We appreciate the continued feedback and discussion. After reviewing the most recent round and observing more high-level play, we feel good about continuing with our plans to reduce Anti-Armor Missile’s late-game strength and improve Terran‘s mid-game strength in the TvP matchup.
Raven’s Anti-Armor Missile base damage reduced from 30 to 15.
We considered different options for rebalancing the Anti-Armor Missile, but we settled on damage reduction. This change decreases its late-game damage potential while minimally affecting utility in the mid-game, where it can still be used as a reliable source of armor reduction. Another popular suggestion that we considered was to reduce the speed or acceleration of the missile in order to promote more counter-play via splitting. While we felt this change would have similar effects in the late-game, we thought this would be too much of a hit to its mid-game strength, when more manageable armies allow for easier splitting.
Viking health increased from 125 to 135.
We realize Terrans will take a hit to their late-game strength due to the Anti-Armor Missile change, so we feel this is a good time to provide a buff to the Viking. We will be increasing Viking health to increase its survivability, specifically against area-of-effect abilities like Psionic Storm and Parasitic Bomb, which are commonly used in the late game. In addition, this buff will aid Terrans against Colossi, a unit that has become more popular in TvP over the last few months. This buff doesn’t fully offset the Anti-Armor Missile nerf in the extreme late game, but as we mentioned in the last community update, we’d like to focus more on how Terran’s mid-game power scales into the late-game, which will hopefully grant Terrans with more control over that transition.
Marauder’s number of attacks reduced from 2 to 1. Damage increased from 5 (10 vs Armored) per attack to 10 (20 vs Armored). Weapon upgrades give +1 (+2 vs armored) per infantry upgrade, changed from +1 (+1 vs armored) per shot.
Near the end of Heart of the Swarm, Zerg players would struggle when transitioning from Ling/Bane/Muta compositions to Ultralisks because of how effective Marauders were as a counter. At the beginning of Legacy of the Void, we split the Marauder’s attack into two separate shots to encourage Terran players to transition to more specialized units against Hive tech. Throughout LotV, a popular suggestion has been to revert this change because it also had the side effect of reducing the lethality of the Terran army in the mid game against Protoss. We believe this is a good time to do so, since we’re now less worried about strength of Marauders in TvZ. For one, Ultralisks now have one additional starting armor and are thus more resistant to both Marine and Marauder attacks. In addition, Zerg is now less reliant on Ultralisks to stabilize in the late-game, as Hydralisks, Vipers, and Brood Lords are now frequently used for transitioning. As for TvP, we believe this change will improve Terran’s ability to apply more consistent pressure during the mid game. This change will be particularly noticeable against Light Protoss units (Zealots, Adepts) when the Terran is behind in upgrades.
Raven’s Auto-Turret cast range increased from 1 to 2.
When we reintroduced the Raven’s Auto-Turret ability, we reduced the cast range from 3 to 1 in order to provide more of an opportunity for counter-play against Auto-Turret harass. Our feeling now is that we may have reduced the range too much—Auto-Turrets just aren’t being used much for harass. In addition, this cast-range increase allows Ravens to place Turrets out of range of anti-air static defenses, which slightly helps when attempting to break stalemates in the late-game.
Our current plan is to release this balance update, along with the new ladder season, on May 15, but this is subject to change. As always, thank you for your continued feedback and let us know what you think!
Would have rather seen viking HP be increased to at least 155 and the Seeker missile do even less. It would help vikings against voidrays especially. I'm not sure how much of a difference 125-135 will make.
The Viking buff is not enough to be able to trade vs Carriers. If Vikings got 1 armor as well you could actually use Vikings to counter Carriers. Carrier+storm still hard counter everything that is Terran and now when Ravens get nerfed into the ground playing TvP late game will be even more unplayable.
But at least all-inning with bio will be more effective.
The Marauder change will help bio but it will also be the end of mech. No one will use mech when you have 20 damage marauders with superior mobility.
Mech is already useless in TvP, after this mech will be even worse.
In TvZ mech will be dead outside of pre hive timing attacks. Ravens were the unit that made TvZ late game possible, just ghosts will not suffice when going up against BroodLord/Corruptor/Vipers.
In TvT bio will be both stronger and more mobile than mech so I think mech will become extinct here as well.
Overall this patch will probably improve Terran win rates. But it will change mech from being viable in 2 matchups to being viable in 0 matchups.
So they went for the marauder change to fix TvP. Their reasoning sounds fine, as is their focus on upgrades as the culprit, but we'll see if it's enough. At least they're changing something. Hopefully it also means fewer cyclones in TvT.
Not a huge fan of the anti-armor change. Not only does it have the potential to becoming the new "interceptor cost", but it also feels like an acknowledgement that they're fine with mass raven design wise (despite their original goal of avoiding mass spellcaster stuff) and are only trying to balance it now. Pragmatically it is the simpler approach to make sure terran has game in the late game, but it is also a compromise that could have consequences in the long term.
just for the enjoyment of the game i am hoping something will happen at some point to make mutalisks the preferred playstyle again over the hydra
Seems like sensible changes. Will have to see how it holds up in game, however, it seems to me that it won't help terran that much in TvP. I don't like the auto turret change but only because auto turret harass wasn't fun at all.
Not sure what the point is for the half-revert on the Raven nerf. In lategame it will be useless anyway except for the armor reduction since you will never have the firepower to nuke armies. Overall I'm quite happy with the changes but would've liked an even bigger Viking buff.
On May 09 2018 03:09 Charoisaur wrote: Not sure what the point is for the half-revert on the Raven nerf. In lategame it will be useless anyway except for the armor reduction since you will never have the firepower to nuke armies. Overall I'm quite happy with the changes but would've liked an even bigger Viking buff.
The combination of AAM missile and vikings being buffed should help terran late game.
Although I still think that 10HP isn't enough for this to work
On May 09 2018 02:56 terran4lyfe wrote: Finally, it'll be good to have the old marauders back. Also it's wouldn't be a blizzard patch without a worthless hp change.
Worthless HP change like the Hydra or Adept hp changes were
How much will Terran late game suffer because of the Anti Armor missile nerf? How much will the Viking buff and Auto Turret buff compensate for the Anti Armor missile nerf?
good update overall! Personally, I would rather have seen a buff for the Widow Mine than for the Marauder, because Roach / Ravager and Ultralisk play will become very difficult.
I'm also not sure if the AAM dmg-nerf is enough to stop mass raven. We will see, maybe they need to reduce the dmg even further or make the radius smaller.
Nice to see Blizzard really want to make mech non viable. When will they go all-in on that and make factory an unique building ?
The raven nerf / viking buff duo is a joke. They are removing the only thing that allows a terran army to fight compositions like tempest / carrier / HT & infestor / BL / viper head-on, and essentially giving nothing to make up for it.
On May 09 2018 03:21 Lyyna wrote: Nice to see Blizzard really want to make mech non viable. When will they go all-in on that and make factory an unique building ?
The raven nerf / viking buff duo is a joke. They are removing the only thing that allows a terran army to fight compositions like tempest / carrier / HT & infestor / BL / viper head-on, and essentially giving nothing to make up for it.
They are buffing Viking, Auto Turret, and Marauder. Are these buffs enough to offset the Anti Armor Missile nerf?
On May 09 2018 03:21 Lyyna wrote: Nice to see Blizzard really want to make mech non viable. When will they go all-in on that and make factory an unique building ?
The raven nerf / viking buff duo is a joke. They are removing the only thing that allows a terran army to fight compositions like tempest / carrier / HT & infestor / BL / viper head-on, and essentially giving nothing to make up for it.
They are buffing Viking, Auto Turret, and Marauder. Are these buffs enough to offset the Anti Armor Missile nerf?
None of these are factory units so it doesn't count.
On May 09 2018 03:21 Lyyna wrote: Nice to see Blizzard really want to make mech non viable. When will they go all-in on that and make factory an unique building ?
The raven nerf / viking buff duo is a joke. They are removing the only thing that allows a terran army to fight compositions like tempest / carrier / HT & infestor / BL / viper head-on, and essentially giving nothing to make up for it.
They are buffing Viking, Auto Turret, and Marauder. Are these buffs enough to offset the Anti Armor Missile nerf?
No, because the lategame is all about dealing a ton of damage and being efficient. These changes do nothing to help avoid getting shredded by storm / PB, and they remove the only good terran AOE. Thors have good damage, but their size and miserable AI (hi broodlords) makes them awful in large fights. Vikings are awful compared to tempests & corr alone, and are pretty much useless once PB / storm hits the field. With ravens, the zerg was kept honest because he could not just rush into the vikings and kill them all at close range, and protoss had to play safe around the terran instead of smashing him for 2 screens away with tempests.
If anything, it has more to do with tempest & vipers being retarded units that should never have been put into a RTS,.
On May 09 2018 03:01 MockHamill wrote: The Viking buff is not enough to be able to trade vs Carriers. If Vikings got 1 armor as well you could actually use Vikings to counter Carriers. Carrier+storm still hard counter everything that is Terran and now when Ravens get nerfed into the ground playing TvP late game will be even more unplayable.
But at least all-inning with bio will be more effective.
The Marauder change will help bio but it will also be the end of mech. No one will use mech when you have 20 damage marauders with superior mobility.
Mech is already useless in TvP, after this mech will be even worse.
In TvZ mech will be dead outside of pre hive timing attacks. Ravens were the unit that made TvZ late game possible, just ghosts will not suffice when going up against BroodLord/Corruptor/Vipers.
In TvT bio will be both stronger and more mobile than mech so I think mech will become extinct here as well.
Overall this patch will probably improve Terran win rates. But it will change mech from being viable in 2 matchups to being viable in 0 matchups.
What are you talking about?
We saw a lot of Mech pre 4.0 and before the big Raven buff in late January, hell the go to composition was Mech and we also saw a lot of great late game MechvZ after the Ghost buff without a single raven being used.
On May 09 2018 03:01 MockHamill wrote: The Viking buff is not enough to be able to trade vs Carriers. If Vikings got 1 armor as well you could actually use Vikings to counter Carriers. Carrier+storm still hard counter everything that is Terran and now when Ravens get nerfed into the ground playing TvP late game will be even more unplayable.
But at least all-inning with bio will be more effective.
The Marauder change will help bio but it will also be the end of mech. No one will use mech when you have 20 damage marauders with superior mobility.
Mech is already useless in TvP, after this mech will be even worse.
In TvZ mech will be dead outside of pre hive timing attacks. Ravens were the unit that made TvZ late game possible, just ghosts will not suffice when going up against BroodLord/Corruptor/Vipers.
In TvT bio will be both stronger and more mobile than mech so I think mech will become extinct here as well.
Overall this patch will probably improve Terran win rates. But it will change mech from being viable in 2 matchups to being viable in 0 matchups.
What are you talking about?
We saw a lot of Mech pre 4.0 and before the big Raven buff in late January, hell the go to composition was Mech and we also saw a lot of great late game MechvZ after the Ghost buff without a single raven being used.
We saw "a lot of mech" (10% of games at most..?) because bio was getting demolished by the new hydra / bane composition and people started studying other compositions. And it wasn't exactly winning a lot of games once vipers were out.
That form of mech as a pre-hive timing attack was viable for a short bit, until zerg realised they could get a massive hydra army AND vipers even for a push coming before 10 minutes. Which is why terran had to go back on the defensive. Which is why ravens (or some form of actually good AA) is needed, because otherwise terran just can't fight lategame zerg (and protoss. And all of that is due to the viper and the tempest.)
Hell, something interesting would be to transform the raven in a true support unit, with for example scrambling missile + healing drone + pdd. All of a sudden, no more mass missiles problem, but ravens get a true defined role of "keep other stuff alive".
I understand this changes concidering TvP and how broken it is but...
...Marauder rebuff will completely destroy TvZ. Ultralisks will be trash unit vs BIO just as they were in HOTS. Remember Ultralisks armour nerf after major chsnges? They said they are nerfing it because new Marauder is not as strong as their HOTS version because of that 2 weaker attacks instead of one strong. Now they give Terran back HOTS marauder forgeting that even now stimed BIO is wrecking Ultras if they don't have enough support. Especially with ghost snipes- which were buffed also because of Ultras are supposed to be too strong...
In the same time they forget that in HOTS Infestors and funghal growth was BETTER than now. Rooting units vs slowing them...They forget about Anti Armour Missile from Raven which is demolishing vs Ultras too. I expect Ultras to be much more trash vs BIO than they were in HOTS. Mark my words.
Zerg players choose Broodlords for a REASON Blizzard. Not because they don't like Ultras. Its just better choice if u manage to live to get them.
Raven change- much needed and much appreciated. Pitty that knowing the issue, Blizzard choose to wait longer before implementing it.
Overall - I understand why Blizzard is reverting Marauders (TvP) but without buffs to Zerg, it will ruin this matchup even more.
You Zerg players need to consider that the Anti Armor missile nerf will hurt Terran's late game vs Zerg severely. The Marauder buff makes Marauders more effective against Ultralisks, but the Anti Armor missile nerf will hurt Terran late game vs Zerg. It needs to be played out but it's possible that overall, Terran late game is weaker because of this patch.
On May 09 2018 03:44 hiroshOne wrote: I understand this changes concidering TvP and how broken it is but...
...Marauder rebuff will completely destroy TvZ. Ultralisks will be trash unit vs BIO just as they were in HOTS. Remember Ultralisks armour nerf after major chsnges? They said they are nerfing it because new Marauder is not as strong as their HOTS version because of that 2 weaker attacks instead of one strong. Now they give Terran back HOTS marauder forgeting that even now stimed BIO is wrecking Ultras if they don't have enough support. Especially with ghost snipes- which were buffed also because of Ultras are supposed to be too strong...
In the same time they forget that in HOTS Infestors and funghal growth was BETTER than now. Rooting units vs slowing them...They forget about Anti Armour Missile from Raven which is demolishing vs Ultras too. I expect Ultras to be much more trash vs BIO than they were in HOTS. Mark my words.
Zerg players choose Broodlords for a REASON Blizzard. Not because they don't like Ultras. Its just better choice if u manage to live to get them.
Raven change- much needed and much appreciated. Pitty that knowing the issue, Blizzard choose to wait longer before implementing it.
Overall - I understand why Blizzard is reverting Marauders (TvP) but without buffs to Zerg, it will ruin this matchup even more.
Mate, BZ will ignore everything in the past and relentlessly buff T. It has been their motto for ages.
Mech cancer is still a horrible com to play vs. Even the pro players admit that they hate it as it is slow, clunky and practically no micro whatsover + tedious to control but it is OP so may as well use it anyway. Bio looks worse because mech is strong. Now they buff everything to make sure bio even better.
I basically hold no breath when it comes to balance updates these days. All T changes because T is weak (eyes-rolling).
On May 09 2018 03:44 hiroshOne wrote: I understand this changes concidering TvP and how broken it is but...
...Marauder rebuff will completely destroy TvZ. Ultralisks will be trash unit vs BIO just as they were in HOTS. Remember Ultralisks armour nerf after major chsnges? They said they are nerfing it because new Marauder is not as strong as their HOTS version because of that 2 weaker attacks instead of one strong. Now they give Terran back HOTS marauder forgeting that even now stimed BIO is wrecking Ultras if they don't have enough support. Especially with ghost snipes- which were buffed also because of Ultras are supposed to be too strong...
In the same time they forget that in HOTS Infestors and funghal growth was BETTER than now. Rooting units vs slowing them...They forget about Anti Armour Missile from Raven which is demolishing vs Ultras too. I expect Ultras to be much more trash vs BIO than they were in HOTS. Mark my words.
Zerg players choose Broodlords for a REASON Blizzard. Not because they don't like Ultras. Its just better choice if u manage to live to get them.
Raven change- much needed and much appreciated. Pitty that knowing the issue, Blizzard choose to wait longer before implementing it.
Overall - I understand why Blizzard is reverting Marauders (TvP) but without buffs to Zerg, it will ruin this matchup even more.
Mate, BZ will ignore everything in the past and relentlessly buff T. It has been their motto for ages.
Mech cancer is still a horrible com to play vs. Even the pro players admit that they hate it as it is slow, clunky and practically no micro whatsover + tedious to control but it is OP so may as well use it anyway. Bio looks worse because mech is strong. Now they buff everything to make sure bio even better.
I basically hold no breath when it comes to balance updates these days. All T changes because T is weak (eyes-rolling).
On May 09 2018 03:44 hiroshOne wrote: I understand this changes concidering TvP and how broken it is but...
...Marauder rebuff will completely destroy TvZ. Ultralisks will be trash unit vs BIO just as they were in HOTS. Remember Ultralisks armour nerf after major chsnges? They said they are nerfing it because new Marauder is not as strong as their HOTS version because of that 2 weaker attacks instead of one strong. Now they give Terran back HOTS marauder forgeting that even now stimed BIO is wrecking Ultras if they don't have enough support. Especially with ghost snipes- which were buffed also because of Ultras are supposed to be too strong...
In the same time they forget that in HOTS Infestors and funghal growth was BETTER than now. Rooting units vs slowing them...They forget about Anti Armour Missile from Raven which is demolishing vs Ultras too. I expect Ultras to be much more trash vs BIO than they were in HOTS. Mark my words.
Zerg players choose Broodlords for a REASON Blizzard. Not because they don't like Ultras. Its just better choice if u manage to live to get them.
Raven change- much needed and much appreciated. Pitty that knowing the issue, Blizzard choose to wait longer before implementing it.
Overall - I understand why Blizzard is reverting Marauders (TvP) but without buffs to Zerg, it will ruin this matchup even more.
Mate, BZ will ignore everything in the past and relentlessly buff T. It has been their motto for ages.
Mech cancer is still a horrible com to play vs. Even the pro players admit that they hate it as it is slow, clunky and practically no micro whatsover + tedious to control but it is OP so may as well use it anyway. Bio looks worse because mech is strong. Now they buff everything to make sure bio even better.
I basically hold no breath when it comes to balance updates these days. All T changes because T is weak (eyes-rolling).
I feel like instead buffing Terran to help them in TvP, they should look into Protoss- tone down Chronoboost for example.
On May 09 2018 03:44 hiroshOne wrote: I understand this changes concidering TvP and how broken it is but...
...Marauder rebuff will completely destroy TvZ. Ultralisks will be trash unit vs BIO just as they were in HOTS. Remember Ultralisks armour nerf after major chsnges? They said they are nerfing it because new Marauder is not as strong as their HOTS version because of that 2 weaker attacks instead of one strong. Now they give Terran back HOTS marauder forgeting that even now stimed BIO is wrecking Ultras if they don't have enough support. Especially with ghost snipes- which were buffed also because of Ultras are supposed to be too strong...
In the same time they forget that in HOTS Infestors and funghal growth was BETTER than now. Rooting units vs slowing them...They forget about Anti Armour Missile from Raven which is demolishing vs Ultras too. I expect Ultras to be much more trash vs BIO than they were in HOTS. Mark my words.
Zerg players choose Broodlords for a REASON Blizzard. Not because they don't like Ultras. Its just better choice if u manage to live to get them.
Raven change- much needed and much appreciated. Pitty that knowing the issue, Blizzard choose to wait longer before implementing it.
Overall - I understand why Blizzard is reverting Marauders (TvP) but without buffs to Zerg, it will ruin this matchup even more.
Mate, BZ will ignore everything in the past and relentlessly buff T. It has been their motto for ages.
Mech cancer is still a horrible com to play vs. Even the pro players admit that they hate it as it is slow, clunky and practically no micro whatsover + tedious to control but it is OP so may as well use it anyway. Bio looks worse because mech is strong. Now they buff everything to make sure bio even better.
I basically hold no breath when it comes to balance updates these days. All T changes because T is weak (eyes-rolling).
I feel like instead buffing Terran to help them in TvP, they should look into Protoss- tone down Chronoboost for example.
People who aren't you don't think PvZ should be unwinnable.
If terran needs units that basicaly have mini nukes to win, the problem is probably much bigger than those small changes can fix. It just feels like we'll be back to the pre raven patch again, so i think the real solution would be adressing all the late game cancer. I'm with Ret about TvP; this patch will change nothing.
Am I the only one who still thinks the marauder concussive shell upgrade should be reverted? This upgrade was implemented in WoL Beta. I feel like it should go back to being included for free. It would open things up early game for terran vs protoss and give players room for creativity when it comes to build orders since they have the 50 extra gas early game.
I find most interesting that now that mech's been buffed, most terrans are playing bio vs Zerg again. Funny, considering how many years they asked for mech. Such memers.
Still, i don't think mech will ever be viable vs protoss unless there's a massive nerf to airtoss, warp prism and maybe immortals.
On May 09 2018 05:01 ReachTheSky wrote: Am I the only one who still thinks the marauder concussive shell upgrade should be reverted? This upgrade was implemented in WoL Beta. I feel like it should go back to being included for free. It would open things up early game for terran vs protoss and give players room for creativity when it comes to build orders since they have the 50 extra gas early game.
Ah yes, giving room for creativity by making proxy marauders incredibly strong while not doing anything else of note.
On May 09 2018 05:04 xTJx wrote: I find most interesting that now that mech's been buffed, most terrans are playing bio vs Zerg again. Funny, considering how many years they asked for mech. Such memers.
Still, i don't think mech will ever be viable vs protoss unless there's a massive nerf to airtoss, warp prism and maybe immortals.
Ironically, mech has never been as close as being viable since a long time vP. And after the raven nerf, it'll be waaaayy harder to play mech lategame vZ rather than vP.
If not for the tempest being a retarded unit, it would actually be strong.
On May 09 2018 05:04 xTJx wrote: I find most interesting that now that mech's been buffed, most terrans are playing bio vs Zerg again. Funny, considering how many years they asked for mech. Such memers.
Still, i don't think mech will ever be viable vs protoss unless there's a massive nerf to airtoss, warp prism and maybe immortals.
Ironically, mech has never been as close as being viable since a long time vP. And after the raven nerf, it'll be waaaayy harder to play mech lategame vZ rather than vP.
If not for the tempest being a retarded unit, it would actually be strong.
Most mech games never even reach the raven stage, so you're overstating how it'll affect TvZ.
And you think the tempest of all units it why mech isn't viable in TvP?!? Not the immortal or chargelots or carriers or something else? Just to be clear, by mech you don't mean mass ranged liberators right, because tempests are pretty far down the list of reasons why mech's not great in TvP.
so after marauder and viking buffs why snipes need that only bio 170 dmg? down it to 100-120 and make it work against mech units, would be nice for mech tvp, but could screw mech in tvt vs bio even worse tho.
On May 09 2018 05:04 xTJx wrote: I find most interesting that now that mech's been buffed, most terrans are playing bio vs Zerg again. Funny, considering how many years they asked for mech. Such memers.
Still, i don't think mech will ever be viable vs protoss unless there's a massive nerf to airtoss, warp prism and maybe immortals.
Ironically, mech has never been as close as being viable since a long time vP. And after the raven nerf, it'll be waaaayy harder to play mech lategame vZ rather than vP.
If not for the tempest being a retarded unit, it would actually be strong.
Most mech games never even reach the raven stage, so you're overstating how it'll affect TvZ.
And you think the tempest of all units it why mech isn't viable in TvP?!? Not the immortal or chargelots or carriers or something else? Just to be clear, by mech you don't mean mass ranged liberators right, because tempests are pretty far down the list of reasons why mech's not great in TvP.
Most mech games wouldn't happen if the raven did not exist as a fallback for the lategame. Just like before the raven buff, ya know ? What would be the point of going for a strategy that revolves around a single push & autolose if that push doesn't kill the opponent ? That actually sounds a lot like current TvP, speaking of that.
Yes, the tempest. Same reason why the raven in lategame makes TvZ mech midgame viable ; because unlike in TvZ, in TvP the terran has no good composition that he can transition to in lategame and still trade efficiently against an opponent with a superior economy, which is impossible to avoid in both matchups because that's how zerg works, and because lolbatteries / cannons / warps. Hellbat / tank / ghost / lib does very well against zeal / immo. Carriers can be killed by mass libs or BCs - the units that are hard countered by tempest (+storm). There is no way to fight a tempest / HT / battery force if the protoss isn't an extremely polite fellow who stack his air army upon seeing 10 ravens coming at him (most protoss in master, apparently)
I've been meching for years, i'm not feeling too much like i'm pulling shit out of my ass there.
On May 09 2018 03:21 Lyyna wrote: Nice to see Blizzard really want to make mech non viable. When will they go all-in on that and make factory an unique building ?
The raven nerf / viking buff duo is a joke. They are removing the only thing that allows a terran army to fight compositions like tempest / carrier / HT & infestor / BL / viper head-on, and essentially giving nothing to make up for it.
They are buffing Viking, Auto Turret, and Marauder. Are these buffs enough to offset the Anti Armor Missile nerf?
No.
All these changes affect mid game not lategame (well viking does). I dont disagree with why they do this, they want less games being about lategame armies that last for 40 mins and more about games ending in midgame.
The problem is that this does nothing for the current problems while adding more.
Against Z terran will still go for mass ghost because marauders do nothing against hydra/bane comps, the only difference is that now we have a worst raven, so it will be the same as before, just with less ravens and more ghosts.
Against P it will still be 2 base all ins, the only difference being that they will be stronger.
Meanwhile ultras will be out of TvZs, terran still wont want to go lategame vs toss, and on top of that mech is being more brushed aside (TvZ it should still be viable but in TvT I can see it dissapear)
On May 09 2018 03:21 Lyyna wrote: Nice to see Blizzard really want to make mech non viable. When will they go all-in on that and make factory an unique building ?
The raven nerf / viking buff duo is a joke. They are removing the only thing that allows a terran army to fight compositions like tempest / carrier / HT & infestor / BL / viper head-on, and essentially giving nothing to make up for it.
They are buffing Viking, Auto Turret, and Marauder. Are these buffs enough to offset the Anti Armor Missile nerf?
No.
All these changes affect mid game not lategame (well viking does). I dont disagree with why they do this, they want less games being about lategame armies that last for 40 mins and more about games ending in midgame.
The problem is that this does nothing for the current problems while adding more.
Against Z terran will still go for mass ghost because marauders do nothing against hydra/bane comps, the only difference is that now we have a worst raven, so it will be the same as before, just with less ravens and more ghosts.
Against P it will still be 2 base all ins, the only difference being that they will be stronger.
Meanwhile ultras will be out of TvZs, terran still wont want to go lategame vs toss, and on top of that mech is being more brushed aside (TvZ it should still be viable but in TvT I can see it dissapear)
Hopefully the threat of strong 2 base all-ins will keep Protoss honest and they will prepare for the possibility instead of going double upgrade and storm with few units, knowing they will probably defend anyway. If you are greedy you deserve to be punished by an all-in. The meta should adjust from there. I see a problem if the 2 base all in is unstoppable no matter what.
On May 09 2018 03:21 Lyyna wrote: Nice to see Blizzard really want to make mech non viable. When will they go all-in on that and make factory an unique building ?
The raven nerf / viking buff duo is a joke. They are removing the only thing that allows a terran army to fight compositions like tempest / carrier / HT & infestor / BL / viper head-on, and essentially giving nothing to make up for it.
They are buffing Viking, Auto Turret, and Marauder. Are these buffs enough to offset the Anti Armor Missile nerf?
No.
All these changes affect mid game not lategame (well viking does). I dont disagree with why they do this, they want less games being about lategame armies that last for 40 mins and more about games ending in midgame.
The problem is that this does nothing for the current problems while adding more.
Against Z terran will still go for mass ghost because marauders do nothing against hydra/bane comps, the only difference is that now we have a worst raven, so it will be the same as before, just with less ravens and more ghosts.
Against P it will still be 2 base all ins, the only difference being that they will be stronger.
Meanwhile ultras will be out of TvZs, terran still wont want to go lategame vs toss, and on top of that mech is being more brushed aside (TvZ it should still be viable but in TvT I can see it dissapear)
Hopefully the threat of strong 2 base all-ins will keep Protoss honest and they will prepare for the possibility instead of going double upgrade and storm with few units, knowing they will probably defend anyway. If you are greedy you deserve to be punished by an all-in. The meta should adjust from there. I see a problem if the 2 base all in is unstoppable no matter what.
Well...Once droperlords or even possibility of early droperlord kept Protoss honest in the same way. But guess what XD
Marauders 3/3 vs ultras 3/5 will go from 16.9 to 22.5 (+33%), so 5 marauders kill 1 ultras in 4.4s instead of 5.9s.
Ultras are already terrible in the game, crushed by immortal in ZvP, lurkers in ZvZ, and ghost/liberator/tanks in ZvT, with marauder buff no one will ever build ultras.
On May 09 2018 06:25 Tyrhanius wrote: Marauders 3/3 vs ultras 3/5 will go from 16.9 to 22.5 (+33%), so 5 marauders kill 1 ultras in 4.4s instead of 5.9s.
Ultras are already terrible in the game, crushed by immortal in ZvP, lurkers in ZvZ, and ghost/liberator/tanks in ZvT, with marauder buff no one will ever build ultras.
Ultras are absolutely not terrible in TvZ and they won't be after this patch.
The raven gameplay was just stupid, this change will almost certainly remove the mass AAM spamming.
I don't really like the turret buff because terran already has too many harrass units but I guess soemthing was needed to keep the raven useful after the AAM nerf.
The Marauder change is actually very massive, it's such a HUGE change versus ultras and versus protoss with armor upgrades - it's basically a +1 damage upgrade per enemy armor in addition to +1 damage per attack upgrade if enemy armor is on the same level.
Then we have the viking change.. viking deal serious damage versus mechanical, a 10 hp buff is not negligible, ask any toss or zerg about getting a 10 hp buff to a massable unit and they would be ecstatic.
It makes me sad that we will probably see a return of the MMM dominance though and when terrans finally figure out how to use AAM as a support...
What about pvz though? Consecutive battles with perfect storms and forcefields or crazy early game damage are the only ways for pvz... Seems like you can't win based off macro as p vs z at all.
On May 09 2018 06:31 Freeborn wrote: What about pvz though? Consecutive battles with perfect storms and forcefields or crazy early game damage are the only ways for pvz... Seems like you can't win based off macro as p vs z at all.
On May 09 2018 06:25 Tyrhanius wrote: Marauders 3/3 vs ultras 3/5 will go from 16.9 to 22.5 (+33%), so 5 marauders kill 1 ultras in 4.4s instead of 5.9s.
Ultras are already terrible in the game, crushed by immortal in ZvP, lurkers in ZvZ, and ghost/liberator/tanks in ZvT, with marauder buff no one will ever build ultras.
Ultras are absolutely not terrible in TvZ and they won't be after this patch.
On May 09 2018 06:25 Tyrhanius wrote: Marauders 3/3 vs ultras 3/5 will go from 16.9 to 22.5 (+33%), so 5 marauders kill 1 ultras in 4.4s instead of 5.9s.
Ultras are already terrible in the game, crushed by immortal in ZvP, lurkers in ZvZ, and ghost/liberator/tanks in ZvT, with marauder buff no one will ever build ultras.
Ultras are absolutely not terrible in TvZ and they won't be after this patch.
I do not think we'll ever see again ultras vs bio in pro matches. Their window of opportunity was already quite small, and is going to be virtually non-existent.
On May 09 2018 07:04 StarscreamG1 wrote: present 2*(13-7)=10 future 26-7=19 Is this true for upgraded marauders versus ultras? Cause if it is I'm afraid we go back to MMM late game :\
Not with banes hydras and blords. It'll just be mass ghost.
Terran gets 3 buffs and 1 nerf and still find a way to wine XD Never change, Terran players, because Blizzard will always listen to you no matter what.
I wish they had focused on the ghost instead of the raven when they aimed the nerf hammer, but we'll see what happens. I'm pretty convinced the issue with TvZ lategame won't be affected much and the same TvP problems will persist at that phase as well.
On May 09 2018 07:04 StarscreamG1 wrote: present 2*(13-7)=10 future 26-7=19 Is this true for upgraded marauders versus ultras? Cause if it is I'm afraid we go back to MMM late game :\
it is 12 -> 19, +58%
i like the changes except the added range of auto turret.
On May 09 2018 06:25 Tyrhanius wrote: Marauders 3/3 vs ultras 3/5 will go from 16.9 to 22.5 (+33%), so 5 marauders kill 1 ultras in 4.4s instead of 5.9s.
Ultras are already terrible in the game, crushed by immortal in ZvP, lurkers in ZvZ, and ghost/liberator/tanks in ZvT, with marauder buff no one will ever build ultras.
Ultras are absolutely not terrible in TvZ and they won't be after this patch.
I guess you have never played zerg.
How about you base your claims on pro games and not on your personal ladder matches? Ultras are played all the time currently and I'm sure we'll see them regularly even after the patch.
Don't like the Marauder revert at all. We should move away from the bioball being the end-all, be-all Terran composition and frantic aggro being the primary Terran strategy, not back towards it.
I'd have preferred the small Liberator AtG buff proposed earlier (+2 to +5 AtG damage) instead of this. As it stands this might fix TvP but it'll just further marginalize Ultralisks in TvZ. Terrans will still transition to Ghost/Raven, they'll just make more Ghosts and fewer Ravens like Lexender said, and Ultralisks won't be used outside of narrow timings to close out an advantage. Normally that wouldn't be terrible, since Ultralisks are the epitome of a dumb, faceroll unit, but this isn't actually introducing any new strategies or compositions into the game, just cementing old ones.
If they revert anything, it should be the Cyclone, not the Marauder.
On May 09 2018 06:25 Tyrhanius wrote: Marauders 3/3 vs ultras 3/5 will go from 16.9 to 22.5 (+33%), so 5 marauders kill 1 ultras in 4.4s instead of 5.9s.
Ultras are already terrible in the game, crushed by immortal in ZvP, lurkers in ZvZ, and ghost/liberator/tanks in ZvT, with marauder buff no one will ever build ultras.
Ultras are absolutely not terrible in TvZ and they won't be after this patch.
I guess you have never played zerg.
How about you base your claims on pro games and not on your personal ladder matches? Ultras are played all the time currently and I'm sure we'll see them regularly even after the patch.
Yeah no. Pro games are not the only thing people (including Blizz) should be looking at. Ultras suck in most leagues, and even in higher leagues I don't see them winning games as often as they delay the inevitable or act as a small stepping stone to reach BL/whatever and this change makes them a worse option in both cases.
On top of the Raven Auto Turret buff it's ridiculous. The majority of the community decided ages ago that Auto Turrets are bad for the game, it's sad to see the Raven being forced in this direction.
On May 09 2018 06:25 Tyrhanius wrote: Marauders 3/3 vs ultras 3/5 will go from 16.9 to 22.5 (+33%), so 5 marauders kill 1 ultras in 4.4s instead of 5.9s.
Ultras are already terrible in the game, crushed by immortal in ZvP, lurkers in ZvZ, and ghost/liberator/tanks in ZvT, with marauder buff no one will ever build ultras.
Ultras are absolutely not terrible in TvZ and they won't be after this patch.
I guess you have never played zerg.
How about you base your claims on pro games and not on your personal ladder matches? Ultras are played all the time currently and I'm sure we'll see them regularly even after the patch.
Yeah no. Pro games are not the only thing people (including Blizz) should be looking at.
They aren't, but ideas based around balance such as "X is imba/underpowered" should be based around nothing but high level games.
And I'd be willing to bet ultras get stronger the lower down the ladder anyway. I doubt most plat leaguers have gosu ghost micro.
Good changes overall. Marauders vs superior upgraded protoss (unavoidable if not 2-base all-ining) was a joke. Marauder vs guardian shield was a joke too. (guardian was already so good vs marines, it didn't need more) When the two combined, it was no more a joke but a one-sided slaughter :/
It was somewhat compensated with the old lib(+mine combo), but since mine+lib nerf the terran midgame was way way too weak vs toss. People argued against MMM "boring" play, but any Polt vs Toss was 100 times better than any mass lib play vs toss (the best probably being the TY vs Patience matchs, but they are the rare exception, long gone )
On May 09 2018 07:44 Solar424 wrote: Terran gets 3 buffs and 1 nerf and still find a way to wine XD Never change, Terran players, because Blizzard will always listen to you no matter what.
Yep, that's why we got 6 months of unplyable TvP (tbh it was kinda 40% win-able for top korean T thanks 100% to all-ins and tricks)
Most terrans will be happy. Only avilo-style mechers will whine (marauders vs modern 2xarmory mech was a total joke, too. That's why many played some rine-tank into double starport libs play versus mech ). That's what they always do.
I like the Auto-turret change : Yes raven's Auto-turret harras is not really fun to play against. But the 1 range made it unusable in combat situation without sacrificing the raven to the opponent.
In my opinion, 3 range cast was too much, but 1 range was also too few. So 2 should be the good value.
On May 09 2018 02:56 terran4lyfe wrote: Finally, it'll be good to have the old marauders back. Also it's wouldn't be a blizzard patch without a worthless hp change.
Worthless HP change like the Hydra or Adept hp changes were
the thing is that those changes dramatically changed how many shots it took to kill them and I think + hp is more impactfull on a ground unit because of all the things that trade with ground units before they close and do dmg, mines, tanks, storms, ect. the viking on the other hand has enough range that getting shots off is not its problem. The viking just has alot of ineherent weeknesses when it comes to unit interactions with zerg and + 10 hp does not address them. I think the bigest drawback is that when zerg attacks all there army goes forward such that there hydras support there air units, but when terran attacks their bio wants to go backward and kite so it does not get melted by banes but the vikings need to stand there ground to get shots off on thier currpoters, during this time hydras are able to do tons of dmg to the vikings and really snowball the air fight. Odly I think alot of the weekness of the viking in bio compositions comes down to the fact that marines dont have the same impact on the air fight as hydras do. In mech vs zerg I think the main problem with the viking is that its just terrible against vipers, its so bad that if terran can avoid building any of them they will.
overall though Im excited about the change. Im ok with terran late game not being better than zerg and protoss provided that terran has the tools to put on a ton of pressure in the midgame. bio is also such a snowbally composition that even moderat buffs to its core can have a huge impact so im excited to see what this will do to tvp.
On May 09 2018 06:04 hiroshOne wrote: Well...Once droperlords or even possibility of early droperlord kept Protoss honest in the same way. But guess what XD
yeah but its less critical for zerg to keep protoss honest in the early stages of the game because zerg can always punish a player for being passive and greedy in the early game by being even more passive and even greedier Unfortunately for Terran this kind of play vs protoss is no go because of the extreme strength of late game protoss armies with large upgrade leads. If Terran does not shut down protoss fast, they wont be able to vs a competent opponent..
This balance patch reminds me when I give my kids chores to do and they say "Dad, look I did ten chores in a half hour!" Then I have to remind them it is not about quantity it is about quality.
How does this analogy relate? Blizzard essentially gave Terran three negligible buffs for trading one major late-game support unit; it is not about quantity it is about quality. Terran was already crippled by late game Protoss (Tempest/Storm/Carrier) and Zerg (Broodlord/Viper/Corruptor). Some would argue Marauder is a large buff, but sorry, that unit does not shoot up will only increase all-ins. The HP buff is nothing compared to storm, parasitic bomb, mass interceptors etc. Think to yourself: "Gee, my army has a wopping 200 HP more with 20 Vikings - I'm sure that is going to really make a difference with a maxed out Zerg and Protoss with spell casters."
I don't understand Blizzards logic in having Terran scale with other races (like Protoss) when, in the late game, they ultimately have nothing of value to fight with a maxed out army. I could have 10k/10k in the bank but if I have far inferior units to keep headbutting against my opponent, then what is the point.
Mark my words, Blizzard not only single handedly destroyed an already bad Terran late game, but nullified any chance for viable mech while simultaneously encouraging Terran 2-base all-ins. If stats start turning in Terrans favor it will not be because of healthy balance; it will be Terrans running to end the game before 10 minutes because they don't have any options after that.
On May 09 2018 12:07 SirPinky wrote: This balance patch reminds me when I give my kids chores to do and they say "Dad, look I did ten chores in a half hour!" Then I have to remind them it is not about quantity it is about quality.
How does this analogy relate? Blizzard essentially gave Terran three negligible buffs for trading one major late-game support unit; it is not about quantity it is about quality. Terran was already crippled by late game Protoss (Tempest/Storm/Carrier) and Zerg (Broodlord/Viper/Corruptor). Some would argue Marauder is a large buff, but sorry, that unit does not shoot up will only increase all-ins. The HP buff is nothing compared to storm, parasitic bomb, mass interceptors etc. Think to yourself: "Gee, my army has a wopping 200 HP more with 20 Vikings - I'm sure that is going to really make a difference with a maxed out Zerg and Protoss with spell casters."
I don't understand Blizzards logic in having Terran scale with other races (like Protoss) when, in the late game, they ultimately have nothing of value to fight with a maxed out army. I could have 10k/10k in the bank but if I have far inferior units to keep headbutting against my opponent, then what is the point.
Mark my words, Blizzard not only single handedly destroyed an already bad Terran late game, but nullified any chance for viable mech while simultaneously encouraging Terran 2-base all-ins. If stats start turning in Terrans favor it will not be because of healthy balance; it will be Terrans running to end the game before 10 minutes because they don't have any options after that.
So what is your suggestions and how to make it work? I'm pretty sure we talking about the major patch (a global thing). But how it could be possible to do when we live with patch 4.0 only for 6 month?
In the current situation we should accept anything from Blizzard. Any case, they listened us. They said something. This is not a deaf wall between them and players.
On May 09 2018 12:07 SirPinky wrote: This balance patch reminds me when I give my kids chores to do and they say "Dad, look I did ten chores in a half hour!" Then I have to remind them it is not about quantity it is about quality.
How does this analogy relate? Blizzard essentially gave Terran three negligible buffs for trading one major late-game support unit; it is not about quantity it is about quality. Terran was already crippled by late game Protoss (Tempest/Storm/Carrier) and Zerg (Broodlord/Viper/Corruptor). Some would argue Marauder is a large buff, but sorry, that unit does not shoot up will only increase all-ins. The HP buff is nothing compared to storm, parasitic bomb, mass interceptors etc. Think to yourself: "Gee, my army has a wopping 200 HP more with 20 Vikings - I'm sure that is going to really make a difference with a maxed out Zerg and Protoss with spell casters."
I don't understand Blizzards logic in having Terran scale with other races (like Protoss) when, in the late game, they ultimately have nothing of value to fight with a maxed out army. I could have 10k/10k in the bank but if I have far inferior units to keep headbutting against my opponent, then what is the point.
Mark my words, Blizzard not only single handedly destroyed an already bad Terran late game, but nullified any chance for viable mech while simultaneously encouraging Terran 2-base all-ins. If stats start turning in Terrans favor it will not be because of healthy balance; it will be Terrans running to end the game before 10 minutes because they don't have any options after that.
So what is your suggestions and how to make it work? I'm pretty sure we talking about the major patch (a global thing). But how it could be possible to do when we live with patch 4.0 only for 6 month?
In the current situation we should accept anything from Blizzard. Any case, they listened us. They said something. This is not a deaf wall between them and players.
My logic may be oversimplifying things but I think it is pretty obvious - look at the Battlecruiser. Why is the BC the most expensive unit in the game which takes the longest to build (significantly longer than the Tempest) yet is one of the worst units in the game? It is dead in TvT because of interference matrix; it is dead in TvP because of Tempest easily kiting; it is dead in TvZ because of mass corruptor/viper(abduct) or mass hydra. Change something about the BC to make it better: Such as faster build time, less money, longer range, better speed...SOMETHING! They were on the right track with Tactical Jump, it was a nice novelty, but ultimately it did not make the unit playable against the many counter options of each race. Am I saying make the BC the strongest unit in the game which has little counter? No of course not...but not some pitiful unit that has zero place in any matchup. The irony here is Terran's flagship unit where you see the image everywhere in the game for marketing etc...is, indeed, one of the worst.
For the Protoss players that don't understand why Blizzard had to make these changes, Protoss had an advantage going into the mid-game against Terran. Demuslim explains it pretty well here:
Hey! Hard to pinpoint one thing, there's several build orders for Protoss which are all viable, and have very different possibilities - Twilight = Aggressive Blink, Defensive blink (3 base), Nothing to do with blink but a fake out and tech, DT. Robo = Collosus 2 base, Collosus 3 base, Immortal, Warp prism aggression, Disruptor Drops. Stargate = Oracle 1x into phoenix, 2x oracle, 3x oracle +
They are all good openings, and can lead to very quick and efficient victories, anyone of them can change too based on what they're seeing, if a Protoss sees the Terran is going 3 cc (probe scout initially into the adept across the map) Lets say he was going robo initially into 3 base was his plan in mind, he can then very quickly transition into a warp prism opening and put on pressure. I feel there's a huge amount of lenience in Protoss builds that allow them to go from being "hardcountered" to doing the hard countering, now that example was very basic. But if you see a terran that goes 5 rax before his 3rd cc, there's no real getting out of what he's gonna do, if you see his addons, you can also tell what army comp you're gonna face, If you see 1/1/1 from a terran with an oracle for instance, you see the addons or lack of, and you can tell what's coming, and everything that comes out of a 1/1/1 has the a very similar response and won't really slow down a toss. If you see 3 cc, you can change, if you see 3 rax then 3rd cc, you have your 3rd up already and respond appropriately. Protoss will always get the 3rd up faster than the terran, they can scout better than a terran (Oracle or observers) and they get upgrades faster than a terran, they also have much better late game so the Terran is working with less readable. The shield battery is a very quick "Ah, so the terran is going to be pushing at X:xx minute mark, i'll throw up 3 shield batteries for the attack since my economy is better." All in all, when you play as a Terran vs Protoss, you pick a build at the start of the game, the issue comes in that once you've made your choice, that's it, can do the hard countering, or be hard countered, but as long as a Protoss scouts, he should never realistically be hard countered. It's a game of Rock, Paper, Scissors where they can change their answer. Extremely frustrating and very unforgiving for a terran.
The specific point you missed here is, they can afford to do it since they get a 3rd up much faster than a terran meaning their economy is better, so technically if You survive, you win. Throwing up bunkers because an attack is coming, vs an opponent that is already ahead because they have an extra base, is not a way of getting out of a bad situation, it's a way of further cementing it.
Most TvP's you see will have this trend where Protoss has the harrass Option (oracle) while also getting up a third much faster, so they not only get to expand faster, they also have better scouting info with their harrass tool.
You're missing the point again, having a third base doesn't mean that's where you're going to attack, having a third base means you have a superior economy and so the argument you made earlier saying, terran can just slap down bunkers right, or Zerg can just slap down static right, You can, but if you're already behind you're cementing that position of being behind. You don't play TvT where your opponent is already on 3 bases, and then you take your 3rd later and make it a PF, you just guaranteed you lost the game.
Acid Plant and Catalyst -- Catalyst is a great example of a map you don't drop reason being -- there's only 1 drop spot (The main), and realistically only 1 ground attack spot (at the third, you're never gonna go up the ramps near the natural as 1 sentry will ruin your day). And so being able to put down Shield batteries only at the third (Natural isn't penetrable) and the 130 supply, superior economy vs the 120 supply, inferior economy situation, especially as you can revelate his army permanently, or have observers to keep tabs, losing to drops in the main with stalkers waiting at high level isn't something that's going to happen, especially given the ground point of attack is across the map compared to the main meaning no room for back and forth. You talking about Protoss All ins to validate your point is kinda like me talking about how Zerg 1 base ling/bling all in counters cc first. It's not the meta the top level players are doing, and so bringing that up is as relevant as me talking about flavours of tea in this convo. You watch Maru, Inno or TY try play TvP, Innovation in the Olimo league was a great example of how terrans are playing, it's 2 base or die trying. If you're doing a 2 base all in vs a protoss, there's no chance of flying and dropping into a base, the chances of losing are far higher than a ground attack, hence why the best terrans don't do that, you utilise the best ground position you can. (Which your opponents will also know, which is why it's easy to know where to put up static).
I wrote a decent lengthed paragraph of a multitude of situations that all accumulate to give Protoss an edge, for you to speak specifically of only specifically shield batteries is incorrect. And given you're speaking of examples and scenarios that don't occur at a top level, and seemingly missing every point I bring up, I think we should conclude here and just agree to disagree.
On May 09 2018 12:57 xelnaga_empire wrote: For the Protoss players that don't understand why Blizzard had to make these changes, Protoss had an advantage going into the mid-game against Terran. Demuslim explains it pretty well here:
Hey! Hard to pinpoint one thing, there's several build orders for Protoss which are all viable, and have very different possibilities - Twilight = Aggressive Blink, Defensive blink (3 base), Nothing to do with blink but a fake out and tech, DT. Robo = Collosus 2 base, Collosus 3 base, Immortal, Warp prism aggression, Disruptor Drops. Stargate = Oracle 1x into phoenix, 2x oracle, 3x oracle +
They are all good openings, and can lead to very quick and efficient victories, anyone of them can change too based on what they're seeing, if a Protoss sees the Terran is going 3 cc (probe scout initially into the adept across the map) Lets say he was going robo initially into 3 base was his plan in mind, he can then very quickly transition into a warp prism opening and put on pressure. I feel there's a huge amount of lenience in Protoss builds that allow them to go from being "hardcountered" to doing the hard countering, now that example was very basic. But if you see a terran that goes 5 rax before his 3rd cc, there's no real getting out of what he's gonna do, if you see his addons, you can also tell what army comp you're gonna face, If you see 1/1/1 from a terran with an oracle for instance, you see the addons or lack of, and you can tell what's coming, and everything that comes out of a 1/1/1 has the a very similar response and won't really slow down a toss. If you see 3 cc, you can change, if you see 3 rax then 3rd cc, you have your 3rd up already and respond appropriately. Protoss will always get the 3rd up faster than the terran, they can scout better than a terran (Oracle or observers) and they get upgrades faster than a terran, they also have much better late game so the Terran is working with less readable. The shield battery is a very quick "Ah, so the terran is going to be pushing at X:xx minute mark, i'll throw up 3 shield batteries for the attack since my economy is better." All in all, when you play as a Terran vs Protoss, you pick a build at the start of the game, the issue comes in that once you've made your choice, that's it, can do the hard countering, or be hard countered, but as long as a Protoss scouts, he should never realistically be hard countered. It's a game of Rock, Paper, Scissors where they can change their answer. Extremely frustrating and very unforgiving for a terran.
The specific point you missed here is, they can afford to do it since they get a 3rd up much faster than a terran meaning their economy is better, so technically if You survive, you win. Throwing up bunkers because an attack is coming, vs an opponent that is already ahead because they have an extra base, is not a way of getting out of a bad situation, it's a way of further cementing it.
Most TvP's you see will have this trend where Protoss has the harrass Option (oracle) while also getting up a third much faster, so they not only get to expand faster, they also have better scouting info with their harrass tool.
You're missing the point again, having a third base doesn't mean that's where you're going to attack, having a third base means you have a superior economy and so the argument you made earlier saying, terran can just slap down bunkers right, or Zerg can just slap down static right, You can, but if you're already behind you're cementing that position of being behind. You don't play TvT where your opponent is already on 3 bases, and then you take your 3rd later and make it a PF, you just guaranteed you lost the game.
Acid Plant and Catalyst -- Catalyst is a great example of a map you don't drop reason being -- there's only 1 drop spot (The main), and realistically only 1 ground attack spot (at the third, you're never gonna go up the ramps near the natural as 1 sentry will ruin your day). And so being able to put down Shield batteries only at the third (Natural isn't penetrable) and the 130 supply, superior economy vs the 120 supply, inferior economy situation, especially as you can revelate his army permanently, or have observers to keep tabs, losing to drops in the main with stalkers waiting at high level isn't something that's going to happen, especially given the ground point of attack is across the map compared to the main meaning no room for back and forth. You talking about Protoss All ins to validate your point is kinda like me talking about how Zerg 1 base ling/bling all in counters cc first. It's not the meta the top level players are doing, and so bringing that up is as relevant as me talking about flavours of tea in this convo. You watch Maru, Inno or TY try play TvP, Innovation in the Olimo league was a great example of how terrans are playing, it's 2 base or die trying. If you're doing a 2 base all in vs a protoss, there's no chance of flying and dropping into a base, the chances of losing are far higher than a ground attack, hence why the best terrans don't do that, you utilise the best ground position you can. (Which your opponents will also know, which is why it's easy to know where to put up static).
I wrote a decent lengthed paragraph of a multitude of situations that all accumulate to give Protoss an edge, for you to speak specifically of only specifically shield batteries is incorrect. And given you're speaking of examples and scenarios that don't occur at a top level, and seemingly missing every point I bring up, I think we should conclude here and just agree to disagree.
You're speaking to a non-existent audience. This thread is all about the upset mech and zerg players.
Zerg players getting upset is premature. The Anti Armor Missile nerf is a huge nerf to the Terran late game. It's possible that Terrran late game is worse off after this patch, despite the other buffs. People are saying that the Marauder buff will hurt Ultralisks. But they also need to consider the impact the Anti Armor Missile nerf has on Terran late game against Zerg now. It's possible that the other buffs to Terran won't compensate for the Anti Armor Missile nerf in the late game. We'll have to see when the patch comes out.
it has come to my attention that some losers who play handbag apres-ski (spring break) farmerboy """sky terran""" of the most horrible kind dare to call themselves MECH players. this pokemon shit has nothing to do with true MECH and its a straight up wrong use of the term...a falsification of history and disrespect to many
those s ö y b ö y terrans don't understand the game from the Falling angle (http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/360325-in-defence-of-mech), they don't know what a mag field accelerator is and probably never seen a cyclone army kite a roach army. oh, you made 4 starports and now you're a mech player?? tell me more about your maru builds you clueless wee dote
ja ja, everyone wants mech to be viable, but not like this. raven """mech""" is fake mech played by talentless & fantasyless pricks that don't give a fuck about mech -- but only how big their flying air penises look and how they can score enough mana to put in their flobby asses so they can shit all over the map with gg missiles. mech = factory ground units with SOME support from other units. terran players were too busy sitting on their throne of DICKS they didn't even protest patch 3.8.0 because the changes was perceived as a buff. terran players would rather have zero skill warhounds than high skill glass cannon cyclones. think about it. there is no difference in skill between Maru controlling a cyclone and a gold league player controlling a cyclone. the only thing Maru can do better is repair and pick up with a medivac. why don't terran players cry about this? because it gets u free wins sometimes, amirite? terran players don't care about good unit design, they only want to be the ez race
I don't understand why they don't make the raven missile just not stack like all other spells. I think that is a better approach as opposed to the nerfing the damage.
As a zerg player, I think there is still the opportunity to change the ultra by adding additional armor to either the ultra upgrade or as a base stat, if marauders turn out to make the ultras too useless.
On May 09 2018 13:27 Ulargg wrote: I don't understand why they don't make the raven missile just not stack like all other spells. I think that is a better approach as opposed to the nerfing the damage.
As a zerg player, I think there is still the opportunity to change the ultra by adding additional armor to either the ultra upgrade or as a base stat, if marauders turn out to make the ultras too useless.
I guess we will see.
Let's see how the patch plays out. The Anti Armor Missile nerf will hit Terran hard against Zerg in the late game. Yeah, Ultralisks will die easier to Marauders, but at the same time, Zerg won't have to worry as much about Anti Armor Missiles from Terran.
On May 09 2018 12:07 SirPinky wrote: This balance patch reminds me when I give my kids chores to do and they say "Dad, look I did ten chores in a half hour!" Then I have to remind them it is not about quantity it is about quality.
How does this analogy relate? Blizzard essentially gave Terran three negligible buffs for trading one major late-game support unit; it is not about quantity it is about quality. Terran was already crippled by late game Protoss (Tempest/Storm/Carrier) and Zerg (Broodlord/Viper/Corruptor). Some would argue Marauder is a large buff, but sorry, that unit does not shoot up will only increase all-ins. The HP buff is nothing compared to storm, parasitic bomb, mass interceptors etc. Think to yourself: "Gee, my army has a wopping 200 HP more with 20 Vikings - I'm sure that is going to really make a difference with a maxed out Zerg and Protoss with spell casters."
I don't understand Blizzards logic in having Terran scale with other races (like Protoss) when, in the late game, they ultimately have nothing of value to fight with a maxed out army. I could have 10k/10k in the bank but if I have far inferior units to keep headbutting against my opponent, then what is the point.
Mark my words, Blizzard not only single handedly destroyed an already bad Terran late game, but nullified any chance for viable mech while simultaneously encouraging Terran 2-base all-ins. If stats start turning in Terrans favor it will not be because of healthy balance; it will be Terrans running to end the game before 10 minutes because they don't have any options after that.
So what is your suggestions and how to make it work? I'm pretty sure we talking about the major patch (a global thing). But how it could be possible to do when we live with patch 4.0 only for 6 month?
In the current situation we should accept anything from Blizzard. Any case, they listened us. They said something. This is not a deaf wall between them and players.
My logic may be oversimplifying things but I think it is pretty obvious - look at the Battlecruiser. Why is the BC the most expensive unit in the game which takes the longest to build (significantly longer than the Tempest) yet is one of the worst units in the game? It is dead in TvT because of interference matrix; it is dead in TvP because of Tempest easily kiting; it is dead in TvZ because of mass corruptor/viper(abduct) or mass hydra. Change something about the BC to make it better: Such as faster build time, less money, longer range, better speed...SOMETHING! They were on the right track with Tactical Jump, it was a nice novelty, but ultimately it did not make the unit playable against the many counter options of each race. Am I saying make the BC the strongest unit in the game which has little counter? No of course not...but not some pitiful unit that has zero place in any matchup. The irony here is Terran's flagship unit where you see the image everywhere in the game for marketing etc...is, indeed, one of the worst.
Yeah, and it's good. It was said by several people in a previous community updates.
But what is more important that is terran should have a fair chance to deal with the 3rd and economical advantage. That's the point and if terran can fuck that greddy third, we okay, at least right now. Because Dear vs Maru GSL S2, 2nd match was like "i'm ready to blow up".
As i said- Ultras will be worse than in HOTS, straight because of how Infestors and Funghal Growth was nerfed during LOTV, how ghost was buffed and how AntiArmourMissile works with deleting any armour advantage. Despite 1 base armour more this will be the trash unit.
I just can't understand how Terrans can whine about lategame in the same tine having unit as Ghost... Unbelievable.
You're speaking to a non-existent audience. This thread is all about the upset mech and zerg players.
Zerg players getting upset is premature. The Anti Armor Missile nerf is a huge nerf to the Terran late game. It's possible that Terrran late game is worse off after this patch, despite the other buffs. People are saying that the Marauder buff will hurt Ultralisks. But they also need to consider the impact the Anti Armor Missile nerf has on Terran late game against Zerg now. It's possible that the other buffs to Terran won't compensate for the Anti Armor Missile nerf in the late game. We'll have to see when the patch comes out.
I don't know why zergs are whingeing about ultras and marauders tbh, when it would be so much more sensible to whine about roaches and marauders.
TBH I really wish people would just wait until the changes are actually implemented, then play a meaningful size of games to totally grasp the aftereffects of the patches. All this theory-crafting balance talk really doesn't matter until we see it in action and to be really brutally honest (from my ladder experiences at least) I think up til like diamond 2 its more a question of how well you know your win conditions against your opponent than really anything about balance. I've beaten and lost in equal measure, and my wins were more me just knowing the situation better midgame and capitalizing on it than me losing to the itty bitty tiny changes that are supposedly breaking the game as some people are stating in the comments. For the most part, most ladder players apart from the literal top 5% dont even bother trying to go to the late game purposefully.
On May 09 2018 15:23 Orlok wrote: TBH I really wish people would just wait until the changes are actually implemented, then play a meaningful size of games to totally grasp the aftereffects of the patches. All this theory-crafting balance talk really doesn't matter until we see it in action and to be really brutally honest (from my ladder experiences at least) I think up til like diamond 2 its more a question of how well you know your win conditions against your opponent than really anything about balance. I've beaten and lost in equal measure, and my wins were more me just knowing the situation better midgame and capitalizing on it than me losing to the itty bitty tiny changes that are supposedly breaking the game as some people are stating in the comments. For the most part, most ladder players apart from the literal top 5% dont even bother trying to go to the late game purposefully.
yeah pretty much this, sadly this will never happen. People like complaining too much
On May 09 2018 03:21 Lyyna wrote: Nice to see Blizzard really want to make mech non viable. When will they go all-in on that and make factory an unique building ?
The raven nerf / viking buff duo is a joke. They are removing the only thing that allows a terran army to fight compositions like tempest / carrier / HT & infestor / BL / viper head-on, and essentially giving nothing to make up for it.
They are buffing Viking, Auto Turret, and Marauder. Are these buffs enough to offset the Anti Armor Missile nerf?
No.
All these changes affect mid game not lategame (well viking does). I dont disagree with why they do this, they want less games being about lategame armies that last for 40 mins and more about games ending in midgame.
The problem is that this does nothing for the current problems while adding more.
Against Z terran will still go for mass ghost because marauders do nothing against hydra/bane comps, the only difference is that now we have a worst raven, so it will be the same as before, just with less ravens and more ghosts.
Against P it will still be 2 base all ins, the only difference being that they will be stronger.
Meanwhile ultras will be out of TvZs, terran still wont want to go lategame vs toss, and on top of that mech is being more brushed aside (TvZ it should still be viable but in TvT I can see it dissapear)
Hopefully the threat of strong 2 base all-ins will keep Protoss honest and they will prepare for the possibility instead of going double upgrade and storm with few units, knowing they will probably defend anyway. If you are greedy you deserve to be punished by an all-in. The meta should adjust from there. I see a problem if the 2 base all in is unstoppable no matter what.
This can already punished if you scout and prepare an appropiate response.
But yeah I understand how this patch will help those A-move terrans, ie. most of them.
Not surprised and dont care, Im used to Terran being favoured by Blizz.
Big fan of the Marauder revert, not sure about raven,and Viking buff is laughable. There is room for mech still, I think. But tvp skytoss is just impossible to deal with, combined with storm.as terran you simply can't afford to wait for that transition, a competent protoss wins every time. No unit comp should be so overpowered, all other things being equal. give the raven missile a property similar to a weaker EMP or something, then mech might be viable.
it s kind of a shame, i was having fun offracing as Protoss, and enjoying that i dont have to really know the PvT mu and still manage to win some games
On May 09 2018 17:16 Geo.Rion wrote: it s kind of a shame, i was having fun offracing as Protoss, and enjoying that i dont have to really know the PvT mu and still manage to win some games
Uhmm, what about the Terran on the other end that does know the PvsT matchup but loses to you anyways?
On May 09 2018 13:27 Ulargg wrote: I don't understand why they don't make the raven missile just not stack like all other spells. I think that is a better approach as opposed to the nerfing the damage.
As a zerg player, I think there is still the opportunity to change the ultra by adding additional armor to either the ultra upgrade or as a base stat, if marauders turn out to make the ultras too useless.
I guess we will see.
Let's see how the patch plays out. The Anti Armor Missile nerf will hit Terran hard against Zerg in the late game. Yeah, Ultralisks will die easier to Marauders, but at the same time, Zerg won't have to worry as much about Anti Armor Missiles from Terran.
It'll work out. Other things will be buffed if it really is a problem. Just like tossing the mothership core out and adding a shield battery worked. The more important thing is that the AAM was being used exactly opposite to what it was supposed to be used for. They nerfed it to bring it in line with the vision of it.
On May 09 2018 18:17 DavStarcraft2 wrote: I wish Terran had a solid late-game unit/comp that doesn't get reworked and/or nerfed every 4-6 months...
The problem about that is that terran's lategame units are so much worse than their Z / P equivalents, so the only way to make them good without reworking the other races' units (which would be ideal but won't happen) is to give terran something "stupid" like the missile or snipe which ends up being very strong (tho never to the point some people implies on TL, and largely counterable by micro, but hey..) but extremely gimmicky.
Also no fast remax mechanic so you end up with a worse army that can't be replenished as fast and isn't as mobile. Terran is the only race that has to trade mobility & production speed for firepower.. without getting more in the firepower departement. Also, static D.
I'll mention again an idea i put in the other thread : make ravens a true support unit. Give them scrambler missile, pdd, & healing drone. Now you get an unit that can be used to truly help the bigger terran units like thors & BCs, and help fighting tempests / corruptors. Hell, you can even introduce more micro by making the healing drone something attached to an unit (ala defensive matrix) instead of a static thing.
I wish Terran had a solid late-game unit/comp that doesn't get reworked and/or nerfed every 4-6 months...
It's dangerous to give Terran a good late game comp. If you give them powerful late game, a lot of turtle play will emerge from that. They are the best at defending bases.
I like to play it & play against it if you have the right tools. Right now IMO you clearly have the tools. (With the AAM nerf which I like)
We will not see a lot of Mech (turtle or aggressive) now. Why bother with Mech if you have no more tools in late game than BIO ? I guess Blizzard just want to see BIO play with multi tasking, and not take any risk at giving T a powerfull late game.
I don't understand how someone with common sense could not understand Raven nerf- just go see game no3 soO vs Cure. It was pure Raven cancer. I felt like vomiting after watching this.
The only beef i have with Blizzard is that they admitted 2 months ago that they know Raven is being imba, but still they decided to not nerf it, leaving this broken units untouched trough whole ro32 of GSL. Korean Zergs send big thanks.
On May 09 2018 12:07 SirPinky wrote: This balance patch reminds me when I give my kids chores to do and they say "Dad, look I did ten chores in a half hour!" Then I have to remind them it is not about quantity it is about quality.
How does this analogy relate? Blizzard essentially gave Terran three negligible buffs for trading one major late-game support unit; it is not about quantity it is about quality. Terran was already crippled by late game Protoss (Tempest/Storm/Carrier) and Zerg (Broodlord/Viper/Corruptor). Some would argue Marauder is a large buff, but sorry, that unit does not shoot up will only increase all-ins. The HP buff is nothing compared to storm, parasitic bomb, mass interceptors etc. Think to yourself: "Gee, my army has a wopping 200 HP more with 20 Vikings - I'm sure that is going to really make a difference with a maxed out Zerg and Protoss with spell casters."
I don't understand Blizzards logic in having Terran scale with other races (like Protoss) when, in the late game, they ultimately have nothing of value to fight with a maxed out army. I could have 10k/10k in the bank but if I have far inferior units to keep headbutting against my opponent, then what is the point.
Mark my words, Blizzard not only single handedly destroyed an already bad Terran late game, but nullified any chance for viable mech while simultaneously encouraging Terran 2-base all-ins. If stats start turning in Terrans favor it will not be because of healthy balance; it will be Terrans running to end the game before 10 minutes because they don't have any options after that.
Don't involve your kids in your arguing, that's gross. A spammable quasi instant seeker missile is just ridiculous design wise, you should be grateful that blizzard let this joke unchanged + the +1 range of the turret is actually big and could be pretty strong combined with the seeker's armor reduced but I bet you do not even realize this as you do not talk about. The seeker was not supposed to destroy by itself gigantic bulbs of zergs army but was intended as a support spell which it is in tvp (clearly, it works pretty well in this mu). Now, we have turtling T who waits until they have mass raven with hellbat/thor (inno/rogue) or just a lot of ghost/turrets and this is quiet ugly, while there are solutions to break this, the point is that late game tvz is just terrible. And the other buffs while minor could have their importance, the goal is not to have a 300 hp vikings tho it is pretty sure that it would not stop your balance whining. Anyway, that's a sensitive patch, the ultra could become less popular but it seems like a minor problem for now.
I really, really, reaaaaally hate Blizzard's 'don't let them get there' approach to lategame involving terran. Why does SC2 have to be the only RTS game still alive? Why does god hate RTS fans so much and must punish us like this?
Instead of nerfing anti armor missile to 15 damage, what Blizzard should do is increase it (and then we doubled it) to 60 damage. I really want to see some pro games with 60 damage AAMs blotting out the sun.
After all we want to see amazing games like these:
The Viking has never been in a better spot than as of late, especially with the ground damage buff to mechanical and smart servos. Undoubtedly, performing the more cautious role as a dedicated anti-air unit, it will be very useful to be able to tank another stalker shot.
Historically, landing them has been far too risky though, being a critical anti-air component of the army that is rather fragile for its cost. This is particularly questionable in TvP. I'm not sure if an 8% HP increase will push this over the threshold where they're worth landing in a relatively close battle (in light of the risk of an opponent's followup air/colossus production), rather than remaining relegated as additional cleanup crew after the ground battle has been mostly decided. If it's not Blizzard's intent to significantly change this dynamic, it's a moot point though.
On May 09 2018 21:06 ihatevideogames wrote: I really, really, reaaaaally hate Blizzard's 'don't let them get there' approach to lategame involving terran. Why does SC2 have to be the only RTS game still alive? Why does god hate RTS fans so much and must punish us like this?
Iron Harvest is on its way dude,...just hang on a bit
Ultras are not terrible, they can end a game if you're macroing correctly and rushing hive as you should as zerg, but it is true that there's a timer before terran have too many counters out and with the marauder buff it will probably get worse, we'll see.
On May 09 2018 19:46 hiroshOne wrote: I don't understand how someone with common sense could not understand Raven nerf- just go see game no3 soO vs Cure. It was pure Raven cancer. I felt like vomiting after watching this.
The only beef i have with Blizzard is that they admitted 2 months ago that they know Raven is being imba, but still they decided to not nerf it, leaving this broken units untouched trough whole ro32 of GSL. Korean Zergs send big thanks.
And yet soo managed to win the losers series somehow without the patch... imagine that. He should spend less time practicing and more time crying on the forums this way he'd lose and help ur case.
On May 09 2018 19:46 hiroshOne wrote: I don't understand how someone with common sense could not understand Raven nerf- just go see game no3 soO vs Cure. It was pure Raven cancer. I felt like vomiting after watching this.
The only beef i have with Blizzard is that they admitted 2 months ago that they know Raven is being imba, but still they decided to not nerf it, leaving this broken units untouched trough whole ro32 of GSL. Korean Zergs send big thanks.
And yet soo managed to win the losers series somehow without the patch... imagine that. He should spend less time practicing and more time crying on the forums this way he'd lose and help ur case.
On May 09 2018 19:46 hiroshOne wrote: I don't understand how someone with common sense could not understand Raven nerf- just go see game no3 soO vs Cure. It was pure Raven cancer. I felt like vomiting after watching this.
The only beef i have with Blizzard is that they admitted 2 months ago that they know Raven is being imba, but still they decided to not nerf it, leaving this broken units untouched trough whole ro32 of GSL. Korean Zergs send big thanks.
And yet soo managed to win the losers series somehow without the patch... imagine that. He should spend less time practicing and more time crying on the forums this way he'd lose and help ur case.
A six-time GSL finalist and of the 4 Korean Zergs who have accomplished anything since LotV came out was able to win one Bo3 against a bottom tier Terran player, therefore mech is balanced. Good to know.
On May 09 2018 19:46 hiroshOne wrote: I don't understand how someone with common sense could not understand Raven nerf- just go see game no3 soO vs Cure. It was pure Raven cancer. I felt like vomiting after watching this.
The only beef i have with Blizzard is that they admitted 2 months ago that they know Raven is being imba, but still they decided to not nerf it, leaving this broken units untouched trough whole ro32 of GSL. Korean Zergs send big thanks.
And yet soo managed to win the losers series somehow without the patch... imagine that. He should spend less time practicing and more time crying on the forums this way he'd lose and help ur case.
A six-time GSL finalist and of the 4 Korean Zergs who have accomplished anything since LotV came out was able to win one Bo3 against a bottom tier Terran player, therefore mech is balanced. Good to know.
So if ro32 ends as expected there will be 7 toss 5 terran and 4 zergs in ro16.. everybody who is supposed to be there will be there..and we've seen hardly any mech at all...and yet this is the whine? Really? Lets replay that zanster vs maru series with the new raven and see what would have happened lol..zanster threw a won game vs the best terran in the world with the current raven. Not saying the offsetting buffs wont help or arent a good direction but this isnt a balance patch its a lets make the forum warriors stop crying about ravens patch which we all saw coming..but stop pretending like zerg is fucked in the current the state its a laughable arguement.
Let me know when we see gsl with a couple foreign terran mech players competing with the best zergs in the world then we can rehatch this ok. Good talk.
On May 09 2018 21:20 Loccstana wrote: Instead of nerfing anti armor missile to 15 damage, what Blizzard should do is increase it (and then we doubled it) to 60 damage. I really want to see some pro games with 60 damage AAMs blotting out the sun.
Hey hey hey, don't you dare bad mouth my boy Ketroc, he is pure love and smiles, I'll fight you.
Also I think people miss the point here. HotS marauders will make terran mid game strong enough that all TvP will be 2 base games. When you have a weaker lategame and stronger midgame, why transition at all?
Also how are zergs complaining? Yes ultras are much weaker but hydra/bane into infestor/broodlord will be even stronger. Its not like terran actually needed the marauder there, making ghosts is 100% better.
On May 09 2018 21:06 ihatevideogames wrote: I really, really, reaaaaally hate Blizzard's 'don't let them get there' approach to lategame involving terran. Why does SC2 have to be the only RTS game still alive? Why does god hate RTS fans so much and must punish us like this?
CoH2 and SC2 are alive because lots of people like playing them. The assortment of RTS games released since 2010 have not been good enough for the ever shrinking player base.
Basically, releasing an RTS game after 2010 is like making a Dot-Eating-Maze-Game Arcade Game after 1987 and expecting it to succeed.
Current situation: Terran is really weak in the late game so almost every Terran try to kill Protoss before the late game.
Blizzards solution: Improve Terrans midgame and nerf Terran late game.
Result: Terrans all-ins will be stronger and their late game even worse. Is this really a good idea?
Would it not make more sense to improve Terrans late game or nerf Protoss late game?
Blizzard is taking the idea of asymmetrical design too far in my opinion. It is ok if races are slightly stronger or slightly weaker at different phases in the game but no race should have a huge advantage just because you hit the 12+ minute mark.
Even with the current Raven TvP late game is very Protoss favored. Without Ravens I am not sure if late game TvP will be playable.
I mean everyone will all-in with bio in the midgame since there is no point of going late game now. Is this really the meta Blizzard desires?
On May 10 2018 00:20 MockHamill wrote: I mean everyone will all-in with bio in the midgame since there is no point of going late game now. Is this really the meta Blizzard desires?
can you more carefully define "everyone" in this statement.
On May 10 2018 00:20 MockHamill wrote: I mean everyone will all-in with bio in the midgame since there is no point of going late game now. Is this really the meta Blizzard desires?
can you more carefully define "everyone" in this statement.
100% of the Terran pro players since not trying to end every game in the mid game would not make sense at all when money is on the line if this patch goes live.
I am sad about the Raven change as it was one of the few very fun tools Terran had but that is my opinion... A lot of people even Terrans themselves have to acknowledge it is broken and while it is sad it is being nerfed like this the Raven was a gimmick tool. I think it should be changed to maybe have the old seeker or if we leave it as it is now (Which is fine) then we should look towards buffing other late game tools for Terran. The Viking change is nice vs protoss and Terran but I think another change could be made to it. With this coming patch mech is probably going to be the weaker of the 2 Terran styles in the later game vs Zerg I feel like units such as the liberator and ghost aren't the ones we should look to buff but instead look at units like battlecruiser, thor, and raven. I think the battlecruiser could receive maybe a slight increase to the cast time of yamato or maybe even a buff to its cooldowns. As for the thor I feel like its greatest weakness in the late game against zerg is that it no longer becomes efficient and seems like a weak response to broodlord viper corruptor hydra. Since you need siege tanks to kill the ground army of zerg you manually will need to fire at the ground army to avoid hitting your own thors but even if you move your tanks to focus the ground army the zerg can pull back and the broodlords will trigger siege tank friendly fire to demolish thors. That being said I don't think the thor should counter the broodlord but perhaps something can be done there to increase thors resistance to friendly splash? (its a long stretch I know) Finally the raven. I think blizzard never intended to make the AAM used in the way it is today. It was meant as an actual utility spell. Unfortunately, the spell seems to benefit bio units more so than it does mechanical units. Even with how much armor is reduced the raven had to be massed in order to efficiently clear out the armies of Zerg. Protoss and Zerg both have strong remax mechanics in comparison to Terran. Where the missile could go or what can be done for it I do not know but I think the AAM may be necessary to deal with certain Zerg armies... (possibly even the maxed out skytoss army) Finally the last thing I can think of is to rebuff the mule just slightly (maybe to mine 5-10 minerals more?) I think all of these changes are not needed at all but perhaps 1 or 2 of them should be considered for Terran.
On May 10 2018 00:20 MockHamill wrote: I mean everyone will all-in with bio in the midgame since there is no point of going late game now. Is this really the meta Blizzard desires?
can you more carefully define "everyone" in this statement.
100% of the Terran pro players since not trying to end every game in the mid game would not make sense at all when money is on the line if this patch goes live.
thx for clarifying. and thx for having the balls to make a projection that is testable.
On May 10 2018 00:20 MockHamill wrote: I mean everyone will all-in with bio in the midgame since there is no point of going late game now. Is this really the meta Blizzard desires?
can you more carefully define "everyone" in this statement.
100% of the Terran pro players since not trying to end every game in the mid game would not make sense at all when money is on the line if this patch goes live.
thx for clarifying. and thx for having the balls to make a projection that is testable.
Both Taeja & Polt are not playing anymore, right? (AKA the best lategame Terrans )
Does failing the all-in and staying in the game until lategame loss counts as not going into lategame?
But not sure about nerfing Ravens. Of course vikings should be not buffed if Ravens would not nerf.
If Ravens are no more effective enough, Zergs would kill easily mass vikings with infestators and fungal and some Corruptors hits. Ravens help to avoid mass fungal and to lose all his vikings so easily. So nerfing them would be a disaster. I think Zergs have to learn to split as Terran use to do for years and we are starting to see Zerg players splitting their units. Not very easy for Broodlords, but even when it is easy like vikings, you have to split the units before the attack to avoid mass fungal.
On May 10 2018 03:02 bObA wrote: But not sure about nerfing Ravens. Of course vikings should be not buffed if Ravens would not nerf.
If Ravens are no more effective enough, Zergs would kill easily mass vikings with infestators and fungal and some Corruptors hits. Ravens help to avoid mass fungal and to lose all his vikings so easily. So nerfing them would be a disaster. I think Zergs have to learn to split as Terran use to do for years.
First they could have tried to not stuck the damage. If the intended use is the debuff, that would do.
First of all its not Ravens but Ghosts are to defend versus mass funghal. They're not nerfing ghosts but cancer unit with spammable and stackable burst damage. And drop those myths about splitting versus Anti Armour Missile. It was possible vs old Seeker Missile but not this. It's hits almost instant. So let's get back to instant funghal growths and try to split vs that.
I'd say Terran gets buffed against protoss overall, by quite the margin even. Those zealots might actually take some damage from marauders again. Against the sky deathball it's not great to lose ravens, but terran was probably favored near the super end. Viking buff will make it easier to get there so that's probably a slight win for terran aswell. This was very deserved, although I do think it's possible protoss just continues to dominate the midgame and early lategame so much that these hardly matter.
Against zerg, I started to feel like the lategame was over the top while the midgame has been feeling weak. Basically apart from an early push and drops, terran can't actually move out anymore. They just turtle raven ghost, but once you get there Zerg can't really attack anymore either. Marauder buff probably means the midgame is a bit more reliable; you could probably start mixing in marauders against ling bane hydra and be safer against the early ultras. It's hard to guess how much the raven nerf will affect things; it might just be that you cant really do the raven ghost turtle. I hope this still remains the style - its actually pretty cool - but just that zerg can be a little bit more cost effective in the heads up fight.
I think these are steps in the right direction at the very least, and I hope they turn out well.
On May 10 2018 03:43 FrkFrJss wrote: Not stacking damage is a much harsher nerf than 15 stacking damage though.
Well then they could have upped the damage.
Currently they're going wrong way IMO. Stackable AoE damage in this game is wrong. Many units tend to hug - not only air units. And stackable AoE on AIR caster is wrong on a different level. If I have a stackable storm - templars are being blocked by other units(or I need to unload them from the prism, but only 4 get in and I cannot unload all of them at once). But in the air no unint is blocked by others and, well, you have no transport for air units(outside of some teleports and landed viking ). So you can clump all your casters together and cast stackable damage much faster than with land casters.
But hey, that's just my view on this matter, what do I know, I just saw a pro player do this(the fact I do this doesn't matter, I am a noob )
On May 10 2018 03:02 bObA wrote: But not sure about nerfing Ravens. Of course vikings should be not buffed if Ravens would not nerf.
If Ravens are no more effective enough, Zergs would kill easily mass vikings with infestators and fungal and some Corruptors hits. Ravens help to avoid mass fungal and to lose all his vikings so easily. So nerfing them would be a disaster. I think Zergs have to learn to split as Terran use to do for years and we are starting to see Zerg players splitting their units. Not very easy for Broodlords, but even when it is easy like vikings, you have to split the units before the attack to avoid mass fungal.
mass fungal?? that's a fine way of suiciding... here's a suggestion: you can keep your raven as it is, no nerf whatsoever, BUT! "revert" (such a nice word) fungal in 1 of 3 ways: 1) allow infestors to cast it while borrowed AGAIN 2) make it an instant spell (instead of a projectile) AGAIN 3) return the functionality to stun (instead of slow) AGAIN seriously, whining about fungal in it's current form is laughable!
Seriously, non-unironically, their marketing department must be telling them to not give terran a late game in order to have 'action packed' pro games.
the question is, how much of the ghost's strength is afforded by the threat of raven missiles? the presence of ravens forced zerg players to babysit their units real carefully... without this distraction, ghosts will not be able to slip by so easily. without this threat, zerg will be able to devote their attention to more advantageous things around the map. I predict that ghosts won't be anywhere near as effective as they are now, even if the ghost itself is unchanged.
On May 10 2018 07:34 deacon.frost wrote: Stackable AoE damage in this game is wrong. Many units tend to hug - not only air units. And stackable AoE on AIR caster is wrong on a different level. If I have a stackable storm - templars are being blocked by other units(or I need to unload them from the prism, but only 4 get in and I cannot unload all of them at once). But in the air no unint is blocked by others and, well, you have no transport for air units(outside of some teleports and landed viking ). So you can clump all your casters together and cast stackable damage much faster than with land casters.
stackable AoE spell damage from an Air Unit is BS.
perhaps make basic Terran units basic attacks slightly stronger on their 3rd upgrade maybe?
The raven nerf is definitely a needed change from the e-sport perspective, raven-ghost-planetary turtle has become the go to TvZ lategame, as many of us have predicted and it was painful to watch after the first couple of games.
From a personal point of view, i still have never lost to mass raven to this date in ZvT as a low masters player, but i did lose a lot to normal terran compositions, including mass vikings to counter the hive tech flyers (BL+viper). That just received a buff, so that s sad for me.
Still, in 3v3 and 4v4 mass ravens have been very annoying, not that it matters a lot.
Overall sensible changes. Let's see how the play out. However I'd like more to have Raven's AAM made unstackable instead of dmg nerf as some people in thread already suggested. If it becomes too weak then we might tweak the dmg.
Good patch, i like. I think it isn't anymore cost effective to mass raven with that aa missile nerf. I don't like random rules: why a exploding missile doesn't too stackable dmg? if the dmg nerf isn't enough, make raven cost 3 supply.
Well, hell i think all casters should cost at least 3 supply so you can't make excessive amounts of them. I think even hts should cost 3 supply (and archons 4) so protoss can't just have as many storms as possible and then morph them to archons, usually without a penalty.
On May 10 2018 18:20 Taco87 wrote: Why reduce the anti armor missle dmg? Goodbye any hope for Terran late game, see you after the Blizzcon patch !
Because a spell which causes a deficit of cost efficienty around 30-40% for the zerg might no be the best idea for balance? And is a joke design wise. See you
On May 10 2018 19:34 Tyrhanius wrote: You should at least buffs hatch hp/armor they already die too fast, with a marauder buff no way you can play on more than 5bases vs bio.
This marauder revert is game breaking.
What? The Marauder revert makes them worse against buildings.
On May 10 2018 19:34 Tyrhanius wrote: You should at least buffs hatch hp/armor they already die too fast, with a marauder buff no way you can play on more than 5bases vs bio.
This marauder revert is game breaking.
Gamebreaking like Protoss for sure...Are you serious?
This should at the very least be followed up by +1 ultralisk base armor and some protoss air nerfs: Either transition to carriers needs to be slowed down or carriers themselves require the nerf.
What I find really interesting is that the race that struggles the most in the late game is nerfed even more in the late game.
Raven nerf makes sense but at least combine it with a Carrier nerf and a Viper nerf to balance things out.
If this patch goes through every game will be about sniping the Protoss third. If you succeed you win, if you fail you lose.
I would rather see a patch like this:
- Increase the cost of shield batteries to 150 minerals - Carrier maximum number of interceptors changed from 8 to 6 - Raven seeker missile cost changed to 100 energy. - Raven supply changed from 2 to 3. - Vipers can no longer abduct massive units.
On May 10 2018 19:34 Tyrhanius wrote: You should at least buffs hatch hp/armor they already die too fast, with a marauder buff no way you can play on more than 5bases vs bio.
This marauder revert is game breaking.
Dude I know you are a known zerg whiner but you don't even try to know what you are talking about.
Marauders with 0 upgrades do 1 more damage vs buildings yes. Marauders with +1 get +1(+2) over 2x(+1(+1)) double shot Marauders do, doing the math +1+2-1=2 and +2+2-2=2. Both Marauders deal the same damage. Once you keep going up HotS Marauders deal less damage because while double shot once got an extra attack upgrade zerg buildings CAN'T upgrade their armor, so HotS Marauders deal 1 less damage at +2 and 2 less damage at +3.
It is a buff for buildings against Marauders, the only exceptions being terrans with building armour and protoss with shield upgrades
On May 10 2018 23:29 MockHamill wrote: What I find really interesting is that the race that struggles the most in the late game is nerfed even more in the late game.
Raven nerf makes sense but at least combine it with a Carrier nerf and a Viper nerf to balance things out.
If this patch goes through every game will be about sniping the Protoss third. If you succeed you win, if you fail you lose.
I would rather see a patch like this:
- Increase the cost of shield batteries to 150 minerals - Carrier maximum number of interceptors changed from 8 to 6 - Raven seeker missile cost changed to 100 energy. - Raven supply changed from 2 to 3. - Vipers can no longer abduct massive units.
Uhm, shield battery change affects PvZ early/mid game and not in a funny way. I wouldn't say Protoss needs a nerf in that department.
Edit> Like it's not a huge nerf IMO, but some all-ins can be more lethal. It's the price of removal MSC and the whole Protoss design fiasco
On May 10 2018 23:02 LSN wrote: This should at the very least be followed up by +1 ultralisk base armor and some protoss air nerfs: Either transition to carriers needs to be slowed down or carriers themselves require the nerf.
But zerg midgame and early hive completely destroys terran? There's no way to beat ultras/broodlords with marines and marauders right now, you have to turtle into ghost raven.
On May 10 2018 19:34 Tyrhanius wrote: You should at least buffs hatch hp/armor they already die too fast, with a marauder buff no way you can play on more than 5bases vs bio.
This marauder revert is game breaking.
Dude I know you are a known zerg whiner but you don't even try to know what you are talking about.
Marauders with 0 upgrades do 1 more damage vs buildings yes. Marauders with +1 get +1(+2) over 2x(+1(+1)) double shot Marauders do, doing the math +1+2-1=2 and +2+2-2=2. Both Marauders deal the same damage. Once you keep going up HotS Marauders deal less damage because while double shot once got an extra attack upgrade zerg buildings CAN'T upgrade their armor, so HotS Marauders deal 1 less damage at +2 and 2 less damage at +3.
It is a buff for buildings against Marauders, the only exceptions being terrans with building armour and protoss with shield upgrades
Current Marauders only gain +1 per upgrade, even against armored. So the reverted Marauder will do an additional 1 damage against zerg and terran buildings, at all upgrade levels.
But of all the things to complain about, that seems silly.
Think it's fair enough to nerf Raven. And they should redesign it again (someday). There are many options and approaches to make it good. Like vessels design from broodwar. Mmmm.
On May 10 2018 23:29 MockHamill wrote: What I find really interesting is that the race that struggles the most in the late game is nerfed even more in the late game.
Raven nerf makes sense but at least combine it with a Carrier nerf and a Viper nerf to balance things out.
If this patch goes through every game will be about sniping the Protoss third. If you succeed you win, if you fail you lose.
I would rather see a patch like this:
- Increase the cost of shield batteries to 150 minerals - Carrier maximum number of interceptors changed from 8 to 6 - Raven seeker missile cost changed to 100 energy. - Raven supply changed from 2 to 3. - Vipers can no longer abduct massive units.
Why would you nerf shield batteries? They have nothing to do with late game and the last thing anybody should be doing is nerfing Protoss early game. Personally I think a lot of Terrans complaining this isn't enough are drastically underestimating the effect of how a stronger midgame will naturally lead to a stronger late game without any specific changes to late game units. For a one patch this is more than enough changes to a single race.
On May 10 2018 19:34 Tyrhanius wrote: You should at least buffs hatch hp/armor they already die too fast, with a marauder buff no way you can play on more than 5bases vs bio.
This marauder revert is game breaking.
Dude I know you are a known zerg whiner but you don't even try to know what you are talking about.
Marauders with 0 upgrades do 1 more damage vs buildings yes. Marauders with +1 get +1(+2) over 2x(+1(+1)) double shot Marauders do, doing the math +1+2-1=2 and +2+2-2=2. Both Marauders deal the same damage. Once you keep going up HotS Marauders deal less damage because while double shot once got an extra attack upgrade zerg buildings CAN'T upgrade their armor, so HotS Marauders deal 1 less damage at +2 and 2 less damage at +3.
It is a buff for buildings against Marauders, the only exceptions being terrans with building armour and protoss with shield upgrades
Current Marauders only gain +1 per upgrade, even against armored. So the reverted Marauder will do an additional 1 damage against zerg and terran buildings, at all upgrade levels.
But of all the things to complain about, that seems silly.
So basically new Marauder will get +1 dmg more right?. It's +3 dmg with +3 attack upgrade. 10 marauders will hit Ultralisk with 30 dmg more than now per shot. Add stim to that and u'll see that Ultralisk will be trash vs 1 tier unit. Your post is bs dude- it presents non existent situation of 1 marauder against ultralisk.
Couple of things must be done to make mech viable in TVP:
1. Siege tank siege range must be increased from 13 to 17. Maps are too large to effective use the siege tank as intended as a zoning tool. It really easy for Protoss to abuse Terran by forcing sieges/unsieges.
2. Battlecruiser absolutely needs to be buffed. Unit is trash right now and needs a range increase and moving shot. This make the battlecruiser actually microable.
3. The cooldown on blink really needs to be increased. One of the most infuriating things is stalkers blinking into main, wrecking tech labs and blinking out with absolute zero risk. It is very hard to catch blink stalkers with stimmed bio, pretty much impossible with mech.
4. Tempest needs a range nerf, mass tempest with HT support beats every mech composition right now. Nerf the air range to 12.
5. Planetaries die like flies to units like immortals also they cannot protect mineral line against range units. Buff PF to 2000 hp, increase range to 8.
On May 11 2018 19:18 Loccstana wrote: Couple of things must be done to make mech viable in TVP:
1. Siege tank siege range must be increased from 13 to 17. Maps are too large to effective use the siege tank as intended as a zoning tool. It really easy for Protoss to abuse Terran by forcing sieges/unsieges.
2. Battlecruiser absolutely needs to be buffed. Unit is trash right now and needs a range increase and moving shot. This make the battlecruiser actually microable.
3. The cooldown on blink really needs to be increased. One of the most infuriating things is stalkers blinking into main, wrecking tech labs and blinking out with absolute zero risk. It is very hard to catch blink stalkers with stimmed bio, pretty much impossible with mech.
4. Tempest needs a range nerf, mass tempest with HT support beats every mech composition right now. Nerf the air range to 12.
5. Planetaries die like flies to units like immortals also they cannot protect mineral line against range units. Buff PF to 2000 hp, increase range to 8.
What do you think would happen in TvZ with that kind of ridiculous changes? Do you even think twice before posting something like that?
On May 11 2018 19:18 Loccstana wrote: 5. Planetaries die like flies to units like immortals also they cannot protect mineral line against range units. Buff PF to 2000 hp, increase range to 8.
I think we need air attack with a reasonable radius of AOE on PF as well. This would allow for PF rushes against carrier users.
On May 10 2018 19:34 Tyrhanius wrote: You should at least buffs hatch hp/armor they already die too fast, with a marauder buff no way you can play on more than 5bases vs bio.
This marauder revert is game breaking.
Dude I know you are a known zerg whiner but you don't even try to know what you are talking about.
Marauders with 0 upgrades do 1 more damage vs buildings yes. Marauders with +1 get +1(+2) over 2x(+1(+1)) double shot Marauders do, doing the math +1+2-1=2 and +2+2-2=2. Both Marauders deal the same damage. Once you keep going up HotS Marauders deal less damage because while double shot once got an extra attack upgrade zerg buildings CAN'T upgrade their armor, so HotS Marauders deal 1 less damage at +2 and 2 less damage at +3.
It is a buff for buildings against Marauders, the only exceptions being terrans with building armour and protoss with shield upgrades
Current Marauders only gain +1 per upgrade, even against armored. So the reverted Marauder will do an additional 1 damage against zerg and terran buildings, at all upgrade levels.
But of all the things to complain about, that seems silly.
So basically new Marauder will get +1 dmg more right?. It's +3 dmg with +3 attack upgrade. 10 marauders will hit Ultralisk with 30 dmg more than now per shot. Add stim to that and u'll see that Ultralisk will be trash vs 1 tier unit. Your post is bs dude- it presents non existent situation of 1 marauder against ultralisk.
What part of "against zerg and terran buildings" do you not understand?
On May 10 2018 19:34 Tyrhanius wrote: You should at least buffs hatch hp/armor they already die too fast, with a marauder buff no way you can play on more than 5bases vs bio.
This marauder revert is game breaking.
Dude I know you are a known zerg whiner but you don't even try to know what you are talking about.
Marauders with 0 upgrades do 1 more damage vs buildings yes. Marauders with +1 get +1(+2) over 2x(+1(+1)) double shot Marauders do, doing the math +1+2-1=2 and +2+2-2=2. Both Marauders deal the same damage. Once you keep going up HotS Marauders deal less damage because while double shot once got an extra attack upgrade zerg buildings CAN'T upgrade their armor, so HotS Marauders deal 1 less damage at +2 and 2 less damage at +3.
It is a buff for buildings against Marauders, the only exceptions being terrans with building armour and protoss with shield upgrades
Current Marauders only gain +1 per upgrade, even against armored. So the reverted Marauder will do an additional 1 damage against zerg and terran buildings, at all upgrade levels.
But of all the things to complain about, that seems silly.
So basically new Marauder will get +1 dmg more right?. It's +3 dmg with +3 attack upgrade. 10 marauders will hit Ultralisk with 30 dmg more than now per shot. Add stim to that and u'll see that Ultralisk will be trash vs 1 tier unit. Your post is bs dude- it presents non existent situation of 1 marauder against ultralisk.
What part of "against zerg and terran buildings" do you not understand?
And which part about "Ultralisk will be trash unit if that change is live" u don't understand? For me it's silly to make an example from literally one marauder, when it's clearly not even close to real deal, where u got lots of them. In my case, those numbers say clearly that this change is demolishing for ZvT in its current form. I'm not arguing about PvT, because i'm aware how it helps Terran in this case, but they should buff something in Zerg arsenal to help in midgame vs stronger BIO again.
On May 10 2018 19:34 Tyrhanius wrote: You should at least buffs hatch hp/armor they already die too fast, with a marauder buff no way you can play on more than 5bases vs bio.
This marauder revert is game breaking.
Dude I know you are a known zerg whiner but you don't even try to know what you are talking about.
Marauders with 0 upgrades do 1 more damage vs buildings yes. Marauders with +1 get +1(+2) over 2x(+1(+1)) double shot Marauders do, doing the math +1+2-1=2 and +2+2-2=2. Both Marauders deal the same damage. Once you keep going up HotS Marauders deal less damage because while double shot once got an extra attack upgrade zerg buildings CAN'T upgrade their armor, so HotS Marauders deal 1 less damage at +2 and 2 less damage at +3.
It is a buff for buildings against Marauders, the only exceptions being terrans with building armour and protoss with shield upgrades
Current Marauders only gain +1 per upgrade, even against armored. So the reverted Marauder will do an additional 1 damage against zerg and terran buildings, at all upgrade levels.
But of all the things to complain about, that seems silly.
So basically new Marauder will get +1 dmg more right?. It's +3 dmg with +3 attack upgrade. 10 marauders will hit Ultralisk with 30 dmg more than now per shot. Add stim to that and u'll see that Ultralisk will be trash vs 1 tier unit. Your post is bs dude- it presents non existent situation of 1 marauder against ultralisk.
What part of "against zerg and terran buildings" do you not understand?
And which part about "Ultralisk will be trash unit if that change is live" u don't understand? For me it's silly to make an example from literally one marauder, when it's clearly not even close to real deal, where u got lots of them. In my case, those numbers say clearly that this change is demolishing for ZvT in its current form. I'm not arguing about PvT, because i'm aware how it helps Terran in this case, but they should buff something in Zerg arsenal to help in midgame vs stronger BIO again.
So the answer was "everything". You didn't understand a single word of that post, nor did you even bother to look at what I was responding to.
On May 10 2018 19:34 Tyrhanius wrote: You should at least buffs hatch hp/armor they already die too fast, with a marauder buff no way you can play on more than 5bases vs bio.
This marauder revert is game breaking.
Dude I know you are a known zerg whiner but you don't even try to know what you are talking about.
Marauders with 0 upgrades do 1 more damage vs buildings yes. Marauders with +1 get +1(+2) over 2x(+1(+1)) double shot Marauders do, doing the math +1+2-1=2 and +2+2-2=2. Both Marauders deal the same damage. Once you keep going up HotS Marauders deal less damage because while double shot once got an extra attack upgrade zerg buildings CAN'T upgrade their armor, so HotS Marauders deal 1 less damage at +2 and 2 less damage at +3.
It is a buff for buildings against Marauders, the only exceptions being terrans with building armour and protoss with shield upgrades
Current Marauders only gain +1 per upgrade, even against armored. So the reverted Marauder will do an additional 1 damage against zerg and terran buildings, at all upgrade levels.
But of all the things to complain about, that seems silly.
So basically new Marauder will get +1 dmg more right?. It's +3 dmg with +3 attack upgrade. 10 marauders will hit Ultralisk with 30 dmg more than now per shot. Add stim to that and u'll see that Ultralisk will be trash vs 1 tier unit. Your post is bs dude- it presents non existent situation of 1 marauder against ultralisk.
What part of "against zerg and terran buildings" do you not understand?
And which part about "Ultralisk will be trash unit if that change is live" u don't understand? For me it's silly to make an example from literally one marauder, when it's clearly not even close to real deal, where u got lots of them. In my case, those numbers say clearly that this change is demolishing for ZvT in its current form. I'm not arguing about PvT, because i'm aware how it helps Terran in this case, but they should buff something in Zerg arsenal to help in midgame vs stronger BIO again.
So the answer was "everything". You didn't understand a single word of that post, nor did you even bother to look at what I was responding to.
Noooo feed the troll lolol..this guy is a lunatic doesnt matter what you say he will cry ..the life for zerg is so unfair!
On May 11 2018 19:18 Loccstana wrote: 5. Planetaries die like flies to units like immortals also they cannot protect mineral line against range units. Buff PF to 2000 hp, increase range to 8.
I think we need air attack with a reasonable radius of AOE on PF as well. This would allow for PF rushes against carrier users.
Those wouldn't be 'real' rushes would they...
Rather - on top of getting AoE Anti-Air - Planetaries should uproot and move with the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow. And 30% faster than that if stimmed.
On May 11 2018 19:18 Loccstana wrote: 5. Planetaries die like flies to units like immortals also they cannot protect mineral line against range units. Buff PF to 2000 hp, increase range to 8.
I think we need air attack with a reasonable radius of AOE on PF as well. This would allow for PF rushes against carrier users.
Those wouldn't be 'real' rushes would they...
Rather - on top of getting AoE Anti-Air - Planetaries should uproot and move with the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow. And 30% faster than that if stimmed.
Do you think a PF ability to jump up cliffs might be necessary? Fusion core 150/150/79 research, so it will be balanced.
On May 11 2018 19:18 Loccstana wrote: 5. Planetaries die like flies to units like immortals also they cannot protect mineral line against range units. Buff PF to 2000 hp, increase range to 8.
I think we need air attack with a reasonable radius of AOE on PF as well. This would allow for PF rushes against carrier users.
Those wouldn't be 'real' rushes would they...
Rather - on top of getting AoE Anti-Air - Planetaries should uproot and move with the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow. And 30% faster than that if stimmed.
Do you think a PF ability to jump up cliffs might be necessary? Fusion core 150/150/79 research, so it will be balanced.
How about a research from ghost building that would gave them a tactical nukes for defense if a ghost sits inside?
On May 11 2018 19:18 Loccstana wrote: Couple of things must be done to make mech viable in TVP:
1. Siege tank siege range must be increased from 13 to 17. Maps are too large to effective use the siege tank as intended as a zoning tool. It really easy for Protoss to abuse Terran by forcing sieges/unsieges.
2. Battlecruiser absolutely needs to be buffed. Unit is trash right now and needs a range increase and moving shot. This make the battlecruiser actually microable.
3. The cooldown on blink really needs to be increased. One of the most infuriating things is stalkers blinking into main, wrecking tech labs and blinking out with absolute zero risk. It is very hard to catch blink stalkers with stimmed bio, pretty much impossible with mech.
4. Tempest needs a range nerf, mass tempest with HT support beats every mech composition right now. Nerf the air range to 12.
5. Planetaries die like flies to units like immortals also they cannot protect mineral line against range units. Buff PF to 2000 hp, increase range to 8.
There's no way these can be serious suggestions right? Quite apart from the fact that none of them except the first one matter since one-base/two-base tank timings are now unbeatable, the mapmaking community would probably commit mass suicide rather than having to deal with 17 range tanks.
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.
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?
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. There's a real risk that the marauder change doesn't do enough in TvP, but does too much in TvZ. We'll see.
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).
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?
protoss can defend 2base terran all-in while sitting on 3 bases with 1-1, blink and charge all done by 6;30(just play like hero boy) so it's yet unknown that marauder buff is enough.
protoss can defend 2base terran all-in while sitting on 3 bases with 1-1, blink and charge all done by 6;30(just play like hero boy) so it's yet unknown that marauder buff is enough.
I assume you're talking about the Hangzhou game 2. inno vs hero Then that game miss the point completly. It was 1-1-1 drop mine followed by a stim timing vs blink + 3rd base + gate explosion. Mine failed to do damage at all and the medivac was lost in the process. The stim timing was late with barely any marauder.
after the patch you'll see 3 rax stim timing followed by medivacs and even more bio in protoss face.That kind of build hit 2 min earlier. Also Rax + techlab first will be a thing again, Polt style.
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.
in sc2 is balanse - sometchin per other rase have somtching.
extra suply depot should be removed - if another rase forget about pylon/ovelord - must build them and wait.
skan should be another upgrate (on tech lab/ebay/....) and then you can use it on cc - they have skan for (almost) free because on 99% build them on 19 suplay. if prot/zerg forget lair oversir/spor or robotics observer/cannon and see DT just gg and left, teran never, bacause have cc same oracle revelation - another upgrate. thx!!
protoss can defend 2base terran all-in while sitting on 3 bases with 1-1, blink and charge all done by 6;30(just play like hero boy) so it's yet unknown that marauder buff is enough.
I assume you're talking about the Hangzhou game 2. inno vs hero Then that game miss the point completly. It was 1-1-1 drop mine followed by a stim timing vs blink + 3rd base + gate explosion. Mine failed to do damage at all and the medivac was lost in the process. The stim timing was late with barely any marauder.
after the patch you'll see 3 rax stim timing followed by medivacs and even more bio in protoss face.That kind of build hit 2 min earlier. Also Rax + techlab first will be a thing again, Polt style.
polt wasn't played vs buffed gateway units and shieldbatts tho, all protoss should do against that is warp zealots and stalkers, maybe only 1 forge, no way such play will be as strong now.
I think blizzard could have done a better redesign of the raven missile that would leave it with a role. Now, I can't see the armor reduction with low damage actually mattering for a use, even if only confined to midgame.
On May 12 2018 06:25 Danglars wrote: I think blizzard could have done a better redesign of the raven missile that would leave it with a role. Now, I can't see the armor reduction with low damage actually mattering for a use, even if only confined to midgame.
Good change on the marauder.
The actual damage of the AAM was not really impactful in the midgame (30 with fall-off isn't that much). The armour reduction was always what made it useful.
If you were using the missiles for damage you needed at least 10 ravens or so.
protoss can defend 2base terran all-in while sitting on 3 bases with 1-1, blink and charge all done by 6;30(just play like hero boy) so it's yet unknown that marauder buff is enough.
I assume you're talking about the Hangzhou game 2. inno vs hero Then that game miss the point completly. It was 1-1-1 drop mine followed by a stim timing vs blink + 3rd base + gate explosion. Mine failed to do damage at all and the medivac was lost in the process. The stim timing was late with barely any marauder.
after the patch you'll see 3 rax stim timing followed by medivacs and even more bio in protoss face.That kind of build hit 2 min earlier. Also Rax + techlab first will be a thing again, Polt style.
Going for techlab first is asking to get death by oracle.
On May 12 2018 06:25 Danglars wrote: I think blizzard could have done a better redesign of the raven missile that would leave it with a role. Now, I can't see the armor reduction with low damage actually mattering for a use, even if only confined to midgame.
Good change on the marauder.
Like a missile that gives your units armor and shields instead of damage to enemy units?
On May 12 2018 07:53 Loccstana wrote: Bring back the medivac heal upgrade to make bio viable lategame again.
I see a ton of people, even Blizzard, saying "If we can improve the Terran mid-game, it will help them in the late game." That logic is sound if there is a Terran late game unit. Let's say Terran uses this "buff" to have the same stride/economy that Protoss has. Now both of you are sitting with the same 10k/10k economy but Terran has no late game units. They will just "headbutt" endlessly against the Protoss superior army (i.e. Tempest, Carrier, Storm) until they eventually lose. Having an improved ability to scale with other races economy doesn't help if there are no late game units to fight with.
EDIT: No please, someone tell me what beats mass Carrier/Tempest/Storm (or even disruptor underneath) in TvP. You don't see it b/c pro Terran players know they are dead if it gets to that point. There is no Terran DPS to kill it; AAM only takes the armor down but there is no DPS to follow-up - Vikings shoot slow and can't kill fast enough. And BC's use Yamato so AAM is pretty pointless. Where is the DPS now that the Raven is worthless? I won't even bother with Zerg, there is no AA there either versus Corruptor, Viper, BL. Again, any Terran winning increases (if at all) will only be attributed to 2-base all-ins. If the Raven is gone, the BC needs to be looked at to improve.
On May 12 2018 09:35 SirPinky wrote: No please, someone tell me what beats mass Carrier/Tempest/Storm (or even disruptor underneath) in TvP. You don't see it b/c pro Terran players know they are dead if it gets to that point. There is no Terran DPS to kill it; AAM only takes the armor down but there is no DPS to follow-up - Vikings shoot slow and can't kill fast enough. And BC's use Yamato so AAM is pretty pointless. Where is the DPS now that the Raven is worthless? I won't even bother with Zerg, there is no AA there either versus Corruptor, Viper, BL. Again, any Terran winning increases (if at all) will only be attributed to 2-base all-ins. If the Raven is gone, the BC needs to be looked at to improve.
there is one unit that could do the job.... pre-patch 3.8.0 lock-on cyclones. time to get rid of zero skill tornado blaster cyclones and bring back the glass cannons.
give it a late-game-oriented techlab / armory requirement upgrade for +2 or +3 activation range (activation range, not leash range), so it can stand toe-to-toe with tempest / carrier and brood lords. if its AA is too powerful in the early game, give it a techlab upgrade for AA damage.
On May 12 2018 09:35 SirPinky wrote: I see a ton of people, even Blizzard, saying "If we can improve the Terran mid-game, it will help them in the late game." That logic is sound if there is a Terran late game unit. Let's say Terran uses this "buff" to have the same stride/economy that Protoss has. Now both of you are sitting with the same 10k/10k economy but Terran has no late game units. They will just "headbutt" endlessly against the Protoss superior army (i.e. Tempest, Carrier, Storm) until they eventually lose. Having an improved ability to scale with other races economy doesn't help if there are no late game units to fight with.
EDIT: No please, someone tell me what beats mass Carrier/Tempest/Storm (or even disruptor underneath) in TvP. You don't see it b/c pro Terran players know they are dead if it gets to that point. There is no Terran DPS to kill it; AAM only takes the armor down but there is no DPS to follow-up - Vikings shoot slow and can't kill fast enough. And BC's use Yamato so AAM is pretty pointless. Where is the DPS now that the Raven is worthless? I won't even bother with Zerg, there is no AA there either versus Corruptor, Viper, BL. Again, any Terran winning increases (if at all) will only be attributed to 2-base all-ins. If the Raven is gone, the BC needs to be looked at to improve.
Maybe your problem is your approach to late game? Late game is not about "headbutting" your army into theirs, it's about picking them apart piece by piece with cost efficient trades since late game they are spread all over the map. Terran has other strong late game advantages that have nothing to do with 200/200 armies smashing into each other like PFs, nukes, mule spam, etc. Same as mid game, you don't "headbutt" your bio into Protoss either, you have to exploit Protoss' immobility. If you can get Protoss to attack in to your PF/turret spam and/or get some money EMPs on their HT Protoss armies are definitely not unbeatable. Late game clashes have always been about jockeying for position. IMO the Viking HP buff will help a lot more in than people think. Look at how Hydralisks went from never used to staple unit overnight when they got their HP buff.
On May 12 2018 09:35 SirPinky wrote: I see a ton of people, even Blizzard, saying "If we can improve the Terran mid-game, it will help them in the late game." That logic is sound if there is a Terran late game unit. Let's say Terran uses this "buff" to have the same stride/economy that Protoss has. Now both of you are sitting with the same 10k/10k economy but Terran has no late game units. They will just "headbutt" endlessly against the Protoss superior army (i.e. Tempest, Carrier, Storm) until they eventually lose. Having an improved ability to scale with other races economy doesn't help if there are no late game units to fight with.
EDIT: No please, someone tell me what beats mass Carrier/Tempest/Storm (or even disruptor underneath) in TvP. You don't see it b/c pro Terran players know they are dead if it gets to that point. There is no Terran DPS to kill it; AAM only takes the armor down but there is no DPS to follow-up - Vikings shoot slow and can't kill fast enough. And BC's use Yamato so AAM is pretty pointless. Where is the DPS now that the Raven is worthless? I won't even bother with Zerg, there is no AA there either versus Corruptor, Viper, BL. Again, any Terran winning increases (if at all) will only be attributed to 2-base all-ins. If the Raven is gone, the BC needs to be looked at to improve.
Maybe your problem is your approach to late game? Late game is not about "headbutting" your army into theirs, it's about picking them apart piece by piece with cost efficient trades since late game they are spread all over the map. Terran has other strong late game advantages that have nothing to do with 200/200 armies smashing into each other like PFs, nukes, mule spam, etc. Same as mid game, you don't "headbutt" your bio into Protoss either, you have to exploit Protoss' immobility. If you can get Protoss to attack in to your PF/turret spam and/or get some money EMPs on their HT Protoss armies are definitely not unbeatable. Late game clashes have always been about jockeying for position. IMO the Viking HP buff will help a lot more in than people think. Look at how Hydralisks went from never used to staple unit overnight when they got their HP buff.
I think your points are valid if we are talking about a Protoss with 3 or less bases. I'm talking about a Protoss with 4, 5 or more bases. "Picking" them apart stops at a certain point; it is this threshold where a Protoss becomes invulnerable to an attack. Their "deathball" cannot be beat head-to-head.
If I'm a Protoss on 5 bases and have Carriers, Tempest, HT and maybe a few Disruptors thrown in...how do you beat that. Pick them apart? No, they have recall and mass warp-in at that point. And it's interesting you mention things like PF, Nukes, and mule spam: Those are all economy related components. Where is the offense? Economy is not synonymous with winning the game. Sure, it helps, but there are tons of times players lose because they have an inferior composition. My point is...Terran will never have a equal or superior composition to late game Protoss in LOTV. Blizzard should just come out and say "Sorry, Terran, don't let them get to that point." And, indirectly, this patch is saying just that.
EDIT: Eventually you are going to have to battle their army head-to-head and the "harass" stops. This is where Terran will die...regardless of what is in the bank. Remember in some of Neebs late games PvZ he went down to less than 10 probes? If both players are sitting on 5k/5k, economy, nukes, PF etc. don't matter. Terran will lose - there is no late game unit to contend with Protoss.
On May 12 2018 09:35 SirPinky wrote: I see a ton of people, even Blizzard, saying "If we can improve the Terran mid-game, it will help them in the late game." That logic is sound if there is a Terran late game unit. Let's say Terran uses this "buff" to have the same stride/economy that Protoss has. Now both of you are sitting with the same 10k/10k economy but Terran has no late game units. They will just "headbutt" endlessly against the Protoss superior army (i.e. Tempest, Carrier, Storm) until they eventually lose. Having an improved ability to scale with other races economy doesn't help if there are no late game units to fight with.
EDIT: No please, someone tell me what beats mass Carrier/Tempest/Storm (or even disruptor underneath) in TvP. You don't see it b/c pro Terran players know they are dead if it gets to that point. There is no Terran DPS to kill it; AAM only takes the armor down but there is no DPS to follow-up - Vikings shoot slow and can't kill fast enough. And BC's use Yamato so AAM is pretty pointless. Where is the DPS now that the Raven is worthless? I won't even bother with Zerg, there is no AA there either versus Corruptor, Viper, BL. Again, any Terran winning increases (if at all) will only be attributed to 2-base all-ins. If the Raven is gone, the BC needs to be looked at to improve.
Maybe your problem is your approach to late game? Late game is not about "headbutting" your army into theirs, it's about picking them apart piece by piece with cost efficient trades since late game they are spread all over the map. Terran has other strong late game advantages that have nothing to do with 200/200 armies smashing into each other like PFs, nukes, mule spam, etc. Same as mid game, you don't "headbutt" your bio into Protoss either, you have to exploit Protoss' immobility. If you can get Protoss to attack in to your PF/turret spam and/or get some money EMPs on their HT Protoss armies are definitely not unbeatable. Late game clashes have always been about jockeying for position. IMO the Viking HP buff will help a lot more in than people think. Look at how Hydralisks went from never used to staple unit overnight when they got their HP buff.
I think your points are valid if we are talking about a Protoss with 3 or less bases. I'm talking about a Protoss with 4, 5 or more bases. "Picking" them apart stops at a certain point; it is this threshold where a Protoss becomes invulnerable to an attack. Their "deathball" cannot be beat head-to-head.
If I'm a Protoss on 5 bases and have Carriers, Tempest, HT and maybe a few Disruptors thrown in...how do you beat that. Pick them apart? No, they have recall and mass warp-in at that point. And it's interesting you mention things like PF, Nukes, and mule spam: Those are all economy related components. Where is the offense? Economy is not synonymous with winning the game. Sure, it helps, but there are tons of times players lose because they have an inferior composition. My point is...Terran will never have a equal or superior composition to late game Protoss in LOTV. Blizzard should just come out and say "Sorry, Terran, don't let them get to that point." And, indirectly, this patch is saying just that.
EDIT: Eventually you are going to have to battle their army head-to-head and the "harass" stops. This is where Terran will die...regardless of what is in the bank. Remember in some of Neebs late games PvZ he went down to less than 10 probes? If both players are sitting on 5k/5k, economy, nukes, PF etc. don't matter. Terran will lose - there is no late game unit to contend with Protoss.
Harder to harass when the Protoss has more bases, i.e. more places to attack? Protoss becomes "invulnerable" to harass in late game? PFs, nukes, mule spams are not useful in late game? I don't know what to say I basically don't agree with anything you said and I doubt many people share your opinion on any of these points. What do you think Zergs do to Protoss late game? "Headbutt" their army into the Protoss army? And do you think Protoss needs to be nerfed in PvZ too because they what is generally viewed as having a superior late game army to Zerg?
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.
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.
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 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.
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 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.
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.
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 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 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.
On May 14 2018 02:32 KR_4EVR wrote: 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.
Why looking for a complicated and false definition.
It's simple :
If the unit become stronger, it's a buff, if it becomes weaker a nerf, if it fits a different role, it's a design change.
With your definition, we can come back into mass reaper area because it stays long so it's not " a buff" according to you.
These changes might ultimately not truly change TvZ but smoothen it out a little bit. Zerg will be very hard to push early on but that should still be possible. When the ultra tech hits right now, terran has to go back and turtle on raven/ghost because marauders simply tickle ultralisks. If terrans survive the transition and can secure some extra bases, they almost always seem to win (maru is godlike at this, while innovation has lost a lot before getting to that stage for example).
With this change, it might be that you dont have to instantly turtle against ultra tech as marauders do deal with them much better. Then it will be easier to go into ghosts and some ravens but of course that will be weaker. Yet in practise raven + some buffed vikings and some bio/tanks can probably do really well against broodlord corruptor still.
Worst case either marauders kill ultras too easily forcing zerg on lair tech, or the terran lategame raven flock becomes so weak that terran once again is forced to all in before lategame.
On May 14 2018 08:28 Jerom wrote: These changes might ultimately not truly change TvZ but smoothen it out a little bit. Zerg will be very hard to push early on but that should still be possible. When the ultra tech hits right now, terran has to go back and turtle on raven/ghost because marauders simply tickle ultralisks. If terrans survive the transition and can secure some extra bases, they almost always seem to win (maru is godlike at this, while innovation has lost a lot before getting to that stage for example).
With this change, it might be that you dont have to instantly turtle against ultra tech as marauders do deal with them much better. Then it will be easier to go into ghosts and some ravens but of course that will be weaker. Yet in practise raven + some buffed vikings and some bio/tanks can probably do really well against broodlord corruptor still.
Worst case either marauders kill ultras too easily forcing zerg on lair tech, or the terran lategame raven flock becomes so weak that terran once again is forced to all in before lategame.
On May 14 2018 08:28 Jerom wrote: These changes might ultimately not truly change TvZ but smoothen it out a little bit. Zerg will be very hard to push early on but that should still be possible. When the ultra tech hits right now, terran has to go back and turtle on raven/ghost because marauders simply tickle ultralisks. If terrans survive the transition and can secure some extra bases, they almost always seem to win (maru is godlike at this, while innovation has lost a lot before getting to that stage for example).
With this change, it might be that you dont have to instantly turtle against ultra tech as marauders do deal with them much better. Then it will be easier to go into ghosts and some ravens but of course that will be weaker. Yet in practise raven + some buffed vikings and some bio/tanks can probably do really well against broodlord corruptor still.
Worst case either marauders kill ultras too easily forcing zerg on lair tech, or the terran lategame raven flock becomes so weak that terran once again is forced to all in before lategame.
This is only Terran perspective. Terran midgame is quite strong in current state, especially with all that variety of early and early midgame pressure. Often, rushing to Hive and Ultras was a saving grace for Zerg, securing them possibility of transitioning to lategame. With much stronger Marauders, which are concideribly cheap comparing to Ultras, that will be very hard if possible.
I guess we'll see but i think the change which was designed to helo Terran in PvT will destroy balance in ZvT unfortunaly.
Woah woah, guys. Easy! Reading through the thread my eyes are widening while i'm bleeding from the inside. These balance change proposals... I'm glad you are not on the balance team. God. This terran whine is over the board. First of all. "TvP issue" was never really an issue (winrates for the last half a year clearly indicate that). And i'm glad blizzard understood that at the last moment throwing you a bone with so called marauder "buff". As a protoss i dont give a single f about that as i mostly go for stalker/colosi comps w/o armor upgraids, so yes, marauders will deal + 1 additional damage on my shieldless stalkers (in 50 if not less % of scenarios)... and after the first terran attack upgraid it will go back to prepatch state. Viking hp buff is a bit annoying though. And missile nerf is just on spot.
If you do the maths right with upgrades/sentry shield it's huge change vs stalker/collosi comps. You probably didn't play HoTs maurauder-drop-the-toss Cure-style era to not remember the difference between the old and the new maraudeur (yep i know lot of other things have changed, like eco and upgrades, but still )
For your TvP balance statement, simply check trop korean players winrates in the MU.
These changes seem to be moving in the right direction. I think a lot of people are underrating the Viking 10hp buff. Terran did need some help vs Toss. I play Toss and my winrate vs T is the best by a long way, it really has felt too easy for a while now (at least at my MMR).
My issue is actually with Skytoss funnily enough. I hate being forced into going Skytoss vs Skytoss if I don't flat-out stop my opponent with a blink stalker rush. Carriers are just too strong in high numbers and with upgrades. It's largely the same issue (but probably even worse) for Terran and Zerg. I don't want Carriers to be useless I just don't want them to be the be-all and end-all of protoss (if not T and Z as well). And I feel like I'm letting down my team-mate/s in 2v2/3v3 if I don't play Skytoss :/.
On May 15 2018 19:33 xongnox wrote: If you do the maths right with upgrades/sentry shield it's huge change vs stalker/collosi comps. You probably didn't play HoTs maurauder-drop-the-toss Cure-style era to not remember the difference between the old and the new maraudeur (yep i know lot of other things have changed, like eco and upgrades, but still )
For your TvP balance statement, simply check trop korean players winrates in the MU.
That was the 4 best ranked korean terran players. Now let's whatch the best Protoss : Classic : 81% herO : 67 % Zest : 70% Stats : 70% sOs : 65%
Hard to say anything more.
Yeah, if you check Maru's list he met a lot of team mates(which doesn't make a good case as they know each other), he met Classic a lot and his personal nemesis - Dear. And even if we don't cherry-pick. It's a fucking 19 matches!!! So huge sample I lost my words.
The sample isn't too big.
While I'm not saying the balance is perfect(and it actually isn't), this is an offense to statistics to be used. We have what, 6 months of games and whopping 19 matches of Maru. And when I checked Inno - a lot of nonames or weak players which doesn't bring anything to the discussion.
On May 15 2018 20:15 winsonsonho wrote: These changes seem to be moving in the right direction. I think a lot of people are underrating the Viking 10hp buff. Terran did need some help vs Toss. I play Toss and my winrate vs T is the best by a long way, it really has felt too easy for a while now (at least at my MMR).
My issue is actually with Skytoss funnily enough. I hate being forced into going Skytoss vs Skytoss if I don't flat-out stop my opponent with a blink stalker rush. Carriers are just too strong in high numbers and with upgrades. It's largely the same issue (but probably even worse) for Terran and Zerg. I don't want Carriers to be useless I just don't want them to be the be-all and end-all of protoss (if not T and Z as well). And I feel like I'm letting down my team-mate/s in 2v2/3v3 if I don't play Skytoss :/.
Well Carriers have been absurd for a long time. They may not be quite as problematic at top pro level as on ladder, but on ladder level they are absurd.
I think the core problem is the leach range combined with psi storm. Vikings are supposed to counter Carriers but instead Carriers counter Vikings.
Without the leach range it would be easier to get to the Carriers without losing DPS all the time by having to dodge storms.
The 8% more hit points on Vikings will do almost nothing for this problem. Vikings will still work in the unit tester but not in the real game.
I am not sure why Blizzard do not nerf Carriers. It makes mech obsolete vs Protoss (and mech would still be weak in TvP if Carrier did not even exist) and it ruins team games completely.
And Carriers are not even an interesting unit. There is not much difference between a top pro using Carriers and a diamond player using Carriers. In comparison there is gigantic difference between a diamond Stalker and top pro Stalker.
On May 15 2018 19:33 xongnox wrote: If you do the maths right with upgrades/sentry shield it's huge change vs stalker/collosi comps. You probably didn't play HoTs maurauder-drop-the-toss Cure-style era to not remember the difference between the old and the new maraudeur (yep i know lot of other things have changed, like eco and upgrades, but still )
Old 0/0 marauder - 20(s)/18(hp)dmg per attack vs 0/0 stalker. 16/14 (with Sentry shield) New 0/0 marauder - 20(s)/19(hp)dmg per attack vs 0/0 stalker. 18/17 (with Sentry shield)
Old 1/1 marauder - 22(s)/20(hp)dmg per attack vs 1/0 stalker. 18/16 (with Sentry shield) New 1/1 marauder - 22(s)/21(hp)dmg per attack vs 1/0 stalker. 20/19 (with Sentry shield)
Old 2/2 marauder - 24(s)/22(hp)dmg per attack vs 2/0 stalker. 20/18 (with Sentry shield) New 2/2 marauder - 24(s)/23(hp)dmg per attack vs 2/0 stalker. 22/21 (with Sentry shield)
Old 3/3 marauder - 26(s)/24(hp)dmg per attack vs 3/0 stalker. 22/20 (with Sentry shield) New 3/3 marauder - 26(s)/25(hp)dmg per attack vs 3/0 stalker. 24/23 (with Sentry shield)
So, right math indicated this buff is worth a whole lot of 0,5 dmg per attack a 2-2,5% damage increase (w/o sentry shield).
Sure, sentry shield makes more difference (2,5 dmg per attack). So average dmg per attack equals 12-16% increase.
But assuming it has at most 50% uptime, overall buff is worth 1,5 dmg ((2,5 dmg + 0,5 dmg) / 2), with a total of 7-9% damage increase. And that's on unupgraded Stalker - an armored unit. This change got alomost NO effect on zealot, as single marauder attack gets only 1 vs nonarmored units (while old one got + 2).
On May 15 2018 19:33 xongnox wrote: For your TvP balance statement, simply check trop korean players winrates in the MU.
That was the 4 best ranked korean terran players. Now let's whatch the best Protoss : Classic : 81% herO : 67 % Zest : 70% Stats : 70% sOs : 65%
Hard to say anything more.
No, not hard at all. According to aligulac since september 2017 PvT was 47%-54%. That's just a healthy volatility. On the other hand, PvZ was 43%-49%. Have you read a single whine post from a protoss players regarding this MU within half a year? Right, because whining is terran prerogative. And hiroshone's.
On May 15 2018 19:33 xongnox wrote: If you do the maths right with upgrades/sentry shield it's huge change vs stalker/collosi comps. You probably didn't play HoTs maurauder-drop-the-toss Cure-style era to not remember the difference between the old and the new maraudeur (yep i know lot of other things have changed, like eco and upgrades, but still )
For your TvP balance statement, simply check trop korean players winrates in the MU.
That was the 4 best ranked korean terran players. Now let's whatch the best Protoss : Classic : 81% herO : 67 % Zest : 70% Stats : 70% sOs : 65%
Hard to say anything more.
And Byun is 52% vs Korean Protoss since December 1. It's pretty clear that the top Korean Protoss have had it easier against the top Korean Terran in the last 5 months.
On May 15 2018 21:17 insitelol wrote: This change got alomost NO effect on zealot, as single marauder attack gets only 1 vs nonarmored units (while old one got + 2).
Specifically I think the issue was about 0-0 terran vs 1-1 protoss w/ guardian shield, or 1-1 terran vs 2-2 protoss w/ guardian shield. In those cases, a marauder used to do 2 damage on a zealot and now it'll do 6. Against a stalker, it was 12 damage and now it'll be 16 (0-0 vs 1-1) or 17 (1-1 vs 2-2). Those are big differences that'll have a big effect on the whole matchup because terrans were having to play in weird ways specifically to avoid fights where protoss could take advantage of invincible zealots.
On May 15 2018 21:17 insitelol wrote: This change got alomost NO effect on zealot, as single marauder attack gets only 1 vs nonarmored units (while old one got + 2).
Specifically I think the issue was about 0-0 terran vs 1-1 protoss w/ guardian shield, or 1-1 terran vs 2-2 protoss w/ guardian shield. In those cases, a marauder used to do 2 damage on a zealot and now it'll do 6. Against a stalker, it was 12 damage and now it'll be 16 (0-0 vs 1-1) or 17 (1-1 vs 2-2). Those are big differences that'll have a big effect on the whole matchup because terrans were having to play in weird ways specifically to avoid fights where protoss could take advantage of invincible zealots.
Just curious, how often does Protoss even use Guardian Shield in PvT? I rarely see it in pro games because you're absolutely right about Guardian Shield being the thing that is most impacted by the Marauder change.
But I just rarely see it used so I don't know if it's going to have a big impact on the winrate of the match up by itself.
This change is just going to make Marauders a little better vs Immortals and Collosus.
On May 15 2018 21:17 insitelol wrote: This change got alomost NO effect on zealot, as single marauder attack gets only 1 vs nonarmored units (while old one got + 2).
Specifically I think the issue was about 0-0 terran vs 1-1 protoss w/ guardian shield, or 1-1 terran vs 2-2 protoss w/ guardian shield. In those cases, a marauder used to do 2 damage on a zealot and now it'll do 6. Against a stalker, it was 12 damage and now it'll be 16 (0-0 vs 1-1) or 17 (1-1 vs 2-2). Those are big differences that'll have a big effect on the whole matchup because terrans were having to play in weird ways specifically to avoid fights where protoss could take advantage of invincible zealots.
I get your idea here, but this is just too much. Be should stop babysitting terrans. Being behind in upgrades (if its even an issue) is an eco problem that shouldnt be adressed with wierd unit tweaks. Anyways. Zealots MELT to mines. Its absurd how efficient mines are against zealot plays. And lets be honest already. PvT is almost perfectly fine without any tweaks. All that whine is just an echo from the past of those who dont want to adjust their plays.
On May 15 2018 19:33 xongnox wrote: If you do the maths right with upgrades/sentry shield it's huge change vs stalker/collosi comps. You probably didn't play HoTs maurauder-drop-the-toss Cure-style era to not remember the difference between the old and the new maraudeur (yep i know lot of other things have changed, like eco and upgrades, but still )
Old 0/0 marauder - 20(s)/18(hp)dmg per attack vs 0/0 stalker. 16/14 (with Sentry shield) New 0/0 marauder - 20(s)/19(hp)dmg per attack vs 0/0 stalker. 18/17 (with Sentry shield)
Old 1/1 marauder - 22(s)/20(hp)dmg per attack vs 1/0 stalker. 18/16 (with Sentry shield) New 1/1 marauder - 22(s)/21(hp)dmg per attack vs 1/0 stalker. 20/19 (with Sentry shield)
Old 2/2 marauder - 24(s)/22(hp)dmg per attack vs 2/0 stalker. 20/18 (with Sentry shield) New 2/2 marauder - 24(s)/23(hp)dmg per attack vs 2/0 stalker. 22/21 (with Sentry shield)
Old 3/3 marauder - 26(s)/24(hp)dmg per attack vs 3/0 stalker. 22/20 (with Sentry shield) New 3/3 marauder - 26(s)/25(hp)dmg per attack vs 3/0 stalker. 24/23 (with Sentry shield)
So, right math indicated this buff is worth a whole lot of 0,5 dmg per attack a 2-2,5% damage increase (w/o sentry shield).
Sure, sentry shield makes more difference (2,5 dmg per attack). So average dmg per attack equals 12-16% increase.
But assuming it has at most 50% uptime, overall buff is worth 1,5 dmg ((2,5 dmg + 0,5 dmg) / 2), with a total of 7-9% damage increase. And that's on unupgraded Stalker - an armored unit. This change got alomost NO effect on zealot, as single marauder attack gets only 1 vs nonarmored units (while old one got + 2).
That was the 4 best ranked korean terran players. Now let's whatch the best Protoss : Classic : 81% herO : 67 % Zest : 70% Stats : 70% sOs : 65%
Hard to say anything more.
No, not hard at all. According to aligulac since september 2017 PvT was 47%-54%. That's just a healthy volatility. On the other hand, PvZ was 43%-49%. Have you read a single whine post from a protoss players regarding this MU within half a year? Right, because whining is terran prerogative. And hiroshone's.
main reason behind 'the whine' is simply because terran is not fun, frustrating and extremely unforgiving to play compare to other 2, thats why terrans from low leagues to korean tops are acting similar.
On May 16 2018 01:04 Haukinger wrote: Why exactly do they think they need to buff against Zerg when no Zerg has won a single GSL since Life more than three years ago?
Because outside of GSL Zerg has been pretty damn dominant for the last couple of years.
The foreign scene in particular is a massive Zerg fest, and it's only getting worse with Serral reaching Super Saiyan Blue status.
And even in GSL's case, sure no Zerg has won the whole thing since Life, but we've had Zergs basically in the finals every year with soO being there like 4-5 times.
If soO wasn't so cursed Zerg could easily have like 3-4 GSL titles since Life.
From 2016-2018 there have been six GSL seasons. 2016 Season 1: Zest wins vs TY 2016 Season 2: Byun wins over sOs 2017 Season 1: Stats wins over soO 2017 Season 2: GuMiho wins over soO 2017 Season 3: INnoVation wins over sOs 2018 Season 1: Maru wins over Stats P two wins, three seconds, T four wins, one second Z no wins, three seconds. Not really trying to say something one way or another.
On May 15 2018 21:17 insitelol wrote: This change got alomost NO effect on zealot, as single marauder attack gets only 1 vs nonarmored units (while old one got + 2).
Specifically I think the issue was about 0-0 terran vs 1-1 protoss w/ guardian shield, or 1-1 terran vs 2-2 protoss w/ guardian shield. In those cases, a marauder used to do 2 damage on a zealot and now it'll do 6. Against a stalker, it was 12 damage and now it'll be 16 (0-0 vs 1-1) or 17 (1-1 vs 2-2). Those are big differences that'll have a big effect on the whole matchup because terrans were having to play in weird ways specifically to avoid fights where protoss could take advantage of invincible zealots.
Just curious, how often does Protoss even use Guardian Shield in PvT? I rarely see it in pro games because you're absolutely right about Guardian Shield being the thing that is most impacted by the Marauder change.
But I just rarely see it used so I don't know if it's going to have a big impact on the winrate of the match up by itself.
This change is just going to make Marauders a little better vs Immortals and Collosus.
Well that's what I mean by saying these changes could have a big effect on the whole matchup. Terran has been playing a different way out of necessity. So protoss plays differently. But if terrans started repeatedly playing old styles of just heavy MMM, you'd see protoss respond and deal with it extremely effectively. I don't think that this patch will make it so that there are certain builds terrans can immediately start doing with great success. But the increased effectiveness of marauders will creep into each terran's play as they figure out which situations marauders are okay to get. And in the long term it'll be better for the game for a basic unit to be a little more reliable.
On May 15 2018 21:17 insitelol wrote: This change got alomost NO effect on zealot, as single marauder attack gets only 1 vs nonarmored units (while old one got + 2).
Specifically I think the issue was about 0-0 terran vs 1-1 protoss w/ guardian shield, or 1-1 terran vs 2-2 protoss w/ guardian shield. In those cases, a marauder used to do 2 damage on a zealot and now it'll do 6. Against a stalker, it was 12 damage and now it'll be 16 (0-0 vs 1-1) or 17 (1-1 vs 2-2). Those are big differences that'll have a big effect on the whole matchup because terrans were having to play in weird ways specifically to avoid fights where protoss could take advantage of invincible zealots.
I get your idea here, but this is just too much. Be should stop babysitting terrans. Being behind in upgrades (if its even an issue) is an eco problem that shouldnt be adressed with wierd unit tweaks. Anyways. Zealots MELT to mines. Its absurd how efficient mines are against zealot plays. And lets be honest already. PvT is almost perfectly fine without any tweaks. All that whine is just an echo from the past of those who dont want to adjust their plays.
They get behind in upgrades because protoss has chrono boost. You'd begin unraveling the whole game just to keep some particular thing you want, without a care for all the people who like the things you're taking away.
I think each race enjoys being able to build a solid basic army. It's been a desire for protoss for a long time (to buff gateway units). I think it's good for the game to make MMM a little more solid and reliable in general.
On May 15 2018 19:33 xongnox wrote: If you do the maths right with upgrades/sentry shield it's huge change vs stalker/collosi comps. You probably didn't play HoTs maurauder-drop-the-toss Cure-style era to not remember the difference between the old and the new maraudeur (yep i know lot of other things have changed, like eco and upgrades, but still )
For your TvP balance statement, simply check trop korean players winrates in the MU.
That was the 4 best ranked korean terran players. Now let's whatch the best Protoss : Classic : 81% herO : 67 % Zest : 70% Stats : 70% sOs : 65%
Hard to say anything more.
Yeah, if you check Maru's list he met a lot of team mates(which doesn't make a good case as they know each other), he met Classic a lot and his personal nemesis - Dear. And even if we don't cherry-pick. It's a fucking 19 matches!!! So huge sample I lost my words.
The sample isn't too big.
While I'm not saying the balance is perfect(and it actually isn't), this is an offense to statistics to be used. We have what, 6 months of games and whopping 19 matches of Maru. And when I checked Inno - a lot of nonames or weak players which doesn't bring anything to the discussion.
1. It's not only Maru but all top korean terrans. The best in TvP winrate is Innovation, and like you said, he is at 57% only because he played noobs. We also have top protoss PvT winrates. So in total it's not 20games but hundreds.
2. Yep the sample is still kinda small, yet it is the best we have to describe the top-level. The very top level today is very small, like 4 or 5 koreans players of each race. After that the skill level drops. If we wait for a sufficient big number of games of very top level to be sure at 99% of balance, we will wait for eternity. (and, maps will change, and maps interact with balance and meta)
3. If we take into account the winrate (so, the matchs) of the top5 koreans terrans since 6 months and compare it to the same stats to past aera, it should be pretty significant i guess. You know, top players used to have better than 50% winrate...
4. To use a more sophisticated statistical way to look at it, accounting who each players play, aligulac provides match-up MMR per player. In PvT we have : 1.Classic : 2875 2. herO : 2791 3. Zest : 2709 4. Stats : 2681 5. sOs : 2617
So all-in-all it's 100 MMR lower across the board, very clear, no exception. In aligulac ranking, 100 points is the difference between being 3rd or 9th in the complete list, so for top players it's really significant.
Last but not least, we have these stats despite players adapting to TvP total macro imbalance, so if you watch Maru/inno games etc, they bullshit/2 bases all-in most of their games versus top tier opponent (and imo bs/2-base is way moe strong than macro in TvP). In a standard macro game, even Maru struggle to death to barely win someone like Drogo, while in BS mode, even MaSa take a lot of games versus Neeb.
On May 16 2018 01:04 Haukinger wrote: Why exactly do they think they need to buff against Zerg when no Zerg has won a single GSL since Life more than three years ago?
Because outside of GSL Zerg has been pretty damn dominant for the last couple of years.
The foreign scene in particular is a massive Zerg fest, and it's only getting worse with Serral reaching Super Saiyan Blue status.
And even in GSL's case, sure no Zerg has won the whole thing since Life, but we've had Zergs basically in the finals every year with soO being there like 4-5 times.
If soO wasn't so cursed Zerg could easily have like 3-4 GSL titles since Life.
It's really impressive how you managed to spin foreign, notably low-level (with all due respect to non-Korean pros, but WCS isn't GSL) scene to somehow reflect satte of Zerg's dominance while the inability for Zerg to win a GSL is just "curse". Yep, because soO was always favored to win. Every GSL final he played, he just either choked it away or was stopped by divine forces. Oh and btw, while there have been 4 appearances of Zerg in GSL finals since Life's win, onyl 2 of them were soO (in LotV). The 2 in Heart of the Swarm were ByuL's. A player who gained notoriety as being able to win in the not-so-friendly to Zerg meta of mech and +2 blink, but somehow, by supernatural forces, was also always stopped in his tracks in finals and eventually labaled a Kong.
On May 16 2018 01:04 Haukinger wrote: Why exactly do they think they need to buff against Zerg when no Zerg has won a single GSL since Life more than three years ago?
Because outside of GSL Zerg has been pretty damn dominant for the last couple of years.
The foreign scene in particular is a massive Zerg fest, and it's only getting worse with Serral reaching Super Saiyan Blue status.
And even in GSL's case, sure no Zerg has won the whole thing since Life, but we've had Zergs basically in the finals every year with soO being there like 4-5 times.
If soO wasn't so cursed Zerg could easily have like 3-4 GSL titles since Life.
It's really impressive how you managed to spin foreign, notably low-level (with all due respect to non-Korean pros, but WCS isn't GSL) scene to somehow reflect satte of Zerg's dominance while the inability for Zerg to win a GSL is just "curse". Yep, because soO was always favored to win. Every GSL final he played, he just either choked it away or was stopped by divine forces. Oh and btw, while there have been 4 appearances of Zerg in GSL finals since Life's win, onyl 2 of them were soO (in LotV). The 2 in Heart of the Swarm were ByuL's. A player who gained notoriety as being able to win in the not-so-friendly to Zerg meta of mech and +2 blink, but somehow, by supernatural forces, was also always stopped in his tracks in finals and eventually labaled a Kong.
Being able to make it to the grand finals, while having a solid representation in the higher brackets, is a sign of good balance for that race.
It is also not a co-incidence that we do not get a lot of new up-and-coming Terran pros (both in Korea and foreign scene).
On May 16 2018 01:04 Haukinger wrote: Why exactly do they think they need to buff against Zerg when no Zerg has won a single GSL since Life more than three years ago?
Because outside of GSL Zerg has been pretty damn dominant for the last couple of years.
The foreign scene in particular is a massive Zerg fest, and it's only getting worse with Serral reaching Super Saiyan Blue status.
And even in GSL's case, sure no Zerg has won the whole thing since Life, but we've had Zergs basically in the finals every year with soO being there like 4-5 times.
If soO wasn't so cursed Zerg could easily have like 3-4 GSL titles since Life.
It's really impressive how you managed to spin foreign, notably low-level (with all due respect to non-Korean pros, but WCS isn't GSL) scene to somehow reflect satte of Zerg's dominance while the inability for Zerg to win a GSL is just "curse". Yep, because soO was always favored to win. Every GSL final he played, he just either choked it away or was stopped by divine forces. Oh and btw, while there have been 4 appearances of Zerg in GSL finals since Life's win, onyl 2 of them were soO (in LotV). The 2 in Heart of the Swarm were ByuL's. A player who gained notoriety as being able to win in the not-so-friendly to Zerg meta of mech and +2 blink, but somehow, by supernatural forces, was also always stopped in his tracks in finals and eventually labaled a Kong.
There are no divine forces. soO and ByuL just can't win in the pressure of a final.
GSL is a small sample size, GSL champions is an even smaller one. Zerg is fine when you look at tournaments and results overall. soO, Dark, and Rogue are regulars at making it to later stages of tournaments
On May 15 2018 21:17 insitelol wrote: This change got alomost NO effect on zealot, as single marauder attack gets only 1 vs nonarmored units (while old one got + 2).
Specifically I think the issue was about 0-0 terran vs 1-1 protoss w/ guardian shield, or 1-1 terran vs 2-2 protoss w/ guardian shield. In those cases, a marauder used to do 2 damage on a zealot and now it'll do 6. Against a stalker, it was 12 damage and now it'll be 16 (0-0 vs 1-1) or 17 (1-1 vs 2-2). Those are big differences that'll have a big effect on the whole matchup because terrans were having to play in weird ways specifically to avoid fights where protoss could take advantage of invincible zealots.
Just curious, how often does Protoss even use Guardian Shield in PvT? I rarely see it in pro games because you're absolutely right about Guardian Shield being the thing that is most impacted by the Marauder change.
But I just rarely see it used so I don't know if it's going to have a big impact on the winrate of the match up by itself.
This change is just going to make Marauders a little better vs Immortals and Collosus.
Well that's what I mean by saying these changes could have a big effect on the whole matchup. Terran has been playing a different way out of necessity. So protoss plays differently. But if terrans started repeatedly playing old styles of just heavy MMM, you'd see protoss respond and deal with it extremely effectively. I don't think that this patch will make it so that there are certain builds terrans can immediately start doing with great success. But the increased effectiveness of marauders will creep into each terran's play as they figure out which situations marauders are okay to get. And in the long term it'll be better for the game for a basic unit to be a little more reliable.
On May 15 2018 21:17 insitelol wrote: This change got alomost NO effect on zealot, as single marauder attack gets only 1 vs nonarmored units (while old one got + 2).
Specifically I think the issue was about 0-0 terran vs 1-1 protoss w/ guardian shield, or 1-1 terran vs 2-2 protoss w/ guardian shield. In those cases, a marauder used to do 2 damage on a zealot and now it'll do 6. Against a stalker, it was 12 damage and now it'll be 16 (0-0 vs 1-1) or 17 (1-1 vs 2-2). Those are big differences that'll have a big effect on the whole matchup because terrans were having to play in weird ways specifically to avoid fights where protoss could take advantage of invincible zealots.
I get your idea here, but this is just too much. Be should stop babysitting terrans. Being behind in upgrades (if its even an issue) is an eco problem that shouldnt be adressed with wierd unit tweaks. Anyways. Zealots MELT to mines. Its absurd how efficient mines are against zealot plays. And lets be honest already. PvT is almost perfectly fine without any tweaks. All that whine is just an echo from the past of those who dont want to adjust their plays.
They get behind in upgrades because protoss has chrono boost. You'd begin unraveling the whole game just to keep some particular thing you want, without a care for all the people who like the things you're taking away.
I think each race enjoys being able to build a solid basic army. It's been a desire for protoss for a long time (to buff gateway units). I think it's good for the game to make MMM a little more solid and reliable in general.
I agree that Terran needed that change when it comes to PvZ, but don't u think that with that live, Blizzard is creating a problem in TvZ?
On May 16 2018 01:04 Haukinger wrote: Why exactly do they think they need to buff against Zerg when no Zerg has won a single GSL since Life more than three years ago?
Because outside of GSL Zerg has been pretty damn dominant for the last couple of years.
The foreign scene in particular is a massive Zerg fest, and it's only getting worse with Serral reaching Super Saiyan Blue status.
And even in GSL's case, sure no Zerg has won the whole thing since Life, but we've had Zergs basically in the finals every year with soO being there like 4-5 times.
If soO wasn't so cursed Zerg could easily have like 3-4 GSL titles since Life.
It's really impressive how you managed to spin foreign, notably low-level (with all due respect to non-Korean pros, but WCS isn't GSL) scene to somehow reflect satte of Zerg's dominance while the inability for Zerg to win a GSL is just "curse". Yep, because soO was always favored to win. Every GSL final he played, he just either choked it away or was stopped by divine forces. Oh and btw, while there have been 4 appearances of Zerg in GSL finals since Life's win, onyl 2 of them were soO (in LotV). The 2 in Heart of the Swarm were ByuL's. A player who gained notoriety as being able to win in the not-so-friendly to Zerg meta of mech and +2 blink, but somehow, by supernatural forces, was also always stopped in his tracks in finals and eventually labaled a Kong.
Don't really know what you're so upset about with the current World champion being Z, runner-up also Z with a Ro16 distribution of 3 P, 5 T and 8 Z.
With +10hp, so great, so huge buff, you can land vs ultralisk, Make Terran Great Again ! best balance ever ! told you HoTs trailer was real ! +10hp will even get all illegals zerglings out of yours bases ! Land Viking and MTGA ! For free, coz THEY will pay the buff!
On a more serious note, i prognostic maurauder buff to have a sensible effect in TvP (but not that much in top pro TvZ, except vs roach play), but viking buff ? Maybe for some mid-game anti-collosi timing/all-ins. In late game vikings are super bad and get super hard-countered by storm/archon/vipers, so +10hp won't change anything, nor 'compensate' the raven nerf. If anything, we will more ghosts in late game TvZ (who was already stronger than raven in most cases), witch is bad, because snipe is such a defensive spell it's sadly best played while staying behind PF and turrets.
In TvP we will see if some bio build force toss to be less greedy in eco+upgrades (the reasons terrans feels TvP unfair). I don't think so but let's see. But maybe we will see the come back of 5rax heavy pressure/drop play.
I think Blizzard missed an opportunity here, at least from a ZvT perspective. The marauder buff...that is pretty cool, and it makes them a lot better vs. ultralisks late game. With that taken into consideration, why nerf ravens? I think the obvious choice is to nerf ghosts instead, and leave ravens the way they were. How about halving the damage of steady shot, or halving the amount of energy dissipated by EMP instead of the AA missile damage?
Now that ultralisks are (to an even greater extent) hard countered by marauders, Terran doesn't need ghosts to be able to shred 1k+ gas worth of overseers at no cost to them besides energy. Brood lord deathballs could still be cleaned out by ravens, but now Terran wouldn't be able to choose between snipe killing an entire control group of BLs and AA missil-ing them.
On May 16 2018 01:04 Haukinger wrote: Why exactly do they think they need to buff against Zerg when no Zerg has won a single GSL since Life more than three years ago?
Because outside of GSL Zerg has been pretty damn dominant for the last couple of years.
The foreign scene in particular is a massive Zerg fest, and it's only getting worse with Serral reaching Super Saiyan Blue status.
And even in GSL's case, sure no Zerg has won the whole thing since Life, but we've had Zergs basically in the finals every year with soO being there like 4-5 times.
If soO wasn't so cursed Zerg could easily have like 3-4 GSL titles since Life.
It's really impressive how you managed to spin foreign, notably low-level (with all due respect to non-Korean pros, but WCS isn't GSL) scene to somehow reflect satte of Zerg's dominance while the inability for Zerg to win a GSL is just "curse". Yep, because soO was always favored to win. Every GSL final he played, he just either choked it away or was stopped by divine forces. Oh and btw, while there have been 4 appearances of Zerg in GSL finals since Life's win, onyl 2 of them were soO (in LotV). The 2 in Heart of the Swarm were ByuL's. A player who gained notoriety as being able to win in the not-so-friendly to Zerg meta of mech and +2 blink, but somehow, by supernatural forces, was also always stopped in his tracks in finals and eventually labaled a Kong.
Don't really know what you're so upset about with the current World champion being Z, runner-up also Z with a Ro16 distribution of 3 P, 5 T and 8 Z.
I don't like the idiotic notion of atributing Zerg being unable to win a GSL to a "curse" or "choking". I also don't like when someone brings up racial distribution from a glorified weekender that invited half the players from outside Korea and happened half a year ago, but that's different fucking matter.
On May 16 2018 01:04 Haukinger wrote: Why exactly do they think they need to buff against Zerg when no Zerg has won a single GSL since Life more than three years ago?
Because outside of GSL Zerg has been pretty damn dominant for the last couple of years.
The foreign scene in particular is a massive Zerg fest, and it's only getting worse with Serral reaching Super Saiyan Blue status.
And even in GSL's case, sure no Zerg has won the whole thing since Life, but we've had Zergs basically in the finals every year with soO being there like 4-5 times.
If soO wasn't so cursed Zerg could easily have like 3-4 GSL titles since Life.
It's really impressive how you managed to spin foreign, notably low-level (with all due respect to non-Korean pros, but WCS isn't GSL) scene to somehow reflect satte of Zerg's dominance while the inability for Zerg to win a GSL is just "curse". Yep, because soO was always favored to win. Every GSL final he played, he just either choked it away or was stopped by divine forces. Oh and btw, while there have been 4 appearances of Zerg in GSL finals since Life's win, onyl 2 of them were soO (in LotV). The 2 in Heart of the Swarm were ByuL's. A player who gained notoriety as being able to win in the not-so-friendly to Zerg meta of mech and +2 blink, but somehow, by supernatural forces, was also always stopped in his tracks in finals and eventually labaled a Kong.
Don't really know what you're so upset about with the current World champion being Z, runner-up also Z with a Ro16 distribution of 3 P, 5 T and 8 Z.
I don't like the idiotic notion of atributing Zerg being unable to win a GSL to a "curse" or "choking". I also don't like when someone brings up racial distribution from a glorified weekender that invited half the players from outside Korea and happened half a year ago, but that's different fucking matter.
If you don't believe in the Kong curse, how do you explain soO making it to 6 GSL finals and losing every single time? Not to mention DH Stockholm, IEM gamescom, and Blizzcon. The man plows through stacked playoff brackets time and time again, but simply can't get a gold.
Clearly there's something more than bad luck at work here. Some kind of mental block that soO can't get over.
On May 16 2018 13:56 mierin wrote: I think Blizzard missed an opportunity here, at least from a ZvT perspective. The marauder buff...that is pretty cool, and it makes them a lot better vs. ultralisks late game. With that taken into consideration, why nerf ravens? I think the obvious choice is to nerf ghosts instead, and leave ravens the way they were. How about halving the damage of steady shot, or halving the amount of energy dissipated by EMP instead of the AA missile damage?
Now that ultralisks are (to an even greater extent) hard countered by marauders, Terran doesn't need ghosts to be able to shred 1k+ gas worth of overseers at no cost to them besides energy. Brood lord deathballs could still be cleaned out by ravens, but now Terran wouldn't be able to choose between snipe killing an entire control group of BLs and AA missil-ing them.
in tvt raven was a problem too, 2 missiles was enough to instakill bunch of marines in first fight, tvt's earlygame variety is already too small cuz of almighty cyclones.
On May 16 2018 01:04 Haukinger wrote: Why exactly do they think they need to buff against Zerg when no Zerg has won a single GSL since Life more than three years ago?
Because outside of GSL Zerg has been pretty damn dominant for the last couple of years.
The foreign scene in particular is a massive Zerg fest, and it's only getting worse with Serral reaching Super Saiyan Blue status.
And even in GSL's case, sure no Zerg has won the whole thing since Life, but we've had Zergs basically in the finals every year with soO being there like 4-5 times.
If soO wasn't so cursed Zerg could easily have like 3-4 GSL titles since Life.
It's really impressive how you managed to spin foreign, notably low-level (with all due respect to non-Korean pros, but WCS isn't GSL) scene to somehow reflect satte of Zerg's dominance while the inability for Zerg to win a GSL is just "curse". Yep, because soO was always favored to win. Every GSL final he played, he just either choked it away or was stopped by divine forces. Oh and btw, while there have been 4 appearances of Zerg in GSL finals since Life's win, onyl 2 of them were soO (in LotV). The 2 in Heart of the Swarm were ByuL's. A player who gained notoriety as being able to win in the not-so-friendly to Zerg meta of mech and +2 blink, but somehow, by supernatural forces, was also always stopped in his tracks in finals and eventually labaled a Kong.
Then why did those "divine forces" stop soO and Byul in the finals but not before that? You can't argue that soO and Byul aren't bad in finals, before that they managed to beat most opponents. soO beat Zest in GSL season 3 semis but lost to him in GSL season 1 final and Byul beat Inno in SSL while losing to him in GSL finals just to name two examples. Dark also certainly didn't lose game 6 against Stats because Zerg is weak.
On May 16 2018 01:04 Haukinger wrote: Why exactly do they think they need to buff against Zerg when no Zerg has won a single GSL since Life more than three years ago?
Because outside of GSL Zerg has been pretty damn dominant for the last couple of years.
The foreign scene in particular is a massive Zerg fest, and it's only getting worse with Serral reaching Super Saiyan Blue status.
And even in GSL's case, sure no Zerg has won the whole thing since Life, but we've had Zergs basically in the finals every year with soO being there like 4-5 times.
If soO wasn't so cursed Zerg could easily have like 3-4 GSL titles since Life.
It's really impressive how you managed to spin foreign, notably low-level (with all due respect to non-Korean pros, but WCS isn't GSL) scene to somehow reflect satte of Zerg's dominance while the inability for Zerg to win a GSL is just "curse". Yep, because soO was always favored to win. Every GSL final he played, he just either choked it away or was stopped by divine forces. Oh and btw, while there have been 4 appearances of Zerg in GSL finals since Life's win, onyl 2 of them were soO (in LotV). The 2 in Heart of the Swarm were ByuL's. A player who gained notoriety as being able to win in the not-so-friendly to Zerg meta of mech and +2 blink, but somehow, by supernatural forces, was also always stopped in his tracks in finals and eventually labaled a Kong.
Don't really know what you're so upset about with the current World champion being Z, runner-up also Z with a Ro16 distribution of 3 P, 5 T and 8 Z.
I don't like the idiotic notion of atributing Zerg being unable to win a GSL to a "curse" or "choking". I also don't like when someone brings up racial distribution from a glorified weekender that invited half the players from outside Korea and happened half a year ago, but that's different fucking matter.
If you don't believe in the Kong curse, how do you explain soO making it to 6 GSL finals and losing every single time? Not to mention DH Stockholm, IEM gamescom, and Blizzcon. The man plows through stacked playoff brackets time and time again, but simply can't get a gold.
Clearly there's something more than bad luck at work here. Some kind of mental block that soO can't get over.
He can't win the finals because Zerg is underpowered. Ah wait how did he manage to reach the finals then? I mean Zerg is only underpowered in bo7s. Ah wait, how did he win all the semis then? I mean Zerg is only underpowered in high pressure situations like finals. Oh what do you mean? Life and Rogue are good in finals...?uhh I don't know then.
On May 16 2018 17:10 Ej_ wrote: Rogue was never close to a starleague final and Life was never close to the GSL studio in LotV, but w/e. Zerg players are just chokers.
On May 16 2018 17:10 Ej_ wrote: Rogue was never close to a starleague final and Life was never close to the GSL studio in LotV, but w/e. Zerg players are just chokers.
I have no idea why you insist on viewing this as some attack on Zerg as a race. soO and Dark are individual players, and whatever personal mental obstacles they have are their own, not some magical quality of their race.
MKP was a Kong too, but that didn't mean all of Terran was cursed or something (as Mvp demonstrated more than once).
GSL finalists are an absurdly tiny sample, and GSL champions halve that sample size, as if it wasn't small enough already. Using Zerg's lack of GSL trophies in LotV as some kind of balance argument is ridiculous. Applying similar (flawed) logic, I could argue that Terran was underpowered for the entirety of HotS because a grand total of 1 single Terran ever made the GSL finals during that entire expansion, compared to 4 Zerg and 5 Protoss finalists.
On May 16 2018 17:10 Ej_ wrote: Rogue was never close to a starleague final and Life was never close to the GSL studio in LotV, but w/e. Zerg players are just chokers.
I mean, yeah. What other explanation is there? Rogue is clearly better at weakend events, Life got arrested, and the zergs that dominate starleagues just happen to be chokers.
If zerg was genuinely underpowered, then there would be shortage of them getting far in tournaments. In reality it's the opposite. Out of the last 10 premier tournaments, 9 of them had at least one zerg in the final.
Using only champions is already a very small sample size. Using only GSL champions is an even smaller one. Disregarding SSL, as well as the IEMs/blizzcons/Super cups that zerg win is stupid.
On May 16 2018 01:04 Haukinger wrote: Why exactly do they think they need to buff against Zerg when no Zerg has won a single GSL since Life more than three years ago?
Because outside of GSL Zerg has been pretty damn dominant for the last couple of years.
The foreign scene in particular is a massive Zerg fest, and it's only getting worse with Serral reaching Super Saiyan Blue status.
And even in GSL's case, sure no Zerg has won the whole thing since Life, but we've had Zergs basically in the finals every year with soO being there like 4-5 times.
If soO wasn't so cursed Zerg could easily have like 3-4 GSL titles since Life.
It's really impressive how you managed to spin foreign, notably low-level (with all due respect to non-Korean pros, but WCS isn't GSL) scene to somehow reflect satte of Zerg's dominance while the inability for Zerg to win a GSL is just "curse". Yep, because soO was always favored to win. Every GSL final he played, he just either choked it away or was stopped by divine forces. Oh and btw, while there have been 4 appearances of Zerg in GSL finals since Life's win, onyl 2 of them were soO (in LotV). The 2 in Heart of the Swarm were ByuL's. A player who gained notoriety as being able to win in the not-so-friendly to Zerg meta of mech and +2 blink, but somehow, by supernatural forces, was also always stopped in his tracks in finals and eventually labaled a Kong.
Don't really know what you're so upset about with the current World champion being Z, runner-up also Z with a Ro16 distribution of 3 P, 5 T and 8 Z.
I don't like the idiotic notion of atributing Zerg being unable to win a GSL to a "curse" or "choking". I also don't like when someone brings up racial distribution from a glorified weekender that invited half the players from outside Korea and happened half a year ago, but that's different fucking matter.
I think it's time for Terrans and Protosses to give us Zergs some tips about efficient whining, and how to use salt and tears to force Blizzard to help with balance patches.
On May 16 2018 20:07 hiroshOne wrote: I think it's time for Terrans and Protosses to give us Zergs some tips about efficient whining, and how to use salt and tears to force Blizzard to help with balance patches.
Zergs need to start actually struggling in tournaments first lol
On May 15 2018 19:33 xongnox wrote: If you do the maths right with upgrades/sentry shield it's huge change vs stalker/collosi comps. You probably didn't play HoTs maurauder-drop-the-toss Cure-style era to not remember the difference between the old and the new maraudeur (yep i know lot of other things have changed, like eco and upgrades, but still )
For your TvP balance statement, simply check trop korean players winrates in the MU.
That was the 4 best ranked korean terran players. Now let's whatch the best Protoss : Classic : 81% herO : 67 % Zest : 70% Stats : 70% sOs : 65%
Hard to say anything more.
I like how you included the pre stalker nerf period to argue about current PvT balance. Try using post mid February stats and post again. PvT is not even close to being as bad as people make it out to be.
I would also say that using winrate stats to argue about SC2 racial balance is inherently flawed because of the small player pool we have. It's bound to be skewed towards whatever race that has more top level players. We could have perfect racial balance, but it just happens to be that we have a 7/6/4 split in terms of number of champion contender quality players among races so the winrate is skewed towards the first race. You can argue in a healthy scene, if the game is balanced, this split will change over time and tends to converge to 6/6/6 for example. But it's not the case for SC2. There's no 'up and coming' players that could go from being nameless to relevant because of a balance update, even if it's a dramatic one.
You might have to make the game hugely inbalanced to make the winrates appear to be balanced at this point.
That was such a huge 'nerf' i forgot about this one ^^
But sample size will actually be too small if we take numbers after 1 mars 2018. For example Classic had only 10 matchs vs korean terrans since (and he's at 9 win 1 loose )
On May 16 2018 21:17 xongnox wrote: That was such a huge 'nerf' i forgot about this one ^^
You must be kidding. That nerf was actually more gamechanging for protoss than a MSC removal. Before that blink stalkers allins destroyed even zergs. Let alone poor terrans and other protosses.
On May 16 2018 10:25 xongnox wrote: .But maybe we will see the come back of 5rax heavy pressure/drop play.
What come back? Thats been the meta for months.
games ? With top korean terran actually wining vs a decent opponent ?
We see a lot of 5rax, but not with constant heavy pressure/drop play. It's more like one frontal timing into defending. (except if toss id dying). And it's played way less marauder-heavy than in the old days.