| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
CheddarToss
534 Posts
On March 12 2016 07:23 DeadByDawn wrote: Not a chance with blink. Too hard not to make them OP when they can just blink under air units. Too hard not to make them OP? Hahahaha! Even with Blink Stalkers are pretty bad vs Mutas and Liberators. Why is it acceptable that Protoss only has ONE unit that can handle Mutas? I'm bored of Pheonix into Chargelot/Immortal/Archon every single game vs Zerg. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
On March 12 2016 07:27 seemsgood wrote: Because if you want to counter mass air, you must go mass air.That how this game was designed. And its the biggest general design flaw of Sc2. | ||
|
JackONeill
861 Posts
GIVE THE CYCLONE THE POTENTIAL TO BE A CORE UNIT. (aka redesign). If you increase its health and its supply, it's just gonna be an abusive viking that won't be used (maybe one in TvP/TvT as an opener). If you want to make the thor, the viking, and the liberator the terran facto/SP AA, it's gonna overlap as hell. About bio/mech mixing JUST REDESIGN THE CYCLONE TO MAKE IT THE MECH CORE UNIT. You can work on the siege tank/thor later, for now : Proposition for mech/the cyclone Cyclone : - 150/75 ressources 2 supply - remove lock on (abusive ability, therefore either the unit is OP, either it's worthless) - attack range from 5 to 6, health from 120 to 140 - tech lab upgrape so the cyclone can shoot while moving - reduce movespeed a little and increase rate of fire a little There you go. It's cheaper, a little slower, a little thougher, with better Amove DPS, but can have an upgrade to kite : IT'S A MECH FOOTMAN. It's a core, massable unit, that needs support units (tanking, AoE, and good AA). And without the abusive lock on. | ||
|
Gullis
Sweden740 Posts
Cyclone, I think they should to try to change it into a massable anti air specialist (with weak anti ground) instead. Key here is you need to be able to reactor it. Banshee, tbh I have no clue about this and I have never understood this unit to begin with, I would much rather have a wraith type of unit that can do light harass and are decent against other air (even though I think air should mainly be countered by ground) What I hope giving mech an anti air unit accomplishes is that it gives terran a timing before broods/temps. Right now any such timings get nullified by small ammounts of air. Creating this timing goes hand in hand with nerfing starports (vikings) so it doesn't become the same turtle to a big air army as before. | ||
|
Ch4lice
7 Posts
Now can we get overseer to tier 1 (unlocked with evo chamber) so we can start to build up energy earlier and use contaminate for harass? :D | ||
|
royalroadweed
United States8301 Posts
| ||
|
rls
6 Posts
| ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2661 Posts
On March 12 2016 07:45 Gullis wrote: Regarding overlord drops and ravager I think it is resonable areas to look at for pvz. Personally from what I have seen, zergs going for hydra lurker into a big muta switch seems pretty troublesome, if not for balance it just looks so cancerous to play from the protoss side of things. I dont play the matchup so I dont really now. Cyclone, I think they should to try to change it into a massable anti air specialist (with weak anti ground) instead. Key here is you need to be able to reactor it. Banshee, tbh I have no clue about this and I have never understood this unit to begin with, I would much rather have a wraith type of unit that can do light harass and are decent against other air (even though I think air should mainly be countered by ground) What I hope giving mech an anti air unit accomplishes is that it gives terran a timing before broods/temps. Right now any such timings get nullified by small ammounts of air. Creating this timing goes hand in hand with nerfing starports (vikings) so it doesn't become the same turtle to a big air army as before. Theres no problems with vikings the only mass air options from terrans are ravens and libs, the first were already nerfed and the second are about to get nerfed | ||
|
KiWiKaKi
Canada691 Posts
| ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2661 Posts
On March 12 2016 07:23 seemsgood wrote: I disagree about liberator's nerf and buff banshee because it may be balance in zerg but does nothing vs protoss.Which mean we nerf it and don't give terran anything back vs P match up. And talk about liberator too strong vs protoss ground or protoss ground AA is too weak.I think liberator is doing a good job compare with what tank suppose to be right now.It zone the shit out every ground unit, just like BW siege tank.So it's not about damage or protoss's AA.Counterplay of protoss vs liberator is way too hard. We keep its strength which is zone ability while nerf it's AOE circle to make counterplay easier. Also with new factory AA, we can torn down it AA ablity too. This unit is the BW siege tank vs protoss which is good but also the goliath as the same time. It's wayy too versatile but not a jack of all trade kind. You what other unit is like a BW siege tank? The siege tank, dunno just think about it, a siege tank doing the role of the siege tank, maybe we should explore that instead. | ||
|
ZAiNs
United Kingdom6525 Posts
On March 12 2016 07:36 Hider wrote: And its the biggest general design flaw of Sc2. The biggest flaw is that mass air is best against mass air even though that situation is extremely rare in pro games? | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20343 Posts
We saw the strong points many of you brought up in terms of not nerfing Ravagers, and focusing more so on Overlord drops as the first pass. If we were to go this route, we believe moving the requirement from Evolution Chamber to Lair would be the most reasonable, and although this is a huge nerf, we can definitely test this out due to the early game PvZ issue looking pretty clear at this point. Let’s discuss whether we should test a Ravager or Overlord tier 1 drop nerf first, because we’d like to test something as soon as possible on the balance test map so that we can patch to the live game. change drops first 100% IMO. ravager design is a little iffy for multiple races (vs siege tanks & static defenses, that discussion has been had with siege tank buffs) - they change how some stuff works in the game just as a fact of their range, but that's not neccesarily a balance problem. If siege tanks are worth building even though ravagers exist, if protoss can live without photon cannons that ravagers have invalidated etc then it can still be good. The main problem is if tanks are not worth building and if toss would otherwise need static defense to live, but can't build it. ---- Drop is a way bigger problem for protoss right now IMO - a ravager corrosive bile cooldown nerf would largely affect ZvT, maybe even more than ZvP. Protoss can hold their own in a game with drops at lair and a well balanced map pool - they just have neither at the moment. It's quite easy to make a map that's not so bad for protoss - some key things to keep in mind are: * The distance between the main and the natural * The width of the natural entrance (if this is 9 squares it's amazing, if it's 15 then it can be very very hard) - this is not just about the amount of buildings that you need to wall, but also the amount of ground that you can effectively cover with 1 or 2 overcharges or photon cannons. * The holdability of the third base for both Z and P * With hatch(!) tech drops in the game, the air to air distance. That allows for more overlords to drop without overlord speed or for queens to easily be brought if overlord speed is researched. If drops hit later, this is less of a problem because P can live through the early game then start to leverage the close air distance back against the zerg. A dead protoss cannot abuse close air distance though, so this tends to favor zerg right now. | ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2661 Posts
On March 12 2016 08:46 ZAiNs wrote: The biggest flaw is that mass air is best against mass air even though that situation is extremely rare in pro games? You mean like protoss having to go mass phonex vs a muta switch or mass tempest vs liberators? Or terran going mass liberators as their endgame almost every non-TvT? HotS skyterran vs zerg? skytoss vs zerg? Theres ton of example that occur very commonly in progames | ||
|
ZAiNs
United Kingdom6525 Posts
On March 12 2016 08:57 Lexender wrote: You mean like protoss having to go mass phonex vs a muta switch or mass tempest vs liberators? Or terran going mass liberators as their endgame almost every non-TvT? HotS skyterran vs zerg? skytoss vs zerg? Theres ton of example that occur very commonly in progames Phoenix vs Muta: 'Mass' Mutalisk Corruptor isn't really a thing in LotV like it was in HotS thanks to the new economy. Zerg do go Mutalisk sometimes but a handful of Phoenixes is all you need and that opening Phoenix hardly counts as going 'mass air', Blink Stalker compositions are also more popular as of late and deal with Mutalisks fine as long as you know what you're doing. Late-game Muta switches are also pretty bad in LotV most of the time. Tempest vs Liberator: Tempests aren't a necessity vs high Liberator counts (Stork vs Innovation on Prion o_o), but even if you do go for them, they are just complementing your ground force, there are times where the Tempest count gets super high but that's pretty rare. When they get Liberator range you do need some air presence so that you actually mine, but again that's not mass air. Liberator vs Zerg: I don't really see a 'only mass air "counter" mass air' situation here. HotS Raven Viking and PvZ Skytoss are actual examples of mass air and yea they sometimes did lead to boring games, but that's not an issue any more. PvP Carrier styles do seem really strong, you have to kill them with a really strong ground timing to win, but it seems to be pretty rare in pro games so I guess the best players are good against it now. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20343 Posts
Zerg do go Mutalisk sometimes but a handful of Phoenixes is all you need and that opening Phoenix hardly counts as going 'mass air', Blink Stalker compositions are also more popular as of late and deal with Mutalisks fine as long as you know what you're doing. Late-game Muta switches are also pretty bad in LotV most of the time. They're strong enough and counters are specific enough to limit strategic diversity. People don't open stargate or drop 2-3 stargates blindly in the midgame because it's good, but because it's risky to play otherwise even if it may put you behind. Liberator is a much better muta deterrant than phoenix or blink due to the splash damage, it would be lovely to have that tool. The problem with muta is not a numerical problem but due to the conflicting styles of zerg and protoss production | ||
|
MiCroLiFe
Norway275 Posts
| ||
|
CheddarToss
534 Posts
On March 12 2016 09:10 ZAiNs wrote: Phoenix vs Muta: 'Mass' Mutalisk Corruptor isn't really a thing in LotV like it was in HotS thanks to the new economy. Zerg do go Mutalisk sometimes but a handful of Phoenixes is all you need and that opening Phoenix hardly counts as going 'mass air', Blink Stalker compositions are also more popular as of late and deal with Mutalisks fine as long as you know what you're doing. Late-game Muta switches are also pretty bad in LotV most of the time. Tempest vs Liberator: Tempests aren't a necessity vs high Liberator counts (Stork vs Innovation on Prion o_o), but even if you do go for them, they are just complementing your ground force, there are times where the Tempest count gets super high but that's pretty rare. When they get Liberator range you do need some air presence so that you actually mine, but again that's not mass air. Liberator vs Zerg: I don't really see a 'only mass air "counter" mass air' situation here. HotS Raven Viking and PvZ Skytoss are actual examples of mass air and yea they sometimes did lead to boring games, but that's not an issue any more. PvP Carrier styles do seem really strong, you have to kill them with a really strong ground timing to win, but it seems to be pretty rare in pro games so I guess the best players are good against it now. Regarding mass Muta + Corruptor: did you see the one game DRG and Hero played at the GSL today? Even if you scout the moment the Zerg planted his Spire and build two Stargates, there is a chance that he will win with mass Muta/Corruptor. Saying that it's not a problem is very odd, because I see top level players losing to that quite often. There is a reason Protoss open with Stargate or double Stargate. They do it in order to have a lead on the Zerg in terms of air. As the above referenced game showed, reacting 100% properly is often simply not enough, you have to blind counter Mutas to make sure that you won't die to them. And that is unbelievably dumb design. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20343 Posts
On March 12 2016 09:20 MiCroLiFe wrote: yes terran is doin so good at the moment. link to any foreginer terran winning anyone good? WCS winter world: TvZ: 19-16 (54.3%) Code S: TvZ: 15-9 (62.5%) Ting open: TvZ: 28-29 (49.1%) Dreamhack: TvZ: 16-14 (53.3%) KR masters is 42% terran. | ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
Cyclone currently has less health than an auto-turret, and less DPS than an auto-turret. That's pretty disgusting -_- 4 supply cyclone will be even more useless. I don't know why blizzard won't just buff the unit AND THEN SEE what changes to make. Buffing and nerfing the cyclone at the same time is pointless and the unit will remain in it's useless garbage state. The thor change, i hope they took a look at the mod map that myself and nice_username created with that thor upgrade on it. Honestly, that upgrade alone made mech viable because thors became a good counter to carrier/tempest/etc. Honestly...they should just take the idea i had and put it in the game...it just makes sense...makes thors able to deal with air bullshit, and is gated by being an upgrade in the game for the thor with fusion core pre-req so it's not available too early in the game. Either way...thors/cyclones being good vs air...will make mech viable assuming they can actually deal with air. Honestly, i don't understand how people in the community think that massing 100% pure carrier/tempest is healthy for SC2 games vs mech lol. I mean, that's fine...but shouldn't someone going mech have a counter to that? Of course they should. I just hope they will finally fix mech anti-air...i think people will see mech is playable if anti-air is strong because you can then go past 5 factories and you won't have to sit and turtle into mass air every game just because your opponent is massing air. edit: also, people should honestly stop that argument of "winrate is so n so, so why even bother changing the game or this race or that unit?" It should not matter at all what winrates are when it comes to improving the design of units or changing the metagame of the game to be more healthy. | ||
|
NKexquisite
United States911 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
Kung Fu Cup
Replay Cast
The PondCast
OSC
Replay Cast
Escore
CranKy Ducklings
Sparkling Tuna Cup
OSC
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
