Thor changes We received a lot of feedback regarding the Thor changes, especially from our Chinese community, in that this change can be seen as a nerf. We totally agree with the suggestion from the CN region to bring back the mode switch on the Thor while keeping the current, stronger numbers for the single target mode. We will make this change in the test map asap.
We also do see the feedback that the current damage buff is not enough. If this is the case, we can continue moving in small steps to continue tweaking it up as needed.
Immortal Barrier change This seems to be a solid change. Because it only affects the such short duration of the ability being up, we believe this is a solid targeted change to help reduce the effectiveness of Immortals slightly per pro player feedback.
Colossus change As expected, this one looks to be a fairly small increase in Colossus effectiveness. Because our main goal with this change is to help out non pro players slightly, while having it be a small change at the pro level, we believe we can make this move as a first step and see how it goes.
Liberator change We definitely agree with many players in that the change may have been slightly too much, so we would like to go from 4 +3light to 5+2light in tomorrow's update in order to test a softer version of this change.
Cyclone changes This change looks to be solid at the moment, and we can start publically testing this in the next version as well.
Swarm Host changes We saw a lot of mixed feedback for these changes, but our thought is that we should go forward with a change here to locate how the current role of the unit is. However, we do agree that we should move in smaller steps, so instead of reducing the cost to 150/75 in one go, we wanted to test changing it to 150/100 in tomorrow's test map.
Overall, the direction of the changes appears to be good, so let’s work on fine tuning the specific numbers so that we can aim for an update to the test map as early as tomorrow, and attempt to make a balance update to the live game towards the end of this month. Thank you.
We totally agree with the suggestion from the CN region to bring back the mode switch on the Thor while keeping the current, stronger numbers for the single target mode
Everybody has been suggesting this since it was removed - I've seen it posted again and again and again and again on TL, reddit and other communities. It's not clear why it was removed in the first place
We definitely agree with many players in that the change may have been slightly too much, so we would like to go from 4 +3light to 5+2light in tomorrow's update in order to test a softer version of this change.
Pretty nice. If AA is being adjusted rather than AG (lib is very good all-round unit atm) then 5+2 isn't that bad.
Since corruptors have 2 base armor, hitting for 5(-2) instead of 4(-2) means doing 1.5x more damage through the armor. That's probably the unit interaction that it affects the most.
changes seem to be good. cant rly tell, how powerfull the lib AA now is. the swarm host is still a lost unit. it could cost 25/25 and still would be just a rly bad unit. i think a cost reduction isnt the right way to fix this unit..
C'mon the Thor does not need two useless anti air attacks, just give it one solid option, or some ability to empower it's anti air functionality. Terran already have too many overlapping anti air attacks.
He seems to listen more to the community which is good but I wonder why he still doesn't adress tankivacs, 4 supply tempests and 8 armor ultras which are the biggest problems in the game. Liberator range and parasitic bomb should also be adressed/removed
what about adepts? adept harrass is also to strong imo. the shade ability doesnt punish the toss in any way, its basicly a free scout, where the opponent cant do anything about it and also provides an option to set up a rly strong harrass
On May 13 2016 06:21 DalaiiLameR wrote: what about adepts? adept harrass is also to strong imo. the shade ability doesnt punish the toss in any way, its basicly a free scout, where the opponent cant do anything about it and also provides an option to set up a rly strong harrass
Yeah adept harass is absurdly strong but I don't really see a way to reduce their harassment potential without making them completely useless.
one solution would come to my mind - just take them the ability, to shade through units and it would be fine. the opponent could block the scouting, if he microes correctly and fast enough, while the shade still would be a good scout/harrass option.
On May 13 2016 06:21 DalaiiLameR wrote: what about adepts? adept harrass is also to strong imo. the shade ability doesnt punish the toss in any way, its basicly a free scout, where the opponent cant do anything about it and also provides an option to set up a rly strong harrass
Yeah adept harass is absurdly strong but I don't really see a way to reduce their harassment potential without making them completely useless.
Adept harass is strong but that's just what happens when you have respectable t1 units.
Stimmed marine harass & zergling runbys are very dangerous too and current meta has baneling drops used very often against protoss which can kill 15 probes in 1 second if you're not looking at the minimap when speed overlord comes in.
On May 13 2016 06:21 DalaiiLameR wrote: what about adepts? adept harrass is also to strong imo. the shade ability doesnt punish the toss in any way, its basicly a free scout, where the opponent cant do anything about it and also provides an option to set up a rly strong harrass
Yeah adept harass is absurdly strong but I don't really see a way to reduce their harassment potential without making them completely useless.
Adept harass is strong but that's just what happens when you have respectable t1 units.
Stimmed marine harass & zergling runbys are very dangerous too and current meta has baneling drops used very often against protoss which can kill 15 probes in 1 second if you're not looking at the minimap when speed overlord comes in.
Except stim and speed needed to make those useful are upgrades and they both get stopped by reasonable defenses at the front. Adepts are mass-able from the get-go with nearly all of their utility/capabilities.
On May 13 2016 06:21 DalaiiLameR wrote: what about adepts? adept harrass is also to strong imo. the shade ability doesnt punish the toss in any way, its basicly a free scout, where the opponent cant do anything about it and also provides an option to set up a rly strong harrass
Yeah adept harass is absurdly strong but I don't really see a way to reduce their harassment potential without making them completely useless.
Adept harass is strong but that's just what happens when you have respectable t1 units.
Stimmed marine harass & zergling runbys are very dangerous too and current meta has baneling drops used very often against protoss which can kill 15 probes in 1 second if you're not looking at the minimap when speed overlord comes in.
the difference is, that toss can walloff, so its the fault of the toss, if a ling runby is succesfull (or its the laaaategame). terran also can just walloff and be safe against any early runbys (oh, and there are also tanks..).
drop defense can be difficult yes, but toss got warpin, so with good reaction, you can minimize the dmg.
zerg on the other hand is completely open to any adept harrass. its just like a cat and mouse game with lings and adepts. if you split your lings up, you wount have enough to kill ~10 adepts in a straight up fight. if you dont split up your lings, the toss shades away and thats the next problem. you never know, if he cancels the shade or not. so, do you stay at the adepts and try to kill some of them, or do you hunt the shades? in both cases, the toss can do alot of dmg, if he isnt rly dumb.
On May 13 2016 06:21 DalaiiLameR wrote: what about adepts? adept harrass is also to strong imo. the shade ability doesnt punish the toss in any way, its basicly a free scout, where the opponent cant do anything about it and also provides an option to set up a rly strong harrass
Yeah adept harass is absurdly strong but I don't really see a way to reduce their harassment potential without making them completely useless.
Adept harass is strong but that's just what happens when you have respectable t1 units.
Stimmed marine harass & zergling runbys are very dangerous too and current meta has baneling drops used very often against protoss which can kill 15 probes in 1 second if you're not looking at the minimap when speed overlord comes in.
Except stim and speed needed to make those useful are upgrades and they both get stopped by reasonable defenses at the front. Adepts are mass-able from the get-go with nearly all of their utility/capabilities.
You don't start out w/ warpgate technology and resonating glaives either. Ling speed hits before warpgate tech and stim is comparable to glaives.
Adepts without WG, prism and glaives also get stopped by reasonable defenses, just not completely 100% denied damage all of the time.
zerg on the other hand is completely open to any adept harrass. its just like a cat and mouse game with lings and adepts. if you split your lings up, you wount have enough to kill ~10 adepts in a straight up fight.
Do you mean 10 adepts like shortly after the warpgate timing with a 1gate expand into 3-4 gate pressure but no resonating glaives?
Thor: Good thing. Could not understand why they never thought about bringing back the switch mode before. It has been suggested in all communities over all websites. Also they are right, the flat damage has to be buffed to make up for being a clunky big ass ground unit. Immortal: Its worth testing, but the numbers shouldnt be fixed before alot of testing. The immortal is very important at the moment and quite overused, either becaue of the lack of other choices or by the fact it is too strong. Colossus and Swarmhost: You have to name both togeather because: Both dont need buffes, they dont need to be fixed, they need to be cut out of the game. They did alot of damage to the game and do not have a place anywhere. Liberator: David listens!. If he listens a bit more, he will find out, that 7x2 damage with falling off splash instead of flat splash is the answer. Cyclone: David does not listen. He still thinks this unit has a place in the game. I wouldnt build it if it is for 50 minerals and no gas. And now it costs 4 supply and thus burns more of your supply then anything else. A way to fix this car is to give it flat damage and no lock-on ability, remove cost to 150-75 and 2 supply and buff the normal damage a little step. Then call it Goliath on Wheels and it is fixed.
Good changes, except swarm host (still an improvement). Remember when Blizz introduced the swarm host and said it was a zerg siege breaking unit? None of that seems applicable. It simply has no reason to exist. It needs a design overhaul with a clearly defined purpose.
On May 13 2016 06:21 DalaiiLameR wrote: what about adepts? adept harrass is also to strong imo. the shade ability doesnt punish the toss in any way, its basicly a free scout, where the opponent cant do anything about it and also provides an option to set up a rly strong harrass
Yeah adept harass is absurdly strong but I don't really see a way to reduce their harassment potential without making them completely useless.
Make shade cost (just a random number) 20 shield so we dont get the endless free shading.
While he's at it, he should also listen about the wanted nerf to the tankvac and buff to siege tank dmg. This has been by far the nr 1 wanted change since the beginning.
I still don't understand why would they want to increase the supply of the cyclone and sh and not that of the tempest and a couple other air units ? Why not make the game ground based again ? Also what happened to the proposed change of removing tankivacs and increasing siege tank damage ? Almost the entire community was happy when it was announced and then it kinda fell into obscurity.
i don't think the 3 units are related. the increase in supply count for the 2 units in question is put in place so that they are not massable in the late game. i like this post mort-em update thing.
Terran needs a better early game.I don't think any suggestion of this community for cyclone address that.Reduce cyclone's mineral cost a bit so terran can research mag-field. Liberator nerf is needed unless people still want mass air vs mass air battle .Thor change isn't enough doesn't mean liberator doesn't derserve a nerf.
On May 13 2016 08:13 JimmyJRaynor wrote: i don't think the 3 units are related. the increase in supply count for the 2 units in question is put in place so that they are not massable in the late game. i like this post mort-em update thing.
why should tempests be massable lategame? it does nothing except promoting mass air battles
On May 13 2016 08:21 ShowTheLights wrote: JUST MAKE COLLOSI RANGE BASELINE . You did it with the tank, the lurker. This would fit for protoss very well.
I think it may be even better to make it 8 range baseline and remove the upgrade instead of having 6+3. More useful in early-midgame and less useful late
why should tempests be massable lategame?
Tempest 4 supply is gonna go sooner or later. With changes to some units like Libs doing 5+2 light instead of 7 AA this is especially true
On May 13 2016 08:21 ShowTheLights wrote: JUST MAKE COLLOSI RANGE BASELINE . You did it with the tank, the lurker. This would fit for protoss very well.
I think it may be even better to make it 8 range baseline and remove the upgrade instead of having 6+3. More useful in early-midgame and less useful late
I disagree about the new address for Thor and Liberator, they were going to be completely different, and serve for different purposes, how SC is meant to be, rewarding good builds, scouting and adaptation. They are also overlapping to vikings in their function.
SH won't worth for any purpose with such a cooldown like that, no matter what price. Very worrying they still aren't concerned about Ultras.
A few areas still of concern with the game, to name only the most pressing:
- Thor and cyclone's lack of range to deal with BL/Tempest. - Tempest supply too low. - Marauder nerf coupled with 8 armor ultras. - Tankivacs going against proper design.
On May 13 2016 08:49 ArmazingerZ wrote: I disagree about the new address for Thor and Liberator, they were going to be completely different, and serve for different purposes, how SC is meant to be, rewarding good builds, scouting and adaptation. They are also overlapping to vikings in their function.
SH won't worth for any purpose with such a cooldown like that, no matter what price. Very worrying they still aren't concerned about Ultras.
i think liberators were supposed to be anti muta, cuz terrans struggled against mass muta in wol and hots, so NOW the liberator is where it supposed to be. it was never the plan, that liberators counter everything in the air.
the thor is something like a lost child for blizzard. they never had a plan, what the role of the thor should be. maybe it was meant as antiair for mech play, but mech is relatively easy counterable nowadays, so they lost their role and now, blizz is searchen for a new place in the game for them.
i like where it is going. some anti heavy air is nice to have and cuz the single dmg, expensive units like broodlords are still worth their costs.
What exact situations do you think that adepts are a problem in? I have not seen many particularly problematic situations recently (esp since -1 damage for 3-shot on scv's and marines)
People complain about adepts, phoenixes and immortals in ZvP and the immortal is being reduced in power some but this is a matchup that has a lot of very powerful units on both sides, it's also not a matchup that's heavily imbalanced in P favor. I don't see the justification for nerfing these other units as well unless you want to nerf 6 units on both sides of the matchup.
As terran: Thor:Nice to see the switch mode,but I think the Thor need a damage buff to become cost\efficient. Cyclone:I don't like the changes,cyclone need a serious buff and removing the lock on would be the best choice. Liberator:Let's see how it works,obviously better than the previous patch. Hope to see something about tankivac soon
I'd be pretty enthused by a tankivac change/revision. Honestly it makes TvT more hellish than it helps in any other match-up just because tanks are non-viable / rarely-used in any other matchup. I've seen some games where people take a few meditanks vs zerg, but it would seem that having liberators is almost as good if not as or better.
The problem with the liberator change isn't the nerf itself, it's terran not having a real late game in tvz. They can nerf the liberator for the sake of design and that's fine, but they need to realize that it's the only thing keeping tvz late game alive at all.
On May 13 2016 09:45 Cyro wrote: What exact situations do you think that adepts are a problem in? I have not seen many particularly problematic situations recently (esp since -1 damage for 3-shot on scv's and marines)
adepts are so good in killing workers that it's extremely risky in tvp to move out at all before you have your base fully covered with bunkers/turrets. if 1 warpprism gets in when your army is out on the map the game is almost over because adepts kill workers at an insane speed and terran doesn't have units that can kill them very fast so your reinforcements won't do much vs an adept warpin. can't really speak for zvp but from what I've seen they are very good there too.
a good example for that is this game where at 11:30 dream was out on the map while trap dropped only 4 adepts(didn't even warpin additional ones) in dreams main and killed 23 workers in seconds
Omg where did they read that anyone like the supply increases.
Liberator and thor tweaks are somewhat elegent though, but they're still making all SP and facto unit bio support, instead of adressing fucking non viability of mech and overall absence of diversity for terran play
This happens to protoss quite often as well. Why is this an adept/protoss issue? The same supply of marines kills workers roughly twice as fast and this happens in all three terran matchups and has done for the last 5 or 6 years.
Problem with the adept is that defending it needs to have twice the amount you need to actually defend the adepts because they threaten 2 locations at once, passing through any static defence. Also because terran doesn't have any real anti drop defense except for turrets. Can't put 2 canons in your main and overcharge supplies
This happens to protoss quite often as well and in many of the matchups that don't involve a protoss. Why is this an adept/protoss issue?
The same supply of marines kills workers literally twice as fast and this happens in all three terran matchups and has done for the last 5 or 6 years.
If there's a case for nerfing anything i'd expect it to be the warp prism pickup range.
protoss has pylon overcharge to defend their bases and protoss units kill marines a lot faster than terran units kill adepts so the marines have less time to do damage. when protoss gets adepts into a mineral line they still do a ton of damage even when your army is in position because marines and marauders need so long to kill adepts
I want to see that game where 8 marines kill 23 probes
Overcharge exists because P is the most vulnerable of the 3 races without it
I want to see that game where 8 marines kill 23 probes
That vid was actually quite underwhelming.
If you're being attacked by 8 stimmed marines as protoss or zerg and you show up with 2 stalkers or 8 zerglings, you'll just lose them and continue losing workers. This has happened time and time again hundreds of times over the lifespan of pro sc2.
In this particular game they both drop at the same time; T flies through a cannon, drops 8 supply and doesn't stim - there are 4 supply of adepts w/ resonating and an upgrade advantage waiting next to the cannon.
If that terran was looking at his base, he would have controlled better and either attacked with or ran away with his workers. He should have lost significantly less (with proper control and planning) and what he did lose would have been deserved in that case as upgraded t1 units have always had the potential to deal significant damage in sc2. Protoss has historically been the worst at this but Legacy brought them more up to par.
In a game where a terran drops 8 stimmed marines w/ a medivac and drones/probes are not pulled but 5 supply of units show up halfway through the drop to defend, i'm sure you'll find plenty of games where 23 workers die. People don't leave their workers and defense like that in high level play unless they're having a lot of trouble multitasking. This is also something that everyone has seen so many times in pro play (either with good defense or bad defense) but they're just not accustomed to seeing protoss have that same capability so there are some alarm bells going off.
Overcharge exists because P is the most vulnerable of the 3 races without it
Overcharge exists to prevent one base PvP. That's why it was created.
That's absolutely true but these days it's arguably more important in PvZ because it actually affects balance (instead of PvP where it only affects design) and zerg has several early attacks that are balanced around overcharge existing
Overcharge exists because P is the most vulnerable of the 3 races without it
Overcharge exists to prevent one base PvP. That's why it was created.
That's absolutely true but these days it's arguably more important in PvZ because it actually affects balance (instead of PvP where it only affects design) and zerg has several early attacks that are balanced around overcharge existing
There's no denying that the other matchups have to be balanced around its existence, but it isn't the 'fault' of zerg/terran being too powerful, it's ironically the fault of protoss being too powerful.
Overcharge exists because P is the most vulnerable of the 3 races without it
Overcharge exists to prevent one base PvP. That's why it was created.
That's absolutely true but these days it's arguably more important in PvZ because it actually affects balance (instead of PvP where it only affects design) and zerg has several early attacks that are balanced around overcharge existing
There's no denying that the other matchups have to be balanced around its existence, but it isn't the 'fault' of zerg/terran being too powerful, it's ironically the fault of protoss being too powerful.
They reset ZvP / PvZ some 14 months ago and did the balance from scratch with both sets of new and overpowered stuff cancelling eachother out (overcharge vs hatch tech drop, hatch tech overlord speed and ravagers)
Not sure what to think of the Protoss changes yet but having Collossi vaguely back should definitely help at my level where I find most Z seem to be going mass hydra and just a-moving into everything and winning pretty handily because of the DPS. Won't affect PvT either because Collossi would just get destroyed by Libs anyway.
I'm still not sure why Blizz are not touching Liberator anti-ground, it's ridiculously strong especially once T gets the range upgrade. It's almost impossible to take a good engagement as Protoss when they're sieged up given the insane AG damage plus the bio clump kept nearby. Sure Protoss has Tempests but we need to be able to get there.
This happens to protoss quite often as well and in many of the matchups that don't involve a protoss. Why is this an adept/protoss issue?
The same supply of marines kills workers literally twice as fast and this happens in all three terran matchups and has done for the last 5 or 6 years.
If there's a case for nerfing anything i'd expect it to be the warp prism pickup range.
I think the difference between them and marines or lings is that the later can get killed very fast. So newly produced units can fight lowish numbers of marines and lings, but with Adepts, Marines get killed by them, Hellions get killed. So they kill shit fast AND they are very resilient. They are a massive pain for me.
On May 13 2016 09:45 Cyro wrote: What exact situations do you think that adepts are a problem in? I have not seen many particularly problematic situations recently (esp since -1 damage for 3-shot on scv's and marines)
adepts are so good in killing workers that it's extremely risky in tvp to move out at all before you have your base fully covered with bunkers/turrets. if 1 warpprism gets in when your army is out on the map the game is almost over because adepts kill workers at an insane speed and terran doesn't have units that can kill them very fast so your reinforcements won't do much vs an adept warpin. can't really speak for zvp but from what I've seen they are very good there too.
a good example for that is this game where at 11:30 dream was out on the map while trap dropped only 4 adepts(didn't even warpin additional ones) in dreams main and killed 23 workers in seconds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ArXN4q8hrY
I don't know if that game illustrates your point, because that was an incredibly close match on both sides, despite Terran never really taking any spectacular advantages yet Protoss destroying a significant amounts of workers, since Terran tends to stay in the game with Mules. This might be evidence for Adept's harass potential being perfectly in line with counteracting Terran's other strengths. One thing I did notice was the relative ease of sniping Nexi though, something Adepts are woefully terrible at. Both races seem to have their strengths, but neither party seems to have advantages too overpowered to make unilateral changes.
This happens to protoss quite often as well. Why is this an adept/protoss issue? The same supply of marines kills workers roughly twice as fast and this happens in all three terran matchups and has done for the last 5 or 6 years.
Problem with the adept is that defending it needs to have twice the amount you need to actually defend the adepts because they threaten 2 locations at once, passing through any static defence. Also because terran doesn't have any real anti drop defense except for turrets. Can't put 2 canons in your main and overcharge supplies
Terrans can much more easily redrop to other bases. I think TY exemplifies this pretty well, where even Zest couldn't handle it in the GSL finals g1. I would also argue Turrets are more desirable than Cannons for your typical harass because of their air DPS, relative cheapness, and air priority are desirable. If Terrans dedicated a Liberator to defense, they could accomplish similar things to MsC, or even a bunker. Protoss is somewhat forced into dedicated AtA when ranged Liberators come along. No Protoss harass unit can do that level of damage with already present ground defense.
When you've lost hope for SC2 after countless painfully out of touch updates (the +bio AA cannon change being the most remarkable one), DK throws at you incredibly sensible updates that may actually make the game reach the best state it has been in for ages.
Throw in a tempest supply change to 5 or 6 and we're golden.
On May 13 2016 18:38 [PkF] Wire wrote: When you've lost hope for SC2 after countless painfully out of touch updates (the +bio AA cannon change being the most remarkable one), DK throws at you incredibly sensible updates that may actually make the game reach the best state it has been in for ages.
Throw in a tempest supply change to 5 or 6 and we're golden.
Good job DK.
I agree so badly,4 supply tempest should be one of next changes
On May 13 2016 18:29 Cloak wrote: Terrans can much more easily redrop to other bases. I think TY exemplifies this pretty well, where even Zest couldn't handle it in the GSL finals g1. I would also argue Turrets are more desirable than Cannons for your typical harass because of their air DPS, relative cheapness, and air priority are desirable. If Terrans dedicated a Liberator to defense, they could accomplish similar things to MsC, or even a bunker. Protoss is somewhat forced into dedicated AtA when ranged Liberators come along. No Protoss harass unit can do that level of damage with already present ground defense.
1) redrop to their bases : what? How does that remotely compares to fucking warpin?? 2) TY stated that protoss is OP atm. And it's fun that you bring up this series that showed everything that was wrong with TvP xD 3) turrets > canons? Really? Against adept harass? Okay then let's drop 4 adepts in a mineral line with a canon and a mineral line with a turret rofl 4) bunker are already used against drop adepts to little efficiency since you can just shade where the bunker doesn't cover the mineral line. And dude no you can't cover a mineral line with a liberator, you can only chase the prism. And achieve similar things to MsC? Really? Between paying 100/100 to transform all my supplies in 40 dmg high ROF photon canons ? XD
Dude do you even watch starcraft? I'm fine with people arguing that the liberator is OP, because it is and it's the only reason why terrans are still somewhat performing at high level, but don't even start to talk about harass because every single TvP pro game shows a terran in foeutal position early game against protoss harass.
On May 13 2016 18:38 [PkF] Wire wrote: When you've lost hope for SC2 after countless painfully out of touch updates (the +bio AA cannon change being the most remarkable one), DK throws at you incredibly sensible updates that may actually make the game reach the best state it has been in for ages.
Throw in a tempest supply change to 5 or 6 and we're golden.
Good job DK.
I agree so badly,4 supply tempest should be one of next changes
That's something that needs to happen. However it's kinda obvious DK doesn't know what to do with supply, since 4 supply cyclones and SH are both ridiculous propositions.
Someone else is posing as DK, I refuse to believe the real DK is considering these changes. These...actually make some sense. No, it's not DK, it can't be.
On a more serious note, since they want to make underused units viable again, what direction should the BC take? Personally, I'd like to see the tactical jump nerfed and it's attacks changed from peashooters with high atk spd to slow hard hitting.
On May 13 2016 20:25 ihatevideogames wrote: Someone else is posing as DK, I refuse to believe the real DK is considering these changes. These...actually make some sense. No, it's not DK, it can't be.
Meh, we said the same thing when they tested the removal of the Tankvac and buffed dmg. Let's wait to see what actually makes it in to the game before singing to much praise.
What I don't get is the immortal barrier thing. I mean 100 shield or 200 shield, you're never able to burst it down in 2 seconds, unless in extreme scenarii. Barrier will still, i guess, mean your immortal isn't taking real damage for 2 secs.
These changes all look reasonable now, especially the thor change. The cyclone and swarm host changes look pointless but I don't think they're going to hurt anything because the units will remain useless.
On May 13 2016 22:09 JackONeill wrote: What I don't get is the immortal barrier thing. I mean 100 shield or 200 shield, you're never able to burst it down in 2 seconds, unless in extreme scenarii. Barrier will still, i guess, mean your immortal isn't taking real damage for 2 secs.
On May 13 2016 18:38 [PkF] Wire wrote: When you've lost hope for SC2 after countless painfully out of touch updates (the +bio AA cannon change being the most remarkable one), DK throws at you incredibly sensible updates that may actually make the game reach the best state it has been in for ages.
Throw in a tempest supply change to 5 or 6 and we're golden.
Good job DK.
No clue how this isn't on the table, late game mass Tempest is absurd, DK fearing all of these crappy units like the Cyclone and Swarm Host getting massed but isn't afraid of mass Tempest?
It's not paid particular attention to because that situation isn't seen in a large % of games, i guess. That doesn't mean that it's not a problem, but an issue in the 0-5 minute window will show up in many many more games than an issue in the 20-25 minute window.
On May 13 2016 22:09 JackONeill wrote: What I don't get is the immortal barrier thing. I mean 100 shield or 200 shield, you're never able to burst it down in 2 seconds, unless in extreme scenarii. Barrier will still, i guess, mean your immortal isn't taking real damage for 2 secs.
Focus fire with Tanks? Lurkers, other Immortals
While the other handful of Immortals shoot your Tanks into bits.
If you are using Tanks against Immortals (or Protoss in general) you are doing it wrong anyways.
On May 13 2016 22:09 JackONeill wrote: What I don't get is the immortal barrier thing. I mean 100 shield or 200 shield, you're never able to burst it down in 2 seconds, unless in extreme scenarii. Barrier will still, i guess, mean your immortal isn't taking real damage for 2 secs.
Focus fire with Tanks?
That actually sounds like an awful idea, much to better to focus stuff that would actually die.
On May 13 2016 22:09 JackONeill wrote: What I don't get is the immortal barrier thing. I mean 100 shield or 200 shield, you're never able to burst it down in 2 seconds, unless in extreme scenarii. Barrier will still, i guess, mean your immortal isn't taking real damage for 2 secs.
Focus fire with Tanks?
That actually sounds like an awful idea, much to better to focus stuff that would actually die.
A zealot costs 100 resources and has 150hp
An immortal costs 350 resources and has 300(+100) hp
Why wouldn't you shoot at it? Even if you're DPSing through the entirety of the immortal's shield, it has 2.67x the health and 3.5x the cost. It's also balanced around being slower and harder to produce and replace in your army than gateway units.
If someone could kill 4-5 zealots or 2 immortals, i'd rather give them the zealots practically 100% of the time!
Why is everybody complaining about mass tempest? Tempest lose to all other anti air in direct fights, are super slow, at the end of the tech tree and they lose really hard vs marines and hydras.
Cyclone has insane damage and can attack all units and is really early tech and swarm host does massive damage without risk of losing the unit.
So many terran whiny kids around here, first time terran is not super dominant and they cry :p
On May 14 2016 01:54 Freeborn wrote: Why is everybody complaining about mass tempest? Tempest lose to all other anti air in direct fights, are super slow, at the end of the tech tree and they lose really hard vs marines and hydras.
Cyclone has insane damage and can attack all units and is really early tech and swarm host does massive damage without risk of losing the unit.
So many terran whiny kids around here, first time terran is not super dominant and they cry :p
I guess people see a big unit and assume it ought to cost a lot of supply. But one tempest has dps somewhere between a roach and an infested terran, for the low cost of 300/200. If you're losing to mass tempest I'd love for you to post the replay, for a laugh.
On May 14 2016 01:54 Freeborn wrote: Why is everybody complaining about mass tempest? Tempest lose to all other anti air in direct fights, are super slow, at the end of the tech tree and they lose really hard vs marines and hydras.
Cyclone has insane damage and can attack all units and is really early tech and swarm host does massive damage without risk of losing the unit.
So many terran whiny kids around here, first time terran is not super dominant and they cry :p
When the protoss is slowly pushing with mass tempests with cannons, hts, and maybe disruptors underneath there is no way to fight his army while he is slowly picking of unit after unit. So no they don't lose to other anti-air or marines/hydras because those units can never engage into them. Once protoss gets to that stage there is not much you can do anymore
but reading your thoughts about cyclones and swarmhosts I assume you are a troll so no point in discussing any more.
Thor changes We received a lot of feedback regarding the Thor changes, especially from our Chinese community, in that this change can be seen as a nerf. We totally agree with the suggestion from the CN region to bring back the mode switch on the Thor while keeping the current, stronger numbers for the single target mode. We will make this change in the test map asap.
We also do see the feedback that the current damage buff is not enough. If this is the case, we can continue moving in small steps to continue tweaking it up as needed.
Immortal Barrier change This seems to be a solid change. Because it only affects the such short duration of the ability being up, we believe this is a solid targeted change to help reduce the effectiveness of Immortals slightly per pro player feedback.
Colossus change As expected, this one looks to be a fairly small increase in Colossus effectiveness. Because our main goal with this change is to help out non pro players slightly, while having it be a small change at the pro level, we believe we can make this move as a first step and see how it goes.
Liberator change We definitely agree with many players in that the change may have been slightly too much, so we would like to go from 4 +3light to 5+2light in tomorrow's update in order to test a softer version of this change.
Cyclone changes This change looks to be solid at the moment, and we can start publically testing this in the next version as well.
Swarm Host changes We saw a lot of mixed feedback for these changes, but our thought is that we should go forward with a change here to locate how the current role of the unit is. However, we do agree that we should move in smaller steps, so instead of reducing the cost to 150/75 in one go, we wanted to test changing it to 150/100 in tomorrow's test map.
Overall, the direction of the changes appears to be good, so let’s work on fine tuning the specific numbers so that we can aim for an update to the test map as early as tomorrow, and attempt to make a balance update to the live game towards the end of this month. Thank you.
Thor changes We received a lot of feedback regarding the Thor changes, especially from our Chinese community, in that this change can be seen as a nerf. We totally agree with the suggestion from the CN region to bring back the mode switch on the Thor while keeping the current, stronger numbers for the single target mode. We will make this change in the test map asap.
We also do see the feedback that the current damage buff is not enough. If this is the case, we can continue moving in small steps to continue tweaking it up as needed.
Immortal Barrier change This seems to be a solid change. Because it only affects the such short duration of the ability being up, we believe this is a solid targeted change to help reduce the effectiveness of Immortals slightly per pro player feedback.
Colossus change As expected, this one looks to be a fairly small increase in Colossus effectiveness. Because our main goal with this change is to help out non pro players slightly, while having it be a small change at the pro level, we believe we can make this move as a first step and see how it goes.
Liberator change We definitely agree with many players in that the change may have been slightly too much, so we would like to go from 4 +3light to 5+2light in tomorrow's update in order to test a softer version of this change.
Cyclone changes This change looks to be solid at the moment, and we can start publically testing this in the next version as well.
Swarm Host changes We saw a lot of mixed feedback for these changes, but our thought is that we should go forward with a change here to locate how the current role of the unit is. However, we do agree that we should move in smaller steps, so instead of reducing the cost to 150/75 in one go, we wanted to test changing it to 150/100 in tomorrow's test map.
Overall, the direction of the changes appears to be good, so let’s work on fine tuning the specific numbers so that we can aim for an update to the test map as early as tomorrow, and attempt to make a balance update to the live game towards the end of this month. Thank you.
On May 14 2016 01:54 Freeborn wrote: Why is everybody complaining about mass tempest? Tempest lose to all other anti air in direct fights, are super slow, at the end of the tech tree and they lose really hard vs marines and hydras.
Cyclone has insane damage and can attack all units and is really early tech and swarm host does massive damage without risk of losing the unit.
So many terran whiny kids around here, first time terran is not super dominant and they cry :p
I wonder if you're being serious. Mass tempests is bad but tempests + cannons + HTs is a real problem.
"first time terran is not super dominant and they cry" -> ok you're most likely not being serious.
Thor changes We received a lot of feedback regarding the Thor changes, especially from our Chinese community, in that this change can be seen as a nerf. We totally agree with the suggestion from the CN region to bring back the mode switch on the Thor while keeping the current, stronger numbers for the single target mode. We will make this change in the test map asap.
We also do see the feedback that the current damage buff is not enough. If this is the case, we can continue moving in small steps to continue tweaking it up as needed.
Immortal Barrier change This seems to be a solid change. Because it only affects the such short duration of the ability being up, we believe this is a solid targeted change to help reduce the effectiveness of Immortals slightly per pro player feedback.
Colossus change As expected, this one looks to be a fairly small increase in Colossus effectiveness. Because our main goal with this change is to help out non pro players slightly, while having it be a small change at the pro level, we believe we can make this move as a first step and see how it goes.
Liberator change We definitely agree with many players in that the change may have been slightly too much, so we would like to go from 4 +3light to 5+2light in tomorrow's update in order to test a softer version of this change.
Cyclone changes This change looks to be solid at the moment, and we can start publically testing this in the next version as well.
Swarm Host changes We saw a lot of mixed feedback for these changes, but our thought is that we should go forward with a change here to locate how the current role of the unit is. However, we do agree that we should move in smaller steps, so instead of reducing the cost to 150/75 in one go, we wanted to test changing it to 150/100 in tomorrow's test map.
Overall, the direction of the changes appears to be good, so let’s work on fine tuning the specific numbers so that we can aim for an update to the test map as early as tomorrow, and attempt to make a balance update to the live game towards the end of this month. Thank you.
On May 13 2016 18:29 Cloak wrote: Terrans can much more easily redrop to other bases. I think TY exemplifies this pretty well, where even Zest couldn't handle it in the GSL finals g1. I would also argue Turrets are more desirable than Cannons for your typical harass because of their air DPS, relative cheapness, and air priority are desirable. If Terrans dedicated a Liberator to defense, they could accomplish similar things to MsC, or even a bunker. Protoss is somewhat forced into dedicated AtA when ranged Liberators come along. No Protoss harass unit can do that level of damage with already present ground defense.
1) redrop to their bases : what? How does that remotely compares to fucking warpin?? 2) TY stated that protoss is OP atm. And it's fun that you bring up this series that showed everything that was wrong with TvP xD 3) turrets > canons? Really? Against adept harass? Okay then let's drop 4 adepts in a mineral line with a canon and a mineral line with a turret rofl 4) bunker are already used against drop adepts to little efficiency since you can just shade where the bunker doesn't cover the mineral line. And dude no you can't cover a mineral line with a liberator, you can only chase the prism. And achieve similar things to MsC? Really? Between paying 100/100 to transform all my supplies in 40 dmg high ROF photon canons ? XD
Dude do you even watch starcraft? I'm fine with people arguing that the liberator is OP, because it is and it's the only reason why terrans are still somewhat performing at high level, but don't even start to talk about harass because every single TvP pro game shows a terran in foeutal position early game against protoss harass.
There really isn't any objectivity to your bias or TYs bias. Win rates are as even as can be. And the original point was Adept ghost forces you to defend multiple points, and how does redrop not accomplish the same thing? It's very difficult for Protoss ground to cover the cliff hopping Terran does rather easily with their entire army plus heal.
The primary target against a harass is the air units (Warp Prism or Medivacs) you see the pros target these first, to prevent escape or reinforcement. Turrets have an advantage for having a very high dps/cost ratio. Do you even understand the game you watch?
You don't really see abuse of photon cannons to begin with. Overcharge is just the answer to both Zerg and Terran unit design and macro being more favored to more bases.
Bunkers excellently shut down Adept harass, since they target structures and do poor damage to them. You should be blocking the ghosting anyway. There's a lot of passive reasons Terrans and Zergs just scale better than Protoss, and Protoss has to abuse these explosive spellcasts to compensate.
So hovering around with a medivac is comparable to the invulnerable shade. Of course.
And turrets have high dps against air, but in case of adept harass, and with the blink prism, of course protoss players drop on turrets. And if they don't, turrets are so much better at defending adept harass than canons. Of course.
Dude it's impossible to debate with you of this subject if you're gonna say stuff that is obviously false. Every single TvP in GSL/proleague is terran staying at home trying to take 3 bases, with the exception of the occasionnal marine mine drop, while protoss harasses intensively to prevent terran's economy to allow too much liberators on the field. You're just being silly, and the nail in the coffin has to be "Terrans and Zergs just scale better than Protoss", which in itself shows how biased you are.
EPT
