|
On January 23 2016 03:36 Musicus wrote: Nerfing both spores and para bomb might make it muta only or blind counter again.
It's a good unit to watch at the pro scene... I personally like it.
|
United States572 Posts
On January 23 2016 05:05 DinoMight wrote: By the time Protoss has +1 weapons, Marines should have combat shields. You could get combat shields before the strongest adept timings hit. It's not worth it because SCVs don't get combat shields and it doesn't kill or push back the adepts any faster. So you spend that gas on things that will help you kill the adepts faster over combat shields.
|
On January 23 2016 05:05 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 05:01 MockHamill wrote: The adept nerf is not enough. A single attack upgrade negates the whole nerf.
Something more needs to go either 1) Make the shade an upgrade 2) Decrease hit points. The nerf makes it take 2 hits to kill a Marine instead of 3 until the marine has combat shields. By the time Protoss has +1 weapons, Marines should have combat shields. Therefore even +1 weapons doesn't change Adept efficiency against marines. If they have combat shields right now they also take 3 hits either way (and with stim its back to two hits with +1). The +1 weapons does negate the nerf, but you can't have the +1 weapons for the prism/adept timing (I guess), so that specific strategy is nerfed.
|
On January 23 2016 05:08 swissman777 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 03:36 Musicus wrote: Nerfing both spores and para bomb might make it muta only or blind counter again. It's a good unit to watch at the pro scene... I personally like it.
I actually liked to play it, but I think people didn't like watching it that much. Vipers will still make it different to HotS though I guess, even with the para bomb nerf, so maybe it won't be as bad as I thought.
|
On January 23 2016 04:55 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 04:40 Nebuchad wrote:On January 23 2016 04:30 Vanadiel wrote:On January 23 2016 03:39 KeksX wrote:On January 23 2016 03:38 Asturas wrote: So... Adept is nerfed or not, because I am very, very (extremely?) confused. What kind of change is that? Is it at all? Damn Blizz... Yes. They no longer 2-shot workers, instead it takes 3. This means they're weaker on the harrassment side of things. Is this really the main issue though? I always felt that it was how good they were in fight which was the bigger problem, by shading directly into the enemy army. I would have liked some kind nerf to the shade, something like adept can't attack for one second after they shade somewhere, or it consume a bit of shield like stimpack. It means you can skip marauder much more against the early adept pressures, as the marines are killed much slower. The marines deal with the adepts much better with higher dps and lesser cost. Besides with less gas put into marauders you can tech way faster to liberators, tanks and other useful units, as opposed to the marauder that pretty much sucks against anything but stalkers right now. Marauders didn't die to adepts, but they couldn't stop them from killing workers, so we didn't really see lots of them built. This change doesn't change that existing relationship or existing builds with regard to marauders, really. Armored adept would have changed them drastically.
Obviously not saying that marauders will be better against adepts (the armored adept would be a terrible change btw, like community-decision levels of bad). Saying that it makes the strategy that deals the best with adepts (a focus on marines and as few marauders as possible) much better.
|
hell yeah finally adept and PO nerf!! :D
|
Yay. Adepts get nerfed (with good reasons). Nothing to compensate. Protoss even get PO nerf on top (again with good reasons). Nothing else. Even worse winrate inbound in the weeks coming.
Also apparently a 42% PvZ is a seconday issue. Not a single word. No worry, it can wait...
|
I don't understand the spore nerf. Muta isn't weak?
|
On January 23 2016 05:21 Maxie wrote: I don't understand the spore nerf. Muta isn't weak?
Excuse me?
|
On January 23 2016 05:18 PPN wrote: Yay. Adepts get nerfed (with good reasons). Nothing to compensate. Protoss even get PO nerf on top (again with good reasons). Nothing else. Even worse winrate inbound in the weeks coming.
Also apparently a 42% PvZ is a seconday issue. Not a single word. No worry, it can wait...
Soon protoss will have single digit winrates in both matchups...I guess SC2 will be unplayable for a month or two after the patch.
|
TvT is fun with tankivac. I have fun with it.
SC2 is no fun game with a series of tank lines and turrets with no overkill.
|
On January 23 2016 03:39 Clonester wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 03:38 Asturas wrote: So... Adept is nerfed or not, because I am very, very (extremely?) confused. What kind of change is that? Is it at all? Damn Blizz... Adept now does 22 damage against light units per shot. That means, you need instead of 2 shots, 3 shots to kill SCVs and Marines. Thats quite a nerf. The problem is still the prism. The problem is the shift providing perfect intel and making a single group of adepts require two armies capable of dealing with them.
|
On January 23 2016 05:28 itsMAHVELbaybee wrote: TvT is fun with tankivac. I have fun with it.
SC2 is no fun game with a series of tank lines and turrets with no overkill. Please see Gumiho vs MMA on Antiga Shipyard tyvm
|
United States572 Posts
On January 23 2016 05:13 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 04:55 TheWinks wrote:On January 23 2016 04:40 Nebuchad wrote:On January 23 2016 04:30 Vanadiel wrote:On January 23 2016 03:39 KeksX wrote:On January 23 2016 03:38 Asturas wrote: So... Adept is nerfed or not, because I am very, very (extremely?) confused. What kind of change is that? Is it at all? Damn Blizz... Yes. They no longer 2-shot workers, instead it takes 3. This means they're weaker on the harrassment side of things. Is this really the main issue though? I always felt that it was how good they were in fight which was the bigger problem, by shading directly into the enemy army. I would have liked some kind nerf to the shade, something like adept can't attack for one second after they shade somewhere, or it consume a bit of shield like stimpack. It means you can skip marauder much more against the early adept pressures, as the marines are killed much slower. The marines deal with the adepts much better with higher dps and lesser cost. Besides with less gas put into marauders you can tech way faster to liberators, tanks and other useful units, as opposed to the marauder that pretty much sucks against anything but stalkers right now. Marauders didn't die to adepts, but they couldn't stop them from killing workers, so we didn't really see lots of them built. This change doesn't change that existing relationship or existing builds with regard to marauders, really. Armored adept would have changed them drastically. Saying that it makes the strategy that deals the best with adepts (a focus on marines and as few marauders as possible) much better. I'm saying that's what people already do and this doesn't change that. Again, combat shields could be researched in time for a ton of adept timings, but terrans don't get it because scvs don't get combat shields. There isn't any 'saving gas' by not getting marauders to fight off adepts like you're claiming.
|
A heavy handed approach. Spore damage could be reduced by 5, not 10. With Fungal being a projectile there is a possibility of Muta wars making a return.
PB nerf does not change the relationship of Viper vs Air - it only delays it (as you need more energy/Vipers). This is the same story as with Carrier - with ability it is too strong, so they increased build time -> which means that P will die waiting for Carriers, but Carriers themselves are still strong. They could make it non-stackable, or make it so that units are not killed by PB alone, and left with 1 hp instead.
Adept nerf is long overdue, nut finally they are comming to their senses.
PO nerf is great, but I'm a bit worried how is P supposed to defend vs Zerg. I know Blizzard will never even think about reduction of build times on Gateway, even by 2-3 seconds per unit.
|
Very disappointing changes after all this time. Make adepts unable to move or attack while shading IMO. Also give Terran mech a better siege tank and/or anti air.
|
I would have liked to see an increase in cooldown time between adept shades. On the pylon overcharge front, I don't really like the increase in rate of fire, I would have preferred a slight range buff to make up for the massive decrease in positional zoning. I don't think a small range buff would hurt terran that much, and it would help pvp a lot. Right now gateway pressure with oracles is fairly strong, but if the number of overcharges available is halved oracles will be really annoying to deal with as it takes 2 pylons to cover a single mineral line given the current overcharge range.
|
I honestly think too that, while adept and PO needs a nerf, Protoss will need a buff to late game to compensate. I think it's good time to play around the colossus since it's no longer used at all at the moment, they can try to make it more interesting to play and more useful. Why not try other design than the actual one, such a linear attack?
|
On January 23 2016 03:44 RaFox17 wrote: This adept nerf will do nothing against zerg? Adepts are really stupid and strong against Z also :/
Adepts are only stupid and strong in ZvP if you still subscribe to the school of 'no banelings against Protoss'
Get past that mindset and they're not bad at all.
ZvT is the biggest problem and they're admitting feedback that it's favoring Terran but at the same time saying they don't want to do anything about it except nerf PB (liberator buff) and maybe not buff siege tank
|
On January 23 2016 05:32 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 05:13 Nebuchad wrote:On January 23 2016 04:55 TheWinks wrote:On January 23 2016 04:40 Nebuchad wrote:On January 23 2016 04:30 Vanadiel wrote:On January 23 2016 03:39 KeksX wrote:On January 23 2016 03:38 Asturas wrote: So... Adept is nerfed or not, because I am very, very (extremely?) confused. What kind of change is that? Is it at all? Damn Blizz... Yes. They no longer 2-shot workers, instead it takes 3. This means they're weaker on the harrassment side of things. Is this really the main issue though? I always felt that it was how good they were in fight which was the bigger problem, by shading directly into the enemy army. I would have liked some kind nerf to the shade, something like adept can't attack for one second after they shade somewhere, or it consume a bit of shield like stimpack. It means you can skip marauder much more against the early adept pressures, as the marines are killed much slower. The marines deal with the adepts much better with higher dps and lesser cost. Besides with less gas put into marauders you can tech way faster to liberators, tanks and other useful units, as opposed to the marauder that pretty much sucks against anything but stalkers right now. Marauders didn't die to adepts, but they couldn't stop them from killing workers, so we didn't really see lots of them built. This change doesn't change that existing relationship or existing builds with regard to marauders, really. Armored adept would have changed them drastically. Saying that it makes the strategy that deals the best with adepts (a focus on marines and as few marauders as possible) much better. I'm saying that's what people already do and this doesn't change that. Again, combat shields could be researched in time for a ton of adept timings, but terrans don't get it because scvs don't get combat shields. There isn't any 'saving gas' by not getting marauders to fight off adepts like you're claiming.
As long as the number of marauders built is positive, it can be decreased by making marines stronger. That's just a fact, I don't know how you can argue against that. As long as the number of marauders is decreased, it allows gas to be put into something else.
The only way your argument is true is if zero marauders are built against adept rushes today, which is not the case.
|
|
|
|