|
Tempest Ability Removal + New Ability Add
For the Tempest ability, we agree that the current state isn’t working out. In response, our process is to first identify the issue (which we believe our community has done well), and then to make changes accordingly. In this case, the current ability was functioning more as worker line harassment, but that wasn't the intention, and we agree with your points that Protoss already has enough worker harass options. With that in mind, we’ve been testing a few different abilities instead of the current one. This ability is the one that we’re leaning towards: Tempest targets ground, has a 5 second cast time, and then blasts the target location with electricity, stunning enemy ground units in the target area for 10 seconds (these numbers are obviously subject to change). Enemy will be able to see where the Tempest has targeted when the cast starts, and will also hear an under attack warning.
This change should keep Tempests focused on the front lines rather than on harassment. In combat, we are thinking something like this is more interesting because the correct response for both players will vary in different engagements. An ability like this will be stronger against units like Siege Tanks or Lurkers, which is what we need to target more so than the mobile units or worker lines. We’re hoping to start testing this right away, so we’ll get the changes out as soon as possible if you agree with this direction.
Tuning Changes
We’ve also been testing other changes, but for now we’d like to focus on the changes that we can begin testing out as early as next week.
First, we’d like to test a slightly slower attack speed for the Siege Tank. We agree with everyone in that the damage is quite powerful right now, and we suspect it’s better to adjust the attack speed here rather than nerfing the damage. We’re thinking something like 2.8 to 3.
Second is a slight damage nerf to the Swarm Host. We agree that the buff has been too much in the current pass, and lowering the cost barrier was a good change. However, the effectiveness especially after we upped the swoop range seems too high right now.
For both of these changes, we will be moving in small steps so that we can make sure both of units are in a much more powerful state than in the live game.
Cyclone
We’re seeing a lot of discussion regarding how the Cyclone currently in the live game (on ladder) is turning out much better than before, and players are figuring out cool ways to micro them and they’re seeing more usage than they previously have. Unsurprisingly, this has led to feedback indicating that we should just revert the cyclone back to live, and instead discuss numbers buffs to the unit. This is definitely a possibility, but we do see the pros and cons of the live Cyclone vs. the Cyclone being tested. Therefore, we’d like to ask you to focus your discussions around which Cyclone would be the best for the game especially when considering all the other changes with this major patch.
This is an important topic at the moment, so let’s get constructive discussions going so that we can decide the best direction going forward.
Discussions Within the Community
We’d like to encourage everyone to try your best at working towards having productive discussions. Being negative towards something you don’t like is fine, but contributing no ideas and just being negative for the sake of being negative isn’t helpful. We’re definitely seeing good conversations, but also some of the less useful conversations as well.
Another thing we’d like to mention is that we totally agree with the feedback that we should be making tuning changes more often towards these last couple months of testing, so we’ll aim for patching at least once per 2 weeks at the latest.
We’d like to remind everyone is that working on in progress changes is difficult, but continuing to work at it together with the goal of making the game better will feel extremely rewarding once we get there. Let’s always keep this goal in mind when we get frustrated with some of the details and we already know the huge upside of the heavy community collaboration we’ve been working at for the past 1-2 years, so let’s just keep focused and work at it as one team!
Edit: I'm adding a poll to focus the discussion and make the feedback clearer for Blizzard. Remember the numbers can still be adjusted, this is about design.
Poll: Which Cyclone design is better?New Cyclone (test map). (86) 65% Old Cyclone (current live version). (46) 35% 132 total votes Your vote: Which Cyclone design is better? (Vote): New Cyclone (test map).
(Vote): Old Cyclone (current live version).
|
I love the Tempest ability change, not sure about the rest, haven't been playing enough of the test map tbh.
|
I really don't want them to revert the cyclone. The live one just isn't a nice unit to play with, or against for that matter (just ask the poor Protoss players who get cheesed out now more than ever). The newer one can still be fine tuned later if it's too strong or weak. The one we have now will always be one or the other (or rather it will always have a strange role) because its entire strength is the lock-on.
I like the tempest change but 10 seconds seems kinda long. If this ever hits units that need to be microed in a fight you just outright lose if you can't do anything for 10 seconds. Although I guess the long activation time makes up for it.
|
So the new Tempest ability provides area control, and pushing power. With a 5 second cast time it will probably only seldom hit anything but it doesn't really need to.
|
Does the Tempest stun ability just immobilises the units or also prevents them from attacking?
|
Cant believe they want us TO DISCUSS THE LIVE CYCLONE VS THE PTR CYCLONE.
|
So Tempest get a stun storm instead of a psistorm...
Honestly I don't think the Tempest needs any ability. Keep the nerfed ground range and leave it. Anything else and we're just going to see mass tempest late game against since its objectively better than the carrier.
|
On October 15 2016 02:58 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
So Tempest get a stun storm instead of a psistorm...
Honestly I don't think the Tempest needs any ability. Keep the nerfed ground range and leave it. Anything else and we're just going to see mass tempest late game against since its objectively better than the carrier.
The existence of turtle mech disagrees. Protoss needs some sort of anti-turtle tool, and while the tempest isn't an elegant solution, it is a solution.
|
On October 15 2016 02:19 Blizzard wrote:
For the Tempest ability, we agree that the current state isn’t working out. In response, our process is to first identify the issue (which we believe our community has done well),
The community has done well?
Starcraft 2 would probably be on top of the world if the customers weren't solely responsible for identifying issues. The design team should be at the helm and leading. Blizzard should be explaining to us why the Tempest should have X ability, how it makes the game better, but they can't (actually, I'd still like an explanation of why the Tempest needs to exist, since it overlaps so much with the Carrier). Just like how they thought the original Swarm Host was going to be this sick mid game units that would allow Zerg to end the game if they got way ahead. How did that work out?
That isn't to say the community shouldn't have a say, but Blizzard's approach of throwing out random units and ideas and then backing off when/if there is a community outcry is an awful approach. And yet we continue to do that.
How much money in development costs were sunk into the Warhound? How much beta time was used to test that ridiculously bad idea?
People at Blizzard need to be held accountable for the terrible ideas that are ruining this game. And that is a productive discussion that needs to be had.
|
This is a very constructive update.
|
How is this not a good harass spell?
|
An update I can get behind. Good.
|
Very few people want proposed new Cyclone.
|
I like the tank changes BECAUSE I DEMANDED THEM SINCE WOL!
I dont know what is more frustrating: Not getting the changes for so long or finally getting them after all this time. I always said: Make the tank stronger but lower the attack rate but people kept calling that a bad idea for some reason. Now they do it and suddenly people seem to like the idea...
|
Tankivac : 2 ROF, 50 damage => 25 DPS
Test map tank : 2,8 or 3 ROF, 70 damage => 25 DPS or 23,3 DPS
What's even the point David? So we'll have a tank that has no tankivac to reposition, that deals less DPS with more lost damage per shot, what is the fucking point?
|
Yeah...pretty much everyone identified from the very beginning that the tempest spell would be ridiculous and/or op from the beginning.
But other than that, I like the idea for the Tempest. Regardless of whether you can kill the units stunned or not, this will be a nice counter to the siege style of both mech and lurkers.
|
What kind of a sorry excuse for a game design team is this?
It seems to me like they're not even thinking things through anymore, just trying random shit and letting the community decide if they like it or not. Except the problem is that the squeakiest wheel gets the oil and in this case the loudest trolls get their way with the game.
Community Feedback is one thing, but actively relying on a crowd of gamers to design your game for you is bad and lazy.
|
Thank you for not lowering the siege tank damage. Tuning the attack rate is the far better choice.
|
On October 15 2016 03:28 JackONeill wrote:
Tankivac : 2 ROF, 50 damage => 25 DPS
Test map tank : 2,8 or 3 ROF, 70 damage => 25 DPS or 23,3 DPS
What's even the point David? So we'll have a tank that has no tankivac to reposition, that deals less DPS with more lost damage per shot, what is the fucking point?
Blizzard time vs actual time dude. 2 is the equivalent of 2.8.
So live DPS vs armored is 25, current test map DPS vs armored 35, and they're considering reducing it to 32.7.
|
I actually think this is the best community update in a long while.
The tempest ability was a long duration weaker psistorm and it would be a nightmare to balance. In the current form, it's very very strong. The new ability seems to have a more defined purpose and also offers a better counterplay.
About the cyclone, I think people just rather have a stronger AA in factory. That's why some people are advocating in reverting the design to the current live version. I'm almost indifferent to the ground attack (between the test map and live version), but I like the live version AA much more. My suggestion is either revert the design and keep the being reactorable buff, along with a minor hp buff, like +20, or keep the test map design, but lower the ground DPS, but buff the AA DPS.
About the swarmhost, as DK stated, definitely deserves a nerf. The dmg is too high for the price.
|
For the Tempest ability, we agree that the current state isn’t working out. In response, our process is to first identify the issue (which we believe our community has done well) Wow Blizzard. How condescending. Instead of admitting that it was a terrible idea that plenty saw as soon as it was announced and took a shitfest to bring to attention, they instead type out this smug stement.
|
|
|
Norway839 Posts
thank the heavens for the tempest change, because the initial ability made no sense to me. but i think stasis would be more fun than 'electricity' (stun).
+ Show Spoiler +
disclaimer: i haven't played the test map
|
"we want mech to be viable, but not so viable that someone would play it at high lvl on a regular basis"
|
Blizzards wants more focus on new ideas and more constructive feedback.
Dear Blizzard the current changes in the balance test are pretty good and i respect you guys for trying, but i think the current problems in starcraft is the asimetry and the harassment.
1. Zerg is way stronger on ladder because its easier to play in lower ranks like Masters and Diamond. And the current matchups require alot of aggresion from T and P players who dont have the required skill to execute.
2. Zerg is really bad in Korea and competive play because its very hard to get anything more from the macro race ( who got nerfed in the macro area ), once the race is figured a skilled player can destroy zerg without much of a problem
3. Starcraft 2 suffers more from design problems then balance problems. For example units that overlap or are just better then older tools ( Liberator ) or units that have no place design wise in the race ( Swarmhost )
4. The harassment units seem way to good, i think alot of units are doing way to much damage, and while is flashy... it becomes very stupid with time.
My solution is to revert back the macro mechanics, lower some damage points and add some micro to certain units instead of spammable abiltys.
And we can adjust balance from there.
|
On October 15 2016 03:02 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2016 02:58 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
So Tempest get a stun storm instead of a psistorm...
Honestly I don't think the Tempest needs any ability. Keep the nerfed ground range and leave it. Anything else and we're just going to see mass tempest late game against since its objectively better than the carrier. The existence of turtle mech disagrees. Protoss needs some sort of anti-turtle tool, and while the tempest isn't an elegant solution, it is a solution.
Let the carrier provide air superiority and the tempest provide the assault on the ground units / siege up on buildings and tadaa, they compliment each other nicely in a late game scenario. 
|
So with the season closed, when are we going to hear about next season's maps?
|
On October 15 2016 04:30 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
So with the season closed, when are we going to hear about next season's maps?
Blizzcon complicates things. They might go with a short season with the same maps, and swap them out after Blizzcon.
|
Not even playing the test map, just hurry up and release the changes :-P
|
On October 15 2016 03:49 petro1987 wrote:
About the cyclone, I think people just rather have a stronger AA in factory. That's why some people are advocating in reverting the design to the current live version.
ignore this. i changed my position on the cyclone after playing more PTR games.
+ Show Spoiler +i want a Cyclone with strong anti-air. so i prefer the current live version of the Cyclone. i'm on the fence about whether or not the Cyclone should be produced 2 at a time via a Reactor add-on.
On October 15 2016 04:08 ShamanElemental1 wrote:
1. Zerg is way stronger on ladder because its easier to play in lower ranks like Masters and Diamond. And the current matchups require alot of aggresion from T and P players who dont have the required skill to execute.
T is my favourite race to play. Z is my best race. Its been that way for years.. not just lately. i just accept that i'll have a lower rank playing T. My micro for Zerg is acceptable ... my micro for T is comically bad. most of my scrub pals have the same experience with T and Z that i do. i'm a diamond random.
just my $0.02.
|
Personally in PvMech I feel protoss already has a very strong number of options even with the tempest AtG range nerf, and due to this the Tempest really doesn't need an ability on it. It should serve as a capital ship that specializes in taking out other capital ships, OR, if you really want it to have some extra utility, make it's attack slow units that it hits as to allow your other units to pick them off (but this is just me spit balling because I really think the tempest with a reduced AtG range is fine).
The warp prism is a very solid way to punish immobility, adepts shading to every which base can deal a lot of damage. If you're trying to limit minerals, storm drops or adepts can destroy an SCV line, if you're trying to limit gas, double warp prism with 4 immortals can destroy a CC in record time. Protoss has a lot of options to circumvent a turtle terran. Expanding is rewarded so much more in LOTV compared to HOTS, that a turtle playstyle isn't as effective because you relinquish map control and your opponent can out expand you rapidly. If Carriers retain their release interceptor ability, they offer cheap zone control, especially with the mineral reduction cost of interceptors.
As far as Adepts go, I'm not sure where they landed on this, but the vision isn't the problem. Protoss uses adepts to scout, and it's really necessary - getting a lot of sentries early for halluc phoenixes just isn't very viable right now as there are a magnitude of all in's that punish it. The cooldown, however, is where I believe it should be nerfed. I'm always amazed at how much I can get done with adepts, and by the time they are starting to be responded to I can begin to shade away and kite so as to minimize losses.
In regards to directly, head ups fighting mech as protoss, I don't think protoss is at a huge disadvantage. Shades can force unsieges / resieges on tanks and really slow down pushes. A heavy immortal count is still very strong against a lot of mech. The biggest problem I face personally vs a mech terran is a lot of widow mines so I can never engage, but this really requires a terran to be heavily entrenched in an area. If you allow Terran to get a heavily entrenched turret/mech/Mine area that threatens your bases, that's a misplay on your part, you should be able to slow it down and trade units out slowly.
Personally I prefer the live cyclone over the new one, but as to what is objectively better, I can't say. The PTR redesign feels easily massable and once it hits a critical mass it becomes terrifying and forces Protoss to go air, which even then isn't a solid solution, but again I have limited experience in this regard.
My biggest concern is with the warp prism, if it gets a HP nerf and a terran does eventually invest heavily in turrets you can never threaten production with it, and some maps don't allow you to pick off turrets from low ground. Camping terran production is a necessary "kill move" when they have a high economy, which turtle mech will have started to bank once maxing out. This mostly will come down to map design though, as If the map doesn't allow you to threaten the main after a certain point it must allow you to be aggressive in other scenarios.
For the swarm host, I'm not too sure as I stopped playing zerg seriously in 2014, But I always thought even with the redesign, the unit was almost fine but the cooldown was just a little too long, maybe a 10% reduction in the cooldown. I don't think many people like the idea of harrassing with swarm hosts - I think what a lot of people want is a way to bolster their main army with units that can tank some fire while their min/gas/supp units get into better position and do damage. This just hasn't been possible with the live SH as if you even try it, the cooldown is so long you basically have dead supply and die to any follow up.
Just some personal thoughts and feedback, I'm not claiming to know everything or have the right answers.
edit: I really wish the collosus were viable in PvZ. Personally I feel the range upgrade is the problem - the gas investment to get even a single collosus out is so great, and they are mostly useful against ling styles, that as soon as zerg sees Col. being made, a muta switch is on the table which can outright kill you. Perhaps a) reducing the range upgrade cost or b) removing the range upgrade altogether could allow them to be viable again. With the pretty hefty nerf between Hots and LOTV for Col, I feel any 'all-ins' that crop up from this aren't nearly as scary as they otherwise could be. But again, I'm just thinking out loud on things I wish existed or were possible here.
|
On October 15 2016 03:49 petro1987 wrote:
I actually think this is the best community update in a long while.
The tempest ability was a long duration weaker psistorm and it would be a nightmare to balance. In the current form, it's very very strong. The new ability seems to have a more defined purpose and also offers a better counterplay.
About the cyclone, I think people just rather have a stronger AA in factory. That's why some people are advocating in reverting the design to the current live version. I'm almost indifferent to the ground attack (between the test map and live version), but I like the live version AA much more. My suggestion is either revert the design and keep the being reactorable buff, along with a minor hp buff, like +20, or keep the test map design, but lower the ground DPS, but buff the AA DPS.
About the swarmhost, as DK stated, definitely deserves a nerf. The dmg is too high for the price.
I feel from a Terran perspective, a reactored cyclone with more HP would break TvP early game. I really wouldn't want to have only one option to open (reactored cyclones) because it's too good.
|
On October 15 2016 04:51 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2016 03:49 petro1987 wrote:
About the cyclone, I think people just rather have a stronger AA in factory. That's why some people are advocating in reverting the design to the current live version. i want a Cyclone with strong anti-air. so i prefer the current live version of the Cyclone. i'm on the fence about whether or not the Cyclone should be produced 2 at a time via a Reactor add-on. Show nested quote +On October 15 2016 04:08 ShamanElemental1 wrote:
1. Zerg is way stronger on ladder because its easier to play in lower ranks like Masters and Diamond. And the current matchups require alot of aggresion from T and P players who dont have the required skill to execute.
T is my favourite race to play. Z is my best race. Its been that way for years.. not just lately. i just accept that i'll have a lower rank playing T. My micro for Zerg is acceptable ... my micro for T is comically bad. most of my scrub pals have the same experience with T and Z that i do. i'm a diamond random. just my $0.02.
While the problem was obivous since forever, the changes in LotV killed LBM who had more skill then Roach/Ravager/Ultralisk.
It whent from a more acceaptable problem to quite a mess.
The whole aspect of TvZ was murdered, transformed into the old TvP where one race turtles and the other attacks.
The problem its to in our face now and without design changes, i feel TvZ will be a really messed up match.
I dont want to wait for Starcraft 3 to see design changes.
|
I'm frankly disappointed with the tank nerf. It feals like every time blizzard wants to make mech better they emediatly fear the consequences and proceed to either preemptiy buff the other races anti mech or back step there efforts. Just look at hots. In hots blizzard promised us viable mech all of terran's new units were ment to help mech. We got two new factory units. But than blizzard was worried about mech strength before the game was even out so they added vipers, tempests, and swarmhosts so that the other races would have answers. What ended up happening was that these answers were to good so mech was not viable. Meanwhile when they introduce new playstyles for other races they don't emediatly give the other races powerful answers, look at adepts. Did bliz worry about adept strength and give t or z a powerful anti adept counter? No. Or look at ultras bliz buffed ghosts and added libs for Terran to deal with them but these " answers" can still quite easily lose to the unit you build them to counter.
|
On October 15 2016 04:51 LHK wrote:
As far as Adepts go, I'm not sure where they landed on this, but the vision isn't the problem. Protoss uses adepts to scout, and it's really necessary - getting a lot of sentries early for halluc phoenixes just isn't very viable right now as there are a magnitude of all in's that punish it. The cooldown, however, is where I believe it should be nerfed. I'm always amazed at how much I can get done with adepts, and by the time they are starting to be responded to I can begin to shade away and kite so as to minimize losses.
Definitely agree with this. Vision nerf is nice but the cooldown is what needs to change. Adepts running around every which way and shading every 5 seconds is such a pain to deal with.
|
On October 15 2016 05:07 ShamanElemental1 wrote:
I dont want to wait for Starcraft 3 to see design changes.
i had the same issue with Brood War. I'm better with Zerg than Terran. So are my scrub buddies. we can just throw zerglings at things with little micro and if things aren't going well just pull back. Not so with Terran. i have to babysit every single Terran attack. players with an APM double or triple mine don't even view it as "babysitting".
Blizzard balances this asymmetrical game for guys who play at 2,3, or 4 times faster than i play. i'm not expecting perfect balance at my level of play. Its balanced enough for me at my level. I don't think Diamond players should expect the same fine tuned level of balance that the best players in the world should have.
my main complaint with LotV is that Terran is/was too air-centric. Slowly, Blizz has been addressing this issue so i'm a happy camper.
|
keep current cyclone pls, new cyclone is boring to use, perhaps another upgrade to make it more viable in the late game could be an option, if you want mech to go in that direction
|
where is the distruptor and stalker topic? why theres nothing about here? 
|
i don't like to see the Siege Tank nerfed, however, your approach is the best way to do it. increasing the attack period from 2.8 to 3.0 is a reasonable change; we still get devastating Siege Tank blasts with every shot. i have no opinion on the Swarm Host because i don't play Zerg enough.
|
On October 15 2016 03:03 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2016 02:19 Blizzard wrote:
For the Tempest ability, we agree that the current state isn’t working out. In response, our process is to first identify the issue (which we believe our community has done well), The community has done well? Starcraft 2 would probably be on top of the world if the customers weren't solely responsible for identifying issues. The design team should be at the helm and leading. Blizzard should be explaining to us why the Tempest should have X ability, how it makes the game better, but they can't (actually, I'd still like an explanation of why the Tempest needs to exist, since it overlaps so much with the Carrier). Just like how they thought the original Swarm Host was going to be this sick mid game units that would allow Zerg to end the game if they got way ahead. How did that work out? That isn't to say the community shouldn't have a say, but Blizzard's approach of throwing out random units and ideas and then backing off when/if there is a community outcry is an awful approach. And yet we continue to do that. How much money in development costs were sunk into the Warhound? How much beta time was used to test that ridiculously bad idea? People at Blizzard need to be held accountable for the terrible ideas that are ruining this game. And that is a productive discussion that needs to be had.
There have been only 2 times in the past when the SC2 was better, in my opinion.
1. The very first season of competitive gsl for Starcraft 2 when Marineking was doing things like winning with crazy basetrades and marine/medivac drops.
2. the second to last season of Wings of Liberty before Zergs discovered Infestor Broodlord.
Three things make for great Starcraft: Creativity in players, unpredictability in games, and Superior execution in strategies.
I believe the current build of Starcraft is the third most interesting time because of the complexity that now exists in the game. There are very few things that haven't been tried, but thousands of people have been playing this game now for 6 years straight. It is foolishness to say things like "Blizzard is ruining this game." Blizzard made the best RTS in history thus far.
The community does play a part, testing this massively complex game through thousands of tests to determine if a unit actually does play a necessary role. I don't know how many playtesters Bizzard employs, but I know they employ some.
I agree with you that Blizzard has pandered too much to the whiners. That period needs to be in the past. From where I sit, Blizzard is better than just about any other game company at conception, development, playtesting and executing good gaming ideas. They are like the Apple of video games, they provide a quality gaming experience.
Now, my opinions on the questions for today:
1. Tempest - Yes, the Tempest may have a place as a "field-control" type of unit. Protoss does not need any more worker harass options. Field control is extremely powerful though, so the unit cannot maintain sharpshooter dps and also control the battlefield.
2. Tank - The attack rate of the tank is extremely important, and the importance of burst damage in a dps-based race like Terran is so high and so volatile that we should expect lots of tweaking on this in the future.
3. Swarm Host Nerf - Yes please.
4. The Cyclone - The new cyclone is much more interesting and better designed than the old one. Terran does not need another unit that has to always be micro'd. Terran is the only race that doesn't have reliable tanking units and therefore is dependent on microing every unit. The live cyclone is so heavily dependent on micro that it's just gimmicky. It doesn't work with too many other units or compositions. These kind of units have a place, but Terran has greater needs in terms of mech and the transition to late game, so it fits better there. The hybrid ground dps and tankiness plus the anti-air potential (raised with micro) is a better design decision for the cyclone.
|
On October 15 2016 06:00 Ransomstarcraft wrote:
4. The Cyclone - The new cyclone is much more interesting and better designed than the old one. Terran does not need another unit that has to always be micro'd. Terran is the only race that doesn't have reliable tanking units and therefore is dependent on microing every unit. The live cyclone is so heavily dependent on micro that it's just gimmicky. It doesn't work with too many other units or compositions. These kind of units have a place, but Terran has greater needs in terms of mech and the transition to late game, so it fits better there. The hybrid ground dps and tankiness plus the anti-air potential (raised with micro) is a better design decision for the cyclone.
i know its a very lazy post but i completely agree with this. The only thing i can add is that the new cyclone is way better in multiple compositions the old is so gimmicky and only for special occasions
|
On October 15 2016 04:08 ShamanElemental1 wrote:
Blizzards wants more focus on new ideas and more constructive feedback.
Dear Blizzard the current changes in the balance test are pretty good and i respect you guys for trying, but i think the current problems in starcraft is the asimetry and the harassment.
1. Zerg is way stronger on ladder because its easier to play in lower ranks like Masters and Diamond. And the current matchups require alot of aggresion from T and P players who dont have the required skill to execute.
2. Zerg is really bad in Korea and competive play because its very hard to get anything more from the macro race ( who got nerfed in the macro area ), once the race is figured a skilled player can destroy zerg without much of a problem
3. Starcraft 2 suffers more from design problems then balance problems. For example units that overlap or are just better then older tools ( Liberator ) or units that have no place design wise in the race ( Swarmhost )
4. The harassment units seem way to good, i think alot of units are doing way to much damage, and while is flashy... it becomes very stupid with time.
My solution is to revert back the macro mechanics, lower some damage points and add some micro to certain units instead of spammable abiltys.
And we can adjust balance from there.
I think there's a lot of truth in this post. In Wings of Liberty the Asymmetry worked, but one area of design that I think needs to be considered runs right alongside what ShamanElemental is saying here. Here are some thoughts I have.
1. Each race needs to have 1 early-game and 1 or 2 mid-game viable all-in options to keep the enemy from simply macroing with no consequences. Adding more macro mechanics may help here as well, as we may have gone a little too far with "auto-pilot" on macro.
2. Each race should have specific information gathering options to somewhat correspond with the all-in options.
3. The basic design problems I think starcraft has:
a. Terran has weak scouting and no viable tanking units. In Wings of Liberty Terran gained information through harassment with banshees, hellions, reapers, or drops. If this is going to continue to be the case then Terran should be the race with the best harass and defense. Right now bunkers are less useful than at any other time in SC2's existence.
b. Zerg is too dependent on queens and all that they provide. Because of this Zerg cannot be provided with powerful burst damage since then they would always have too much information about the map and map control plus the ability to immediately put units in the right place at the right time. Mass queens as a bread-and-butter zerg style is not interesting.
c. Protoss is too dependent on the Mothership core. It is time to change this unit to some kind of basic spellcaster and give a buff to a core unit. Either the Stalker or the Adept can fill this role. If this happened, then Protoss could even consider an oracle or DT buff. Right now, Protoss has such a strength at early-game defense that you can't give any unit in the early or mid-game a buff otherwise you rush straight to mass immortal/tempest/carrier.
|
On October 15 2016 02:19 Musicus wrote:Show nested quote +Tempest Ability Removal + New Ability Add
For the Tempest ability, we agree that the current state isn’t working out. In response, our process is to first identify the issue (which we believe our community has done well), and then to make changes accordingly. In this case, the current ability was functioning more as worker line harassment, but that wasn't the intention, and we agree with your points that Protoss already has enough worker harass options. With that in mind, we’ve been testing a few different abilities instead of the current one. This ability is the one that we’re leaning towards: Tempest targets ground, has a 5 second cast time, and then blasts the target location with electricity, stunning enemy ground units in the target area for 10 seconds (these numbers are obviously subject to change). Enemy will be able to see where the Tempest has targeted when the cast starts, and will also hear an under attack warning.
This change should keep Tempests focused on the front lines rather than on harassment. In combat, we are thinking something like this is more interesting because the correct response for both players will vary in different engagements. An ability like this will be stronger against units like Siege Tanks or Lurkers, which is what we need to target more so than the mobile units or worker lines. We’re hoping to start testing this right away, so we’ll get the changes out as soon as possible if you agree with this direction.
Tuning Changes
We’ve also been testing other changes, but for now we’d like to focus on the changes that we can begin testing out as early as next week.
First, we’d like to test a slightly slower attack speed for the Siege Tank. We agree with everyone in that the damage is quite powerful right now, and we suspect it’s better to adjust the attack speed here rather than nerfing the damage. We’re thinking something like 2.8 to 3.
Second is a slight damage nerf to the Swarm Host. We agree that the buff has been too much in the current pass, and lowering the cost barrier was a good change. However, the effectiveness especially after we upped the swoop range seems too high right now.
For both of these changes, we will be moving in small steps so that we can make sure both of units are in a much more powerful state than in the live game.
Cyclone
We’re seeing a lot of discussion regarding how the Cyclone currently in the live game (on ladder) is turning out much better than before, and players are figuring out cool ways to micro them and they’re seeing more usage than they previously have. Unsurprisingly, this has led to feedback indicating that we should just revert the cyclone back to live, and instead discuss numbers buffs to the unit. This is definitely a possibility, but we do see the pros and cons of the live Cyclone vs. the Cyclone being tested. Therefore, we’d like to ask you to focus your discussions around which Cyclone would be the best for the game especially when considering all the other changes with this major patch.
This is an important topic at the moment, so let’s get constructive discussions going so that we can decide the best direction going forward.
Discussions Within the Community
We’d like to encourage everyone to try your best at working towards having productive discussions. Being negative towards something you don’t like is fine, but contributing no ideas and just being negative for the sake of being negative isn’t helpful. We’re definitely seeing good conversations, but also some of the less useful conversations as well.
Another thing we’d like to mention is that we totally agree with the feedback that we should be making tuning changes more often towards these last couple months of testing, so we’ll aim for patching at least once per 2 weeks at the latest.
We’d like to remind everyone is that working on in progress changes is difficult, but continuing to work at it together with the goal of making the game better will feel extremely rewarding once we get there. Let’s always keep this goal in mind when we get frustrated with some of the details and we already know the huge upside of the heavy community collaboration we’ve been working at for the past 1-2 years, so let’s just keep focused and work at it as one team!
How about giving Tempests Disruption Web already. It's exactly the spell that's needed to disrupt zone control (which I assume is the desired role of the Tempest). The new spell can be used for eco harass just as much as the previous one (the difference being that workers are not killed but prevented from mining). And please push the Stalker change.
On a sidenote, wouldn't it be better to change one race at a time and not all at the same time. Seems easier to manage than what you're doing now.
|
|
|
Disruption web is already at the viper, don't wanna dupe abilities across races.
Conceptually disagree with tempests being a support-like spellcaster, the only massive support spellcaster in the game is the mothership no? BCs Yamato is basically a damage spell, seems reasonable compared to this.
I like the idea proposed in some other thread, move oracle stasis ward to be much faster casting. Support spells belong on the oracle, not the tempest, and stasis will accomplish a similar job to the current tempest spell.
Many ways to tweak, e.g. make oracles invulnerable when creating wards, since they would probably die trying to lay down wards in battle. And maybe make the wards visible, if this is proving too strong. Point being, lots of freedom with existing spells in the game, no need to turn the tempest, a poke unit, into a spellcaster too.
|
in case blizzard reads this thread:
CYCLONE NEEDS TO BE STRONG VS AIR. THIS IS THE ROLE THAT MECH IS MISSING RIGHT NOW.
|
On October 15 2016 03:02 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2016 02:58 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
So Tempest get a stun storm instead of a psistorm...
Honestly I don't think the Tempest needs any ability. Keep the nerfed ground range and leave it. Anything else and we're just going to see mass tempest late game against since its objectively better than the carrier. The existence of turtle mech disagrees. Protoss needs some sort of anti-turtle tool, and while the tempest isn't an elegant solution, it is a solution.
since when was mech ever viable vs protoss enough to ever show that? Has tank mech ever been a problem as a protoss?
|
10 seconds is a REALLY long time
|
Is prefer they don't change cyclones direction. Current cyclone is lackluster anti air any way, new cyclones lets the meching player get out on the map early and assert some semblance of map control. This makes mech more interactive by encouraging the meching player to fight for map presence/slow down opponents growth rather than just turtle up and play passivley. Reactored marines can be an answer to thing like oracles early on for meching players and if thier oponent comits to air they can build Viking, lib ect. It's not ideal. I'd love a good ground to air unit for mech but the cyclone in its state on the current patch does not fulfill this role well any way so unless its aa is heavily reworked I prefer the new iteration. New cyclones are better vs everything but air compared to old cyclone and they are far more useful overall throughout the game.
If the new cyclone is to strong mabey tweek it a bit but keep its ability to skirmish with p units early on and focuse its role in early map presence, like a vulture without mines. Hellions can't fill this role well in tvp due to thier light armor type vs adepts and poor attack dmg vs stalkers.
|
This ability on the Tempest is way better, but it's just yet another Protoss unit that has another activated ability so that's lame, instead of just making the unit good and balanced it has to have some button to push. On the other hand, this ability is way better designed, so it's certainly better then nothing.
Siege tank change seems appropriate, attack speed can always be further slightly tuned down if it's not heavy enough or vice versa.
Cyclone should go on ladder imo, it's test map incarnation is far superior, only thing that needs to be done with this unit is tone down ground damage a wee bit and keep it strong vs air and it will be in a great spot, a much needed and well executed improvement by the team.
Things that still need to be done in my opinion across the board, feel free to disagree with any of them.
Zerg
- Lurkers are still a wee bit powerful vs Protoss but suck vs Terran because they take so long to get go, maybe reducing the overall power of the Lurker but shortening the upgrade time for the Lurker Den itself so they can be fielded earlier?
- 8 Armor Ultralisks still seem a bit overwhelming at times, not sure if it's still considered imba or not
- Reduce the out of the gate range for the Hydra, I think a simpler change is just to give it +10 HP and +1 armor innately or +20 HP, the units problem isn't really anything other then it's so incredibly fragile, it pumps out great DPS.
Terran
- Buff Raven utility, stop buffing it's damage, energy units dealing tons of damage is just screaming for turtle/mass raven builds
- Either revert Ultralisk nerf or revert the Marauder 2 attack nerf so it isn't so stifled vs chitnous plating
- Thor is still a terrible clunky a move deathball unit, if there was a ever a time to give this unit some overhaul work now is the time, a Goliath would fit far better into a more mobile harass heavy mech compared to the lumbering Thor.
Protoss
- There is still a weird balance of power with Gateway units. Stalkers are currently very bad but Adepts and the new Doomlots are very strong, strong enough to perhaps even necessitate some type of Warp Gate nerf (should have been done away with entirely with LOTV beta but oh well) so Stalkers definitely need love, even at the expense of a mild Blink nerf, they aren't very good in any match up really.
- Turn Disruptor (gag) into the Reaver and be done with it or at least make the Disruptor attack like the Reaver
- Remove Warp Prism pick up it's imba as shit lol or put some type of cap on many Warp Gates the prism can utilize
- Remove Chargelot (noob) and give them legs for Speedlots (not lame)
- Completely overhaul the Oracle
Oracle
- Nerf Pulsar Beam damage to light units but increase it's range by either +1 or +2 (mild damage nerf +1 heavy damage nerf +2) to respond to micro better and to not be made useless by the addition of 1 or 2 static anti air buildings.
- Change Revelation to function like Parasite from BW
- Make the Oracle detector innately
|
the new cyclone is a boring 1A mech marine. bring back lock-on!
|
On October 15 2016 04:51 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2016 04:08 ShamanElemental1 wrote:
1. Zerg is way stronger on ladder because its easier to play in lower ranks like Masters and Diamond. And the current matchups require alot of aggresion from T and P players who dont have the required skill to execute.
T is my favourite race to play. Z is my best race. Its been that way for years.. not just lately. i just accept that i'll have a lower rank playing T. My micro for Zerg is acceptable ... my micro for T is comically bad. most of my scrub pals have the same experience with T and Z that i do. i'm a diamond random. just my $0.02.
True for me also as a random player who tries to be more macro focused. I'm winning ~75% Zerg, 50% Protoss and 35% as Terran.
Once you can macro and vaguely understand early game timings, Zerg is ridiculously easy, I'm sat high plat/low diamond and I'm 2 for 2 against masters players ZvT.
Terran's the most fun but it's by far the hardest of the three to play,
Mid to late game TvZ is stupid hard. It's not a balance issue, just relative difficulty, dealing with ultras and lurkers feels impossible at my skill level. ZvT feels like I have to do something really dumb to lose, even without going to T3 units. Currently its all positional or presplit move and A-move stuff that's vastly easier to use than to defend against. I'd like to see some zerg units that are harder to use, so you can get more but you have to micro more. None of it really calls for much in the way of micro as it stands. Marauders going back to single attacks would be nice as you need magic to deal with armoured stuff now (even if the damage per shot has to come down a little).
This is the case for me, in the middle of the skill curve anyway.
|
& why does Protoss need another spellcaster unit?
|
Quick the swarm hosts might be viable units roll back the buff before anyone figures out a way to handle them.
|
Added a Cyclone poll to the OP, so go vote .
|
tempests going to stun my worker lines now
|
Why do all unit seem to need a spell Blizzard? There are already too many. I m playing sc not war3 (which is a great game! Because it was designed around spells and micro directly). Give us an arbiter! If you want a spellcaster.
Remove the momocore then.
|
Well lately its obvious that the actual cyclone is rly nice to spetacte with lockon and some more damage against air units than the new one ( which aa is awful and its 8 damage per shot :/ ) i would leave the actuall cyclone lower it lockon damage and increase its health and slow the movment speed a bit tempest change is interesting though i think it would be still ncie to see tempest haveing at least 9 range anti ground cuz its a joke unit hydras outrange it just wtf. Carrier: pls give it back 50 hp that were taken for no reason at start of lotv if u remove release interceptors this flag unit of toss deserves some love
|
The cyclone just needs to be kept as it is in the current game (without test map changes) but :
- give it 160 health
- make it 3 pop instead of 4
- reduce the range of the lock to 13 or 12 instead of 15, and increase its cooldown to 6 secs instead of 4
and maybe :
- make it reactorable
- cost ajusted to 150/75
- remove the damage upgrade
This would make the cyclone's lock less of a spammable autocast, while keeping the base design and niche role (AA/skirmisher/chaser), and making it have a less terrible health over supply/cost ratio.
|
People are clamoring for the old cyclone because it has better niche uses than the new one not because it has a better design.
Terran doesn't need another unit that's powerful in a gimmicky all in, Terran needs units that help DEFEND gimmicky all ins which is what the Cyclone on the live version of the game does.
More than anything else, the Cyclone on the live realm has better ground to air combat value than the PTR one. That can be adjusted with numbers tuning which is really what the PTR version needs right now more than anything else. Its damage scales horribly against Armor and its high gas cost makes it a pointless unit later on in the game once higher tech units from the oppposing races come out.
|
Watching shoutcraft kings gumiho vs byun, gumigod knocked down byun with some amazing mech play.
And from that game, we could notice that gumiho built up his mech play by opening with quite a few cyclones to assure himself air dominance with his viking production, therefore allowing him to build medivacs and be responsive and mobile with hellbats in medivacs.
The fact is that building few cyclones allowed gumiho to prevent byun to go straight for liberators, or mass vikings to go straight into ravens/vikings. Byun got outplayed throughout the game, but this initial niche role makes mech so much more viable and infinitely less turtly. Gumiho actually managed to push out on the map with mech against bio, which is sadly rare enough to be noticed.
Making the cyclone more tanky, less expansive (at least supply-wise) while maybe nerfing its lock cooldown and/or range and/or damage would allow the cyclone to retain this core and essential role, while opening the unit for uses in other matchups/stages of the game.
Compared to the complete lack of purpose of the test map's version, we can see that this needs to happen.
|
On October 15 2016 06:48 yubo56 wrote:
Disruption web is already at the viper, don't wanna dupe abilities across races.
Conceptually disagree with tempests being a support-like spellcaster, the only massive support spellcaster in the game is the mothership no? BCs Yamato is basically a damage spell, seems reasonable compared to this.
I like the idea proposed in some other thread, move oracle stasis ward to be much faster casting. Support spells belong on the oracle, not the tempest, and stasis will accomplish a similar job to the current tempest spell.
Many ways to tweak, e.g. make oracles invulnerable when creating wards, since they would probably die trying to lay down wards in battle. And maybe make the wards visible, if this is proving too strong. Point being, lots of freedom with existing spells in the game, no need to turn the tempest, a poke unit, into a spellcaster too.
They're different spells. Disruption Web actually prevents units from attacking underneath it. Blinding Cloud just reduces range to 1 but does not prevent attacking.
On October 15 2016 23:05 JackONeill wrote:
The cyclone just needs to be kept as it is in the current game (without test map changes) but :
- give it 160 health
- make it 3 pop instead of 4
- reduce the range of the lock to 13 or 12 instead of 15, and increase its cooldown to 6 secs instead of 4
and maybe :
- make it reactorable
- cost ajusted to 150/75
- remove the damage upgrade
This would make the cyclone's lock less of a spammable autocast, while keeping the base design and niche role (AA/skirmisher/chaser), and making it have a less terrible health over supply/cost ratio.
I think they hesitate to buff the AA of the Cyclone because mech would be too all-round and no one would ever play bio again.
Best solution I can think of is moving the Lock-On to the Thor and merge it with High Impact Payload (the transformation time would be dropped). So, the Thor would have two strong AA attacks: a normal AA vs air with splash and a spell based AA for single targets.
Then remove the AA of the Cyclone and remove Hellbats. Now Mech has a massable all-round damage dealer (Cyclone), light unit counter (Hellion), ground splash (Tanks) and a strong AA option (Thor). However, since Thors are very expensive you have to carefully balance them with the rest of your army. If build to little, obvious air based counters open up; on the flipside, if you build too many you might not have sufficient ground DPS.
Seems like a very clear and stable dynamic to me.
|
"I think they hesitate to buff the AA of the Cyclone because mech would be too all-round and no one would ever play bio again."
It's ok for mech to be well rounded. Having a strong AA on the cyclone would only mean that air transitions against mech must happen in the later stages of the game. Right now, mech vs mech on the test map is mass viking ravens => libs with massive turtle, TvP is protoss massing phenixes right away, straight into tempest, and TvZ is zerg going into mutas => SHs => broodlords.
If the cyclone remains quite fragile for its cost, therefore being heavily countered by anti armored units in frontal situations (hydras, immortals, marauders for instance), while cutting into the "late game units" budget from the mech player, i don't see why it'd be bad in any way for the game.
|
On October 15 2016 02:58 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
So Tempest get a stun storm instead of a psistorm...
Honestly I don't think the Tempest needs any ability. Keep the nerfed ground range and leave it. Anything else and we're just going to see mass tempest late game against since its objectively better than the carrier.
It's mostly to improve the toss vs tank line late game scenario. The ability won't reallly do much against other units because it has such long cast time. It will mostly serve as area control in those scenarios
|
after additional play-testing with the cyclone i've changed my vote on the Cyclone.
On October 15 2016 06:00 Ransomstarcraft wrote:
4. The Cyclone - The new cyclone is much more interesting and better designed than the old one. Terran does not need another unit that has to always be micro'd. Terran is the only race that doesn't have reliable tanking units and therefore is dependent on microing every unit. The live cyclone is so heavily dependent on micro that it's just gimmicky. It doesn't work with too many other units or compositions. These kind of units have a place, but Terran has greater needs in terms of mech and the transition to late game, so it fits better there. The hybrid ground dps and tankiness plus the anti-air potential (raised with micro) is a better design decision for the cyclone.
generally speaking, i agree with the above opinion.
i vote for the PTR Cyclone.
PTR Cyclone > Live Cyclone
|
|
|
making mech well rounded wouldn't change much, terrans will still use bio because bio is easy and strong as hell, it's not like it's getting nerfed. I can guarantee you that if mech received a goliath type unit, a well rounded ground/air attacker, bio would be just fine and remain relevant for the rest of SC2's lifespan.
we've seen bio as the main strength of terran since 2010, would it really be so bad if mech becomes used a bit more than bio in 2016/17? generally, mechs weakness will be mobility and bio will require more multitasking, terrans will simply choose whatever style they want to represent.
|
On October 16 2016 02:20 JuanDi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2016 02:58 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
So Tempest get a stun storm instead of a psistorm...
Honestly I don't think the Tempest needs any ability. Keep the nerfed ground range and leave it. Anything else and we're just going to see mass tempest late game against since its objectively better than the carrier. It's mostly to improve the toss vs tank line late game scenario. The ability won't reallly do much against other units because it has such long cast time. It will mostly serve as area control in those scenarios
yea, against a race that had no trouble breaking down tank line
Anyway current cyclone with few buff or improvement to health would be way better than the patch one that cant handle air and is only really good for early game.
|
On October 15 2016 07:35 -NegativeZero- wrote:
in case blizzard reads this thread:
CYCLONE NEEDS TO BE STRONG VS AIR. THIS IS THE ROLE THAT MECH IS MISSING RIGHT NOW.
Lol what a JOKE. Terran already has good options for anti air. Zerg doesn't even good anti-air options right now, whether they are air units or ground units.
|
On October 16 2016 08:53 parkufarku wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2016 07:35 -NegativeZero- wrote:
in case blizzard reads this thread:
CYCLONE NEEDS TO BE STRONG VS AIR. THIS IS THE ROLE THAT MECH IS MISSING RIGHT NOW. Lol what a JOKE. Terran already has good options for anti air. Zerg doesn't even good anti-air options right now, whether they are air units or ground units.
hydralisk got buffed in test map
|
On October 16 2016 08:00 emc wrote:
making mech well rounded wouldn't change much, terrans will still use bio because bio is easy and strong as hell, it's not like it's getting nerfed. I can guarantee you that if mech received a goliath type unit, a well rounded ground/air attacker, bio would be just fine and remain relevant for the rest of SC2's lifespan.
we've seen bio as the main strength of terran since 2010, would it really be so bad if mech becomes used a bit more than bio in 2016/17? generally, mechs weakness will be mobility and bio will require more multitasking, terrans will simply choose whatever style they want to represent.
And that is bad becuase?
The point isn't to force them to go one way or another (wich is what happens currently, forcing players to go bio everygame), but to give them choices.
I however wouldn't like mech to be used more than bio because of patch changes or because it is better in a certain MU. However I think it would be cool to make both as strong but make it map dependant, like this map is really good for mech or that map is really bad for mech and good for bio, etc. That way it adds variety, forces players to use both and would create the option of more metagame and mindgames, like player doing a strong mech timing but the opponent didn't saw it comming because it was a bad map for mech (this actually happened in HotS were players would do 2 base mech pushes in bad mech maps and catch the opponent off guard or do fake mech oppeners and transition to bio in good mech maps).
|
Why not increase the supply from 4 to 6 and just leave it be?
|
On October 16 2016 03:33 JimmyJRaynor wrote:after additional play-testing with the cyclone i've changed my vote on the Cyclone. Show nested quote +On October 15 2016 06:00 Ransomstarcraft wrote:
4. The Cyclone - The new cyclone is much more interesting and better designed than the old one. Terran does not need another unit that has to always be micro'd. Terran is the only race that doesn't have reliable tanking units and therefore is dependent on microing every unit. The live cyclone is so heavily dependent on micro that it's just gimmicky. It doesn't work with too many other units or compositions. These kind of units have a place, but Terran has greater needs in terms of mech and the transition to late game, so it fits better there. The hybrid ground dps and tankiness plus the anti-air potential (raised with micro) is a better design decision for the cyclone. generally speaking, i agree with the above opinion. i vote for the PTR Cyclone. PTR Cyclone > Live Cyclone
It a makes early game tvt hell and is really bad against air compositions which old cyclone did decent enough until it could delay to your own air
New one doesn't do that at all and dies to oracle whIle being stupid early game. Anti armor stationary unit is already there in tanks and thor
|
On October 16 2016 02:20 JuanDi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2016 02:58 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
So Tempest get a stun storm instead of a psistorm...
Honestly I don't think the Tempest needs any ability. Keep the nerfed ground range and leave it. Anything else and we're just going to see mass tempest late game against since its objectively better than the carrier. It's mostly to improve the toss vs tank line late game scenario. The ability won't reallly do much against other units because it has such long cast time. It will mostly serve as area control in those scenarios
but why does toss need another tank bust, when zealot blink stalker immortals warp prisms and more already crush tank lines?
|
Since when blink stalkers crush tank lines ???
|
On October 17 2016 06:40 VHbb wrote:
Since when blink stalkers crush tank lines ???
Since 2010.
Example:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
|
|
On October 17 2016 07:32 Lexender wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 06:40 VHbb wrote:
Since when blink stalkers crush tank lines ??? Since 2010. Example: + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgLcCbv_oEI
lol, tanks are a fu**ing joke vs protoss. David Kim, please, you can even reduce the splash, but PLEASE buff the hell out of tanks!
|
On October 17 2016 07:32 Lexender wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 06:40 VHbb wrote:
Since when blink stalkers crush tank lines ??? Since 2010. Example: + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgLcCbv_oEI
To be fair, that's more like Immortals bunker busting + tank busting and then stalkers cleaning up afterwards. It isn't pure stalkers against an entrenched tank line (not with a cc that's out of range).
|
On October 17 2016 10:17 FrkFrJss wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 07:32 Lexender wrote:On October 17 2016 06:40 VHbb wrote:
Since when blink stalkers crush tank lines ??? Since 2010. Example: + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgLcCbv_oEI To be fair, that's more like Immortals bunker busting + tank busting and then stalkers cleaning up afterwards. It isn't pure stalkers against an entrenched tank line (not with a cc that's out of range).
Yeah but really as protoss right now you only need to build blink stalkers against mech to force the guy to stay at home, while taking a third and building tempest. And from there, there's not much terran can do tbh
|
so david kim is at it again did he not learn when he said "mech is too strong" only to realize nobody can play mech against super swarmhosts and tempest ability spam?
mech is 100% unplayable because of this, he has no testing data to go from
he must first enable mech to be viable, then he can balance it if necessary, right now tanks are fine and do not need a fire rate reduction and honestly this is in the exact line of thinking he has had all along which is that he knows best when he clearly has no idea how weak mech is currently.
maybe you should ask mech players for feedback instead of biased zerg and protoss players david kim? if you nerf the tank fire rate the point of increasing the damage is meaningless, make up your mind but dont bullshit us with this
i am losing my patience giving you feedback replays youtube videos and comments not to mention testing the map for you, only to have you ignore everything and do the wrong things
we need ANTI AIR for mech, do not change tanks instead give terran something that can shoot up!
|
It boggles my mind how some people are arguing that bio would be used less or would suddenly be underpowered if mech is made good lol.
If mech is made playable...it makes Terran have more options instead of just 16 marine drop 90% of the games or however many that is right now.
Bio will still be the same as it has been for years - ridiculously mobile, a-move, and quite easy to play.
I'm not saying that "bio is easy" to trigger anyone...it's just fact.
Bio play in general is really simple - u make marines/marauder/medivacs then box select to split. The splitting part is the only "tough" part that someone can argue. The rest is you load up medivacs and right click to the enemy base.
Mech has always not been viable to the point it has so many weaknesses and ways to almost auto-lose the game. Bio has never really had that issue of your army supply suddenly becoming worthless.
There are mech games where 10 void rays can push back a 200/200 mech army because there's no anti-air unit on the field or that can trade with air from mech. So mech has to sit back and turtle into viking+raven.
Bio can simply "make more marines" without much thought and it'll always be effective.
Anyways, i really hope they make mech viable, and not overpowered because no one wants overpowered mech either.
|
On October 16 2016 19:00 redloser wrote:
Why not increase the supply from 4 to 6 and just leave it be?
That would leave it in the same state as Live Swarm Hosts.
|
(disclaimer : I have barely played the test map, one troll game to see how blink DTs looked and that's it)
With buffed tanks/ravens + untouched vs ground libs, how does P deal with mech ?
|
On October 17 2016 17:55 [PkF] Wire wrote:
(disclaimer : I have barely played the test map, one troll game to see how blink DTs looked and that's it)
With buffed tanks/ravens + untouched vs ground libs, how does P deal with mech ?
Immortals disruptors carriers blinkstalkers chargelots mass adepts warp prism abuse
i dont think you understand, protoss has no issues with mech its like fighting a protoss with more expensive but weaker units
bio play beats you because they multitask drop/split/micro mech has to "brave the storm" which means that you can easily counter it and crush it very hard
now there is going to be an adjustment phase because youve never had to adapt like zergs have, since mech has never been a thing in tvp, but that doesnt mean anything for balance as long as the gms in each region have zero issues beating mech PvT.
|
"Immortals disruptors carriers blinkstalkers chargelots mass adepts warp prism abuse"
what kind of composition is this :D ??
Ah yeah, everything a protoss builds is "abuse"... eheh
Also, it's funny how zerg and protoss feedback is "biased"
while feedback from mech players is not..
Every time a read this thread I just hope Blizzard does NOT listen to feedback from the community..
|
Avil, the problem with your statements like: "There are mech games where 10 void rays can push back a 200/200 mech army because there's no anti-air unit on the field or that can trade with air from mech. So mech has to sit back and turtle into viking+raven." suggests that u want to have "answer to everything" composition once u leave your base after 20 minutes of turtling and waiting fo ypir 200/200. Now that's not what starcraft is or should be about. We want dynamic games. If Blizz would do what u suggest it would be like- i'm turtling in my bases, got my 200/200 ans steamroll everything on the map because in that limit i got perfect counter to everything that my opponent could throw at me. It would be itself imba and stupid firdt of all. For example if i max on roach/hydra and go vs Protoss and see that he's got collosus and immortals i must concider follow up or mix my comp. U say that mech shouldn't. That it justt have to have perfect comp vs all once it's out on the map. Ridiculous.
|
Jeez, how did we get from "Terran is super hard because bio is extremely powerful but fragile so you have to have 600 APM and broken wrist to play " to "well, bio is easy, no micro, A move across the map "? I leave for a couple of week and I'm already outdated in terran's whine. 
|
On October 17 2016 18:30 FoxDog wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 17:55 [PkF] Wire wrote:
(disclaimer : I have barely played the test map, one troll game to see how blink DTs looked and that's it)
With buffed tanks/ravens + untouched vs ground libs, how does P deal with mech ? Immortals disruptors carriers blinkstalkers chargelots mass adepts warp prism abuse i dont think you understand, protoss has no issues with mech its like fighting a protoss with more expensive but weaker units bio play beats you because they multitask drop/split/micro mech has to "brave the storm" which means that you can easily counter it and crush it very hard now there is going to be an adjustment phase because youve never had to adapt like zergs have, since mech has never been a thing in tvp, but that doesnt mean anything for balance as long as the gms in each region have zero issues beating mech PvT.
Chargelot immortal archon was common composition vs mech in hots. Skytoss is an option as well since protons economy starts faster than mech econ
Mech isnt too mobile so harassing with adept is option or out expanding and overwhelming with gateway remax is as well
|
On October 17 2016 14:57 avilo wrote:
Anyways, i really hope they make mech viable, and not overpowered because no one wants overpowered mech either.
Except you.
|
On October 17 2016 03:48 jinjin5000 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2016 03:33 JimmyJRaynor wrote:after additional play-testing with the cyclone i've changed my vote on the Cyclone. On October 15 2016 06:00 Ransomstarcraft wrote:
4. The Cyclone - The new cyclone is much more interesting and better designed than the old one. Terran does not need another unit that has to always be micro'd. Terran is the only race that doesn't have reliable tanking units and therefore is dependent on microing every unit. The live cyclone is so heavily dependent on micro that it's just gimmicky. It doesn't work with too many other units or compositions. These kind of units have a place, but Terran has greater needs in terms of mech and the transition to late game, so it fits better there. The hybrid ground dps and tankiness plus the anti-air potential (raised with micro) is a better design decision for the cyclone. generally speaking, i agree with the above opinion. i vote for the PTR Cyclone. PTR Cyclone > Live Cyclone It a makes early game tvt hell and is really bad against air compositions which old cyclone did decent enough until it could delay to your own air New one doesn't do that at all and dies to oracle whIle being stupid early game. Anti armor stationary unit is already there in tanks and thor
On your "early game tvt" point: if cyclone didn't stop reaper play, tvt openings would be plagued again by reaper vs. reaper play. It's an even trade in this regard.
On your "cyclone needs better AA" point: The new Cyclone simply needs an Anti-Air DPS buff. The design of the unit overall is simply better.
|
On October 17 2016 18:44 VHbb wrote:
"Immortals disruptors carriers blinkstalkers chargelots mass adepts warp prism abuse"
what kind of composition is this :D ??
Ah yeah, everything a protoss builds is "abuse"... eheh
Also, it's funny how zerg and protoss feedback is "biased"
while feedback from mech players is not..
Every time a read this thread I just hope Blizzard does NOT listen to feedback from the community..
Bias is when you discriminate absent facts nothing else
as in your desire to dismiss every other opinion but your own.
|
DK provided some recent feedback on the Cyclone.
his decision is to wait.
http://us.battle.net/forums/en/sc2/topic/20749876886
Thanks for all the feedback this week everyone. We want to circle back about the Cyclone.
As many of you have been pointing out, pros have started using this unit more often and it looks to be going to a good place. From your feedback, it sounds like most of you are curious to see what will develop instead of rebooting the unit. Making a call on what's best is tough here, because as we mentioned, we don't quite know what new meta pros may find for the Cyclone.
It sounds like the verdict is to wait - and we're okay with that, but we want to make sure that's what we all want.
Please let us know, and we'll make the necessary adjustments. Thanks!
|
On October 15 2016 03:30 FrkFrJss wrote:
Yeah...pretty much everyone identified from the very beginning that the tempest spell would be ridiculous and/or op from the beginning.
Yes... everyone except the design team led by the brilliant David Kim... you know the people that are actually paid to design the game. Somehow the idea came out of one of their heads, and then they were pretty much the only ones who couldn't figure out it was ridiculous, just like they couldn't figure out that the Warhound was a terrible idea after some designer vomited that out of his brain and wasted valuable beta time and money on developing that unit.
Why are they still employed at Blizzard?
On October 17 2016 17:55 [PkF] Wire wrote:
(disclaimer : I have barely played the test map, one troll game to see how blink DTs looked and that's it)
With buffed tanks/ravens + untouched vs ground libs, how does P deal with mech ?
I've just been doing 1 base Adept/Void Ray all-ins with success. The Void Ray buff is fun.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On October 20 2016 13:12 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2016 03:30 FrkFrJss wrote:
Yeah...pretty much everyone identified from the very beginning that the tempest spell would be ridiculous and/or op from the beginning.
Yes... everyone except the design team led by the brilliant David Kim... you know the people that are actually paid to design the game. Somehow the idea came out of one of their heads, and then they were pretty much the only ones who couldn't figure out it was ridiculous, just like they couldn't figure out that the Warhound was a terrible idea after some designer vomited that out of his brain and wasted valuable beta time and money on developing that unit. Why are they still employed at Blizzard? Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 17:55 [PkF] Wire wrote:
(disclaimer : I have barely played the test map, one troll game to see how blink DTs looked and that's it)
With buffed tanks/ravens + untouched vs ground libs, how does P deal with mech ? I've just been doing 1 base Adept/Void Ray all-ins with success. The Void Ray buff is fun.
The warhound was a goliath with super overpowered haywire missiles against robotic units
if you removed the missiles the unit wouldve been fine
i just balanced your unit that was "ridiculous" in 2 seconds.
what you dont know is "why would anyone build thors when they have cheaper more mobile anti air that costs less supply per dps that deals with swarms of small units better"
the answer is nobody would make thors if there was a goliath type unit and blizzard knows this, it is beyond the point of disagreement, the only way they would redeem the thor would be to increase the splash to the point it win the competition against equal supply in warhounds
so they made up a giant lie about "it stepped on the marauder" which isnt true because they did remove the haywire missiles making it a perfect goliath after their last nerf in the pre beta, and how do i know this?
you can add warhounds in the editor and play with them, and they function exactly like a goliath with no anti robotic unit bs only a mediocre anti ground attack, and a long range anti armored anti air attack.
|
These Changes come after BLizzcon or when hit's the major Patch?
|
On October 21 2016 09:29 Primelot wrote:
These Changes come after BLizzcon or when hit's the major Patch?
Sometime after blizzcon
|
On October 20 2016 13:12 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2016 03:30 FrkFrJss wrote:
Yeah...pretty much everyone identified from the very beginning that the tempest spell would be ridiculous and/or op from the beginning.
Yes... everyone except the design team led by the brilliant David Kim... you know the people that are actually paid to design the game. Why are they still employed at Blizzard?
why you ask? i'll tell you why.
Greg Black and David Kim are employed at Blizzard for so long because their bosses ( Morhaime, Sigaty, Browder ) know how to identify, hire , and nurture top notch game designers. I do not think you know how to nurture, develop and identify top notch game designers. Therefore, I'll go with Blizzard's actions over your words every day and twice on sundays.
I'm really happy with the game ( Artosis says he has never been more excited about Sc2 than right now ). I'm also really happy with Overwatch. Its obvious that the Blizzard products that are not "my kind of game" are great games. Blizzard makes the best games in the world.
|
don't worry about the "raynor" puppet BronzeKnee, he's just a blind bully who fancies trying to get a nice reputation by simply always praising the "big guys with the money". He likes provoking people through sheer disdain.
The truth I'm afraid is that Activision-Blizzard knows how to identify, hire, and empower obedient liars.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CM809rKWoAAiV0C.jpg)
