|
On June 20 2016 16:52 egrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2016 23:30 Cyro wrote:
It's quite a big buff for a unit that's been buffed in combat strength repeatedly since WOL without having the cost changed once. I don't personally think the games with 6 queens super early or 12 queens in the midgame are fun to watch or play
(also range and mobility creep in general..) The more I look at the problems that arise in sc2 the more I'm convinced that Hydras should have been made T1.5 at hatch tech. Instead Zerg have Queens which try to do the AA job early game but are never enough so they are buffed repeatedly. Terran have Marines, Protoss Stalkers and Zerg have to cope with slow low dmg queens. No wonder they have problems against aerial harass.
Well hydras do have better dps but they get one shotted by libs, while queens take 3 hits and have transfuse.
So if one lib sets up behind a mineral line, then GL killing it with hydras in the early game anyway.
Of course the issue is not with the hydras, but with the lib instead. A 150/150 flying unit that's supposed to be mainly AA (Blizz words) is one shotting a 100/50 ground unit.
|
On June 20 2016 16:17 TequilaMockingbird wrote:So I am a little confused... I just played my placement match for season 3, but the maps are still the same - and its says season ends on june 24th ?! Is this a mistake ? Did I miss something ? Why no new maps, i was really looking forward to finally playing some new maps. I even set an alarm to wake up early and play SC before work 
Same, wtf is going on? Sais season ends july 1st for me.
|
Elentos
55594 Posts
On June 20 2016 18:50 genghiswolve wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 16:17 TequilaMockingbird wrote:So I am a little confused... I just played my placement match for season 3, but the maps are still the same - and its says season ends on june 24th ?! Is this a mistake ? Did I miss something ? Why no new maps, i was really looking forward to finally playing some new maps. I even set an alarm to wake up early and play SC before work Same, wtf is going on? Sais season ends july 1st for me.
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/20745075835
Bullshit to start a new season for 3 weeks and not even change the maps, honestly. This season is hardly worth playing.
|
On June 20 2016 19:06 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 18:50 genghiswolve wrote:On June 20 2016 16:17 TequilaMockingbird wrote:So I am a little confused... I just played my placement match for season 3, but the maps are still the same - and its says season ends on june 24th ?! Is this a mistake ? Did I miss something ? Why no new maps, i was really looking forward to finally playing some new maps. I even set an alarm to wake up early and play SC before work Same, wtf is going on? Sais season ends july 1st for me. http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/20745075835Bullshit to start a new season for 3 weeks and not even change the maps, honestly. This season is hardly worth playing.
why the hell do they even renew the season? just let season 2 be there for a little longer and they could've changed the maps and started season 3 when they're ready. it's really disappointing
|
queen range will kill stargate in zvp, oracles will never be worth it even against no spore and mass queen will be able to more effectively shut down phoenix midgame (which is fine, but it's all protoss really has at the moment for stable macro play)
|
On June 20 2016 19:44 redloser wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 19:06 Elentos wrote:On June 20 2016 18:50 genghiswolve wrote:On June 20 2016 16:17 TequilaMockingbird wrote:So I am a little confused... I just played my placement match for season 3, but the maps are still the same - and its says season ends on june 24th ?! Is this a mistake ? Did I miss something ? Why no new maps, i was really looking forward to finally playing some new maps. I even set an alarm to wake up early and play SC before work Same, wtf is going on? Sais season ends july 1st for me. http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/20745075835Bullshit to start a new season for 3 weeks and not even change the maps, honestly. This season is hardly worth playing. why the hell do they even renew the season? just let season 2 be there for a little longer and they could've changed the maps and started season 3 when they're ready. it's really disappointing
blizz said somewhere, that season 3 will be rly rly rly short (around 1 month), reasons are, that they wanted to put in the tlmc maps in it (which arent rdy yet to go live on ladder). another reason is, that they wanted to time the season with wcs summer championship, so that pros can train on ladder (if i remember correctly).
the new maps will come in season 4, ~ around end of july.
ah, found it:
eu.battle.net
|
United Kingdom20345 Posts
Terran have Marines, Protoss Stalkers and Zerg have to cope with slow low dmg queens. No wonder they have problems against aerial harass.
Queens are immobile due to the massive reduction in speed off-creep and being a little bit fat but they're not that low damage.
Queen AA is 12.6 DPS at 7 range for 150/0
Stalker AA is 9.7dps at 6 range (12.5 dps vs armored) for 125/50
With current stats, i think that both zerg and protoss are not good at anti air in the early to early midgame - the stuff that clearly stands out is queen immobility and stalker low DPS against air-light.
This has been brought up a lot for both races - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/505739-a-change-to-the-oracle
|
On June 20 2016 17:11 Salteador Neo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 16:52 egrimm wrote:On June 19 2016 23:30 Cyro wrote:
It's quite a big buff for a unit that's been buffed in combat strength repeatedly since WOL without having the cost changed once. I don't personally think the games with 6 queens super early or 12 queens in the midgame are fun to watch or play
(also range and mobility creep in general..) The more I look at the problems that arise in sc2 the more I'm convinced that Hydras should have been made T1.5 at hatch tech. Instead Zerg have Queens which try to do the AA job early game but are never enough so they are buffed repeatedly. Terran have Marines, Protoss Stalkers and Zerg have to cope with slow low dmg queens. No wonder they have problems against aerial harass. Well hydras do have better dps but they get one shotted by libs, while queens take 3 hits and have transfuse. So if one lib sets up behind a mineral line, then GL killing it with hydras in the early game anyway. Of course the issue is not with the hydras, but with the lib instead. A 150/150 flying unit that's supposed to be mainly AA (Blizz words) is one shotting a 100/50 ground unit.
I agree that liberator is main culprit and its harass potential (and dmg output generally) is too big and in this specific scenario (one shoting hydras + lair level hydras cost) it would be still not enough. However I was referring to the fact that Zergs have a lot of problems against aerial harass in general. Oracles, phoenixes, warp prisms, medivacs, tankivacs, libs, banshees etc. most of them would be easier if You had option to focus fire flying units faster with redesigned, hatch-level hydras (cheaper but weaker) instead of slow moving and shooting queens.
|
On June 20 2016 21:27 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +Terran have Marines, Protoss Stalkers and Zerg have to cope with slow low dmg queens. No wonder they have problems against aerial harass. Queens are immobile due to the massive reduction in speed off-creep and being a little bit fat but they're not that low damage. Queen AA is 12.6 DPS at 7 range for 150/0 Stalker AA is 9.7dps at 6 range (12.5 dps vs armored) for 125/50 With current stats, i think that both zerg and protoss are pretty bad at anti air in the early to early midgame (with zerg being immobile and protoss being weak vs non-armored) This has been brought up a lot for both races - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/505739-a-change-to-the-oracle
That's also true that stalkers are not strong in AA department. However they are easier replaced/massed with warpgates and have much better mobility with blink and higher movement speed than queens. Plus protoss have PO which deals with most aerial threats which zergs have problem with (early lib harass, tankivacs harass, banshee harass etc). As a result it is easier for protoss to deal with air harass than for zergs.
Also I'd rather have zerg early game designed around "normal, common" units (like zerglings, roaches and hydras) than queens which are quite specific unit (macro abilities plus creep spreading but also strong in certain builds especially all-ins).
|
On June 20 2016 17:11 Salteador Neo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 16:52 egrimm wrote:On June 19 2016 23:30 Cyro wrote:
It's quite a big buff for a unit that's been buffed in combat strength repeatedly since WOL without having the cost changed once. I don't personally think the games with 6 queens super early or 12 queens in the midgame are fun to watch or play
(also range and mobility creep in general..) The more I look at the problems that arise in sc2 the more I'm convinced that Hydras should have been made T1.5 at hatch tech. Instead Zerg have Queens which try to do the AA job early game but are never enough so they are buffed repeatedly. Terran have Marines, Protoss Stalkers and Zerg have to cope with slow low dmg queens. No wonder they have problems against aerial harass. Well hydras do have better dps but they get one shotted by libs, while queens take 3 hits and have transfuse. So if one lib sets up behind a mineral line, then GL killing it with hydras in the early game anyway. Of course the issue is not with the hydras, but with the lib instead. A 150/150 flying unit that's supposed to be mainly AA (Blizz words) is one shotting a 100/50 ground unit.
well hydras are horrible in almost every situation in every matchup so maybe thats part of the problem
|
Zerg needs mobility or proper AA against both T and P. Currently both have total air-dominance against zerg. When you combine this with T mobility and R/R combos you get zerg who is not able to secure fourth expansion and just dies or manages to get to ultras that are the only viable unit at the moment. Either Z needs more mobile units or some way to deal with T and P air dominance.
|
Z doesn't need more mobility, terran needs less! :D
|
On June 21 2016 05:09 LSN wrote:
Z doesn't need more mobility, terran needs less! :D
Well said.
|
On June 18 2016 03:28 [PkF] Wire wrote:
queen AA range buff would also be a huge buff in PvZ (both for killing prisms and phoenix). It's potentially a good change because as we all know Z is not in the best place currently in both mus but it could actually be far better than it sounds.
mass queen can hardly deal with mass phoenix on their own, they still need spore support so the buff doesn't really change that dynamic much really. The damage output is pretty shit for one queen so zerg would still need to invest in a couple queens per base and since liberators can't move while attacking, this seems like a fair buff that would only effect this specifically. We'll have to see how much they increase it by, I'm going to guess that the range buff will only enable the queen to hit the liberator a bit sooner when stepping into it's siege circle.
Now, it may actually be much harder to scout in ZvZ with a slow overlord, so this could make the match up a lot more volatile in the early game. shouldn't effect medivac harass because they have speed boost, I don't see it changing much else, but we'll have to see. I see how the oracle would be weaker now, do toss still open oracle against zerg?
The only thing blizzard needs to fear is how the queen would work with a nydus all-in, imagine the all-ins you're used to seeing but with queens having +1 range on anti-air, if terran opens 1-1-1 with liberator or banshee, they die.
|
United Kingdom20345 Posts
"only effect this specifically" is exactly what it won't do. It's buffing range to deal with the one outlier unit at the expense of every other unit as they all work at closer ranges
What happened to the balance test map change that gave liberators -1 range until advanced ballistics was researched? Did that never go through?
|
On June 20 2016 23:11 Scarlett` wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 17:11 Salteador Neo wrote:On June 20 2016 16:52 egrimm wrote:On June 19 2016 23:30 Cyro wrote:
It's quite a big buff for a unit that's been buffed in combat strength repeatedly since WOL without having the cost changed once. I don't personally think the games with 6 queens super early or 12 queens in the midgame are fun to watch or play
(also range and mobility creep in general..) The more I look at the problems that arise in sc2 the more I'm convinced that Hydras should have been made T1.5 at hatch tech. Instead Zerg have Queens which try to do the AA job early game but are never enough so they are buffed repeatedly. Terran have Marines, Protoss Stalkers and Zerg have to cope with slow low dmg queens. No wonder they have problems against aerial harass. Well hydras do have better dps but they get one shotted by libs, while queens take 3 hits and have transfuse. So if one lib sets up behind a mineral line, then GL killing it with hydras in the early game anyway. Of course the issue is not with the hydras, but with the lib instead. A 150/150 flying unit that's supposed to be mainly AA (Blizz words) is one shotting a 100/50 ground unit. well hydras are horrible in almost every situation in every matchup so maybe thats part of the problem
When a Korea GM says something like this, it's probably best to take note and listen.
And to the people thinking this will kill Stargate openers, it's not like Queens were swatting away Phoenix harass anyways they were more like big fat targets for pick up and kill.
I just think it's hilarious that all these years later Zerg is still suffering from the same damn problem it's always had, our offense sucks outside of all ins and aerial play in general is too strong (more like Zerg anti air defenses are just too weak).
|
I support a 15-20 HP hydra buff!
Either that or reduce the liberator ATG damage by like 5 or so or maybe just give hydras one more armor so they don't get 1 shot when liberator has +1 ship weapons. I'd love to play a hydra ling lurker ZvT!
Also maybe buff hydra movespeed off creep a little bit more :3.
|
I think this is a good idea. Those first couple of libs are a pain, and I don't think zerg should be forced into hydra to deal with a couple of libs. Also slightly weakens stargate play, which I think is a good thing.
Now please make mech viable. I love bio but I'm so sick of watching it!
|
What made mech play interesting in BW was mass vultures + mines and that they had to be replaced constantly and especially mine placement during engagements and while pushing in.
In SC2 the problem of mech is that it is so incredible easy to play. Few thros barely need any precise micro and can get out of hand and create op situations easily. Mines can be placed easily all over the map and if required moved easily to new positions, they live forever you just spam them in 1-2 factories. The only thing that is like BW is tank placement and movement but thats not much with easy SC2 macro that doesn't require you to put much effort on base management other than building few depots.
Now don't get me wrong I am all for mech style of play. It is way harder to play against mech than to play mech in SC2 tho. I am sure this is something to look at while and for making it viable by any means. I come to the conclusion that somhow marines must be required to take a part in mech-play (in a minor role). Just spamming mines that live forever and add this up with even liberators etc. isn't really a huge thing to achieve as terran, not much skill required. But in the current layout making mech viable means pretty much making terran invulnerable and invincible in several phases of the game. A bigger overhaul therefore is imo required to make mech viable and fair to play and play against. Playing vs liberators, mines, thors and tanks is a pain in the ass as zerg.
Actually tankivacs had to go, liberators should not exist at all and mines should work differently to make mech an appealing and demanding way of play. With the a general mech buff to make it viable and current liberators & mines it is getting quickly into a place where mech cannot be dealt with anymore at all once you get a minor disadvantage just because how mines and liberators work and how hard they are being engaged against once massed. The combination of these mech units would just get too strong. But thats a general problem of SC2 and the reason for why things should get nerfed all over the place instead of more buffs. The only thing I see to make it happen is if terran actually needed marines to complement it against air (at a ~20-30% army component rate).
|
And i think that Liberators overall are not the problem. The problem is how 3 larva slows Zerg's macro especially in early game, making them be so behind in midgame that they can't really exchange armies with Terran cost efficently. It's not about production in midgame, as macro hatch solves it but it's about early game economy- less larva is less drones and slower base saturation, that means slower 4th and the snowball effect begins. In the same time with Zerg's macro nerfed by 25% u got Terran and Toss with much more powerful harras (liberators,tankivacks and also adepts and disruptor drops for example). I just can't imagine how can this be fair. Mule nerf is like 10% and chrono nerf is about 5% of old ones. Not the liberators are the problem but u just cannot nerf Zergs macro so much buffing harras of other races so strong. The main problem is how LOTv economy+ mules synergies especially in BIO scenario, where Terran needs mostly minerals. And how nerfed macro of Zerg affects this race in early game, snowballing into midgame.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
