EPTThe beginning of an answer - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
fastr
France902 Posts
| ||
|
Vision_
870 Posts
On March 15 2020 15:02 fastr wrote: This post is actually hilarious, OP please post some more gibberish, I'm sure it will all start making sense real soon! Hilarous ? All players claim Terran is broken, Special said race need radical changes, Serral said he won if he doesn t take risks ... Pro Koreans admit too.. I m honestly advocate for Terran survival.. On March 15 2020 06:22 Snakestyle11 wrote: ... But you also have to take in consideration reapers are stronger now a bit, and adepts exist. Before lotv, as zerg, u could cut lings for a long time because adept didnt exist, there was no 1/2 adept poke. Already this more than makes up for *10seconds* pool timing difference. As for ZvT, terran has a lot more potent early game harass, such as liberator and BCs, Forcing more queens than ever in hots. .... Yes this is right, and i agree that great decisions have been made after LoTV. And There are mostly concerning the new stuff Blizzard "gave" us to compensate the retard. As a viewer and an old beta tester, I will lie saying I dislike BC. Also, Liberator is well design for terran play style, In fact i hate as much i like LoTV. Regarding adepts idk, Protoss is the only race i didn t played since BW. Well now, you can discuss for ever but i prefer to see some Zerg all-ins on two bases (HoTS) than Every games a free and legit expansion move (made up in decision).... And by the way, always a late game play... Following the idea, you can look ahead to evaluate the percentage of games done on two bases before LoTV.. You will probably notice the percentage is less than two bases all-ins used in LoTV. As i m a Zerg player in WoL and HoTS, i know Zerg is the race which is depending the less of BO (reactive race), So all these none used BO on two bases means a significant loss of quality in the Zerg gameplay. | ||
|
Ej_
47656 Posts
| ||
|
InfCereal
Canada1759 Posts
On March 15 2020 05:38 Vision_ wrote: That s exactly the kind of comments which is absurd... As Dangermousecatdog comment, you aren t able to understand or read a thread... it proves Zerg is ahead by 12 seconds in hatchery first BO against Terran or Protoss compared to Hatch first in HoTS... That s good sense... Why are they ahead by 12 seconds? | ||
|
MarianoSC2
Slovakia1855 Posts
| ||
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19299 Posts
Even if the start up timing of certain buildings/build orders is different in LoTV, that doesn't justify a chief complaint. Blizzard has been balancing around that change since it's release. It's valid for you to be upset with the balance choices they have picked, but the timings itself is just the nature of the game in its current expansion. I would like to hear more about balance solutions you would propose that don't change core aspects of LoTV. Building timings won't change and I truly believe aren't what are responsible from some of the holes that exist in the mid to late game. | ||
|
Psychonian
United States2322 Posts
On March 16 2020 00:07 BisuDagger wrote: To focus on the thread content: Even if the start up timing of certain buildings/build orders is different in LoTV, that doesn't justify a chief complaint. Blizzard has been balancing around that change since it's release. It's valid for you to be upset with the balance choices they have picked, but the timings itself is just the nature of the game in its current expansion. I would like to hear more about balance solutions you would propose that don't change core aspects of LoTV. Building timings won't change and I truly believe aren't what are responsible from some of the holes that exist in the mid to late game. I agree. Tbh I think this entire discussion about worker start numbers and such is completely pointless. There's so many things we could do to help balance without fundamentally changing the entire pace of the game, or in my opinion, changing anything in the game at all. I still hold the opinion that between maps and meta development, after this patch we've reached a state where the game can be balanced with minimal dev interference. | ||
|
Vision_
870 Posts
On March 16 2020 00:07 BisuDagger wrote: I would like to hear more about balance solutions you would propose that don't change core aspects of LoTV. Building timings won't change and I truly believe aren't what are responsible from some of the holes that exist in the mid to late game. holes ? I would say the opposite.. The game is so full of macro than you are constantly at home, polishing BO, focus on macro... I play better on lotv and i never have to adapt my game style... I play better so much than i have to lose more so, and the macro still goes on.. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
On March 14 2020 22:58 dUTtrOACh wrote: 60 seconds in 'Blizzard time' was 40 seconds in real time. Sounds about right. The game timer was set at 'normal' speed originally, so everything had inflation once the game speed was turned up to 'faster', like when you're playing ladder games. This meant that a production timer that said 60 seconds on its tooltip was in fact a 40 second timer in reality. There would have been a patch at some point, probably during HotS, where all the tooltips were updated to reflect time at 'faster' game speed. Not quite 1.5x difference (It's about 1.375x, but i forgot the exact exact number) The game tick rate is around 22hz while "normal" speed was exactly 16. | ||
| ||
