EPTCommunity Feedback Update - November 17 - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
scoo2r
Canada91 Posts
| ||
|
Kenny_mk1
31 Posts
This playstyle with speedprism was a bit viable before patch too and really fun to me. I hope if they reimplement the drop-delay that it will not be too long, old one was too long. I'm really sad they buff Servos, mech suck. It would be bad if top-kor bioplay TvZ stop... edit : about the mine, i'm not a bw elitist but having him cannot target drone&probe cuz "flying" unit would just be good to me & sounds like a good solution (& revert visibility of course& keeping upgrade buff) but i guess T would'nt be ok :p. | ||
|
Ej_
47656 Posts
On November 18 2017 07:45 youngjiddle wrote: I never implied I won't adapt and find a new build, or that my build is fun for only me even when I lose with it. I don't even proxy stargate anyways. yet saying "you're morally entitled to surprise your opponent with 10 worker kills craft" is very ignorant to say when it still in the game for every race which has been discussed a billion of times. I hope they reverse the revelation nerf too. Or at least reduce the cost so that it requires more protoss apm -> more skill, while still becoming more useful. nice, you better start counting those 4 things. a)implying that proxy oracle in PvT wasn't literally impossible to stop with a macro build b)implying that the nerf was caused by "whiners" c)calling people who recognized the ridiculesness of the build "whiners" d)saying the "winrates were balanced if not zerg favored" which is horrendously wrong, every Terran I know has been getting buttfucked in the matchup, dk what Zerg has to do with it  e)having the guts to call anyone a whiner right after saying that a slight oracle nerf will "nerf it out of the game" That's 5. | ||
|
washikie
United States752 Posts
I do think the shield battery nerf is to much if they also nerf oracle, I would say change one or the other but not both at the same time, protoss is already struggling a bit to take thirds in pvz and nerfing battery will make it even harder, and further encourage the current 2 base allin meta. I also think that if terran isnt cripled in the early game drops might be a bit to strong without cheep batteries. | ||
|
franzji
United States583 Posts
On November 18 2017 07:49 ZigguratOfUr wrote: - "5 nerfs" It's two nerfs and a buff. - "nerf a strategy out of the game" Oracles will still be very viable. - "winrates were balanced" They weren't particularly in PvT. Not sure what he meant by the fourth wrong thing. aha 5 nerfs refers to this quick balance patch plus the most recent patch making it 5 nerfs in a week or so. and with winrates and openers I refered to zerg and oracle openers in LotV and the nerf hurting oracles vs. Hydras, so. | ||
|
Heyjoray
240 Posts
On November 18 2017 07:15 Edowyth wrote: The lurker upgrade seems like it might be a problem in TvZ, but I suspect otherwise it just means that lurker drops / runbys will start seeing some usage. Lurker will only find a way into the game when this insane harassment play by Terran and Protoss slows down. There is a good reason why hydra bane is the must go. Its a massive pain in the ass to defend with lurker. Quite ironic | ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2654 Posts
On November 18 2017 07:59 youngjiddle wrote: aha 5 nerfs refers to this quick balance patch plus the most recent patch making it 5 nerfs in a week or so. and with winrates and openers I refered to zerg and oracle openers in LotV and the nerf hurting oracles vs. Hydras, so. They nerfed the damage, but only in the way it interacts with 3 units. They nerfed the duration of stasis. Thats it The build time it kind of its a nerf but considering CB got a buff it makes the build time overall the same as prepatch so it pretty much stays the same. On November 18 2017 07:03 Olli wrote: Good changes overall. Not sure I like drilling claws though. Sounds to me like that moves widow mines in the direction of researching drilling claws to suicide mines into mineral lines. They'll get big hits off regardless of how fast protoss/zerg react, and that's worth the investment even if you lose the mines afterwards. I'd rather see the mine nerf reverted or at least toned down honestly. I'm thinking the same thing, buffing drilling claws just makes gigantic unseen shots be the norm and thats what the change was supposed to evade, I seriously think they have it backwards with the WM changes. | ||
|
franzji
United States583 Posts
On November 18 2017 07:51 Ej_ wrote: a)implying that proxy oracle in PvT wasn't literally impossible to stop with a macro build b)implying that the nerf was caused by "whiners" c)calling people who recognized the ridiculesness of the build "whiners" d)saying the "winrates were balanced if not zerg favored" which is horrendously wrong, every Terran I know has been getting buttfucked in the matchup, dk what Zerg has to do with it e)having the guts to call anyone a whiner right after saying that a slight oracle nerf will "nerf it out of the game" That's 5. a) didn't even mention PvT, I said the oracle time nerf was needed because of chrono. b) you'd be blind to not notice people whining about mass oracles. c) what's wrong with that? if people whine about my cannon rush because they think it is "ridiculesness" I am calling them whiners. d) didn't even mention PvT when talking about winrates, and If you want to tell me one whole week is proof of insane toss winrates with nothing to back it up  e) it's 5 nerfs not one slight nerf. | ||
|
franzji
United States583 Posts
On November 18 2017 08:05 Lexender wrote: They nerfed the damage, but only in the way it interacts with 3 units. They nerfed the duration of stasis. Thats it The build time it kind of its a nerf but considering CB got a buff it makes the build time overall the same as prepatch so it pretty much stays the same. Revelation duration reduced from 43 to 30 seconds. Stasis Ward will no longewr affect eggs or larva. Stasis Ward has a 170 second timed life duration Pulsar Beam weapon changed from Spell to Normal damage (Pulsar Beam damage will now be affected by Armor values). and the two new ones damage and build time. | ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2654 Posts
On November 18 2017 08:09 youngjiddle wrote: Revelation duration reduced from 43 to 30 seconds. Stasis Ward will no longewr affect eggs or larva. Stasis Ward has a 170 second timed life duration Pulsar Beam weapon changed from Spell to Normal damage (Pulsar Beam damage will now be affected by Armor values). and the two new ones damage and build time. Build time as I said its not really nerf with in the CB change. Spell damage got reverted with damage nerf. So 3 nerfs, and it in no way stops oracles from being viable vs zerg, you still 2 shot drones and still can cast stasis in mineral lines. | ||
|
Edowyth
United States183 Posts
On November 18 2017 07:19 ZigguratOfUr wrote: It's still horrible gameplay regardless of whether it is balanced or not. Besides ZvZ and even PvZ are much more of a concern than TvZ where lurkers are concerned. Shit ... I typoed the hell out of that. I meant ZvZ. PvZ I don't see it being as large an issue because immortals will wreck any such attempts (just like tanks stopping it in TvZ). In ZvZ there's nothing that really kills lurkers fast enough to prevent that kind of a play from happening. | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On November 18 2017 08:14 Edowyth wrote: Shit ... I typoed the hell out of that. I meant ZvZ. PvZ I don't see it being as large an issue because immortals will wreck any such attempts (just like tanks stopping it in TvZ). In ZvZ there's nothing that really kills lurkers fast enough to prevent that kind of a play from happening. At least before the upgrade was a thing you could try to pick a few lurkers off and retreat, and lurkers weren't nearly as good at offense than defense. Now with this upgrade it's no longer the case in ZvZ. I'm not sure what positive gameplay this upgrade is supposed to engender. | ||
|
Edowyth
United States183 Posts
On November 18 2017 08:12 Lexender wrote: Build time as I said its not really nerf with in the CB change. Not to get in on the rest of this, but that's bullshit. Oracles' build time was straight up nerfed. The short-duration effects of chronoboost have exactly the same effect as old chrono over time so if you ever build more than one oracle this is a straight up nerf to their production speed. And if you ever considered building oracles without chronoboosting them (as is frequently the case in the mid- or late- game when chrono is desperately needed on upgrades like ETL, blink, glaives, or storm), it's even more clearly a straight nerf. The nerf to their damage is also effectively a 50% DPS nerf in PvT in the early game. Certainly something was needed (longer build time on stargates?) but this is a massive over-nerf. Oracles will certainly see far, far less play than even before the design patch once this goes through. Sure, you'll see one or two for scouting purposes throughout the game, but that's it. | ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2654 Posts
On November 18 2017 08:22 Edowyth wrote: Not to get in on the rest of this, but that's bullshit. Oracles' build time was straight up nerfed. The short-duration effects of chronoboost have exactly the same effect as old chrono over time so if you ever build more than one oracle this is a straight up nerf to their production speed. And if you ever considered building oracles without chronoboosting them (as is frequently the case in the mid- or late- game when chrono is desperately needed on upgrades like ETL, blink, glaives, or storm), it's even more clearly a straight nerf. The nerf to their damage is also effectively a 50% DPS nerf in PvT in the early game. Certainly something was needed (longer build time on stargates?) but this is a massive over-nerf. Oracles will certainly see far, far less play than even before the design patch once this goes through. Sure, you'll see one or two for scouting purposes throughout the game, but that's it. With constant old chrono oracles got build in 31.5 seconds, with current chrono they got out in in 27 seconds with 1 chrono and 18.5 seconds with 2 chronos, with this change they get build in 33 seconds with 1 chrono and 23 seconds with 2 chronos. At the end your point is wheter or not new chrono is an overall nerf to new chrono because you are considering using chrono in everything else, but thats a different matter altogether. | ||
|
Edowyth
United States183 Posts
On November 18 2017 08:38 Lexender wrote: With constant old chrono oracles got build in 31.5 seconds, with current chrono they got out in in 27 seconds with 1 chrono and 18.5 seconds with 2 chronos, with this change they get build in 33 seconds with 1 chrono and 23 seconds with 2 chronos. And, as stated, those chronos still have the same long term effect as the old chrono ... so you can rush out that 1 oracle, but everything else is going to be slower. As I said before, it's a flat-out nerf to oracles' build time. Just because the fastest possible oracle is roughly the same speed does not negate the fact that it's a nerf. | ||
|
Togekiss
Canada154 Posts
I'm glad the folks over at Blizzard have been paying attention! | ||
|
FrkFrJss
Canada1205 Posts
On November 18 2017 08:54 Togekiss wrote: This update looks to be on a positive note. Some may say it's a bit rushed, but from the few high level games we have had the chance to witness, this is an obvious step in the right direction. I'm glad the folks over at Blizzard have been paying attention! My hope is that the quick patches don't result in long-term balance problems. i think some oracle nerf was needed, but this change is a rather large nerf to the oracle overall. But now that the initial changes are out of the way, hopefully we can let the meta stabilize. | ||
|
Boggyb
2855 Posts
| ||
|
Serimek
France2274 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Snute
Norway839 Posts
targeting the oracle might be a slippery slope when chrono stack rush might turn out to be the real issue. very important to focus on the right properties here | ||
| ||
