|
Hey everyone. As we mentioned in the feedback update this week, we want to communicate how ideas are progressing more frequently. Below are our thoughts around topics from the last Balance Test Map.
Photon Cannon Change
- This change wasn’t targeted at the pro level
- Our understanding is that the community is now against this change. We will pull this change, unless you point out that this isn’t the case.
Swarm Host Cost Reduction
- We still believe bringing Swarm Hosts back into play in this redesigned version is good, and we’ll continue with this change.
Thor/Liberator
- This seems like a good change in terms of unit diversity.
- We can also explore other mech diversity changes, and Cyclone is something that we can definitely look to test as many of you want (let us know if we’re wrong).
Banshee Tech Requirement Reduction
- Our understanding is that the community was heavily against this change, so we’re pulling it unless you point out that this isn’t the case.
We are also working on a list of added changes such as Immortal Barrier nerf, Colossus attack speed buff, and Cyclone changes. We'll have more details on these this week as well.
Source
|
as a person who did heavy test map testing during thor flat splash period, let me offer some opinion on the thor change
I really don't like it- I believe that single target long range AA should go into cyclone and make it cheaper/more disposable instead of the current mess of the lock on mechanics.
Even if the above wasn't possible, Thor being single target could use more help in that department as it is losing the splash damage
Now onto my points:
Thor change:
Thor change is really overall nerf to utility of the unit- Thor is 6 supply unit that does 35+15- numbers may look impressive at glance, but it really is population inefficient. Its not really useful at all but vs broodlords- which it doesn't do great against since both sides can kite each other and broodlings block the thors. Thors also have clunky firing delay that worked with burst damage nature of the javline missles, but doesn't work as well with faster-firing current change missles.
Not only that, the damage isn't really great- 25 air DPS vs armored for 6 pop unit isn't really "worth" it when its huge, blocky (blocks other thor from firing at same time) when vikings can stack and do just as well and offer fast, reliable single target focus-
You may argue that Parasitic bomb is a big threat for the vikings, but binding cloud does just as much vs AA thors in denying damage. There is no real reason to make thors against lategame air except in TvT when it becomes liberator coutner.
For comparison, Vikings do 19.6 single target DPS vs armored air, while thor offers 25 single target dps. Thors cost 6 supply while vikings cost 2 and is more mobile. There is no real incentive to make thors for the anti air capacity when it does so poorly. It had its niche as AA vs muta in past, now it doesn't do anything much.
---
build diversity:
Also, opening factory is difficult now with 2 base muta becoming a much larger threat- turret+thor isn't enough anymore vs 2 base muta openers since thors do so poorly against mutas as it became a single target 17.5 dps unit-
What made thors great vs muta was the splash and also the burst damage of thor that punished mutas flying into base. Thor offered an instant, splash damage response but with change, it doesn't anymore. Thor right now offers 14 dps over 3 seconds with small splash, while the change makes thor a 17.5 dps SINGLE target over 2 seconds, which is whole lot worse against mutas.
Not only is it less burst and instantaneously punishing. it loses the splash damage for very minor 3.5 dps upgrade.
Its worse even vs magic boxed muta. Factory openings are simply discouraged with this change going through.
|
Canada8157 Posts
Jeez, you could at least format it correctly. So lazy
|
The thor "buff" is nice, but as mentioned by jinjin5000 it reduces the build diversity. Also, a 6!!!! supply unit that has such little impact isnt worth it. The old HOTS Thor with alternate fire mode was much better (AOE or impact mode) so the player can decide what to go for. But the impact damage with this buff is not enough, it should be bit more + a bit more range.
Also, take a look at:
Why can we see burrowed widowmines, but not lurkers.
Why does the stasis ward spell not expire and last forever.
Why can the opponent see the liberation zones when they dont have vision on the unit.
Envision lasts way too long for such a cheap spell.
Tempests still 4 supply?
Reduce warprism pickuprange?
Immortals?
Dont make a nova ball a magnet to units?
Why can pylons attack buildings, its just frustrating and doesnt make quality games.
|
Cyclone is something that we can definitely look to test as many of you want (let us know if we’re wrong).
NOPE.You are damn right.
You are damn right......
|
I like the way they're managing the situation a lot more. I indeed think the cyclone should be given some more love and that the banshee change and the cannon change were plain bad. I also think an immortal nerf, even a slight one, is long overdue : Z should be able to fight a fully fledged chargelot archon immortal army with ground units. Overall a very nice and uplifting update that cheers me up a lot.
|
protoss tempest carrier ht ball should be adressed asap, its beyond broken
|
So, they're looking to fix one of terran's two completely useless units while they throw one of the almost-useless units into the gutter. In the end, terran will still have 2 useless units. Not to mention putting terran on a timer in tvz, because being on a timer in tvp is so much fun already.
But hey, they're at least bringing the swarm host back!
Also, can someone explain to me, why has the BC been such a trash unit ever since WOL and they haven't even considered looking at it?
But I know, I know, I'm just a dumb balance whiner and should git gud, right?
|
I absolutely hate the reasoning: "the community is against the change" so we aren't going ahead with it. They are the game designers not the community.
If the community brings up good points against the change, by all means consider those points, and pull the changes if necessary, but the community disliking a change isn't of itself a reason not to go ahead with something.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On May 06 2016 07:00 jinjin5000 wrote:
as a person who did heavy test map testing during thor flat splash period, let me offer some opinion on the thor change
I really don't like it- I believe that single target long range AA should go into cyclone and make it cheaper/more disposable instead of the current mess of the lock on mechanics.
Even if the above wasn't possible, Thor being single target could use more help in that department as it is losing the splash damage
Now onto my points:
Thor change:
Thor change is really overall nerf to utility of the unit- Thor is 6 supply unit that does 35+15- numbers may look impressive at glance, but it really is population inefficient. Its not really useful at all but vs broodlords- which it doesn't do great against since both sides can kite each other and broodlings block the thors. Thors also have clunky firing delay that worked with burst damage nature of the javline missles, but doesn't work as well with faster-firing current change missles.
Not only that, the damage isn't really great- 25 air DPS vs armored for 6 pop unit isn't really "worth" it when its huge, blocky (blocks other thor from firing at same time) when vikings can stack and do just as well and offer fast, reliable single target focus-
You may argue that Parasitic bomb is a big threat for the vikings, but binding cloud does just as much vs AA thors in denying damage. There is no real reason to make thors against lategame air except in TvT when it becomes liberator coutner.
For comparison, Vikings do 19.6 single target DPS vs armored air, while thor offers 25 single target dps. Thors cost 6 supply while vikings cost 2 and is more mobile. There is no real incentive to make thors for the anti air capacity when it does so poorly. It had its niche as AA vs muta in past, now it doesn't do anything much.
---
build diversity:
Also, opening factory is difficult now with 2 base muta becoming a much larger threat- turret+thor isn't enough anymore vs 2 base muta openers since thors do so poorly against mutas as it became a single target 17.5 dps unit-
What made thors great vs muta was the splash and also the burst damage of thor that punished mutas flying into base. Thor offered an instant, splash damage response but with change, it doesn't anymore. Thor right now offers 14 dps over 3 seconds with small splash, while the change makes thor a 17.5 dps SINGLE target over 2 seconds, which is whole lot worse against mutas.
Not only is it less burst and instantaneously punishing. it loses the splash damage for very minor 3.5 dps upgrade.
Its worse even vs magic boxed muta. Factory openings are simply discouraged with this change going through.
Hey, JinJin, were you able to test any kind of Hellbat Thor composition against Zerg / Protoss? Overall, it is undeniable how cost/supply inefficient Thor ends up being if you try to include it in your army comp, regardless of the change, but in lower numbers it becomes more useful with splash rather than without it.
Speaking of Blinding Cloud, I am wondering if it affects Cyclones Lock-on, if it does not, the focus could go on trying to make the Cyclone reasonably good against Armored Air units (not Armored Ground units). And yet the cyclone suffers from the same as the Thor, being cost/supply inefficient to an extent, oh and very fragile for their supply cost too.
EDIT: There's a thread in the B.net forums that suggests an interesting change to the Cyclone. Wether it is aligned with what Blizzard wants the Cyclone to be or not, this suggestion helps a great deal. There's even a test map for this change.
[10 (+10 Armored) Reactored Cyclone...]
|
im relation to thor discussion and cyclone - i would reduce the size of the Thor, the cost and supply cost and basically make a mini goliath single target and then i would buff the cyclone and make it 6 supply and cost 300/200 and a very tanky unit(single target) that can mix wit ultras and immortals and archons late game
Imagine terrans going mech or bio.. mini thors and cyclone micro late game..
im a high master terran have been Gm but this is how i would fix the units..
this is my feedback blizzard
|
+ Show Spoiler +On May 06 2016 12:04 ihatevideogames wrote:
So, they're looking to fix one of terran's two completely useless units while they throw one of the almost-useless units into the gutter. In the end, terran will still have 2 useless units. Not to mention putting terran on a timer in tvz, because being on a timer in tvp is so much fun already.
But hey, they're at least bringing the swarm host back!
Also, can someone explain to me, why has the BC been such a trash unit ever since WOL and they haven't even considered looking at it?
But I know, I know, I'm just a dumb balance whiner and should git gud, right?
Exactly! Now you get it  Get good son.
|
i, like everyone else am hopeful that some positive changes will eventually come. And Jinjin's post i thought was well thoughtout & reasoned, same with PinoKotsbeer. As someone who reads threads on here & reddit everyday, I cant help but think to myself, here we go again for the millionth time saying what changes they should focus on. The cyclone & thor changes have been suggested over & over & over again. And Blizzard says "they can explore other mech diversity changes." Well if u look back in past threads you can find those exact words from 4 years ago. But they can "definitely look into testing it, Please let us know if were wrong".
This all just gives me a headache.
|
I think the cyclone is a prime example of why this balance-by-community method won't work.
Blizzard has an idea of how they want to cyclone to feel and how its going to interact with other units in the game.
The community has an idea of how THEY want it to work and feel.
The two are not the same. So long as blizzard holds strong to their vision of the game, they can't rely on the community to suggest changes- unless the community has the same vision. As soon as a disconnect happens, the system fails.
|
Cyclone changes are damn well overdue at this point, remove tankivac and replace the medivacs role of protecting the tanks to the Cyclone which currently has zero useful role in the Terran arsenal.
While your at it, buff the damn Infestor, or maybe shift Blinding Cloud to the Infestor so the Viper can become more specialized to fight mass air and the Infestor can be a useful ground support again. In it's current for, Infestration Pit/Infestors are merely stepping stones to Hive, not a truly viable play style. Fungal Growth does pitiful damage for how difficult it is to land (at least compared to Storm) and everyone knows Infested Terrans were neutered long ago. They are huge and bulky, extremely easy to target, I would even consider a model size reduction a stealth buff at this point.
Nerf the Ultralisk end game armor or revert the Marauder change, theres really no need for both of them, one of the other will do the job. The nerfed Liberator performs remarkably less well against Corruptors (as should be the case if it's going to hard counter Mutalisks) and getting out Ghosts is a bitch and they themselves aren't really that fantastic unless the user is very good with them.
Pretty much, get the other spell casters online with High Templar please, other races want good casters too <3 Well besides the Viper of course, but Ghosts/Infestors definitely need to be buffed.
Remove Colossus from the game and turn the Disruptor into the Reaver, there ya go, problem solved.
|
It's weird how the cannon and banshee changes are being pulled by them saying it's a result of the 'community' while the sh changes are going forward despite a ton of people not wanting to see sh again.
Are they actually trying to listen (not that this will ever work) or are they just using this as an excuse to do what they want?
|
I really dislike the chosen nerf for the liberator AA. The system of hardcounters in this game is already brutal, this only makes it even more clear. Also promotes more mass air play vs liberators, which is just awful.
Really wish the liberator design would have never been this flying siege tank with some anti-air mode on top. It's creating a whole bunch of problems. Why can't we just have the good old strong siege tank on the ground and a new valkyrie on the air instead T_T
|
I also agree with jinjin5000 that the AA anti armor role could be much better served by Cyclones. With a rebalance to be cheaper and a rework on the lock-on mechanic, a more cost effective and supply efficient solution is needed from the factory.
|
United Kingdom20314 Posts
On May 06 2016 08:05 Mojzii1 wrote:
protoss tempest carrier ht ball should be adressed asap, its beyond broken
Which is why it was used exactly 0 times in the recent GSL finals
for all of the complaints that this style of play gets, i don't see it very often at all. The stuff like 3-5 minute all-in attacks occur far more often because there is no gamestate pre-requisite for them to happen
|
Hey all we are pulling the change, unless you like the change again? Do you like it now or no? We can put it back in if you want? No take it out? I can leave it if you want....
Blizzard is that annoying friend that just tries to hard. Just focus on designing units that are fun to use. Cool, diverse, fun units in the game then let the game balance itself as people figure things out. To much worrying about perfect balance not enough focus on just making the game fun.
|
Make the thor pushes enemy units out of the way like it does with friendly units (make it a cooldown ability if it's too powerful - could even receive a small speed boost whilst it's active), give it +1 armour and alternate firing modes. Then it's tanky, less immobile and good against all air units. Move those broodlings out of the way and kill those broodlords. Ignore those zealots and chase down those carriers.
Just give the cyclone some more HP so it can get in there, lock on, and start to kite without dieing. Also, reduce its gas cost. My god that thing is expensive.
I personally liked the cannon change though so who am I to know what is best haha
|
With the new Thor, wouldn't the following unit composition allow for really interesting fights?
Tank, Thor, Hellion, Medivac
Hellions with Thor at the front, so the Thor is protected from fast, light units while it can shoot at heavily armored air. Plus backup from Tank in the back to clear armored units on the ground.
Enough Medivacs to transport tanks and thors, so you can move out and to hold positions even better by using hellbats, which can then be healed.
As I am not that experienced, I don't know what the composition (in terms of numbers) would look like and whether it's feasible with Stargate and Factory only. But to me it looks like an interesting composition that I would like to see discussed (maybe even with and without siegevacs).
Edit: light air units would be a problem of course, but you can go for liberators/vikings. Whether you get into supply problems at that point, I don't know. But maybe you'd rather have a lib based army in midgame and transition into the composition I proposed.
|
LOTV is a fast paced game where the better, undisturbed mining+production mostly wins
LOTV is a fast paced game where the better mirco of units like disruptor, cyclone, reaper, viper, wins
Try to bring those two togehter.
|
zerg and terran whined again and the required buff anti-muta does not come, so at my lvl there is no way you do anything other than a stargate for the openning
|
On May 06 2016 18:42 CyanApple wrote:
With the new Thor, wouldn't the following unit composition allow for really interesting fights?
Tank, Thor, Hellion, Medivac
Hellions with Thor at the front, so the Thor is protected from fast, light units while it can shoot at heavily armored air. Plus backup from Tank in the back to clear armored units on the ground.
Enough Medivacs to transport tanks and thors, so you can move out and to hold positions even better by using hellbats, which can then be healed.
As I am not that experienced, I don't know what the composition (in terms of numbers) would look like and whether it's feasible with Stargate and Factory only. But to me it looks like an interesting composition that I would like to see discussed (maybe even with and without siegevacs).
With Thor single AA target you lack anti air big time with that comp. That's why TvT you had Hellion Tank Viking, or Tank Hellion Thor Viking, etc. Thor anti light, Viking anti everything. If you add Medivacs and maybe Liberators you now have 100 different types of units and a small army.
I've always thought that an army that makes for good games, should have 2 core units, and 1 or 2 for support. So Hellion-Tank core, with Cyclone-mine support, or Thor-Viking, or any other. But when you have to many support units or to many core units it becomes a silly deathball army IMO and one that can not split to cover the map, since 15 units depend on each other to do a job.
In LOTV, i think a Tank-Hellion army could be a good core, with Cyclones for anti armor air for support and a few Mines or a few Medivacs or Liberators as the case might be. Right now this is not possible IMO because the core is already 3 must have units in Tank, Medivac, Hellion, and none of them shoot up; so you need at least 2 more in either Vikings or Thors or Cyclones. To many units. Solution? Buff Tank dmg so it's not so dependent on medivac micro 
|
Sometimes I wonder if the Communitymanager from WoW has taken over SC2 and just blaming stuff on the community if he they don't find a convincing reason to change or not to change something. There will always be whiners and people upset about changes but Blizzard, you employ mostly grown ups, please learn to watch beyond the first row whiners.
But talking about Thors, did Blizzard reduce its size as it did with Ultras or did I miss something? Also I think that the Cyclone is godd early game to defend prisms or fend of dropships but making it more tanky and/or stronger will in my mind just develop terran late game into "kite to win".
|
On May 06 2016 19:11 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2016 18:42 CyanApple wrote:
With the new Thor, wouldn't the following unit composition allow for really interesting fights?
Tank, Thor, Hellion, Medivac
Hellions with Thor at the front, so the Thor is protected from fast, light units while it can shoot at heavily armored air. Plus backup from Tank in the back to clear armored units on the ground.
Enough Medivacs to transport tanks and thors, so you can move out and to hold positions even better by using hellbats, which can then be healed.
As I am not that experienced, I don't know what the composition (in terms of numbers) would look like and whether it's feasible with Stargate and Factory only. But to me it looks like an interesting composition that I would like to see discussed (maybe even with and without siegevacs). With Thor single AA target you lack anti air big time with that comp. That's why TvT you had Hellion Tank Viking, or Tank Hellion Thor Viking, etc. Thor anti light, Viking anti everything. If you add Medivacs and maybe Liberators you now have 100 different types of units and a small army. I've always thought that an army that makes for good games, should have 2 core units, and 1 or 2 for support. So Hellion-Tank core, with Cyclone-mine support, or Thor-Viking, or any other. But when you have to many support units or to many core units it becomes a silly deathball army IMO and one that can not split to cover the map, since 15 units depend on each other to do a job. In LOTV, i think a Tank-Hellion army could be a good core, with Cyclones for anti armor air for support and a few Mines or a few Medivacs or Liberators as the case might be. Right now this is not possible IMO because the core is already 3 must have units in Tank, Medivac, Hellion, and none of them shoot up; so you need at least 2 more in either Vikings or Thors or Cyclones. To many units. Solution? Buff Tank dmg so it's not so dependent on medivac micro
That doesn't change the immobility of the overall army,though. I think the medivac is necessary to have non-turtling mech with the units designed as they are now(immobile). For the medivac to be of better use in such a battle, it maybe should be able to repair mech?
Also see my edit above: In midgame the thor should be replaced by libs/vikings.
I'm interested whether the proposed unit comp would actually do well in lategame fights vZ and vP.(TvT already uses mech and thor change wouldn't change much i guess)
|
If the Thor is not going to have increased range, please look at Cyclone changes that would allow it to deal with later game ranged air armies. Because Terran air certainly does not allow that.
If a Terran player has played a good macro game and scouted well, it should be possible to produce the right army to deal with BL and/or Tempest. If the Thor will remain clunky, lower range, and more of a "mixed use unit", the Cyclone will need to fill a longer range anti-air role like the Goliath did in BW. It would go a long way in making the game enjoyable.
Otherwise, there will continue to be issues with design. Please note that we are absolutely not looking for an overpowered solution here, just having a chance to have the better player come out in the later game. For all I care, make the range upgrade to the Cyclone expensive and add it to the Fusion Core.
|
I don't see the big problem with the thor change. Liberators and thors badly overlap and let's not forget about widow mines. This seems like a straight buff to terran and mech builds. In fact I think the danger is more that it could make mech too "complete" with no weaknesses, like a deathball. I do feel like thors need a slight cost reduction though.
|
Basically a straight TvZ nerf.
|
On May 06 2016 12:29 ZigguratOfUr wrote:
I absolutely hate the reasoning: "the community is against the change" so we aren't going ahead with it. They are the game designers not the community.
If the community brings up good points against the change, by all means consider those points, and pull the changes if necessary, but the community disliking a change isn't of itself a reason not to go ahead with something.
And the inconsistency?
"We still believe bringing Swarm Hosts back into play in this redesigned version is good, and we’ll continue with this change".
One change they aren't going ahead because the community is against it, the other the are going regardless... So, what's the reasoning behind these decisions exactly?
|
On May 06 2016 18:19 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2016 08:05 Mojzii1 wrote:
protoss tempest carrier ht ball should be adressed asap, its beyond broken Which is why it was used exactly 0 times in the recent GSL finals for all of the complaints that this style of play gets, i don't see it very often at all. The stuff like 3-5 minute all-in attacks occur far more often because there is no gamestate pre-requisite for them to happen
do you know why it's so rarely seen at the pro level? It's the same reason ultralisks are rarely seen. Terran has to allin before that unit composition gets into play because it's almost impossible to beat.
I hate that "kill him before he gets there" design because it takes the strategy out of the game. Everything comes down to the execution of the timing attack and strategy barely matters anymore.
this also applies to zvp
|
On May 07 2016 01:15 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2016 18:19 Cyro wrote:On May 06 2016 08:05 Mojzii1 wrote:
protoss tempest carrier ht ball should be adressed asap, its beyond broken Which is why it was used exactly 0 times in the recent GSL finals for all of the complaints that this style of play gets, i don't see it very often at all. The stuff like 3-5 minute all-in attacks occur far more often because there is no gamestate pre-requisite for them to happen do you know why it's so rarely seen at the pro level? It's the same reason ultralisks are rarely seen. Terran has to allin before that unit composition gets into play because it's almost impossible to beat. I hate that "kill him before he gets there" design because it takes the strategy out of the game. Everything comes down to the execution of the timing attack and strategy barely matters anymore.
Maybe if you set the timer even lower and make the players switch sides after 15 matches, it could be a really popular game
|
On May 07 2016 01:17 neptunusfisk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2016 01:15 Charoisaur wrote:On May 06 2016 18:19 Cyro wrote:On May 06 2016 08:05 Mojzii1 wrote:
protoss tempest carrier ht ball should be adressed asap, its beyond broken Which is why it was used exactly 0 times in the recent GSL finals for all of the complaints that this style of play gets, i don't see it very often at all. The stuff like 3-5 minute all-in attacks occur far more often because there is no gamestate pre-requisite for them to happen do you know why it's so rarely seen at the pro level? It's the same reason ultralisks are rarely seen. Terran has to allin before that unit composition gets into play because it's almost impossible to beat. I hate that "kill him before he gets there" design because it takes the strategy out of the game. Everything comes down to the execution of the timing attack and strategy barely matters anymore. Maybe if you set the timer even lower and make the players switch sides after 15 matches, it could be a really popular game
I have no idea what you want to say
|
On May 07 2016 01:25 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2016 01:17 neptunusfisk wrote:On May 07 2016 01:15 Charoisaur wrote:On May 06 2016 18:19 Cyro wrote:On May 06 2016 08:05 Mojzii1 wrote:
protoss tempest carrier ht ball should be adressed asap, its beyond broken Which is why it was used exactly 0 times in the recent GSL finals for all of the complaints that this style of play gets, i don't see it very often at all. The stuff like 3-5 minute all-in attacks occur far more often because there is no gamestate pre-requisite for them to happen do you know why it's so rarely seen at the pro level? It's the same reason ultralisks are rarely seen. Terran has to allin before that unit composition gets into play because it's almost impossible to beat. I hate that "kill him before he gets there" design because it takes the strategy out of the game. Everything comes down to the execution of the timing attack and strategy barely matters anymore. Maybe if you set the timer even lower and make the players switch sides after 15 matches, it could be a really popular game I have no idea what you want to say
that having a defensive side and one that's aggressive on a timer isn't inherently bad design
|
On May 07 2016 01:25 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2016 01:17 neptunusfisk wrote:On May 07 2016 01:15 Charoisaur wrote:On May 06 2016 18:19 Cyro wrote:On May 06 2016 08:05 Mojzii1 wrote:
protoss tempest carrier ht ball should be adressed asap, its beyond broken Which is why it was used exactly 0 times in the recent GSL finals for all of the complaints that this style of play gets, i don't see it very often at all. The stuff like 3-5 minute all-in attacks occur far more often because there is no gamestate pre-requisite for them to happen do you know why it's so rarely seen at the pro level? It's the same reason ultralisks are rarely seen. Terran has to allin before that unit composition gets into play because it's almost impossible to beat. I hate that "kill him before he gets there" design because it takes the strategy out of the game. Everything comes down to the execution of the timing attack and strategy barely matters anymore. Maybe if you set the timer even lower and make the players switch sides after 15 matches, it could be a really popular game I have no idea what you want to say
He is hinting at SC2 not being CS:GO, not sure what he wants to accomplish here, though.
|
On May 07 2016 01:48 neptunusfisk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2016 01:25 Charoisaur wrote:On May 07 2016 01:17 neptunusfisk wrote:On May 07 2016 01:15 Charoisaur wrote:On May 06 2016 18:19 Cyro wrote:On May 06 2016 08:05 Mojzii1 wrote:
protoss tempest carrier ht ball should be adressed asap, its beyond broken Which is why it was used exactly 0 times in the recent GSL finals for all of the complaints that this style of play gets, i don't see it very often at all. The stuff like 3-5 minute all-in attacks occur far more often because there is no gamestate pre-requisite for them to happen do you know why it's so rarely seen at the pro level? It's the same reason ultralisks are rarely seen. Terran has to allin before that unit composition gets into play because it's almost impossible to beat. I hate that "kill him before he gets there" design because it takes the strategy out of the game. Everything comes down to the execution of the timing attack and strategy barely matters anymore. Maybe if you set the timer even lower and make the players switch sides after 15 matches, it could be a really popular game I have no idea what you want to say that having a defensive side and one that's aggressive on a timer isn't inherently bad design
examples of successful games implementing this design:
1. starcraft brood war: terran mech was pretty much ridiculously unbeatable straight up: protoss needs to attack you before you max out or seriously outmultitask you when you have
2. counter-strike: if you are terrorist and dont plant the bomb or kill the CTs before the round ends you lose
3. tetris: if you dont move the stuff before they fill up the screen you lose
|
I think it should be required that people attached their SC2 account to their TL account, so we could see what rank people that are so sure about their balance issues really are.
|
On May 06 2016 06:58 Wrath wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Hey everyone. As we mentioned in the feedback update this week, we want to communicate how ideas are progressing more frequently. Below are our thoughts around topics from the last Balance Test Map. Photon Cannon Change
- This change wasn’t targeted at the pro level
- Our understanding is that the community is now against this change. We will pull this change, unless you point out that this isn’t the case.
Swarm Host Cost Reduction
- We still believe bringing Swarm Hosts back into play in this redesigned version is good, and we’ll continue with this change.
Thor/Liberator
- This seems like a good change in terms of unit diversity.
- We can also explore other mech diversity changes, and Cyclone is something that we can definitely look to test as many of you want (let us know if we’re wrong).
Banshee Tech Requirement Reduction
- Our understanding is that the community was heavily against this change, so we’re pulling it unless you point out that this isn’t the case.
We are also working on a list of added changes such as Immortal Barrier nerf and Cyclone changes. We'll have more details on these this week as well. Source
Colossus Attack speed? The problem was protoss players didn't have to watch their army; how does this make it better?
I guess I have some thoughts on this preemptively. The problem with colossus in hots was that it was hard to push into them because they would mow down light units so fast. I don't mind seeing colossus right, but like what happens is they were easily massed and made it so that the protoss did not have to watch their army while the other players did. Once they had even a small number of them ~5 they shot fast enough you couldn't really push them in a fight.
I feel like increasing the attack speed of colossus is going the wrong way. i think what makes more sense is that they fire slower, not faster with more damage so that you can still push on them. Like maru used to do a lot of early timings and pull 2-3 marauders forward to tank the first shots and try and push in with the delay. It was beautiful micro and what set him apart was that protoss players that weren't watching their colossus in low numbers (1-2) could still lose them. If they fire faster, i don't see this window existing. (I can provide several maru proleague hots games for help with this)
I would like a little clarification on what games you are watching with the colossus or fights that are happening that make this seem like the right way to go. I could see i guess it as an ability that you cast over a few seconds maybe, but as a baseline buff, I feel like its even worse than protoss was before. I would prefer that this was somehow attached to sentries. Like sentries cast a buff on colossus so that they fire faster. Thus a colossus scaling would lose part of its army to make that push happen, but even then i could just see protoss players casting on colossus without ever having to look at their army if the colossus had the ability on it.
|
4713 Posts
On May 07 2016 01:53 neptunusfisk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2016 01:48 neptunusfisk wrote:On May 07 2016 01:25 Charoisaur wrote:On May 07 2016 01:17 neptunusfisk wrote:On May 07 2016 01:15 Charoisaur wrote:On May 06 2016 18:19 Cyro wrote:On May 06 2016 08:05 Mojzii1 wrote:
protoss tempest carrier ht ball should be adressed asap, its beyond broken Which is why it was used exactly 0 times in the recent GSL finals for all of the complaints that this style of play gets, i don't see it very often at all. The stuff like 3-5 minute all-in attacks occur far more often because there is no gamestate pre-requisite for them to happen do you know why it's so rarely seen at the pro level? It's the same reason ultralisks are rarely seen. Terran has to allin before that unit composition gets into play because it's almost impossible to beat. I hate that "kill him before he gets there" design because it takes the strategy out of the game. Everything comes down to the execution of the timing attack and strategy barely matters anymore. Maybe if you set the timer even lower and make the players switch sides after 15 matches, it could be a really popular game I have no idea what you want to say that having a defensive side and one that's aggressive on a timer isn't inherently bad design examples of successful games implementing this design: 1. starcraft brood war: terran mech was pretty much ridiculously unbeatable straight up: protoss needs to attack you before you max out or seriously outmultitask you when you have 2. counter-strike: if you are terrorist and dont plant the bomb or kill the CTs before the round ends you lose 3. tetris: if you dont move the stuff before they fill up the screen you lose
Horrible examples, Tetris is a single player game and even if it had multi-player both would play by the same rules. In CS you take turns playing Terrorists and CT, so the better team in a combination of 30 rounds wins, thats like taking turns playing Terran and than Protoss. BW late game terran wasn't unbeatable, you could out-multitask it and if the protoss could get there it could also be fought using carriers.
BW was pretty much a anomaly anyway given the depth of strategic diversity it offered for all races, the possibility to all-in, play the aggressor or the defender at nearly all stages of the game, based on style not the meta. However one thing that BW did correctly was implement the asymmetric economy, allowing faster rates of mining the more spread out your workers, giving one of the sides the possibility to brute force the turtle at any given point. The beauty of that system is that terran, protoss or zerg could do it and they weren't locked into any racial identity, just that of the player.
So yeah, the prevent it before it happens is awfully stale and only really worked in one game, we saw the worst iterations of it in BL/Infestor and SH. If only for the sake of strategic diversity I'd rather there also be a way to fight a late game composition, not just prevent the other race from getting to it. The more options the healthier the game is, it isn't rocket science, its just common sense.
|
On May 07 2016 01:53 neptunusfisk wrote:
examples of successful games implementing this design:
1. starcraft brood war: terran mech was pretty much ridiculously unbeatable straight up: protoss needs to attack you before you max out or seriously outmultitask you when you have
2. counter-strike: if you are terrorist and dont plant the bomb or kill the CTs before the round ends you lose
3. tetris: if you dont move the stuff before they fill up the screen you lose
Ok, so are we going to make every SC2 game a Bo2 where players swap races and start positions in the second game? Because that's how Counter-Strike is balanced. Tetris is a single-player game and applying single-player design standards to multiplayer is plainly ridiculous. Have you not noticed the huge differences between campaign and MP units?
The only valid comparison you made is Brood War and it's just factually inaccurate. Have you never seen a mech force get wiped out by a carrier fleet before?
A much better comparison would be Supreme Commander / Total Annihilation where tech progress is "linear" and units like the krogoth just stomp all lower tech. But that is not the Starcraft way and there's a reason one of these games came to dominate the RTS genre and the other did not.
|
On May 06 2016 19:58 CyanApple wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2016 19:11 Sapphire.lux wrote:On May 06 2016 18:42 CyanApple wrote:
With the new Thor, wouldn't the following unit composition allow for really interesting fights?
Tank, Thor, Hellion, Medivac
Hellions with Thor at the front, so the Thor is protected from fast, light units while it can shoot at heavily armored air. Plus backup from Tank in the back to clear armored units on the ground.
Enough Medivacs to transport tanks and thors, so you can move out and to hold positions even better by using hellbats, which can then be healed.
As I am not that experienced, I don't know what the composition (in terms of numbers) would look like and whether it's feasible with Stargate and Factory only. But to me it looks like an interesting composition that I would like to see discussed (maybe even with and without siegevacs). With Thor single AA target you lack anti air big time with that comp. That's why TvT you had Hellion Tank Viking, or Tank Hellion Thor Viking, etc. Thor anti light, Viking anti everything. If you add Medivacs and maybe Liberators you now have 100 different types of units and a small army. I've always thought that an army that makes for good games, should have 2 core units, and 1 or 2 for support. So Hellion-Tank core, with Cyclone-mine support, or Thor-Viking, or any other. But when you have to many support units or to many core units it becomes a silly deathball army IMO and one that can not split to cover the map, since 15 units depend on each other to do a job. In LOTV, i think a Tank-Hellion army could be a good core, with Cyclones for anti armor air for support and a few Mines or a few Medivacs or Liberators as the case might be. Right now this is not possible IMO because the core is already 3 must have units in Tank, Medivac, Hellion, and none of them shoot up; so you need at least 2 more in either Vikings or Thors or Cyclones. To many units. Solution? Buff Tank dmg so it's not so dependent on medivac micro That doesn't change the immobility of the overall army,though. I think the medivac is necessary to have non-turtling mech with the units designed as they are now(immobile). For the medivac to be of better use in such a battle, it maybe should be able to repair mech? Also see my edit above: In midgame the thor should be replaced by libs/vikings. I'm interested whether the proposed unit comp would actually do well in lategame fights vZ and vP.(TvT already uses mech and thor change wouldn't change much i guess)
The lack of mobility is only at the core of firepower and it's a feature, just like bio being weak to AOE. It's poor thinking IMO that all armies have to have some quallity all the time (DK is in a period where he is convinced that speed is the answer for all).
Hellions, Cyclones, Banshees and even mines have good mobility. Having the "strong" unit, the Tank, be slow is what promotes a different thinking and playstyle. If the entire army is mobile and is dependant on medivacs, you only get a bio 2.0. And here is why IMO DK fails in his thinking: he wants Terran to play the same way, but using different units. So then, what is the point of using unit A or unit B if the FEEL of the game is the same? It makes no diferance if you run around and unload a few marauders from a med, or a tank, or a whatever. The FEEL of the game is the same. This gets boring real fast, for me.
As far as "boring" games go, this is about design IMO and not playstyles. Mech was and is fantastic in BW yet crap in SC2. The Tank is the same in both, even stronger in BW actually. It's what happens around it that makes a game fun; it's the synergy of units and game flow.
I already said that i have no expectations from SC2, but it pains me a little that some fans of SC have only seen defensive strategies in the form of Raven-Tank/SH-Viper/Infestor-BL. Yes those were terrible games, but not because mech or defensive strategies are bad, but because Dustin Browder and DK have failed misserably at implementig them. I understand why DK would say mech games were boring, he was part of the design and balance and he's looking to save his arse, but fans should know that it was HIS version of those things that were bad. Good strategy games have always had a variety of playstyles viable, and some of the most admired were the defensive ones, from BW to single player Total War and even SC2 single player.
Granted, it's a more complex game flow to make defensive/mech fun, then just harass-harass-move-move, but maybe that's why BW was so popular for so long and it still is while SC2 feels like it's dying all the time.
+ Show Spoiler +I've always thought that if Blizz had the rights to CS, we would have never had CS Go but a Call of Duty clone. Blizz has really lost it's way in knowing how to exploit what they already have, and it's looking to hard at what others are doing and tryng to make shity copies. SC2 is becoming MOBA-ified IMO: unit abilities over composition, twitch reflex over positioning, etc.
Can't yet tell if it's shity designers or to much ego or Activision orders, but save for Heartstone (a game coming from a small team with little pressure) they have been bad with all their major titles.
They've changed from a leader attitude, to one of "hopefully we'll get a piece of the market". And in the process they've lost the faith of the fans AND failed to get new ones. IMO
|
On May 06 2016 06:58 Wrath wrote:Hey everyone. As we mentioned in the feedback update this week, we want to communicate how ideas are progressing more frequently. Below are our thoughts around topics from the last Balance Test Map. Photon Cannon Change
- This change wasn’t targeted at the pro level
- Our understanding is that the community is now against this change. We will pull this change, unless you point out that this isn’t the case.
Swarm Host Cost Reduction
- We still believe bringing Swarm Hosts back into play in this redesigned version is good, and we’ll continue with this change.
Thor/Liberator
- This seems like a good change in terms of unit diversity.
- We can also explore other mech diversity changes, and Cyclone is something that we can definitely look to test as many of you want (let us know if we’re wrong).
Banshee Tech Requirement Reduction
- Our understanding is that the community was heavily against this change, so we’re pulling it unless you point out that this isn’t the case.
We are also working on a list of added changes such as Immortal Barrier nerf and Cyclone changes. We'll have more details on these this week as well. Source
Why did you change the post to remove the part about the colossus buff?
|
I don't use Liberators at all so I can't comment, but it would be a shame to nerf such a cool unit.
|
On May 07 2016 02:55 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2016 19:58 CyanApple wrote:On May 06 2016 19:11 Sapphire.lux wrote:On May 06 2016 18:42 CyanApple wrote:
With the new Thor, wouldn't the following unit composition allow for really interesting fights?
Tank, Thor, Hellion, Medivac
Hellions with Thor at the front, so the Thor is protected from fast, light units while it can shoot at heavily armored air. Plus backup from Tank in the back to clear armored units on the ground.
Enough Medivacs to transport tanks and thors, so you can move out and to hold positions even better by using hellbats, which can then be healed.
As I am not that experienced, I don't know what the composition (in terms of numbers) would look like and whether it's feasible with Stargate and Factory only. But to me it looks like an interesting composition that I would like to see discussed (maybe even with and without siegevacs). With Thor single AA target you lack anti air big time with that comp. That's why TvT you had Hellion Tank Viking, or Tank Hellion Thor Viking, etc. Thor anti light, Viking anti everything. If you add Medivacs and maybe Liberators you now have 100 different types of units and a small army. I've always thought that an army that makes for good games, should have 2 core units, and 1 or 2 for support. So Hellion-Tank core, with Cyclone-mine support, or Thor-Viking, or any other. But when you have to many support units or to many core units it becomes a silly deathball army IMO and one that can not split to cover the map, since 15 units depend on each other to do a job. In LOTV, i think a Tank-Hellion army could be a good core, with Cyclones for anti armor air for support and a few Mines or a few Medivacs or Liberators as the case might be. Right now this is not possible IMO because the core is already 3 must have units in Tank, Medivac, Hellion, and none of them shoot up; so you need at least 2 more in either Vikings or Thors or Cyclones. To many units. Solution? Buff Tank dmg so it's not so dependent on medivac micro That doesn't change the immobility of the overall army,though. I think the medivac is necessary to have non-turtling mech with the units designed as they are now(immobile). For the medivac to be of better use in such a battle, it maybe should be able to repair mech? Also see my edit above: In midgame the thor should be replaced by libs/vikings. I'm interested whether the proposed unit comp would actually do well in lategame fights vZ and vP.(TvT already uses mech and thor change wouldn't change much i guess) The lack of mobility is only at the core of firepower and it's a feature, just like bio being weak to AOE. It's poor thinking IMO that all armies have to have some quallity all the time (DK is in a period where he is convinced that speed is the answer for all). Hellions, Cyclones, Banshees and even mines have good mobility. Having the "strong" unit, the Tank, be slow is what promotes a different thinking and playstyle. If the entire army is mobile and is dependant on medivacs, you only get a bio 2.0. And here is why IMO DK fails in his thinking: he wants Terran to play the same way, but using different units. So then, what is the point of using unit A or unit B if the FEEL of the game is the same? It makes no diferance if you run around and unload a few marauders from a med, or a tank, or a whatever. The FEEL of the game is the same. This gets boring real fast, for me. As far as "boring" games go, this is about design IMO and not playstyles. Mech was and is fantastic in BW yet crap in SC2. The Tank is the same in both, even stronger in BW actually. It's what happens around it that makes a game fun; it's the synergy of units and game flow. I already said that i have no expectations from SC2, but it pains me a little that some fans of SC have only seen defensive strategies in the form of Raven-Tank/SH-Viper/Infestor-BL. Yes those were terrible games, but not because mech or defensive strategies are bad, but because Dustin Browder and DK have failed misserably at implementig them. I understand why DK would say mech games were boring, he was part of the design and balance and he's looking to save his arse, but fans should know that it was HIS version of those things that were bad. Good strategy games have always had a variety of playstyles viable, and some of the most admired were the defensive ones, from BW to single player Total War and even SC2 single player. Granted, it's a more complex game flow to make defensive/mech fun, then just harass-harass-move-move, but maybe that's why BW was so popular for so long and it still is while SC2 feels like it's dying all the time. + Show Spoiler +I've always thought that if Blizz had the rights to CS, we would have never had CS Go but a Call of Duty clone. Blizz has really lost it's way in knowing how to exploit what they already have, and it's looking to hard at what others are doing and tryng to make shity copies. SC2 is becoming MOBA-ified IMO: unit abilities over composition, twitch reflex over positioning, etc.
Can't yet tell if it's shity designers or to much ego or Activision orders, but save for Heartstone (a game coming from a small team with little pressure) they have been bad with all their major titles.
They've changed from a leader attitude, to one of "hopefully we'll get a piece of the market". And in the process they've lost the faith of the fans AND failed to get new ones. IMO
I see your point - and agree with it. I was just adresing the immobility of the army because many players feel vulnerable when moving out on the map because of it, as it can be scouted and they will be harassed as a reaction. To have your mech army deployed at the battlefront by the medivac and to set up there is a design I would like, because (without the siegevac) you still would need to choose your positions properly, but wouldn't take so long to do it.
|
On May 06 2016 12:04 ihatevideogames wrote:
So, they're looking to fix one of terran's two completely useless units while they throw one of the almost-useless units into the gutter. In the end, terran will still have 2 useless units. Not to mention putting terran on a timer in tvz, because being on a timer in tvp is so much fun already.
But hey, they're at least bringing the swarm host back!
Also, can someone explain to me, why has the BC been such a trash unit ever since WOL and they haven't even considered looking at it?
But I know, I know, I'm just a dumb balance whiner and should git gud, right?
actually you might want to get worse.
according to my silver and gold friends the Banshee is a good unit. clearly, this is anecdotal. I wonder if the Banshee is totally useless at every level of play.
unless of course you're talking about the Thor and Cyclone
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
