EPTWhat I think needs to be changed however, is that liberator's anti air needs to be toned down, a lot. This won't effect tvt or tvp a lot I think, and would help zerg actually have a fighting chance against mass air late game - an alternate route would be to buff corrupters, which would also help vs mass protoss air (another scenario in which zerg has absolutely no chance to win once critical mass is reached). They could also buff parasitic bomb back to its original value.
Community Feedback Update - April 8 - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Avi-Love
Denmark423 Posts
What I think needs to be changed however, is that liberator's anti air needs to be toned down, a lot. This won't effect tvt or tvp a lot I think, and would help zerg actually have a fighting chance against mass air late game - an alternate route would be to buff corrupters, which would also help vs mass protoss air (another scenario in which zerg has absolutely no chance to win once critical mass is reached). They could also buff parasitic bomb back to its original value. | ||
|
RavingRaver
Canada57 Posts
On April 09 2016 04:17 Charoisaur wrote: Agreed. On top of that it's just a straight nerf in tvp since banshees are useless there Yeah, it's kind of silly when you think about it since the problematic match up is PvZ that Protoss is struggling in due to it being heavily Zerg favored and not PvT that is balanced. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
What I think needs to be changed however, is that liberator's anti air needs to be toned down, a lot. This won't effect tvt or tvp a lot I think You can already play Phoenix into terran early-midgame, it's just not as good as ground toss styles. It may see more popularity and strength if you can effectively kill liberators without matching or exceeding their numbers. I do agree that the AA is a bit crazy (a few of them are very effective against an entire army of mutalisks and they scale excellently) but a change would be pushing liberator into more of an anti ground specialist rather than "flies and is kinda good against everything" | ||
|
Avi-Love
Denmark423 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
The damage is already high enough to make the engagements highly volatile - stuff like higher radius, less energy cost etc would be nicer if you really need to buff parasitic bomb. I think that changes to other units would be more suitable as well. We don't want to encourage superunits like the WOLfestor or HOTShost because the race cannot play into a matchup or situation without a common OP unit. The Viper is already a strong unit that adds abilties and all-around value to a range of armies, it's just not absolutely amazing. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9362 Posts
zerg loses when terran gets to build enough air units in zvt Not really. But nice whine from an overrepresented race. What I think needs to be changed however, is that liberator's anti air needs to be toned down, a lot. Yeh because every pro TvZ consists of mass Liberators beating Zergs. | ||
|
Vanadiel
France961 Posts
On April 09 2016 07:56 Cyro wrote: Parasitic bomb damage is already high enough for its main design of shredding low and medium health air units. Stuff like vikings, liberators, phoenix, muta are at serious risk of taking game ending damage when dealing with parasitic bombs from what is a relatively small supply investment for vipers and the other viper spells are not dead weight either No, not really. Balance aside, at the highest level of play, terran alreardy splits against it very well. On April 09 2016 08:07 Hider wrote: Not really. But nice whine from an overrepresented race. Over represented with a single Zerg out of 8 player in gsl(and because he was in a group of 3 players), best players in proleague are mostly terran and protoss, I lol'd. | ||
|
Fran_
United States1024 Posts
On April 09 2016 07:15 Avi-Love wrote: What I think needs to be changed however, is that liberator's anti air needs to be toned down, a lot. May I also interest you in a GG button? | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
On April 09 2016 08:08 Vanadiel wrote: No, not really. Balance aside, at the highest level of play, terran alreardy splits against it very well. And you want to encourage situations where terrans will take either 0 damage or instantly fatal damage rather than making the spell more consistent or fixing up other means of dealing with the situation? | ||
|
Avi-Love
Denmark423 Posts
On April 09 2016 08:07 Hider wrote: Not really. But nice whine from an overrepresented race. Yeh because every pro TvZ consists of mass Liberators beating Zergs. Do you even follow Korean sc2? | ||
|
Vanadiel
France961 Posts
On April 09 2016 08:10 Cyro wrote: And you want to encourage situations where terrans will take either 0 damage or instantly fatal damage rather than making the spell more consistent or fixing up other means of dealing with the situation? What I want is simple, I would have like Zerg to have a decent AA in the game so we don't have to suffer skymech/skytoss -kinda-bullshit-play, and Parasite bomb was an answer to that, although it was an awful one. Now it's more or less not useful. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
By Aligulac rankings, TvZ is the most balanced matchup and hasn't drifted more than ~1% away from 50/50 for the last 7000 games. It's hard to say a lot based on the result of one part of one tournament, though Korea seems to be going T>Z>P while EU and NA are Z>T>P based on winrates and representation. | ||
|
Avi-Love
Denmark423 Posts
| ||
|
seemsgood
5527 Posts
We have other changes we believe we should continue exploring in the balance test map, but we wanted to make a move on these 3 changes as soon as possible, if there is agreement in this area. Let’s also aggressively discuss these proposed changes so that we can make a move in this area as soon as possible. Thanks! Let's wait and see. IMO i don't think those change are bad as you think  Banshee + Liberator We believe bringing a bit more strength to the Banshee and taking away from the Liberator strength seems to be a solid way to go. Due to how much emphasis there is on Liberator strength, and the fun we’re seeing with speed upgraded Banshees, we believe these changes will be good for the game. The changes would be the same as what we’re testing currently in the balance test map, but we’re thinking the cost of the Banshee upgrade should be reduced to 150/150 instead of 100/100 like it is on the test map. If further changes are needed here, we believe changing the Liberator AA damage to be +Light instead of dealing full damage to everything, and further increasing the Banshee speed upgrade effectiveness could be a viable next step. | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
| ||
|
seemsgood
5527 Posts
On April 09 2016 08:07 Hider wrote: Not really. But nice whine from an overrepresented race. Yeh because every pro TvZ consists of mass Liberators beating Zergs. You must look at the bigger picture.The problem is people don't want mass air vs mass air but also don't want liberator gets nerf.It doesn't make sense :O We need another community feedback to conclude this feedback. | ||
|
Supah
708 Posts
150/150 for Speed sounds okay. As it stands now, Toss is having to more and more have to go air or plan a Robo all in. It will be interesting to see how the defense shapes up. | ||
|
emc
United States3088 Posts
| ||
|
Vandroiy
11 Posts
Take LOL for example, a single map but with 10 out of 130 champions used every game you have ~10^14 possible initial conditions and different item builds makes a whole lot more strategies. I don't see people screaming after a replacement for Summoners Rift. Now, SC2 only has about 50 or so units, depending on if you include workers, overlords etc. However, since you can build any number of any unit at any given time, assuming that you have the money and the tech, there is theoretically an infinite number of possible builds. Of course not every build is viable but I would rather have a more "standard" set of maps(whatever that means) where several strategies are viable. Basically maps like Coda or Ohana (it means family), from HOTS, where the latter is probably my favourite map of all time. It was just as common to see rushes, three base games and games where the map was split in half. I'm sure Blizzard wants to make the game as fun as possible for everyone (why wouldn't they) but pushing for a lot of new maps every season is not something you should prioritize. What makes SC great is the gameplay, the mechanics and the strategies. In my opinion, there should be about 5-7 maps each season (so that you can veto some but still play on 3 or 4) and every new season 2 maps would rotate out and 2 would rotate in. If a map is imbalanced it should be replaced, or preferably edited, but I would rather like to see "safe" picks all the way through than experimental ones. We all know about the struggle to make mech viable and other units that are never used (rip swarmhost) and I think that the focus should be on making all (hopefully) units and strategies viable on those maps instead. I don't want any gimmicky maps but straight up maps with characteristics such as "Here I have to break some rocks to connect my natural to my third." or "Here I can choose the closer low ground base as my third or the further away highground one." Again I know that Blizzard do what they can to accomodate for all players and I don't want to take away from their effort. I would just like to share my view, which I hope is taken as constructive critisism, since I am very passionate about the game. Which we all are and thats why we're yelling so much  | ||
|
RedAlice
51 Posts
On April 09 2016 07:15 Avi-Love wrote: Reading through this thread I cannot help but feel that a lot of people (and blizzard) are simply not keeping up to date with the current situation of the game. First and foremost, Dusk and Orbital are not balanced maps, they are both disadvantageous to zerg, especially in zvt. Secondly, zerg is not strong lategame, zerg is actually losing both zvp and zvt lategame (although the breakpoint for this occurs at different times in the two matchups, zerg starts losing when protoss gets 3 bases and enough immortals in zvp, and zerg loses when terran gets to build enough air units in zvt). None of the proposed changes will help zerg, and nerfing drops (or ravagers, which was their original idea) hurts zergs ability to win / do enough damage early on. I think it is fairly obvious that zergs are struggling at the highest level of play right now, and that is not factoring in these changes and the new maps, which I believe will just make the situation worse. What I think needs to be changed however, is that liberator's anti air needs to be toned down, a lot. This won't effect tvt or tvp a lot I think, and would help zerg actually have a fighting chance against mass air late game - an alternate route would be to buff corrupters, which would also help vs mass protoss air (another scenario in which zerg has absolutely no chance to win once critical mass is reached). They could also buff parasitic bomb back to its original value. Mass immortal are weak on maps that have a 3rd with two narrow exit and the attacker doesn't have to detour while switching target. I think there's a mislead in the games that protoss wins just because they get to 3rd base.They win because they made almost no mistakes from the very start. PvZ currently allows no mistakes or you die instantly at the next wave of attack. | ||
| ||
