|
General
- Fixed an issue with the Vertical Sync option that could cause a lag at the start of the game.
- Updated TotalBiscuit Announcer to make transition between lines smoother.
Gameplay and Races
- Terran
- Liberator Concord Cannon damage changed from 85 to 75.
- Maps
- Updated doodads at certain locations in Refinery XJ-17 to block air pathing as intended.
- Fixed an issue where Liberators could siege mineral lines out of the range of Stalkers, Marines, and Spore Crawlers at certain locations in Cactus Valley LE.
- Fixed a pathing issue in Abyssal Reef LE.
- Fixed an issue where Hatcheries could not spread Creep properly at certain locations in Tropic Shores.
Call to Action: January 31 Balance Testing
Source
As we've been discussing recently in the Community Feedback Updates, there are some changes we'd like to explore after seeing the results of recent balance on the ladder and in tournament events. As of today, these changes are now live on and ready to be experimented within the Testing section of Multiplayer. Check out the full changes below and after you've had some time to test them, let us know what you think.
- Terran
- Widow Mine
- Splash damage +shield bonus reduced from +40 to +25
- Zerg
- Hydralisk
- Health increased from 80 to 90.
- Protoss
- Carrier
- Interceptor cost increased from 10 to 15
If you're interested in the StarCraft II Balance Team's reasoning behind these potential changes, you can check out the Community Feedback Updates as well as their most recent update announcing these specific changes.
We’d like to remind you that feedback based on playtesting is the most helpful information you can share with us at this time. We kindly ask that you spend some time playing games in the testing section before offering your thoughts on the changes listed above. We look forward to hearing your feedback and please remember that none of these changes are final.
|
Hi guys,i'm just stream watcher not playing at all.But it so strange how no one coment Battlecrusers and broodlords.In my view they are absolute useless right now.It so stupid when some zerg risk to go for BLs and they just got owned from some ground army...and they pretend to be best antiground top tier3 unit in game.And about BCs i see them maby in 1/100 games and when they come just get owned from almost everything.And after years Cariers got some play right now, and all whine about this.In my opinion when u risk and go for tier3 top unit, its absolutly ok to u have some advantage vs u oponent.
Why someone will go for tier3 if him oponent just counter him with tier2 units, its what kill this game for me, we just wana to see tier3 big battle and nukes, no mass marines/maruder (nerf them blizzard, no liberators and buff BC and nukes).
Sorry for my bad english
|
|
|
On February 01 2017 05:23 Kikirik1 wrote:
its what kill this game for me, we just wana to see tier3 big battle and nukes, no mass marines/maruder (nerf them blizzard, no liberators and buff BC and nukes).
Many people (myself included) would think that a blind rush to tier 3 with unstoppable units would be a boring game to play and watch. I would not care for it.
With regards to the patch - I'm pretty happy for the liberator nerf, and I'm fine for the moment with none of the other changes they briefly talked about the other day. Hopefully this will help balance out some of the trends that we've been seeing with various race performances.
|
Thank you for pointing this out
|
i hope to god the widdow mine nerf goes through
|
|
|
But they don't remove the bonus to splash? Now i don't understand -_- that means the mines only change is 40+25 instead 40+40 splash on shieds?
|
But they don't remove the bonus to splash? Now i don't understand -_- that means the mines only change is 40+25 instead 40+40 splash on shieds?
Yes.
|
On February 01 2017 05:45 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +But they don't remove the bonus to splash? Now i don't understand -_- that means the mines only change is 40+25 instead 40+40 splash on shieds?
Yes.
>_>
|
On February 01 2017 05:44 ArtyK wrote:But they don't remove the bonus to splash? Now i don't understand -_- that means the mines only change is 40+25 instead 40+40 splash on shieds?
They're still testing, they might still come around to removing +shields on splash entirely.
|
Good changes.I'm happy that the WM primary target nerf hasn't gone through
|
On February 01 2017 05:45 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2017 05:44 ArtyK wrote:But they don't remove the bonus to splash? Now i don't understand -_- that means the mines only change is 40+25 instead 40+40 splash on shieds? They're still testing, they might still come around to removing +shields on splash entirely.
yeah i know, just the order in which they decide to do stuff makes no sense to me.
|
Love the changes, especially how I cant use widow mines to deal with the carriers' interceptors any more. Great job.
|
They already listened to the community and did not go with the single target damage nerf and are instead only nerfing the splash.
<3 Blizz and their fast reaction time these days.
|
They already listened to the community and did not go with the single target damage nerf and are instead only nerfing the splash.
<3 Blizz and their fast reaction time these days.
Times are good. The majority of the community was in favor of that, and it went through.
Ofc there will always be salty whiners.
|
On February 01 2017 05:51 Psychobabas wrote:
Love the changes, especially how I cant use widow mines to deal with the carriers' interceptors any more. Great job.
In how many of your TvPs does the Protoss get out carriers? Do you mech or something?
|
On February 01 2017 05:58 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2017 05:51 Psychobabas wrote:
Love the changes, especially how I cant use widow mines to deal with the carriers' interceptors any more. Great job. In how many of your TvPs does the Protoss get out carriers? Do you mech or something?
and why would you want mines if they friendly fire your entire army when interceptors go over it x)
your opponent makes 2 disruptors and theyre useless
|
So widow mines still obliterate Probes.
Cool.
|
On February 01 2017 05:40 SwiftRH wrote:
i hope to god the widdow mine nerf goes through
yes would be so nice and long time needed. probes will die the same way, thats sad :D
|
on of the most if not the best part of starcraft is in my mind the unitscaling into the lategame even t1 units have their uses but it is worth teching
|
I really hope they will see the widow mine nerf is very bad.
We already have liberator nerf that's way enough !!!
Protoss already kill back terran even before Liberator nerf so that's not useful to nerf mines now
|
Yay!! They read the forums... thanks blizz 
|
On February 01 2017 06:08 DinoMight wrote:
So widow mines still obliterate Probes.
Cool.
Yes but at least there is more potential for a counter push IF you lose some workers or IF they go for this type of opening.
|
nice compromise with the Widow Mine. It also makes the Tank more and more the ground based splash damage unit against big armies.
|
Stop killing terran.. (((((
|
I wonder when terrans are gonna realize that they need to get their bio nerfed before they can get decent factory/stargate units
|
I think people severily underestimate the impact of the liberator nerf. It heavily reduces their efficiency against gateway units.
I don't think the widow mine nerf will be needed.
|
On February 01 2017 07:20 Charoisaur wrote:
I think people severily underestimate the impact of the liberator nerf. It heavily reduces their efficiency against gateway units.
I don't think the widow mine nerf will be needed.
I'm pretty sure it would have been fine at 80 damage, now at 75 theyre terrible, especially if WM lose the bonus to splash
obviously theyre still amazing to harass and later on with upgrades
|
Oracle and Raven still desperately need a redesign, Oracle to do less damage but scale better outside of mass Oracle cheese and Raven's are just cancerous to play against, PDD being shorter but more powerful totally negates anything outside of a Viper pull and auto turrets are literally enough to drive me away from this game, I've already dealt with a different metagame shift that gravitated towards the mass Raven cloud and it makes SC2 go from an 8 or 9/10 game to a 2/10.
Redesign the Raven to provide utility and survivability to Terran end game, and give the Oracle something along these lines..
Oracle
- Remove bonus damage to light and increase range on Pulsar Beam by 1 or 2 so it does not instantly melt workers but at the same time can find sweet spots in static air defense like a Banshee
- Remove Revelation and give the Oracle innate detection
- Nerf the radius, time spent frozen, and mana cost of Stasis, so it functions more like Spider Mines being a spammable map control element
Raven
- Remove Auto Turret from the game along with Seeker Missile and replace them with good non damage for spell points abilities that let's Terran have more utility units outside of the Medivac
The rest of the changes are fine, Hydralisks are still not as beefy as they need to be and Widow Mines shouldn't be deleting Chargelot compositions just by existing.
|
Oh man, oh man, oh man if the hydra change goes through I am so going to be playing again .
|
On February 01 2017 07:24 jpg06051992 wrote:
Oracle and Raven still desperately need a redesign, Oracle to do less damage but scale better outside of mass Oracle cheese and Raven's are just cancerous to play against, PDD being shorter but more powerful totally negates anything outside of a Viper pull and auto turrets are literally enough to drive me away from this game, I've already dealt with a different metagame shift that gravitated towards the mass Raven cloud and it makes SC2 go from an 8 or 9/10 game to a 2/10.
Redesign the Raven to provide utility and survivability to Terran end game, and give the Oracle something along these lines..
Oracle
- Remove bonus damage to light and increase range on Pulsar Beam by 1 or 2 so it does not instantly melt workers but at the same time can find sweet spots in static air defense like a Banshee
- Remove Revelation and give the Oracle innate detection
- Nerf the radius, time spent frozen, and mana cost of Stasis, so it functions more like Spider Mines being a spammable map control element
Raven
- Remove Auto Turret from the game along with Seeker Missile and replace them with good non damage for spell points abilities that let's Terran have more utility units outside of the Medivac
The rest of the changes are fine, Hydralisks are still not as beefy as they need to be and Widow Mines shouldn't be deleting Chargelot compositions just by existing.
Smart man
|
On February 01 2017 05:47 ArtyK wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2017 05:45 Elentos wrote:On February 01 2017 05:44 ArtyK wrote:But they don't remove the bonus to splash? Now i don't understand -_- that means the mines only change is 40+25 instead 40+40 splash on shieds? They're still testing, they might still come around to removing +shields on splash entirely. yeah i know, just the order in which they decide to do stuff makes no sense to me.
it is intended to cause as little impact as posible in the game to address specific issues. If it is not enough, they tweak it further
|
It seems like blizzards fix to the black screen at the start is to force V-Sync on for everyone now, regardless of if they choose to enable it?
|
Cool man a test map that almost no-one is gonna play.
Hydra hp buff won't help much vs Carriers anyway, will just make it stronger vs Protoss ground and in timing attacks.
Intercepter cost change will not make a difference either, carriers were always this strong, but just hard to get to without dying.
Make the interceptors 5 minerals again for all I care, but decrease their damage or increase carrier supply.
Hopefully the lib change will at least help Protoss, and we will see in a few weeks if the mine change is still needed or not
|
On February 01 2017 08:26 JuanDi wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2017 05:47 ArtyK wrote:On February 01 2017 05:45 Elentos wrote:On February 01 2017 05:44 ArtyK wrote:But they don't remove the bonus to splash? Now i don't understand -_- that means the mines only change is 40+25 instead 40+40 splash on shieds? They're still testing, they might still come around to removing +shields on splash entirely. yeah i know, just the order in which they decide to do stuff makes no sense to me. it is intended to cause as little impact as posible in the game to address specific issues. If it is not enough, they tweak it further
And when the change on both single target + splash was revealed some people basically said : "it is intended to cause as much impact as possible in the game to address specific issues. If its too much, they tweak it back a bit..."
Works both ways :p
Then again i wasn't questionning the change rather than the way they changed their mind on the last few feedbacks.
|
On February 01 2017 05:58 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2017 05:51 Psychobabas wrote:
Love the changes, especially how I cant use widow mines to deal with the carriers' interceptors any more. Great job. In how many of your TvPs does the Protoss get out carriers? Do you mech or something?
I do as the latest big balanced patch promoted me to do as stated by David Kim. Play mech terran.
Is that not viable?
|
If you're at the point in the late game where you can afford like 5/6 carriers, is a 5 mineral nerf to interceptor cost really that big a deal? Seems like just a slap on the wrist.
|
On February 01 2017 07:24 jpg06051992 wrote:
Oracle and Raven still desperately need a redesign, Oracle to do less damage but scale better outside of mass Oracle cheese and Raven's are just cancerous to play against, PDD being shorter but more powerful totally negates anything outside of a Viper pull and auto turrets are literally enough to drive me away from this game, I've already dealt with a different metagame shift that gravitated towards the mass Raven cloud and it makes SC2 go from an 8 or 9/10 game to a 2/10.
Redesign the Raven to provide utility and survivability to Terran end game, and give the Oracle something along these lines..
Oracle
- Remove bonus damage to light and increase range on Pulsar Beam by 1 or 2 so it does not instantly melt workers but at the same time can find sweet spots in static air defense like a Banshee
- Remove Revelation and give the Oracle innate detection
- Nerf the radius, time spent frozen, and mana cost of Stasis, so it functions more like Spider Mines being a spammable map control element
Raven
- Remove Auto Turret from the game along with Seeker Missile and replace them with good non damage for spell points abilities that let's Terran have more utility units outside of the Medivac
The rest of the changes are fine, Hydralisks are still not as beefy as they need to be and Widow Mines shouldn't be deleting Chargelot compositions just by existing.
oracle is cancer but since they only listen what majority says, it won't be changed.
|
On February 01 2017 08:32 ArtyK wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2017 08:26 JuanDi wrote:On February 01 2017 05:47 ArtyK wrote:On February 01 2017 05:45 Elentos wrote:On February 01 2017 05:44 ArtyK wrote:But they don't remove the bonus to splash? Now i don't understand -_- that means the mines only change is 40+25 instead 40+40 splash on shieds? They're still testing, they might still come around to removing +shields on splash entirely. yeah i know, just the order in which they decide to do stuff makes no sense to me. it is intended to cause as little impact as posible in the game to address specific issues. If it is not enough, they tweak it further And when the change on both single target + splash was revealed some people basically said : "it is intended to cause as much impact as possible in the game to address specific issues. If its too much, they tweak it back a bit..." Works both ways :p Then again i wasn't questionning the change rather than the way they changed their mind on the last few feedbacks.
Because changing your mind is a bad thing? They realized their idea wasn't good enough so they changed it to a better idea. And it was based off popular opinion. That's a good thing man!
|
Has anyone else noticed a FPS drop with this patch?
|
Anyone else locked at 60 FPS with all settings with this patch? I usually run about 500 frames on low and it's stuck at 60, can't seem to change it.
|
Has anyone an idea how to get around the forced vsync? Otherwise it's unplayable for me.
|
On February 01 2017 09:10 WeddingEpisode wrote:
Has anyone else noticed a FPS drop with this patch?
Yes I have
|
On February 01 2017 09:49 IamBiSa wrote:Has anyone an idea how to get around the forced vsync? Otherwise it's unplayable for me.
Unplayable for me, too. Really bums me out, I wanted to play that testing queue while I had some free time but it's just too bad
|
On February 01 2017 05:51 Psychobabas wrote:
Love the changes, especially how I cant use widow mines to deal with the carriers' interceptors any more. Great job.
You're not supossed to win against Carriers.
|
4713 Posts
On February 01 2017 07:09 Heyjoray wrote:
I wonder when terrans are gonna realize that they need to get their bio nerfed before they can get decent factory/stargate units
I wonder when people are gonna realize that bio cannot be nerfed unless Blizzard gives the race a easier way to transition to to other compositions.
As it stands if terran invests into bio is orders of mangitude harder to transition to other comps due to:
1. Infantry upgrades and mech upgrades being separate.
2. Infantry infrastructure and mech/air infrastructure is separate, takes a long time to build and is more expensive than for the other races.
Also, this concept that a army has to transition from one tier of units to another in order to remain effective is BS.
In BW all armies had a natural progression that gradually incorporated all tier of units:
Terrans started by using marine+ medic and eventually added tanks and science vessels into their compositions or they went straight mech off vultures.
Protoss started with GW units like Zealots and Dragoons but would later incorporate Corsairs, DTs, Archons, High Templar, Arbiter and even Carries into their comps.
Zerg started off Zergling+ Hydra and eventually went into Mutas, Lurkers, Defilers and Ultralisk.
Moral of the story, terran bio doesn't need any nerf, its probably mech or air units that require some sort of adjustment to make it easier to incorporate them into bio armies.
|
Don't know if it's related .. Logged onto Europe after being capped at 60fps, got 500 frames in game.. Went back to NA, now have 500 frames in game.
Either they just fixed something or swapping regions helped.
|
On February 01 2017 08:46 tantalus wrote:
If you're at the point in the late game where you can afford like 5/6 carriers, is a 5 mineral nerf to interceptor cost really that big a deal? Seems like just a slap on the wrist.
Fair, but a good start ... and it may make a difference in longer games where players start to mine out and need to rebuild interceptors after engages
|
On February 01 2017 06:08 DinoMight wrote:
So widow mines still obliterate Probes.
Cool.
That's right, as they should. When was the last time widow mine drops gave you any trouble?
|
On February 01 2017 10:26 LHK wrote:
Don't know if it's related .. Logged onto Europe after being capped at 60fps, got 500 frames in game.. Went back to NA, now have 500 frames in game.
Either they just fixed something or swapping regions helped.
I tried and still can't get it to work properly. Ughhhhhh.
|
nothing to do with swarmhosts? =(
|
On February 01 2017 11:35 jimminy_kriket wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2017 10:26 LHK wrote:
Don't know if it's related .. Logged onto Europe after being capped at 60fps, got 500 frames in game.. Went back to NA, now have 500 frames in game.
Either they just fixed something or swapping regions helped. I tried and still can't get it to work properly. Ughhhhhh.
You can try setting vsync off in graphics driver (Nvidia CP for me), works fine, no vsync in-game. gl
|
On February 01 2017 11:12 D_K_night wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2017 06:08 DinoMight wrote:
So widow mines still obliterate Probes.
Cool. That's right, as they should. When was the last time widow mine drops gave you any trouble?
you do realize you are are quoting right?
|
On February 01 2017 07:20 Charoisaur wrote:
I think people severily underestimate the impact of the liberator nerf. It heavily reduces their efficiency against gateway units.
I don't think the widow mine nerf will be needed.
You Terran players are a riot, seriously.
When one abandoned liberator at mineral line can still take out 3 non-blink stalkers from the P's stalker army when P went specifically to clear it out while lib just stood there, that's when you know liberators were just insanely broken. This 10 damage nerf is nothing.
WM is needed badly as well, but we need to nerf the liberator more. Raise the cost and supply.
|
Interesting, the 15-cost interceptors feel a bit too expensive. I think the 5-mineral increments will be a problem balancing this unit's cost unless they make gameplay changes.
|
On February 01 2017 17:29 zyce wrote:
Interesting, the 15-cost interceptors feel a bit too expensive. I think the 5-mineral increments will be a problem balancing this unit's cost unless they make gameplay changes.
Yeah Interceptors should cost 13.5 minerals. 15 is clearly UP.
|
On February 01 2017 17:19 parkufarku wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2017 07:20 Charoisaur wrote:
I think people severily underestimate the impact of the liberator nerf. It heavily reduces their efficiency against gateway units.
I don't think the widow mine nerf will be needed. You Terran players are a riot, seriously. When one abandoned liberator at mineral line can still take out 3 non-blink stalkers from the P's stalker army when P went specifically to clear it out while lib just stood there, that's when you know liberators were just insanely broken. This 10 damage nerf is nothing. WM is needed badly as well, but we need to nerf the liberator more. Raise the cost and supply.
You do realize that with this patch the liberator goes from 2-shotting stalkers to 3-shotting them? This massively reduces the efficiency against gateway units.
I'm fully in favor of this nerf because I don't like liberators but if you think that further nerfs are needed you just don't understand the impact of this change. I wouldn't be surprised if balance swings into protoss favor with this change alone.
And I don't really play terran anymore I mostly play zerg lately.
|
On February 01 2017 09:04 Exquisite7 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2017 08:32 ArtyK wrote:On February 01 2017 08:26 JuanDi wrote:On February 01 2017 05:47 ArtyK wrote:On February 01 2017 05:45 Elentos wrote:On February 01 2017 05:44 ArtyK wrote:But they don't remove the bonus to splash? Now i don't understand -_- that means the mines only change is 40+25 instead 40+40 splash on shieds? They're still testing, they might still come around to removing +shields on splash entirely. yeah i know, just the order in which they decide to do stuff makes no sense to me. it is intended to cause as little impact as posible in the game to address specific issues. If it is not enough, they tweak it further And when the change on both single target + splash was revealed some people basically said : "it is intended to cause as much impact as possible in the game to address specific issues. If its too much, they tweak it back a bit..." Works both ways :p Then again i wasn't questionning the change rather than the way they changed their mind on the last few feedbacks. Because changing your mind is a bad thing? They realized their idea wasn't good enough so they changed it to a better idea. And it was based off popular opinion. That's a good thing man!
"Then again i wasn't questionning the change rather than the way they changed their mind on the last few feedbacks."
|
On February 01 2017 18:22 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2017 17:19 parkufarku wrote:On February 01 2017 07:20 Charoisaur wrote:
I think people severily underestimate the impact of the liberator nerf. It heavily reduces their efficiency against gateway units.
I don't think the widow mine nerf will be needed. You Terran players are a riot, seriously. When one abandoned liberator at mineral line can still take out 3 non-blink stalkers from the P's stalker army when P went specifically to clear it out while lib just stood there, that's when you know liberators were just insanely broken. This 10 damage nerf is nothing. WM is needed badly as well, but we need to nerf the liberator more. Raise the cost and supply. You do realize that with this patch the liberator goes from 2-shotting stalkers to 3-shotting them? This massively reduces the efficiency against gateway units. I'm fully in favor of this nerf because I don't like liberators but if you think that further nerfs are needed you just don't understand the impact of this change. I wouldn't be surprised if balance swings into protoss favor with this change alone. And I don't really play terran anymore I mostly play zerg lately.
Yes it goes from 2-shotting stalkers to 3-shotting which reducecs the efficiency, which is good, because it was fucking ridiculous.
|
On February 01 2017 17:29 zyce wrote:
Interesting, the 15-cost interceptors feel a bit too expensive. I think the 5-mineral increments will be a problem balancing this unit's cost unless they make gameplay changes. That is so funny.
|
On February 01 2017 18:22 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2017 17:19 parkufarku wrote:On February 01 2017 07:20 Charoisaur wrote:
I think people severily underestimate the impact of the liberator nerf. It heavily reduces their efficiency against gateway units.
I don't think the widow mine nerf will be needed. You Terran players are a riot, seriously. When one abandoned liberator at mineral line can still take out 3 non-blink stalkers from the P's stalker army when P went specifically to clear it out while lib just stood there, that's when you know liberators were just insanely broken. This 10 damage nerf is nothing. WM is needed badly as well, but we need to nerf the liberator more. Raise the cost and supply. You do realize that with this patch the liberator goes from 2-shotting stalkers to 3-shotting them? This massively reduces the efficiency against gateway units. I'm fully in favor of this nerf because I don't like liberators but if you think that further nerfs are needed you just don't understand the impact of this change. I wouldn't be surprised if balance swings into protoss favor with this change alone. And I don't really play terran anymore I mostly play zerg lately.
It changes things from the harrassment aspect but doesn't change it in actual fights very much. In a army vs army fight, is the Terran army fully composed of libs? No, only like 4 or 5 supported with mass bio, mines, tanks. Libs still do 70+ damage per target - it's still massive DPS. The "3 hit to 2 hit stalker" argument would work if it was mostly liberators vs mostly stalkers but both P and T armies are mixed with a ton of different types of units. The DPS is still there - and that's a big problem.
|
On February 01 2017 09:38 LHK wrote:
Anyone else locked at 60 FPS with all settings with this patch? I usually run about 500 frames on low and it's stuck at 60, can't seem to change it.
I have.
Dunno what to do with it!
My regular fps is about 140-150. Now 59-60. Even 30 for a while! Unplayable!
|
On February 02 2017 08:26 pacholak wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2017 09:38 LHK wrote:
Anyone else locked at 60 FPS with all settings with this patch? I usually run about 500 frames on low and it's stuck at 60, can't seem to change it. I have. Dunno what to do with it! My regular fps is about 140-150. Now 59-60. Even 30 for a while! Unplayable!
It is like that for everybody...
enforced vSync... how could that ever slip by?
Hands down worst patch ever.
|
|
|
To fix the V-sync, if you have an NVIDIA card, you can force it off in the nvidia config. AMD is out of luck, it doesn't work.
The way Blizzard handled this is really bad.. Okay, the black screen was annoying (I personally barely had it, but some people had black screens for 3 seconds+), but forced vsync is awful. Just awful. Lots of us are running high refresh rate monitors or simply hate added input lag. SC2 is very wonky with FPS in fights so it dips into the 50-60s, even on really good systems. My question: WHY force vsync? They could've just recommended you turn it on in the client, or made an official statement about putting on vsync temporarily fixing it. This is just really bad on their part. Inexcusable. I wouldn't play if I didn't have an nvidia card right now.
|
mmm... dunno guys. I've checked vsync, running hybrid low settings. do not experience any form of lags with windowed fullscreen either during the fights or w/e. Nothing really changed. (gt 970)
|
After reading the liberator ground damage nerf I just had to dig up some of the old threads where some of us TL regulars talked about how to try and actually balance this thing. So many talks, including damage, range and radius...
I loved rereading this post of mine from october 2th 2015, answering questions regarding the unit as per OP proposal:
If you could make any changes to the Liberator, which would it be?
TBH, I would have scrapped the unit and added a bio or bio-mech kind of unit. As it is, I'd change the Defender mode quite a bit: slightly reduce the range (too many long range units, overlaps with tank), nerf the base damage so it doesn't one shot a hydra and give it a small bonus damage against massive (there's no such unit in the terran arsenal? Would help against ultras). If the result is too underpowered, then I would reduce the cost.
Feels good :D
|
the forced vsync is killing me, it is quite unplayable
|
Liberators should just be removed from game. Not only are they broken, but even if they weren't, they overlap with the role of tanks. What's the point of two siege units for one race? one from air and one from ground? If anything, give P or Z something similar to what lib does.
|
Imo the liberartor nerf is way enough, no need to nerf widow mine again.
In big fight with liberator nerf adn if you add widow mines nerf terran has no chance against protoss.
I saw stats using templars more often and that rocks pretty well.
|
On February 03 2017 07:33 parkufarku wrote:
Liberators should just be removed from game. Not only are they broken, but even if they weren't, they overlap with the role of tanks. What's the point of two siege units for one race? one from air and one from ground? If anything, give P or Z something similar to what lib does.
Disagree, they are good against entirely different units. And you need entirely different types of units to combat each of them. One is heavy splash and one is heavy single target. Terran has always been about the positioning and transforming units that always sacrifice one strength (like mobility) for a powerful attack. That's cool
|
Update on the framerate issues
https://us.battle.net/forums/en/sc2/topic/20753276048
A recent update to improve performance on FreeSync and G-Sync monitors has a side-effect of capping StarCraft II’s framerate to the monitor’s refresh rate. We’re already working on further improvements in a future patch and will continue to monitor this issue. We know this is affecting our players and we appreciate your patience and understanding as we work towards a better solution.
|
oh wow great so zealot archon just has ghost as a viable counter wich wont be there in time... we had the lower shield damage of widow mines before at the beginning of heart of the swarm and it didnt work out well at that time, am i the only one who remembers this?
|
On February 04 2017 08:41 Exquisite7 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2017 07:33 parkufarku wrote:
Liberators should just be removed from game. Not only are they broken, but even if they weren't, they overlap with the role of tanks. What's the point of two siege units for one race? one from air and one from ground? If anything, give P or Z something similar to what lib does. Disagree, they are good against entirely different units. And you need entirely different types of units to combat each of them. One is heavy splash and one is heavy single target. Terran has always been about the positioning and transforming units that always sacrifice one strength (like mobility) for a powerful attack. That's cool
Ok give Terran 325 ways to deal X type of damage while the other races have 0 ways to do X type of damage
Real cool. Hey why don't we give T the ability to warp-in and burrow while we're at it? Since T players see nothing wrong with one race hogging all the options and flexibility. Can you imagine walking your stalker force and a MnM group pops out of the ground beneath them and decimates them? That's be a fantastic idea.
|
In the test mode, i tested widow mine with a friend on zealot, stalker, adept, oracle, and they won t one shot any of them anymore, what do you think, its pretty sure patch or?
|
lol all these terran upset about change. it's not like you guys are going mech. go boi which still has ton of options. just glad hydra got health buff after 7 yrs.
sc2 really need to nerf marines. 50 with ton of upgrades for marines which can also shoot air. no marines can't shoot air units kidding me. take away air attack from marines see how terrans do.
|
Terran would get absolutely destroyed if marines couldn't target air, wtf are you talking about.
|
On February 06 2017 06:04 starkiller123 wrote:
Terran would get absolutely destroyed if marines couldn't target air, wtf are you talking about.
It wouldn't be a bad idea as long as T gets an anti-air compensation, like Cyclone anti-air buff or something at same time
He has a point, the very first T1 units should not be able to defend against air. Queens are excluded from this because you can't mass them as easily as marines - they don't cost 50 and pop out super fast
|
On February 06 2017 08:32 parkufarku wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2017 06:04 starkiller123 wrote:
Terran would get absolutely destroyed if marines couldn't target air, wtf are you talking about. It wouldn't be a bad idea as long as T gets an anti-air compensation, like Cyclone anti-air buff or something at same time He has a point, the very first T1 units should not be able to defend against air. Queens are excluded from this because you can't mass them as easily as marines - they don't cost 50 and pop out super fast
Terran still needs to build an Engineering Bay just to get a Missile Turret.
And they have nothing else that can shoot air reliably fast before an Oracle (or even a MSC) can arrive.
Oracles would ravage everything in TvP, forcing Terran into an Engineering Bay and multiple Missile Turrets just to ward off the potential threat of the Oracle since your modified Marines can't shoot them down. If Protoss then comes in with a bunch of Blink Stalkers it's instant GG. It's not really an option.
If Widow Mines are changed to not one-shot Oracles anymore then 6 early Marines will be the only truly viable defense in early game TvP. It sadly also forces Terran to get 6 early Marines in every single TvP, again because of the potential threat of the Oracle. It just pidgeon holes TvP openings even more. Either keep the Widow Mine as it is versus single targets and only reduce the splash or remove the Engineering Bay requirement for building a Missile Turret.
|
On February 06 2017 18:08 Thezzy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2017 08:32 parkufarku wrote:On February 06 2017 06:04 starkiller123 wrote:
Terran would get absolutely destroyed if marines couldn't target air, wtf are you talking about. It wouldn't be a bad idea as long as T gets an anti-air compensation, like Cyclone anti-air buff or something at same time He has a point, the very first T1 units should not be able to defend against air. Queens are excluded from this because you can't mass them as easily as marines - they don't cost 50 and pop out super fast Terran still needs to build an Engineering Bay just to get a Missile Turret. And they have nothing else that can shoot air reliably fast before an Oracle (or even a MSC) can arrive. Oracles would ravage everything in TvP, forcing Terran into an Engineering Bay and multiple Missile Turrets just to ward off the potential threat of the Oracle since your modified Marines can't shoot them down. If Protoss then comes in with a bunch of Blink Stalkers it's instant GG. It's not really an option. If Widow Mines are changed to not one-shot Oracles anymore then 6 early Marines will be the only truly viable defense in early game TvP. It sadly also forces Terran to get 6 early Marines in every single TvP, again because of the potential threat of the Oracle. It just pidgeon holes TvP openings even more. Either keep the Widow Mine as it is versus single targets and only reduce the splash or remove the Engineering Bay requirement for building a Missile Turret.
Oracles are a legit concern if marines don't have AA, but this is why I said cyclones could get a buff compensation in return to address air units. And oracle build time could be increased.
Leaving WM as strong as it currently is, is silly. It's too strong for its cost. Increase the supply & cost if you want to leave it able to 1 shot targets like it currently does. 75 mineral 25 gas 2 supply unit that has potential to take out 1000 mineral / 1000 gas worth of units in 1 shot thanks to a simple mistake or mis-micro or inattention? Doesn't sound right to me.
|
1. Tempest.
A brief historical reference: it was initially introduced as anti-muta unit with aoe (which is obviously a bad design decision that leads to massing of a certain unit, liberator pre-nerf is a good example of why you don't want air units with ranged aoe attack in the game), then it was redesigned into anti-massive siege unit. A very arguable role, but still it somehow "worked" in HoTS as a "answer" to BL/SH/Terran Ghost/Viking late game. With the LoTV release Tempest was barely used, so blizzard decided to redesign it once more and failed. So it was reverted to an old version and (!) severly nerfed (?). That's even more of a mystery to me than the initial purpose of the unit. And by nerf I mean a 50% supply increase. NOONE uses tempest at all as it became a complete trash unit. Terrans laugh at you as a fleet of BC + a single raven annihilates your whole tempest army w/o a single loss. The math is simple here. They take 6 of your supply so having a tempest based comp is always worse than having same amount of carriers in ANY situation. Carriers insanely outdps tempests, have almost the same range, immune to pdd.
So, my question is. What is the justification of this unit to be present in the game? What role does it fulfill now? And seems to me that there is no answer to that. It obvious that tempest should just go (and should never be implemented in the first place).
2. Carrier and air-based compositions.
I will be brief here. As a protoss player, who won an insane amount of pvz with carriers (on a low master level), after watching lots of vods/streams that showcase abusing that style I want to say. We don't want that kind of starcraft. Noone does. This playstyle is not mechanically demanding, its easy to execute, easy to micro (mass 16 carriers and A-CLICK, that’s literally what it takes to win games, even on Stats/Naniwas stream), promotes turtling, insanely boring to watch and play, frustrating to lose against. And that applies to any race (BL/Vipers deathballs, BCs). It contradicts with a DK statement that he wants SC2 to be the hardest game on the planet. Blizzard please tone down air units. This should only work as a surprise/sneaky strat. Please, revert carriers to Hots state. Or nerf interceptor damage, or their attack speed whatsoever.
3. Protoss ground-based compositions.
Just 2 things. Mines and Banelings. There is a reason why blizzard is trying to buff colossi every now and then. At first it was 10% attack speed increase. Then a + 4 to light proposal. And the reason is: Protoss can't fight evenly on the ground vs Zerg (mostly) and Terran (to a lesser extent). TvP is not THAT of a problem because protoss CAN sneak a colossi tech in, while in pvz you will be insta-countered with mutas. Im not saying its completely unplayable, but its obvious that protoss gateway units are extremely vulnerable to other races insanely cheap and reliable aoe tier 1 units. All I want to ask of blizzard is.
Do something to this w/o buffing colossi, e.g:
remove + shield damage on mines completely (on splash),
revert banelings HP buff and make them do 15 + 20 to light (instead of 20 + 15 to light). They will still annihilate adepts and zealots but at least it will help to save stalkers (that struggle so much vs zerg) and other protoss units that are not light.
P.S. And SH must go as well. For real.
|
On February 06 2017 18:38 parkufarku wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2017 18:08 Thezzy wrote:On February 06 2017 08:32 parkufarku wrote:On February 06 2017 06:04 starkiller123 wrote:
Terran would get absolutely destroyed if marines couldn't target air, wtf are you talking about. It wouldn't be a bad idea as long as T gets an anti-air compensation, like Cyclone anti-air buff or something at same time He has a point, the very first T1 units should not be able to defend against air. Queens are excluded from this because you can't mass them as easily as marines - they don't cost 50 and pop out super fast Terran still needs to build an Engineering Bay just to get a Missile Turret. And they have nothing else that can shoot air reliably fast before an Oracle (or even a MSC) can arrive. Oracles would ravage everything in TvP, forcing Terran into an Engineering Bay and multiple Missile Turrets just to ward off the potential threat of the Oracle since your modified Marines can't shoot them down. If Protoss then comes in with a bunch of Blink Stalkers it's instant GG. It's not really an option. If Widow Mines are changed to not one-shot Oracles anymore then 6 early Marines will be the only truly viable defense in early game TvP. It sadly also forces Terran to get 6 early Marines in every single TvP, again because of the potential threat of the Oracle. It just pidgeon holes TvP openings even more. Either keep the Widow Mine as it is versus single targets and only reduce the splash or remove the Engineering Bay requirement for building a Missile Turret. Oracles are a legit concern if marines don't have AA, but this is why I said cyclones could get a buff compensation in return to address air units. And oracle build time could be increased. Leaving WM as strong as it currently is, is silly. It's too strong for its cost. Increase the supply & cost if you want to leave it able to 1 shot targets like it currently does. 75 mineral 25 gas 2 supply unit that has potential to take out 1000 mineral / 1000 gas worth of units in 1 shot thanks to a simple mistake or mis-micro or inattention? Doesn't sound right to me.
Keep in mind that a Widow Mine takes up 2 supply and only fires once every 40 seconds or so and it has to get into position first. (and that position can be seen)
Hallucinations or Blink can deal with Widow Mine shots. I'd be fine with a Widow Mine nerf as long as the Oracle can be properly dealt with. Purely by existing it forces Terran to built defenses against it because if you don't a single Oracle can win the game for Protoss. They fly too fast and deal far too much damage to be slowly poked to death by a Cyclone.
By the time one Cyclone (which isn't cheap and would have to be built purely for AA) destroys it you're looking at a lot of SCV losses. Maybe if the Oracle speed and damage against Light was curbed a bit I could agree to a Widow Mine nerf.
I was never fond of the Widow Mine myself and always preferred the tank but it just didn't measure up.
That all said, Marines will need their AA at all times if not just for TvZ alone. Just think fast 2 base Mutalisks.
Thors won't arrive in time and can be magicboxed, the Widow Mine shots can be tanked by Overseers and Liberators will simply be overwhelmed by sheer numbers. Cyclones are too big and costly to properly provide anti-air without gimping ground presence. Anti-air needs to be present on a relatively cheap/massable unit, which is currently Marine/Stalker/Hydra for the three races.
|
On February 07 2017 00:27 Thezzy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2017 18:38 parkufarku wrote:On February 06 2017 18:08 Thezzy wrote:On February 06 2017 08:32 parkufarku wrote:On February 06 2017 06:04 starkiller123 wrote:
Terran would get absolutely destroyed if marines couldn't target air, wtf are you talking about. It wouldn't be a bad idea as long as T gets an anti-air compensation, like Cyclone anti-air buff or something at same time He has a point, the very first T1 units should not be able to defend against air. Queens are excluded from this because you can't mass them as easily as marines - they don't cost 50 and pop out super fast Terran still needs to build an Engineering Bay just to get a Missile Turret. And they have nothing else that can shoot air reliably fast before an Oracle (or even a MSC) can arrive. Oracles would ravage everything in TvP, forcing Terran into an Engineering Bay and multiple Missile Turrets just to ward off the potential threat of the Oracle since your modified Marines can't shoot them down. If Protoss then comes in with a bunch of Blink Stalkers it's instant GG. It's not really an option. If Widow Mines are changed to not one-shot Oracles anymore then 6 early Marines will be the only truly viable defense in early game TvP. It sadly also forces Terran to get 6 early Marines in every single TvP, again because of the potential threat of the Oracle. It just pidgeon holes TvP openings even more. Either keep the Widow Mine as it is versus single targets and only reduce the splash or remove the Engineering Bay requirement for building a Missile Turret. Oracles are a legit concern if marines don't have AA, but this is why I said cyclones could get a buff compensation in return to address air units. And oracle build time could be increased. Leaving WM as strong as it currently is, is silly. It's too strong for its cost. Increase the supply & cost if you want to leave it able to 1 shot targets like it currently does. 75 mineral 25 gas 2 supply unit that has potential to take out 1000 mineral / 1000 gas worth of units in 1 shot thanks to a simple mistake or mis-micro or inattention? Doesn't sound right to me. Keep in mind that a Widow Mine takes up 2 supply and only fires once every 40 seconds or so and it has to get into position first. (and that position can be seen) Hallucinations or Blink can deal with Widow Mine shots. I'd be fine with a Widow Mine nerf as long as the Oracle can be properly dealt with. Purely by existing it forces Terran to built defenses against it because if you don't a single Oracle can win the game for Protoss. They fly too fast and deal far too much damage to be slowly poked to death by a Cyclone. By the time one Cyclone (which isn't cheap and would have to be built purely for AA) destroys it you're looking at a lot of SCV losses. Maybe if the Oracle speed and damage against Light was curbed a bit I could agree to a Widow Mine nerf. I was never fond of the Widow Mine myself and always preferred the tank but it just didn't measure up. That all said, Marines will need their AA at all times if not just for TvZ alone. Just think fast 2 base Mutalisks. Thors won't arrive in time and can be magicboxed, the Widow Mine shots can be tanked by Overseers and Liberators will simply be overwhelmed by sheer numbers. Cyclones are too big and costly to properly provide anti-air without gimping ground presence. Anti-air needs to be present on a relatively cheap/massable unit, which is currently Marine/Stalker/Hydra for the three races.
Stalkers is anything but cheap & massable unit, is one of the shittiest dps unit in the game.
Agree with you that Terran needs WM as AA for oracles & mass mutas.
But that's what wrong with David Kim & co, you don't generally design a gimmicky unit to counter another gimmicky unit. (Yes, I am looking at you! widow mines, fast regen mutas & oracles, ahem, ahem)
All 3 units are very frustrating to play against, and only bring enjoyment to the players that abuse them & IMHO, contributes nothing to the spectacle of a game.
Oh, I forgot to mention the random +10hp centrifugal hook that David Kim's team randomly pull out of their asses.
|
so the widow mine change really got through? wow am i the only one that remembers we had this change before in the beginning of hots and it didnt work out then...
|
I played a couple of games on Abyssal Reef yesterday and gotta say that Blizz botched their pathfinding algortithms really bad. There are very serious issues when you wanna transfer your units across the map. The majority of my army got stuck behind buildings and were dancing around for 2 minutes doing nothing until I realized where they really were. Blizz gives you some new maps that are not necessarily bad but which have a lot of technical glitches (I'm thinking about Abyssal Reef with your units getting stuck behind buildings, New Gettysburg's screens on island expansions and Frozen Temple to some extent when you wanted to retreat to your third location from your opponent's natural so your units actually went through the middle lane). My opinion is that if your algorithims are crap then you should stick with maps that have been thoroughly tested and are working properly, the best example of which seem to be Overgrowth-type maps (with terrain not being too yellow or to white). After that I launched Warcraft 3 to check how pathfinding worked there, and to my amusement, I saw that my units were able to get to basically any point on the map even though some of those maps had even more difficult architecture from the stanpoint of pathfinding...
|
I really appreciate the effort made in the 3.8 patch to make mech a viable playstyle. Unfortunately we are not there yet but the good news is that only a few changes are needed to make mech ok.
1. Increase the cost of Swarm Hosts. They currently hard counter mech due their price. Swarm Hosts should be a harass unit, not a unit that you can mass cheaply to counter an entire play style.
2. Make Swarm Hosts light. This would make it possible to use hellions to chase Swarm Hosts, thus promoting aggressive mech instead of Turtle mech.
3. Increase Thor armour by 1. This means that Thors trade better vs Carriers which means that the mech player can attack Protoss in the midgame when the Carrier count is still low. Currently you are forced to sit back and turtle to BCs if Protoss go Carriers since BC is the only mech unit that can trade with Carriers with High Templar support.
|
On February 01 2017 08:12 Nerchio wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2017 07:24 jpg06051992 wrote:
Oracle and Raven still desperately need a redesign, Oracle to do less damage but scale better outside of mass Oracle cheese and Raven's are just cancerous to play against, PDD being shorter but more powerful totally negates anything outside of a Viper pull and auto turrets are literally enough to drive me away from this game, I've already dealt with a different metagame shift that gravitated towards the mass Raven cloud and it makes SC2 go from an 8 or 9/10 game to a 2/10.
Redesign the Raven to provide utility and survivability to Terran end game, and give the Oracle something along these lines..
Oracle
- Remove bonus damage to light and increase range on Pulsar Beam by 1 or 2 so it does not instantly melt workers but at the same time can find sweet spots in static air defense like a Banshee
- Remove Revelation and give the Oracle innate detection
- Nerf the radius, time spent frozen, and mana cost of Stasis, so it functions more like Spider Mines being a spammable map control element
Raven
- Remove Auto Turret from the game along with Seeker Missile and replace them with good non damage for spell points abilities that let's Terran have more utility units outside of the Medivac
The rest of the changes are fine, Hydralisks are still not as beefy as they need to be and Widow Mines shouldn't be deleting Chargelot compositions just by existing. Smart man
makes observer not killable.
|
First priority is fixing the massive fps drops/caps that the new patch induced (blizz at it again).
Then fixing the SH (not as a harass tool, but as a massable option that shuts down mech on its own).
Then fixing late game PvZ.
|
so it began... i lost 3 tvp´s in a row on balance map, all going mass chargelot + archons, at that time i have some marine marauder medivac, but ghosts are far from beeing out... got rolled over just like i expected... we had the same situation with the widow mine at the beginning of hots were they also nerfed shield damage. shortly after that they reverted it back...
guess i need to got early liberators and hope they focus the archons and kite like dumb with the rest of my army...
|
On February 06 2017 21:53 insitelol wrote:
1. Tempest.
A brief historical reference: it was initially introduced as anti-muta unit with aoe (which is obviously a bad design decision that leads to massing of a certain unit, liberator pre-nerf is a good example of why you don't want air units with ranged aoe attack in the game), then it was redesigned into anti-massive siege unit. A very arguable role, but still it somehow "worked" in HoTS as a "answer" to BL/SH/Terran Ghost/Viking late game. With the LoTV release Tempest was barely used, so blizzard decided to redesign it once more and failed. So it was reverted to an old version and (!) severly nerfed (?). That's even more of a mystery to me than the initial purpose of the unit. And by nerf I mean a 50% supply increase. NOONE uses tempest at all as it became a complete trash unit. Terrans laugh at you as a fleet of BC + a single raven annihilates your whole tempest army w/o a single loss. The math is simple here. They take 6 of your supply so having a tempest based comp is always worse than having same amount of carriers in ANY situation. Carriers insanely outdps tempests, have almost the same range, immune to pdd.
So, my question is. What is the justification of this unit to be present in the game? What role does it fulfill now? And seems to me that there is no answer to that. It obvious that tempest should just go (and should never be implemented in the first place).
Tempests also got a big damage nerf in the latter part of HotS, with their bonus vs massive being nerfed from +50 to +14. Blizzard wanted to change the unit from being a complete deterrent against massive air units to just being a reactive counter. The teleporting BC's of today would get wrecked by the old Tempest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/blog_header/kz/KZCCXNSS8ERJ1485569127121.jpg)
