|
On June 18 2016 06:56 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2016 03:33 [PkF] Wire wrote:
Holy shit queen AA range is already at 7, I don't think buffing it would be reasonable.
Buffing spores root time makes a lot of sense though. queen AA range to 8 or 9 and spore root time would both affect PvZ phoenix, prism, dt etc play a lot, as well as muta play in ZvZ and non-lib ZvT games. If the problem is with liberator then change lib IMO.
None of those things sound bad IMO. Giving Zergs better tools to deal with phoenix openings and warp prisms actually sounds like a wonderful thing and could help balance that match up as well. Maybe compensate with a Queen attack/attack speed nerf if the need would arise.
|
On June 18 2016 07:58 chipmonklord17 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2016 06:56 Cyro wrote:On June 18 2016 03:33 [PkF] Wire wrote:
Holy shit queen AA range is already at 7, I don't think buffing it would be reasonable.
Buffing spores root time makes a lot of sense though. queen AA range to 8 or 9 and spore root time would both affect PvZ phoenix, prism, dt etc play a lot, as well as muta play in ZvZ and non-lib ZvT games. If the problem is with liberator then change lib IMO. None of those things sound bad IMO. Giving Zergs better tools to deal with phoenix openings and warp prisms actually sounds like a wonderful thing and could help balance that match up as well. Maybe compensate with a Queen attack/attack speed nerf if the need would arise.
I kinda agree since P looks indeed slightly favored in PvZ with PICA ; I think this is something that could be tested because it has the potential to help in both mus as it would make the harass (be it banshees, meditanks, prisms or phoenix) easier to deal with. Needs to be heavily tested and monitored though, we all know what happened last time queens allowed Z to get to a favorable lategame in ZvT.
|
On June 18 2016 03:33 [PkF] Wire wrote:
Holy shit queen AA range is already at 7, I don't think buffing it would be reasonable.
.
Viking queen boyyyy.
|
Thank god for the that Zerg update.
|
United Kingdom20323 Posts
On June 18 2016 07:58 chipmonklord17 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2016 06:56 Cyro wrote:On June 18 2016 03:33 [PkF] Wire wrote:
Holy shit queen AA range is already at 7, I don't think buffing it would be reasonable.
Buffing spores root time makes a lot of sense though. queen AA range to 8 or 9 and spore root time would both affect PvZ phoenix, prism, dt etc play a lot, as well as muta play in ZvZ and non-lib ZvT games. If the problem is with liberator then change lib IMO. None of those things sound bad IMO. Giving Zergs better tools to deal with phoenix openings and warp prisms actually sounds like a wonderful thing and could help balance that match up as well. Maybe compensate with a Queen attack/attack speed nerf if the need would arise.
I think that better tools would be nice, but the Queen is already a bit of a weird unit. It's been buffed repeatedly over the years because of zerg earlygame woes rather than giving the tools in any other way. It's strong enough to be regularly used in large numbers and to be used regularly on offense (via hatch tech speed drop, nydus or just straight up walking across the map on maps like prion and ulrena) as they're pretty great units for the mineral cost and 0 larvae cost if you can get around the core weakness of no mobility off creep. They have some other interactions like augmenting hive units very well as well.
Do you really want to put that power onto the queen specifically? I can't think of a good reason to do that other than every other unit and mechanic being even less appropriate to touch
|
disclaimer: I play terran.
I'd rather see zerglings shoot up than another queen buff. remember what happened last time?
a queen AA buff will not only stop liberator harass, it'll stop banshees and medivacs too. how is terran supposed to open without the threat of drops or banshees?
I don't know how it would affect ZvP, but I think tier 1 hydras would be better than the proposed spore/queen changes.
|
On June 18 2016 09:10 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2016 07:58 chipmonklord17 wrote:On June 18 2016 06:56 Cyro wrote:On June 18 2016 03:33 [PkF] Wire wrote:
Holy shit queen AA range is already at 7, I don't think buffing it would be reasonable.
Buffing spores root time makes a lot of sense though. queen AA range to 8 or 9 and spore root time would both affect PvZ phoenix, prism, dt etc play a lot, as well as muta play in ZvZ and non-lib ZvT games. If the problem is with liberator then change lib IMO. None of those things sound bad IMO. Giving Zergs better tools to deal with phoenix openings and warp prisms actually sounds like a wonderful thing and could help balance that match up as well. Maybe compensate with a Queen attack/attack speed nerf if the need would arise. I think that better tools would be nice, but the Queen is already a bit of a weird unit. It's been buffed repeatedly over the years because of zerg earlygame woes rather than giving the tools in any other way. It's strong enough to be regularly used in large numbers and to be used regularly on offense (via hatch tech speed drop, nydus or just straight up walking across the map on maps like prion and ulrena) as they're pretty great units for the mineral cost and 0 larvae cost if you can get around the core weakness of no mobility off creep. They have some other interactions like augmenting hive units very well as well. Do you really want to put that power onto the queen specifically? I can't think of a good reason to do that other than every other unit and mechanic being even less appropriate to touch
I'd rather not but the options to fix both ZvP and ZvT would be
a) nerf liberators and possibly reapers, nerf phoenix, tempest, possibly immortals and then probably nerf mutas and ultras a drop to compensate
b)buff queens
Sounds like its the best of a bad situation
|
United Kingdom20323 Posts
On June 18 2016 09:36 chipmonklord17 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2016 09:10 Cyro wrote:On June 18 2016 07:58 chipmonklord17 wrote:On June 18 2016 06:56 Cyro wrote:On June 18 2016 03:33 [PkF] Wire wrote:
Holy shit queen AA range is already at 7, I don't think buffing it would be reasonable.
Buffing spores root time makes a lot of sense though. queen AA range to 8 or 9 and spore root time would both affect PvZ phoenix, prism, dt etc play a lot, as well as muta play in ZvZ and non-lib ZvT games. If the problem is with liberator then change lib IMO. None of those things sound bad IMO. Giving Zergs better tools to deal with phoenix openings and warp prisms actually sounds like a wonderful thing and could help balance that match up as well. Maybe compensate with a Queen attack/attack speed nerf if the need would arise. I think that better tools would be nice, but the Queen is already a bit of a weird unit. It's been buffed repeatedly over the years because of zerg earlygame woes rather than giving the tools in any other way. It's strong enough to be regularly used in large numbers and to be used regularly on offense (via hatch tech speed drop, nydus or just straight up walking across the map on maps like prion and ulrena) as they're pretty great units for the mineral cost and 0 larvae cost if you can get around the core weakness of no mobility off creep. They have some other interactions like augmenting hive units very well as well. Do you really want to put that power onto the queen specifically? I can't think of a good reason to do that other than every other unit and mechanic being even less appropriate to touch I'd rather not but the options to fix both ZvP and ZvT would be a) nerf liberators and possibly reapers, nerf phoenix, tempest, possibly immortals and then probably nerf mutas and ultras a drop to compensate b)buff queens Sounds like its the best of a bad situation
I don't think that buffing queen AA "fixes" most of those things. Many of the things that you consider it to fix are not a massive issue at the moment and/or affect multiple matchups as much as vs Z, so wouldn't be dealt with using a queen AA buff
|
Spore root/uproot time sounds like a very targeted change to that interaction. Queen AA buff sounds like it would affect a lot of interactions.
|
Blizzard.
Stop.
Buffing.
Shit.
Seriously.
If nerfing Liberators makes TvP(i don't think TvT really sees much lib use tbh) more brutal, then give some time for the pros to figure stuff out, and nerf the focking thing that makes TvP more brutal if it doesn't get solved in 2~3 seasons.
|
United States132 Posts
Here's an idea...burrow move banelings. Or we could go to Broodlord Infestor 2.0 now with Ultras and vipers... NotLikeThis :/
User was warned for this post
|
Queen range buff could be fine vs air only.
Or you could just make the liberator shoot SLIGHTLY slower.
|
Blizzard's habit of going for the smallest possible change is harmful in the long run. Changes like buffing spores vs biological units are unhealthy, since they don't solve the underlying problem. If Blizzard thinks the liberators are the problem in TvZ (personally I don't feel like that's the problem, but that's irrelevant for this argument) they should nerf the liberator instead of going for some inelegant change of limited scope. Mild repercussions to other match-ups shouldn't block a change from going ahead if that change is truly the best one. Those repercussions can be handled later or mitigated by other simultaneous buffs or nerfs.
|
On June 18 2016 12:05 ZigguratOfUr wrote:
Blizzard's habit of going for the smallest possible change is harmful in the long run. Changes like buffing spores vs biological units are unhealthy, since they don't solve the underlying problem. If Blizzard thinks the liberators are the problem in TvZ (personally I don't feel like that's the problem, but that's irrelevant for this argument) they should nerf the liberator instead of going for some inelegant change of limited scope. Mild repercussions to other match-ups shouldn't block a change from going ahead if that change is truly the best one. Those repercussions can be handled later or mitigated by other simultaneous buffs or nerfs.
Spores doing bio vs muta did wonders in HOTS
|
On June 18 2016 12:09 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2016 12:05 ZigguratOfUr wrote:
Blizzard's habit of going for the smallest possible change is harmful in the long run. Changes like buffing spores vs biological units are unhealthy, since they don't solve the underlying problem. If Blizzard thinks the liberators are the problem in TvZ (personally I don't feel like that's the problem, but that's irrelevant for this argument) they should nerf the liberator instead of going for some inelegant change of limited scope. Mild repercussions to other match-ups shouldn't block a change from going ahead if that change is truly the best one. Those repercussions can be handled later or mitigated by other simultaneous buffs or nerfs. Spores doing bio vs muta did wonders in HOTS
Oh it did in the short term. After the change ZvZ was no longer a muta vs muta fest. However later in HotS it worsened the match-up considerably most notably by strengthening swarm host turtling, but also by narrowing tech options in the mid-late game etc. Nerfing mutas by removing the idiotic health regeneration would have been much better. It would have helped out ZvZ, and also down the line made PvZ better.
|
United Kingdom20323 Posts
Spores doing bio vs muta did wonders in HOTS
It was a bad change overall as it targetted the symptoms rather than seeking to adress the true problem - muta strength after massive buffs to speed and regeneration that occured in late 2012.
Balance Update #8
Speed increased from 3.75 to 4
Balance Update #9
New passive ability: Mutalisk Regeneration
Mutalisk health regeneration rate increased from .2734 to 1.
Because of that response, the mutalisk and its interactions continue to suffer today (it's generally strong but the "OP" counters are too prevelant). It's painful to see how blizzard shot themselves in the foot and actually made the Mutalisk a worse and less usable unit through overbuffing it and then responding too strongly with counters.
People said as much the moment the patch notes were announced, this is not a "hindsight is 20/20" thing - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2-hots/387767-beta-balance-update-9#2
I'm not against any change in particular but these changes were a large straight buff and not properly dealt with. Some comparable changes in todays gameplay could be the 16% range buff on brood lords and +2 armor on ultralisk plating upgrade which were thrown in during the LOTV beta to change up the game just as these mutalisk buffs were added in the HOTS beta
|
On June 18 2016 04:37 NinjaToss wrote:
I love Dasan Station, please make Dasan go through. I'm a big fan of macro maps but Dasan is just amazing, it has a really big potential to be a amazing map
I like how this thread is completely at the extremes, some love the map while others vomit when they hear it LOL
Stay classy tl
|
Queens should be able to launch Banelings into the air like catapult style, the same range as the Tempest
|
On June 18 2016 17:44 Topdoller wrote:
Queens should be able to launch Banelings into the air like catapult style, the same range as the Tempest
While she wears a bandana
implement pls
|
On June 18 2016 07:58 chipmonklord17 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2016 06:56 Cyro wrote:On June 18 2016 03:33 [PkF] Wire wrote:
Holy shit queen AA range is already at 7, I don't think buffing it would be reasonable.
Buffing spores root time makes a lot of sense though. queen AA range to 8 or 9 and spore root time would both affect PvZ phoenix, prism, dt etc play a lot, as well as muta play in ZvZ and non-lib ZvT games. If the problem is with liberator then change lib IMO. None of those things sound bad IMO. Giving Zergs better tools to deal with phoenix openings and warp prisms actually sounds like a wonderful thing and could help balance that match up as well. Maybe compensate with a Queen attack/attack speed nerf if the need would arise.
Maybe nerf the phoenix and warprism, terran has a lot of problems with it as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
