|
On October 05 2019 12:53 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2019 12:19 BerserkSword wrote:On October 05 2019 11:58 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On October 05 2019 11:34 BerserkSword wrote:On October 05 2019 08:58 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 05 2019 08:41 Charoisaur wrote:On October 05 2019 08:18 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On October 05 2019 07:49 Boggyb wrote:On October 05 2019 04:32 pissinmyhand wrote:
how about we just make it so mothership cant be pulled or neuraled 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? 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. 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. 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.
I agree with you. Would like to see more fundamental change to the late game air deathball problem. I think bliz is trying with the range changes, but I think until you address the core problems that lead to air deathball we will have late game issues.
|
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
No, the game is fine as it is with worker start. There are bigger problems which make the game annoying such as swarm hosts, nydus worms, broodlord/infestor, protoss air (team games only), etc.
|
soo infested terran are too strong so they buff them?
|
Czech Republic12134 Posts
So no BL-infestor quick fixes before Blizzcon? Yeah, at least I know my lost hope wasn't wrong...
|
On October 05 2019 13:17 Boggyb wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2019 11:34 BerserkSword wrote:On October 05 2019 08:58 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 05 2019 08:41 Charoisaur wrote:On October 05 2019 08:18 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On October 05 2019 07:49 Boggyb wrote:On October 05 2019 04:32 pissinmyhand wrote:
how about we just make it so mothership cant be pulled or neuraled 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? 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. 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.
sounds like the current state of PvZ from the Protoss side. So you just want to reverse it?
|
On October 05 2019 17:56 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2019 13:17 Boggyb wrote:On October 05 2019 11:34 BerserkSword wrote:On October 05 2019 08:58 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 05 2019 08:41 Charoisaur wrote:On October 05 2019 08:18 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On October 05 2019 07:49 Boggyb wrote:On October 05 2019 04:32 pissinmyhand wrote:
how about we just make it so mothership cant be pulled or neuraled 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? 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. 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. sounds like the current state of PvZ from the Protoss side. So you just want to reverse it?
Except with Pvx it's defend defend defend auto lose.
Mind you in PvX it's also attack attack attack auto lose
Or Defend Attack Defend Auto lose
Basically what I'm saying is the only way to win as Protoss is never play.
|
On October 05 2019 11:58 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2019 11:34 BerserkSword wrote:On October 05 2019 08:58 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 05 2019 08:41 Charoisaur wrote:On October 05 2019 08:18 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On October 05 2019 07:49 Boggyb wrote:On October 05 2019 04:32 pissinmyhand wrote:
how about we just make it so mothership cant be pulled or neuraled 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? 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. 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.
Agreed but then it's need to be quiet an impactful nerf, not the bs we have in compensation for sh nerf in late hots.
|
On October 05 2019 13:44 brickrd wrote:Show nested quote +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
Yeah I mean why go back to the times when early cheeses were actually scoutable and did not hit 20 secs after you realized what was going on, you could tell what build order the opponent was doing by the absence of certain information and was not forced to always probe scout in the case of protoss. I mean that era when tech and upgrade choices were actually a meaningful strategical commitment and you actually had more varied game compositions, timings and strategies was definitely the worst starcraft has ever had to offer...
There is an article on this very site called A Eulogy for the Six Pool, maybe you and the rest of those that have this basic and unrefined way of discussing the sc2 economy should read it.
LoTV had less players at release than the last season of HoTS, a lot of people left (including some pros) because they believed that the new economy was badly designed and would make the game into a more streamlined, weaker version of what had come before. The only reason this game now has more players than it did at release was because of going free to play, quite a few times on ladder I find people that are dragged back into playing because of the nostalgia but they leave soon after because they enjoyed the slower worker start more, some of them find the fact that you are forced to expand during the first minute and a half of the game an aberration, there is barely no early game anymore.
The game would benefit from an overall slowing of pace, so dont go and say that there is "no reason" for making sc2 a little bit slower, this is the same unprofessional way of thinking that David Kim provided and was by available metrics proven wrong.
I love this game, it had and still has a lot of potential, but it was bleeding back in HoTS and it still bleeds in LOTV because Blizzard employees are either too lazy, too slow or too unprepared to fix their mistakes and actually make sc2 the best version of what it could possibly be.
|
On October 05 2019 19:33 Steelghost1 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2019 13:44 brickrd wrote: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 Yeah I mean why go back to the times when early cheeses were actually scoutable and did not hit 20 secs after you realized what was going on, you could tell what build order the opponent was doing by the absence of certain information and was not forced to always probe scout in the case of protoss. I mean that era when tech and upgrade choices were actually a meaningful strategical commitment and you actually had more varied game compositions, timings and strategies was definitely the worst starcraft has ever had to offer... There is an article on this very site called A Eulogy for the Six Pool, maybe you and the rest of those that have this basic and unrefined way of discussing the sc2 economy should read it. LoTV had less players at release than the last season of HoTS, a lot of people left (including some pros) because they believed that the new economy was badly designed and would make the game into a more streamlined, weaker version of what had come before. The only reason this game now has more players than it did at release was because of going free to play, quite a few times on ladder I find people that are dragged back into playing because of the nostalgia but they leave soon after because they enjoyed the slower worker start more, some of them find the fact that you are forced to expand during the first minute and a half of the game an aberration, there is barely no early game anymore. The game would benefit from an overall slowing of pace, so dont go and say that there is "no reason" for making sc2 a little bit slower, this is the same unprofessional way of thinking that David Kim provided and was by available metrics proven wrong. I love this game, it had and still has a lot of potential, but it was bleeding back in HoTS and it still bleeds in LOTV because Blizzard employees are either too lazy, too slow or too unprepared to fix their mistakes and actually make sc2 the best version of what it could possibly be.
Ok, let's see what others think about less workers.
Poll: Should there be less workers at start?(Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
(Vote): Fine with either option
|
On October 05 2019 19:52 SC-Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2019 19:33 Steelghost1 wrote:On October 05 2019 13:44 brickrd wrote: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 Yeah I mean why go back to the times when early cheeses were actually scoutable and did not hit 20 secs after you realized what was going on, you could tell what build order the opponent was doing by the absence of certain information and was not forced to always probe scout in the case of protoss. I mean that era when tech and upgrade choices were actually a meaningful strategical commitment and you actually had more varied game compositions, timings and strategies was definitely the worst starcraft has ever had to offer... There is an article on this very site called A Eulogy for the Six Pool, maybe you and the rest of those that have this basic and unrefined way of discussing the sc2 economy should read it. LoTV had less players at release than the last season of HoTS, a lot of people left (including some pros) because they believed that the new economy was badly designed and would make the game into a more streamlined, weaker version of what had come before. The only reason this game now has more players than it did at release was because of going free to play, quite a few times on ladder I find people that are dragged back into playing because of the nostalgia but they leave soon after because they enjoyed the slower worker start more, some of them find the fact that you are forced to expand during the first minute and a half of the game an aberration, there is barely no early game anymore. The game would benefit from an overall slowing of pace, so dont go and say that there is "no reason" for making sc2 a little bit slower, this is the same unprofessional way of thinking that David Kim provided and was by available metrics proven wrong. I love this game, it had and still has a lot of potential, but it was bleeding back in HoTS and it still bleeds in LOTV because Blizzard employees are either too lazy, too slow or too unprepared to fix their mistakes and actually make sc2 the best version of what it could possibly be. Ok, let's see what others think about less workers. Poll: Should there be less workers at start?(Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
(Vote): Fine with either option
I don´t think this is a good system of polling, consider that the sample you will take from here will be heavily influenced by the fact that those that don´t like the 12 worker start might have already left the game and the discussion boards on tl, so the results you will have regarding the LOTV economy side will be overrepresented. Some of us that hate the LOTV economy still stay mainly due to inertia or just to keep an interest to where the balance discussion goes. Still, if you would like to settle such a decision through voting there are more ways you could discriminate in order to reach a better conclusion.
First you should probably allow only high diamond players + to participate since it usually is at this point where balance and technical game knowledge start to somewhat matter, then actually see what players from each race and skill differential vote (zerg players might prefer 12 worker start more than members of the other two races). Also maybe you should allow for a middle ground choice of 9 workers (not as slow as HoTS nor as fast as LOTV)
However, this is entirely hypothetical since I heavily doubt that at this point Blizzard is willing to do anything other than try to patch the current iteration of the game, redesigning seems like a big no to them even when blatantly obvious problems run amok.
|
|
|
On October 05 2019 17:56 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2019 13:17 Boggyb wrote:On October 05 2019 11:34 BerserkSword wrote:On October 05 2019 08:58 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 05 2019 08:41 Charoisaur wrote:On October 05 2019 08:18 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On October 05 2019 07:49 Boggyb wrote:On October 05 2019 04:32 pissinmyhand wrote:
how about we just make it so mothership cant be pulled or neuraled 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? 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. 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. sounds like the current state of PvZ from the Protoss side. So you just want to reverse it?
I want them to bring back March 2018 TvZ which from a design perspective was the pinnacle of how an RTS should work. The onus on aggression shifted as the game went on. Both players were constantly teching as the game went on rather than hitting a mid game composition then sticking on it until they won or lost.
|
Some ppl should really try to play all races, nerfing something to the ground just because it makes you lose sometimes is not a great idea. Infestor is essential when Z has to deal with big unit centric army. It can be certainly beaten by terran, it can be beaten by toss on lower lvls, so logical fix high level balance should be a new protos high tech micro intensive unit.
Late game toss is pretty easy to control in battle and I have pretty high win rate against late game zerg armies, while with Z, I often lose, cos I misread the P army and my composition is out of balance or because I just mess up the micro. Blizz has the low lvl data, they know the exact win rate of PvZ late game in dia and lower and I'm pretty sure it is P favored, they can't just nerf Z and call it good, because pros are balanced.
Z have Viper and Infestor, units that are both super strong and nobody below 5k MMR can use them at the same time. And not even semi-pro can add BL positioning, queen support, creep re-spread, static D repositioning and corruptor zoning to that. Toss needs something that is as difficult as that. It will even make for a great watching experience.
|
Northern Ireland27479 Posts
On October 05 2019 23:24 MrFreeman wrote:
Some ppl should really try to play all races, nerfing something to the ground just because it makes you lose sometimes is not a great idea. Infestor is essential when Z has to deal with big unit centric army. It can be certainly beaten by terran, it can be beaten by toss on lower lvls, so logical fix high level balance should be a new protos high tech micro intensive unit.
Late game toss is pretty easy to control in battle and I have pretty high win rate against late game zerg armies, while with Z, I often lose, cos I misread the P army and my composition is out of balance or because I just mess up the micro. Blizz has the low lvl data, they know the exact win rate of PvZ late game in dia and lower and I'm pretty sure it is P favored, they can't just nerf Z and call it good, because pros are balanced.
Z have Viper and Infestor, units that are both super strong and nobody below 5k MMR can use them at the same time. And not even semi-pro can add BL positioning, queen support, creep re-spread, static D repositioning and corruptor zoning to that. Toss needs something that is as difficult as that. It will even make for a great watching experience.
What late game Toss composition in PvZ is easy to control?
Zerg lategame is extremely difficult to control to the level of a Dark or Serral too, I do agree that observers aren’t aware of that when they’re complaining.
I don’t think there’s 100% consensus, most people concede that in the current state of the game that Zerg need really potent Infestors, but would prefer the game change to alter this in some way.
|
On October 05 2019 16:30 Mun_Su wrote:
soo infested terran are too strong so they buff them?
yes a "buff but double energy per infested terran. So we will see half as much infested terrans. I don't think this is a buff in general but this change is great for fps (especially for lategame).
|
Northern Ireland27479 Posts
On October 06 2019 00:10 Dingodile wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2019 16:30 Mun_Su wrote:
soo infested terran are too strong so they buff them? yes a "buff but double energy per infested terran. So we will see half as much infested terrans. I don't think this is a buff in general but this change is great for fps (especially for lategame).
If I was to guess I think it’s a buff for Infestor harassment squads potentially, ITs will hit harder initially so might do more damage before you can pull workers etc.
I think it’s a slight nerf for lategame engagements, there are fewer ITs so they’re more vulnerable to being taken out quickly by AoE, there are fewer ITs for your units to auto-attack etc
|
Czech Republic12134 Posts
On October 05 2019 23:24 MrFreeman wrote:
Some ppl should really try to play all races, nerfing something to the ground just because it makes you lose sometimes is not a great idea. Infestor is essential when Z has to deal with big unit centric army. It can be certainly beaten by terran, it can be beaten by toss on lower lvls, so logical fix high level balance should be a new protos high tech micro intensive unit.
Late game toss is pretty easy to control in battle and I have pretty high win rate against late game zerg armies, while with Z, I often lose, cos I misread the P army and my composition is out of balance or because I just mess up the micro. Blizz has the low lvl data, they know the exact win rate of PvZ late game in dia and lower and I'm pretty sure it is P favored, they can't just nerf Z and call it good, because pros are balanced.
Z have Viper and Infestor, units that are both super strong and nobody below 5k MMR can use them at the same time. And not even semi-pro can add BL positioning, queen support, creep re-spread, static D repositioning and corruptor zoning to that. Toss needs something that is as difficult as that. It will even make for a great watching experience.
PvZ on a ladder is sitting around 50 %. Do you know why? Because match making! That makes the ladder bellow high master 50 %. So, uh, Blizz has nothing out of ladder because their own system is placing the players together so both have equal chanca to win... 
|
I wish Blizzard would do something extremely radical like adding some broodwar units or something to really stir up the meta... am I alone in that? It wouldn't hurt to at least test.. just buffing the infestor over and over is getting boring xD
|
On October 05 2019 12:53 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2019 12:19 BerserkSword wrote:On October 05 2019 11:58 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On October 05 2019 11:34 BerserkSword wrote:On October 05 2019 08:58 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 05 2019 08:41 Charoisaur wrote:On October 05 2019 08:18 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On October 05 2019 07:49 Boggyb wrote:On October 05 2019 04:32 pissinmyhand wrote:
how about we just make it so mothership cant be pulled or neuraled 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? 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. 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. 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.
Completely changing the game, essentially from scratch, will kill SC2, which is why I don't think it's fine. Despite the fact that I do think that ideally, heavy redesigns everywhere are ideal.
The elephant in the room is that Protoss ground is severely outclassed in the lategame. Which is why Skytoss deathball has to be viable. Protoss ground simply doesnt scale well, has poverty AA capabilities, and gets eviscerated in the lategame.
A 3 supply infestor would make lategame balance HEAVILY in favor of protoss (and Terran, but I'm one of the few who believe that terran lategame actually beats zerg lategame). To balance this skytoss would require further nerfs, essentially turning it from the garbage it is now to a pile of crap. Because of these nerfs Protoss ground to air capabilities would have to be buffed, and they'd probably turn the immortal into a mini thor, since buffing stalkers would make them broken - whatever the case protoss ground would become broken as they now are capable of handling air units.
I can go on and on, but the point is that drastic changes in units lead to drastic metagame changes, and that is a death knell for an already dying game. It should not happen for a variety of reasons.
|
On October 05 2019 13:01 seemsgood wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2019 11:34 BerserkSword wrote:On October 05 2019 08:58 Wombat_NI wrote:On October 05 2019 08:41 Charoisaur wrote:On October 05 2019 08:18 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On October 05 2019 07:49 Boggyb wrote:On October 05 2019 04:32 pissinmyhand wrote:
how about we just make it so mothership cant be pulled or neuraled 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? 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. 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 Show nested quote +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
I agree that infestors can be out of control.
I'm not saying this unit should NOT be nerfed
I'm saying that making them 3 supply is too drastic. Zerg needs a strong infestor to contend.
I dont see why Blizzard doesnt look into buffing protoss lategame. I agree with wombat in that 2018 lategame pvz was very close to balanced, at least ocmpared to 2019 after carriers lost graviton catapult, tempests got nerfed, and feedback got nerfed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
