EPTBalance Update - April 28, 2020 - Page 12
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Slydie
1883 Posts
| ||
|
Vision_
844 Posts
On May 08 2020 05:34 Slydie wrote: Am I the only one enjoying that landing a vikingflock on a tankline is a viable play? No i m thinking they don t need a nerf ( -1 damage could be a viable solution) What do you think about a tweak from mechanical tag into armored ? is there too many tags ? | ||
|
Decendos
Germany1338 Posts
I would be surprised if they go through with any Z nerfs or T buffs looking at recent tournaments like Gsl or tsl qualifiers etc Sad thing is the baneling depency of Z against bio or zealots. I would be fine with nerfing banes while buffing lair tech zerg. hydras, mutas, infestors and shs are all more or less useless. It's always best to go Ling bane roach ravager into hive units... | ||
|
Vision_
844 Posts
- mutas seems a little bit useless than before also cause liberator do aoe damage. I m not a real fan of the collision design of air units, it seems coming from an another age. - infestor redesign is a failure because community liked infested terrans. I m also for an infested terrans come back. - i didn t see shs for a long time but in some case they can be used depending the map (i m not super aware of their place in all matchup). It seems they are situationnal but the difference between broodlords and shs in the tech tree and the smallest place of the mid game in LoTV regarding HoTS makes them more or less useless. I would like to see more micro on zerg units with for example an armor bonus while burrowing (for roachs especially). Mutas have of course heavy micro management when they are stacked but not any special spells (even if the unit doesn t really deserve it). As stimpack marines, Hydras could have poisonous spikes but the role / function of all units aren t so different from any other units that it seems hard for Blizzard to uniformize that. My question is more like,Aren t all zergs units a little bit useless for a design reason ? (involving their function to remax their 200 supply count very fast) | ||
|
pvsnp
7676 Posts
On May 16 2020 20:32 Decendos wrote: Is there any feedback regarding the testing? I would be surprised if they go through with any Z nerfs or T buffs looking at recent tournaments like Gsl or tsl qualifiers etc Sad thing is the baneling depency of Z against bio or zealots. I would be fine with nerfing banes while buffing lair tech zerg. hydras, mutas, infestors and shs are all more or less useless. It's always best to go Ling bane roach ravager into hive units... No. Blizzard takes the longer view on balance patches, and afaik there is no precedent for cancelling a patch altogether because a week or two of results. They've explicitly spelled out their reasoning and intent: nerf Zerg and buff Protoss. Unless I've missed a sudden spike in PvZ macro games, that still holds true. What there is precedent for is only some of the proposed changes going through, or specific numbers being tweaked after testing. The baneling change, for instance, might be altered or replaced since it affects TvZ more than PvZ. At the end of the day, there are likely to be Zerg nerfs and Protoss buffs. Though at a guess, they'll wait until the end of the GSL season to go live with them. | ||
|
Snakestyle11
191 Posts
On May 16 2020 21:12 pvsnp wrote: No. Blizzard takes the longer view on balance patches, and afaik there is no precedent for cancelling a patch altogether because a week or two of results. They've explicitly spelled out their reasoning and intent: nerf Zerg and buff Protoss. Unless I've missed a sudden spike in PvZ macro games, that still holds true. What there is precedent for is only some of the proposed changes going through, or specific numbers being tweaked after testing. The baneling change, for instance, might be altered or replaced since it affects TvZ more than PvZ. At the end of the day, there are likely to be Zerg nerfs and Protoss buffs. Though at a guess, they'll wait until the end of the GSL season to go live with them. Queen range and baneling nerfs both affect ZvT immensely. And if we judge from recent TvZ results at top level, will completely ruin the matchup. The feedback buff only is already pretty big. Protoss might be less scared to turtle and go late game, since it should give them the edge in deathball scenario. Banelings runby are really strong versus protoss, just not sure what they can do to fix that without destroying ZvT. Maybe +5 hp to probes could be a start? | ||
|
xelnaga_empire
620 Posts
7 Protoss qualify for GSL Super Tournament out of 16 spots Now there are 3 Protoss in the Round of 8 in the GSL (7 Protoss qualified for this GSL out of 24 spots) Why does Protoss need a buff? Looking at the results above, Protoss is performing very well this year. | ||
|
Vision_
844 Posts
On May 16 2020 21:58 Snakestyle11 wrote: Maybe +5 hp to probes could be a start? Probes are annoying cause they have shield so it s difficult to answer with no progamming knowledge. The only way to tweak banelings is to play on the size of units which is slighty different : zealot radius = 1 marine radius = 0.75 Supposing we have a progressive damage reduction depending on the radius, as marines have two times less hit points, they are less impacted with this change;... of course sometimes if two banelings connect with half of the damage, (if the marine have a shield bonus comparing to the banes) rarely, you will need a third banelings to kill him, but in definitive the change is less drastic than - 5 hp (cause banelings doesn t reach their target) Now, it s easy to understand as zealots have bigger collision box, they will be more impacted (and recieve in proportion slightly less damage). On May 16 2020 20:32 Decendos wrote: Is there any feedback regarding the testing? I would be surprised if they go through with any Z nerfs or T buffs looking at recent tournaments like Gsl or tsl qualifiers etc Sad thing is the baneling depency of Z against bio or zealots. I would be fine with nerfing banes while buffing lair tech zerg. hydras, mutas, infestors and shs are all more or less useless. It's always best to go Ling bane roach ravager into hive units... Actually, you re right, there s nothing more than roachs ravagers banes,.. Hydras have not enought advantages to replace roachs, indeed.. with the ravagers, zergs can poke opponent and trade well if he s not on his army. Hydralisks are less tanky and zergs players benefits from ravagers damage. | ||
|
MockHamill
Sweden1798 Posts
Maybe some upgrade that gave tanks bonus damage to shields. Pro players would still go bio in TvP but normal level player would have a viable alternative that would not require pro level mechanics to pull off. The problem right now is that even though TvP may be balanced on pro level, for normal players being Terran is much harder than being Protoss, especially if you try to play a macro game. | ||
|
Vision_
844 Posts
On May 17 2020 00:42 MockHamill wrote: I would really like if they implemented some change that made TvP more even if you do not not have pro level mechanics. Maybe some upgrade that gave tanks bonus damage to shields. Pro players would still go bio in TvP but normal level player would have a viable alternative that would not require pro level mechanics to pull off. The problem right now is that even though TvP may be balanced on pro level, for normal players being Terran is much harder than being Protoss, especially if you try to play a macro game. Yes for example, many of these upgrades would be only viable under diamond level.. There would be actually players in master which would have to play diamond but in this case, the lowest option is applied and they play together with these new upgrades. Then, when you re ready to step up, you can play master or grand master as pro gamers. I would be glad to see Blizzard dare to create a completely new multiplayer mod in the ladder, testing and why not, come back to previous state if the mod isn t popular.. The ladder could be divided into original SC2 and improved mod design by a new team in Blizzard. I don t think Starbow could be implemented with their own pathfinding but i can be wrong. | ||
|
washikie
United States752 Posts
On May 16 2020 20:55 Vision_ wrote: Without talking hydra directly, i would say - mutas seems a little bit useless than before also cause liberator do aoe damage. I m not a real fan of the collision design of air units, it seems coming from an another age. - infestor redesign is a failure because community liked infested terrans. I m also for an infested terrans come back. - i didn t see shs for a long time but in some case they can be used depending the map (i m not super aware of their place in all matchup). It seems they are situationnal but the difference between broodlords and shs in the tech tree and the smallest place of the mid game in LoTV regarding HoTS makes them more or less useless. I would like to see more micro on zerg units with for example an armor bonus while burrowing (for roachs especially). Mutas have of course heavy micro management when they are stacked but not any special spells (even if the unit doesn t really deserve it). As stimpack marines, Hydras could have poisonous spikes but the role / function of all units aren t so different from any other units that it seems hard for Blizzard to uniformize that. My question is more like,Aren t all zergs units a little bit useless for a design reason ? (involving their function to remax their 200 supply count very fast) Mutas are far from useless, they see a ton of play in zvt, they also have a limited place in zvp as a surprise tech switch ragnorok used them to finish off zest after his Allin failed in the most recent gsl Hydras are also a really strong option for zerg, I think the primary reason ravager are seen instead is that the transition to them is easier, since ravager are a hatch tech unit that performs about as well and better vs high tech units they tend to see more play, still if zerg feels safe enough to go hydra bane it’s definitely viable even at the pro level, ragnorok also used hydra bane vs zest in the recent gsl group. Swarmhost are just a hard unit to tune either they look totally busted and opresive because zergs can get them at a point where the chip dmg they do is very significant or they are not made because the other races can reach an army comp capable of allins across the map before zerg can reasonably make them. They have pretty much always been either utterly oppressive or so bad players only make them by mistake. Frankly I prefer the mostly useless version for this unit, it just does not work well as a concept, in general free units have shown over the years to be really problematic especially when the race that get to take the most expansions late game, also has access to units that trade a cool down for resource based units. A few months ago we were seeing some fringe use in combination with the nydus, right now the units strength is heavily tied to the nydus, with nydus nerfs it really hit swarmhosts hard. | ||
|
TaeTae
United Kingdom97 Posts
On May 16 2020 21:58 Snakestyle11 wrote: Queen range and baneling nerfs both affect ZvT immensely. And if we judge from recent TvZ results at top level, will completely ruin the matchup. The feedback buff only is already pretty big. Protoss might be less scared to turtle and go late game, since it should give them the edge in deathball scenario. Banelings runby are really strong versus protoss, just not sure what they can do to fix that without destroying ZvT. Maybe +5 hp to probes could be a start? I feel like the design in the balance is poorly misunderstood. Baneling runbys are not 'really strong versus protoss' because of banelings, they are really strong because it's not against Terran. If you run by a terrans mineral line he can just call down mules afterwards. The idea of nerfing Zerg in ZvP because Terran is stronger than Protoss is clearly and fundamentally flawed. This change, not in the grand scheme of things, is not a balance change but a broken change. This is going to nerf the baneling into the ground against Protoss, and even moreso in ZvT, where it is used more. | ||
|
DieuCure
France3713 Posts
 Everybody is a Jean-Michel Aulas at heart. | ||
|
Athenau
569 Posts
| ||
|
freelifeffs
97 Posts
| ||
|
ilax30
720 Posts
On May 17 2020 09:20 freelifeffs wrote: am i the only one who thinks liberators are gonna be super broken after the queen nerf? there is already so many spots on the maps where queens can barely hit them or not hit them at all without getting shot. dunno. wouldve rather nerfed queen damage vs ground or whatever. or at least give a hydra buff in return. hydras are just lolbad. "Super broken" is a very big stretch. More irritating for sure. Saw Bly lose 8+ drones to uthermal's lib in the balance tourney because he thought his queen could attack the lib without going through the "death zone" So it would def take some adjusting. Still libs are expensive and with good spore positioning/movement they shouldnt get out of control. We will most likely see a increase in banshee play as well because of this, zergs will be taxed more with defending, interesting to see how this pans out in the end | ||
|
GreasedUpDeafGuy
United States398 Posts
| ||
|
Vision_
844 Posts
https://starcraft2.com/fr-fr/news/21509420 French version in the middle of the text : "Dans les gènes : Terrans contaminés et autres chancres" In english : " In the genes : Infested Terrans and other Banelings" Why do they remove it ? | ||
|
fastr
France901 Posts
On May 18 2020 01:19 Vision_ wrote: Infested Terrans were considered by Blizzard as a part of the "lore" : https://starcraft2.com/fr-fr/news/21509420 French version in the middle of the text : "Dans les gènes : Terrans contaminés et autres chancres" In english : " In the genes : Infested Terrans and other Banelings" Why do they remove it ? Literally who gives a fuck about the lore? The infested terran was a terrible units and the game is now unequivocally better without it. Should we add campaign Jim Raynor to terran and Kerrigan to zerg because they're also part of the lore? | ||
|
Vision_
844 Posts
| ||
| ||
