|
On March 02 2016 01:51 Cyro wrote:
but part of the reason that LOTV is fast is because we have units like siege tank which are now hypermobile instead of strong positional units. We have mobility creep because nobody stood up for unit designs like the siege tank.
I don't know if it is good politics to object to a change because it contributes to a harmful trend. I see this on political forum discussions all the time, flame wars about minor issues all because it pits one entire political philosophy against another, and it can completely overshadow the actual issue. Though on the other hand, if this trend continues unabated it might be worthwhile to take a stand against one particularly egregious example simply to draw attention to the issue, to draw a line in the sand.
But I do not think you can stop lotv hypermobility by one change at the time, the game is too far gone for that to happen.
|
United States572 Posts
On March 02 2016 01:57 Cyro wrote:
You would increase tank health and nerf ravagers before going that far, 100%.
Ravagers aren't the only problem. And as you start going through the list of problems and tweaking other units, you're changing unit relationships all over the game. And you're not guaranteed a better game in the end even if you do it.
|
On March 01 2016 23:53 PressureSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2016 23:49 weikor wrote:
I dont understand why the tank had to change from a positional unit, to a 2 part colossus that requires a little more micro.
If theres really need for a long range - mobile unit, isnt that why they implemented the cyclone?
Why dont they change the cyclone to fill the role of the tankivac, and change the flying tank to a proper siege tank
That is how it should be designed. Also, why do it at the precise time (beta) that a new flying siege unit is being introduced to the game !! Why create a Tankivac out of the most positional and core unit that Terran has, when you are also bringing in the Liberator as part of LOTV? It makes absolutely no sense from a design perspective !
It's pretty obvious that they've gone back to the drawing board with LotV and looked at what made Brood War so cool, so they can implement it.
Lurkers, Reaver(Disruptor,) more spread out bases(economy,) BoXeR Tank drops(siegevacs) and plenty others.
|
On March 02 2016 01:11 SpecKROELLchen wrote:
I think the design of the old siegetank is problematic because lotv is so fast that you have to reposition yourself very often.
If you do not hit a 30 sec timing you have to backoff. If you backoff with tanks you can be overrun so hard.
Thats why i like the idea of the tank being able to pick off sieged but then unsiege + maybe a slight damage increas.
Not entirely true. If 3-4 siege tanks per choke point/base were good support for the 10-20 Cyclones and a planetary fortress that can easily swoop over to repel a zerg advance based on sensor tower information - they might still play a role even if the game is much more mobile and fast compared to HOTS.
The fact that economies, unit costing and Cyclones are not where they should be to achieve balance should not remove the possibility that the tank can still have a role to play in a very fast paced game. Just look at how everyone is concerned about how Siege Tanks could/and do anihilate speedlings... although one is incredibly fast and the other completely immobile.
Now, if you expect to have most of your army in siege mode in the middle of the map and the zerglings can just run completely around you and hit bases - of course you made a bad choice in not having any mobility in your army and you should pay for it.
Regardless of the pace of the game, missile turrets will always be great to help Terran hold bases. However, if you plan to put 30-50% of your resources into missile turrets - you are going to be in trouble at some point in the game. You have to strike a balance between static positional defense and needing mobility. The evidence is how Mech is more powerful than most armies in head-on engagements (and definitely has always been), but how the Mech style was just not played much at the pro level in TvT, or other matchups for that matter. Bio is mostly preferred.
|
|
|
On March 02 2016 03:19 PressureSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2016 01:11 SpecKROELLchen wrote:
I think the design of the old siegetank is problematic because lotv is so fast that you have to reposition yourself very often.
If you do not hit a 30 sec timing you have to backoff. If you backoff with tanks you can be overrun so hard.
Thats why i like the idea of the tank being able to pick off sieged but then unsiege + maybe a slight damage increas. Not entirely true. If 3-4 siege tanks per choke point/base were good support for the 10-20 Cyclones and a planetary fortress that can easily swoop over to repel a zerg advance based on sensor tower information - they might still play a role even if the game is much more mobile and fast compared to HOTS. The fact that economies, unit costing and Cyclones are not where they should be to achieve balance should not remove the possibility that the tank can still have a role to play in a very fast paced game. Just look at how everyone is concerned about how Siege Tanks could/and do anihilate speedlings... although one is incredibly fast and the other completely immobile. Now, if you expect to have most of your army in siege mode in the middle of the map and the zerglings can just run completely around you and hit bases - of course you made a bad choice in not having any mobility in your army and you should pay for it. Regardless of the pace of the game, missile turrets will always be great to help Terran hold bases. However, if you plan to put 30-50% of your resources into missile turrets - you are going to be in trouble at some point in the game. You have to strike a balance between static positional defense and needing mobility. The evidence is how Mech is more powerful than most armies in head-on engagements (and definitely has always been), but how the Mech style was just not played much at the pro level in TvT, or other matchups for that matter. Bio is mostly preferred.
Sure if you move out mindlessly you should get punished but guess why we did not build tanks the entire HotS time. On your way to the enemies base you get delayed so much that even a new techtree can be ready. And if you increase the damage too much turtling will be an issue again.
Another interesting option for the testmap would be to test increasing the siegetank damage, maybe by far,
if no other tank is in range and else keep it as it is. But i do not see something like this happening :D
Turrets are great but they have a high efficiency (low cost, no supply) so i wont compare them to a tank.
|
I still think there is room for a better tank without having a turtle mech concern. I think the old Raven was more to blame for true turtling as was very high minerals per base which created a larger mineral dump to buffer your gas units (walls, turrets, PF, more inconsequential hellbat trading) all across thd map.
|
Why is Parasitic Bomb even a thing? Zerg's lategame air army was always superstrong anyways. I mean I think it's pretty dumb that Zerg can spam one spell and Terran MUST do amazing splits with air units (which is incredible hard to begin with) or the air army just get demolished. Even if you do spread it does so much damage. I mean zerg already has fungal and in LotV they have Ravager shots and we all know that when you combine those two things it's pretty nasty. Zerg would do just fine even without this dumb spell.
|
On March 03 2016 05:52 SiaBBo wrote:
Why is Parasitic Bomb even a thing? Zerg's lategame air army was always superstrong anyways. I mean I think it's pretty dumb that Zerg can spam one spell and Terran MUST do amazing splits with air units (which is incredible hard to begin with) or the air army just get demolished. Even if you do spread it does so much damage. I mean zerg already has fungal and in LotV they have Ravager shots and we all know that when you combine those two things it's pretty nasty. Zerg would do just fine even without this dumb spell.
Everyone things you say is false lol.
Zerg lategame air mary is the weakest, you only have mass corruptors, and mass corruptors are beaten by massliberator/protossair. Parasitic bomb prevent having game when zerg makes 50 spores, and abduct one by one the air T/P as like he was forced to do on HOTS.
It's super easy to perform a split with Terran air units, as they have a lot of PV, don't naturally climb, you have more time to do it, compare to the other situation players need to split...
And the only Terran has to split is just QQ, Zerg has to split a lot too : mutas vs liberator/thor, any units vs WM, vs dirsuptors, zerglings/bane war in ZvZ, mutas vs parasitic bomb in ZvZ etc...
Splitting is a basic skill, every race do. T no longer more micro intensive than the other race.
And With range upgrades, liberators outrange ravagers/infestor, and are no longer countered by them.
|
So here is a list of what I think would make some nice and well needed changes for each race, of course I wouldn't expect all of this in 1 patch:
TERRAN
- Siege tanks: Damage buff, Unload unsieged from medivacs
- Liberators: Increase supply cost to 4, reduce move speed
- Cyclones: Lower cost, Increase HP
- Thors: Possibly boost AA vs armored (avilo's upgrade ?)
ZERG
- Ravagers: Change to armored since they have +1 armor, increase morph time, possibly nerf corrosive bile
- Lurkers: Reduce their range, possibly make their bonus damage vs Light instead of Armored
- Nydus: Remove invincibility
- Ultra: Possibly reduce their armor to +6 instead of +8
PROTOSS
- Immortals: Increase their shield cooldown
- Tempest: Increase their supply cost to 6, Reduce their range, Possibly make them only attack air
- Adept: Increase their cost to 150/25 or 125/25
- Disruptors: Remove their damage bonus vs shield
|
On March 03 2016 08:34 MaxTa wrote:
So here is a list of what I think would make some nice and well needed changes for each race:
TERRAN
- Siege tanks: Damage buff, Unload unsieged from medivacs
- Liberators: Increase supply cost to 4, reduce move speed
- Cyclones: Lower cost, Increase HP
- Thors: Possibly boost AA vs armored
ZERG
- Ravagers: Change to armored since they have +1 armor, increase morph time, possibly nerf corrosive bile
- Lurkers: Reduce their range, possibly make their bonus damage vs Light instead of Armored
- Nydus: Remove invincibility
- Ultra: Possibly reduce their armor to +6 instead of +8
PROTOSS
- Immortals: Remove autocast on their shield and make it manual with a cooldown
- Tempest: Increase their supply cost to 6, Reduce their range, Possibly make them only attack air
- Adept: Increase their cost to 150/25 or 125/25
Yeah, i guess you're just playing Terran....
Thors don't need better AA vs air armored, they're not supposed to counter them.
Lurkers will be just useless with reduced range, they're already not used in ZvT as the tank outranged them.
Nydus : just removing invincibility without cost reducing, is backing to the time nobody use nyndus. Honestly, i don't like the invincibility things for gimmick all-in, prefer reduced cost, and reduced time to morph and you can use nyndus to increase mobility of roach/hydra for example.
Ultra can't be nerfed without nerfing Terran, as TvZ is T favored.
Don't get why someone get tempest if they haven't a good range, and 6 supply.
Adept cost you propose is just way too high...
|
On March 03 2016 08:34 MaxTa wrote:
So here is a list of what I think would make some nice and well needed changes for each race:
TERRAN
- Siege tanks: Damage buff, Unload unsieged from medivacs
- Liberators: Increase supply cost to 4, reduce move speed
- Cyclones: Lower cost, Increase HP
- Thors: Possibly boost AA vs armored
ZERG
- Ravagers: Change to armored since they have +1 armor, increase morph time, possibly nerf corrosive bile
- Lurkers: Reduce their range, possibly make their bonus damage vs Light instead of Armored
- Nydus: Remove invincibility
- Ultra: Possibly reduce their armor to +6 instead of +8
PROTOSS
- Immortals: Remove autocast on their shield and make it manual with a cooldown
- Tempest: Increase their supply cost to 6, Reduce their range, Possibly make them only attack air
- Adept: Increase their cost to 150/25 or 125/25
Yeah, i guess you're just playing Terran....
Thors don't need better AA vs air armored, they're not supposed to counter them.
Lurkers will be just useless with reduced range, they're already not used in ZvT as the tank outranged them.
Nydus : just removing invincibility without cost reducing, is backing to the time nobody use nyndus. Honestly, i don't like the invincibility things for gimmick all-in, prefer reduced cost, and reduced time to morph and you can use nyndus to increase mobility of roach/hydra for example.
Ultra can't be nerfed without nerfing Terran, as TvZ is T favored.
Don't get why someone get tempest if they haven't a good range, and 6 supply.
Adept cost you propose is just way too high...
If you read carefully you will notice I did say "Possibly" boost Thors AA which means it's not like 100% a necessity if they nerf Liberators and boost Cyclones instead. Also "Possibly" reduce ultra's armor, so it's not that of a priority...
For the nydus I'm ok with your idea of reducing cost, as long as they remove invincibilty. As for adepts, please explain me how 25 more minerals is way too much are you serious ?? At least P players would think more about making zealots instead of pure adepts all the time. There is no reason to make zealots at the moment untill mid-late game when u have charge and a shitload of minerals to empty...
|
On March 03 2016 15:59 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2016 08:34 MaxTa wrote:
So here is a list of what I think would make some nice and well needed changes for each race:
TERRAN
- Siege tanks: Damage buff, Unload unsieged from medivacs
- Liberators: Increase supply cost to 4, reduce move speed
- Cyclones: Lower cost, Increase HP
- Thors: Possibly boost AA vs armored
ZERG
- Ravagers: Change to armored since they have +1 armor, increase morph time, possibly nerf corrosive bile
- Lurkers: Reduce their range, possibly make their bonus damage vs Light instead of Armored
- Nydus: Remove invincibility
- Ultra: Possibly reduce their armor to +6 instead of +8
PROTOSS
- Immortals: Remove autocast on their shield and make it manual with a cooldown
- Tempest: Increase their supply cost to 6, Reduce their range, Possibly make them only attack air
- Adept: Increase their cost to 150/25 or 125/25 Yeah, i guess you're just playing Terran.... Thors don't need better AA vs air armored, they're not supposed to counter them. Lurkers will be just useless with reduced range, they're already not used in ZvT as the tank outranged them. Nydus : just removing invincibility without cost reducing, is backing to the time nobody use nyndus. Honestly, i don't like the invincibility things for gimmick all-in, prefer reduced cost, and reduced time to morph and you can use nyndus to increase mobility of roach/hydra for example. Ultra can't be nerfed without nerfing Terran, as TvZ is T favored. Don't get why someone get tempest if they haven't a good range, and 6 supply. Adept cost you propose is just way too high...
tvz is not terran favored. where have you been? lol
|
I find it funny that people are talking about mech, Tankivacs and TvZ, as if those were the glaring issues of this game.
Meanwhile PvZ ist under 45% 5(!) months in a row and currently at 42.7%, but I guess that is not important, since it only concerns Protoss, the despised "dirty imba race"...
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On March 03 2016 17:30 CheddarToss wrote:
I find it funny that people are talking about mech, Tankivacs and TvZ, as if those were the glaring issues of this game.
Meanwhile PvZ ist under 45% 5(!) months in a row and currently at 42.7%, but I guess that is not important, since it only concerns Protoss, the despised "dirty imba race"...
According to the number of threads mech is generating it is the most important thing in SC2 right now 
|
On March 03 2016 17:38 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2016 17:30 CheddarToss wrote:
I find it funny that people are talking about mech, Tankivacs and TvZ, as if those were the glaring issues of this game.
Meanwhile PvZ ist under 45% 5(!) months in a row and currently at 42.7%, but I guess that is not important, since it only concerns Protoss, the despised "dirty imba race"... According to the number of threads mech is generating it is the most important thing in SC2 right now
I will give up my wife for it! If i have one.
|
To me the liberator is the most clear and recent example of what is the general consensus that air units are too strong and the ground anti air is generally too weak (stalkers, hydras, cyclones, thors, ravager shots can be dodged by most units...).
It's also the reason that protoss are going stargate pretty much always in early game TvP. A well positioned lib either trades favorably against a few stalkers or just denies mining. With the lategame range upgrade, ground protoss units can't even reach it at all.
|
On March 03 2016 16:37 MiCroLiFe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2016 15:59 Tyrhanius wrote:On March 03 2016 08:34 MaxTa wrote:
So here is a list of what I think would make some nice and well needed changes for each race:
TERRAN
- Siege tanks: Damage buff, Unload unsieged from medivacs
- Liberators: Increase supply cost to 4, reduce move speed
- Cyclones: Lower cost, Increase HP
- Thors: Possibly boost AA vs armored
ZERG
- Ravagers: Change to armored since they have +1 armor, increase morph time, possibly nerf corrosive bile
- Lurkers: Reduce their range, possibly make their bonus damage vs Light instead of Armored
- Nydus: Remove invincibility
- Ultra: Possibly reduce their armor to +6 instead of +8
PROTOSS
- Immortals: Remove autocast on their shield and make it manual with a cooldown
- Tempest: Increase their supply cost to 6, Reduce their range, Possibly make them only attack air
- Adept: Increase their cost to 150/25 or 125/25 Yeah, i guess you're just playing Terran.... Thors don't need better AA vs air armored, they're not supposed to counter them. Lurkers will be just useless with reduced range, they're already not used in ZvT as the tank outranged them. Nydus : just removing invincibility without cost reducing, is backing to the time nobody use nyndus. Honestly, i don't like the invincibility things for gimmick all-in, prefer reduced cost, and reduced time to morph and you can use nyndus to increase mobility of roach/hydra for example. Ultra can't be nerfed without nerfing Terran, as TvZ is T favored. Don't get why someone get tempest if they haven't a good range, and 6 supply. Adept cost you propose is just way too high... tvz is not terran favored. where have you been? lol
Looking at korean leagues, yes terran does have a slight edge.
The suggesting by maxta are super bad and biased.
|
IEM katowice summary:
6 zergs ro8, 3 koreans ro8 in a "foreigner" tournament. gj david, gj blizzard
interesting notes: ravagers, parasitic bomb.
|
On March 03 2016 18:41 Salteador Neo wrote:
To me the liberator is the most clear and recent example of what is the general consensus that air units are too strong and the ground anti air is generally too weak (stalkers, hydras, cyclones, thors, ravager shots can be dodged by most units...).
It's also the reason that protoss are going stargate pretty much always in early game TvP. A well positioned lib either trades favorably against a few stalkers or just denies mining. With the lategame range upgrade, ground protoss units can't even reach it at all.
so is it the range or DPS? Its been suggested to make it tech lab required as another option. I think it needs its range to be a siege unit (map design the other half) so I think DPS could be played with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
