|
Update:
Hey everyone!
We accidentally jumped the gun here and posted this early. While we are always exploring ways to make the game better, these specific changes are still being thought out and may be tried out at a later date. Apologies for any confusion.
Source
The following changes are being implemented today to the Testing section of Multiplayer, as well as the Balance Test Extension Mod.
Cyclone
Anti-ground weapon range increased from 4 to 6.
Anti-ground weapon minimum scan range updated to 6.5.
"Mag-Field Launchers" upgrade removed.
Colossus
Thermal Lance damage increased from 12 to 12 + 4 vs Light.
Edit: Hm the source has been removed and it says 404 now.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/NpZIwR5.png)
|
Still nothing about mech's viability... At least last cyclone's nerf was reverted.
|
i cant believe that buff to the colossi.
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
On November 30 2016 04:40 petro1987 wrote:
Still nothing about mech's viability... At least last cyclone's nerf was reverted.
Mech is fine.
* Want to harass with mobile units? Banshees, ravens, hellions.
* Need anti-ground-light? Hellbats vs ling runby, and hellions to chase and kite. Widow mines also.
* Need soft-anti-air with aoe damage? Liberators. Otherwise make thors, seeker missiles and battlecruisers.
* Need to protect territories? Siege tanks, hellbats, widow mines, liberator zones, cruisers can warp-in to defend (last one will rarely occur but it's possible)
* Need anti-mech? Ground vikings, siege tanks, thors, cyclones.
* Need mobile anti-armored? Cyclones, siege tanks.
* Need anti air-armored? Vikings, 2nd Thor mode.
* Need burst aoe-damage that only mutas can escape? Seeker missiles that can chase up for 19 range.
* Need to snipe core targets? Yamato cannons, vikings / 250mm thors / banshees
* Need anti-ultralisk as mech? Siege tanks, banshees, liberation zones, thors, yamato cannons, mules (they fk ultralisk pathing late game), Raven turrets also breaking ultralisk pathing
|
South Korea2105 Posts
Hey, colossi should deal with mid game hydra comps better now. I love when they balance the game without taking other matchups into consideration #riptvp
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
On November 30 2016 04:44 Topin wrote:
i cant believe that buff to the colossi.
I think buff will be reduced to +2 cause colossies counter well hydralisks even now, with zealots and other stuff. Especially with new chargelots (that have 8 damage on charge and faster speed so harder to kite by hydras).
Hey, colossi should deal with mid game hydra comps better now. I love when they balance the game without taking other matchups into consideration #riptvp
rip tvp? Why?
* terrans still have vikings versus colossies
* 250mm thors can annihilate colossies
* widow mines do bonus dmg vs shields
* ghosts are still viable
* battlecruisers can't be feedbacked and can yamato colossies
* buffed ravens work well vs protoss spam
* cyclones counter stalkers super well
|
This will ruin bio and ling/hydra mid game compositions I think. The Colossus attacks 10% faster than in HotS already.
Many zergs have alrady gone back to ling/bling/ravager anyway and bio does not seem too strong vs Protoss. The new chargelots have not even come to full effect yet.
This also means the Viper as the only choice to counter the other races in the late game becomes even more important :/.
Not happy with this, but it's just the test map so far.
|
On November 30 2016 04:49 Existor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2016 04:40 petro1987 wrote:
Still nothing about mech's viability... At least last cyclone's nerf was reverted. Mech is fine. * Want to harass with mobile units? Banshees, ravens, hellions. * Need anti-ground-light? Hellbats vs ling runby, and hellions to chase and kite. Widow mines also. * Need soft-anti-air with aoe damage? Liberators. Otherwise make thors, seeker missiles and battlecruisers. * Need to protect territories? Siege tanks, hellbats, widow mines, liberator zones, cruisers can warp-in to defend (last one will rarely occur but it's possible) * Need anti-mech? Ground vikings, siege tanks, thors, cyclones. * Need mobile anti-armored? Cyclones, siege tanks. * Need anti air-armored? Vikings, 2nd Thor mode. * Need burst aoe-damage that only mutas can escape? Seeker missiles that can chase up for 19 range. * Need to snipe core targets? Yamato cannons, vikings / 250mm thors / banshees * Need anti-ultralisk as mech? Siege tanks, banshees, liberation zones, thors, yamato cannons, mules (they fk ultralisk pathing late game), Raven turrets also breaking ultralisk pathing
Sure, mech is fine. It's just that no pro plays it. Theorycraft is a beautiful thing, right?
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
On November 30 2016 04:56 petro1987 wrote:
Sure, mech is fine. It's just that no pro plays it. Theorycraft is a beautiful thing, right?
Maybe because that huge patch is out only for 1.5 week? Were there swarm hour lasting games when SC2:HOTS was released?
Everyone is hyped about hydralisks but many people still not understood how powerfull new cruisers or seeker missiles are (seeker missile tracking range is 19 after upgrade, only Mutalisks can escape if you react ASAP)
|
On November 30 2016 04:59 Existor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2016 04:56 petro1987 wrote:
Sure, mech is fine. It's just that no pro plays it. Theorycraft is a beautiful thing, right?
Maybe because that huge patch is out only for 1.5 week? Were there swarm hour lasting games when SC2:HOTS was released? Everyone is hyped about hydralisks but many people still not understood how powerfull new cruisers or seeker missiles are (seeker missile tracking range is 19 after upgrade, only Mutalisks can escape if you react ASAP)
Oh, so the answer is just wait one year to see if mech is viable... I get it. Btw, mass ravens isn't mech. At least not the traditional meaning of the word. Would you call making 50 science vessels mech? Yeah, I don't think so.
|
Or maybe mech is just bad?
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
On November 30 2016 04:53 Musicus wrote:
This will ruin bio and ling/hydra mid game compositions I think. The Colossus attacks 10% faster than in HotS already.
Many zergs have alrady gone back to ling/bling/ravager anyway and bio does not seem too strong vs Protoss. The new chargelots have not even come to full effect yet.
This also means the Viper as the only choice to counter the other races in the late game becomes even more important :/.
Not happy with this, but it's just the test map so far.
Well, if not vipers, then:
- ultralisks can counter colossies well. Except colossies are with immortals, but that would mean less anti-air and vipers might be viable? But what if protoss adds HT to robo units?
- corruptors? Now corruptors are not "dead supply" when colossies are dead, after killing colossies they become zerg void-rays against buildings.
- ravager fungals? That new combo from LOTV may work versus HT, immortals and colossies I think. Burrowed infestors doing surprizing fungals and ravagers sniping colossies. Doesn't it sound nice?
|
On November 30 2016 04:49 Existor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2016 04:40 petro1987 wrote:
Still nothing about mech's viability... At least last cyclone's nerf was reverted. Mech is fine. * Want to harass with mobile units? Banshees, ravens, hellions. * Need anti-ground-light? Hellbats vs ling runby, and hellions to chase and kite. Widow mines also. * Need soft-anti-air with aoe damage? Liberators. Otherwise make thors, seeker missiles and battlecruisers. * Need to protect territories? Siege tanks, hellbats, widow mines, liberator zones, cruisers can warp-in to defend (last one will rarely occur but it's possible) * Need anti-mech? Ground vikings, siege tanks, thors, cyclones. * Need mobile anti-armored? Cyclones, siege tanks. * Need anti air-armored? Vikings, 2nd Thor mode. * Need burst aoe-damage that only mutas can escape? Seeker missiles that can chase up for 19 range. * Need to snipe core targets? Yamato cannons, vikings / 250mm thors / banshees * Need anti-ultralisk as mech? Siege tanks, banshees, liberation zones, thors, yamato cannons, mules (they fk ultralisk pathing late game), Raven turrets also breaking ultralisk pathing
Every mech player is struggling super hard and openly saying it but hey, mech stronk right now. Litterally the only thing savig mech is the new retarded seeker missile
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
On November 30 2016 05:02 petro1987 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2016 04:59 Existor wrote:On November 30 2016 04:56 petro1987 wrote:
Sure, mech is fine. It's just that no pro plays it. Theorycraft is a beautiful thing, right?
Maybe because that huge patch is out only for 1.5 week? Were there swarm hour lasting games when SC2:HOTS was released? Everyone is hyped about hydralisks but many people still not understood how powerfull new cruisers or seeker missiles are (seeker missile tracking range is 19 after upgrade, only Mutalisks can escape if you react ASAP) Oh, so the answer is just wait one year to see if mech is viable... I get it. Btw, mass ravens isn't mech. At least not the traditional meaning of the word. Would you call making 50 science vessels mech? Yeah, I don't think so.
For me mech is not only Factory units. Starport units greatly fullfilling some weak spots of mech and its lack of mobility.
Yes, liberators might be not that effective vs mutalisk balls, but they AREN'T mean to do that. They are your support units that can deploy and protect territory versus Ultralisks for example. Versus mutalisks you have many other tools in terran factory/starport arsenal.
Every mech player is struggling super hard and openly saying it but hey, mech stronk right now. Litterally the only thing savig mech is the new retarded seeker missile
I think it's only because whole game became "more mobile", kinda, while mech is still kinda slow, except Cyclones. But cyclones with default 6 range might work I think.
I saw Bly vs TYTY game previous week, I thought zerg wins easily with ultras. But terran just comebacked with Liberators and bio, probably also widow mines.
|
On November 30 2016 05:06 Existor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2016 05:02 petro1987 wrote:On November 30 2016 04:59 Existor wrote:On November 30 2016 04:56 petro1987 wrote:
Sure, mech is fine. It's just that no pro plays it. Theorycraft is a beautiful thing, right?
Maybe because that huge patch is out only for 1.5 week? Were there swarm hour lasting games when SC2:HOTS was released? Everyone is hyped about hydralisks but many people still not understood how powerfull new cruisers or seeker missiles are (seeker missile tracking range is 19 after upgrade, only Mutalisks can escape if you react ASAP) Oh, so the answer is just wait one year to see if mech is viable... I get it. Btw, mass ravens isn't mech. At least not the traditional meaning of the word. Would you call making 50 science vessels mech? Yeah, I don't think so. For me mech is not only Factory units. Starport units greatly fullfilling some weak spots of mech and its lack of mobility. Yes, liberators might be not that effective vs mutalisk balls, but they AREN'T mean to do that. They are your support units that can deploy and protect territory versus Ultralisks for example. Versus mutalisks you have many other tools in terran factory/starport arsenal.
You're abusing semantics. Mech right now doesn't use starport units to "fullfl weak spots" : it is all about amassing ravens, even more than during the worse HOTS time
For record's sake, what's your personal experience with mech in terms of lvl / number of games played ?
Every mech player is struggling super hard and openly saying it but hey, mech stronk right now. Litterally the only thing savig mech is the new retarded seeker missile
I think it's only because whole game became "more mobile", kinda, while mech is still kinda slow, except Cyclones. But cyclones with default 6 range might work I think.
I saw Bly vs TYTY game previous week, I thought zerg wins easily with ultras. But terran just comebacked with Liberators and bio, probably also widow mines. [/QUOTE]
What has a lib/bio game to do with mech viability right now exactly ?
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
On November 30 2016 05:08 Lyyna wrote:
You're abusing semantics. Mech right now doesn't use starport units to "fullfl weak spots" : it is all about amassing ravens, even more than during the worse HOTS time
Probably the problem is that protoss rarely did HT / phoenixes versus terrans? it's time now to do that. Zergs can chain-fungal I think (but ravens can easily kill infestors), and maybe parasitic bombs might work too.
So many things come to mind, and i think Blizzard should do these changes from test map AND let the game stabilize for at least some months, untill everyone figures that some old unit combos might work well against new treats.
For record's sake, what's your personal experience with mech in terms of lvl / number of games played ?
Why it is important? Not everyone should be GML to be pro at this game. After so many years, and especially now with completely revamped and restarted "meta", there are no "100% guaranteed" statements.
Yes, I do a lot of theorycraft, and some things might not work in real game. But you even didn't try to do anything in game, instead you only complain after being defeated by that "OP" unit combination.
What has a lib/bio game to do with mech viability right now exactly ?
Sorry it was answer to other guy in this thread. I wanted to say that the only mobile things in terran's mech arsenal are banshees, liberators (kinda), hellions and cyclones. Why you call it not viable?
|
On November 30 2016 05:11 Existor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2016 05:08 Lyyna wrote:
You're abusing semantics. Mech right now doesn't use starport units to "fullfl weak spots" : it is all about amassing ravens, even more than during the worse HOTS time Probably the problem is that protoss rarely did HT / phoenixes versus terrans? it's time now to do that. Zergs can chain-fungal I think (but ravens can easily kill infestors), and maybe parasitic bombs might work too. So many things come to mind, and i think Blizzard should do these changes from test map AND let the game stabilize for at least some months, untill everyone figures that some old unit combos might work well against new treats.
What does that even mean? How is protoss HT / phoenix related to mech right now ?
On November 30 2016 05:11 Existor wrote:Show nested quote +For record's sake, what's your personal experience with mech in terms of lvl / number of games played ? Why it is important? Not everyone should be GML to be pro at this game. After so many years, and especially now with completely revamped and restarted "meta", there are no "100% guaranteed" statements. Yes, I do a lot of theorycraft, and some things might not work in real game. But you even didn't try to do anything in game, instead you only complain after being defeated by that "OP" unit combination.
Theorycrafting is fine when you have a basic knowledge of what you're talking about. You apparently don't play mech (do you actually play terran , judging from your icon ?), and yet you think your opinion has a more solid basis than actual mech player' ?
On November 30 2016 05:11 Existor wrote:
Sorry it was answer to other guy in this thread. I wanted to say that the only mobile things in terran's mech arsenal are banshees, liberators (kinda), hellions and cyclones. Why you call it not viable?
Fair enough . The main reason i call it not viable, and this is shared by other mech players, is mostly about TvZ : hydra/viper is almost unbeatable, and overall, all 3 match-ups in the lategame relies on getting mass ravens. Boring, and relying on the stupid missile
|
Thermal Lance damage increased from 12 to 12 + 4 vs Light.
There is something seriously wrong with Blizzard's approach to Protoss' design.
Protoss is the powerhouse race. This means few-in-number, but packs-a-punch. It doesn't mean 3-5 units to rule (or lose) every single battle.
I don't know if they'll ever make a gateway unit comparable to marines / lings / hydras, but it's what Protoss really needs. Something to stabilize the early- and mid- game so that Protoss can reach the late-game with relative stability. Meanwhile, things like PO and disruptors need to be scaled back so that there are opportunities for opponents to attack and the game is less instantly-punishing of single mistakes.
A game between equal opponents should be a back and forth of poking and prodding. Peeling off small victories (and losses) everywhere across the map until a victory finally emerges: bloodied but alive.
Instead we have boomcraft. Inspired by Michael Bay.
|
On November 30 2016 04:50 Existor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2016 04:44 Topin wrote:
i cant believe that buff to the colossi. I think buff will be reduced to +2 cause colossies counter well hydralisks even now, with zealots and other stuff. Especially with new chargelots (that have 8 damage on charge and faster speed so harder to kite by hydras). Show nested quote +Hey, colossi should deal with mid game hydra comps better now. I love when they balance the game without taking other matchups into consideration #riptvp rip tvp? Why? * terrans still have vikings versus colossies * 250mm thors can annihilate colossies * widow mines do bonus dmg vs shields * ghosts are still viable * battlecruisers can't be feedbacked and can yamato colossies * buffed ravens work well vs protoss spam * cyclones counter stalkers super well
because he see a "protoss buff" and like to whine. its always the same with that topic. Maybe then terrans have to counter colossus with vikings, like protoss have to counter liberator with tempest at some point.
|
omg collossus buff. I don't know what to say, tvp will be so hard
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
