|
On March 12 2016 08:46 ZAiNs wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2016 07:36 Hider wrote:On March 12 2016 07:27 seemsgood wrote:On March 12 2016 06:34 CheddarToss wrote:On March 12 2016 06:30 Hider wrote:Please don't nerf the liberator at this point. The banshee buff does nothing for standard Terran play, while the strong liberator is necessary in PvT, the matchup does not need a Terran nerf. Well I think that if buff protoss AA options the Liberator nerf wouldn't be needed. Buffing Stalker AA damage has been needed since forever. I don't know why Blizzard thinks that Stalkers need to do the same amount of damage vs ground and vs air. It's not like there aren't already units in the game that have differing DPS vs ground and vs air. 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. The biggest flaw is that mass air is best against mass air even though that situation is extremely rare in pro games?
First of, it is there. You see Phoenix vs Mutas as Stalkers are too bad in low numbers. It would open up for a lot more variety if toss had better ground counter vs air.
Secondly, there is a reason its not in pro games. Part of that is because everytime a meta has been involved with mass (tier 3) air vs mass air it has resulted in terrible games and thus has had to be nerfed.
Further, note that this is late game only, and since the air vs air typically implies that one race is better (one comp is usually more efficient than the other), one of the races needs to end the game before it gets to that time. For instance terran needs to get ahead before tempests/HT gets out. If on the other hand, Thors could beat Tempests, the dynamic would be very different.
Adress air vs ground, and you will see a ton more variety in terms of unit compositions.
|
On March 12 2016 03:56 vult wrote:Posted by DayvieWe know it’s not as difficult to just pump out the same types of maps on different tilesets, but it’s just awesome seeing many mapmakers out there pushing the limits for the better of the game.
This bit, plus how they seem to link Invader and Central Protocol together, make me think they see maps in a really skewed way. It's like how people used to talk about Daybreak syndrome - they think all maps are basically the same but with different tilesets. I wonder if Dayvie would put Galactic Process in the same category or 'map type' as Lerilak Crest.
I take that statement as direct discouragement to the standard-and-amazing maps that I see as the best choices to put on ladder. Your map doesn't have island features, has a longer than 35 second rush distance, and has no gold minerals? Might as well tear it up, they want Ulrena instead. "It's just awesome seeing many mapmakers out there pushing the limits" but they actually couldn't care less. People seem to think Eris could be that third map - it would be a miracle. It does make sense though in a weird way, if Blizzard sees Invader and Central Protocol as the same concept, they might describe Eris like that. I think they dump Eris right into the 'pushing the limits for the better of the game but will never see competitive play' bucket.
Give us all community maps, every season, and change out 4 or more every season, and let masters players vote on maps, instead of having the balance team just pick them.
|
On March 12 2016 09:18 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +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
Just because they restrict unit composition somewhat, it doesn't mean they limit strategic diversity, Mutalisks, and by extension the threat of Mutalisks, bring their own strategic elements into the game. Pros aren't going to drop Stargates blindly in the mid-game unless they feel something is up, and they decided to go for a Chargelot composition without opening Phoenix (which is a very strong opening in its own right beyond deterring Mutas). You can also go for a Blink Stalker composition and Phoenixes aren't a necessity at all vs Muta openings. If you made Stalkers stronger vs Mutalisks I don't think it would really give you many more options, because if you have lots of Stalkers you should be fine.
On March 12 2016 09:22 CheddarToss wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2016 09:10 ZAiNs wrote:On March 12 2016 08:57 Lexender wrote:On March 12 2016 08:46 ZAiNs wrote:On March 12 2016 07:36 Hider wrote:On March 12 2016 07:27 seemsgood wrote:On March 12 2016 06:34 CheddarToss wrote:On March 12 2016 06:30 Hider wrote:Please don't nerf the liberator at this point. The banshee buff does nothing for standard Terran play, while the strong liberator is necessary in PvT, the matchup does not need a Terran nerf. Well I think that if buff protoss AA options the Liberator nerf wouldn't be needed. Buffing Stalker AA damage has been needed since forever. I don't know why Blizzard thinks that Stalkers need to do the same amount of damage vs ground and vs air. It's not like there aren't already units in the game that have differing DPS vs ground and vs air. 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. 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 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.
Well firstly I've heard you whining about Mutalisks for months in probably every other Feedback Update so it's kind of hard to take you seriously. Of course there is a 'chance' you can lose, StarCraft is a complicated game, you aren't going to get a free-win just for scouting a Spire... HerO reacted 100% properly? StarCraft is a lot more complicated than you seem to think.
|
On March 12 2016 08:39 Lexender wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Yes but let liberator fulfill its role vs protoss when you choose to play bio,its mobility is perfectly fit into bio army.
|
United Kingdom20274 Posts
Pros aren't going to drop Stargates blindly in the mid-game unless they feel something is up, and they decided to go for a Chargelot composition
The best PvZ guide that we have on TL advocates doing exactly that and if you look for it in pro games, you'll probably see more games with early stargate or added midgame stargates than you realize.
Many Z will drop a spire even if they don't plan on building any mutalisks because it's a 200/200 building that usually forces a disproportionate response.
I don't think it's a huge issue right now but it is a significant pressure in the matchup - when doing any kind of early or midgame play, it's something that every single protoss player and pro is thinking about.
As an observer who's not a high level protoss player that's probably less obvious, but it's less obvious because people are constantly adjusting their play so that it's not a problem (at the expense of other areas)
|
On March 12 2016 09:39 ZAiNs wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2016 09:18 Cyro wrote: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 Just because they restrict unit composition somewhat, it doesn't mean they limit strategic diversity, Mutalisks, and by extension the threat of Mutalisks, bring their own strategic elements into the game. Pros aren't going to drop Stargates blindly in the mid-game unless they feel something is up, and they decided to go for a Chargelot composition without opening Phoenix (which is a very strong opening in its own right beyond deterring Mutas). You can also go for a Blink Stalker composition and Phoenixes aren't a necessity at all vs Muta openings. If you made Stalkers stronger vs Mutalisks I don't think it would really give you many more options, because if you have lots of Stalkers you should be fine. Show nested quote +On March 12 2016 09:22 CheddarToss wrote:On March 12 2016 09:10 ZAiNs wrote:On March 12 2016 08:57 Lexender wrote:On March 12 2016 08:46 ZAiNs wrote:On March 12 2016 07:36 Hider wrote:On March 12 2016 07:27 seemsgood wrote:On March 12 2016 06:34 CheddarToss wrote:On March 12 2016 06:30 Hider wrote:Please don't nerf the liberator at this point. The banshee buff does nothing for standard Terran play, while the strong liberator is necessary in PvT, the matchup does not need a Terran nerf. Well I think that if buff protoss AA options the Liberator nerf wouldn't be needed. Buffing Stalker AA damage has been needed since forever. I don't know why Blizzard thinks that Stalkers need to do the same amount of damage vs ground and vs air. It's not like there aren't already units in the game that have differing DPS vs ground and vs air. 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. 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 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. Well firstly I've heard you whining about Mutalisks for months in probably every other Feedback Update so it's kind of hard to take you seriously. Of course there is a 'chance' you can lose, StarCraft is a complicated game, you aren't going to get a free-win just for scouting a Spire... HerO reacted 100% properly? StarCraft is a lot more complicated than you seem to think.
Hero scouted seconds after the Spire was planted, he immediately built 2 Stargates and started pumping out Phoenixes. He made no glaring mistake in that game and yet he lost quite convincingly. But who knows, maybe you would have won that game, seeing how you seem to know something that Hero doesn't.
|
He made no glaring mistake in that game and yet he lost quite convincingly.
His multitasking was actually terrible that game. So much miscontrol and missed opportunies along with a bad engagement. Hero just isn't a very good player. In the hands of a skilled player that actually can attack locations at once effectively, it seems like an interesting build.
|
On March 12 2016 09:48 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +Pros aren't going to drop Stargates blindly in the mid-game unless they feel something is up, and they decided to go for a Chargelot composition The best PvZ guide that we have on TL advocates doing exactly that and if you look for it in pro games, you'll probably see more games with early stargate or added midgame stargates than you realize. Many Z will drop a spire even if they don't plan on building any mutalisks because it's a 200/200 building that usually forces a disproportionate response. I don't think it's a huge issue right now but it is a significant pressure in the matchup - when doing any kind of early or midgame play, it's something that every single protoss player and pro is thinking about
Exactly this! Overwhelming majority of PvZ games on the top level start with either one or double Stargate. IMO this is quite a good indicator of just how much Mutas restrict Protoss strategic options.
|
On March 12 2016 09:54 Hider wrote:His multitasking was actually terrible that game. So much miscontrol and missed opportunies along with a bad engagement. Hero just isn't a very good player. In the hands of a skilled player that actually can attack locations at once effectively, it seems like an interesting build.
Nope, he was trading Adepts for Drones, but he didn't lose Phoenixes. The one attack (at over 150 supply) that Tastosis taught was premature, would have looked a whole lot different, when mass Muta wouldn't wreck Stalkers as hard as they do. You can't fault Hero for moving out, when he knows that he's on a timer and that Zerg could just as well be teching to Parasitic Bomb.
|
Talk about mass air situation.
Here is the statement:
Zerg goes broodlord + viper + corruptor
Protoss goes tempest+ carrier
Terran goes liberator.
What unit comp you gonna respond ?
Why those situations are so rare in pro game ? Because the gane isn't long enough,it is a uncommon issue unless you face sOs or play mech.
I don't care it's the best design flaw or not but i don't like mass air vs mass air.It need to rarely seen as much as possible or completely dissapear.
You guys try to argue it's the best design flaw make no sense to me....the rest comments just go off track.
|
I do think lib range needs a slight range nerf, wouldnt mind banshee speed. Ravagers feel quite strong. Dont see a big problem with the evo drops though, I'd rather see a ravager nerf before I saw the drop nerf.
|
United Kingdom20274 Posts
On March 12 2016 10:06 crazedrat wrote:
I do think lib range needs a slight range nerf, wouldnt mind banshee speed. Ravagers feel quite strong. Dont see a big problem with the evo drops though, I'd rather see a ravager nerf before I saw the drop nerf.
You are talking from a TvZ standpoint though?
I think a targetted corrosive bile nerf would affect terran a lot, maybe even more than protoss. Meanwhile drop affects protoss a lot more than it affects terran
|
On March 12 2016 10:02 CheddarToss wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2016 09:54 Hider wrote:He made no glaring mistake in that game and yet he lost quite convincingly. His multitasking was actually terrible that game. So much miscontrol and missed opportunies along with a bad engagement. Hero just isn't a very good player. In the hands of a skilled player that actually can attack locations at once effectively, it seems like an interesting build. Nope, he was trading Adepts for Drones, but he didn't lose Phoenixes. The one attack (at over 150 supply) that Tastosis taught was premature, would have looked a whole lot different, when mass Muta wouldn't wreck Stalkers as hard as they do. You can't fault Hero for moving out, when he knows that he's on a timer and that Zerg could just as well be teching to Parasitic Bomb.
First of he absolutely spewed the first 3 Adepts by shading when he shouldn't and loses them for no reason. Had he not shaded he would be able to go get a few more ling kills and then get behind the mains mineral lines. While doing that he would get a great opportunity for warping in 1-3 more Adepts at the 3rd for a few more kills. (Though that would delay the double stargate by 5-10 seconds.)
You also notice that when he tries to do double pronged Adept + Disruptor drops he doesn't fire with the Disruptor but just afk's it. Meanwhile (and over the next 2 minutes) he is never below 300 minerals showing subpar macro. When the Oracle arrives, they are also afk for 5-10 seconds at DRGs 3rd giving him a bit of time to react. (though DRG reacts terribly).
After the initial 2 Adepts he also just afks with the second warp prism that he isn't capable of multitasking with. The second warp prism could be harassing the natural or kill the 4th, but he afks with it for several minutes. His mechanics seems limited to one warp prism + oracle + subpar macro.
With better macro he could have had templar tech at the time his twilight actually finished. This would allow him to go for 2-3 archons with the attack and he would likely win.
|
On March 12 2016 05:34 Charoisaur wrote:
So what's with the tank damage buff. That's the most important thing for mech
It seems most do not want stronger mech that is designed to turtle. So cyclone and thor are safer bets to create factory play that can cross the map before 160 supply and critical mass.
|
On March 12 2016 05:40 Charoisaur wrote:
If thors AA becomes single target mech will have no answer to mutas
That is why I think cyclone is better as general AA and thor more in a specialized role but maybe in LOTV you still need to increase thor speed a little to make it viable at all.
|
On March 12 2016 11:45 PressureSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2016 05:34 Charoisaur wrote:
So what's with the tank damage buff. That's the most important thing for mech It seems most do not want stronger mech that is designed to turtle. So cyclone and thor are safer bets to create factory play that can cross the map before 160 supply and critical mass.
Just because they don't mention it now doesn't mean there is no change coming, they don't always touch everything all the time in these posts.
|
Great direction on this one Blizzard. When you consider BW longevity LOTV is just a baby. Do not be afraid to redesign a little and finalize balance later. Everyone will thanks you for it in a few years and the game will be epic.
|
Interesting maps, liked it.
Overlord drops were the coolest thing ever happened to zerg if you move it to the Lair is a really really bad idea.
|
Here are my recommended Terran changes:
-Change Thor anti-air to high single target dps. Allow it to trade evenly with broodlords and carriers.
-Give vikings a late game upgrade that adds a small splash radius to their air attack.
-Remove cyclone lock on ability. Increase cyclone hp to 160 and range to 9 to compensate.
-Remove energy bar from battlecruiser. Change yamato to 60 cooldown, increase cast range to 15.
-Raven: reduce seeker missile to 75 energy, increase PDD time to 60 seconds, and auto turret time to 30 seconds.
-Revert the marauder nerf.
|
On March 12 2016 11:45 PressureSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2016 05:34 Charoisaur wrote:
So what's with the tank damage buff. That's the most important thing for mech It seems most do not want stronger mech that is designed to turtle. So cyclone and thor are safer bets to create factory play that can cross the map before 160 supply and critical mass.
I think making high supply unit with decent build time become good enough is the smart move to hasten the time terran need to max out a mech army.Even player chooses to turtle.
A mech army invole a couple cyclone and thor is insanely supply heavy.If those units are good enough.
Then we can keep the tank's buff to make terran turtle easier.
I want a test map to test how long terran turtle until move out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
