|
On December 16 2016 08:42 Qwyn wrote:
I have not heard anyone complain about the baneling buff?! With 70 damage tanks and widow mines functioning the way they do, the main means by which Terran deal with banelings are as effective as always...
The main means by which terran deal with banelings is splitting and shooting banelings. Some will inevitably get hits on the bio, but others will be killed before they can make contact with a marine, perhaps splashing some, but still limiting their damage. Increasing bane health means splitting is less effective at preventing costly bane hits on your marines because more banes hit marines. It also means you have to split marines farther apart to deal with the same number of banelings, increasing guaranteed losses and decreasing overall dps.
|
Nerf baneling instead of infestor or swarmhost? I don't get it.
|
So when are they going to fix the icons? I see green boxes when I try to select my Marines.
|
I think what should happen is that the build time on an interceptor should be raised. If it automatic theres absolutely 0 micro in waiting for it to rebuild. However if it takes longer and the toss loses the interceptors it forces them to have to wait giving the opposing race an opening to either rebuild their army or push. As for the other changes I think the Hydralisk is in a great position. Maybe nerfing the cost would be good but that would mean you would have to do a small buff to Terran I think like maybe increase the damage bonus of blue flame or hellions perhaps. Also has anyone else felt that 3.9's name update was dumb? I really enjoyed having my own SC2 username rather than my battle.tag and friends with real id's only see my battlenet tag where as in lobby it'll still show peoples SC2 usernames. I don't like it I enjoyed having my SC2 username.
|
curious what lead them to the conclusion that +10 baneling health is to much.
Also I would have really preferred an infestor nerf and a swarmhost nerf (for mech viability).
|
Have infestors have -1 cast range while burrowed. Easy fix. -2 if really felt needed.
Could go further and give infestors +1 range to throwing infested Terrans from their current state, so it's the same while burrowed (but +1 range while not burrowed).
|
Good changes.
I'd look at Infestors and Ravens next while focusing on mech viability in TvP.
|
On December 16 2016 09:12 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2016 08:42 Qwyn wrote:
I have not heard anyone complain about the baneling buff?! With 70 damage tanks and widow mines functioning the way they do, the main means by which Terran deal with banelings are as effective as always...
The main means by which terran deal with banelings is splitting and shooting banelings. Some will inevitably get hits on the bio, but others will be killed before they can make contact with a marine, perhaps splashing some, but still limiting their damage. Increasing bane health means splitting is less effective at preventing costly bane hits on your marines because more banes hit marines. It also means you have to split marines farther apart to deal with the same number of banelings, increasing guaranteed losses and decreasing overall dps.
Yes I understand the point of the buff.
The main way that terrans deal with widow mines is not splitting - it's using splash. Splitting is used to mitigate the damage dealt by banelings.
And in that regard widow mines are just as effective now against +10 hp baneling as they were before...And tanks now do 70 damage as well...
If anything it just makes it less volatile.
Terran and Protoss are just bitching left and right but all I really see are Zerg getting shafted. We have not been given any new ways to play.
Making gimmick units like the swarmhost or using burrowed infestors doesn't qualify as a new composition.
We had a new unit to play with...but then Terran and Protoss bitched it out of the park and now it's back to being as shitty as it ever was. Now it looks like Blizzard is contemplating not giving the hydra any sort of buff at all...
People don't seem to realize just how INSANELY strong Protoss ground units are. Zealots are ridiculous. I don't know why Protoss players are bitching as though gateway units aren't good. Charge gives extra damage, passive movespeed boost, and charge! Adepts two shot drones.
Protoss units are SO strong that Zerg doesn't have a reliable answer to them. That's why all the compositions in ZvP revolve around just trading with ling bane over and over - you can't really do anything else. It's stupid, but there's not much else you can do...
That's also why Zerg is so focused on destroying Protoss econ with baneling drops all game - there's not many ways to fight against Protoss in a straight up fight other than T3.
Throw carriers in as well...
As I see it the only thing that Zerg have gotten this patch are gimmick infestors. Woohoo!
|
On December 16 2016 14:29 Qwyn wrote:
The main way that terrans deal with widow mines is not splitting - it's using splash. Splitting is used to mitigate the damage dealt by banelings.
And in that regard widow mines are just as effective now against +10 hp baneling as they were before...And tanks now do 70 damage as well...
Widow mines discourage clumped up attacks from zerg through set mines. They are not the primary way of dealing with banelings if the zerg properly controls their units. Yes, one mine hit can wipe out a ton of banes, but that's on the zerg player and is not what normally happens.Splitting is still the primary way of dealing with banes.
Tanks don't do 70 damage against non-armored targets and against lbm are dead again for the same reason they were dead in hots - mobility. Even against roach/ravager styles they don't look very strong anymore because you can no longer dodge biles and ravagers aren't armored and therefore don't take the additional damage against them. Turns out a tank that does less damage, but can sustain dps over a fight is much more effective than a tank that does more up front damage and dies right away.
|
On December 16 2016 07:24 Musicus wrote:
Two small changes, I like both of them.
I just hope they aren't done with the hydra, because nothing really changed now compared to 3.8. The speed buff on creep does not count as a redesign to a core unit.
I think they are done with the hydra which is sad. The unit is essentially back to how it was before and the speed buff on creep isn't that much of a buff imo.
I was hoping when they originally announced redesign, that they would do more than 1 range increase and a creep speed buff. I think it's a shame they aren't really modifying the unit at all :/.
|
On December 16 2016 14:29 Qwyn wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2016 09:12 TheWinks wrote:On December 16 2016 08:42 Qwyn wrote:
I have not heard anyone complain about the baneling buff?! With 70 damage tanks and widow mines functioning the way they do, the main means by which Terran deal with banelings are as effective as always...
The main means by which terran deal with banelings is splitting and shooting banelings. Some will inevitably get hits on the bio, but others will be killed before they can make contact with a marine, perhaps splashing some, but still limiting their damage. Increasing bane health means splitting is less effective at preventing costly bane hits on your marines because more banes hit marines. It also means you have to split marines farther apart to deal with the same number of banelings, increasing guaranteed losses and decreasing overall dps. Yes I understand the point of the buff. The main way that terrans deal with widow mines is not splitting - it's using splash. Splitting is used to mitigate the damage dealt by banelings. And in that regard widow mines are just as effective now against +10 hp baneling as they were before...And tanks now do 70 damage as well... If anything it just makes it less volatile. Terran and Protoss are just bitching left and right but all I really see are Zerg getting shafted. We have not been given any new ways to play. Making gimmick units like the swarmhost or using burrowed infestors doesn't qualify as a new composition. We had a new unit to play with...but then Terran and Protoss bitched it out of the park and now it's back to being as shitty as it ever was. Now it looks like Blizzard is contemplating not giving the hydra any sort of buff at all... People don't seem to realize just how INSANELY strong Protoss ground units are. Zealots are ridiculous. I don't know why Protoss players are bitching as though gateway units aren't good. Charge gives extra damage, passive movespeed boost, and charge! Adepts two shot drones.Protoss units are SO strong that Zerg doesn't have a reliable answer to them. That's why all the compositions in ZvP revolve around just trading with ling bane over and over - you can't really do anything else. It's stupid, but there's not much else you can do... That's also why Zerg is so focused on destroying Protoss econ with baneling drops all game - there's not many ways to fight against Protoss in a straight up fight other than T3. Throw carriers in as well... As I see it the only thing that Zerg have gotten this patch are gimmick infestors. Woohoo!
The voice of reason.
|
On December 16 2016 14:29 Qwyn wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2016 09:12 TheWinks wrote:On December 16 2016 08:42 Qwyn wrote:
I have not heard anyone complain about the baneling buff?! With 70 damage tanks and widow mines functioning the way they do, the main means by which Terran deal with banelings are as effective as always...
The main means by which terran deal with banelings is splitting and shooting banelings. Some will inevitably get hits on the bio, but others will be killed before they can make contact with a marine, perhaps splashing some, but still limiting their damage. Increasing bane health means splitting is less effective at preventing costly bane hits on your marines because more banes hit marines. It also means you have to split marines farther apart to deal with the same number of banelings, increasing guaranteed losses and decreasing overall dps. As I see it the only thing that Zerg have gotten this patch are gimmick infestors. Woohoo!
and the only things protoss got are slightly faster zealots and a carrier change - while tempests got heavily nerfed.
btw banes have still +5 health and hydras a speed buff.
|
On December 16 2016 14:50 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2016 07:24 Musicus wrote:
Two small changes, I like both of them.
I just hope they aren't done with the hydra, because nothing really changed now compared to 3.8. The speed buff on creep does not count as a redesign to a core unit. I think they are done with the hydra which is sad. The unit is essentially back to how it was before and the speed buff on creep isn't that much of a buff imo. I was hoping when they originally announced redesign, that they would do more than 1 range increase and a creep speed buff. I think it's a shame they aren't really modifying the unit at all :/.
well the hydralisk is a simple straightforward attacking unit without a fancy ability. not surprising they don't want it to be to much of a core unit.
|
It's clear the aim of the patch was to give Terran an alternative to bio through mech; some of the P/Z units had to change to allow that to happen. Also a couple of units here and there from Z/P were buffed to make them more relevant in general.
It's not a patch to overhaul the entire game, but to bring Terran in line with Z/P as having more ways to play then the same bio focused game of the last 7 years. New ways of playing that in 2 expansion worked for Z/P but not for T.
|
Well trading offcreep decently was fun for a while, back to turtle to hivetech again..
|
On December 16 2016 14:57 hiroshOne wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2016 14:29 Qwyn wrote:On December 16 2016 09:12 TheWinks wrote:On December 16 2016 08:42 Qwyn wrote:
I have not heard anyone complain about the baneling buff?! With 70 damage tanks and widow mines functioning the way they do, the main means by which Terran deal with banelings are as effective as always...
The main means by which terran deal with banelings is splitting and shooting banelings. Some will inevitably get hits on the bio, but others will be killed before they can make contact with a marine, perhaps splashing some, but still limiting their damage. Increasing bane health means splitting is less effective at preventing costly bane hits on your marines because more banes hit marines. It also means you have to split marines farther apart to deal with the same number of banelings, increasing guaranteed losses and decreasing overall dps. Yes I understand the point of the buff. The main way that terrans deal with widow mines is not splitting - it's using splash. Splitting is used to mitigate the damage dealt by banelings. And in that regard widow mines are just as effective now against +10 hp baneling as they were before...And tanks now do 70 damage as well... If anything it just makes it less volatile. Terran and Protoss are just bitching left and right but all I really see are Zerg getting shafted. We have not been given any new ways to play. Making gimmick units like the swarmhost or using burrowed infestors doesn't qualify as a new composition. We had a new unit to play with...but then Terran and Protoss bitched it out of the park and now it's back to being as shitty as it ever was. Now it looks like Blizzard is contemplating not giving the hydra any sort of buff at all... People don't seem to realize just how INSANELY strong Protoss ground units are. Zealots are ridiculous. I don't know why Protoss players are bitching as though gateway units aren't good. Charge gives extra damage, passive movespeed boost, and charge! Adepts two shot drones.Protoss units are SO strong that Zerg doesn't have a reliable answer to them. That's why all the compositions in ZvP revolve around just trading with ling bane over and over - you can't really do anything else. It's stupid, but there's not much else you can do... That's also why Zerg is so focused on destroying Protoss econ with baneling drops all game - there's not many ways to fight against Protoss in a straight up fight other than T3. Throw carriers in as well... As I see it the only thing that Zerg have gotten this patch are gimmick infestors. Woohoo! The voice of reason.
The voice of Zerg whine.
|
Increasing the interceptor cost by 5 minerals sounds a bit drastic.
Maybe increase the cost with 1-2 minerals and then evaulate after a few month?
|
On December 16 2016 18:14 MockHamill wrote:
Increasing the interceptor cost by 5 minerals sounds a bit drastic.
Maybe increase the cost with 1-2 minerals and then evaulate after a few month?
They always do costs in multiples of 5. The only exceptions are cancelled buildings/units.
|
Dunno why they dont focus on their bigger things first, then the smaller ones....
I so want to enjoy this game but i cant.
|
Banelings VS Marines should be a decision by the Terran of should I split or should I target fire? When Banelings always force a split it removes the decision of taking the risk of pulling off the more impressive target fire micro. I want to watch Terrans who can shoot down the Banelings rolling in and if they misclick they'll lose the engagement. I think less health on banelings is a great direction.
I have no deep thoughts on the carrier change. Fully replacing all interceptors previously cost less than a single marine so doubling it was an obvious step in the right direction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
