While much of the feedback regarding the Widow Mine splash damage reduction has been positive, we also received feedback that pushing that change to live so quickly after making changes to the Liberator might swing the matchup too far in one direction. We will keep an eye on this matchup in the coming weeks to determine if this change should still be implemented.
Carrier
We heard your feedback that adjustments to the Carrier’s Interceptor costs might not help Zerg enough in this matchup. Rather than trying to change the Carrier, we are thinking that improvements to the Corruptor might be a better solution. Our current thinking is to improve both the speed and the responsiveness (damage point + acceleration) of the Corruptor. This would give the unit greater flexibility during engagements, and occasionally even catch parts of the Protoss army before engaging it. We would like to hear your ideas here as well.
Hydralisk
This will remain on the Balance Testing Matchmaking for now. Interestingly, we have not seen as much feedback about the Hydralisk health buff as we had expected.
Let's get some discussions going on these topics and thank you for the feedback!
Widow Mines - Still deleting Chargelots from the game by existing, either change the mine or change Charge to function more like Zealot legs so they won't charge into the mines and they can be individually micro'd away from the shots.
Carriers - They are OP but yes I don't want Carriers with their balls chopped off I would rather have Corruptors that actually HAVE balls, so this is a fantastic direction to go to reduce the Skytoss deathball auto win
Hydralisks - No feedback because everyone is sick of the constant changes, the Hydralisk has gone through so many patch notes I don't even bother following it anymore, the unit sucks for what it costs, so yes obviously either make it beefier or reduce the gas cost
Decent community update here, think the balance team might be mildly on the right track with these ones
Dunno i would rather fix the carrier tbh. Air based armies are too strong in sc2 anyway, that needs a fix. A potential corruptor buff is the completely wrong way to fix this.
Hydralisk
What exactly is the point of buffing Hydras anyway? I don't think there is any need to see the unit vs bio terrans. I would rather see them make lurkers an option there. Hydra tier one yada yada
Widow Mine
Not sure about this one. I never liked the widow mine one shotting units like the oracle tbh. Seems wrong to me. Whatever makes TvP become storm vs bio again seems good to me
Making corruptors even faster and better.... Nice, that will help mech and skyterran. So nice that we will see more bio games! so rare to see. Roach ravager into Broodlords will be stronger as well....
On February 11 2017 03:34 The_Red_Viper wrote: Carrier
Dunno i would rather fix the carrier tbh. Air based armies are too strong in sc2 anyway, that needs a fix. A potential corruptor buff is the completely wrong way to fix this.
Hydralisk
What exactly is the point of buffing Hydras anyway? I don't think there is any need to see the unit vs bio terrans. I would rather see them make lurkers an option there. Hydra tier one yada yada
Widow Mine
Not sure about this one. I never liked the widow mine one shotting units like the oracle tbh. Seems wrong to me. Whatever makes TvP become storm vs bio again seems good to me
Air armies are far to strong in SC2 and always have been, my fondest wish is for the SH to be made into an anti - massive air unit to deter skytoss deathballing, but obviously the balance team thinks mass air units are awesome because they haven't done shit to it.
And idk about that Hydralisk statement, I would love if Hydralisks got some type of + dmg to bio (I know lore doesn't mean shit but it does state that they are venomous) I mean if Terrans can sit there and cry all day about mech not being 100% viable at all times vs all comps then why can't Zerg have units that suck vs bio be tuned to be better? Tanks are already ludicrously strong and completely necessitate the Swarm Host tactics so yes, bring on the Hydralisk buffs.
I also never enjoyed WM's one shitting things, sure they added a nice micro element to ZvT but they are cancer against Protoss. What really sucks about this update is no changes to Ravens which have been buffed back to mega cancer and Swarm Hosts are total cancer vs mech but worthless vs anything else.
Let's all just be honest with ourselves, David Kim doesn't play this game nor does he have a clue what to do with it, he's simply in too far and too deep to back track as heavily as needed to be, LOTV is a complete failure in terms of design and balance, just let him pump out his little PR "balance patches" that don't even make any sense, (Buff Hydra which is crap vs air and crap vs mech and crap vs bio but it craps on Gateway units which in turn get crapped on by air/bio/mech which allows Carriers to be OP which *brain explosion*)
On February 11 2017 04:04 jpg06051992 wrote: Air armies are far to strong in SC2 and always have been, my fondest wish is for the SH to be made into an anti - massive air unit to deter skytoss deathballing, but obviously the balance team thinks mass air units are awesome because they haven't done shit to it.
Or they are trying to keep the game somewhat realistic. Air control is imperative in modern warfare but would suddenly stop being so valuable and powerful in space battles?
The game is in an awful state, the patch that aimed to improve mech managed to make it worse and Blizzard pretends everything is fine.
Carriers are too strong. The logical solution would be to nerf Carriers but I guess that would make too much sense.
Why are the following things even in the game: Liberator range uppgrade Nydus Worms that can not be killed. Teleporting BCs Carriers that counter their own counters. Swarm Host that hard counter an entire playstyle while still worthless against everything that is not mech.
There are so many broken issues to correct in this game but you ignore them and focus on irrelevant things like voice packs and skins. Maybe try to fix the actual game instead?
I think dividing up the number of attacks on the interceptors to make armor a larger factor in whether or not the units take damage would be an effective fix to the carrier, since its direct counters are also units that have high armor. Hydra vs. carrier woudn't change much, but corruptor vs. carrier would.
On February 11 2017 05:01 MockHamill wrote: Is this a joke?
The game is in an awful state, the patch that aimed to improve mech managed to make it worse and Blizzard pretends everything is fine.
Carriers are too strong. The logical solution would be to nerf Carriers but I guess that would make too much sense.
Why are the following things even in the game: Liberator range uppgrade Nydus Worms that can not be killed. Teleporting BCs Carriers that counter their own counters. Swarm Host that hard counter an entire playstyle while still worthless against everything that is not mech.
There are so many broken issues to correct in this game but you ignore them and focus on irrelevant things like voice packs and skins. Maybe try to fix the actual game instead?
You're falling into the common fallacy of assuming that balance and cosmetics share the same development resources. They mostly do not.
On February 11 2017 05:01 MockHamill wrote: Is this a joke?
The game is in an awful state, the patch that aimed to improve mech managed to make it worse and Blizzard pretends everything is fine.
Carriers are too strong. The logical solution would be to nerf Carriers but I guess that would make too much sense.
Why are the following things even in the game: Liberator range uppgrade Nydus Worms that can not be killed. Teleporting BCs Carriers that counter their own counters. Swarm Host that hard counter an entire playstyle while still worthless against everything that is not mech.
There are so many broken issues to correct in this game but you ignore them and focus on irrelevant things like voice packs and skins. Maybe try to fix the actual game instead?
You are the classic example of the privileged gamer that whines for attention yet never actually gives any reasoning or examples as to why your ideas are correct. It would actually help Blizzard if you gave more input on WHAT CHANGES SHOULD ACTUALLY BE MADE TO THE GAME. So that, ya know, Blizzard could use your feedback to make a better game. Oh wait hold up, that would make too much sense.
or maybe just MAYBE! You need to take a break from SC2. Or quit. Seems like its really disappointing you these days, it might help you out.
Another completely underwhelming and absolutely disappointing community update. Again, everything is pushed to the back burner, and the devs escape the clutches of work once again. There are so many things to discuss and address, yet week after week we get these pathetic 'updates'. It seems as soon as they write these up, they act as if they are done. Never mentioning previous updates and suggestions again. How can a company accomplish so little during the week?
Hmm, well as far as realistic changes go I think the corruptor change might be okay. I think most units are too fast, especially the air units, but at least this might make a boring unit slightly more interesting.
Still, the dream is an overhaul of Zerg AA, starting with swapping the hydralisk with the roach at tier 1 and giving the SH scourge.
I see the patching is done as if everything is almost perfect and just a minuscule change will fix the current issues. Well I do not think this is the case. I can understand that Blizz wants to wait with mine nerf - as the liberator change is very significant and the state of TvP balance might not be bad now. But the mine is too powerful - this is bad design and this applies to many units - like disruptors, reapers, swarmhosts, carriers etc. making the games being won on random basis by random players. I especially despise very strong early game units that cannot be truly countered on many maps. I disagree with the logic of balancing the game with maps, but I guess too many changes would have to be applied to fix this. You have not heard much about Hydra buff change as you would have expected - well who cares about a change that will not change anything? Who cares really? Its a move in the right direction as the unit is too fragile in relation to technology and cost required and does not fulfill the function it should have - well maybe it counters mutalisks. You are fixing TvP but you are ignoring TvZ as if that is a perfect MU, it is not - look at GSL. Look at the games. I cannot believe you are totally ignorant of the problems. Try to make the game competitive and balanced in a sport-like manner like chess. Similar apm - similar advantage. Similar early game harass and scouting options. Balanced early, middle game and late game power. Make maps irrelevant. Otherwise there is something wrong with the whole philosophy and vision behind the work. Be brave with changes and make them more frequently - as it is it is a big mess.
Blizzard states that they have an issue with the Carrier, so their response is to buff the corrupter, & in typical Blizzard fashion they figure making it move faster is the answer. Air units are already too strong imo. At this rate if the game lasts a few more years, units will just be flying all over the map lol.
On February 11 2017 06:03 Kafka777 wrote: I see the patching is done as if everything is almost perfect and just a minuscule change will fix the current issues. Well I do not think this is the case. I can understand that Blizz wants to wait with mine nerf - as the liberator change is very significant and the state of TvP balance might not be bad now. But the mine is too powerful - this is bad design and this applies to many units - like disruptors, reapers, swarmhosts, carriers etc. making the games being won on random basis by random players. I especially despise very strong early game units that cannot be truly countered on many maps. I disagree with the logic of balancing the game with maps, but I guess too many changes would have to be applied to fix this. You have not heard much about Hydra buff change as you would have expected - well who cares about a change that will not change anything? Who cares really? Its a move in the right direction as the unit is too fragile in relation to technology and cost required and does not fulfill the function it should have - well maybe it counters mutalisks. You are fixing TvP but you are ignoring TvZ as if that is a perfect MU, it is not - look at GSL. Look at the games. I cannot believe you are totally ignorant of the problems. Try to make the game competitive and balanced in a sport-like manner like chess. Similar apm - similar advantage. Similar early game harass and scouting options. Balanced early, middle game and late game power. Make maps irrelevant. Otherwise there is something wrong with the whole philosophy and vision behind the work. Be brave with changes and make them more frequently - as it is it is a big mess.
If every game was played on overgrowth I would be so happy.
I've just completely lost track of this game because of these updates.
So has David
Or they are trying to keep the game somewhat realistic. Air control is imperative in modern warfare but would suddenly stop being so valuable and powerful in space battles?
Yea I understand that, but the reason air control isn't the only thing that matters in modern warfare is because ground forces still have powerful options against most air fighters
Guys never use "realism" as an argument for video game design UNLESS it's a simulation. The game has to be fun and interesting. Air armies going head to head with ground armies in open field (or rather being better than ground armies) isn't interesting. Air vs air is mostly boring as well. The game should be designed in a way which let's you make air units do pick off workers, use terrain to its advantage, etc Just look at the carrier interactions in sc2 compared to bw (yes again bw as an example boo-hoo) and while it wasn't perfect in bw either, it was at least way better.
A Nony video from back then explaining a bit (some of it iirc got added in sc2, but the interactions simply aren't comparable still edit: i think retargeting got added?)
Sometimes I wish they would just stop giving a fuck what the community says (which is more divided then the political U.S.), lock the design team in some basement and tell them, that they have to deal with saw level "games" if they dont redesign the complete game within 2 months.
Then just release this redesign without any "community discussion" aka "cancerish 1 playstyle only players trying to be the loudest so the game gets pushed in their direction" shittalks dont matter and then bring out one or two patches for the most imbalanced numbers and leave it.
On February 11 2017 03:34 The_Red_Viper wrote: I never liked the widow mine one shotting units like the oracle tbh
And I don't like the fact that widow mines are the only Terran units that have a realistic chance of killing an oracle the Protoss is paying attention to for the first 10 minutes of a game. But that's the world we live in, you're stuck with widow mines that one-shot oracles and I'm stuck with cyclones that couldn't defend my base from overlords, much less kill actual air units.
Or they are trying to keep the game somewhat realistic. Air control is imperative in modern warfare but would suddenly stop being so valuable and powerful in space battles?
Yea I understand that, but the reason air control isn't the only thing that matters in modern warfare is because ground forces still have powerful options against most air fighters
The only reason air control hasn't been the sole deciding factor in modern warfare is the modern wars have been fought in jungles or against people not wearing uniforms who surround themselves by civilians. In a true army in the field modern war fought directly between world powers, air control would be decisive. Hell, assuming anti-ballistic missile protection systems don't exist, those could decide things without a shot being fired from a conventional weapon.
As to Starcraft 2, a Battlecruiser or a Carrier would absolutely have defense systems capable of stopping anything deployed from a mobile weapon system regardless of its type. Stationary defense might have weapons capable of breaking through that and to defend itself, but armies definitely shouldn't. One Battlecruiser or Carrier should completely invalidate any and all ground armies, so air in SC2 is significantly under powered.
If the problem is Carriers (and it is), why not just nerf Carriers......? Buff Protoss ground to compensate. Buffing Corruptors buffs ZvT as well as ZvP, and ZvT is about as close to perfect as it can ever get, in terms of balance.
Makes no sense to destabilize other matchups when Carrier range, or attack speed, or interceptor build time, or anything else, could just be nerfed.
As far as mines go, perhaps removing (+shield) splash bonus completely and buffing Ghosts as a replacement?
I don't know where all these whine replies come from! Blizz are on the right track lately. TvP is addressed, and obviously they can't push another terran nerf before checking how did the previous one did (released less then 2 weeks ago). It takes time for players realizing that Stalkers are a soft counter to libs now, unlike 2 weeks before, and use them in a more decisive way vs Libs. So regarding the widow mine change lets see where the lib nerf leads us now.
Corruptor buff is a good thing in my opinion, as unlike P or T zerg don't have AA air units that can do that much, and the corruptor's weak link is its speed. I don't think it will make a huge change in ZvT, even though corruptor ling bane can turn into a thing ones the corruptors are buffed. It is a style which is hard to play now, medivacs can run away from them (can even escape mutas), so buffing corruptors can be a thing. Will help zergs vs skyterran, which is a state in the game where the zerg struggles. Another solution can be modifying the HT feedback energy cost, as hydras don't do that well vs carriers because HTs are underneath them and can easily feedback vipers which can abduct carriers so that the carriers will be in a decent range for the hydras. I don't think the feedback energy nerf will affect other areas of the game apart for vipers abducting protoss power units. A counter can be a few tempests shooting these vipers from a far. But going for some tempests over carriers will make the carrier number low enough so the zerg can fight it.
In case a corruptor buff will happen then a hydra buff is not necessary and can even break PvZ.
Regarding the mech issue, then there are ways of playing mech in TvZ. What you can't do is start camping until you build an unbeatable army. And in case the later was possible the game and the match-up would have been broken. There are more mobile mech units now, which can make mech work in the early game, and mines is the way to go in the later stage of the game, as they shut down both anti mech hard counters (swarm hosts and vipers). I think mech players didn't really adjusted to the new patch, and didn't accept that the camping mech style isn't fun to play, isn't fun to play against, and isn't fun to watch, which is why it is not really an option now.
On February 11 2017 08:54 Boggyb wrote: As to Starcraft 2, a Battlecruiser or a Carrier would absolutely have defense systems capable of stopping anything deployed from a mobile weapon system regardless of its type. Stationary defense might have weapons capable of breaking through that and to defend itself, but armies definitely shouldn't. One Battlecruiser or Carrier should completely invalidate any and all ground armies, so air in SC2 is significantly under powered.
I mean ... marines have rifles that shoot bullets directly into space ... Something that tiny that doesn't get captured by the gravity of the planet is going to make for one hell of a hard-to-detect much less hard-to-stop-projectile.
Nonetheless, the carriers and battlecruisers in lore would still completely wreck face on planets (even if they lost one or two carriers to freak shots to power centers / distribution and took tons of casualties due to ordinary shots going end-to-end through their ship).
Regardless, none of that matters for game-play. Having a single unit end the game simply isn't fun. I'd argue this is even worse for ground-based units (disruptors, widow mines) than air-based units, but ground-to-air from all three races is significantly lacking and always has been.
I'd say all of these units either suck or are only marginal against air threats:
i like how careful DK is being with changing the Widow Mine
On February 11 2017 06:12 ihatevideogames wrote: Nothing about Swarm Hosts. Whatever, I'll stick to dota 2 I guess. Who knows, maybe someone someday will make another good RTS.
Halo Wars 2 is out in February its gonna go down faster than the Hindenburg.
On February 11 2017 08:54 Boggyb wrote: As to Starcraft 2, a Battlecruiser or a Carrier would absolutely have defense systems capable of stopping anything deployed from a mobile weapon system regardless of its type. Stationary defense might have weapons capable of breaking through that and to defend itself, but armies definitely shouldn't. One Battlecruiser or Carrier should completely invalidate any and all ground armies, so air in SC2 is significantly under powered.
I mean ... marines have rifles that shoot bullets directly into space ... Something that tiny that doesn't get captured by the gravity of the planet is going to make for one hell of a hard-to-detect much less hard-to-stop-projectile.
Nonetheless, the carriers and battlecruisers in lore would still completely wreck face on planets (even if they lost one or two carriers to freak shots to power centers / distribution and took tons of casualties due to ordinary shots going end-to-end through their ship).
Regardless, none of that matters for game-play. Having a single unit end the game simply isn't fun. I'd argue this is even worse for ground-based units (disruptors, widow mines) than air-based units, but ground-to-air from all three races is significantly lacking and always has been.
I'd say all of these units either suck or are only marginal against air threats:
Which leaves slow, splash damage (HTs, WMs, infestors), cheap, mass-producible options (Marines), or high-impact options (Ghost).
Of those, only marines are actually reliable and mobile enough to be considered "good" versus air units.
It's not that air units are "too good" versus ground -- it's just that all the ground-to-air options are actually horrible.
In regards to the list of units you posted, it really matters what this air threat really means. The only units on that list that truly struggle against all air types are ravagers, sentries and cyclones. Everything else does really well against a certain type of air unit like Thor to muta, or queens to void rays.
Can u please think fast why are u guys not recieving feedback about hydralisk health buff? Let me tell you its very simple: the majority of players are zerg, and of course they are way okay, terrans dont care that much cause there are no hidras vs bio, so only mech players really deal with them (and mech is way okay to care about that. So, the only matchup that really shows the impact is zvp, but guess what, protoss are no longer in this game. PD: I was one
On February 11 2017 03:34 The_Red_Viper wrote: I never liked the widow mine one shotting units like the oracle tbh
And I don't like the fact that widow mines are the only Terran units that have a realistic chance of killing an oracle the Protoss is paying attention to for the first 10 minutes of a game. But that's the world we live in, you're stuck with widow mines that one-shot oracles and I'm stuck with cyclones that couldn't defend my base from overlords, much less kill actual air units.
I mean i don't like the design of the oracle at all, too much dps, etc Still, widow mines one shotting potential harassment is just silly if you think about it. I want the game to reward skill over time, not being lucky the protoss couldn't see the spot. ^^
Same thing i wrote in every previous community update thread from months ago still applies as the developers still leave many unaddressed balance issues in the game in favor of doing things completely irrelevant or flat out wrong like buffing hydras or nerfing more mech units (mines vs P).
So i think people really need to see that it really is MONTHS as usual since the last patch that actually did anything to this game. The rest of the updates are flat out bullshit PR from blizzard and an excuse to not actually iterate and patch their game.
Everything i've written over the past months (and years) still applies today to why SC2 has fallen as an e-sport and will continue to until people start calling out blizzard for their bullshit and get them to replace their lead balance dev with someone that knows the game much better.
On January 17 2017 04:20 avilo wrote: Mech still worse on the "mech patch" than it ever has been. Swarmhosts currently are worse than the old ridiculous swarmhost that took over the game.
Virtually zero mech games at pro level. And if the Z knows about how to abuse swarmhosts it's always a loss.
On January 23 2017 02:46 PharaphobiaSC wrote: No wonder they don't talk to anyone from the community... SC2 might dodged the toxicity bullet (which is being raised Avilo anyway), but it is the most negative community in the gaming industry.
There is nothing that Blizzard can do because it's double edge sword, u satisfy one ppl and 10 other started flaming and being vocal.
At this point I'm glad they keep the money and casual updates rolling. But I would not be suprised that one day someone retired from Blizzard will publicly agrees with me with fact that working with this community which is like 95% negative about anything Blizz came with was "pain in the a*s"
I started playing in late hots, but I still belive the main source of problem for SC2 is the diversed and negative community..
P.S: I'm glad that at least BW guys working together and are somehow united and I wish same thing would happen to SC2 but at this point I almost lost all the hope
I disagree with this, because ever since LotV beta, they have not even had a guiding light for their own game. They aren't working towards a design goal. This isn't growing pains. They have never worked on a solution to the problems. They don't have a long term plan.
They are simply trying to deal with balance issues as they come, and dealing these PR updates every week, disguised as working with the community, when in reality they do whatever they want in the end anyway.
The straw that broke the camels back was in LotV beta when the lead designer straight up said that he chose against the better design of the game in order to please "some people in the community that has a false perception". Its his JOB to give us the best damn design he is capable of. And he intentionally made the choice against doing that.
Since then, they have never came back on track. They promise us major "design" changes, and give us a half baked balance update where most the changes are reverted in the end anyway. They don't have any long term plan at all, and that's destined to fail.
Sorry, but there's no way in hell I'm going to support a development team that does not even take the time to develop a solid plan for the games future. I gave them more money than I should have, and will not be giving them anymore unless they somehow regain strong leadership. This team has proven their not capable. The leader designer did not give us the best design he could, and when that happens, everything else underneath falls apart.
You can say it's just "negativity in the community", but the level of incompetence that this team has shown, is unlike anything I've ever seen out of Blizzard. Ever.
Yep, exactly. It's not the community being negative in response to changes. It's the community responding to terrible change, after change, after change that doesn't impact the game or address blatant issues.
Enough with the SJW: SC2 edition please. If someone is doing a terrible job call them out on it.
Why are swarmhosts not addressed yet after the "mech viability" patch? Invincible nydus? 8 armor ultras left in game for 1+ yr. Warp prism pick-up? Parasitic bomb? Mass ravens? 3 rax reaper?
List goes on. We've gone in circles for years now. Myself, you, others have tried the nice guy lovey dovey approach MANY a time. It falls on deaf ears and every now and then SC2 blizzard will simply put out a "PR community update" that essentially says a whole of of nothing and then they do a whole lot of nothing.
How else should the community respond when the updates/patches are infrequent as hell and when they do come up they always miss the mark every time?
This game has no direction in terms of balance and it hasn't for years. The fact we're all destined to watch the same 16 marine drop game ever since the swarmhost patch proves they have no idea what they're doing and a refusal to listen and acknowledge the problems.
I mean if it wasn't clear enough that they don't want to listen - i was banned from the battle.net forums for posting feedback about 3 rax reaper a while ago because they don't want your feedback or mine anymore. They (meaning dkim?) will patch balance as they see fit, regardless if the entire community wants things like mech viability for years.
That is the honest to god truth. It's depressing, but oh well.
The most recent "huge game update" for "mech viability" made mech worse than it ever has been and should more appropriately be called the "swarm host patch."
A lot of other people that play mech have tried for years to ask for mech viability and this entire last 1-2 months try to get blizzard to acknowledge swarmhosts are ridiculous vs mech atm. Still no word after 3 community updates. How do we even know some of the developers play their own game atm or get feedback from playtesters when they don't even acknowledge how ridiculous swarmhosts are?
On January 20 2017 11:04 avilo wrote: Are people really fine with blizzard completely ignoring the absurdity of swarmhosts and carriers while simultaneously saying they are going to nerf 3 mech units? @_@ i mean come on..."mech viability" right...
On January 20 2017 05:01 avilo wrote: I really just wanna write my post as a one liner and write: "the developers don't play their own game anymore."
But i guess i'll just elaborate as usual and write the same post i have for over 1+ yr now of problems that have not been addressed with the game and the latest problems / balance issues that aren't addressed:
-carriers too strong, interceptor cost needs revert -3 rax reaper coinflip is still in the game for some reason -invulnerable nydus worm still in the game -new swarmhost is ridiculously broken versus both protoss and mech -infestor burrow cast is perma cloak....that needs to be reverted -baneling buff way over the top, unneeded -BC teleport cooldown way too low -tempest still an oppressive lategame unit vs all races -warp prism pick-up range is still too much
Those are issues that need looking at. The priority being swarmhosts and carriers.
It's absurd to me that the update jay wilson I MEAN david kim just put out says nothing about addressing swarmhosts, and then in the same post wants to simultaneously nerf TWO MECH UNITS ROFL.
Mech was made near unplayable on patch 3.8 because of swarmhost/carrier. Now they wanna nerf tanks and mines for no reason? Disgusting.
On January 17 2017 04:20 avilo wrote: Mech still worse on the "mech patch" than it ever has been. Swarmhosts currently are worse than the old ridiculous swarmhost that took over the game.
Virtually zero mech games at pro level. And if the Z knows about how to abuse swarmhosts it's always a loss.
Pretty disappointed.
On December 16 2016 19:20 avilo wrote: Interceptor should be reverted to 25 minerals. Carriers are ridiculous atm.
On December 09 2016 14:51 avilo wrote: Every game vs Zergs that know how to abuse is them massing 100% swarmhost. Not that fun. I have a 75% winrate vs Protoss massing pure swarmhost off 2 base. There is nothing the opponent can do to respond because i swarmhost bomb a base, and then escape thru nydus network and keep doing it till they die.
On December 06 2016 14:09 avilo wrote: Mass ravens and swarmhosts says hello.
On December 05 2016 07:56 avilo wrote: So does anyone know if they are planning to correct this patch and address:
swarmhosts hydralisks vipers infestor burrow cast invincible nydus adept shades warp prisms mass ravens mech anti-air mass reapers
On February 11 2017 03:36 hiroshOne wrote: Aaaand Terran whine about buffing corruptors coming in 3...2...1...
On February 11 2017 03:51 PinoKotsBeer wrote: Making corruptors even faster and better.... Nice, that will help mech and skyterran. So nice that we will see more bio games! so rare to see. Roach ravager into Broodlords will be stronger as well....
LOL just 2 or 3 posts below you. Already see the whine from the race that doesn't deserve to whine about them. PDD and Terran anti-air options (so much options) shut down Corrupters really hard. The worst part of his post is that he thinks he is entitled to mech and skyterran. Mech should NOT be viable. Terrans should not have 30592359x ways to play the game while the other races get 2 or 3.
On February 11 2017 03:51 PinoKotsBeer wrote: Making corruptors even faster and better.... Nice, that will help mech and skyterran. So nice that we will see more bio games! so rare to see. Roach ravager into Broodlords will be stronger as well....
LOL just 2 or 3 posts below you. Already see the whine from the race that doesn't deserve to whine about them. PDD and Terran anti-air options (so much options) shut down Corrupters really hard. The worst part of his post is that he thinks he is entitled to mech and skyterran. Mech should NOT be viable. Terrans should not have 30592359x ways to play the game while the other races get 2 or 3.
Idk man
its mostly bio in 99% of the games I watch
what are the 30592358x other ways to play you are referring to?
While much of the feedback regarding the Widow Mine splash damage reduction has been positive, we also received feedback that pushing that change to live so quickly after making changes to the Liberator might swing the matchup too far in one direction. We will keep an eye on this matchup in the coming weeks to determine if this change should still be implemented.
Oh look, they "Pulled a Blizzard" with SC2 again.
Blaming the community for the reason you don't do a change, even though the community supports it. Why was it are they getting feedback again...?
They can't make it any more obvious that this isn't really about getting feedback from the community, rather it's PR at it's finest.
It really sucks that this is seriously the best Blizzard can give us for one of their flagship game series... All the principals they were built on have vanished.
great stuff, it's a joke how un-maneuverable they've been throughout sc2 comparing a voidray and corruptor side by side the voidray has so much more micro potential and is easier to use. better damage point is going to help so much, and i wouldn't even mind a slight maxspeed increase, too. more to be said but yay for corruptor buff finally
On February 11 2017 03:36 hiroshOne wrote: Aaaand Terran whine about buffing corruptors coming in 3...2...1...
On February 11 2017 03:51 PinoKotsBeer wrote: Making corruptors even faster and better.... Nice, that will help mech and skyterran. So nice that we will see more bio games! so rare to see. Roach ravager into Broodlords will be stronger as well....
LOL just 2 or 3 posts below you. Already see the whine from the race that doesn't deserve to whine about them. PDD and Terran anti-air options (so much options) shut down Corrupters really hard. The worst part of his post is that he thinks he is entitled to mech and skyterran. Mech should NOT be viable. Terrans should not have 30592359x ways to play the game while the other races get 2 or 3.
Idk man
its mostly bio in 99% of the games I watch
what are the 30592358x other ways to play you are referring to?
For example, take ZvT.
Zerg NEEDS banelings and Mutas to combat bio/dropships, and NEEDS Roaches & SH (vs mech units), and NEEDS zerglings no matter what.
Terran only NEEDS Marines regardless of what units Zerg pulls out. Wanna go w/o Marauders? Ok. Wanna go w/o Tanks? ok. Wanna go without Liberators? Ok. Wanna go without Cyclones? Ok. Wanna go without Hellions? Ok.
I can do this all day. Terrans have all the flexibility in the world while the other races are stuck with recycled units and playstyles, yet you guys want even more flexibility and diversity. Judging from your attitude, fairness of the matchup is the least of your worries.
I´m moderately concerned about buffing corruptors for ZvT. Ultralisk are still incredibly strong and the transitions terran have to make to switch from midgame marine mine into lategame ultra counters takes a while because the entire infrastructure is different and you need some time behind units like libs to do this. When the corruptors show up nothing in the terran army at that time is particularly good at killing corruptors before all your air units are gone. Yes a lot of units shoots up but first off they are running backwards away from the zerg ground army, secondly none of them deal a particuarly high amount of damage to corruptors and lastly they all have higher priority targets than corruptors in the middle of battles.
Yes you can fight them with a good amount of ravens and vikings and crush it, but let´s be realistic noone has the starport time or money to have this kind of army for when the first ultra corruptor armies are on the field. And you shouldn´t have it either because it´s absolutely garbage against the zerg midgame armies.
@Parkufarku sorry buddy but you really have no idea what you´re talking about if you think terran can simply mass marines and be okay.
On February 11 2017 03:51 PinoKotsBeer wrote: Making corruptors even faster and better.... Nice, that will help mech and skyterran. So nice that we will see more bio games! so rare to see. Roach ravager into Broodlords will be stronger as well....
LOL just 2 or 3 posts below you. Already see the whine from the race that doesn't deserve to whine about them. PDD and Terran anti-air options (so much options) shut down Corrupters really hard. The worst part of his post is that he thinks he is entitled to mech and skyterran. Mech should NOT be viable. Terrans should not have 30592359x ways to play the game while the other races get 2 or 3.
You have clearly no idea what you are talking about. Also, by discussing stuff or pointing out stuff isnt balance whine its called a discussion. Using the "balance whine" as an argument to shut down every comment that doesnt fit your own perspective is pretty weak.
On February 11 2017 21:31 TheKhyira wrote: I´m moderately concerned about buffing corruptors for ZvT. Ultralisk are still incredibly strong and the transitions terran have to make to switch from midgame marine mine into lategame ultra counters takes a while because the entire infrastructure is different and you need some time behind units like libs to do this. When the corruptors show up nothing in the terran army at that time is particularly good at killing corruptors before all your air units are gone. Yes a lot of units shoots up but first off they are running backwards away from the zerg ground army, secondly none of them deal a particuarly high amount of damage to corruptors and lastly they all have higher priority targets than corruptors in the middle of battles.
Yes you can fight them with a good amount of ravens and vikings and crush it, but let´s be realistic noone has the starport time or money to have this kind of army for when the first ultra corruptor armies are on the field. And you shouldn´t have it either because it´s absolutely garbage against the zerg midgame armies.
@Parkufarku sorry buddy but you really have no idea what you´re talking about if you think terran can simply mass marines and be okay.
I see your point, and you could be right (we aren't there,yet, so nobody knows). Although terran has other late game transitions which counter ultras. Libs are the transition of the 3.7.1 patch, and they were nerfed lately, so may be some terrans will go for other transitions even without the corruptor buff. Siege tanks counter ultras now quite hard, and there is alwas the ghost transition. Some can make marauders work vs Ultras (Ultras were nerfed since 3.7.1, so its an option for terrnas other then Maru). Those are the few which come up into my head now.
I also see some thors now if the zerg goes for a muta ling bane mid game. Buffing the Thor AA vs armored can compensate for the corruptor buff, and I don't think it will buff terran in TvP.
On February 11 2017 03:36 hiroshOne wrote: Aaaand Terran whine about buffing corruptors coming in 3...2...1...
On February 11 2017 03:51 PinoKotsBeer wrote: Making corruptors even faster and better.... Nice, that will help mech and skyterran. So nice that we will see more bio games! so rare to see. Roach ravager into Broodlords will be stronger as well....
LOL just 2 or 3 posts below you. Already see the whine from the race that doesn't deserve to whine about them. PDD and Terran anti-air options (so much options) shut down Corrupters really hard. The worst part of his post is that he thinks he is entitled to mech and skyterran. Mech should NOT be viable. Terrans should not have 30592359x ways to play the game while the other races get 2 or 3.
Idk man
its mostly bio in 99% of the games I watch
what are the 30592358x other ways to play you are referring to?
For example, take ZvT.
Zerg NEEDS banelings and Mutas to combat bio/dropships, and NEEDS Roaches & SH (vs mech units), and NEEDS zerglings no matter what.
Terran only NEEDS Marines regardless of what units Zerg pulls out. Wanna go w/o Marauders? Ok. Wanna go w/o Tanks? ok. Wanna go without Liberators? Ok. Wanna go without Cyclones? Ok. Wanna go without Hellions? Ok.
I can do this all day. Terrans have all the flexibility in the world while the other races are stuck with recycled units and playstyles, yet you guys want even more flexibility and diversity. Judging from your attitude, fairness of the matchup is the least of your worries.
cant we just make the carrier useless ? Its never fun to play nor to play against also fixing the pvz iussue doesnt make pvp any more fun on pocket base maps either T_T
Seems like most of the conversation around this update is on Corruptors. Consensus seems to be that Zerg in general and Corruptors in particular have no need for a buff, and I tend to agree. Zerg is doing great in terms of winrates atm, almost perfectly 50% in both matchups. There's no need to destabilize this equilibrium.
That said, the 50% winrate is basically dependent on whether Protoss can turtle up to the Golden Armada. If they succeed (about half the time), they autowin. If they fail (the other half) they autolose. So the solution, in broad strokes, would seem to be simple: nerf skytoss, buff groundtoss.
Ideally, the buffs would be to the same units that are used against Terran, to boost the winrates in PvT. Immortal or Colossus would be my preference over Gateway units, but I defer to the balance team for implementation.
Of lesser importance, it would be really great if a few broken abilities could be nerfed, like autoturrets and burrowed fungals.
On February 12 2017 13:30 pvsnp wrote: Seems like most of the conversation around this update is on Corruptors. Consensus seems to be that Zerg in general and Corruptors in particular have no need for a buff, and I tend to agree. Zerg is doing great in terms of winrates atm, almost perfectly 50% in both matchups. There's no need to destabilize this equilibrium.
That said, the 50% winrate is basically dependent on whether Protoss can turtle up to the Golden Armada. If they succeed (about half the time), they autowin. If they fail (the other half) they autolose. So the solution, in broad strokes, would seem to be simple: nerf skytoss, buff groundtoss.
Ideally, the buffs would be to the same units that are used against Terran, to boost the winrates in PvT. Immortal or Colossus would be my preference over Gateway units, but I defer to the balance team for implementation.
Of lesser importance, it would be really great if a few broken abilities could be nerfed, like autoturrets and burrowed fungals.
Zerg AA is crap, just because we can win before a certain composition is attained doesn't mean that composition is imba nor is it justification for allowing it into the game.
Remove Carriers from the game for all I care, complete a-move deathball unit, like SC2 really needs anymore of that, especially from Protoss, if buffed Corruptors skew Zerg's win rate too much then perhaps a sensible Gateway unit buff (Like maybe the Stalker? Hello David?) or anything along those lines, Skytoss OP, groundtoss is not so great until shit tons of Immortals and Archons hit the field and then by that time if the Zerg defended the early game pressure it's like, "Hello Archon/Immortal, say hello to Lurker/Broodlord fleet with Crackling run byes".
On February 12 2017 13:30 pvsnp wrote: Seems like most of the conversation around this update is on Corruptors. Consensus seems to be that Zerg in general and Corruptors in particular have no need for a buff, and I tend to agree. Zerg is doing great in terms of winrates atm, almost perfectly 50% in both matchups. There's no need to destabilize this equilibrium.
That said, the 50% winrate is basically dependent on whether Protoss can turtle up to the Golden Armada. If they succeed (about half the time), they autowin. If they fail (the other half) they autolose. So the solution, in broad strokes, would seem to be simple: nerf skytoss, buff groundtoss.
Ideally, the buffs would be to the same units that are used against Terran, to boost the winrates in PvT. Immortal or Colossus would be my preference over Gateway units, but I defer to the balance team for implementation.
Of lesser importance, it would be really great if a few broken abilities could be nerfed, like autoturrets and burrowed fungals.
just my 2 cents here, but the pro matches look wildly different than average ladder matches (for me at least)
tournament games show that protoss is not afraid of mutas and will play robotics on 2-3 bases, going archon or immortal heavy, if z goes mutas they can jst get rolled by a strong push. balance changes should be made with recent GSL games in mind, i think if you are very high skilled P, it unlocks the matchup to be more than just carriers or bust. again just my opinion
edit: i do agree with auto turret nerf, or just removal of this ability and adding in mech repairing skill or something. burrowed fungals are fine imo. infestors feel underwhelming when you compare the cost/apm committments compared to something like ling bane or ravagers
On February 12 2017 13:30 pvsnp wrote: Seems like most of the conversation around this update is on Corruptors. Consensus seems to be that Zerg in general and Corruptors in particular have no need for a buff, and I tend to agree. Zerg is doing great in terms of winrates atm, almost perfectly 50% in both matchups. There's no need to destabilize this equilibrium.
That said, the 50% winrate is basically dependent on whether Protoss can turtle up to the Golden Armada. If they succeed (about half the time), they autowin. If they fail (the other half) they autolose. So the solution, in broad strokes, would seem to be simple: nerf skytoss, buff groundtoss.
Ideally, the buffs would be to the same units that are used against Terran, to boost the winrates in PvT. Immortal or Colossus would be my preference over Gateway units, but I defer to the balance team for implementation.
Of lesser importance, it would be really great if a few broken abilities could be nerfed, like autoturrets and burrowed fungals.
just my 2 cents here, but the pro matches look wildly different than average ladder matches (for me at least)
tournament games show that protoss is not afraid of mutas and will play robotics on 2-3 bases, going archon or immortal heavy, if z goes mutas they can jst get rolled by a strong push. balance changes should be made with recent GSL games in mind, i think if you are very high skilled P, it unlocks the matchup to be more than just carriers or bust. again just my opinion
edit: i do agree with auto turret nerf, or just removal of this ability and adding in mech repairing skill or something. burrowed fungals are fine imo. infestors feel underwhelming when you compare the cost/apm committments compared to something like ling bane or ravagers
1) Swarmhosts are currently ridiculously overpowered versus mech.
This is a fact. You can ask any mech player or even Zerg players themselves, or infested Terrans like myself that play both races. This unit was removed from the game (essentially) for a reason before, and it's because it generates free income.
It needs to be toned down massively. Mech will be viable after that. Increase the price of swarmhosts to double the current price, change swarmhosts to LIGHT TAG so they can be chased down by hellions, and give them less health so that they can be caught and killed.
These nerfs might seem heavyhanded and too many, but this unit honestly does not belong in Starcraft.
2) Along with the above, once swarmhosts are fixed, ravens are the next counter part on the list. Auto-turrets are just as bad as locusts currently, allowing ravens to infinitely scale as they produce free income from energy. My suggestion for this is simply blizzard should increase auto-turret energy to 75 energy.
This fix alone will address ravens without making the unit useless. You'll have to think more carefully about how you allocate energy, since you won't be able to PDD/seeker/mass turret anymore.
3) Tempests/Carriers need to be toned down.
People saying Zerg AA is too weak might not have tried mass burrow neural/fungal + corruptor etc. Zerg AA is fine imo (i play a ton of Zerg) what is not fine are how bullshit carriers are atm. We all know objectively interceptors should be 25 minerals as they originally were, so you can now fungal interceptors or use mines on interceptors to fight the carriers. This alone will fix the carrier issue that everyone knows is a problem, including blizzard.
Just revert interceptors to 25 minerals, and carriers are most likely fixed and not a balance issue anymore.
On February 12 2017 17:06 jpg06051992 wrote: ^ Avilo is speaking the truth, he's talking about nerfing toss, nerfing hosts, and nerfing Ravens, seems pretty unbiased to me.
^^ Strange still no mention by him that Terran BC's are broken. Thank fuck the Koreans havent caught on to it yet
I would be so, so happy to see the corruptor get a nice buff. It is probably one of the most limited unit (function wise) in the entire game atm. This and the hydra buff would make Zerg just so much more stable.
1) redesign the SH into an AoE AA that requires T3 but is really powerfull against air armies, and that attack with scourges 2) remplace the raven's auto turret with a defensive matrix spell that costs 50 energy, nerf the recalibrated explosives upgrade by removing the AoE increase and only keeping the tracking range increase 3) buff the BL back to 11 range and buff the cocoon duration to 18 secs from 24 secs 4) remove parasitic bomb and make abduct unable to target ground massive, but give blinding cloud its 10 secs duration back 5) nerf the BC by giving it a shared 5 second delay when one of the ability is used (if you use yamato, you have to wait 5 secs before using tactical jump, or the other way around, to avoid free damage abuse)
On February 12 2017 16:09 avilo wrote: Ok, time to bring in the real talk here.
1) Swarmhosts are currently ridiculously overpowered versus mech.
This is a fact. You can ask any mech player or even Zerg players themselves, or infested Terrans like myself that play both races. This unit was removed from the game (essentially) for a reason before, and it's because it generates free income.
It needs to be toned down massively. Mech will be viable after that. Increase the price of swarmhosts to double the current price, change swarmhosts to LIGHT TAG so they can be chased down by hellions, and give them less health so that they can be caught and killed.
These nerfs might seem heavyhanded and too many, but this unit honestly does not belong in Starcraft.
2) Along with the above, once swarmhosts are fixed, ravens are the next counter part on the list. Auto-turrets are just as bad as locusts currently, allowing ravens to infinitely scale as they produce free income from energy. My suggestion for this is simply blizzard should increase auto-turret energy to 75 energy.
This fix alone will address ravens without making the unit useless. You'll have to think more carefully about how you allocate energy, since you won't be able to PDD/seeker/mass turret anymore.
3) Tempests/Carriers need to be toned down.
People saying Zerg AA is too weak might not have tried mass burrow neural/fungal + corruptor etc. Zerg AA is fine imo (i play a ton of Zerg) what is not fine are how bullshit carriers are atm. We all know objectively interceptors should be 25 minerals as they originally were, so you can now fungal interceptors or use mines on interceptors to fight the carriers. This alone will fix the carrier issue that everyone knows is a problem, including blizzard.
Just revert interceptors to 25 minerals, and carriers are most likely fixed and not a balance issue anymore.
You forgot to mention that Protoss has no counter to BC/Pdd.
The hydra buff is a very small and good change, that's why there's very little feedback on it.
Little feedback = good, since people will generally only post when they are outraged or super worried about their own gameplay in platinum league.
Corrupter buff would be amazing, Zerg anti-air has been horrendous and zvp has been in this terrible state where protoss air armies in late game have been untouchable since Hots came out...which is now 4 years ago.
On February 12 2017 23:05 Comedy wrote: The hydra buff is a very small and good change, that's why there's very little feedback on it.
Interpreting silence as acknowledgement is of course arbitrary and the height of egoistic ignorance. Every TL user with a forum account who doesn't object to this statement shares this opinion. *Kappa*
It of course makes Z armys a little bit more a-movy, but as armys with hydras are mixed armys of at least roach rave ger and hydras, atm, it is tough to gauge the actual effect of this buff. Nothing if this means it is a good buff. However, it is not quite clear which problem this buff is supposed to solve. In doubt that fact alone makes it a bad patch on the one hand and easy to remove on the other hand
On February 12 2017 13:30 pvsnp wrote: Seems like most of the conversation around this update is on Corruptors. Consensus seems to be that Zerg in general and Corruptors in particular have no need for a buff, and I tend to agree. Zerg is doing great in terms of winrates atm, almost perfectly 50% in both matchups. There's no need to destabilize this equilibrium.
That said, the 50% winrate is basically dependent on whether Protoss can turtle up to the Golden Armada. If they succeed (about half the time), they autowin. If they fail (the other half) they autolose. So the solution, in broad strokes, would seem to be simple: nerf skytoss, buff groundtoss.
Ideally, the buffs would be to the same units that are used against Terran, to boost the winrates in PvT. Immortal or Colossus would be my preference over Gateway units, but I defer to the balance team for implementation.
Of lesser importance, it would be really great if a few broken abilities could be nerfed, like autoturrets and burrowed fungals.
I don't see where you see consensus not to buff corruptors when liquid snute say corruptors buff is a good idea.
And while Zerg winrate isn't 40% on aligulac, the race is the least represent on GSL and have no chance of winning the tournament after the patch 3.8
It's funny that everybody talks about BC's, tempests, lurkers, swarmhosts. And it's fair, cause like me you guys watch streams and those things seem broken. But when we watch the top tier playing I only see A LOT of marines, medivacs liberators, adepts, queens, banelings... Those things yes, are strong and dominant at the matchups as hell.
On February 12 2017 23:05 Comedy wrote: The hydra buff is a very small and good change, that's why there's very little feedback on it.
Interpreting silence as acknowledgement is of course arbitrary and the height of egoistic ignorance. Every TL user with a forum account who doesn't object to this statement shares this opinion. *Kappa*
When it comes to balance updates it's absolutely true. Everyone who is invested and cares about Starcraft reads those, but what triggers people into writing replies? Rage/Whine/disagreement/discontent. The % of people who think 'wow, nice update', and go on about their day not posting is way higher than the people who are upset about an update and think their reply might still hold some power in swaying the general opinion.
It doesn't take excessive research to realize this.
I don't see where you see consensus not to buff corruptors when liquid snute say corruptors buff is a good idea.
Consensus meaning that the majority of the posts regarding Corruptors I have seen say either: 1. This buff won't help Zerg defeat Skytoss. 2. This buff will adversely affect TvZ, which is in a great place rn. Therefore, it's pretty easy to draw the conclusion that: This buff should not go through.
And while Zerg winrate isn't 40% on aligulac, the race is the least represent on GSL and have no chance of winning the tournament after the patch 3.8
It's definitely a shame that there aren't more Zergs in the Ro8, but I fail to see any connection between Dark/ByuL/Solar not making it and the impossibility of winning any tournament ever in the current meta. Sample size is way too small, bracket luck/misfortune plays a big role, and skill at the highest levels is so close that matches can (and do) go either way depending on things so small as what people ate for breakfast.
Just because top Zergs are defeated in a specific tournament in no way implies imbalance across all tournaments.
I don't see where you see consensus not to buff corruptors when liquid snute say corruptors buff is a good idea.
Consensus meaning that the majority of the posts regarding Corruptors I have seen say either: 1. This buff won't help Zerg defeat Skytoss. 2. This buff will adversely affect TvZ, which is in a great place rn. Therefore, it's pretty easy to draw the conclusion that: This buff should not go through.
And while Zerg winrate isn't 40% on aligulac, the race is the least represent on GSL and have no chance of winning the tournament after the patch 3.8
It's definitely a shame that there aren't more Zergs in the Ro8, but I fail to see any connection between Dark/ByuL/Solar not making it and the impossibility of winning any tournament ever in the current meta. Sample size is way too small, bracket luck/misfortune plays a big role, and skill at the highest levels is so close that matches can (and do) go either way depending on things so small as what people ate for breakfast.
Just because top Zergs are defeated in a specific tournament in no way implies imbalance across all tournaments.
1. This buff will help Zerg defeat Skytoss even though Skytoss will remain OP as always. (At least they can run away from storm a little bit faster) 2. This buff won't affect TvZ adversely, which is still terran favoured anyway. Therefore, it's pretty easy to draw the conclusion that: This buff should go through.
1. This buff will help Zerg defeat Skytoss even though Skytoss will remain OP as always. (At least they can run away from storm a little bit faster) 2. This buff won't affect TvZ adversely, which is still terran favoured anyway. Therefore, it's pretty easy to draw the conclusion that: This buff should go through.
I never said it was my logic. It's just what I've seen across most of the posts here/reddit/bnet.
2. This buff won't affect TvZ adversely, which is still terran favoured anyway.
4M vs Muta/Ling/Bane seems quite balanced to me. Just like in the old days of HotS. Also TvZ balance has been +/- 3% of 50% for months now on Aligulac, ever since 3.8.
Terran is certainly favored against Protoss, but Zerg?
1. This buff will help Zerg defeat Skytoss even though Skytoss will remain OP as always. (At least they can run away from storm a little bit faster) 2. This buff won't affect TvZ adversely, which is still terran favoured anyway. Therefore, it's pretty easy to draw the conclusion that: This buff should go through.
I never said it was my logic. It's just what I've seen across most of the posts here/reddit/bnet.
2. This buff won't affect TvZ adversely, which is still terran favoured anyway.
4M vs Muta/Ling/Bane seems quite balanced to me. Just like in the old days of HotS. Also TvZ balance has been +/- 3% of 50% for months now on Aligulac, ever since 3.8.
Terran is certainly favored against Protoss, but Zerg?
Lots of intelligent people have commented to stop using aligulac for balance discussions..
There's so much wrong with it it is ridiculous. Does aligulac account for the fact that there is only 1 good terran in Europe who hasn't even been practicing the last few months (Uthermal)?
I have been seeing some SH plays vP on streams from the likes of Snute and True. Personally I have been trying to incorporate them into vP as well at a lower level. Maybe people should quit bitching about SH and actually try making the units instead of qq-ing.
The corrupter buff is welcomed, but unnecessary. Would a small health buff to the viper break the game? (maybe +5 to 10 health)
Widow mines splash change is great, for PvT mainly.
I like the hydra buff, but I think Zergs will be in a really comfortable place if this goes though (as in slightly OP).
Lots of intelligent people have commented to stop using aligulac for balance discussions..
There's so much wrong with it it is ridiculous. Does aligulac account for the fact that there is only 1 good terran in Europe who hasn't even been practicing the last few months (Uthermal)?
I know. I've read those posts. And in almost all of the intelligent ones (meaning not the counter-whine l2p/i-don't-like-aligulac-when-it-disagrees-with-me ones) they say that Aligulac is a useful but not perfect tool.
I know there are tons of flaws with Aligulac. But is there some mythical perfect algorithm that accounts for player skill, reaction time, thought process, and has all the data on every game ever played?
Aligulac isn't perfect or even close. But it's the best we've got. The alternative is solely basing balance off of totally subjective individual experiences. And if you want that, bnet has plenty of rage threads already.
EDIT: I agree with you that there's a problem with Aligulac and Terran. Specifically that the Koreans have disproportionately dominant Terrans while the rest of the world has disproportionately feeble ones. This problem is only worsened when someone like Innovation goes on a killing spree and triggers a dozen balance whine threads on his own (like he has been recently).
It would be nice if there was a place to check win rates of every major & premier tournaments, its very easy to do as well. http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Premier_Tournaments What i can do is to check every premier tournaments win rates by clicking them one by one. I checked like last 10 premier tournaments and its always terran favoured, some of them drastically. And its been like this even before 3.8. Considering that Aligulac wouldn't lie, i guess there are lots of zerg wins in minor events to cover this imbalance in the statistics.
It would be nice if there was a place to check win rates of every major & premier tournaments, its very easy to do as well. (Wiki)Premier_Tournaments What i can do is to check every premier tournaments win rates by clicking them one by one. I checked like last 10 premier tournaments and its always terran favoured, some of them drastically. And its been like this even before 3.8. Considering that Aligulac wouldn't lie, i guess there are lots of zerg wins in minor events to cover this imbalance in the statistics.
Yeah, that's useful too. But is that really an indication of balance? Tournament stats suffer from the opposite problem of aligulac; instead of too many samples of dubious quality, they have too few samples of high quality.
Like I said in a previous post, who wins in a tournament setting is dependent on a lot of variables besides balance. For instance, Dark was knocked out of GSL yesterday. But he was in the Group of Death. If he had been in Group C or D, perhaps he could go on to win GSL altogether. Bracket luck plays a huge role in who wins tournaments. Not to mention, Classic hardcountered his greedy ling/bane build with great forcefields and splits. Is this an indication of imbalance, or just good play by Classic? The answer is obvious.
Currently Innovation is hailed as the greatest player in the world. Before 3.8, ByuN was called the same. Both of them participate in as many Premier Tournaments as they can, and obviously won a lot of tournament matches. Does this mean their race is imba solely because one player is successful? I hardly think so.
Brackets, skill, builds, all these factors exert great influence over who wins and who loses in tournaments. In the end, taking ~100 games divided over six matchups means that the sample sizes are minuscule. Far too small to draw any meaningful conclusions about balance by relying on Premier Tournaments alone.
I guess my point is: There's no reliable source from which to measure balance. Aligulac and tournaments are handy tools but in the end asserting one race is imbalanced because of subjective interpretation is exactly that: subjective.
1. This buff will help Zerg defeat Skytoss even though Skytoss will remain OP as always. (At least they can run away from storm a little bit faster) 2. This buff won't affect TvZ adversely, which is still terran favoured anyway. Therefore, it's pretty easy to draw the conclusion that: This buff should go through.
I never said it was my logic. It's just what I've seen across most of the posts here/reddit/bnet.
2. This buff won't affect TvZ adversely, which is still terran favoured anyway.
4M vs Muta/Ling/Bane seems quite balanced to me. Just like in the old days of HotS. Also TvZ balance has been +/- 3% of 50% for months now on Aligulac, ever since 3.8.
Terran is certainly favored against Protoss, but Zerg?
4M vs Muta/Bling is not balanced like it was. It can't be as new economy model with more workers at the start favors Terran (Bio is mineral based composition. And second but more important reason is macro nerf that was much more painful for Zerg than for Terran. Mules are almost as strong as they were but 3 larva instead of 4 is huge as it snowballs from early game to late midgame.
4M vs Muta/Bling is not balanced like it was. It can't be as new economy model with more workers at the start favors Terran (Bio is mineral based composition. And second but more important reason is macro nerf that was much more painful for Zerg than for Terran. Mules are almost as strong as they were but 3 larva instead of 4 is huge as it snowballs from early game to late midgame.
Certainly there have been chances from HotS, I'm not saying the MU is exactly the same. But it's not as though Zerg has only received nerfs and Terran only buffs. Marauders have split attacks now, Banes have +5 health, burrowed fungals are a thing, etc.
My point was that TvZ is balanced right now, or as close as any MU is ever going to be. One side is not clearly dominant and, like in HotS, there is enormous micro potential on both sides, so the more skilled player typically wins.
To be sure, at the very top Terrans seem to be doing better right now. Watching GSL, INnoVation is invincible against Zergs, but really, that says more about INnoVation than it does about Zerg. Like Artosis said: "I don't think that TvZ is imbalanced but INnoVation vs Z certainly is."
My point was that TvZ is balanced right now, or as close as any MU is ever going to be. Unlike say TvP one side is not clearly dominant and, like in HotS, there is enormous micro potential on both sides, so the more skilled player typically wins.
The game should be balanced around best players - as they are the only persons who represent what the game really offers. True? Well already above someone mentioned how it looks in premier tournaments - and results are heavily Terran favored. Aligulac - lets look at ratings of best Terran players vs Zerg. Innovation - 2839 Byun - 2730 Maru - 2788 TY 2580
Compared to best Zerg ratings vs Terran Dark - 2532 Solar - 2415 etc. (EU ratings are incomparable to Korea ratings) There is a huge difference which is very apparent. Almost 400 points between best Terran and best Zergs - which clearly indicates the balance is very far off target. If you take 5 best Terrans and 5 best Zergs you will get win ratio of 70-30 in favor of Terran. By the way - herO with a rating of 2736 vs Zerg.(best Zerg vs P rating 2495 is also indicative of a problem)
So no, the game is not balanced and it is very far from being balanced. You may not see this but a minor change like the reaper buff might change the whole MU dramatically, as apart from giving a possibility of a straight win, it gives a huge economic advantage with no plausible counter - unless you consider some wild all-in strategy as a plausible counter.
The game should be balanced around best players - as they are the only persons who represent what the game really offers. True? Well already above someone mentioned how it looks in premier tournaments - and results are heavily Terran favored. Aligulac - lets look at ratings of best Terran players vs Zerg. Innovation - 2839 Byun - 2730 Maru - 2788 TY 2580
Compared to best Zerg ratings vs Terran Dark - 2532 Solar - 2415 etc. (EU ratings are incomparable to Korea ratings) There is a huge difference which is very apparent. Almost 400 points between best Terran and best Zergs - which clearly indicates the balance is very far off target. If you take 5 best Terrans and 5 best Zergs you will get win ratio of 70-30 in favor of Terran. By the way - herO with a rating of 2736 vs Zerg.(best Zerg vs P rating 2495 is also indicative of a problem)
So no, the game is not balanced and it is very far from being balanced. You may not see this but a minor change like the reaper buff might change the whole MU dramatically, as apart from giving a possibility of a straight win, it gives a huge economic advantage with no plausible counter - unless you consider some wild all-in strategy as a plausible counter.
Dude I LITERALLY just finished talking about how Aligulac is flawed. It takes in data from a broad spread of sources (GSL to Masters-level), between players of vastly differing skill (NationWars), and as a result ranks people who play larger quantities of games higher than they ought to be (Nerchio, who plays a lot online, is ranked higher than Dark, who doesn't).
Irony of ironies, a second ago I was defending aligulac as a useful (but flawed) tool and here I am now pointing out that it is a flawed (but useful) one. Don't want to sound tetchy, but c'mon dude, read the previous posts.
I think I have whiplash. Medic!
Oh, and you are making the same mistake I see all the time from balance whiners. Yes, the game should be balanced. Yes, top-level play gives the best indication whether or not the game is balanced. NO the top-level players should NOT always have 50% winrates in all matchups. The more skilled player should consistently win.
Nobody has exactly the same skill at the top; the best Zerg does not equal the best Protoss does not equal the best Terran. If you're telling me Innovation, currently the best player in the world, should be winning 50% of his games otherwise "Terran imba!" then you clearly have no understanding of balance.
So no, the game is not balanced and it is very far from being balanced.
I am not saying the game is balanced. I want to make this clear: I am saying your argument that the game is imbalanced is based on untenable evidence. There is a difference.
Dude I LITERALLY just finished talking about how Aligulac is flawed. It takes in data from a broad spread of sources (GSL to Masters-level), between players of vastly differing skill (NationWars), and as a result ranks people who play larger quantities of games higher than they ought to be (Nerchio, who plays a lot online, is ranked higher than Dark, who doesn't).
Irony of ironies, a second ago I was defending aligulac as a useful (but flawed) tool and here I am now pointing out that it is a flawed (but useful) one. Don't want to sound tetchy, but c'mon dude, read the previous posts.
I read your post and I know it is flawed, especially if you take all results into consideration, like Koreans playing cross server, all EU tournaments where best protoss and terrans do not participate. It is hardly flawed if you only take results of best players from Korea into consideration. The mentioned players do not play in hundreds of tournaments, they mainly play between each other. If you want to look at balance you have to look at results and even if a rating may be a bit off - a difference of several hundred Aligulac points is indicative of balance issues. If this does not help you - take a look at results between the best players, as I did.
If you have a group of players from a given race that is better than the best players from other races by a huge margin - it is nothing less than obvious.
I read your post and I know it is flawed, especially if you take all results into consideration, like Koreans playing cross server, all EU tournaments where best protoss and terrans do not participate. It is hardly flawed if you only take results of best players from Korea into consideration. The mentioned players do not play in hundreds of tournaments, they mainly play between each other. If you want to look at balance you have to look at results and even if a rating may be a bit off - a difference of several hundred Aligulac points is indicative of balance issues. If this does not help you - take a look at results between the best players, as I did.
Ok, if you read my posts, then sorry for getting annoyed.
Still, I disagree that the Aligulac top ten list is valid evidence for imbalance. Dark, for instance, is the best Zerg but he rarely if ever participates in online tourneys. ByuN on the other hand is a great Terran who jumps into nearly every small online cup there is, even the ones in Australia and America. It is only natural that their Aligulac scores place ByuN higher than Dark when their actual skill level is far closer.
Furthermore, if you look only at the best players then you run headlong into the problem I mentioned above. The best of each race are not equals. Sometimes they aren't even close; look at how TY beat Stats in Group A or how Inno beat soO in Group B, those games were laughably one-sided. But does that serve as proof Terran is imbalanced? Hardly.
To claim that people like TY and Innovation are only good because of their race is not only false but grossly insulting to the years of work that they've put into mastering the game. (Not to mention ridiculous in its premise; if players' races were truly the massive crutch that Twitch GMs claim, then why is there only one Dark, or herO, or Innovation?)
I'd like to reiterate: I am not saying the game is balanced. It's entirely possible that Terran is in fact favored in the current meta, and I actually think so myself (to a slight degree). I'm saying that using Aligulac's top ten list doesn't prove imbalance.
On February 12 2017 16:09 avilo wrote: Ok, time to bring in the real talk here.
1) Swarmhosts are currently ridiculously overpowered versus mech.
This is a fact. You can ask any mech player or even Zerg players themselves, or infested Terrans like myself that play both races. This unit was removed from the game (essentially) for a reason before, and it's because it generates free income.
It needs to be toned down massively. Mech will be viable after that. Increase the price of swarmhosts to double the current price, change swarmhosts to LIGHT TAG so they can be chased down by hellions, and give them less health so that they can be caught and killed.
These nerfs might seem heavyhanded and too many, but this unit honestly does not belong in Starcraft.
2) Along with the above, once swarmhosts are fixed, ravens are the next counter part on the list. Auto-turrets are just as bad as locusts currently, allowing ravens to infinitely scale as they produce free income from energy. My suggestion for this is simply blizzard should increase auto-turret energy to 75 energy.
This fix alone will address ravens without making the unit useless. You'll have to think more carefully about how you allocate energy, since you won't be able to PDD/seeker/mass turret anymore.
3) Tempests/Carriers need to be toned down.
People saying Zerg AA is too weak might not have tried mass burrow neural/fungal + corruptor etc. Zerg AA is fine imo (i play a ton of Zerg) what is not fine are how bullshit carriers are atm. We all know objectively interceptors should be 25 minerals as they originally were, so you can now fungal interceptors or use mines on interceptors to fight the carriers. This alone will fix the carrier issue that everyone knows is a problem, including blizzard.
Just revert interceptors to 25 minerals, and carriers are most likely fixed and not a balance issue anymore.
Honestly if Blizzard just implemented everything written here the game would be much better for it. Everyone knows that Swarm Hosts are broken, auto turrets are too strong and interceptors should go back to their old price.
On February 12 2017 16:09 avilo wrote: Ok, time to bring in the real talk here.
1) Swarmhosts are currently ridiculously overpowered versus mech.
This is a fact. You can ask any mech player or even Zerg players themselves, or infested Terrans like myself that play both races. This unit was removed from the game (essentially) for a reason before, and it's because it generates free income.
It needs to be toned down massively. Mech will be viable after that. Increase the price of swarmhosts to double the current price, change swarmhosts to LIGHT TAG so they can be chased down by hellions, and give them less health so that they can be caught and killed.
These nerfs might seem heavyhanded and too many, but this unit honestly does not belong in Starcraft.
2) Along with the above, once swarmhosts are fixed, ravens are the next counter part on the list. Auto-turrets are just as bad as locusts currently, allowing ravens to infinitely scale as they produce free income from energy. My suggestion for this is simply blizzard should increase auto-turret energy to 75 energy.
This fix alone will address ravens without making the unit useless. You'll have to think more carefully about how you allocate energy, since you won't be able to PDD/seeker/mass turret anymore.
3) Tempests/Carriers need to be toned down.
People saying Zerg AA is too weak might not have tried mass burrow neural/fungal + corruptor etc. Zerg AA is fine imo (i play a ton of Zerg) what is not fine are how bullshit carriers are atm. We all know objectively interceptors should be 25 minerals as they originally were, so you can now fungal interceptors or use mines on interceptors to fight the carriers. This alone will fix the carrier issue that everyone knows is a problem, including blizzard.
Just revert interceptors to 25 minerals, and carriers are most likely fixed and not a balance issue anymore.
You forgot to mention that Protoss has no counter to BC/Pdd.
It's called iteration. You change/fix the parameters that are currently showing to be a problem. Once those are addressed, then i agree BCS could be looked at, but not until the current issues are fixed, because those being solved might show that BCS are NOT a problem. Or they may show they ARE a problem.
The SC2 dev team needs to learn iteration though. Make changes that are relevant, then make a new set of changes. They barely make any changes at all, and when they do it's to irrelevant non-sense such as hydralisks.
They need to pin point the core problems like i did in that post above and address those immediately. Everything else is irrelevant until those are fixed.
To claim that people like TY and Innovation are only good because of their race is not only false but grossly insulting to the years of work that they've put into mastering the game.
TY: Prior to his quarterfinals matches, TY was in a losing streak in Proleague, losing four games in a row to Bunny, Maru, ByuL and Trap. Contrary to his rather disappointing previous result, TY won his GSL Ro8 match with a set score of 3-0. His semifinals opponent was Cure. Many expected this series to be closer than his previous series, however TY won with a set score of 4-0, not dropping a single map since Ro8 to go his first finals in 3060 days.
Innovation: In an interview, he mentioned that he saw 2016 as a "year taken off".[5] INnoVation said that he played a lot of League of Legends (after his practicing sessions), and that it affected his focus on the game.
It does not appear Innovation the most focused hard working SC2 player around. But maybe Terran players are just more talented than players from other races who practice consistently hard and who do not have instant surges of form while being semi-retired.
On February 13 2017 07:30 Kafka777 wrote: It does not appear Innovation the most focused hard working SC2 player around. But maybe Terran players are just more talented than players from other races who practice consistently hard and who do not have instant surges of form while being semi-retired.
I don't really know what you're trying to say here. Neither about TY (especially about TY tbh, I'm at a loss there, quoting his LP entry only served to confuse me), nor about INnoVation. While INnoVation essentially "took a year off", he is one of the hardest working players right now. He has played almost 400 tournament games since patch 3.8.0 came out and who knows how many hours of ladder he has streamed and played off-stream.
Im referring to TY's exceptional form - best in 8 years. While Innovation by his own words, did not take the last 12 months very seriously and nevertheless is in the best form of his life. Not unlike many other Terrans at the moment. Im not saying they are bad players - they are exceptionally good, but the patches implemented over the last several months have greatly helped them find themselves in this spot.
On February 13 2017 08:24 Kafka777 wrote: Im referring to TY's exceptional form - best in 8 years. While Innovation by his own words, did not take the last 12 months very seriously and nevertheless is in the best form of his life. Not unlike many other Terrans at the moment. Im not saying they are bad players - they are exceptionally good, but the patches implemented over the last several months have greatly helped them find themselves in this spot.
TY has been a top 3 Terran for all of LotV, certainly the best at times. He's such a very different case from INnoVation who had a terrible first year in LotV and is now back to peak form.
Im referring to TY's exceptional form - best in 8 years. While Innovation by his own words, did not take the last 12 months very seriously and nevertheless is in the best form of his life. Not unlike many other Terrans at the moment. Im not saying they are bad players - they are exceptionally good, but the patches implemented over the last several months have greatly helped them find themselves in this spot.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc. More commonly known as the correlation vs causation fallacy.
Though I am happy to see that you do at least recognize the exceptional skill of players like TY and Innovation.
It does not appear Innovation the most focused hard working SC2 player around. But maybe Terran players are just more talented than players from other races who practice consistently hard and who do not have instant surges of form while being semi-retired.
You don't seem to understand what I've been saying. Aside from the fact that 'hardest work = best results' is obviously false in both Starcraft and life in general, there is still no proof that Terran (vs Zerg) imbalance exists in anything you have said.
Aligulac's top ten don't prove it. You saying so doesn't prove it. Until you have proof, getting outraged at "Terran imba!" is just immature (not to mention premature) whining.
And in case you were wondering what I meant by proof, I meant consistently lopsided results at every level of the matchup, across a sample of thousands of players. ....yknow, the kind that has been exhibited by TvP in the past few months.
On February 13 2017 06:07 Kafka777 wrote: If you have a group of players from a given race that is better than the best players from other races by a huge margin - it is nothing less than obvious.
here some insight from years of watching sc: the best terrans always beat the best zergs
like yeah, you have ur Life's and your Dark's that really do look unbeatable, but the trend in professional sc is that at the highest highs of each of the races, when they go head to head, terran comes out on top (id say like 60+% of the time, assuming tey are evenly matched). its not because teran is wildly imba, its just a design thing that happens when micro becomes perfect, the drones vs units understanding becomes deeper and deeper (ever made a round of lings and then felt like you lost the game because of it? well now Top terrans are reading zergs better and better, and they know the impact of droning vs unit decisions probably, better than most zergs at this point). this is probably even more true in bw than in sc2 tbqh. although i am not playing bw anymore..
remember that these guys have hundreds of thousands of games under their belt. just looking at the unit designs of bw AND sc2 you can tell that the highest levels really are about reads with unit vs drone production, counter attacks, and terrans reads on when there is window, because their units can be so efficient
4M vs Muta/Bling is not balanced like it was. It can't be as new economy model with more workers at the start favors Terran (Bio is mineral based composition. And second but more important reason is macro nerf that was much more painful for Zerg than for Terran. Mules are almost as strong as they were but 3 larva instead of 4 is huge as it snowballs from early game to late midgame.
Certainly there have been chances from HotS, I'm not saying the MU is exactly the same. But it's not as though Zerg has only received nerfs and Terran only buffs. Marauders have split attacks now, Banes have +5 health, burrowed fungals are a thing, etc.
My point was that TvZ is balanced right now, or as close as any MU is ever going to be. One side is not clearly dominant and, like in HotS, there is enormous micro potential on both sides, so the more skilled player typically wins.
To be sure, at the very top Terrans seem to be doing better right now. Watching GSL, INnoVation is invincible against Zergs, but really, that says more about INnoVation than it does about Zerg. Like Artosis said: "I don't think that TvZ is imbalanced but INnoVation vs Z certainly is."
The problem is that u are not looking beyond pure units stats.It's more complicated than that. Marauder attack split doesn't matter for ZvT as it matters for TvP more. Baneling hp buff is gimicky and to be honest i didn't noticed any improvement in egagements as Terran just makes more WM to compensate. Burrowed Funghal might help, but it comes to late. The big problem with ZvT nowadays is LOTV economy model and how Terrans economy is superior vs Zerg when Terran chooses to go BIO. Zerg who chooses counter it with muta/bling will not be as sufficient as he was in HOTS for example. Less larva in early game means slower saturation on your third and slower 4th base. In the same time with more workers at the beginning Terran will have faster first orbital, and faster second orbital and faster mules. That snowballs into faster BIO production. And Zerg in order to counter BIO needs gas, which collection rate did not change at all. Look at the most games- in HOTS when Terran came with push Zerg with muta/bling had solid army and 4th base with at least gas saturation. in LOTV, when Terran comes Zerg just finished his 4th or is just making it. Therefore sustaining 4th base under pressure is nearly impossible for Z. Terran has his 3 orbitals EZ, and on 3 bases he can outproduce Zerg. Indeed with all that changes, Terran is now the one, true Swarm.
So no- TvZ is not balanced at all. It was balanced in HOTS (in BIO+WM vs Muta/Bling) but now it's not. Zerg supposed to have weaker units, but had the ability to make more of them. that's why he had superior economy to sustain production. in LOTV- Zerg still has weaker units but with larva nerf, has weaker macro and weaker economy. Blizzard also made harras muchm ore efficient in LOTV which not helps at all. U must remember that Zerg has 3 recources (not 2 like T and P) the third one is Larva. There is a reason why they say that "Zerg always needs to have 1 base more than opponent".
I hope i helped u to understand the issues. English is not my native, so sorry for mistakes and shit.
On February 12 2017 16:09 avilo wrote: Ok, time to bring in the real talk here.
1) Swarmhosts are currently ridiculously overpowered versus mech.
This is a fact. You can ask any mech player or even Zerg players themselves, or infested Terrans like myself that play both races. This unit was removed from the game (essentially) for a reason before, and it's because it generates free income.
It needs to be toned down massively. Mech will be viable after that. Increase the price of swarmhosts to double the current price, change swarmhosts to LIGHT TAG so they can be chased down by hellions, and give them less health so that they can be caught and killed.
These nerfs might seem heavyhanded and too many, but this unit honestly does not belong in Starcraft.
2) Along with the above, once swarmhosts are fixed, ravens are the next counter part on the list. Auto-turrets are just as bad as locusts currently, allowing ravens to infinitely scale as they produce free income from energy. My suggestion for this is simply blizzard should increase auto-turret energy to 75 energy.
This fix alone will address ravens without making the unit useless. You'll have to think more carefully about how you allocate energy, since you won't be able to PDD/seeker/mass turret anymore.
3) Tempests/Carriers need to be toned down.
People saying Zerg AA is too weak might not have tried mass burrow neural/fungal + corruptor etc. Zerg AA is fine imo (i play a ton of Zerg) what is not fine are how bullshit carriers are atm. We all know objectively interceptors should be 25 minerals as they originally were, so you can now fungal interceptors or use mines on interceptors to fight the carriers. This alone will fix the carrier issue that everyone knows is a problem, including blizzard.
Just revert interceptors to 25 minerals, and carriers are most likely fixed and not a balance issue anymore.
Everyone knows that Swarm Hosts are broken,
A lie repeted multiple times doesn't become a truth
Proposed changes all seem quite good to me, although i primarely speak from a viewers perspective.
Seems to be a step into the right direction. I understand they want to wait a bit ... but i think, it has to come sooner or later. Lib buff doesn't have that much of an impact for the TvP imbalance right now, it's more about early marine/wm/tank pushes, which a lot of even very good toss players can only survive, if luck is heavily on their side.
Regarding GSL / race distribution. Well, i maybe guessing here ... but isn't it possible that there just are NOT as many top tier zerg players in Korea (left) compared to top tier terran und toss players (i honestly had the feeling, toss has been the biggest numbers in the top korean scene for a quite long time)? And would that really be that strange / bad? I think that's a bit typical for all the other regions too ... in europe for example you have a huge pool of extremely strong / top tier zerg players, less top tier toss und even more less top tier terrans. In NA you have more top tier toss players ... and so on. It's a bit diverted in all the regions. So why should we expect a perfect race distribution for korea regarding their top players? Who is saying that the 6 best korean players must be diverted into 2 T, 2 P and 2 Z?
But as some already said, it is no point you can use to truely measure balance with. There can be many reasons why people like or dislike one or the other races. And who knows, maybe even Life has his part that zerg in general isn't that beloved in the korean region. (don't think so personally, but at least there are so much more reasons for people prfer playing terran or toss than just "zerg is underpowered". if zerg would be that underpowered, they wouldn't be that strong in other reagions ...
And you can't forget, korean starcraft 2 scene took quite a beating at the end of last year (although you can argue they just got grounded and are now more comparable to the EU/NA scene). A lot of good players disappeared or switched to other games.
i love those guys pretending to understand balance more than blizzard. They talk big but still don't give any reason of what they said.... cmon go play tetris maybe u chill out a bit. It seems to me that any particular imbalance has always been fixed, in fact the game now looks so balanced, with ofc little adjustments to be done, but nothing disastrous.
Its blizzard that doesnt showcase anything when it comes around. Looking at winrates is pathetic if thats your #1 priority when what should matter overall is the context of said games, how someone wins, how someone loses. What could this player do better in this game?
Does a particular race lack anything mandatory? Can the race scout in time? This player right here, he lost the deathball, could he have microed it better?
You look at everything, it takes time and effort, yes but thats how you do it.
I could give blizzard the benefit of the doubt that they dont show what goes on behind the curtains but why wouldnt blizzard showcase it to us since they are so "open" to us?
On February 14 2017 01:29 junkdrop wrote: i love those guys pretending to understand balance more than blizzard. They talk big but still don't give any reason of what they said.... cmon go play tetris maybe u chill out a bit. It seems to me that any particular imbalance has always been fixed, in fact the game now looks so balanced, with ofc little adjustments to be done, but nothing disastrous.
Tetris is imbalanced, it requires Korean levels of APM to be good at it
Personally I would. be very sad to see widow mine Go. The dmg they got against Protoss allowed Terran to not have to be 10x better than toss to hold off charglot archon, the most a move type army in the game if there is no splash on the other side. It also prity much kills drop playstyles and evrey game will start being about turtleing till you get critical mass than fighting one or two big battles agian. As for those who want mine nerfed because they think it shreds workers to fast. I would say so do orcles, so do dts. Why should terran's worker shreding option be removed in a matchup that has these option from both sides currently? If tank push is a problem I'd much rather see Protoss buffs to help them hold it, they could also use the buffs in Pvz probably.
On February 12 2017 16:09 avilo wrote: Ok, time to bring in the real talk here.
1) Swarmhosts are currently ridiculously overpowered versus mech.
This is a fact. You can ask any mech player or even Zerg players themselves, or infested Terrans like myself that play both races. This unit was removed from the game (essentially) for a reason before, and it's because it generates free income.
It needs to be toned down massively. Mech will be viable after that. Increase the price of swarmhosts to double the current price, change swarmhosts to LIGHT TAG so they can be chased down by hellions, and give them less health so that they can be caught and killed.
These nerfs might seem heavyhanded and too many, but this unit honestly does not belong in Starcraft.
2) Along with the above, once swarmhosts are fixed, ravens are the next counter part on the list. Auto-turrets are just as bad as locusts currently, allowing ravens to infinitely scale as they produce free income from energy. My suggestion for this is simply blizzard should increase auto-turret energy to 75 energy.
This fix alone will address ravens without making the unit useless. You'll have to think more carefully about how you allocate energy, since you won't be able to PDD/seeker/mass turret anymore.
3) Tempests/Carriers need to be toned down.
People saying Zerg AA is too weak might not have tried mass burrow neural/fungal + corruptor etc. Zerg AA is fine imo (i play a ton of Zerg) what is not fine are how bullshit carriers are atm. We all know objectively interceptors should be 25 minerals as they originally were, so you can now fungal interceptors or use mines on interceptors to fight the carriers. This alone will fix the carrier issue that everyone knows is a problem, including blizzard.
Just revert interceptors to 25 minerals, and carriers are most likely fixed and not a balance issue anymore.
Everyone knows that Swarm Hosts are broken,
A lie repeted multiple times doesn't become a truth
when you tell a lie.. keep it simple and keep repeating it.. eventually they'll believe you.
On February 14 2017 03:20 washikie wrote: Personally I would. be very sad to see widow mine Go. The dmg they got against Protoss allowed Terran to not have to be 10x better than toss to hold off charglot archon, the most a move type army in the game if there is no splash on the other side.
On February 12 2017 16:09 avilo wrote: Ok, time to bring in the real talk here.
1) Swarmhosts are currently ridiculously overpowered versus mech.
This is a fact. You can ask any mech player or even Zerg players themselves, or infested Terrans like myself that play both races. This unit was removed from the game (essentially) for a reason before, and it's because it generates free income.
It needs to be toned down massively. Mech will be viable after that. Increase the price of swarmhosts to double the current price, change swarmhosts to LIGHT TAG so they can be chased down by hellions, and give them less health so that they can be caught and killed.
These nerfs might seem heavyhanded and too many, but this unit honestly does not belong in Starcraft.
2) Along with the above, once swarmhosts are fixed, ravens are the next counter part on the list. Auto-turrets are just as bad as locusts currently, allowing ravens to infinitely scale as they produce free income from energy. My suggestion for this is simply blizzard should increase auto-turret energy to 75 energy.
This fix alone will address ravens without making the unit useless. You'll have to think more carefully about how you allocate energy, since you won't be able to PDD/seeker/mass turret anymore.
3) Tempests/Carriers need to be toned down.
People saying Zerg AA is too weak might not have tried mass burrow neural/fungal + corruptor etc. Zerg AA is fine imo (i play a ton of Zerg) what is not fine are how bullshit carriers are atm. We all know objectively interceptors should be 25 minerals as they originally were, so you can now fungal interceptors or use mines on interceptors to fight the carriers. This alone will fix the carrier issue that everyone knows is a problem, including blizzard.
Just revert interceptors to 25 minerals, and carriers are most likely fixed and not a balance issue anymore.
Everyone knows that Swarm Hosts are broken,
A lie repeted multiple times doesn't become a truth
Ignoring an obvious issue doesnt make a balanced game either.
Seriously wtf are you talking about? Is this another one of your troll attempts, considering your post history, or are you just that ignorant? Plenty of players have already approved (besides TL) that Swarmhosts and Ravens are among the most broken Units.
But sure keep posting unproductive comments that lead to nowhere instead of contributing something constructive. Im sure this will make the game more balanced.
I do not like swarmhosts, lousy units that do not fit into the game or Zerg gameplay. But to say they are broken is ludicrous in the current state of the game.
The problem is that u are not looking beyond pure units stats.It's more complicated than that. Marauder attack split doesn't matter for ZvT as it matters for TvP more. Baneling hp buff is gimicky and to be honest i didn't noticed any improvement in egagements as Terran just makes more WM to compensate. Burrowed Funghal might help, but it comes to late. The big problem with ZvT nowadays is LOTV economy model and how Terrans economy is superior vs Zerg when Terran chooses to go BIO. Zerg who chooses counter it with muta/bling will not be as sufficient as he was in HOTS for example. Less larva in early game means slower saturation on your third and slower 4th base. In the same time with more workers at the beginning Terran will have faster first orbital, and faster second orbital and faster mules. That snowballs into faster BIO production. And Zerg in order to counter BIO needs gas, which collection rate did not change at all. Look at the most games- in HOTS when Terran came with push Zerg with muta/bling had solid army and 4th base with at least gas saturation. in LOTV, when Terran comes Zerg just finished his 4th or is just making it. Therefore sustaining 4th base under pressure is nearly impossible for Z. Terran has his 3 orbitals EZ, and on 3 bases he can outproduce Zerg. Indeed with all that changes, Terran is now the one, true Swarm.
So no- TvZ is not balanced at all. It was balanced in HOTS (in BIO+WM vs Muta/Bling) but now it's not. Zerg supposed to have weaker units, but had the ability to make more of them. that's why he had superior economy to sustain production. in LOTV- Zerg still has weaker units but with larva nerf, has weaker macro and weaker economy. Blizzard also made harras muchm ore efficient in LOTV which not helps at all. U must remember that Zerg has 3 recources (not 2 like T and P) the third one is Larva. There is a reason why they say that "Zerg always needs to have 1 base more than opponent".
I hope i helped u to understand the issues. English is not my native, so sorry for mistakes and shit.
Your English is quite good! I have no trouble comprehending your points.
I say this as somebody for whom English is also a second language (though I've spent years studying it at this point).
On February 12 2017 16:09 avilo wrote: Ok, time to bring in the real talk here.
1) Swarmhosts are currently ridiculously overpowered versus mech.
This is a fact. You can ask any mech player or even Zerg players themselves, or infested Terrans like myself that play both races. This unit was removed from the game (essentially) for a reason before, and it's because it generates free income.
It needs to be toned down massively. Mech will be viable after that. Increase the price of swarmhosts to double the current price, change swarmhosts to LIGHT TAG so they can be chased down by hellions, and give them less health so that they can be caught and killed.
These nerfs might seem heavyhanded and too many, but this unit honestly does not belong in Starcraft.
2) Along with the above, once swarmhosts are fixed, ravens are the next counter part on the list. Auto-turrets are just as bad as locusts currently, allowing ravens to infinitely scale as they produce free income from energy. My suggestion for this is simply blizzard should increase auto-turret energy to 75 energy.
This fix alone will address ravens without making the unit useless. You'll have to think more carefully about how you allocate energy, since you won't be able to PDD/seeker/mass turret anymore.
3) Tempests/Carriers need to be toned down.
People saying Zerg AA is too weak might not have tried mass burrow neural/fungal + corruptor etc. Zerg AA is fine imo (i play a ton of Zerg) what is not fine are how bullshit carriers are atm. We all know objectively interceptors should be 25 minerals as they originally were, so you can now fungal interceptors or use mines on interceptors to fight the carriers. This alone will fix the carrier issue that everyone knows is a problem, including blizzard.
Just revert interceptors to 25 minerals, and carriers are most likely fixed and not a balance issue anymore.
Everyone knows that Swarm Hosts are broken,
A lie repeted multiple times doesn't become a truth
Ignoring an obvious issue doesnt make a balanced game either.
Seriously wtf are you talking about? Is this another one of your troll attempts, considering your post history, or are you just that ignorant? Plenty of players have already approved (besides TL) that Swarmhosts and Ravens are among the most broken Units.
But sure keep posting unproductive comments that lead to nowhere instead of contributing something constructive. Im sure this will make the game more balanced.
Who agree with that ? Avilo, you, platium/diamond terrans ?
The unit has a huge supply, and is useless most of the time, between 15 SH and 90 zerglings/banelings, i obviously choose 90 zerglings, even vs mech (with upgrades when you avoid the hellbat they are surprising good vs thor/tanks/cyclon) Mutas, faster hive for vipers/broodlords, all of that is better than building SH...
How you explain Gumiho, Innovation, TY manage to play mech (it's not me that say that it's Scarlett) while it's "it's not viable"... SH is niche unit, it's barely viable vs mech while completly useless vs the rest, but well it's me the troll while you call it "Broken overpowered units"
Do play zerg, play this "imba "unit, you'll probably crush every mech player, or not...
It's your personnal opinion, not an universally truth like you pretend, so yeah i disagree, insult me, bully me if you want, i won't cede because some other people think like you.
Your English is quite good! I have no trouble comprehending your points.
I say this as somebody for whom English is also a second language (though I've spent years studying it at this point).
No input, irony, beside the topic, we are talking about updates here.... you will get yourself banned for this. Let's hope the next updates are better :-)
On February 12 2017 16:09 avilo wrote: Ok, time to bring in the real talk here.
1) Swarmhosts are currently ridiculously overpowered versus mech.
This is a fact. You can ask any mech player or even Zerg players themselves, or infested Terrans like myself that play both races. This unit was removed from the game (essentially) for a reason before, and it's because it generates free income.
It needs to be toned down massively. Mech will be viable after that. Increase the price of swarmhosts to double the current price, change swarmhosts to LIGHT TAG so they can be chased down by hellions, and give them less health so that they can be caught and killed.
These nerfs might seem heavyhanded and too many, but this unit honestly does not belong in Starcraft.
2) Along with the above, once swarmhosts are fixed, ravens are the next counter part on the list. Auto-turrets are just as bad as locusts currently, allowing ravens to infinitely scale as they produce free income from energy. My suggestion for this is simply blizzard should increase auto-turret energy to 75 energy.
This fix alone will address ravens without making the unit useless. You'll have to think more carefully about how you allocate energy, since you won't be able to PDD/seeker/mass turret anymore.
3) Tempests/Carriers need to be toned down.
People saying Zerg AA is too weak might not have tried mass burrow neural/fungal + corruptor etc. Zerg AA is fine imo (i play a ton of Zerg) what is not fine are how bullshit carriers are atm. We all know objectively interceptors should be 25 minerals as they originally were, so you can now fungal interceptors or use mines on interceptors to fight the carriers. This alone will fix the carrier issue that everyone knows is a problem, including blizzard.
Just revert interceptors to 25 minerals, and carriers are most likely fixed and not a balance issue anymore.
Everyone knows that Swarm Hosts are broken,
A lie repeted multiple times doesn't become a truth
Ignoring an obvious issue doesnt make a balanced game either.
Seriously wtf are you talking about? Is this another one of your troll attempts, considering your post history, or are you just that ignorant? Plenty of players have already approved (besides TL) that Swarmhosts and Ravens are among the most broken Units.
But sure keep posting unproductive comments that lead to nowhere instead of contributing something constructive. Im sure this will make the game more balanced.
Who agree with that ? Avilo, you, platium/diamond terrans ?
The unit has a huge supply, and is useless most of the time, between 15 SH and 90 zerglings/banelings, i obviously choose 90 zerglings, even vs mech (with upgrades when you avoid the hellbat they are surprising good vs thor/tanks/cyclon) Mutas, faster hive for vipers/broodlords, all of that is better than building SH...
How you explain Gumiho, Innovation, TY manage to play mech (it's not me that say that it's Scarlett) while it's "it's not viable"... SH is niche unit, it's barely viable vs mech while completly useless vs the rest, but well it's me the troll while you call it "Broken overpowered units"
Do play zerg, play this "imba "unit, you'll probably crush every mech player, or not...
It's your personnal opinion, not an universally truth like you pretend, so yeah i disagree, insult me, bully me if you want, i won't cede because some other people think like you.
Just because you are bad at using it doesn´t make it any less broken. I know what Scarlett said but just because ONE pro player says THREE other pro players can make it work doesn´t make it viable either. And btw I called it "Broken Unit" not "broken overpowered Unit" thats a difference.
Of course Ignorant Zerg players like you are gonna defend this unit because they are scared their freewins will get taken away from them. But hey we are at a point where people call others "ludicrous" because they want something broken fixed, man this community...no wonder this game is such a mess right now.
And thanks for the "barely viable vs Mech", had a good laugh out of that XD.
I'd like to see the widow mine retooled to fire multiple projectiles. The idea of it is kind of dumb. It's very much a suicide unit in that it either does damage, or it dies, and mostly dies after doing damage.
It should fire multiple longer ranged projectiles that do significantly less damage, but if all hit the same target it will do significant damage. Have it so if your unit walks out of A lock on range the follow up shots aimed at the current target lose lock and explode at the spot the unit walked out of range.
This significantly reduces alpha damage, bs reload times that make the unit useless for long periods after a shot, maybe allow us to remove the bs reveal mechanic. They can retain a much more limited splash area, meaning they don't just wipe out an army. single shots become much harder to bait and waste during early game aggression against Terran. Mine drops become less devastating.
Blizz - why did you employ DK - Coz he was needed at the time. and speaks korean Blizz - How is balance - ask DK but DK has no clue about balance/ he is complacent and does not want to change anything, it would cost money and prove other decisions were wrong Blizz The game should be balanced like chess - DK over my dead body, fuck you
No input, irony, beside the topic, we are talking about updates here.... you will get yourself banned for this. Let's hope the next updates are better :-)
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Can't even be a decent guy without somebody getting on your case. The Internet, smh.
On the subject of balance, I have to agree that Blizzard should really take a look at some of the more egregious abilities before trying to address everything else. Raven autoturrets, Reaper grenades, burrowed fungals, PO, etc should really be redesigned/replaced/repurposed before we worry about things like Corruptor speed. These topics seem to regularly come up every time a new update is released, but still no acknowledgement from Blizzard. If they disagree with the community, would it be too much to ask for a simple "we don't think x is the problem, but we will keep an eye on it" sort of message? Instead of just ignoring it altogether?
On February 12 2017 16:09 avilo wrote: Ok, time to bring in the real talk here.
1) Swarmhosts are currently ridiculously overpowered versus mech.
This is a fact. You can ask any mech player or even Zerg players themselves, or infested Terrans like myself that play both races. This unit was removed from the game (essentially) for a reason before, and it's because it generates free income.
It needs to be toned down massively. Mech will be viable after that. Increase the price of swarmhosts to double the current price, change swarmhosts to LIGHT TAG so they can be chased down by hellions, and give them less health so that they can be caught and killed.
These nerfs might seem heavyhanded and too many, but this unit honestly does not belong in Starcraft.
2) Along with the above, once swarmhosts are fixed, ravens are the next counter part on the list. Auto-turrets are just as bad as locusts currently, allowing ravens to infinitely scale as they produce free income from energy. My suggestion for this is simply blizzard should increase auto-turret energy to 75 energy.
This fix alone will address ravens without making the unit useless. You'll have to think more carefully about how you allocate energy, since you won't be able to PDD/seeker/mass turret anymore.
3) Tempests/Carriers need to be toned down.
People saying Zerg AA is too weak might not have tried mass burrow neural/fungal + corruptor etc. Zerg AA is fine imo (i play a ton of Zerg) what is not fine are how bullshit carriers are atm. We all know objectively interceptors should be 25 minerals as they originally were, so you can now fungal interceptors or use mines on interceptors to fight the carriers. This alone will fix the carrier issue that everyone knows is a problem, including blizzard.
Just revert interceptors to 25 minerals, and carriers are most likely fixed and not a balance issue anymore.
Everyone knows that Swarm Hosts are broken,
A lie repeted multiple times doesn't become a truth
Ignoring an obvious issue doesnt make a balanced game either.
Seriously wtf are you talking about? Is this another one of your troll attempts, considering your post history, or are you just that ignorant? Plenty of players have already approved (besides TL) that Swarmhosts and Ravens are among the most broken Units.
But sure keep posting unproductive comments that lead to nowhere instead of contributing something constructive. Im sure this will make the game more balanced.
Who agree with that ? Avilo, you, platium/diamond terrans ?
The unit has a huge supply, and is useless most of the time, between 15 SH and 90 zerglings/banelings, i obviously choose 90 zerglings, even vs mech (with upgrades when you avoid the hellbat they are surprising good vs thor/tanks/cyclon) Mutas, faster hive for vipers/broodlords, all of that is better than building SH...
How you explain Gumiho, Innovation, TY manage to play mech (it's not me that say that it's Scarlett) while it's "it's not viable"... SH is niche unit, it's barely viable vs mech while completly useless vs the rest, but well it's me the troll while you call it "Broken overpowered units"
Do play zerg, play this "imba "unit, you'll probably crush every mech player, or not...
It's your personnal opinion, not an universally truth like you pretend, so yeah i disagree, insult me, bully me if you want, i won't cede because some other people think like you.
Just because you are bad at using it doesn´t make it any less broken. I know what Scarlett said but just because ONE pro player says THREE other pro players can make it work doesn´t make it viable either. And btw I called it "Broken Unit" not "broken overpowered Unit" thats a difference.
Of course Ignorant Zerg players like you are gonna defend this unit because they are scared their freewins will get taken away from them. But hey we are at a point where people call others "ludicrous" because they want something broken fixed, man this community...no wonder this game is such a mess right now.
And thanks for the "barely viable vs Mech", had a good laugh out of that XD.
Who is your three pro players ? Quote them, if there are real... But no, it's just things you invent...
And please don't say avilo, and co, there are not pro players, they don't win any tournaments, they're not professionnal, and they whine long before SH exists...
So i don't use SH because i'm bad, but i defend them because they give me free wins lol ? You contradict yourself, big proof your arguments are false.
You know what will happened if Mech become OP ? Zerg will leave the game, that's all.
We've already had a few days ago a topic from a GM terran playing mech (which is not viable according to you) that was complaining he played too many TvT...
Must be so glad to play TvT as "It's the only MU where mech is viable", and "Mech is so good for the game", but apparently no... what a surprise !
Protoss have nearly all left the game, Zerg still stays but between the "Double medivac drops" "3 rax reapers" "cyclon-hellion" everygame, and the "All-in before skytoss", Zerg players are really close to the exit, push them and well, i hope TvT is your favorite MU.
On February 11 2017 11:22 Kokujin wrote: i like that suggestion earlier about balancing around similar apm=similar advantages for all races.
I disagree. A style/race requires more or less repetitive/mindless actions, which may certainly be different from smart decision making involved. Plus the how-to-measure-APM has never truly been solved. SC is not just a mechanical game. It's about decision making too. Just not a solution.
I actually like all of this. Though, I think hydra buff should go through. I think the mech qq about the hydras is a little overstated... corrupters don't fully counter mech how they do v skytoss. And the hydra health buff is pretty laughable for tanks, but slightly more important vs bio (which might actually open up more interesting possibilities for mech games)
On February 12 2017 16:09 avilo wrote: Ok, time to bring in the real talk here.
1) Swarmhosts are currently ridiculously overpowered versus mech.
This is a fact. You can ask any mech player or even Zerg players themselves, or infested Terrans like myself that play both races. This unit was removed from the game (essentially) for a reason before, and it's because it generates free income.
It needs to be toned down massively. Mech will be viable after that. Increase the price of swarmhosts to double the current price, change swarmhosts to LIGHT TAG so they can be chased down by hellions, and give them less health so that they can be caught and killed.
These nerfs might seem heavyhanded and too many, but this unit honestly does not belong in Starcraft.
2) Along with the above, once swarmhosts are fixed, ravens are the next counter part on the list. Auto-turrets are just as bad as locusts currently, allowing ravens to infinitely scale as they produce free income from energy. My suggestion for this is simply blizzard should increase auto-turret energy to 75 energy.
This fix alone will address ravens without making the unit useless. You'll have to think more carefully about how you allocate energy, since you won't be able to PDD/seeker/mass turret anymore.
3) Tempests/Carriers need to be toned down.
People saying Zerg AA is too weak might not have tried mass burrow neural/fungal + corruptor etc. Zerg AA is fine imo (i play a ton of Zerg) what is not fine are how bullshit carriers are atm. We all know objectively interceptors should be 25 minerals as they originally were, so you can now fungal interceptors or use mines on interceptors to fight the carriers. This alone will fix the carrier issue that everyone knows is a problem, including blizzard.
Just revert interceptors to 25 minerals, and carriers are most likely fixed and not a balance issue anymore.
Everyone knows that Swarm Hosts are broken,
A lie repeted multiple times doesn't become a truth
Ignoring an obvious issue doesnt make a balanced game either.
Seriously wtf are you talking about? Is this another one of your troll attempts, considering your post history, or are you just that ignorant? Plenty of players have already approved (besides TL) that Swarmhosts and Ravens are among the most broken Units.
But sure keep posting unproductive comments that lead to nowhere instead of contributing something constructive. Im sure this will make the game more balanced.
Who agree with that ? Avilo, you, platium/diamond terrans ?
The unit has a huge supply, and is useless most of the time, between 15 SH and 90 zerglings/banelings, i obviously choose 90 zerglings, even vs mech (with upgrades when you avoid the hellbat they are surprising good vs thor/tanks/cyclon) Mutas, faster hive for vipers/broodlords, all of that is better than building SH...
How you explain Gumiho, Innovation, TY manage to play mech (it's not me that say that it's Scarlett) while it's "it's not viable"... SH is niche unit, it's barely viable vs mech while completly useless vs the rest, but well it's me the troll while you call it "Broken overpowered units"
Do play zerg, play this "imba "unit, you'll probably crush every mech player, or not...
It's your personnal opinion, not an universally truth like you pretend, so yeah i disagree, insult me, bully me if you want, i won't cede because some other people think like you.
Just because you are bad at using it doesn´t make it any less broken. I know what Scarlett said but just because ONE pro player says THREE other pro players can make it work doesn´t make it viable either. And btw I called it "Broken Unit" not "broken overpowered Unit" thats a difference.
Of course Ignorant Zerg players like you are gonna defend this unit because they are scared their freewins will get taken away from them. But hey we are at a point where people call others "ludicrous" because they want something broken fixed, man this community...no wonder this game is such a mess right now.
And thanks for the "barely viable vs Mech", had a good laugh out of that XD.
Who is your three pro players ? Quote them, if there are real... But no, it's just things you invent...
And please don't say avilo, and co, there are not pro players, they don't win any tournaments, they're not professionnal, and they whine long before SH exists...
So i don't use SH because i'm bad, but i defend them because they give me free wins lol ? You contradict yourself, big proof your arguments are false.
You know what will happened if Mech become OP ? Zerg will leave the game, that's all.
We've already had a few days ago a topic from a GM terran playing mech (which is not viable according to you) that was complaining he played too many TvT...
Must be so glad to play TvT as "It's the only MU where mech is viable", and "Mech is so good for the game", but apparently no... what a surprise !
Protoss have nearly all left the game, Zerg still stays but between the "Double medivac drops" "3 rax reapers" "cyclon-hellion" everygame, and the "All-in before skytoss", Zerg players are really close to the exit, push them and well, i hope TvT is your favorite MU.
You mention Gumiho, Innovation and TY yourself. Then you say "who are these three players"... -_- . Yeah you are deinetly trolling considering your posting history. Not wasting my energy and time with Ignorant biased Zerg players like you anymore. And stop putting words in our mouth. We dont want Mech to be OP. We want it to be viable to a point where even pro players use it. As an actual strategy that is. Not as an gimmicky all-in tactic that only works because the opponent got caught by surprise. We get it. You don´t like Mech like many Zerg players and therefore it shouldn´t be played or be viable. Nice logic.
On February 12 2017 16:09 avilo wrote: Ok, time to bring in the real talk here.
1) Swarmhosts are currently ridiculously overpowered versus mech.
This is a fact. You can ask any mech player or even Zerg players themselves, or infested Terrans like myself that play both races. This unit was removed from the game (essentially) for a reason before, and it's because it generates free income.
It needs to be toned down massively. Mech will be viable after that. Increase the price of swarmhosts to double the current price, change swarmhosts to LIGHT TAG so they can be chased down by hellions, and give them less health so that they can be caught and killed.
These nerfs might seem heavyhanded and too many, but this unit honestly does not belong in Starcraft.
2) Along with the above, once swarmhosts are fixed, ravens are the next counter part on the list. Auto-turrets are just as bad as locusts currently, allowing ravens to infinitely scale as they produce free income from energy. My suggestion for this is simply blizzard should increase auto-turret energy to 75 energy.
This fix alone will address ravens without making the unit useless. You'll have to think more carefully about how you allocate energy, since you won't be able to PDD/seeker/mass turret anymore.
3) Tempests/Carriers need to be toned down.
People saying Zerg AA is too weak might not have tried mass burrow neural/fungal + corruptor etc. Zerg AA is fine imo (i play a ton of Zerg) what is not fine are how bullshit carriers are atm. We all know objectively interceptors should be 25 minerals as they originally were, so you can now fungal interceptors or use mines on interceptors to fight the carriers. This alone will fix the carrier issue that everyone knows is a problem, including blizzard.
Just revert interceptors to 25 minerals, and carriers are most likely fixed and not a balance issue anymore.
Everyone knows that Swarm Hosts are broken,
A lie repeted multiple times doesn't become a truth
Ignoring an obvious issue doesnt make a balanced game either.
Seriously wtf are you talking about? Is this another one of your troll attempts, considering your post history, or are you just that ignorant? Plenty of players have already approved (besides TL) that Swarmhosts and Ravens are among the most broken Units.
But sure keep posting unproductive comments that lead to nowhere instead of contributing something constructive. Im sure this will make the game more balanced.
Who agree with that ? Avilo, you, platium/diamond terrans ?
The unit has a huge supply, and is useless most of the time, between 15 SH and 90 zerglings/banelings, i obviously choose 90 zerglings, even vs mech (with upgrades when you avoid the hellbat they are surprising good vs thor/tanks/cyclon) Mutas, faster hive for vipers/broodlords, all of that is better than building SH...
How you explain Gumiho, Innovation, TY manage to play mech (it's not me that say that it's Scarlett) while it's "it's not viable"... SH is niche unit, it's barely viable vs mech while completly useless vs the rest, but well it's me the troll while you call it "Broken overpowered units"
Do play zerg, play this "imba "unit, you'll probably crush every mech player, or not...
It's your personnal opinion, not an universally truth like you pretend, so yeah i disagree, insult me, bully me if you want, i won't cede because some other people think like you.
Just because you are bad at using it doesn´t make it any less broken. I know what Scarlett said but just because ONE pro player says THREE other pro players can make it work doesn´t make it viable either. And btw I called it "Broken Unit" not "broken overpowered Unit" thats a difference.
Of course Ignorant Zerg players like you are gonna defend this unit because they are scared their freewins will get taken away from them. But hey we are at a point where people call others "ludicrous" because they want something broken fixed, man this community...no wonder this game is such a mess right now.
And thanks for the "barely viable vs Mech", had a good laugh out of that XD.
Who is your three pro players ? Quote them, if there are real... But no, it's just things you invent...
And please don't say avilo, and co, there are not pro players, they don't win any tournaments, they're not professionnal, and they whine long before SH exists...
So i don't use SH because i'm bad, but i defend them because they give me free wins lol ? You contradict yourself, big proof your arguments are false.
You know what will happened if Mech become OP ? Zerg will leave the game, that's all.
We've already had a few days ago a topic from a GM terran playing mech (which is not viable according to you) that was complaining he played too many TvT...
Must be so glad to play TvT as "It's the only MU where mech is viable", and "Mech is so good for the game", but apparently no... what a surprise !
Protoss have nearly all left the game, Zerg still stays but between the "Double medivac drops" "3 rax reapers" "cyclon-hellion" everygame, and the "All-in before skytoss", Zerg players are really close to the exit, push them and well, i hope TvT is your favorite MU.
You mention Gumiho, Innovation and TY yourself. Then you say "who are these three players"... -_- . Yeah you are deinetly trolling considering your posting history. Not wasting my energy and time with Ignorant biased Zerg players like you anymore. And stop putting words in our mouth. We dont want Mech to be OP. We want it to be viable to a point where even pro players use it. As an actual strategy that is. Not as an gimmicky all-in tactic that only works because the opponent got caught by surprise. We get it. You don´t like Mech like many Zerg players and therefore it shouldn´t be played or be viable. Nice logic.
And pro players are playing mech on ladder, so what is the problem?
But yeah people prefer playing bio in tournaments because that is what they have played for the past years and have a lot of experience with. Zergs in korea don't even stand a chance vs the top Terrans atm, because bio is so strong.
They are not gonna play mech unless you make it stronger then bio, they just have so much more experience with bio that it's just not worth the risk.
But keep whining about a problem that isn't there, mech is perfectly viable on ladder, even in GM.
Funny how most of the Zerg players keeps saying its viable and dismiss it as whining while lots of Terran players say the opposite. What are you guys afraid of? If it´s done right there wont be an Swarhost/Raven era like in HotS. But you guys rather still mention that it´s perfectly viable cause you saw a handful of players won a handful of games with it.
Just give zerg a better option for combatting airtoss without breaking z v t. Whether its hydras or corruptors or increasing viper bomb dmg vs shields.
On February 12 2017 16:09 avilo wrote: Ok, time to bring in the real talk here.
1) Swarmhosts are currently ridiculously overpowered versus mech.
This is a fact. You can ask any mech player or even Zerg players themselves, or infested Terrans like myself that play both races. This unit was removed from the game (essentially) for a reason before, and it's because it generates free income.
It needs to be toned down massively. Mech will be viable after that. Increase the price of swarmhosts to double the current price, change swarmhosts to LIGHT TAG so they can be chased down by hellions, and give them less health so that they can be caught and killed.
These nerfs might seem heavyhanded and too many, but this unit honestly does not belong in Starcraft.
2) Along with the above, once swarmhosts are fixed, ravens are the next counter part on the list. Auto-turrets are just as bad as locusts currently, allowing ravens to infinitely scale as they produce free income from energy. My suggestion for this is simply blizzard should increase auto-turret energy to 75 energy.
This fix alone will address ravens without making the unit useless. You'll have to think more carefully about how you allocate energy, since you won't be able to PDD/seeker/mass turret anymore.
3) Tempests/Carriers need to be toned down.
People saying Zerg AA is too weak might not have tried mass burrow neural/fungal + corruptor etc. Zerg AA is fine imo (i play a ton of Zerg) what is not fine are how bullshit carriers are atm. We all know objectively interceptors should be 25 minerals as they originally were, so you can now fungal interceptors or use mines on interceptors to fight the carriers. This alone will fix the carrier issue that everyone knows is a problem, including blizzard.
Just revert interceptors to 25 minerals, and carriers are most likely fixed and not a balance issue anymore.
Everyone knows that Swarm Hosts are broken,
A lie repeted multiple times doesn't become a truth
Ignoring an obvious issue doesnt make a balanced game either.
Seriously wtf are you talking about? Is this another one of your troll attempts, considering your post history, or are you just that ignorant? Plenty of players have already approved (besides TL) that Swarmhosts and Ravens are among the most broken Units.
But sure keep posting unproductive comments that lead to nowhere instead of contributing something constructive. Im sure this will make the game more balanced.
Who agree with that ? Avilo, you, platium/diamond terrans ?
The unit has a huge supply, and is useless most of the time, between 15 SH and 90 zerglings/banelings, i obviously choose 90 zerglings, even vs mech (with upgrades when you avoid the hellbat they are surprising good vs thor/tanks/cyclon) Mutas, faster hive for vipers/broodlords, all of that is better than building SH...
How you explain Gumiho, Innovation, TY manage to play mech (it's not me that say that it's Scarlett) while it's "it's not viable"... SH is niche unit, it's barely viable vs mech while completly useless vs the rest, but well it's me the troll while you call it "Broken overpowered units"
Do play zerg, play this "imba "unit, you'll probably crush every mech player, or not...
It's your personnal opinion, not an universally truth like you pretend, so yeah i disagree, insult me, bully me if you want, i won't cede because some other people think like you.
Just because you are bad at using it doesn´t make it any less broken. I know what Scarlett said but just because ONE pro player says THREE other pro players can make it work doesn´t make it viable either. And btw I called it "Broken Unit" not "broken overpowered Unit" thats a difference.
Of course Ignorant Zerg players like you are gonna defend this unit because they are scared their freewins will get taken away from them. But hey we are at a point where people call others "ludicrous" because they want something broken fixed, man this community...no wonder this game is such a mess right now.
And thanks for the "barely viable vs Mech", had a good laugh out of that XD.
Who is your three pro players ? Quote them, if there are real... But no, it's just things you invent...
And please don't say avilo, and co, there are not pro players, they don't win any tournaments, they're not professionnal, and they whine long before SH exists...
So i don't use SH because i'm bad, but i defend them because they give me free wins lol ? You contradict yourself, big proof your arguments are false.
You know what will happened if Mech become OP ? Zerg will leave the game, that's all.
We've already had a few days ago a topic from a GM terran playing mech (which is not viable according to you) that was complaining he played too many TvT...
Must be so glad to play TvT as "It's the only MU where mech is viable", and "Mech is so good for the game", but apparently no... what a surprise !
Protoss have nearly all left the game, Zerg still stays but between the "Double medivac drops" "3 rax reapers" "cyclon-hellion" everygame, and the "All-in before skytoss", Zerg players are really close to the exit, push them and well, i hope TvT is your favorite MU.
You mention Gumiho, Innovation and TY yourself. Then you say "who are these three players"... -_- . Yeah you are deinetly trolling considering your posting history. Not wasting my energy and time with Ignorant biased Zerg players like you anymore. And stop putting words in our mouth. We dont want Mech to be OP. We want it to be viable to a point where even pro players use it. As an actual strategy that is. Not as an gimmicky all-in tactic that only works because the opponent got caught by surprise. We get it. You don´t like Mech like many Zerg players and therefore it shouldn´t be played or be viable. Nice logic.
I mention they play mech, proving it's viable, never heard them said something about "SH is broken"...
Your speech is so confuse, and there is nothing convincing so you use multiple insults to try to make a point...
I don't understand why they didn't go with +1 armor on the hydra instead of the +10 hp. It make hydra better vs T where they are currently unsable and better vs carriers which are considered OP vs Z while not buffing it significantly in all other situations vs P where hydra are considered already good.
+10 hp on the other hand make hydra generically more good vs P where it is already good but is worse than +1 armor vs carriers which are considered problematic in the MU.
On February 15 2017 20:08 Aegwynn wrote: Ryung 2 - 1 Leenock, two solid wins with mech. But mech is not viable guyz T.T
I was waiting for this : - one game where leenock didn't scout a liberator range build. - one game where he completely choked and lost 20+ drones to simple hellion runbies, then allowed the extremely tank heavy army of Ryung to cross the entirety of cross position cactus valley without contest whatsoever.
No SH in any game. Every game lost to the first mech push because there was only 2-3 vipers ready instead of the mandatory 4-5. No mutas in any game despite lib range build or banshee build.
On February 15 2017 20:08 Aegwynn wrote: Ryung 2 - 1 Leenock, two solid wins with mech. But mech is not viable guyz T.T
I was waiting for this : - one game where leenock didn't scout a liberator range build. - one game where he completely choked and lost 20+ drones to simple hellion runbies, then allowed the extremely tank heavy army of Ryung to cross the entirety of cross position cactus valley without contest whatsoever.
No SH in any game. Every game lost to the first mech push because there was only 2-3 vipers ready instead of the mandatory 4-5. No mutas in any game despite lib range build or banshee build.
"Yeah so i guess mech is fine"
...right, so the better player won. Exactly how it should be.
On February 15 2017 20:08 Aegwynn wrote: Ryung 2 - 1 Leenock, two solid wins with mech. But mech is not viable guyz T.T
I was waiting for this : - one game where leenock didn't scout a liberator range build. - one game where he completely choked and lost 20+ drones to simple hellion runbies, then allowed the extremely tank heavy army of Ryung to cross the entirety of cross position cactus valley without contest whatsoever.
No SH in any game. Every game lost to the first mech push because there was only 2-3 vipers ready instead of the mandatory 4-5. No mutas in any game despite lib range build or banshee build.
"Yeah so i guess mech is fine"
Dont feed the trolls. A classic troll post the one you quoted.
On February 15 2017 20:08 Aegwynn wrote: Ryung 2 - 1 Leenock, two solid wins with mech. But mech is not viable guyz T.T
I was waiting for this : - one game where leenock didn't scout a liberator range build. - one game where he completely choked and lost 20+ drones to simple hellion runbies, then allowed the extremely tank heavy army of Ryung to cross the entirety of cross position cactus valley without contest whatsoever.
No SH in any game. Every game lost to the first mech push because there was only 2-3 vipers ready instead of the mandatory 4-5. No mutas in any game despite lib range build or banshee build.
"Yeah so i guess mech is fine"
...right, so the better player won. Exactly how it should be.
i'm enjoying watching the GSL this season ... people pissing, moaning and complaining about how horrible the game is... i'm not sure what it is they're watching. they post up a bunch of vague, tenuous-at-best generalizations based on small sample sizes.
On February 15 2017 20:08 Aegwynn wrote: Ryung 2 - 1 Leenock, two solid wins with mech. But mech is not viable guyz T.T
I was waiting for this : - one game where leenock didn't scout a liberator range build. - one game where he completely choked and lost 20+ drones to simple hellion runbies, then allowed the extremely tank heavy army of Ryung to cross the entirety of cross position cactus valley without contest whatsoever.
No SH in any game. Every game lost to the first mech push because there was only 2-3 vipers ready instead of the mandatory 4-5. No mutas in any game despite lib range build or banshee build.
"Yeah so i guess mech is fine"
...right, so the better player won. Exactly how it should be.
i'm enjoying watching the GSL this season ... people pissing, moaning and complaining about how horrible the game is... i'm not sure what it is they're watching. they post up a bunch of vague, tenuous-at-best generalizations based on small sample sizes.
hmmm...
you tell em JJR! (with your bunch of vague, tenuous-at-best generalizations based on small sample sizes.)
On February 15 2017 23:16 hiroshOne wrote: Well i guess the game is fine atm if u're not playing Zerg.
I disagree, Zerg is balanced if not a teeny tiny bit strong vs. Protoss (not Skytoss it's imbalanced as shit) but Terran is in probably one of the best places they have been. The SH vs Mech being broken thing is vastly overstated by Avilo, tanks are ludicrously strong as are Ravens and it's not like those things being better made bio any weaker.
Hopefully hydralisk buffs open up some diversity, but if David and the team want to be taken seriously right now they need to put a Raven redesign along with a SH one on the table, both units are cancer except Ravens are cancer vs everything and SH are a cancer to mech (when played flawlessly) and that can hardly be good for the meta.
I gotta get my cry out, but if the meta goes back to some type of Skytoss (P) mass Raven/turtle mech (T) crap I will 100% be putting this game down never to look back, it wasn't fun to watch or play against in HOTS and it's not any less terrible now, if Avilo wants to go play in a meta where mech is the go to he should go play Brood War.
When I read TL it seems all games should be - turtle mech vs swarm host - skytoss - mass raven
Then you tune into the most competitive tournament and none of this appears.. but I'm sure Avilo would beat Leenock every day of the week I mean one is a streamer who builds his reputation and viewership on whining, the other a Code S player
On February 16 2017 03:38 VHbb wrote: When I read TL it seems all games should be - turtle mech vs swarm host - skytoss - mass raven
Then you tune into the most competitive tournament and none of this appears.. but I'm sure Avilo would beat Leenock every day of the week I mean one is a streamer who builds his reputation and viewership on whining, the other a Code S player
The game should be designed in a way a lot of people can play the game and have fun. It might be that all these things won't ever affect pro play, but if it does affect everyone else and people dislike it because it promotes bad gameplay then we have a problem. WIth that being said, at least on the lvl i play (diamond league) there isn't much of that going on
On February 16 2017 03:38 VHbb wrote: When I read TL it seems all games should be - turtle mech vs swarm host - skytoss - mass raven
Then you tune into the most competitive tournament and none of this appears.. but I'm sure Avilo would beat Leenock every day of the week I mean one is a streamer who builds his reputation and viewership on whining, the other a Code S player
The game should be designed in a way a lot of people can play the game and have fun. It might be that all these things won't ever affect pro play, but if it does affect everyone else and people dislike it because it promotes bad gameplay then we have a problem. WIth that being said, at least on the lvl i play (diamond league) there isn't much of that going on
I play vs skytoss almost every ZvP on Proxima and rather often on Honorgrounds.
On February 16 2017 03:38 VHbb wrote: When I read TL it seems all games should be - turtle mech vs swarm host - skytoss - mass raven
Then you tune into the most competitive tournament and none of this appears.. but I'm sure Avilo would beat Leenock every day of the week I mean one is a streamer who builds his reputation and viewership on whining, the other a Code S player
The game should be designed in a way a lot of people can play the game and have fun. It might be that all these things won't ever affect pro play, but if it does affect everyone else and people dislike it because it promotes bad gameplay then we have a problem. WIth that being said, at least on the lvl i play (diamond league) there isn't much of that going on
I play vs skytoss almost every ZvP on Proxima and rather often on Honorgrounds.
Well i don't play much zerg these days. But yeah the last time i lost vs carriers with pure hydra hehe
On February 16 2017 03:38 VHbb wrote: When I read TL it seems all games should be - turtle mech vs swarm host - skytoss - mass raven
Then you tune into the most competitive tournament and none of this appears.. but I'm sure Avilo would beat Leenock every day of the week I mean one is a streamer who builds his reputation and viewership on whining, the other a Code S player
The game should be designed in a way a lot of people can play the game and have fun. It might be that all these things won't ever affect pro play, but if it does affect everyone else and people dislike it because it promotes bad gameplay then we have a problem. WIth that being said, at least on the lvl i play (diamond league) there isn't much of that going on
I play vs skytoss almost every ZvP on Proxima and rather often on Honorgrounds.
Well i don't play much zerg these days. But yeah the last time i lost vs carriers with pure hydra hehe
When i play vs skytoss, i make hydras and lose, they say me i shouldn't have built hydras, and when i make corruptors and lose, that i have the wrong composition.
So now i make only all-in vs P or defend them lol
But if someone truly know how to beat it, i wanna learn it.
On February 16 2017 03:38 VHbb wrote: When I read TL it seems all games should be - turtle mech vs swarm host - skytoss - mass raven
Then you tune into the most competitive tournament and none of this appears.. but I'm sure Avilo would beat Leenock every day of the week I mean one is a streamer who builds his reputation and viewership on whining, the other a Code S player
The game should be designed in a way a lot of people can play the game and have fun. It might be that all these things won't ever affect pro play, but if it does affect everyone else and people dislike it because it promotes bad gameplay then we have a problem. WIth that being said, at least on the lvl i play (diamond league) there isn't much of that going on
I play vs skytoss almost every ZvP on Proxima and rather often on Honorgrounds.
Well i don't play much zerg these days. But yeah the last time i lost vs carriers with pure hydra hehe
When i play vs skytoss, i make hydras and lose, they say me i shouldn't have built hydras, and when i make corruptors and lose, that i have the wrong composition.
So now i make only all-in vs P or defend them lol
But if someone truly know how to beat it, i wanna learn it.
It's pretty annoying to play against, but sounds like you are having macro issues. Do you have some replays we can analyze? When they go skytoss, you can be pretty greedy and drone of a long time. If they are going straight sky toss without pressuring, you can usually get away with a double expo.
On February 16 2017 03:38 VHbb wrote: When I read TL it seems all games should be - turtle mech vs swarm host - skytoss - mass raven
Then you tune into the most competitive tournament and none of this appears.. but I'm sure Avilo would beat Leenock every day of the week I mean one is a streamer who builds his reputation and viewership on whining, the other a Code S player
The game should be designed in a way a lot of people can play the game and have fun. It might be that all these things won't ever affect pro play, but if it does affect everyone else and people dislike it because it promotes bad gameplay then we have a problem. WIth that being said, at least on the lvl i play (diamond league) there isn't much of that going on
I play vs skytoss almost every ZvP on Proxima and rather often on Honorgrounds.
Well i don't play much zerg these days. But yeah the last time i lost vs carriers with pure hydra hehe
When i play vs skytoss, i make hydras and lose, they say me i shouldn't have built hydras, and when i make corruptors and lose, that i have the wrong composition.
So now i make only all-in vs P or defend them lol
But if someone truly know how to beat it, i wanna learn it.
It's pretty annoying to play against, but sounds like you are having macro issues. Do you have some replays we can analyze? When they go skytoss, you can be pretty greedy and drone of a long time. If they are going straight sky toss without pressuring, you can usually get away with a double expo.
In my experience that doesn't really help because the toss can expand faster as well with some canons, etc. If anything you have to hit a timing attack to be able to beat that mass carrier stuff. At the point of carriers + ht/archon you are basically hopeless imo
I very rarely saw/played a game where the zerg *never* pressured / pushed before I got carriers + ht/archons (one of the most expensive compositions in the game) come on ..
Idk who's worse, people that try so hard to make Blizzard remove every single thing that counters turtle mech, or the protoss players that think sitting there and making carriers is a good game design.
Maybe they should buff thors against carriers so mechers and protosses could turtle until 200 supply and amove into eachother, then their dream of perfect fun game would be fullfilled.
On February 16 2017 07:25 VHbb wrote: I very rarely saw/played a game where the zerg *never* pressured / pushed before I got carriers + ht/archons (one of the most expensive compositions in the game) come on ..
I never said that though? I simply said that when you go full macro the toss can expand faster as well. At the end of the day it simply relies on the toss having an opportunity to get to that composition, i think it works. At least below pro lvl. At that point we have a problem tbh, it's always the same though in sc2. Things are too easy to use and voila there is a problem. Same with mass spellcasters as well.
On February 16 2017 08:20 The_Red_Viper wrote: Things are too easy to use and voila there is a problem.
Seems to apply to zerg as a race. According to this, zerg is globally most represented in every league above gold, and least represented in every league below gold.
If anything, game might need more casting and abilities to other races than protoss, as conventional balancing techniques aren't very good when problem is relative skill required between races.
On February 16 2017 08:20 The_Red_Viper wrote: Things are too easy to use and voila there is a problem.
Seems to apply to zerg as a race. According to this, zerg is globally most represented in every league above gold, and least represented in every league below gold.
If anything, game might need more casting and abilities to other races than protoss, as conventional balancing techniques aren't very good when problem is relative skill required between races.
Zerg is easier at the lowest level and is easiest at the highest level but still balanced at the top, theres been alot of Zerg players for a long time, honestly though I run into tons of Terrans in diamond league lately.
If playing Zerg vs SkyToss u must hit precise timing with hydra. That's the first way to beat it. If not, u may try burrowed Infestors with mass neural parasite- there are rumors that it works. That's the only thing u can do.
And no. U cannot be as greedy as u think, as good protoss while going into carriers will definitely harras the shit out of you with adepts which are not so gas heavy. On the other hand, taking 3 bases is extremely easy for Protosss, and as we know Terran and Toss on 3 bases can afford everything they like.
The problem with carrier is that there is only 1 or 2 ways of winnning against it for each race, and it remains very hard. On a scale, what the protoss has to do to win get and control carrier is a difficulty of 1/10, while the race that has to counter mass carrier has to adapt to it and is forced to go on the perfect counter strategy and unit mix, plus he has to hard micro these units in order to counter the carriers => difficulty 9/10.
On February 16 2017 07:37 xTJx wrote: Idk who's worse, people that try so hard to make Blizzard remove every single thing that counters turtle mech, or the protoss players that think sitting there and making carriers is a good game design.
Maybe they should buff thors against carriers so mechers and protosses could turtle until 200 supply and amove into eachother, then their dream of perfect fun game would be fullfilled.
Same sentiment I have when met plenty of Zergs who turtle with mass queens spines spores lurkers SH into ultra/broods.
Come on, all races have cancerous turtle builds, don't pretend zergs do not turtle. Ofc you would lie to yourself that queen spines spores are good defense/play, that doesn't mean it is not turtleling.
On February 16 2017 07:37 xTJx wrote: Idk who's worse, people that try so hard to make Blizzard remove every single thing that counters turtle mech, or the protoss players that think sitting there and making carriers is a good game design.
Maybe they should buff thors against carriers so mechers and protosses could turtle until 200 supply and amove into eachother, then their dream of perfect fun game would be fullfilled.
Same sentiment I have when met plenty of Zergs who turtle with mass queens spines spores lurkers SH into ultra/broods.
Come on, all races have cancerous turtle builds, don't pretend zergs do not turtle. Ofc you would lie to yourself that queen spines spores are good defense/play, that doesn't mean it is not turtleling.
we only see that as a reaction when opponent goes carriers, its not a go to build and not relevant at all.
They are not gonna play mech unless you make it stronger then bio, they just have so much more experience with bio that it's just not worth the risk.
Yeah ... i already mentioned it in some other threads ... the problem about mech not being viable (although you can argue if that really is the case) is less aber mech being too week or getting to heavily hard-countered but more about bio being to strong compared to mech. Maybe there just need to get some nerfs done to bio ... as playstyles from other races got nerfed over time, too, if they had been to strong (or blizz simply wanted other playstyles to rise up for more diversity). Look at blink stalkers, zealot/archon, roach/ravager (when ravagers were quite broken), BL Infestor and so on.
But Blizzard did the opposite. Bio only got stronger with the added units like wm or lib (okay, you can argue, that this is more a bio-mech style then pure bio, but anyways, it has so more possibilities then pure mech ... so why should terran take a risk?
It's maybe more a question of design then of balance. If you want to make mech more viable, and you add "mech" units that suite better with bio then with other mech units ... well ... I would go as far and say they should remove wm and lib and add in 2 mech units which suit mech playstyles ... less fast, more strong units. But i'm afraid that would be too much effort anyways. Maybe for another really big patch, if blizzard still will make on besides the smaller changes and updates.
I think there may also be a point to be made about how could players train and develop mech strategies. A pro player has no incentive (this is my guess) to devote a large fraction of his time to come up with a completely new strategy and style, because - he is "betting" on the fact that the new strategy (mech) will be more powerful than the old one (bio); if it is just as powerful as the old one than he doesn't gain that much - he is risking a lot: if you spent 2-3 month just training with mech and then it turns out that the style is not viable at the top level (like GSL, ...) you lost a lot of time, and a lot of practice with the usual style (bio) - so now all other terrans will be "better" than you - there aren't a lot of long periods without competition/tournaments: of course this is good for players, but it also means that there isn't that much time to devote to develop new styles
The point is: how can we evaluate if mech is viable or not, without the input of progamers which dedicate themselves to play mech consistently? I don't think that this lack of mech play can be interpreted only as "mech is too weak", because there may be a strong argument that devoting to mech (for a progamer) is a very unsafe bet.
(I don't know if I was very clear - english is not my first language ) There was a very interesting State of the Game episode which touched this argument, but unfortunately I cannot remember which one.. (maybe it was the 100th..)
On February 20 2017 22:54 VHbb wrote: I think there may also be a point to be made about how could players train and develop mech strategies. A pro player has no incentive (this is my guess) to devote a large fraction of his time to come up with a completely new strategy and style, because - he is "betting" on the fact that the new strategy (mech) will be more powerful than the old one (bio); if it is just as powerful as the old one than he doesn't gain that much - he is risking a lot: if you spent 2-3 month just training with mech and then it turns out that the style is not viable at the top level (like GSL, ...) you lost a lot of time, and a lot of practice with the usual style (bio) - so now all other terrans will be "better" than you - there aren't a lot of long periods without competition/tournaments: of course this is good for players, but it also means that there isn't that much time to devote to develop new styles
The point is: how can we evaluate if mech is viable or not, without the input of progamers which dedicate themselves to play mech consistently? I don't think that this lack of mech play can be interpreted only as "mech is too weak", because there may be a strong argument that devoting to mech (for a progamer) is a very unsafe bet.
(I don't know if I was very clear - english is not my first language ) There was a very interesting State of the Game episode which touched this argument, but unfortunately I cannot remember which one.. (maybe it was the 100th..)
you were very clear and I think that this is a very interesting point
On February 20 2017 22:54 VHbb wrote: I think there may also be a point to be made about how could players train and develop mech strategies. A pro player has no incentive (this is my guess) to devote a large fraction of his time to come up with a completely new strategy and style, because - he is "betting" on the fact that the new strategy (mech) will be more powerful than the old one (bio); if it is just as powerful as the old one than he doesn't gain that much - he is risking a lot: if you spent 2-3 month just training with mech and then it turns out that the style is not viable at the top level (like GSL, ...) you lost a lot of time, and a lot of practice with the usual style (bio) - so now all other terrans will be "better" than you - there aren't a lot of long periods without competition/tournaments: of course this is good for players, but it also means that there isn't that much time to devote to develop new styles
The point is: how can we evaluate if mech is viable or not, without the input of progamers which dedicate themselves to play mech consistently? I don't think that this lack of mech play can be interpreted only as "mech is too weak", because there may be a strong argument that devoting to mech (for a progamer) is a very unsafe bet.
(I don't know if I was very clear - english is not my first language ) There was a very interesting State of the Game episode which touched this argument, but unfortunately I cannot remember which one.. (maybe it was the 100th..)
I don't think that's accurate. (at least, not the only reason)
The general dynamic of SC2 was foreigners "inventing" metagames, and the koreans perfecting it. In turn, the koreans, because of their level at the game, mainly played against each other, creating a very specific KR meta. Meanwhile, most foreigners just couldn't compete with the raw mechanical skills of koreans. I do agree that since the end of PL and the "exportation" of korean players, this dynamic might have changed a little, however i think it's still more or less the same.
What does that mean?
On the one hand, there's not much foreign pro terrans anymore. Who is there, as a sucessful terran foreign pro player? Marinelord left, maybe Uthermal, or Demuslim? Maybe Major? And no one, except for Major's "straight into skyterran" build, is playing mech. There was practically no mech play in NA/EU since patch 3.8.
On the other hand, because KR players are so used to play in a tiny and specific community, they tend to use the most mainstream style with variations. Mainly because mech revolves so much around specific builds and sneaky/very agressive stuff, once it's figured out, "everyone" knows how to counter it. And when you play in a tiny community where everyone watches everyone play, you can't really get away with a recurrent sneak/ultra agressive build. A good exemple was Innovation playing the same mech build every game against Dark at the IEM Gyeonggi finals. We could see that Dark was still adaptating throught the BO to try and figure out the 2 reactored factories into mech build. In the end, Innovation won. Fast forward few months, Byun uses the same build against Ptak at nationwars, and he gets wrecked because ptak went for fast mutas. This is a good exemple of a mech build that was used by Inno, either because it wasn't figured out yet, either because he identified that Dark had a specific weakness. But when it gets figured out, it can completely whiff.
So what do we end up with?
- NA/EU : few sucessfull terrans, and no mech play - KR : KR top players aren't coming up with a "mech vs zerg standard" meta, but snipe/sneaky builds
(if i'm wrong, feel free to correct)
I think that at this point, if better results in the foreign scene could be achieved with mech play, the few sucessfull terran players we have would have come up with some mech vs zerg meta in 3.8. And KR terran top players (who are doing quite well at the moment) mech builds are snipe/cheesy builds, that don't rely on much any meta. We could see that leenock, playing against Ryung, played the HOTS meta. No use of SHs, roach hydras into fast vipers.
And that's why mech, i think, despite all the indirect reasons we can think of, has proven itself not to be viable. Because there's no "standard meta". No standard build. No "reaper expand into 2 medivacs 16 marine stim drop". It's entirely based on sneaky/ultra agressive stuff where you either gain a very early advantage, or fail.
Maybe because mech is not 4th race to have exquisite meta? It's the main mistake made by all "mech not viable" people. Pure Mech is an option that T have and as an option it works very well. If Zerg would play one composition every game he could say same thing that his style is not viable vs some styles of other players. And because mech players refuse to understand that, they will always whine to Blizzard for nerfing every counter to mech.
On February 20 2017 22:54 VHbb wrote: I think there may also be a point to be made about how could players train and develop mech strategies. A pro player has no incentive (this is my guess) to devote a large fraction of his time to come up with a completely new strategy and style, because - he is "betting" on the fact that the new strategy (mech) will be more powerful than the old one (bio); if it is just as powerful as the old one than he doesn't gain that much - he is risking a lot: if you spent 2-3 month just training with mech and then it turns out that the style is not viable at the top level (like GSL, ...) you lost a lot of time, and a lot of practice with the usual style (bio) - so now all other terrans will be "better" than you - there aren't a lot of long periods without competition/tournaments: of course this is good for players, but it also means that there isn't that much time to devote to develop new styles
The point is: how can we evaluate if mech is viable or not, without the input of progamers which dedicate themselves to play mech consistently? I don't think that this lack of mech play can be interpreted only as "mech is too weak", because there may be a strong argument that devoting to mech (for a progamer) is a very unsafe bet.
(I don't know if I was very clear - english is not my first language ) There was a very interesting State of the Game episode which touched this argument, but unfortunately I cannot remember which one.. (maybe it was the 100th..)
I don't think that's accurate. (at least, not the only reason)
The general dynamic of SC2 was foreigners "inventing" metagames, and the koreans perfecting it. In turn, the koreans, because of their level at the game, mainly played against each other, creating a very specific KR meta. Meanwhile, most foreigners just couldn't compete with the raw mechanical skills of koreans. I do agree that since the end of PL and the "exportation" of korean players, this dynamic might have changed a little, however i think it's still more or less the same.
What does that mean?
On the one hand, there's not much foreign pro terrans anymore. Who is there, as a sucessful terran foreign pro player? Marinelord left, maybe Uthermal, or Demuslim? Maybe Major? And no one, except for Major's "straight into skyterran" build, is playing mech. There was practically no mech play in NA/EU since patch 3.8.
On the other hand, because KR players are so used to play in a tiny and specific community, they tend to use the most mainstream style with variations. Mainly because mech revolves so much around specific builds and sneaky/very agressive stuff, once it's figured out, "everyone" knows how to counter it. And when you play in a tiny community where everyone watches everyone play, you can't really get away with a recurrent sneak/ultra agressive build. A good exemple was Innovation playing the same mech build every game against Dark at the IEM Gyeonggi finals. We could see that Dark was still adaptating throught the BO to try and figure out the 2 reactored factories into mech build. In the end, Innovation won. Fast forward few months, Byun uses the same build against Ptak at nationwars, and he gets wrecked because ptak went for fast mutas. This is a good exemple of a mech build that was used by Inno, either because it wasn't figured out yet, either because he identified that Dark had a specific weakness. But when it gets figured out, it can completely whiff.
So what do we end up with?
- NA/EU : few sucessfull terrans, and no mech play - KR : KR top players aren't coming up with a "mech vs zerg standard" meta, but snipe/sneaky builds
(if i'm wrong, feel free to correct)
I think that at this point, if better results in the foreign scene could be achieved with mech play, the few sucessfull terran players we have would have come up with some mech vs zerg meta in 3.8. And KR terran top players (who are doing quite well at the moment) mech builds are snipe/cheesy builds, that don't rely on much any meta. We could see that leenock, playing against Ryung, played the HOTS meta. No use of SHs, roach hydras into fast vipers.
And that's why mech, i think, despite all the indirect reasons we can think of, has proven itself not to be viable. Because there's no "standard meta". No standard build. No "reaper expand into 2 medivacs 16 marine stim drop". It's entirely based on sneaky/ultra agressive stuff where you either gain a very early advantage, or fail.
I am not sure about the part with foreigners inventing and Koreans refining metas. But yea, currently mech is just in a "I'll try and see what happens"-state. It's true that there are games in which a meching players defeats his opponent here and there, but the term viability describes more than that, sadly regardless of what certain individuals claim.
On February 20 2017 22:54 VHbb wrote: I think there may also be a point to be made about how could players train and develop mech strategies. A pro player has no incentive (this is my guess) to devote a large fraction of his time to come up with a completely new strategy and style, because - he is "betting" on the fact that the new strategy (mech) will be more powerful than the old one (bio); if it is just as powerful as the old one than he doesn't gain that much - he is risking a lot: if you spent 2-3 month just training with mech and then it turns out that the style is not viable at the top level (like GSL, ...) you lost a lot of time, and a lot of practice with the usual style (bio) - so now all other terrans will be "better" than you - there aren't a lot of long periods without competition/tournaments: of course this is good for players, but it also means that there isn't that much time to devote to develop new styles
The point is: how can we evaluate if mech is viable or not, without the input of progamers which dedicate themselves to play mech consistently? I don't think that this lack of mech play can be interpreted only as "mech is too weak", because there may be a strong argument that devoting to mech (for a progamer) is a very unsafe bet.
(I don't know if I was very clear - english is not my first language ) There was a very interesting State of the Game episode which touched this argument, but unfortunately I cannot remember which one.. (maybe it was the 100th..)
I don't think that's accurate. (at least, not the only reason)
The general dynamic of SC2 was foreigners "inventing" metagames, and the koreans perfecting it. In turn, the koreans, because of their level at the game, mainly played against each other, creating a very specific KR meta. Meanwhile, most foreigners just couldn't compete with the raw mechanical skills of koreans. I do agree that since the end of PL and the "exportation" of korean players, this dynamic might have changed a little, however i think it's still more or less the same.
What does that mean?
On the one hand, there's not much foreign pro terrans anymore. Who is there, as a sucessful terran foreign pro player? Marinelord left, maybe Uthermal, or Demuslim? Maybe Major? And no one, except for Major's "straight into skyterran" build, is playing mech. There was practically no mech play in NA/EU since patch 3.8.
On the other hand, because KR players are so used to play in a tiny and specific community, they tend to use the most mainstream style with variations. Mainly because mech revolves so much around specific builds and sneaky/very agressive stuff, once it's figured out, "everyone" knows how to counter it. And when you play in a tiny community where everyone watches everyone play, you can't really get away with a recurrent sneak/ultra agressive build. A good exemple was Innovation playing the same mech build every game against Dark at the IEM Gyeonggi finals. We could see that Dark was still adaptating throught the BO to try and figure out the 2 reactored factories into mech build. In the end, Innovation won. Fast forward few months, Byun uses the same build against Ptak at nationwars, and he gets wrecked because ptak went for fast mutas. This is a good exemple of a mech build that was used by Inno, either because it wasn't figured out yet, either because he identified that Dark had a specific weakness. But when it gets figured out, it can completely whiff.
So what do we end up with?
- NA/EU : few sucessfull terrans, and no mech play - KR : KR top players aren't coming up with a "mech vs zerg standard" meta, but snipe/sneaky builds
(if i'm wrong, feel free to correct)
I think that at this point, if better results in the foreign scene could be achieved with mech play, the few sucessfull terran players we have would have come up with some mech vs zerg meta in 3.8. And KR terran top players (who are doing quite well at the moment) mech builds are snipe/cheesy builds, that don't rely on much any meta. We could see that leenock, playing against Ryung, played the HOTS meta. No use of SHs, roach hydras into fast vipers.
And that's why mech, i think, despite all the indirect reasons we can think of, has proven itself not to be viable. Because there's no "standard meta". No standard build. No "reaper expand into 2 medivacs 16 marine stim drop". It's entirely based on sneaky/ultra agressive stuff where you either gain a very early advantage, or fail.
I'm not sure I got your point (I honestly ask) Do you mean that we don't have well developed mech builds because there are few foreigners playing mech?
I think it may be part of the issue - though I don't know how much the foreigners contributed to build development wrt koreans in the past (maybe you are right, I don't have enough experience to tell)
But I think, on top of what you say, there is still the point that: it's difficult to evaluate if mech is viable if nobody plays mech consistently for a long period of time. But my question is: - do proplayers not play mech because mech is unviable? or do proplayer not play mech because changing style so drastically is a very unsafe bet to make?
It's kind of like saying (example case): if the race X is overpowered wrt Y and Z, do you think proplayers who use Y and Z since many years will switch to X? How much does X have to be better than Y and Z? How safe is to switch, when maybe it turns out that Z was not so much overpowered?
On February 20 2017 22:54 VHbb wrote: I think there may also be a point to be made about how could players train and develop mech strategies. A pro player has no incentive (this is my guess) to devote a large fraction of his time to come up with a completely new strategy and style, because - he is "betting" on the fact that the new strategy (mech) will be more powerful than the old one (bio); if it is just as powerful as the old one than he doesn't gain that much - he is risking a lot: if you spent 2-3 month just training with mech and then it turns out that the style is not viable at the top level (like GSL, ...) you lost a lot of time, and a lot of practice with the usual style (bio) - so now all other terrans will be "better" than you - there aren't a lot of long periods without competition/tournaments: of course this is good for players, but it also means that there isn't that much time to devote to develop new styles
The point is: how can we evaluate if mech is viable or not, without the input of progamers which dedicate themselves to play mech consistently? I don't think that this lack of mech play can be interpreted only as "mech is too weak", because there may be a strong argument that devoting to mech (for a progamer) is a very unsafe bet.
(I don't know if I was very clear - english is not my first language ) There was a very interesting State of the Game episode which touched this argument, but unfortunately I cannot remember which one.. (maybe it was the 100th..)
I don't think that's accurate. (at least, not the only reason)
The general dynamic of SC2 was foreigners "inventing" metagames, and the koreans perfecting it. In turn, the koreans, because of their level at the game, mainly played against each other, creating a very specific KR meta. Meanwhile, most foreigners just couldn't compete with the raw mechanical skills of koreans. I do agree that since the end of PL and the "exportation" of korean players, this dynamic might have changed a little, however i think it's still more or less the same.
What does that mean?
On the one hand, there's not much foreign pro terrans anymore. Who is there, as a sucessful terran foreign pro player? Marinelord left, maybe Uthermal, or Demuslim? Maybe Major? And no one, except for Major's "straight into skyterran" build, is playing mech. There was practically no mech play in NA/EU since patch 3.8.
On the other hand, because KR players are so used to play in a tiny and specific community, they tend to use the most mainstream style with variations. Mainly because mech revolves so much around specific builds and sneaky/very agressive stuff, once it's figured out, "everyone" knows how to counter it. And when you play in a tiny community where everyone watches everyone play, you can't really get away with a recurrent sneak/ultra agressive build. A good exemple was Innovation playing the same mech build every game against Dark at the IEM Gyeonggi finals. We could see that Dark was still adaptating throught the BO to try and figure out the 2 reactored factories into mech build. In the end, Innovation won. Fast forward few months, Byun uses the same build against Ptak at nationwars, and he gets wrecked because ptak went for fast mutas. This is a good exemple of a mech build that was used by Inno, either because it wasn't figured out yet, either because he identified that Dark had a specific weakness. But when it gets figured out, it can completely whiff.
So what do we end up with?
- NA/EU : few sucessfull terrans, and no mech play - KR : KR top players aren't coming up with a "mech vs zerg standard" meta, but snipe/sneaky builds
(if i'm wrong, feel free to correct)
I think that at this point, if better results in the foreign scene could be achieved with mech play, the few sucessfull terran players we have would have come up with some mech vs zerg meta in 3.8. And KR terran top players (who are doing quite well at the moment) mech builds are snipe/cheesy builds, that don't rely on much any meta. We could see that leenock, playing against Ryung, played the HOTS meta. No use of SHs, roach hydras into fast vipers.
And that's why mech, i think, despite all the indirect reasons we can think of, has proven itself not to be viable. Because there's no "standard meta". No standard build. No "reaper expand into 2 medivacs 16 marine stim drop". It's entirely based on sneaky/ultra agressive stuff where you either gain a very early advantage, or fail.
I'm not sure I got your point (I honestly ask) Do you mean that we don't have well developed mech builds because there are few foreigners playing mech?
Yes, but mainly because since EU/NA terran are performing poorly, if mech play allowed better results, they would go for it. Look at Major defeating Nerchio (at NW4 i think) with a very silly skyterran build that was working only when libs did 7x2 AA damage flat. I think top NA/EU terrans are already reaching for some unconventionnal builds because they have trouble against other races, but mech isn't part of it. So not only is there few terran foreigners that COULD come up with new builds for mech, but they are actually not coming up with any. Therefore the only plausible explaination is that mech sucks at their level of play.
On February 21 2017 22:17 VHbb wrote: I think it may be part of the issue - though I don't know how much the foreigners contributed to build development wrt koreans in the past (maybe you are right, I don't have enough experience to tell)
But I think, on top of what you say, there is still the point that: it's difficult to evaluate if mech is viable if nobody plays mech consistently for a long period of time. But my question is: - do proplayers not play mech because mech is unviable? or do proplayer not play mech because changing style so drastically is a very unsafe bet to make?
It's kind of like saying (example case): if the race X is overpowered wrt Y and Z, do you think proplayers who use Y and Z since many years will switch to X? How much does X have to be better than Y and Z? How safe is to switch, when maybe it turns out that Z was not so much overpowered?
As I said i think it's because mech isn't viable outside of top KR level snipe/cheesy builds. That's an opinion, but the facts i presented, i think, tend to prove it.
Appart from that i don't think you have to see playing mech as "a switch" from terrans playing bio. Mech and bio are styles, just like ranged and melee styles for zergs. The difference may be greater, but it still relies on the same terran production and control for the most part. Just as many zerg players use ranged or melee comps depending on the meta, some terran players also play mech or bio whenever one is "stronger" than the other.
The best exemples are players like TY, Maru, Gumiho or mainly Innovation. Innovation is a mech god but is probably the best "parade push" (M/M/M/M strats against zerg) player in the world. Gumiho is such a wacky player that he'll use any units he needs, wether it's mech or bio. Even Bomber, i think, who was the prince of marine tanks in WOL, played mech from time to time.
Perhaps foreign terrans have a harder time switching from one style to another, because mastering both is a lot of work, but i'm really not sure.
EPT![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CM809rKWoAAiV0C.jpg)
I mean one is a streamer who builds his reputation and viewership on whining, the other a Code S player
) There was a very interesting State of the Game episode which touched this argument, but unfortunately I cannot remember which one.. (maybe it was the 100th..)
