|
On May 12 2018 14:49 SpecKROELLchen wrote:
I think the game in general should not be designed in a way such as "don't let race a get to this point or you are dead". It sounds like an exaggeration but in tvp it always felt like this for a very long time. And i also think z feels the same way when its against mass air/storm/MS/archon armies even though you see some quite well lategames in zvp.
That's how TvX has worked for a long time.
vZ during WoL & early LotV, vP since the tempest has been a thing because it meant BCs were useless.
Imma throw in again my raven idea : make it a true support unit with scrambling missile / healing drone / pdd. All of a sudden you can make a few without massing them either, they can help cover your big units and increase your efficiency, manipulate the battlefield, and have a true identity instead of being in the same 2 positions since 2010 : either a waste of gas, or a "make as many as possible to blow shit up" unit.
Obviously the more sensible thing would be to delete vipers & tempests (and gimme goliaths plz), but that ain't happening so might as well make something that helps reduce the ability of these units to do risk-free damage.
|
get ready for 2/3 base bio allins.
|
On May 12 2018 02:54 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2018 02:32 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On May 12 2018 01:16 Ryu3600 wrote:
I think marauder change won't be a huge deal in TvZ for the midgame where it stays on HLB/MLB for fights since most Terrans opt to go heavy marine but later as hive comes out or if its vs roach ravager I can see the marauder being more impactful. Regardless Zerg dealt with old marauder in HotS and they will surely deal with it now. The same goes for protoss players. Roach/Hydra is pretty common as are various Roach/Ravager pressure openings especially with how popular hellion and hellbat stuff is nowadays, so the marauder buff will assuredly change a lot in TvZ. Roach/hydra sees essentially no play against bio as is. And pressure openings are likely less affected by the marauder change than the big dedicated 1/1 roach/ravager timings because you'd rather spend the money on a tank or a banshee than awkward marauders that early in the game (and marines in a bunker work well enough anyway).
Don't make as if roach ravagers timing will not be affected by this, considering the fact it generally ends with a contain and that there are already qome marauders contrary to your claim, that's a terran buff on a huge scale actually, and there's still a lot of salt. Incredible ! Well, reading some propositions made by T posters on this thread was at leats really funny.
Those changes are sensibles but I hope Blizzard would monitor them carefully.
Moreover mass ravens could become a bit stronger in zvt, while the critical mass would be harder to obtain because of the nerf the turret range's buff allow you to slow push against the creep ans spore without getting it by those.
And run by will dealt easier.
|
On May 12 2018 19:15 stilt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2018 02:54 Elentos wrote:
And pressure openings are likely less affected by the marauder change than the big dedicated 1/1 roach/ravager timings because you'd rather spend the money on a tank or a banshee than awkward marauders that early in the game (and marines in a bunker work well enough anyway). Don't make as if roach ravagers timing will not be affected by this
What
Like did you misread my post, or are you saying the marauder buff is a big deal for early ravager pressure (like 4 minutes into the game)? Cause it's not, the change barely affects marauder/ravager interaction and that early the Terran would really just love to get by everything having made 0 marauders.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On May 12 2018 04:52 Lexender wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2018 02:04 deacon.frost wrote:On May 12 2018 01:16 Ryu3600 wrote:
I think marauder change won't be a huge deal in TvZ for the midgame where it stays on HLB/MLB for fights since most Terrans opt to go heavy marine but later as hive comes out or if its vs roach ravager I can see the marauder being more impactful. Regardless Zerg dealt with old marauder in HotS and they will surely deal with it now. The same goes for protoss players. *cough* MSC *cough* *cough* old immortal *cough* Marauders are designed to demolition GW army without proper upgrades(mostly charge) in the early game. Edit> Although I love the hypocricy. Look, zerg won't be affected and if they will they will cope. Same for Protoss. How are coping Terrans, how about you would try to cope with something and not whine about buffs? *cough* shield batteries*cough* *cough*stronger zealots and stalkers*cough* *cough*cheaper charge*cough* GW armies are much, much stronger than they were in HotS, are they strong enough? Maybe, maybe not. Also hipocrosy is saying GW armies without proper upgrades, because the whole crux of the problem is that protoss players are ALWAYS ahead on upgrades.
Shield batteries don't matter as bio players micro away from chargelots(and, surprise, from SB). Thus SB are useless in fights. If you have to turn away from bio you getting free shots on slowed chargelots.
Thus SB is iffy at best. Zealots aren't that much stronger against healed massed marauders as zealots tend to get away from the rest of the army.
Protoss players are always ahead because they can get there. But will they be able to get there with the marauder being as strong as WoL?
|
On May 12 2018 19:32 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2018 19:15 stilt wrote:On May 12 2018 02:54 Elentos wrote:
And pressure openings are likely less affected by the marauder change than the big dedicated 1/1 roach/ravager timings because you'd rather spend the money on a tank or a banshee than awkward marauders that early in the game (and marines in a bunker work well enough anyway). Don't make as if roach ravagers timing will not be affected by this What Like did you misread my post, or are you saying the marauder buff is a big deal for early ravager pressure (like 4 minutes into the game)? Cause it's not, the change barely affects marauder/ravager interaction and that early the Terran would really just love to get by everything having made 0 marauders.
Ooops sorry my bad I totally missread your post indeed !
I thought you were saying the 1/1 ravagers push would be unaffected because of the lack of marauders.
|
Nerf psi storm to 40 damage, nerf parasitic bomb to 60 damage. Buff void ray hp by 10, buff corruptor hp by 10.
|
On May 12 2018 20:36 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2018 04:52 Lexender wrote:On May 12 2018 02:04 deacon.frost wrote:On May 12 2018 01:16 Ryu3600 wrote:
I think marauder change won't be a huge deal in TvZ for the midgame where it stays on HLB/MLB for fights since most Terrans opt to go heavy marine but later as hive comes out or if its vs roach ravager I can see the marauder being more impactful. Regardless Zerg dealt with old marauder in HotS and they will surely deal with it now. The same goes for protoss players. *cough* MSC *cough* *cough* old immortal *cough* Marauders are designed to demolition GW army without proper upgrades(mostly charge) in the early game. Edit> Although I love the hypocricy. Look, zerg won't be affected and if they will they will cope. Same for Protoss. How are coping Terrans, how about you would try to cope with something and not whine about buffs? *cough* shield batteries*cough* *cough*stronger zealots and stalkers*cough* *cough*cheaper charge*cough* GW armies are much, much stronger than they were in HotS, are they strong enough? Maybe, maybe not. Also hipocrosy is saying GW armies without proper upgrades, because the whole crux of the problem is that protoss players are ALWAYS ahead on upgrades. Shield batteries don't matter as bio players micro away from chargelots(and, surprise, from SB). Thus SB are useless in fights. If you have to turn away from bio you getting free shots on slowed chargelots. Thus SB is iffy at best. Zealots aren't that much stronger against healed massed marauders as zealots tend to get away from the rest of the army. Protoss players are always ahead because they can get there. But will they be able to get there with the marauder being as strong as WoL?
The issue is that Protoss is able to turtle with 3 nexus and minimal army. Keyword: turtle, meaning defend. If Terran is kiting away from SBs, then it's a Protoss win because their tech and upgrades are ramping ahead.
|
Of all the things to complain about Shield Batteries are really far down the list...
|
On May 12 2018 22:52 Loccstana wrote:
Nerf psi storm to 40 damage, nerf parasitic bomb to 60 damage. Buff void ray hp by 10, buff corruptor hp by 10.
I agree with the psi storm/parasitic bomb nerfs but void rays are fine as is(half of their hp-shields-can regen, plus toss has shield batteries to go with) and corruptor's hp is fine, they are almost indestructible lol(plus they regen hp as well).
|
On May 13 2018 00:04 Charoisaur wrote:
Of all the things to complain about Shield Batteries are really far down the list...
The priority is to remove vipers and give siege tanks 6 more range
|
On May 12 2018 22:52 Loccstana wrote:
Nerf psi storm to 40 damage, nerf parasitic bomb to 60 damage. Buff void ray hp by 10, buff corruptor hp by 10.
Yeah sure, why not have marines live through storm. What could possibly go wrong?
|
On May 13 2018 00:47 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2018 22:52 Loccstana wrote:
Nerf psi storm to 40 damage, nerf parasitic bomb to 60 damage. Buff void ray hp by 10, buff corruptor hp by 10. Yeah sure, why not have marines live through storm. What could possibly go wrong?
I agree with buffing the hp of air units (especially vikings), but nerfing storm itself would make bio and LBH far too strong.
|
On May 12 2018 22:52 Loccstana wrote:
Nerf psi storm to 40 damage
That would completely delete ANY ability to play mid to late game for Protoss. There would be a few allins and those would be the ONLY strats in PvT and PvZ since there would be no transition.
|
The reason that psi storm is so strong is that if it's not then Protoss' gateway units are laughably weak. It's mostly a design flaw in stalkers not being able to be main army comp for protoss. If they are like dragoons in BW, protoss would not have to have a ridiculously strong mid game tech like SC2 storm.
Also I probably missed something. PvT has never gone beyond 54.x% in monthly winrate after stalker nerf this year and everyone suggests it's unplayable for terrans. But thinking of terran fans on TL, it makes sense again.
Blizzard would probably never gone this direction but the way to tackle the root cause is:
1. remove blink
2. revert stalker nerf
3. nerf psi storm by make it more dodgable (0.5s delay) and less spammable but keep its damage output.
so basically make stalkers dragoons and make sc2 psi storm bw psi storm and admit their design failure.
|
On May 13 2018 05:53 yangluphil wrote:
The reason that psi storm is so strong is that if it's not then Protoss' gateway units are laughably weak. It's mostly a design flaw in stalkers not being able to be main army comp for protoss. If they are like dragoons in BW, protoss would not have to have a ridiculously strong mid game tech like SC2 storm.
Also I probably missed something. PvT has never gone beyond 54.x% in monthly winrate after stalker nerf this year and everyone suggests it's unplayable for terrans. But thinking of terran fans on TL, it makes sense again.
Blizzard would probably never gone this direction but the way to tackle the root cause is:
1. remove blink
2. revert stalker nerf
3. nerf psi storm by make it more dodgable (0.5s delay) and less spammable but keep its damage output.
so basically make stalkers dragoons and make sc2 psi storm bw psi storm and admit their design failure.
Stalkers are one of the best designed unit in Protoss, if not THE best.
|
On May 13 2018 06:10 Xamo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2018 05:53 yangluphil wrote:
The reason that psi storm is so strong is that if it's not then Protoss' gateway units are laughably weak. It's mostly a design flaw in stalkers not being able to be main army comp for protoss. If they are like dragoons in BW, protoss would not have to have a ridiculously strong mid game tech like SC2 storm.
Also I probably missed something. PvT has never gone beyond 54.x% in monthly winrate after stalker nerf this year and everyone suggests it's unplayable for terrans. But thinking of terran fans on TL, it makes sense again.
Blizzard would probably never gone this direction but the way to tackle the root cause is:
1. remove blink
2. revert stalker nerf
3. nerf psi storm by make it more dodgable (0.5s delay) and less spammable but keep its damage output.
so basically make stalkers dragoons and make sc2 psi storm bw psi storm and admit their design failure. Stalkers are one of the best designed unit in Protoss, if not THE best.
As a standalone unit I kind of agree. But no. Stalkers' design makes it necessary to have a very strong mid game tech to make up for its unscalability. And then psi storm scales exponentially late game. Psi storm/ colossus are basically so-called 'design patches'. Being cool does not imply being good.
|
On May 13 2018 05:53 yangluphil wrote:
The reason that psi storm is so strong is that if it's not then Protoss' gateway units are laughably weak. It's mostly a design flaw in stalkers not being able to be main army comp for protoss. If they are like dragoons in BW, protoss would not have to have a ridiculously strong mid game tech like SC2 storm.
Storm in BW has higher damage potential than in SC2, is considered one of the main reasons that bio is not viable against Protoss and is still quite strong against mech. All this despite the fact that dragoons exist.
|
On May 13 2018 05:53 yangluphil wrote:
The reason that psi storm is so strong is that if it's not then Protoss' gateway units are laughably weak. It's mostly a design flaw in stalkers not being able to be main army comp for protoss. If they are like dragoons in BW, protoss would not have to have a ridiculously strong mid game tech like SC2 storm.
Also I probably missed something. PvT has never gone beyond 54.x% in monthly winrate after stalker nerf this year and everyone suggests it's unplayable for terrans. But thinking of terran fans on TL, it makes sense again.
Blizzard would probably never gone this direction but the way to tackle the root cause is:
1. remove blink
2. revert stalker nerf
3. nerf psi storm by make it more dodgable (0.5s delay) and less spammable but keep its damage output.
so basically make stalkers dragoons and make sc2 psi storm bw psi storm and admit their design failure.
Storm is so strong because Protoss needs a second splash option to go with Colossi. Making Stalkers into Dragoons wouldn't solve that because Bio is much better and Zerg didn't have banelings in BW.
Storm is absolutely dodge able in its current form. If Blizzard were to add a delay, they'd have to seriously crank up the damage or Protoss ground armies would be wrecked even more by banelings than they currently are.
|
I like people having strongly biased views and heated arguments. It's fun. But let's all try to be more factual when talking about things, especially with regards to terminology in balance changes.
For example, I've heard a lot of people complain about a 'nerf' just because a buff given in a trial period was removed. This is not a nerf. I've also heard a lot of people complain about a 'buff' when a unit is restored to a previous long-duration static level. This is not a buff.
Starcraft II has been through a lot of variations in unit strengths at all times, so the history is rich. Everyone, please try to be more precise when you're complaining. That way it's fun and educational for everyone.
Strictly speaking, it would be nice if people began providing links to the complete unit history from liquipedia since WOL whenever discussing a unit. I think I'll try to do that myself from now on. The whole graph is much more informative than the instantaneous value and derivative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
