|
Bisutopia19368 Posts
On March 19 2018 22:58 ReachTheSky wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2018 22:40 Boggyb wrote:On March 19 2018 20:27 ypslala wrote:
i have a suggestion: the function of the bunker is to defend a terran base. bunkers should not be allowed for offensive purporses - especially in early game. to avoid bunker rush/cheese they need to be in range of a command center. for example like 15 range The function of spore crawlers and spine crawlers is to defend Zerg bases. Neither should be allowed for offensive purposes. To avoid misuse of the buildings, they need to be in range of a hatchery. For example, like 15 range. Nothing is stopping a zerg from building a hatchery anywhere on the map to create creep for the spines/spores to burrow on.
Float a command center across the map and build bunkers wherever it floats.
|
On March 19 2018 23:27 fds wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2018 21:35 ihatevideogames wrote:
What if Armory cost and build time were reduced, so terran could start 2/2 infantry a bit faster?
Would faster terran infantry upgrades and faster upgrades for mech have too big ramifications for TvZ? Making bio 2/2 upgrade faster is very interesting idea. Cheaper and faster armory might be problematic due to faster access to helbats and thors. Maybe simple solution would be to postpone armory requirement, so you would need it only for 3/3.
I don't think armory should be a requirement for bio upgrades at all.
|
On March 19 2018 23:29 BisuDagger wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2018 22:58 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 19 2018 22:40 Boggyb wrote:On March 19 2018 20:27 ypslala wrote:
i have a suggestion: the function of the bunker is to defend a terran base. bunkers should not be allowed for offensive purporses - especially in early game. to avoid bunker rush/cheese they need to be in range of a command center. for example like 15 range The function of spore crawlers and spine crawlers is to defend Zerg bases. Neither should be allowed for offensive purposes. To avoid misuse of the buildings, they need to be in range of a hatchery. For example, like 15 range. Nothing is stopping a zerg from building a hatchery anywhere on the map to create creep for the spines/spores to burrow on. Float a command center across the map and build bunkers wherever it floats.
Except that if you make this change to the terran bunker, It removes terran aggression options and makes the game less interactive. Less interactive games=bad for viewership because they are boring to watch and we aren't here to watch someone play simcity or listen to pointless caster banter for the first several minutes of a game.
|
On March 20 2018 00:34 ReachTheSky wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2018 23:29 BisuDagger wrote:On March 19 2018 22:58 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 19 2018 22:40 Boggyb wrote:On March 19 2018 20:27 ypslala wrote:
i have a suggestion: the function of the bunker is to defend a terran base. bunkers should not be allowed for offensive purporses - especially in early game. to avoid bunker rush/cheese they need to be in range of a command center. for example like 15 range The function of spore crawlers and spine crawlers is to defend Zerg bases. Neither should be allowed for offensive purposes. To avoid misuse of the buildings, they need to be in range of a hatchery. For example, like 15 range. Nothing is stopping a zerg from building a hatchery anywhere on the map to create creep for the spines/spores to burrow on. Float a command center across the map and build bunkers wherever it floats. Except that if you make this change to the terran bunker, It removes terran aggression options and makes the game less interactive. Less interactive games=bad for viewership because they are boring to watch and we aren't here to watch someone play simcity or listen to pointless caster banter for the first several minutes of a game.
So you're for letting overlord drop T1 ? because it's exactly the same
|
|
|
On March 20 2018 04:18 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2018 00:34 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 19 2018 23:29 BisuDagger wrote:On March 19 2018 22:58 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 19 2018 22:40 Boggyb wrote:On March 19 2018 20:27 ypslala wrote:
i have a suggestion: the function of the bunker is to defend a terran base. bunkers should not be allowed for offensive purporses - especially in early game. to avoid bunker rush/cheese they need to be in range of a command center. for example like 15 range The function of spore crawlers and spine crawlers is to defend Zerg bases. Neither should be allowed for offensive purposes. To avoid misuse of the buildings, they need to be in range of a hatchery. For example, like 15 range. Nothing is stopping a zerg from building a hatchery anywhere on the map to create creep for the spines/spores to burrow on. Float a command center across the map and build bunkers wherever it floats. Except that if you make this change to the terran bunker, It removes terran aggression options and makes the game less interactive. Less interactive games=bad for viewership because they are boring to watch and we aren't here to watch someone play simcity or listen to pointless caster banter for the first several minutes of a game. So you're for letting overlord drop T1 ? because it's exactly the same
Lmao ling drops and bunker rushes are as different as they get. Basically a perfect antithesis.
Stationary defense structure for ranged units against melee
vs
Mobile transport unit for melee units against ranged
|
On March 20 2018 04:18 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2018 00:34 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 19 2018 23:29 BisuDagger wrote:On March 19 2018 22:58 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 19 2018 22:40 Boggyb wrote:On March 19 2018 20:27 ypslala wrote:
i have a suggestion: the function of the bunker is to defend a terran base. bunkers should not be allowed for offensive purporses - especially in early game. to avoid bunker rush/cheese they need to be in range of a command center. for example like 15 range The function of spore crawlers and spine crawlers is to defend Zerg bases. Neither should be allowed for offensive purposes. To avoid misuse of the buildings, they need to be in range of a hatchery. For example, like 15 range. Nothing is stopping a zerg from building a hatchery anywhere on the map to create creep for the spines/spores to burrow on. Float a command center across the map and build bunkers wherever it floats. Except that if you make this change to the terran bunker, It removes terran aggression options and makes the game less interactive. Less interactive games=bad for viewership because they are boring to watch and we aren't here to watch someone play simcity or listen to pointless caster banter for the first several minutes of a game. So you're for letting overlord drop T1 ? because it's exactly the same
I personally prefer zerg to still have it in their bag of goodies since it's fun to execute and fun to watch. Maybe they should have buffed the sentry to allow protoss the early scouting instead, who knows. I've heard some protosses say they will still go stargate anyway due to the benefits it offers. I can't say which solution is the best in the long run. I think with the change blizzard made toss gets to play even greedier now.
|
On March 19 2018 23:29 BisuDagger wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2018 22:58 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 19 2018 22:40 Boggyb wrote:On March 19 2018 20:27 ypslala wrote:
i have a suggestion: the function of the bunker is to defend a terran base. bunkers should not be allowed for offensive purporses - especially in early game. to avoid bunker rush/cheese they need to be in range of a command center. for example like 15 range The function of spore crawlers and spine crawlers is to defend Zerg bases. Neither should be allowed for offensive purposes. To avoid misuse of the buildings, they need to be in range of a hatchery. For example, like 15 range. Nothing is stopping a zerg from building a hatchery anywhere on the map to create creep for the spines/spores to burrow on. Float a command center across the map and build bunkers wherever it floats.
if maru had to do that first, he would have lost the finals and 120000 US $ if i am right.
there is no income while floating the CC and no scvs can be produced.
________________
and if you have to build a hatch first, you need to spend 300 minerals. and if you want to get creep from overlords, you need to have a lair first!
and the terran player gets a refund for the bunker... you can't compare spine crawler with bunker rush at all.
|
On March 20 2018 00:34 ReachTheSky wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2018 23:29 BisuDagger wrote:On March 19 2018 22:58 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 19 2018 22:40 Boggyb wrote:On March 19 2018 20:27 ypslala wrote:
i have a suggestion: the function of the bunker is to defend a terran base. bunkers should not be allowed for offensive purporses - especially in early game. to avoid bunker rush/cheese they need to be in range of a command center. for example like 15 range The function of spore crawlers and spine crawlers is to defend Zerg bases. Neither should be allowed for offensive purposes. To avoid misuse of the buildings, they need to be in range of a hatchery. For example, like 15 range. Nothing is stopping a zerg from building a hatchery anywhere on the map to create creep for the spines/spores to burrow on. Float a command center across the map and build bunkers wherever it floats. Except that if you make this change to the terran bunker, It removes terran aggression options and makes the game less interactive. Less interactive games=bad for viewership because they are boring to watch and we aren't here to watch someone play simcity or listen to pointless caster banter for the first several minutes of a game.
the World Electronic Sports Games 2017 finals game 7 was a disaster for the viewership. totally disapointing.
|
On March 20 2018 09:58 ypslala wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2018 00:34 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 19 2018 23:29 BisuDagger wrote:On March 19 2018 22:58 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 19 2018 22:40 Boggyb wrote:On March 19 2018 20:27 ypslala wrote:
i have a suggestion: the function of the bunker is to defend a terran base. bunkers should not be allowed for offensive purporses - especially in early game. to avoid bunker rush/cheese they need to be in range of a command center. for example like 15 range The function of spore crawlers and spine crawlers is to defend Zerg bases. Neither should be allowed for offensive purposes. To avoid misuse of the buildings, they need to be in range of a hatchery. For example, like 15 range. Nothing is stopping a zerg from building a hatchery anywhere on the map to create creep for the spines/spores to burrow on. Float a command center across the map and build bunkers wherever it floats. Except that if you make this change to the terran bunker, It removes terran aggression options and makes the game less interactive. Less interactive games=bad for viewership because they are boring to watch and we aren't here to watch someone play simcity or listen to pointless caster banter for the first several minutes of a game. the World Electronic Sports Games 2017 finals game 7 was a disaster for the viewership. totally disapointing.
Can you back that up with a survey?
|
Raven missile in it's current state is just bad for the game, there is no counterplay to it for zerg at least. It outranges most units and the missiles travel way too fast to make proper splitting possible (even the best zergs can't manage to split against it as we saw many times). Can't believe they really wanna keept it, they should rather buff terran in other ways, if their winrate is really that bad.
|
On March 20 2018 00:07 WaesumNinja wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2018 23:27 fds wrote:On March 19 2018 21:35 ihatevideogames wrote:
What if Armory cost and build time were reduced, so terran could start 2/2 infantry a bit faster?
Would faster terran infantry upgrades and faster upgrades for mech have too big ramifications for TvZ? Making bio 2/2 upgrade faster is very interesting idea. Cheaper and faster armory might be problematic due to faster access to helbats and thors. Maybe simple solution would be to postpone armory requirement, so you would need it only for 3/3. I don't think armory should be a requirement for bio upgrades at all.
Personally I think that a lot of balance issues in TvP could be solved by halving the reactor build time.
|
On March 21 2018 03:39 JayuSC2 wrote:
Raven missile in it's current state is just bad for the game, there is no counterplay to it for zerg at least. It outranges most units and the missiles travel way too fast to make proper splitting possible (even the best zergs can't manage to split against it as we saw many times). Can't believe they really wanna keept it, they should rather buff terran in other ways, if their winrate is really that bad.
First, It's not strictly uncounterable. Use fungals and parasitic bombs to decimate multiple ravens. Second, I agree that there should be a brief delay to enable splitting.
|
On March 20 2018 09:58 ypslala wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2018 00:34 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 19 2018 23:29 BisuDagger wrote:On March 19 2018 22:58 ReachTheSky wrote:On March 19 2018 22:40 Boggyb wrote:On March 19 2018 20:27 ypslala wrote:
i have a suggestion: the function of the bunker is to defend a terran base. bunkers should not be allowed for offensive purporses - especially in early game. to avoid bunker rush/cheese they need to be in range of a command center. for example like 15 range The function of spore crawlers and spine crawlers is to defend Zerg bases. Neither should be allowed for offensive purposes. To avoid misuse of the buildings, they need to be in range of a hatchery. For example, like 15 range. Nothing is stopping a zerg from building a hatchery anywhere on the map to create creep for the spines/spores to burrow on. Float a command center across the map and build bunkers wherever it floats. Except that if you make this change to the terran bunker, It removes terran aggression options and makes the game less interactive. Less interactive games=bad for viewership because they are boring to watch and we aren't here to watch someone play simcity or listen to pointless caster banter for the first several minutes of a game. the World Electronic Sports Games 2017 finals game 7 was a disaster for the viewership. totally disapointing.
How do you mean? Most tournament games with best of 7 have at least 2 rush games. This one had 3. Re-watch both of $O$'s Blizzcon finals.
In terms of viewer numbers, I think that a lot of people found the time of broadcast inconvenient; that's all.
|
On March 21 2018 03:39 JayuSC2 wrote:
Raven missile in it's current state is just bad for the game, there is no counterplay to it for zerg at least. It outranges most units and the missiles travel way too fast to make proper splitting possible (even the best zergs can't manage to split against it as we saw many times). Can't believe they really wanna keept it, they should rather buff terran in other ways, if their winrate is really that bad.
Why do people keep parroting this nonsense?
Did you even watch WESG finals?
If you did and you are still saying this it's really bizarre.
I'm OK if you don't like watching it (yet some how I bet you enjoy watching Broods a move across the map), but to say it has no counter is straight up wrong - watch the games rofl.
|
On March 21 2018 03:39 JayuSC2 wrote:
Raven missile in it's current state is just bad for the game, there is no counterplay to it for zerg at least. It outranges most units and the missiles travel way too fast to make proper splitting possible (even the best zergs can't manage to split against it as we saw many times). Can't believe they really wanna keept it, they should rather buff terran in other ways, if their winrate is really that bad.
Dark's counterplay was to split and friendly fire onto SCVs:
Instead of screaming how broken it is on the forums, try watching what the pros like Dark do. Anyone who actually watched the WESG finals knows that Maru didn't rely on Ravens to win at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
