|
http://us.battle.net/forums/en/sc2/topic/20748805214
Thoughts on the test map so far
It’s cool seeing a lot of constructive discussion on whether or not certain things are good/bad for the game as well as if certain changes are strong/weak right now. We agree that it’s a bit difficult to tell with so many things having changed at once, but we are exploring ways to have a bit more high-level game representation within the balance testing. And we would really love to encourage more players to continuously play the test maps especially after the matchmaker goes out in a couple of weeks.
Now, let’s talk about a few specific items.
Infestor
Both of the new abilities on the Infestor are kind of achieving the similar goal of surprising the enemy before Infestor spells can be cast. When we compare the two things: casting all abilities while burrowed and Deep Tunnel, we believe that the first is much cooler, while Deep Tunnel has significant overlaps with the Battlecruiser’s Tactical Jump ability. Therefore, we wanted to get your thoughts on removing Deep Tunnel, and pushing the cast while burrowed ability to be the strong add.
Adept
We are seeing feedback of trying out a change where the vision radius is reduced on the Adept shades. Unless there is strong disagreement about this change, we’ll start testing on this as well.
Banshee Speed Upgrade
This upgrade at the current tech level does seem to be a bit too much right now. We have been discussing between reducing the speed bonus a bit, or increasing the research time to delay when it is available. Please let us know what your thoughts are regarding this.
|
Wait, out of all the Adept discussions they single out the vision radius? I didn't know people were even discussing that. I think they should increase shade cooldown and it'd be good but whatever, maybe it will be a better change.
I agree with their infestor change though, I think deep tunnel was a bit too strong along with burrowed casting. That'd be insanely powerful.
|
Maybe allow infestors to enter/exit a nydus worm while burrowed, so it could still give infestors the "surprise" feel Deep Tunnel gives while not being something that can be done all the time.
Please remove the banshee speed upgrade, its unnecessary and ridiculously good
|
The adept change seems really nice, I like it, maybe it could lead to some nice counter-moves to adepts shading around, without nerfing the unit too much
Nice!
|
Vision radius nerf instead of cooldown nerf? Uhh that's a weird change. It does make ambushing adepts when they appear easier.
|
On August 27 2016 02:06 Thouhastmail wrote:
Banshee Speed Upgrade
This upgrade at the current tech level does seem to be a bit too much right now. We have been discussing between reducing the speed bonus a bit, or increasing the research time to delay when it is available. Please let us know what your thoughts are regarding this.
please increase the research time and research cost.
|
On August 27 2016 02:12 blade55555 wrote:
Wait, out of all the Adept discussions they single out the vision radius? I didn't know people were even discussing that. I think they should increase shade cooldown and it'd be good but whatever, maybe it will be a better change.
I agree with their infestor change though, I think deep tunnel was a bit too strong along with burrowed casting. That'd be insanely powerful.
Surely free scouting is a problem.
I thought they would nerf adept itself tho.
|
I think we have a lot of obvious things that we need to talk about.
Like Winter and Lokwo said , we should buff Zerg and Protoss and not nerf the Terran buffs.
Zerg ( I will talk about them because I main that )
Hydras are to costly and to low in HP , the changes are good but the unit can hardly be a core one.
Ravagers with Armor are worse then pure roaches, this is one unit that doesn't need to be nerfed because it kills the balance in ZvP , yes their good vs tanks but with armor their absolute trash vs marauder,stalker,immortals,tanks etc.
Infestor should get a bit more love like removing the research for neural parasite ability and giving back upgrades for infested terrans.
Banelings need a speed buff not a HP buff , mostly because ZvZ is even worse , yes guys it can be worse.
Zerg economy in general feels weak, we need 4 larva tested or a buff to the larva spawning rate.
The SH needs a redesign, their still bad units because you don't harass at that point in the game as Zerg.
Early game for Zerg is still problematic, a new unit like a redesign SH should be tested. Lings and Roaches can't be the answer to everything and they shouldn't be either.
|
United States572 Posts
On August 27 2016 02:12 blade55555 wrote:
Wait, out of all the Adept discussions they single out the vision radius? I didn't know people were even discussing that. I think they should increase shade cooldown and it'd be good but whatever, maybe it will be a better change.
It's being rallied around by protoss players in an attempt to avoid a nerf that actually matters just like msc vision during blink era.
|
Infestor and battlecruiser ability overlaps ? If you MC a Battlecruiser then yes ?
|
So... the matchmaker for the balance tesp map only will be available in a couple weeks? That's sad =[.
|
A couple of weeks for the matchmaker? damn....
|
i feel like the current problem for zerg is that it doesnt have the economy advantage anymore at any point of the game , or larva" that it used to have , convined with the lack of options zerg has , it's really predictable
i'll like to see overlord speed increase (better harass , and vision) , or at least the morphed one for drops , it would also help holding the abundant 10pool zvz
give the infestor a single target skill similar to high templar or ghost
reduce the cooldown of the swarmhost to reasonable lvls , maybe make its upgrades more costly
maybe even make a new early game unit for zerg for harass mainly
basically buff zerg early game , and economy , fix or replace sh
|
Please nerf Adepts into uselessness, its a toxic unit
|
We are seeing feedback of trying out a change where the vision radius is reduced on the Adept shades. Unless there is strong disagreement about this change, we’ll start testing on this as well.
This isn't going to do much unless the radius is nerfed to nearly nothing.
If that's the case, then shading around for harassment is slightly more risky ... but it's still not going to change how the unit is primarily used. That's the real complaint people have: mass adepts + warp prisms shading around all their mineral lines focusing workers.
|
Nothing on how useless ravagers are with armored tag?
|
I agree with infestor deep tunnel ability to be a bit similar or nearly the same as bc tactical jump... however casting speels while burrowed is kinda op as fuck in my opinion it can be to deadly specially when paired with banes vs infantry or toss deathball... also i still think that nerfing tempest range vs ground to 6 is overreaction killing the unit, and the spell on it is kinda useless, it cant kill running through ling, only good vs cannons and tanks... much more like worse storm or damageing FF.banshee speed upgread must be moved somewhere, otherwise meching players have justto many opening options as zergs have vs toss now- insane, imagine toss haveing to be ready for banshee opener, tank pushes, helion/mines drop standard bio, cyclone pushes and more ( tested it on balance map  ) also i disagree on nerfing adept.i even think that instead of nerfing terran mech now, we should focus on buffing both zerg and toss abit, not to much but small buffs to more units instead of buffing 1 unit to be just ridicoulus effective
|
Also as guys aove stated the nerf on ravager is also a killing blow to this unit as nerf to tempest- they will be new Swarm hosts which by the way need redesign...
|
All I play is the test map nowadays since once this goes through those who are prepared will excel in the new meta, this is a mildly disappointing update but only because the Adept isn't being taken seriously as a balance problem.
The problem with the Adept is threefold
1. Bonus damage vs. almost everything Zerg/Terran has in the early game (especially Zerg) while being BEEFY AS HELL
2. The Shade allowing the Adepts to perfectly and with zero risk scout for holes/weaknesses
3. Easy to mass and once massed can attack 2 - 3 different places at once with an innate ability
1. Give the shade a weakness (it's a spam ability with no energy and low cool down) not something lame like they can't see as well that is a terrible PR "Yea we know Adepts are OP let's give it more time" nerf.
2. Nerf it's damn HP or shields or something, they take more punishment then a Zealot while dealing much more damage and being infinitely more mobile, the unit is just absurdly tanky for how mobile it is. Generally units that hit hard are either slow or fragile or why would you even bother building anything else?
3. Do something about the fact that Protoss players mass Adepts over and over again and Blink Stalkers are still horrible, there needs to be a power balance shift between the 2 units. Stalkers need to hit harder out of the gate, and Adepts need to be mellowed out. Notice how there is no mass stalker or mass zealot builds but mass adepts builds are dominating the ladder and pro scene.
anyways...
Remove the goddamn Banshee speed change, stop making everything so fast, that isn't balance, this isn't FastCraft 2. It was OP when they tried it before and it's OP now, give the Banshee a useful change like +1 range upgrade, make the Banshee better offensively not broken.
Change the Raven some other way, auto turret buffs? Hello mass Raven cancer builds, if anything buff this unit's speed it's slow as hell but turrets are so cancerous.
Remove the Swarm Host from the game, please, or make it counter mass air or give it some actual useful role in the Zerg Swarm. It has no identity, why would I build these siege unit wannabe's when I can use that gas for Brood Lords which do the job better?
Disruption Web (the Corsair/Tempest thingy) seems cool but with how long it lasts it can kind of be a bit broken, I think if the duration wasn't almost a minute it would be a cool addition to the game but in it's current form it's just OP as shit.
Pretty much every other change besides these ones seem fantastic, Hydralisks are awesome, scarier Zealots are awesome, the new Cyclone seems cool.
|
On August 27 2016 04:39 Beelzebub1 wrote:
All I play is the test map nowadays since once this goes through those who are prepared will excel in the new meta, this is a mildly disappointing update but only because the Adept isn't being taken seriously as a balance problem.
The problem with the Adept is threefold
1. Bonus damage vs. almost everything Zerg/Terran has in the early game (especially Zerg) while being BEEFY AS HELL
2. The Shade allowing the Adepts to perfectly and with zero risk scout for holes/weaknesses
3. Easy to mass and once massed can attack 2 - 3 different places at once with an innate ability
1. Give the shade a weakness (it's a spam ability with no energy and low cool down) not something lame like they can't see as well that is a terrible PR "Yea we know Adepts are OP let's give it more time" nerf.
2. Nerf it's damn HP or shields or something, they take more punishment then a Zealot while dealing much more damage and being infinitely more mobile, the unit is just absurdly tanky for how mobile it is. Generally units that hit hard are either slow or fragile or why would you even bother building anything else?
3. Do something about the fact that Protoss players mass Adepts over and over again and Blink Stalkers are still horrible, there needs to be a power balance shift between the 2 units. Stalkers need to hit harder out of the gate, and Adepts need to be mellowed out. Notice how there is no mass stalker or mass zealot builds but mass adepts builds are dominating the ladder and pro scene.
anyways...
Remove the goddamn Banshee speed change, stop making everything so fast, that isn't balance, this isn't FastCraft 2. It was OP when they tried it before and it's OP now, give the Banshee a useful change like +1 range upgrade, make the Banshee better offensively not broken.
Change the Raven some other way, auto turret buffs? Hello mass Raven cancer builds, if anything buff this unit's speed it's slow as hell but turrets are so cancerous.
Remove the Swarm Host from the game, please, or make it counter mass air or give it some actual useful role in the Zerg Swarm. It has no identity, why would I build these siege unit wannabe's when I can use that gas for Brood Lords which do the job better?
Disruption Web (the Corsair/Tempest thingy) seems cool but with how long it lasts it can kind of be a bit broken, I think if the duration wasn't almost a minute it would be a cool addition to the game but in it's current form it's just OP as shit.
Pretty much every other change besides these ones seem fantastic, Hydralisks are awesome, scarier Zealots are awesome, the new Cyclone seems cool.
Agreed on everything but adepts. I guess poeple had figured them out. They are not as dominant as they used to be. A very slight HP buff is, may be, the only thing that could be done.
|
I agree with the proposed Infestor change, casting while burrowed seems very natural to the infestor while beaming anywhere is kinda odd. Only thing I ask is reverting the design of the burrowed Infestor to what it was before. Right now it looks butt ugly when its underground.
|
On August 27 2016 04:58 insitelol wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 04:39 Beelzebub1 wrote:
All I play is the test map nowadays since once this goes through those who are prepared will excel in the new meta, this is a mildly disappointing update but only because the Adept isn't being taken seriously as a balance problem.
The problem with the Adept is threefold
1. Bonus damage vs. almost everything Zerg/Terran has in the early game (especially Zerg) while being BEEFY AS HELL
2. The Shade allowing the Adepts to perfectly and with zero risk scout for holes/weaknesses
3. Easy to mass and once massed can attack 2 - 3 different places at once with an innate ability
1. Give the shade a weakness (it's a spam ability with no energy and low cool down) not something lame like they can't see as well that is a terrible PR "Yea we know Adepts are OP let's give it more time" nerf.
2. Nerf it's damn HP or shields or something, they take more punishment then a Zealot while dealing much more damage and being infinitely more mobile, the unit is just absurdly tanky for how mobile it is. Generally units that hit hard are either slow or fragile or why would you even bother building anything else?
3. Do something about the fact that Protoss players mass Adepts over and over again and Blink Stalkers are still horrible, there needs to be a power balance shift between the 2 units. Stalkers need to hit harder out of the gate, and Adepts need to be mellowed out. Notice how there is no mass stalker or mass zealot builds but mass adepts builds are dominating the ladder and pro scene.
anyways...
Remove the goddamn Banshee speed change, stop making everything so fast, that isn't balance, this isn't FastCraft 2. It was OP when they tried it before and it's OP now, give the Banshee a useful change like +1 range upgrade, make the Banshee better offensively not broken.
Change the Raven some other way, auto turret buffs? Hello mass Raven cancer builds, if anything buff this unit's speed it's slow as hell but turrets are so cancerous.
Remove the Swarm Host from the game, please, or make it counter mass air or give it some actual useful role in the Zerg Swarm. It has no identity, why would I build these siege unit wannabe's when I can use that gas for Brood Lords which do the job better?
Disruption Web (the Corsair/Tempest thingy) seems cool but with how long it lasts it can kind of be a bit broken, I think if the duration wasn't almost a minute it would be a cool addition to the game but in it's current form it's just OP as shit.
Pretty much every other change besides these ones seem fantastic, Hydralisks are awesome, scarier Zealots are awesome, the new Cyclone seems cool. Agreed on everything but adepts. I guess poeple had figured them out. They are not as dominant as they used to be. A very slight HP buff is, may be, the only thing that could be done.
I'm not sure if you just meant that they should slightly buff Adept HP but if that is what you meant, you are absolutely dead wrong lol unless they drastically reduced it's damage or nerfed the living shit out of the Shade ability, it's already more tanky then a Zealot.
|
On August 27 2016 04:35 gab12 wrote:I agree with infestor deep tunnel ability to be a bit similar or nearly the same as bc tactical jump... however casting speels while burrowed is kinda op as fuck in my opinion it can be to deadly specially when paired with banes vs infantry or toss deathball... also i still think that nerfing tempest range vs ground to 6 is overreaction killing the unit, and the spell on it is kinda useless, it cant kill running through ling, only good vs cannons and tanks... much more like worse storm or damageing FF.banshee speed upgread must be moved somewhere, otherwise meching players have justto many opening options as zergs have vs toss now- insane, imagine toss haveing to be ready for banshee opener, tank pushes, helion/mines drop standard bio, cyclone pushes and more ( tested it on balance map ) also i disagree on nerfing adept.i even think that instead of nerfing terran mech now, we should focus on buffing both zerg and toss abit, not to much but small buffs to more units instead of buffing 1 unit to be just ridicoulus effective
Realy? For years Terran have complaned about build variety disparity in tvp. Protoss have so many early game options. Pylon rush, proxy oracle,in base oracle dt Rush, blink Allin, blink fast 3rd, 6 gate adept drop, 8 gate adept Allin,3 gate proxy stargate void ray bust. 3 gate adept prism pressure, proxy robo, cannon rush, proxy tempest, 2 gate stalker pressure, 4 gate Allin, 2 gate adept pressure. 2 base imortal, disrupter drop, Phenix expand, proxy robo dt drop and many other builds. In addition p have many valid unit comps, collosi+support, blink stalker disrupter, mass gate way into storm+tempest. Imortal gateway into storm and tempest. Charglot archon+storm. Gateway+phenix into storm and tempest.
Meanwhile Terran prity much has had reaper into mine drop. 1-1-1. Proxy rax. Reaper into 2 hellion into bio, fast expand, cyclone expand, fast lib range rush, and surprise I hope he has no robo or stargate clock banshee rush.. The only valid unit comp is bio lib with occasional tank or mine support in the early game and ocasional ghost support in the late game. So finally Terran has some parity in options and you want them taken away??
|
What the actual hell. Infestor burrowed casting is making ambush infestor moves completely braindead. Whereas deep tunnel would help infestors to deal with multiproned threats, offering zerg another tech path to deal with drops than mutas.
It's amazing how the dev team seems to grasp very well the issues of their game, then throw it away for the "cool factor"
|
Yeah not a fan of that adept change. What I'd like to see is the adept ability reworked into something more positional. Remove the "move" command from the ghosts so that they cannot be redirected and always go to the casting target. Then, change it so that the shade lifetime is either really long or does not expire, and add a "transfer" command. The cast range will need to be nerfed to something like 15 or 20, and the cooldown will need to be much longer (45-60 seconds?).
This recall-type ability would make the adept a lot more flexible - it's usable for defense, harassment, denying expansions etc. It overlaps with the MSC but it is overall more flexible because it's not tied to a nexus and there is still an offensive use case. I was actually planning on putting this into an arcade map/mod where the MSC would just be removed among many other changes...
I guess one problem is that the shades might be able to block building construction, not sure if there's a way around that. Maybe they would need to have HP and lose invulnerability.
|
Why are you making changes and nerfing stuff before the matchmaker is out so you can properly test this? banshee speed is 5.25 while phoenix speed is 5.95 and muta speed is 5.6, even with the uppgrade you can easily catch the banshees this is a non issue balancewise...
on the other hand what needs looking into is mech against air which still is massively underpowered and we can tell by the fact this has not been adressed you arrent balancing according to data yet, please fix mech against air specificly:
Mass carrier/tempest
Viper broodlord infestor corruptor
Please wait for the testmap ladder so you can test the changes before you make up your mind.
|
|
|
On August 27 2016 03:01 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 02:12 blade55555 wrote:
Wait, out of all the Adept discussions they single out the vision radius? I didn't know people were even discussing that. I think they should increase shade cooldown and it'd be good but whatever, maybe it will be a better change.
It's being rallied around by protoss players in an attempt to avoid a nerf that actually matters just like msc vision during blink era.
I can't comment on the proposed nerf to Adept, but your example was quite the nerf to the blink play. The MSC was able to give high-ground vision with absolutely no risk. The MSC was completely safe to any attacks while allowing stalkers to blink up. Granted it wasn't the nerf everyone expected, but it did limit the success of blink play. The MSC vision nerf mattered.
edit:
Now that I think about it, the proposed nerf to adept vision will be impactful. Currently, protoss can send the shade out and know exactly if it is risky to complete the shade or cancel. With the vision nerfed on shade, protoss won't know the risk invovled, and might accidentally complete the shades near a stack of roaches or any defensive units/structures.
|
On August 27 2016 03:01 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 02:12 blade55555 wrote:
Wait, out of all the Adept discussions they single out the vision radius? I didn't know people were even discussing that. I think they should increase shade cooldown and it'd be good but whatever, maybe it will be a better change.
It's being rallied around by protoss players in an attempt to avoid a nerf that actually matters just like msc vision during blink era.
Do you know where that discussion happened? On TL or Reddit or in progamer feedback maybe? I can't recall it being discussed in one of these threads.
|
I think Blizzard should remove latest queen up.
Change hydras like you want, but Queens are way too critical to be THAT versatile.
|
On August 27 2016 06:11 Grumbels wrote:
Do you know where that discussion happened? On TL or Reddit or in progamer feedback maybe? I can't recall it being discussed in one of these threads.
It was mentioned a few places by people as a counter to the scouting of the adept. I've never seen it mentioned as a nerf to the harassment or rallied behind by anybody.
|
United States572 Posts
On August 27 2016 06:08 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 03:01 TheWinks wrote:On August 27 2016 02:12 blade55555 wrote:
Wait, out of all the Adept discussions they single out the vision radius? I didn't know people were even discussing that. I think they should increase shade cooldown and it'd be good but whatever, maybe it will be a better change.
It's being rallied around by protoss players in an attempt to avoid a nerf that actually matters just like msc vision during blink era. I can't comment on the proposed nerf to Adept, but your example was quite the nerf to the blink play. The MSC was able to give high-ground vision with absolutely no risk. The MSC was completely safe to any attacks while allowing stalkers to blink up. Granted it wasn't the nerf everyone expected, but it did limit the success of blink play. The MSC vision nerf mattered.
The msc still gave enough high ground vision to keep blink broken. It made msc control more important, but it didn't really impact the strength of the strategy itself.
Now that I think about it, the proposed nerf to adept vision will be impactful. Currently, protoss can send the shade out and know exactly if it is risky to complete the shade or cancel. With the vision nerfed on shade, protoss won't know the risk invovled, and might accidentally complete the shades near a stack of roaches or any defensive units/structures.
They will still know the risk. The actual transit will show a lot of information and if they arrive at their intended destination before the cooldown is up they can just move around a little and see all that needs to be seen. For committed adept attacks like in ZvP the vision doesn't even matter because almost the entire zerg army has to fight the protoss adept ball anyway and you're going to know where that is because they're attacking the adepts. The vision would have to be reduced to like 1 in order for things like widow mines and units to surprise them.
|
On August 27 2016 05:25 JackONeill wrote:
What the actual hell. Infestor burrowed casting is making ambush infestor moves completely braindead. Whereas deep tunnel would help infestors to deal with multiproned threats, offering zerg another tech path to deal with drops than mutas.
It's amazing how the dev team seems to grasp very well the issues of their game, then throw it away for the "cool factor"
An invisible spellcaster that can instantly lock down your entire army seems like good design...(not)
To me the fact that Blizzard is even contemplating this shows that something somewhere has gone wrong, perhaps with the relative power of invisible units, the strength of the infestor itself or the relevance of high tech caster units.
And it is certainly not cool. What was kind of cool was the bug in beta where you could cast while burrowed if you used an exploit at the cost of requiring a fair amount of control. That would have been weird to have in the game maybe, but at least wouldn't be a blatant example of power creep.
Certainly the current infestor is quite flexible and intriguing, but it lacks a good replacement for neural parasite and is probably undertuned. Perhaps deep burrow was the better approach because at least it fits into the new gameplay of super dynamic harassment units. I guess both iterations can end up being balanced, but I like neither. Why can't Blizzard just fix it in a normal way instead of constantly making everything more dynamic and powerful?
|
On August 27 2016 06:20 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 06:08 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:On August 27 2016 03:01 TheWinks wrote:On August 27 2016 02:12 blade55555 wrote:
Wait, out of all the Adept discussions they single out the vision radius? I didn't know people were even discussing that. I think they should increase shade cooldown and it'd be good but whatever, maybe it will be a better change.
It's being rallied around by protoss players in an attempt to avoid a nerf that actually matters just like msc vision during blink era. I can't comment on the proposed nerf to Adept, but your example was quite the nerf to the blink play. The MSC was able to give high-ground vision with absolutely no risk. The MSC was completely safe to any attacks while allowing stalkers to blink up. Granted it wasn't the nerf everyone expected, but it did limit the success of blink play. The MSC vision nerf mattered. The msc still gave enough high ground vision to keep blink broken. It made msc control more important, but it didn't really impact the strength of the strategy itself. Show nested quote +Now that I think about it, the proposed nerf to adept vision will be impactful. Currently, protoss can send the shade out and know exactly if it is risky to complete the shade or cancel. With the vision nerfed on shade, protoss won't know the risk invovled, and might accidentally complete the shades near a stack of roaches or any defensive units/structures. They will still know the risk. The actual transit will show a lot of information and if they arrive at their intended destination before the cooldown is up they can just move around a little and see all that needs to be seen. For committed adept attacks like in ZvP the vision doesn't even matter because almost the entire zerg army has to fight the protoss adept ball anyway and you're going to know where that is because they're attacking the adepts. The vision would have to be reduced to like 1 in order for things like widow mines and units to surprise them.
Yes it depends on the vision nerf to shade. It needs to be enough that you can surprise the adept if they misplay the shade, but not enough that protoss would use it solely as an escape mechanism.
|
On August 27 2016 03:02 FFW_Rude wrote:
Infestor and battlecruiser ability overlaps ? If you MC a Battlecruiser then yes ?
They are of the (stupid, IMO) disposition that there must be radical asymmetry between the factions.
|
|
|
Until Zerg is buffed accordingly and given more options in play than it currently has, I think I might just switch to Terran and go mech every game in every MU, lol. Getting tired of ZvP especially.
Blizzard needs to make the shade ability uncancellable and increase the cool down. Free scouting + the ability to pull the opponent's army around without commitment + insane synergy with warprism is just way too much versatility from such a cheap low tech unit. I would also like to see hydras get an HP buff, please.
|
regardless if they decide to buff other units instead of directly nerfing adept, they need to make shade uncancellable, its shit bad design, they shouldnt be able to to force you to split up and be 2 places at once just to deal with harassment.
|
On August 27 2016 06:55 Barrin wrote:
were abandoned since after WC2
What I've been waiting on since the final expansion to WC2 is another WC2 game.
I guess that's never going to happen, but it's what I really want.
|
Adepts should take bonus damage while their shades are out. This puts some kind of risk into sending a shade out in the middle of a fight. You can theme it out as them severing part of their soul or shield system.
|
I didn't even realise people were discussing adept vision range adjustments...
|
Good job.
Liberators make too much dmg (antiground) tho, not even talking about the "gg upgrade" on it...
The last nerfs on this unit just affects TvZ, not PvT. bio + libs when tempest cant be an option yet (mid game), is very broken atm, please check it out.
Keep up the good work blizz
|
Require Armory for Banshee speed upgrade.
Double the cooldown of the shades before Blizzcon and this update.
Remove the "funny tunnels" and please, make a visual indicator for tunneled infestors just like for burrowed widow mines. The pathing this is not enough and I cant see a reason to give this visual indicator for all cloaked units and burrowed widow mine, but not burrowed zerg units. While its mostly not a balance problem for the rest, its definitly for the game changing infestor who can now fungle from underground.
More balance:
Give Cyclone 4+2 attack but decrease the attack rate so the damage against non armored units stays the same. The Damage against armored units should be lowered quite a bit.
Reduce the stim upgrade time by 20 real time secs.
Increase Marauder from (5+5)*2 to (6+6)*2.
Remove Warp-Prism hot pickup or decrease its range from 6 to 3. Reduce researchtime for blink-DTs by 60 real time secs. (It is currently 120 or?) (Else make it 60s int total).
Give oracle old detection and relevation again.
Give carriers +50 hp back, reduce their build time by 20%
Reduce BC build time by 20%
Call Armory Engineering Bay and the Engineering Bay Armory.
Remove neo steel bunkers, nobody ever makes that.
|
On August 27 2016 07:48 CannonsNCarriers wrote:
Adepts should take bonus damage while their shades are out. This puts some kind of risk into sending a shade out in the middle of a fight. You can theme it out as them severing part of their soul or shield system.
I really like this idea. it would be similar to how stimpack works. where bio is punished for over-stimming, adepts should be punished for shading at the wrong moment. maybe deplete the unit's shields entirely while it is shading. thematically, the "shield" part of the adept is its soul, which would be reunited with its corporeal self when the cooldown is over.
|
On August 27 2016 08:22 SHODAN wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 07:48 CannonsNCarriers wrote:
Adepts should take bonus damage while their shades are out. This puts some kind of risk into sending a shade out in the middle of a fight. You can theme it out as them severing part of their soul or shield system. I really like this idea. it would be similar to how stimpack works. where bio is punished for over-stimming, adepts should be punished for shading at the wrong moment. maybe deplete the unit's shields entirely while it is shading. thematically, the "shield" part of the adept is its soul, which would be reunited with its corporeal self when the cooldown is over.
Make adepts take double damage when they have a shade out, also make the shade attackable and the damage on the shade gets transferred on the adept
|
|
|
Some ideas :
-Cyclone: weapon speed changed to 0.36
- Adept: base armor 0 instead of 1 OR change to armored tag
- Ravager: require lair OR roach warren mutation, Increase hp to 165
- Lurker: reduce range to 8
|
JUST MAKE IT SO YOU CAN'T CANCEL THE SHADE. It's very simple.
|
Adept should lose all of it's shields when it completes the psionic transfer.
Creates a drawback/choice on the unit.
Do you want to use it as your army? OK, it has full HP/shields.
Do you want to use it for harrass? OK, but they are actually killable now.
Or do you want to use zealots instead of adepts?
Right now the adept is one of the worst designed units in the game. It's basically a better Zealot. There is absolutely no choice for Protoss - u just simply make adepts because it does everything the Zealot does but with better stats, range, and no upgrade necessary for insane mobility.
I hope they fix 8 armor ultras/banelings by the way guys...i don't know if bio will be viable with those being in the game. And blizzard should want choices for players - not just you HAVE to play mech or HAVE to play bio. There should be strategic choices.
Zerg right now is the best race with the most unit compositional choices. I also think queens need a range revert but people don't seem to want to discuss that.
On August 27 2016 10:57 Pugfarmer wrote:
JUST MAKE IT SO YOU CAN'T CANCEL THE SHADE. It's very simple.
Or this. Something to make the unit have an actual drawback. Otherwise what is the point of the Zealot being in the game? I dunno about most people, but i think blizzard should relegate the adept to specifically more of a harrass unit, not a massable unit for the entire army. And then Zealot is the main army unit. Just a thought.
|
Russian Federation15 Posts
Just. Nerf. Adepts. Already...
Adepts with Resonating Glaives are cancer. It's not that Protoss don't need Zealots nowadays, they don't need AoE. They just build Adepts death ball and destroy everything in every matchup. Recent games in GSL are hard to watch without SPARKULING tears...
Best Terran players in GSL(Maru and TY) were whiped out by mass adepts builds.
My suggestions are(one of them):
1) Nerf Adepts HP or Shield drastically. So Zealots will become tanky units again. There will be diversity.
2) Nerf Adepts base armor. But I don't think that will be enough.
3) Nerf Resonating Glaives. From 45% -> 25% or smth. or change upgrade( +45% atack speed and -40%(-50%) shield or health).
4) Nerf Shades somehow someway.
|
lol nerfing adepts shade vision, something that is suggested by almost no one and it doesn't address the problem. Adepts are too good at everything. It can harass, scout, force engagements, tank damage, and can be mass very easily. Just nerf the shade cooldown or its health. It's not that hard, Blizzard.
|
On August 27 2016 16:28 ilikeredheads wrote:
[...] something that is suggested by almost no one and it doesn't address the problem.[...]
This is Blizzard style for 5 years. They are reading all suggestions about unit x and then they come with one suggestion that nobody said for unit x. This actually means they are really reading all suggestions and looking for one suggestion that no one said.
edit: They do the same in Diablo3.
|
A rarely suggested but significant nerf to the adept without changing the unit at all stat wise would be to give shades collision vs enemy units. Adds a ton of counterplay to the unit. For example:
A zerg could block shades from getting into the main by holding a ramp, lowering the amount of bases where units are required from 3 to 2 (in a prism-less scenario).
A worker surround on adepts can prevent them from shading away if you surround them before the cooldown resets.
Most importantly, it prevents the, IMHO, toxic mechanic of shading on top of armies to kill them which has next to no counterplay. Like, positioning and whatnot is very important, and the shade just kind of negates that because you cannot really ever get into a good position vs adepts. Adepts are absolutely at their strongest when they shade directly into the center of a bio ball, and there is really nothing Terran (or anyone, but most problematic vs T) can do to prevent it. To top it all off, the Adept is really snowball-y by nature so if Protoss ever really gets an advantage they can just shade on Terran's army and its almost always a 1-sided slaughter. You cannot run from it because shades are much faster that unstimmed bio, and if you preemptively stim P can just cancel the shade and you've effectively just damaged your army for nothing.
If shade collision with enemy units existed, P would never be able to spawn inside the bioball, which would allow T to kite back and re-position better. Instead of shading on top of an army and disallowing micro from both sides (a situation where adepts win, heavily), the fight would be more fair (it just is, testing has shown me T trades much, much better against Adepts shaded beside vs Adepts shaded into Bio) AND micro would be both allowed and rewarded.
|
On August 27 2016 16:36 Dingodile wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 16:28 ilikeredheads wrote:
[...] something that is suggested by almost no one and it doesn't address the problem.[...] This is Blizzard style for 5 years. They are reading all suggestions about unit x and then they come with one suggestion that nobody said for unit x. This actually means they are really reading all suggestions and looking for one suggestion that no one said. edit: They do the same in Diablo3.
Don't worry, it's just taking some patience lol. Siege Tank buff only took them 5 years
|
On August 27 2016 17:33 Creager wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 16:36 Dingodile wrote:On August 27 2016 16:28 ilikeredheads wrote:
[...] something that is suggested by almost no one and it doesn't address the problem.[...] This is Blizzard style for 5 years. They are reading all suggestions about unit x and then they come with one suggestion that nobody said for unit x. This actually means they are really reading all suggestions and looking for one suggestion that no one said. edit: They do the same in Diablo3. Don't worry, it's just taking some patience lol. Siege Tank buff only took them 5 years
it is not about patience but how they listen to community. Suggestions said "We need blue or red or green or yellow cars". Blizz says then "We have heard about cars, we will implement pink cars".
|
On August 27 2016 18:08 Dingodile wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 17:33 Creager wrote:On August 27 2016 16:36 Dingodile wrote:On August 27 2016 16:28 ilikeredheads wrote:
[...] something that is suggested by almost no one and it doesn't address the problem.[...] This is Blizzard style for 5 years. They are reading all suggestions about unit x and then they come with one suggestion that nobody said for unit x. This actually means they are really reading all suggestions and looking for one suggestion that no one said. edit: They do the same in Diablo3. Don't worry, it's just taking some patience lol. Siege Tank buff only took them 5 years it is not about patience but how they listen to community. Suggestions said "We need blue or red or green or yellow cars". Blizz says then "We have heard about cars, we will implement pink cars".
yeah, it`s been like "you said that you want chocolate ice cream, so we decided to give you a fudge brownie"
|
Russian Federation15 Posts
On August 27 2016 18:08 Dingodile wrote:
it is not about patience but how they listen to community.
They do not listen. Moreover, they don't watch pro matches, like GSL or SSL or SPL.
They just do what they like. I'm not even sure if they play SC
|
Russian Federation15 Posts
|
Ravager regenerate HP when they burrow to compensate the armor nerf ?
Edit :
Else as zerg would love to have larvas buff, and roach/hydra cut in half :
example instead of a 100/50 16 attack 80HP 2 supply hydra.
You have some 50/25 8 attack 40hp 1 supply hydra.
So feel more swarmy with both ling/bane and roach/hydra.
And with the larvas buff we could nerf ultras to compensate.
|
The warpgate mechanic is the core problem with adepts and Protoss in general. The gateway units will always be off because of how strong warpgate is. Make gateway units too strong like adept now and they own the game and easily mass able. Make gateway units too weak and toss struggles early and we get shooting pylons. If you remove warpgate, you could slightly nerf adepts, beef up stalkers and zealots, and then maybe do something with the warp prism where it has charges that can be used to warp In units per energy. Then you still have that in the game in some form but you also don't have a warp prism in your base with 10 units warping in all the sudden.
Summary- remove warpgate, nerf adept, beef up stalker and zealot, let warp prism warp in gateway units at a rate of 50 energy per unit.
|
On August 27 2016 18:17 Traitorwtf wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 18:08 Dingodile wrote:
it is not about patience but how they listen to community. They do not listen. Moreover, they don't watch pro matches, like GSL or SSL or SPL. They just do what they like. I'm not even sure if they play SC
I strongly *hope* they do not listen to these suggestions..
Protoss is fairly balanced with the other races, if you nerf the adepts a LOT (e.g. much longer cooldown, remove all shields while shading, etc.) you will have to balance somehow by buffing some other units/areas..
Also it is not true that adepts made zealots completely unused: zealots are still used in pro matches and have their roles.
1) adepts w/o upgrade are super slow in attacking
2) in late game compositions zealot may be better than adepts, because they charge leaving other ranged units free to shot for the protoss (with adepts it's harder to have your whole army shooting because they have low range), they can charge tanks in close range, they are better for sniping zerg structures, etc.
I like the idea of a small change that can impact the counterplays to the adepts, like the smaller sight radius for the shade, because it has less impact on the overall balance but it affects something that many players perceive as bad play (adepts shading around).
|
On August 27 2016 20:13 FLuE wrote:
The warpgate mechanic is the core problem with adepts and Protoss in general. The gateway units will always be off because of how strong warpgate is. Make gateway units too strong like adept now and they own the game and easily mass able. Make gateway units too weak and toss struggles early and we get shooting pylons. If you remove warpgate, you could slightly nerf adepts, beef up stalkers and zealots, and then maybe do something with the warp prism where it has charges that can be used to warp In units per energy. Then you still have that in the game in some form but you also don't have a warp prism in your base with 10 units warping in all the sudden.
Summary- remove warpgate, nerf adept, beef up stalker and zealot, let warp prism warp in gateway units at a rate of 50 energy per unit.
Another way would be to nerf the Warp Gate production rate to and buff Gateway production rate such that gateways produce faster. This has been suggested a couple of times — I sure did  — and I think this is the way to go.
However, I don't think that Warp Gate is the core problem with Adepts. The balance problem imo comes primarily from Psionic Transfer because it has too much utility:
- increased mobility (it's a blink of sorts)
- free scouting (if there is no wall-off)
- negates positioning (for example shading on top of sieged tanks)
On top of that the base stats of Adepts are very good.
So, I think the sensible thing is to make Psionic Transfer a Twilight Council upgrade and make Adepts rely on Warp Prisms for mobility without the upgrade. I would also like to see a change to Psionic Transfer where Adepts turn into an attackable shade but also retain their attack (basically simply gaining movement speed and the ability to move through units for a limited duration).
|
On August 27 2016 22:08 VHbb wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 18:17 Traitorwtf wrote:On August 27 2016 18:08 Dingodile wrote:
it is not about patience but how they listen to community. They do not listen. Moreover, they don't watch pro matches, like GSL or SSL or SPL. They just do what they like. I'm not even sure if they play SC I strongly *hope* they do not listen to these suggestions..Protoss is fairly balanced with the other races, if you nerf the adepts a LOT (e.g. much longer cooldown, remove all shields while shading, etc.) you will have to balance somehow by buffing some other units/areas.. Also it is not true that adepts made zealots completely unused: zealots are still used in pro matches and have their roles. 1) adepts w/o upgrade are super slow in attacking 2) in late game compositions zealot may be better than adepts, because they charge leaving other ranged units free to shot for the protoss (with adepts it's harder to have your whole army shooting because they have low range), they can charge tanks in close range, they are better for sniping zerg structures, etc. I like the idea of a small change that can impact the counterplays to the adepts, like the smaller sight radius for the shade, because it has less impact on the overall balance but it affects something that many players perceive as bad play (adepts shading around).
Alot of this is just not true.
Adepts without upgrade are still better then slow zelots without charges. That makes this up.
Zelots are never better then Adepts in anything but sniping buildings (and for that you warp in DTs with adepts): They can charge on an army to make room for your ranged units? Guess what, adepts freaking shade on enemies army and making all the room of the world. They shade on tanks, so they dont even need to get in close range taking first shots. They shade on bio balls so that tanks hit the bioball.
Without a 12 pool i cant remember a game that had Zelots (who havent been a missclick). Adepts are better in scouting, in killing workers, in moving, in harassing, in fighting bio armies, in getting close range, in tanking. They are better in everything then Zelots.
The amount of Protoss is too damn high at the moment, their dominance with adept only play is disgusting to the game, even if it is balanced (which it is not), it is repetitive to the maximum, it is boring to watch, it makes the viewers shut off, it makes the players feel disgusted. The adept would still have a core roll in the protoss army, even without a shade ability what so ever. A nerf to this abilitiy would help the game, not only the balance.
|
I don't know, maybe you are right, I was a bit to strong in my statement (I don't know what is true and what it's not  )
However I still see zealots being built in pro games
Also at least at my level protoss are by far the least played race, so I don't see this huge P dominance.. (plat~diamond)
It's true that you can shade on top of armies, but I still believe that zealots with charge have a role in lategame comp (of course not massing them, but some zealots charging force the opponent to kite back and can complement well the protoss army).. it's just my feeling when I play so I may be wrong.
Finally, I think "disgusting" "boring" "protoss dominance" may be more your experience..
p.s. DTs are super expensive for warp in in base
They are good if you can target a super important building (like I would invest in 3-4 DTs to snipe a spire / greater spire), but you can warp in charging zealots to snipe less crucial buildings for a good trade (like sniping a pool for instance)
edit: btw, P is indeed under represented in almost all leagues
http://www.rankedftw.com/stats/races/1v1/#v=2&r=0&l=-2
PvX is also quite balanced from the aligulac "top of the ladder", although I'm not sure what games are considered here
http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/
|
how about make cloak available by default, but speed upgrade replace it in the lab, and nerf speed bonus that upgrade giving or increase value etc etc, because it's obvious that 2 upgrades on banshee is too much, unit exist just for harassment and useless against protoss in this job.
|
Not sure an adept vision nerf will really affect anything. They can still scout easily with it. Even if they were to remove it all together toss can still easily keep tabs on everything vs hallucination, and oracles. I think they should go in a diffident direction all together. I'd prefer if they keep adepts untouched and nerf overchagre or buff banelings vs shields.
|
On August 27 2016 22:08 VHbb wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 18:17 Traitorwtf wrote:On August 27 2016 18:08 Dingodile wrote:
it is not about patience but how they listen to community. They do not listen. Moreover, they don't watch pro matches, like GSL or SSL or SPL. They just do what they like. I'm not even sure if they play SC I strongly *hope* they do not listen to these suggestions..Protoss is fairly balanced with the other races, if you nerf the adepts a LOT (e.g. much longer cooldown, remove all shields while shading, etc.) you will have to balance somehow by buffing some other units/areas.. Also it is not true that adepts made zealots completely unused: zealots are still used in pro matches and have their roles. 1) adepts w/o upgrade are super slow in attacking 2) in late game compositions zealot may be better than adepts, because they charge leaving other ranged units free to shot for the protoss (with adepts it's harder to have your whole army shooting because they have low range), they can charge tanks in close range, they are better for sniping zerg structures, etc. I like the idea of a small change that can impact the counterplays to the adepts, like the smaller sight radius for the shade, because it has less impact on the overall balance but it affects something that many players perceive as bad play (adepts shading around).
adepts and immortals were the only cost efficient units at the beginning of LotV. They could just buff gateway units, the zealot, hard countered by mines, stalkers not enough dps. I would say a boost for charge, immune to concussive, and much faster passive speed, stalkers are still a huge issue since buff too much and you have the possibility of early HotS again.
|
avilo saying zerg has the more options? speed/bane or roach ravager in 90% of the games..
everysingle team in korea its like
4 protoss ,1 -2 terran , 1. 1/2 useless zerg
no team besides probably skt with (dark) "rely" on zergs , just because they are so predictable and risky compared to protoss and terran , their all ins are risky as fuck vs mothershipcore etc, tank wm bunker ,fortress , liberator.... tell me a team that rely on their zerg to win ? , while a protoss can play 100% any map , and come up with a diferent strat everytime even in the same map
look what happened to SKT this season , first time using zerg as an ace , and lost everything , ended up in second last place
Dark " the best zerg atm" end up 1-4 in round 3
4 out of 5 zergs lost their ace matches too in round 3
look at code S ,no zerg managed to advance to the first stages of playoff...
is anyone else tired of watching PvX for the past like 3 years? its like 80% of the games at this point have a protoss i personally dont watch sc2 since more than a year ago , only specific games , its so boring... we all know in the end, it comes down to zest , stats , sos classic performance who wins the league (playoffs) , i copy paste it every year.., ever since kespa switched even with life and inno at their peak
i never saw so many zergs not wanting to play zerg as right now.. it is honestly very boring.. its not only limited but zerg has to defend the entire game now there's simply no window at the highest lvl to do damage with the new units terran and protoss are safe regardless of their build or greed . watch any GM zerg stream its all game defending... harassing even for 300 apm players is kind of useless , its so easy to stop with liberator wm tankivac , mothership1clickwin , adepts , etc.. how do you even expect zerg to do damage? terran can triple expand without beign punish at all zerg cant even take the third without losing every drone and the expansion itself ,i want fun games not avilo games.. ZzZz turtle games
nothing can really surprise the enemy that zerg has while da protoss can win games with 1 oracle or 1 dt 3 adepts
|
On August 28 2016 02:57 iamkaokao wrote:
is anyone else tired of watching PvX for the past like 3 years?
Well Protoss is winning the most premiers for the last 3 years.
This year they seem to be doing even better and that without actually using the really strong units they were tying to get to in HOTS. As much as the MSC and pylon overcharge may be needed for the race, for me it destroys a whole lot of fun while watching. Seeing literally everything get shut down that T and Z can throw early game and often even later with just a few well placed pylons feels just wrong while the other two races struggle to defend having their whole army at home.
Protoss harass just never fails...
|
On August 27 2016 23:19 SCHWARZENEGGER wrote:
how about make cloak available by default, but speed upgrade replace it in the lab, and nerf speed bonus that upgrade giving or increase value etc etc, because it's obvious that 2 upgrades on banshee is too much, unit exist just for harassment and useless against protoss in this job.
Cloak available by default means the banshee is out way before Protoss can get detection off any reasonable expansion build.
|
Adept
We are seeing feedback of trying out a change where the vision radius is reduced on the Adept shades. Unless there is strong disagreement about this change, we’ll start testing on this as well.
meh, just test it with less hp (shields)
|
On August 28 2016 06:02 Penev wrote:Show nested quote +Adept
We are seeing feedback of trying out a change where the vision radius is reduced on the Adept shades. Unless there is strong disagreement about this change, we’ll start testing on this as well. meh, just test it with less hp (shields)
Increasing shade cooldown and having the cooldown start when the ability finishes would also be fine I think. At least instances of 30+ workers dying in 30 seconds would be less common, at which point the armies that fight the adepts could be bigger and better.
|
I am kind of worried that the Tempest disruption ball ability is a bit ridiculous. That does 70% of the DPS of Psi Storm but has 130% of the AoE, which is just going to absolutely shred Terran everything. The current dominant TvP lategame strat is to make more Liberators than their Tempests can kill so you can just zone the entire ground army out and trade 6-8 liberators for an expansion. If Tempest can suddenly drop a bunch of AoE to keep the bio away while simultaneously annihilating all the Libs from 16 range away it's going to be messy.
|
On August 28 2016 05:56 Xequecal wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 23:19 SCHWARZENEGGER wrote:
how about make cloak available by default, but speed upgrade replace it in the lab, and nerf speed bonus that upgrade giving or increase value etc etc, because it's obvious that 2 upgrades on banshee is too much, unit exist just for harassment and useless against protoss in this job. Cloak available by default means the banshee is out way before Protoss can get detection off any reasonable expansion build.
Well how about get a forge like terran has to get an ebay for ages now for dts and oracles.
|
On August 28 2016 06:11 Xequecal wrote:
I am kind of worried that the Tempest disruption ball ability is a bit ridiculous. That does 70% of the DPS of Psi Storm but has 130% of the AoE, which is just going to absolutely shred Terran everything. The current dominant TvP lategame strat is to make more Liberators than their Tempests can kill so you can just zone the entire ground army out and trade 6-8 liberators for an expansion. If Tempest can suddenly drop a bunch of AoE to keep the bio away while simultaneously annihilating all the Libs from 16 range away it's going to be messy.
I think with this patch you're just supposed to go mech against Protoss. And Terran. And Zerg if you feel like it.
On August 28 2016 06:13 _Epi_ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 05:56 Xequecal wrote:On August 27 2016 23:19 SCHWARZENEGGER wrote:
how about make cloak available by default, but speed upgrade replace it in the lab, and nerf speed bonus that upgrade giving or increase value etc etc, because it's obvious that 2 upgrades on banshee is too much, unit exist just for harassment and useless against protoss in this job. Cloak available by default means the banshee is out way before Protoss can get detection off any reasonable expansion build. Well how about get a forge like terran has to get an ebay for ages now for dts and oracles.
Banshees having cloak without research would be more Wings of Liberty beta than the actual Wings beta I think.
|
On August 28 2016 06:13 _Epi_ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 05:56 Xequecal wrote:On August 27 2016 23:19 SCHWARZENEGGER wrote:
how about make cloak available by default, but speed upgrade replace it in the lab, and nerf speed bonus that upgrade giving or increase value etc etc, because it's obvious that 2 upgrades on banshee is too much, unit exist just for harassment and useless against protoss in this job. Cloak available by default means the banshee is out way before Protoss can get detection off any reasonable expansion build. Well how about get a forge like terran has to get an ebay for ages now for dts and oracles.
Yeah, this doesn't work. First of all, unlike a single missile turret vs. oracles, one cannon doesn't cover a mineral line against banshees, they can still kill half your probes without getting shot by the cannon. It takes 14 stalker shots to kill a banshee, so to beat this you need two stalkers plus a cannon in BOTH mineral lines. If you spend this many resources at the timing you need to do so you will just die to literally any other aggressive opening by Terran, let alone any kind of all in. Even overcharge won't save you if you're stuck on 1 or 2 gates because you had to spend all your other resources making this defense.
|
On August 28 2016 06:22 Xequecal wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 06:13 _Epi_ wrote:On August 28 2016 05:56 Xequecal wrote:On August 27 2016 23:19 SCHWARZENEGGER wrote:
how about make cloak available by default, but speed upgrade replace it in the lab, and nerf speed bonus that upgrade giving or increase value etc etc, because it's obvious that 2 upgrades on banshee is too much, unit exist just for harassment and useless against protoss in this job. Cloak available by default means the banshee is out way before Protoss can get detection off any reasonable expansion build. Well how about get a forge like terran has to get an ebay for ages now for dts and oracles. Yeah, this doesn't work. First of all one cannon doesn't cover a mineral line against banshees, they can still kill half your probes without getting shot by the cannon. It takes 14 stalker shots to kill a banshee, so to beat this you need two stalkers plus a cannon in BOTH mineral lines. If you spend this many resources at the timing you need to do so you will just die to literally any other aggressive opening by Terran, let alone any kind of all in. Even overcharge won't save you if you're stuck on 1 or 2 gates because you had to spend all your other resources making this defense.
You also fall really behind if the Terran fakes you out and just goes greedy.
|
On August 28 2016 06:24 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 06:22 Xequecal wrote:On August 28 2016 06:13 _Epi_ wrote:On August 28 2016 05:56 Xequecal wrote:On August 27 2016 23:19 SCHWARZENEGGER wrote:
how about make cloak available by default, but speed upgrade replace it in the lab, and nerf speed bonus that upgrade giving or increase value etc etc, because it's obvious that 2 upgrades on banshee is too much, unit exist just for harassment and useless against protoss in this job. Cloak available by default means the banshee is out way before Protoss can get detection off any reasonable expansion build. Well how about get a forge like terran has to get an ebay for ages now for dts and oracles. Yeah, this doesn't work. First of all one cannon doesn't cover a mineral line against banshees, they can still kill half your probes without getting shot by the cannon. It takes 14 stalker shots to kill a banshee, so to beat this you need two stalkers plus a cannon in BOTH mineral lines. If you spend this many resources at the timing you need to do so you will just die to literally any other aggressive opening by Terran, let alone any kind of all in. Even overcharge won't save you if you're stuck on 1 or 2 gates because you had to spend all your other resources making this defense. You also fall really behind if the Terran fakes you out and just goes greedy.
Sounds really familiar to me being a Terran.
On August 28 2016 06:22 Xequecal wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 06:13 _Epi_ wrote:On August 28 2016 05:56 Xequecal wrote:On August 27 2016 23:19 SCHWARZENEGGER wrote:
how about make cloak available by default, but speed upgrade replace it in the lab, and nerf speed bonus that upgrade giving or increase value etc etc, because it's obvious that 2 upgrades on banshee is too much, unit exist just for harassment and useless against protoss in this job. Cloak available by default means the banshee is out way before Protoss can get detection off any reasonable expansion build. Well how about get a forge like terran has to get an ebay for ages now for dts and oracles. Yeah, this doesn't work. First of all, unlike a single missile turret vs. oracles, one cannon doesn't cover a mineral line against banshees, they can still kill half your probes without getting shot by the cannon. It takes 14 stalker shots to kill a banshee, so to beat this you need two stalkers plus a cannon in BOTH mineral lines. If you spend this many resources at the timing you need to do so you will just die to literally any other aggressive opening by Terran, let alone any kind of all in. Even overcharge won't save you if you're stuck on 1 or 2 gates because you had to spend all your other resources making this defense.
Exactly the same applies for turrets. Except the DPS of Marines to Stalkers is a bit different, but guess how many marineshots you need to kill an oracle or a dt. And besides that guess how easily the marine is killed in contrary to the stalker.
Well nvm, this situation is standard for terran since hots.
|
On August 28 2016 06:43 _Epi_ wrote:
Exactly the same applies for turrets. Except the DPS of Marines to Stalkers is a bit different, but guess how many marineshots you need to kill an oracle or a dt. And besides that guess how easily the marine is killed in contrary to the stalker.
Well nvm, this situation is standard for terran since hots.
No, it doesn't. Oracles have 4 range, a single missile turret in the minerals covers all your workers. The oracle can snipe off a couple gas workers but they have to take fire from the turret to do so. They cannot kill your mineral workers at all. A single widow mine will also cover all your mineral workers against oracle harass.
Banshees, on the other hand, have 6 range. A single cannon in the minerals does NOT cover the whole mineral line. The banshee can kill half of your probes without taking any damage if you don't have two stalkers there as well.
Having cloak immediately would work if banshees had range 4 to begin with and there was an upgrade to put them back to 6 in place of the cloak upgrade. But with the current stats it would be absolutely broken.
|
On August 28 2016 06:49 Xequecal wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 06:43 _Epi_ wrote:
Exactly the same applies for turrets. Except the DPS of Marines to Stalkers is a bit different, but guess how many marineshots you need to kill an oracle or a dt. And besides that guess how easily the marine is killed in contrary to the stalker.
Well nvm, this situation is standard for terran since hots.
No, it doesn't. Oracles have 4 range, a single missile turret in the minerals covers all your workers. The oracle can snipe off a couple gas workers but they have to take fire from the turret to do so. They cannot kill your mineral workers at all. A single widow mine will also cover all your mineral workers against oracle harass. Banshees, on the other hand, have 6 range. A single cannon in the minerals does NOT cover the whole mineral line. The banshee can kill half of your probes without taking any damage if you don't have two stalkers there as well. Having cloak immediately would work if banshees had range 4 to begin with and there was an upgrade to put them back to 6 in place of the cloak upgrade. But with the current stats it would be absolutely broken.
dude the cannon is for detection so you can hunt off the banshe with whatever you like. So it is almost the same. Stalkers have range of 6 so this should be easy peacy with some micro. And with a phoenix its insta gg since the banshee is so slow.
|
Yes but so you are forcing the protoss to build 1 cannon in each mineral line + 2 stalkers (usually you don't open with stalkers).
|
On August 28 2016 07:21 VHbb wrote:
Yes but so you are forcing the protoss to build 1 cannon in each mineral line + 2 stalkers (usually you don't open with stalkers).
That is the point I am trying to make. That is basically what is done to terrans for the past 3 years.
|
Forcing them to make marines ?
That's not the same to me, marines are the core of the bio terran composition, while stalkers definitely are not. The terran would build marines anyway, while if I make 2-4 stalkers, then they are much less useful in the midgame and I risk to just die to a bio push because stalkers are bad vs marauders and marines.
Edit: also you don't need to have marines AND turrets blindly in each mineral line. You can either leave some marines (and if you don't see the oracle then they move out) or build a turret to be safe.
|
On August 28 2016 07:32 VHbb wrote:Forcing them to make marines ? That's not the same to me, marines are the core of the bio terran composition, while stalkers definitely are not. The terran would build marines anyway, while if I make 2-4 stalkers, then they are much less useful in the midgame and I risk to just die to a bio push because stalkers are bad vs marauders and marines.
No but getting a turret for dts or oracles. Against oracles you do not always need it but to be honest as protoss you wouldnt need the cannon in each case aswell.
We are talking about detection mainly, because that is the key point of this discussion, not the banshee itself.
|
Well there are two points:
1) detection: you don't need detection for oracles so they are not the point. As terran you either build turrets or save 1-2 scans. You can also repair turrets in case they are under attack. As protoss you need cannons (which cannot be repaired, and you also need a pylon close to the minerals) or a robo + observer (which is a large investment).
Also, as protoss, you need 2-3 stalkers in each mineral line to deflect a banshee and it's easy to just fly away with the banshee. In the meantime you forced units which are BAD vs bio terran.
As terran you can save one scan and kill the DTs with stimmed bio since the DTs doesnt fly it may escape but it's much more difficult. Also you are not being forced to build units that are not useful later on.
DTs are a much bigger investment because it's more difficult to get into the enemy base (w/o prism) and much much more difficult to get away, so usually you loose them and you have to trade well with them to not be behind.
2) flying harassment unit: as terran you need to either leave some marines in the mineral lines or build turrets. Also in this case you are building units that you would build either way, and you just need one turret per mineral line if you want to move out with the marines.
As toss you would need (for cloacked banshee) 1 cannon + 2 stalker per mineral line (in most maps this means 4 stalkers to cover natural and main since moving stalkers from one place to an other is long), so you are forcing the toss to invest quite heavily in units he would not need later on, and that trade very bad vs terran bio.
Also you can simply move out of the detection range of the cannons and kill pylons, trailing units, transferring probes, etc. (this is possible with the oracle as well but a) you don't have infinite energy and b) it's easier to chase it since it's not invisible)
|
On August 28 2016 07:43 VHbb wrote:Well there are two points: 1) detection: you don't need detection for oracles so they are not the point. As terran you either build turrets or save 1-2 scans. You can also repair turrets in case they are under attack. As protoss you need cannons (which cannot be repaired, and you also need a pylon close to the minerals) or a robo + observer (which is a large investment). Also, as protoss, you need 2-3 stalkers in each mineral line to deflect a banshee and it's easy to just fly away with the banshee. In the meantime you forced units which are BAD vs bio terran. As terran you can save one scan and kill the DTs with stimmed bio since the DTs doesnt fly it may escape but it's much more difficult. Also you are not being forced to build units that are not useful later on. DTs are a much bigger investment because it's more difficult to get into the enemy base (w/o prism) and much much more difficult to get away, so usually you loose them and you have to trade well with them to not be behind. 2) flying harassment unit: as terran you need to either leave some marines in the mineral lines or build turrets. Also in this case you are building units that you would build either way, and you just need one turret per mineral line if you want to move out with the marines. As toss you would need (for cloacked banshee) 1 cannon + 2 stalker per mineral line (in most maps this means 4 stalkers to cover natural and main since moving stalkers from one place to an other is long), so you are forcing the toss to invest quite heavily in units he would not need later on, and that trade very bad vs terran bio. Also you can simply move out of the detection range of the cannons and kill pylons, trailing units, transferring probes, etc. (this is possible with the oracle as well but a) you don't have infinite energy and b) it's easier to chase it since it's not invisible)
Weird enough that you never see banshees in TvP by how awesome they must be by your explanation. I think deep down your arguments dont apply as good as you think they do. Since everything you have said applies to terran to a certain extent aswell. If you have not enough marines the oracle just erases your few marines, or you can be dragged out of position easily. Each scan is also some damage for not having the mule to keep up with protoss superior economy.
Well nvm
|
I think you see less banshee because when you are building banshees you are not building medivacs, and this delays the push with bio. This is not something you fix with free cloack though (I think)
Also I don't think banshee are *awesome* at all, but I guess it's just sarcasm.
And yes, scans come with a price, but that's ok: if you scan and kill my DTs you have to sacrifice something no? You can always build turrets if you think the investment is worth..
|
On August 28 2016 07:50 VHbb wrote:
I think you see less banshee because when you are building banshees you are not building medivacs, and this delays the push with bio. This is not something you fix with free cloack though (I think)
Also I don't think banshee are *awesome* at all, but I guess it's just sarcasm.
And yes, scans come with a price, but that's ok: if you scan and kill my DTs you have to sacrifice something no? You can always build turrets if you think the investment is worth..
You dont see banshees in TvP at all because they are so easily countered by protoss. Thats it, normally an observer is already out. Wouldnt be that unfair to have to force protoss to actually scout better and prepare properly. As I have said already, that is the situation for terran for years already.
|
Well that's your opinion
I said before while I think it's not fair, because the situation is not symmetrical and P needs to invest more to deflect banshees. Anyway I see you just want to whine vs protoss so ok, nothing I can do about it gg
|
On August 28 2016 06:09 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 06:02 Penev wrote:Adept
We are seeing feedback of trying out a change where the vision radius is reduced on the Adept shades. Unless there is strong disagreement about this change, we’ll start testing on this as well. meh, just test it with less hp (shields) Increasing shade cooldown and having the cooldown start when the ability finishes would also be fine I think. At least instances of 30+ workers dying in 30 seconds would be less common, at which point the armies that fight the adepts could be bigger and better.
That's better than reducing the vision radius for sure but reducing hp would make it less tanky than a Zealot which is something I'd like to see as well and not to forget make the shading on top of armies less preferable
|
How about with the adepts you add collision to shade against enemy units.
|
On August 28 2016 06:49 Xequecal wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 06:43 _Epi_ wrote:
Exactly the same applies for turrets. Except the DPS of Marines to Stalkers is a bit different, but guess how many marineshots you need to kill an oracle or a dt. And besides that guess how easily the marine is killed in contrary to the stalker.
Well nvm, this situation is standard for terran since hots.
No, it doesn't. Oracles have 4 range, a single missile turret in the minerals covers all your workers.
No it doesn't oracles can kill about 40-50% of a mineral line without getting hit by a turret, also 2 range is about the size of single mineral patch.
|
The problem w adept is that it is hard to define it's role. Now it is like a tank and harass unit all rolled in one.
You should either have one or another. A tank that is strong and can take a fight but not as mobile. Or harass unit that can move fast and weak. Adept is the mix of both.
Maybe a good way is to make adept less tanky from the start. W an upgrade you increase the rate of fire and also more hp.
|
I would love to see gateway units tweaked a bit to create more parity in their usage. Something like a slight Zealot HP buff, slight Stalker DPS buff + HP nerf, and Adept HP nerf + shade CD increase. I would also like to see build time reductions for gateway units (leaving warpgate build times the same) to smooth out the powercurve b/w pre-warpgate and post-warpgate.
|
At some point though do we just remove the zealot? Like if they feel the Adept provides this cool mechanic they enjoy then just get rid of the zealot and let the adept fill that role.
I think you could just make the adept the zealot role, and the shade is the "speed" mechanic of the zealot. The shade should wear off much faster and it is then just like charge but you can choose to cancel it. Then you also can't use the shade to go between 2 bases. The shade should be really fast but only a few seconds before you have to cancel it or let your units warp. Removing units is OK, if we have something better than the zealot than fine, get rid of the zealot.
|
I feel like it's hard to say where the balance is (obviously), but I love the feel of the game a whole lot better now that Siege Tanks are actually fucking good. I feel like when I set myself a spot on the map it really fucking counts, and that's a great feeling.
It's nice to see Hydras in the mid game, they're interesting in conjunction with Lurkers. We'll see how it pans out in the late game if Zergs can get there more often, but I'm fearful that Ultras are still too strong when a-moving in conjunction with these high-utility Hydras.
I think the next balance pass needs to be made at air units, however. Air units are still just too efficient at killing ground units, and I'd really love to see Liberator, Banshee and Oracle anti-ground nerfs next. I'd like to have Liberators take an extra shot to kill most Protoss units. I'd like Banshees to take 3 shots to kill workers, but with a slight HP buff. And I think Oracle anti-light attack should be removed, and its function to shift from worker harass to utility spellcaster (revelation and stasis ward)
|
It's unfortunate that a lot of the discussion here is done by overly zealous Terrans, making grand statements backed with either no or false statistics.
Let's look at those first:
Protoss matchups in professional games are very well balanced result-wise. They are currently sitting at 50.23% in PvT and 50.10% in PvZ according to aligulac. That's pretty much as balanced as it can get.
They had a strong PvT around May (52.71%), which was as dominating as Terrans in TvZ during June (52.63%), but the results have since evened out.
In terms of aligulac ratings, Protoss has not been the dominant race even once since the release of LotV. Out of the 21 intervals, they have been the lagging race for the first 13 intervals.
Of course this may very well be heavily influenced by the strong performance of a few select individuals (I am looking at you, Byun).
Out of the 13 premier tournaments since LotV release, we had 5 Zerg, 5 Protoss and 3 Terran champions. There were 11 zerg, 9 Protoss and 6 Terran finalists.
With that out of the way, I think we can focus on design decisions.
I heard an awful lot of "Remove Adepts", "Nerf them into oblivion" along with crazy suggestions to remove their shield when casting their shades, severe HP/Shield nerfs on top of DPS nerfs.
While I agree that the Adept is a very strong unit that might be a bit too strong in the worker harass department due to their mobility, straight-up nerfing their core stats seems like the wrong way to go about it.
Keep in mind that the strong Adept in its current form is why we get to see a Protoss that is so different from the "Try to stay alive until Colossus are out" we had in HotS that you all were complaining about.
If you want to nerf the Adept into the ground and buff lategame Protoss units, we are bound to go back to the HotS style of being overly defensive until Protoss has a deathball of high-tech units... Relying on Pylon overcharges and the MSC to even stay alive. And the same could be said about the Warpprism nerfs some of you are suggesting.
I thought we all agreed that Protoss should move away from such a defensive playstyle, more into being able to have some map control in the early game.
From what I have read thus far, I get the very strong impression that you don't really care about what Protoss does as long as they are not winning.
Protoss earlygame is too weak so that they have to sit in their base until they have high-tech units? Nerf high-tech units.
Protoss gateway unit(s) are strong enough that they can apply pressure and win games without going to high-tech units? Nerf gateway units.
For now I'd suggest to be patient until we have matchmaking on the test map and get more data on how the matchups play out with the proposed changes by Blizzard.
|
On August 28 2016 07:46 _Epi_ wrote:
Weird enough that you never see banshees in TvP by how awesome they must be by your explanation. I think deep down your arguments dont apply as good as you think they do. Since everything you have said applies to terran to a certain extent aswell. If you have not enough marines the oracle just erases your few marines, or you can be dragged out of position easily. Each scan is also some damage for not having the mule to keep up with protoss superior economy.
Well nvm
You don't see banshees because cloak costs extra and comes too late for them to be effective. If cloak was free, that all changes.
|
If mech gets viable in TvP and that allins against mech suck, PvT could end up in a good spot. Right now the MU is so ridiculously frustrating and asymetrical, with protoss completely dominating early game while terran's only goal is to mass more than 5 liberators.
With the new changes kinda going in a good direction, i feel like the next big thing to change in the game is the PO. Pylon rushing chokes and one clic defense is so fucking bad for the game. Also it has to make protoss weaker at certain points in the game to compensate for the immense defensive capabilities it gives, which i suppose is annoying for protoss players.
|
On August 28 2016 14:09 Xequecal wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 07:46 _Epi_ wrote:
Weird enough that you never see banshees in TvP by how awesome they must be by your explanation. I think deep down your arguments dont apply as good as you think they do. Since everything you have said applies to terran to a certain extent aswell. If you have not enough marines the oracle just erases your few marines, or you can be dragged out of position easily. Each scan is also some damage for not having the mule to keep up with protoss superior economy.
Well nvm
You don't see banshees because cloak costs extra and comes too late for them to be effective. If cloak was free, that all changes.
Cloak normally hits by the time the banshee arrives at the other base. Maybe there is a delay of 10sec. But hey, really nevermind.
|
On August 28 2016 07:53 _Epi_ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 07:50 VHbb wrote:
I think you see less banshee because when you are building banshees you are not building medivacs, and this delays the push with bio. This is not something you fix with free cloack though (I think)
Also I don't think banshee are *awesome* at all, but I guess it's just sarcasm.
And yes, scans come with a price, but that's ok: if you scan and kill my DTs you have to sacrifice something no? You can always build turrets if you think the investment is worth.. You dont see banshees in TvP at all because they are so easily countered by protoss. Thats it, normally an observer is already out. Wouldnt be that unfair to have to force protoss to actually scout better and prepare properly. As I have said already, that is the situation for terran for years already.
You need stargate+robo or stargate+forge+cannons at each base to counter cloak banshees. Or forge+cannon+2stalkers at each base to counter 1cloak banshee.
Even with 2stalkers, you still need 8shots to kill the one banshee. Imagine there are 2 or more banshees.
All these are gigantic investment and forces the toss to deviate from tech path. Terran 1 turret per base investment is not even remotely close to these.
|
On August 28 2016 15:31 fx9 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 07:53 _Epi_ wrote:On August 28 2016 07:50 VHbb wrote:
I think you see less banshee because when you are building banshees you are not building medivacs, and this delays the push with bio. This is not something you fix with free cloack though (I think)
Also I don't think banshee are *awesome* at all, but I guess it's just sarcasm.
And yes, scans come with a price, but that's ok: if you scan and kill my DTs you have to sacrifice something no? You can always build turrets if you think the investment is worth.. You dont see banshees in TvP at all because they are so easily countered by protoss. Thats it, normally an observer is already out. Wouldnt be that unfair to have to force protoss to actually scout better and prepare properly. As I have said already, that is the situation for terran for years already. You need stargate+robo or stargate+forge+cannons at each base to counter cloak banshees. Or forge+cannon+2stalkers at each base to counter 1cloak banshee. Even with 2stalkers, you still need 8shots to kill the one banshee. Imagine there are 2 or more banshees. All these are gigantic investment and forces the toss to deviate from tech path. Terran 1 turret per base investment is not even remotely close to these.
honestly, this makes me laugh so hard. You guys are explaining that cloaked banshees would be ridiciolously overpowered. But you never see Banshees in TvP because they suck so hard. You can get cloak easily by the time the banshee arrives, no problemo.
|
On August 28 2016 10:12 BEZZiiE wrote:
How about with the adepts you add collision to shade against enemy units.
I think it has no collision with forcefield either, you can't really interact with it.
|
How about with the adepts you add collision to shade against enemy units. Then a couple of Shades can indefinately block a ramp. Unless Blizzard realizes that there is something like push priority in the editor, but I wouldn't trust them to predict something this obvious in advance, never mind being aware of existence of "push priority" field.
|
On August 28 2016 15:31 fx9 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 07:53 _Epi_ wrote:On August 28 2016 07:50 VHbb wrote:
I think you see less banshee because when you are building banshees you are not building medivacs, and this delays the push with bio. This is not something you fix with free cloack though (I think)
Also I don't think banshee are *awesome* at all, but I guess it's just sarcasm.
And yes, scans come with a price, but that's ok: if you scan and kill my DTs you have to sacrifice something no? You can always build turrets if you think the investment is worth.. You dont see banshees in TvP at all because they are so easily countered by protoss. Thats it, normally an observer is already out. Wouldnt be that unfair to have to force protoss to actually scout better and prepare properly. As I have said already, that is the situation for terran for years already. You need stargate+robo or stargate+forge+cannons at each base to counter cloak banshees. Or forge+cannon+2stalkers at each base to counter 1cloak banshee. Even with 2stalkers, you still need 8shots to kill the one banshee. Imagine there are 2 or more banshees. All these are gigantic investment and forces the toss to deviate from tech path. Terran 1 turret per base investment is not even remotely close to these.
You got shooting supply depots for that.
|
On August 28 2016 15:47 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 10:12 BEZZiiE wrote:
How about with the adepts you add collision to shade against enemy units. I think it has no collision with forcefield either, you can't really interact with it.
Right now shades interact with other shades, meaning you can block opponent shades with the shades of your adepts (I know it's almost impossible I just wanted to bring up the fact)
|
On August 28 2016 20:51 VHbb wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 15:47 Grumbels wrote:On August 28 2016 10:12 BEZZiiE wrote:
How about with the adepts you add collision to shade against enemy units. I think it has no collision with forcefield either, you can't really interact with it. Right now shades interact with other shades, meaning you can block opponent shades with the shades of your adepts (I know it's almost impossible I just wanted to bring up the fact)
Yeah, I recall that being the case. wasn't it also the case that the early version of the disruptor had the same sort of pathing of no collision with anything except itself? You couldn't block it with forcefield either, which at the time seemed silly to me because it removes a normal/expected use of forcefield. (maybe it would have be blocked by shades)
I thought the reason for this must be technical, that they had this pathfinding class and changing it so that these type of units could be blocked by forcefield but nothing else wasn't a priority. but I haven't checked in the editor or anything
|
On August 27 2016 03:36 iamkaokao wrote:
i'll like to see overlord speed increase (better harass , and vision) , or at least the morphed one for drops , it would also help holding the abundant 10pool zvz
I would love an ability for drop overlords similar to medivac speed boost but this one uses overlord health as food while active.
|
On August 28 2016 13:40 Nezgar wrote:
It's unfortunate that a lot of the discussion here is done by overly zealous Terrans, making grand statements backed with either no or false statistics.
Let's look at those first:
Protoss matchups in professional games are very well balanced result-wise. They are currently sitting at 50.23% in PvT and 50.10% in PvZ according to aligulac. That's pretty much as balanced as it can get.
They had a strong PvT around May (52.71%), which was as dominating as Terrans in TvZ during June (52.63%), but the results have since evened out.
In terms of aligulac ratings, Protoss has not been the dominant race even once since the release of LotV. Out of the 21 intervals, they have been the lagging race for the first 13 intervals.
Of course this may very well be heavily influenced by the strong performance of a few select individuals (I am looking at you, Byun).
Out of the 13 premier tournaments since LotV release, we had 5 Zerg, 5 Protoss and 3 Terran champions. There were 11 zerg, 9 Protoss and 6 Terran finalists.
With that out of the way, I think we can focus on design decisions.
I heard an awful lot of "Remove Adepts", "Nerf them into oblivion" along with crazy suggestions to remove their shield when casting their shades, severe HP/Shield nerfs on top of DPS nerfs.
While I agree that the Adept is a very strong unit that might be a bit too strong in the worker harass department due to their mobility, straight-up nerfing their core stats seems like the wrong way to go about it.
Keep in mind that the strong Adept in its current form is why we get to see a Protoss that is so different from the "Try to stay alive until Colossus are out" we had in HotS that you all were complaining about.
If you want to nerf the Adept into the ground and buff lategame Protoss units, we are bound to go back to the HotS style of being overly defensive until Protoss has a deathball of high-tech units... Relying on Pylon overcharges and the MSC to even stay alive. And the same could be said about the Warpprism nerfs some of you are suggesting.
I thought we all agreed that Protoss should move away from such a defensive playstyle, more into being able to have some map control in the early game.
From what I have read thus far, I get the very strong impression that you don't really care about what Protoss does as long as they are not winning.
Protoss earlygame is too weak so that they have to sit in their base until they have high-tech units? Nerf high-tech units.
Protoss gateway unit(s) are strong enough that they can apply pressure and win games without going to high-tech units? Nerf gateway units.
For now I'd suggest to be patient until we have matchmaking on the test map and get more data on how the matchups play out with the proposed changes by Blizzard.
Thanks for one of the few level headed posts in this thread.
If your post is colored by emotionally charged language like 'disgusting' or 'cancer' etc it pretty much gets disregarded immediately.
|
Btw, for anyone wondering why the crazy Cyclone stats don't seem to translate into in-game performance, it's because it's firing a lot slower than it's supposed to.
I measured 50 dps against armored (1 base armor) instead of the 71 (5/.07) it's supposed to do on paper.
|
On August 28 2016 15:31 fx9 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 07:53 _Epi_ wrote:On August 28 2016 07:50 VHbb wrote:
I think you see less banshee because when you are building banshees you are not building medivacs, and this delays the push with bio. This is not something you fix with free cloack though (I think)
Also I don't think banshee are *awesome* at all, but I guess it's just sarcasm.
And yes, scans come with a price, but that's ok: if you scan and kill my DTs you have to sacrifice something no? You can always build turrets if you think the investment is worth.. You dont see banshees in TvP at all because they are so easily countered by protoss. Thats it, normally an observer is already out. Wouldnt be that unfair to have to force protoss to actually scout better and prepare properly. As I have said already, that is the situation for terran for years already. You need stargate+robo or stargate+forge+cannons at each base to counter cloak banshees. Or forge+cannon+2stalkers at each base to counter 1cloak banshee. Even with 2stalkers, you still need 8shots to kill the one banshee. Imagine there are 2 or more banshees. All these are gigantic investment and forces the toss to deviate from tech path. Terran 1 turret per base investment is not even remotely close to these.
No. Protoss needs only a Pylon, an Observer, and a Mother shop Core to deflect a Cloaked Banshee. Robotics builds with Twilight Council (for Blink) follow-up or Stargate builds with Phoenixes are both completely standard for Protoss, which means Terran's gas investment will be easily deflected if Protoss simply plays properly
|
Every single agression the terran can perform against protoss is pretty much countered by going stalkers + obs. Doesn't matter what tech you're going for, as long as you land a robo, build a MSC and BUILD UNITS you're gonna be fine.
|
On August 29 2016 10:41 Beliskner wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2016 13:40 Nezgar wrote:
It's unfortunate that a lot of the discussion here is done by overly zealous Terrans, making grand statements backed with either no or false statistics.
Let's look at those first:
Protoss matchups in professional games are very well balanced result-wise. They are currently sitting at 50.23% in PvT and 50.10% in PvZ according to aligulac. That's pretty much as balanced as it can get.
They had a strong PvT around May (52.71%), which was as dominating as Terrans in TvZ during June (52.63%), but the results have since evened out.
In terms of aligulac ratings, Protoss has not been the dominant race even once since the release of LotV. Out of the 21 intervals, they have been the lagging race for the first 13 intervals.
Of course this may very well be heavily influenced by the strong performance of a few select individuals (I am looking at you, Byun).
Out of the 13 premier tournaments since LotV release, we had 5 Zerg, 5 Protoss and 3 Terran champions. There were 11 zerg, 9 Protoss and 6 Terran finalists.
With that out of the way, I think we can focus on design decisions.
I heard an awful lot of "Remove Adepts", "Nerf them into oblivion" along with crazy suggestions to remove their shield when casting their shades, severe HP/Shield nerfs on top of DPS nerfs.
While I agree that the Adept is a very strong unit that might be a bit too strong in the worker harass department due to their mobility, straight-up nerfing their core stats seems like the wrong way to go about it.
Keep in mind that the strong Adept in its current form is why we get to see a Protoss that is so different from the "Try to stay alive until Colossus are out" we had in HotS that you all were complaining about.
If you want to nerf the Adept into the ground and buff lategame Protoss units, we are bound to go back to the HotS style of being overly defensive until Protoss has a deathball of high-tech units... Relying on Pylon overcharges and the MSC to even stay alive. And the same could be said about the Warpprism nerfs some of you are suggesting.
I thought we all agreed that Protoss should move away from such a defensive playstyle, more into being able to have some map control in the early game.
From what I have read thus far, I get the very strong impression that you don't really care about what Protoss does as long as they are not winning.
Protoss earlygame is too weak so that they have to sit in their base until they have high-tech units? Nerf high-tech units.
Protoss gateway unit(s) are strong enough that they can apply pressure and win games without going to high-tech units? Nerf gateway units.
For now I'd suggest to be patient until we have matchmaking on the test map and get more data on how the matchups play out with the proposed changes by Blizzard. Thanks for one of the few level headed posts in this thread. If your post is colored by emotionally charged language like 'disgusting' or 'cancer' etc it pretty much gets disregarded immediately.
I quote 100% Nezgar's post, nicely written
It's also a bit weird since the main complaint I read about protoss is that they rely on "gimmicky" strategy (whatever that means), and then you'd like a banshee with free cloak.. doesn't that go in the same direction?
I read a lot of posts with sweeping statements that don't admit a reply (like "no. it's like this. stop."), at least at my level of play I can only guess how things works, I don't think anything is set in stone and players can adapt and figure out solutions... sometimes it seems the discussion here is more a way come out on top rather than figure out stuff.. which is a pity since this, at least for me, is the main platform where I can talk about sc2..
For instance, just from the post above:
"Every single agression the terran can perform against protoss is pretty much countered by going stalkers + obs. Doesn't matter what tech you're going for, as long as you land a robo, build a MSC and BUILD UNITS you're gonna be fine."
Are you 100% sure that "every single aggression" can be hold with stalkers+obs?? I'm not saying you are wrong, but in my experience even early bio pushes with stim can be problematic, especially if you set up a defense with stalkers, which die very easily to stimmed bio.
We have PO, but you cannot have infinite pylons, I usually prefer to cover both mineral lines with pylons, which leaves maybe 1-2 pylons at the front: you stim 16 marines and take out the pylons (and I'm not going to be able to defend with stalkers for sure). Had I opened with more adepts I could have held probably, but them a cloaked banshee would have done big damage..
This is all fanta-starcraft, I agree, it's just to say that playing the game is much more nuanced than how you put it, imho.
Reading this it seems protoss *never* dies to early aggression, which is very extreme.
p.s. @EatingBomber (cool nickname ) blink stalkers into phoenixes vs terran is definitely not a standard build order eheh
|
I actually had a great idea which I'm gonna present again for the infestor!!!
Acidic Spores: The infestor shoots a green orb of spores at the ground which stays dormant until an enemy moves within 1.5 range of it, then it detonates dealing heavy damage vs light units in addition to a minor slow effect. Spores placed on creep cloak after a short fade delay.
Energy Cost: 75
Cooldown: 5 seconds
Damage: 5 per second 10 vs light
AOE: About the same as a tank shot.
Slow: 15%
Duration: 3 seconds
Role: the role of this ability is to have a PRE pathogen glands timing for infestors to fight mass lings and marine shoves. also does well vs adepts and zealots.. the cloaking aspect will wreck heavy investments in ling runbys and bad clumping...
Second Idea!!!
My second idea to bring the infestor into the spotlight is a RECURSION of the parasite that the queen had..
Lesser Parasite: The infestor launches a small infectious spore cloud at an area infecting all biological units that pass through it with "Lesser parasites". These parasites last until the unit receives healing. They provide vision of 1 around the unit.
Energy Cost: 75
Cooldown: N/A
AOE: About twice as big as a tank shot, Same as fungal.
Duration: 2.5 seconds
Hive tech upgrade at ultralisk cavern!
Ultra- Strain :
This upgrade allows The lesser parasites to be replaced by "Ultrastrain Parasites" Which after 240 seconds of being inside of a host will destroy the host and spawn a broodling.
Notes: Parasites will (as in broodwar) be revealed by a note added to the infocard of the unit as well as causing him to glow green in the wiretool card. The parasite is instantly eradicated with any healing.
|
hmm,
how about reducing duration of the shade ability itself?
It would make shade having less possible distance, which would make for easier defense.
Also it would nerf scouting capabilities a bit.
|
If pylon overcharge is to or should get at disposal you guys should elaborate why it was brought into the game and if these factors can be changed.
That mainly comes down to terran bio + medivacs. Protoss was just too weak in split up fights against terran units that are getting healed. And the fact that bio + medivac anyway are the main army component of any terran army so the tech and units were a zero commitment.
If that changes we can can drop pylon overcharge.
The same about the adept. Bio was just too strong since release of WOL and could only be countered with massive splash units when not going all-in. Therefore the game got stale on very narrow unit compositions and timings. Therefore they introduced adepts in the manner they were.
Get the bio issue fixed and you fix the fundamentals of the game.
Fixing it means less omnipotence of bio and more requirement of supplementation of other and higher tech units. Imo the best way to do it is to remove the marauder from early game and move it behind some expensive tech in terms of time and resources (T3). Then terran had to fill this gap with units from factories. Marauders just add what is too much to bio. They are too solid in tanking damage and other than that even counter armored units - all that at the same mobility as marines and with basically the same tech requirements. This is what mech should have been there for.
The current solution with marauders is below standard. Having their attack splitted into two attacks makes them worse against units with armor. This is contrary to the idea of design to let them counter armored units. It underlines the issue with the unit imo.
On a seperate note:
I dislike the fact that we have units with armor and on the other hand units with the armored tech. In a perfect world this should not exist. A unit like the ultralisk with 8 amor is an amored unit, a unit with 0 armor isn't an armored unit, an non-ugraded ultralisk is a less armored unit than a fully upgraded one. I know that these tags helps to make balancing easier but I believe it could get redundant with a perfect system.
In this regard:
I imagine a more organic system with the tags to be potentially more interesting and dynamic if this can be made viable:
Why don't you let anti armor damage scale with the amount of armor the attacked unit has (the more armor the more damage)?
Then anti light damage could scale with the armor the attacked unit doesn't have (the more armor the less damage).
I know that requires alot of change and testing but I think it is worth thinking it through. We could get some completely new and interesting interactions and strategies.
Example with zealot:
If a zealot did 8x2 normal damage and had the damage against armored units tag then it could do the following damage:
0-0-0 zealot:
against 0 armor 2x8 = 16
against 1 armor 2x7 + 2x1 = 16
against 2 armor 2x6 + 2x2 = 16
...
1-0-0 zealot:
against 0 armor 2x9 = 18
against 1 armor 2x8 + 2x1 = 18
...
Just a thought.
Obviously this alone does not seem viable.
Probably it creates unnecessary complexity.
Maybe it can be expanded with any brilliant idea to bring it into a viable spot? Anyone?
Anyway I believe with such fundamental changes as planned the whole thing with the tags should be thought through again and if possible improved.
But really this isn't the most pressing issue of SC2 if at all, don't get me wrong. I just don't like the boring tags that much at all and would rather see the bonus damage of anti armored or non armored somehow come out of the stats of the interacting units itself and be a bit more dynamic. Probably too difficult to make it viable.
|
Example with zealot:
If a zealot did 8x2 normal damage and had the damage against armored units tag then it could do the following damage:
0-0-0 zealot:
against 0 armor 2x8 = 16
against 1 armor 2x7 + 2x1 = 16
against 2 armor 2x6 + 2x2 = 16
...
1-0-0 zealot:
against 0 armor 2x9 = 18
against 1 armor 2x8 + 2x1 = 18 Simpler solution to above example - attacks ignore armor. Very easy to change.
But if you want specific unit to deal specific bonus damage vs some specific unit but different vs another, then it can get very complicated, messy and time consuming to implement.
|
On August 29 2016 19:46 Nazara wrote:Show nested quote +Example with zealot:
If a zealot did 8x2 normal damage and had the damage against armored units tag then it could do the following damage:
0-0-0 zealot:
against 0 armor 2x8 = 16
against 1 armor 2x7 + 2x1 = 16
against 2 armor 2x6 + 2x2 = 16
...
1-0-0 zealot:
against 0 armor 2x9 = 18
against 1 armor 2x8 + 2x1 = 18 Simpler solution to above example - attacks ignore armor. Very easy to change. But if you want specific unit to deal specific bonus damage vs some specific unit but different vs another, then it can get very complicated, messy and time consuming to implement.
Warcraft III armor system now!
|
Wish they would increase the combat power of the Banshee to make up for the stronger option each race has against Banshees since early HotS. Speed buff sounds just wrong for a cloaked atg.
|
On August 29 2016 23:08 FeyFey wrote:
Wish they would increase the combat power of the Banshee to make up for the stronger option each race has against Banshees since early HotS. Speed buff sounds just wrong for a cloaked atg.
Having fast flying units that are strong enough to stand on their own against anti-flyer units is a very bad idea. Having overly strong flying units in general is a very bad idea, since it completely negates most map features. It also removes the element of good positioning from the game, which would be a significant loss. I shouldn't even have to mention the horrors we have experienced with sky-X armies (you can substitute the X for any race, really) in the lategame.
On August 29 2016 17:42 LSN wrote:
If pylon overcharge is to or should get at disposal you guys should elaborate why it was brought into the game and if these factors can be changed.
That mainly comes down to terran bio + medivacs. Protoss was just too weak in split up fights against terran units that are getting healed. And the fact that bio + medivac anyway are the main army component of any terran army so the tech and units were a zero commitment.
If that changes we can can drop pylon overcharge.
The same about the adept. Bio was just too strong since release of WOL and could only be countered with massive splash units when not going all-in. Therefore the game got stale on very narrow unit compositions and timings. Therefore they introduced adepts in the manner they were.
Get the bio issue fixed and you fix the fundamentals of the game.
I can agree with you up to this point. I have elaborated before why strong Adepts or Gateway units in general are important for Protoss to not have to revert back to their HotS style.
The problem with Photon Overcharge is not that bio is too strong in the early- to midgame, we have buffed Adepts for that. The problem here is the mobility of high DPS units that can ignore terrain. That includes not just Medivacs, but also Mutalisks and the stronger Warp Prism.
If you as the attacker can move your forces faster from one enemy base to the other than the defender, it causes a lot of problems. If it then also ignores terrain and defenses, it's even more troublesome. It is the main reason why I loathe the boost on Medivacs, it is the most problematic unit in the game and has been for a very long time, if you ask me. Not in terms of pure balancing, but in terms of design.
|
Maybe the harass role of the banshee now is a bit shadowed by the liberator ?
I don't know, I see many players going for liberator harass, because you can re-utilize the liberators in the following push and in your standard composition, while for the banshee is more difficult (not sure since I don't play terran)
|
On August 30 2016 00:17 VHbb wrote:
Maybe the harass role of the banshee now is a bit shadowed by the liberator ?
I don't know, I see many players going for liberator harass, because you can re-utilize the liberators in the following push and in your standard composition, while for the banshee is more difficult (not sure since I don't play terran)
Also liberator harass strains your opponent's multitasking much more than your own, unlike banshees, and it can be reactored/made without add-ons (in case you get all-in'd) and fight air units. It's just all around better.
|
i dont have much of a problem with adept itself, but I do have issue with the ability to cancel the shade at will, it should cost shields or health or something as a risk/reward for a free scout on a very strong early game unit.
deep tunneling wasn't all that great anyways, I prefer being able to cast while burrowed but it sure is odd seeing the burrow model for those infestors and the fact that they can block units makes it pretty obvious they are there.
|
It could be that when you cancel the shade you have some additional cooldown on the shade ability itself (it may be frozen for some amount of time, to be tweaked).
This way if you decide to cancel the shade you won't have the opportunity to re-shade again shortly and you are somehow committing to the current move (it may mean that you won't be able to escape from the enemy base, of that you will retard the next shading enough so that the opponent can prepare more defense).
|
I'd personally redesign the Colossus in the following way:
- Slower attack speed.
- Larger range, slightly less than a Siege Tank.
- Moves very slowly - has to be microed with a Warp Prism for mobility.
- No longer considered an air unit, so you can't just mass Corruptors to counter them.
|
Why should we touch the colossus now? I think it's in a good place, with a not so dominant but not useless role..
|
Adept
We are seeing feedback of trying out a change where the vision radius is reduced on the Adept shades. Unless there is strong disagreement about this change, we’ll start testing on this as well.
The fundamental problem with Adepts, as with many other Protoss abilities, is noncommitment. Vision radius does zilch to fix it. The basic problem is you can have an army in one base, fighting, and threaten that same army in a different place without any need to make good on that threat. An army that's ace at slaughtering workers at that. An army that can start that fight in one place by deciding that they are in your base now, and get out all the same.
The unit is fundamentally, completely anti-commitment as it stands. A proper fix to the Adept means shelving the shitfest that is Shade completely or to do something to make it a commitment - making it uncancelable and/or blockable with units would probably be my favourites after removing the POS completely in the first place and giving them something more interesting to do, something that plays with the basic mechanisms of the game: Movement, threat of force, the way all basic combat units do it: Bio, Lings, Blings, Roaches, Stalkers, Ravagers, Tanks, Hellions, you name it.
Normal, but interesting movement, and a threat of force that needs the unit to be there to present it. These are fundamental tenets of interesting engagements, and Protoss as a faction shits all over them in a myriad of ways already. We need less, not more.
|
I loathe the boost on Medivacs, it is the most problematic unit in the game and has been for a very long time, if you ask me. Not in terms of pure balancing, but in terms of design.
Ability to proxy most of your production to any random farm
Ability to proxy most of your production to a dropship
Ability to whip up indestructible unpathable obstacles on a whim to the point you dictate engagements
A button to turn random farms into übercannons
übercannon maker is also a quickly online flier to make long-term contains by Z untenable early
A button to threaten an army in a different place with no need to make good on the threat
A button to zap an army out of a deeply committed position while continuing to fight
A button to zap an army out of a deeply committed position
Medivac boost may be too strong, but as far as egregious game design goes, a temporary speed boost doesn't hold a candle to Protoss. The faction isn't just a bit too good at moving around - it directly breaks a ridiculous number of the basic dynamics of logistics and engagements with special abilities that are often unilateral decisions by the Protoss player.
|
The whining and complaining about protoss is really strong.. honestly I can't remember the last ladder game when I won and someone said gg to me, it's always some variation of "protoss lol" "easy race" , etc.
Yes P has very different mechanics, but they characterize the race wrt T and Z.. you cannot compare too much how the difference races works since the production mechanisms are deeply different. A protoss cannot really macro his production while fighting because you have to go back to a pylon / energy field and warp in units, while as T and Z you do everything with hotkeys and keyboard (this is just *one* example)..
It's true that P can easily disengage in many situations, but it's also true that when you loose an engagement as T or Z, often you have a second army at home composed of units you produced during the engagement. If a P looses all its army it's generally game over..
|
On August 31 2016 02:57 VHbb wrote:
The whining and complaining about protoss is really strong.. honestly I can't remember the last ladder game when I won and someone said gg to me, it's always some variation of "protoss lol" "easy race" , etc.
Yes P has very different mechanics, but they characterize the race wrt T and Z.. you cannot compare too much how the difference races works since the production mechanisms are deeply different. A protoss cannot really macro his production while fighting because you have to go back to a pylon / energy field and warp in units, while as T and Z you do everything with hotkeys and keyboard (this is just *one* example)..
It's true that P can easily disengage in many situations, but it's also true that when you loose an engagement as T or Z, often you have a second army at home composed of units you produced during the engagement. If a P looses all its army it's generally game over..
This sounds just like Terran Mech, minus the ability to disengage...
|
On August 31 2016 02:46 Coffeeling wrote:Show nested quote +I loathe the boost on Medivacs, it is the most problematic unit in the game and has been for a very long time, if you ask me. Not in terms of pure balancing, but in terms of design.
Ability to proxy most of your production to any random farm Ability to proxy most of your production to a dropship Ability to whip up indestructible unpathable obstacles on a whim to the point you dictate engagements A button to turn random farms into übercannons übercannon maker is also a quickly online flier to make long-term contains by Z untenable early A button to threaten an army in a different place with no need to make good on the threat A button to zap an army out of a deeply committed position while continuing to fight A button to zap an army out of a deeply committed position Medivac boost may be too strong, but as far as egregious game design goes, a temporary speed boost doesn't hold a candle to Protoss. The faction isn't just a bit too good at moving around - it directly breaks a ridiculous number of the basic dynamics of logistics and engagements with special abilities that are often unilateral decisions by the Protoss player.
Medivac Boost is the sole reason why Blink Stalkers and Mutalisks became mandatory in the HotS PvT and ZvT metagames. With any other style, you'd be overwhelmed by the mobility of bio drops. It's why every professional game became Blink Stalker Colossus or Ling Bling Muta versus MMMM, with a few exceptions (Oracle cheese, or Swarm Hosts vs Mech.)
Granted, the Mothership Core was honestly far more broken back in HotS when it used to outrange Siege Tanks and effectively hold off every 1-1-1 all in. Now, it just feels like a safety crutch that falls apart once you spend your energy.
|
On August 31 2016 03:25 Clbull wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2016 02:57 VHbb wrote:
The whining and complaining about protoss is really strong.. honestly I can't remember the last ladder game when I won and someone said gg to me, it's always some variation of "protoss lol" "easy race" , etc.
Yes P has very different mechanics, but they characterize the race wrt T and Z.. you cannot compare too much how the difference races works since the production mechanisms are deeply different. A protoss cannot really macro his production while fighting because you have to go back to a pylon / energy field and warp in units, while as T and Z you do everything with hotkeys and keyboard (this is just *one* example)..
It's true that P can easily disengage in many situations, but it's also true that when you loose an engagement as T or Z, often you have a second army at home composed of units you produced during the engagement. If a P looses all its army it's generally game over.. This sounds just like Terran Mech, minus the ability to disengage...
Mech units are much more powerful one by one than gateway units, especially in this new patch, which I would say balance for the difficulty to replenish you army and to move around / disengage
(just my thoughts , I may well be off track )
|
Adepts are absurdly broken because they have superior mobility to Zealots, are ranged, and have the same effective HP (combination of Life and Shields) and armour values. They need a big nerf (perhaps justified by a 25 mineral cost reduction) to bring back the Zealot in the metagame.
Also, the Shade ability completely breaks the concept of using Siege Tanks to hold a defensive position, since you can just project your Adepts right on top of the tank and negate any kind of advantage your opponent would have achieved.
Infestors would be good with burrowed casting alone - at least for Neural Parasite, which means that it might finally be used once again.
As for Banshee Speed, I'd prefer things the way they were. Banshees are fine in the meta. Giving them increased speed just makes them absurdly hard to catch out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
