EPTBalance Patch 5.0.11 PTR Patch Notes - Page 7
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
warnull
United States280 Posts
| ||
|
Ciaus_Dronu
South Africa1848 Posts
On December 09 2022 22:36 ZeroByte13 wrote: BCs are so strong that we see them in what percentage of late games? 1%? Maybe 0.1%? And ground mech is not that viable either. If we're talking about pro-level, of course. With current version of super-fast lurkers you need ghosts, it's the only answer Terran has now really. And with the new patch lurkers will be able to run away from snipe more often than before. And Thors lose to lurkers badly. So what terrans are supposed to use now to compensate this nerf in late game? I guess it will be era of "kill zerg in first 8 minutes or lose" TvZ meta. One thought, that I'm almost surprised isn't here given that they've implemented some version of almost every sane change I've seen seriously suggested, is to make lurkers a bit slower. Nerf their move and upgraded burrow speed so that at least they can't get into good engagement spots so easily. | ||
|
JJH777
United States4418 Posts
On December 09 2022 23:07 NotSoHappy wrote: to all that zerg this, terran that whine bottom line is, this is a dead game with really shallow playerbase and little to no new players inflow. most good protoss are already retirded or in the army. same with terran. you shouldn't act suprised that one race can dominate the other if the game is like that. Zerg was just as dominant while all of pre military Stats/Classic/TY/Inno/Trap/sOs/byun were active though. On December 09 2022 23:47 warnull wrote: Heromarine is very knowledgeable about Starcraft and has valuable insights on overall balance. Of course incorporating his feedback is important. My point is that Heromarine's patch analysis (VOD linked above) is for entertainment. When he starts off with "Serral and Reynor paid bribes to top Protoss players to approve Protoss nerfs", viewers understand that he's not serious about it. The way he showed the creep nerf is useless was very much objective analysis not tainted by bias. He pulled up vods of Serral on stream and showed that he almost never uses creep tumors within 2 seconds of their CD ending. That very objectively shows that creep nerf does nothing. All of his analysis isn't nullified just because he opened the stream with a joke lol. | ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10374 Posts
For example, if we're giving love to units like Hydras and Ultras, then why are we decreasing the power of Protoss armies without compensating them with strength in weak units? Gateway Army / Sentry Why don't we give love to Gateway armies by buffing Sentry damage from 6 to ~10? Heck even 8? It wouldn't break any unit interaction, and it'd do more to help protoss gateway strength than the forge upgrade. (Think about it - 4 more sentries in your army means 16 more damage as long as they live, compared to your army made up of ~30 units having +1 attack for only ~10 more total seconds of a game than before). Mothership Would buffing Mothership slightly hurt? You could give it a little more DPS, or make it a little cheaper, or give it a better Time Warp, since Time Warp really isn't even that good as is. You could decrease the energy to 75 or something. This could help make up for the weaker zoning of Disruptors now. Overcharge Protoss needs Overcharge to defend rushes in PvP and pushes in other MUs, what was given to compensate for this? Why not just tweak Overcharge so that it's still as useful early game and for pushes, but less strong mid and lategame? For example, what about tweaking the Recharge rate from 200% to 175%, but allowing it to last 2 seconds longer? That way it'd still heal around as much early game for rushes, but it won't be so strong that mid and late game pushes need to just back off completely and wait for it to run out. And meanwhile, it could still be helpful for defending farther away bases against smaller armies (this is important for the "spread out" direction that LotV did great in pushing to capture some of the dynamic gameplay of BW). I guess you can have a little quicker sentries and have a little more FF energy, but that's kind of it. Do people like FF more than Overcharge? Since Battery rushes were nerfed already and accounted for, if we're nerfing Overcharge why not increase the base Battery recharge rate slightly maybe, or increase the amount it heals per energy slightly? Or since Overcharge will be less of a "you need to back off and wait for it to finish before attacking" ability, then maybe you can just remove the cooldown? That way you can bank up energy however you see fit and have more sustained defenses, and at the same time, the opponent can still attack into it and out DPS the heal if they want. Disruptors Disruptors are a core part of LotV's direction and helping with the dynamic spread out feel that BW has. Disruptor, similar to Liberator and Lurker, is a unit that can be used to: -Harass with and drop with, which means there's more action and more action around the map, you can even open with a disruptor drop -Defend with, especially for far off bases - defense is a big thing that was lacking pre-LotV, and defense is a way to help get more bases spread out across the map and hold them for less supply, and discourage deathball/turtle gameplay -To zone with, to make engagements more active and back and forth, make gameplay more positional, and slows down fights and gameplay in general -Being able to fit many roles in 1 does make it a "good" unit, but it's also important to have versatile units so that you don't get locked into not being able to do much with the units that you have built. Versatile units allow players to harass, fight, and defend all in one, which results in more active games with more dynamic gameplay Sure maybe getting a perfect disruptor shot is a little punishing, but as we see in pro play, even if a player blows up 15-20 supply of Zerg with each hit, multiple hits in a row (Creator vs Solar at GSL Super), it still really isn't even game ending. In what games are we seeing where hitting a perfect disruptor shot is game ending or heavily shifts the state of the game? It's very rare, I can't recall any off the of my head. And how many games do we see where a Disruptor hit is dodged, and then it ends up not having any impact? Why are we straight up nerfing the AOE rather than simply tweaking them? Also, if the nerf is moreso just to discourage players from massing Disruptors in deathballs, then why not increase Disruptor collision size to around an Immortal or slightly bigger, to make them clunkier and less effective in larger numbers/armies? Right now, despite the big model size, they take very little space. This allows Protoss to clump a lot of Disruptors and shoot Novas easily at near max range. If they're clunkier and you choose to have a lot of Disruptors in 1 army, then at least you need to micro them to the front more if you want them to use their full range. Broodlord When it comes to the BL, we weakened the broodlings so they're less strong in a deathball, but buffed them to be faster so they can be more mobile and well rounded. And we also buffed Hydras and Ultras. When it comes to the Carrier and Disruptor though, they were straight up nerfed, with nothing to compensate? Slightly faster HTs, Obs, Forge upgrades do not compensate at all either. Ok, how does that compensate for the lack of raw army strength? Sure maybe you can get into position to storm a fraction of a second earlier, or maybe you can occasionally get a Feedback off a Viper that you couldn't get off before an Abduct. But that's kind of it? Forge upgrades Faster forge upgrades does not make a protoss army "stronger" really. At the most it's only stronger for 10 more seconds than normal, and the rest of it it's the same strength as before the buff. Why can't we buff Sentry damage a little if we want to buff gateway styles? It will also make holding a 3rd Nexus vs ling runby's easier for example, without relying so much on Oracles to chase the lings away. Let me ask Protoss players - do you prefer the slightly weaker creep at the cost of the much weaker Overcharge? If the only thing this patch changed was nerfing creep, I think everyone would be OK with that and in agreement. But instead we nerfed things like Overcharge, Sensor towers, and so on and so on... shouldn't the goal be to nerf Zerg at the highest level? Not nerf creep but also nerf Protoss and Terran? To note I don't even play Protoss, I play Mech. I am quite confused and disappointed by this patch. | ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10374 Posts
While I get the general direction of the changes - weakening Matrix and AA missile, and making Ravens cheaper and faster to build to compensate, I don't like how much it's negatively effecting Terran in terms of them having even less of a gas sink, and how only being able to drop 2 Turrets at max energy instead of 4 is too big. If we were seeing oppressive lategame mass Raven strategies, I'd understand. If we were seeing overly turtle gameplay where players just want to sit and let Ravens reach max energy, I'd understand. But I at least haven't seen any - so is there really an issue or is this a side effect? We could just make Turret cost 60 energy, that way you can still put down 3 at max energy, or use 1 Matrix/AA Missile and 2 Turret at max energy. Matrix Usage Buffed? TvT: You can build 4 Ravens instead of 3 Ravens for the same gas and time, so you'll have more Matrix vs tanks in TvT. 8 seconds is enough to attack into and take out a position. I'm worried this means we'll be building even more Ravens... Matrix will still be very effective vs taking out smaller positions, just weaker if attacking into a big position. Ideally, we keep smaller positions strong (it's good to encourage armies to be spread out and be able to hold a space somewhat cost efficiently), and make bigger armies/positions weaker. TvP: Since Ravens build faster and start with 75 energy, it means you'll have about 85 energy at the time that a pre-patch Raven would only have 50 when first built. This means that... you will also be able to save energy for 2 Matrix sooner and go for an earlier push. As long as there are no overpowered pushes I guess it's fine to be able to be more active, but a weaker Overcharge is worrying. Your 1st Raven will reach 150 energy about 45 seconds sooner than before. Raven Proposal You could do something like this to maintain the cost/power/supply ratio of things, while nerfing Matrix/AA Missile and also giving a cheaper/quicker Detection option, while still limiting its effectiveness lategame when massed. Cost - 75 minerals, 150 gas, 2 supply Matrix - 8 seconds from 11, but 100 energy -You need to save more energy if you want to use 2 Matrix in a push in TvP. This works out since Ravens build faster and will have more energy saved up too. It delays the push timing which will help if Overcharged is weakened this much. -This compensates the fact you can build more Ravens and use more Matrix in TvT vs sieged positions, since 8 seconds is more than enough to attack into such a position AA missile - 15% damage increase, instead of effecting armor. Also reduce AOE from 2.88 to 2. -This encourages you to shoot 2-4 missiles instead of just 1 if you want to tag the whole army, if you want to invest more -This also makes it more of an option to build more than 1-2 Ravens for AA missile, instead of it being the only unit designed in the game to where it's discouraged to build more than 1 (Blizzard literally said they wanted it to be a unit you get just 1 or 2 of, honestly this was an overreaction to the old PDD Raven, it shouldn't be criminal in an RTS to want to build energy units and try to maximize their cost efficiency, it allows for more styles as long as it's not degenerative) -This would very targetedly weaken its impact on marines and make it less game ending in TvT, or PvT when defending early-mid pushes. -This would increase its relative effectiveness on units like Marauders in TvT which we rarely see -This would be much less useless for mech (Before it was useful if you wanted to do some weird AA missile + Liberator combo for anti air, or if you wanted to mass BCs vs Corruptors, or Thors vs Mutas). -Locking the ability to a % damage increase still ensures that you don't want to have too high of a Raven ratio in your army, because having more army will naturally increase your damage output more. Auto Turret - 50 energy, Damage decreased from 18 to 12, so when accounting for armor it's close to half DPS -This way you can still drop 1 AT turret for harass early game to make them pull away their workers if you want, and also making it less punishing if you didn't see it for 1-2 seconds (it's not really fun gameplay and feels bad). -But also, you can wait a little longer for 100 energy, and put down 2 Turrets for harass if you want to try to kill workers before they pull away. More options is good! Also this means you can still use 2 Matrix/AA Missile and 1 Turret at max energy -This means you can still put down 4 Turrets at max energy. Sure, you'd be using 200 energy for 4 weaker Turrets, instead of 150 energy for 2 strong Turrets as proposed in the PTR. BUT, it's not just about DPS. Being able to put more Turrets down to change the field of battle is interesting and unique, as a sort of wall, which helps not only Mech but Bio too. | ||
|
Thaniri
1264 Posts
Queue the balance whiners now | ||
Poopi
France12955 Posts
On December 10 2022 01:57 Thaniri wrote: Huge patch with a ton of changes. Queue the balance whiners now I mean it is pretty healthy that a lot of people are discussing the changes. Having that many changes in a single patch is epic and is imo a very good sign for the years to come, but there needs to be some discussion and tweaking  .All we need now is a documentary about Starcraft 2 similar to the Melee documentary, and we can get 5 more years of healthy Starcraft 2 esports, especially with Microsoft around the corner. | ||
|
Chewbacca.
United States3634 Posts
I'm hoping that now that the raven is both cheaper and a quicker build that we will start to see more usage of a single early game raven against zerg for creep spread denial. It has always seemed to me like something that could pay off big by allowing way more mules in the early-midgame to accelerate the terran economy and allow them to get to a more threatening position quicker, likely leading to a delay zerg getting to lategame. | ||
|
JJH777
United States4418 Posts
| ||
|
bulldozer06701
160 Posts
On December 10 2022 02:12 Chewbacca. wrote: I think I generally like the direction that they are trying to take things, although could probably use a few tweaks. I'm hoping that now that the raven is both cheaper and a quicker build that we will start to see more usage of a single early game raven against zerg for creep spread denial. It has always seemed to me like something that could pay off big by allowing way more mules in the early-midgame to accelerate the terran economy and allow them to get to a more threatening position quicker, likely leading to a delay zerg getting to lategame. I hope this is not the reason for the Raven rework. No one uses it like that for creep cleanup, the scans are optimal. One of the reasons as Heromarine said: the Queens will snipe the Raven easily from a long distance. | ||
|
Chewbacca.
United States3634 Posts
On December 10 2022 02:33 bulldozer06701 wrote: I hope this is not the reason for the Raven rework. No one uses it like that for creep cleanup, the scans are optimal. One of the reasons as Heromarine said: the Queens will snipe the Raven easily from a long distance. I mean that doesn't have to be the reason for the change, but it certainly makes the possibility more likely. Also, the raven sight/detection range is like 50% higher than the queens air attack range, so it should not be a given that the raven is a loss. From a TvZ, perspective at least it's a straight buff. Cheaper and potentially faster creep spread denial and faster harassment potential. The harassment perspective may have been nerfed in the increased energy cost to 75, but only really in the case of secretly massing ravens. The initial turrets which are the ones to likely actually do damage can be out faster. | ||
|
JJH777
United States4418 Posts
| ||
|
Ahli
Germany355 Posts
Can people check if the attack behaves odd/different under some circumstances? e.g. when Lurker dies, unburrows, switches target, etc Details: LurkerMP gained Channeled and EffectFailure flags and lost periodic checks for CasterIsAttacking. | ||
|
ZeroByte13
797 Posts
"Attacks will no longer be blocked by certain low-ground terrain features." | ||
|
Ahli
Germany355 Posts
On December 10 2022 05:09 ZeroByte13 wrote: I think this change is (probably) mentioned here: "Attacks will no longer be blocked by certain low-ground terrain features." There is a validator change that would address to that (target point needs to be GE ground level 1 => not ground level 0 which is down the deep cliff). Since I noticed that more was changed, I am posting this. I would like the rare patches not introduce undesired side effects, undocumented balance changes or even new bugs. I made a comparison of all changes, so people can have a look themselves: https://github.com/Ahli/sc2xml/pull/1/files | ||
|
Vision_
875 Posts
Vision on creep is a little bit nerf (and tumors also) I waited 12 years so it s a really cool day. Need (wishlist for Xmas) 1) lurker role adjustement 2) nova stun (less punishing) 3) IT come back Overall a good direction, thanks blizzard | ||
|
warnull
United States280 Posts
| ||
|
Ahli
Germany355 Posts
On December 10 2022 07:40 warnull wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdN3lD7nS4E Scarlett is wrong about Ultra's attack area not being changed. The radius is offset by the Ultra's unit radius (damage effect flag). Since the unit radius shrunk, the total area (big half circle) will be smaller (= less radius) resulting in a smaller area. But still, units in front of the Ultra (180° arc) within range 2 will be hit by the 33% area damage (excluding the targeted unit which receives 100%) Other notes (side effects / undocumented changes / potential bugs):
I am trying to document/comment all data changes and make notes about things that could potentially break. I am far from done, but the amount of undocumented changes is concerning. Also, there are a few small bugs that could be fixed as well:
| ||
|
warnull
United States280 Posts
| ||
|
Athenau
575 Posts
Lurker's Unburrow random starting delay was changed from [0, 0.5] to [0, 0]. This means Lurkers will be able to unburrow and move away up to half a second faster Lurker's Burrow random starting delay was changed from [0, 0.25] to [0, 0.125]. They burrow on average 1 game update = 0.625 game seconds = ~44ms faster than before allowing them to attack that time earlier as well or escape fire from flying units Wtf? This means that Lurkers can now escape snipe after unburrowing. This shit is egregious. | ||
| ||
![[image loading]](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/5763784/206855164-bb444b44-a731-4d05-a82a-0905256b17c8.png)
to ![[image loading]](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/5763784/206855248-fc9d6ef1-95b9-4923-8b51-858ebf1ead88.png)
![[image loading]](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/5763784/206867874-ea728229-6a6d-445a-8785-70407163d0a1.png)
