Here is what we're exploring, and what we would like to bring out next week. There are a few new changes on top of the changes that we're carrying over from the last balance test map, so let's focus down on testing these changes so that we can aim for a release to live potentially later this month.
Swarm Host cost reduction We want to really nail down to see if the current role of the Swarm Host is good, and we believe the best way to do it is to do a straight up power buff such as this one.
Liberator AA damage to be focused to be +light We want to help the situation where mass Liberators are too all round against Air units in the late game. Thor AA damage to be high, single target, and focused vs. armored We want to combo this with the Liberator change to give Terran a tool back to help deal with armored air units. Cyclone supply cost increased, but resource cost reduced. We’re seeing a lot of community request to resume testing Cyclone changes so we’d like to add this to the list. (Let us know if we’re wrong here) Goal here is to have them see more play in the early/mid games, but make sure mass Cyclone only strategy isn’t viable in the end game.
Colossus improvement We want to give back some of the Colossi strength. Goal here isn’t to make Colossi be used in every single game, but we want to have them see play a bit more frequently. Attack speed buff is what we’re thinking here to help with the overall DPS output. Immortal Barrier nerf Due to heavy pro player feedback regarding this ability being the top priority in terms of changes needed to the game, we’d like to test this out. We’re currently thinking of reducing the amount absorbed when Barrier is up.
It's like a bunch of ranchers trying to catch their cattle which escaped from the barn. Blizzard is trying to tackle so many things at once without much precision as to each of their choices. They need to narrow the voices they're trying to appease >.>
Swarm Host - The new change makes it a gimmick unit usable in extremely rare situations, I guess it's better then nothing, but the Host's role in the game is still strong and weird.
Liberator - I mean better then nothing, it was OP as hell, now it's only OP as hell vs Mutalisks, at least dedicated anti-air units like the Corruptor can finally bring it down without suffering massive casualties.
Thor - Can't tell if overall nerf or buff to mech, I don't play Terran but I haven't heard any Terran players jump for joy over the change.
Cyclone - What is with all of the supply increases? Just make the damn thing worth building, it will only be massed if it becomes a core unit or totally broken then appropriate changes can be made from there.
Colossus - Would rather then Disruptor get worked on, it's infinitely more interesting to watch and play against then the Colossus.
Immortal - This unit is and has been over performing, now that Protoss is finding some serious strength in the meta it needs to be nerfed, having a ground unit that can a move roll over any Zerg ground composition (and I'm assuming it's pretty damn good vs. Terran as well) isn't good for the game. Just make sure you guys don't completely neuter Protoss ground armies in the process, we need more ground play and less air play in general.
Still lots of work to do, Infestors and Ghosts are still barely worth the investment with Infestation Pit being merely a stepping stone to Hive and not a viable tech route, Siege Tanks still (amazingly) haven't been buffed in place of tankivacs being removed/nerfed, Disruptors are still wonky, Oracle spells last WAY too damn long for how cheap and easy to use they are and Stalkers are still complete garbage in the late game.
But at least he's getting there, I would say David is finally doing a decent job.
On May 07 2016 02:23 Charoisaur wrote: The collossus nerf was imo the only improvement from HotS. Now they are even backpedaling on that
I agree with this but death balling is much weaker in LOTV which was where the Colossus shined, I'm okay with at least making it semi viable., especially if the dreaded Immortal get's it's well deserved nerf.
I don't know about Terran but Zerg's have had plenty of practice dealing with the Colossus and there's lots of ways to counter it, especially with Liberators being in the game now.
I think the Cyclone should get a small health boost it dies so easily vs blink stalker and it only serves one purpose honestly this may seem imba but what if the lock on had tiny splash damage? or if it kills a unit the lock-on has its cooldown refreshed? (My grammar and sentence formatting is probably really bad this is only my 2nd comment ever haha) EDIT: I think the Cyclone could be used with the hellion early on as a harassment unit and if it were to get the lockon buff the damage on it is fine but I think hellion cyclone would be a really effective harassment as 1 cyclone could target down things like stalkers or roaches and hellions could get lings etc however I think the cool-down refresh should have a small recharge but I think the immortal nerf is a good idea, Thors however their change isn't that good imo people who play factory mech can't hold off mutas with cyclones, further more you need a bunch of liberators (like 4-6) Before the mutas actually back off
I agree with all the changes except the swarm host cost reduction. Just remove the unit from the game, Zerg is a complete race with lots of powerful tools without it. There is basically no need for this unit to be in the game, it does not add anything interesting.
I think it would be better if they just sat back and really thought about what their goal is with tuning and balancing. These half-hearted proposals that don't have a clear point don't give much confidence in their planning - especially when they keep being called back.
Colossus improvement "We want to give back some of the Colossi strength. Goal here isn’t to make Colossi be used in every single game, but we want to have them see play a bit more frequently. Attack speed buff is what we’re thinking here to help with the overall DPS output."
Are they insane, bringing back that dreadful unit has to be the worst decision ever. "A move" deathballs here we come again
One of the points here is to be more transparent. I think it's a great thing to be constantly getting updates about their thinking. Another point is that they're actually using the balance test maps to TEST now, rather than just putting everything they test into the game without a second thought.
It makes sense for them to not have complete confidence at this point because it no longer is up to just them. They've included the whole of the Starcraft 2 community in this process, and that is a great place to start. This all seems like progress to me.
On May 07 2016 03:16 Ctesias wrote: I think it would be better if they just sat back and really thought about what their goal is with tuning and balancing. These half-hearted proposals that don't have a clear point don't give much confidence in their planning - especially when they keep being called back.
I've become convinced that they don't actually have any designs for the game.
It's just "let's look at possibilities!" without any clear set of goals. Disorganized and completely unplanned.
Call me crazy but I think it's an improvement that they're listening to the community. If they did that 4 years ago this game would be in a much better place right now.
Immortal Barrier nerf Due to heavy pro player feedback regarding this ability being the top priority in terms of changes needed to the game, we’d like to test this out. We’re currently thinking of reducing the amount absorbed when Barrier is up.
They might as well remove the collosus and the swarmhost. Collosus is just a boring deathball unit. Swarmhost is just pointless, as any successful harrass with it just invites a push that'll kill the Zerg. Admittedly, the collossus is still seen in pro foreigner games, but I don't see how weakening the immortal would encourage less pheonix play PvZ. It just seems like they have given up on that idea.
Collossus: not the correct change. I agree the collosus could use a buff, but a flat dps increase isn't it. A (small) damage buff vs light, possibly accompanied by a slight reduction in base damage, on the other hand, would be nice, and help differentiate it from the immortal. Maybe something like 10 (+5 light) would work. Currently both units suffer from being too good all-round and so end up either overpowered (LotV immortal, HotS collossus) or hardly ever used (LotV collossus). Also: a small cost/time reduction for thermal lance research would also help in getting out effective collosus-based compositions quick enough to defend timings. Right now I see no reason why thermal lance should be a 200/200(100 sec) upgrade.
Immortal: Changing the immortal to be weaker overall will definitely help. An immortal more focused vs roaches and lurkers will help strategic diversity, provided there is a way deal with compositions that the immortal currently counters(ling/hydra/bane timings come to mind). Seeing collossi deal with ling/bane/hydras while immortals are refocused to counter roaches/lurkers would be a nice way to add a little variety to the midgame vs zerg.
Phoenix openings aren't dying anytime soon, since ling, and more recently baneling drops are very difficult to deal with otherwise (oracle into a few void rays set on patrol is pretty much the only other option). The only way to diversify the midgame is to allow for compositions which are not immortal-based to be viable.
Oh boy. I knew it, they're not really gonna try to fix to give a proper ground vs air unit, they're gonna try as hard as they can to keep their gimmicky cyclone in the game. Just remove the damn lock on and buff range and stats, is it so hard? Why can't terrans we have a decent, non-gimmicky anti air unit?
On May 07 2016 06:28 ihatevideogames wrote: Oh boy. I knew it, they're not really gonna try to fix to give a proper ground vs air unit, they're gonna try as hard as they can to keep their gimmicky cyclone in the game. Just remove the damn lock on and buff range and stats, is it so hard? Why can't terrans we have a decent, non-gimmicky anti air unit?
You already have decent anti-air units. Marines, widow mines and vikings. Thor is just a bonus. How many options does protoss have vs mutas and how many of them are mobile? Only stalkers, which actually lose to mutas, and phoenixes. Archons are good if mobility isn't a requirement and if zerg doesn't use vipers to mess up with their attack.
On May 07 2016 02:31 blade55555 wrote: Colossus buff huh, sounds horrible .
Colossus is a pretty bad unit atm. It still has the full cost of WOL and HOTS in minerals, gas, tech and supply but it does about 1.5x less damage when you have +3 attack and the opponent has +3 armor.
On May 07 2016 06:26 ejozl wrote: I cannot really get behind the Protoss changes, both heavily removes a lot of the needed skill to play with and against the race.
We had design changes with the specific goal of making some other stuff easier to play recently. Protoss is quite far from the easiest race at the moment judging by the gameplay and the extremely poor representation (other races 1.5 - 2x more common at master and diamond level)
Liberator air damage seems fine as is. The situation they're talking about fixing requires an absurd amount of Liberators in a late-late-game map split, and Parasitic Bomb/Tempests still handle it fine. It's such a rare occurrence that I don't understand why they're aiming a balance change at it, especially since in pro games, significantly weakening the ability of a Liberator to pressure an early Warp Prism or drop Overlord will almost certainly be more consequential.
On May 07 2016 02:31 blade55555 wrote: Colossus buff huh, sounds horrible .
Colossus is a pretty bad unit atm. It still has the full cost of WOL and HOTS in minerals, gas, tech and supply but it does about 1.5x less damage when you have +3 attack and the opponent has +3 armor.
On May 07 2016 06:26 ejozl wrote: I cannot really get behind the Protoss changes, both heavily removes a lot of the needed skill to play with and against the race.
We had design changes with the specific goal of making some other stuff easier to play recently. Protoss is quite far from the easiest race at the moment judging by the gameplay and the extremely poor representation (other races 1.5 - 2x more common at master and diamond level)
but collossus is also a terribly designed unit and it was better for the game when it was effectively gone
Blizzard was on a role for a while, now it seems like it's just downhill.
The part I can't stand about TvZ is the fact Terran MUST make liberators vs the Ultras. Now you're nerfing them vs Armor? Why not just marginally reduce their overall damage to something like +75. Increase the tank damage and nerf the RoF (would also help a lot TvP as what matters is the initial shots fired).
Why can't we just reduce the amount of armor Chitinous plating gives to +3, and make Marauders back like they were in WoL/HoTS? Would still be a substantial nerf to marines from how they fared vs ultras in HoTS.
And increase cyclone supply cost? They're already only good in small numbers (if that), you want to make them even less viable in larger army scenarios?
Why not just make Immortal back to how they were in WoL/HotS as well?
I wouldn't mind a colossi in between HoTS and LotV, but the tone down was appreciated.
They really want to give mothership core/queen for terran.Normally a cyclone has a hard time to fend off warp prism cause protoss army beneath it.But with 2 cyclones,that's not the case. I hope this buff will help terran against protoss's bullshit.And maybe terran can open with different build. Thor and liberator change are very good in term of design.If anything wrong,just tweak number.But i want to see it in action first,rather than theorycraft and conclude it doesnt work. Immortal nerf is needed. Not because balance but because zerg players don't use lurker anymore. I think with colossus buffed,protoss can go colussus/sentry/archon for L/B/hydra and PICA for lurker/hydra.Unit diversity in this matchup is somehow solved.
I think it's time for them to redesign Starcraft 2 from the foundations. Mix the best BW units and the best SC2 units and give us a RTS for the ages. Enough of Colossus, Cyclone, Tempest, Swarm Host, Thor. More is not better. Have the balls for it David Kim, it's not a shame, it's a show of competence.
A nerf of the ultra armor? On the ghost snipe? A tempest at 6 supply? Or buff on the mine? (and maybe a slightly nerf of liberators AA Attack against light by 1 as I don't like the unit) The immortal is extremely strong against zerg but in mid game, Toss seems to have some difficulties against terrans even if as a no T or P players, the early and late game seems to heavely favor the protoss race, in fact, a WP nerf seems a better idea, I feel like it is more coherent. The colossus and SH proposition are awful propositions, this is at least, the only part in which I am 100% sure.
Buffing the collosus sounds like a terrible idea. I think it will make p to strong in tvp at the highest level. Sure at the masters level I play at its not a huge problem because Protoss make positional mistakes. But when I watch high level tvp Protoss defense and counter harass tends to be air tight. With a buff to thier mid game aoe(which is collosi's current use) p will be able to get to the tempest ht deathball to easily. With out a change to Terran( no cyclones won't be enough) I predict you will see a return to a hots meta where Terran desperately tries to slow p down and then does a midgame Allin. Since collosi are generraly bad vs scvs you might even reintroduce the dreaded pull the boyz strats. If a collosi buff is neccisary. then Terran will need some kind of compensation since your buffing a unit in an mu that is at best 50-50 right now and might be slightly p favored, (not like bl investor favored but like late hots bio vs ling bane muta slight z favored). Perhaps consider nerfing photon overcharge so although p units are stronger they need more to deffend drops. Or buffing mauraders so that the t army performs better vs a restored collosi. I don't understand why every one talks about the collosi nerfs in lotv but seems to forget one of terran's core units also was nerfed. If p realy needs a buff I would also prefer a more interesting change then restoring the glorifies golden deathball and backtracking from the fun meta we have now where thier is actually a late game because t is only on a marginal clock unlike hots where if a game went 15 minutes or more it was prity much a certainty that p had won unless you were Maru or taija. I tend to try to see things from both sides In terms of balance bye playing random a ton and thinking about both races in each mu but it's hard for me to see anything positive in a collosi buff.
That's the sanest set of ideas posted in quite a while. Add Liberator ground attack nerf, Tankivac nerf, Tank buff and the game might become watchable again.
I've just trying to imagine how ridiculous mass colossus will look with faster attack speed *PEW PEW PEW*
That said I think one of the holes Protoss' army is AoE +light damage, so the above poster's idea of +light damage would be at least make the unit more strategically interesting while also discouraging mass colossus strategies, especially since it comes from the same production building as the primary anti-armored unit.
On May 07 2016 06:28 ihatevideogames wrote: Oh boy. I knew it, they're not really gonna try to fix to give a proper ground vs air unit, they're gonna try as hard as they can to keep their gimmicky cyclone in the game. Just remove the damn lock on and buff range and stats, is it so hard? Why can't terrans we have a decent, non-gimmicky anti air unit?
You already have decent anti-air units. Marines, widow mines and vikings. Thor is just a bonus. How many options does protoss have vs mutas and how many of them are mobile? Only stalkers, which actually lose to mutas, and phoenixes. Archons are good if mobility isn't a requirement and if zerg doesn't use vipers to mess up with their attack.
And how many protoss units are completely, 100% worthless? Maaaaaaaybe the Carrier? Even Carriers are decent in large numbers in the lategame. As it stands right now, at least 3 terran units are worthless. With this new change to the cyclone, instead of being an interesting unit to cover for mech lack of anti-air, it will become a part of alot of early game cheese/all in strats. Quote me on it.
Also I meant mech anti-air unit. Unless you mean using marines vs tempests, which ain't smart cause you know, tempests have 15 range and storms underneath them. Thors could maaaaybe be useful vs Brood Lords, but Brood Lords outrange them, outkite them, and have ultras underneath, so there goes that.
On May 07 2016 10:24 Skyro wrote: I've just trying to imagine how ridiculous mass colossus will look with faster attack speed *PEW PEW PEW*
That said I think one of the holes Protoss' army is AoE +light damage, so the above poster's idea of +light damage would be at least make the unit more strategically interesting while also discouraging mass colossus strategies, especially since it comes from the same production building as the primary anti-armored unit.
On May 07 2016 06:28 ihatevideogames wrote: Oh boy. I knew it, they're not really gonna try to fix to give a proper ground vs air unit, they're gonna try as hard as they can to keep their gimmicky cyclone in the game. Just remove the damn lock on and buff range and stats, is it so hard? Why can't terrans we have a decent, non-gimmicky anti air unit?
There are many units I'd love to see them removed. But the change you stated would just make the Cyclone another boring unit. I highly doubt that blizz will do it.
Better make the goliath back, but then it contradicts a little with the thor...
Still would be glad to see them.
And please, for the sake of this game's future, just remove that retarded swarmhost and colossus, thank you. Don't be stubborn blizz.
As a terran player, I can understand why liberators should be nerfed since it is so good on all aspects (imo it is the needed op unit for terran though).
However, I can never get the idea "Thors get single-armored AA" for what DK called "diversity"... For single-armored AA we terran already have Vikings who can do a better job than the new Thors since Vikings are more mobile and cheaper. So based on DK's "diversity" logic why not just delete Thors' AA? Thors are already mascot than viable unit for terran on most scenarios.
BTW, I agree that colossus nerf is one of the best improvements from hots, maybe it should get some love since it almost never appear in tournaments after lotv, but a simple dps buff is really not a good idea imo. Also, a buff for the reason that the unit doesn't appear much is really unreasonable in consideration of the fact that each race has some of such units (carriers, BCs, Thors, SHs, etc.).
And cyclone is just a completely-failure unit, it does make some sense in some early defense scenario of TvP and TvT, but that's all. Without cyclone both two matchups would not get affected much. What cyclone needs is a completely redesign or just replace it with a new unit. The idea of cyclone fails.
The very design of the cyclone will always make it switch bewteen being OP and being fucking terrible. That's the way it works.
Increasing the supply is so retarded i can't even imagine how they had this idea. So what, a unit that costs less than 150/150 is gonna be 4 pop? Cyclone same supply as fucking tempest?
Should just create 2 formats, standard and wild, and relegate units like colossus and swarm host to the wild format. Blizzard's A team clearly know what they are doing better.
I keep saying this: They totally forgot their idea in HOTS to remove units. Now they really need to. There's a whole bunch of units that are totally unused because something else overlaps them, and trying to make them all viable is extremely difficult.
Another way I could put this is taht the new units are just wayyyy too overlappy to existing things:
Collosus -> Disruptors Liberators -> Siege Tanks, Banshees, Widow Mines, Vikings, Thors Imo worst design: not needed, too strong at too many things. Very little opportunity cost. Spammable AOE, Air unit with very high speed. Lrukers now do what Swarm Host used to do, just worse. Imo, Zerg was best designed this expansion. Though I really wish Vipers did not get an AOE debuff. I really like that it destroys air compositions.
One thing I applaud the Liberator and its range upgrade for though is that it requires Terran to go to T3 now instead of staying T2 all game. (And including ghosts)
By nerfing Marauder into 2 shots vs armor upgrades, it reduces slightly the scaling of MMM into the late game, thus requiring Libs to take out Ultralisks and everything else on the ground.
In that sense, Liberators are a good design for that. And LOTV is still rather interesting to watch and play.
I would hate to see a buff to the Colossus. Nerfing it turned out, in my opinion, to be one of the most refreshing things that came with LotV. Please don't go back to that boring, A-moving turd of a unit.
also remove swarm hosts and give z a different unit.... the flying locusts are just uncool man. give them a drop unit/ or secondary revelation/obs unit....no need to complicate things
Colossus improvement We want to give back some of the Colossi strength. Goal here isn’t to make Colossi be used in every single game, but we want to have them see play a bit more frequently.
Immortal, looking at its name, i would like to see it as the tanky unit that it is, but to reduce its impact let it make less damage. Like that micro can be rewarded, when other units are targeted first. Other than the colossus change (rather slightly reduce overall damage of Disruptor), I like the rest.
Cyclone supply increase to what... 4? It's already the most useless 3 supply unit ever created.... As if massing cyclones would be a good strategy in some way... The state of the cyclone is so confusing...
Hmm I get what they are trying to do with the cyclone. But I think they should switch the techlab requirement for armory requirement so you can reactor them (in addition to the cost decrease)
But why nerf only immortal? Lurkers are already insanely good in large numbers. How do you beat that with nerfed immortal? No air unit suggestions please.
I didn't really have a problem with Colossi in HotS, although I agree that some matches would often be decided by Colossus number alone. So I wasn't a big fan of nerfing them in LotV, but I think it turned out reasonably... However, now we have mass Immortal instead of mass Colossus (at least against Zerg). If they heavily nerf the Immortal, too, we will be either back to mass Blink Stalker, or Protosses being very weak against Zerg. Also, I don't feel a Colossus buff is necessary now. They are a bit underused, yes, but I have a feeling they are much more useful than they are actually being used right now. As if players upon hearing the damage nerf in LotV had resigned to not ever making them because they are nerfed so they must be bad units... I think we would see Colossi used more frequently sooner or later, but if they buff them and nerf Immortals at the same time, I'm pretty sure mass Colossus will return to PvZ, and possibly to other matchups as well.
For the love of everything that's nerdy and awesome in the universe please don't make me build fucking Colossi again, not right after i just started playing again, and having fun because that unit is gone. Please.
Not sure how i feel about the Immortal nerf. On the one hand, it does outshine everything else Protoss has in PvZ...on the other, the matchup seems just fine right now balance wise, so i don't know why zergs (Kespa zergs specifically) are so up in arms about Immortals.
I think immortal nerf will make sense if colossus is buffed as: - damage per second is improved as Blizzard suggests - range is increased by +1
That way, protoss won't be helpless vs lurkers after immortal nerf. Immortal's balance is closely tied to lurker's balance in my opinion. You can't nerf one without the other.
On May 07 2016 15:39 NKexquisite wrote: Cyclone supply increase to what... 4? It's already the most useless 3 supply unit ever created.... As if massing cyclones would be a good strategy in some way... The state of the cyclone is so confusing...
You forget swarm host, at least cyclon help to deal with warp prism and oracle, can hit and run gateway units.
Honestly, i exchange my 4 supply SH vs your 4 supply Cyclon. A unit which can both target air and ground and zone the units with a great 25dps isn't useless at all, specially if the cost is decreased.
On May 07 2016 20:52 Shield wrote: I think immortal nerf will make sense if colossus is buffed as: - damage per second is improved as Blizzard suggests - range is increased by +1
That way, protoss won't be helpless vs lurkers after immortal nerf. Immortal's balance is closely tied to lurker's balance in my opinion. You can't nerf one without the other.
That would make Colossi stronger than they were in WoL and HotS, meaning Protoss would go back to Blink Stalker/Colossus deathballs. I'm pretty sure we should avoid that. Colossus armies are inevitably deathballs because Colossi are more expensive and require way more ground support units around them than Immortals do, and Immortals are complemented much more easily with zealot/adept/templar armies which are also good at multiple engagements rather than one big fight.
On May 07 2016 20:52 Shield wrote: I think immortal nerf will make sense if colossus is buffed as: - damage per second is improved as Blizzard suggests - range is increased by +1
That way, protoss won't be helpless vs lurkers after immortal nerf. Immortal's balance is closely tied to lurker's balance in my opinion. You can't nerf one without the other.
That would make Colossi stronger than they were in WoL and HotS, meaning Protoss would go back to Blink Stalker/Colossus deathballs. I'm pretty sure we should avoid that. Colossus armies are inevitably deathballs because Colossi are more expensive and require way more ground support units around them than Immortals do, and Immortals are complemented much more easily with zealot/adept/templar armies which are also good at multiple engagements rather than one big fight.
Yes, hence why I said when immortal nerf would make sense. I'm against immortal nerf.
I think increasing colossus attack speed is the wrong change. If you look at most artillery/siege units in Starcraft, they have high damage, low attack speed and low mobility, like the siege tank and reaver. I wish they would normalize the colossus instead of making it like a marine with splash damage.
You poor Terrans with your better army's than ever before sure hate on any Protoss buff, but forget that with a immortal nerf Protoss is completely and utterly fucked against lurkers. I am getting so tired of being called a guy that plays a skill less a mover race when I have to constantly fight swaths of mm and hydra lurker. This is what happens to protoss in PvZ when the immortal get's nerfed and the colossus does NOT get a buff. Zerg makes a bunch of hydra's, Zerg turns half of them into lurkers, zerg amoves them into Protosses 3rd and presses the burrow button on the lurkers. GG. No skill required.
But what about Disruptors I hear you say? They counter Lurkers! Yes 2 disruptors can kill 1 lurker every 21 seconds. So by the time you kill 4 lurkers everything and everyone you know and love as a Protoss is dead, That is if Zerg is playing with one hand and is to lazy to unborrow and burrow said lurkers on a slightly different spot.
So when the Immortal get's nerfed I bet you PvZ is going to change into Protoss desperately doing 2 base all inns vs zerg in a pathetic attempt to kill them before the lurkers come out. Off course we still need this all in to include phoenix because otherwise Muta's will mutilate us to death before the lurkers even come out. Because Terrans unlike marines we have stalkers, they have the ability to make Muta's cry from Laughter at their AA ability.
On May 07 2016 20:52 Shield wrote: I think immortal nerf will make sense if colossus is buffed as: - damage per second is improved as Blizzard suggests - range is increased by +1
That way, protoss won't be helpless vs lurkers after immortal nerf. Immortal's balance is closely tied to lurker's balance in my opinion. You can't nerf one without the other.
I totally think the opposite about the colossus range. Reducing it, like just removing thermal lance could guarantee that it is not massed in a death ball style.
For instance, colossus range should remain inferior to lurker's range.
Also, instead of increasing speed (applies to all units) I'd rather see an increase against light, say 12(+3) instead of 12(+1) (hots was 15(+2))
That way it can be used against Dark's mass ling bane mid game - against which stats seemed helpless - but still remains semi useless in late game.
The key imho is to manage to make the coloss a mid game unit only that gets obsolete when the opponent hits tier 3
maybe its armor can be reduced too, to make it too squishy for late game???
Anyway, people saying that bringing colossus back would only mean death balls everywhere again seriously lack imagination....
On May 07 2016 20:52 Shield wrote: I think immortal nerf will make sense if colossus is buffed as: - damage per second is improved as Blizzard suggests - range is increased by +1
That way, protoss won't be helpless vs lurkers after immortal nerf. Immortal's balance is closely tied to lurker's balance in my opinion. You can't nerf one without the other.
I totally think the opposite about the colossus range. Reducing it, like just removing thermal lance could guarantee that it is not massed in a death ball style.
For instance, colossus range should remain inferior to lurker's range.
Also, instead of increasing speed (applies to all units) I'd rather see an increase against light, say 12(+3) instead of 12(+1) (hots was 15(+2))
That way it can be used against Dark's mass ling bane mid game - against which stats seemed helpless - but still remains semi useless in late game.
The key imho is to manage to make the coloss a mid game unit only that gets obsolete when the opponent hits tier 3
maybe its armor can be reduced too, to make it too squishy for late game???
Anyway, people saying that bringing colossus back would only mean death balls everywhere again seriously lack imagination....
Colossi are an immense investment and suck ass in small engagements, so if you take out other options early on (like immortals) you force protoss to do everything in their power to protect their investment, ie mass blink stalker/sentry and deathball it up. It's simply how the unit functions.
On May 07 2016 20:42 Teoita wrote: For the love of everything that's nerdy and awesome in the universe please don't make me build fucking Colossi again, not right after i just started playing again, and having fun because that unit is gone. Please.
Not sure how i feel about the Immortal nerf. On the one hand, it does outshine everything else Protoss has in PvZ...on the other, the matchup seems just fine right now balance wise, so i don't know why zergs (Kespa zergs specifically) are so up in arms about Immortals.
because zerg that isnt named Dark cant win a macro ZvP
Give disruptor + damage against lurkers specifically to 1-shot them and I have no problem with immortals nerf. Remember how pros deemed disruptors not good enough against lurkers.
On May 07 2016 20:52 Shield wrote: I think immortal nerf will make sense if colossus is buffed as: - damage per second is improved as Blizzard suggests - range is increased by +1
That way, protoss won't be helpless vs lurkers after immortal nerf. Immortal's balance is closely tied to lurker's balance in my opinion. You can't nerf one without the other.
I totally think the opposite about the colossus range. Reducing it, like just removing thermal lance could guarantee that it is not massed in a death ball style.
For instance, colossus range should remain inferior to lurker's range.
Also, instead of increasing speed (applies to all units) I'd rather see an increase against light, say 12(+3) instead of 12(+1) (hots was 15(+2))
That way it can be used against Dark's mass ling bane mid game - against which stats seemed helpless - but still remains semi useless in late game.
The key imho is to manage to make the coloss a mid game unit only that gets obsolete when the opponent hits tier 3
maybe its armor can be reduced too, to make it too squishy for late game???
Anyway, people saying that bringing colossus back would only mean death balls everywhere again seriously lack imagination....
Colossi are an immense investment and suck ass in small engagements, so if you take out other options early on (like immortals) you force protoss to do everything in their power to protect their investment, ie mass blink stalker/sentry and deathball it up. It's simply how the unit functions.
This is part of the reason I suggested reducing the cost of thermal lance (hell, we already have to sink 200/200 into robotics bay) so that a less powerful colossus would still be viable in the midgame without ruining the lategame.
On May 07 2016 20:42 Teoita wrote: For the love of everything that's nerdy and awesome in the universe please don't make me build fucking Colossi again, not right after i just started playing again, and having fun because that unit is gone. Please.
Not sure how i feel about the Immortal nerf. On the one hand, it does outshine everything else Protoss has in PvZ...on the other, the matchup seems just fine right now balance wise, so i don't know why zergs (Kespa zergs specifically) are so up in arms about Immortals.
because zerg that isnt named Dark cant win a macro ZvP
its like BL/inf PvZ except the other way around
Actually it's the other way around. Just a couple of days ago Departure beat Zest 3:1 (Kung Fu Cup) and it looked ezpz. Second class Zerg utterly wrecking the best Protoss in the world. That is the state of PvZ balance.
I dont know why immortals are singled out as the problem when it's the late air toss army that's the problem.
Brood lords are pretty good vs immortals right?
If only protoss air didnt shrek everything combined with 1-2 oracles, storm feedback and archons.
Swarmhost I feel very meh about it. when I play Zerg I'm not going to use swarmhosts, the unit has run it's course and just isn't fun. I'd rather see it deleted altogether to get some redemption for 2014.
I'd rather see zerg and protoss air interaction change, or tempest + Broodlord supply both increased. Anything that prevents pvz from getting to that impossible protoss air deathball stage.
On May 07 2016 20:42 Teoita wrote: For the love of everything that's nerdy and awesome in the universe please don't make me build fucking Colossi again, not right after i just started playing again, and having fun because that unit is gone. Please.
Not sure how i feel about the Immortal nerf. On the one hand, it does outshine everything else Protoss has in PvZ...on the other, the matchup seems just fine right now balance wise, so i don't know why zergs (Kespa zergs specifically) are so up in arms about Immortals.
because zerg that isnt named Dark cant win a macro ZvP
its like BL/inf PvZ except the other way around
Actually it's the other way around. Just a couple of days ago Departure beat Zest 3:1 (Kung Fu Cup) and it looked ezpz. Second class Zerg utterly wrecking the best Protoss in the world. That is the state of PvZ balance.
And even, if there are 5 or 15 protoss in Korea, who are able to keep it even against Z; among mortals Protoss clump up in the lower leagues and Z clump up in the higher leagues on a completely unprecedented level. Colossus buff might help with that imbalance, so whoever is against it, at least offer an alternative solution.
Immortal Barrier nerf Due to heavy pro player feedback regarding this ability being the top priority in terms of changes needed to the game, we’d like to test this out. We’re currently thinking of reducing the amount absorbed when Barrier is up.
The Colossus should have been removed, replaced, or reworked into something completely different. In WoL and HotS it bore most of the responsibility for the existence of the Protoss Deathball. It being nerfed into the ground was one of the good things that LotV did, along with the new economy and starting with 12 workers. Please don't bring it back.
On May 07 2016 20:42 Teoita wrote: For the love of everything that's nerdy and awesome in the universe please don't make me build fucking Colossi again, not right after i just started playing again, and having fun because that unit is gone. Please.
Not sure how i feel about the Immortal nerf. On the one hand, it does outshine everything else Protoss has in PvZ...on the other, the matchup seems just fine right now balance wise, so i don't know why zergs (Kespa zergs specifically) are so up in arms about Immortals.
because zerg that isnt named Dark cant win a macro ZvP
its like BL/inf PvZ except the other way around
I mean, it's not like no top level Zergs are winning at all vs. Protoss, but I would say the Immortal keeps Protoss more then their fair share of strength in the match up being able to (don't flame me please) A move through Lurker armies.
I really don't want to see the Colossus buffed because it's a terrible no skill a move unit, would much rather see Stalkers become more effective general combat units, maybe with some type of 200/200 research ability at Twilight that gives them +1 range or some little extra boost vs. light units so Protoss can stop opening Phoenix and ruining my life?
While I'm talking about the Colossus being a terrible unit, just remove the damn Swarm Host from the game entirely, Zerg needs help with air not with ground or siege ability, if it's not going to be reworked into an anti air unit then just scrap it, the unit isn't fun to play with or against, it's just a failed crap gimmick unit that should have never made it into HOTS beta, let alone made it OUT of the beta.
Buff the Stalker, buff the Infestor, buff the Cyclone, start buffing the units that take skill to use David, not all of the retarded a move splash "good vs. everything" units.
On May 07 2016 02:40 Charoisaur wrote: His statements don't sound like he has a lot of confidence in his decisions...
considering his decisions can alter the fate of a pro players destiny or not, I'd say he's hesitant for good reason.
Frankly, I dont think he gives a shit about proplayers destiny a lot of players were cut off completely during the WoL broodlord infestor bullshit anyway.
On May 07 2016 20:42 Teoita wrote: For the love of everything that's nerdy and awesome in the universe please don't make me build fucking Colossi again, not right after i just started playing again, and having fun because that unit is gone. Please.
Not sure how i feel about the Immortal nerf. On the one hand, it does outshine everything else Protoss has in PvZ...on the other, the matchup seems just fine right now balance wise, so i don't know why zergs (Kespa zergs specifically) are so up in arms about Immortals.
because zerg that isnt named Dark cant win a macro ZvP
its like BL/inf PvZ except the other way around
I mean, it's not like no top level Zergs are winning at all vs. Protoss, but I would say the Immortal keeps Protoss more then their fair share of strength in the match up being able to (don't flame me please) A move through Lurker armies.
I really don't want to see the Colossus buffed because it's a terrible no skill a move unit, would much rather see Stalkers become more effective general combat units, maybe with some type of 200/200 research ability at Twilight that gives them +1 range or some little extra boost vs. light units so Protoss can stop opening Phoenix and ruining my life?
While I'm talking about the Colossus being a terrible unit, just remove the damn Swarm Host from the game entirely, Zerg needs help with air not with ground or siege ability, if it's not going to be reworked into an anti air unit then just scrap it, the unit isn't fun to play with or against, it's just a failed crap gimmick unit that should have never made it into HOTS beta, let alone made it OUT of the beta.
Buff the Stalker, buff the Infestor, buff the Cyclone, start buffing the units that take skill to use David, not all of the retarded a move splash "good vs. everything" units.
I'm not sure how infestor takes skill. It just casts a spell like high templar. The only skill it may require is for you to predict where to land your fungle growth after WoL.
All this collosus hate. It is a fairly unique unit and it needs some love. This coming from a masters terran. People say it is designed horrible /just a deathball unit. Please freaking tell me how it is designed ANY differently from a thor/ultra/immortal in that regard. They all wreck ground and thats what they are meant to do. I think it is arguablly a more onteresting unit then the thor (with cliff walk and being able to be hit by air)
On May 07 2016 20:42 Teoita wrote: For the love of everything that's nerdy and awesome in the universe please don't make me build fucking Colossi again, not right after i just started playing again, and having fun because that unit is gone. Please.
Not sure how i feel about the Immortal nerf. On the one hand, it does outshine everything else Protoss has in PvZ...on the other, the matchup seems just fine right now balance wise, so i don't know why zergs (Kespa zergs specifically) are so up in arms about Immortals.
because zerg that isnt named Dark cant win a macro ZvP
its like BL/inf PvZ except the other way around
I mean, it's not like no top level Zergs are winning at all vs. Protoss, but I would say the Immortal keeps Protoss more then their fair share of strength in the match up being able to (don't flame me please) A move through Lurker armies.
I really don't want to see the Colossus buffed because it's a terrible no skill a move unit, would much rather see Stalkers become more effective general combat units, maybe with some type of 200/200 research ability at Twilight that gives them +1 range or some little extra boost vs. light units so Protoss can stop opening Phoenix and ruining my life?
While I'm talking about the Colossus being a terrible unit, just remove the damn Swarm Host from the game entirely, Zerg needs help with air not with ground or siege ability, if it's not going to be reworked into an anti air unit then just scrap it, the unit isn't fun to play with or against, it's just a failed crap gimmick unit that should have never made it into HOTS beta, let alone made it OUT of the beta.
Buff the Stalker, buff the Infestor, buff the Cyclone, start buffing the units that take skill to use David, not all of the retarded a move splash "good vs. everything" units.
I'm not sure how infestor takes skill. It just casts a spell like high templar. The only skill it may require is for you to predict where to land your fungle growth after WoL.
How is the collossus take ANY less skill to use then a thor, brood lord, bc, carrier ultra?????
Collosus were hated because they were a staple, always used, always powerful. Blizzard just wants to make them a viable alternative to an already varied protoss arsenal.
The collosus NEEDS to be buffed to help stop the stupid mass immortol shit that is the only way to kill lurkers aside from going air. Do people really think the 10 immprtal deathball is better than a couple collosus? Jesus
On May 08 2016 05:00 WhaleOFaTALE1 wrote: All this collosus hate. It is a fairly unique unit and it needs some love. This coming from a masters terran. People say it is designed horrible /just a deathball unit. Please freaking tell me how it is designed ANY differently from a thor/ultra/immortal in that regard. They all wreck ground and thats what they are meant to do. I think it is arguablly a more onteresting unit then the thor (with cliff walk and being able to be hit by air)
Immortals are cheaper and easier to get, meaning Protoss gets to invest more heavily in gateway units. Gateway-heavy armies are inherently less deathballish than Colossus heavy armies, because Adepts, Zealots and Blink Stalkers all can function fairly well on their own if their sole job isn't to protect 3-4 colossi (they don't need to do that same thing with immortals).
On May 08 2016 05:00 WhaleOFaTALE1 wrote: All this collosus hate. It is a fairly unique unit and it needs some love. This coming from a masters terran. People say it is designed horrible /just a deathball unit. Please freaking tell me how it is designed ANY differently from a thor/ultra/immortal in that regard. They all wreck ground and thats what they are meant to do. I think it is arguablly a more onteresting unit then the thor (with cliff walk and being able to be hit by air)
Although I agree that the Colossus does not deserve as much hate as it gets, and I always like to see units being useful, I also have to say that the Colossus is indeed designed horribly. (talking about the pre LotV Colossus here) Its the combination of all of its features that makes it incredibly hard to balance. It has high range, high damage, high hitpoints, splash and it can stand on top of other units. Either of these features is already pretty powerful. Having all of the above at once is just a formula for disaster. Of course mass Colossus was a great tactic because everything about that unit is great. Its one weakness is that it can be targeted by anti-air, but that is simply not enough.
The other high tech ground units usually not have splash which makes target firing more important. You dont want to waste your thor attacks on zerglings or marines. With the Colossus splash damage you dont really care what is being attacked. They are also big and bulky which makes it hard to mass them (unlike the Colossus which can stack with other ground units). And their range is short enough so they have to get within range of enemy units when they want to attack.
On May 08 2016 05:00 WhaleOFaTALE1 wrote: All this collosus hate. It is a fairly unique unit and it needs some love. This coming from a masters terran. People say it is designed horrible /just a deathball unit. Please freaking tell me how it is designed ANY differently from a thor/ultra/immortal in that regard. They all wreck ground and thats what they are meant to do. I think it is arguablly a more onteresting unit then the thor (with cliff walk and being able to be hit by air)
Although I agree that the Colossus does not deserve as much hate as it gets, and I always like to see units being useful, I also have to say that the Colossus is indeed designed horribly. (talking about the pre LotV Colossus here) Its the combination of all of its features that makes it incredibly hard to balance. It has high range, high damage, high hitpoints, splash and it can stand on top of other units. Either of these features is already pretty powerful. Having all of the above at once is just a formula for disaster. Of course mass Colossus was a great tactic because everything about that unit is great. Its one weakness is that it can be targeted by anti-air, but that is simply not enough.
The other high tech ground units usually not have splash which makes target firing more important. You dont want to waste your thor attacks on zerglings or marines. With the Colossus splash damage you dont really care what is being attacked. They are also big and bulky which makes it hard to mass them (unlike the Colossus which can stack with other ground units). And their range is short enough so they have to get within range of enemy units when they want to attack.
I would be ok with a small range nerf: maybe make thermal lance 100/100 and bring the (upgraded) range down to 8, or make it 7 range from the start with no upgrade.
I also think nerfing the base damage and adding +light damage would help the focus firing dynamics: you wouldn't want to waste shots on roaches when you could be bringing down hydras, for example.
They should really bring back the old Immortal barrier ability. People say the current Barrier ability is stronger overall, but they are missing the point of the unit. The Immortal is the Siege Breaker, the Hard Hitter. This Barrier ability makes it an all-around ok/good unit against everything, but not great at specific things.
I would rather have the Immortal of old. That Immortal was designed to attack into Lurkers or to stand under Liberation Zones. The old Immortal would laugh while fighting entrenched Lurkers or while walking under Luberatoration Zones as it would cap any shield damage to 10 per volley. With that being said, its ability didn't help versus units like Zerglings, Marines, or Zealots whose attacks never exceeded 10 damage per shot. It had a noticeable weakness. And that was the point. It faired extremely well versus certain units and very poorly versus others.
But now the community wants to nerf the Immortal because it's too good overall. If that is true, then I say bring back the old Immortal. No one complained about that unit.
And frankly, I think Protoss would welcome it back with open arms. I know I would.
If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
On May 08 2016 05:00 WhaleOFaTALE1 wrote: All this collosus hate. It is a fairly unique unit and it needs some love. This coming from a masters terran. People say it is designed horrible /just a deathball unit. Please freaking tell me how it is designed ANY differently from a thor/ultra/immortal in that regard. They all wreck ground and thats what they are meant to do. I think it is arguablly a more onteresting unit then the thor (with cliff walk and being able to be hit by air)
I'll break it down why the colossus is a horribly designed unit in a fairly easy to get format. 1st The colossus is a long range fighting/siege unit. 2nd As a range unit it has far more range then the standard armies at no inherit drawback like, fragility or mobility. 3rd As a siege unit the colossus doesn't have any mobility issues, in fact it its extremely versatile, able to move in between shots, over your own units and even up and down cliffs. 4th Due to its characteristics the colossus has extremely few ground based counters and the most reliable counters come from the air in the form of vikings and corruptors. 5th Due to the need to have strong counters to the colossus both terran and zerg air units were heavily influenced, terran by having vikings be extremely long range and anti-armored, corruptors by making them durable with anti-massive. 6th Due to this design direction air vs air dynamics for all races is skewed and borring, instead of having dynamic air vs air wars like we had in BW with the old Wraith vs Muta/Scourge or Corsair/Scout vs Muta/Scourge, we're reduced to having clumps of slow moving and uninteresting air units.
So, not only is the colossus a badly designed unit, but it also has the dubious honor of warping the entire design of a entire class of units around it, with horrible consequences if I may add.
LotV TvP/PvT may be in a weird place from a few points of view, but without a doubt it is orders of magnitude better now that the colossus doesn't see any play any more. We actually have interesting dynamics of armies posturing around the maps, being active, looking for openings, forcing errors with faints and jukes etc. The current dynamics of bio vs disruptors is also way better, while the disruptor can be incredibly punishing and maybe downright broken in a lot of situations, it still creates unit interactions and considerations that are orders of magnitude better than bio vs colossus.
Against disruptors micro matters, you can run, split or lift your armies to safety. Against disruptors terrain matters, you can actually use the fact that the disruptors don't shoot up or down cliffs to maneuver around the army and attack locations in ways you could never dream of vs colossus.
No, the colossus deserves no love, it deserves to be deleted from the game permanently, its wrought nothing but misery through its existence.
On May 08 2016 05:00 WhaleOFaTALE1 wrote: All this collosus hate. It is a fairly unique unit and it needs some love. This coming from a masters terran. People say it is designed horrible /just a deathball unit. Please freaking tell me how it is designed ANY differently from a thor/ultra/immortal in that regard. They all wreck ground and thats what they are meant to do. I think it is arguablly a more onteresting unit then the thor (with cliff walk and being able to be hit by air)
I'll break it down why the colossus is a horribly designed unit in a fairly easy to get format. 1st The colossus is a long range fighting/siege unit. 2nd As a range unit it has far more range then the standard armies at no inherit drawback like, fragility or mobility. 3rd As a siege unit the colossus doesn't have any mobility issues, in fact it its extremely versatile, able to move in between shots, over your own units and even up and down cliffs. 4th Due to its characteristics the colossus has extremely few ground based counters and the most reliable counters come from the air in the form of vikings and corruptors. 5th Due to the need to have strong counters to the colossus both terran and zerg air units were heavily influenced, terran by having vikings be extremely long range and anti-armored, corruptors by making them durable with anti-massive. 6th Due to this design direction air vs air dynamics for all races is skewed and borring, instead of having dynamic air vs air wars like we had in BW with the old Wraith vs Muta/Scourge or Corsair/Scout vs Muta/Scourge, we're reduced to having clumps of slow moving and uninteresting air units.
No, the colossus deserves no love, it deserves to be deleted from the game permanently, its wrought nothing but misery through its existence.
So rather than concluding that the colossus deserves to be removed, why couldn't you suggest a fix to some of these issues? People have already brought up the idea of reducing the range, why don't you throw out a number that you think would work? If you think it should be more vulnerable, why not give us an idea how much less hp/shields would be the right balance?
On May 08 2016 06:10 Cloak wrote: If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
Of course that army is unstoppable if you don't have tempests.
On May 08 2016 06:10 Cloak wrote: If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
Of course that army is unstoppable if you don't have tempests.
Vikings destroy Tempests. Liberators can aggressively zone out any ground support for Tempests, Tempests too slow to reposition in time. Only retreating Storms can push back the aggression, but that's where solid Ghost micro comes into play and eventually Protoss runs out of HTs.
On May 08 2016 05:00 WhaleOFaTALE1 wrote: All this collosus hate. It is a fairly unique unit and it needs some love. This coming from a masters terran. People say it is designed horrible /just a deathball unit. Please freaking tell me how it is designed ANY differently from a thor/ultra/immortal in that regard. They all wreck ground and thats what they are meant to do. I think it is arguablly a more onteresting unit then the thor (with cliff walk and being able to be hit by air)
I'll break it down why the colossus is a horribly designed unit in a fairly easy to get format. 1st The colossus is a long range fighting/siege unit. 2nd As a range unit it has far more range then the standard armies at no inherit drawback like, fragility or mobility. 3rd As a siege unit the colossus doesn't have any mobility issues, in fact it its extremely versatile, able to move in between shots, over your own units and even up and down cliffs. 4th Due to its characteristics the colossus has extremely few ground based counters and the most reliable counters come from the air in the form of vikings and corruptors. 5th Due to the need to have strong counters to the colossus both terran and zerg air units were heavily influenced, terran by having vikings be extremely long range and anti-armored, corruptors by making them durable with anti-massive. 6th Due to this design direction air vs air dynamics for all races is skewed and borring, instead of having dynamic air vs air wars like we had in BW with the old Wraith vs Muta/Scourge or Corsair/Scout vs Muta/Scourge, we're reduced to having clumps of slow moving and uninteresting air units.
No, the colossus deserves no love, it deserves to be deleted from the game permanently, its wrought nothing but misery through its existence.
So rather than concluding that the colossus deserves to be removed, why couldn't you suggest a fix to some of these issues? People have already brought up the idea of reducing the range, why don't you throw out a number that you think would work? If you think it should be more vulnerable, why not give us an idea how much less hp/shields would be the right balance?
Range nerfs aren't the way forward, they'll be too polarizing, either range is too short and the colossus are useless since its much, much easier to close on them and kill them before they can be effective, or the range is too big and they are too strong, there is no middle ground with a unit like that.
What I can suggest is fixing its broken design, which would involve giving it a mobile mode, where it can walk up and down cliffs and over units but has short range, and a long range mode where its static (like tanks), but can't move. That would provide it with a suitable weakness without its dumb gimmic counter and would open the room to rework all air units.
Now if you want to complain that makes it too similar to siege tanks, well sorry, but you can't have your cake and eat it too. The design is just that bad, it requires a significant rework, not a numbers tweak.
Edit: Oh and such a rework would make colossus too similar to tanks/libs/lurkers in terms of design, and protoss needs neither a zone control unit, (they already have that from disruptors) nor do they need more aoe (they have shitloads of that already).
The most suitable change really is just removing them, it just isn't worth it to work on them.
On May 08 2016 06:10 Cloak wrote: If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
Of course that army is unstoppable if you don't have tempests.
Vikings destroy Tempests. Liberators can aggressively zone out any ground support for Tempests, Tempests too slow to reposition in time. Only retreating Storms can push back the aggression, but that's where solid Ghost micro comes into play and eventually Protoss runs out of HTs.
That is all about late game unit control problem than balance problem.I disagree with any suggestion which can effect terran late game vs P. Unless pro players prove i'm wrong about late game TvP.
On May 08 2016 06:10 Cloak wrote: If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
Of course that army is unstoppable if you don't have tempests.
Vikings destroy Tempests. Liberators can aggressively zone out any ground support for Tempests, Tempests too slow to reposition in time. Only retreating Storms can push back the aggression, but that's where solid Ghost micro comes into play and eventually Protoss runs out of HTs.
That is all about late game unit control problem than balance problem.I disagree with any suggestion which can effect terran late game vs P. Unless pro players prove i'm wrong about late game TvP.
The Liberator change is more for all phases of the game. I was just throwing out that statement because it's a common whine to say lategame Protoss is "unstoppable."
On May 08 2016 06:10 Cloak wrote: If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
Of course that army is unstoppable if you don't have tempests.
Vikings destroy Tempests. Liberators can aggressively zone out any ground support for Tempests, Tempests too slow to reposition in time. Only retreating Storms can push back the aggression, but that's where solid Ghost micro comes into play and eventually Protoss runs out of HTs.
That is all about late game unit control problem than balance problem.I disagree with any suggestion which can effect terran late game vs P. Unless pro players prove i'm wrong about late game TvP.
The Liberator change is more for all phases of the game. I was just throwing out that statement because it's a common whine to say lategame Protoss is "unstoppable."
All 3 phases nerf is even worse than only late game phase .If liberator is too strong then it just needs a slightly AOE nerf. Like -0.5 radius. Just slightly,not heavily nerf it for banshee's buff like DKIM LOL.
On May 08 2016 06:10 Cloak wrote: If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
Of course that army is unstoppable if you don't have tempests.
Vikings destroy Tempests. Liberators can aggressively zone out any ground support for Tempests, Tempests too slow to reposition in time. Only retreating Storms can push back the aggression, but that's where solid Ghost micro comes into play and eventually Protoss runs out of HTs.
That is all about late game unit control problem than balance problem.I disagree with any suggestion which can effect terran late game vs P. Unless pro players prove i'm wrong about late game TvP.
The Liberator change is more for all phases of the game. I was just throwing out that statement because it's a common whine to say lategame Protoss is "unstoppable."
All 3 phases nerf is even worse than only late game phase .If liberator is too strong then it just needs a slightly AOE nerf. Like -0.5 radius. Just slightly,not heavily nerf it for banshee's buff like DKIM LOL.
On May 08 2016 06:10 Cloak wrote: If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
Of course that army is unstoppable if you don't have tempests.
Vikings destroy Tempests. Liberators can aggressively zone out any ground support for Tempests, Tempests too slow to reposition in time. Only retreating Storms can push back the aggression, but that's where solid Ghost micro comes into play and eventually Protoss runs out of HTs.
That is all about late game unit control problem than balance problem.I disagree with any suggestion which can effect terran late game vs P. Unless pro players prove i'm wrong about late game TvP.
The Liberator change is more for all phases of the game. I was just throwing out that statement because it's a common whine to say lategame Protoss is "unstoppable."
All 3 phases nerf is even worse than only late game phase .If liberator is too strong then it just needs a slightly AOE nerf. Like -0.5 radius. Just slightly,not heavily nerf it for banshee's buff like DKIM LOL.
Hasn't it already been nerfed by 0.5 radius?
That was a mistake.They fixed it. Real AOE is 5 not 5.5.
It would be interesting to remove thermal lance and robo bay requirement for collosi and tweak accordingly (some big changes probably). So 1-2 collosi make sense and you don't have to invest that much. SC2 has way too many upgrades and requirements. If balanced without those the game would be more diverse.
On May 08 2016 06:10 Cloak wrote: If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
Of course that army is unstoppable if you don't have tempests.
Vikings destroy Tempests. Liberators can aggressively zone out any ground support for Tempests, Tempests too slow to reposition in time. Only retreating Storms can push back the aggression, but that's where solid Ghost micro comes into play and eventually Protoss runs out of HTs.
That is all about late game unit control problem than balance problem.I disagree with any suggestion which can effect terran late game vs P. Unless pro players prove i'm wrong about late game TvP.
The Liberator change is more for all phases of the game. I was just throwing out that statement because it's a common whine to say lategame Protoss is "unstoppable."
sorry but lategame protoss is absolutely unstopable if played correctly. Envision from oracle provides vision at all times, tempest 15 range, templars for ground support in case either vikings, but also corrupters/vipers come into range to shoot the tempest. You kite back with tempests while you have envision on the viking ball constantly.
Protoss cannot lose if played correctly, liberator range does not zone out templars because of tempest 15 range.
tempest 15 range just fucks up the game on so many levels in late-game lol. Carriers are also a joke if they are completed. Infact Carriers are even harder to deal with because the interceptors make it so that its way harder to micro vikings or the corrupters vs the capital ships.
On May 08 2016 06:10 Cloak wrote: If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
Of course that army is unstoppable if you don't have tempests.
Vikings destroy Tempests. Liberators can aggressively zone out any ground support for Tempests, Tempests too slow to reposition in time. Only retreating Storms can push back the aggression, but that's where solid Ghost micro comes into play and eventually Protoss runs out of HTs.
That is all about late game unit control problem than balance problem.I disagree with any suggestion which can effect terran late game vs P. Unless pro players prove i'm wrong about late game TvP.
The Liberator change is more for all phases of the game. I was just throwing out that statement because it's a common whine to say lategame Protoss is "unstoppable."
sorry but lategame protoss is absolutely unstopable if played correctly. Envision from oracle provides vision at all times, tempest 15 range, templars for ground support in case either vikings, but also corrupters/vipers come into range to shoot the tempest. You kite back with tempests while you have envision on the viking ball constantly.
Protoss cannot lose if played correctly, liberator range does not zone out templars because of tempest 15 range.
tempest 15 range just fucks up the game on so many levels in late-game lol. Carriers are also a joke if they are completed. Infact Carriers are even harder to deal with because the interceptors make it so that its way harder to micro vikings or the corrupters vs the capital ships.
I have seen a game on avilos stream where avilo emp'd all the hts and moved in with his bio viking ball like 3 times but every time the protoss just recalled and regenerated energy. It's basically impossible to lose for protoss because they can just recall every time you get a good engagement vs his army. Also good disruptor use can make the ghosts almost useless.
On May 08 2016 06:10 Cloak wrote: If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
Of course that army is unstoppable if you don't have tempests.
Vikings destroy Tempests. Liberators can aggressively zone out any ground support for Tempests, Tempests too slow to reposition in time. Only retreating Storms can push back the aggression, but that's where solid Ghost micro comes into play and eventually Protoss runs out of HTs.
That is all about late game unit control problem than balance problem.I disagree with any suggestion which can effect terran late game vs P. Unless pro players prove i'm wrong about late game TvP.
The Liberator change is more for all phases of the game. I was just throwing out that statement because it's a common whine to say lategame Protoss is "unstoppable."
sorry but lategame protoss is absolutely unstopable if played correctly. Envision from oracle provides vision at all times, tempest 15 range, templars for ground support in case either vikings, but also corrupters/vipers come into range to shoot the tempest. You kite back with tempests while you have envision on the viking ball constantly.
Protoss cannot lose if played correctly, liberator range does not zone out templars because of tempest 15 range.
tempest 15 range just fucks up the game on so many levels in late-game lol. Carriers are also a joke if they are completed. Infact Carriers are even harder to deal with because the interceptors make it so that its way harder to micro vikings or the corrupters vs the capital ships.
I have seen a game on avilos stream where avilo emp'd all the hts and moved in with his bio viking ball like 3 times but every time the protoss just recalled and regenerated energy. It's basically impossible to lose for protoss because they can just recall every time you get a good engagement vs his army. Also good disruptor use can make the ghosts almost useless.
This is a stupid argument. Terran can do the same, go back and heal with medivacs. You have to do better than that to convince people.
On May 08 2016 06:10 Cloak wrote: If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
Of course that army is unstoppable if you don't have tempests.
Vikings destroy Tempests. Liberators can aggressively zone out any ground support for Tempests, Tempests too slow to reposition in time. Only retreating Storms can push back the aggression, but that's where solid Ghost micro comes into play and eventually Protoss runs out of HTs.
That is all about late game unit control problem than balance problem.I disagree with any suggestion which can effect terran late game vs P. Unless pro players prove i'm wrong about late game TvP.
The Liberator change is more for all phases of the game. I was just throwing out that statement because it's a common whine to say lategame Protoss is "unstoppable."
sorry but lategame protoss is absolutely unstopable if played correctly. Envision from oracle provides vision at all times, tempest 15 range, templars for ground support in case either vikings, but also corrupters/vipers come into range to shoot the tempest. You kite back with tempests while you have envision on the viking ball constantly.
Protoss cannot lose if played correctly, liberator range does not zone out templars because of tempest 15 range.
tempest 15 range just fucks up the game on so many levels in late-game lol. Carriers are also a joke if they are completed. Infact Carriers are even harder to deal with because the interceptors make it so that its way harder to micro vikings or the corrupters vs the capital ships.
I have seen a game on avilos stream where avilo emp'd all the hts and moved in with his bio viking ball like 3 times but every time the protoss just recalled and regenerated energy. It's basically impossible to lose for protoss because they can just recall every time you get a good engagement vs his army. Also good disruptor use can make the ghosts almost useless.
This is a stupid argument. Terran can do the same, go back and heal with medivacs. You have to do better than that to convince people.
On May 08 2016 06:10 Cloak wrote: If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
Of course that army is unstoppable if you don't have tempests.
Vikings destroy Tempests. Liberators can aggressively zone out any ground support for Tempests, Tempests too slow to reposition in time. Only retreating Storms can push back the aggression, but that's where solid Ghost micro comes into play and eventually Protoss runs out of HTs.
That is all about late game unit control problem than balance problem.I disagree with any suggestion which can effect terran late game vs P. Unless pro players prove i'm wrong about late game TvP.
The Liberator change is more for all phases of the game. I was just throwing out that statement because it's a common whine to say lategame Protoss is "unstoppable."
sorry but lategame protoss is absolutely unstopable if played correctly. Envision from oracle provides vision at all times, tempest 15 range, templars for ground support in case either vikings, but also corrupters/vipers come into range to shoot the tempest. You kite back with tempests while you have envision on the viking ball constantly.
Protoss cannot lose if played correctly, liberator range does not zone out templars because of tempest 15 range.
tempest 15 range just fucks up the game on so many levels in late-game lol. Carriers are also a joke if they are completed. Infact Carriers are even harder to deal with because the interceptors make it so that its way harder to micro vikings or the corrupters vs the capital ships.
I have seen a game on avilos stream where avilo emp'd all the hts and moved in with his bio viking ball like 3 times but every time the protoss just recalled and regenerated energy. It's basically impossible to lose for protoss because they can just recall every time you get a good engagement vs his army. Also good disruptor use can make the ghosts almost useless.
This is a stupid argument. Terran can do the same, go back and heal with medivacs. You have to do better than that to convince people.
okay next time i get my army stormed and the protoss charges in with blinkstalkers and chargelots I just go back and heal up thanks for the tip.
On May 08 2016 06:10 Cloak wrote: If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
Of course that army is unstoppable if you don't have tempests.
Vikings destroy Tempests. Liberators can aggressively zone out any ground support for Tempests, Tempests too slow to reposition in time. Only retreating Storms can push back the aggression, but that's where solid Ghost micro comes into play and eventually Protoss runs out of HTs.
That is all about late game unit control problem than balance problem.I disagree with any suggestion which can effect terran late game vs P. Unless pro players prove i'm wrong about late game TvP.
The Liberator change is more for all phases of the game. I was just throwing out that statement because it's a common whine to say lategame Protoss is "unstoppable."
tempest 15 range just fucks up the game on so many levels in late-game lol. Carriers are also a joke if they are completed. Infact Carriers are even harder to deal with because the interceptors make it so that its way harder to micro vikings or the corrupters vs the capital ships.
Then 18 range Liberator must sound insane to you. Sextuple the base DPS (74) vs (12.7), half the cost. Liberators don't even need to reposition, just stagger themselves, and it's impossible for Protoss to engage them outside of Tempests. Turret spam handles Carriers pretty well.
No wonder blizzard cant find their way out of this mess! -Listening to community= too often sounds like ppl whining for their race: no balance to be found there ( though i believe some people here on TL are trying to give objective advice) just to many whiners ( whine colossus buff, whine liberator damage, whine msc (i lold)) and any good advice gets lost in the noob tears - Listening to pros= only balances the game at high lvls of play (if everyone could keep lib count down, multi drop, split like the pros then it would be helpful) plus aren't the player buyest to their race when they give advice? come on they live off the thing... - Having to hold their ground after DLC: lets face it, HOTS LOTV, both huge money makers, gotta make things interesting from afar so ppl buy the stuff ( yay new units, yay faster games, etc) so then they cant nerf anything expansion defining back to previous states. Thats why units that are useless stay in the game ( pls stop asking them to remove units: don't like em = don't make em)
Regarding the balance work they are doing. though it does feel like they are probing in the dark sometimes at least they are not giving up or making things easy for themselves (Ie: balance for pro only) congratz to them! (on a side note i hope ppl spitting at DK are as good at their jobs as he is at his, or at least have the same commitment)
Just to keep this post on topic, my opinion on next patch ( hopefully whine free).
-swarm host buff = good idea to find out how they can be used ( building snipe burowed unit with flying locust over chokes? anti lurker in late game? mid game harass). though keep it on PTR until figured out. no need to patch it into the game and break the game more. now one is asking for a speed patch! just a good patch
-libs: they feel broken right now in large numbers vs air cause of splash ( voidrays melt, vikings trade even ? corruptors wins vs them) but are fine against muta. has to go with thor buff.
-thor: if the units is designed as anti air single high damage now so be it. id love to see them back!
- cyclone: can't figure out what its gonna change to modify supply cost. the design is faulty not the cost
- collosi: need to be somewhere in between LOTV and HOTS as said before. liberator shoul/could be a counter to them in some way. or maybe make them more like the archon higher shield than life so EMP+ libs can walk all over them. love to see them back too! but no way as powerful as before. the nerf has brougth much more diversity to protoss play and that is GOOD.
- immortals: switch back to HOTS shield system ( you didnt sell LOTV with that modification no one cares if it disappears) coupled with a slight colo buff i'm thinking it would work. though this is obvioulsy a GM+ problem.
i feel it is a step forward for everything except cyclone. terran strat diversity need to be adressed ( though i have no idea how) but MMM for 5 years is plain boring.
On May 08 2016 06:10 Cloak wrote: If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
Of course that army is unstoppable if you don't have tempests.
Vikings destroy Tempests. Liberators can aggressively zone out any ground support for Tempests, Tempests too slow to reposition in time. Only retreating Storms can push back the aggression, but that's where solid Ghost micro comes into play and eventually Protoss runs out of HTs.
That is all about late game unit control problem than balance problem.I disagree with any suggestion which can effect terran late game vs P. Unless pro players prove i'm wrong about late game TvP.
The Liberator change is more for all phases of the game. I was just throwing out that statement because it's a common whine to say lategame Protoss is "unstoppable."
tempest 15 range just fucks up the game on so many levels in late-game lol. Carriers are also a joke if they are completed. Infact Carriers are even harder to deal with because the interceptors make it so that its way harder to micro vikings or the corrupters vs the capital ships.
Then 18 range Liberator must sound insane to you. Sextuple the base DPS (74) vs (12.7), half the cost. Liberators don't even need to reposition, just stagger themselves, and it's impossible for Protoss to engage them outside of Tempests. Turret spam handles Carriers pretty well.
Liberators have 14 range with the upgrade (9 cast range + 5 radius), and that's only at the farthest point in the circle.
On May 08 2016 06:10 Cloak wrote: If Immortals are going to get nerfed, then Liberators should get an Adept-style adjustment. Liberators are a clearly more OP ground presence. Can reduce their damage from 85 to 80 so they don't two shot Stalkers. And Protoss endgame is not unstoppable. A well played Ghost/Viking with 10-12 Liberators and then Turret spam is unstoppable.
Of course that army is unstoppable if you don't have tempests.
Vikings destroy Tempests. Liberators can aggressively zone out any ground support for Tempests, Tempests too slow to reposition in time. Only retreating Storms can push back the aggression, but that's where solid Ghost micro comes into play and eventually Protoss runs out of HTs.
That is all about late game unit control problem than balance problem.I disagree with any suggestion which can effect terran late game vs P. Unless pro players prove i'm wrong about late game TvP.
The Liberator change is more for all phases of the game. I was just throwing out that statement because it's a common whine to say lategame Protoss is "unstoppable."
tempest 15 range just fucks up the game on so many levels in late-game lol. Carriers are also a joke if they are completed. Infact Carriers are even harder to deal with because the interceptors make it so that its way harder to micro vikings or the corrupters vs the capital ships.
Then 18 range Liberator must sound insane to you. Sextuple the base DPS (74) vs (12.7), half the cost. Liberators don't even need to reposition, just stagger themselves, and it's impossible for Protoss to engage them outside of Tempests. Turret spam handles Carriers pretty well.
Liberators have 14 range with the upgrade (9 cast range + 5 radius), and that's only at the farthest point in the circle.
The game should be balanced ONLY AT PRO LEVEL, you can't balanced in on all levels, PRO LEVEL SHOULD ONLY BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION, and as far as i know tempest carrier ht is unbeatable on all levels. If someone watched polt vs naniwa game on stream (you can find vods of it i think unless you need to subscribe to watch them), polt had 7 bases vs naniwa 4 bases. He was not able to make army which could counter it. But i guess naniwa deserved a win, he outplayed polt cuz he get there.................................
On May 09 2016 07:02 Mojzii1 wrote: The game should be balanced ONLY AT PRO LEVEL, you can't balanced in on all levels, PRO LEVEL SHOULD ONLY BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION, and as far as i know tempest carrier ht is unbeatable on all levels. If someone watched polt vs naniwa game on stream (you can find vods of it i think unless you need to subscribe to watch them), polt had 7 bases vs naniwa 4 bases. He was not able to make army which could counter it. But i guess naniwa deserved a win, he outplayed polt cuz he get there.................................
Yes you can, if you do it right. If they only balance around pro players then there aren´t that many "normal" players left soon.
I have to agree with the guy 2 posts above yours. Ever think of that the Pro´s might be biased too because they live from it? Im sure there is bias among Pro Players too.
On May 09 2016 07:26 CheddarToss wrote: Watching Hydra v Neeb I understand why Colossus needs to get a buff. It's so that Zerg can't just get Banes and Hydras and a-move to victory.
no that's not the reason colossi should be buffed.
On May 09 2016 07:26 CheddarToss wrote: Watching Hydra v Neeb I understand why Colossus needs to get a buff. It's so that Zerg can't just get Banes and Hydras and a-move to victory.
no that's not the reason colossi should be buffed.
Well, at least we agree that they should be buffed.
On May 09 2016 07:26 CheddarToss wrote: Watching Hydra v Neeb I understand why Colossus needs to get a buff. It's so that Zerg can't just get Banes and Hydras and a-move to victory.
On May 09 2016 07:26 CheddarToss wrote: Watching Hydra v Neeb I understand why Colossus needs to get a buff. It's so that Zerg can't just get Banes and Hydras and a-move to victory.
no that's not the reason colossi should be buffed.
Well, at least we agree that they should be buffed.
They should be rather get totally removed and replaced by something, that does not make protoss playing stale, defensive and boring again. The heavy investment of colossus + their tendency to snowball with other colossus and "meatshield" made Protoss to what they have become and force the complete game into a wrong direction in all PvX Matchups. Never again.
On May 09 2016 07:26 CheddarToss wrote: Watching Hydra v Neeb I understand why Colossus needs to get a buff. It's so that Zerg can't just get Banes and Hydras and a-move to victory.
On May 09 2016 07:26 CheddarToss wrote: Watching Hydra v Neeb I understand why Colossus needs to get a buff. It's so that Zerg can't just get Banes and Hydras and a-move to victory.
no that's not the reason colossi should be buffed.
Well, at least we agree that they should be buffed.
They should be rather get totally removed and replaced by something, that does not make protoss playing stale, defensive and boring again. The heavy investment of colossus + their tendency to snowball with other colossus and "meatshield" made Protoss to what they have become and force the complete game into a wrong direction in all PvX Matchups. Never again.
1) Hydras hit waaaay earlier than storm. It's like people know nothing about the Protoss race and how long Protoss research takes because of old chrono, which equalized this deficit.
2) Fair enough. Then gateway units need a buff. But I guess that is also out of the question, because Protoss does not deserve a fair chance to win and because of the misguided view of large parts of the community that Protoss is even then OP, when PvZ winrate is at 45%?
On May 09 2016 07:26 CheddarToss wrote: Watching Hydra v Neeb I understand why Colossus needs to get a buff. It's so that Zerg can't just get Banes and Hydras and a-move to victory.
Like Storm never existed.
On May 09 2016 07:46 CheddarToss wrote:
On May 09 2016 07:41 Charoisaur wrote:
On May 09 2016 07:26 CheddarToss wrote: Watching Hydra v Neeb I understand why Colossus needs to get a buff. It's so that Zerg can't just get Banes and Hydras and a-move to victory.
no that's not the reason colossi should be buffed.
Well, at least we agree that they should be buffed.
They should be rather get totally removed and replaced by something, that does not make protoss playing stale, defensive and boring again. The heavy investment of colossus + their tendency to snowball with other colossus and "meatshield" made Protoss to what they have become and force the complete game into a wrong direction in all PvX Matchups. Never again.
1) Hydras hit waaaay earlier than storm. It's like people know nothing about the Protoss race and how long Protoss research takes because of old chrono, which equalized this deficit.
2) Fair enough. Then gateway units need a buff. But I guess that is also out of the question, because Protoss does not deserve a fair chance to win and because of the misguided view of large parts of the community that Protoss is even then OP, when PvZ winrate is at 45%?
1) By the time you're executing a strong Hydra/Baneling attack "waaaaay" before Storm is out you pretty much have to drone up very heavily with no punishment which I think is safe to say, was a mistake on the Protoss end. Foreign Protoss players like Neeb are (no disrespect intended they are obviously GM level players) not the highest caliber of players to make calls like, "Oh yea Neeb got bopped that's obviously imba" at all. I would never say the Immortal is imbalanced if I see it wrecking players like Firecake or Nerchio both of whom I'm big fans of, but I will say it's imbalanced if Zerg's like Dark or Soo are getting wrecked by it, that's a problem, the other is not, and the difference is obvious.
2) At least everyone see's the point of removing Colossus from the game, the unit just sucks, sure it's better if all units are viable but theres way better underused units to buff then the ultimate deathball unit. Buff the Stalker, buff the Infestor or Ghost, buff or change Cyclones, don't buff the damn Colossus.
On May 09 2016 07:26 CheddarToss wrote: Watching Hydra v Neeb I understand why Colossus needs to get a buff. It's so that Zerg can't just get Banes and Hydras and a-move to victory.
Like Storm never existed.
On May 09 2016 07:46 CheddarToss wrote:
On May 09 2016 07:41 Charoisaur wrote:
On May 09 2016 07:26 CheddarToss wrote: Watching Hydra v Neeb I understand why Colossus needs to get a buff. It's so that Zerg can't just get Banes and Hydras and a-move to victory.
no that's not the reason colossi should be buffed.
Well, at least we agree that they should be buffed.
They should be rather get totally removed and replaced by something, that does not make protoss playing stale, defensive and boring again. The heavy investment of colossus + their tendency to snowball with other colossus and "meatshield" made Protoss to what they have become and force the complete game into a wrong direction in all PvX Matchups. Never again.
1) Hydras hit waaaay earlier than storm. It's like people know nothing about the Protoss race and how long Protoss research takes because of old chrono, which equalized this deficit.
2) Fair enough. Then gateway units need a buff. But I guess that is also out of the question, because Protoss does not deserve a fair chance to win and because of the misguided view of large parts of the community that Protoss is even then OP, when PvZ winrate is at 45%?
In this specific match, Storm could have been a thing. Storm does not take much longer then Robo (Twilight) - RoboBay (Temp-Arch) - Range upgrade (Storm). Hydras might hit before storm, but so they do in Hydra-Bane or Hydra-Ling way before Colossus. Hydra Bane is not made to be countered by these 2 tec routes at the beginning. Also Hydra-Bane gets countered by ForceFields and a Neeb has shown that he is inferiour in this game and didnt played protoss to the fullest. Hydra Bane costs a large amount of gas, you cannot play Hydra-Ravager-Bane in numbers. Scouting Hydra Bane and thus playing sentrys in a decent number makes you winning this moments. But when you fail to scout the 3 base Hydra-Bane play, then you lose, yeah. Or when there are Broodlords on the map, you counter em with Void Rays and never spend the 350 gas for Storm tech... you lose. Thats nothing wrong with the balance, just with the way Neeb played this.
Its seriously stupid to take Balance approaches from a WCS Event and statistics that are leading larger parts from western online and offline events.
If you want to buff Protoss at a certain position at the moment, you will need to nerf the immortal at the same day. You will not agree, I know, the rest will.
And one dream that will never happen: "Buffed gateway units". 1/2 year of Stalker sentry and 3 month of adept prism ripped that dream forever and a day. You might hope for Upgrades in Temp-Arch for Zelots, but thats all Blizzard will ever do in that way.
People need to stop referencing Colossus of old. Thinking Colossus needs a buff does not equal advocating going back to those days. Nobody liked mass Colossus, not even Protoss players themselves. There are a million different ways to buff Colossus while still making it so they are not prone to be massed.
Right now Protoss has a dire lack of anti-light AoE in their arsenal and Colossus can easily be tweaked to fill this void. And no storm doesn't count, which is essentially tier 4 tech. Something like buffing Colossus range to 7 or 8, removing the range upgrade and giving them +light damage would make a lot of sense, giving Colossus a place in the mid-game vs. light army compositions but the lower range plus lower scaling on attack upgrades would make them a lot weaker in the late game than their WoL/HotS counterparts.
edit: This is more from a game design perspective. From a balance perspective Protoss players haven't really adjusted vs. Dark's ling/bane into broods playstyle yet.
On May 09 2016 07:26 CheddarToss wrote: Watching Hydra v Neeb I understand why Colossus needs to get a buff. It's so that Zerg can't just get Banes and Hydras and a-move to victory.
Like Storm never existed.
On May 09 2016 07:46 CheddarToss wrote:
On May 09 2016 07:41 Charoisaur wrote:
On May 09 2016 07:26 CheddarToss wrote: Watching Hydra v Neeb I understand why Colossus needs to get a buff. It's so that Zerg can't just get Banes and Hydras and a-move to victory.
no that's not the reason colossi should be buffed.
Well, at least we agree that they should be buffed.
They should be rather get totally removed and replaced by something, that does not make protoss playing stale, defensive and boring again. The heavy investment of colossus + their tendency to snowball with other colossus and "meatshield" made Protoss to what they have become and force the complete game into a wrong direction in all PvX Matchups. Never again.
1) Hydras hit waaaay earlier than storm. It's like people know nothing about the Protoss race and how long Protoss research takes because of old chrono, which equalized this deficit.
2) Fair enough. Then gateway units need a buff. But I guess that is also out of the question, because Protoss does not deserve a fair chance to win and because of the misguided view of large parts of the community that Protoss is even then OP, when PvZ winrate is at 45%?
1) By the time you're executing a strong Hydra/Baneling attack "waaaaay" before Storm is out you pretty much have to drone up very heavily with no punishment which I think is safe to say, was a mistake on the Protoss end. Foreign Protoss players like Neeb are (no disrespect intended they are obviously GM level players) not the highest caliber of players to make calls like, "Oh yea Neeb got bopped that's obviously imba" at all. I would never say the Immortal is imbalanced if I see it wrecking players like Firecake or Nerchio both of whom I'm big fans of, but I will say it's imbalanced if Zerg's like Dark or Soo are getting wrecked by it, that's a problem, the other is not, and the difference is obvious.
2) At least everyone see's the point of removing Colossus from the game, the unit just sucks, sure it's better if all units are viable but theres way better underused units to buff then the ultimate deathball unit. Buff the Stalker, buff the Infestor or Ghost, buff or change Cyclones, don't buff the damn Colossus.
edited-grammarT_T
1) Zest got wrecked by far inferior players, such as Snute and Departure. So according to your argument, Zerg is OP, right? And as for Storm, check again, it takes ages to get to Templar Archives and another eon to research Storm. It is the equivalent of Hive tech. So in what universe can you have it ready against mass Hydras with Banes? That's like suggesting to Zergs to make Broodlords to counter Blink all-ins.
2) I have waited for Protoss to get buffed since release of this bloody game. All the while all stats show that Protoss is in dire need of a buff. After all this time I really don't care what buff David will decide to give to Protoss. But a buff is needed, that much is certain.
@Clonester
I'm not referencing any specific match. Since Neeb didn't play Protoss to the fullest, how about Zest? Is he also a noob? Because last I checked he didn't fare or look any better vs. Snute and Departure. Two Zergs, which objectively are nowhere near his level. So if the best Protoss in the world can't beat 2nd tier Zerg players, what hope do other Protoss players have?
"Its seriously stupid to take Balance approaches from a WCS Event and statistics that are leading larger parts from western online and offline events."
No, it is not. And you know why? Because Koreans play on different maps! They essentially play a different game than the rest of the world. And if this game were balanced on ladder maps, Koreans would also start using them. If anything, referencing GSL results as proof of balance is wrong.
"If you want to buff Protoss at a certain position at the moment, you will need to nerf the immortal at the same day. You will not agree, I know, the rest will."
PvZ is at 46.5% this week, like so many weeks before. And these stats also include Korean games, which were played on more balanced maps. So in reality, on ladder maps, Protoss is even weaker. I don't see how any part of Protoss can be OP.
"And one dream that will never happen: "Buffed gateway units". 1/2 year of Stalker sentry and 3 month of adept prism ripped that dream forever and a day. You might hope for Upgrades in Temp-Arch for Zelots, but thats all Blizzard will ever do in that way."
Sadly I think you are right. David Kim will listen to anti-Protoss whine, to players who never stop complaining about how overpowered Protoss is, even when Protoss is clearly weaker than Zerg. One of those people is Nerchio. Never misses a thread to complain about Immortals, even though he wins vs most Protoss while playing only with the mouse. I guess he wants his job to be even easier than it already is.
If you buff Colossus range, then no one will make disruptor and make Colossus instead. Plus, we will get back to the HOTS/WOL days where toss can simply a-move to victory.
On May 09 2016 07:26 CheddarToss wrote: Watching Hydra v Neeb I understand why Colossus needs to get a buff. It's so that Zerg can't just get Banes and Hydras and a-move to victory.
Like Storm never existed.
On May 09 2016 07:46 CheddarToss wrote:
On May 09 2016 07:41 Charoisaur wrote:
On May 09 2016 07:26 CheddarToss wrote: Watching Hydra v Neeb I understand why Colossus needs to get a buff. It's so that Zerg can't just get Banes and Hydras and a-move to victory.
no that's not the reason colossi should be buffed.
Well, at least we agree that they should be buffed.
They should be rather get totally removed and replaced by something, that does not make protoss playing stale, defensive and boring again. The heavy investment of colossus + their tendency to snowball with other colossus and "meatshield" made Protoss to what they have become and force the complete game into a wrong direction in all PvX Matchups. Never again.
1) Hydras hit waaaay earlier than storm. It's like people know nothing about the Protoss race and how long Protoss research takes because of old chrono, which equalized this deficit.
2) Fair enough. Then gateway units need a buff. But I guess that is also out of the question, because Protoss does not deserve a fair chance to win and because of the misguided view of large parts of the community that Protoss is even then OP, when PvZ winrate is at 45%?
In this specific match, Storm could have been a thing. Storm does not take much longer then Robo (Twilight) - RoboBay (Temp-Arch) - Range upgrade (Storm). Hydras might hit before storm, but so they do in Hydra-Bane or Hydra-Ling way before Colossus. Hydra Bane is not made to be countered by these 2 tec routes at the beginning. Also Hydra-Bane gets countered by ForceFields and a Neeb has shown that he is inferiour in this game and didnt played protoss to the fullest. Hydra Bane costs a large amount of gas, you cannot play Hydra-Ravager-Bane in numbers. Scouting Hydra Bane and thus playing sentrys in a decent number makes you winning this moments. But when you fail to scout the 3 base Hydra-Bane play, then you lose, yeah. Or when there are Broodlords on the map, you counter em with Void Rays and never spend the 350 gas for Storm tech... you lose. Thats nothing wrong with the balance, just with the way Neeb played this.
Its seriously stupid to take Balance approaches from a WCS Event and statistics that are leading larger parts from western online and offline events.
If you want to buff Protoss at a certain position at the moment, you will need to nerf the immortal at the same day. You will not agree, I know, the rest will.
And one dream that will never happen: "Buffed gateway units". 1/2 year of Stalker sentry and 3 month of adept prism ripped that dream forever and a day. You might hope for Upgrades in Temp-Arch for Zelots, but thats all Blizzard will ever do in that way.
Storm doesn't seem very good at all against what Hydra was doing. If he saw storm, he would just morph lurkers, because contrary to popular belief, storm doesn't do that much damage. It has a radius of 1.5 (fungal is radius 2 for comparison). It does 80 damage over 4 seconds, if you don't move. 2 seconds is the most it would take someone to micro out, so they will usually only deal 40 max. The only thing not moving in a zerg army are lurkers, and they have 200 hp. That's 3 storms per lurker if they are spread correctly, and why you cannot efficiently beat lurkers with storm.
Please no colossus buff, it still sees some use in the game, and could very well find a place in the not too distant future if the meta shifts. As a zerg player, I miss the swarm host but since you rarely see dedicated mech play vs zerg, it's utility is questionable these days. With hive tech being so strong also, you probably don't even need a stronger swarm host.
As for the Immortal, seems strong in every pro Korean PvZ, wouldn't mind the old Immortal to be honest.
Something like buffing Colossus range to 7 or 8, removing the range upgrade and giving them +light damage would make a lot of sense, giving Colossus a place in the mid-game vs. light army compositions but the lower range plus lower scaling on attack upgrades would make them a lot weaker in the late game than their WoL/HotS counterparts.
I don't think that most people realize how much less damage colossus does compared to WOL and HOTS - it's around 1.5x - 1.55x lower against many targets when +3 attack and +3 armor are in play even though the cost in time, minerals, gas and supply is the same.
A small redesign into a reliable anti-light unit with some splash damage would be great, IMO - especially if you're talking about nerfing the immortal which is the core unit in PvZ that the entire meta is based around right now (right from the start of the game where you're often dropping a stargate to safely be able to play double robo immortal)
Colossus needs to be cheaper and much easier to get if its only for anti light aoe. Included range and slight dmg buff would help. If immo gets yet anothr nerf i'd even go far to say that old dmg and upgrades return as well.
As an old school toss player, id love to use toss again but zerg is so much easier to play and less punishing. Somehow the rotisserie chicken lib still hasnt had its ground dmg touched yet...very strange.
Colossi and Swarmhost are alike, in the sense that they are flawed by design. Nerf or buff can only make units viable or not, but do not change the fondamental design of the unit. I agree that Blizzard recognized this, because they changed the design of the swarmhost by making it a harass unit. However that did not work out either, so it does need to change again.
For the colossi I believe there are many options that would make it interesting, like changing his attack from horizontal to vertical, which would make it stronger to control choke point but weak in a deathball vs a concave, or limiting its range between 6 and 9 for example.
For the SwarmHost... Well as an harass option is not worth it, and as a core unit leads to boring play, I'd like to see the SH as a AA unit, the brewing something like scourge rather than locust, and remove parasite bomb for it.
And, come on, raise the supply cost of the tempest.
On May 09 2016 22:14 Vanadiel wrote: Colossi and Swarmhost are alike, in the sense that they are flawed by design. Nerf or buff can only make units viable or not, but do not change the fondamental design of the unit. I agree that Blizzard recognized this, because they changed the design of the swarmhost by making it a harass unit. However that did not work out either, so it does need to change again.
For the colossi I believe there are many options that would make it interesting, like changing his attack from horizontal to vertical, which would make it stronger to control choke point but weak in a deathball vs a concave, or limiting its range between 6 and 9 for example.
For the SwarmHost... Well as an harass option is not worth it, and as a core unit leads to boring play, I'd like to see the SH as a AA unit, the brewing something like scourge rather than locust, and remove parasite bomb for it.
And, come on, raise the supply cost of the tempest.
Colossus with vertical damage would make them more true to the war of the worlds movie too, I just rewatched it a couple weeks ago and I'm confident the lasers do indeed move away ("vertically") from the robot
On May 09 2016 23:09 coolmiyo wrote: i like david kim is more confident and he finally takes the command of the game, patching it no matter what people thinks.
even if some of the changes are not the best, u have to patch the game and see what happens.
if he doesnt act like this, the game will stay the same forever.
Yup.
Involving the community was the worst decision Blizzard has ever made.
On May 09 2016 23:09 coolmiyo wrote: i like david kim is more confident and he finally takes the command of the game, patching it no matter what people thinks.
even if some of the changes are not the best, u have to patch the game and see what happens.
if he doesnt act like this, the game will stay the same forever.
Yup.
Involving the community was the worst decision Blizzard has ever made.
Such a shortsighted point of view. Big companies like Valve and Riot also take plenty of feedback from the community and it is usually for the better. The difference? The other companies know how to filter the constructive criticism from the bad one. Blizzard is fucking awful at tacking any sort of criticism, constructive or not. If they listen to all the criticism of course you get these god awful patches where nothing makes any sense, but if they don't listen to any criticism at all the game never evolves. Right now I have no idea of which direction the game is going because of the super erratic way Blizzard patches, but it most certainly is not good.
Now stop blaming the community for Blizzard's design choices, its their job to not only listen to it, but also to filter the information.
On May 09 2016 23:09 coolmiyo wrote: i like david kim is more confident and he finally takes the command of the game, patching it no matter what people thinks.
even if some of the changes are not the best, u have to patch the game and see what happens.
if he doesnt act like this, the game will stay the same forever.
Yup.
Involving the community was the worst decision Blizzard has ever made.
Such a shortsighted point of view. Big companies like Valve and Riot also take plenty of feedback from the community and it is usually for the better. The difference? The other companies know how to filter the constructive criticism from the bad one. Blizzard is fucking awful at tacking any sort of criticism, constructive or not. If they listen to all the criticism of course you get these god awful patches where nothing makes any sense, but if they don't listen to any criticism at all the game never evolves. Right now I have no idea of which direction the game is going because of the super erratic way Blizzard patches, but it most certainly is not good.
Now stop blaming the community for Blizzard's design choices, its their job to not only listen to it, but also to filter the information.
Both dota and league keep making volvo/riot money. SC2 does what for Blizzard, maybe a SP mission pack? Possible monetization of the game through unit skins could help alot in that direction. Also, dota's spectator options put sc2's to shame. Maybe a sort of monetization could make Blizz throw some money at the game and give us spectator options similar to dota. This would also mean a larger team for balancing, because i'm pretty convinced the balance team of sc2 is pretty small atm.
It's funny about Blizzard, I always thought that once every fans bought the game, they would put the multiplayer as a F2P with skins to pay (and unlockable for free for those who purchased the game), now that they won't probably make much money with selling the game. Well, I guess it would be a bad signal for Overwatch though. :D
On May 09 2016 23:09 coolmiyo wrote: i like david kim is more confident and he finally takes the command of the game, patching it no matter what people thinks.
even if some of the changes are not the best, u have to patch the game and see what happens.
if he doesnt act like this, the game will stay the same forever.
Yup.
Involving the community was the worst decision Blizzard has ever made.
Such a shortsighted point of view. Big companies like Valve and Riot also take plenty of feedback from the community and it is usually for the better. The difference? The other companies know how to filter the constructive criticism from the bad one. Blizzard is fucking awful at tacking any sort of criticism, constructive or not. If they listen to all the criticism of course you get these god awful patches where nothing makes any sense, but if they don't listen to any criticism at all the game never evolves. Right now I have no idea of which direction the game is going because of the super erratic way Blizzard patches, but it most certainly is not good.
Now stop blaming the community for Blizzard's design choices, its their job to not only listen to it, but also to filter the information.
Both dota and league keep making volvo/riot money. SC2 does what for Blizzard, maybe a SP mission pack? Possible monetization of the game through unit skins could help alot in that direction. Also, dota's spectator options put sc2's to shame. Maybe a sort of monetization could make Blizz throw some money at the game and give us spectator options similar to dota. This would also mean a larger team for balancing, because i'm pretty convinced the balance team of sc2 is pretty small atm.
Most people that play DotA, League, Wot and any other free to play game never invest a cent. ALL SC2 players have invested at least 60$ if not 90 or 120 and more to fallow through mission packs. It is an investment up front and IMO this makes SC2 fans much more entitled to comment on Blizzards work in balance, design, etc. I personally feel like both HOTS and LOTV have failed me because they promised to fix and make mech viable and fun but they didn't.
That's why I referenced Hearthstone earlier, which is run by one of Blizzard's A teams. The colossus and swarm host are fundamentally bad designs that should've been removed from standard format. Hearthstone relegated some old cards to the wild format to reduce the bloat when they introduce new units.
SC2 has a very bloated roster full of overlapping units. Making every unit useful just results in very, very niche units that hard counter a very specific strategy.
On May 09 2016 23:09 coolmiyo wrote: i like david kim is more confident and he finally takes the command of the game, patching it no matter what people thinks.
even if some of the changes are not the best, u have to patch the game and see what happens.
if he doesnt act like this, the game will stay the same forever.
Yup.
Involving the community was the worst decision Blizzard has ever made.
Such a shortsighted point of view. Big companies like Valve and Riot also take plenty of feedback from the community and it is usually for the better. The difference? The other companies know how to filter the constructive criticism from the bad one. Blizzard is fucking awful at tacking any sort of criticism, constructive or not. If they listen to all the criticism of course you get these god awful patches where nothing makes any sense, but if they don't listen to any criticism at all the game never evolves. Right now I have no idea of which direction the game is going because of the super erratic way Blizzard patches, but it most certainly is not good.
Now stop blaming the community for Blizzard's design choices, its their job to not only listen to it, but also to filter the information.
Both dota and league keep making volvo/riot money. SC2 does what for Blizzard, maybe a SP mission pack? Possible monetization of the game through unit skins could help alot in that direction. Also, dota's spectator options put sc2's to shame. Maybe a sort of monetization could make Blizz throw some money at the game and give us spectator options similar to dota. This would also mean a larger team for balancing, because i'm pretty convinced the balance team of sc2 is pretty small atm.
Most people that play DotA, League, Wot and any other free to play game never invest a cent. ALL SC2 players have invested at least 60$ if not 90 or 120 and more to fallow through mission packs. It is an investment up front and IMO this makes SC2 fans much more entitled to comment on Blizzards work in balance, design, etc. I personally feel like both HOTS and LOTV have failed me because they promised to fix and make mech viable and fun but they didn't.
That's even worse then. A game that markets itself as an e-sport and costs 40 euros has such inferior implementation of spectating than a free to play game. If SC2 had something similar to DOTA TV, where you can watch high-level ongoing matches or tournaments ingame, I bet the game wouldn't have declined as much. For a game that markets itself as an esport, SC2 really doesn't have that many 'esport' features.
On May 09 2016 23:09 coolmiyo wrote: i like david kim is more confident and he finally takes the command of the game, patching it no matter what people thinks.
even if some of the changes are not the best, u have to patch the game and see what happens.
if he doesnt act like this, the game will stay the same forever.
Yup.
Involving the community was the worst decision Blizzard has ever made.
Such a shortsighted point of view. Big companies like Valve and Riot also take plenty of feedback from the community and it is usually for the better. The difference? The other companies know how to filter the constructive criticism from the bad one. Blizzard is fucking awful at tacking any sort of criticism, constructive or not. If they listen to all the criticism of course you get these god awful patches where nothing makes any sense, but if they don't listen to any criticism at all the game never evolves. Right now I have no idea of which direction the game is going because of the super erratic way Blizzard patches, but it most certainly is not good.
Now stop blaming the community for Blizzard's design choices, its their job to not only listen to it, but also to filter the information.
Both dota and league keep making volvo/riot money. SC2 does what for Blizzard, maybe a SP mission pack? Possible monetization of the game through unit skins could help alot in that direction. Also, dota's spectator options put sc2's to shame. Maybe a sort of monetization could make Blizz throw some money at the game and give us spectator options similar to dota. This would also mean a larger team for balancing, because i'm pretty convinced the balance team of sc2 is pretty small atm.
Most people that play DotA, League, Wot and any other free to play game never invest a cent. ALL SC2 players have invested at least 60$ if not 90 or 120 and more to fallow through mission packs. It is an investment up front and IMO this makes SC2 fans much more entitled to comment on Blizzards work in balance, design, etc. I personally feel like both HOTS and LOTV have failed me because they promised to fix and make mech viable and fun but they didn't.
That's even worse then. A game that markets itself as an e-sport and costs 40 euros has such inferior implementation of spectating than a free to play game. If SC2 had something similar to DOTA TV, where you can watch high-level ongoing matches or tournaments ingame, I bet the game wouldn't have declined as much. For a game that markets itself as an esport, SC2 really doesn't have that many 'esport' features.
I know, we barely got chat and many would argue it's not very good. Frankly, the lack of some "esport" features is indefensible, along with some of the failures and broken promises. But SC2 is no exception, Diablo had the same thing as did WoW. It's really Heartstone that is the shining beacon for Blizzard. I don't understand what happened with them and why they have become so disconnected from their own fanbase. That's how i see it anyway.
On May 10 2016 00:47 andrewlt wrote: That's why I referenced Hearthstone earlier, which is run by one of Blizzard's A teams. The colossus and swarm host are fundamentally bad designs that should've been removed from standard format. Hearthstone relegated some old cards to the wild format to reduce the bloat when they introduce new units.
SC2 has a very bloated roster full of overlapping units. Making every unit useful just results in very, very niche units that hard counter a very specific strategy.
it's pretty clear they didn't fully plan out the expansions. Like, they knew they wanted 2 expansions so they could milk Starcraft for all its commercial value, but they didn't have a plan for the actual game. They just knew they had to have new units because otherwise sales would suffer. So the game got polluted with units like widow mines, mothership cores, swarm hosts, hellbats etc. There were a few good new units here and there, but not enough to support 2 expansions.
This is a pattern in League of Legends and Hearthstone too. Game balance is constantly being worsened by new additions. Counter-Strike avoids the whole issue by monetizing around skins and mission packs instead.
Colossus - Would rather then Disruptor get worked on, it's infinitely more interesting to watch and play against then the Colossus.
.
The Disruptor is literally disruptive to Protoss. It requires so much micro that it means you can't micro all the other casters Protoss has. Also, for it to be effective versus certain units, it can't do friendly fire. It is the reason why Ling/Bane is working so well now, because without the Colossus Protoss has limited AOE options in the mid game to fight it.
Finally, the Disruptor is more effective against Roaches and slower moving armored units than faster moving light units, which is where the Colossus shined. And Protoss already has the Immortal to counter armored units. So yeah...
The Disruptor is a very poorly designed unit, it overlaps with other units, it doesn't replace the Colossus at all.
Colossus - Would rather then Disruptor get worked on, it's infinitely more interesting to watch and play against then the Colossus.
.
The Disruptor is literally disruptive to Protoss. It requires so much micro that it means you can't micro all the other casters Protoss has. Also, for it to be effective versus certain units, it can't do friendly fire. It is the reason why Ling/Bane is working so well now, because without the Colossus Protoss has limited AOE options in the mid game to fight it.
No it means that you can't micro the other casters. Micro-ing the disruptors perfectly and the army at the same time is what set apart Zest from every other protoss player in the world. Micro-ing the disruptors *almost perfectly and the army at the same time is what set apart Dear from every other protoss -except Zest- player in the world.
I mean, isn't it what we wanted and asked over the last five years? A game riche, complexe and impossible to master really perfectly that when someone get close you can truly appreciate the depth of his skill and see how that player can dominate the game?
Colossus - Would rather then Disruptor get worked on, it's infinitely more interesting to watch and play against then the Colossus.
.
The Disruptor is literally disruptive to Protoss. It requires so much micro that it means you can't micro all the other casters Protoss has. Also, for it to be effective versus certain units, it can't do friendly fire. It is the reason why Ling/Bane is working so well now, because without the Colossus Protoss has limited AOE options in the mid game to fight it.
No it means that you can't micro the other casters. Micro-ing the disruptors perfectly and the army at the same time is what set apart Zest from every other protoss player in the world. Micro-ing the disruptors *almost perfectly and the army at the same time is what set apart Dear from every other protoss -except Zest- player in the world.
I mean, isn't it what we wanted and asked over the last five years? A game riche, complexe and impossible to master really perfectly that when someone get close you can truly appreciate the depth of his skill and see how that player can dominate the game?
These complexities are also what are allowing more foreigners to compete with Koreans. With more areas to excel, there's more areas to be weak in. It's making the game more competitive.
Looking at Patch 3.3 it seems like Blizzard is indeed putting work and money in SC2. If there are major problems with 1v1 multiplayer, and there are for me, it's not down to money but to the people doing the design, balance and vision.
thats why I don´t understand the argument that SC II and BW are completely different games that always comes up, when they are actually quite similar in some designs.
thats why I don´t understand the argument that SC II and BW are completely different games that always comes up, when they are actually quite similar in some designs.
The argument comes from people that never played BW much. I've seen this attitude with other games and gamers like Morrowind vs Oblivion/Skyrim. People hate hearing how the things they did not have the chance to enjoy might be better then the once they do. It's an emotional thing, not a rational one. Best to ignore them if no actual arguments are given.
thats why I don´t understand the argument that SC II and BW are completely different games that always comes up, when they are actually quite similar in some designs.
The argument comes from people that never played BW much. I've seen this attitude with other games and gamers like Morrowind vs Oblivion/Skyrim. People hate hearing how the things they did not have the chance to enjoy might be better then the once they do. It's an emotional thing, not a rational one. Best to ignore them if no actual arguments are given.
This might be true. But I didn´t played much BW either (at least competitive). I got into it when SC II was still in Beta. Was searching for a new RTS game when EA ruined C&C with the terrible 4th installment and found a gameplay video of SC II. That interested me so much that I gave BW a shot and thought it was awesome (after I found out how SC works).
SC II is great too but it needs more attention to be more refined. But it also annoys me that I can´t play it properly right now because my PC sucks.
thats why I don´t understand the argument that SC II and BW are completely different games that always comes up, when they are actually quite similar in some designs.
The argument comes from people that never played BW much. I've seen this attitude with other games and gamers like Morrowind vs Oblivion/Skyrim. People hate hearing how the things they did not have the chance to enjoy might be better then the once they do. It's an emotional thing, not a rational one. Best to ignore them if no actual arguments are given.
This might be true. But I didn´t played much BW either (at least competitive). I got into it when SC II was still in Beta. Was searching for a new RTS game when EA ruined C&C with the terrible 4th installment and found a gameplay video of SC II. That interested me so much that I gave BW a shot and thought it was awesome (after I found out how SC works).
SC II is great too but it needs more attention to be more refined. But it also annoys me that I can´t play it properly right now because my PC sucks.
You might be more objective then others but a lot of people get very emotionally attached to what they like and can't stand to hear how something before might have been better. They take it personal.
I'll never forget Dustin Browder responding to a question comparing BW and SC2, on death balls i think, where his critical thinking was nullified by ego with the response "go play BW, great game". As if it was him against the past rather then making SC2 as best as it can be.
Buy a new CPU, Skylake is not expensive and you don't need a super GPU, unless you are a filthy casual that wants max graphics :p
Even if you want to max graphics the lowest end reasonable GPU's like a gtx950 are fine, leaving you CPU-limited with the fastest CPU's during periods of high stress like lategame fights.
There's also practically no scaling past 2 cores for sc2, so no need to spend a lot on CPU as long as it has high core performance. The main reason for using a 6600k instead of a skylake i3 is because of the unlocked overclock clock speeds for CPU core and RAM as they both help.
I have a proposal for the colossus... change it back to this: www.youtube.com
A continuous beam, that should be good vs clumped units and groups of low hp units, due to lack the of overkill. If it shoots while walking but has low dps, it would be a unique unit which I personally would love to use.
All the collosus "redesign" suggestions are basically 1A powerful deathball units. No thank you. Nerfing the collosus was the right decision LoTV has made. Just remove the unit which has marred WoL and HotS with its existence.
The colossus design has always been high tech, consistent splash damage that requires support to function well. That's not neccesarily a bad design, it was just not implemented particularly well
The cliff-walking idea was cool but in practice it works pretty badly. They're too expensive to be used in a harassment role so all they do is weaken high ground advantage by granting vision. Moreover their attack particles ignore cliffs/collision unlike reavers or disruptors, further weakening high ground advantage. They're also the cause of protoss deathballs, and they make protoss look like a War of the Worlds ripoff instead of a design with its own identity. It's hard to find anything positive about colossus.
My own two cents, I really like the Colossus and if it's a slight buff then I'm okay with it. People seems to think Blizz wants to bring the Colossus back to its HotS version, I believe Blizz doesn't want that. it would be cool to see the Colossus in competitive games again and but just a misclick from the players
On May 10 2016 23:25 NinjaToss wrote: My own two cents, I really like the Colossus and if it's a slight buff then I'm okay with it. People seems to think Blizz wants to bring the Colossus back to its HotS version, I believe Blizz doesn't want that.
Well seeing how their idea was to increase the dps, I'm not so sure. Either the change is so slight that it isn't really a buff, or they change basically back to HotS levels.
High dps against potentially multiple targets from range is why the colossus has been too powerful in the past. Unless it is changed so that it is not as effective against late game compositions, it will be continue to be a lategame oriented, deathballish unit. I think reducing the base damage and adding +light damage is the best way to do this, as lategame armies tend to be composed primarily of armored units (or at least, like the ghost, neither armored nor light). It doesn't fit 100% (a lot of zergs still use hydras for anti-air in the later stages of the game, although ideally they would be switching to queens) but I don't see a better way. Plus, if you are nerfing the immortal you really, really need to give protoss a unit that can hold off ling/bane/hydra timings.
Well seeing how their idea was to increase the dps, I'm not so sure. Either the change is so slight that it isn't really a buff, or they change basically back to HotS levels.
Maybe you don't realize how substantial the nerfs were. The damage wasn't just lowered, the upgrade scaling was halved as well.
Pre-legacy = 15 damage + 2*3 (attack upgrades) for 21 damage at +3 attack and then take off 3-4 for armor with enemy at +3 armor. Final damage = 17-18.
Legacy = 12 damage +3 (attack upgrades) for 15 damage at +3 attack and then take off 3-4 for armor with enemy at +3 armor. Final damage is 11-12.
That's a 1.5x - 1.55x nerf in those conditions with zero compensation related to the unit directly. You also have to keep in mind that chronoboost was heavily nerfed and things like upgrade and tech timings for half of the protoss race are still built around the old economy and old chronoboost - colossus play feels that a lot.
With no upgrades in play, the nerf is 1.25x - 1.27x by raw damage.
High dps against potentially multiple targets from range is why the colossus has been too powerful in the past.
It did full damage to all units at range 9 and liberators, lurkers and ravagers were not in the game. I also think that making a portion of the damage anti-light only would help with that, less of a unit that you want against anything in a high supply army just because it does a lot of splash damage.
I'm not a fan of the WOL+HOTS colossus - if we're balancing around some powerful AOE being in the game (like disruptor) i'd like to have the best unit designs possible.
A default-8-range, 1.15x rate-of-fire buffed colossus would be way way better in the midgame (a lot more than merely noticable) but still a shadow of what the WOL+HOTS Colossi were before you're supply capped or at +3 attack. I don't even think that going that far would be neccesary, it's just an example of what you could do. You could even make it cost 8 supply if there's any worry about its role in an army that's approxing max supply
Another option that blizz could use to redesign the collosus is some sort of hazard field type attack. By making the hazard fields not stack, it provides natural mechanic that disincentivizes massing. You could also make the hazard field targetable (perhaps with a horizontal and vertical line option), which would IMO create some interesting engagement dynamics with army positioning as well as synergize with force fields (imagine the clutch play potential here!).
I really wish they would just fix the Disruptor and make it the go to Robotics splash unit and just be done with the Colossus, it just adds an extremely boring and a move element to the game, this game already has sooo many no skill a move units that are almost always extremely strong.
Chargelots.. Immortals.. Ultralisks.. Hellbats.. Thors..(strong is debatable for this one definitely) Colossus.. Carriers.. Void Rays.. Corruptors..
Literally the last thing this game needs is more a move units, buff units that take skill to use and differentiate and make them useful for what the race is struggling against. If Protoss is struggling against ling/bling compositions but wrecking armored comps then tone the Immortal down while toning the Disruptor up, it's really not as complex as David likes to make it sound.
Also, can we have all the old proleague maps? I'd kill to have King Sejong Station and Overgrowth back in the game, those maps absolutely poop all over maps like Prion and Ulrena.
On May 11 2016 02:29 Beelzebub1 wrote: I really wish they would just fix the Disruptor and make it the go to Robotics splash unit and just be done with the Colossus, it just adds an extremely boring and a move element to the game, this game already has sooo many no skill a move units that are almost always extremely strong.
It can't be fixed because it is a poor design that doesn't replace the Colossus.
As I said earlier in response to you, for it to be effective versus certain units that the Colossus was effective versus, it can't do friendly fire. It is the reason why Ling/Bane is working so well now, because without the Colossus Protoss has limited AOE options in the mid game to fight it, and no Protoss is going to use the Disruptor against Lings that are attacking their own units. I wouldn't be surprised if Zealot heavy PvP builds become common in the future, because the Disruptor won't be effective versus Chargelots either (in fact, I'm calling that right now if the Colossus doesn't get a buff).
Finally, the Disruptor is more effective against Roaches and slower moving armored units than faster moving light units, which is where the Colossus shined. And Protoss already has the Immortal to counter armored units... so yeah...
The Disruptor is a very poorly designed unit, it overlaps with other units and it doesn't replace the Colossus at all. Right now people are realizing the gaping hole the Colossus has left, and that is why Ling/Bane is working.
Colossus - Would rather then Disruptor get worked on, it's infinitely more interesting to watch and play against then the Colossus.
.
The Disruptor is literally disruptive to Protoss. It requires so much micro that it means you can't micro all the other casters Protoss has. Also, for it to be effective versus certain units, it can't do friendly fire. It is the reason why Ling/Bane is working so well now, because without the Colossus Protoss has limited AOE options in the mid game to fight it.
No it means that you can't micro the other casters. Micro-ing the disruptors perfectly and the army at the same time is what set apart Zest from every other protoss player in the world. Micro-ing the disruptors *almost perfectly and the army at the same time is what set apart Dear from every other protoss -except Zest- player in the world.
I mean, isn't it what we wanted and asked over the last five years? A game riche, complexe and impossible to master really perfectly that when someone get close you can truly appreciate the depth of his skill and see how that player can dominate the game?
Well I don't agree that aiming shots is the way to get a rich complex RTS game, that is more for a MOBA...but that is a matter of opinion.
As to the first point I think I misstated myself. The Disruptor doesn't require that much micro individually that is overwhelming, but when put with all the other caster units Protoss, it is impossible and I have to see any Protoss use them all close perfectly. Please link a video of near perfect play if you got one, where a player is microing Sentries, Disruptors, Stalkers, the MSC, High Templars, Disruptors and Phoenixes in unison (or at least 6 of 7 of those units).
Every Protoss player, no matter how fast they are, must spend time microing a Disruptor. And that time cannot be used to cast other spells. That is how the game works. And at every level, that matters, because even at the highest levels it means a Terran player splitting drops across the map will be that more effective against a Disruptor versus a Colossus.
That is a fact. It doesn't matter if you are Dear or Zest or me. Unless you are cheating, you can't do two things at once.
And if people could micro all the casters effectively, Archon/Chargelot/Immortal wouldn't be the go-to composition versus Zerg at the top and in Archon mode! It is the result of the spaghettification of Starcraft that TheDwf warned us about.
On May 11 2016 02:29 Beelzebub1 wrote: I really wish they would just fix the Disruptor and make it the go to Robotics splash unit and just be done with the Colossus, it just adds an extremely boring and a move element to the game, this game already has sooo many no skill a move units that are almost always extremely strong.
It can't be fixed because it is a poor design that doesn't replace the Colossus.
As I said earlier in response to you, for it to be effective versus certain units that the Colossus was effective versus, it can't do friendly fire. It is the reason why Ling/Bane is working so well now, because without the Colossus Protoss has limited AOE options in the mid game to fight it, and no Protoss is going to use the Disruptor against Lings that are attacking their own units. I wouldn't be surprised if Zealot heavy PvP builds become common in the future, because the Disruptor won't be effective versus Chargelots either (in fact, I'm calling that right now if the Colossus doesn't get a buff).
Finally, the Disruptor is more effective against Roaches and slower moving armored units than faster moving light units, which is where the Colossus shined. And Protoss already has the Immortal to counter armored units... so yeah...
The Disruptor is a very poorly designed unit, it overlaps with other units and it doesn't replace the Colossus at all. Right now people are realizing the gaping hole the Colossus has left, and that is why Ling/Bane is working.
Colossus - Would rather then Disruptor get worked on, it's infinitely more interesting to watch and play against then the Colossus.
.
The Disruptor is literally disruptive to Protoss. It requires so much micro that it means you can't micro all the other casters Protoss has. Also, for it to be effective versus certain units, it can't do friendly fire. It is the reason why Ling/Bane is working so well now, because without the Colossus Protoss has limited AOE options in the mid game to fight it.
No it means that you can't micro the other casters. Micro-ing the disruptors perfectly and the army at the same time is what set apart Zest from every other protoss player in the world. Micro-ing the disruptors *almost perfectly and the army at the same time is what set apart Dear from every other protoss -except Zest- player in the world.
I mean, isn't it what we wanted and asked over the last five years? A game riche, complexe and impossible to master really perfectly that when someone get close you can truly appreciate the depth of his skill and see how that player can dominate the game?
Well I don't agree that aiming shots is the way to get a rich complex RTS game, that is more for a MOBA...but that is a matter of opinion.
As to the first point I think I misstated myself. The Disruptor doesn't require that much micro individually, but when put with all the other caster units Protoss, it is impossible and I have to see any Protoss use them all close perfectly (please link a video of near perfect play if you got one).
Every Protoss player, no matter how fast they are, must spend time microing a Disruptor. And that time cannot be used to cast other spells. That is how the game works. And at every level, that matters, because even at the highest levels it means a Terran player splitting drops across the map will be that more effective against a Disruptor versus a Colossus.
That is a fact. It doesn't matter if you are Dear or Zest or me. Unless you are cheating, you can't do two things at once.
And if people could micro all the casters effectively, Archon/Chargelot/Immortal wouldn't be the go-to composition versus Zerg at the top. It is the result of the spaghettification of Starcraft that TheDwf warned us about.
Were you responding to me about friendly fire? lol I guess I've seen the Disruptor used so few times that I didn't even realize it did friendly fire?
That is just flat out retarded, maybe they could at least try to remove friendly fire to see if it makes any difference in it's viability?
I don't know, I'd rather the design team just swallow their pride, make a bold move and say, "Hey, the Disruptor is really bad and no matter how much it get's buffed or nerfed it's going to be bad, were going to put in the Reaver for a test map and really get alot of feedback on it" or something along those lines.
this game already has sooo many no skill a move units that are almost always extremely strong.
Chargelots.. Immortals.. Ultralisks.. Hellbats.. Thors..(strong is debatable for this one definitely) Colossus.. Carriers.. Void Rays.. Corruptors..
You forgot zergling, roach, hydralisk in there. They're even more simplistic than chargelots, immortals & void rays because they don't have activate abilities.
I don't think that the disruptor turned out particularly badly but it's definately one of the hardest units in the game to control and use and has some weaknesses that the colossus did not have - mainly the friendly fire (enemy gets on top of your stuff? Can't shoot yourself..) and the way that it's highly effective against slow units but cannot reliably hit fast units like zerglings and to some extent stimmed marines etc.
this game already has sooo many no skill a move units that are almost always extremely strong.
Chargelots.. Immortals.. Ultralisks.. Hellbats.. Thors..(strong is debatable for this one definitely) Colossus.. Carriers.. Void Rays.. Corruptors..
You forgot zergling, roach, hydralisk in there. They're even more simplistic than chargelots, immortals & void rays because they don't have activate abilities.
I don't think that the disruptor turned out particularly badly but it's definately one of the hardest units in the game to control and use and has some weaknesses that the colossus did not have - mainly the friendly fire (enemy gets on top of your stuff? Can't shoot yourself..) and the way that it's highly effective against slow units but cannot reliably hit fast units like zerglings and to some extent stimmed marines etc.
That's a falsity, at least compared to chargelots. You have to make your own concave with hydra and roaches, chargelots micro themselves and firm their own concave. Try a moving roaches and hydra and watch them ball up with half of the army just squirming around not doing anything, a move chargelots and they all connect and engage.
this game already has sooo many no skill a move units that are almost always extremely strong.
Chargelots.. Immortals.. Ultralisks.. Hellbats.. Thors..(strong is debatable for this one definitely) Colossus.. Carriers.. Void Rays.. Corruptors..
You forgot zergling, roach, hydralisk in there. They're even more simplistic than chargelots, immortals & void rays because they don't have activate abilities.
I don't think that the disruptor turned out particularly badly but it's definately one of the hardest units in the game to control and use and has some weaknesses that the colossus did not have - mainly the friendly fire (enemy gets on top of your stuff? Can't shoot yourself..) and the way that it's highly effective against slow units but cannot reliably hit fast units like zerglings and to some extent stimmed marines etc.
That's a falsity, at least compared to chargelots. You have to make your own concave with hydra and roaches, chargelots micro themselves and firm their own concave. Try a moving roaches and hydra and watch them ball up with half of the army just squirming around not doing anything, a move chargelots and they all connect and engage.
And ball up? You need to control carefully to allow for adequate surface area. It's at least as challenging as hydralisk control
On May 08 2016 05:00 WhaleOFaTALE1 wrote: All this collosus hate. It is a fairly unique unit and it needs some love. This coming from a masters terran. People say it is designed horrible /just a deathball unit. Please freaking tell me how it is designed ANY differently from a thor/ultra/immortal in that regard. They all wreck ground and thats what they are meant to do. I think it is arguablly a more onteresting unit then the thor (with cliff walk and being able to be hit by air)
I'll break it down why the colossus is a horribly designed unit in a fairly easy to get format. 1st The colossus is a long range fighting/siege unit. 2nd As a range unit it has far more range then the standard armies at no inherit drawback like, fragility or mobility. 3rd As a siege unit the colossus doesn't have any mobility issues, in fact it its extremely versatile, able to move in between shots, over your own units and even up and down cliffs. 4th Due to its characteristics the colossus has extremely few ground based counters and the most reliable counters come from the air in the form of vikings and corruptors. 5th Due to the need to have strong counters to the colossus both terran and zerg air units were heavily influenced, terran by having vikings be extremely long range and anti-armored, corruptors by making them durable with anti-massive. 6th Due to this design direction air vs air dynamics for all races is skewed and borring, instead of having dynamic air vs air wars like we had in BW with the old Wraith vs Muta/Scourge or Corsair/Scout vs Muta/Scourge, we're reduced to having clumps of slow moving and uninteresting air units.
So, not only is the colossus a badly designed unit, but it also has the dubious honor of warping the entire design of a entire class of units around it, with horrible consequences if I may add.
LotV TvP/PvT may be in a weird place from a few points of view, but without a doubt it is orders of magnitude better now that the colossus doesn't see any play any more. We actually have interesting dynamics of armies posturing around the maps, being active, looking for openings, forcing errors with faints and jukes etc. The current dynamics of bio vs disruptors is also way better, while the disruptor can be incredibly punishing and maybe downright broken in a lot of situations, it still creates unit interactions and considerations that are orders of magnitude better than bio vs colossus.
Against disruptors micro matters, you can run, split or lift your armies to safety. Against disruptors terrain matters, you can actually use the fact that the disruptors don't shoot up or down cliffs to maneuver around the army and attack locations in ways you could never dream of vs colossus.
No, the colossus deserves no love, it deserves to be deleted from the game permanently, its wrought nothing but misery through its existence.
You are definitely wrong about one thing. The Colossus was never designed to be hit by air units. Blizzard only introduced a patch near the end of the WoL Beta that allowed air units to target the COlossus. THis was well after the roles/statistics of the air units were established.
this game already has sooo many no skill a move units that are almost always extremely strong.
Chargelots.. Immortals.. Ultralisks.. Hellbats.. Thors..(strong is debatable for this one definitely) Colossus.. Carriers.. Void Rays.. Corruptors..
You forgot zergling, roach, hydralisk in there. They're even more simplistic than chargelots, immortals & void rays because they don't have activate abilities.
I don't think that the disruptor turned out particularly badly but it's definately one of the hardest units in the game to control and use and has some weaknesses that the colossus did not have - mainly the friendly fire (enemy gets on top of your stuff? Can't shoot yourself..) and the way that it's highly effective against slow units but cannot reliably hit fast units like zerglings and to some extent stimmed marines etc.
That's a falsity, at least compared to chargelots. You have to make your own concave with hydra and roaches, chargelots micro themselves and firm their own concave. Try a moving roaches and hydra and watch them ball up with half of the army just squirming around not doing anything, a move chargelots and they all connect and engage.
This is false. Chargelots do not form their own concave any more than any other melee unit in SC2. You might as well make the same baseless example over Ultras and Zerglings. All of these units will run headlong 1 at a time into the opponents army depending on the angle of the engagement.
EPT
if they mix it with disuptor. Its gonna sux in team games :s
