|
On February 24 2016 00:07 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2016 23:33 dNa wrote:I hope today's pro league games showed Blizzard how great the new TvT is and tells all the lower league players complaining about it at the moment just to suck it up and learn how to properly play it. I can tell most people in lower leagues are just doing weird 1 base stuff instead of trying to play macro games because they just don't want to learn how to properly play with tankivacs. It would be really sad if this great mechanic gets patched out of the game because the community refuses to adapt ...  This wouldn't be very smart. SC2 population is already small, you cannot say to lower league players(which is THE MAJORITY of the population) this. It would meant that more and more people would leave and as we can see not that many new players are coming.
I agree. I would say that HOTS for the most part got it right in terms of creating a pro-level balanced game that was actually fun at the casual level for the 99% of other players. What happened with LOTV that Blizzard should set a lower standard than trying to please as many people as possible while maintaining the pro-level top competitive RTS?
|
Do people think this Siege Tank change will do enough for TvT? WoL TvT was by far my favourite matchup as a Protoss player, but since Medivac Boost has been introduced, it's just not been the same at all.
|
On February 23 2016 23:56 Big J wrote:
Yeah, the game quite perfectly showed the up and downsides of the tankivac (and the mass drops that have been dominating TvT since HotS). You put everything into medivacs, and you fly around your opponent until he makes a positioning mistake. It's supertense and at the same time it's extremely shallow. You cannot deviate at all since nothing besides mass marine/tank loaded in medivacs can deal with mass marine/tank loaded in medivacs .
Exactly. Probably the best and most simple explanation I have seen. In the end, this will only hold more truth as time goes by and people get better with Tankivac micro/movement. Nothing will be viable other than constantly probing the doom drop. I can see it becoming very painful for those of us that play TvT, and becoming laughable for those that will only spectate TvT.
Although it is only my opinion, the most painful part is that TvT was definitely one of my most favored match-ups to play and spectate in HOTS. Now, it feels more like larger scale baneling wars in ZvZ, only that it does not phase out after the next tier of units enters the field - it continues to be that volatile until the game ends and trumps any further investments in tech or expansions.
|
On February 23 2016 21:34 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2016 19:59 Loccstana wrote:
What the siege tank really needs is a range buff. In Broodwar, tanks can hit from the left side of the screen to the right side. In SC2, you can only hit only about half a screen distance. This gives the attackers a huge advantage since they can see where the siege tanks are when they attack. Give siege tanks +5 range and suddenly they become useful again. Also another argument is that maps have gotten much bigger since 2010, yet the siege tank range is still the same as when maps were half the current size. +5 range is not enough. Some units could still come close enough to damage them. They should have at least +10 range so everything gets obliterated without doing anything. ... On a serious note, 18 range tanks would just be completely broken.
I don't think that's true, for a couple of reasons.
1. As Grumbels recently wrote in a different thread, it is very rare for a unit to be objectively broken. What normally happens is that the unit's strength becomes interwoven with the fabric of the race as a whole. Right now the Siege Tank is a niche unit. Between "niche" and "completely broken" theres a lot of room for a balanced, well-designed unit, and that room is "core" - what Marines, Medivacs, and Liberators are, what Lings, Roaches, Mutas, and Ultralisks are, what Adepts, Stalkers, Archons and pre-nerf Colossi are. Units you want to be making all the time because having more of them than you do right now can directly lead to winning the game. That is what people want the tank to be, powerful enough to be worth getting not along with, but instead of, the Marine. Better at early engagements where it currently gets run over before it can do anything at all. Don't forget that the Viper and Ravager are both very good vs the Tank, as is everything Protoss. It will take a "completely broken" Tank to be relevant in a game where Ravagers and vipers exist.
2. If it is broken, really broken, other things CAN be nerfed to keep the tank in check. Bring back overkill, increased production time, increased cost, slow down the sieging process.
3. More range doesn't increase Tanks' vision and Tanks can't shoot where they can't see. Even if we gave Tanks 50 range there would be lots of times when they effectively only have 8. When they don't, it's because they'll be using scans (230 minerals per) or sending flying units ahead as scouts (which means they can be sniped). Maybe flying Barracks would become a problem? Or maybe Corruptors/Stalkers would shut those down extra hard. Hard to theorize.
the key thing that isn't said often enough about tanks is that they must function as part of a duo. If you take the Vulture out of BW, not only does mech die, but it becomes a tedious turtle fest. The mech player must be forced to use some kind of highly mobile unit along with his tanks, be it for space control, harassment, anti air, whatever. Maybe that unit is the Marine. Marines are mineral dumps, provide excellent anti-air, and are as responsive in sc2 as Vultures were in sc1 (read: very). Maybe it's the Banshee. Maybe a revamped Reaper or Cyclone. Maybe the Hellion? It doesn't plant mines, but it does soak up damage a lot better than the Vulture in its Hellbat form. This is a concern... but I hope that Blizzard understands that it's a down-the-line problem, as in let's make Tanks good first and then we'll see if the emerging playstyle is solid or not. If yes: mission accomplished, if no: there are lots of tools at a game designer's disposal to create new weaknesses that some select mobile unit must be produced to shore up.
|
On February 24 2016 01:15 ejozl wrote:
Do people think this Siege Tank change will do enough for TvT? WoL TvT was by far my favourite matchup as a Protoss player, but since Medivac Boost has been introduced, it's just not been the same at all.
It will go a very long way. Time will tell if it will be enough. The more important question is would anything else create strategic options other than what Big J referred to - I can't see anything short of drastic changes to neutralize sieged tank doom drops.
|
Balance test map is out, everybody go play!!
Go test the changes instead of simply theoricrafting!
|
Got a dumb question : how do you actually play the balance test map? Can't find it in custom games
Edit : okay, the previous post was just misleading xD
|
For the record, Mr. Kim created a response to the feedback provided for the February 18th post.
"Thank you for the great discussion around the proposed changes, especially on the Siege Tank proposal.
We definitely hear and agree with many parts of both sides of the argument, and because we're just talking about a balance test map here, let's try it out in actual games so that we can learn more. We'll put up the balance test map as early as tomorrow.
We're not particularly leaning towards either direction at the moment due to the great points many of you bring up, and we've also been in the process of pinging the highest level pro gamers again for more detailed feedback. We are compiling our thoughts and feedback at the moment, and we'll definitely go more in detail on this week's Weekly Update. Thank you."
Source: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/20742375064?page=1#1
Because he said they are not leaning towards either direction ... let me say this:
PLEASE, MR. DAVID KIM SIR ... IN ALL YOUR WISDOM AND KINDNESS...BUFF THE SIEGE TANK
|
What the actual fuck. Each community feedback update has been laugh at by the community, EXCEPT THIS ONE. It seems overwhelming how the majority of the community wants these change to happen.
Do they actually read the community's feedback?
|
Just look at the "no change needed" vote percentages in this thread's polls. Why would they say they are not leaning in any direction based on page 1 of this thread?
Confusing at best.
|
On February 24 2016 12:58 PressureSC2 wrote:
Just look at the "no change needed" vote percentages in this thread's polls. Why would they say they are not leaning in any direction based on page 1 of this thread?
Confusing at best.
Does Blizzard actually read TL though? I haven't seen that much evidence for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
