|
Hey everyone,
We received feedback that Protoss early game options are currently limited in the Protoss vs. Zerg matchup due to the potential of very early Zergling drop builds. Protoss players were having trouble holding off these early attacks without the help of a Stargate and thus gravitated towards opening with a “safe” Stargate in most games. So as to open up the early game for Protoss players, we’ll looking to change the Overlord’s “Mutate Ventral Sacs” upgrade requirement from Evolution Chamber to Lair.
Zerg
*Overlord’s “Mutate Ventral Sacs” upgrade requirement changed from Evolution Chamber to Lair.
Next, we’ve been seeing a lot of games where Anti-Armor Missile spam becomes the determining factor in the late game in all three Terran matchups. The Anti-Armor Missile is intended to combo with core units such as Marines, Marauders, Liberators, and Cyclones—not to be massed purely for damage, as is currently the case. Thus, we’d like to reduce the damage of Anti-Armor missiles to reinforce its intended function.
At the same time, since Terrans are currently relying on the Raven for their late-game power, reducing the Anti-Armor Missile’s damage would help rein that strategy in. We think this would provide a good opportunity to give Terrans a bit more late-game help in the form of a buff to the Viking.
Vikings are often perceived as being weaker in the current metagame than they were before, partially due to recent changes to other races. We’re proposing a health buff, from 125 to 135, which will not only change the unit’s relationship against anti-air ground units and late-game air units, but also against area-of-effect spells commonly used against them, such as Parasitic Bomb and Psionic Storm.
Terran
*Raven’s Anti-Armor missile damage reduced from 30 impact damage with splash fall-off to 5 flat area of effect damage.
*Viking health increased from 125 to 135.
These changes are currently available in the testing matchmaking queue. After testing, we would like to publish the finalized balance changes to live Versus on Monday 3/19. However, keep in mind that this date is subject to change. As always, thanks for you continued interest and please let us know what you think on the forums or any other community sites.
|
Live just before gsl finals lol
|
Terran had a late game. This couldn't last long. More seriously, I hope the viking buff will address the problem.
|
from 30 aoe to flat 5... is that right? idk kev
|
The viking buff is fine, but parasitic bomb still needs a nerf.
Also while these changes seem fine, Terran probably still needs some sort of Protoss nerf (either upgrades or colossus or both) for TvP.
|
Wow that was fast. Anyway someone will test or I will: Does 1  Carrier no longer beat 3 vikings?
|
Do they just want the raven to be gone from late game..? like I fail to see how giving the raven 5 AOE damage and 1 range auto turrets will make it a unit anyone would want to spend 100/200 on.. whats worse is that the viking buff is so minor 10 hp isn't going to make a big enough difference to compensate for what we are losing... The only good change here is nerfing dropper lords. This will make PvZ a lot better but changing the raven and slight buffing the viking really isn't the way to go
|
On March 07 2018 08:00 Ryu3600 wrote:
Do they just want the raven to be gone from late game..? like I fail to see how giving the raven 5 AOE damage and 1 range auto turrets will make it a unit anyone would want to spend 100/200 on.. whats worse is that the viking buff is so minor 10 hp isn't going to make a big enough difference to compensate for what we are losing
They want you to just get probably 1-3 ravens and no more just to use them for detection and the reduced armour, they don't want people building 20 ravens and blowing up an army in seconds. The drops to lair tech is pretty huge, opens up twilight and robo openings for PvZ.
|
I saw it coming, I knew the ravens were not gonna stay, it was really broken.
Also, as a zerg player who recently offraced some protoss, I also saw the ling drop nerf coming. Damn that is really strong when the protoss doesnt have tight build order and good micro and building placement. I had a lot of problems against early ling drop + mass ling flood builds, I always took so much damage.
Overall, 2 really solid changes. I still wonder if mothership reallly needs to be in the game. I know its too cool looking and epic to remove, but balance wise, it doesnt seem fair that only protoss has 1 hero unit. ( 2, with probius) Do they really need an extra recall in the mothership? They already have nexus recalls, which are really clutch...
As for terran late game, the viking buffs is alright.. but...
Battlecruisers!! What are you waiting for? The fix is easy.
The problem with battle cruisers against zerg especially, is that they are DOUBLE hard countered by the corruptors.
I explain.
1) Their armor is armored and massive, meaning they take a LOT of dmg from corruptors.
2) They attack really fast for really little damage, similar to marines. Meaning the corruptors natural high armor of 2 hard counters the BCs attack. Its pretty much like marines shooting at ultralisks.
The fix is obvious, you have to make BCS more like starcraft1 bcs. Attack slower, for high damage. Maybe a tiny bit of cleave damage to 2 close targets? Might be too strong.
Obviously if you buff the BCs, teleport and yamato have to be reworked.
Make the bcs a strong a-move unit. Terran does not have good late game A-move units. Their late game units are all super micro intensive, while the other races late game unit is super a-move.
|
Ravens are broken but taking away aggressive possibilities from Zerg once again... meh
|
I don't mind a raven nerf but to nerf the missile to 5 damage is silly.. it'll be even more useless than it was before the last patch.
|
On March 07 2018 08:11 Nerchio wrote:
Ravens are broken but taking away aggressive possibilities from Zerg once again... meh
Maru,struggling against an out-of-form Stats is proof that the Ravens are OP, but Scarlett, who easily won the PC without Macro, isn't enough to consider changes ?
|
Is the raven missile the new bunker?
|
Good changes. Was weird to watch the anti-armor missile spam all the time at IEM. Balance-wise, it'll work out with later changes I guess.
They could also maybe just reduce the raven cost and buff movement speed, so it could work as a detector for once if they are nerfing the abilities that much. I wouldn't mind if they removed the auto-turret again.
Also hopefully they'll get rid of burrowed neural and fungal growth as well some time in the future.
|
On March 07 2018 08:11 Nerchio wrote:
Ravens are broken but taking away aggressive possibilities from Zerg once again... meh
It isn't fair for Zerg to be able to play either aggressive or defensive against Protoss when Protoss doesn't have that choice with how strong Zerg mid and late game is.
|
Austria24417 Posts
Not sure about this entirely. It's a nice change for Protoss in the matchup, but drops were holdable. Imo it's a general scouting issue with Protoss vs Zergs where early tech is hard to scout with adepts and stargate units, but also later tech becomes a scouting issue once hydras are out. A queen and spore per base + hydras on the map make it very hard to keep tabs on things like a spire going up or when hive tech starts, etc.
I'd rather see a change that allows Protoss to scout better for all-ins, but also mid-lategame tech so they can prepare in time.
Ravens I think did need a patch, but hard to say yet if vikings getting buffed in return will be enough to compensate.
|
On March 07 2018 07:42 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
[i] *Raven’s Anti-Armor missile damage reduced from 30 impact damage with splash fall-off to 5 flat area of effect damage.
*Viking health increased from 125 to 135.
30 to 5 seems like a ridiculous difference? It's actual damage is negligible in that case. RIP terran lategame anyway, was cool while it lasted.
The viking change has been necessary for a while now. Hopefully it helps with the voidray allins.
|
Back to defense only as zerg or go super all-in with that Elazer/Rogue nydus bullshit.
An aggressive option that could set up a cool macro game was too much I guess.
The Stargate problem is a scouting problem and not a "must open stargate to survive ling drops" problem imo.
I am really curious if this will actually mean that we will see less stargates, still think it will be the superior opening for killing overlords and drones, gaining map control and securing a third.
|
On March 07 2018 08:55 Musicus wrote:
Back to defense only as zerg or go super all-in with that Elazer/Rogue nydus bullshit.
An aggressive option that could set up a cool macro game was too much I guess.
The Stargate problem is a scouting problem and not a "must open stargate to survive ling drops" problem imo.
We rarely ever saw "aggressive options that could set up macro games". Sure people occasionally went for some 8 ling drops for some harassment, but overwhelmingly it was 16 lings or ling/ravager or ling/baneling off a minimal drone count that either killed the opponent or lost.
|
Next, we’ve been seeing a lot of games where Anti-Armor Missile spam becomes the determining factor in the late game in all three Terran matchups.
Next, we’ve been seeing a lot of games where Anti-Terran Nerfhammer spam becomes the determining factor in the late game in all three Terran matchups....
Skytoss is the dermining factor in lategame Protoss for years and never seemed to be a problem...
Storm -> ha ha terran learn to play and learn to split !
Colossus -> ha ha terran learn to play and learn to split !
Baneling -> ha ha terran learn to play and learn to split !
Raven -> ha ha nerf terran !
CQFD
User was banned for this post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CM809rKWoAAiV0C.jpg)
