|
On January 23 2016 09:19 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 08:44 pure.Wasted wrote:On January 23 2016 07:40 BronzeKnee wrote: The fact I have power of over you over the internet says a lot about you. Be like me, don't care what other people think about you.
The only opinion that matters is what you think of yourself. The fact that you think you have power over me says a lot about you. Don't worry about me BronzeKnee, thinking that you're an ass doesn't get in the way of me having a fantastic day. I don't think the WM is genius design, I think - as I said - it is genius compared to the other units in this game. In fact, as I'm sure you're aware, a unit can only be designed well or poorly in relation to other units. Banelings without WMs are awful, with WMs they're great. Marines without Medivacs and Banes are terrible, with them they're friggin awesome. The WM's defining characteristic, as seen 99% of the time that it's used in the MU where it's used the most, is making Zerg units more interesting than they otherwise would be. Any shittiness in the randomness of its targeting (still kind of an issue), or its burst (not at all an issue IMO), pales in comparison to the good it does for the MU. If you're drawing a line for units that deserve to be cut or totally reworked, there are infinity plus one better candidates than the WM, eg Roaches, which are neither interesting in and of themselves, nor force particularly interesting plays of the opponent. This is one of the greatest SC2 games of all time in my opinion, and with the Widow Mine we wouldn't have seen the greatness of it. you talk like they weren't any good tvz games with WMs
|
it is unchanging that adept performance per price is ridiculous in 1tier unit
|
On January 23 2016 10:00 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 09:19 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 08:44 pure.Wasted wrote:On January 23 2016 07:40 BronzeKnee wrote: The fact I have power of over you over the internet says a lot about you. Be like me, don't care what other people think about you.
The only opinion that matters is what you think of yourself. The fact that you think you have power over me says a lot about you. Don't worry about me BronzeKnee, thinking that you're an ass doesn't get in the way of me having a fantastic day. I don't think the WM is genius design, I think - as I said - it is genius compared to the other units in this game. In fact, as I'm sure you're aware, a unit can only be designed well or poorly in relation to other units. Banelings without WMs are awful, with WMs they're great. Marines without Medivacs and Banes are terrible, with them they're friggin awesome. The WM's defining characteristic, as seen 99% of the time that it's used in the MU where it's used the most, is making Zerg units more interesting than they otherwise would be. Any shittiness in the randomness of its targeting (still kind of an issue), or its burst (not at all an issue IMO), pales in comparison to the good it does for the MU. If you're drawing a line for units that deserve to be cut or totally reworked, there are infinity plus one better candidates than the WM, eg Roaches, which are neither interesting in and of themselves, nor force particularly interesting plays of the opponent. This is one of the greatest SC2 games of all time in my opinion, and with the Widow Mine we wouldn't have seen the greatness of it. you talk like they weren't any good tvz games with WMs Well whether X unit can produce good games isn't much the point of discussion, but rather X unit's actual impact on games overall. You can have 10 games that fit inside this bubble where things are fun and cool, but have 100 games all outside the bubble, where things aren't so cool.
|
On January 23 2016 10:05 jasonbourne907 wrote: it is unchanging that adept performance per price is ridiculous in 1tier unit
Ah so massing t1 units is a problem now, but the fact that zerglings and marines are viable and extremely effective throughout the entire game is not? Also with this change marines will be able to trade cost efficiently with units that are designed to kill light units.
|
So I've been doing some math on the tank and taking some inspiration from a reddit thread I've come up with a small change that helps the siege tank and mech without going overboard.
Change siege tank damage from 35+15 to 41+15. Change siege tank attack upgrades from 3+2 for each upgrade to 2+3 for each upgrade.
Reasoning, with this buff tanks would take 1 shot to kill some P/Z units (1 less shot to kill stalkers, adepts, zealots, roaches, ravagers) and 2 shots less to kill archons. At the same time it would take the same amount of shots to kill bio units (marines and marauder) and the interactions stay the same compared to actual siege tank with same upgrade. Also it would take the same amount of shots to kill an immortal.
Once fully upgraded the tank retains somewhat the same strenght also.
A small change that its not too strong but goes a long way to help siege tanks and mech, specially early game.
|
On January 23 2016 10:07 ProtossMasterRace wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 10:05 jasonbourne907 wrote: it is unchanging that adept performance per price is ridiculous in 1tier unit Ah so massing t1 units is a problem now, but the fact that zerglings and marines are viable and extremely effective throughout the entire game is not? Also with this change marines will be able to trade cost efficiently with units that are designed to kill light units. it's a problem when you need t3 units to counter t1 units. Protoss can just mass adepts and you are forced to turtle to mass libs/mass wm. adepts are supremely cost-effective against all low tier units of terran. Just watch alive vs classic where classic played with an adept monocomposition 10 minutes into the game and won.
|
I have a feeling we're still going to see protosses doing damage to terrans with their adepts. They won't kill 17 workers while marines slowly drain their health. But I think skilled GSL level protosses will be positioning their warp prism more aggressively for pickup micro...we might even see it become a thing that raises the skill ceiling. Where like koreans can do it while macroing well and foreigners can't. We'll have to see. I have faith that Blizzard is going to fix this game correctly because it will be the last Starcraft for awhile. 2016 may be a shitty year for the competitive scene because of this, but if 2017-2025 is good (even if it's just a thriving amateur scene like BW because of the terrible things that may happen this year) I'm fine with them taking it slow. I like the idea of tanks quickly sieging and unsieging. Sounds like a great middle ground that will make TvT more skill oriented like it was in HotS and WoL. Like a clear division between the b tier Terrans and the A-tier ones, because there isn't one right now really. Sorry, Journey, Bravo and Natural didn't become competitive at the highest level in TvT overnight for no reason.
|
hey blizzard sc2 team! please listen kr progammer feedback. they play game 8h+ a day. they know sc2 than you all!!!!! just listen and do. It is difficult?
|
it's a problem when you need t3 units to counter t1 units. Protoss can just mass adepts and you are forced to turtle to mass libs/mass wm. adepts are supremely cost-effective against all low tier units of terran. Just watch alive vs classic where classic played with an adept monocomposition 10 minutes into the game and won.
@Charoisaur Deja-vu!!!! It's almost like you're talkin about the reverse of PvT for the entirety of WoL and HoTS
|
Yeah lets not give a fuck about lurkers destroying everything without any micro whatsoever.
|
On January 23 2016 10:07 ProtossMasterRace wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 10:05 jasonbourne907 wrote: it is unchanging that adept performance per price is ridiculous in 1tier unit Ah so massing t1 units is a problem now, but the fact that zerglings and marines are viable and extremely effective throughout the entire game is not? Also with this change marines will be able to trade cost efficiently with units that are designed to kill light units.
By "trade cost efficiently" you mean that marines will still be raped but not as fast. I see.
|
On January 23 2016 10:24 Jonsoload wrote:Show nested quote +it's a problem when you need t3 units to counter t1 units. Protoss can just mass adepts and you are forced to turtle to mass libs/mass wm. adepts are supremely cost-effective against all low tier units of terran. Just watch alive vs classic where classic played with an adept monocomposition 10 minutes into the game and won. @Charoisaur Deja-vu!!!! It's almost like you're talkin about the reverse of PvT for the entirety of WoL and HoTS 
That's total BS, marines are good with stim shield AND medivac in support, adept are good from the beginning to the end.
|
On January 23 2016 10:13 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 10:07 ProtossMasterRace wrote:On January 23 2016 10:05 jasonbourne907 wrote: it is unchanging that adept performance per price is ridiculous in 1tier unit Ah so massing t1 units is a problem now, but the fact that zerglings and marines are viable and extremely effective throughout the entire game is not? Also with this change marines will be able to trade cost efficiently with units that are designed to kill light units. it's a problem when you need t3 units to counter t1 units. Protoss can just mass adepts and you are forced to turtle to mass libs/mass wm. adepts are supremely cost-effective against all low tier units of terran. Just watch alive vs classic where classic played with an adept monocomposition 10 minutes into the game and won.
Um... this is like the entirety of the protoss side of life from WoL => HotS
Terran spams bio Protoss needs T3
Now it is switched and people cry that there is a problem?
|
- adept change is underwhelming. It only nerfs very early game, maybe 3g warp prism allin too. But once toss gets +1, it's back to the "oh I failed my drop : doesn't matter killed 12 scvs lol" - PB nerf is ridiculous. The spell is so badly designed they already are on the path no nerf hammer it until no one can use it. - overcharge nerf : still a terrible designed spell that's nerfed because it's not viable. - don't care much for the spore nerf
STILL NOTHING ABOUT
- thor AA - liberator AG - retarded disruptor - ravager - tankivac ("in TvT and TvZ"... okay DK you finally clearly stated we're not supposed to build tanks in TvP, thanks.) - thor AA - viper/corru/BL deathball - 8 armor ultra
I'm seriously asking myself if DK and his team are lord of the ring's ents. We've litterally seen NO changes for a few months. So much for community feedback. Seed's interview was the wake up call, so blizzard got scared people won't buy the mission packs, so they cut DK's 3 months vacations.
|
I much rather they do some design changes and than try to balance the game from there. They are so bloody scared over there i want to scream atthem in the face
|
I guess they are more focused on selling their mission packs than balancing the game, btw I miss hots a lot, the only good point with lotv, to me, is the 12 workers start: all the new units are not very fun to play, to deal with or to watch.
|
On January 23 2016 10:32 BiiG-Fr wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 10:24 Jonsoload wrote:it's a problem when you need t3 units to counter t1 units. Protoss can just mass adepts and you are forced to turtle to mass libs/mass wm. adepts are supremely cost-effective against all low tier units of terran. Just watch alive vs classic where classic played with an adept monocomposition 10 minutes into the game and won. @Charoisaur Deja-vu!!!! It's almost like you're talkin about the reverse of PvT for the entirety of WoL and HoTS  That's total BS, marines are good with stim shield AND medivac in support, adept are good from the beginning to the end.
Marines only need the stim/shield/medivac because the opponent's have been fielding blink/charge/speed or more expensive, often very specific anti-marine units against terran. Adept's are good from the beginning because all the starting units are light. The moment you start fielding armored units (roaches, stalkers) they become quite weak. They also require an upgrade to keep up. Terran is just out of luck in that regard because blizzard never fixed the oracle which means you cannot open with marauders, so you have to pretend you lack a brain and build marines despite knowing adepts are coming.
|
On January 23 2016 10:29 Fran_ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 10:07 ProtossMasterRace wrote:On January 23 2016 10:05 jasonbourne907 wrote: it is unchanging that adept performance per price is ridiculous in 1tier unit Ah so massing t1 units is a problem now, but the fact that zerglings and marines are viable and extremely effective throughout the entire game is not? Also with this change marines will be able to trade cost efficiently with units that are designed to kill light units. By "trade cost efficiently" you mean that marines will still be raped but not as fast. I see.
By trade cost efficiently I mean 2 marines will be able to kill an adept almost and 3 will be able to kill one with ease, 1 adept costs 100 minerals 25 gas, so lets say that's ~150 minerals that are 3 marines because gas is more valuable then minerals. So yea at that point mass marine will trade cost efficiently with something that is supposed to hard counter it.
|
On January 23 2016 11:04 ProtossMasterRace wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 10:29 Fran_ wrote:On January 23 2016 10:07 ProtossMasterRace wrote:On January 23 2016 10:05 jasonbourne907 wrote: it is unchanging that adept performance per price is ridiculous in 1tier unit Ah so massing t1 units is a problem now, but the fact that zerglings and marines are viable and extremely effective throughout the entire game is not? Also with this change marines will be able to trade cost efficiently with units that are designed to kill light units. By "trade cost efficiently" you mean that marines will still be raped but not as fast. I see. By trade cost efficiently I mean 2 marines will be able to kill an adept almost and 3 will be able to kill one with ease, 1 adept costs 100 minerals 25 gas, so lets say that's ~150 minerals that are 3 marines because gas is more valuable then minerals. So yea at that point mass marine will trade cost efficiently with something that is supposed to hard counter it.
I don't think that is true. I've played around with a test map with these customized adepts and they still countered marines pretty well as far as I recall. I surely can't tell you about all scenarios (low amounts, high amounts, all upgrade variations), but note that with 1/1 vs 1/1 to 3/3 vs 3/3 there is hardly any change at all, since adepts upgrade with +1(+1 vs light) and thereby reinstate any pre-nerf shot relations unless the terran is ahead in armor upgrades. And even that only works until +2 is done for the protoss.
|
Nerfing spores? Mutas are still damn strong in ZvZ... What are they thinking...
|
|
|
|