|
The Warp Prism is 50% of the problem while the Adept Shade is the other 50% of the problem, and honesty nerfing the shade is the way to go.
Warp Prisms do heavily negate defenders advantage but that's what drop ships do, they drop troops behind enemy lines, so that pretty much means that the Prism is just doing it's job. Granted, unlimited warp ins might need a tone down, pretty hilarious to watch PL matches where Hero is just pumping 9 fucking Adepts into a Zergs main every production cycle, pretty OP from a viewer perspective.
The Adept is the worse half of the problem, the Shade ability being easy to spam with no risk (allowing Protoss to forward scout without placing the unit itself at any risk let's the player perfectly choose their engagement) is a huge issue for a fresh out of the Gateway unit. It also allows the unit to be essentially in 2 places at the same time. The Adept could use a nerf at this point, watching pro league, the unit is overpowered and this game is balanced from the top down.
|
On July 23 2016 01:04 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2016 00:53 Sapphire.lux wrote:On July 22 2016 22:42 geokilla wrote:
Again Blizzard doesn't know how to fix their game. The problem is the pickup range for Warp Prism, not their health! Well, the high health makes it very forgiving to do WP shit. With lower HP, lower level Ps should loose them more often. Removing the +light damage of Liberators would take away the only interesting aspect of the unit for me: an alternative to the Thor as anti Muta. The main problem i think is the huge anti ground dmg, and that it's in direct conflict with the siege tank as a role; true that the tank is crap right now. So buff the Tank and nerf the anti ground of the Lib. There should never have been an anti ground attack for the liberator to begin with. I would go as far as to say that every single new unit they added in lotv was a design failure.
Couldn't disagree more. I think the new positional units (liberators, lurkers and disruptors) are the best things that happened to the game in a long time because they added a ton of depth to the game.
Also adepts are very cool imo and have made toss very multitasking-depending.
Ravagers suck though.
|
On July 22 2016 22:42 geokilla wrote:
Again Blizzard doesn't know how to fix their game. The problem is the pickup range for Warp Prism, not their health!
DK explained exactly why they're thinking of decreasing its health and how it impacts highly skilled players versus the rest of the player base.
generalizing your issue into "blizz does not know how to their game" is a big overstretch.
i'm unwilling to put in the time or energy to get my real APM substantially over 120. I've accepted that this means certain aspects of the game won't be accessible to me. Furthermore, I've accepted that DK and his team will spend a good portion of their time on the player base not at my level. you should accept the same thing.. you'll enjoy the game a lot more.
|
On July 23 2016 03:42 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2016 01:04 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 23 2016 00:53 Sapphire.lux wrote:On July 22 2016 22:42 geokilla wrote:
Again Blizzard doesn't know how to fix their game. The problem is the pickup range for Warp Prism, not their health! Well, the high health makes it very forgiving to do WP shit. With lower HP, lower level Ps should loose them more often. Removing the +light damage of Liberators would take away the only interesting aspect of the unit for me: an alternative to the Thor as anti Muta. The main problem i think is the huge anti ground dmg, and that it's in direct conflict with the siege tank as a role; true that the tank is crap right now. So buff the Tank and nerf the anti ground of the Lib. There should never have been an anti ground attack for the liberator to begin with. I would go as far as to say that every single new unit they added in lotv was a design failure. Couldn't disagree more. I think the new positional units (liberators, lurkers and disruptors) are the best things that happened to the game in a long time because they added a ton of depth to the game. Also adepts are very cool imo and have made toss very multitasking-depending. Ravagers suck though.
Agree 100%. Liberators, lurkers, and disruptors are bonkers strong because that's how strong they need to be to actually deter YOLO attacks in a game with good pathing and no real high ground advantage. Positional play was almost non-existent in WoL and HotS because large battles just devolved into deathballs crashing into each other ad-nauseum. LotV has gone a long way towards fixing that.
|
On July 23 2016 03:42 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2016 01:04 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 23 2016 00:53 Sapphire.lux wrote:On July 22 2016 22:42 geokilla wrote:
Again Blizzard doesn't know how to fix their game. The problem is the pickup range for Warp Prism, not their health! Well, the high health makes it very forgiving to do WP shit. With lower HP, lower level Ps should loose them more often. Removing the +light damage of Liberators would take away the only interesting aspect of the unit for me: an alternative to the Thor as anti Muta. The main problem i think is the huge anti ground dmg, and that it's in direct conflict with the siege tank as a role; true that the tank is crap right now. So buff the Tank and nerf the anti ground of the Lib. There should never have been an anti ground attack for the liberator to begin with. I would go as far as to say that every single new unit they added in lotv was a design failure. Couldn't disagree more. I think the new positional units (liberators, lurkers and disruptors) are the best things that happened to the game in a long time because they added a ton of depth to the game. Also adepts are very cool imo and have made toss very multitasking-depending. Ravagers suck though.
Positionnal units are very important I feel in every matchup. Wether both opponent have some, or one of the opponent has some and you have to screw him with a mobile comp.
TvT mech vs bio gave us the most glorious pieces of starcraft i've ever seen. Beautiful mechanic play and brilliant strategy from both sides.
However, blizzard took away the main drawbacks of positionnal units in LOTV, and that's why they're not really positionnal units. I liked the liberator concept : an insanely strong AG on a very tiny zone. However, it flies. It kinda defeats the "positionning" aspect of the unit because it doesn't really accounts for terrain, and it's so so so easy to place into abusive positions, effectively killing the beauty of the play. Who ever said "wow, these liberator positionnements are so skillfull?"
Another illustration of this problem lies with the tankivac. Tanks used to be very carefully set up in a position to exploit their range and slash at best. Now it's just "boost in and throw them wherever, it's more important to be poorly positionned fast than to be well positionned slowly". Where the tankivac gained in how microable it is, it lost in how strategic it was.
With their main weakness being their cooldown, disruptors are also not really about positioning, they're about micro. Even though we've seen some pretty awesome moves from PvP in Korea, with blink baits followed by well placed disruptors, in the EU pro scene we see them more used as a micro skillshot.
The main exception would be the lurkers, which are mobile and cloacked, but are still very position-dependant because of their "short" range and their linear AoE
Finally, the colossi, while naysayers said it's a terrible unit that promotes deathballs (which is true sometimes, and no one like that), promoted interesting positionnal play in TvP. Vikings/bio vs stalker/colossi was a constant dance between armies where the bio had to be concaving on stalkers while vikings shot colossi. And increasing how the colossus needs to be positionned well to dish out as much damage as possible for the longest time during the fight should have been the goal of its buff, not a stupid "MOAR ATTAK SPEED LOL".
I think that having a clear weakness for a positionnal unit isn't enough for it to be fun. Colossi being targetable by AA isn't enough if in most cases you can Amove it like an idiot. Tankivacs aren't about position, they're about micro and speed. Disruptors aren't about the positionning of the unit, they're a 14 range skillshot. Liberators aren't that much about positioning since the fact they fly make them more usefull to abuse shift-clic-siege-onto-mineral-lines than to occupy strategic chokes or pathways.
In LOTV, most of the "positionnal units" are simply micro intensive units that don't really require strategy, but speed of execution.
|
On July 23 2016 03:42 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2016 01:04 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 23 2016 00:53 Sapphire.lux wrote:On July 22 2016 22:42 geokilla wrote:
Again Blizzard doesn't know how to fix their game. The problem is the pickup range for Warp Prism, not their health! Well, the high health makes it very forgiving to do WP shit. With lower HP, lower level Ps should loose them more often. Removing the +light damage of Liberators would take away the only interesting aspect of the unit for me: an alternative to the Thor as anti Muta. The main problem i think is the huge anti ground dmg, and that it's in direct conflict with the siege tank as a role; true that the tank is crap right now. So buff the Tank and nerf the anti ground of the Lib. There should never have been an anti ground attack for the liberator to begin with. I would go as far as to say that every single new unit they added in lotv was a design failure. Couldn't disagree more. I think the new positional units (liberators, lurkers and disruptors) are the best things that happened to the game in a long time because they added a ton of depth to the game. Also adepts are very cool imo and have made toss very multitasking-depending. Ravagers suck though.
I agree about the lurker but that's about it. (and even there you could argue that the actual unit interactions aren't close perfect yet)
Liberators can fly which removes the positional aspect almost completely. Liberators do what tanks should do, instead of adding a new unit which is a strong siege unit it would have been better to make the tank work.
Liberators are mobile, extremely good vs air and also good vs ground. "It's absurd" tbh. I can see why terrans are fine with that though, because they need some help for lategame and simply massing liberators does exactly that (and you can use it in midgame as well) That's still bad design though.
The disruptor is an all or nothing unit. You either hit with your attack or you aren't able to do anything with it for the next while. Which means that you basically need at least as many disruptors to always have one without cd ready. I don't need units which function this way in the game.
Adapts surely can be used in a multitasking way, the problem here is that as a defender you basically need 2 times the army to defend it because of the shades. It also kinda overlaps with the zealot.
So yeah i disagree with your reasoning and still think these units are badly designed overall. It kinda works out but i would say that's more due to players adapting and the general band aid fixes blizzard is known for and not really because it's solid unit design.
|
On July 23 2016 00:06 Salteador Neo wrote:
Another way to nerf ultras other than the obvious -1armor would be... to limit queen transfuse to buildings only -.-
Mass queens turtle into invincible ultras is getting boring already. And watching 60 pop of bio never killing an ultra because of armor+transfuses is just lame as an spectator.
ghost?
|
On July 23 2016 06:51 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2016 03:42 Charoisaur wrote:On July 23 2016 01:04 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 23 2016 00:53 Sapphire.lux wrote:On July 22 2016 22:42 geokilla wrote:
Again Blizzard doesn't know how to fix their game. The problem is the pickup range for Warp Prism, not their health! Well, the high health makes it very forgiving to do WP shit. With lower HP, lower level Ps should loose them more often. Removing the +light damage of Liberators would take away the only interesting aspect of the unit for me: an alternative to the Thor as anti Muta. The main problem i think is the huge anti ground dmg, and that it's in direct conflict with the siege tank as a role; true that the tank is crap right now. So buff the Tank and nerf the anti ground of the Lib. There should never have been an anti ground attack for the liberator to begin with. I would go as far as to say that every single new unit they added in lotv was a design failure. Couldn't disagree more. I think the new positional units (liberators, lurkers and disruptors) are the best things that happened to the game in a long time because they added a ton of depth to the game. Also adepts are very cool imo and have made toss very multitasking-depending. Ravagers suck though. Positionnal units are very important I feel in every matchup. Wether both opponent have some, or one of the opponent has some and you have to screw him with a mobile comp. TvT mech vs bio gave us the most glorious pieces of starcraft i've ever seen. Beautiful mechanic play and brilliant strategy from both sides. However, blizzard took away the main drawbacks of positionnal units in LOTV, and that's why they're not really positionnal units. I liked the liberator concept : an insanely strong AG on a very tiny zone. However, it flies. It kinda defeats the "positionning" aspect of the unit because it doesn't really accounts for terrain, and it's so so so easy to place into abusive positions, effectively killing the beauty of the play. Who ever said "wow, these liberator positionnements are so skillfull?" Another illustration of this problem lies with the tankivac. Tanks used to be very carefully set up in a position to exploit their range and slash at best. Now it's just "boost in and throw them wherever, it's more important to be poorly positionned fast than to be well positionned slowly". Where the tankivac gained in how microable it is, it lost in how strategic it was. With their main weakness being their cooldown, disruptors are also not really about positioning, they're about micro. Even though we've seen some pretty awesome moves from PvP in Korea, with blink baits followed by well placed disruptors, in the EU pro scene we see them more used as a micro skillshot. The main exception would be the lurkers, which are mobile and cloacked, but are still very position-dependant because of their "short" range and their linear AoE Finally, the colossi, while naysayers said it's a terrible unit that promotes deathballs (which is true sometimes, and no one like that), promoted interesting positionnal play in TvP. Vikings/bio vs stalker/colossi was a constant dance between armies where the bio had to be concaving on stalkers while vikings shot colossi. And increasing how the colossus needs to be positionned well to dish out as much damage as possible for the longest time during the fight should have been the goal of its buff, not a stupid "MOAR ATTAK SPEED LOL". I think that having a clear weakness for a positionnal unit isn't enough for it to be fun. Colossi being targetable by AA isn't enough if in most cases you can Amove it like an idiot. Tankivacs aren't about position, they're about micro and speed. Disruptors aren't about the positionning of the unit, they're a 14 range skillshot. Liberators aren't that much about positioning since the fact they fly make them more usefull to abuse shift-clic-siege-onto-mineral-lines than to occupy strategic chokes or pathways. In LOTV, most of the "positionnal units" are simply micro intensive units that don't really require strategy, but speed of execution.
I agree 100%. Tankivac is the main reason why I didn't buy LotV.
|
to early to make the call
to early to make the call
to early to make the call
to early to make the call
to early to make the call
to early to make the call
to early to make the call
to early to make the call
to early to make the call
to early to make the call
to early to make the call
to early to make the call
to early to make the call
User was temp banned for this post.
|
Too early?
SC2 has been out for 6 years.
Battle Cruisers have been terrible for 6 years. It is in fact far too late.
I remember during the early parts of HOTS Beta, people were claiming that it was too early for big changes, but early in the Beta was precisely when big changes should have been made. The later stages are for polishing the big changes.
But there is no point in polishing something when you know it will look terrible once polished. And so here we are, big changes need to happen to SC2 if we want to bring it to the next level. It is shameful that BC's are so bad, that Ultralisks have so much armor, ect... Most of the educated community agrees on basic small changes that would improve the game, but Blizzard can't do them, because they don't have the ability to recognize good ideas and weed out bad ideas from the game. Nevermind the real sweeping changes that only a part of the community, people knowledgeable in game design recognize that could greatly improve the game that Blizzard is totally oblivious to.
We see it in this very thread with positional play, Blizzard just doesn't seem to understand the strategy of it and what it adds to the game. It reminds me of the people I used to play the original DOTA against when it was first released, a lot of them said my preferred hero Zeus took no skill because you just casted single abilities that couldn't miss. But the skill wasn't being able to cast the abilities, it was when you casted said abilities. And we all know those people were wrong and what happened with MOBAs.
The skill in positional play is being able to force the more mobile but less powerful army into a direct fight, while not being outflanked and outmaneuvered. That can require extreme skill and strategy that taxes your brain, but Blizzard just wants to tax our hands with Tankivacs.
SC2 had so much potential. But it seems destined to be be remembered as a good game, with quality somewhere inbetween BW (and no, I didn't play BW and am not some fanboy wanting SC2 to be BW, but as I write this about there is more than twice as many people watching BW streams than SC2 streams. Great games last forever and the proof is always in the pudding, or in this case, the stream numbers) and Diablo III.
But not a great game.
|
On July 23 2016 06:51 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2016 03:42 Charoisaur wrote:On July 23 2016 01:04 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 23 2016 00:53 Sapphire.lux wrote:On July 22 2016 22:42 geokilla wrote:
Again Blizzard doesn't know how to fix their game. The problem is the pickup range for Warp Prism, not their health! Well, the high health makes it very forgiving to do WP shit. With lower HP, lower level Ps should loose them more often. Removing the +light damage of Liberators would take away the only interesting aspect of the unit for me: an alternative to the Thor as anti Muta. The main problem i think is the huge anti ground dmg, and that it's in direct conflict with the siege tank as a role; true that the tank is crap right now. So buff the Tank and nerf the anti ground of the Lib. There should never have been an anti ground attack for the liberator to begin with. I would go as far as to say that every single new unit they added in lotv was a design failure. Couldn't disagree more. I think the new positional units (liberators, lurkers and disruptors) are the best things that happened to the game in a long time because they added a ton of depth to the game. Also adepts are very cool imo and have made toss very multitasking-depending. Ravagers suck though. Positionnal units are very important I feel in every matchup. Wether both opponent have some, or one of the opponent has some and you have to screw him with a mobile comp. TvT mech vs bio gave us the most glorious pieces of starcraft i've ever seen. Beautiful mechanic play and brilliant strategy from both sides. However, blizzard took away the main drawbacks of positionnal units in LOTV, and that's why they're not really positionnal units. I liked the liberator concept : an insanely strong AG on a very tiny zone. However, it flies. It kinda defeats the "positionning" aspect of the unit because it doesn't really accounts for terrain, and it's so so so easy to place into abusive positions, effectively killing the beauty of the play. Who ever said "wow, these liberator positionnements are so skillfull?" Another illustration of this problem lies with the tankivac. Tanks used to be very carefully set up in a position to exploit their range and slash at best. Now it's just "boost in and throw them wherever, it's more important to be poorly positionned fast than to be well positionned slowly". Where the tankivac gained in how microable it is, it lost in how strategic it was. With their main weakness being their cooldown, disruptors are also not really about positioning, they're about micro. Even though we've seen some pretty awesome moves from PvP in Korea, with blink baits followed by well placed disruptors, in the EU pro scene we see them more used as a micro skillshot. The main exception would be the lurkers, which are mobile and cloacked, but are still very position-dependant because of their "short" range and their linear AoE Finally, the colossi, while naysayers said it's a terrible unit that promotes deathballs (which is true sometimes, and no one like that), promoted interesting positionnal play in TvP. Vikings/bio vs stalker/colossi was a constant dance between armies where the bio had to be concaving on stalkers while vikings shot colossi. And increasing how the colossus needs to be positionned well to dish out as much damage as possible for the longest time during the fight should have been the goal of its buff, not a stupid "MOAR ATTAK SPEED LOL". I think that having a clear weakness for a positionnal unit isn't enough for it to be fun. Colossi being targetable by AA isn't enough if in most cases you can Amove it like an idiot. Tankivacs aren't about position, they're about micro and speed. Disruptors aren't about the positionning of the unit, they're a 14 range skillshot. Liberators aren't that much about positioning since the fact they fly make them more usefull to abuse shift-clic-siege-onto-mineral-lines than to occupy strategic chokes or pathways. In LOTV, most of the "positionnal units" are simply micro intensive units that don't really require strategy, but speed of execution.
Yup, couldn't agree more. All to make the game more "exciting" for viewers, no one gave two shits about the players. RTS imo is about building stuff and securing/expanding your territory, lots of people complained about games being too long and boring to watch (ok, 2h turtle mech vs SH was hard to endure, but it didn't happen THAT often), when in fact those games had strategical beauty from a player perspective.
LotV economy changes killed that methodical approach, it's all about mobility and while that may be exciting for the average viewer, I'd really like some diversity here as a player.
|
Revert back to HOTS delete all LOTV units except for Liberator
|
On July 23 2016 17:32 this might work wrote:
Revert back to HOTS delete all LOTV units except for Liberator
That won't work.
|
why? just make custom map in HOTS and lets see
|
On July 23 2016 17:34 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2016 17:32 this might work wrote:
Revert back to HOTS delete all LOTV units except for Liberator That won't work.
It'll work wonders for terran. 
|
On July 23 2016 17:53 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2016 17:34 Elentos wrote:On July 23 2016 17:32 this might work wrote:
Revert back to HOTS delete all LOTV units except for Liberator That won't work. It'll work wonders for terran.
indeed. they will finally get the siegetank they deserve. only its flying 
|
no u retard atleast we get something against the mutalisk and voidray oracle phoenix early game in HOTS u fuckin shit the ground is just bonus
User was temp banned for this post.
|
^ Well that escalated quickly 
|
On July 23 2016 16:56 Creager wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2016 06:51 JackONeill wrote:On July 23 2016 03:42 Charoisaur wrote:On July 23 2016 01:04 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 23 2016 00:53 Sapphire.lux wrote:On July 22 2016 22:42 geokilla wrote:
Again Blizzard doesn't know how to fix their game. The problem is the pickup range for Warp Prism, not their health! Well, the high health makes it very forgiving to do WP shit. With lower HP, lower level Ps should loose them more often. Removing the +light damage of Liberators would take away the only interesting aspect of the unit for me: an alternative to the Thor as anti Muta. The main problem i think is the huge anti ground dmg, and that it's in direct conflict with the siege tank as a role; true that the tank is crap right now. So buff the Tank and nerf the anti ground of the Lib. There should never have been an anti ground attack for the liberator to begin with. I would go as far as to say that every single new unit they added in lotv was a design failure. Couldn't disagree more. I think the new positional units (liberators, lurkers and disruptors) are the best things that happened to the game in a long time because they added a ton of depth to the game. Also adepts are very cool imo and have made toss very multitasking-depending. Ravagers suck though. Positionnal units are very important I feel in every matchup. Wether both opponent have some, or one of the opponent has some and you have to screw him with a mobile comp. TvT mech vs bio gave us the most glorious pieces of starcraft i've ever seen. Beautiful mechanic play and brilliant strategy from both sides. However, blizzard took away the main drawbacks of positionnal units in LOTV, and that's why they're not really positionnal units. I liked the liberator concept : an insanely strong AG on a very tiny zone. However, it flies. It kinda defeats the "positionning" aspect of the unit because it doesn't really accounts for terrain, and it's so so so easy to place into abusive positions, effectively killing the beauty of the play. Who ever said "wow, these liberator positionnements are so skillfull?" Another illustration of this problem lies with the tankivac. Tanks used to be very carefully set up in a position to exploit their range and slash at best. Now it's just "boost in and throw them wherever, it's more important to be poorly positionned fast than to be well positionned slowly". Where the tankivac gained in how microable it is, it lost in how strategic it was. With their main weakness being their cooldown, disruptors are also not really about positioning, they're about micro. Even though we've seen some pretty awesome moves from PvP in Korea, with blink baits followed by well placed disruptors, in the EU pro scene we see them more used as a micro skillshot. The main exception would be the lurkers, which are mobile and cloacked, but are still very position-dependant because of their "short" range and their linear AoE Finally, the colossi, while naysayers said it's a terrible unit that promotes deathballs (which is true sometimes, and no one like that), promoted interesting positionnal play in TvP. Vikings/bio vs stalker/colossi was a constant dance between armies where the bio had to be concaving on stalkers while vikings shot colossi. And increasing how the colossus needs to be positionned well to dish out as much damage as possible for the longest time during the fight should have been the goal of its buff, not a stupid "MOAR ATTAK SPEED LOL". I think that having a clear weakness for a positionnal unit isn't enough for it to be fun. Colossi being targetable by AA isn't enough if in most cases you can Amove it like an idiot. Tankivacs aren't about position, they're about micro and speed. Disruptors aren't about the positionning of the unit, they're a 14 range skillshot. Liberators aren't that much about positioning since the fact they fly make them more usefull to abuse shift-clic-siege-onto-mineral-lines than to occupy strategic chokes or pathways. In LOTV, most of the "positionnal units" are simply micro intensive units that don't really require strategy, but speed of execution. Yup, couldn't agree more. All to make the game more "exciting" for viewers, no one gave two shits about the players. RTS imo is about building stuff and securing/expanding your territory, lots of people complained about games being too long and boring to watch (ok, 2h turtle mech vs SH was hard to endure, but it didn't happen THAT often), when in fact those games had strategical beauty from a player perspective. LotV economy changes killed that methodical approach, it's all about mobility and while that may be exciting for the average viewer, I'd really like some diversity here as a player.
I'm a very fervant supporter of bringing back strategy in LOTV, and mainly through positional units, but SH were just cancer. Just like late HOTS mech play was cancer too. Why ? Because it was never worth it to attack. Which is something that happen whenever one race has a garanteed win late game. Innovation mech style, which was the best mech style was about never attacking and splitting the map in two, because the mech army was always more cost effective than the zerg army.
Turtly comps are okay if they :
1) are able to perform strong timing pushes
2) are eventually weaker than a late game air comp
3) aren't able to transition to an air comp too easily
For instance : right now mech play in TvZ is kinda weak but very fun. You are :
1) able to do very strong timing pushes : tanks/hellbats/liberators go through roach/hydra like butter, and hellbats/mines/thors/liberators go through LBM
2) your mech army will be eventually terrible against BL/corru/viper, so while you're not playing under a timer you can't split the map like an idiot
3) because bases are depleated very quickly, you don't have the money to transition into mass libs/vikings/raven/ghosts (for instance) quickly, and you can't go straight to this composition because it's too expansive and you're gonna die for sure on the way there.
I play mech at high masters/low GM level, and it's tons of fun. Because you're able to have a mid game comp that moves on the map while you're building your "frontal push" army. With hellion/cyclones you can go out on the map and snipe workers, or even bases with the lock, while getting some liberators, tanks and thors at home.
That's why i'd very much like for the cyclone to be brought down to 3 pop and have a little HP increase. If they had 150 hps, they'd still be very fragile and 3 pop would still make them unmassable and cost inefficient. And because they allow a mech style that can move around the map, that's tons of fun.
|
On July 23 2016 21:33 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2016 16:56 Creager wrote:On July 23 2016 06:51 JackONeill wrote:On July 23 2016 03:42 Charoisaur wrote:On July 23 2016 01:04 The_Red_Viper wrote:On July 23 2016 00:53 Sapphire.lux wrote:On July 22 2016 22:42 geokilla wrote:
Again Blizzard doesn't know how to fix their game. The problem is the pickup range for Warp Prism, not their health! Well, the high health makes it very forgiving to do WP shit. With lower HP, lower level Ps should loose them more often. Removing the +light damage of Liberators would take away the only interesting aspect of the unit for me: an alternative to the Thor as anti Muta. The main problem i think is the huge anti ground dmg, and that it's in direct conflict with the siege tank as a role; true that the tank is crap right now. So buff the Tank and nerf the anti ground of the Lib. There should never have been an anti ground attack for the liberator to begin with. I would go as far as to say that every single new unit they added in lotv was a design failure. Couldn't disagree more. I think the new positional units (liberators, lurkers and disruptors) are the best things that happened to the game in a long time because they added a ton of depth to the game. Also adepts are very cool imo and have made toss very multitasking-depending. Ravagers suck though. Positionnal units are very important I feel in every matchup. Wether both opponent have some, or one of the opponent has some and you have to screw him with a mobile comp. TvT mech vs bio gave us the most glorious pieces of starcraft i've ever seen. Beautiful mechanic play and brilliant strategy from both sides. However, blizzard took away the main drawbacks of positionnal units in LOTV, and that's why they're not really positionnal units. I liked the liberator concept : an insanely strong AG on a very tiny zone. However, it flies. It kinda defeats the "positionning" aspect of the unit because it doesn't really accounts for terrain, and it's so so so easy to place into abusive positions, effectively killing the beauty of the play. Who ever said "wow, these liberator positionnements are so skillfull?" Another illustration of this problem lies with the tankivac. Tanks used to be very carefully set up in a position to exploit their range and slash at best. Now it's just "boost in and throw them wherever, it's more important to be poorly positionned fast than to be well positionned slowly". Where the tankivac gained in how microable it is, it lost in how strategic it was. With their main weakness being their cooldown, disruptors are also not really about positioning, they're about micro. Even though we've seen some pretty awesome moves from PvP in Korea, with blink baits followed by well placed disruptors, in the EU pro scene we see them more used as a micro skillshot. The main exception would be the lurkers, which are mobile and cloacked, but are still very position-dependant because of their "short" range and their linear AoE Finally, the colossi, while naysayers said it's a terrible unit that promotes deathballs (which is true sometimes, and no one like that), promoted interesting positionnal play in TvP. Vikings/bio vs stalker/colossi was a constant dance between armies where the bio had to be concaving on stalkers while vikings shot colossi. And increasing how the colossus needs to be positionned well to dish out as much damage as possible for the longest time during the fight should have been the goal of its buff, not a stupid "MOAR ATTAK SPEED LOL". I think that having a clear weakness for a positionnal unit isn't enough for it to be fun. Colossi being targetable by AA isn't enough if in most cases you can Amove it like an idiot. Tankivacs aren't about position, they're about micro and speed. Disruptors aren't about the positionning of the unit, they're a 14 range skillshot. Liberators aren't that much about positioning since the fact they fly make them more usefull to abuse shift-clic-siege-onto-mineral-lines than to occupy strategic chokes or pathways. In LOTV, most of the "positionnal units" are simply micro intensive units that don't really require strategy, but speed of execution. Yup, couldn't agree more. All to make the game more "exciting" for viewers, no one gave two shits about the players. RTS imo is about building stuff and securing/expanding your territory, lots of people complained about games being too long and boring to watch (ok, 2h turtle mech vs SH was hard to endure, but it didn't happen THAT often), when in fact those games had strategical beauty from a player perspective. LotV economy changes killed that methodical approach, it's all about mobility and while that may be exciting for the average viewer, I'd really like some diversity here as a player. I'm a very fervant supporter of bringing back strategy in LOTV, and mainly through positional units, but SH were just cancer. Just like late HOTS mech play was cancer too. Why ? Because it was never worth it to attack. Which is something that happen whenever one race has a garanteed win late game. Innovation mech style, which was the best mech style was about never attacking and splitting the map in two, because the mech army was always more cost effective than the zerg army. Turtly comps are okay if they : 1) are able to perform strong timing pushes 2) are eventually weaker than a late game air comp 3) aren't able to transition to an air comp too easily For instance : right now mech play in TvZ is kinda weak but very fun. You are : 1) able to do very strong timing pushes : tanks/hellbats/liberators go through roach/hydra like butter, and hellbats/mines/thors/liberators go through LBM 2) your mech army will be eventually terrible against BL/corru/viper, so while you're not playing under a timer you can't split the map like an idiot 3) because bases are depleated very quickly, you don't have the money to transition into mass libs/vikings/raven/ghosts (for instance) quickly, and you can't go straight to this composition because it's too expansive and you're gonna die for sure on the way there. I play mech at high masters/low GM level, and it's tons of fun. Because you're able to have a mid game comp that moves on the map while you're building your "frontal push" army. With hellion/cyclones you can go out on the map and snipe workers, or even bases with the lock, while getting some liberators, tanks and thors at home. That's why i'd very much like for the cyclone to be brought down to 3 pop and have a little HP increase. If they had 150 hps, they'd still be very fragile and 3 pop would still make them unmassable and cost inefficient. And because they allow a mech style that can move around the map, that's tons of fun.
I didn't want to advocate for HotS Swarm Hosts in any way
But I don't see that much of a problem with not having to attack, if it gives me the highest win chance, why not go for it. It's actually VERY hard to do correctly as a single mistake could easily cost you the game, so there's room to exploit for the opponent. I agree that transitioning into air shouldn't be THAT easy, but current comps kinda always have to include a fair amount of Liberators so your argument seems kinda contradicting (at least when looking at current balance).
Apparently we have slightly different views of what defines "mech" play, as I don't want it do be just "another mobile composition" coming out of the factory, but actually being able to put pressure on your opponent by entrechning certain positions on the map (siege tank lines around watch towers), thus having a different strategical approach from the get-go as opposed to MMM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
