EPTBalance Update - April 28, 2020 - Page 6
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
sparklyresidue
United States5524 Posts
| ||
|
True_Spike
Poland3434 Posts
| ||
|
MarianoSC2
Slovakia1855 Posts
| ||
|
FFW_Rude
France10201 Posts
you will not be able to offensively Battery Overcharge rush your opponents. Awww come on EDIT : Did someone test the Baneling nerf with tanks / storms ? | ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5226 Posts
The Widow Mine is one of most toxic and uninteresting units in the game that promotes power without game play. I stopped playing when HOTS came out because of it, and returned when it wasn't invisible after firing. Buffing it is a terrible idea. Even higher level players (in relative terms) like Winter admit to struggling versus Widow Mine drops as Protoss, so lesser players like myself who aren't Grandmasters who already get decimated by the coin flippiness of a Widow Mine drop, are going to face them more often. Even if you have a cannon up, it won't kill multiple Widow Mines before they ravage your mineral line. Unlike a Banshee, Oracles or DT, Widow Mines do instant burst damage that can kill multiple Probes, leaving little time for reaction. If you react when the game provides warnings you're under attack to a Dark Templar or Liberator, you'll only have lost a few workers, but Widow Mines will have killed your entire mineral line. Sure the pros can handle them (as having the reaction time is requisite now for Protoss pro players), but most others struggle with this uninteresting dynamic. | ||
|
-Kyo-
Japan1927 Posts
On April 29 2020 21:38 BronzeKnee wrote: Time for me to go again. The Widow Mine is one of most toxic and uninteresting units in the game that promotes power without game play. I stopped playing when HOTS came out because of it, and returned when it wasn't invisible after firing. Buffing it is a terrible idea. Even higher level players (in relative terms) like Winter admit to struggling versus Widow Mine drops as Protoss, so lesser players like myself who aren't Grandmasters who already get decimated by the coin flippiness of a Widow Mine drop, are going to face them more often. Even if you have a cannon up, it won't kill multiple Widow Mines before they ravage your mineral line. The risk-reward is all wrong. Just like Abduct and Blinding Cloud. And this battery overcharge is absolutely going to the increase the number of proxies. You should not be defending a widow mine with cannons. You should not be worried about an armory making them invisible because you should surely have a robo, or even now an oracle, before that is finished. | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
We’re also aware that this new ability will draw some obvious comparisons with Pylon Overcharge, but we believe there are two keys differences. First, unless you get extremely creative, you will not be able to offensively Battery Overcharge rush your opponents Blizzard really underestimates the great book of protoss | ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5226 Posts
On April 29 2020 21:41 -Kyo- wrote: You should not be defending a widow mine with cannons. You should not be worried about an armory making them invisible because you should surely have a robo, or even now an oracle, before that is finished. You didn't read what Blizzard wrote did you? "To put indirect economic pressure on Protoss by increasing the number of potential Terran openers and putting strain on their defenses across multiple bases. We believe this change could encourage more thoughtful positioning of Stalkers as well as force earlier Photon Cannons, both of which detract from the power of the Protoss' primary army." Blizzard doesn't understand their game. And that's the problem. I don't build Cannons to defend Widow Mines, which I why I said even if you have on up... so their proposed solution doesn't solve the problem as I mentioned. That's the whole point. | ||
|
batatm
Israel116 Posts
The baneling nerf plus WM buff equals more bio play, but wasn't bio already the dominant strat? | ||
|
-Kyo-
Japan1927 Posts
On April 29 2020 21:46 BronzeKnee wrote: You didn't read what Blizzard wrote did you? "To put indirect economic pressure on Protoss by increasing the number of potential Terran openers and putting strain on their defenses across multiple bases. We believe this change could encourage more thoughtful positioning of Stalkers as well as force earlier Photon Cannons, both of which detract from the power of the Protoss' primary army." Blizzard doesn't understand their game. And that's the problem. I don't build Cannons to defend Widow Mines, which I why I said even if you have on up... so their proposed solution doesn't solve the problem as I mentioned. That's the whole point. ?? Idk what you mean anymore. You've made two opposing conclusions in two posts. If you're not building cannons, that's good. If you're putting stalkers in the correct position, that's good. Most standard blink openings have the power deny a drop completely if you're positioned correctly. idk how the armory making them invisible would lead you to quitting when you'll a robo built before 40 supply in like... literally every pvt build o.o... My understanding of your first post was that you didn't like window mines; now they'll be invisible without an upgrade, and that made you unhappy. I didn't understand that logic at all. edit: + Show Spoiler + I thought bout it, and you could probably easily defend mine drops with the old twilight, forge opening if you just pull workers when they actually drop. If you're taking that risk to pull workers instead of use a robo for spotting then it's something you need to think about with your build, but you could probably easily play that sort of way until like 5k+... :/ | ||
|
LTCM
174 Posts
On April 29 2020 21:31 FFW_Rude wrote: Awww come on EDIT : Did someone test the Baneling nerf with tanks / storms ? Doesn't change how fast storm kills banes and it doesn't really change how toss units kill them outside of some fringe combinations. It does reduce the number of hits needed from a marine. It's like blizzard didn't read their own notes from before. There is a reason they backed off the +10 health that somehow made it into the game years ago. This is a huge nerf for Terran and useless for protoss. | ||
|
-Kyo-
Japan1927 Posts
On April 29 2020 21:31 FFW_Rude wrote: Awww come on EDIT : Did someone test the Baneling nerf with tanks / storms ? I tested earlier. If you roll through a storm your banes will survive with 1hp. (offcreep) | ||
|
LTCM
174 Posts
On April 29 2020 22:11 -Kyo- wrote: I tested earlier. If you roll through a storm your banes will survive with 1hp. You didn't even need to test it. Storm does 10 damage per tick. Ignores armor. Zerg regenerates 1 health immediately. Three ticks - bane survives with 1hp vs 6hp. This is useless because it still is oneshot but pretty much everything. No change. Four ticks - bane dies pre and post patch. No change. It does reduce marine shots by one.... | ||
|
-Kyo-
Japan1927 Posts
On April 29 2020 22:16 LTCM wrote: You didn't even need to test it. Storm does 10 damage per tick. Ignores armor. Zerg regenerates 1 health immediately. Three ticks - bane survives with 1hp vs 6hp. This is useless because it still is oneshot but pretty much everything. No change. Four ticks - bane dies pre and post patch. No change. It does reduce marine shots by one.... ty for ur supportive post. also, ty for reposting what i posted in 4 lines. + Show Spoiler + oh and also, not useless for protoss; cannons will always 2 shot banes now, even with +3 armor, as opposed to 3 | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
inner radius (14% of the area): 40 damage mid radius (25% of the area): 20 damage outer radius (61% of the area): 10 damage After the patch you need to do 30 damage in a single shot or 31 damage with shots in quick succession (due to Zerg regeneration). So those scenarios where heavy red bane blops keep on rolling won't happen anymore. They usually happen when 2-3 tank shots bruise them in the outer radiuses. | ||
|
LTCM
174 Posts
On April 29 2020 22:35 -Kyo- wrote: ty for ur supportive post. also, ty for reposting what i posted in 4 lines. + Show Spoiler + oh and also, not useless for protoss; cannons will always 2 shot banes now, even with +3 armor, as opposed to 3 That's rich given your post was simply reposting what I had already said. | ||
|
Vision_
877 Posts
On April 29 2020 12:53 Dedraterllaerau wrote: Banelings need a straight up damage nerf vs armored targets and a hard one. They are way 2 cost efficient vs anything ground units and buildings. Baneling runbys are smashing entire nexuses or planetary's, calculate the amount of banelings you need to blow up and expand with 30 workers in 1 go and you can tell just from math perspective how broken this unit is. Imagine banelings were never in the game and then you patch in a new unit called the baneling and first pro games you watch zergs blow up entire expansions with little investment that unit would be nerfed hard within a month. You get 100 banelings for 50 supply, just roll that around in your head a little as I feel most people have forgot. I understand Blizzard are scared of drastic changes but this is really getting out of hand I don't know why people can be so blind to things obviously broken in this game. It s better to keep the unit unchanged (or look at these changes and..) and increase his gas cost (25 to 30 or 35 idk). PS : Here, Some have mocked me about my posts about Banelings and creep tumors.. But now i know my suggestion were full of good sense. PS 2 : The infested Terrans miss me | ||
|
DarthIke7
United States1 Post
So they're gonna make a slight change to widow mines while massively buffing shield batteries? I don't know. I guess we'll have to see how it plays out in practice. I'm seeing protoss players comment that it's bad because it will complicate macro/nexus energy management. I'm the terran saying once the protoss players adjust it will be fine. Ever drop mules right before you realize there's dt's in your mineral line? You just have to save energy on your most vulnerable nexus. The strength of keeping that base seems much more important than losing a couple chrono boosts to me. It also seems to me like they're not really buffing the widow mine. Now if I want them to be cloaked while burrowed and have drilling claws I need an Armory and a tech lab upgrade. It forces detection but also delays the timing of widow mine drops. Protoss has such strong detection capabilities I feel like will hardly make a difference. Meanwhile denying expansions as terran vs protoss will be much harder. When already, "Terran players often talk about feeling economically behind, especially in the TvP matchup." | ||
|
Tommy131313
Germany157 Posts
nerfing banes - maybe ok. but you have to consider, that banes are suicide units, having them is simultaneously being necessary and risky. you need them against certain t and p unit combos, but if you don't trade them okay-ish, you're just dead HT feedback buff is really strong, as it counters each and every energy unit, affecting especially most lategame scenarios oracle change seems good. you get something (versatility) and you loose something ("indefinite" detection) battery overcharge - could have large impact on p turtling tactics, resulting into reduced dynamic gameplay widowmine change - it's hard to say. will obviously make the mines invisible a tad earlier. making them a lot stronger against defending banes and mutas and ambushing rush paths. but i doubt they will have big impact on harassing the p eco creep change - will possibly have a massive influence on z gameplay. the reactive race depends mostly on scouting information, especially in early to mid game state. increasing t and p ability to reduce creep in this phase of the game with cheap units is a big deal as for the microbial tweak - the poll says it all: microbial what??? really made my day, bro!  | ||
|
rasi86
44 Posts
| ||
| ||
