|
Hello guys,
This is my first post on TL so please be clement.
Since the beginning of LOTV, I hear a lot of things regarding balance. My point of view is that we are going on the correct way at the moment. The only thing I dislike at the moment is the way Blizzard is working on "new" maps. Having a particularity on each is something I totally agree with and trying to balance these maps after there released is something I also totally agree with. BUT, I think I should be done faster with like 2 new maps each season. Anyway this isn't what I want to discuss with you but I think this is also a big factor that should be more taken into consideration when Blizzard is trying to balance the game.
At the moment, there is a lot of units which aren't used or used a very little and I'd like to point it out and discuss about it with you guys. Because, in my opinion, most of the time we are trying to balance the game by using current statement and current unit comp/units used.
I would love to see more diversity in unit used (even if It's still already for me to micro properly).
For examples:
T : Why Raven isn't used ? Or why BC couldn't be used vs Ultra when Yamato seems to be the issue?
Z: Why Swarm hosts aren't used at all in LOTV? and why neural control isn't used anymore?
P: Why protoss aren't using colossi anymore?
I totally understand that Blizzard is trying to balance the game by looking at current statement/meta. But why are they sometimes not trying to fix the issue by using other units and especially units which aren't used in current statement/meta?
Let's not be this slanderous because they already tried to do it in LOTV with Ghosts vs Ultras and I feel it's still not used enough often to figure if it's a proper counter or not. BUT, in my opinion, the ghost unit is a counter to mana units (HT/Ghost/Raven/Infest) not heavy units.
So here is my question, what do you guys think? Do you also think that making unit comp in SC2 a lot more diversified would be more entertaining or will it just be a nightmare to try to balance the game afterwards?
|
Colossi and Swarm Hosts were nerfed into the ground. Don't know abot the Terran units though
|
Collossi are still common in tvp
|
Well, every single ability of the raven got nerfed in one way or another. And they weren't little nerfs either. 125 energy for a seeker missile from the 75 in HotS, PDD lasts like, 10(?) seconds now, and auto turrets are pretty useless.
|
What about the BC? Didn't they get a buff?
|
Battlecruiser is the least satisfying unit in the terran arsenal in terms of attack animation imo. Who gave that giant ship a slightly bigger gauss rifle. They are expensive, they are slow, their range is short. Even with the teleport ability(i am not sure if this thing still exists) i haven't seen any battlecruisers in any game for a while.
I also hate battlecruisers since MVP lost a gsl by losing all his army to an archon toilet. He was doing just fine without battlecruisers, they are inefficient.
|
On February 11 2016 17:42 Isualin wrote:
Battlecruiser is the least satisfying unit in the terran arsenal in terms of attack animation imo. Who gave that giant ship a slightly bigger gauss rifle. They are expensive, they are slow, their range is short. Even with the teleport ability(i am not sure if this thing still exists) i haven't seen any battlecruisers in any game for a while.
I also hate battlecruisers since MVP lost a gsl by losing all his army to an archon toilet. He was doing just fine without battlecruisers, they are inefficient.
Mvp didn't lose that gsl he won in g7
|
On February 11 2016 17:44 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 17:42 Isualin wrote:
Battlecruiser is the least satisfying unit in the terran arsenal in terms of attack animation imo. Who gave that giant ship a slightly bigger gauss rifle. They are expensive, they are slow, their range is short. Even with the teleport ability(i am not sure if this thing still exists) i haven't seen any battlecruisers in any game for a while.
I also hate battlecruisers since MVP lost a gsl by losing all his army to an archon toilet. He was doing just fine without battlecruisers, they are inefficient. Mvp didn't lose that gsl he won in g7
Probably could have won in that game five though.
|
On February 11 2016 17:44 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 17:42 Isualin wrote:
Battlecruiser is the least satisfying unit in the terran arsenal in terms of attack animation imo. Who gave that giant ship a slightly bigger gauss rifle. They are expensive, they are slow, their range is short. Even with the teleport ability(i am not sure if this thing still exists) i haven't seen any battlecruisers in any game for a while.
I also hate battlecruisers since MVP lost a gsl by losing all his army to an archon toilet. He was doing just fine without battlecruisers, they are inefficient. Mvp didn't lose that gsl he won in g7
My memory failed me then. Still it was in the finals and they lost him a game.
|
I think it might be partially because the game is still in a relatively new stage still, when people start to realize what they can get away with i terms of builds, they will be able to utilize these units a little better. So while the game is in this stage people pretty much just fall back on whatever works, I guess.
|
On February 11 2016 17:27 Charoisaur wrote:
Collossi are still common in tvp
They are used occasionally, they are by no means common
|
On February 11 2016 17:46 Sakat wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 17:44 Charoisaur wrote:On February 11 2016 17:42 Isualin wrote:
Battlecruiser is the least satisfying unit in the terran arsenal in terms of attack animation imo. Who gave that giant ship a slightly bigger gauss rifle. They are expensive, they are slow, their range is short. Even with the teleport ability(i am not sure if this thing still exists) i haven't seen any battlecruisers in any game for a while.
I also hate battlecruisers since MVP lost a gsl by losing all his army to an archon toilet. He was doing just fine without battlecruisers, they are inefficient. Mvp didn't lose that gsl he won in g7 Probably could have won in that game five though.
Yeah EMP on mothership is much easier than HT.Squirtle just has better position.
|
Hope collosus never gets used again
Ultimate boring attack move unit with no micro required.
|
Ravens are still used in TvT no ?
The only units i have NEVER seen in LotV matches are battlecruisers.
|
On February 11 2016 17:26 Sakat wrote:
Colossi and Swarm Hosts were nerfed into the ground. Don't know abot the Terran units though
Keep in mind SH was buffed a LOT compared to late HOTS.
Late hots: 100 minerals, 200 gas, 4 supply. Requires 200/200 160second flying locust upgrade.
LOTV: 200 mins, 100 gas, 3 supply. No upgrade required.
I guarantee we'll see more of these in a year+ time when players figure out lotv more 
|
Canada5565 Posts
I would love to watch upgraded ravens blowing shit up. Seeker Missile, please.
|
Swarm Host and Battlecruiser.
I am happy that SH is basically gone. It was and it is a terrible, terrible unit and I don't think it is possible to fix it. And sincerely I hope it will stay gone. For all I care, it can be completely removed and replaced with something reasonable.
Battlecruiser - sometimes I see it on GM players streams. I can't remember if in LotV I have ever seen it in pro games, though. It's just too expensive and not enough efficient. In small numbers it's useless, massing it won't win a game like Ultralisks, for example.
|
On February 11 2016 18:43 Asturas wrote:
Swarm Host and Battlecruiser.
I am happy that SH is basically gone. It was and it is a terrible, terrible unit and I don't think it is possible to fix it. And sincerely I hope it will stay gone. For all I care, it can be completely removed and replaced with something reasonable.
Battlecruiser - sometimes I see it on GM players streams. I can't remember if in LotV I have ever seen it in pro games, though. It's just too expensive and not enough efficient. In small numbers it's useless, massing it won't win a game like Ultralisks, for example.
Technically you paid to be able to use that unit by buying HotS, throwing it into the trash can isn't ok, throwing any unit into the trashcan isn't.
|
On February 11 2016 18:40 PiGStarcraft wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 17:26 Sakat wrote:
Colossi and Swarm Hosts were nerfed into the ground. Don't know abot the Terran units though Keep in mind SH was buffed a LOT compared to late HOTS. Late hots: 100 minerals, 200 gas, 4 supply. Requires 200/200 160second flying locust upgrade. LOTV: 200 mins, 100 gas, 3 supply. No upgrade required. I guarantee we'll see more of these in a year+ time when players figure out lotv more
Yes, I know. But how viable is it? The only use I can think of for it is sniping Nexii vP or addons vT. It doesn't seem useful in engagements at all.
EDIT: Although, I'm pretty shit at the game so I guess I'll take your word for it
|
On February 11 2016 19:01 Sakat wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 18:40 PiGStarcraft wrote:On February 11 2016 17:26 Sakat wrote:
Colossi and Swarm Hosts were nerfed into the ground. Don't know abot the Terran units though Keep in mind SH was buffed a LOT compared to late HOTS. Late hots: 100 minerals, 200 gas, 4 supply. Requires 200/200 160second flying locust upgrade. LOTV: 200 mins, 100 gas, 3 supply. No upgrade required. I guarantee we'll see more of these in a year+ time when players figure out lotv more Yes, I know. But how viable is it? The only use I can think of for it is sniping Nexii vP or addons vT. It doesn't seem useful in engagements at all. EDIT: Although, I'm pretty shit at the game so I guess I'll take your word for it
Purely for harassment in the midgame. The locusts do ridiculous damage for free, even though the cast time isn't long just 3 SH spawning 6 locusts has the potential to kill so much stuff. In the endgame for it's cost efficiency in mega turtle situations - though I haven't tested that out.
|
I think this is bound to happen when we now have so many units in the game. You buff something and others will be left in obscurity. Also a lot of this has to do with not figuring the game out yet, an example is the Swarm Host that PiG mentioned.
If this continues to happen in like 1-2 years then I think it would be good to buff something underused, nerf something overly used.
|
On February 11 2016 19:13 PiGStarcraft wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 19:01 Sakat wrote:On February 11 2016 18:40 PiGStarcraft wrote:On February 11 2016 17:26 Sakat wrote:
Colossi and Swarm Hosts were nerfed into the ground. Don't know abot the Terran units though Keep in mind SH was buffed a LOT compared to late HOTS. Late hots: 100 minerals, 200 gas, 4 supply. Requires 200/200 160second flying locust upgrade. LOTV: 200 mins, 100 gas, 3 supply. No upgrade required. I guarantee we'll see more of these in a year+ time when players figure out lotv more Yes, I know. But how viable is it? The only use I can think of for it is sniping Nexii vP or addons vT. It doesn't seem useful in engagements at all. EDIT: Although, I'm pretty shit at the game so I guess I'll take your word for it Purely for harassment in the midgame. The locusts do ridiculous damage for free, even though the cast time isn't long just 3 SH spawning 6 locusts has the potential to kill so much stuff. In the endgame for it's cost efficiency in mega turtle situations - though I haven't tested that out.
Yeah, I guess it makes sense. 3 SH isn't that much of an investment.
|
I think its kinda funny that Blizzard have added 2 Colossus skins but you rarely see the unit used. Maybe its Blizzard's way of telling us to use it? Maybe make colossus spawn with the ability to make the ground burn like in the campaign.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On February 11 2016 19:25 SlammerSC2 wrote:
I think its kinda funny that Blizzard have added 2 Colossus skins but you rarely see the unit used. Maybe its Blizzard's way of telling us to use it? Maybe make colossus spawn with the ability to make the ground burn like in the campaign.
They know that most of the people who buy the game won't touch the ladder with 10 feet long stick, so they probably just don't care.
Edit:
I can completely see the process>
Design team with marketing:
Well, how about we reward our Protoss people out there with a skin? We gave Terrans the Thor, we gave Zergs the Ultralisk, si there any big fucking unit we can skin for Protoss?
Well, we have a Colossus, a Tempest, a Mothership and a Carrier.
OK, so, we cannot change Carriers, do you remember the shitstorm when we tried to remove them? Not gonna risk it. Most people hate Tempests, so we cannot change this either. Well, almost nobody builds a MS, so that would bring an internet rage against us again. Hmm, how about Colossus? This is a unit, that's built all the time! People don't like them, but they build them and they build them often, so everybody will see the skin they have!
That's awesome! hey, drawing guy! Give me a cool Colossus skin!
Mean time in the balance team meeting>
Everyone is fucking nuts about Colossi and them being built in every fucking game. How about we nerf them into useless piece of crap and people will love us?
Yaaaay!
|
On February 11 2016 17:27 Charoisaur wrote:
Collossi are still common in tvp
yes
|
On February 11 2016 19:13 PiGStarcraft wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 19:01 Sakat wrote:On February 11 2016 18:40 PiGStarcraft wrote:On February 11 2016 17:26 Sakat wrote:
Colossi and Swarm Hosts were nerfed into the ground. Don't know abot the Terran units though Keep in mind SH was buffed a LOT compared to late HOTS. Late hots: 100 minerals, 200 gas, 4 supply. Requires 200/200 160second flying locust upgrade. LOTV: 200 mins, 100 gas, 3 supply. No upgrade required. I guarantee we'll see more of these in a year+ time when players figure out lotv more Yes, I know. But how viable is it? The only use I can think of for it is sniping Nexii vP or addons vT. It doesn't seem useful in engagements at all. EDIT: Although, I'm pretty shit at the game so I guess I'll take your word for it Purely for harassment in the midgame. The locusts do ridiculous damage for free, even though the cast time isn't long just 3 SH spawning 6 locusts has the potential to kill so much stuff. In the endgame for it's cost efficiency in mega turtle situations - though I haven't tested that out.
Do you think this is the kind of Unit that will me used in the midgame vs P or T when Zergs are playing roach ravager or roach hydra?
I think it could be a good way to multifront attack but not really used at the moment because it costs a lot of mineral in the current meta which are currently used with roach/ling ravager composition.
@elojt: I totally agree with your point of view. It's still too early to try to buff them but maybe they could try it to encourage players to use them.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
P: Why protoss aren't using colossi anymore?
Colossus damage was nerfed by over 1.5x in some situations (particularly when you have attack upgrades and are shooting at anything with any armor since they deal 2 attacks and used to gain more per upgrade)
there was no compensation for that at all. Chronoboost was nerfed to the ground when colossus openers were quite dependant on it.
A unit gated behind so much tech and research time (build t1, t1.5, t2, t3 building and then research from the t3 building) would already be a pain to use in legacy where it's not acceptable to sit back for ages waiting for units to get done before expanding any more. With nerfs that big, it's not really usable as an army core
|
On February 11 2016 17:19 DropMsZ1 wrote:
T : Why Raven isn't used ? Or why BC couldn't be used vs Ultra when Yamato seems to be the issue?
Well I use the Raven in tvt still. autoturrets are tank shot pdds. But 125 energy for the seeker is meh. Getting a decent shot requires so much micro, and the damage is just to low for it. Compare that to a Disruptor, which is basically 10 ravens spamming seekers :p.
Energy costs are just to high on this unit. They should give it charge energy ability. Eat up minerals or vespene or other units energy even the enemy.
Still a nice unit to have if you have the apm free for using it, and don't have to go to far out of your way to build it.
As for Yamato on an Ultra ... You spam Yamatos on the ultras, just to see the Zerg being on point with the transfuses which is rather easy to hit. And then you shower the Ultra in 1 hit damage, before it simply run away from you. Having 2 Bcs is quite awesome in the lategame though.
Flying Marines that can warp around on the map x3. They can be a real pain in the ass.
Though having maximum upgraded Ultras is still a win condition in this game x3. Still don't understand how they could think it would be a good idea to make Ultras even more resilient to sustained damage, while keeping transfuse as it is.
But we are basically still in multiplayer beta, And they are working away at each matchup at a time right now, So they can monitor the effect on the other matchups. And they keep the map pool rather diverse so that the game balance doesn't just work on one map type.
So its rather important to talk about all the issues. Especially transfuse ! ;P
|
If only the Oracle would join the ranks of unused units in Legacy of the Void. I would gladly trade anything for an Oracle damage nerf.
|
On February 11 2016 18:04 LongShot27 wrote:They are used occasionally, they are by no means common
They seem to be effective when used though. I couldn't say if that's a result of them being so unexpected.
|
Colossi are still good against PURE MARINES when there are no Vikings. Otherwise they die too quickly and don't do enough damage to the Marauders. That's why you hardly see them.
Back to Swarm Hosts though:
On maps like Ulrena, wouldn't it be fun to plant like 3-4 SH in your main and just fly the locusts into their main? DO they last that long even?
EDIT - and by fun I mean a fucking nightmare for the other player...
|
Ravens are nerfed into oblivion. Yes i agree that 3 minute turrets (after upgrade) were a bit too much. But 9 seconds for a high energy cost isnt worth it. Also the PDD cost increase isnt helping either. In HOTS we could use ravens to have some defence vs tempests, with the cost increase we can only place 1 PDD per raven. One of the reasons why terran vs toss skyarmy has become extra cost efficient for toss.
|
I don't think there's a problem with having a few units that are only used situationally or even only in lower-level games. To be honest, though, so far, LotV doesn't seem to be leaving too many units out in the cold at all. Colossi still definitely have a place in TvP, they're just not a core unit like the used to be. SH and BCs are the least used, but they're still situationally viable, and people will come up with strats that use them as the game and maps develop.
Anyway, you gotta have at least one Joke unit (a la Scout) that you can use to humiliate your opponents...right?
|
On February 11 2016 17:46 Isualin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 17:44 Charoisaur wrote:On February 11 2016 17:42 Isualin wrote:
Battlecruiser is the least satisfying unit in the terran arsenal in terms of attack animation imo. Who gave that giant ship a slightly bigger gauss rifle. They are expensive, they are slow, their range is short. Even with the teleport ability(i am not sure if this thing still exists) i haven't seen any battlecruisers in any game for a while.
I also hate battlecruisers since MVP lost a gsl by losing all his army to an archon toilet. He was doing just fine without battlecruisers, they are inefficient. Mvp didn't lose that gsl he won in g7 My memory failed me then. Still it was in the finals and they lost him a game.
to be honest i don't really have anything to add to this thread but this just blew my mind. that is literally the most epic series in sc2 history and you don't remember who won or how he won? no offense but that's just kind of ridiculous to me. please do yourself the favour and watch the whole series, pretty sure it should be on youtube.
|
BC is a pretty terrible anti-ultra unit. It costs a ton, it requires a ton of energy to fire Yamato and it fires really fast for very little damage so it's auto attack won't do shit. Ghosts are completely superior versus Ultra.
|
On February 12 2016 01:24 Captain Peabody wrote:
I don't think there's a problem with having a few units that are only used situationally or even only in lower-level games. To be honest, though, so far, LotV doesn't seem to be leaving too many units out in the cold at all. Colossi still definitely have a place in TvP, they're just not a core unit like the used to be. SH and BCs are the least used, but they're still situationally viable, and people will come up with strats that use them as the game and maps develop.
Anyway, you gotta have at least one Joke unit (a la Scout) that you can use to humiliate your opponents...right?
You shut up you.. mass scout was a perfectly viable strategy :p
+ Show Spoiler +in my 2v2v2v2 BGH! games
|
Since it fits the topic, a crosspost from the Swarm Host thread, Dustin Browder on designing an esports 2011. I really like his points and why too many units are not great for a game/esports. I wish they'd have sticked more to their guns in that regard.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014488/The-Game-Design-of-STARCRAFT
and go to the section Simple (Why the Designers hate me), or watch the whole thing, it is very interesting even if some of the thoughts might be outdated after another 5 years of esports/Starcraft.
|
On February 12 2016 01:16 DinoMight wrote:
Colossi are still good against PURE MARINES when there are no Vikings. Otherwise they die too quickly and don't do enough damage to the Marauders. That's why you hardly see them.
Back to Swarm Hosts though:
On maps like Ulrena, wouldn't it be fun to plant like 3-4 SH in your main and just fly the locusts into their main? DO they last that long even?
EDIT - and by fun I mean a fucking nightmare for the other player...
Well,why not use the new cheap Overlord drops to move the S.Hosts to the gold base. From there the locusts can hit anything haha
|
On February 12 2016 04:27 ThorPool wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2016 01:16 DinoMight wrote:
Colossi are still good against PURE MARINES when there are no Vikings. Otherwise they die too quickly and don't do enough damage to the Marauders. That's why you hardly see them.
Back to Swarm Hosts though:
On maps like Ulrena, wouldn't it be fun to plant like 3-4 SH in your main and just fly the locusts into their main? DO they last that long even?
EDIT - and by fun I mean a fucking nightmare for the other player... Well,why not use the new cheap Overlord drops to move the S.Hosts to the gold base. From there the locusts can hit anything haha
Yes! +1 to you.
No wonder the ladder is full of Zergs. They can have fun once I a while
|
On February 12 2016 03:21 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2016 01:24 Captain Peabody wrote:
I don't think there's a problem with having a few units that are only used situationally or even only in lower-level games. To be honest, though, so far, LotV doesn't seem to be leaving too many units out in the cold at all. Colossi still definitely have a place in TvP, they're just not a core unit like the used to be. SH and BCs are the least used, but they're still situationally viable, and people will come up with strats that use them as the game and maps develop.
Anyway, you gotta have at least one Joke unit (a la Scout) that you can use to humiliate your opponents...right? You shut up you.. mass scout was a perfectly viable strategy :p + Show Spoiler +in my 2v2v2v2 BGH! games
On June 12 2011 01:40 dukethegold wrote:
Your esteemed selves may recall the glorious golden past, when you turtle on two base for 40 minutes and unleash a swarm of fury consisted of no less than 48 almighty Scouts, piloted by sons of Aiur. Your AI foes can only stare haplessly at your flying angels of death and put up a valiant but futile resistance.
|
On February 12 2016 01:16 DinoMight wrote:
On maps like Ulrena, wouldn't it be fun to plant like 3-4 SH in your main and just fly the locusts into their main? DO they last that long even?
I played against that once in plat league. Was a nightmare to deal with, and lost my nat. Zerg had lots of hydras and a couple of lurkers. I managed to overwhelm it eventually with voidray disruptor play
|
I remember this being the case in both Wings and HotS too. Eventually people will start trying new things, it just takes a while for new things to be implemented into public games like tournaments. People will always try to stick to the things they are comfortable with as long as they have good results.
Example: It took a while for infestors to show up in Wings and later they were nerfed because everyone was using them.
|
They're troll units, you make them to bm your opponent.
|
This game has a very bloated unit roster. Limits are what makes games exciting, not very bloated rosters full of very niche units with overlapping functions. It's a good thing for shitty, boring units to remain nonviable though it would be better if Blizzard actually grew the balls to cut them out of the game completely.
|
On February 12 2016 06:12 andrewlt wrote:
This game has a very bloated unit roster. Limits are what makes games exciting, not very bloated rosters full of very niche units with overlapping functions. It's a good thing for shitty, boring units to remain nonviable though it would be better if Blizzard actually grew the balls to cut them out of the game completely.
If you think there are *too many units* you could always just NOT USE them.
I'm okay having more variety in the game.
|
Forget units. I can probably count on one hand every time Neosteel Frame has been used in the last six years.
|
Make SH a Dark Swarm generator. It walks around with a permanent dark swarm over its head. No locusts, no attack. Name fits too.
|
Battlecruiser yamoto is not only canceled by abduct, but you also lose the 100 energy as well which essentially gives you an expensive fucking dead weight 6 supply ship that hits like a marinr
|
On February 12 2016 06:57 ElMeanYo wrote:
Make SH a Dark Swarm generator. It walks around with a permanent dark swarm over its head. No locusts, no attack. Name fits too.
That honestly sounds pretty sweet, how would it work with burrow?
|
On February 12 2016 07:07 Hexe wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2016 06:57 ElMeanYo wrote:
Make SH a Dark Swarm generator. It walks around with a permanent dark swarm over its head. No locusts, no attack. Name fits too. That honestly sounds pretty sweet, how would it work with burrow?
Probably it would turn off while burrowed, so SH can hide when in trouble 
|
On February 12 2016 05:15 eezyBash wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2016 01:16 DinoMight wrote:
On maps like Ulrena, wouldn't it be fun to plant like 3-4 SH in your main and just fly the locusts into their main? DO they last that long even?
I played against that once in plat league. Was a nightmare to deal with, and lost my nat. Zerg had lots of hydras and a couple of lurkers. I managed to overwhelm it eventually with voidray disruptor play
I had it in masters. Although he just knocked down the rocks (I actually scouted that and was kinda confused why he did that, I thought to prevent me from making a base there unobserved). First wave was a pain, and he ran, but after that his attacks were mainly costing him his swarmhosts.
Regarding battlecruisers vs ultras. I actually use battlecruisers quite a bit since I go mech, ground units all die to BL, and vikings / Liberators all die to vipers (maybe now a bit less problematic). If the opponent has corruptors, and even queens, they really are the higher priority since otherwise your battlecruisers simply die. So only yamatos you have is either when he has hydra - ultra or after you wiped out all his anti air (or he brought no anti air). And while somewhere in HotS Yamato was boosted (lowered cost to 100 energy, don't actually know if I consider that a good thing), its auto attack is nerfed against ultras in LotV. Generally I rely more on a few banshees and liberators in ground mode to mop up the ultras than battlecruisers.
And ravens, well enough has been said about them, the nerf bat is simply painful.
|
I just don't understand why we don't still have durable materials upgrade.
Even making a fusion core requirement and making it take longer to research, just to give Terran a bit more something in the ultra late game. Everyone's talking about how TvZ is getting back to the Zerg just going for the ultra late game army behind infestor/ravager and Terran not being able to make an army to beat it any more.
Longer duration pdd/seeker missile would give terran much better tools to take the right fight in that late game.
|
rather than any unit, i think the research burrow is vastly underused.
ever see a player a-move with infestors in an even engagement?
that's a thousand gas down the drain after the dust settles because they were not salvaged or kept alive.
how about burrowing individual roaches for regen, or cheap units across the map to scout key positions
|
On February 12 2016 06:38 royalroadweed wrote:
Forget units. I can probably count on one hand every time Neosteel Frame has been used in the last six years.
i recall one game in GSTL where an IM terran, and i think it was Yoda, did a Neosteel Frame bunker push against Protoss. it was actually really sweet and won him the game. but that is literally the only time i can remember seeing it in a tournament game.
|
On February 11 2016 17:44 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 17:42 Isualin wrote:
Battlecruiser is the least satisfying unit in the terran arsenal in terms of attack animation imo. Who gave that giant ship a slightly bigger gauss rifle. They are expensive, they are slow, their range is short. Even with the teleport ability(i am not sure if this thing still exists) i haven't seen any battlecruisers in any game for a while.
I also hate battlecruisers since MVP lost a gsl by losing all his army to an archon toilet. He was doing just fine without battlecruisers, they are inefficient. Mvp didn't lose that gsl he won in g7
nah Squirtle threw
|
how about burrowing individual roaches for regen
It's not good. The roach has a burrow and unborrow delay each of of like 15-25% of it's attack cooldown. You would want to burrow a wounded roach the moment after it used its attack but unburrow before the next. Something that you absolutely don't have the attention to watch properly. On average the gain is very small:
10 HP if you can burrow for half the cooldown which competes with 16 damage attacks that you may delay or cancel if you do it wrong.
I have given tons of (seperate or combineable) suggestions to make this type of micro better in the past:
- remove/severely shorten burrow/unburrow delays
- give roaches an insta 5 heal upon burrowing
- make a burrowing roach dodge projectiles (like blink)
- possibly offset roach health by -5 or -10 to account for the greater combat strength
also, finally push out the burrow button patch...
On February 12 2016 08:22 DonDomingo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 17:44 Charoisaur wrote:On February 11 2016 17:42 Isualin wrote:
Battlecruiser is the least satisfying unit in the terran arsenal in terms of attack animation imo. Who gave that giant ship a slightly bigger gauss rifle. They are expensive, they are slow, their range is short. Even with the teleport ability(i am not sure if this thing still exists) i haven't seen any battlecruisers in any game for a while.
I also hate battlecruisers since MVP lost a gsl by losing all his army to an archon toilet. He was doing just fine without battlecruisers, they are inefficient. Mvp didn't lose that gsl he won in g7 nah Squirtle threw
nah, Mvp threw (but still won the series)
|
On February 12 2016 08:32 Big J wrote:It's not good. The roach has a burrow and unborrow delay each of of like 15-25% of it's attack cooldown. You would want to burrow a wounded roach the moment after it used its attack but unburrow before the next. Something that you absolutely don't have the attention to watch properly. On average the gain is very small: 10 HP if you can burrow for half the cooldown which competes with 16 damage attacks that you may delay or cancel if you do it wrong. I have given tons of (seperate or combineable) suggestions to make this type of micro better in the past: - remove/severely shorten burrow/unburrow delays - give roaches an insta 5 heal upon burrowing - make a burrowing roach dodge projectiles (like blink) - possibly offset roach health by -5 or -10 to account for the greater combat strength also, finally push out the burrow button patch... Show nested quote +On February 12 2016 08:22 DonDomingo wrote:On February 11 2016 17:44 Charoisaur wrote:On February 11 2016 17:42 Isualin wrote:
Battlecruiser is the least satisfying unit in the terran arsenal in terms of attack animation imo. Who gave that giant ship a slightly bigger gauss rifle. They are expensive, they are slow, their range is short. Even with the teleport ability(i am not sure if this thing still exists) i haven't seen any battlecruisers in any game for a while.
I also hate battlecruisers since MVP lost a gsl by losing all his army to an archon toilet. He was doing just fine without battlecruisers, they are inefficient. Mvp didn't lose that gsl he won in g7 nah Squirtle threw nah, Mvp threw (but still won the series)
it's not about roach micro during a fight, it's about regenning between engagements because you have several low HP roaches
|
On February 12 2016 00:17 DropMsZ1 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 19:13 PiGStarcraft wrote:On February 11 2016 19:01 Sakat wrote:On February 11 2016 18:40 PiGStarcraft wrote:On February 11 2016 17:26 Sakat wrote:
Colossi and Swarm Hosts were nerfed into the ground. Don't know abot the Terran units though Keep in mind SH was buffed a LOT compared to late HOTS. Late hots: 100 minerals, 200 gas, 4 supply. Requires 200/200 160second flying locust upgrade. LOTV: 200 mins, 100 gas, 3 supply. No upgrade required. I guarantee we'll see more of these in a year+ time when players figure out lotv more Yes, I know. But how viable is it? The only use I can think of for it is sniping Nexii vP or addons vT. It doesn't seem useful in engagements at all. EDIT: Although, I'm pretty shit at the game so I guess I'll take your word for it Purely for harassment in the midgame. The locusts do ridiculous damage for free, even though the cast time isn't long just 3 SH spawning 6 locusts has the potential to kill so much stuff. In the endgame for it's cost efficiency in mega turtle situations - though I haven't tested that out. Do you think this is the kind of Unit that will me used in the midgame vs P or T when Zergs are playing roach ravager or roach hydra? I think it could be a good way to multifront attack but not really used at the moment because it costs a lot of mineral in the current meta which are currently used with roach/ling ravager composition. @elojt: I totally agree with your point of view. It's still too early to try to buff them but maybe they could try it to encourage players to use them.
Yeah just as a relatively risk free multiprong harassment (even stim bio struggles to catch up with the new SH movespeed) as opposed to drops where you need to actually commit a lot of units - and the ovie drops aren't very agile so they sometimes can get completely shut down
|
Raven are used sometimes, but because mech is so terrible ATM, you don't see them very much. BCs aren't used because terrans die to ultralisks before going for it.
Colossi are used, but the gamble-y bullshit disruptor is way stronger as long as AoE goes (plus you can harass with the roflprism).
Neural is still a niche spell, but it's too expansive in energy, and you're not allowed to build big units anymore against zerg ATM since ravagers eat through anything that doesn't run. And SHs are so f****ing terrible they're not used.
It's so so. I mean I like that the raven is used as a support unit and not as mass raven death turtle strat. I like that zerg can only build 10-15 mutas because of liberators, and not rely on the 45 mutas luftwaffe any more. I like that you can build tanks in TvP to support your bio. I like that colossi are countered by static siege units, like the liberator.
However, still, a lot of units are underused because the LOTV units are still so OP. Except for the cyclone, which is so bad in design it's always gonna be terrible or OP.
|
On February 12 2016 06:19 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2016 06:12 andrewlt wrote:
This game has a very bloated unit roster. Limits are what makes games exciting, not very bloated rosters full of very niche units with overlapping functions. It's a good thing for shitty, boring units to remain nonviable though it would be better if Blizzard actually grew the balls to cut them out of the game completely. If you think there are *too many units* you could always just NOT USE them. I'm okay having more variety in the game.
That's a silly argument. Every single viable unit needs to be prepared for. Every single viable unit can be used for an all in. As a spectator, it makes games look more like a guessing game rather than a game of skill. And you're making the game less accessible to the casual spectator who sees a new unit he's never seen before almost every time he watches the game. Also, the units the OP wants back are some of the worst designed units the game has to offer.
SC2 already matched BW's unit roster way back in WoL. The expansions added more units and on the whole, HotS' new units have been an unmitigated disaster. It's too early to tell whether LotV's new units will match the disaster that HotS' new units were.
|
if you get to the point that you're using BC's, that's pretty much the lazy man's way of bolstering an already strong army.
it's like making mass voidray when you're ahead and your opponent has one mining base around 130 supply.
like holy fuck they cost so much
|
On February 11 2016 17:19 DropMsZ1 wrote:Hello guys, + Show Spoiler +This is my first post on TL so please be clement.
Since the beginning of LOTV, I hear a lot of things regarding balance. My point of view is that we are going on the correct way at the moment. The only thing I dislike at the moment is the way Blizzard is working on "new" maps. Having a particularity on each is something I totally agree with and trying to balance these maps after there released is something I also totally agree with. BUT, I think I should be done faster with like 2 new maps each season. Anyway this isn't what I want to discuss with you but I think this is also a big factor that should be more taken into consideration when Blizzard is trying to balance the game.
At the moment, there is a lot of units which aren't used or used a very little and I'd like to point it out and discuss about it with you guys. Because, in my opinion, most of the time we are trying to balance the game by using current statement and current unit comp/units used.
I would love to see more diversity in unit used (even if It's still already for me to micro properly).
For examples:
T : Why Raven isn't used ? Or why BC couldn't be used vs Ultra when Yamato seems to be the issue?
Z: Why Swarm hosts aren't used at all in LOTV? and why neural control isn't used anymore?
P: Why protoss aren't using colossi anymore?
I totally understand that Blizzard is trying to balance the game by looking at current statement/meta. But why are they sometimes not trying to fix the issue by using other units and especially units which aren't used in current statement/meta?
Let's not be this slanderous because they already tried to do it in LOTV with Ghosts vs Ultras and I feel it's still not used enough often to figure if it's a proper counter or not. BUT, in my opinion, the ghost unit is a counter to mana units (HT/Ghost/Raven/Infest) not heavy units. So here is my question, what do you guys think? Do you also think that making unit comp in SC2 a lot more diversified would be more entertaining or will it just be a nightmare to try to balance the game afterwards?
The way I approach the game is very different from this post. I don't think every unit has to be able to be part of a core composition most competitive games. I would like to see burrow move for swarm hosts to make them viable again.
I think the game is more about a composition that fits the scenario you are playing. I think in fact Swarm hosts, Ravens,
and Colossus are still useful. The problem is, in a large fight at the current state, very few games go low econ/turtling so swarm hosts and ravens aren't common.
------------------------------------------------------------
Compositionally least used-
Least used units(buildings)-
Terran- Ravens, Nukes, BC's, Hyperflight Banshees, Vikings, (Sensor Towers)
Protoss- Colossus, Carriers, Motherships, Voids rays, Sentries
Zerg- Swarm hosts, infestors, vipers, corruptors, BroodLords
------------------------------------------------------------
Why are these the least used?
What do these units all have in common? They all are late game units which usually aren't good at breaking positions and require tech and gas to be useful. The economic changes effect this more than the nerfs to be honest. The reason being in small numbers in turtling, almost none of these units are extremely useful The map pool/economy has an effect on what types of units give the most bang for the buck.
If you have the same requirements to get a liberator as a raven... Let's ask the question, when is a raven more cost efficient and serves more purposes than the liberator. It works better when the opponent has bc's vikings; island base with turrets, deflect blink shots if you have no tank support for liberators, Clearing creep with limited scans from slow expanding.
When you build units they have a purpose. The ideal situation is that a unit fulfills that purpose in the most cost efficient way as well as gives you the most options after its primary purpose. So I think in the players mind, they are choosing between different things.
------------------------------------------------------------
Common Decisions and why they are made compositionally-
+ Show Spoiler +
Liberators vs ravens-
Liberators require time to set up to be effective, so liberator play see's much more sensor tower usage. Gasless openers from zerg have much more creep and more aggressive ravager timings, so Hyperflight banshees/ravens are more ideal against gasless styles from zerg.
Colossus vs Disruptors-
Colossus require the opponent to not have direct access to air units. Most terrans push for 2 starports late game most games. Colossus are more reliable than disruptors at hitting shots, but require an upgrade to be effective. Early game units like roaches, and marauders do well to split the army and make colossus harder to execute. Colossus rely heavily on a sentry backbone as well to control engagements. Sentries are not as easy to get with the changes in the econ. Colossus can still work for 4 base protoss with phoenix openers and close proximity between bases.
Colossus vs Archons-
Archons can be hard to get to if you have already commit to 2 tech trees (i.e. Phoenix, disruptor) Colossus could be viable off of adept/oracle opener into a sentry colossus backbone against a passive player. This sort of passive play is not common though. Keep in mind, this is setting up for an engagement which in the passive section of the game the opponent is not going mass air styles to counter the phoenix not units that go through the sentries. (an example would be infestor/ roach/hydra/ling or Marine heavy/ghost styles.) Most players are not rushing ghosts or going infestor heavy early. Archons are more reliable in open field engagements and do not require a sentry backbone.
Colossus vs Tempests-
Once you get to 4-5 bases. Often to push through defensive positions tempests are more common. The reason being that tempests give you more potential to push past lurkers, spores, and liberators. I think the choice to break the player it makes more sense to push with tempests than colossus.
Mothership vs Tempests-
The mothership requires a large amount of gas and time to morph. It also has weakness in its mobility. When the game has slowed down the mothership would be better than a tempest. It gives recall so you can push one side of the map, then reposition and army to the other side. It pairs better with carriers which take a long time to build a count up.
Carriers vs Tempests-
Carriers build much slower and require about 6-8 before they have enough dps to stack and not lose to many to fast. Tempests compliment lower tech units better. Carriers are better at pushing through defensive armies where dps is a limiting factor to the engagement. (i.e. against marine/mutalisk compositions)
Swarm hosts vs Infestors-
Infestors take a considerable amount of time to generate damage just like swarm hosts. The biggest difference is the burrow move. Infestors can inflict damage than leave more safely. Also, Infestors pair well with ravagers. Swarm hosts are better than infestors if there are static defense around the map and econ is low.
Swarm Hosts vs brood lords-
Swarm hosts are better than brood lords only when zerg has lost the capacity to get brood lords. Brood lords serve basically every function of swarm hosts but also are really good in engagements.
Swarm Hosts vs ravagers-
Ravagers are also gas heavy units. Ravagers have range just like swarm hosts. If the tank count has reached critical mass, spire tech is unavailable and the opponent is passive in a low econ situation where you don't need to break them quickly, you might consider swarm hosts. Swarm hosts also can hit island bases, which aren't too popular in the current map pool.
------------------------------------------------------------
Increasing usage?
To be honest to increase usage, the most important thing will be players playing more passive in the mid game and a map pool which facilitates player passiveness. Blizzard has said, they don't want to mess with mineral counts per base for play style diversity. Mostly this is due to players taking wins off better players by turtling. This would be the first change made to see an increase in passive play. Eventually to see more diversity Blizzard might drop this premise. The problem is that some races are much easier to play in a passive game(I.e. zerg/protoss have less abilities in the late late game.) Its much harder to differentiate pro skill with passiveness. If these units were more common, players with less multitasking and slower decision making would be more successful.
If Blizzard had a non-competitive casual based ladder with more maps and more economic variety, they could implement something like this that would favor more styles and more success to players with less multitasking and slower decision making. Blizzard has made the choice to not commit to a casual scene though.
|
separating casual and less casual base is no gucci.
it's going to hang on the casual player's mind that they have it easy mode and there's no way to validate their play without that being a thing.
the only way to be a true casual is having a bunch of friends in the same court and playing together for the sake of it, as it has always been for any game ever.
|
On February 12 2016 12:21 nanaoei wrote:
separating casual and less casual base is no gucci.
it's going to hang on the casual player's mind that they have it easy mode and there's no way to validate their play without that being a thing.
the only way to be a true casual is having a bunch of friends in the same court and playing together for the sake of it, as it has always been for any game ever.
How do you figure? I mean honestly, the casual base is strong in sc2, coop is faster finding a game any time of the day. In Cs:go people play more casual games with custom maps. In dota you can queue multiple modes. In diablo 3, more people play softcore than hardcore. In heroes of the storm more people play quick match than queue as competitive teams. Almost every game players play more casual and its more popular. You really have no idea what you are talking about. None of my closest friends like starcraft against people because they get crushed. I play more coop with friends than ladder with friends. A casual ladder would be more popular.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
What do these units all have in common? They all are late game units which usually aren't good at breaking positions and require tech and gas to be useful. The economic changes effect this more than the nerfs to be honest.
Colossi are still used some now. They would be used way way more if they got their damage back.
At +3 attack and with opponent +3 armor, it's a 1.5x damage nerf against normal units and a 1.55x damage nerf against units with 1 base armor.
Those are INSANE nerfs for a unit that was relatively well balanced for 5 years and recieved no compensation. No reduction in supply cost (still 6), resource cost, availability (still a t3 unit gated behind a long 200/200 research) etc.
Economic changes are nothing compared to the scale of such nerfs. Passivity won't fix it either as it's not a case of "i want to build colossi but i can't get to them" - it's a case of not wanting them
Colossus require the opponent to not have direct access to air units. Most terrans push for 2 starports late game most games.
Protoss have been effectively building Colossi for 6 years with terran and zerg building AA units because they brought something to the table that made that vulnerability worth it. Starport habits have not changed that much, nor is it honestly that difficult to get half a dozen sentries - i think you're way overthinking it here, it's a simple case of power vs cost (in time, resources, supply)
|
I still make Collo, sometimes terran assumes you wont go for collo hehe
|
reducing both yamato cast time and energy cost would be nice, even if it means increasing yamato research time and/or cost to balance.
I also think that in a similar way to what has been done for marauders, i mean modifying the number of shots delivered, i would divide by two the number of shots delivered by the primary weapon but increase the damage output 2 times, while allowing this weapon to deliver a bit more damage to armored enemy units. This could go in the way of coutering a late game unit, the ultralisk, with another late game unit, the battlecruiser.
|
Colossus is being used in almost every game TvP again, so it's not really unused unit.
Ravens got nerfed to the ground and unless you make one early game in TvT you probably won't make them at all. Bc's do almost no damage to ultras and aren't that good vs zerg air nowadays with corruptors and vipers, zerg can either make mass air or mass ground and bc's won't do much. Not to mention they are too expensive for their worth.
Game is too fast for swarm hosts, but I heard it has some use in ZvZ late game.
|
On February 12 2016 20:00 FFgringo wrote:
reducing both yamato cast time and energy cost would be nice, even if it means increasing yamato research time and/or cost to balance.
No, no and no. Rather increase the energy cost. And I am a mech terran who loves to go for battlecruisers, but I rather don't have them screw over balance and fun completely.
With 100 energy cost for yamato I now already have games where if I got a large group hanging around, quite some have full energy, and then 30 corruptors come in. At which points I fire of 30 yamatos and all corruptors are gone. While you can say 15 battlecruisers should maybe kill 30 corruptors, doing it with no losses except energy is questionable. Meanwhile if you lack energy you get whiped out.
So that heavily promotes just hanging around doing nothing besides gaining energy, and it makes balance impossible. Especially if you low the energy amount of yamato further: Yamato kills everything, including its supposed counter. I rather got a less accessible yamato with better stats for the BC itself.
|
Why are Tempests and Broodlords being played, but BCs and Carriers not? Because the former have a clear purpose as siege units with dedicated units that they counter and dedicated units which they are countered by.
The BC? Does it have any outstanding weakness? Not really. Does it have any outstanding strenght or utility? Not really. There is hardly any scenario in which you'd want a BC over a Viking/Liberator or a Tank/Thor (the only semi-popular use has been to combat siege lines and even there it always competed with banshees or just dropping onto the tanks). The only power the BC has is that it makes for one of the most supplyefficient army units. In a game in which you don't turtle really, really hardcore and are rather concerned with your income that means it has no real role at all.
It's similar for the Carrier, though the unit feels a bit more specialized with its greater range and the interceptor mechanic, which makes it a bit weaker as an unsupported combatant and a bit stronger in an active game.
Imo both those units should have undergone some redesign some time ago. E.g. the BC could be made cheaper, a little less durable with more attack and less anti-air capability. Thereby making for a more efficient antiground unit that you may want to switch into against a typical composition, but with better ways to take them down with the dedicated antiair units. Or in case of the carrier, adding some damage vs light and removing vs armored to make it more of a supplement to the voidray, while again, strengthening certain armored units against them.
With such redesigns there would be clear unit compositions against which you'd want to go for BCs and Carriers without having to turtle to 10 of them, but also they wouldn't make for those ultimate air armies anymore.
|
On February 12 2016 12:37 tokinho wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2016 12:21 nanaoei wrote:
separating casual and less casual base is no gucci.
it's going to hang on the casual player's mind that they have it easy mode and there's no way to validate their play without that being a thing.
the only way to be a true casual is having a bunch of friends in the same court and playing together for the sake of it, as it has always been for any game ever. How do you figure? I mean honestly, the casual base is strong in sc2, coop is faster finding a game any time of the day. In Cs:go people play more casual games with custom maps. In dota you can queue multiple modes. In diablo 3, more people play softcore than hardcore. In heroes of the storm more people play quick match than queue as competitive teams. Almost every game players play more casual and its more popular. You really have no idea what you are talking about. None of my closest friends like starcraft against people because they get crushed. I play more coop with friends than ladder with friends. A casual ladder would be more popular.
watching streams and not playing is another form of being a casual. us talking here is pretty damn casual. it's pretty popular isn't it? except sometimes it's the next step down from not actually playing the game.
i understand that readily-made and sanctioned modes gain popularity, but because it appears on the choices on the queue list does not necessarily do it any favors. in dota 2, you have many modes you can work with but by far the most played modes are All Pick, and Ranked All Pick. there are literally several other modes including the options to coach, spectate, and 1v1 (unconventional mode) as a mode to improve. it's all casual, it's about the way you play, and of course what keeps you playing is that you're enjoying whatever it is you're into. Friends, however, provide a really big bonus and make you want to play and try new things, even when you don't want to.
for HotStorm, it's first setting is that it's a casual game, but through winning, losing and matching against other people it's a competitive game by nature. people don't queue to suck and get flamed, it just feels bad and you lose.
they queue because it's a less stressful and more friendly environment to test or get better in. it's also more fun because everyone else takes it less seriously as well. quickmatch games are also the closest, smoothest, and most convenient ways to get into ranked games which are not too much different. they way they structure ladder climbing in that game is that losing is fine at the start, and only winning counts. it's also the first and one of the only modes in the game. people watch streamers play ranked to learn how to have more fun, or how get ahead of their skill mmr.
talking about softcore rather than hardcore in diablo 2 and 3, dozens of hours put on a hero that you may lose in many different situations is already off-putting. i'll cut to the point, if you're still playing these games you have a community or a set of friends you play for, or you enjoy the genre greatly with a lack of better alternatives in an entire package. the only thing that comes close is a korean mmo stylized the same way or path of exile which also has its own flavor to hardcore--being that hardcore characters revive as softcore characters. why is being casual not looked down on? because there's no shame in not wanting to waste time and getting frustrated when it's not for everyone.. along with all the different problems that plagued the hardcore experience earlier on (connection to servers, champion packs, spawns, patterns, etc.)
so to gear up for hardcore, or a less casual experience, you do research, watch streams, read guides and builds, and make plans to get yourself ready--reducing the chance you will have wasted your time, and making it overall more enjoyable because you know what you're doing. it's a grind game, and efficiency is always called into question.
but then there's the lack of challenge or the adrenaline of having to gear up and fight hard to stay aloft, hoping for the right drops. the economy in hardcore is much less saturated for obvious reasons and you get more street cred for doing the same things playing a HC char.
even more so in starcraft 2, the amount of respect you get and the potential rewards/satisfaction go up with your competitive drive and league ranking. if league ranking isn't important, but say playing the same game as your favorite streamers are playing is, reducing the difficulty and making it easier is only a stepping stone for where you'll end up anyway. 1v1 is the most responsibility you'll have as a player in starcraft. it's win or lose, there's no grinding and getting better eventually. it's all up to you, improvement and going through the motions like you're training or understanding as you go on. ladder, league, ranking, and your opponents all add anxiety to that whole experience. overall, i don't think it will change even if you make monobattles a queue-able thing or you significantly reduce the difficulty of mechanics and cater a bit. there are already ways you can do that, like reducing game speed. there's no way that feels good because everyone knows the end-goal in playing starcraft 2 melee is to play or understand ladder. there is no intermingling between the casual and serious base because the games are played entirely differently with different speeds and mechanics.
for starcraft 2 specifically,
a master league player logging in to only queue lottery defence for a few hours? not so likely.
a customs player with 0 league games (very common) looking to hash out some placement and league games? even less likely.
different crowd for different games.
don't get me wrong, there are people who really enjoy customs or co-op missions/singleplayer as the main gameplay, but there's little to no middleground for what is predominantly a ladder game (i'm including teamplay queues as well).
if you could make a game mode to queue monobattles as 2v2/3v3 where it lets you draft out of a list, which units you can make all game, sweet make it happen that sounds awesome but please don't underestimate the general player's mentality when it comes to gaming and how quickly people get bored, especially for a game that's so hard to truly get into in the first place.
starcraft 2's selling point at this point is the competition and the difficulty even if you're only there to watch it happen, it is truly the best and most popular (, and best supported) modern RTS title at the moment.
if custom games were the solution, they'd erase the delay and add support for a lot of features that were present in wc3 and now dota 2. if they could add an objective-based game in the same sort of RTS setting that makes players love mining and creating units to achieve something (like, team king of the hill, ala overwatch in dota 2), whilst removing the tougher mechanics of melee, awesome! but we have customs for that, it's all possible there and you can even have tournaments and rankings with nothing more than having the map and the community to do so.
|
In late game PvT, the colossus is still used but imo it is too expensive. Look at the lurker... 150/150 and it does a better job than the colossus :/
|
They nerfed colususs because design decision not becuase balance.Just like marauder.
People complain about it should understand.
|
IMO you shouldn't have to upgrade Colosus range. Colossus is still used in PvT but PvT late-game needs help anyway. Colosus are no longer massed up in huge numbers and fills a niche role that's defined more by its range than its damage now so it doesn't make sense they don't have the range automatically.
I'd like to see Void Rays redesigned/buffed somehow so they become more of a soft counter to stationary units like Liberators and Lurkers. I wish they would revert the build time nerf on Carriers too, seemed unwarranted.
I think from a design standpoint at least it would be cool if Banshees got a speed upgrade so they can maintain a harassment role into the late game. Would make them more microable in combat as well. I think Raven could use a buff, maybe reduction in the delay on Seeker Missile?
|
BCs and carriers are still the most cost efficient units in the game. No unit will trade really well vs them once they are 3/3 and massed.
The problem that skytoss and skyterran arent viable styles by themselves, so theres no natural way to transition into carriers and bcs using upgrades from the midgame. ie: ( ill start with 1-1 roaches, go into 2-2 hydra, and end with 3-3 lurker hydra broodlord.) compared to (ill go 3-3 bio, then squeeze in 3-3 ship weapons somehow and then suddenly 20 BCs and win)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
