|
The more i see and play, i feel like the changes have been very well thought out; not just as individual units as has been the case till now, but in terms of synergy within a race AND against other races. A lot of thinking and testing has gone in to this IMO. Color me impressed data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c81e3/c81e334f952fa6a3b77a0f55297a8c05972c04b5" alt=""
On the negative side, blink DTs feel complete BS lol. Maybe we are supposed to build turrets everywhere or something but the scan is a waste right now. The SH is also highly abbusable at such a low price, but maybe that is to be expected at this stage.
|
If you want tier 2 units like cylone become tempest,carrier,BCs counter then terran's tier 3 will stay useless. BCs vs carriers is dank as fuck but its hard to figure out how to transition due to mech army is gas heavy already. About mass air case.I think they dont need to creat good ground anti air units,just give air units more weakness to force player add another units. That why we saw mass tempests but not mass broodlord.
|
I'm glad they're finally taking a more radical approach to changing the game but it's obvious the chief reason they're doing this is because SC2's viewer count is becoming RIDICULOUSLY low. It's too late, unfortunately.
|
On August 18 2016 02:29 Pugfarmer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2016 01:40 Clbull wrote: There is an instant win TvZ all-in build where you make Reactor Factory at the start and spam Cyclones (and Hellions when you don't have the gas for Cyclones) and just rush your opponent while he's on two bases.
There is nothing that the Zerg player can do to hold it. Mass lings are too weak to kill the Cyclones, Roaches get hard-countered, Spine Crawlers get hard-countered, and a combination of lings, roaches and spines isn't really possible without weaker overall army numbers.
Even if you do survive, you're still on two bases, you likely sacrificed drones to hold, and your Terran opponent is now on two bases, likely producing more Cyclones and Hellions, and is now teching up to his third base and to Starport. This is correct. I've seen Hydra absolutely demolish this. It depends how many hellions and how many cyclones and then lings are also good. But yeah, mineral only armies of ling queen can get punished hard.
|
Just from looking at some streams, feels like cyclones and tanks overlap in the role of "ground unit that destroys armored units". For the tank it feels just right, since it's slow and static when attacking and has clear counters (like melee units on top of them, or air units).
Cyclones need to be better against air and worse vs ground than in their current iteration. Otherwise it's back to the old ways, with other ground units standing no chance against mech but any strong air army hardcountering it.
|
maybe its only fair terran had their own version of a protoss lawnmower aka Colossus hots, which absolutely trampled anything on foot (or wheels).
'Let the meta settle' was it, right ?
|
I agree with others who have said that cyclone AA is too weak. it should be strong against air and only decent against ground (like the goliath). widow mines help with anti-air, especially against light flyers. however, they can't really do anything against brood lords, liberators, carriers or tempests. I don't like the overlap between thors and cyclones. thors are terrible, clunky units that are joyless to use (unless you boost them everywhere with medivacs).
ideally, I'd like to see thors and cyclones combined into a cheap, reliable infantry mech with strong, long-range AA and mediocre ground attack (the goliath). give the thor the old yeller treatment. keep the movement speed and unit model of the cyclone, but give it all the goliath's attack characteristics, plus some kind of range upgrade with armory+techlab requirement.
|
I did'nt tested out the new map yet, but after playing a decent quantity of game lately, i agree with a precedent post that says that gateway units could get weaker ability and stronger stats, or a slight nerf to P aoes in a way or another, and boost gateway unit. I mean i feel like chargelots are just useless right now, their ONLY utility (to me) is to flank&destroy a base in PvZ late game, in PvT you generally found PF which make them useless, i'd better warp adept and shade them behind the mineral line. PvP mid/late i feel like they melt on adepts, making them sucks even if they avoid apm-less the disruptor Ball. Better doing Photons if i got that much minerals.
A match-up that really frustate me lately is PvT, the P bioball is so damn weak against the T ones, even with upgrades, that you ABSOLUTELY have to rely on aoe for defend, in PvZ i feel like it's more fair, because Z don't have all the movement possibility that MMM have, but vs T i feel like the positionnement of aoes &MC must be perfect in defensive phase of drop + agression if you don't want to lose key structures or bleed out too much unit, where even if this require APM, the T just have to drop where it's annoying which is'nt hard. Really those fight where your bioball melt &almost deal no damage due to Medivac are pretty raging. I don't think a massive rework is necessary, but if in this change they could tone down this situation a bit i feel like players could enjoy more the game.
|
On August 18 2016 16:58 SHODAN wrote: I agree with others who have said that cyclone AA is too weak. it should be strong against air and only decent against ground (like the goliath). widow mines help with anti-air, especially against light flyers. however, they can't really do anything against brood lords, liberators, carriers or tempests. I don't like the overlap between thors and cyclones. thors are terrible, clunky units that are joyless to use (unless you boost them everywhere with medivacs).
ideally, I'd like to see thors and cyclones combined into a cheap, reliable infantry mech with strong, long-range AA and mediocre ground attack (the goliath). give the thor the old yeller treatment. keep the movement speed and unit model of the cyclone, but give it all the goliath's attack characteristics, plus some kind of range upgrade with armory+techlab requirement. You still want to produce cyclones to defend against stalkers,adepts shit on your base rather than hellion.Mobile option for mech,dat is the whole point of new cyclone. IF you trade its ground dmg for air dmg just like goliaths,we already know what will happen.Only thor needs more attention cause right now i dont even need to micro carriers for cost effect trade against thors like blizzard said....Just A-move.....
|
Thor needs to have 1 more armor. That would make them being able to trade vs Carriers and make them more useful in the lategame.
|
On August 16 2016 15:51 insitelol wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 13:31 Khai wrote: I never understand why competitive games undergo such drastic changes, particularly when it's not at the start of a season/year. This. But i guess DK is in the state where "SC2 is only getting worse everyday so let's turn everything on its head we got nothing to lose". I've been saying this for ages: "leave this game alone". It's not healthy for an esport to be changed drastically every half a year. But people continue to drag in their "the more changes the better" casual attitude. It's keeping the game fresh the say. "i'll definitely gonna play after these changes". They said this before the LoTV release, they are saying this now. But the truth is LoTV has A HALF of HoTS playerbase http://www.rankedftw.com/stats/population/1v1/#v=1&r=-2&sx=a&sy=c . Where are you guys, you promised me to play the game, you hyped so much, i believed you. But it all turned out that changes didnt attract new players or make old ones to come back but instead scared off the huge number of dedicated players. I myself did go through a long period of apathy and irritation, and finally overcame that and adapted. But seems like half of the players where lost in the process. Now they are gonna do it again. And all i see is people hyping that w/o even understanding how this will turn out lead by avilo who's only purpose is to attract attention to his person.
Your post explains everything I feel, thank you !
|
Propositions Terran
Remove cyclone, reintroduce warhound with weak ground dps, good AA dps and the ability to repair mech units only at mule speed with small extra cost (+ maybe an energy cost )
Yea Thor + 1 armor
Remove tp for BC, instead adding a medivac boost with high cooldown, and some cargo space ( 1.5 medivac size ? )
Protoss
Canceling shades remove 20hp to the adept
Oracles increase energy consumption of the attack spell
New Tempest +1 range to ground, change the new spell to a kamikaze spell, maybe lasting longer Or reduce its dmg and adding negative movespeed buff to its zone
|
I think drastic changes like this have the opposite of the intended effect. They turn off more and more of the people who still play this game and they will not attract new/old players to the game. Just leave it alone if the option is big changes vs leave alone.
|
On August 18 2016 19:58 Wohodix wrote: Propositions Terran
Remove cyclone, reintroduce warhound with weak ground dps, good AA dps and the ability to repair mech units only at mule speed with small extra cost (+ maybe an energy cost )
Yea Thor + 1 armor
Remove tp for BC, instead adding a medivac boost with high cooldown, and some cargo space ( 1.5 medivac size ? )
Protoss
Canceling shades remove 20hp to the adept
Oracles increase energy consumption of the attack spell
New Tempest +1 range to ground, change the new spell to a kamikaze spell, maybe lasting longer Or reduce its dmg and adding negative movespeed buff to its zone
They could just change the Cyclone to do that
Variety wise better as well otherwise you'd get too many robots/ too little vehicles imo
|
I still think that the Cyclone AA attack should be removed completely. Mech should really only have one solid anti-air option: the Thor.
Why? Mech is supposed to be very strong against ground but immobile and requiring positional play. If you give it a strong, massable and mobile jack-of-all trades unit like the current cyclone, the list of potential counter plays becomes very short. This is not good design and makes games against mech dull.
What I would like to see is:
- Lock-On ability moved to Thor and merged with Punisher Cannons (single-target AA)
Because the Thor should be the mech AA option both for light and armored targets. With the Lock-On ability the clunkiness of the Thor is mitigated and it will work better as a counter to massive air units (brood lords, carriers, BCs, even Tempests) while positioning may still provide a counter (flying out of sight and/or blocking the Thor with ground units).
- Cyclone G2A removed
The Cyclone should be a massable footman unit with mostly micro-based counters and not an all-round unit.
- Cyclone G2G range reduced (so, other ranged units can kite them more easily)
That way we might see micro intense positioning battles were the non-meching player tries to shave off some of the meching players footmen (Cyclones, Hellions) while the army is moving and backs out once tanks are deployed. This might make Bio, Blink Stalkers and Roach/Ravager/Hydra more viable against mech.
|
Maybe just give the DTs the same movement speed bonus that Zealots get instead of giving them blink?
|
Anybody knows which pros tend to/might stream games on the test map?
|
On August 18 2016 21:08 a_flayer wrote: Maybe just give the DTs the same movement speed bonus that Zealots get instead of giving them blink?
IMO they should just buff the least used/weaker units instead of the DT, which is already pretty good. I mean the stalker, disruptor and zealot could use some small buffs. The stalker in the AA damage, the disruptor in the nova cooldown and the zealot in hp/shield or getting the shade ability instead of charge data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/44632/446320620b2797481b98f0248bf47d03f83e2600" alt=""
|
On August 18 2016 20:56 Turb0Sw4g wrote:....
*G2A and G2G are probably acronyms you are looking for
|
If Blizzard wants a completely new game experience they should make a new game instead of making drastic changes to an already existing game. They almost ruined LoD for me when they made immunities and even double-immunities a thing as well as making lots of fun builds unplayable with the synergy system (good idea, very poorly applied). I like LotV more than HotS but many players are very unhappy because they essentially have to play a completely different game than they did for years (LotV is not SC2 part 3, it has an entirely different feel). That is a very strong argument against another radical change that will again make SC2 into something it never was before. Even if I'm gonna like the new changes, most players probably don't want any further (radical) changes, so I'm against it. It's very important to not consistently piss off a large chunk of the existing player base.
Blizzard should make SC3 instead.
|
|
|
|