|
nydus are currently only used as allin strategy.
there is one strategy with roach queens nydus that is specifically designed to hardcounter the bc build in tvz, if unscouted it is a free win in that certain situation, if scouted early enough and with the right adapation by the terran it becomes a free win for terran.
We do see nydus often, but it is only used as a gimmicky coinflip.
We dont see nydus in mid/lategame for mobility because while it can be really rewarding to pull it off, it takes a lot of attention for what it really gives you ( you can use your attention in other ways and get way more out of it, and attention is limited) and brings risks.
In my personal experience this is mostly because nydus doesnt consider the supply cost of the units that are loaded in/out. if you have zerglings in your lategame army and want to send them through a nydus it becomes a complete waste of time as it takes the same time to load in lings as it does with ultras.
I would like to see a change to that. It should be a change that doesnt change the strength of nydus allins.
-maybe adept the current load in/out speed to match units with 2 supply cost. and scale other units load in/out speed to their supply.
-another option would be an upgrade from hive that increases loading speed. but this would more difficult to balance since it could easily turn into something way too strong that has like an extreme warpprism effect (forcing enemy units somewhere without an actual commitment)
|
I think that TvP is in a much worse state than blizzard seems to acknowledge. The fact that Terrans best option in 90% of scenarios is to allin is just dumb. Protoss late game is oppressively strong so the best counter is for Terran to go allin every single game leading to a terrible match up. I think all the other match ups are in a good spot overall zvt has so much going on right now that all the games feel fresh and interesting but I think tvp needs looking at Terran needs better avenues to win in the mid and late game and proxies need to go, I'm worried though that bliz will continue to chip away at proxy play without doing anything to curb protoss's absurd late game strength..
|
No word about swarmhosts, it's been 5+ "updates" where they refuse to acknowledge and address one of the most idiotic units in the game.
Maybe if everyone collectively calls them out on this they will finally fix it? I can't take their updates seriously.
They also have no clue what they are talking about for TvP, the match-up has been heavily Protoss favored and became even more Protoss favored after the cyclone changes. 3 nexus lets Protoss economy be out of control with chronoboost. Everything they wrote about "all-ins being hard to decipher" is the exact opposite - it's hard for Terran to figure out the all-ins, not the Protoss player.
Let's not even mention tempests and how ridiculous these things need a hotfix.
The devs also mention "hey no one is using thors?" I wonder why. They nerfed the armor by 1, left swarmhosts in their current state for 2+ yrs, and made tempests the most insane unit in the game while also reducing it's supply.
I take nothing Blizzard writes or posts about SC2 seriously until they fix swarmhosts.
The only thing they remotely even got correct in their terrible balance post, is about PvP being mass phoenix every game. It's obvious whoever writes these has a good knowledge of Protoss but is very Protoss biased.
"I think tempest might be too strong" oh really, quite the detective Mr. Sherlock balance designer.
"People aren't building thors" oh really, maybe stop nerfing mech every patch and fix swarmhosts.
"Terran all-ins are hard to figure out" oh really, you made cyclones unusable, Terran has no allins anymore lol
Almost every single Terran player hates the cyclone being reverted to it's original values. Why? Because it has 120 health, that's less health than a marauder....yeah...revert the cyclone change back to the 2nd version. I have no clue why they thought this was a good idea. Either that or give it more health appropriate to it's expensive cost. Everyone knows 120 health is horseshit for a 3 supply factory unit that cost 100 gas.
Less. Health. Than. A. Marauder. The blizzcon update was a joke for Terran.
User was banned for this post.
|
|
|
On December 23 2018 05:02 avilo wrote:
[...]
Almost every single Terran player hates the cyclone being reverted to it's original values. Why? Because it has 120 health, that's less health than a marauder....yeah...revert the cyclone change back to the 2nd version. I have no clue why they thought this was a good idea. Either that or give it more health appropriate to it's expensive cost. Everyone knows 120 health is horseshit for a 3 supply factory unit that cost 100 gas.
Less. Health. Than. A. Marauder. The blizzcon update was a joke for Terran.
I think Avilo has a point there. Marauder health should be tuned down a notch, to more clearly reflect its place in the Terran arsenal.
|
Problem with Stargate in PVP is not purely related to scouting, problem is Stargate is always the best opener in PVP.
Also it is paired usually with adept openings which also adds high pressure before stargate units come out.
This is limiting options of any non Stargate build and you are basicly accepting to be defensive which gives a stargate player way 2 much space to run away with the game, and PVP is an extreme snowball matchup.
Sadly it is very hard 2 adust any of the units or build times etc because of the other matchups in the game.
Something like you did for Zerg spores vs Muta might be the only solution to stop Stargate dominated PVP.
But I know Blizzard stated at some point you do not like to make 1 matchup specific changes to units&buildings, I personally totally agree with this but its looking hard to find solutions at the moment.
|
On December 23 2018 07:15 raXNT wrote:
Problem with Stargate in PVP is not purely related to scouting, problem is Stargate is always the best opener in PVP.
Also it is paired usually with adept openings which also adds high pressure before stargate units come out.
This is limiting options of any non Stargate build and you are basicly accepting to be defensive which gives a stargate player way 2 much space to run away with the game, and PVP is an extreme snowball matchup.
Sadly it is very hard 2 adust any of the units or build times etc because of the other matchups in the game.
Something like you did for Zerg spores vs Muta might be the only solution to stop Stargate dominated PVP.
But I know Blizzard stated at some point you do not like to make 1 matchup specific changes to units&buildings, I personally totally agree with this but its looking hard to find solutions at the moment.
What if Stalkers did bonus damage to shields? (say double the damage as long as there are shields, and then you can tweak the shield to health of a pheonix oracle...).
Wouldn't it make blink quite a hard counter to SG, which makes SG openers not that strong?
Going SG you must go for a robo if you see twilight as DTs are also an option, so stalkers that are better at countering phoenix and oracles can be quite of a difference to the strength of SG openers.
|
On December 23 2018 07:36 bulya wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2018 07:15 raXNT wrote:
Problem with Stargate in PVP is not purely related to scouting, problem is Stargate is always the best opener in PVP.
Also it is paired usually with adept openings which also adds high pressure before stargate units come out.
This is limiting options of any non Stargate build and you are basicly accepting to be defensive which gives a stargate player way 2 much space to run away with the game, and PVP is an extreme snowball matchup.
Sadly it is very hard 2 adust any of the units or build times etc because of the other matchups in the game.
Something like you did for Zerg spores vs Muta might be the only solution to stop Stargate dominated PVP.
But I know Blizzard stated at some point you do not like to make 1 matchup specific changes to units&buildings, I personally totally agree with this but its looking hard to find solutions at the moment. What if Stalkers did bonus damage to shields? (say double the damage as long as there are shields, and then you can tweak the shield to health of a pheonix oracle...). Wouldn't it make blink quite a hard counter to SG, which makes SG openers not that strong? Going SG you must go for a robo if you see twilight as DTs are also an option, so stalkers that are better at countering phoenix and oracles can be quite of a difference to the strength of SG openers.
Oracle can stop DT rushes easily, is it quite easy to read possible DT openings and react to it and if DT opening does no damage it's hard to stay level in the game. Shield Batteries with units on hold position now also makes it easier to hold DT rushes and give time for Oracles to come out.
Changing any units would have too much of an impact on other MU's and is very risky in my opinion.
|
On December 23 2018 07:36 bulya wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2018 07:15 raXNT wrote:
Problem with Stargate in PVP is not purely related to scouting, problem is Stargate is always the best opener in PVP.
Also it is paired usually with adept openings which also adds high pressure before stargate units come out.
This is limiting options of any non Stargate build and you are basicly accepting to be defensive which gives a stargate player way 2 much space to run away with the game, and PVP is an extreme snowball matchup.
Sadly it is very hard 2 adust any of the units or build times etc because of the other matchups in the game.
Something like you did for Zerg spores vs Muta might be the only solution to stop Stargate dominated PVP.
But I know Blizzard stated at some point you do not like to make 1 matchup specific changes to units&buildings, I personally totally agree with this but its looking hard to find solutions at the moment. What if Stalkers did bonus damage to shields? (say double the damage as long as there are shields, and then you can tweak the shield to health of a pheonix oracle...). Wouldn't it make blink quite a hard counter to SG, which makes SG openers not that strong? Going SG you must go for a robo if you see twilight as DTs are also an option, so stalkers that are better at countering phoenix and oracles can be quite of a difference to the strength of SG openers.
I think that's a bit too complicated. A better solution would be to give stalkers a damage bonus versus light air units. There are only 6 units in the game that fit that criteria: the phoenix, the oracle, the observer, the mutalisk, the banshee, and the raven. I can't see most protoss players being sad about oracles being a bigger risk in PvP, given how prominent proxy oracles still sometimes are. In the cases of the banshee and the raven, it'd probably be fine to remove the light tag, since from what I can tell, the only unit in the game that does bonus damage currently to light air units is the phoenix, and in either case, if phoenixes are attacking a banshee or a raven, it's probably dead anyway. This would mitigate stalkers potentially being too good at defending against banshees. Same deal with the observer, if they get sniped too easily just remove the light tag.
This light air damage bonus would accomplish two things: it would allow another option in dealing with these stupid double stargate phoenix openings (It currently takes a shocking number of stalker shots to kill a single phoenix. It's very much akin to how protoss used to fair versus mutalisks in HOTS before they added the phoenix range spell where killing the mass mutalisks required the person attacking to screw up since the defender could never catch them and you could never actually kill any of the mutas, just damage them). It also would potentially finally open the door, when combined with the new hallucination buff, for there to be a way to have a safe, non-stargate opening in PvZ since protoss could finally know that if the zerg switches to mass muta or does a fake with few mutalisks (which is just as dangerous since if you don't prepare for mutas and they go muta, you usually lose), it could be dealt with without having to throw down multiple stargates and potentially a fleet beacon just to survive.
It doesn't have to be a big damage bonus, just enough to make it so going mass phoenix against blink is more of a risk since it would take fewer shots to kill a phoenix.
|
On December 23 2018 06:48 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
swarmhosts are fine dude
Sometimes i feel like the entire community basically just stopped giving a fuck years ago when i read posts like yours.
|
Czech Republic12133 Posts
On December 23 2018 08:42 avilo wrote:Sometimes i feel like the entire community basically just stopped giving a fuck years ago when i read posts like yours.
Balance wise they're fine.
Design wise - at least a quarter of units is bad. So what, look at the news. Blizzard is being destroyed by Activision, there won't be any redesign. EVER. Deal with it.
|
proxy play feels like the safest option to secure a low ground expansion against fast Adepts. We’re considering attacking this issue from two angles, both by weakening proxy openers and making macro openers more robust.
i can see them reducing the build time of the reactor for this ( might give helion opening too much strength though).
But i can't see a way to nerf proxies other than " your first barack can't be build outside of your base"
Any thoughts ?
edit : production facilities need to be near a CC or a supply depot to be build ( with a large radius like 30-40 yards = a whole base)
|
Canada8991 Posts
On December 23 2018 08:56 nonoessc2 wrote:Show nested quote +proxy play feels like the safest option to secure a low ground expansion against fast Adepts. We’re considering attacking this issue from two angles, both by weakening proxy openers and making macro openers more robust.
i can see them reducing the build time of the reactor for this ( might give helion opening to much strength though). But i can't see a way to nerf proxies other than " your first barack can't be build outside of your base" Any thoughts ?
Is there a weird ass world where we give workers bigger vision radius to make proxy less luck base?
(In the sense that if you scout the right way at least you have less of chance to miss the proxy anyway)
Seems like a shitty way to go about it, but I can't see a lot of way to nerf it either.
Edit: or bring back the MSC, how could that go wrong.
On December 22 2018 13:58 FataLe wrote:
I love how comprehensive this new balance team is.
Ya the team has been really good on feedback, happy holidays to them too if they read this!
|
On December 23 2018 08:42 avilo wrote:Sometimes i feel like the entire community basically just stopped giving a fuck years ago when i read posts like yours.
not giving a fuck is what all the cool kids are doing. come be cool with us
|
On December 23 2018 08:42 avilo wrote:Sometimes i feel like the entire community basically just stopped giving a fuck years ago when i read posts like yours.
"It's everyone else who is wrong! I am the only one who sees the game for what it truly is!"
No, Avilo. Just accept your opinion on balance and design when it comes to the swarmhost is in the minority. There's nothing wrong with that.
|
Swarmhosts are pretty absurd vs mech, the only reason they are currently not as oppressive is because BC opening became a thing after the design patch.
If blizzard somehow nerfs BC opening in TvZ, swarmhosts/ravager (or SH/hydra cause of new cyclone) will completely shut down mech again just like it did before.
Its not just avilos opinion, everyone high level terran knows that. You can literally ask any terran pro player and they will tell you this. The difference is simply that most pros dont openly speak about balance, cause the community is more toxic than open minded when it comes to balance discussions.
Its easier to hate on someone like avilo than actually coming up with a valid counter argument.
|
User was banned for this post.
|
On December 23 2018 08:49 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2018 08:42 avilo wrote:On December 23 2018 06:48 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
swarmhosts are fine dude Sometimes i feel like the entire community basically just stopped giving a fuck years ago when i read posts like yours. Blizzard is being destroyed by Activision, there won't be any redesign. EVER. Deal with it.
*cough* warcraft 3 *cough*
|
On December 23 2018 11:10 Siegetank_Dieter1 wrote:
Swarmhosts are pretty absurd vs mech, the only reason they are currently not as oppressive is because BC opening became a thing after the design patch.
If blizzard somehow nerfs BC opening in TvZ, swarmhosts/ravager (or SH/hydra cause of new cyclone) will completely shut down mech again just like it did before.
Its not just avilos opinion, everyone high level terran knows that. You can literally ask any terran pro player and they will tell you this. The difference is simply that most pros dont openly speak about balance, cause the community is more toxic than open minded when it comes to balance discussions.
Its easier to hate on someone like avilo than actually coming up with a valid counter argument.
yeah sure, pro players NEVER talk about balance, stuff like whining over balance never happens there, maybe your are mistaking them for casters (or e-sport-personalities as some are known), who only say there opinion on balance after it was changed (prior to that its always fine).
but pros are complaining all the time...
and there are countless posts here that tell you how you can handle SW pretty well, if you honestly think that nobody does, than i can't help you really i think. (in short use hellions or land somthing in the path of the locust, then counterattack)
i honestly don't enjoy playing against SW that much, but i still have decent winrate against them, and there are worse things to play against (turtle mech beeing way up there)
just because "turtle harder" isn't the answer doesn't mean that you can't handle them rather well since SW are dead supply most of the time.
and at this point i am starting to think, that they just don't change SW because they fear that avilo would be unemployed after that
|
i have an honest question on that regard (means im really curious, no attempt at trolling anybody here):
is terran mech the only playstyle in SC2 where you deliberately ignore one of your techbuildings?
i dont't mean it in a way that you just don't build a darkshrine or roach warren in a game when you don't need it, but in a way where you say "it's not part of the BO, period"
i hope its not to OT here but i'm thinking about that for some time now
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
