|
United Kingdom20344 Posts
1) That is actually a pretty decent idea, I've shared this sentiment for a long time, Stalkers aren't that great, but they should be, they are a high skill cap unit so I've never understood why they do such pitiful damage, Stalkers vs. mid game bio armies is hilariously 1 sided, and honestly Stalkers vs. Mutalisks even can be pretty bad.
Stalkers are pretty good in low numbers but not larger, i think a lot of that is due to the two points that i brought up - model size and wasting an increasingly large % of their damage as you get more of them
|
Stalkers always beat mutas on equal number.
If you go full stalkers, zerglings/mutas can beat you because of zerglings not because of mutas.
One Zergling + 1 have more dps than 1 mutas even when you cumulate dps of bounces. If you have zealots tanking zerglings + stalkers you will be fine, it's better than full stalkers vs zerglings/mutas.
If you lose anyway, it's just Z having more army value or you've made too many adept/immortal that can't hit air.
|
United Kingdom20344 Posts
Stalkers always beat mutas on equal number.
They beat them much harder in lower numbers than they do in higher numbers because of not being able to attack and wasting damage.
Mutas lose vs both stalkers and marines when there are low numbers are both*, but a blob of mutas can fight a blob of stalkers (especially around a cliff edge like behind a base) while a blob of mutas cannot do the same nearly as easily to a blob of marines, they have to run away and rely on banelings.
*As they should, they are a flying, fast-speed, fast-regen harass unit
|
On May 29 2016 08:18 Glorfindel! wrote:Well... The Cyclone could still need some love. In the current state there is no way a terran is going to "mass cyclones" that they keep being afraid of. A 4 supply unit with 120 health. Compared to Adepts that are being massed every PvT, 150 health and 2 supply. I just dont get the 4 supply... The unit is a piece of rusty crap 
I agree!
In the late beta-LotV the cyclone was the real Ultralisk killer. The cyclone/liberator/hellbat was insane so a nerf was probably needed but since they are now dead they sure could use a buff and a serve a purpose.
|
I mean it's really obvious that a unit that is really good against x and y strategies gets build. So it is true for the 8Armor ultralsik. The problem is not that it's impossible to shoot them down with bio. The problem is that a terran has no option to get out other viable tech than liberators or ghosts without sacrificing the power of bio.
It's very clear that any Z knows that Ultralisks are the best unit against bio, as so many Z Players rush for them and try to save ressources whereever possible in the early and mid game.
|
Ultralisk are too easy to use, they are pretty fast, strong and insane armor. Their attack animation is instant unlike certain units (thor etc) A disruptor can do amazing damage but it requires skill to controll it. There is no downside to an ultralisk, except it doesnt shoot air.... 
|
On May 29 2016 19:47 PinoKotsBeer wrote:Ultralisk are too easy to use, they are pretty fast, strong and insane armor. Their attack animation is instant unlike certain units (thor etc) A disruptor can do amazing damage but it requires skill to controll it. There is no downside to an ultralisk, except it doesnt shoot air....
And it's a melee unit.
On May 29 2016 10:50 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +1) That is actually a pretty decent idea, I've shared this sentiment for a long time, Stalkers aren't that great, but they should be, they are a high skill cap unit so I've never understood why they do such pitiful damage, Stalkers vs. mid game bio armies is hilariously 1 sided, and honestly Stalkers vs. Mutalisks even can be pretty bad. Stalkers are pretty good in low numbers but not larger, i think a lot of that is due to the two points that i brought up - model size and wasting an increasingly large % of their damage as you get more of them
Those ideas sound very reasonable and exciting to me.
|
Their attack animation is instant unlike certain units (thor etc)
No it's not. It has the second highest delay in the game after the Thor anti-ground.
Anyway, comparing melee damage point to ranged damage point makes no sense anyway.
|
Separate MMR per race is good but that means 3 rankings per account right?
Edit: posted too fast. Wanted to add:
So would that mean 3 icons for the league, depending on your race? Or even 4 for random I guess.
Only for 1v1 or team games too?
|
Please allow players to queue Archon Mode solo - queue, or this mode will just go down and become the next FFA.
|
United Kingdom20344 Posts
Archon population (counting 2 people as 1 archon "player") is ~1/10'th of 1v1 right now
|
On May 29 2016 19:47 PinoKotsBeer wrote:Ultralisk are too easy to use, they are pretty fast, strong and insane armor. Their attack animation is instant unlike certain units (thor etc) A disruptor can do amazing damage but it requires skill to controll it. There is no downside to an ultralisk, except it doesnt shoot air....
You prefer ultras that can hit and run bio ? lol
Ultras are always stuck by buildings, don't really maximize their AOE (sometimes they attack one unit, instead of attacking the units on the center). It's so easy to kill them with bio when they don't have their upgrade, as they are so easy to kite.
Best way to lose on ZvT is : make too much ultras, and liberator/ghost just crush you hard.
You need no more than 5-6, then you need to support them with infestors, corruptors, queens.
|
Here's my opion on the ultralisk. I think that the late game interactions it creates are not very fun or interesting. It's dumb that it puts Terran on a clock to close out the game before Zerg can stabilize on ultralisk tech and it forces t to play in pseudo Allin ways. On the other hand I get why blizzard did this. In lotv just like in the previse expansions Zerg is not that great at attacking. Normally they either need to make large cuts to Econ or upgrades if they want to attack Terran. So since Zerg is normally the defender in the mu it makes sense for them to have some reward for defending succesfully that lets them then push out and win games. This helps balance out the ennifectivness of Zerg units on offense in the mid game. The problem is this leads to unfun gameplay. Zerg just turtles and t tries to breach them with fairly limited variety. Also it's prity unfun as Terran to have taken no dmg over the course of the game but then ato lose to the ultralisk clock. Yes Terran does have some answers to ultras but these answers generally work only if Terran has a large lead, killed a lot of drones/bases, wrecked zergs army. I understand why the match is ballanced the way it is. Zerg attacks can't be allowed to be to strong because of the way Zerg works. Rember the Stephano roach Max build vs Protoss that attacke was so strong it pigenholed protoss into very specific openings that could stop it. A lot of Zerg attacks are holdable now but If they got stronger they would be overpowered. Zerg will always be problamatic because it's harder to balance a race which can shift production of Econ and army so fluidly. Zerg units can't be to strong because of how strong the larva mechanic is but this forces the balance we have now where Zerg defends till ultras then crushes. I don't know how you fix this problem. If you just nerfed ultras then it would just make Zerg weeker but it might tip the scale to far in terran's favor. It would probably be best if Terran simply had an alternative to bio that would let them opt to play defensively if they did not want to be on a clock. Sadly mech sucks right now so your always going to get the bio Terran vs turtle Zerg games.
|
What do you guys think about a Liberator behavior change:
- mobile AG mode with range=4, damage=35-40(+25 shield?) with same cooldown as it is now (low dps, no hydra one shot nonsense).
can be upgraded to range=7 at fusion core (probably +25% AG damage as well?)
- siege AA mode with flat 7 damage (pre patch damage) with same cooldown.
The aim of the change would be to give terran a tool that has high damage to deal with ultras, and because of fixed mode AA, make mutas more accessible in zvt.
|
On May 28 2016 03:29 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2016 03:24 Shield wrote:On May 28 2016 03:14 Beelzebub1 wrote:On May 28 2016 03:12 MockHamill wrote:
The latest patch was a really good step in the right direction. The only huge problem remaining right now is Tempest at 4 supply. Tempest needs to be at 6 supply, this alone would make TvP late game more balanced and make mech semi-usable in TvP at least at casual level.
Separate MMR per race is a good idea as is showing worker count and army count in game.
For ladder revamp I really hope you go for lots of ranks within each league instead of just 3. The whole point is that everyone should have something to strive for on ladder, and after years of playing most people are stuck in their current league. By having 5-10 ranks per league everyone can get a goal that is actually achievable without having to quit their jobs and forsake their studies. Completely agree about the Tempest, that unit and the Cyclone being the same supply must be some kind of joke. Once a Protoss is allowed to mass 12 + of them in a defensive macro game and put some Carriers with it, it's pretty much undefeated in a 1v1 fight against almost any other composition. If you allow protoss to get 12+ tempests and carriers in PvT, it's kind of your fault. No protoss is expected to have money for such expensive army. yeah "don't let him get there or you lose" In my opinion in a strategy game you should have more options than being forced to allin every game before a certain unit composition hits the field.
Ok then liberator to techlab 
|
Stalkers aren't that great, but they should be, they are a high skill cap unit so I've never understood why they do such pitiful damage
Stalkers aren't bad. They don't hold up without robo support in the later stages of the game because that is supposed to be how the protoss gateway units are. If they had more damage, blink allins would be unbeatable. We already see what gateway units that are really good by themselves can do... adepts made the game unplayable until they were nerfed and are still a bit strong even now.
If protoss could win by just massing gateway units... which by the way the can and shouldn't be able to, then there's either no reason to get robo, or robo is the nail in the coffin of the other races.
|
Separate MMR because Hell - it's about time. It's probably my biggest issue with the ladder itself. You can't simply go offrace if you don't want to tank your mmr or play unranked.
|
I like what they are seeing.
The next step in the balance department should be to look at the Tempest. It's to easy to mass and they become untouchable in larger numbers.
The Siege Tank should perform better against Protoss in general, so they should have a look at that.
|
|
|
United Kingdom20344 Posts
On May 30 2016 16:19 Sapphire.lux wrote:
I like what they are seeing.
The next step in the balance department should be to look at the Tempest. It's to easy to mass and they become untouchable in larger numbers.
The Siege Tank should perform better against Protoss in general, so they should have a look at that.
They had a look at it for ages and a large fraction of the population was voting to keep siege tank drop in its current form instead of increasing damage (because of TvZ?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
