| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
bObA
France300 Posts
Imo the current match ups and the different fight we can see in games are pretty well balanced. When a fight is won very often the winner has just a few units left and the fight lat longer with some reinforcements. The way terran pro Korean players use reapers and ravens is very recent. Let zerg players found a way to counter that. Same for mech. And to be honest only Byun knows how to play reapers and only Gumiho knows how to play Mech. So that would be very premature to nerf that. | ||
|
plogamer
Canada3132 Posts
On July 14 2017 14:04 jpg06051992 wrote: "Increase the Reaper’s cost to 75 minerals / 50 Vespene gas. This would make it harder for the Reaper user to transition into a normal game after a Reaper rush." This is the change that should go through imo, make them more of an investment, harder to mass. Don't cut their balls off, they are finally a strong unit that has some type of use past mere scouting, but they should absolutely be harder to mass for how strong they are. The strength of 3rax-reaper lies in the ability to transition easily to a normal game if you micro them perfectly and extract value from the opening using the mobility, regeneration and grenades. Terrans capable of doing so are extremely rare. Nerfing reapers also nerfs mech in TvZ. The simple threat of reapers keeps zergs honest in Korea. With reapers nerfed, TvZ meta will be the same as EU - where Terrans are not able to use 3rax reaper to the same effectiveness. Go ahead and nerf reapers, but let Terrans have a way to keep Zergs honest in the early game. Maybe a hellion buff, like | ||
|
pvsnp
7676 Posts
| ||
|
Elentos
55593 Posts
On July 14 2017 14:22 bObA wrote: The way terran pro Korean players use reapers and ravens is very recent. Let zerg players found a way to counter that. Same for mech. And to be honest only Byun knows how to play reapers and only Gumiho knows how to play Mech. So that would be very premature to nerf that. Mass reaper spam has been a thing in LotV since beta, ByuN won Blizzcon with it, how is that recent in any capacity? It phased out slightly because the map pool wasn't the best for it, but ByuN plays 3-rax on every map now. And it's only going to get worse as the Terrans spend more and more time refining their reaper control. No, not only ByuN knows how to play reapers and not only GuMiho knows how to play mech. They're just the most successful ones in tournaments. So far. And that's not even addressing the fact yet that tons of high level TvTs (4 out of 6 games in the GSL semis) have at least one player proxying reapers, which is pretty much killing the match-up at this point. | ||
|
Edowyth
United States183 Posts
Zerg has no new counters in LotV which will work in this same way. Bringing the colossus back (in fact even harder than previously) versus light units will only serve to promote a death-ball, turtle style for Protoss in PvZ. Returning to that style would be a tragedy for the game. Blizzard should consider a different change. - +1 archon range (allows banelings / lings to be hit further away) - 12 (+10) vs light adept damage (allows banelings to be 3-hit instead of 4-hit) - 25 energy, 6 (blizzard) second forcefield (very slight nerf which allows double the FFs for short engagements) | ||
|
StarscreamG1
Portugal1653 Posts
| ||
|
Edowyth
United States183 Posts
On July 14 2017 21:48 StarscreamG1 wrote: People are insane. How is this a buff to the Colossus? Stalkers, Marauders will be stronger vs it.. This change is GOOD, it gives colossi a different role from the disruptor, now it stops "light" units better, and is worse vs some of his natural predators. Come on guys... The colossus is already different than the disruptor in a thousand different ways ... Most importantly, it provides reliable splash and interdiction versus bio / lib. It pushes back the bio a long distance for as long as you have the colossus, but with smaller numbers than you would need to do the same thing with disruptors. This is a huge benefit to Protoss, as the main point of bio/lib is that the libs hold everything back while the bio pokes and kills stuff. With the colossus, the bio can't poke as easily and there's a balance point in the match-up where the Terran has to carefully try to re-position libs while the Protoss buys time and tries to out-manuver the Terran with stalkers / phoenix. This is absolutely a nerf to the colossus in PvT, where marauders will now easily take them out. In PvZ, however, it's a huge buff to the unit whose main usage has always been frying large numbers of units ... specifically lings, hydras, and roaches. While it's not better versus roaches, they are taken care of by other units (immortals, sentries, archons) which you would naturally want with colossus anyway ... versus the lings, it would be stupidly better. A mixed nerf / buff ... it will impact both match-ups in negative ways. The colossus is fine in PvT; it must transition due to the threat of ranged libs / vikings, so it doesn't have all the death-ball and never-build-anything-else problems that it had in HotS. The colossus is pretty useless in PvZ, but that's a good thing because Zerg doesn't have any new tools to make colossus-interactions significantly different than in HotS. If the change goes through, the colossus will be less useful in PvT, where it is finally interesting, and more used in PvZ, where it is not. It's a bad change. | ||
|
Suchbalancemuchwow
76 Posts
On July 14 2017 21:48 StarscreamG1 wrote: People are insane. How is this a buff to the Colossus? Stalkers, Marauders will be stronger vs it.. This change is GOOD, it gives colossi a different role from the disruptor, now it stops "light" units better, and is worse vs some of his natural predators. Come on guys... I'll try and tell you why I personally think it's a buff. This ''different'' role makes the colossus worth building (aka buff). Marine marauder medivac for example works because these units synergize. If you can eliminate the marines more easily with colossi (which is what the unit is always constructed for) all you need to beat are the marauders. Marauders don't deal very well with chargelots or archons in their face without marine support. The reason protoss needs AOE vs the terran bio ball, is primarily because of marine DPS. For example, would you think that the adept would be a better unit if it got it's 10(+12 to light) values remapped to 16 damage flat? I personally don't. Adepts would die to marines the same way as stalkers do. It's precisely because adepts are good vs marines (and scv's) that they are valuable in the matchup. | ||
|
Qwyn
United States2781 Posts
Colossus buff sucks especially in ZvP and I wish they'd consider a different route to help Toss against hydra/ling/bane without inviting War of the Worlds again. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17737 Posts
On July 13 2017 08:23 Elentos wrote: I think specifically for the reaper changes, they absolutely need pros to test them thoroughly to see which one is the most suitable. i agree. the Reaper is an extremely tricky, intricate unit and if its mechanics remain the same then pros must test it. OR they can get rid of knock-back on the mine. in exchange for that nerf they might have to buff something else though. | ||
|
jpg06051992
United States580 Posts
On July 14 2017 14:40 plogamer wrote: The strength of 3rax-reaper lies in the ability to transition easily to a normal game if you micro them perfectly and extract value from the opening using the mobility, regeneration and grenades. Terrans capable of doing so are extremely rare. Nerfing reapers also nerfs mech in TvZ. The simple threat of reapers keeps zergs honest in Korea. With reapers nerfed, TvZ meta will be the same as EU - where Terrans are not able to use 3rax reaper to the same effectiveness. Go ahead and nerf reapers, but let Terrans have a way to keep Zergs honest in the early game. Maybe a hellion buff, like Are you trying to insinuate that because your average Master league player can't micro Reapers as good as Byun that all is fine in dandy in the world of ZvT I liken that to good unit design (which I count as "you can tell the difference between a pro and a master league) but that doesn't mean that the opening isn't overpowered. The real strength is not only the transition potential, but just the sheer overwhelming damage that you can do once you hit 8+ Reapers. If you could only mass say, 5 Reapers instead, the damage output would be drastically lowered but the unit would still be strong when played well. | ||
|
FFW_Rude
France10201 Posts
"Reaper nerf is bullshit" "Raven nerf is bullshit" "Mech should be buffed Like tank should have 35rang and do 800 damge" "Colossus is already too strong" "Zerg and protoss are good early, mid, late game" "Terran only strong midgame" or something like that. i'm sure that's somewhere | ||
|
JulDraGoN
Sweden370 Posts
Blizzard said they wanted the Reaper to be a tool in the mid and late game and not just the early game. The solution was this grenade thingy that could help to control space and thus make the reaper a part of a "standard" composition. So, eventually they must have figured out that this just wasn't going to happen. Now why can't they just admit they made a mistake, remove the grenade and try to come up with something that actually does what it was meant to do? I suck at this game, my opinions are not based on any balance issues, maybe the grenade is perfectly fine and necessary. I just find it strange that they implement stuff for a specific reason then refuse to change it when it doesn't pan out. | ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24239 Posts
On July 15 2017 04:21 JulDraGoN wrote: Do you guys remember when the Reaper grenade was revealed? Blizzard said they wanted the Reaper to be a tool in the mid and late game and not just the early game. The solution was this grenade thingy that could help to control space and thus make the reaper a part of a "standard" composition. So, eventually they must have figured out that this just wasn't going to happen. Now why can't they just admit they made a mistake, remove the grenade and try to come up with something that actually does what it was meant to do? I suck at this game, my opinions are not based on any balance issues, maybe the grenade is perfectly fine and necessary. I just find it strange that they implement stuff for a specific reason then refuse to change it when it doesn't pan out. my thoughts exactly | ||
|
Suchbalancemuchwow
76 Posts
On July 15 2017 04:21 JulDraGoN wrote: Do you guys remember when the Reaper grenade was revealed? Blizzard said they wanted the Reaper to be a tool in the mid and late game and not just the early game. The solution was this grenade thingy that could help to control space and thus make the reaper a part of a "standard" composition. So, eventually they must have figured out that this just wasn't going to happen. Now why can't they just admit they made a mistake, remove the grenade and try to come up with something that actually does what it was meant to do? I suck at this game, my opinions are not based on any balance issues, maybe the grenade is perfectly fine and necessary. I just find it strange that they implement stuff for a specific reason then refuse to change it when it doesn't pan out. Well to be fair, reapers are seeing some use lately as part of the main army in the hands of some of the top korean terrans in the midgame after they 3 rax reaper and retain some reapers. It's just very taxing to micro marines/reapers vs ling/bane while utilizing all of the abilities and sniping banelings. The issue with reapers is not really their strength (which given infinite APM would be absolutely absurd) but whether it's acceptable for the metagame in TvT and TvZ to be(come) so reaper centric in the early game for both viewership and the ladder experience. | ||
|
KR_4EVR
316 Posts
_________________________________________________ 2017 WCS Tournament Ro.16 Racial "Diversity" Record Valencia Jonkoping Austin Totals Protoss 5 2 3 10 ~ 21% Terran 3 4 3 10 ~ 21% Zerg 8 10 10 28 ~ 58% _________________________________________________ Now that you have read the facts, please explain to me in what way the proposed changes will move the status quo towards equilibrium? _________________________________________________ Now, for my honest opinon: I don't care about racial distributions, but PLEASE LEAVE THE GAME ALONE! Seriously. Please, please, please, please, I implore you to let the game settle for once, like Broodwar. | ||
|
DomeGetta
480 Posts
On July 13 2017 07:45 hiroshOne wrote: ![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CM809rKWoAAiV0C.jpg) There is new Community update on battle.net: Hey everyone. We’ve been seeing your feedback on the forums and elsewhere over the past few weeks and wanted to make an effort this week to provide more insight into our thoughts. These thoughts range from less discussed units like the Colossus, to more common topics like Reapers and Mech. In all of this, we’re making an effort to be conservative with making changes in an effort to bring greater stability to promote mastery. With that in mind, let’s discuss these topics. Reaper Recently, we’ve been receiving feedback regarding Reapers openings. We have some changes we’d like to test, but before we get to them we want to clarify what our intended role for the Reaper should be. Reapers should be good for scouting, and through tactical use of their KD8 charge be a viable but risky rush opener when made in large quantities. However, in the TvZ matchup we are seeing numerous Reapers being used as a general opener that has a bit too clean of a transition to normal play for Terrans. While this strategy requires a lot of skill to execute perfectly, we think that amassing larger numbers of Reapers is too safe for how much threat they pose. Currently, we are thinking of the following possible options:
We are planning to implement Reaper changes during the period between IEM Season XII – Shanghai and GSL vs. the World. Terran Mech Recently at high levels in Korea we have been seeing a relatively new form of mech play appearing in TvZ and performing well. We would like to continue to observe how it continues to play out first before stepping in and making changes here. This includes keeping an eye on its historic predator, the Swarm Host. Currently it has not been as effective in the Korean scene as elsewhere so we are wondering if there are regional differences in meta at play here. Raven Mass Raven strategies have shown up infrequently in high level play. However, we believe the playstyle of mass Raven could be problematic for ladder level play. We are currently thinking of increasing its supply count from 2 to 3, which would bring it in line with other tech air units like the Banshee and Viper. This should have limited impact at professional levels of play and when using smaller counts of Ravens, while making mass Raven style easier to counter. Colossus In high level play we have not been seeing much Colossus use, even in situations where it seems like the Colossus should be viable. We think this is partially due to the Colossus not having a sharp enough identity, so we want to explore changing the Colossus from a general purpose splash damage unit into an anti-light splash damage unit. Our current thinking is to change its weapon from doing 12 damage flat to 10 + 5 light. Ideally this would also make the differences between Protoss’s splash damage options more clear. Disruptors have high burst damage and work especially well vs low mobility units, the Colossus is good for sustained damage vs light enemies, and High Templars are a more general purpose splash damage role. This change would likely impact the current pro-level PvZ and PvT metas which involves heavy Hydralisk/Zergling and Marine usage respectively. While we want to give Protoss a new option, we don’t want Colossi to be the only build choice so we will have to be careful with this change. Please feel free to let us know your thoughts on these topics and provide any feedback on the proposed changes. Original link : https://us.battle.net/forums/en/sc2/topic/20757617408 This is a depressing and unfortunately recurring type of response from blizzard. It was pointed out numerous times back from the ro16 in code S that Terran was doing literally NOTHING but 3 rax reaper vs. Zerg - then we got to the finals and Gumiho did his mech. So - issue: too much 3 rax reaper Snap response - nerf the opening out of viability completely. No one stopped for a minute to think about the reason that Terran is doing this build as a standard opening - let's not worry about that at all and just focus immediately on patching! Bio terrans are opening this way because it is literally 1 of 2 ways to open safely and use bio (helion / banshee is really only borderline safe - unless you also SCV scout to make sure it's not a full retard ravager rush). I'm not a fan at all of the reaper openings - but I'm also not a fan of the equivalent bullshit that zerg has in the form of the 1 base ravager push. The queen buff (AGAIN for the how many fucks time) that made them outrange liberators and kill medevacs from laughable distances totally removed the 2-1-1 meta from an option other than using it after you've cheesed 10 games in a row (see both series of Dark vs Maru in ro16 code S). You cannot 3 cc off reaper or otherwise without going full retard where you will die to a number of zerg all ins (ravager 1 base - nydus 2 base - ling/bane 1 base and even certain overlord drop builds with queen/ling). You also can't open "safely" or the zerg can 3 base mass queen to max drones and free hive tech - yes BL/infestor is not the same as it use to be - but zerg hive tech without harassment can still be played in turtle mode never leave creep maxxing on corrupter/ultra/infestor which a late game army for terran cannot trade with on creep - If they are going to nerf literally 1 out of the 2 aggressive openers for Terran - they can't do nothing to do zerg - ravagers requiring lair or something that delays that push so at least one of the bullshit options is gone as well. | ||
|
Scarlett`
Korea (South)2399 Posts
On July 15 2017 06:12 DomeGetta wrote: This is a depressing and unfortunately recurring type of response from blizzard. It was pointed out numerous times back from the ro16 in code S that Terran was doing literally NOTHING but 3 rax reaper vs. Zerg - then we got to the finals and Gumiho did his mech. So - issue: too much 3 rax reaper Snap response - nerf the opening out of viability completely. No one stopped for a minute to think about the reason that Terran is doing this build as a standard opening - let's not worry about that at all and just focus immediately on patching! Bio terrans are opening this way because it is literally 1 of 2 ways to open safely and use bio (helion / banshee is really only borderline safe - unless you also SCV scout to make sure it's not a full retard ravager rush). I'm not a fan at all of the reaper openings - but I'm also not a fan of the equivalent bullshit that zerg has in the form of the 1 base ravager push. The queen buff (AGAIN for the how many fucks time) that made them outrange liberators and kill medevacs from laughable distances totally removed the 2-1-1 meta from an option other than using it after you've cheesed 10 games in a row (see both series of Dark vs Maru in ro16 code S). You cannot 3 cc off reaper or otherwise without going full retard where you will die to a number of zerg all ins (ravager 1 base - nydus 2 base - ling/bane 1 base and even certain overlord drop builds with queen/ling). You also can't open "safely" or the zerg can 3 base mass queen to max drones and free hive tech - yes BL/infestor is not the same as it use to be - but zerg hive tech without harassment can still be played in turtle mode never leave creep maxxing on corrupter/ultra/infestor which a late game army for terran cannot trade with on creep - If they are going to nerf literally 1 out of the 2 aggressive openers for Terran - they can't do nothing to do zerg - ravagers requiring lair or something that delays that push so at least one of the bullshit options is gone as well. if you're having trouble thinking of viable aggressive openings in tvz ill help you out a lil~ proxy -> 2 rax marine into banshee 4 rax marine 1 rax reaper into cc 3 rax reaper into -> 2 medivac marine drop 2 medivac 16 reaper 3cc 2 ebay 5 rax reaper cc first into -> 2 factory cyclone hellbat 1 rax reaper/marine expand into -> hellion banshee hellion raven 4 hellion drop widow mine drop into tank drop 2 mine drop with 4 hellion runby 2/1/1 -> into 4 medivac 1/1 timing -> into 2 tank/ marine drop -> no reactor on starport fast hellbat/marine all in -> into 5rax (2cc) marine mine all in -> into 3 medivac 1 mine 3cc 1 ebay 6 hellbat 3 marine 1 medivac 1 liberator 8 hellbat 1 cloak banshee 2cc liberator range 2 fac cyclone hellbat aggressive mech transition followups -> speed banshee 2 thor drop 4 cyclone hellbat timing with +1 im sure i missed a few but im not a terran player and yes ravager all ins can kill a terran if they dont defend properly but if it doesnt win you the game you're just dead; with reapers you can do 0 damage other than forcing lings and still be ahead | ||
|
Deleted User 132135
702 Posts
| ||
|
Vanadiel
France961 Posts
and yes ravager all ins can kill a terran if they dont defend properly but if it doesnt win you the game you're just dead; with reapers you can do 0 damage other than forcing lings and still be ahead Exactly. 1 base Ravager is an extremely aggressive opening/all-in (and I'd say not as good as before as it gets pretty much shut downed lately by high level terran), and as such you don't win or if you don't do a considerable amount of damage, you are very behind. This is fine to me. 3 Rax reaper, on the other hand, has the strength and the potential to win of an all-in, but as long as you don't lose stupidly your reaper, even if the Zerg defends well you're at most slightly behind. | ||
| ||
|
|
Kung Fu Cup
Replay Cast
The PondCast
OSC
Replay Cast
Escore
CranKy Ducklings
Sparkling Tuna Cup
OSC
Afreeca Starleague
Rush vs Hm
Bisu vs Shuttle
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
