev
28453 Posts
On January 17 2016 18:18 Hurricaned wrote: Am I the only one thinking the -1 adept damage is just ridiculously useless? When I encounter a 8 gate warp prism adept "all in" (difficult for me to say all in because even if you defend, which you don't, you're behind) it wouldnt change much that the adept did 1 or 2 or 5 damage less. It's just too tanky, too cheap, too slippery. Either nerf the shade cd/speed/duration/make it impossible to cancel, lower the HP, increase the cost, make WP only capable to warp 2 units at once at low speed... But -1 damage feels so stupid to me I'm not sure about the Adept change myself but the -1 actually does make a difference; It makes it so SCV's and Marines require 3 shots to kill instead of 2. It seems you didn't quite get that. | ||
|
RaFox17
Finland4581 Posts
On January 17 2016 19:50 Penev wrote: I'm not sure about the Adept change myself but the -1 actually does make a difference; It makes it so SCV's and Marines require 3 shots to kill instead of 2. It seems you didn't quite get that. Will it change anything against zerg? WP+adept are quite stupid against Z also. | ||
|
SheaR619
United States2399 Posts
On January 17 2016 19:53 RaFox17 wrote: Will it change anything against zerg? WP+adept are quite stupid against Z also. I think the point of the change is for TvP. I think it pretty much universally accepted that now TvP needs alot of help. The -1 won't affect PvZ which was the point in the first place. Since they are unsure of PvZ atm since NA and euro are saying ZvP is heavily Z favor while protoss are starting to figure it out kinda so it a bit unstable. This change will let it flesh out more since it won't affect PvZ. If it ever does become a problem, they can just reduce it further to also affect PvZ. | ||
|
Penev
28453 Posts
On January 17 2016 19:53 RaFox17 wrote: Will it change anything against zerg? WP+adept are quite stupid against Z also. Nope | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7028 Posts
On January 17 2016 18:18 Hurricaned wrote: Am I the only one thinking the -1 adept damage is just ridiculously useless? When I encounter a 8 gate warp prism adept "all in" (difficult for me to say all in because even if you defend, which you don't, you're behind) it wouldnt change much that the adept did 1 or 2 or 5 damage less. It's just too tanky, too cheap, too slippery. Either nerf the shade cd/speed/duration/make it impossible to cancel, lower the HP, increase the cost, make WP only capable to warp 2 units at once at low speed... But -1 damage feels so stupid to me It might not be a useless change, but it's certainly an odd one. Balancing a unit so that when they attack they leave their two most common targets with 1 remaining hit point is more like psychologically frustrating players. On January 17 2016 15:00 Deathstar wrote: Smart fire is hard coded into the game (Dustin Browder said this I think a long time ago). However, the tank can be changed in other ways. At a minimal it must do more damage. It is currently a pathetic positional unit. Tankivac was a hell Mary attempt at creativity and it shows these designers don't know what they're doing. That's misleading. Smart fire only happens because the projectiles of the siege tank and marine are instant. If you add a very fast projectile the smart fire effects also disappear. It's just a quirk of the engine when it has to process instant projectiles. Nevertheless, Blizzard will likely never make this change because it goes against some of their principles: 1. Only make conceptual changes to units if they are improvements. Changing the way that the attack works changes the siege tank's functionality, the tactics and strategies you have to use against it. Blizzard does not want players to have to learn new concepts for frivolous reasons such as abstract reasoning on TL forums, they only want to change the game if people consider it an improvement. The benefits are not clear enough, and furthermore the unit becomes strictly weaker which will force compensations which puts even more tasks on Blizzard's plate. 2. Do not make changes that dumb down the game. I'm adding it here even though it's a dishonest argument, just because I know that David Kim will use it to justify not making the change if pressed and because most of the people in the community will take him at face value. The idea is that removing "smart fire" makes the game less "smart". Anyhow, removing smart fire was a nice idea five years ago, but now that the game is so much faster I no longer see the point. One could postulate that the siege tank needs to be yet even more user-friendly if it is to survive. Speed up the transformation, remove the friendly fire, increase the movement speed, remove the minimum radius. If I had to choose between those sort of changes and the one concession of medivac-tank synergy the latter might be the lesser evil. At least it is difficult to use and allows for some cool, if abusive, tactics. | ||
|
RoomOfMush
1296 Posts
On January 17 2016 20:18 Grumbels wrote: That's misleading. Smart fire only happens because the projectiles of the siege tank and marine are instant. If you add a very fast projectile the smart fire effects also disappear. It's just a quirk of the engine when it has to process instant projectiles. You dont even need a projectile. The same effect can be achieved by adding a very short wait (0.01 seconds) to the damage output. It still looks and feels like an instant attack but overkill is back. Black Lilium did that in his SC2 balance mod. | ||
|
nubHunter
Spain44 Posts
| ||
|
A_needle_jog
Korea (South)699 Posts
On January 17 2016 21:21 nubHunter wrote: collosus should be inmune to viper pull so we can see some collosus in pvz I think restrictions and exceptions are bad design. If they buff collosus then they should make the unit itself slightly better like + bio damage or something. | ||
Charoisaur
Germany15880 Posts
First they are angry that blizzard never listens to feedback and even ignore the most discussed topics and when they finally comment on controversial topics they are angry that DK can't get good ideas himself. this community is ridicolous. | ||
|
A_needle_jog
Korea (South)699 Posts
On January 17 2016 22:22 Charoisaur wrote: sometimes people are funny. First they are angry that blizzard never listens to feedback and even ignore the most discussed topics and when they finally comment on controversial topics they are angry that DK can't get good ideas himself. this community is ridicolous. That is because you are generalizing "people". Have you ever considered that it's not the same people that are angry that blizzard never listens to feedback and the ones that are angry at DK listening to the community? It is impossible to make everyone happy  | ||
|
nubHunter
Spain44 Posts
On January 17 2016 22:08 A_needle_jog wrote: I think restrictions and exceptions are bad design. If they buff collosus then they should make the unit itself slightly better like + bio damage or something. maybe they should buff collosus damage vs light or something, then they can be countered easily by armored units. | ||
|
Deathstar
9150 Posts
On January 17 2016 21:12 RoomOfMush wrote: You dont even need a projectile. The same effect can be achieved by adding a very short wait (0.01 seconds) to the damage output. It still looks and feels like an instant attack but overkill is back. Black Lilium did that in his SC2 balance mod. Both are good ideas! Pretty mad that none of this was implemented in favor of more damage | ||
|
corydoras
161 Posts
On January 17 2016 20:18 Grumbels wrote: It might not be a useless change, but it's certainly an odd one. Balancing a unit so that when they attack they leave their two most common targets with 1 remaining hit point is more like psychologically frustrating players. But come on, this is nothing new. Zealots need three swipes to kill lings but +1 reduces it to two swipes. Adepts will just work the same against marines and SCVs. Especially for marines this means significantly more time to deal damage to the attacking adepts. In other words, adept/WP attacks will be significantly weaker unless the Protoss gets +1 attack, which has huge impact on timings, not to mention another 250/100 investment (fast forge + upgrade). | ||
|
dNa
Germany591 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20280 Posts
On January 17 2016 23:15 nubHunter wrote: maybe they should buff collosus damage vs light or something, then they can be countered easily by armored units. Old colossus did about 25-55% more damage depending on upgrade levels + a few other things and it cost the same. Pretty amazing nerf after keeping it for 5 years! | ||
| ||
