|
On July 05 2016 22:14 JackONeill wrote:
I don't really know if the main issue with adept shade is design related, or "easiness of execution" related.
What I mean is that just like with liberators, it's so easy to warp adepts in a mineral line, and send shades into the next mineral line. It's extremly easy, just like sieging a liberator onto a mineral line is also very easy.
However, both force a very APM heavy reaction. Running after adepts with bio or roaches, or shooing away a liberator requires a huge amount of attention, and even then, you still can end up eating a lot of damage even with an overall good reaction.
Same. We used to complain about Oracles, but at least they get exhausted from energy pretty fast, the unit is easy to kill with most AA units (at least in equal cost value), defence, and it kinda forces early game commitement to that stargate which is bad (Stargate has not the great synergy that a RaxStarport can bring to Terran).
Liberators, in comparaison, feel kinda stupid. Easy siege and worker kills and destroys any ground units under the siege area (which is not that small) insanely fast because has the highest DPS in the game.
The thing with Adepts is trickier, because actually any kind of Warp/drop can be insane, it's not exclusive to Protoss. Doom drops are Terran's signature. I would relate this problem to how vulnerable shit is if you don't have an army. Toss can drop some Pylon overcharge, Zerg has some queens which is something, but Terran doesn't have ground defense until they commit to Fortress, and the Macro is balanced around having Orbitals so you'll never have much base defense.
Regarding the early game harass, they also feel destructive to me. But I always thought that the unit was poorly designed. IMAO they could have tried with some retuning to Zealot move speed (2.5/2.75) and having Adepts as a midgame unit with different balance, because Adepts are actually ranged Zealots considering how much damage they are able to pull before dying and health pools. With that in mind, Protoss could still be active around the map and early game pressure would still be possible in a manly way. I guess that since LotV threw all the PvT mechancs away with the introduction of the Adept, it would be interesting if they reevaluated both units and tested some changes. If it doesn't break PvZ, that would be a great improvement.
|
Change Cylcone, Change Thor, Delete Tankivac. Are any of these being tested internally now?
|
On July 06 2016 04:21 PressureSC2 wrote:
Change Cylcone, Change Thor, Delete Tankivac. Are any of these being tested internally now?
I guess Cyclone is tested contiously, Thor only really needs buffs to shine because it's plainly bad as a T3 unit in most cases.
The thing about tankivac is that it surely needs rebalance. It is actually a good idea and dinamizes Mech a lot, but can be exploited easily. In my opinion, it could be very easy to rebalance:
- Add 50 or 100 cost investigation, with mid-low downtime, delaying the early game pressure.
- Add some delays to the pick up thing, since it's insanely easy to pick up tanks to avoid projectiles. The interaction about siegevac should feel kinda different mechanically, same with Thor.
Thors really need something, they feel very underwhelming. A very small AoE effect on hit, 2.25 speed (same as bio) and +1 armor would help them insanely.
|
Buffing the cyclone slightly would be perfectly okay because it doesn't synergize at all with bio. It'd help terrans to explore some new compositions.
I'm thinking reverting to 3 population, adding something like 15 or 20 hps on the thing, and lowering slightly the build time. Maybe at the cost of reducing slightly its movespeed.
Thor could simply use an upgrade that allows it to shoot it's AA weapon while shooting with its AG weapon. Many of the situations where the thor sucks balls is when it starts targeting the wrong stuff, and that since its autoattack cooldowns are very long, you loose 1-2 seconds to refocus.
A 150/150 armory-required upgrade that takes a long time (as long as stim) to research would be nice. Maybe +1 native armor would be fair too, thor having only 1 armor is kinda stupid for sure.
Of course these buff would need to be accompanied by slight nerfs of the overused crap (liberator and tankivac abuse in every single MU). For instance, increasing the tankivac shooting delay, and nerfing the liberator AG from 85 to 70 to 2 shot hydras and 3 shot protoss gate units?
These buffs might seem very strong, but they'd even out terran :
- encourages terrans to expore other compositions. Mech could be a thing in TvP with cylones? Mech could be decent in TvZ? It'd be a good thing to see new terran comps
- would allow for some slight nerfs on over-emphasised units (liberator-tankivac)
- doesn't synergize with bio (except for the thor, but in TvZ late game scenarii where terran needs help) so current pro scene won't be plagued by blatant abuse
|
Blizzard has a tendency to try already tested numbers when making balance changes, so I fully expect the next Cyclone buff (if there is one) to be a reduction in supply back to 3 or an increase in HP to 160 which were both tested in the beta.
|
On July 06 2016 05:52 JackONeill wrote:
Buffing the cyclone slightly would be perfectly okay because it doesn't synergize at all with bio. It'd help terrans to explore some new compositions.
I'm thinking reverting to 3 population, adding something like 15 or 20 hps on the thing, and lowering slightly the build time. Maybe at the cost of reducing slightly its movespeed.
Thor could simply use an upgrade that allows it to shoot it's AA weapon while shooting with its AG weapon. Many of the situations where the thor sucks balls is when it starts targeting the wrong stuff, and that since its autoattack cooldowns are very long, you loose 1-2 seconds to refocus.
A 150/150 armory-required upgrade that takes a long time (as long as stim) to research would be nice. Maybe +1 native armor would be fair too, thor having only 1 armor is kinda stupid for sure.
Of course these buff would need to be accompanied by slight nerfs of the overused crap (liberator and tankivac abuse in every single MU). For instance, increasing the tankivac shooting delay, and nerfing the liberator AG from 85 to 70 to 2 shot hydras and 3 shot protoss gate units?
These buffs might seem very strong, but they'd even out terran :
- encourages terrans to expore other compositions. Mech could be a thing in TvP with cylones? Mech could be decent in TvZ? It'd be a good thing to see new terran comps
- would allow for some slight nerfs on over-emphasised units (liberator-tankivac)
- doesn't synergize with bio (except for the thor, but in TvZ late game scenarii where terran needs help) so current pro scene won't be plagued by blatant abuse
1 thing I've been spamming for 1 year could be interesting too.
Hellions or Banshees not being light (keep it on Hellbats). Both things would make Mech much powerful vs Protoss while not affecting TvZ much, specially since the only Zerg unit that deals bonus dmage vs light are banelings and they are not the real counter to Hellions, and the only real unit that cares a ton about light armor in air battles are phoenixes.
|
All these patches are incredibly small. At the current rate of patching, by the time they fix everything, nobody will be playing the game anymore. They need to do a lot of big changes to the design to fix the fundamentals of the game, then maybe give players a month to adjust, then balance around the results.
|
Even if the game is "balanced" at the top. everything below that is facing a lot annoying stuff non stop, gimmicky stuff. Everytime im in the mood to play sc2 it disappears within 2 games. Pylon msc stalker rush while expanding and not much later a third base. 8 armor ultralisks, invincible nydus, liberator range, the insane buffed crackling, hyperfast cheap warprism with huge pick up range, 4 supply tempest, the list is endless. LOTV feels so coinflippy.
Its "only" 8 months since the release of LOTV and it we are still facing the same stuff the community complained about during the beta. The game is imho not fun as terran (like HTOmario said as well and so many others).
|
If only the SC2 team could be as proactive as the HotS team. Just today they released a game changing major balance patch greatly affecting more than 10 heroes, and much more. They are still actively cranking out new content as well. Where is that amount of support for SC2?
|
On July 06 2016 09:19 PinoKotsBeer wrote:
Even if the game is "balanced" at the top. everything below that is facing a lot annoying stuff non stop, gimmicky stuff. Everytime im in the mood to play sc2 it disappears within 2 games. Pylon msc stalker rush while expanding and not much later a third base. 8 armor ultralisks, invincible nydus, liberator range, the insane buffed crackling, hyperfast cheap warprism with huge pick up range, 4 supply tempest, the list is endless. LOTV feels so coinflippy.
Its "only" 8 months since the release of LOTV and it we are still facing the same stuff the community complained about during the beta. The game is imho not fun as terran (like HTOmario said as well and so many others).
I don't think lotv feels coin flippy at all. If I lose its because I got outplayed. That's it.
|
On July 05 2016 23:48 Railgan wrote:
Why do people compare this Queen buff to the WoL one? This is not about making Queens able to easily defend against all harrassment (like they did in WoL as the only T harrass were Hellions...).
Because people love hyperbole
|
Ok, lets sum it up:
In TvZ zerg is forced into it's least mobile unit composition while terran uses maximum mobility units like liberators, tankivacs, stimmed bio, dropped bio and helions. Zerg is very fragile and is to play the defenders game with inferior defence mechanics. Any sort of semi commitment aggression or counter aggression can be shut down easily by the superior defence mechanics of terran.
Now what you do is to buff queens and spore crawlers. What for? So that zerg can defend better.
Will it change anything fundamental? No.
I tell you what. If you think anyone is having fun playing the defenders game with zerg in every game with the least mobile composition of units aside of some korean masochits, you are mistaken (actually I guess not even them). Ravagers were to become a bit of an exception and allow zerg to get offensive but it really doesn't cut it for me and is the wrong choice: It only makes the matchup more fragile as massing ravagers is a thing and anything else isn't.
In a healthy state of the game the roles should be the other way round. Zerg in the offensive position to abuse it's mobility and terran in the defensive position to abuse what they can achieve with only very few units at defending.
Mission failed.
Why?
1. Even if you get winrates right, it still will hardly be fun to play.
2. TvZ is fragile. Ravager massing is strong. Little shifts in the meta might enable zerg to overpower terran with roach/ravagers in many games. Ultralisk follow up as well.
3. Everything which is too strong can be massed and built too early. Very few adaptions needed, both build their best composition from minute one, no variability, barely any progress through the techs and units. Terran just masses bio, liberator and tankivacs from the beginning. Zerg masses roaches/ravagers only and potentially later transitions into utlralisks and air if the game lasts as long.
SC2 is rightfully to decline in this state. I don't see many people having fun with it (the opposite).
So what would be right for sc2?
Bring back and stretch early and midgame. Liberators shouldn't be an option for harrassment but an endgame unit, ravagers should be available alot later only. Bio should lose marauder so that lurkers can get a sooner but weaker appearance and positional play tanks vs. lurkers gets a place (bw-like). Nerf baneling dmg by 50%, etc. (not listing every detail now). Adjust endgame so that zerg has a weaker 200/200 army and is forced to engage terran all the time to not let him get to 200/200. Easy as that. I would love to play that as both terran and zerg. It would feel right as you can abuse each race's strenth which is unit efficiency as terran and mobility and quickly shifting units as zerg.
Strengthen strenghts instead of weaken weaknesses! What you do is the opposite. You weaken zergs weakness which is defending. And yes therefore it is fundamentally wrong. You haven't understood your own game the slightest.
|
I'm curious about his nunchuck skills tho
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
