EPTCommunity Feedback Update - July 12 - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Gheizen64
Italy2077 Posts
| ||
|
MockHamill
Sweden1798 Posts
The only thing missing is a Swarm Hosts price increase and a Carrier DPS nerf. | ||
|
Ej_
47656 Posts
| ||
|
SlammerSC2
77 Posts
| ||
|
Zaros
United Kingdom3692 Posts
| ||
|
Gheizen64
Italy2077 Posts
I wouldn't mind seeing 10+4 vs light though. | ||
|
zyce
United States649 Posts
I think something should be done to address the ~42-43% winrates in both PvT and PvZ currently, hopefully the maps will accomplish this but I have my doubts. I don't understand their statement about Swarm Hosts. | ||
|
QuinnTheEskimo
Germany55 Posts
After the recent buffs, there is no objective reason for Z to not go mass Hydra or even to transition out of it. This makes Z dumb. Protoss has to build their entire strategy around the Adept in every phase of the game, or face a massive disadvantage, except for mass carriers of course. This makes P dumb. Everything that is not Marine Marauder Medivac (and Thor) keeps getting nerfed. This makes T dumb. (Ironically, I still agree with the most recent announcements of T nerfs.) LOTV has been a complete failure and they are not addressing any of it. They just tweak stats until there are equal win rates "at the top level". Whatever that means. It's a stupid metric for measuring game quality. I guess they will keep nerfing T into oblivion. Then, they increase the damage of widow mines to that of nukes to equal out win rates, and call it a well thought out plan and a great state of the game. If the game is stupid to play, then nobody cares about any win rates. Haven't the last months been enough empiric proof of that? | ||
|
bulya
Israel386 Posts
Protoss won major tournaments (GSL, Austin, Jönköping). Terran won major tournaments (IEM 1, IEM 2, GSL, we can count the SSL1 here as well), and all these were won by different Terrans with different play styles. Zerg won... hmmm... Nothing! Yeah, some second places, but even in the foreign scene where the zerg is a way more popular race nothing major has been won by a zerg player. (We'll see about Valencia) Terran has the best late game, but its the hardest one to control out of the 3. So even not that many pros use it, but Terran has a lot of potential so I don't understand where does all this Terran whine come from. | ||
|
Aggression1
Denmark16 Posts
As for the proposed colossus change, all I have to say is..what? I'm not sure which games the balance team is watching but I see colossus being used in PvT almost every tournament game, and on the ladder as well. Even if colossus play wasn't prevalent, I don't see the point of buffing it, as it is already very strong. | ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24232 Posts
| ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24232 Posts
On July 13 2017 16:52 Ej_ wrote: please leave collossi alone, they are in a VERY good spot right now Probably the best they've ever been in actually | ||
|
hiroshOne
Poland425 Posts
Avilo. The difference in mass reapers and Ravager allin is that early Ravagers are full blown allin by definition. If u not kill Terran with it- you're dead and Terran can defend it with scout, fast cyclone and bunkers. It only kill greedy turtle mech like yourself and that's fromvyour bias is coming. And reapers- well its not an allin in any means. Its just pressure opening that auto sets Zerg far behind. Mass Ravens are cancer and should be changed. Swamrhost nerf could be in olay as soon as Blizzard rebuffs Funghal growth with +armoured bonus and let Infested Terrans benefit from uogrades. Projectile may stay as it creates chances to counterplay more than instant spell. Collosus change is interesting. Protoss is struggling with BIO a d Hydras. This change is more vs Hydras and lings than Banelings as B can be countered by Forcefields and Archon shield. I would like to see how it play out. Maybe i won't see so many mass OPmortals. | ||
|
QuinnTheEskimo
Germany55 Posts
On July 13 2017 19:03 Aggression1 wrote: As a Terran, I'm all for nerfing Reaper strength. I don't think increasing the cost is the answer though. I think it's important for Blizzard to investigate why Terrans are doing 3rax Reaper builds. If you control it well, it's the safest way to get in a good position for the macro game, as it allows you to stop the Zerg from droning too heavily, while you get your infrastructure up and running. If you're doing another pressure build than 3rax Reaper, it's very high risk in comparison, so you might end up doing damage to yourself while trying to do damage to the Zerg. IMHO 3 rax reaper is all in. It delays your expansion so much and costs so much gas, it doesn't make sense to use it as an opening for a macro game. Even if you don't lose all your reapers, they become useless very quickly. So you either do critical damage then and there, or you are incredibly behind. Isn't that what "all in" means? If they really want the reaper to be good but not snowball out of control, they should leave its health and cost alone. Just give each reaper 3 KD8 charges as it spawns and that's it; no refill. It will leave its ability to be annoying early game. Even be good at 1-2 close encounters but no more snowballing. | ||
|
WidowMineHero
New Zealand143 Posts
| ||
|
Aggression1
Denmark16 Posts
On July 13 2017 19:27 QuinnTheEskimo wrote: IMHO 3 rax reaper is all in. It delays your expansion so much and costs so much gas, it doesn't make sense to use it as an opening for a macro game. Even if you don't lose all your reapers, they become useless very quickly. But.. it's not an all-in. Even if your expansion is late, you're forcing the zerg to make units, while you can play greedy at home. Even if the zerg doesn't lose a single drone, their economy is affected heavily by having to defend reapers. It keeps you safe versus lings, roaches and ravagers, and gives you a very easy transition into a macro game. | ||
|
Couguar
Russian Federation54 Posts
| ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On July 13 2017 08:31 The_Red_Viper wrote: I mean reaper builds happen in TvT a lot as well, something should change.. Personally i would rather see a complete redesign of the raven and how spellcasting works in sc2. I said it a million times already, but all these changes to spellcasters are basically bandaid fixes which don't address the real problem (that mass spellcasting is too easy to execute) One way to stop this is to make spells less effective on their own, but then you also nerf single spellcaster usage. I would prefer a way to nerf mass spellcasters only. Changing the supply is a way i guess, but i don't think it's really enough in general. Same thing, a redesign to the colossus would be needed. A lot of it is "do i have enough anti air units like vikings or vipers for zerg". The interactions a colossus creates are uninspiring. Exactly why i think all this balance talk should only happen if we are actually fine with the basic interactions. About the update: Well at least we are talking about reapers finally, so good one  This self-imposed blindness is very typical of Blizzard and is the reason why I don't think these updates have that much real value. The colossus is weak and doesn't have an identity because they created the disruptor as a replacement for the colossus, as the latter was a failed unit. The reaper is too strong early game because they created it specifically as an early game unit and stacked it with abilities only useful early on. The raven is a massable, slow spellcaster that creates free units that benefits a lot from smartcasting. Of course you can be very clever and create bandaid fixes that prevent all these problems from being noticeable, but it's a constant struggle. | ||
|
DBooN
Germany2727 Posts
Also not sure what the collossus cahnge is supposed to do. Sometimes they're played, sometimes not. Seems about right to me? ZvP seems like a complete mess, design wise, at the moment so I don't see why they want to make minor changes to a perfectly fine unit. | ||
|
woodedmicrobe9
Finland18 Posts
| ||
| ||
