| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On October 05 2019 07:49 Boggyb wrote: Or better yet just delete Abduct and Neural Parasite. Deleting abduct would have... interesting effects on ZvZ. Also is there anyone that's against the idea of increasing the supply cost of infestors? | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany15920 Posts
On October 05 2019 08:18 ZigguratOfUr wrote: Deleting abduct would have... interesting effects on ZvZ. Also is there anyone that's against the idea of increasing the supply cost of infestors? Too big of a nerf - the proposed nerfs should be enough to make infestors reasonably strong. | ||
|
Boggyb
2855 Posts
On October 05 2019 08:18 ZigguratOfUr wrote: Deleting abduct would have... interesting effects on ZvZ I assume you think there would be no way to break a Hydra/Lurker siege line. On October 05 2019 08:18 ZigguratOfUr wrote: Also is there anyone that's against the idea of increasing the supply cost of infestors? Blizzard. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25071 Posts
On October 05 2019 08:41 Charoisaur wrote: Too big of a nerf - the proposed nerfs should be enough to make infestors reasonably strong. What nerfs? Ok I’ll concede in practice basically giving Infestors half the number of ITs who are individual 2x as strong is a functional nerf, in that opponents can kill them a bit easier. Giving Infestors neural by default is a buff, and a pretty big one IMO. They are still way too good at way too many different things and the synergy with Brood Lords is still entirely intact. A supply change is long overdue IMO. By all means make them potent, but to have 10+ or whatever negatively impacting the strength of your other army seems a no-brainer Despite many other disagreements, if there’s one general common thread across Protoss, Terran and even Zerg it’s that BL/Infestor is too strong, and just boring. These proposed patches do a lot of other things, some I find interesting but they don’t address that composition at all really. | ||
Jerom
Netherlands588 Posts
| ||
|
pzlama333
United States277 Posts
1.Mothership’s Time Stop still does not decrease enemy beam-type weapon’s attack speed, including sentry, oracle, void ray and enemy mothership. They attack at exactly same speed inside the Time Stop bubble. Originally Time Stop only decrease enemy ground units and structures’ attack speed, so the bug only affect enemy sentry in verse mode. With new patch it will affect more units, though all of them are also Protoss units. 2.Raven’s AAM bug is still not fixed. It still does not decrease affected units’ armor at all, instead just add 3 damage taken from melee or range attack, but not splash damage. 3.Battlecruiser’s Tactical Jump adds 1 second of stun time with the new patch. The balance team believe “Interference Matrix, Fungal Growth, and Abduct will be able to cancel Tactical Jump and put it on cooldown during the Battlecruiser’s vulnerability phase.” Actually, only Fungal Growth will put it on cooldown. Though Interference Matrix and Abduct also stop Tactical Jump successfully, the BC may still use Tactical Jump immediately after Interference Matrix expire of abducted. 4.Thor’s High Impact Paylord damage bonus from weapon upgrade does not decrease according to its reduced damage. Right now Thor’s High Paylord does 40 + 15 Massive damage, and receives +5 damage per upgrade, and it would becomes 55 + 15 Massive if maxed. With new patch, the weapon upgrade still gives +5 damage per upgrade, which means 25 +10 Massive will become 40 +10 Massive at max upgrade, at a weapon cooldown of 0.9 second. | ||
|
Valyrian
41 Posts
On October 04 2019 13:02 tigon_ridge wrote: What I don't understand is: why doesn't Blizzard just hire and organize a committee consisting of English-speaking pro players to work on balancing the game, instead of relying on some TL randos who are more opinionated than experienced? I'd much rather have Serral, Neeb, and Bunny come together to brainstorm ideas in private, and submit them to Blizzard's balance team, than have the people in this thread influence the state of the game. Democracy means a bunch of idiots get to decide the direction of their community. Stop trying to democratize SC2. Let the most competent people handle the all-important task of balancing the game. Pros are interested in keeping the meta stale and predictable. As someone who wants to watch good Starcraft with an interesting meta, this is the last thing I want. There is more to balancing the game than satisfying the pros. | ||
|
seemsgood
5527 Posts
all they need to do is making those numbers moar rational | ||
|
BerserkSword
United States2123 Posts
On October 05 2019 08:58 Wombat_NI wrote: What nerfs? Ok I’ll concede in practice basically giving Infestors half the number of ITs who are individual 2x as strong is a functional nerf, in that opponents can kill them a bit easier. Giving Infestors neural by default is a buff, and a pretty big one IMO. They are still way too good at way too many different things and the synergy with Brood Lords is still entirely intact. A supply change is long overdue IMO. By all means make them potent, but to have 10+ or whatever negatively impacting the strength of your other army seems a no-brainer Despite many other disagreements, if there’s one general common thread across Protoss, Terran and even Zerg it’s that BL/Infestor is too strong, and just boring. These proposed patches do a lot of other things, some I find interesting but they don’t address that composition at all really. I think people are really underestimating the massive nerf a change to 3 supply would be. Without a globe of Infestors, Zerg is virtually helpless against Terran and Protoss late game compositions. Only being able to build 67% of the infestors for the same supply is devastating. Infestors below a critical mass cannot contend with Skytoss + massive splash + warp ins, or the insane efficiency and firepower of a 200/200 Terran. Infestors are the equalizer for Zerg late game, as the rest of their units do not compete. BLs and Ultras are not strong enough. Herein lies the problem since there is a very fine line between Zerg's late game being helpless vs overpowered and it's all really based on the capabilities of infestor. 3 supply infestor would massively shift that balanced towards the helpless end of the spectrum. Barring mass Infestors, Zerg AA simply does not hold up to maxed out capital ship-based armies. Hydras die to everything, Corruptors will get shredded by support units if they get into range of BCs/Carriers/Tempests, and vipers are too easy to kill/neutralize for them to be a reliable and cost effective AA | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On October 05 2019 11:34 BerserkSword wrote: I think people are really underestimating the massive nerf a change to 3 supply would be. Without a globe of Infestors, Zerg is virtually helpless against Terran and Protoss late game compositions. Only being able to build 67% of the infestors for the same supply is devastating. Infestors below a critical mass cannot contend with Skytoss + massive splash + warp ins, or the insane efficiency and firepower of a 200/200 Terran. Infestors are the equalizer for Zerg late game, as the rest of their units do not compete. BLs and Ultras are not strong enough. Herein lies the problem since there is a very fine line between Zerg's late game being helpless vs overpowered and it's all really based on the capabilities of infestor. 3 supply infestor would massively shift that balanced towards the helpless end of the spectrum. Barring mass Infestors, Zerg AA simply does not hold up to maxed out capital ship-based armies. Hydras die to everything, Corruptors will get shredded by support units if they get into range of BCs/Carriers/Tempests, and vipers are too easy to kill/neutralize for them to be a reliable and cost effective AA I think you underestimate how much people hate mass infestor. If increasing the supply cost makes mass infestor a thing of the past so much the better. Getting to nerf skytoss/skyterran armies afterwards for balance reasons sounds like a bonus to me. | ||
|
BerserkSword
United States2123 Posts
On October 05 2019 11:58 ZigguratOfUr wrote: I think you underestimate how much people hate mass infestor. If increasing the supply cost makes mass infestor a thing of the past so much the better. Getting to nerf skytoss/skyterran armies afterwards for balance reasons sounds like a bonus to me. A 3 supply infestor is such a huge nerf that sky protoss and sky terran would have to be massively nerfed too. That sets everything out of whack, as Terran and Protoss ground units would need to be heavily changed to maintain balance. For example, if you heavily nerf the infestor and skytoss, then Zerg just wins by virtue of the fact that Protoss comps that are heavily ground based are straight up trash against zerg in the lategame. Protoss also heavily relies on skytoss for late game anti air. You significantly nerf skytoss and then you need to significantly buff Protoss ground to air capabilities and that screws with PvT. There is literally no point in significantly nerfing an equalizer unit like the infestor. It just creates more balance problems than it solves. You saw what happened when the Protoss lategame backbone was heavily nerfed - you get a disaster of a PvZ where protoss desperately tries to end the game before Zerg lategame can kill maxed out armies several times over. Zerg is designed around a powerful infestor. There's really nothing anyone can do about it at this point unless you want to redesign the game from scratch. Changing the supply to 3 is insane. It's like changing the battlecruiser's supply to 9... | ||
|
dalecooper
56 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25071 Posts
On October 05 2019 12:19 BerserkSword wrote: A 3 supply infestor is such a huge nerf that sky protoss and sky terran would have to be massively nerfed too. That sets everything out of whack, as Terran and Protoss ground units would need to be heavily changed to maintain balance. For example, if you heavily nerf the infestor and skytoss, then Zerg just wins by virtue of the fact that Protoss comps that are heavily ground based are straight up trash against zerg in the lategame. Protoss also heavily relies on skytoss for late game anti air. You significantly nerf skytoss and then you need to significantly buff Protoss ground to air capabilities and that screws with PvT. There is literally no point in significantly nerfing an equalizer unit like the infestor. It just creates more balance problems than it solves. You saw what happened when the Protoss lategame backbone was heavily nerfed - you get a disaster of a PvZ where protoss desperately tries to end the game before Zerg lategame can kill maxed out armies several times over. Zerg is designed around a powerful infestor. There's really nothing anyone can do about it at this point unless you want to redesign the game from scratch. Changing the supply to 3 is insane. It's like changing the battlecruiser's supply to 9... Which is fine? Late game Skytoss got nerfed til it largely sucked, even though IMO PvZ was in its best state ever, albeit still not perfect when Skytoss was good Zerg has other advantages in that matchup and can win by other means. Can make a few tweaks if not the case. Likewise Terran and mass BCs teleporting everywhere, which was cool for about 10 minutes for novelty’s sake and is just a bit silly. Blizz don’t have to make every composition competitively viable, I think their mistake is trying to do so. Most players and spectators don’t like big late game air balls, certainly don’t like BL/Infestor in its current state, and most think the Infestor is way too good, there’s few drawbacks in massing them etc. It feels like this patch is just a whole bunch of changes meant to rebalance the game while keeping those two factors largely intact, instead of toning those things down and rebalancing to give other options to compensate. | ||
|
seemsgood
5527 Posts
On October 05 2019 11:34 BerserkSword wrote: I think people are really underestimating the massive nerf a change to 3 supply would be. Without a globe of Infestors, Zerg is virtually helpless against Terran and Protoss late game compositions. Only being able to build 67% of the infestors for the same supply is devastating. Infestors below a critical mass cannot contend with Skytoss + massive splash + warp ins, or the insane efficiency and firepower of a 200/200 Terran. Infestors are the equalizer for Zerg late game, as the rest of their units do not compete. BLs and Ultras are not strong enough. Herein lies the problem since there is a very fine line between Zerg's late game being helpless vs overpowered and it's all really based on the capabilities of infestor. 3 supply infestor would massively shift that balanced towards the helpless end of the spectrum. Barring mass Infestors, Zerg AA simply does not hold up to maxed out capital ship-based armies. Hydras die to everything, Corruptors will get shredded by support units if they get into range of BCs/Carriers/Tempests, and vipers are too easy to kill/neutralize for them to be a reliable and cost effective AA On October 05 2019 12:19 BerserkSword wrote: A 3 supply infestor is such a huge nerf that sky protoss and sky terran would have to be massively nerfed too. That sets everything out of whack, as Terran and Protoss ground units would need to be heavily changed to maintain balance. For example, if you heavily nerf the infestor and skytoss, then Zerg just wins by virtue of the fact that Protoss comps that are heavily ground based are straight up trash against zerg in the lategame. Protoss also heavily relies on skytoss for late game anti air. You significantly nerf skytoss and then you need to significantly buff Protoss ground to air capabilities and that screws with PvT. There is literally no point in significantly nerfing an equalizer unit like the infestor. It just creates more balance problems than it solves. You saw what happened when the Protoss lategame backbone was heavily nerfed - you get a disaster of a PvZ where protoss desperately tries to end the game before Zerg lategame can kill maxed out armies several times over. Zerg is designed around a powerful infestor. There's really nothing anyone can do about it at this point unless you want to redesign the game from scratch. Changing the supply to 3 is insane. It's like changing the battlecruiser's supply to 9... how tho ? this unit only goes out of control when zerg players make over 20 infestors while still be able to harrass P/T naturals and that secures them a very healthy eco for another instant 20-25 units remax 20 infestors for 60 supply will definately hold thier ground no problem like the current one but zerg players must work harder in drone count and thier hit squads.Late game was never just about all out direct engagement | ||
|
seemsgood
5527 Posts
On October 05 2019 12:53 Wombat_NI wrote: Which is fine? Late game Skytoss got nerfed til it largely sucked, even though IMO PvZ was in its best state ever, albeit still not perfect when Skytoss was good Zerg has other advantages in that matchup and can win by other means. Can make a few tweaks if not the case. Likewise Terran and mass BCs teleporting everywhere, which was cool for about 10 minutes for novelty’s sake and is just a bit silly. Blizz don’t have to make every composition competitively viable, I think their mistake is trying to do so. Most players and spectators don’t like big late game air balls, certainly don’t like BL/Infestor in its current state, and most think the Infestor is way too good, there’s few drawbacks in massing them etc. It feels like this patch is just a whole bunch of changes meant to rebalance the game while keeping those two factors largely intact, instead of toning those things down and rebalancing to give other options to compensate. uncle blizz wants every unit has a role ,not every army comp! post blizzcon patch is for shaking up the meta and give the balance team another reason to keep doing balance change. just like a MOBA game hell yeah moba philosophy is gud also,it fits the modern gaming moar | ||
|
Boggyb
2855 Posts
On October 05 2019 11:34 BerserkSword wrote: I think people are really underestimating the massive nerf a change to 3 supply would be. Without a globe of Infestors, Zerg is virtually helpless against Terran and Protoss late game compositions. Only being able to build 67% of the infestors for the same supply is devastating. Infestors below a critical mass cannot contend with Skytoss + massive splash + warp ins, or the insane efficiency and firepower of a 200/200 Terran. Infestors are the equalizer for Zerg late game, as the rest of their units do not compete. BLs and Ultras are not strong enough. Herein lies the problem since there is a very fine line between Zerg's late game being helpless vs overpowered and it's all really based on the capabilities of infestor. 3 supply infestor would massively shift that balanced towards the helpless end of the spectrum. Barring mass Infestors, Zerg AA simply does not hold up to maxed out capital ship-based armies. Hydras die to everything, Corruptors will get shredded by support units if they get into range of BCs/Carriers/Tempests, and vipers are too easy to kill/neutralize for them to be a reliable and cost effective AA Full on Sky Terran and Sky Toss are extremely difficult to get to. If the Zerg player just sits back and lets it happen, they deserve to lose. Zerg cannot have overly aggressive early game options because their production makes those overpowered, but the design philosophy that Zerg just gets to defend defend defend and then auto win is absurd. | ||
|
AssyrianKing
Australia2111 Posts
| ||
|
brickrd
United States4894 Posts
On October 05 2019 13:19 AssyrianKing wrote: I will start playing Starcraft on one condition, bring back 8 worker start or at least reduce to 10 worker start yeah man i too wish the game were fucking 5 minutes slower for no reason | ||
|
dalecooper
56 Posts
On October 05 2019 13:44 brickrd wrote: yeah man i too wish the game were fucking 5 minutes slower for no reason i feel you both. | ||
|
washikie
United States752 Posts
On October 05 2019 11:34 BerserkSword wrote: I think people are really underestimating the massive nerf a change to 3 supply would be. Without a globe of Infestors, Zerg is virtually helpless against Terran and Protoss late game compositions. Only being able to build 67% of the infestors for the same supply is devastating. Infestors below a critical mass cannot contend with Skytoss + massive splash + warp ins, or the insane efficiency and firepower of a 200/200 Terran. Infestors are the equalizer for Zerg late game, as the rest of their units do not compete. BLs and Ultras are not strong enough. Herein lies the problem since there is a very fine line between Zerg's late game being helpless vs overpowered and it's all really based on the capabilities of infestor. 3 supply infestor would massively shift that balanced towards the helpless end of the spectrum. Barring mass Infestors, Zerg AA simply does not hold up to maxed out capital ship-based armies. Hydras die to everything, Corruptors will get shredded by support units if they get into range of BCs/Carriers/Tempests, and vipers are too easy to kill/neutralize for them to be a reliable and cost effective AA Your acting like an infestor nerf would happen in a vacuum. Obviously zerg needs something to give them not just an even playing field but an edge late game due to the way the game is balanced. We just want that edge to not come from the most static boring and grinding army in the game. I want to see more games like the one Ragnorok had vs Maru where he used nydus mobility and his bank to take the fight to the terran in the late game. That's a way more exciting premise for late game than zerg sitting on their unengageable static d+ infestor+ bl comp while trying to slowly bleed their opponent to death. Id be more ok with infestor bl if it was more like mech where it was counterable with clear weaknesses and strengths. and although efficient could be traded against and worn down over time due to its inability to hold far flung basses effectively. The problem with bl infestor is that its so efficient that its weaknesses are just not relevant enough. Who cares that its hard to hold far away basses if your army is so extremely strong that it takes 3 to 4 fights where your opponent losses everything to wear it down? Who cares that you cant mine as much as your opponent when you have a 3k 4k bank due to the design of your race and the efficiency of your late game. Give zerg better tools to leverage a big bank into a win. But make them spend that bank, take risks and play aggressively to do so. Take away the tools to camp on their static d and wait for the map to run dry. This would lead to a way more interesting and engaging late game. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
RSL Revival
Classic vs Clem
FEL
Elazer vs Spirit
Gerald vs MaNa
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
Bonyth vs Dewalt
QiaoGege vs Dewalt
Hawk vs Bonyth
Sziky vs Fengzi
Mihu vs Zhanhun
QiaoGege vs Zhanhun
Fengzi vs Mihu
Wardi Open
Replay Cast
WardiTV European League
PiGosaur Monday
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
