|
On March 07 2018 14:58 MockHamill wrote:
I do not even know what to say.
Terran finally had an answer to clumped up Carriers with HT support. And you instantly nerf it.
10 more hit points on Vikings does absolut nothing in comparison. Vikings can still not be used against Carrier/HT due to storm plus no native amour so no protection against interceptors.
I could understand the move if Terran was dominating all tournaments. But every finale is a PvZ and there were only 2 Terrans in the top 12 in Katowice.
Terran is not overperforming so why nerf their only answer to the golden armada?
Think back to how fast the Liberator air damage was nerfed in early LOTV. I'm starting to believe the marketing department is forcing the balance team to keep terran with no lategame at all so they force an 'action packed' meta for the proscene.
|
On March 07 2018 14:58 MockHamill wrote:
I do not even know what to say.
Terran finally had an answer to clumped up Carriers with HT support. And you instantly nerf it.
10 more hit points on Vikings does absolut nothing in comparison. Vikings can still not be used against Carrier/HT due to storm plus no native amour so no protection against interceptors.
I could understand the move if Terran was dominating all tournaments. But every finale is a PvZ and there were only 2 Terrans in the top 12 in Katowice.
Terran is not overperforming so why nerf their only answer to the golden armada?
I need every Terran to remember when PvT was at 50%, and then Blizzard nerfed the Adept. Or when PvT was at 50% and Khaydarin Amulet was removed.
Terran has consistently had the highest win rates over the course of SC2 history. A small period without huge winrates won't hurt.
Try being Protoss, the only race that has had sub 45% win rates since January 2017. And it has happened 6 times!
http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/
|
On March 07 2018 15:13 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2018 14:58 MockHamill wrote:
I do not even know what to say.
Terran finally had an answer to clumped up Carriers with HT support. And you instantly nerf it.
10 more hit points on Vikings does absolut nothing in comparison. Vikings can still not be used against Carrier/HT due to storm plus no native amour so no protection against interceptors.
I could understand the move if Terran was dominating all tournaments. But every finale is a PvZ and there were only 2 Terrans in the top 12 in Katowice.
Terran is not overperforming so why nerf their only answer to the golden armada? I need every Terran to remember when PvT was at 50%, and then Blizzard nerfed the Adept. Or when PvT was at 50% and Khaydarin Amulet was removed. Terran has consistently had the highest win rates over the course of SC2 history. A small period without huge winrates won't hurt. Try being Protoss, the only race that has had sub 45% win rates since January 2017. And it has happened 6 times!http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/
So the correct way to balance this is to make sure every race takes turn in the gutter. Alright.
This still doesn't explain why they keep nerfing it every time terrans have a viable lategame. They could nerf something else to make sure we get our 'turn in the gutter', no?
|
On March 07 2018 15:13 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2018 14:58 MockHamill wrote:
I do not even know what to say.
Terran finally had an answer to clumped up Carriers with HT support. And you instantly nerf it.
10 more hit points on Vikings does absolut nothing in comparison. Vikings can still not be used against Carrier/HT due to storm plus no native amour so no protection against interceptors.
I could understand the move if Terran was dominating all tournaments. But every finale is a PvZ and there were only 2 Terrans in the top 12 in Katowice.
Terran is not overperforming so why nerf their only answer to the golden armada? I need every Terran to remember when PvT was at 50%, and then Blizzard nerfed the Adept. Or when PvT was at 50% and Khaydarin Amulet was removed.
Is PvT now at 50%? If I read it right, people are arguing that there's already an imbalance, that the imbalance has just barely started to be figured out, and the way it's been figured out is being nerfed. In other words, the existing imbalance is being made worse.
For my part, I have no idea. Obviously at the highest levels, terran has been doing badly lately overall. I don't know how well it generalises across skill levels. The idea of every late game turning into the same comp with the same ideas sounds like something worth avoiding, but obviously it's not worth avoiding if late game becomes severely imbalanced.
|
On March 07 2018 08:11 Nerchio wrote:
Ravens are broken but taking away aggressive possibilities from Zerg once again... meh
Don't worry, you already got the worst result in group C at IEM. Even with the nerf, you can't possibly get any worst than that. The small zerg nerf will be fine.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On March 07 2018 15:21 neutralrobot wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2018 15:13 BronzeKnee wrote:On March 07 2018 14:58 MockHamill wrote:
I do not even know what to say.
Terran finally had an answer to clumped up Carriers with HT support. And you instantly nerf it.
10 more hit points on Vikings does absolut nothing in comparison. Vikings can still not be used against Carrier/HT due to storm plus no native amour so no protection against interceptors.
I could understand the move if Terran was dominating all tournaments. But every finale is a PvZ and there were only 2 Terrans in the top 12 in Katowice.
Terran is not overperforming so why nerf their only answer to the golden armada? I need every Terran to remember when PvT was at 50%, and then Blizzard nerfed the Adept. Or when PvT was at 50% and Khaydarin Amulet was removed. Is PvT now at 50%? If I read it right, people are arguing that there's already an imbalance, that the imbalance has just barely started to be figured out, and the way it's been figured out is being nerfed. In other words, the existing imbalance is being made worse. For my part, I have no idea. Obviously at the highest levels, terran has been doing badly lately overall. I don't know how well it generalises across skill levels. The idea of every late game turning into the same comp with the same ideas sounds like something worth avoiding, but obviously it's not worth avoiding if late game becomes severely imbalanced.
While PvT win-rates are at 50% approximately on aligulac terrans are still forced into a lot of all-ins to get that win rate (and ofc aligulac has lots of weaknesses). Playing macro Terran against Protoss right now is difficult, because chrono-ed Protoss upgrades outscale terran units really fast, and (to a lesser extent) due to the new colossus absolutely evaporating marines. I'd like to see a few nerfs targeting those two points. Redistributing the colossus's damage to do less versus light would be rather easy since colossi aren't particularly good in PvZ anyways. Nerfing Protoss upgrades is trickier since it also impacts PvZ, but I think increasing the build time for +2 and +3 might be necessary. The golden armada is tbh a rather minor issue when it comes to PvT.
|
On March 07 2018 07:46 DieuCure wrote:
Live just before gsl finals lol
Yea that is really not a good move imo.
Also only Maru is using ravens like this, and he is the only Terran in GSL still alive...
And that did not let him win against Rogue at IEM, so I do no think that is a real problem.
|
I don't understand why late game Terran is considered bad. I'm a low GM toss and I ALWAYS lose late game Pvt. I just feel like I can't do anything vs Viking ghost, emp rips my ground and Viking my colossus. The end.
If I get tempest to chip away the terran army he just a moves into me. I just don't understand it. In pro games this is never the case because the game ends much earlier.
Also seeing in pro games zvt ghost snipes are amazing late game, maybe too hard to pull off due to fungal broods? Possibly increase its range
|
Like the terran changes but why not just remove the stacking from the AA missile?
|
Raven missles need nerfed for the same reason parasitic bomb needed to be nerfed. Being able to stack AOEs is always going to cause issues in the late game. You end up in the position where the player can create a circle of death because the only limiting factor on how much damage he can deal in the circle instantly is the amount of energy he has. Is the viking buff enough? IDK. TY was doing really well in crazy late game against dark with ghost liberator. He only lost the last game because he attacked into broodlords with all of his liberators and got fungaled. Regardless mass raven missiles is bad for the game and everyone knows it.
|
Is +10HP enough?
Would it be broken if they made it +15?
|
On March 07 2018 12:16 Loccstana wrote:
I have never seen a single pro game where it is won single highhandedly due to Ravens. If someone has an example, please post.
The above quote is the clearest of all of those who don't understand why the raven nerf is needed. Can someone not on mobile (I am lying in bed writing this) share a couple of raven clips?
On another note: if the terran lategame is so bad why not give late game upgrades to terran? Fusion core required upgrades would be late game options. Upgrade to make marauders shot their old rounds, one shot for 10 damage instead of two shots for 5 each. Upgrade to give thor 2 more javeline missiles and a boost to their single target AA damage. Upgrade hellion/hellbat armour by 1, or give either of them a movement speed upgrade. An increase to ghost range, be it steady target or base attack.
The advanced ballistics upgrade is a current late game upgrade. I think terran could use some more of those, but not too many.
|
I thought the raven maybe needed a little speed reduction on the missile. But instead they divise by 6 the damages and add 10 hp to the viking, ok 
|
 Probably every single terran hates them now. Arghhh!!
|
That's removing every agressive options for zerg on early game.
Back to turtle again like on WOL/HOTS without any possibilities to surprise the other.
Also vikings will become more powerful than corruptors while cheaper.
I guess the balance is more decided with cries than thoughts.
|
Why not just increase raven supply cost. 3 supply per raven and terrans can't spam that many ravens without sacrificing core army.
Or just make dmg nerf much smaller. Like 30->20. I think 20 dmg missiles would already to the trick and 5 dmg is pure overkill.
|
On March 07 2018 09:06 Sibayah wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Yeah i was laughing my ass off when Tod said in one game IEM toss has a lot problems with getting used to split units :D Sure its fine if Terrans have to split again banelings, Storms, Colossus, Disrutors, Vipers. But if Toss and Zerg have to learn it naaaaaah to op
|
On March 07 2018 17:12 spenzzer wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2018 09:06 Sibayah wrote: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. Yeah i was laughing my ass off when Tod said in one game IEM toss has a lot problems with getting used to split units :D Sure its fine if Terrans have to split again banelings, Storms, Colossus, Disrutors, Vipers. But if Toss and Zerg have to learn it naaaaaah to op
Zerg and protoss units cant stim and the raven missile is instant.
Imagine storm doing all of its dmg in 1s or banelings with blink.
Also funny how people say that drop was zerg's only aggressive option in early ZvP rigth after Rogue and Dark did dropless roach all-ins at IEM. Also a baneling bust in Dark's case (vs Trap).
|
Solar was trying to micro out from anti armour missiles and failed. Its not possible to outmicro AAM. Its faster than old seeker missile.
Yes. Dorperlords were the only agressive option for Zerg that is not an allin. Those roach pushes or baneling bust, were allins. With droperlord u could still follow up into mavro game.
|
On March 07 2018 15:41 SCMasterGoD wrote:
I don't understand why late game Terran is considered bad. I'm a low GM toss and I ALWAYS lose late game Pvt. I just feel like I can't do anything vs Viking ghost, emp rips my ground and Viking my colossus. The end.
If I get tempest to chip away the terran army he just a moves into me. I just don't understand it. In pro games this is never the case because the game ends much earlier.
Also seeing in pro games zvt ghost snipes are amazing late game, maybe too hard to pull off due to fungal broods? Possibly increase its range
I agree 100%, Mass ghosts not only do like 2k dmg in 5 seconds by emping but also melts zealots like they are nothing, its a struggle to cast good storms and the beef of P is demolished so fast
|
|
|
|
|
|
WCS
