EPTCommunity Feedback Update - December 15 - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
usopsama
6502 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17657 Posts
On December 17 2016 03:25 Beelzebub1 wrote: All of these constant changes are keeping me from wanting to play this game lol, i want to play the final incarnation of this balance patch not the in between where David is making everything that was underused imbalanced as fuck and then slowly dialing it down. diverse race RTS games take a long time to balance. with the game being reset after BlizzCon it'll take a while before LotV is balanced. | ||
|
MockHamill
Sweden1798 Posts
Carriers need less hit points or to cost 8 supply, they are simply too supply efficient against everything. They are basically the only unit in the game that are so strong that they really have no counter unit. | ||
|
owlman
France58 Posts
| ||
|
JackONeill
861 Posts
The tempest is still the problem. The 15/10 range makes the tempest basically the same. Terran late game got buffed, but it's near impossible to get to that point where you've got full raven/BC. Mainly because when the first couple tempests are out, protoss can start to siege your bases while BCs are quite terrible before you got 6+ of them. About the changes, they're fast, and tiny. I like it a lot, i think blizz should tweak the game very often to prevent abusive strats from plaguing the game. However, they should also focus on design issues (with the help of the test map functionnality), for instance pylon overcharge, SHs versus mech, vipers/ravens dynamic making MechvZ very turtly (unless you go for an extreme timing like innovation did against dark), or the adept still being both abusive and gamble-y with the shade vision nerf. | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
| ||
|
bulya
Israel386 Posts
On December 17 2016 08:39 JackONeill wrote: Actually carriers aren't an issue if there's less than 10-12 of them in TvP. The tempest is still the problem. The 15/10 range makes the tempest basically the same. Terran late game got buffed, but it's near impossible to get to that point where you've got full raven/BC. Mainly because when the first couple tempests are out, protoss can start to siege your bases while BCs are quite terrible before you got 6+ of them. About the changes, they're fast, and tiny. I like it a lot, i think blizz should tweak the game very often to prevent abusive strats from plaguing the game. However, they should also focus on design issues (with the help of the test map functionnality), for instance pylon overcharge, SHs versus mech, vipers/ravens dynamic making MechvZ very turtly (unless you go for an extreme timing like innovation did against dark), or the adept still being both abusive and gamble-y with the shade vision nerf. To my understanding, unlike bio, mech is about longer games unless the early pushes which are necessary with mech end the game entirely. So there is nothing wrong with long mech games. I guess inno's mech plan isn't clear to him beyond the Tank switch, so he keeps with his helion cyclone pushes, securing his bases with tanks. But there are phases beyond that, at which the terran secures 4 bases (with tanks and turrets), and the game goes to the following stages which take a very long time. This is how mech works, I don't think it can be changed that much, as mech relies on a slower army which is hard to break when it is seiged, and can be leapfrogged and take better engagements so that its fine if the zerg is on 6 or 7 bases while the terran is on 4. Just played a zerg vs mech game today (as a zerg player), eventually it was decided on the air battle (raven, viking, liberator vs corruptor viper) while his bases were secured. I guess I didn't realize how much dead space there is on Echo. But at some point he didn't have mining at all and still won the game. Very patiently, all the bases sieged to the point I can hardly touch them, and the hydra viper vs his air was in his supreriority, my corroptor switch was too late, as I didn't have enough gas by this time. This is how mech works, 30 minute games... If it doesn't suit you, its the time to switch back to bio, as it is just as good, but the game is completely different. As the zerg, I'm fine with both games, as both mech an bio require skill, but many mech players on the ladder just make something which seems as a dathball, a moving into me and die to simple things like complete surrounds of lings on the thors/tanks, hydra swarm hosts enaging to not that much protected sieged places, or hydra viper compositions trading well enough while I own the map and the terran has at most 4 bases. The games I lose vs mech are either short due to a successful early push (helion cyclone, or hellbat into banshees), or very long games which gets to the terran having his bases secured and an air fleet (ravens viking and libs if there is enough dead space) which trades well with the hydra viper. These games go through many stages, which is why it is skill based (for both, the terran and the zerg). | ||
|
Sapphire.lux
Romania2620 Posts
On December 16 2016 23:32 SpecKROELLchen wrote: [/url]Of course we dont want one 10 sec fight but this has nothign to do with what he is talking about. The game would be the most fun if it would be worth to mix in like 4 carriers because they have a specific role, instead of massing carriers and making it hard for the opponent to do anything. For most players it is no fun to try to win the game before it is impossible (sure it is possible but the chances are low). Take for example tvp in HotS. That was definetly no fun for both sides from the midgame on (which lead to scv timing win or fail). I disagree with that too. This add a little of that, and a little of this, is what created deathballs and it's the Browder school of design for RTS that is completely at odds with what Starcraft was and should be. | ||
Liquid`Snute
Norway839 Posts
But I'm sure on average, 10 minerals should be better than 5. The reddit thread linked earlier was also interesting. Would've loved to see a higher quantity of issues addressed rather than just these two, but aside from that, good update | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16079 Posts
On December 17 2016 18:21 Liquid`Snute wrote: I think these changes are good actually, +5 hp buff on speedbanes on lair is still pretty strong and hopefully ling bane remains viable vs bio. Very gentle and decent changes. ps: if interceptors cost 10 minerals, I'm 90% sure byul would've won vs stats on habitation station playing ultra hydra queen viper with minimal spore support, idk if that's a good thing or a bad thing. But I'm sure on average, 10 minerals should be better than 5. The reddit thread linked earlier was also interesting. Would've loved to see a higher quantity of issues addressed rather than just these two, but aside from that, good update what's your opinion on burrow-fungal? | ||
|
Liquid`Snute
Norway839 Posts
I don't have that much experience with it in practice and haven't seen it much in pro games (early weakness indicator) but in theory I'd imagine it's all about the siege tanks. Tanks normally destroy Infestors above ground whereas all other interactions/compositions aren't really that different post change aside from demanding extra anticipation/detection/splits from all races. Roach ravager infestor is stronger with infestors burrowed but siege tanks are still very strong against that composition and Infestors are still pretty paper once their energy is spent. EDIT: what i mean is important here is that thanks to the burrow change one can now fungal vs tanks BEFORE engagement, rather than immediately after the grand ling bane amove initiation. I don't play ling bane sharkfestor/ultralisk and haven't seen it much in high level play so it's hard to judge how that does vs something like marine tank thor (burrow neural+fungal sounds strong on paper here). I've read plenty of complaints from people about invisible infestors with death fungals, but a lot of the time those games were lost anyway and it was just a more of a negative memory on top of losses. I've seen a lot of terrans use forward turrets and widow mines in combination to great effect vs both burrowed infestors and overseers, so that's kinda cool i think, as long as it's not too expensive.  imo the infestor is still in a weird spot and it's very hard to judge its actual strength, but i'd be very hesitant to call it strong or overpowered, or extremely weak. it's somewhere in between in a mysterious spot - so far I think it's not the worst of buffs, the Infestor really needed some help before and is still a very expensive unit ![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/mirror/smilies/sadley.gif) | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16079 Posts
| ||
|
DeadByDawn
United Kingdom476 Posts
On December 16 2016 21:48 Sapphire.lux wrote: Did you learn from the Innovation games how to play mech without turtling to mass Ravens and use actual timings? A few days back I tuned into Avilo - he was whining that his opponent was trying to play like Inno, but that what people don't realize is that Inno is a noob. That's right - a noob. So I guess he has nothing to learn from Inno. And amusingly as the Twitch stream started the first two words that I heard were 'map hacker'. I prefer 15 mineral cost to interceptors, 5 was basically free and I hate the free units that can encourage turtle. | ||
|
Scrubwave
Poland1786 Posts
| ||
|
jimjimmie
13 Posts
also i hope some nerf to cyclone's anti-ground and buff to cyclone's anti-air | ||
|
washikie
United States752 Posts
On December 17 2016 07:28 MockHamill wrote: Carriers are broken now. There is basically no way for Terran to defeat a Carrier fleet, especially if they go Carrier/Void Ray if you try to go BC. Carriers need less hit points or to cost 8 supply, they are simply too supply efficient against everything. They are basically the only unit in the game that are so strong that they really have no counter unit. Even if that's the case at what point is Protoss going to be able to transition to carriers without being punished. If Terran can't stop Protoss during such a transition they are probably behind enoughbthat the game is lost anyway. I don't think there's an issue with carriers in tvp, but there is one in zvp hence the need for nerfs. | ||
|
NutriaKaiN
88 Posts
On December 16 2016 08:19 Shield wrote: Patch still doesn't make me excited to play 1vs1 as protoss. No Patch since 10 years do this. There is 2 ways to play pvz: carrier or 2-3 eco/base allin. Because you cant play a normal macro game. Stalkers are totaly crap except for allin. All other compositions gets beaten by ling/bane/hydra or ravager. You have to max out vs that style to push and even then you can lose the game easily, the zerg can play this style for years. Not sure blizzard noticed it after 3 tournaments all protoss plays dt drop into allin or carrier haha. This post with core units is pretty annoying. Blizzard called zerg have 3 core units, protoss only 1? Stalker isnt a real one because they are way to cost ineffective. But i have a solution, buff zerg like the last time. | ||
|
Gwavajuice
France1810 Posts
On December 19 2016 11:02 NutriaKaiN wrote: No Patch since 10 years do this. There is 2 ways to play pvz: carrier or 2-3 eco/base allin. Because you cant play a normal macro game. Stalkers are totaly crap except for allin. All other compositions gets beaten by ling/bane/hydra or ravager. You have to max out vs that style to push and even then you can lose the game easily, the zerg can play this style for years. Not sure blizzard noticed it after 3 tournaments all protoss plays dt drop into allin or carrier haha. This post with core units is pretty annoying. Blizzard called zerg have 3 core units, protoss only 1? Stalker isnt a real one because they are way to cost ineffective. But i have a solution, buff zerg like the last time. Protoss are playing archon drop into archon immo chargelot all in because it's extremely strong, not because they don't dare playing the long macro game. If you can win in 10 minutes why bother playing a 20 minutes game? | ||
|
The_Last_Terran
9 Posts
On December 18 2016 15:52 jimjimmie wrote: i don't think banelings are problematic. burrowed fungal is more problematic. also i hope some nerf to cyclone's anti-ground and buff to cyclone's anti-air Burrow fungal looks a good idea but the synergy with banelings and ultras is quite strong if terran doesn t split previously his marines and marauders. I would like to see the infestor emerge from the soil and cast the fungal automatically so you have a small chance to split your marines. It looks like to the instant fungal problem we got in WoL which has been improved to allow terran to split. Then i disagree for the cyclone anti air damage. There is already Thor for counter air. The only problem of the cyclone come from his cost supply. One factory is equal to three barracks, so timings of Mech player are stronger than Bio player which is literally opposing of mind Terran. You can t add an unit without impacting meta game but this one change everything terran is used to play since WoL. | ||
|
NutriaKaiN
88 Posts
On December 19 2016 11:24 Gwavajuice wrote: Protoss are playing archon drop into archon immo chargelot all in because it's extremely strong, not because they don't dare playing the long macro game. If you can win in 10 minutes why bother playing a 20 minutes game? the biggest lie i heard. in all tourneys all the time you see only 2 builds you cant really play s talker without allin. the other comps get destroyed by hydra ling bane etc. | ||
| ||
