Last year, we released an update containing design changes aimed at improving StarCraft II multiplayer. This year, we plan to release another design patch soon after the WCS Global Finals at BlizzCon. Our main goals for this patch include balancing the late-game power of each race while discouraging turtle play, ensuring upgrades present non-trivial decisions, and broadening the unit composition options in a number of matchups. This includes looking at each race’s massive units and making improvements to give them a clearer role or to make them more interesting to play with.
Terran
Battlecruiser
•Removed random delay between shots for both ATS Laser Batter and ATA Laser Battery •ATA Laser Battery damage reduced from 6 to 5 •Yamato Cannon damage reduced from 300 to 240 •Can move while shooting
The mighty Battlecruiser has always occupied a strange place in StarCraft II. With very high damage per second, but slow speed and a medium attack range, it can deal a ton of damage—but only if its target allows it to. It also has some odd unit relationships. At maximum upgrades, few units can stand up to a Battlecruiser, but when first produced without upgrades, basic ground units like Marines and Hydralisks can effectively counter it. Air units like Void Rays and Corruptors can also counter Battlecruisers, but they’re in turn vulnerable to being one-shot by the Yamato Cannon.
Removing the random delay on Battlecruiser auto attacks is perhaps the most unusual change we’ve implemented here. While virtually all units in StarCraft II have a random delay, the Battlecruiser’s high random delay ratio to the auto-attack cooldown could cause moments where the Battlecruiser would do less damage than expected. By removing it, we’re increasing Battlecruiser damage per second by roughly 20% and making its damage consistent. However, while we want the Battlecruiser to be stronger against ground targets, we don’t want to make it the best all-around unit, so we’re reducing its anti-air attack by 1, which maintains its current vulnerability to airborne threats.
Lowering Yamato Cannon damage to 240 is actually a throwback to its Brood War damage value. This mainly affects Void Rays, as it will now heavily damage them rather than outright destroy them in a single shot, while still keeping it at a similar power level versus Corruptors and Carriers.
Moving while shooting is an experimental and often requested change. While Battlecruisers are slow, being able to pursue targets that have to stop to fire back makes the Battlecruiser much more maneuverable in combat and dangerous to kite unless you use units that greatly outrange it, such as Tempests or Vikings. Thus, this change mitigates the medium range weakness of the Battlecruiser without changing its relation to static defenses and long-range units.
•Drilling Claws upgrade now also permanently cloaks the Widow Mine while burrowed. A new visual effect will be applied to the Widow Mine to indicate this.
This change restores the Widow Mine, post-upgrade, to its state prior to patch 4.0. This aligns with our previous goal of making early game Widow Mines feel fairer to both attacker and defender, while also improving the value of the Widow Mine upgrade. This should allow Terrans to utilize Widow Mines late-game more effectively in TvZ against Zergling/Baneling packs and achieve better passive scouting and zone control through well-placed mines.
Currently in TvT, Cyclones can trade very efficiently against most other early-game options. Removing 1 armor makes Reapers and Marines much stronger against Cyclones while not affecting Cyclone strength against units like Marauders and Siege Tanks. This should make them less effective to mass early on, but they’ll still have value if mixed with other units. Cyclone effectiveness versus Zerglings and Queens will also move in the Zerg player’s favor, so we’ll be watching closely.
•250mm Punisher Cannons weapon speed changed from 3 to 2.5 •250mm Punisher Cannons damage changed from 35 (+15 Armored) to 40 (+10 Massive) •Javelin Missile Launchers area-of-effect radius reduced from 0.6 to 0.5 •Base armor reduced from 2 to 1
Our goal with the Thor is to push its role away from being strong all-around and into being a giant that slays other giants. In turn, it should be weak when swarmed by smaller units. Changing its armor allows units with fast attack speed but low damage like Marines and Zerglings to have an easier time against Thors. The reduction in anti-air radius is to address feedback that it heavily contributed towards making Mutalisks weak in the mid-to-late game against Terran. Since we want to promote more Mutalisk play, we’re reducing the power of this counter.
Increasing its attack rate against massive targets makes the Thor very dangerous to units like as the new Tempest and Carrier in straight-up fights. Additionally, Brood Lords can be killed much more quickly, so Terrans opting to use multiple Thors pose a greater threat in head-on fights by denying Broodlings from being created. This should make the Thor a strong option when fighting massive air units, and reduce overlap with Vikings when it comes to fighting armored air in general.
•High-Capacity Fuel Tanks no longer increase the duration of Ignite Afterburners. Now it reduces the cooldown of Ignite Afterburners from 14 to 9. •Medivac Heal will now work on units under the effect of the Phoenix Graviton Beam
This keeps the uptime of Ignite Afterburners the same as before, but now players will have greater control over when they want to trigger it. Additionally, reducing cooldown makes it easier to move between multiple attack locations rather than having a longer duration, which encourages one-way attacks into a base. Overall, this should make the upgrade more attractive to players who value micro control for their Medivacs.
The change to Medivac Heal makes it consistent with our change to Shield Batteries.
While speedy Banshees are very threatening, this upgrade is quite rare at high-level play. We wanted to give this Banshee upgrade a slight boost by reducing the price to make it more attractive to get in the mid or late game.
While we have reduced the Raven’s damage on the Anti-Armor Missile a few times now, it still sees use as a strong area-of-effect damage ability in the late-game during TvT matchups. Since the intent is for Anti-Armor missile to be used as a debuff and not for its damage, we want to emphasize this purity of purpose. Thus, we’re removing the damage and making it affect all types of armor upgrades in the game. Other changes might be required to make this spell sharper in its purpose, so we’ll be monitoring how things go during testing.
•Neosteel Frame and Structure Armor are being combined into Neosteel Armor, which combines their upgrades. It will cost 150/150 and take 100 seconds to research—the same as Structure Armor.
Neosteel Frame improvements are often requested by various Neosteel enthusiasts in the community. This change aims to make it more attractive by combining it with an existing structure upgrade.
Increasing Unburrow speed should allow for more tactical and sneaky Zerg plays—for example, using Hydralisks to catch Warp Prisms or Medivacs unaware as they fly towards a mineral line, or using Zerglings to ambush reinforcements as they walk across the map.
In the past, we set out to make the Hydralisk more of a core unit. This has perhaps been too successful, to the point where it crowds out other strategies. Altering the Hydralisks’ health reduces their ability to be massed by making them more vulnerable to area-of-effect damage. Since altering the health of core units is always a big change, we will be watching to make sure Zerg still has the Hydralisk as an option, although perhaps not the best option for every matchup.
At 8 range, Infestors will be better able to cast Infested Terrans outside the range of static defenses and further away from enemy armies, allowing them to more effectively break siege lines or threaten massed enemy forces.
This makes the Ultralisk a much stronger and more responsive option off-creep without support. Due to their previous speed off-creep, they were sometimes a questionable choice against Terran Bio, with high-level players being able to defeat them with Marauders. Post-upgrade, they can better pressure Terran Bio forces, as their new speed is very close to Stim Marine/Marauder speed. Against Protoss, they can also be used to better pressure Carrier/High Templar compositions by quickly engaging the High Templars while shrugging off Carrier Interceptor damage.
•Nydus Network cost increased from 150/200 to 200/250 •Nydus Worm cost decreased from 100/100 to 50/50 •While Nydus Worm is emerging, it will no longer be invincible. Instead, it has 6 armor.
Nydus Worms have been used historically for all-in strategies. We want to encourage more late game usage as a transport/harass tool. We’ve heard consistent high-level feedback to the effect that their lack of use late-game was due to the cost of the Worms themselves. Additionally, we wanted to increase the counterplay of Nydus Worms being placed directly in front of an opponent’s units, so we’re removing their invincibility during their emerging phase. However, its armor will be increased while emerging, so stopping a Nydus Worm will require more commitment than just swarming it with worker units or attacking with a few basic units.
•Burrow and Unburrow have been separated into two separate keys •Burrowed and Unburrowed Zerg unit types will now be on the same tab-select, and both will be selected when double clicking on units
This is a more experimental change. We have gotten requests over the years to separate the Burrow and Unburrow buttons for Zerg to give greater control over units, similar to how Terran controls the transforming of their Siege Tanks or Liberators. We are looking for feedback on how this feature feels in players’ hands, as it requires a bit of getting used to.
•Nexus Mass Recall renamed to Strategic Recall •Mothership’s Strategic Recall renamed to Mass Recall •Nexus Strategic Recall cooldown reduced from 130 second to 85 seconds •Nexus Strategic Recall radius reduced from 6.5 to 2.5
We want to make Mass Recall a more useful tool for Protoss players to be able to attack early on with small groups of units without necessarily committing to an all-in attack. The greatly lowered radius makes it much less attractive for bringing back large armies, thus making positioning more important when moving with lots of units.
Currently, Protoss players often rely on Stargate units or Adepts to scout their opponents. Hallucination was more heavily used in the past, before Adepts existed, due to the opening phases of the game being faster and the window to build up energy on a Sentry being much lower. Therefore, decreasing the energy cost for Hallucination should help make it a more attractive scouting option.
Increasing the radius of Guardian Shield is aimed at supporting more modern playstyles. Zealots are a more popular choice now as a core unit, but their Charge often places them outside of a Sentry’s Guardian Shield. This aims to slightly reduce that gap so they more effectively cover larger Gateway-centric armies.
When the Ghost’s Snipe ability was changed to Steady Shot, the Ghost lost the ability to instantly kill a High Templar, but Templars remained very lethal to Ghosts. This change should move this relationship to focus more on energy denial/casting rather than outright lethality. Reducing Feedback’s damage also means that Medivacs will also no longer be instantly destroyed, which promotes more multipronged play in late-game scenarios. Against Zerg, this makes Vipers slightly less fragile, which should allow Zerg a few more chances to try and pull apart a Protoss player’s late-game armies.
Ideally, this change will reduce the strain on Robotics Facility unit build time. Currently, their cost and position in the Protoss tech tree makes it tricky to afford two of them early on, which is an issue since the four units it can produce are all very important to Protoss mid-game strategies. Since Robotics Facilities are sometimes used in proxy strategies, we will be monitoring this change to see if it makes holding proxies improbable.
Units with turret tracking functionality continue to face their targets even when not firing. The Siege Tank and Immortal are two examples of units that demonstrate this behavior. With turret tracking, microing a Colossus in battle should feel more rewarding for players and increase the unit’s skill ceiling.
•Purification Nova changed back to pre-4.0 state. Purification Nova deploys a ball of energy that will detonate after 2 seconds, dealing 155 damage and an additional 55 shield damage to all ground units in its radius. •Purification Nova no longer detonates on contact with enemy units •Purification Nova now sends a threat signal to the opponent on detonation instead of during the launch phase
Last year, we made a change to the Disruptor to see if it could work better at chipping away at armies over time. The change created a new way to use Purification Nova, but the new Disruptor was less effective at dealing damage to backline units such as Lurkers, as the ability would detonate on melee units screening for them. In some ways, the Disruptor became harder to use, since the possibility of friendly fire was very high once combat with either Zealots or Zerglings was underway. For these reasons, we are reverting to the older version of the Disruptor.
We are also adding one change—the “your units are under attack” signal will happen after Purification Nova detonates on units instead of when it’s deployed. Before, this signal would cause units to immediately attack the Disruptor, which made it appear that your units were walking towards the undetonated Purification Nova, and their own death. This change also brings Purification Nova more in line with other splash effects like Siege Tank attacks and Psionic Storm.
•Cost reduced from 300/200 to 250/175 •Supply reduced from 6 to 5 •Hit Points and Shields reduced from 300/150 to 150/125 •Speed increased from 2.632 to 3.5 •Acceleration increased from 1.4875 to 2.8
We want to keep the Tempest’s identity as a mobile long range weapons platform but give it a number of changes to make it both more interesting to fight against as well as more desirable in maxed-out army situations. At 450 total health, the previous Tempest had one of the highest health-to-cost ratios of all air units. By reducing its overall health, we can emphasize the weakness of the Tempest—overrunning it with numerous smaller units—as well as freeing up design space to make its strengths more interesting.
Increasing speed without reducing damage or range will allow Tempest players to better position their units. This is designed around the idea that the Tempest is a large warship that trades durability for range and speed. Reduction of cost and supply is aimed at feedback we have gotten over time that in late-game scenarios against Zerg, Tempests are not desirable due to their supply and low effectiveness for cost versus targets other than Brood Lords. Against Terrans, Tempests already have a place fighting Battlecruisers, or more commonly, Liberators. After these changes, Tempests will match up well against these targets but will have to be extra careful around Vikings and Thors due to their decreased health pool.
•Graviton Catapult upgrade removed •Hit Points and Shields increased from 250/150 to 300/150 •Build time decreased from 86 to 64 seconds •Interceptor build time increased from 6 to 11 seconds •Interceptor damage decreased from 5x2 to 8x1 •Interceptors will get +1x1 per Air Attack upgrade instead of +1x2
For the Carrier, we want to make changes that allow players to show their skill in controlling this powerful capital ship. One of the main pain points with Carrier power is that it is very front-loaded in terms of burst damage. Currently, the Graviton Catapult upgrade allows the Carrier to deploy Interceptors to easily overwhelm the sorts of rapid-firing units that could soft counter it, like Hydralisks and Marines. This makes the interaction between Carrier groups and opponents highly lethal—either kill the Carriers quickly, or be quickly destroyed. By removing the Graviton Catapult upgrade, reducing Interceptor damage, and increasing Carrier hit points, we hope to reduce how immediately lethal Carrier encounters are for both sides.
Increasing Interceptor build time is aimed at making one of the soft counters to Carriers, killing their Interceptors, more reliable. We’re also reducing the Carrier’s build time, partly to offset the increased time it takes for them to come up to full power, since Carriers will still start with four out of eight Interceptors available. Also, since the burst damage of the Carrier is reduced, we have more room to allow them to be produced faster as opponents should be under less pressure to quickly amass their counters.
Time Warp has remained unchanged since the removal of the Mothership Core. Since the old Time Warp was balanced around being on an early game unit, we wanted to increase the power of this ability to make it better fitting for a high-tech unit. By reducing attack speed this reinforces the ability’s zoning potential. It can also be especially effective against entrenched enemy positions by weakening static defenses without outright killing them.
This will allow Shield Batteries to be more effective against low numbers of Phoenix harass. As a result, Phoenix play will need to be more of a commitment if the opponent builds Shield Batteries.
Ideally, once Warp Gate research is done, newly built Gateways are always transformed into Warp Gates. This isn’t the most strategic or mechanics-intensive decision, so we are testing out making it automated.
We’ve received feedback that players would like to test the addition of a countdown timer at the beginning of matches. This could help players have a smoother transition from the loading screen to the start of a match by reducing uncertainty about when the game starts. Thus, we’ll be feeling out this change in the Testing Tab.
This is our first pass of changes for our post-BlizzCon update coming in November. As with previous design updates, these changes are balanced towards being more noticeable, with new changes being added or some being removed over the testing period—but that’s where you come in! Starting on Tuesday, you’ll be able to hop into the Testing Matchmaking queue, try out the changes, and let us know what you think. Good luck and have fun!
I don't get how they can nerf the cyclone's armor to lower its allin/early game power (with is more than fair) and not increase its mid/late game viability (since the unit is basically useless past 10 minutes)
Some interesting changes. not sure if the buff/nerf to thor is good enough to fix its issues against broodlords tbh. Thors will still be clunky as hell and changing their attack speed isn't gonna do much if broods just throw out their broodlings to body-block and kite. The simultaneous feedback nerf + recall nerf has some scary (exciting?) prospects for lategame tvp harrass.
On September 10 2018 07:09 JackONeill wrote: I don't get how they can nerf the cyclone's armor to lower its allin/early game power (with is more than fair) and not increase its mid/late game viability (since the unit is basically useless past 10 minutes)
I don't think it's ever their intention to make cyclones viable past the early midgame. Terran mech has core comp around hellbats, tanks, thors.
I like the quality of life changes (burrow, warp gate), the actual gameplay changes will need some testing. Glad to see nothing absurd like DT blink again.
On September 10 2018 07:26 Haikus wrote: Some interesting changes. not sure if the buff/nerf to thor is good enough to fix its issues against broodlords tbh. Thors will still be clunky as hell and changing their attack speed isn't gonna do much if broods just throw out their broodlings to body-block and kite. The simultaneous feedback nerf + recall nerf has some scary (exciting?) prospects for lategame tvp harrass.
On September 10 2018 07:09 JackONeill wrote: I don't get how they can nerf the cyclone's armor to lower its allin/early game power (with is more than fair) and not increase its mid/late game viability (since the unit is basically useless past 10 minutes)
I don't think it's ever their intention to make cyclones viable past the early midgame. Terran mech has core comp around hellbats, tanks, thors.
I'm not sure mech is viable now.
While I agree with making them not counter mutas too much the armor nerf makes him weak to everything zerg. Also nerfing cyclones, while makes sense to help TvT and weaken TvP proxys, it also makes mech have much less options in both TvT and TvZ in early game. If they go with these changes I forsee cyclones seeing 0 play at all. Also cheaper robos, stronger doom drops, and other changes makes mech way too weak.
Good changes. I won't list everything out, but it's a good direction to go IMO. Everything has good reasons behind it and personally I prefer more subtle patches as opposed to big huge sweeping changes.
I just realized but isn't tenpest changes kind of insane?
Cheaper and less supply, while also being faster. I don't think lowering supply does anything here, it would only matter in low supply but a maxed out toss while be having more tempests and actually catching them will be really hard.
I wonder what happens to Protoss units being built out of a gateway as warpgate tech finishes??? Do they instantly finish, or are they outright canceled. For some builds this could make managing when warpgate finishes a lot more of a hastle than changing gateways to warpgate is.
LOL feedback nerf Arthur's wish finally came true.Old thor ain't worth shit compared to 2 vikings but now it's definately better than 2 vikings against high armor units due to no split attack.Reliable ?? dunno for now.
On September 10 2018 08:40 washikie wrote: I wonder what happens to Protoss units being built out of a gateway as warpgate tech finishes??? Do they instantly finish, or are they outright canceled. For some builds this could make managing when warpgate finishes a lot more of a hastle than changing gateways to warpgate is.
It says "newly built gateways will automatically transform" So the gateways you have before wg finishes you still have to manually transform.
On September 10 2018 08:38 Lexender wrote: I just realized but isn't tenpest changes kind of insane?
Cheaper and less supply, while also being faster. I don't think lowering supply does anything here, it would only matter in low supply but a maxed out toss while be having more tempests and actually catching them will be really hard.
They only have 3/5 of the hp they used to have though. I'd like to see how the speed really affects tempests vs. marines/hydras/vikings/corruptor, but i doubt it'll make enough of a difference to counteract being that much squishier.
Why did they wait so long to reveal they are were and went wrong? Finally. BСs. Mines. Even Cyclones. But, goddamn, the whole year... we (terrans) waited the whole year. And now only in November. I should have been happy, sweetly satisfied that day and at that moment... but no... I'm pissed off (a little bit).
I like the changes other than the change to the hydralisk. "Making them more vulnerable to area-of-effect damage". Huh?? That's literally the counter to hydras already lmao. They were already glass canons
Overall I think the changes fix some of the issues the game had. But I would have liked to see even more changes to late game that not only alters ultimate compositions but encourages more multipronged fast paced action and less big blobs of big units raming into each other. The carrier ht and Thor changes will help but I think that what we will primarily see is that Zerg shifts to the dominant late game faction with these changes because zerg late game air went untouched while Protoss air was nerfed heavily and i don't think battle cruiser changes do much for Terran air, maybe Thor will help Idk for bio in mech probably. I like the stronger ultras but whish they were cuppled with weeker vipers to reduce the strength of Zerg air to encourage ground based zvt end games rather than broodlord deathball viper curupter baneling zergling deathball vs ghost Viking lib with some bio deathball. I enjoy evrey part of sc2 but the late game blob fest, I think many players feel the same way. this patch helps but perhaps does not go far enough to reduce the late game air blobs desirability over other end game compositions and ways of playing. This remains my biggest gripe with lotv, with midgame generally being shorter more games reach ultra late game than they did in HOTS and ultra late game lotv is just kind of unfun compared to mid and early game. For ballance sake zerg still needs to have a very strong late game vs Terran bio, but I wish that late game was not centered around air.
"We’ve received feedback that players would like to test the addition of a countdown timer at the beginning of matches. This could help players have a smoother transition from the loading screen to the start of a match by reducing uncertainty about when the game starts. Thus, we’ll be feeling out this change in the Testing Tab."
Finally!!! I waited for this since Wings of Liberty Beta.
On September 10 2018 09:04 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: Neosteel Frame improvements are often requested by various Neosteel enthusiasts in the community
Best line in patch notes ever
Lol yeah what is that one guy who always brings up the bunker upgrades total irelivance going to say in ballance threads now?
On September 10 2018 07:09 JackONeill wrote: I don't get how they can nerf the cyclone's armor to lower its allin/early game power (with is more than fair) and not increase its mid/late game viability (since the unit is basically useless past 10 minutes)
Yeah what I realy wish what they would do for cyclones is make them a good ground to air unit for Terran mech that Terran could get access to with upgrades. Honestly I think what evrey Terran really wants the cyclone to be is the Goliath 2.0 that's the unit fantasy it would be nice if we could get that and have it balanced, not so good that it outshine bio as a footman unit, but does offer Terran some level of flexibility and anti air that they can mix into there mech army.
Right now the cyclone is in a weird spot of being a very useful unit in the early game for fending of allins or doing an Allin yourself but outside of that it does not really do much or see much use. In a lot of ways it's a lot like the reaper, now I'm fine with the way the reaper is, it has a well defined place and role for terran, but I don't think the cyclone is in as good a spot and mech feels lacking without a Goliath like unit in a way that bio does not with out mid or late game utility from reapers.
On September 10 2018 08:38 Lexender wrote: I just realized but isn't tenpest changes kind of insane?
Cheaper and less supply, while also being faster. I don't think lowering supply does anything here, it would only matter in low supply but a maxed out toss while be having more tempests and actually catching them will be really hard.
Tempests just aren't used much in any situation except to counter range libs and ultra emergency brood lord counter, and even then the minimum possible number. They needed to be buffed a) to see more use and b) offset the kind of ridiculous carrier nerfs. Graviton catapult removal is a huge deal in nerfing sky toss, carriers no longer have siege/poke potential so tempest needs to step up to fulfill that role better than it did so far.
Personally I would have preferred a faster attack animation rather than the crazy speed boost, but maybe now the new skytoss comp will be tempest/voidray/colossus instead of carrier/archon/templar. Seems interesting.
I dont see how any of this addresses late game Tvp. Unless im missing something feedback still shits on BC? Terran is dead presently when Toss rounds out their massive splash with tempests to shut down the liberators. Having less hitpoints is irrelevant if the range is the same and they are now faster? You cant get to them with your army without getting nuked.. you give ravens a redundant ability with ghosts to nuke shields..im not really following. Nerfing cyclone basically removes the proxy all in which im ok with but this is going to be an even more epic shitshow than we had pre stalker nerf.
I guess Maru will come up w some proxy all inns that dont involve cyclones lol.
And why are u changing disrupters?? At least now u have the potential to micro units into them to set them off..u want them to be even easier to spam now??
How bout we look at the main problem ??? Not a word about chrono????!
On September 10 2018 11:20 DomeGetta wrote: So a few things to consider for sure:
I dont see how any of this addresses late game Tvp. Unless im missing something feedback still shits on BC? Terran is dead presently when Toss rounds out their massive splash with tempests to shut down the liberators. Having less hitpoints is irrelevant if the range is the same and they are now faster? You cant get to them with your army without getting nuked.. you give ravens a redundant ability with ghosts to nuke shields..im not really following. Nerfing cyclone basically removes the proxy all in which im ok with but this is going to be an even more epic shitshow than we had pre stalker nerf.
I guess Maru will come up w some proxy all inns that dont involve cyclones lol.
And why are u changing disrupters?? At least now u have the potential to micro units into them to set them off..u want them to be even easier to spam now??
How bout we look at the main problem ??? Not a word about chrono????!
BC’s haven’t had energy for a long time, so feedback isn’t an issue.
On September 10 2018 11:20 DomeGetta wrote: So a few things to consider for sure:
I dont see how any of this addresses late game Tvp. Unless im missing something feedback still shits on BC? Terran is dead presently when Toss rounds out their massive splash with tempests to shut down the liberators. Having less hitpoints is irrelevant if the range is the same and they are now faster? You cant get to them with your army without getting nuked.. you give ravens a redundant ability with ghosts to nuke shields..im not really following. Nerfing cyclone basically removes the proxy all in which im ok with but this is going to be an even more epic shitshow than we had pre stalker nerf.
I guess Maru will come up w some proxy all inns that dont involve cyclones lol.
And why are u changing disrupters?? At least now u have the potential to micro units into them to set them off..u want them to be even easier to spam now??
How bout we look at the main problem ??? Not a word about chrono????!
BC’s haven’t had energy for a long time, so feedback isn’t an issue.
LOL been that long since i seen one i guess! Well thats good news then...maybe thats what they are thinking will deal w late game toss..still skeptical at best
On September 10 2018 08:38 Lexender wrote: I just realized but isn't tenpest changes kind of insane?
Cheaper and less supply, while also being faster. I don't think lowering supply does anything here, it would only matter in low supply but a maxed out toss while be having more tempests and actually catching them will be really hard.
Tempests just aren't used much in any situation except to counter range libs and ultra emergency brood lord counter, and even then the minimum possible number. They needed to be buffed a) to see more use and b) offset the kind of ridiculous carrier nerfs. Graviton catapult removal is a huge deal in nerfing sky toss, carriers no longer have siege/poke potential so tempest needs to step up to fulfill that role better than it did so far.
Personally I would have preferred a faster attack animation rather than the crazy speed boost, but maybe now the new skytoss comp will be tempest/voidray/colossus instead of carrier/archon/templar. Seems interesting.
The new tempest has very similar stats to the void ray, so the dev team wants tempests to be used in counter part with void rays. Problem is that tempests worse now than they were before, and people rarely used them before.
Tempests are now 50 minerals and 25 gas cheaper, which at the point that you'd need them, does pretty much nothing. Going from 6 to 5 supply really only means they're nominally less supply inefficient than they were before.
i like the changes to Terran even though they are strengthening 2 air units.
On September 10 2018 09:04 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: Neosteel Frame improvements are often requested by various Neosteel enthusiasts in the community Best line in patch notes ever
i've been part of the Neosteel enthusiasts community since July 27th , 2010.
On September 10 2018 07:13 Rodya wrote: Warp gate change is stupid and I say that as a protoss player.
warp gate has always been stupid since they introduced it in beta and made it in every way better than gateways. should have made it a choice between both with pros and cons for each ie warp gates have longer cooldown than gateways
I like the changes overall. Significantly less drastic as last year which is good, I imagine things won't be quite as unstable as they were post 4.0 initially.
Probably still need a couple more late game terran changes, and parasitic bomb still needs a look at IMO. As a Protoss player, I'm confused about the robo change, it's nice but completely unnecessary? Warpgate change is also unnecessary but I'll take it, will probably save my life in a couple games. Recall change is good but perhaps the cool down is still too short, even with the nerf. I'd go somewhere between the current one and the proposed one.
Most of this sounds reasonable (they kinda did the sentry hallucination change I mentioned in the other thread! Still think it should be 50 energy though, so you can scout as soon as the sentry is made) though I'm curious how the changes to the carrier will affect PvZ. I guess the emphasis now will be on mixing in carriers with other air units with storm and archons as support rather than mostly just using carriers since losing all intercepters will now basically end the carriers being useful in the fight for up to 88 seconds and carriers can't burst damage down corruptors and hydras as well. Maybe mixing in colossus and void rays will be the thing to do. I'd need to see that colossus change in action to actually understand how it is different. As much as I don't like the recall change, I think it's fair. It was kinda BS that Protoss could kill a base and then immediately recall their entire army home to stop a counter-attack. Requiring a mothership to do big recalls makes sense.
I haven't done the math yet on how the damage will change attacking cyclones but I'm not sure if that cyclone change will be enough to actually slow down all the proxy cyclone shenanigans in TvP. I always thought the issue was that two of them could target down units faster than shield batteries could recharge shields, and with SCV support on auto-repair they can attack before the required defences to stop the attack can be built. It seemed more to me like the damage scaling was wrong for them. They're too strong for about a 3-5 minute period near the start of the game and then their damage output completely falls off and they become dead weight.
The Nydus change is good. Invincible Nydus worms were dumb. They made for bad games that would come down a split second where either the worm would die and Zerg would lose or 2-3 queens would get out and transfuse the worm, and Zerg would win.
Tempest will be even more of a hard counter to BC with less cost and faster speed. Having less hitpoins does not matter much if you have 15 range.
Thors firing faster will be completely negated by 1. Thors now taking 7 instead of 6 damage from each interceptor. 2. Carriers now having more hit points. 3. Carriers being produced faster.
And Carriers will still have 14 range with leach.
TvP mech will be just as dead in this patch as it is currently. Every TvP game will in a proxy or an all-in as it is currently.
Apart from that how is cheaper Nydus worms a good idea? Zerg can just spam almost free Nydus worms at every base and the one you do not manage to kill in time will mean that you lost that base. Do you we really need to make abilities that completely ignore positioning cheaper?
Why do Blizzard always have to introduce and awful idea (Make Nydus worms almost free) when they do something right (remove invulnerability from Nydus worms).
On September 10 2018 11:20 DomeGetta wrote: So a few things to consider for sure:
I dont see how any of this addresses late game Tvp. Unless im missing something feedback still shits on BC? Terran is dead presently when Toss rounds out their massive splash with tempests to shut down the liberators. Having less hitpoints is irrelevant if the range is the same and they are now faster? You cant get to them with your army without getting nuked.. you give ravens a redundant ability with ghosts to nuke shields..im not really following. Nerfing cyclone basically removes the proxy all in which im ok with but this is going to be an even more epic shitshow than we had pre stalker nerf.
I guess Maru will come up w some proxy all inns that dont involve cyclones lol.
And why are u changing disrupters?? At least now u have the potential to micro units into them to set them off..u want them to be even easier to spam now??
How bout we look at the main problem ??? Not a word about chrono????!
feedback has had little effect on bcs since they remved enrgy from bcs awhile back, bcs are bad and I dont think the change fixes that but the big reasons bcs suck is infrastructure cost is insane to make them in any reasonable number, 2: bcs are a unit you mass in a race that has trouble massing tech units and usually wants tech units to support there army not be there army, at least when playing bio. 3: armorys take along time to build cost alot, so it takes along time to get air upgrades unless your banking up as terran, 4: bcs struggle hard agianst zerg tech switches, its a huuuuge investment to swap into bcs but unlike carriers bcs dont have a good matchup vs there counters voidrays, currupters, and vikings all perform well vs them and are not that hard to get out compared to an army of bcs. 5: With the nerfs to ravens terran currently has the worst support caster for air deathballs, ravens are heavily outclassed by vipers and hts. 6, bcs do to many attacks with to low dmg, this makes them bad against most big late game units, yamoto helps this problem but it does not solve it.
bcs are just a bad unit letting them shoot while moving and fixing the attack delay does not make them good enough when ontop of it they get quite a few nerfs. frankly though im ok living in a world were bcs are a meme unit I just whis that carriers and broodlords (to a lesser extent) were also memes and the game was ballanced around capital ships being a meme unit..
They are nerfing Hydras and say hat they do that to open Zerg to other compositions, but in the same time they do nothing to make Mutas viable for example. Which other composition do they mean? We have nothing other than Hydras. Mutas are wrecked by one Thor, and Thor gets buffs. Protoss has problems with that only if not scouted... That's horrible change, especially that Hydras were weak in HP always.
Overall I would say that the majority of changes sound kinda reasonable, but in reality I really hoped we were done with the bigger revamps once and for all with the one we had last year. Turns out that was just another PR lie from Blizzard. While there are really good and interesting changes to be made, delivering them all at once without good testing beforehand could/will make the game unstable again for months, at least. More likely are additional tweaks needed.
On September 10 2018 15:01 Zerg.Zilla wrote: Loving the nydus change, but the hydra nerf...fuck!
It went from hydras buffs with combined upgrade to just +5 hp lol. Of course they won't undo the buffs they gave to protoss to deal with the used to be better hydras.
Same treatment for fungal, from instant and root, to projectile, doesn't root, not casted while burrow.
They nerf ultras because it was too good due to marauder nerf, but they finally undo marauder nerf, while keeping ultras nerf and keeping all the ghost buffs they added.
Blizzard loves to make zerg changes, and reverts them like they forget they changed them because there were weak, but finally keep all the nerfs they introduce to "balance the buff", resulting the unit is finally weaker or as weak than before they touch it...
On September 10 2018 13:29 Dumbledore wrote: Feels like big buff to terran, moderate changes to zerg, and protoss nerfed to oblivion. Maybe I am wrong.
Protoss get a reasonable buff to early game and a slight nerf to carriers which are worse against sworms of units(stormu!!!) but better against armored units. (also moar HP and shorter build time) And as a bonus - Colossus change is neat
I don't see it as a nerf, but maybe I'm missing something
Why not? Have to test it first, before I can have an option about this.
The only thing that actually gets an immediate dislike from me is this:
Burrow and Unburrow have been separated into two separate keys
Why? Was there any problem with the way it worked previously? I just hope I don't need to use an additional key to burrow/unburrow. Otherwise I have to change the key settings. (Note to myself: Don't forget.)
Burrow and Unburrow have been separated into two separate keys
Why? Was there any problem with the way it worked previously? I just hope I don't need to use an additional key to burrow/unburrow. Otherwise I have to change the key settings. (Note to myself: Don't forget.)
Currently if you burrow some units and then you want them unburrow you have to select just the burrowed units otherwise the burrow has higher priority. Probably players want to not do burrow/unburrow with new units. I don't know, on my level I just hit the key twice, but I will probably like this more.
On September 10 2018 13:29 Dumbledore wrote: Feels like big buff to terran, moderate changes to zerg, and protoss nerfed to oblivion. Maybe I am wrong.
Protoss get a reasonable buff to early game and a slight nerf to carriers which are worse against sworms of units(stormu!!!) but better against armored units. (also moar HP and shorter build time) And as a bonus - Colossus change is neat
I don't see it as a nerf, but maybe I'm missing something
The early/mid game buffs are the sentry hallucination and guardian shield buff as well as the robotics facility cost reduction.
Carriers and tempests were pretty significantly nerfed. Carriers not having graviton catapult is really quite large, because instead of swarming out, they lazily launch. This significantly reduces the engagement dps, which is where most of the initial damage takes place. A carrier's interceptors are its damage, so it's like saying that for the first second of engage marine shoots at 1/4 damage that gradually increases over time until it stops shooting at an enemy at which point the cycle begins again.
Part of the issue is that interceptors are very easily taken out when launched one at a time, and now, the interceptors will be made even slower. So it means that not only does a carrier take longer to fully enter the fight, a depleted carrier takes much longer to rejoin the fight. We're talking about 48 seconds versus 88 seconds to fully stock a new carrier. Now, once the interceptors are out, then the carrier is very scary, but when a Protoss carrier fleet engages, it is much weaker for the first second and a bit of the engage.
The health buff is nominal, as carriers were already pretty tanky, and the cost build time is fairly nice, but it's a lot less useful when your very expensive unit can't actually get its damage in until after it's half dead, and then after the interceptors are dead, it takes a minute or so to become fully useful again.
The dps buff is only good with 0/0 carriers against 3+ armour units or more. if the difference between enemy armour and unit attack is 2 or less, then attacking twice does the same thing. For instance, a corruptor has base 2 armour. 2x5 minus 2x2 armour is 6 damage. 1x8 damage minus 1x2 armour is 6 damage. On even upgrades, the carrier does slightly worse.
Tempests were heavily nerfed because its health got reduced by 40% (450 total versus 275), and its cost got reduce by a negligible amount (50 m, 25 g). At the point in time that a person gets tempests, being able to build an extra probe for every tempest, or an adept for every two tempest, or an extra tempest for every seven tempest, is not really that big of a deal. The supply buff only means that you can have five tempest for every four you used to. The speed buff is nice in that the tempest don't lag behind, but tempest were almost always behind the army anyways, so if your tempest were being sniped off, you were probably dead anyways (or the enemy had a better surround).
The nexus change is more of a change than a buff/nerf. You can recall a smaller amount of units more often. This change might mean that you'll see more recalled harassment, but also that you might be less aggressive since you can't recall all your units at once.The MS buff is a late game buff that will not likely make a huge difference. HT nerf is a decently significant nerf against taking out high energy ghosts or caster units.
The one thing that is much better is the disruptor. I think everyone can agree that this change is a decent buff to the midgame. I am unsure as to how much this will improve Protoss. I don't doubt that it will help them. But, I think most people also agreed before the disruptor change that it was not op.
The colossus change is nice, and it's good when your army is retreating, but it doesn't seem like that huge of a buff unless like 10 marines were chasing your lone colossus in which case...nice I guess? I feel like most people would either be fast enough to stim and kill the colossus or just back off and avoid being kited by the colossus.
So all told, we got two early game buffs that is yet to see how it will change the game. (Halluc reduction doesn't really impact much, and guardian shield increase is nice, but I'm not sure how significant it will be. Robotics could be significant, but we will see how much earlier we can get WP and whatnot out). We will also see how much the recall change hurts/buffs Protoss. We got 2 pretty large nerfs to the carrier and tempest, a moderate nerf to the HT, and other random buffs and nerfs that won't really change anything.
Perhaps Protoss did not get "nerfed into the ground," but we definitely weren't buffed overall (Unless the disruptor and robotics proves to be that big of a metagame shifting change).
TL;DR Early game - nominal buff Mid game - big buff Late game - Heavy Nerf
On September 10 2018 15:45 hiroshOne wrote: I don't understand.
They are nerfing Hydras and say hat they do that to open Zerg to other compositions, but in the same time they do nothing to make Mutas viable for example. Which other composition do they mean? We have nothing other than Hydras. Mutas are wrecked by one Thor, and Thor gets buffs. Protoss has problems with that only if not scouted... That's horrible change, especially that Hydras were weak in HP always.
big balance whiner and patch complainer here and i have to admit this seems like a reasonable one and in any event worth implementing and testing it out. my impression of the "new balance team" is rather good. they actually care about hight level feedback and finding feasible solutions for overall balance improvements. im quite curious about this next patch.
Holy smack balls these changes are massive. After two reads I have no idea if these are actually good or just a circle that will put us right back to where we are now.
On September 10 2018 13:29 Dumbledore wrote: Feels like big buff to terran, moderate changes to zerg, and protoss nerfed to oblivion. Maybe I am wrong.
...
TL;DR Early game - nominal buff Mid game - big buff Late game - Heavy Nerf
If there is a micro trick to keep the interceptors out as it is in BW(feel free to fix me if my memory is bad) then this is a nerf to the bad players, good players will go around it. Yeah, I thought corruptors have more armor, my bad there.
On September 10 2018 13:29 Dumbledore wrote: Feels like big buff to terran, moderate changes to zerg, and protoss nerfed to oblivion. Maybe I am wrong.
...
TL;DR Early game - nominal buff Mid game - big buff Late game - Heavy Nerf
If there is a micro trick to keep the interceptors out as it is in BW(feel free to fix me if my memory is bad) then this is a nerf to the bad players, good players will go around it. Yeah, I thought corruptors have more armor, my bad there.
Nony did a big video or post about carrier leash micro, and then Blizzard changed it to be like or more similar to BW. So yes, good players will micro the carrier to keep attacking units in the leash range (and carriers can keep moving), and lower level players will definitely struggle a bit more.
Why not put the Zerg burrow / unburrow in options/gameplay/rightside of user interface. Like the Life Bars, Control Groups, and Flyer Helpers. We could have a box that allows us to seperate the burrow / un-burrow control keys. I would appreciate it.
On September 10 2018 15:45 hiroshOne wrote: I don't understand.
They are nerfing Hydras and say hat they do that to open Zerg to other compositions, but in the same time they do nothing to make Mutas viable for example. Which other composition do they mean? We have nothing other than Hydras. Mutas are wrecked by one Thor, and Thor gets buffs. Protoss has problems with that only if not scouted... That's horrible change, especially that Hydras were weak in HP always.
Damn I knew you are zerg whiner but still, this is another level.
Thors lost 1 armor and have lower splash, 2 things that make them weaker vs mutas, while gaining a bonus vs massive in single target mode, something that has no effect on mutas.
On September 10 2018 18:34 HomoDeus wrote: To many changes at the same time.
Will be interesting tbh. Gonna take a while until things are figured out 100% again, but that's fun for the players, isn't it?
I, personally, don't like that approach, I prefer a settled environment where I can improve on aspects of my play rather than having to forcefully relearn unit stats and counters/behaviours every year.
On September 10 2018 13:29 Dumbledore wrote: Feels like big buff to terran, moderate changes to zerg, and protoss nerfed to oblivion. Maybe I am wrong.
Protoss get a reasonable buff to early game and a slight nerf to carriers which are worse against sworms of units(stormu!!!) but better against armored units. (also moar HP and shorter build time) And as a bonus - Colossus change is neat
I don't see it as a nerf, but maybe I'm missing something
Tempests were heavily nerfed because its health got reduced by 40% (450 total versus 275), and its cost got reduce by a negligible amount (50 m, 25 g). At the point in time that a person gets tempests, being able to build an extra probe for every tempest, or an adept for every two tempest, or an extra tempest for every seven tempest, is not really that big of a deal. The supply buff only means that you can have five tempest for every four you used to. The speed buff is nice in that the tempest don't lag behind, but tempest were almost always behind the army anyways, so if your tempest were being sniped off, you were probably dead anyways (or the enemy had a better surround).
I'm not sure this really is a nerf to Tempest. When they become this fast and have that ridiculous range they will be impossible to fight for so many units. Above all it seems they become even more specialized as "giant killers". What are BCs, BLs, Carriers, and obviously Ultras going to do against them?
They might also be used to snipe bases since they can now run away.
It'd be nice if they brought some changes to the corruptor. The unit doesn't corrupt anything! Give it the Overseer's Contaminate, replace the energy of the ability by a cooldown
someone proposed this Widow Mine change in a previous feedback thread. I either agreed with them or I was the person who thought it up. I can't recall.
however it happened... its great to see this modification to the Widow Mine! ... and good call by whoever proposed it.
On September 10 2018 13:29 Dumbledore wrote: Feels like big buff to terran, moderate changes to zerg, and protoss nerfed to oblivion. Maybe I am wrong.
Protoss get a reasonable buff to early game and a slight nerf to carriers which are worse against sworms of units(stormu!!!) but better against armored units. (also moar HP and shorter build time) And as a bonus - Colossus change is neat
I don't see it as a nerf, but maybe I'm missing something
Tempests were heavily nerfed because its health got reduced by 40% (450 total versus 275), and its cost got reduce by a negligible amount (50 m, 25 g). At the point in time that a person gets tempests, being able to build an extra probe for every tempest, or an adept for every two tempest, or an extra tempest for every seven tempest, is not really that big of a deal. The supply buff only means that you can have five tempest for every four you used to. The speed buff is nice in that the tempest don't lag behind, but tempest were almost always behind the army anyways, so if your tempest were being sniped off, you were probably dead anyways (or the enemy had a better surround).
I'm not sure this really is a nerf to Tempest. When they become this fast and have that ridiculous range they will be impossible to fight for so many units. Above all it seems they become even more specialized as "giant killers". What are BCs, BLs, Carriers, and obviously Ultras going to do against them?
They might also be used to snipe bases since they can now run away.
Also, it is clearly intended as a buff for Has.
They move as fast as void rays. Now, that's not exactly slow, but it's slower than most air units.
They weren't used excessively to begin with, but change isn't really going to help them be used much more, as faster air units will hunt and kill it much faster despite a faster movement speed.
So given that this niche unit is even nicher, I would say it's overall a nerf. Faster movement just does not make up for getting a 40% nerf to health.
On September 10 2018 13:29 Dumbledore wrote: Feels like big buff to terran, moderate changes to zerg, and protoss nerfed to oblivion. Maybe I am wrong.
Protoss get a reasonable buff to early game and a slight nerf to carriers which are worse against sworms of units(stormu!!!) but better against armored units. (also moar HP and shorter build time) And as a bonus - Colossus change is neat
I don't see it as a nerf, but maybe I'm missing something
Tempests were heavily nerfed because its health got reduced by 40% (450 total versus 275), and its cost got reduce by a negligible amount (50 m, 25 g). At the point in time that a person gets tempests, being able to build an extra probe for every tempest, or an adept for every two tempest, or an extra tempest for every seven tempest, is not really that big of a deal. The supply buff only means that you can have five tempest for every four you used to. The speed buff is nice in that the tempest don't lag behind, but tempest were almost always behind the army anyways, so if your tempest were being sniped off, you were probably dead anyways (or the enemy had a better surround).
I'm not sure this really is a nerf to Tempest. When they become this fast and have that ridiculous range they will be impossible to fight for so many units. Above all it seems they become even more specialized as "giant killers". What are BCs, BLs, Carriers, and obviously Ultras going to do against them?
They might also be used to snipe bases since they can now run away.
Also, it is clearly intended as a buff for Has.
They move as fast as void rays. Now, that's not exactly slow, but it's slower than most air units.
They weren't used excessively to begin with, but change isn't really going to help them be used much more, as faster air units will hunt and kill it much faster despite a faster movement speed.
So given that this niche unit is even nicher, I would say it's overall a nerf. Faster movement just does not make up for getting a 40% nerf to health.
Lets just speak directly on this.
People used the same illogic on the stalker single shot damage increase insanity.
In straight up fights...(situation almost never occuring) its a nerf.
When kiting (what the unit is clearly designed for) its a buff.
A stupid one that does not help address lategame issues in tvp.
I think they should do something to adepts. It is nearly gg if 2 adepts get in mineral line in pvp. There isnt just enough dps to kill adepts without mamma core. Maybe give probes 5 hp more. Or make adepts little squishier and buff something else (price, buildtime, dmg)
On September 10 2018 20:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote: someone proposed this Widow Mine change in a previous feedback thread. I either agreed with them or I was the person who thought it up. I can't recall.
however it happened... its great to see this modification to the Widow Mine! ... and good call by whoever proposed it.
Well at least someone likes the change which will make me quit sc2. Have you played against the old Widow Mine as Protoss or Zerg? It only minimally impacts the highest level of play, but for me as a casual it makes the game too frustrating to play.
On September 10 2018 13:29 Dumbledore wrote: Feels like big buff to terran, moderate changes to zerg, and protoss nerfed to oblivion. Maybe I am wrong.
Protoss get a reasonable buff to early game and a slight nerf to carriers which are worse against sworms of units(stormu!!!) but better against armored units. (also moar HP and shorter build time) And as a bonus - Colossus change is neat
I don't see it as a nerf, but maybe I'm missing something
Tempests were heavily nerfed because its health got reduced by 40% (450 total versus 275), and its cost got reduce by a negligible amount (50 m, 25 g). At the point in time that a person gets tempests, being able to build an extra probe for every tempest, or an adept for every two tempest, or an extra tempest for every seven tempest, is not really that big of a deal. The supply buff only means that you can have five tempest for every four you used to. The speed buff is nice in that the tempest don't lag behind, but tempest were almost always behind the army anyways, so if your tempest were being sniped off, you were probably dead anyways (or the enemy had a better surround).
I'm not sure this really is a nerf to Tempest. When they become this fast and have that ridiculous range they will be impossible to fight for so many units. Above all it seems they become even more specialized as "giant killers". What are BCs, BLs, Carriers, and obviously Ultras going to do against them?
They might also be used to snipe bases since they can now run away.
Also, it is clearly intended as a buff for Has.
They move as fast as void rays. Now, that's not exactly slow, but it's slower than most air units.
They weren't used excessively to begin with, but change isn't really going to help them be used much more, as faster air units will hunt and kill it much faster despite a faster movement speed.
So given that this niche unit is even nicher, I would say it's overall a nerf. Faster movement just does not make up for getting a 40% nerf to health.
Lets just speak directly on this.
People used the same illogic on the stalker single shot damage increase insanity.
In straight up fights...(situation almost never occuring) its a nerf.
When kiting (what the unit is clearly designed for) its a buff.
A stupid one that does not help address lategame issues in tvp.
What exactly is it supposed to be kiting? It's main purpose is to kill liberators and broodlords. Carriers and BCs are never seen vs Protods in pro play. Neither brood lords nor tempests are a threat that warrants kiting. The tempest's counters are all faster than it both on ground and in the air. Remember, a void ray, which is the speed of the new tempest, is not a fast air unit.
On September 10 2018 20:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote: someone proposed this Widow Mine change in a previous feedback thread. I either agreed with them or I was the person who thought it up. I can't recall.
however it happened... its great to see this modification to the Widow Mine! ... and good call by whoever proposed it.
Well at least someone likes the change which will make me quit sc2. Have you played against the old Widow Mine as Protoss or Zerg? It only minimally impacts the highest level of play, but for me as a casual it makes the game too frustrating to play.
What's exactly the problem?
For my casual level it didn't matter if the mines shot or not, it was all about if I was able to retreat with probes or not, if I miss the drop, it's game over because you won't evacuate fast enough with fast burrow. So for me this doesn't change anything.
On September 10 2018 13:29 Dumbledore wrote: Feels like big buff to terran, moderate changes to zerg, and protoss nerfed to oblivion. Maybe I am wrong.
Protoss get a reasonable buff to early game and a slight nerf to carriers which are worse against sworms of units(stormu!!!) but better against armored units. (also moar HP and shorter build time) And as a bonus - Colossus change is neat
I don't see it as a nerf, but maybe I'm missing something
Tempests were heavily nerfed because its health got reduced by 40% (450 total versus 275), and its cost got reduce by a negligible amount (50 m, 25 g). At the point in time that a person gets tempests, being able to build an extra probe for every tempest, or an adept for every two tempest, or an extra tempest for every seven tempest, is not really that big of a deal. The supply buff only means that you can have five tempest for every four you used to. The speed buff is nice in that the tempest don't lag behind, but tempest were almost always behind the army anyways, so if your tempest were being sniped off, you were probably dead anyways (or the enemy had a better surround).
I'm not sure this really is a nerf to Tempest. When they become this fast and have that ridiculous range they will be impossible to fight for so many units. Above all it seems they become even more specialized as "giant killers". What are BCs, BLs, Carriers, and obviously Ultras going to do against them?
They might also be used to snipe bases since they can now run away.
Also, it is clearly intended as a buff for Has.
They move as fast as void rays. Now, that's not exactly slow, but it's slower than most air units.
They weren't used excessively to begin with, but change isn't really going to help them be used much more, as faster air units will hunt and kill it much faster despite a faster movement speed.
So given that this niche unit is even nicher, I would say it's overall a nerf. Faster movement just does not make up for getting a 40% nerf to health.
Lets just speak directly on this.
People used the same illogic on the stalker single shot damage increase insanity.
In straight up fights...(situation almost never occuring) its a nerf.
When kiting (what the unit is clearly designed for) its a buff.
A stupid one that does not help address lategame issues in tvp.
What exactly is it supposed to be kiting? It's main purpose is to kill liberators and broodlords. Carriers and BCs are never seen vs Protods in pro play. Neither brood lords nor tempests are a threat that warrants kiting. The tempest's counters are all faster than it both on ground and in the air. Remember, a void ray, which is the speed of the new tempest, is not a fast air unit.
The use they see in pro play vs Terran is to kill libs as you say. So you keep them behind ur splash and move up out of range of the bio and vikings to pick off the libs then run them away. When the terran tries to target them u kite back..probably havnt seen this since the raven nerf since no Terrans are letting the game get there because its basically unwinnable (unless you are patience and let your army get blown up by a nuke :p) Being faster will help this. You dont a move them into the Terran army now with their current HP or they die..so why would u do this with the new ones??
On September 10 2018 13:29 Dumbledore wrote: Feels like big buff to terran, moderate changes to zerg, and protoss nerfed to oblivion. Maybe I am wrong.
Protoss get a reasonable buff to early game and a slight nerf to carriers which are worse against sworms of units(stormu!!!) but better against armored units. (also moar HP and shorter build time) And as a bonus - Colossus change is neat
I don't see it as a nerf, but maybe I'm missing something
Tempests were heavily nerfed because its health got reduced by 40% (450 total versus 275), and its cost got reduce by a negligible amount (50 m, 25 g). At the point in time that a person gets tempests, being able to build an extra probe for every tempest, or an adept for every two tempest, or an extra tempest for every seven tempest, is not really that big of a deal. The supply buff only means that you can have five tempest for every four you used to. The speed buff is nice in that the tempest don't lag behind, but tempest were almost always behind the army anyways, so if your tempest were being sniped off, you were probably dead anyways (or the enemy had a better surround).
I'm not sure this really is a nerf to Tempest. When they become this fast and have that ridiculous range they will be impossible to fight for so many units. Above all it seems they become even more specialized as "giant killers". What are BCs, BLs, Carriers, and obviously Ultras going to do against them?
They might also be used to snipe bases since they can now run away.
Also, it is clearly intended as a buff for Has.
They move as fast as void rays. Now, that's not exactly slow, but it's slower than most air units.
They weren't used excessively to begin with, but change isn't really going to help them be used much more, as faster air units will hunt and kill it much faster despite a faster movement speed.
So given that this niche unit is even nicher, I would say it's overall a nerf. Faster movement just does not make up for getting a 40% nerf to health.
Lets just speak directly on this.
People used the same illogic on the stalker single shot damage increase insanity.
In straight up fights...(situation almost never occuring) its a nerf.
When kiting (what the unit is clearly designed for) its a buff.
A stupid one that does not help address lategame issues in tvp.
What exactly is it supposed to be kiting? It's main purpose is to kill liberators and broodlords. Carriers and BCs are never seen vs Protods in pro play. Neither brood lords nor tempests are a threat that warrants kiting. The tempest's counters are all faster than it both on ground and in the air. Remember, a void ray, which is the speed of the new tempest, is not a fast air unit.
Well it's the idea of this patch to introduce BCs into the meta. I think the point of the tempest change is to introduce the counter.
While the void ray is not fast (and I think has slower acceleration than the tempest will) the tempest makes up for a lot of that with imba range. And with this speed buff it will be better at killing both libs and BLs as well. Harder to get bio/hydras under them.
That said, I'm not saying it completely makes up for the health nerf. We'll have to wait and see.
Battlecruiser: Not a bad change, but I dont think its enough to get these bad boys into action. You need time to get a fleet and when do you have the time? When you are a head. And when ahead, terran has bio to finish the day.
Widow Mine: Good buff. Most terrans (me too) wished for a complete back to original widow mine cloaking, but this might be a middle ground. Needing a techlab for a reactored unit is still a pain, lets see if pros can show the way.
Cyclone: I'd like to see the numbers of hits a cannon/stalker/zelot needs on the cyclone now, but its definitly a bad day for the cyclone in ZvT and TvT... matchups where I thought the cyclone is in a fine position. I agree cyclone could need changes, but this one?
Thor: Not enough to make Thor counter BL, especially when lings and broodlings scrap them even more now. Mechers gonna be sad.
Medicac: Changes something other races hate, but was rearly seen on the battlefield (again its reactored unit needed a tech lap production building).
Banshee: okay
Raven: Nice, nothing was more boring then mass raven. Sad, nothing was a better f.u. to broodlord zerg then mass raven.
Neosteel: Lulz
Overall Terran: I think the team overestimates the Thor in TvZ and should look into Broodlord Zerg against any form of Terran till they make the patch. Else nothing to go outrages:
Burrow Changes: Dont know if this makes any difference outside bronze-gold.
Hydra: They are already wimps, If I wanted to reduce the amount of hydra based plays, Id gave them slight cost increase.
Infestor: okay
Ultra: As a bio terran: Is he not strong enough????
Nydus: I see this as a buff, Zergs might see the cost tag of the building and say its a nerf. Wonder what good Zergs make out it, but I expect pain.
Zerg overall: Changes are quite small outside the hydra nerf and thats the change I wouldnt agree on at all.
Nexus: Good stuff, I like to see more motherships.
Sentry: Okay
HT: Big nerf. I feel its justified, protoss will tell my why it ruins their race.
Robotic: Okay, protoss will still go stargate.
Coloss: With lower hydra HP, maybe usefull against hydra. Vipers will kill all micro chances anyway.
Disrupter: My bio will feel pain again.
Tempest: I hate it. I think its gonna be terrible. HP should always be nerfed on em, but the speed... oh the speed...
Carrier: Might be the right amount of nerfs and buffs to make them more interesting.
Mothership: Only desperate people gonna use that spell
Assimilator: 7 years too late
Gateway: 10 sec lower buildtime for warpgates overall after WP is finished. Shouldnt change much.
Protoss general: HT nerf gonna be a pain for protoss, new Tempest gonna be a pain for the rest.
On September 11 2018 00:15 Clonester wrote: Battlecruiser: Not a bad change, but I dont think its enough to get these bad boys into action. You need time to get a fleet and when do you have the time? When you are a head. And when ahead, terran has bio to finish the day.
Widow Mine: Good buff. Most terrans (me too) wished for a complete back to original widow mine cloaking, but this might be a middle ground. Needing a techlab for a reactored unit is still a pain, lets see if pros can show the way.
Cyclone: I'd like to see the numbers of hits a cannon/stalker/zelot needs on the cyclone now, but its definitly a bad day for the cyclone in ZvT and TvT... matchups where I thought the cyclone is in a fine position. I agree cyclone could need changes, but this one?
Thor: Not enough to make Thor counter BL, especially when lings and broodlings scrap them even more now. Mechers gonna be sad.
Medicac: Changes something other races hate, but was rearly seen on the battlefield (again its reactored unit needed a tech lap production building).
Banshee: okay
Raven: Nice, nothing was more boring then mass raven. Sad, nothing was a better f.u. to broodlord zerg then mass raven.
Neosteel: Lulz
Overall Terran: I think the team overestimates the Thor in TvZ and should look into Broodlord Zerg against any form of Terran till they make the patch. Else nothing to go outrages:
Burrow Changes: Dont know if this makes any difference outside bronze-gold.
Hydra: They are already wimps, If I wanted to reduce the amount of hydra based plays, Id gave them slight cost increase.
Infestor: okay
Ultra: As a bio terran: Is he not strong enough????
Nydus: I see this as a buff, Zergs might see the cost tag of the building and say its a nerf. Wonder what good Zergs make out it, but I expect pain.
Zerg overall: Changes are quite small outside the hydra nerf and thats the change I wouldnt agree on at all.
Nexus: Good stuff, I like to see more motherships.
Sentry: Okay
HT: Big nerf. I feel its justified, protoss will tell my why it ruins their race.
Robotic: Okay, protoss will still go stargate.
Coloss: With lower hydra HP, maybe usefull against hydra. Vipers will kill all micro chances anyway.
Disrupter: My bio will feel pain again.
Tempest: I hate it. I think its gonna be terrible. HP should always be nerfed on em, but the speed... oh the speed...
Carrier: Might be the right amount of nerfs and buffs to make them more interesting.
Mothership: Only desperate people gonna use that spell
Assimilator: 7 years too late
Gateway: 10 sec lower buildtime for warpgates overall after WP is finished. Shouldnt change much.
Protoss general: HT nerf gonna be a pain for protoss, new Tempest gonna be a pain for the rest.
On September 10 2018 20:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote: someone proposed this Widow Mine change in a previous feedback thread. I either agreed with them or I was the person who thought it up. I can't recall.
however it happened... its great to see this modification to the Widow Mine! ... and good call by whoever proposed it.
Well at least someone likes the change which will make me quit sc2. Have you played against the old Widow Mine as Protoss or Zerg? It only minimally impacts the highest level of play, but for me as a casual it makes the game too frustrating to play.
i'm in Diamond. i'm no superstar. i play 40% as Terran and 60% as Random.
An upgraded Window Mine is a PITA for the opponent. However, i think it should be. As long as the "pain in the ass" aspect of the unit is not caused by the user interface or mouse or clicking issues... then they are part of RTS.
There are aspects of SC2 i do not like. However, relative my currently available options SC2 is my best option by far.
On September 10 2018 20:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote: someone proposed this Widow Mine change in a previous feedback thread. I either agreed with them or I was the person who thought it up. I can't recall.
however it happened... its great to see this modification to the Widow Mine! ... and good call by whoever proposed it.
Well at least someone likes the change which will make me quit sc2. Have you played against the old Widow Mine as Protoss or Zerg? It only minimally impacts the highest level of play, but for me as a casual it makes the game too frustrating to play.
i'm in Diamond. i'm no superstar. i play 40% as Terran and 60% as Random.
An upgraded Window Mine is a PITA for the opponent. However, i think it should be. As long as the "pain in the ass" aspect of the unit is not caused by the user interface or mouse or clicking issues... then they are part of RTS.
There are aspects of SC2 i do not like. However, relative my currently available options SC2 is my best option by far.
I think it is just straight up PTSD in my case. I don't think it will affect the player base at all, just I won't go back to that randomness (Maybe after watching a year of WCS playout I reevaluate^^).
The widow mine change will barely make a difference. Most players won't even get the upgrade and if they do it won't be in the early-mid game, which was where cloaked mines were an issue/stressful to play against.
i cant understand why they dont even mention swarmhosts !? you gotta be blind to think they are fine.
whats the point of buffing Thors HIP mode when swarmhosts literally hardcounter every single factory unit... also buffing HIP mode and nerfing armor at the same time just seems like nonsense.
Thor will actually be weaker with this patch and Thors are already a unit you dont want to rely on. Currently Thors are units a mech terran will build when he scouted an air transition too late and lacks the viking count. You dont actually wanna use them as main anti air, because that will lose you the game.
On September 11 2018 01:03 Fango wrote: The widow mine change will barely make a difference. Most players won't even get the upgrade and if they do it won't be in the early-mid game, which was where cloaked mines were an issue/stressful to play against.
Its not a bad change, people already get drilling claws when going for mines, its actually a pretty good upgrade, also if you are going for drilling claws as an opening in the early game, being invisible its not that big of a buff, considering the cost and time it takes to even get the upgrade.
On September 10 2018 13:29 Dumbledore wrote: Feels like big buff to terran, moderate changes to zerg, and protoss nerfed to oblivion. Maybe I am wrong.
Protoss get a reasonable buff to early game and a slight nerf to carriers which are worse against sworms of units(stormu!!!) but better against armored units. (also moar HP and shorter build time) And as a bonus - Colossus change is neat
I don't see it as a nerf, but maybe I'm missing something
Tempests were heavily nerfed because its health got reduced by 40% (450 total versus 275), and its cost got reduce by a negligible amount (50 m, 25 g). At the point in time that a person gets tempests, being able to build an extra probe for every tempest, or an adept for every two tempest, or an extra tempest for every seven tempest, is not really that big of a deal. The supply buff only means that you can have five tempest for every four you used to. The speed buff is nice in that the tempest don't lag behind, but tempest were almost always behind the army anyways, so if your tempest were being sniped off, you were probably dead anyways (or the enemy had a better surround).
I'm not sure this really is a nerf to Tempest. When they become this fast and have that ridiculous range they will be impossible to fight for so many units. Above all it seems they become even more specialized as "giant killers". What are BCs, BLs, Carriers, and obviously Ultras going to do against them?
They might also be used to snipe bases since they can now run away.
Also, it is clearly intended as a buff for Has.
They move as fast as void rays. Now, that's not exactly slow, but it's slower than most air units.
They weren't used excessively to begin with, but change isn't really going to help them be used much more, as faster air units will hunt and kill it much faster despite a faster movement speed.
So given that this niche unit is even nicher, I would say it's overall a nerf. Faster movement just does not make up for getting a 40% nerf to health.
You make good points. however health on tempests isn't a really that much of an issue, toss only gets tempests really late in the game after they already got their choice of splash (HT, disruptor, Colossus). Reducing the health only matters when you can actually get in close to them, something that is pretty much impossible once toss has their death ball. Except that now they can have more tempests per cost (and more importantly) supply, making lategame toss even stronger.
I think if they changed some of the nerfed health in exchange for some DPS it would make much more sense.
I agree with most of these changes, but here's what I disagree with.
Speed creep: Movement speed has been creeping up over time. It's time to stop or reverse the trend. In particular, Tempests and Ultras don't need a speed increase. Maybe even consider nerfing the speed of some units.
I also don't see the point of the change to the Tempest. Tempests already have a clear role, and they don't need to be a more all-around unit. The Carrier does that.
Anti-armor missile should do damage for logical sense reasons. At 15, I don't see anyone using it for damage currently. If you want, nerf it to 5. To nerf it to 0 doesn't make sense because it's a missile.
Given the robo change I'm concern about proxy robos.
Given that a drilling claws upgrade indicator is being added, please take this opportunity to harmonize how cloaked/uncloaked mines are displayed. In particular, it breaks the normal rules of Starcraft that burrowed widow mine recharging and not recharging are cloaked and not cloaked, respectively, despite both unit models looking exactly the same. They should look different.
After the mine change, I suggest having: 1. Burrowed widow mine without drilling claws not recharging: cloaked, looks the same as current. 2. Burrowed widow mine without drilling claws recharging: not cloaked, looks the same as current but glows red to distinguish with 1. 3. Burrowed widow mine with drilling claws not recharging: cloaked, new upgraded unit model. 4. Burrowed widow mine with drilling claws recharging: cloaked, new upgraded unit model, same as 3.
Choice of mech, bio mine and bio tank vs zerg is good but why nothing for zerg? Muta and hydra are both support for ling bane, meanwhile roach ravager is only good as a buffer for swarm hosts vs mech currently. SHOW SOME LOVE TO ROACHES ALREADY!
Im zerg, so im gonna talk about the zerg changes only.
Ling / Hydra burrow, unburrow time decrease: maybe this will work against terran for 2 weeks, after that it wont be any longer useful. I dont see the point.
Hydra health nerf by 5: I dont think this will change much, maybe u only make them weaker vs air units they suppose to counter. If u afraid hydra is too much of a core unit, then pls go and nerf marines health as well.
Infested terran casting range buff by 1: dumbest change by far. Whats this going to change?: nothing. Whos using infestors?: Noone. What will happen if they nerf the carrier? You will never see infestors anymore. During the years infestors - specially the fungal ability - were nerfed to the ground. They need to change fungal. Currently fungal do no damage, cant hit fast moving units - which they supposed the hit thats why fungal exist -, low casting range, and only slows down units for a few seconds. I think fungals needs to be instant hit, or increase the time they slow down units, maybe increase casting range as well. Also the burrow moving infestors should not interfere with surface units anymore.
Ultralisk off-creep speed buff: Another dumb change. So now u can research a 150/150 upgrade that makes them faster by 10% but only off creep ? xDDD And marauders still beat them! xDDD Marauders attack were reverted back to 1*20 vs armored instead of 2*10 vs armored, so now u can give back 8 armor ultralisks too. Also buff the fungal on the infestors and ultras will be useful again vs bio. Not another retarded minimal speed upgrade pls ...
Nydus changes: 6 armor is obviously better than invicible nydus worms, so i think this is a good change. You probably still cant stop it with tier 1 units and workers, but now u can use some counter units against them. The cost change isnt really good i think. The worm is too cheap, but the nydus canal is too expensive. Gas wise this will be one of the most expensive techs in the game. So i dont see the point. I think they should decrease the network cost but leave the worm cost untouched.
Also in my opinion Blizzard should change spine crawlers burrow time to the same value spore crawlers have. This will help vs 13gas/12 pool allins, 2-4rax pressures, and cannon/battery rushes. Currently spine crawlers are weak/useless in these situations.
On September 10 2018 20:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote: someone proposed this Widow Mine change in a previous feedback thread. I either agreed with them or I was the person who thought it up. I can't recall.
however it happened... its great to see this modification to the Widow Mine! ... and good call by whoever proposed it.
Well at least someone likes the change which will make me quit sc2. Have you played against the old Widow Mine as Protoss or Zerg? It only minimally impacts the highest level of play, but for me as a casual it makes the game too frustrating to play.
i'm in Diamond. i'm no superstar. i play 40% as Terran and 60% as Random.
An upgraded Window Mine is a PITA for the opponent. However, i think it should be. As long as the "pain in the ass" aspect of the unit is not caused by the user interface or mouse or clicking issues... then they are part of RTS.
There are aspects of SC2 i do not like. However, relative my currently available options SC2 is my best option by far.
Widow mines for Protoss is the same as Oracle in HotS for Terrans without any defense. Either you nail the defense or it's a game over. I am a dia toss, speaking from experience. Fast burrow mines are a serious coinflip, you cannot even split in time with that burrow time.
Many P players have PTSD from them because they simple end the game if you miss one and unlike Terran we cannot go simply "build a turret" (this is not a balance whine, I play unranked so I have no issue in leaving right away)
On September 11 2018 01:03 Fango wrote: The widow mine change will barely make a difference. Most players won't even get the upgrade and if they do it won't be in the early-mid game, which was where cloaked mines were an issue/stressful to play against.
this. I don't understand why people think it's a big deal. In TvP it will be never researched outside of some Inno-esque drilling claw rushes because double fac play sucks there and in TvZ it's only built vs LBM anyway and by the time the upgrade is done Zerg should have plenty Overseers ready. This change will barely make a difference.
On September 11 2018 01:03 Fango wrote: The widow mine change will barely make a difference. Most players won't even get the upgrade and if they do it won't be in the early-mid game, which was where cloaked mines were an issue/stressful to play against.
this. I don't understand why people think it's a big deal. In TvP it will be never researched outside of some Inno-esque drilling claw rushes because double fac play sucks there and in TvZ it's only built vs LBM anyway and by the time the upgrade is done Zerg should have plenty Overseers ready. This change will barely make a difference.
Many people are afraid of their state of the game, which is way lower than the average pro game where it won't matter. You would be surprised how some units unusable on high level can be very usable if you play in wooden league
On September 10 2018 20:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote: someone proposed this Widow Mine change in a previous feedback thread. I either agreed with them or I was the person who thought it up. I can't recall.
however it happened... its great to see this modification to the Widow Mine! ... and good call by whoever proposed it.
Well at least someone likes the change which will make me quit sc2. Have you played against the old Widow Mine as Protoss or Zerg? It only minimally impacts the highest level of play, but for me as a casual it makes the game too frustrating to play.
i'm in Diamond. i'm no superstar. i play 40% as Terran and 60% as Random.
An upgraded Window Mine is a PITA for the opponent. However, i think it should be. As long as the "pain in the ass" aspect of the unit is not caused by the user interface or mouse or clicking issues... then they are part of RTS.
There are aspects of SC2 i do not like. However, relative my currently available options SC2 is my best option by far.
Widow mines for Protoss is the same as Oracle in HotS for Terrans without any defense. Either you nail the defense or it's a game over. I am a dia toss, speaking from experience. Fast burrow mines are a serious coinflip, you cannot even split in time with that burrow time.
Many P players have PTSD from them because they simple end the game if you miss one and unlike Terran we cannot go simply "build a turret" (this is not a balance whine, I play unranked so I have no issue in leaving right away)
I still wonder why Blizzard is unable or unwilling to implement the widow mine so that it can't target workers.
I really think the HT nerf should not go through. They are trying to make collosi viable again in PvZ, but it won't happen because as soon as you try to feedback the viper, it won't die, and will return to home to charge up some energy again.
collosi will just be pulled into hydras with abduct all damn day.
A solution to this could be that massive units do not get pulled as far as other units by abduct. That way at least zerg players could close some distance on collosi to attack them, but still will have to be close enough to get hit by ground units of protoss. It also will give protoss a chance to micro the colossi back.
I still wonder why Blizzard is unable or unwilling to implement the widow mine so that it can't target workers.
It should have been done from the start like how mines were in broodwar. I guess they thought they would have to make archons untargetable too because they also are "floating" units, along with any other flying unit, lol. I'm at the point of accepting its a new unit entirely but just having it "not target workers" does not make sense lorewise.
On September 10 2018 20:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote: someone proposed this Widow Mine change in a previous feedback thread. I either agreed with them or I was the person who thought it up. I can't recall.
however it happened... its great to see this modification to the Widow Mine! ... and good call by whoever proposed it.
Well at least someone likes the change which will make me quit sc2. Have you played against the old Widow Mine as Protoss or Zerg? It only minimally impacts the highest level of play, but for me as a casual it makes the game too frustrating to play.
i'm in Diamond. i'm no superstar. i play 40% as Terran and 60% as Random.
An upgraded Window Mine is a PITA for the opponent. However, i think it should be. As long as the "pain in the ass" aspect of the unit is not caused by the user interface or mouse or clicking issues... then they are part of RTS.
There are aspects of SC2 i do not like. However, relative my currently available options SC2 is my best option by far.
Widow mines for Protoss is the same as Oracle in HotS for Terrans without any defense. Either you nail the defense or it's a game over. I am a dia toss, speaking from experience. Fast burrow mines are a serious coinflip, you cannot even split in time with that burrow time.
Many P players have PTSD from them because they simple end the game if you miss one and unlike Terran we cannot go simply "build a turret" (this is not a balance whine, I play unranked so I have no issue in leaving right away)
Getting drilling claws, mines AND medivacs its a huge investment in the early game, its more akin to disruptor drops rather than oracles, except disruptors have more guaranteed damage.
On September 11 2018 01:43 paralleluniverse wrote: I agree with most of these changes, but here's what I disagree with.
Speed creep: Movement speed has been creeping up over time. It's time to stop or reverse the trend. In particular, Tempests and Ultras don't need a speed increase. Maybe even consider nerfing the speed of some units.
My thoughts on the balance patch (trying to be as objective as possible, though I probably won't be able to):
Battlecruiser(Cattlebruiser): Removing random delay and implementing the moving shot definitely feels great, but then again, what does that accomplish? BCs are non-existent in every matchup, not because they lack raw power, but because they are countered so hard it's not even worth making them. TvT - Ravens. 1 Raven equals 1 BC kill due to the interference matrix, which prevents tactical jump and shooting. BCs are also countered by Vikings + kiting and Thors in high impact payload mode. Even a high number of marines can deal reasonably well with the low to medium number of BCs due to the Marines having way superior upgrades. TvZ - Corruptors. Relatively cheap and extremely high HP for their cost, + bonus damage vs massive targets. Hydras in medium to high numbers can also target fire down BCs reasonably well because of the upgrade advantage. On top of that, Vipers can abduct individual BCs, which is always bad for Terrans. TvP - Tempests exist. 15 range + faster movement than BCs (from this patch) are the hardest counter to BCs in the game. Void rays and Stalkers with upgrade advantage are also great at dealing with BCs.
Widow Mine: The change is HUGE, the mine has been dead in TvZ ever since the visibility nerf (though the Hydralisk metagame also contributed to that), so this change is great. Maybe we'll see some more dynamic TvZ games now with this change. Also Protoss will now need detection to deal with upgraded mines, which may lead to some interesting dynamic with sniping the observers, etc.
Cyclone: Uhm, what exactly is this change going to accomplish in TvT? Cyclones will now die in 30 Marine shots instead of 36, but if you are defending against Cyclones with Marines in the early game the game is going very wrong for you. I guess this will make the SCV surrounds on Cyclones more deadly, but again, if you are fighting Cyclones with SCVs you're already dead. And apart from the 1 or 2 Reapers in the early game these are the only units that actually care about the Cyclone's armor. Outside of TvT, Cyclone will have a harder time tanking against Zergling/Zergling Baneling all ins, and Sentries will also do a bit more damage, but I wouldn't say that is too significant.
Thor: The Thor changes apart from the faster anti-air attack in high impact payload mode are straight up bad. The smaller javelin missile radius will make them worse against Mutalisks, but that's still ok. The damage change in high impact payload won't actually do anything. It's like saying "we want to make people feel like we're doing something, but we have no ideas, so we'll just slightly tweak one number and sell it as a big change". Against massive air targets it's still going to do the same amount of damage. The armor change is bad, because it was introduced with the exact intention of making Zerglings worse against Thors to popularize Thor usage against Zergling Baneling Mutalisk compositions. The main problem with Thors is that a) they don't do anything with their anti-ground weapon due to their extremely long retargeting time, b) the javelin missiles are only used to counter mass Mutalisk play, and MAYBE once every 100 games to help in TvT Viking wars, and c) they are so clunky that they easily get kited by units they are supposedly countering in high impact payload - BCs use Yamato and teleport away, Tempests have too high range, and Broodlord attacks spawn Broodlings which root Thors and prevent them from actually hitting the Broodlords. And same as with Battlecruisers, Thors get extremely hard countered by Zerglings, Zealots, Marauders, and Tanks.
Medivac and Banshee: 2 useless changes. If you're investing into a lot of Banshees, you already have to mine a lot of gas, so the 50/50 reduction on hyperflight rotors won't actually change anything. Maybe people will use it a bit because of psychology reasons, but not for much else. The Medivac upgrade is never researched, which will stay that way even after the patch.
Raven: After the first damage nerf to anti-armor missile the damage was being used only in TvT, and it still felt a bit oppressive when used against Marines, so overall a very good change that will improve the watchability and playability of TvT.
Neosteel Frame: Another useless change, that will make Terran players spend an additional 50/50 when they want to get the hi.sec autotracking, so I would say this is overall a bad change. ___________________________________________________________________________ Zergling and Hydralisk unburrow: I feel like this change won't actually do anything really impactful, maybe it will promote a bit more of burrow ambush play, which would be nice to see and can perhaps make the game a bit more dynamic, so it could be a good change.
Hydralisk HP change: I don't really know how this will pan out, because in ZvP the hydras are already a bit too fragile, while they are about ok in ZvZ and ZvT. Will have to see how this change plays out, it could be a good change, but it could also be a bad one.
Infestor: This change actually feels useless. The Infestors MIGHT be able to throw the eggs a bit more behind the enemy lines, but otherwise I feel like this is another change that's useless in a real-world game.
Ultralisk: I feel like this unit has been buffed waaaay too many times up until now (+20 damage vs light in HotS, bonus armor in LotV). If the Zerg REALLY needs a lategame buff, please consider buffing something more interesting than the boring a-move AoE unit. Zerg already has too many strong units that can be simply a-moved, while the counterplay from other races is heavy micro, which takes away attention from other aspects of the game (e. g. macro), while the Zerg can do that undeterred.
Nydus Network: A good change to discourage Nydus all ins, though the 6 armor might still be a bit too much. I would rather go with 4 or maybe 5, but overall any kind of invincibility is bad for the game, so it's a good change.
Burrow hotkeys: A quality of life change, though I would encourage each player being able to set the hotkeys being the same or separate. Overall a good idea. ___________________________________________________________________________ Recall: A great change to prevent the Protoss freely wandering around the map with their entire army and making it more of a gamble. In the current state of the game, Protoss has way too much safety when moving out with their army in any matchup, because the Protoss units have overall a lot of HP, so if the recall is fast, the Protoss maybe loses one or two expensive units when taking an engagement that could otherwise lose him the game. I would say this is a change in the right direction.
Sentry: The hallucination cost is probably something that won't change much in the big picture. The guardian shield radius on the other hand, will affect PvT the most, where Protoss already has an advantage, so I think this change is bad for the health of the game.
Feedback: A good change, High Templars being able to kill all other energy units from high range basically for free was bad for the health of the game, so in my opinion this is a step in the right direction, but a lot of stuff still needs similar tweaking.
Robotics Facility: This might make proxy double robo builds a bit too strong, but I can't really say from just reading the change.
Colossus: Colossi already have high enough damage output, and they are only being used in the current metagme in the PvT matchup, where Protoss is already strong enough, so I don't think this is a good change, unless Terran gets some midgame buff that will balance the matchup a bit more.
Disruptor: This will probably be a good change, it will affect all Protoss matchups in the unique way, which is good, and also promote skillfull usage of Disruptors, which is a good thing for the state of the game. Overall, a thumbs up from me.
Tempest: I agree with most of the Tempest changes. The speed buff however, makes me a bit sceptic, because as the capital ships, Tempests are supposed to be slow and clunky, so that they can be chased down by fast units if they are left without support. This will improve the Tempest escapability in such situations, which I think is bad.
Carrier: The Carrier already has enough HP, so I think the HP buff is uncalled for. Also, decreasing the Carrier build time, making it so that they can be massed faster is a bad thing, because they are a unit that is already extremely strong by itself, not to mention coupled with other Protoss units like High Templars, Colossi, Disruptors, Void Rays, or Tempests. The increased Interceptor build time is good, but I would like to also see an increase in their cost, or a nerf to their HP, because as it currently stands, the Interceptors take too long to die in the situations where players are relying on low damage high attack rate units to deal with the interceptors and move onto the Carriers themselves once the Interceptor numbers are thinned out enough. The Graviton Catapult removal might have a big impact, but I still foresee the Carriers being very strong.
Time Warp: I don't really know if this will be meaningful, since the Mothership is mostly seen only in very late game PvZs. I don't know how it will pan out.
Shield battery and Assimilator: A pair of useless changes.
Gateway: I feel like this is uncalled for. it's the same as Terran players being able to auto build addons on production finishing or Zerg players being able to auto build greater spire after the hive is done. Protoss macro is already much easier than Terran or Zerg macro, so further removing their macro mechanics is plain dumb. ___________________________________________________________________________
Overall I would say the changes won't do much for the state of the game. Some of the changes are totally useless, while others are plain bad. There are however some changes that are a step in the right direction, but there's too few of these. If the goal for the patch is to balance the lategame power of each race, there are a couple of steps that have to be done: TvZ: - Nerf the Viper. Viper is the main reason Terran lategame against Zerg sucks. Abduct allows the Zerg to kill an expensive unit for free, while the Parasitic Bomb completely obliterates clumps of vikings. - Nerf the Corruptor. It has too much HP for its cost and its role. It is supposed to be a counter to massive units, but instead it became an all-around Zerg air to air unit because of its tankiness and decent damage even against the non-massive units. Also, being able to fly in and caustic spray down bases before any defenses can arrive is too strong. - Broodlords. The attack itself is not that much of a threat, but each one spawns 2 Broodlings, which prevent the enemy army from advancing, prevents Thors from being able to deal with the Broodlords, and even force friendly splash damage. I understand that the Zerg need a siege unit to break turtle positions, but maybe changing the attack to spawn only one Broodling would be a reasonable change for a unit that already has a good HP, very long range, and good attack damage. Overall the problem for the lategame TvZ is the spore-Viper-Corruptor-Broodlord-Queen push, especially when coupled with infestors, because the Terran has no way to break such a position, unless the Zerg does a huge controlling mistake.
ZvP: - Carriers are a bit too strong as it currently stands. Not by itself, but in combination with the midgame composition of High Templar, Archon, Immortal, they are extremely hard to deal with for Zerg players.
PvT: - In this matchup, Terran has no lategame, because everything gets hard countered by something in the Protoss arsenal. Ranged liberators get dealt by Tempests, Thors get run over by Zealots, Ravens don't deal damage, and the Battlecruisers also get owned by Tempests. All the while Protoss can still transition into Carriers, which, in combination with any kind of splash damage destroy anything Terran can muster.
My suggestion for balancing the lategame would be to look at the lategame spellcaster units of all races. I feel like the Raven has finally found a very good spot as a purely support unit, while Vipers and High Templars in combination with the air army are still too strong. Their roles should be changed a bit, to be more in line with the Ravens, having only utility spells (e. g. blinding cloud, feedback). In addition to that, the massing of air units should be highly discouraged. They should be used purely as the support units, and not as the core army. I would suggest a complete redesign of the capital ships, Tempests, Carriers, Battlecruisers, Broodlords, and maybe to some degree even Corruptors.
Ohoho, I like this, hope not much changes, I sure do love my BCs and Tempests and all the dirty stuff you can do with them. The only bad thing for me is the hydra HP, but hell, ultra and infestor buffs make up for it. Global finals can't get here soon enough .
On September 11 2018 06:27 K5 wrote: My thoughts on the balance patch (trying to be as objective as possible, though I probably won't be able to):
Battlecruiser(Cattlebruiser): Removing random delay and implementing the moving shot definitely feels great, but then again, what does that accomplish? BCs are non-existent in every matchup, not because they lack raw power, but because they are countered so hard it's not even worth making them. TvT - Ravens. 1 Raven equals 1 BC kill due to the interference matrix, which prevents tactical jump and shooting. BCs are also countered by Vikings + kiting and Thors in high impact payload mode. Even a high number of marines can deal reasonably well with the low to medium number of BCs due to the Marines having way superior upgrades. TvZ - Corruptors. Relatively cheap and extremely high HP for their cost, + bonus damage vs massive targets. Hydras in medium to high numbers can also target fire down BCs reasonably well because of the upgrade advantage. On top of that, Vipers can abduct individual BCs, which is always bad for Terrans. TvP - Tempests exist. 15 range + faster movement than BCs (from this patch) are the hardest counter to BCs in the game. Void rays and Stalkers with upgrade advantage are also great at dealing with BCs.
Widow Mine: The change is HUGE, the mine has been dead in TvZ ever since the visibility nerf (though the Hydralisk metagame also contributed to that), so this change is great. Maybe we'll see some more dynamic TvZ games now with this change. Also Protoss will now need detection to deal with upgraded mines, which may lead to some interesting dynamic with sniping the observers, etc.
Cyclone: Uhm, what exactly is this change going to accomplish in TvT? Cyclones will now die in 30 Marine shots instead of 36, but if you are defending against Cyclones with Marines in the early game the game is going very wrong for you. I guess this will make the SCV surrounds on Cyclones more deadly, but again, if you are fighting Cyclones with SCVs you're already dead. And apart from the 1 or 2 Reapers in the early game these are the only units that actually care about the Cyclone's armor. Outside of TvT, Cyclone will have a harder time tanking against Zergling/Zergling Baneling all ins, and Sentries will also do a bit more damage, but I wouldn't say that is too significant.
Thor: The Thor changes apart from the faster anti-air attack in high impact payload mode are straight up bad. The smaller javelin missile radius will make them worse against Mutalisks, but that's still ok. The damage change in high impact payload won't actually do anything. It's like saying "we want to make people feel like we're doing something, but we have no ideas, so we'll just slightly tweak one number and sell it as a big change". Against massive air targets it's still going to do the same amount of damage. The armor change is bad, because it was introduced with the exact intention of making Zerglings worse against Thors to popularize Thor usage against Zergling Baneling Mutalisk compositions. The main problem with Thors is that a) they don't do anything with their anti-ground weapon due to their extremely long retargeting time, b) the javelin missiles are only used to counter mass Mutalisk play, and MAYBE once every 100 games to help in TvT Viking wars, and c) they are so clunky that they easily get kited by units they are supposedly countering in high impact payload - BCs use Yamato and teleport away, Tempests have too high range, and Broodlord attacks spawn Broodlings which root Thors and prevent them from actually hitting the Broodlords. And same as with Battlecruisers, Thors get extremely hard countered by Zerglings, Zealots, Marauders, and Tanks.
Medivac and Banshee: 2 useless changes. If you're investing into a lot of Banshees, you already have to mine a lot of gas, so the 50/50 reduction on hyperflight rotors won't actually change anything. Maybe people will use it a bit because of psychology reasons, but not for much else. The Medivac upgrade is never researched, which will stay that way even after the patch.
Raven: After the first damage nerf to anti-armor missile the damage was being used only in TvT, and it still felt a bit oppressive when used against Marines, so overall a very good change that will improve the watchability and playability of TvT.
Neosteel Frame: Another useless change, that will make Terran players spend an additional 50/50 when they want to get the hi.sec autotracking, so I would say this is overall a bad change. ___________________________________________________________________________ Zergling and Hydralisk unburrow: I feel like this change won't actually do anything really impactful, maybe it will promote a bit more of burrow ambush play, which would be nice to see and can perhaps make the game a bit more dynamic, so it could be a good change.
Hydralisk HP change: I don't really know how this will pan out, because in ZvP the hydras are already a bit too fragile, while they are about ok in ZvZ and ZvT. Will have to see how this change plays out, it could be a good change, but it could also be a bad one.
Infestor: This change actually feels useless. The Infestors MIGHT be able to throw the eggs a bit more behind the enemy lines, but otherwise I feel like this is another change that's useless in a real-world game.
Ultralisk: I feel like this unit has been buffed waaaay too many times up until now (+20 damage vs light in HotS, bonus armor in LotV). If the Zerg REALLY needs a lategame buff, please consider buffing something more interesting than the boring a-move AoE unit. Zerg already has too many strong units that can be simply a-moved, while the counterplay from other races is heavy micro, which takes away attention from other aspects of the game (e. g. macro), while the Zerg can do that undeterred.
Nydus Network: A good change to discourage Nydus all ins, though the 6 armor might still be a bit too much. I would rather go with 4 or maybe 5, but overall any kind of invincibility is bad for the game, so it's a good change.
Burrow hotkeys: A quality of life change, though I would encourage each player being able to set the hotkeys being the same or separate. Overall a good idea. ___________________________________________________________________________ Recall: A great change to prevent the Protoss freely wandering around the map with their entire army and making it more of a gamble. In the current state of the game, Protoss has way too much safety when moving out with their army in any matchup, because the Protoss units have overall a lot of HP, so if the recall is fast, the Protoss maybe loses one or two expensive units when taking an engagement that could otherwise lose him the game. I would say this is a change in the right direction.
Sentry: The hallucination cost is probably something that won't change much in the big picture. The guardian shield radius on the other hand, will affect PvT the most, where Protoss already has an advantage, so I think this change is bad for the health of the game.
Feedback: A good change, High Templars being able to kill all other energy units from high range basically for free was bad for the health of the game, so in my opinion this is a step in the right direction, but a lot of stuff still needs similar tweaking.
Robotics Facility: This might make proxy double robo builds a bit too strong, but I can't really say from just reading the change.
Colossus: Colossi already have high enough damage output, and they are only being used in the current metagme in the PvT matchup, where Protoss is already strong enough, so I don't think this is a good change, unless Terran gets some midgame buff that will balance the matchup a bit more.
Disruptor: This will probably be a good change, it will affect all Protoss matchups in the unique way, which is good, and also promote skillfull usage of Disruptors, which is a good thing for the state of the game. Overall, a thumbs up from me.
Tempest: I agree with most of the Tempest changes. The speed buff however, makes me a bit sceptic, because as the capital ships, Tempests are supposed to be slow and clunky, so that they can be chased down by fast units if they are left without support. This will improve the Tempest escapability in such situations, which I think is bad.
Carrier: The Carrier already has enough HP, so I think the HP buff is uncalled for. Also, decreasing the Carrier build time, making it so that they can be massed faster is a bad thing, because they are a unit that is already extremely strong by itself, not to mention coupled with other Protoss units like High Templars, Colossi, Disruptors, Void Rays, or Tempests. The increased Interceptor build time is good, but I would like to also see an increase in their cost, or a nerf to their HP, because as it currently stands, the Interceptors take too long to die in the situations where players are relying on low damage high attack rate units to deal with the interceptors and move onto the Carriers themselves once the Interceptor numbers are thinned out enough. The Graviton Catapult removal might have a big impact, but I still foresee the Carriers being very strong.
Time Warp: I don't really know if this will be meaningful, since the Mothership is mostly seen only in very late game PvZs. I don't know how it will pan out.
Shield battery and Assimilator: A pair of useless changes.
Gateway: I feel like this is uncalled for. it's the same as Terran players being able to auto build addons on production finishing or Zerg players being able to auto build greater spire after the hive is done. Protoss macro is already much easier than Terran or Zerg macro, so further removing their macro mechanics is plain dumb. ___________________________________________________________________________
Overall I would say the changes won't do much for the state of the game. Some of the changes are totally useless, while others are plain bad. There are however some changes that are a step in the right direction, but there's too few of these. If the goal for the patch is to balance the lategame power of each race, there are a couple of steps that have to be done: TvZ: - Nerf the Viper. Viper is the main reason Terran lategame against Zerg sucks. Abduct allows the Zerg to kill an expensive unit for free, while the Parasitic Bomb completely obliterates clumps of vikings. - Nerf the Corruptor. It has too much HP for its cost and its role. It is supposed to be a counter to massive units, but instead it became an all-around Zerg air to air unit because of its tankiness and decent damage even against the non-massive units. Also, being able to fly in and caustic spray down bases before any defenses can arrive is too strong. - Broodlords. The attack itself is not that much of a threat, but each one spawns 2 Broodlings, which prevent the enemy army from advancing, prevents Thors from being able to deal with the Broodlords, and even force friendly splash damage. I understand that the Zerg need a siege unit to break turtle positions, but maybe changing the attack to spawn only one Broodling would be a reasonable change for a unit that already has a good HP, very long range, and good attack damage. Overall the problem for the lategame TvZ is the spore-Viper-Corruptor-Broodlord-Queen push, especially when coupled with infestors, because the Terran has no way to break such a position, unless the Zerg does a huge controlling mistake.
ZvP: - Carriers are a bit too strong as it currently stands. Not by itself, but in combination with the midgame composition of High Templar, Archon, Immortal, they are extremely hard to deal with for Zerg players.
PvT: - In this matchup, Terran has no lategame, because everything gets hard countered by something in the Protoss arsenal. Ranged liberators get dealt by Tempests, Thors get run over by Zealots, Ravens don't deal damage, and the Battlecruisers also get owned by Tempests. All the while Protoss can still transition into Carriers, which, in combination with any kind of splash damage destroy anything Terran can muster.
My suggestion for balancing the lategame would be to look at the lategame spellcaster units of all races. I feel like the Raven has finally found a very good spot as a purely support unit, while Vipers and High Templars in combination with the air army are still too strong. Their roles should be changed a bit, to be more in line with the Ravens, having only utility spells (e. g. blinding cloud, feedback). In addition to that, the massing of air units should be highly discouraged. They should be used purely as the support units, and not as the core army. I would suggest a complete redesign of the capital ships, Tempests, Carriers, Battlecruisers, Broodlords, and maybe to some degree even Corruptors.
While I think you have the core problems of the game down pat. I don't think can remove storm from the game, its just to core a part of protoss identity and to many strategies are centered around it to even consider doing such a thing, I think it would be fair however if storm did not hit air units, this way it still has the same power agianst clumps of bio, hydra bane, ect but it wont just outright win you the air game in most head on engagements due to the incredible amounts of dmg it does to stacked air units. as for vipers, abduct is in a wierd spot, I think its way to good vs terran and realy limits terran late game, in alot of ways its similar to how feedback used to totally deny terran the use of thors and bcs. Its just so good vs big units that once zerg has them terran just cant risk trying to go for big units. On the other hand the viper is absolutely mandatory for zerg to have even a remote chance in late game zvp and this is primarily due to the anti massive role it plays.I think that this issue realy stems from the bigger issue of protoss being to good in the late game and that you cant fix this isues with out addressing the strength of late game protoss in all match ups.
On September 11 2018 06:27 K5 wrote: My thoughts on the balance patch (trying to be as objective as possible, though I probably won't be able to):
Battlecruiser(Cattlebruiser): Removing random delay and implementing the moving shot definitely feels great, but then again, what does that accomplish? BCs are non-existent in every matchup, not because they lack raw power, but because they are countered so hard it's not even worth making them. TvT - Ravens. 1 Raven equals 1 BC kill due to the interference matrix, which prevents tactical jump and shooting. BCs are also countered by Vikings + kiting and Thors in high impact payload mode. Even a high number of marines can deal reasonably well with the low to medium number of BCs due to the Marines having way superior upgrades. TvZ - Corruptors. Relatively cheap and extremely high HP for their cost, + bonus damage vs massive targets. Hydras in medium to high numbers can also target fire down BCs reasonably well because of the upgrade advantage. On top of that, Vipers can abduct individual BCs, which is always bad for Terrans. TvP - Tempests exist. 15 range + faster movement than BCs (from this patch) are the hardest counter to BCs in the game. Void rays and Stalkers with upgrade advantage are also great at dealing with BCs.
Widow Mine: The change is HUGE, the mine has been dead in TvZ ever since the visibility nerf (though the Hydralisk metagame also contributed to that), so this change is great. Maybe we'll see some more dynamic TvZ games now with this change. Also Protoss will now need detection to deal with upgraded mines, which may lead to some interesting dynamic with sniping the observers, etc.
Cyclone: Uhm, what exactly is this change going to accomplish in TvT? Cyclones will now die in 30 Marine shots instead of 36, but if you are defending against Cyclones with Marines in the early game the game is going very wrong for you. I guess this will make the SCV surrounds on Cyclones more deadly, but again, if you are fighting Cyclones with SCVs you're already dead. And apart from the 1 or 2 Reapers in the early game these are the only units that actually care about the Cyclone's armor. Outside of TvT, Cyclone will have a harder time tanking against Zergling/Zergling Baneling all ins, and Sentries will also do a bit more damage, but I wouldn't say that is too significant.
Thor: The Thor changes apart from the faster anti-air attack in high impact payload mode are straight up bad. The smaller javelin missile radius will make them worse against Mutalisks, but that's still ok. The damage change in high impact payload won't actually do anything. It's like saying "we want to make people feel like we're doing something, but we have no ideas, so we'll just slightly tweak one number and sell it as a big change". Against massive air targets it's still going to do the same amount of damage. The armor change is bad, because it was introduced with the exact intention of making Zerglings worse against Thors to popularize Thor usage against Zergling Baneling Mutalisk compositions. The main problem with Thors is that a) they don't do anything with their anti-ground weapon due to their extremely long retargeting time, b) the javelin missiles are only used to counter mass Mutalisk play, and MAYBE once every 100 games to help in TvT Viking wars, and c) they are so clunky that they easily get kited by units they are supposedly countering in high impact payload - BCs use Yamato and teleport away, Tempests have too high range, and Broodlord attacks spawn Broodlings which root Thors and prevent them from actually hitting the Broodlords. And same as with Battlecruisers, Thors get extremely hard countered by Zerglings, Zealots, Marauders, and Tanks.
Medivac and Banshee: 2 useless changes. If you're investing into a lot of Banshees, you already have to mine a lot of gas, so the 50/50 reduction on hyperflight rotors won't actually change anything. Maybe people will use it a bit because of psychology reasons, but not for much else. The Medivac upgrade is never researched, which will stay that way even after the patch.
Raven: After the first damage nerf to anti-armor missile the damage was being used only in TvT, and it still felt a bit oppressive when used against Marines, so overall a very good change that will improve the watchability and playability of TvT.
Neosteel Frame: Another useless change, that will make Terran players spend an additional 50/50 when they want to get the hi.sec autotracking, so I would say this is overall a bad change. ___________________________________________________________________________ Zergling and Hydralisk unburrow: I feel like this change won't actually do anything really impactful, maybe it will promote a bit more of burrow ambush play, which would be nice to see and can perhaps make the game a bit more dynamic, so it could be a good change.
Hydralisk HP change: I don't really know how this will pan out, because in ZvP the hydras are already a bit too fragile, while they are about ok in ZvZ and ZvT. Will have to see how this change plays out, it could be a good change, but it could also be a bad one.
Infestor: This change actually feels useless. The Infestors MIGHT be able to throw the eggs a bit more behind the enemy lines, but otherwise I feel like this is another change that's useless in a real-world game.
Ultralisk: I feel like this unit has been buffed waaaay too many times up until now (+20 damage vs light in HotS, bonus armor in LotV). If the Zerg REALLY needs a lategame buff, please consider buffing something more interesting than the boring a-move AoE unit. Zerg already has too many strong units that can be simply a-moved, while the counterplay from other races is heavy micro, which takes away attention from other aspects of the game (e. g. macro), while the Zerg can do that undeterred.
Nydus Network: A good change to discourage Nydus all ins, though the 6 armor might still be a bit too much. I would rather go with 4 or maybe 5, but overall any kind of invincibility is bad for the game, so it's a good change.
Burrow hotkeys: A quality of life change, though I would encourage each player being able to set the hotkeys being the same or separate. Overall a good idea. ___________________________________________________________________________ Recall: A great change to prevent the Protoss freely wandering around the map with their entire army and making it more of a gamble. In the current state of the game, Protoss has way too much safety when moving out with their army in any matchup, because the Protoss units have overall a lot of HP, so if the recall is fast, the Protoss maybe loses one or two expensive units when taking an engagement that could otherwise lose him the game. I would say this is a change in the right direction.
Sentry: The hallucination cost is probably something that won't change much in the big picture. The guardian shield radius on the other hand, will affect PvT the most, where Protoss already has an advantage, so I think this change is bad for the health of the game.
Feedback: A good change, High Templars being able to kill all other energy units from high range basically for free was bad for the health of the game, so in my opinion this is a step in the right direction, but a lot of stuff still needs similar tweaking.
Robotics Facility: This might make proxy double robo builds a bit too strong, but I can't really say from just reading the change.
Colossus: Colossi already have high enough damage output, and they are only being used in the current metagme in the PvT matchup, where Protoss is already strong enough, so I don't think this is a good change, unless Terran gets some midgame buff that will balance the matchup a bit more.
Disruptor: This will probably be a good change, it will affect all Protoss matchups in the unique way, which is good, and also promote skillfull usage of Disruptors, which is a good thing for the state of the game. Overall, a thumbs up from me.
Tempest: I agree with most of the Tempest changes. The speed buff however, makes me a bit sceptic, because as the capital ships, Tempests are supposed to be slow and clunky, so that they can be chased down by fast units if they are left without support. This will improve the Tempest escapability in such situations, which I think is bad.
Carrier: The Carrier already has enough HP, so I think the HP buff is uncalled for. Also, decreasing the Carrier build time, making it so that they can be massed faster is a bad thing, because they are a unit that is already extremely strong by itself, not to mention coupled with other Protoss units like High Templars, Colossi, Disruptors, Void Rays, or Tempests. The increased Interceptor build time is good, but I would like to also see an increase in their cost, or a nerf to their HP, because as it currently stands, the Interceptors take too long to die in the situations where players are relying on low damage high attack rate units to deal with the interceptors and move onto the Carriers themselves once the Interceptor numbers are thinned out enough. The Graviton Catapult removal might have a big impact, but I still foresee the Carriers being very strong.
Time Warp: I don't really know if this will be meaningful, since the Mothership is mostly seen only in very late game PvZs. I don't know how it will pan out.
Shield battery and Assimilator: A pair of useless changes.
Gateway: I feel like this is uncalled for. it's the same as Terran players being able to auto build addons on production finishing or Zerg players being able to auto build greater spire after the hive is done. Protoss macro is already much easier than Terran or Zerg macro, so further removing their macro mechanics is plain dumb. ___________________________________________________________________________
Overall I would say the changes won't do much for the state of the game. Some of the changes are totally useless, while others are plain bad. There are however some changes that are a step in the right direction, but there's too few of these. If the goal for the patch is to balance the lategame power of each race, there are a couple of steps that have to be done: TvZ: - Nerf the Viper. Viper is the main reason Terran lategame against Zerg sucks. Abduct allows the Zerg to kill an expensive unit for free, while the Parasitic Bomb completely obliterates clumps of vikings. - Nerf the Corruptor. It has too much HP for its cost and its role. It is supposed to be a counter to massive units, but instead it became an all-around Zerg air to air unit because of its tankiness and decent damage even against the non-massive units. Also, being able to fly in and caustic spray down bases before any defenses can arrive is too strong. - Broodlords. The attack itself is not that much of a threat, but each one spawns 2 Broodlings, which prevent the enemy army from advancing, prevents Thors from being able to deal with the Broodlords, and even force friendly splash damage. I understand that the Zerg need a siege unit to break turtle positions, but maybe changing the attack to spawn only one Broodling would be a reasonable change for a unit that already has a good HP, very long range, and good attack damage. Overall the problem for the lategame TvZ is the spore-Viper-Corruptor-Broodlord-Queen push, especially when coupled with infestors, because the Terran has no way to break such a position, unless the Zerg does a huge controlling mistake.
ZvP: - Carriers are a bit too strong as it currently stands. Not by itself, but in combination with the midgame composition of High Templar, Archon, Immortal, they are extremely hard to deal with for Zerg players.
PvT: - In this matchup, Terran has no lategame, because everything gets hard countered by something in the Protoss arsenal. Ranged liberators get dealt by Tempests, Thors get run over by Zealots, Ravens don't deal damage, and the Battlecruisers also get owned by Tempests. All the while Protoss can still transition into Carriers, which, in combination with any kind of splash damage destroy anything Terran can muster.
My suggestion for balancing the lategame would be to look at the lategame spellcaster units of all races. I feel like the Raven has finally found a very good spot as a purely support unit, while Vipers and High Templars in combination with the air army are still too strong. Their roles should be changed a bit, to be more in line with the Ravens, having only utility spells (e. g. blinding cloud, feedback). In addition to that, the massing of air units should be highly discouraged. They should be used purely as the support units, and not as the core army. I would suggest a complete redesign of the capital ships, Tempests, Carriers, Battlecruisers, Broodlords, and maybe to some degree even Corruptors.
While I think you have the core problems of the game down pat. I don't think can remove storm from the game, its just to core a part of protoss identity and to many strategies are centered around it to even consider doing such a thing, I think it would be fair however if storm did not hit air units, this way it still has the same power agianst clumps of bio, hydra bane, ect but it wont just outright win you the air game in most head on engagements due to the incredible amounts of dmg it does to stacked air units. as for vipers, abduct is in a wierd spot, I think its way to good vs terran and realy limits terran late game, in alot of ways its similar to how feedback used to totally deny terran the use of thors and bcs. Its just so good vs big units that once zerg has them terran just cant risk trying to go for big units. On the other hand the viper is absolutely mandatory for zerg to have even a remote chance in late game zvp and this is primarily due to the anti massive role it plays.I think that this issue realy stems from the bigger issue of protoss being to good in the late game and that you cant fix this isues with out addressing the strength of late game protoss in all match ups.
Read my post again please, I have never said I would like to change storm Apart from that, I totally agree with what you are saying right now. The bigger picture here is that one race has extremely powerful lategame, the 2nd race got an extremely powerful lategame unit to compensate for that, but as it turns out, that unit also denies the 3rd race any chance of having the lategame, so in the end, the 3rd race (Terran) is left with the "Kill them before they get there".
Carriers got nerfed to hell. A bit better against armored units... Pretty bad though. What armored units were good against them to begin with? Maybe useful against mech T, otherwise rubbish. Not a bad thing, that.
Surprised so many people are so optimistic. Still seems like the Blizz balance team wandering around somewhat aimlessly.
I am waiting for some horror from the neosteel upgrade and just obnoxious rushes that cost nothing because you can salvage.
Toss looks rather tossed. The terran read here is also a bit insane. There needs to be some reward to being battered and living in fear for the first three quarters of the game.
edit: I still fundamentally find the swarm host and broodlords just horrible design. Crazy how they have survived.
On September 11 2018 08:49 ThunderJunk wrote: Carriers got nerfed to hell. A bit better against armored units... Pretty bad though. What armored units were good against them to begin with? Maybe useful against mech T, otherwise rubbish. Not a bad thing, that.
Actually, they're only better against units with 3+ armour. So, if a carrier with no weapon upgrades is fighting a roach with + 2 armour, then the new carrier is technically better. Old carrier: 2x5 damage = 10 damage, versus 1 armour = 2x(5-1) = 8 damage, versus 2 armour = 2x(5-2) = 6 damage, versus 3 armour = 2x(5-3) = 4 damage New carrier 1x8 damage = 8 damage, versus 1 armour = 1x(8-1) = 7 damage, versus 2 armour = 1x(8-2) = 6 damage, versus 3 armour = 1x(8-3) = 5 damage
So if a carrier with no weapon upgrades is fighting a corruptor with +1 armour, then the new carrier does more 1 more damage per interceptor attack. With carriers, though, at that point, Protoss generally have at least +1 weapons.
I sternly disagree with the Disruptor reversion. We're going to see the exact same problems with it as we saw in the previous version. The current version is the best it's yet been, and it's sure not going to be a healthier part of the game if it goes back to what we already determined was not a great thing to have around.
My hot take on a suggested change would be to increase the time of the fuse, but slightly decrease the speed of the projectile. This will improve the ability of crowds of units to micro out of the way, but would make immobile units get hit hard by it. You could tweak the values so that its total range would outrange a Siege Tank's vision, but force the Disruptor to come within the tank's firing range in order to release the nova. This will help enhance the war for vision in PvT.
On September 11 2018 09:19 youngjiddle wrote: I find it funny how people still think terran lategame is bad.
Sometimes I wonder if we are playing the same game. I just hope the balance team sees through the balance whine.
I mean vs Zerg it's not terrible ghost lib can do alright but unless zerg makes larg errors it's hard for a Terran to ever secure the number of bases they need to be competitive in late game on most maps. It's definitely an uphill fight but doable and Terran does get some midgame opurtunities zerg does not have access to so its not so bad the mu is overall prity balanced probably a bit Terran favored at the very highest level. Vs Protoss are you seriuse? Just try figuring out a unit composition that can come close to matching late game toss as Terran. Why do you think that even really good macro players like inno's game plan is to end the game with a dessisive timing? Why do players like ty known mostly for there solid deffensive play proxy and cheese nearly evrey game???? I'm not saying t can't beat p they can, but the manner in which they must play the mu is very undisirable for the health of the game.
Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced.
On several Chinese sc2 forum, a lot of people believe most of these changes are joke and make no sense at all, which collectively summarize as "fix a bug that allow Terran/Protoss to even win a game against Zerg."
I would ask Blizz take into consideration decrease of Neosteel armor time to reserach due to previously Structure Armor was used only in late game, when bunkers are hardly ever been placed. Upgrade of bunker capacity is useless in late game but ealry and mid-game. When you scouted all in, place engineering bay for turrets and after that it would be a real great opportunity to research neostell armor, which allow you to significantly increase your defense opportunity aganist the attack. But 100 seconds for research is to long to wait. And the upgrade will not help you to defend. If the research time decreases considerably, the Neosteel armor upgrade will be very effective way to deal with strnog early and mid game all ins and pushes.
On September 11 2018 06:27 K5 wrote: Neosteel Frame: Another useless change, that will make Terran players spend an additional 50/50 when they want to get the hi.sec autotracking, so I would say this is overall a bad change.
What are you talking about? There are no changes to the Hi-Sec upgrade.
All that the Neosteel Armor change means is that now you get the Neosteel upgrade *for free* when you get Structure Armor.
On September 10 2018 20:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote: someone proposed this Widow Mine change in a previous feedback thread. I either agreed with them or I was the person who thought it up. I can't recall.
however it happened... its great to see this modification to the Widow Mine! ... and good call by whoever proposed it.
Well at least someone likes the change which will make me quit sc2. Have you played against the old Widow Mine as Protoss or Zerg? It only minimally impacts the highest level of play, but for me as a casual it makes the game too frustrating to play.
i'm in Diamond. i'm no superstar. i play 40% as Terran and 60% as Random.
An upgraded Window Mine is a PITA for the opponent. However, i think it should be. As long as the "pain in the ass" aspect of the unit is not caused by the user interface or mouse or clicking issues... then they are part of RTS.
There are aspects of SC2 i do not like. However, relative my currently available options SC2 is my best option by far.
Widow mines for Protoss is the same as Oracle in HotS for Terrans without any defense. Either you nail the defense or it's a game over. I am a dia toss, speaking from experience. Fast burrow mines are a serious coinflip, you cannot even split in time with that burrow time.
Many P players have PTSD from them because they simple end the game if you miss one and unlike Terran we cannot go simply "build a turret" (this is not a balance whine, I play unranked so I have no issue in leaving right away)
Getting drilling claws, mines AND medivacs its a huge investment in the early game, its more akin to disruptor drops rather than oracles, except disruptors have more guaranteed damage.
I don't know whether you missed or not, but we're talking about the bottom 90 % of the playerbase. We down don't care about the investment, because if we would be good, we wouldn't miss the drop in the first place I Although I believe that if a Terran goes for speed burrow drop it's either a killing blow or a win for Protoss even in lower loeagues(Dia, prob. even plat) it's still a move that relies on the lower league effect(players miss things on the map all the time)
My comparison is more about the pressure on the defender rather than attacker. With the cloak - if the Protoss player doesn't have a detection, it's game over even with proper defense action(again, sub masters). With the old Oracle - if the Terran player doesn't have defense it's game over. It's similar in the game ending damage design not in the damage granted or investment where it very differs.
While I honestly believe this doesn't change anything(those terrans who use it will use it and others won't because of the investment argument), I can get why some worse players don't like this change at all. I, personally, hate more the helion drop which is way harder to properly defend as helions tend to move rather quickly and shoot all the time
Although the Carrier in terms of damage does more than the previous Carrier vs armored targets such as Corruptors it will still have a slower DPS output as interceptors will take longer to build and they will release much slower without graviton catapults. This means that carriers interceptors will usually get shot down too quick. Now I think keeping graviton is a bad idea too since these new interceptors are scary but maybe adding a half as good upgrade? (Cheaper of course)
On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote: Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced.
Not sure what to make of this lol. Yah..players play styles that they think will win....pretty obvious statement that everyone is aware of. So you can use the same logic and say people dont play styles that they think cant win...hence no terran players going for standard macro play vs toss bc...it doesnt win..
The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right???
Its very obvious that Terran is fucked late game vs. Toss..its not even a debatable subject at this point. Proxy play being the standard meta is stupid and frustrating. The only way to fix it is to make early game for toss a bit easier to defend and late game for Terran possible to win..this patch seems to take care of the first part but Im not seeing the second part unless BC some how becomes good enough to counter toss late..which doesnt seem to have been made any worse..carriers a bit worse but thats not really the main problem..the main problem is terran doesnt have an answer to HT / Disrupter / tempest. Dont see BC really doing much about that.
On September 11 2018 13:06 pzlama333 wrote: On several Chinese sc2 forum, a lot of people believe most of these changes are joke and make no sense at all, which collectively summarize as "fix a bug that allow Terran/Protoss to even win a game against Zerg."
Sounds like they have common sense in China because i'd agree with that sentiment, at least that a lot of the changes make zero sense.
For guy above that said swarmhost aren't an issue - lol. They have broken mech vs zerg for over a year. Every time you opt into playing mech vs Zerg, Zerg basically gets free income if they decide to make any amount of swarmhosts.
It's like those buildings from cnc generels Zero hour - black markets. You just get free income, which you aren't supposed to get in an RTS game that has limited resources (minerals,gas).
Swarmhost need a fix, or just a flat out removal, they serve no purpose in the game other than to make the game a living hell for anyone that doesn't want to play bio every single game.
Making swarmhost more expensive would be a start, but also making them a LIGHT UNIT so that hellions can roast them would also be a good idea.
I refuse to discuss, or even acknowledge there's any other changes until blizzard addresses the swarmhost. I would trade this entire "balance patch" for them simply fixing swarmhosts, that's how much of a gameplay issue those are.
On September 11 2018 13:06 pzlama333 wrote: On several Chinese sc2 forum, a lot of people believe most of these changes are joke and make no sense at all, which collectively summarize as "fix a bug that allow Terran/Protoss to even win a game against Zerg."
Sounds like they have common sense in China because i'd agree with that sentiment, at least that a lot of the changes make zero sense.
For guy above that said swarmhost aren't an issue - lol. They have broken mech vs zerg for over a year. Every time you opt into playing mech vs Zerg, Zerg basically gets free income if they decide to make any amount of swarmhosts.
It's like those buildings from cnc generels Zero hour - black markets. You just get free income, which you aren't supposed to get in an RTS game that has limited resources (minerals,gas).
Swarmhost need a fix, or just a flat out removal, they serve no purpose in the game other than to make the game a living hell for anyone that doesn't want to play bio every single game.
Making swarmhost more expensive would be a start, but also making them a LIGHT UNIT so that hellions can roast them would also be a good idea.
I refuse to discuss, or even acknowledge there's any other changes until blizzard addresses the swarmhost. I would trade this entire "balance patch" for them simply fixing swarmhosts, that's how much of a gameplay issue those are.
Cant you just leave your character out of here? Arent you acting enough on your stream and twitter?
On September 10 2018 20:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote: someone proposed this Widow Mine change in a previous feedback thread. I either agreed with them or I was the person who thought it up. I can't recall.
however it happened... its great to see this modification to the Widow Mine! ... and good call by whoever proposed it.
Well at least someone likes the change which will make me quit sc2. Have you played against the old Widow Mine as Protoss or Zerg? It only minimally impacts the highest level of play, but for me as a casual it makes the game too frustrating to play.
i'm in Diamond. i'm no superstar. i play 40% as Terran and 60% as Random.
An upgraded Window Mine is a PITA for the opponent. However, i think it should be. As long as the "pain in the ass" aspect of the unit is not caused by the user interface or mouse or clicking issues... then they are part of RTS.
There are aspects of SC2 i do not like. However, relative my currently available options SC2 is my best option by far.
Widow mines for Protoss is the same as Oracle in HotS for Terrans without any defense. Either you nail the defense or it's a game over. I am a dia toss, speaking from experience. Fast burrow mines are a serious coinflip, you cannot even split in time with that burrow time.
Many P players have PTSD from them because they simple end the game if you miss one and unlike Terran we cannot go simply "build a turret" (this is not a balance whine, I play unranked so I have no issue in leaving right away)
Getting drilling claws, mines AND medivacs its a huge investment in the early game, its more akin to disruptor drops rather than oracles, except disruptors have more guaranteed damage.
I don't know whether you missed or not, but we're talking about the bottom 90 % of the playerbase. We down don't care about the investment, because if we would be good, we wouldn't miss the drop in the first place I Although I believe that if a Terran goes for speed burrow drop it's either a killing blow or a win for Protoss even in lower loeagues(Dia, prob. even plat) it's still a move that relies on the lower league effect(players miss things on the map all the time)
My comparison is more about the pressure on the defender rather than attacker. With the cloak - if the Protoss player doesn't have a detection, it's game over even with proper defense action(again, sub masters). With the old Oracle - if the Terran player doesn't have defense it's game over. It's similar in the game ending damage design not in the damage granted or investment where it very differs.
While I honestly believe this doesn't change anything(those terrans who use it will use it and others won't because of the investment argument), I can get why some worse players don't like this change at all. I, personally, hate more the helion drop which is way harder to properly defend as helions tend to move rather quickly and shoot all the time
You'll have to be at least silver for that to happen, my point was that teching to drilling claws WM drops its such an investment that even low league players should have detection, its not something that you can easily 1 base like simple WM drops. A player to get punished would have to be so low that at that point everything will be IMBA anyway.
On September 11 2018 13:06 pzlama333 wrote: On several Chinese sc2 forum, a lot of people believe most of these changes are joke and make no sense at all, which collectively summarize as "fix a bug that allow Terran/Protoss to even win a game against Zerg."
Sounds like they have common sense in China because i'd agree with that sentiment, at least that a lot of the changes make zero sense.
For guy above that said swarmhost aren't an issue - lol. They have broken mech vs zerg for over a year. Every time you opt into playing mech vs Zerg, Zerg basically gets free income if they decide to make any amount of swarmhosts.
It's like those buildings from cnc generels Zero hour - black markets. You just get free income, which you aren't supposed to get in an RTS game that has limited resources (minerals,gas).
Swarmhost need a fix, or just a flat out removal, they serve no purpose in the game other than to make the game a living hell for anyone that doesn't want to play bio every single game.
Making swarmhost more expensive would be a start, but also making them a LIGHT UNIT so that hellions can roast them would also be a good idea.
I refuse to discuss, or even acknowledge there's any other changes until blizzard addresses the swarmhost. I would trade this entire "balance patch" for them simply fixing swarmhosts, that's how much of a gameplay issue those are.
Cant you just leave your character out of here? Arent you acting enough on your stream and twitter?
What?
Any Terran that plays mostly mech knows SH are over the top and need changes.
On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote: Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced.
The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right???
Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate?
On September 11 2018 13:06 pzlama333 wrote: On several Chinese sc2 forum, a lot of people believe most of these changes are joke and make no sense at all, which collectively summarize as "fix a bug that allow Terran/Protoss to even win a game against Zerg."
Sounds like they have common sense in China because i'd agree with that sentiment, at least that a lot of the changes make zero sense.
For guy above that said swarmhost aren't an issue - lol. They have broken mech vs zerg for over a year. Every time you opt into playing mech vs Zerg, Zerg basically gets free income if they decide to make any amount of swarmhosts.
It's like those buildings from cnc generels Zero hour - black markets. You just get free income, which you aren't supposed to get in an RTS game that has limited resources (minerals,gas).
Swarmhost need a fix, or just a flat out removal, they serve no purpose in the game other than to make the game a living hell for anyone that doesn't want to play bio every single game.
Making swarmhost more expensive would be a start, but also making them a LIGHT UNIT so that hellions can roast them would also be a good idea.
I refuse to discuss, or even acknowledge there's any other changes until blizzard addresses the swarmhost. I would trade this entire "balance patch" for them simply fixing swarmhosts, that's how much of a gameplay issue those are.
Cant you just leave your character out of here? Arent you acting enough on your stream and twitter?
What?
Any Terran that plays mostly mech knows SH are over the top and need changes.
You are in your character, acting. Everyone knows that. I remember when i played hots beta against you. You spammed cyclones and said they werent actually that good. Cyclones were nerfed X times after that. Your judgement is part of your second persona. I hope. And now you are advertising yourself in here when you should do that on twitter
Super pleased with the nydus worm and burrow hotkey changes. I've been wanting both of these for years.
Disappointed with the hydra changes, IMO they're already fragile enough.
The ultralisk change doesn't make much sense to me. The thing is it seems like it'll put a huge delay on ultralisk plays, since you already have to research +2 armor first.
Overall the only big change for Zerg is the nydus change, seems like they want to make it a core part of the Zerg lategame. Somehow I still don't think it will do much, but it's a good start.
•Removed random delay between shots for both ATS Laser Batter and ATA Laser Battery •ATA Laser Battery damage reduced from 6 to 5 •Yamato Cannon damage reduced from 300 to 240 •Can move while shooting
•Drilling Claws upgrade now also permanently cloaks the Widow Mine while burrowed. A new visual effect will be applied to the Widow Mine to indicate this.
Ideally upgrade comes in later and doesn’t make fast WM drops too bad, when you do not have detection, but lets WMs live multiple fights later in game. Will always cause frustration when hits big. I just hope it doesn’t increase Terrans defence too much with Tanks and Liberators.
•250mm Punisher Cannons weapon speed changed from 3 to 2.5 •250mm Punisher Cannons damage changed from 35 (+15 Armored) to 40 (+10 Massive) •Javelin Missile Launchers area-of-effect radius reduced from 0.6 to 0.5 •Base armor reduced from 2 to 1
Punisher changes seems reasonable with all capital ship changes. The same with reduced radius of Javelin changes especially, when Interceptors depend more on how long they can stay in fight.
•High-Capacity Fuel Tanks no longer increase the duration of Ignite Afterburners. Now it reduces the cooldown of Ignite Afterburners from 14 to 9. •Medivac Heal will now work on units under the effect of the Phoenix Graviton Beam
Fuel Tanks were only seldomly used and making effect longer never meant much, but with shorter cooldown jumping between bases will be much easier and also increase overall uptime of ability.
•Hyperflight Rotors upgrade cost reduced from 200/200 to 150/150
The change will increase usage simply by lowering cost, but I think that how much it will affect depends more on how good you are using Banshees themselves. If problem arises then I hope they try to adjust speed or acceleration instead reverting to keep upgrade accessible.
•Anti-Armor missile damage reduced from 15 to 0 •Anti-Armor missile will now reduce Protoss shields as well as armor
Clearer focus to armor reduction is better but may need some additional changes like increasing armor reduction by 1 or 2. The damage seemed to me to be there for early game, where building Raven could maybe cut total damage output of your army too much.
•Neosteel Frame and Structure Armor are being combined into Neosteel Armor, which combines their upgrades. It will cost 150/150 and take 100 seconds to research—the same as Structure Armor.
Hopefully this doesn’t make Terran to do too aggressive bunger pushes, specially from proxy 2 rax, but maybe +5 to cargo capacity of CC and Planetary Fortress could make island bases better or help against harass.
•Unburrow speed changed from 0.71 to 0.36 •Unburrow random delay reduced from 0.36 to 0.08
Burrow is not used too much with everything else than Roach, Banelings Infestors and Drones. Only usual cases are banemines, moving/healing, blocking bases and harass avoidance.
Ok but I feel like more could be done with Infestor. My ideas would be allow Fungal be casted while burrowed but add -1 or -2 to casting ranges while burrowed. Also I would maybe even swap Infested Terran to Viper for either Blinding Cloud or Parasitic Bomb. This should create a Auto-Turret like harassment tool.
•Nydus Network cost increased from 150/200 to 200/250 •Nydus Worm cost decreased from 100/100 to 50/50 •While Nydus Worm is emerging, it will no longer be invincible. Instead, it has 6 armor.
Hopefully leads to wanted direction, but good creep spread helps already in late game.
•Nexus Mass Recall renamed to Strategic Recall •Mothership’s Strategic Recall renamed to Mass Recall •Nexus Strategic Recall cooldown reduced from 130 second to 85 seconds •Nexus Strategic Recall radius reduced from 6.5 to 2.5
This seems good but I’m bit worried that it has still global cooldown instead of being separated for each Nexus. This concern is more towards multiprog attacks. Separate cooldown would also mean that army gets split when used so defensively not too good when attack focuses single area. Of course this would let protoss to save his whole army again. Global cooldown may be okay with Robotics being cheaper so that more of them are affordable in late game.
•Hallucination energy cost reduced from 100 to 75 •Guardian Shield radius increased from 4 to 4.5
For scouting cost reduction is good but probably doesn’t yet lead to hallucinated tech hoaxes, that would become too common. With even lower cost I could see such hoaxes happen when sentries can spawn multiple critical units while going for opposite build. Second change has understandable reasoning.
Maybe this and hallucination change will divert from SG openers but I think that issue is not only in map vision but also in map presence. With Warp Prism there is some presence but the threat itself is created by other tech units like Immortals and Archons and not from basic Gateway units, that don’t need anything else than Cybernetics Core. Oracles provide so much utility and Phoenix provides air and vision control with both also providing potential harass, thus opening with Robotics doesn’t seem worth it. However, if having something like 3 or 4 Robotics is affordable, then lot of things will possible and losing high tech army isn’t so problematic if you just have resources to build it back quickly. This probably greatly lessens effects of Mass Recall changes in late game.
This change will probably help quite much with micro, but unique vulnerability to air can still be too much. Also I don’t know how much Cliff Walking helps to anything else than in escaping and allowing to run through the map alone. So I would like it be more in focus, thus I have this stupid idea, that Cliff Walking could be granted to units under Colossus after an upgrade, either always or in special stationary mode. This probably would cause epic pathing issues, but also allow Colossus do grant new kind of maneuverability to Protoss army.
•Purification Nova changed back to pre-4.0 state. Purification Nova deploys a ball of energy that will detonate after 2 seconds, dealing 155 damage and an additional 55 shield damage to all ground units in its radius. •Purification Nova no longer detonates on contact with enemy units •Purification Nova now sends a threat signal to the opponent on detonation instead of during the launch phase
The problem with pre-4.0 Disruptor seem to me be that it doesn’t provide consistent enough damage in high level play. Thus, I think that the current is better, but with current consistency the damage was too high. I would probably have done something like splitting damage to 5 waves of 28 damage to increase armors effectiveness, or maybe increased the size to make them block other units more. However, maybe Colossus will be able to provide good consistent damage now and Disruptor doesn’t become too hit or miss unit.
•Cost reduced from 300/200 to 250/175 •Supply reduced from 6 to 5 •Hit Points and Shields reduced from 300/150 to 150/125 •Speed increased from 2.632 to 3.5 •Acceleration increased from 1.4875 to 2.8
Hopefully this leads to poking Tempests that need to be chased down.
•Graviton Catapult upgrade removed •Hit Points and Shields increased from 250/150 to 300/150 •Build time decreased from 86 to 64 seconds •Interceptor build time increased from 6 to 11 seconds •Interceptor damage decreased from 5x2 to 8x1 •Interceptors will get +1x1 per
Hopefully Carriers will have enough HP and Shields to stay in battle for long enough to all Interceptors to be launched. It is probably better that capitalships provide more staying power or support instead of just damage.
•Time Warp now also reduces the attack speed of enemy units and structures by 50% in addition to slowing by 50%
Maybe this creates good combo with storm and Disruptor against stationary units at least. Tanks and Liberators shooting only half of the current shots would be great, but the cast range of 9 and 4 seconds activation time may be too limiting.
I wonder if ghost BC has the potential to work in TvZ lategame. I want to believe it can work at least, although I am afraid corruptors are too much of a hard counter to BCs.
All the continuous changes to the thor and cyclone make me feel like what terran actually needs is the goliath to replace this units. The thor and cyclone both seem poorly designed 'fixes' to problems that mech has.
The direction of AAM has me scratching my head a little. I feel like they still dont know what they want the raven to do. Maybe the raven is a bit expensive to be a pure support unit that doesnt do damage. I wonder if it could be used as a support unit more effectively if the cost was reduced somewhat.
From a balance POV I am happy they are finally looking at rebalancing the lategames. However, in these patch notes nothing indicates that TvP lategame will really be better. I cant see BCs or Thors becoming a thing. The carrier nerf might help but I feel like protoss can easily replace their carriers with other units and still stomp terran armies.
On September 12 2018 07:28 Jerom wrote: I wonder if ghost BC has the potential to work in TvZ lategame. I want to believe it can work at least, although I am afraid corruptors are too much of a hard counter to BCs.
All the continuous changes to the thor and cyclone make me feel like what terran actually needs is the goliath to replace this units. The thor and cyclone both seem poorly designed 'fixes' to problems that mech has.
The direction of AAM has me scratching my head a little. I feel like they still dont know what they want the raven to do. Maybe the raven is a bit expensive to be a pure support unit that doesnt do damage. I wonder if it could be used as a support unit more effectively if the cost was reduced somewhat.
From a balance POV I am happy they are finally looking at rebalancing the lategames. However, in these patch notes nothing indicates that TvP lategame will really be better. I cant see BCs or Thors becoming a thing. The carrier nerf might help but I feel like protoss can easily replace their carriers with other units and still stomp terran armies.
yeah I think alot will have to change to fix the current, proxy and allinfest that tvp has become. It feals like that mu has gone full circle, after adepts were nerfed tvp was for the first time ever in a state where both players could reasonably opt to play a macro game, due to the power of liberators, weeker stalkers, slower protoss economy. with the current meta though It just seems like terran wins or losses the game in the first 11 minutes or so, if it gets past that its a done deal for protoss. From a ballance perspective this might be alright, top terran players can still beat top protoss players. But I think its unhealthy for the fun of the game that tvp hinges so heavily on the effectiveness of early game shenanigans.
On September 10 2018 20:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote: someone proposed this Widow Mine change in a previous feedback thread. I either agreed with them or I was the person who thought it up. I can't recall.
however it happened... its great to see this modification to the Widow Mine! ... and good call by whoever proposed it.
Well at least someone likes the change which will make me quit sc2. Have you played against the old Widow Mine as Protoss or Zerg? It only minimally impacts the highest level of play, but for me as a casual it makes the game too frustrating to play.
i'm in Diamond. i'm no superstar. i play 40% as Terran and 60% as Random.
An upgraded Window Mine is a PITA for the opponent. However, i think it should be. As long as the "pain in the ass" aspect of the unit is not caused by the user interface or mouse or clicking issues... then they are part of RTS.
There are aspects of SC2 i do not like. However, relative my currently available options SC2 is my best option by far.
Widow mines for Protoss is the same as Oracle in HotS for Terrans without any defense. Either you nail the defense or it's a game over. I am a dia toss, speaking from experience. Fast burrow mines are a serious coinflip, you cannot even split in time with that burrow time.
Many P players have PTSD from them because they simple end the game if you miss one and unlike Terran we cannot go simply "build a turret" (this is not a balance whine, I play unranked so I have no issue in leaving right away)
Getting drilling claws, mines AND medivacs its a huge investment in the early game, its more akin to disruptor drops rather than oracles, except disruptors have more guaranteed damage.
I don't know whether you missed or not, but we're talking about the bottom 90 % of the playerbase. We down don't care about the investment, because if we would be good, we wouldn't miss the drop in the first place I Although I believe that if a Terran goes for speed burrow drop it's either a killing blow or a win for Protoss even in lower loeagues(Dia, prob. even plat) it's still a move that relies on the lower league effect(players miss things on the map all the time)
My comparison is more about the pressure on the defender rather than attacker. With the cloak - if the Protoss player doesn't have a detection, it's game over even with proper defense action(again, sub masters). With the old Oracle - if the Terran player doesn't have defense it's game over. It's similar in the game ending damage design not in the damage granted or investment where it very differs.
While I honestly believe this doesn't change anything(those terrans who use it will use it and others won't because of the investment argument), I can get why some worse players don't like this change at all. I, personally, hate more the helion drop which is way harder to properly defend as helions tend to move rather quickly and shoot all the time
You'll have to be at least silver for that to happen, my point was that teching to drilling claws WM drops its such an investment that even low league players should have detection, its not something that you can easily 1 base like simple WM drops. A player to get punished would have to be so low that at that point everything will be IMBA anyway.
It is an all in on my level, it either does the damage and the enemy denies the scouting, or it's a direct loss. It doesn't happen to me that much as I open in my PvT with phoenixes and I am very active with them, the Terran would have to slip around them to do the drop and deny my scouting(wanna see that). But I started to open with this because it counters exactly everything the Terrans do to me in my league with some proxy shenanigans hitting before I get phoenixes It's not "you have to be silver" thing, it happens in higher leagues too. And if it happens to me in Diamond it has to be happening bellow, thus affecting what, 90 % of the player base? So no, you don't have to be a Silver, it's 1v1 on ladder, remember how many batshit crazy builds we've seen in the Proleague setting ;-) (that won't work... oh, it did)
On September 11 2018 13:06 pzlama333 wrote: On several Chinese sc2 forum, a lot of people believe most of these changes are joke and make no sense at all, which collectively summarize as "fix a bug that allow Terran/Protoss to even win a game against Zerg."
Sounds like they have common sense in China because i'd agree with that sentiment, at least that a lot of the changes make zero sense.
For guy above that said swarmhost aren't an issue - lol. They have broken mech vs zerg for over a year. Every time you opt into playing mech vs Zerg, Zerg basically gets free income if they decide to make any amount of swarmhosts.
It's like those buildings from cnc generels Zero hour - black markets. You just get free income, which you aren't supposed to get in an RTS game that has limited resources (minerals,gas).
Swarmhost need a fix, or just a flat out removal, they serve no purpose in the game other than to make the game a living hell for anyone that doesn't want to play bio every single game.
Making swarmhost more expensive would be a start, but also making them a LIGHT UNIT so that hellions can roast them would also be a good idea.
I refuse to discuss, or even acknowledge there's any other changes until blizzard addresses the swarmhost. I would trade this entire "balance patch" for them simply fixing swarmhosts, that's how much of a gameplay issue those are.
Cant you just leave your character out of here? Arent you acting enough on your stream and twitter?
What?
Any Terran that plays mostly mech knows SH are over the top and need changes.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Your skill level is way too low to discuss balance issues since you make too many mistakes which have nothing to do with balance. We all see that on your stream.
On September 11 2018 13:06 pzlama333 wrote: On several Chinese sc2 forum, a lot of people believe most of these changes are joke and make no sense at all, which collectively summarize as "fix a bug that allow Terran/Protoss to even win a game against Zerg."
Sounds like they have common sense in China because i'd agree with that sentiment, at least that a lot of the changes make zero sense.
For guy above that said swarmhost aren't an issue - lol. They have broken mech vs zerg for over a year. Every time you opt into playing mech vs Zerg, Zerg basically gets free income if they decide to make any amount of swarmhosts.
It's like those buildings from cnc generels Zero hour - black markets. You just get free income, which you aren't supposed to get in an RTS game that has limited resources (minerals,gas).
Swarmhost need a fix, or just a flat out removal, they serve no purpose in the game other than to make the game a living hell for anyone that doesn't want to play bio every single game.
Making swarmhost more expensive would be a start, but also making them a LIGHT UNIT so that hellions can roast them would also be a good idea.
I refuse to discuss, or even acknowledge there's any other changes until blizzard addresses the swarmhost. I would trade this entire "balance patch" for them simply fixing swarmhosts, that's how much of a gameplay issue those are.
Cant you just leave your character out of here? Arent you acting enough on your stream and twitter?
What?
Any Terran that plays mostly mech knows SH are over the top and need changes.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Your skill level is way too low to discuss balance issues since you make too many mistakes which have nothing to do with balance. We all see that on your stream.
get off it mate. hes a grandmaster. 'way too low'. come on.
I don't play the game anymore but I watch it like crazy -
some of these changes are *INSANE*. Why are they touching the game? I initially misread the changes to protoss air, wow, they gutted the shit out of carriers. They weren't *THAT* good.
Who decided widow mines need to be invisible? Widow mine drops are already abused like mad in tvp, Now they are going to be invisible? Have fun running your automatically clumping air units and small ground units into a couple of those invisible widow mines. Game over instantly because your entire army is dead from 2 widow mines your opponent burrowed somewhere random that you don't know about unless you have detection literally everywhere on the map. Right, good idea. What are you even supposed to do against tanks turrets and widow mines? Or even just tanks and turrets, since you don't actually get to know if widow mines are there.
So many of these changes make no sense though. I would say almost all of them make no sense. There's like one or two gems in there though.
Whenever you see a balance team try to make more than a couple changes at once, I would be worried. And the more drastic the changes are, the more I would worry. And the fact that for some reason those balance changes seem to be *in favor of* the race that historically wins the most at the top level... is confusing.
On September 12 2018 22:00 travis wrote: IWho decided widow mines need to be invisible? Widow mine drops are already abused like mad in tvp, Now they are going to be invisible? Have fun running your automatically clumping air units and small ground units into a couple of those invisible widow mines. Game over instantly because your entire army is dead from 2 widow mines your opponent burrowed somewhere random that you don't know about unless you have detection literally everywhere on the map. Right, good idea. What are you even supposed to do against tanks turrets and widow mines? Or even just tanks and turrets, since you don't actually get to know if widow mines are there. .
But, widow mines already work like that? They still are invisible, they always been, only the period between recharging is when they are visible. And as I said to deacon.frost, drilling claws isn't an easy tech to rush to make TvP drops any stronger.
But still WM ALREADY work like that, I'm not sure you actually watch the game.
I can't imagine that they'll keep the tempest as it is now. It sh*ts on mech even harder than the old one, which is currently the main reason why mech isn't viable in TvP.
On September 13 2018 01:20 travis wrote: I was under the impression that widow mines are visible during the process of locking on up until firing?
Read the changes. All it does is so that when you research drilling claws they get reverted to pre- 4.0 mines with the also added bonus of them now being quicker to build. Meaning that when you walk in their range they are visible (Not targetable without detection) and while they are reloading you will also need detection to see them. This means protoss is still not forced to go into detection however like banshees if this tech choice is chosen you will want to have detection whether its an oracle or an observer it is not going to make a massive impact in balance based on what I know about how TvP is played. (It will probably be seen more in TvZ)
Edit: In retrospect I suppose yeah their wording is a little misleading but I can promise you you'll still be able to see it if you brush past its range or right before it fires.
I wonder how significant of a change it would be to add the sliding mechanic banshees have when kiting to the Viking as well. I feel like that unit would have a much smoother time against units such as voidrays, tempests, warp prisms, medivacs broodlords, and corruptors. The micro of the Viking would also feel a lot smoother.
On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote: Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced.
The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right???
Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate?
If you dont have another style that works as well.. u wouldnt..thats my point. If you had 2 styles with comprable results you would mix it up to not be as predictable but we dont see that at all. Since u can go full retard or bluff proxy based on what scout..its the better option. All you have to so is watch all the tvps from code s post raven nerf and you can watch the comedy unfold. I dont know if toss will come up with a good answer or not but i hope it doesnt last much longer..and if they do come up with one then the matchup is just fucked the other way so still needs tons of work...way more than what im seeing in this propos IMO
On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote: Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced.
The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right???
Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate?
If you dont have another style that works as well.. u wouldnt..thats my point. If you had 2 styles with comprable results you would mix it up to not be as predictable but we dont see that at all. Since u can go full retard or bluff proxy based on what scout..its the better option. All you have to so is watch all the tvps from code s post raven nerf and you can watch the comedy unfold. I dont know if toss will come up with a good answer or not but i hope it doesnt last much longer..and if they do come up with one then the matchup is just fucked the other way so still needs tons of work...way more than what im seeing in this propos IMO
So the reason why people went blink all ins wasn't because the allins were op. People went blink allins because Protoss was underpowered.
I've watched a lot of PvTs since the nerf, and when the Terran can pull apart the Protoss, the Terran wins, and if the Protoss can defend the multi harass, the Protoss often wins.
On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote: Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced.
The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right???
Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate?
If you dont have another style that works as well.. u wouldnt..thats my point. If you had 2 styles with comprable results you would mix it up to not be as predictable but we dont see that at all. Since u can go full retard or bluff proxy based on what scout..its the better option. All you have to so is watch all the tvps from code s post raven nerf and you can watch the comedy unfold. I dont know if toss will come up with a good answer or not but i hope it doesnt last much longer..and if they do come up with one then the matchup is just fucked the other way so still needs tons of work...way more than what im seeing in this propos IMO
So the reason why people went blink all ins wasn't because the allins were op. People went blink allins because Protoss was underpowered.
I've watched a lot of PvTs since the nerf, and when the Terran can pull apart the Protoss, the Terran wins, and if the Protoss can defend the multi harass, the Protoss often wins.
I mean even during blink Allin era you would fairly often see Protoss do a different strategy, that was part of the strength of the Allin was that it was fairly ambiguous if you were going to do it or not and you could do stuff like hide the twilight or your extra gates to make it even harder to scout what your plan was. Now I guess there is also ambiguity in Terran proxies, what type of proxy is it? Is it an Allin proxy or is it a fake were they just proxy the rax but make a cc and factory back home ect, but it's not like you see Terran mixing in that many if Any standard openings and I think the reason is partially that proxies are a very good strategy but also that Terran players even with pro level micro don't have confidence in using macro strategies, from watching Maru he might use a macro strat like once in a bo7 and that's only after he has done 2-3 proxies already and he's just hedging against his opponent doing a counter build.And by macro I of course mean a 2 base or three base Allin with tanks+scv pull, because Terran wants to win quick. I think unless Protoss is explicitly countering proxy strats Terran macro strats just don't match up well with Protoss of a similar skill level.
Again I don't think that Terran is weaker than toss right now due to the strength of the new proxy style. I do however think that it's a problem if this is what the matchup becomes, Terran has a powerful early game but is practically unable to contest a 4 base Protoss so Terran will always opt to try to end the game in 12 minutes or less to prevent late game from occurring. This metagame is just so limited and really reduces variety in the matchup Protoss is forced into a highly defensive reactionary style almost every game and Terran is forced into a highly aggressive cheesy style almost evrey game. Now I admit other MUs have fairly forced roles like tvz Terran attacks zerg defends, but they at least offer a lot more choice in how players approach the matchup Terran can go mech or bio, they can go 1-1-1 or 2-1-1 they can do a variety of different things out of there 1-1-1 they can do a variety of different things out of there 2-1-1 that dictate how fast or slow the game will be and this creates a healthy and varied metagame, zerg options are more limited since they are somewhat dictated by Terran but they still have a fair amount of stylistic and reactionary choices about how queen heavy that want to go. If they want to get a safety bane nest or roach warren or tech more aggressively, if they want to invest in early overlord speed, if they want to commit to counterattacks and play on a slightly lower drone count or be more greedy and defensive ect. TvP is just fairly repetitive with both players forced by ballance into a very narrow range of options and the limited time frame that Terran is viable in compresses the time that players have to do interesting moves and make meaningful decisions, its balanced but I don't think it's what the matchup ideally should be and it fails to allow players to use there full range of skills.
On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote: Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced.
The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right???
Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate?
If you dont have another style that works as well.. u wouldnt..thats my point. If you had 2 styles with comprable results you would mix it up to not be as predictable but we dont see that at all. Since u can go full retard or bluff proxy based on what scout..its the better option. All you have to so is watch all the tvps from code s post raven nerf and you can watch the comedy unfold. I dont know if toss will come up with a good answer or not but i hope it doesnt last much longer..and if they do come up with one then the matchup is just fucked the other way so still needs tons of work...way more than what im seeing in this propos IMO
So the reason why people went blink all ins wasn't because the allins were op. People went blink allins because Protoss was underpowered.
I've watched a lot of PvTs since the nerf, and when the Terran can pull apart the Protoss, the Terran wins, and if the Protoss can defend the multi harass, the Protoss often wins.
I mean even during blink Allin era you would fairly often see Protoss do a diffrent strtagey, that was part of the strength of the Allin was that it was fairly ambiguous if you were going to do it or not and you could do stuff like hide the twilight or your extra gates to make it even harder to scout what your plan was. Now I guess there is also ambiguity in Terran proxies, what type of proxy is it? Is it an Allin proxy or is it a fake were they just proxy the rax but make a cc and factory back home ect, but it's not like you see Terran mixing in that many if Any standard openings and I think the reason is partially that proxies are a very good stratagey but also that Terran players even with pro level micro don't have confidence in using macro stratagies, from watching Maru he might use a macro strat like once in a bo7 and that's only after he has done 2-3 proxies already and he's just hedging against his opponent doing a counter build.And by macro i off course mean a 2 base or three base Allin with tanks+scv pull, because Terran wants to win quick. I think unless Protoss is explicitly countering proxy strats Terran macro strats just don't match up well with Protoss of a similar skill level.
Agian I don't think that Terran is weeker than toss right now due to the strength of the new proxy style. I do however think that it's a problem if this is what the matchup becomes, Terran has a powerfull early game but is practically unable to contest a 4 base Protoss so Terran will always opt to try to end the game in 12 minutes or less to prevent late game from occurring. This metagame is just so limited and really reduces variety in the matchup Protoss is forced into a highly deffensive reactionary style almost evrey game and Terran is forced into a highly aggressive cheesy style almost evrey game. Now I admit other MUs have fairly forced roles like tvz Terran attacks zerg defends, but they at least offer a lot more choice in how players aproach the matchup Terran can go mech or bio, they can go 1-1-1 or 2-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 1-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 2-1-1 that dictate how fast or slow the game will be and this creates a healthy and varied metagame, zerg options are more limited since they are somewhat dictated by Terran but they still have a fair amount of stylistic and reactionary choices about how queen heavy that want to go. If they want to get a safety bane nest or roach warren or tech more aggressively, if they want to invest in early overlord speed, if they want to commit to counterattacks and play on a slightly lower drone count or be more greedy and deffensive ect. TvP is just fairly repetitive with both players forced by ballance into a very narrow range of options and the limited time frame that Terran is viable in compresses the time that players have to do interesting moves and make meaningful decisions, its balanced but I don't think it's what the matchup ideally should be and it fails to allow players to use there full range of skills.
I'm not entirely sure I agree that Terran cannot contest a 4-base Protoss. I think if a Terran doesn't harass the Protoss and lets the Protoss get up to 4 bases uncontested, then yes, the Protoss has an advantage, but this type of scenario has always existed from the beginning of WoL. Protoss is weaker until they can get up splash to deal with bio. I don't think the fact that Terran is weaker at a certain stage of the game is necessarily a bad thing.
That's why Terran is so strong at drops and multi-pronged harass; they are intrinsically designed to put pressure on their opponents and make sure that their opponents can't reach a certain stage of the game unscathed. A couple games don't prove anything, but this scenario is fairly common. A Terran (maybe TY or Maru or Taeja back when he was pro) multi-prong drops the Protoss and gradually picks them apart until the main Terran bio force can kill the Protoss. Or what about Rain (when he was playing) and Stats defending against the drops, getting up to their splash, trading cost effectively, and then pushing to win over the Terran.
This was the classic complaint of MMM vs Colossus and HT back in WoL. Terran is strong in the early-mid game and weak in the late game. And to a certain extent, with liberators and cyclones along with disruptors (and adepts and oracles), Blizz has moved the matchup away from solely colossus and bio. However, the states of strength and weakness have not changed, and I think you would have to greatly change the game to change these states. Since all three races have asymmetrical balance to each other, their power levels balance each other out.
Protoss is strong in the lategame because of their power units that naturally come later in the game, and Terran is strong in the early-mid game because their units come early in the game, and with upgrades they are even stronger. Zerg is the race about continually ramping up the economy until they can overwhelm their opponent.
To change the strength of Terran in the lategame and Protoss in the early game, you would have to drastically change the balance of all the races. Now, Blizzard has also tried to use the liberator and the adept as ways to combat these problems, with the adept being strong in the early game and the liberator being really strong towards the later stages of the game. But the problem is that these units created their own balance problems with early adepts overwhelming early bio and liberators being very hard to deal with late game for Protoss. With nerfs, we've shifted back to T strength in early game and P strength in late game.
On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote: Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced.
The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right???
Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate?
If you dont have another style that works as well.. u wouldnt..thats my point. If you had 2 styles with comprable results you would mix it up to not be as predictable but we dont see that at all. Since u can go full retard or bluff proxy based on what scout..its the better option. All you have to so is watch all the tvps from code s post raven nerf and you can watch the comedy unfold. I dont know if toss will come up with a good answer or not but i hope it doesnt last much longer..and if they do come up with one then the matchup is just fucked the other way so still needs tons of work...way more than what im seeing in this propos IMO
So the reason why people went blink all ins wasn't because the allins were op. People went blink allins because Protoss was underpowered.
I've watched a lot of PvTs since the nerf, and when the Terran can pull apart the Protoss, the Terran wins, and if the Protoss can defend the multi harass, the Protoss often wins.
I mean even during blink Allin era you would fairly often see Protoss do a diffrent strtagey, that was part of the strength of the Allin was that it was fairly ambiguous if you were going to do it or not and you could do stuff like hide the twilight or your extra gates to make it even harder to scout what your plan was. Now I guess there is also ambiguity in Terran proxies, what type of proxy is it? Is it an Allin proxy or is it a fake were they just proxy the rax but make a cc and factory back home ect, but it's not like you see Terran mixing in that many if Any standard openings and I think the reason is partially that proxies are a very good stratagey but also that Terran players even with pro level micro don't have confidence in using macro stratagies, from watching Maru he might use a macro strat like once in a bo7 and that's only after he has done 2-3 proxies already and he's just hedging against his opponent doing a counter build.And by macro i off course mean a 2 base or three base Allin with tanks+scv pull, because Terran wants to win quick. I think unless Protoss is explicitly countering proxy strats Terran macro strats just don't match up well with Protoss of a similar skill level.
Agian I don't think that Terran is weeker than toss right now due to the strength of the new proxy style. I do however think that it's a problem if this is what the matchup becomes, Terran has a powerfull early game but is practically unable to contest a 4 base Protoss so Terran will always opt to try to end the game in 12 minutes or less to prevent late game from occurring. This metagame is just so limited and really reduces variety in the matchup Protoss is forced into a highly deffensive reactionary style almost evrey game and Terran is forced into a highly aggressive cheesy style almost evrey game. Now I admit other MUs have fairly forced roles like tvz Terran attacks zerg defends, but they at least offer a lot more choice in how players aproach the matchup Terran can go mech or bio, they can go 1-1-1 or 2-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 1-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 2-1-1 that dictate how fast or slow the game will be and this creates a healthy and varied metagame, zerg options are more limited since they are somewhat dictated by Terran but they still have a fair amount of stylistic and reactionary choices about how queen heavy that want to go. If they want to get a safety bane nest or roach warren or tech more aggressively, if they want to invest in early overlord speed, if they want to commit to counterattacks and play on a slightly lower drone count or be more greedy and deffensive ect. TvP is just fairly repetitive with both players forced by ballance into a very narrow range of options and the limited time frame that Terran is viable in compresses the time that players have to do interesting moves and make meaningful decisions, its balanced but I don't think it's what the matchup ideally should be and it fails to allow players to use there full range of skills.
I'm not entirely sure I agree that Terran cannot contest a 4-base Protoss. I think if a Terran doesn't harass the Protoss and lets the Protoss get up to 4 bases uncontested, then yes, the Protoss has an advantage, but this type of scenario has always existed from the beginning of WoL. Protoss is weaker until they can get up splash to deal with bio. I don't think the fact that Terran is weaker at a certain stage of the game is necessarily a bad thing.
That's why Terran is so strong at drops and multi-pronged harass; they are intrinsically designed to put pressure on their opponents and make sure that their opponents can't reach a certain stage of the game unscathed. A couple games don't prove anything, but this scenario is fairly common. A Terran (maybe TY or Maru or Taeja back when he was pro) multi-prong drops the Protoss and gradually picks them apart until the main Terran bio force can kill the Protoss. Or what about Rain (when he was playing) and Stats defending against the drops, getting up to their splash, trading cost effectively, and then pushing to win over the Terran.
This was the classic complaint of MMM vs Colossus and HT back in WoL. Terran is strong in the early-mid game and weak in the late game. And to a certain extent, with liberators and cyclones along with disruptors (and adepts and oracles), Blizz has moved the matchup away from solely colossus and bio. However, the states of strength and weakness have not changed, and I think you would have to greatly change the game to change these states. Since all three races have asymmetrical balance to each other, their power levels balance each other out.
Protoss is strong in the lategame because of their power units that naturally come later in the game, and Terran is strong in the early-mid game because their units come early in the game, and with upgrades they are even stronger. Zerg is the race about continually ramping up the economy until they can overwhelm their opponent.
To change the strength of Terran in the lategame and Protoss in the early game, you would have to drastically change the balance of all the races. Now, Blizzard has also tried to use the liberator and the adept as ways to combat these problems, with the adept being strong in the early game and the liberator being really strong towards the later stages of the game. But the problem is that these units created their own balance problems with early adepts overwhelming early bio and liberators being very hard to deal with late game for Protoss. With nerfs, we've shifted back to T strength in early game and P strength in late game.
Link pro vods where the terran is "picking apart the toss" until late game on 4 bases and then wins. Post raven nerf. Its all 2 base all in or proxy has been for almost 2 months. You really should stop referencing hots / wol before disrupters tempests and liberators existed. Its not remotely relevant. Obvious statement: if the terran does crippling damage early game he can win. If he doesnt he cant there is no way for him to get a advantage late .. no comp that fights on even footing..will almost 100% of the time be behind on uprades.. these are the reasons we dont see it.. not because these guys have 70 percent winrates w proxy and 65 with macro play rofl. There was never an era of sc2 when toss only opened one way even during the blink era you still saw plenty of wins where the toss played macro.
On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote: Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced.
The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right???
Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate?
If you dont have another style that works as well.. u wouldnt..thats my point. If you had 2 styles with comprable results you would mix it up to not be as predictable but we dont see that at all. Since u can go full retard or bluff proxy based on what scout..its the better option. All you have to so is watch all the tvps from code s post raven nerf and you can watch the comedy unfold. I dont know if toss will come up with a good answer or not but i hope it doesnt last much longer..and if they do come up with one then the matchup is just fucked the other way so still needs tons of work...way more than what im seeing in this propos IMO
So the reason why people went blink all ins wasn't because the allins were op. People went blink allins because Protoss was underpowered.
I've watched a lot of PvTs since the nerf, and when the Terran can pull apart the Protoss, the Terran wins, and if the Protoss can defend the multi harass, the Protoss often wins.
I mean even during blink Allin era you would fairly often see Protoss do a diffrent strtagey, that was part of the strength of the Allin was that it was fairly ambiguous if you were going to do it or not and you could do stuff like hide the twilight or your extra gates to make it even harder to scout what your plan was. Now I guess there is also ambiguity in Terran proxies, what type of proxy is it? Is it an Allin proxy or is it a fake were they just proxy the rax but make a cc and factory back home ect, but it's not like you see Terran mixing in that many if Any standard openings and I think the reason is partially that proxies are a very good stratagey but also that Terran players even with pro level micro don't have confidence in using macro stratagies, from watching Maru he might use a macro strat like once in a bo7 and that's only after he has done 2-3 proxies already and he's just hedging against his opponent doing a counter build.And by macro i off course mean a 2 base or three base Allin with tanks+scv pull, because Terran wants to win quick. I think unless Protoss is explicitly countering proxy strats Terran macro strats just don't match up well with Protoss of a similar skill level.
Agian I don't think that Terran is weeker than toss right now due to the strength of the new proxy style. I do however think that it's a problem if this is what the matchup becomes, Terran has a powerfull early game but is practically unable to contest a 4 base Protoss so Terran will always opt to try to end the game in 12 minutes or less to prevent late game from occurring. This metagame is just so limited and really reduces variety in the matchup Protoss is forced into a highly deffensive reactionary style almost evrey game and Terran is forced into a highly aggressive cheesy style almost evrey game. Now I admit other MUs have fairly forced roles like tvz Terran attacks zerg defends, but they at least offer a lot more choice in how players aproach the matchup Terran can go mech or bio, they can go 1-1-1 or 2-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 1-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 2-1-1 that dictate how fast or slow the game will be and this creates a healthy and varied metagame, zerg options are more limited since they are somewhat dictated by Terran but they still have a fair amount of stylistic and reactionary choices about how queen heavy that want to go. If they want to get a safety bane nest or roach warren or tech more aggressively, if they want to invest in early overlord speed, if they want to commit to counterattacks and play on a slightly lower drone count or be more greedy and deffensive ect. TvP is just fairly repetitive with both players forced by ballance into a very narrow range of options and the limited time frame that Terran is viable in compresses the time that players have to do interesting moves and make meaningful decisions, its balanced but I don't think it's what the matchup ideally should be and it fails to allow players to use there full range of skills.
I'm not entirely sure I agree that Terran cannot contest a 4-base Protoss. I think if a Terran doesn't harass the Protoss and lets the Protoss get up to 4 bases uncontested, then yes, the Protoss has an advantage, but this type of scenario has always existed from the beginning of WoL. Protoss is weaker until they can get up splash to deal with bio. I don't think the fact that Terran is weaker at a certain stage of the game is necessarily a bad thing.
That's why Terran is so strong at drops and multi-pronged harass; they are intrinsically designed to put pressure on their opponents and make sure that their opponents can't reach a certain stage of the game unscathed. A couple games don't prove anything, but this scenario is fairly common. A Terran (maybe TY or Maru or Taeja back when he was pro) multi-prong drops the Protoss and gradually picks them apart until the main Terran bio force can kill the Protoss. Or what about Rain (when he was playing) and Stats defending against the drops, getting up to their splash, trading cost effectively, and then pushing to win over the Terran.
This was the classic complaint of MMM vs Colossus and HT back in WoL. Terran is strong in the early-mid game and weak in the late game. And to a certain extent, with liberators and cyclones along with disruptors (and adepts and oracles), Blizz has moved the matchup away from solely colossus and bio. However, the states of strength and weakness have not changed, and I think you would have to greatly change the game to change these states. Since all three races have asymmetrical balance to each other, their power levels balance each other out.
Protoss is strong in the lategame because of their power units that naturally come later in the game, and Terran is strong in the early-mid game because their units come early in the game, and with upgrades they are even stronger. Zerg is the race about continually ramping up the economy until they can overwhelm their opponent.
To change the strength of Terran in the lategame and Protoss in the early game, you would have to drastically change the balance of all the races. Now, Blizzard has also tried to use the liberator and the adept as ways to combat these problems, with the adept being strong in the early game and the liberator being really strong towards the later stages of the game. But the problem is that these units created their own balance problems with early adepts overwhelming early bio and liberators being very hard to deal with late game for Protoss. With nerfs, we've shifted back to T strength in early game and P strength in late game.
The thing is that in a normal Macro game right now Protoss can get out so many blink stalkers that they just totally shut down harassment past the first drop or tech unit. It used to be that building the number of gateway units Protoss does in this meta would not allow them to have enough tech units but because of the huge upgrade lead Protoss will almost always have in a macro game they are able to stay on pure gateway tech for a lot longer than they used to be able to and thus get a big Econ and upgrade lead while being nigh untouchable By harassment in the hands of a good player. this tight deffense can be kept up untill toss gets up to 4 basses and spread out a bit but at that point it's to late, the proxy plays and 2-3 base bio tank allins have been terran's answer to this problem and I admit it works. Since proxies allow Terran harass to hit before toss has everything locked down with stalkers and tank allins allow Terran to take a decisive fight before late game with an army that's good vs stalkers. But as I've stated earlier I don't think this proxy and 2-3 base Allin meta is a healthy place for the mu to be at. In lotv in the past we did get good interesting macro games between terran and toss but overtime with ballance changes toss has just pulled to far ahead in there late game power for Terran to contest them like they could earlier in lotv, playing a non Allin style as Terran just isn't a viable option. In this new meta the type of harass plays that used to work in macro builds tends to just be a good way to throw away units that you need for your Allin, you can still play harassment heavy styles but to do so you need to open very aggressively usualy with proxys.
On September 13 2018 01:42 JackONeill wrote: I can't imagine that they'll keep the tempest as it is now. It sh*ts on mech even harder than the old one, which is currently the main reason why mech isn't viable in TvP.
Mech will be better now in TvP. Tempests are absolute paperweights now against Vikings and Thors kill them twice as fast now, plus Carriers are now so much worse. Yes, they can be more annoying now, but only the most biased person on the planet would consider this a Mech TvP nerf.
On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote: Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced.
The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right???
Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate?
If you dont have another style that works as well.. u wouldnt..thats my point. If you had 2 styles with comprable results you would mix it up to not be as predictable but we dont see that at all. Since u can go full retard or bluff proxy based on what scout..its the better option. All you have to so is watch all the tvps from code s post raven nerf and you can watch the comedy unfold. I dont know if toss will come up with a good answer or not but i hope it doesnt last much longer..and if they do come up with one then the matchup is just fucked the other way so still needs tons of work...way more than what im seeing in this propos IMO
So the reason why people went blink all ins wasn't because the allins were op. People went blink allins because Protoss was underpowered.
I've watched a lot of PvTs since the nerf, and when the Terran can pull apart the Protoss, the Terran wins, and if the Protoss can defend the multi harass, the Protoss often wins.
I mean even during blink Allin era you would fairly often see Protoss do a diffrent strtagey, that was part of the strength of the Allin was that it was fairly ambiguous if you were going to do it or not and you could do stuff like hide the twilight or your extra gates to make it even harder to scout what your plan was. Now I guess there is also ambiguity in Terran proxies, what type of proxy is it? Is it an Allin proxy or is it a fake were they just proxy the rax but make a cc and factory back home ect, but it's not like you see Terran mixing in that many if Any standard openings and I think the reason is partially that proxies are a very good stratagey but also that Terran players even with pro level micro don't have confidence in using macro stratagies, from watching Maru he might use a macro strat like once in a bo7 and that's only after he has done 2-3 proxies already and he's just hedging against his opponent doing a counter build.And by macro i off course mean a 2 base or three base Allin with tanks+scv pull, because Terran wants to win quick. I think unless Protoss is explicitly countering proxy strats Terran macro strats just don't match up well with Protoss of a similar skill level.
Agian I don't think that Terran is weeker than toss right now due to the strength of the new proxy style. I do however think that it's a problem if this is what the matchup becomes, Terran has a powerfull early game but is practically unable to contest a 4 base Protoss so Terran will always opt to try to end the game in 12 minutes or less to prevent late game from occurring. This metagame is just so limited and really reduces variety in the matchup Protoss is forced into a highly deffensive reactionary style almost evrey game and Terran is forced into a highly aggressive cheesy style almost evrey game. Now I admit other MUs have fairly forced roles like tvz Terran attacks zerg defends, but they at least offer a lot more choice in how players aproach the matchup Terran can go mech or bio, they can go 1-1-1 or 2-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 1-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 2-1-1 that dictate how fast or slow the game will be and this creates a healthy and varied metagame, zerg options are more limited since they are somewhat dictated by Terran but they still have a fair amount of stylistic and reactionary choices about how queen heavy that want to go. If they want to get a safety bane nest or roach warren or tech more aggressively, if they want to invest in early overlord speed, if they want to commit to counterattacks and play on a slightly lower drone count or be more greedy and deffensive ect. TvP is just fairly repetitive with both players forced by ballance into a very narrow range of options and the limited time frame that Terran is viable in compresses the time that players have to do interesting moves and make meaningful decisions, its balanced but I don't think it's what the matchup ideally should be and it fails to allow players to use there full range of skills.
I'm not entirely sure I agree that Terran cannot contest a 4-base Protoss. I think if a Terran doesn't harass the Protoss and lets the Protoss get up to 4 bases uncontested, then yes, the Protoss has an advantage, but this type of scenario has always existed from the beginning of WoL. Protoss is weaker until they can get up splash to deal with bio. I don't think the fact that Terran is weaker at a certain stage of the game is necessarily a bad thing.
That's why Terran is so strong at drops and multi-pronged harass; they are intrinsically designed to put pressure on their opponents and make sure that their opponents can't reach a certain stage of the game unscathed. A couple games don't prove anything, but this scenario is fairly common. A Terran (maybe TY or Maru or Taeja back when he was pro) multi-prong drops the Protoss and gradually picks them apart until the main Terran bio force can kill the Protoss. Or what about Rain (when he was playing) and Stats defending against the drops, getting up to their splash, trading cost effectively, and then pushing to win over the Terran.
This was the classic complaint of MMM vs Colossus and HT back in WoL. Terran is strong in the early-mid game and weak in the late game. And to a certain extent, with liberators and cyclones along with disruptors (and adepts and oracles), Blizz has moved the matchup away from solely colossus and bio. However, the states of strength and weakness have not changed, and I think you would have to greatly change the game to change these states. Since all three races have asymmetrical balance to each other, their power levels balance each other out.
Protoss is strong in the lategame because of their power units that naturally come later in the game, and Terran is strong in the early-mid game because their units come early in the game, and with upgrades they are even stronger. Zerg is the race about continually ramping up the economy until they can overwhelm their opponent.
To change the strength of Terran in the lategame and Protoss in the early game, you would have to drastically change the balance of all the races. Now, Blizzard has also tried to use the liberator and the adept as ways to combat these problems, with the adept being strong in the early game and the liberator being really strong towards the later stages of the game. But the problem is that these units created their own balance problems with early adepts overwhelming early bio and liberators being very hard to deal with late game for Protoss. With nerfs, we've shifted back to T strength in early game and P strength in late game.
The thing is that in a normal Macro game right now Protoss can get out so many blink stalkers that they just totally shut down harassment past the first drop or tech unit. It used to be that building the number of gateway units Protoss does in this meta would not allow them to have enough tech units but because of the huge upgrade lead Protoss will almost always have in a macro game they are able to stay on pure gateway tech for a lot longer than they used to be able to and thus get a big Econ and upgrade lead while being nigh untouchable By harassment in the hands of a good player. this tight deffense can be kept up untill toss gets up to 4 basses and spread out a bit but at that point it's to late, the proxy plays and 2-3 base bio tank allins have been terran's answer to this problem and I admit it works. Since proxies allow Terran harass to hit before toss has everything locked down with stalkers and tank allins allow Terran to take a decisive fight before late game with an army that's good vs stalkers. But as I've stated earlier I don't think this proxy and 2-3 base Allin meta is a healthy place for the mu to be at. In lotv in the past we did get good interesting macro games between terran and toss but overtime with ballance changes toss has just pulled to far ahead in there late game power for Terran to contest them like they could earlier in lotv, playing a non Allin style as Terran just isn't a viable option. In this new meta the type of harass plays that used to work in macro builds tends to just be a good way to throw away units that you need for your Allin, you can still play harassment heavy styles but to do so you need to open very aggressively usualy with proxys.
In theory yes, but in practice no, Protoss don't shut down two pronged harassment very easily. Look at Neeb vs TY, that's a game where TY either dropped or just ran units to lesser defended bases, and Neeb was very much picked apart. TY won or almost won macro games against Neeb, and macro games are Neeb's forte.
I do also want to ask which balance changes throughout LotV actually made Protoss better in the late game. I know the liberator got nerfed, and the warp prism got buffed, but I'm having trouble seeing exactly where Terran was nerfed and where Protoss was buffed that caused this late game imbalance. Raven nerfs were relatively recent, and Tempest buffs were quite a long time ago.
Classic and Innovation played a 23 minute macro game in the Kung Fu Cup relatively recently. It was pretty back and forth, and perhaps I'm blind, but I didn't see any "blink stalkers" defending until four bases. What I mean is that after Inno's failed proxy hellion drop, they both made it to the late game and traded armies. Inno did not do a lot of multi-pronged drops, and instead, he went for the big fights. Through harass, Classic was able to gain an economic lead (5 or 6 to 4 bases) and eventually won off of that lead (also in a big fight around the 17 minute mark, Inno was unprepared for the number of colossi).
I didn't see Classic make any huge mistakes, but the game still seemed pretty even despite Inno's failed proxy hellion drop and Classic's oracle/phoenix harass afterwards.
some of these changes are *INSANE*. Why are they touching the game? I initially misread the changes to protoss air, wow, they gutted the shit out of carriers. They weren't *THAT* good.
This is the main issue I have with it. Adding to much new stuff will make you retract some of that in a year's time: see disruptors... Even if only half of the changes go through (ok, some more than others), the changes will be massive. Much bigger fan of small changes that are tested a huge lot before going to the test servers, rather than forcibly changing meta once a year.
I honestly feel like the elephant in the room is how the marauder changes from last time around are maybe too good (with bio being rather weak without tho), but even there the jury is still out on PvT 2-3 base play, let alone late game imo.
misleading tl;dr: It seems I'm a bloody conservative when it comes to balancing
I hope they will polish and improve current ideas. It's the first time that I was agreed. Everything. Sounds promising, dudes. Mech vs P is possible and real. BCs are fun (can't wait to see Maru doing BCs).
On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote: Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced.
The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right???
Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate?
If you dont have another style that works as well.. u wouldnt..thats my point. If you had 2 styles with comprable results you would mix it up to not be as predictable but we dont see that at all. Since u can go full retard or bluff proxy based on what scout..its the better option. All you have to so is watch all the tvps from code s post raven nerf and you can watch the comedy unfold. I dont know if toss will come up with a good answer or not but i hope it doesnt last much longer..and if they do come up with one then the matchup is just fucked the other way so still needs tons of work...way more than what im seeing in this propos IMO
So the reason why people went blink all ins wasn't because the allins were op. People went blink allins because Protoss was underpowered.
I've watched a lot of PvTs since the nerf, and when the Terran can pull apart the Protoss, the Terran wins, and if the Protoss can defend the multi harass, the Protoss often wins.
I mean even during blink Allin era you would fairly often see Protoss do a diffrent strtagey, that was part of the strength of the Allin was that it was fairly ambiguous if you were going to do it or not and you could do stuff like hide the twilight or your extra gates to make it even harder to scout what your plan was. Now I guess there is also ambiguity in Terran proxies, what type of proxy is it? Is it an Allin proxy or is it a fake were they just proxy the rax but make a cc and factory back home ect, but it's not like you see Terran mixing in that many if Any standard openings and I think the reason is partially that proxies are a very good stratagey but also that Terran players even with pro level micro don't have confidence in using macro stratagies, from watching Maru he might use a macro strat like once in a bo7 and that's only after he has done 2-3 proxies already and he's just hedging against his opponent doing a counter build.And by macro i off course mean a 2 base or three base Allin with tanks+scv pull, because Terran wants to win quick. I think unless Protoss is explicitly countering proxy strats Terran macro strats just don't match up well with Protoss of a similar skill level.
Agian I don't think that Terran is weeker than toss right now due to the strength of the new proxy style. I do however think that it's a problem if this is what the matchup becomes, Terran has a powerfull early game but is practically unable to contest a 4 base Protoss so Terran will always opt to try to end the game in 12 minutes or less to prevent late game from occurring. This metagame is just so limited and really reduces variety in the matchup Protoss is forced into a highly deffensive reactionary style almost evrey game and Terran is forced into a highly aggressive cheesy style almost evrey game. Now I admit other MUs have fairly forced roles like tvz Terran attacks zerg defends, but they at least offer a lot more choice in how players aproach the matchup Terran can go mech or bio, they can go 1-1-1 or 2-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 1-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 2-1-1 that dictate how fast or slow the game will be and this creates a healthy and varied metagame, zerg options are more limited since they are somewhat dictated by Terran but they still have a fair amount of stylistic and reactionary choices about how queen heavy that want to go. If they want to get a safety bane nest or roach warren or tech more aggressively, if they want to invest in early overlord speed, if they want to commit to counterattacks and play on a slightly lower drone count or be more greedy and deffensive ect. TvP is just fairly repetitive with both players forced by ballance into a very narrow range of options and the limited time frame that Terran is viable in compresses the time that players have to do interesting moves and make meaningful decisions, its balanced but I don't think it's what the matchup ideally should be and it fails to allow players to use there full range of skills.
I'm not entirely sure I agree that Terran cannot contest a 4-base Protoss. I think if a Terran doesn't harass the Protoss and lets the Protoss get up to 4 bases uncontested, then yes, the Protoss has an advantage, but this type of scenario has always existed from the beginning of WoL. Protoss is weaker until they can get up splash to deal with bio. I don't think the fact that Terran is weaker at a certain stage of the game is necessarily a bad thing.
That's why Terran is so strong at drops and multi-pronged harass; they are intrinsically designed to put pressure on their opponents and make sure that their opponents can't reach a certain stage of the game unscathed. A couple games don't prove anything, but this scenario is fairly common. A Terran (maybe TY or Maru or Taeja back when he was pro) multi-prong drops the Protoss and gradually picks them apart until the main Terran bio force can kill the Protoss. Or what about Rain (when he was playing) and Stats defending against the drops, getting up to their splash, trading cost effectively, and then pushing to win over the Terran.
This was the classic complaint of MMM vs Colossus and HT back in WoL. Terran is strong in the early-mid game and weak in the late game. And to a certain extent, with liberators and cyclones along with disruptors (and adepts and oracles), Blizz has moved the matchup away from solely colossus and bio. However, the states of strength and weakness have not changed, and I think you would have to greatly change the game to change these states. Since all three races have asymmetrical balance to each other, their power levels balance each other out.
Protoss is strong in the lategame because of their power units that naturally come later in the game, and Terran is strong in the early-mid game because their units come early in the game, and with upgrades they are even stronger. Zerg is the race about continually ramping up the economy until they can overwhelm their opponent.
To change the strength of Terran in the lategame and Protoss in the early game, you would have to drastically change the balance of all the races. Now, Blizzard has also tried to use the liberator and the adept as ways to combat these problems, with the adept being strong in the early game and the liberator being really strong towards the later stages of the game. But the problem is that these units created their own balance problems with early adepts overwhelming early bio and liberators being very hard to deal with late game for Protoss. With nerfs, we've shifted back to T strength in early game and P strength in late game.
The thing is that in a normal Macro game right now Protoss can get out so many blink stalkers that they just totally shut down harassment past the first drop or tech unit. It used to be that building the number of gateway units Protoss does in this meta would not allow them to have enough tech units but because of the huge upgrade lead Protoss will almost always have in a macro game they are able to stay on pure gateway tech for a lot longer than they used to be able to and thus get a big Econ and upgrade lead while being nigh untouchable By harassment in the hands of a good player. this tight deffense can be kept up untill toss gets up to 4 basses and spread out a bit but at that point it's to late, the proxy plays and 2-3 base bio tank allins have been terran's answer to this problem and I admit it works. Since proxies allow Terran harass to hit before toss has everything locked down with stalkers and tank allins allow Terran to take a decisive fight before late game with an army that's good vs stalkers. But as I've stated earlier I don't think this proxy and 2-3 base Allin meta is a healthy place for the mu to be at. In lotv in the past we did get good interesting macro games between terran and toss but overtime with ballance changes toss has just pulled to far ahead in there late game power for Terran to contest them like they could earlier in lotv, playing a non Allin style as Terran just isn't a viable option. In this new meta the type of harass plays that used to work in macro builds tends to just be a good way to throw away units that you need for your Allin, you can still play harassment heavy styles but to do so you need to open very aggressively usualy with proxys.
In theory yes, but in practice no, Protoss don't shut down two pronged harassment very easily. Look at Neeb vs TY, that's a game where TY either dropped or just ran units to lesser defended bases, and Neeb was very much picked apart. TY won or almost won macro games against Neeb, and macro games are Neeb's forte.
I do also want to ask which balance changes throughout LotV actually made Protoss better in the late game. I know the liberator got nerfed, and the warp prism got buffed, but I'm having trouble seeing exactly where Terran was nerfed and where Protoss was buffed that caused this late game imbalance. Raven nerfs were relatively recent, and Tempest buffs were quite a long time ago.
Classic and Innovation played a 23 minute macro game in the Kung Fu Cup relatively recently. It was pretty back and forth, and perhaps I'm blind, but I didn't see any "blink stalkers" defending until four bases. What I mean is that after Inno's failed proxy hellion drop, they both made it to the late game and traded armies. Inno did not do a lot of multi-pronged drops, and instead, he went for the big fights. Through harass, Classic was able to gain an economic lead (5 or 6 to 4 bases) and eventually won off of that lead (also in a big fight around the 17 minute mark, Inno was unprepared for the number of colossi).
I didn't see Classic make any huge mistakes, but the game still seemed pretty even despite Inno's failed proxy hellion drop and Classic's oracle/phoenix harass afterwards.
Post msc change bro. New chrono makes it impossible to stay even on tech and uppgrades in a standard game. Later game timing windows dont exist anymore. As ive said multiple times to you already.. we got a chance to see how the game looked late from maru early on vs patience (code s ro16 season 2 i believe) and vs stats in katowice quals..mass storm/tempest/mothershup/carrier vs mass viking lib ghost raven... this was the first time we saw terran able to be competitive with toss late game post 4.0 or whatever the fuck rev came this year. Then they nerfed the raven out of usability and we havent seen anyone attempt it in a pro game since. Im not saying t is broken u.p vs toss t obviously is gaining an adv in the current bullshit meta but your arguement about it not being imbalanced late is ridiculous.
On September 13 2018 15:43 dicey wrote: [...] Much bigger fan of small changes that are tested a huge lot before going to the test servers, rather than forcibly changing meta once a year. [...]
Maybe they do this on purpose to shake the meta and see if new strategies emerge.. to keep the game 'fresh'..?
Will Cyclones stay armored even though they have 0 armor now? Won't they just be taking unnecessarily higher damage vs Stalkers, Marauders, Immortals, and the sort? I mean I guess if they stay armored it makes sense in terms of toss being to hold it off... Since then Adepts, Banelings and Hellions would start to do more damage but I think an armored unit with 0 armor is ... odd
i'm just really happy that 3 years after SC2's final major infusion of revenue that Blizzard still has a team of people working to move the game forward.
Its a minor miracle that ATVI has figured out how to monetize RTS long term. No one else has.
Terran needs splash damage in the late game in both match ups, the T v Z and the T v P (or alternatively, Z and P should have their splash damaged reduced). Currently is a race against the clock. With the proposed changes, I do not feel the problem is going to be solved.
If the ravens are not “the unit”, because they are supposed to be just a support unit, then there should be an additional spell similar to the Yamato canon, but with area damage (even if it is much lower). Currently, terrans have advantage in the short run, but once zergs and toss holds the initial pushing, the midgame-late game becomes impossible. In that situation Terrans resort to liberators, but the problem with the liberator is that they're not flexible enough.
For T v Z and T v P an improved battle cruiser with area damage would appear in the phase of the game where you can only barely survive with liberators. Note that this would help to fight the traditional compositions that make it impossible to go late, namely de ultra-corruptor in T v Z, and the death toss ball (stalker-inmortal-archon-storm) with tempest.
In any case, other option is to lower the viper vs Viking for the T v Z. Or to improve the ghost in the T v P. I guess making the ghost as deadly as the templar is to bio for toss balls could be an alternative option. Perhaps, rather than buffing the BC, it is better to decrease the damage of the vipers and improve the ghost vs P. Not sure.
Cloaked widow mines are the reason that I stopped playing 4 years ago. I just got back into 1v1 and found the new window mine much more reasonable to deal with. I hope they will reconsider this change. I can't see it making a big difference in super high level games, but at the lower levels it's just another. whoops! you don't have enough detection and insta lose mechanic that I found so frustrating in the early days of HOTS.
On September 13 2018 15:43 dicey wrote: [...] Much bigger fan of small changes that are tested a huge lot before going to the test servers, rather than forcibly changing meta once a year. [...]
that's how david kim did things, and we all know how that worked out
On September 13 2018 21:45 Ryu3600 wrote: Will Cyclones stay armored even though they have 0 armor now? Won't they just be taking unnecessarily higher damage vs Stalkers, Marauders, Immortals, and the sort? I mean I guess if they stay armored it makes sense in terms of toss being to hold it off... Since then Adepts, Banelings and Hellions would start to do more damage but I think an armored unit with 0 armor is ... odd
On September 13 2018 23:14 Vincenzo wrote: Terran needs splash damage in the late game in both match ups, the T v Z and the T v P (or alternatively, Z and P should have their splash damaged reduced). Currently is a race against the clock. With the proposed changes, I do not feel the problem is going to be solved.
If the ravens are not “the unit”, because they are supposed to be just a support unit, then there should be an additional spell similar to the Yamato canon, but with area damage (even if it is much lower). Currently, terrans have advantage in the short run, but once zergs and toss holds the initial pushing, the midgame-late game becomes impossible. In that situation Terrans resort to liberators, but the problem with the liberator is that they're not flexible enough.
For T v Z and T v P an improved battle cruiser with area damage would appear in the phase of the game where you can only barely survive with liberators. Note that this would help to fight the traditional compositions that make it impossible to go late, namely de ultra-corruptor in T v Z, and the death toss ball (stalker-inmortal-archon-storm) with tempest.
In any case, other option is to lower the viper vs Viking for the T v Z. Or to improve the ghost in the T v P. I guess making the ghost as deadly as the templar is to bio for toss balls could be an alternative option. Perhaps, rather than buffing the BC, it is better to decrease the damage of the vipers and improve the ghost vs P. Not sure.
The problem of Ravens was you can better stack air units than ground(with pathing issues(e.g. storming over a hold-position army) and for some weird reason you were able to stack Raven's AoE(WTF? No, seriously, WTF?). I believe the problem would be solved with non-stackable AoE(and maybe some shared cooldown).
I've been saying for aeons: they need to fix the tank so it's auto-fire activates without wasting time searching targets. So frustrating when the presence of 3 zealots or zerglings makes the tank delay firing for an entire half second.
On September 13 2018 01:42 JackONeill wrote: I can't imagine that they'll keep the tempest as it is now. It sh*ts on mech even harder than the old one, which is currently the main reason why mech isn't viable in TvP.
Mech will be better now in TvP. Tempests are absolute paperweights now against Vikings and Thors kill them twice as fast now, plus Carriers are now so much worse. Yes, they can be more annoying now, but only the most biased person on the planet would consider this a Mech TvP nerf.
Withouth stimmed bio you'll never catch a tempest, also thors would be ok-ish vs them but immortals would destroy them.
But it doesn't really matters, inmortal/archon/chargelot still destroys mech into unviability so the tempest changes don't really do much in that regard.
On September 13 2018 21:45 Ryu3600 wrote: Will Cyclones stay armored even though they have 0 armor now? Won't they just be taking unnecessarily higher damage vs Stalkers, Marauders, Immortals, and the sort? I mean I guess if they stay armored it makes sense in terms of toss being to hold it off... Since then Adepts, Banelings and Hellions would start to do more damage but I think an armored unit with 0 armor is ... odd
The units you mentioned will almost not be affected by this change. Zerglings, Mutas, Queens, Broodlings, Marines, Zealots, Sentries, other Cyclones and workers is what will fair better.
As funny as this sounds, the only way to beat late game, 3/3 mass BCs as protoss was to make tempests. Carriers, voidrays, and stalkers lose to them teleporting on top of them and using yamato. Tempests sorta straight up won.
Now they nerf the tempest hit points by half. They will just get teleported on and yamato'd. Speed boost won't make a difference when terran can teleport+firewith shooting, making kiting my protoss non-existent.. It's hilarious. I hope someone could unit test this because I am curious as to how it works.
On September 14 2018 23:24 youngjiddle wrote: As funny as this sounds, the only way to beat late game, 3/3 mass BCs as protoss was to make tempests. Carriers, voidrays, and stalkers lose to them teleporting on top of them and using yamato. Tempests sorta straight up won.
Now they nerf the tempest hit points by half. They will just get teleported on and yamato'd. Speed boost won't make a difference when terran can teleport+firewith shooting, making kiting my protoss non-existent.. It's hilarious. I hope someone could unit test this because I am curious as to how it works.
You just make cannons and recall... Your teleport is faster recharge than our teleport. In the downtime you simply just 1 shot the BC's with enough tempests lol
On September 13 2018 21:45 Ryu3600 wrote: Will Cyclones stay armored even though they have 0 armor now? Won't they just be taking unnecessarily higher damage vs Stalkers, Marauders, Immortals, and the sort? I mean I guess if they stay armored it makes sense in terms of toss being to hold it off... Since then Adepts, Banelings and Hellions would start to do more damage but I think an armored unit with 0 armor is ... odd
The units you mentioned will almost not be affected by this change. Zerglings, Mutas, Queens, Broodlings, Marines, Zealots, Sentries, other Cyclones and workers is what will fair better.
Yes, those are units that the change was meant to affect but my point was that the cyclone is now an armored unit with 0 armor. Which doesn't make much sense. The units you mentioned will do more damage to it but now the units that I mentioned will be doing bonus damage (Since they deal extra damage) vs an armored unit with no armor. What I was trying to say was we have a light unit (basically) taking vs armored damage from immortals lol
On September 14 2018 01:51 gruntrush wrote: Cloaked widow mines are the reason that I stopped playing 4 years ago. I just got back into 1v1 and found the new window mine much more reasonable to deal with. I hope they will reconsider this change. I can't see it making a big difference in super high level games, but at the lower levels it's just another. whoops! you don't have enough detection and insta lose mechanic that I found so frustrating in the early days of HOTS.
Aside from some drilling claws allins, there won't be too much trouble, I think. Even in lower leagues. Ovi speed is a must have upgrade anyway and having some overseers in your armies isn't too hard. Cloaked WMs are pretty neat against ling runbys, though. WMs without the cloaking are pretty much dead supply once they've gone off, especially when they're in the Terran's main army. They don't have lots of HP and are cleaned very easily right now, which is why almost nobody is using them.
On September 13 2018 06:31 batatm wrote: i was waiting for something that would make infestors viable but alas, it was not meant to be...
Making them viable is very hard, unless you go for a complete redesign. If fungal roots, it's OP. Neural always has been a niche spell, there are situations when it's kinda good, but it's not as reliable as other options. As for infested terrans, I think they're in a good spot right now. The main problem with infestors used to be that they could be massed for easy AOE damage and zone control, quite similar to the Raven pre-nerf. Don't forget you're trading energy vs. minerals/gas, which can snowball very quickly. Basically, infestors are specialist units for very specific situations. They do help a lot in some late game scenarios right now.
@balance update in general: I'm not good enough to go beyond my personal opinions here. From what I've seen, the ultralisk upgrade is nuts. I highly doubt it will go through in its current state.
On September 14 2018 23:24 youngjiddle wrote: As funny as this sounds, the only way to beat late game, 3/3 mass BCs as protoss was to make tempests. Carriers, voidrays, and stalkers lose to them teleporting on top of them and using yamato. Tempests sorta straight up won.
Now they nerf the tempest hit points by half. They will just get teleported on and yamato'd. Speed boost won't make a difference when terran can teleport+firewith shooting, making kiting my protoss non-existent.. It's hilarious. I hope someone could unit test this because I am curious as to how it works.
Now BCs kill tempest in 2 Yamatos. However with new patch they'll kill tempest IN...!!! 2 Yamatos.
So don't worry your nightmares of BCs suddenly turning TvP into a 99% for terran aren't going to happen.
You just make cannons and recall... Your teleport is faster recharge than our teleport. In the downtime you simply just 1 shot the BC's with enough tempests lol
Do you not realize that protoss recall aoe will only be able to recall like, 4 tempests because of how small the new aoe is plus tempest's huge size? lol.
On September 15 2018 02:15 Lexender wrote: Now BCs kill tempest in 2 Yamatos. However with new patch they'll kill tempest IN...!!! 2 Yamatos.
So don't worry your nightmares of BCs suddenly turning TvP into a 99% for terran aren't going to happen.
You do realize that it's not about how many yamatos you use on one tempests... drop yamatos on every tempest and you leave them at something like 20 hp. 2 seconds of BC moving attack and they all will all die.
Like I said this weekend I am going to unit test them and maybe make a video.
I get that it sucked that mech didn't work vs protoss at all in high level play, but I think this change might be too large.
Watching some Rotti games, the Tempest change looks totally broken in PvZ. It might be good to require Templar archives or something. As it stands, it's totally ridiculous.
On September 13 2018 13:31 blooblooblahblah wrote: Tempests are absolute paperweights now against Vikings
Haha, no. Tempests will now kite Vikings forever with their shiny new 3.5 movespeed (for reference, Vikings are 3.8), or at least long enough for the viking blob to melt to a few storms.
You just make cannons and recall... Your teleport is faster recharge than our teleport. In the downtime you simply just 1 shot the BC's with enough tempests lol
Do you not realize that protoss recall aoe will only be able to recall like, 4 tempests because of how small the new aoe is plus tempest's huge size? lol.
On September 15 2018 02:15 Lexender wrote: Now BCs kill tempest in 2 Yamatos. However with new patch they'll kill tempest IN...!!! 2 Yamatos.
So don't worry your nightmares of BCs suddenly turning TvP into a 99% for terran aren't going to happen.
You do realize that it's not about how many yamatos you use on one tempests... drop yamatos on every tempest and you leave them at something like 20 hp. 2 seconds of BC moving attack and they all will all die.
Like I said this weekend I am going to unit test them and maybe make a video.
I get that it sucked that mech didn't work vs protoss at all in high level play, but I think this change might be too large.
They also nerfed BC damage vs air from 6 to 5, take into consideration the base armor of a tempest and add a sentry for GS(wich now has a bigger radius) and a BC does a whoping 1 damage per shot, 1 fucking damage, please do test this and let us see how a 1 damage BC is going to destroy air units left and right.
You just make cannons and recall... Your teleport is faster recharge than our teleport. In the downtime you simply just 1 shot the BC's with enough tempests lol
Do you not realize that protoss recall aoe will only be able to recall like, 4 tempests because of how small the new aoe is plus tempest's huge size? lol.
On September 15 2018 02:15 Lexender wrote: Now BCs kill tempest in 2 Yamatos. However with new patch they'll kill tempest IN...!!! 2 Yamatos.
So don't worry your nightmares of BCs suddenly turning TvP into a 99% for terran aren't going to happen.
You do realize that it's not about how many yamatos you use on one tempests... drop yamatos on every tempest and you leave them at something like 20 hp. 2 seconds of BC moving attack and they all will all die.
Like I said this weekend I am going to unit test them and maybe make a video.
I get that it sucked that mech didn't work vs protoss at all in high level play, but I think this change might be too large.
They also nerfed BC damage vs air from 6 to 5, take into consideration the base armor of a tempest and add a sentry for GS(wich now has a bigger radius) and a BC does a whoping 1 damage per shot, 1 fucking damage, please do test this and let us see how a 1 damage BC is going to destroy air units left and right.
I will be watching the shit out of this video he’ll be producing. In addition to that, if you don’t know how to stack your air units for a Recall you’re probably playing the wrong game.
just so you guys know, most changes are overbuffed/overnerfed on purpose so that it's easier for blizzard to identify the right direction for future changes and fine tuning.
One of the things i dont understand is no mentioning of swarmhosts in the revamp. It would be the perfect time to finally adress this god damn unit.
i mean you gotta be blind to think swarmhosts are actually fine balance or design wise. Swarmhosts are one of those units that make you question why you even put time and effort in the game.
It's one of those units that make BW elitists say "...and that's why BW is better..."
It's one of those units that make RTS veteran wanna switch the genre.
It's one of those units that make you wonder why or how it even got out of the first brainstorm meeting at blizzard.
It''s one of those units that make your dad say "you're still watching this stupid game ? clean your room and get a job"
On September 17 2018 04:00 KR_4EVR wrote: Can blizzard please make concussive shell shock an area of effect (AOE) slow?
you realize how stupidly broken that would be?
On September 17 2018 04:54 Siegetank_Dieter1 wrote: i mean you gotta be blind to think swarmhosts are actually fine balance or design wise. Swarmhosts are one of those units that make you question why you even put time and effort in the game.
It's one of those units that make BW elitists say "...and that's why BW is better..."
It's one of those units that make RTS veteran wanna switch the genre.
It's one of those units that make you wonder why or how it even got out of the first brainstorm meeting at blizzard.
It''s one of those units that make your dad say "you're still watching this stupid game ? clean your room and get a job"
,_,
Have mercy with my brain, blizzard.
Thanks
Why? They are pretty fun if they get used, imo. Maybe they are not fun for a turtle mech player like Avilo, but thats a good thing.
On September 17 2018 04:54 Siegetank_Dieter1 wrote: i mean you gotta be blind to think swarmhosts are actually fine balance or design wise. Swarmhosts are one of those units that make you question why you even put time and effort in the game.
It's one of those units that make BW elitists say "...and that's why BW is better..."
It's one of those units that make RTS veteran wanna switch the genre.
It's one of those units that make you wonder why or how it even got out of the first brainstorm meeting at blizzard.
It''s one of those units that make your dad say "you're still watching this stupid game ? clean your room and get a job"
,_,
Have mercy with my brain, blizzard.
Thanks
Why? They are pretty fun if they get used, imo. Maybe they are not fun for a turtle mech player like Avilo, but thats a good thing.
cmon man... cmon.
Swarmhosts and fun in one sentence ?
i mean... cmon man.
swarmhosts are one of the most messed up units i've ever experienced in a RTS game. Also this unit has a very negative history in SC2.
Swarmhosts basically ruined most of heart of the swarm and caused a huge decline in player and viewerbase.
To me personally it's insane how this unit wasn't removed yet. They tried to redesign it and rebalance it, but every iteration turned out to be either too strong balance wise or simply too bad from a design perspective (or both).
So seriously.... i dont get it. What's even their role in the game !? to hardcounter every single factory unit ? because that's exactly what they're doing right now.
It's a single unit that stops a whole playstyle from being viable.
Why ?
It's not like zerg would be weak vs mech without swarmhosts. Every race has to play vs mech, but zerg can abuse free locusts waves even though from a balance standpoint it's not even necessary.
On September 17 2018 04:00 KR_4EVR wrote: Can blizzard please make concussive shell shock an area of effect (AOE) slow?
you realize how stupidly broken that would be?
On September 17 2018 04:54 Siegetank_Dieter1 wrote: i mean you gotta be blind to think swarmhosts are actually fine balance or design wise. Swarmhosts are one of those units that make you question why you even put time and effort in the game.
It's one of those units that make BW elitists say "...and that's why BW is better..."
It's one of those units that make RTS veteran wanna switch the genre.
It's one of those units that make you wonder why or how it even got out of the first brainstorm meeting at blizzard.
It''s one of those units that make your dad say "you're still watching this stupid game ? clean your room and get a job"
,_,
Have mercy with my brain, blizzard.
Thanks
Why? They are pretty fun if they get used, imo. Maybe they are not fun for a turtle mech player like Avilo, but thats a good thing.
cmon man... cmon.
Swarmhosts and fun in one sentence ?
i mean... cmon man.
swarmhosts are one of the most messed up units i've ever experienced in a RTS game. Also this unit has a very negative history in SC2.
Swarmhosts basically ruined most of heart of the swarm and caused a huge decline in player and viewerbase.
To me personally it's insane how this unit wasn't removed yet. They tried to redesign it and rebalance it, but every iteration turned out to be either too strong balance wise or simply too bad from a design perspective (or both).
So seriously.... i dont get it. What's even their role in the game !? to hardcounter every single factory unit ? because that's exactly what they're doing right now.
It's a single unit that stops a whole playstyle from being viable.
Why ?
It's not like zerg would be weak vs mech without swarmhosts. Every race has to play vs mech, but zerg can abuse free locusts waves even though from a balance standpoint it's not even necessary.
So yeah I read that as "it kills my turtle mech playstyle". It is very much possible to play mech vs Zerg.
On September 17 2018 04:00 KR_4EVR wrote: Can blizzard please make concussive shell shock an area of effect (AOE) slow?
you realize how stupidly broken that would be?
On September 17 2018 04:54 Siegetank_Dieter1 wrote: i mean you gotta be blind to think swarmhosts are actually fine balance or design wise. Swarmhosts are one of those units that make you question why you even put time and effort in the game.
It's one of those units that make BW elitists say "...and that's why BW is better..."
It's one of those units that make RTS veteran wanna switch the genre.
It's one of those units that make you wonder why or how it even got out of the first brainstorm meeting at blizzard.
It''s one of those units that make your dad say "you're still watching this stupid game ? clean your room and get a job"
,_,
Have mercy with my brain, blizzard.
Thanks
Why? They are pretty fun if they get used, imo. Maybe they are not fun for a turtle mech player like Avilo, but thats a good thing.
cmon man... cmon.
Swarmhosts and fun in one sentence ?
i mean... cmon man.
swarmhosts are one of the most messed up units i've ever experienced in a RTS game. Also this unit has a very negative history in SC2.
Swarmhosts basically ruined most of heart of the swarm and caused a huge decline in player and viewerbase.
To me personally it's insane how this unit wasn't removed yet. They tried to redesign it and rebalance it, but every iteration turned out to be either too strong balance wise or simply too bad from a design perspective (or both).
So seriously.... i dont get it. What's even their role in the game !? to hardcounter every single factory unit ? because that's exactly what they're doing right now.
It's a single unit that stops a whole playstyle from being viable.
Why ?
It's not like zerg would be weak vs mech without swarmhosts. Every race has to play vs mech, but zerg can abuse free locusts waves even though from a balance standpoint it's not even necessary.
Mech is super viable vs Zerg. If you can't mech vs Zerg, phrasing this as delicately as possible, it isn't through the fault of the game. I see top terran players do it all the time, and I also see it (and sometimes lose to it) on the ladder in Plat 2.
I hate when people talk about "playing mech" as if it was something to take for granted,
Imagine zerg players complaining about hatch only play - hey dude hatch is unplayable right now, im forced to make a lair... wtf- or protoss players complaining about no gateway and robo only compositions -come on blizzard stop nerfing robo plz its unplayable vT I want to play "robo":
The only reason "mech" is a thing is because it was playable in BW. Just stop, mech doesn´t have to be and should not be a thing in SC2.
Hmmm wow, they really change the balance of SC2 completely a lot....it kind of surprises me at this point, but I will have to try out the changes once they go into effect.
So it's been approximately 9 or so days since the potential changes were announced, and still not a single word from blizzard about swarmhosts.
Or any word from them that they are going to put these changes through or not. Do we just assume all of these are going through and they are not addressing swarmhosts? There needs to be a discussion about swarmhosts relatively soon or it's not going to get pushed through into an actual patch.
On September 17 2018 15:45 avilo wrote: So it's been approximately 9 or so days since the potential changes were announced, and still not a single word from blizzard about swarmhosts.
Or any word from them that they are going to put these changes through or not. Do we just assume all of these are going through and they are not addressing swarmhosts? There needs to be a discussion about swarmhosts relatively soon or it's not going to get pushed through into an actual patch.
Yeah tanks need to be adress so SH won't stay the only pre_hive tech that can counter them.
SH is a bandaid to let zerg survive vs mech that received way too many buffs. Mass tanks is really a problem.
Fortunatly they're adressing the Thor buffs.
Something about the AI could be changed, like when there are more than 5 tanks on the area, they start to overkill.
On September 17 2018 11:09 Malongo wrote: I hate when people talk about "playing mech" as if it was something to take for granted,
Imagine zerg players complaining about hatch only play - hey dude hatch is unplayable right now, im forced to make a lair... wtf- or protoss players complaining about no gateway and robo only compositions -come on blizzard stop nerfing robo plz its unplayable vT I want to play "robo":
The only reason "mech" is a thing is because it was playable in BW. Just stop, mech doesn´t have to be and should not be a thing in SC2.
Honestly I've always felt the same way.
SC2 Terran plays nothing like BW Terran to begin with, so I really don't see the obsession with trying to force it to work.
On September 17 2018 15:45 avilo wrote: So it's been approximately 9 or so days since the potential changes were announced, and still not a single word from blizzard about swarmhosts.
Or any word from them that they are going to put these changes through or not. Do we just assume all of these are going through and they are not addressing swarmhosts? There needs to be a discussion about swarmhosts relatively soon or it's not going to get pushed through into an actual patch.
Oh how happy I am that they kill your terrible, terrible playstyle.
On September 17 2018 07:27 Siegetank_Dieter1 wrote:
So seriously.... i dont get it. What's even their role in the game !? to hardcounter every single factory unit ? because that's exactly what they're doing right now.
What a horrible lie it is. Hellions and hellbats are countered with swarmhosts? Lol, locusts just melt in case you will land them somewhere near hellbat.
As a zerg, I don't like using swarmhost because of it's slowness and risks of having lots of supply frozen with no usage for some time. But they are the only valid way to counter this immortal mech fists, other case zerg just meeeeelts.
And one more, speaking about "fun play". I've been dealing with some mech guys who play really interesting: lots of multitasking, or crzay macro and throws, or something else. But most of mech I see is "I hide while harrasing with hellions, mass an immortal fist, get out of the base, die or win", soooooo boring!
On September 17 2018 07:27 Siegetank_Dieter1 wrote:
On September 17 2018 07:15 Aunvilgodess wrote:
On September 17 2018 04:00 KR_4EVR wrote: Can blizzard please make concussive shell shock an area of effect (AOE) slow?
you realize how stupidly broken that would be?
On September 17 2018 04:54 Siegetank_Dieter1 wrote: i mean you gotta be blind to think swarmhosts are actually fine balance or design wise. Swarmhosts are one of those units that make you question why you even put time and effort in the game.
It's one of those units that make BW elitists say "...and that's why BW is better..."
It's one of those units that make RTS veteran wanna switch the genre.
It's one of those units that make you wonder why or how it even got out of the first brainstorm meeting at blizzard.
It''s one of those units that make your dad say "you're still watching this stupid game ? clean your room and get a job"
,_,
Have mercy with my brain, blizzard.
Thanks
Why? They are pretty fun if they get used, imo. Maybe they are not fun for a turtle mech player like Avilo, but thats a good thing.
cmon man... cmon.
Swarmhosts and fun in one sentence ?
i mean... cmon man.
swarmhosts are one of the most messed up units i've ever experienced in a RTS game. Also this unit has a very negative history in SC2.
Swarmhosts basically ruined most of heart of the swarm and caused a huge decline in player and viewerbase.
To me personally it's insane how this unit wasn't removed yet. They tried to redesign it and rebalance it, but every iteration turned out to be either too strong balance wise or simply too bad from a design perspective (or both).
So seriously.... i dont get it. What's even their role in the game !? to hardcounter every single factory unit ? because that's exactly what they're doing right now.
It's a single unit that stops a whole playstyle from being viable.
Why ?
It's not like zerg would be weak vs mech without swarmhosts. Every race has to play vs mech, but zerg can abuse free locusts waves even though from a balance standpoint it's not even necessary.
So yeah I read that as "it kills my turtle mech playstyle". It is very much possible to play mech vs Zerg.
But he's right, the unit isn't funny and breaks the RTS concepts. Swarmhost and broodlord both create units for free. No other race can do that. You either have to pay resources or energy. It would be kinda OKish if those units were "ghosts" - if you could freely walk through them(e.g. kamikaze-ball energy shot), but since they fuck up pathing(which was the major issue both in WoL and HotS with these units) - design wise it's stupid. (at least in the concept of SC RTS).
Fun - that's totally subjective to the user, but I don't feel very entertained when I have to defend against SH or BL and I don't feel very entertained when I am using them. So I don't get from where the fun is coming.
But I won't dispute the balance - while both units are annoying as monday at work after a party weekend, they're balanced. (but they require special response which is a band aid balance IMO)
It is ok that Swarm Host delay the opponents army movement, kill tanks, workers and productions facilities. That is their role. But every unit should have a counter and the counter should never be "skip half your tech tree if this unit is present on the map".
If Swarm Hosts were light so that hellions could chase them instead of just tickling them this problem would be solved. Both sides would then have counter play opportunities.
On September 17 2018 11:09 Malongo wrote: I hate when people talk about "playing mech" as if it was something to take for granted,
Imagine zerg players complaining about hatch only play - hey dude hatch is unplayable right now, im forced to make a lair... wtf- or protoss players complaining about no gateway and robo only compositions -come on blizzard stop nerfing robo plz its unplayable vT I want to play "robo":
The only reason "mech" is a thing is because it was playable in BW. Just stop, mech doesn´t have to be and should not be a thing in SC2.
It's incredible to me to read this in 2018. When the mech/bio distinction has been developped through design (mech-specific units and upgrades, split weapons/armor upgrades through different research buildings, etc.), through the design team communication, and the pro scene's history ("is it mech or bio").
I suppose that it's fine to some people that terran should only play MMM with the occasionnal mech support unit and/or units that are only good for a while. In that logic, cyclones should never be build more than once or twice after terran expands, ever. And that's the only role of the unit. Banshee speed, blue flame, cyclone AA upgrade should also never been research because bio play doesn't allow to build enough of these units for those upgrades to be worth it (because those units don't work well with bio and are therefore can only be built in a limited number through a specific timeframe).
Terran isn't protoss. It's not "every composition is gate + robo or SG support but upgrades are the same". Upgrades are split, production structures are different, not every mech unit works well with bio and bio requires such heavy economical, technological and in terms of production that you can't build a lot of support units that therefore need to work well with bio at specific times.
You have to know and/or understand nothing about the game to compare terran's "you either play with stim or you don't" design to "but it's like a zerg saying he just wants to play with hatch".
On September 17 2018 19:18 Ej_ wrote: Spire units also have separate upgrades. Why isn't mass mutalisk viable playstyle vs Terran?
Confusion between "the unit should be viable in a composition" and "mass". Immortals are viable and an important part of nearly protoss composition, but are most of the time not truly "massed". Also mutas are viable vs terran in a lot of different moments of the game, and can perfectly be integrated to a ling bane composition, or SH/mutas versus mech. Also also zerg units all have the same production so the upgrade argument isn't comparable. BL are perfectly viable out of pretty much any mid game composition and in any matchup despite having different upgrades. Zerg works in tiers much more than the two other races. Also also also building 60 population of a high tech specific harass/tradebase unit hasn't ever been viable but for zerg with mass mutas. You don't see terrans building 20 banshees. Which puts the muta question a very specific case.
On September 17 2018 18:06 MockHamill wrote: If Swarm Hosts were light so that hellions could chase them instead of just tickling them this problem would be solved. Both sides would then have counter play opportunities.
On September 17 2018 18:06 MockHamill wrote: If Swarm Hosts were light so that hellions could chase them instead of just tickling them this problem would be solved. Both sides would then have counter play opportunities.
Have you heard about banshees?
Problem is takes too much time to make a starport and produce banshees when you scout the Swarm Hosts. The game is already over by then. Even if you already have the starport, getting enough banshees in time is not typically not feasible given how fast Zerg can make Swarm Hosts compared to slow Terran make banshees.
Making hellions would make more sense since you already have the production facilities to support hellion production, and hellion are produced fast enough that you can actually respond to what you scout.
On September 17 2018 19:18 Ej_ wrote: Spire units also have separate upgrades. Why isn't mass mutalisk viable playstyle vs Terran?
Confusion between "the unit should be viable in a composition" and "mass". Immortals are viable and an important part of nearly protoss composition, but are most of the time not truly "massed". Also mutas are viable vs terran in a lot of different moments of the game, and can perfectly be integrated to a ling bane composition, or SH/mutas versus mech. Also also zerg units all have the same production so the upgrade argument isn't comparable. BL are perfectly viable out of pretty much any mid game composition and in any matchup despite having different upgrades. Zerg works in tiers much more than the two other races. Also also also building 60 population of a high tech specific harass/tradebase unit hasn't ever been viable but for zerg with mass mutas. You don't see terrans building 20 banshees. Which puts the muta question a very specific case.
I'd say nice try but hey
I think Ej_ was trying to point out that since spire has separate upgrades it should be viable to go spire only vs terran (in the same way that mech upgrades should equal mech only viability). Also following your logic, pure zerg ground melee and pure zerg ground ranged should each be viable on their own no?
On September 17 2018 18:06 MockHamill wrote: If Swarm Hosts were light so that hellions could chase them instead of just tickling them this problem would be solved. Both sides would then have counter play opportunities.
This discussion is pointless, mech IS a thing and will ALWAYS be a thing wether you people like it or not, no matter how much stupid pointless discussion (or in EJ_ case obvious trolling and baiting) have, Blizzard has clearly stated so multiple times.
That being said, as a terran mech lover SH are a non-issue, while I do have some clear disdain for the unit from a gameplay and design perspective they aren't really a problem.
SH are there to force a turtling terrans hand and I think thats fine, mech (despite all the whining people do) isn't about turtling, its about zone control and strong pushes combined with fast harrass. If you are sitting in your bases making tanks and turrets of course SH are going to kill you, but if you are out in the map, threatening with your tanks and making lots of hellbats you will be surprised how much SH actually suck at straight up fights and at being defensive tools.
Mech is here to stay but if you want to have success with it you have to adapt to the game.
To stop swarm hosts with banshees you would typically need speed. To invest into speed means you either add a new starport or take your current starport off of the reactor. You also need cloak and usually, 1 banshee won't be enough because by the time they see 1 the zerg will immediately prepare.
Now out of boredom, I made a chart of how many hits it would take for a banshee to kill a swarm host based on any damage or armor (Should be noted its a very rough chart I didn't put much effort in) So if anyone is interested I have the chart here. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VwtQSDi7nZc9_ZkTkOC9UNbtXuf8YRQMD3t1kJcnobw/edit?usp=sharing I did not include any excess damage or show how much damage would be overkill. Only the amount of required hits a banshee would need to kill a swarmhost based on the circumstance as well as the stats of all 3 units (Banshee, Swarmhost and locust)
Now based on what this sheet shows you can conclude that you'd roughly on average need about 8 banshees if you want to kill swarmhosts in 1 hit quickly and efficiently this requires a large investment of gas that would typically go into your army + a lot of APM to micro and chase the swarmhosts as well as upgrades such as cloak, speed and ship weapons which would require a third armory or stopping another upgrade such as Mech Armor or Vehicle damage.
There next thing to consider is what time are swarmhosts out and how much time do we as Terrans have to invest in terms of killing them with banshees? It is a serious Gas investment as well as time investment + we halt the production of other key units such as vikings, tanks or thors. The banshee is also extremely needy (APM wise) and is pretty easy to kill if the zerg leaves even some hydras and an overseer and while banshees can be used for more than just killing the swarmhost it just isn't a good enough investment to consider.
PS: This isn't to say we don't have other options at all to deal with swarmhosts
I love the people here that just want SC2 to stay in the grave.
Swarmhosts need a fix immediately. If you abuse swarmhosts properly versus mech you basically get an autowin. Every day i stream SC2 and play Terran on stream, every Zerg i get abuses swarmhost because they know it's essentially an autowin vs mech.
"avilo don't go mech then."
Ok, and that's why most people quit SC2 by now. Swarmhosts either need to be deleted from the game, or severely nerfed to the point they don't shut down an entire style of play.
Let's all be honest - swarmhosts never should have been added into SC2 during HOTS. They almost single handledly are what killed SC2's entire viewership and player base.
People can argue what they want here, but the fact is this unit is a joke game design and game balance wise. Things like this in SC2 literally make our community and game look like a laughing stock compared to what SC2 used to be.
I tell my stream this, but i literally have played Fortnite/LoL games where people will recognize me, ask me how it's going, etc, if i still play SC2, and i always ask them if they play or played, they always fuckin have the same anecdotal response - "i quit teh game when they made swarmhosts the entire game" "i quit the game when they made pylons able to shoot my ramp" "i quit the game during brood infestor"
I know people here aren't ever going to wake up because it hasn't happened in the last 4-5 yrs. You just accept the game in the terrible state it's in and think making mass swarmhost versus mech is fine and won't matter, but i tell you it actually matters a lot for people that still play the game. There are people obv posting here that still give a fuck, but the sad truth is the majority already left the game and don't care anymore because they see none of it is ever being fixed.
So again, let's discuss swarmhosts. What changes can they do to fix/delete this unit?
I would say, make them a light unit, and make them 2x more expensive. This unit should never see the light of day in any casual, ladder, or professional game. There is no justifying it even being in the game to this day.
On September 17 2018 15:45 avilo wrote: So it's been approximately 9 or so days since the potential changes were announced, and still not a single word from blizzard about swarmhosts.
Or any word from them that they are going to put these changes through or not. Do we just assume all of these are going through and they are not addressing swarmhosts? There needs to be a discussion about swarmhosts relatively soon or it's not going to get pushed through into an actual patch.
Yeah tanks need to be adress so SH won't stay the only pre_hive tech that can counter them.
SH is a bandaid to let zerg survive vs mech that received way too many buffs. Mass tanks is really a problem.
Fortunatly they're adressing the Thor buffs.
Something about the AI could be changed, like when there are more than 5 tanks on the area, they start to overkill.
Last time I checked, tanks don't shoot up. With the Thor changes, mutas will wreck mech if played sloppily. Which is how it should be.
When gumiho rekts the best Korean players who go swarmhosts every time it really makes you think how bad mech players are that they claim its an autolose for them.
Hmm imo all zerg changes are shit. For me it's going in the wrong direction with being sneeky by burrowing Hydras and Lings and Nydus plays. I would hate to have to play like that.
Why don't they change broken units like the Swarmhost?
I wouldnt say swarmhosts are a balance problem as many top players have shown how to beat them and I dont even think they are meta at the pro scene because they arent actually the best response.
Swarmhosts are just crappy from design perspective. Either you have a critical mass where you are getting in free damage every round or your waves get cleaned up easily and thus you will probably lose to a counterpush. The design of the unit allows for very little space in between and also doesnt really allow for much counterplay (either you push or you accept taking small losses to push a bit later). It just doesnt seem like a good design to have these low risk waves of units that are so extreme in terms of how they work out. In terms of actually salvaging them I like the suggestion someone posted about making them light so Helions counter them and can change them down. At least that would make them more interactive. Although I dont mind swarmhosts in general because they fortunately tend to be pretty mediocre anyways - if only they could be made even worse or be removed from the game. At least the redesign from hots to lotv made them less oppressive.
I honestly might dislike the design of broodlords a bit more because they are actually good. The fact that at any sort of mass of broodlords the free broodlings block all pathing just make them a very oppressive unit. It just means that any ground army is basically useless unless used defensively or as support. It generally seems to force the game into either turtling or into air deathball vs air deathball - two states of the game which generally seem unfun. The fact that corruptors/vipers are great in mass air vs mass air contributes even further to these annoying air fights. Air units are clunky to control because of both their stacking and the fact that you have to click where they go on the ground (instead of on the air). I feel like its better if armies generally stay ground based.
Maybe the broodlords would be a better unit if they spawned fewer broodlings (but generally keeping the dps the same). This way ground units might actually stand a chance versus broodlords.
On September 18 2018 00:36 Lexender wrote: This discussion is pointless, mech IS a thing and will ALWAYS be a thing wether you people like it or not, no matter how much stupid pointless discussion (or in EJ_ case obvious trolling and baiting) have, Blizzard has clearly stated so multiple times.
[snip]
Mech is here to stay but if you want to have success with it you have to adapt to the game.
I see you weren't around for WoL when mech was almost never seen except sometimes in TvT although even then overshadowed by bionic (marine + support) builds.
On September 18 2018 00:55 avilo wrote: I love the people here that just want SC2 to stay in the grave.
[snip]
Ok, and that's why most people quit SC2 by now. Swarmhosts either need to be deleted from the game, or severely nerfed to the point they don't shut down an entire style of play.
Man avilo I understand your passion but the things you bring up are objectively wrong.
SC2 was at its peak in terms of viewership and playerbase when TvZ meta was nothing but Marine Tank Medivac vs Muta Ling Bling (and later infestors became popular).
Hype matches like Nestea vs Mvp, MMA vs DongRaeGu, Leenock vs Jjakji, MarineKing and BoxeR showing off crazy micro. That's when the game was the most popular, that's when MLG Providence hit 200k concurrent viewers, that's when every next big event was breaking some kind of record either for SC2 or even eSports in general.
It was the bio microfest vs the ling bling microfest. That's what was most popular.
That's what made BW TvZ the most hype too, SK Terran, not mech. Few people who don't play Terran actually like watching mech, in either game, even though in BW it's better and doesn't feel like a hamfisted afterthought.
On September 17 2018 23:21 JimmyJRaynor wrote: I love the new role for the Terran Thor. Its the Kevin Nash of the game... its the Giant Killer.
On September 18 2018 00:03 Siegetank_Dieter1 wrote: Thors are the starbucks coffees of SC2... not good, just expensive.
Thors are just ToOoOoOo SWEEEEEEEEEEET!
Seriously though, if the current 40+10 ( Massive ) is not strong enough they can just increase the Massive modifier and sharpen the Thor's role even further. I think the new roll Blizzard has carved out for the Thor is an awesome idea.
Blizzard earned my skins and co-op money for 2018. I'm a satisfied customer.
On September 18 2018 00:55 avilo wrote: I love the people here that just want SC2 to stay in the grave.
activity around SC2 is up slightly in comparison to 2017. it is Overwatch that is bleeding users badly.
On September 18 2018 00:03 Siegetank_Dieter1 wrote: Thors are the starbucks coffees of SC2... not good, just expensive.
Thors are just ToOoOoOo SWEEEEEEEEEEET!
Seriously though, if the current 40+10 ( Massive ) is not strong enough they can just increase the Massive modifier and sharpen the Thor's role even further. I think the new roll Blizzard has carved out for the Thor is an awesome idea.
Blizzard earned my skins and co-op money for 2018. I'm a satisfied customer.
On September 17 2018 23:21 JimmyJRaynor wrote: I love the new role for the Terran Thor. Its the Kevin Nash of the game... its the Giant Killer.
On September 18 2018 00:03 Siegetank_Dieter1 wrote: Thors are the starbucks coffees of SC2... not good, just expensive.
Thors are just ToOoOoOo SWEEEEEEEEEEET!
Seriously though, if the current 40+10 ( Massive ) is not strong enough they can just increase the Massive modifier and sharpen the Thor's role even further. I think the new roll Blizzard has carved out for the Thor is an awesome idea.
Blizzard earned my skins and co-op money for 2018. I'm a satisfied customer.
On September 18 2018 00:55 avilo wrote: I love the people here that just want SC2 to stay in the grave.
activity around SC2 is up slightly in comparison to 2017. it is Overwatch that is bleeding users badly.
Just like DotA 2 and CS:GO. Basically every game that is not fortnite
if you pay attention to the ATVI report. ATVI franchises are stable or growing. Except, Overwatch.
On September 17 2018 23:21 JimmyJRaynor wrote: I love the new role for the Terran Thor. Its the Kevin Nash of the game... its the Giant Killer.
On September 18 2018 00:03 Siegetank_Dieter1 wrote: Thors are the starbucks coffees of SC2... not good, just expensive.
Thors are just ToOoOoOo SWEEEEEEEEEEET!
Seriously though, if the current 40+10 ( Massive ) is not strong enough they can just increase the Massive modifier and sharpen the Thor's role even further. I think the new roll Blizzard has carved out for the Thor is an awesome idea.
Blizzard earned my skins and co-op money for 2018. I'm a satisfied customer.
On September 18 2018 00:55 avilo wrote: I love the people here that just want SC2 to stay in the grave.
activity around SC2 is up slightly in comparison to 2017. it is Overwatch that is bleeding users badly.
Just like DotA 2 and CS:GO. Basically every game that is not fortnite
if you pay attention to the ATVI report. ATVI franchises are stable or growing. Except, Overwatch.
Why are the steamcharts numbers for dota 2 and cs:go not as big as they used to be? DotA 2 and CS:GO should grow because Valve is the best developer, or?
The Swarmhost games Ive seen were usually rather fun. And I tell you what, if Swarmhosts get changed and turtle mech becomes viable we have a *serious* problem. The banshee buff is a step in the right direction to make a style of mech viable that is a little more skill intensive.
On September 17 2018 23:21 JimmyJRaynor wrote: I love the new role for the Terran Thor. Its the Kevin Nash of the game... its the Giant Killer.
On September 18 2018 00:03 Siegetank_Dieter1 wrote: Thors are the starbucks coffees of SC2... not good, just expensive.
Thors are just ToOoOoOo SWEEEEEEEEEEET!
Seriously though, if the current 40+10 ( Massive ) is not strong enough they can just increase the Massive modifier and sharpen the Thor's role even further. I think the new roll Blizzard has carved out for the Thor is an awesome idea.
Blizzard earned my skins and co-op money for 2018. I'm a satisfied customer.
On September 18 2018 00:55 avilo wrote: I love the people here that just want SC2 to stay in the grave.
activity around SC2 is up slightly in comparison to 2017. it is Overwatch that is bleeding users badly.
Just like DotA 2 and CS:GO. Basically every game that is not fortnite
if you pay attention to the ATVI report. ATVI franchises are stable or growing. Except, Overwatch.
Why are the steamcharts numbers for dota 2 and cs:go not as big as they used to be? DotA 2 and CS:GO should grow because Valve is the best developer, or?
no clue. i'm talking about ATVI franchises. Overwatch is bleeding badly. everything else under activision and blizzard is stable.
On September 17 2018 11:09 Malongo wrote: I hate when people talk about "playing mech" as if it was something to take for granted,
Imagine zerg players complaining about hatch only play - hey dude hatch is unplayable right now, im forced to make a lair... wtf- or protoss players complaining about no gateway and robo only compositions -come on blizzard stop nerfing robo plz its unplayable vT I want to play "robo":
The only reason "mech" is a thing is because it was playable in BW. Just stop, mech doesn´t have to be and should not be a thing in SC2.
It's incredible to me to read this in 2018. When the mech/bio distinction has been developped through design (mech-specific units and upgrades, split weapons/armor upgrades through different research buildings, etc.), through the design team communication, and the pro scene's history ("is it mech or bio").
I suppose that it's fine to some people that terran should only play MMM with the occasionnal mech support unit and/or units that are only good for a while. In that logic, cyclones should never be build more than once or twice after terran expands, ever. And that's the only role of the unit. Banshee speed, blue flame, cyclone AA upgrade should also never been research because bio play doesn't allow to build enough of these units for those upgrades to be worth it (because those units don't work well with bio and are therefore can only be built in a limited number through a specific timeframe).
Terran isn't protoss. It's not "every composition is gate + robo or SG support but upgrades are the same". Upgrades are split, production structures are different, not every mech unit works well with bio and bio requires such heavy economical, technological and in terms of production that you can't build a lot of support units that therefore need to work well with bio at specific times.
You have to know and/or understand nothing about the game to compare terran's "you either play with stim or you don't" design to "but it's like a zerg saying he just wants to play with hatch".
Somehow I feel like arguing here is pointless. Some players take a privilege (being able to play with certain unit compositions) as granted and as a right. Terran isn´t Protoss, yeah. Are factory units bad as support units? The only real point you make is about weapons and armor upgrades, wich are -again- a privilege.
In the end, it is never really about "mech", but about playing turtle with siege tank defence. I am pretty confident that even if somehow blizzard took the siege tank out of the equation (by replacing it with an equally good "mech" attacking unit) terran players would still complain because they want to emulate the siege tank-vulture-mine-turret combo from BW.
I dont get people who pretend like mech isn't supposed to be a thing!?
Mech is a part of Terran's design as a race. And no, it's not just BW players who would like to play mech in SC2 too, Mech clearly is and always was supposed to be a playable style.
Blizzard themselves stated multiple times that they want to make mech more viable and people still come up with weird arguments like "but as a protoss i cant play mass robo either blabla"
Different races are different, but to pretend like mech isn't even supposed to be a playable style, is just ridiculous. No StarCraft veteran could say something like that with a straight face.
Hellbats for example got added into the game simply to make mech more viable vs protoss. Thors get constant changes to make mech not auto lose to mass air.
Tankivacs got removed to buff tanks and make mech viable (it was also a highly requested design change by the community)
There are countless examples.
For those who still dont believe me
Every time people discuss mech viability, there's always some people who just come up with those nonsense statements that mech shouldn't be an actual style. Cmon guys. Stop it.
Years and years later Avilo still advocating for anything that keeps mech in check to be removed or nerfed into oblivion, stating that it's "bad for the game" when SC2 was undeniably most popular when mech was all but unviable in everything but TvT.
Oh and Avilo, I'm sure you see Gumiho make Swarm Hosts look bad, either learn to play or start going bio man good God.
I listened to the recent episode of the Pylon podcast where they went through all of these changes. With how they described the new carrier, I have some concerns especially with regards to lategame PvZ. They basically implied the new carrier is bad enough that it's not viable to go for carriers anymore at all. If the protoss air composition of choice switches to being tempest-based, I'm worried we're going to see a return of turtle zerg styles since the new lower health tempest is much more susceptible to viper/queen/mass spore styles. Yes, new tempests are faster, but they still attack very slowly, so moving out with them is still going to be a slow process and thus is going to force a long game if zerg plays it right.
One thing they mentioned on the podcast is that one of the reasons the balance team gave for getting rid of Gravitron Catapult from the carrier is that it allows for too much burst damage. This seems like a silly way to handle the problem to me. It's akin to saying "marines are too good with stim currently, so let's get rid of stim altogether" rather than trying to tone down the upgrade. Without Gravitron Catapult, carriers are not a particularly good unit. The upgrade is what makes them viable in SC2. Why not have Gravitron Catapult launch half of available interceptors, or something like that? It would solve the burst damage issue while still allowing carriers to actually engage rather than needing a bunch of time to launch interceptors before being able to assist in the fight at all. It would allow the carriers to do damage, but protoss would be forced to build other units to backup the carriers since they still need time to release all interceptors, which is what we want. Mass carriers wouldn't be viable, but using carriers as the backbone of an army would still work.
They also mentioned that carriers are too good of an all-around unit, which is definitely true (once you get 10 of them with a few archons and storms you can kill almost any composition) but without it, protoss becomes quite fragile to tech switches, which zerg can do in the lategame much easier than protoss can. I worry that PvZ might return to being either protoss all-ins on two bases, turtles to mass tempest and have dull 40 minute games, or dies to non-stop tech switches.
Carriers are too good right now , but making them completely not viable at all is not the way to go about fixing them.
I haven't seen anyone mention what this means for team games. Anyone who's played any sort of 3v3 or 4v4 team games in the past year might have noticed the absolute plague of protoss players who sit behind cannons and their teammates and build up an unstoppable mass of carriers. It was so prevalent in every single game and there were very few things you could actually do to counter them that it ruined team games entirely. If you did anything as Toss other than building carriers, you weren't playing to win. I'm hopeful that these new carrier nerfs will reduce mass carriers in team games from being an I-win button to actually being able to stand up to them a bit better.
On September 17 2018 11:09 Malongo wrote: I hate when people talk about "playing mech" as if it was something to take for granted,
Imagine zerg players complaining about hatch only play - hey dude hatch is unplayable right now, im forced to make a lair... wtf- or protoss players complaining about no gateway and robo only compositions -come on blizzard stop nerfing robo plz its unplayable vT I want to play "robo":
The only reason "mech" is a thing is because it was playable in BW. Just stop, mech doesn´t have to be and should not be a thing in SC2.
It's incredible to me to read this in 2018. When the mech/bio distinction has been developped through design (mech-specific units and upgrades, split weapons/armor upgrades through different research buildings, etc.), through the design team communication, and the pro scene's history ("is it mech or bio").
I suppose that it's fine to some people that terran should only play MMM with the occasionnal mech support unit and/or units that are only good for a while. In that logic, cyclones should never be build more than once or twice after terran expands, ever. And that's the only role of the unit. Banshee speed, blue flame, cyclone AA upgrade should also never been research because bio play doesn't allow to build enough of these units for those upgrades to be worth it (because those units don't work well with bio and are therefore can only be built in a limited number through a specific timeframe).
Terran isn't protoss. It's not "every composition is gate + robo or SG support but upgrades are the same". Upgrades are split, production structures are different, not every mech unit works well with bio and bio requires such heavy economical, technological and in terms of production that you can't build a lot of support units that therefore need to work well with bio at specific times.
You have to know and/or understand nothing about the game to compare terran's "you either play with stim or you don't" design to "but it's like a zerg saying he just wants to play with hatch".
Somehow I feel like arguing here is pointless. Some players take a privilege (being able to play with certain unit compositions) as granted and as a right. Terran isn´t Protoss, yeah. Are factory units bad as support units? The only real point you make is about weapons and armor upgrades, wich are -again- a privilege.
In the end, it is never really about "mech", but about playing turtle with siege tank defence. I am pretty confident that even if somehow blizzard took the siege tank out of the equation (by replacing it with an equally good "mech" attacking unit) terran players would still complain because they want to emulate the siege tank-vulture-mine-turret combo from BW.
It's not a "privilege" to be able to play a composition that your race is organically designed to support. If zerg were only able to play lings banes mutas in every matchup because ranged compositions were absolutely horrible, it'd be a massive design flaw. Btw ZvP has big design flaws : compositions are pretty much always the same because both races have insanely hard counters to the opponent's units (viper vs colossi or immortals vs ultras for instance). Factory units (or starport units for that matter) aren't designed or supposed to just be support units, or else, as i stated, every single terran unit but MMM, tanks, liberators and arguably ghosts would be extraordinarily tightly time framed and mostly built only once or twice.
Anyway maybe it's indeed pointless to argue because you just revealed that you're actually not arguing the point, but instead trying to invalidate a somewhat imaginary playstyle that you dislike. Mech isn't necessarily about tank turtling, it's about playing without stim and with factory units. Stating things like "terran would still complain if" also illustrates pretty well your true aim here, which is indeed not worth debating.
On September 17 2018 11:09 Malongo wrote: I hate when people talk about "playing mech" as if it was something to take for granted,
Imagine zerg players complaining about hatch only play - hey dude hatch is unplayable right now, im forced to make a lair... wtf- or protoss players complaining about no gateway and robo only compositions -come on blizzard stop nerfing robo plz its unplayable vT I want to play "robo":
The only reason "mech" is a thing is because it was playable in BW. Just stop, mech doesn´t have to be and should not be a thing in SC2.
It's incredible to me to read this in 2018. When the mech/bio distinction has been developped through design (mech-specific units and upgrades, split weapons/armor upgrades through different research buildings, etc.), through the design team communication, and the pro scene's history ("is it mech or bio").
I suppose that it's fine to some people that terran should only play MMM with the occasionnal mech support unit and/or units that are only good for a while. In that logic, cyclones should never be build more than once or twice after terran expands, ever. And that's the only role of the unit. Banshee speed, blue flame, cyclone AA upgrade should also never been research because bio play doesn't allow to build enough of these units for those upgrades to be worth it (because those units don't work well with bio and are therefore can only be built in a limited number through a specific timeframe).
Terran isn't protoss. It's not "every composition is gate + robo or SG support but upgrades are the same". Upgrades are split, production structures are different, not every mech unit works well with bio and bio requires such heavy economical, technological and in terms of production that you can't build a lot of support units that therefore need to work well with bio at specific times.
You have to know and/or understand nothing about the game to compare terran's "you either play with stim or you don't" design to "but it's like a zerg saying he just wants to play with hatch".
Somehow I feel like arguing here is pointless. Some players take a privilege (being able to play with certain unit compositions) as granted and as a right. Terran isn´t Protoss, yeah. Are factory units bad as support units? The only real point you make is about weapons and armor upgrades, wich are -again- a privilege.
In the end, it is never really about "mech", but about playing turtle with siege tank defence. I am pretty confident that even if somehow blizzard took the siege tank out of the equation (by replacing it with an equally good "mech" attacking unit) terran players would still complain because they want to emulate the siege tank-vulture-mine-turret combo from BW.
It's not a "privilege" to be able to play a composition that your race is organically designed to support. If zerg were only able to play lings banes mutas in every matchup because ranged compositions were absolutely horrible, it'd be a massive design flaw. Btw ZvP has big design flaws : compositions are pretty much always the same because both races have insanely hard counters to the opponent's units (viper vs colossi or immortals vs ultras for instance). Factory units (or starport units for that matter) aren't designed or supposed to just be support units, or else, as i stated, every single terran unit but MMM, tanks, liberators and arguably ghosts would be extraordinarily tightly time framed and mostly built only once or twice.
Anyway maybe it's indeed pointless to argue because you just revealed that you're actually not arguing the point, but instead trying to invalidate a somewhat imaginary playstyle that you dislike. Mech isn't necessarily about tank turtling, it's about playing without stim and with factory units. Stating things like "terran would still complain if" also illustrates pretty well your true aim here, which is indeed not worth debating.
Maybe you are correct and terran players have their own ritght from Blizzard to play "mech". All in all I just hate complainers in general. You have no clue about me thou.
I've been thinking a lot about tvz late game and what changes you would need to make to the game in order to move things away from the mass static d+broodlord,viper,corrupter, queen compositions towards a less turtley style of lay game zerg that is still powerfull enough that Zerg can close out a game they are ahead in. I think it's important for zerg to be able to breack a Terran when they have held all at agression more or less unscathed and have reached late game so they still 100% need tools to do this but I would prefer that the unit composition of choice in late game would not be a turtly air army. I would also prefer that there were more options available to Terran in a more neutral late game scenario where they have a lead from midgame but can't quit close it out than turtle in your base for 10-15 minutes and whittle down the broodlord ball. I think to fix this problem I would buff alternative late game techs for zerg and buff Terran air to air vs the bl curropter army. I think that the problem with bl corrupter for Terran is that Zergs late game vipers are to good at shutting down Vikings this makes it so Terran has to rely on ghosts+ static d to contest the air army and starts the turtle fest. I think Terran should have a fusion core upgrade for Vikings that makes them immune to aoe dmg. This would neutralize the strength of parisitic bomb in the matchup without messing up pvz late game.I would than prefer to see some buffs to other Zerg units so that they have alternative late game comps. I think ultras should get the speed upgrade backed in with chitenus plating at no additional cost maybe they should also get 1 additional armor to make them more threatening. I think that the lurker should be made a better late game option for zerg to offer an alternative way to siege an entrenched terran I think it's hive upgrade that buffs burrow time should also give it range equal to that of the siege tank. This way zerg can siege and poke with ground based comps and hopefully this would open up the late game by allowing both Terran and zerg a bit more mobility and ground. based options. Obviously I don't think these changes would ever happen but I'd love to see a more diverse and interesting tvz late game than what we have now.
On September 22 2018 05:02 hiroshOne wrote: "I think Terran should have a fusion core upgrade for Vikings that makes them immune to air dmg."
LOL, just LOL...
lol I ment to say aoe dmg... typed this on my phone while waiting for food aperently aoe-->air no no way did I mean to say immune to air dmg that is way to crazy =[. But yeah maybe a bit to crazy for zerg vs mech for Vikings to shut down vipers still id really like to see a return of late game ground heavy play or even reaching critical mass of upgraded mutas and counter atacking if Terran leaves as the win condition like we had on hots. The slow plodding static d queen bl comp vs static d+ ghost lib comp is just kind of boring and makes all the craziness of the early and mid game just grind to a halt. At least when the late game meta was 8 armor ultra things were more fluid and interesting with Terran dropping like crazy, trying to widdle down the ultras and hold on till enough ghosts, libs and Vikings could be made to stabilize. Maybe a more reasonable change would be to give Vikings a late game upgrade that increases there range, but I think this still promote turtling since now they just sit behind walls of static d and we are back to the dynamic we have with ghosts.
But even if we're talking about "immune to aoe air dmg" it still soubds stupid. Imagine giving Zerg lategame upgrade that makes Hydras immune to aoe ground dmg. U make vikings uncounterable in this way. Still not wise.
On September 22 2018 15:59 hiroshOne wrote: But even if we're talking about "immune to aoe air dmg" it still soubds stupid. Imagine giving Zerg lategame upgrade that makes Hydras immune to aoe ground dmg. U make vikings uncounterable in this way. Still not wise.
Vikings not taking AOE damage would be hilarious. Terran could slow push across the map in PvT with mass viking/liberator/ghost/tank and be quick literally unstoppable since Protoss would have nothing that could kill mass vikings efficiently. Also ghost/liberator/mass viking in TvZ would be just as broken.
That's as funny of a suggestion as that person who suggested tanks shoot from medivacs a while back.
You just make cannons and recall... Your teleport is faster recharge than our teleport. In the downtime you simply just 1 shot the BC's with enough tempests lol
Do you not realize that protoss recall aoe will only be able to recall like, 4 tempests because of how small the new aoe is plus tempest's huge size? lol.
On September 15 2018 02:15 Lexender wrote: Now BCs kill tempest in 2 Yamatos. However with new patch they'll kill tempest IN...!!! 2 Yamatos.
So don't worry your nightmares of BCs suddenly turning TvP into a 99% for terran aren't going to happen.
You do realize that it's not about how many yamatos you use on one tempests... drop yamatos on every tempest and you leave them at something like 20 hp. 2 seconds of BC moving attack and they all will all die.
Like I said this weekend I am going to unit test them and maybe make a video.
I get that it sucked that mech didn't work vs protoss at all in high level play, but I think this change might be too large.
Tempests can be stacked, but even if you can't, it'll hopefully introduce Motherships into the meta, which I would like greatly
Winter stacks stuff in here and the recall works the same.
On September 18 2018 03:11 Jerom wrote: I wouldnt say swarmhosts are a balance problem as many top players have shown how to beat them and I dont even think they are meta at the pro scene because they arent actually the best response.
Swarmhosts are just crappy from design perspective. Either you have a critical mass where you are getting in free damage every round or your waves get cleaned up easily and thus you will probably lose to a counterpush. The design of the unit allows for very little space in between and also doesnt really allow for much counterplay (either you push or you accept taking small losses to push a bit later). It just doesnt seem like a good design to have these low risk waves of units that are so extreme in terms of how they work out. In terms of actually salvaging them I like the suggestion someone posted about making them light so Helions counter them and can change them down. At least that would make them more interactive. Although I dont mind swarmhosts in general because they fortunately tend to be pretty mediocre anyways - if only they could be made even worse or be removed from the game. At least the redesign from hots to lotv made them less oppressive.
I honestly might dislike the design of broodlords a bit more because they are actually good. The fact that at any sort of mass of broodlords the free broodlings block all pathing just make them a very oppressive unit. It just means that any ground army is basically useless unless used defensively or as support. It generally seems to force the game into either turtling or into air deathball vs air deathball - two states of the game which generally seem unfun. The fact that corruptors/vipers are great in mass air vs mass air contributes even further to these annoying air fights. Air units are clunky to control because of both their stacking and the fact that you have to click where they go on the ground (instead of on the air). I feel like its better if armies generally stay ground based.
Maybe the broodlords would be a better unit if they spawned fewer broodlings (but generally keeping the dps the same). This way ground units might actually stand a chance versus broodlords.
Broodlords are a huge design problem in my opinion, its the only unit that absolutely forces you to go air to deal with them. Due to that Zerg anti air has to be weaker than Terran or protoss, because the moment zerg has decent anti air options brood lords become absolutely broken.
On September 18 2018 03:11 Jerom wrote: I wouldnt say swarmhosts are a balance problem as many top players have shown how to beat them and I dont even think they are meta at the pro scene because they arent actually the best response.
Swarmhosts are just crappy from design perspective. Either you have a critical mass where you are getting in free damage every round or your waves get cleaned up easily and thus you will probably lose to a counterpush. The design of the unit allows for very little space in between and also doesnt really allow for much counterplay (either you push or you accept taking small losses to push a bit later). It just doesnt seem like a good design to have these low risk waves of units that are so extreme in terms of how they work out. In terms of actually salvaging them I like the suggestion someone posted about making them light so Helions counter them and can change them down. At least that would make them more interactive. Although I dont mind swarmhosts in general because they fortunately tend to be pretty mediocre anyways - if only they could be made even worse or be removed from the game. At least the redesign from hots to lotv made them less oppressive.
I honestly might dislike the design of broodlords a bit more because they are actually good. The fact that at any sort of mass of broodlords the free broodlings block all pathing just make them a very oppressive unit. It just means that any ground army is basically useless unless used defensively or as support. It generally seems to force the game into either turtling or into air deathball vs air deathball - two states of the game which generally seem unfun. The fact that corruptors/vipers are great in mass air vs mass air contributes even further to these annoying air fights. Air units are clunky to control because of both their stacking and the fact that you have to click where they go on the ground (instead of on the air). I feel like its better if armies generally stay ground based.
Maybe the broodlords would be a better unit if they spawned fewer broodlings (but generally keeping the dps the same). This way ground units might actually stand a chance versus broodlords.
Broodlords are a huge design problem in my opinion, its the only unit that absolutely forces you to go air to deal with them. Due to that Zerg anti air has to be weaker than Terran or protoss, because the moment zerg has decent anti air options brood lords become absolutely broken.
I think this is a key thing to keep in mind and why I am so concerned about what they have done to carriers and tempests. Protoss cannot beat a competent zerg with a ground based army since broodlords prevent any effective form of attack from happening on the ground. If the changes go through as is there now nothing stopping turtle play behind mass spores, vipers, and queens because broodlords force protoss to go air. Tempests and carriers are the only units protoss can make to actually fight turtle styles and both are going to be nerfed against that style.
Puck even mentioned this on the recent episode of Pylon. These changes have a chance of bringing back 2013-style turtle zerg.
Someone said it earlier and I agree that PvZ is going to turn into a TvP-style situation of protoss having to either kill zerg early with some kind of all-in or probably lose in a long, drawn out game.
On September 18 2018 03:11 Jerom wrote: I wouldnt say swarmhosts are a balance problem as many top players have shown how to beat them and I dont even think they are meta at the pro scene because they arent actually the best response.
Swarmhosts are just crappy from design perspective. Either you have a critical mass where you are getting in free damage every round or your waves get cleaned up easily and thus you will probably lose to a counterpush. The design of the unit allows for very little space in between and also doesnt really allow for much counterplay (either you push or you accept taking small losses to push a bit later). It just doesnt seem like a good design to have these low risk waves of units that are so extreme in terms of how they work out. In terms of actually salvaging them I like the suggestion someone posted about making them light so Helions counter them and can change them down. At least that would make them more interactive. Although I dont mind swarmhosts in general because they fortunately tend to be pretty mediocre anyways - if only they could be made even worse or be removed from the game. At least the redesign from hots to lotv made them less oppressive.
I honestly might dislike the design of broodlords a bit more because they are actually good. The fact that at any sort of mass of broodlords the free broodlings block all pathing just make them a very oppressive unit. It just means that any ground army is basically useless unless used defensively or as support. It generally seems to force the game into either turtling or into air deathball vs air deathball - two states of the game which generally seem unfun. The fact that corruptors/vipers are great in mass air vs mass air contributes even further to these annoying air fights. Air units are clunky to control because of both their stacking and the fact that you have to click where they go on the ground (instead of on the air). I feel like its better if armies generally stay ground based.
Maybe the broodlords would be a better unit if they spawned fewer broodlings (but generally keeping the dps the same). This way ground units might actually stand a chance versus broodlords.
Broodlords are a huge design problem in my opinion, its the only unit that absolutely forces you to go air to deal with them.
On September 23 2018 23:32 Vision_ wrote: Actually terran players are punished for so many things.. The proof is done when you notice they are leaving pro level.
But it seems there s a taboo of speaking about creep...
On September 18 2018 03:11 Jerom wrote: I wouldnt say swarmhosts are a balance problem as many top players have shown how to beat them and I dont even think they are meta at the pro scene because they arent actually the best response.
Swarmhosts are just crappy from design perspective. Either you have a critical mass where you are getting in free damage every round or your waves get cleaned up easily and thus you will probably lose to a counterpush. The design of the unit allows for very little space in between and also doesnt really allow for much counterplay (either you push or you accept taking small losses to push a bit later). It just doesnt seem like a good design to have these low risk waves of units that are so extreme in terms of how they work out. In terms of actually salvaging them I like the suggestion someone posted about making them light so Helions counter them and can change them down. At least that would make them more interactive. Although I dont mind swarmhosts in general because they fortunately tend to be pretty mediocre anyways - if only they could be made even worse or be removed from the game. At least the redesign from hots to lotv made them less oppressive.
I honestly might dislike the design of broodlords a bit more because they are actually good. The fact that at any sort of mass of broodlords the free broodlings block all pathing just make them a very oppressive unit. It just means that any ground army is basically useless unless used defensively or as support. It generally seems to force the game into either turtling or into air deathball vs air deathball - two states of the game which generally seem unfun. The fact that corruptors/vipers are great in mass air vs mass air contributes even further to these annoying air fights. Air units are clunky to control because of both their stacking and the fact that you have to click where they go on the ground (instead of on the air). I feel like its better if armies generally stay ground based.
Maybe the broodlords would be a better unit if they spawned fewer broodlings (but generally keeping the dps the same). This way ground units might actually stand a chance versus broodlords.
Broodlords are a huge design problem in my opinion, its the only unit that absolutely forces you to go air to deal with them.
Carriers/Liberators?
It might be fair to say that libs are a problem for the same reason, as for carriers you don't go air to beat carriers you kill them before they get there. Still if carriers were less devastating I honestly would prefer there unit interaction over broodlords. The way that broodlords in large numbers tamper heavily with ground based unit pathing, creating a force field of broodlings that prevents units from reaching them is just very irritating, balance wise I think they are fine but I'm not a fan of the unit and it's interactions. Banelings are a strong unit that's fun to play against because the counter play is to micro well and build ground based aoe units, broodlords are a strong unit that's not fun to play against because the counter play is to mass boring air units and turtle, granted counter attacking and dropping is a more fun answer but at some point you do have to engage them. Maybe its just me but I don't find massed air unit interactions with other massed air units to be fun or interesting with the way air units function in sc2.
On September 18 2018 03:11 Jerom wrote: I wouldnt say swarmhosts are a balance problem as many top players have shown how to beat them and I dont even think they are meta at the pro scene because they arent actually the best response.
Swarmhosts are just crappy from design perspective. Either you have a critical mass where you are getting in free damage every round or your waves get cleaned up easily and thus you will probably lose to a counterpush. The design of the unit allows for very little space in between and also doesnt really allow for much counterplay (either you push or you accept taking small losses to push a bit later). It just doesnt seem like a good design to have these low risk waves of units that are so extreme in terms of how they work out. In terms of actually salvaging them I like the suggestion someone posted about making them light so Helions counter them and can change them down. At least that would make them more interactive. Although I dont mind swarmhosts in general because they fortunately tend to be pretty mediocre anyways - if only they could be made even worse or be removed from the game. At least the redesign from hots to lotv made them less oppressive.
I honestly might dislike the design of broodlords a bit more because they are actually good. The fact that at any sort of mass of broodlords the free broodlings block all pathing just make them a very oppressive unit. It just means that any ground army is basically useless unless used defensively or as support. It generally seems to force the game into either turtling or into air deathball vs air deathball - two states of the game which generally seem unfun. The fact that corruptors/vipers are great in mass air vs mass air contributes even further to these annoying air fights. Air units are clunky to control because of both their stacking and the fact that you have to click where they go on the ground (instead of on the air). I feel like its better if armies generally stay ground based.
Maybe the broodlords would be a better unit if they spawned fewer broodlings (but generally keeping the dps the same). This way ground units might actually stand a chance versus broodlords.
Broodlords are a huge design problem in my opinion, its the only unit that absolutely forces you to go air to deal with them.
Carriers/Liberators?
It might be fair to say that libs are a problem for the same reason, as for carriers you don't go air to beat carriers you kill them before they get there. Still if carriers were less devastating I honestly would prefer there unit interaction over broodlords. The way that broodlords in large numbers tamper heavily with ground based unit pathing, creating a force field of broodlings that prevents units from reaching them is just very irritating, balance wise I think they are fine but I'm not a fan of the unit and it's interactions. Banelings are a strong unit that's fun to play against because the counter play is to micro well and build ground based aoe units, broodlords are a strong unit that's not fun to play against because the counter play is to mass boring air units and turtle, granted counter attacking and dropping is a more fun answer but at some point you do have to engage them. Maybe its just me but I don't find massed air unit interactions with other massed air units to be fun or interesting with the way air units function in sc2.
Zergs feel the same about mass tanks. They are not fun, once Terran siege them. They have no micro potential, just siege and forget mechanics and interaction with this unit is boring. And hey, Terrab can get then much faster than Zerg can have his Broodlords.
On September 18 2018 03:11 Jerom wrote: I wouldnt say swarmhosts are a balance problem as many top players have shown how to beat them and I dont even think they are meta at the pro scene because they arent actually the best response.
Swarmhosts are just crappy from design perspective. Either you have a critical mass where you are getting in free damage every round or your waves get cleaned up easily and thus you will probably lose to a counterpush. The design of the unit allows for very little space in between and also doesnt really allow for much counterplay (either you push or you accept taking small losses to push a bit later). It just doesnt seem like a good design to have these low risk waves of units that are so extreme in terms of how they work out. In terms of actually salvaging them I like the suggestion someone posted about making them light so Helions counter them and can change them down. At least that would make them more interactive. Although I dont mind swarmhosts in general because they fortunately tend to be pretty mediocre anyways - if only they could be made even worse or be removed from the game. At least the redesign from hots to lotv made them less oppressive.
I honestly might dislike the design of broodlords a bit more because they are actually good. The fact that at any sort of mass of broodlords the free broodlings block all pathing just make them a very oppressive unit. It just means that any ground army is basically useless unless used defensively or as support. It generally seems to force the game into either turtling or into air deathball vs air deathball - two states of the game which generally seem unfun. The fact that corruptors/vipers are great in mass air vs mass air contributes even further to these annoying air fights. Air units are clunky to control because of both their stacking and the fact that you have to click where they go on the ground (instead of on the air). I feel like its better if armies generally stay ground based.
Maybe the broodlords would be a better unit if they spawned fewer broodlings (but generally keeping the dps the same). This way ground units might actually stand a chance versus broodlords.
Broodlords are a huge design problem in my opinion, its the only unit that absolutely forces you to go air to deal with them.
Carriers/Liberators?
It might be fair to say that libs are a problem for the same reason, as for carriers you don't go air to beat carriers you kill them before they get there. Still if carriers were less devastating I honestly would prefer there unit interaction over broodlords. The way that broodlords in large numbers tamper heavily with ground based unit pathing, creating a force field of broodlings that prevents units from reaching them is just very irritating, balance wise I think they are fine but I'm not a fan of the unit and it's interactions. Banelings are a strong unit that's fun to play against because the counter play is to micro well and build ground based aoe units, broodlords are a strong unit that's not fun to play against because the counter play is to mass boring air units and turtle, granted counter attacking and dropping is a more fun answer but at some point you do have to engage them. Maybe its just me but I don't find massed air unit interactions with other massed air units to be fun or interesting with the way air units function in sc2.
Zergs feel the same about mass tanks. They are not fun, once Terran siege them. They have no micro potential, just siege and forget mechanics and interaction with this unit is boring. And hey, Terrab can get then much faster than Zerg can have his Broodlords.
wait, what? do you actually think you need brood lords to fight bio tank? you can just fight tanks with straight up hydra ling bane or muta ling bane, and the micro potential AGAINST them is actually quite high (splitting units to reduce splash, diving lings or roaches under the range of exposed tanks, attacking from larger arcs, etc.). i know you were trying to make a point, but it didn't really make sense
On September 18 2018 03:11 Jerom wrote: I wouldnt say swarmhosts are a balance problem as many top players have shown how to beat them and I dont even think they are meta at the pro scene because they arent actually the best response.
Swarmhosts are just crappy from design perspective. Either you have a critical mass where you are getting in free damage every round or your waves get cleaned up easily and thus you will probably lose to a counterpush. The design of the unit allows for very little space in between and also doesnt really allow for much counterplay (either you push or you accept taking small losses to push a bit later). It just doesnt seem like a good design to have these low risk waves of units that are so extreme in terms of how they work out. In terms of actually salvaging them I like the suggestion someone posted about making them light so Helions counter them and can change them down. At least that would make them more interactive. Although I dont mind swarmhosts in general because they fortunately tend to be pretty mediocre anyways - if only they could be made even worse or be removed from the game. At least the redesign from hots to lotv made them less oppressive.
I honestly might dislike the design of broodlords a bit more because they are actually good. The fact that at any sort of mass of broodlords the free broodlings block all pathing just make them a very oppressive unit. It just means that any ground army is basically useless unless used defensively or as support. It generally seems to force the game into either turtling or into air deathball vs air deathball - two states of the game which generally seem unfun. The fact that corruptors/vipers are great in mass air vs mass air contributes even further to these annoying air fights. Air units are clunky to control because of both their stacking and the fact that you have to click where they go on the ground (instead of on the air). I feel like its better if armies generally stay ground based.
Maybe the broodlords would be a better unit if they spawned fewer broodlings (but generally keeping the dps the same). This way ground units might actually stand a chance versus broodlords.
Broodlords are a huge design problem in my opinion, its the only unit that absolutely forces you to go air to deal with them.
Carriers/Liberators?
It might be fair to say that libs are a problem for the same reason, as for carriers you don't go air to beat carriers you kill them before they get there. Still if carriers were less devastating I honestly would prefer there unit interaction over broodlords. The way that broodlords in large numbers tamper heavily with ground based unit pathing, creating a force field of broodlings that prevents units from reaching them is just very irritating, balance wise I think they are fine but I'm not a fan of the unit and it's interactions. Banelings are a strong unit that's fun to play against because the counter play is to micro well and build ground based aoe units, broodlords are a strong unit that's not fun to play against because the counter play is to mass boring air units and turtle, granted counter attacking and dropping is a more fun answer but at some point you do have to engage them. Maybe its just me but I don't find massed air unit interactions with other massed air units to be fun or interesting with the way air units function in sc2.
Zergs feel the same about mass tanks. They are not fun, once Terran siege them. They have no micro potential, just siege and forget mechanics and interaction with this unit is boring. And hey, Terrab can get then much faster than Zerg can have his Broodlords.
The argument presented against broodlords is that they can only be dealt with by an air army (due to the broodlings acting as forcefields) which is then countered by zerg by their own mass air army. Thus broodlords would lead to mass air versus mass, which is then argued to generally be unfun.
Do carriers/liberators force the game into mass air vs mass air? And do tanks do that?
As for liberators, they seem to clearly be a ground support unit in practise. We never see Terrans transition to liberator/viking/raven really, unless it is to deal with another air deathball. While liberators are very strong against ground, they can still be countered or dealt with by other ground forces; broodlords are even more oppressive because at some point there are so many broodlings that a ground army cant even think of getting in range. Also, in the case that liberators are countered in the air terran generally cant respond with an air deathball. Unlike zerg's great options in corruptors/vipers vikings and ravens (especially zero damage seeker missile ravens) dont actually fare as well. So terran usually doesnt have the incentive to replace their bio with air. Instead, liberators act as air support which I think is a good role.
Similairly carriers dont force mass air vs air deathballs as much. Carriers are basically great against almost everything and dont really oppress land or air more. The only reason why you might go mass air against carriers is the fact that storms are oppressive against ground armies that have to charge in to touch the carriers. The combination HT Carriers might generally be an unfun composition that also leads to air deathballs (especially since zerg has to answer them with corruptors/vipers and are already inclined to go mass air broodlord deathball). However, carriers are also being nerfed - probably in part due to this.
Tanks really dont fit the argument. To begin with, they are ground units which dont have the generic downsides that mass air has. Also, tanks dont lead to air deathballs. In TvP tanks can easily be dealt with using immortals/archons/zealots. Although eventually mass carriers is a protoss answer to mech, that is mostly because mech cant really counter it. In TvZ generally the zerg can actually handle tanks with ling bane hydra or ling bane muta. Zerg then tends to have many options including ultras and viper support to deal with mass tanks.
Anyways, broodlords dont have to be massively nerfed, but it would be nice if it was possible to actually use ground forces like marines and stalkers more effectively against them. And thus my suggestion was to have the dps remain the same but reduce the number of broodlings. That would make the pathing issues much smaller.
Marines and Stalkers can be used vs Broodlords. For example Mana deals withe them with Stalkers. But first, u must kill their support units. Only crazy player would leave Broodlords unguarded BECAUSE they die instantly from stimmed Bio if not protected. Same goes for tanks- if not protected , can be killed easier.
So basically your argument that BL needs to be nerfed to let Marines and Stalkers counter them is just false in definition as they do that even now. I would even say that Marines do that better than Stalkers.
On September 24 2018 22:00 hiroshOne wrote: Marines and Stalkers can be used vs Broodlords. For example Mana deals withe them with Stalkers. But first, u must kill their support units. Only crazy player would leave Broodlords unguarded BECAUSE they die instantly from stimmed Bio if not protected. Same goes for tanks- if not protected , can be killed easier.
So basically your argument that BL needs to be nerfed to let Marines and Stalkers counter them is just false in definition as they do that even now. I would even say that Marines do that better than Stalkers.
Broodlords are fine. Leave them be.
Can you really counter broodlords with marines? I dont think that is a thing. Marines can snipe them, if you have a ton of marines versus lone broodlords. However in reality as Terran thats a terrible gameplan. Broodlords with some amount of support will make any pathing impossible at all and actually also make it impossible to actually smoothly attack ground units. And thus, terran needs to either turtle hard or go for full air. Similairly, blink stalkers can work but are hardly cost effective and just die to the support army, which is too hard to pick off as other units cant even dream of getting close to the zerg army. Thus, protoss goes for carriers/tempests instead.
Also, Im not saying the broodlords should be nerfed. Im saying it might be more fun if they were changed. If ground units arent blocked as much by broodlings and that turns out to be a big nerf to zerg and broodlords because ground forces then counter them too well, then I wouldnt oppose a health buff or cost/supply reduction or a small speed buff. I would personally just prefer if the unit was slightly more interactive and wouldnt result in turtling/defensive play and air deathballs as much.
On September 24 2018 22:00 hiroshOne wrote: Marines and Stalkers can be used vs Broodlords. For example Mana deals withe them with Stalkers. But first, u must kill their support units. Only crazy player would leave Broodlords unguarded BECAUSE they die instantly from stimmed Bio if not protected. Same goes for tanks- if not protected , can be killed easier.
So basically your argument that BL needs to be nerfed to let Marines and Stalkers counter them is just false in definition as they do that even now. I would even say that Marines do that better than Stalkers.
Broodlords are fine. Leave them be.
Can you really counter broodlords with marines? I dont think that is a thing. Marines can snipe them, if you have a ton of marines versus lone broodlords. However in reality as Terran thats a terrible gameplan. Broodlords with some amount of support will make any pathing impossible at all and actually also make it impossible to actually smoothly attack ground units. And thus, terran needs to either turtle hard or go for full air. Similairly, blink stalkers can work but are hardly cost effective and just die to the support army, which is too hard to pick off as other units cant even dream of getting close to the zerg army. Thus, protoss goes for carriers/tempests instead.
Also, Im not saying the broodlords should be nerfed. Im saying it might be more fun if they were changed. If ground units arent blocked as much by broodlings and that turns out to be a big nerf to zerg and broodlords because ground forces then counter them too well, then I wouldnt oppose a health buff or cost/supply reduction or a small speed buff. I would personally just prefer if the unit was slightly more interactive and wouldnt result in turtling/defensive play and air deathballs as much.
There's been plenty of games where broodlords alone simply die to stimmed marines as long as there are enough marines to just out dps the broodlings. Sure you have to kill some support units, but where are your own? It doesn't actually take that many marines to just instantly vapourise broodlings and move into range.
On September 24 2018 22:00 hiroshOne wrote: Marines and Stalkers can be used vs Broodlords. For example Mana deals withe them with Stalkers. But first, u must kill their support units. Only crazy player would leave Broodlords unguarded BECAUSE they die instantly from stimmed Bio if not protected. Same goes for tanks- if not protected , can be killed easier.
So basically your argument that BL needs to be nerfed to let Marines and Stalkers counter them is just false in definition as they do that even now. I would even say that Marines do that better than Stalkers.
Broodlords are fine. Leave them be.
Can you really counter broodlords with marines? I dont think that is a thing. Marines can snipe them, if you have a ton of marines versus lone broodlords. However in reality as Terran thats a terrible gameplan. Broodlords with some amount of support will make any pathing impossible at all and actually also make it impossible to actually smoothly attack ground units. And thus, terran needs to either turtle hard or go for full air. Similairly, blink stalkers can work but are hardly cost effective and just die to the support army, which is too hard to pick off as other units cant even dream of getting close to the zerg army. Thus, protoss goes for carriers/tempests instead.
Also, Im not saying the broodlords should be nerfed. Im saying it might be more fun if they were changed. If ground units arent blocked as much by broodlings and that turns out to be a big nerf to zerg and broodlords because ground forces then counter them too well, then I wouldnt oppose a health buff or cost/supply reduction or a small speed buff. I would personally just prefer if the unit was slightly more interactive and wouldnt result in turtling/defensive play and air deathballs as much.
There's been plenty of games where broodlords alone simply die to stimmed marines as long as there are enough marines to just out dps the broodlings. Sure you have to kill some support units, but where are your own? It doesn't actually take that many marines to just instantly vapourise broodlings and move into range.
I mean, yeah if its just bls but its rarely just bls, running marines forward into the banes and other units underneath the bls while having broodlings constantly destroying the unit pathing is a death sentence, and the siege units that terran builds to deal with those units are countered by the bls, so really unless you have a very large lead your never going to be able to take your marine tank army and smash past the broodlings and kill the bls, not necessarily that you should be able to crash through a late game zerg army in this manner in the first place But I would prefer that the bls were a threat more do to stats like, dmg hp, armor, speed ect, and less due to the fact that they are a huge anti micro unit that make all ground units behave in a very clunky way. I'm not really referring to the transition period where zerg has like 3-4 broods and yeah marines can get under them and kill them, but the ultra late game where they have 10-14 broods and a big number of banelings underneath them. I would like it if the bls did not create such a huge impediment to literally all ground units that you have to go into mass air to contest them while still maintaining there role as a strong siege unit for zerg that lets them convert there lead to a win by pummeling a turtling terran or protoss. I'm hoping that the new thor and ultra upgrades will help this issue in the tvz mu by giving terran a better answer to broods while buffing alternative win conditions for zerg like ultras and mutas. we will see, but in pvz I can only see it getting worse on this new patch.
I find it odd that the way bls work now is they are a siege breaking unit that forces your opponent to turtle because they are to difficult to contest without a huge air transition but can be stalled out for a very long time by a turtling player, In my eyes the purpose of offensive siege units should be to force an opponent to come out and fight your army or risk losing there units or buildings, not to force your opponent to sit in there base turtling while you siege them until they can amass a giant army of air units and spell casters to contest your siege units. Moving your siege units to the edge of your opponents base should be a move that says, either fight my army or give up this base, It should not be a move that says, camp in this base im besieging behind a huge wall of static d and siege units of your own while you mass an answer to my siege units that your army is unable to contest in the open. It would be nice if units like lurkers and ultras on the ground were what you had to be concerned about and the broods were mostly there to force a response rather than, these ground units being relatively easy to deal with but the brood lords being the real threat because if this were the case it would be more dynamic since protoss and terran could continue to do things like look for positioning on the map and move out to contest a zerg army or threaten multiple bases, rather than the best response being to have almost all your army bar a few harassment units camping in one spot and all there army camping right outside that spot and the game ends in one huge air vs air deathball fight after a very long period of turtling. I think this could be fixed by nerfing the number of broodlings per broodlord to just 1, or 2 and reducing the time they last but buffing the dmg of the brood lords and either there range, or survivability, if it turns out zerg is to week after that kind of change than some buffs to other "finishing units" that let zerg take a lead from earlier in the game and convert it to a win vs an entrenched opponent could be buffed like ultras, lurkers, or mutas.
If Zerg has Broodlords with support army for example Hydras, corruptors, vipers and Infestors and u have only Marines without support, that means that something went terrible wrong with you in this game. As i said earlier, Broodlords can be successfully countered by Marines and Stalkers. Of course u nust deal with support units, but that's the case in almost every composition. If i want to deal with tanks, I must have an alternative to deal with BIO that's protecting them. And so on.
Second thing is that Broodlord army is very, very immobile. BIO and Stalkers too, are the opposite. U can use that in your favor too. Again. There is no problem with Broodlords. It was a thing back in dark ages of WOL.
On September 25 2018 13:58 hiroshOne wrote: If Zerg has Broodlords with support army for example Hydras, corruptors, vipers and Infestors and u have only Marines without support, that means that something went terrible wrong with you in this game. As i said earlier, Broodlords can be successfully countered by Marines and Stalkers. Of course u nust deal with support units, but that's the case in almost every composition. If i want to deal with tanks, I must have an alternative to deal with BIO that's protecting them. And so on.
Second thing is that Broodlord army is very, very immobile. BIO and Stalkers too, are the opposite. U can use that in your favor too. Again. There is no problem with Broodlords. It was a thing back in dark ages of WOL.
In a real TvZ by the time hive tech starts coming in terran does have marines, tanks and medivacs. That cant deal with broodlords at all. Against broodlords tanks arent even actually beneficial if you're trying to charge in, as they'll just splash on the marines.
And of course you can make things that 'deal' with broodlords. You can turtle with ghosts (cant push with ghosts at all because snipes will just get cancelled) or you can get an air deathball. But wait, that was the entire thing about broodlords: they force turtling or air deathballs.
Of course there is no real problem with broodlords from a balance pov. However, there is nobody here that is arguing that to be the case. Instead, people here think there is a design/gameplay problem with broodlords.
EPT
![[image loading]](https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/blog_header/6y/6YF4SFSABCNZ1535767349576.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/page_media/4WFXAVVRHR2E1535767526640.png)
![[image loading]](https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/page_media/T11OW3UY1WBL1535767526690.png)
![[image loading]](https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/page_media/NCV1H8DG5GM91535767526641.png)
Apart from that, I totally agree with what you are saying right now. The bigger picture here is that one race has extremely powerful lategame, the 2nd race got an extremely powerful lategame unit to compensate for that, but as it turns out, that unit also denies the 3rd race any chance of having the lategame, so in the end, the 3rd race (Terran) is left with the "Kill them before they get there".
