|
On August 31 2023 15:37 [Phantom] wrote:
I was watching the wardi tournament, and also thinking about the cyclone changes and the newest changes from today...
Making them good vs mechanical units is...a band aid. But Ok.
I think the main problem with the cyclone is it shoots while moving, like the phoenix. But the thing is the phoenix to compensate has a very short range, whereas the cyclone has a very big range.
Sure, Phoenix gets a range upgra,de, in the lategame with the fleet beacon, but it's mainly used so that it's a little bit better vs mutas, and it's super situational. And phoenix still has the issue of not attacking ground at all, whereas the cyclone attacks both air and ground.
If the ciclone shoots while moving, then it needs to have a shorter range. If it is going to have a longer range, it should stop to be able to shoot, just like a hellion.
You are absolutely right, i agree, the reasonning is correct.
But today it s not do-able because Cyclones already rapes Colossus with a range of 9
An eventual small Colossus buff, 2 x (10 + 5 light) to 2 x (12 + 3 against light ) (China Patch)
Yesterday it surprising me when i checked the supply cost of a colossus which is equal to 6 !!!!
With a bonus buff against light from 3 to 4, Council balance will have to increase Zerglings hit points from 35 to 36 !!!
( See HM video)
|
Phoenixes are much faster air units, which is a huge advantage. All other things equal, ground units should always have better stats than air units, or air units need to have some other limitation.
|
Agreed the Cyclone doesn't have an interesting limitation/downside to it being able to infinitely move and shoot...
And agreed it's OK for the Cyclone to have better stats than an air unit...
I do think it's a huge mistake to design a unit that benefits from infinitely move and shooting like this though...
That will always reward pros with really great micro, and to prevent it from being broken or potentially snowballing too hard, it will have to be nerfed, becoming a unit that is less powerful for the large majority of players, and being balanced/powerful only for pros with the best micro, like the reaper...
Similar to allowing Zerg to queue up larva injects to reduce the skill floor and reduce the skill ceiling so that the APM isn't as demanding, I think allowing Cyclone to infinitely kite like this isn't the right approach. Blizzard surely understood this and that's why Lock-On had not only a cooldown, but had a small delay before starting to shoot.
The Tempest, Time Warp, Cyclone-Lock on, all having built in small delays were all part of the cost and design of the unit, and emphasizes the positional nature of those units' designs. Having the delay gives the opponent time to move away, thus giving up a little bit of ground to the opponent. That results in successful zoning, as well as an option to avoid damage/impact briefly temporarily.
Making all these units/spells faster and more instant is a mistake, and homogenizes design to be more boring...
For example with Time Warp, instead of buffing it by reducing the delay, they could have just buffed the AOE or duration or the amount of slow instead. That would have made opponents have to respect it more and back off. This would be one of the rare ways to give players defenders advantage in SC2.
Instead, they reduced the delay, which as we all know simply moves things into the direction of deathballing. Remember when we reduced the delay and made it easier for Seeker Missiles to connect? Deathballs! It becomes a unit/ability that you just spam in a battle, without much decision making or counterplay. There is no other utility than to cast it directly on the opponent's army in a fight.
It would be cool if we kept or even strengthened the zoning ability of units/abilities in SC2, to where you can cast it to gain ground positionally without directly damaging your opponent's units if they decide to re-engage elsewhere. And for these zoning abilities to be threatening enough that they do often decide to re-engage elsewhere. The current cyclone has a powerful lock-on with super long range, but you can avoid it by cancelling its lockon or pulling away during the initial delay before it starts shooting much. But because of this drawback, it allows the lock-on to be much more powerful once the opponent can no longer avoid it and has to fight. I think that volatility and tension is much more interesting than having Lock-On be weaker but constant.
But hey, the new patch Cyclone is seeming to be great, and knowing that future patches and hotfixes may not be frequent, I guess I can just keep my mouth shut and enjoy having a Warhound with lower HP but has skates hehe
|
On August 31 2023 21:45 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
But hey, the new patch Cyclone is seeming to be great, and knowing that future patches and hotfixes may not be frequent, I guess I can just keep my mouth shut and enjoy having a Warhound with lower HP but has skates hehe
These are not really official Blizzard created patches. Anything after Tim Morten and his gang left really have not been Blizzard. It does make for interesting times though.
|
On August 31 2023 21:45 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
It would be cool if we kept or even strengthened the zoning ability of units/abilities in SC2, to where you can cast it to gain ground positionally without directly damaging your opponent's units if they decide to re-engage elsewhere. And for these zoning abilities to be threatening enough that they do often decide to re-engage elsewhere. The current cyclone has a powerful lock-on with super long range, but you can avoid it by cancelling its lockon or pulling away during the initial delay before it starts shooting much. But because of this drawback, it allows the lock-on to be much more powerful once the opponent can no longer avoid it and has to fight. I think that volatility and tension is much more interesting than having Lock-On be weaker but constant.
Honestly, Terran doesn't need more zoning tools. And the current design of the lock-on feels a bit like an awkward middle ground between a sniper and a skirmisher. There's potential in going in the opposite direction, giving the lock-on (slightly) longer range and higher damage, but with a longer cooldown (pushing it towards the sniper archetype), but both directions are valid.
|
On August 31 2023 23:29 Athenau wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2023 21:45 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
It would be cool if we kept or even strengthened the zoning ability of units/abilities in SC2, to where you can cast it to gain ground positionally without directly damaging your opponent's units if they decide to re-engage elsewhere. And for these zoning abilities to be threatening enough that they do often decide to re-engage elsewhere. The current cyclone has a powerful lock-on with super long range, but you can avoid it by cancelling its lockon or pulling away during the initial delay before it starts shooting much. But because of this drawback, it allows the lock-on to be much more powerful once the opponent can no longer avoid it and has to fight. I think that volatility and tension is much more interesting than having Lock-On be weaker but constant.
Honestly, Terran doesn't need more zoning tools. And the current design of the lock-on feels a bit like an awkward middle ground between a sniper and a skirmisher. There's potential in going in the opposite direction, giving the lock-on (slightly) longer range and higher damage, but with a longer cooldown (pushing it towards the sniper archetype), but both directions are valid.
That's true actually, I agree. Mech would benefit from a upfront skirmisher, other than the Thor which is clunky and slow. And the torpedo blaster version that David Kim announced when they were trying to make Mech more viable was an upfront skirmisher with a weak anti-air lock-on for deflecting early game drops/harass (that update included making the siege tank stronger https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50_g35pOo60). I guess the new patch will bring it closer to that, but make it a bit more rounded and less extreme. I'm curious, do you remember if the Cyclone was changed to be its sniper state under David Kim or if it happened after he left?
The sniper version of it allowed it to be pretty easily shut down once Blink was out, which the torpedo blaster version and the new patch won't be as much. And the torpedo blaster version was strong early on, but there wasn't much micro potential and it fell off quickly after the earlygame. The current Cyclone is also perhaps a little too strong at punishing early game drops and air harass. It feels like robbery to kill an oracle or drop just because they tried to harass.
|
I believe we may be on the verge of a new golden age of TvX
the new cyclone represents a whole new way of playing terran, and of playing against terran. I'm talking about fast-paced, back-and-forth, utterly chaotic speedmech that leans into multi-pronged parade-pushing!
I see a gameplay mode that harkens back to glory days of sC, who so boldly rallied across the map with mass marine & widow mines, and a way for madmen like GuMiho to exercise their chaotic energies.
a gameplay that will perhaps lead to incredible feats of multi-tasking -- and it's all because of the cyclone's model size. hear me out
just imagine that you're controlling a large group of cyclones. you skate into attack range, activate lock-on, then kite back to a safe distance (e.g. against roach). only the first row of cyclones will be able to activate their lock-ons. the rest of your cyclones (those that are clumped up in middle / rear of the pack) will not be attacking. these are your paperweights. a waste of supply!
it is not always possible or advantageous to force a big concave, where your cyclones are able to attack all at once. the maps often prevent this from happening with choke points and narrow corridors
if you happen to see a large ball of cyclones stutter-stepping forward... chances are the terran has already won. the terran already has overwhelming numbers and can afford to dive on top of the enemy and get all the cyclones firing at once
but what is the best way to use cyclones leading up to that point? what is the best way to eke out an advantage with cyclone-based armies? and what is the optimal number of cyclones to have operating in a single control group?
I think the answer is about 6 or 8
cyclones perform inefficiently when grouped up into a big ball. in smaller groups, they are better able to fire all at once. it is therefore better to split them up, to have multiple squads operating in different parts of the map at the same time: supplemented by other small, speedy units that can easily squeeze between and around the cyclone unit models without getting bumped or stuck too much
this is why hellions, widow mines and cyclones have such a powerful synergy
you might be thinking: pfft... pros know how to dance around widow mines... Serral will just send a few lings forward. this will never work at the pro level!
imagine being attacked by 3 different armies each consisting of 6-8 cyclones, 4 widow mines, 6 hellions: all attacking 3 different locations at once. your eyes can't be everywhere. you must choose where you want your attention to be when all of those widow mines burrow at once. if you are a zerg, you will need 2 lurkers defending one of those locations, so that your eyes are free to deal with the other 2 threats.
think how quickly speedmech can move from place to place, target a different location, maybe even regroup into a bigger force, while you have valuable units stuck defending the original target. now you are the one with paperweight lurkers or paperweight disruptors! it's gonna be so stressful and chaotic to juggle those defenses -- and at the same time, it's gonna be so satisfying to finally snare, surround and squash a big clump of speedmech
now imagine that those multiple speedmech squads all being constantly reinforced by a stream of fast-building, fast-moving units. suddenly, one of those squads has become bolstered and is now strong enough to dive on top of your defenses that you so carefully split up
I don't think we've ever really seen something quite like it: such a heavy emphasis on multi-pronged ground-force attacks. marines? they need medivacs to do anything safely. usually it's medivac drops, warp prisms, or very basic runbys with a single unit type... zerglings or zealots. you rarely see a complex raiding / harass force consisting of 3 units. maybe you get 2 banelings mixed into a pack of speedlings, but usually that's just to kill SCVs, not to challenge huge swaths of the map!
speedmech does not need medivacs or slow-supporting units to operate. it just needs other speedmech units. there is something so pure about the synergy of these units: the way they are very dependent on each others strengths and weaknesses:
hellions to protect the cyclones from zerglings; with smart servos, transforming into hellbats at the right moment
cyclones that can deal some significant damage to buildings and larger units. this is what gives speedmech the sustained pressure that makes it work
widow mines to zone and deter the opponent from diving recklessly on top of your small raiding party. this is what gives speedmech some staying power
who knows... it's just a possibility I've had in my mind for quite some time. a 2 supply cyclone that STILL has an autocast lock-on attack? it's crazy. it could give us something dramatic and wildly unexpected. these balance tournaments that have Clem smashing everyone with braindead mass cyclone deathballs? that's not speedmech. it could be something much, much more
BW had an incredible synergy between tanks, vultures and spider mines. I think this is perhaps where we are headed with cyclone / hellion / mine. all the components are there, with cyclones at the heart of it all. it could enable widow mines to become a more oppressive zone control unit: slowing down an opponent long enough for cyclones to reposition and move out of harm's way. hellions could become scarier, also. not just cannon fodder... if it plays out the way I imagine, with this in-your-face speedmech style constantly threatening to pounce on bases, then hellions will be in striking distance of workers much more than we are used to seeing.
I honestly don't think SC2 fans are prepared for such a style that could potentially play out in the long run. that is obvious to me, from the amount of whining about the cyclone changes. people think it's such an unnecessary part of the patch, but I disagree. it could potentially bring about a monumental change in the way TvX is played. anyway, I look forward to seeing how it develops in the hands of someone like GuMiho. exciting times we're living in
|
On September 01 2023 01:55 SHODAN wrote:
I honestly don't think SC2 fans are prepared for such a style that could potentially play out in the long run. that is obvious to me, from the amount of whining about the cyclone changes. people think it's such an unnecessary part of the patch, but I disagree. it could potentially bring about a monumental change in the way TvX is played. anyway, I look forward to seeing how it develops in the hands of someone like GuMiho. exciting times we're living in
Blackberry owners whined that an onscreen keyboard was unreliable. They should just ignore the whining and do what makes the game the most fun. If that means it is imbalanced at lower levels so be it.
For those at lower levels they're just playing for fun any way. If I finish top 8 tier-1 Diamond with the weakest race in the game.... does it really matter in my real life that I would've made it into Masters with the strongest race?
Balance the game at the top level.. and as a lower priority if you can keep the game somewhat balanced at lower levels ... great. If not, it is no big deal.
|
@SHODAN
Well, I'm not as confident as you are that this is going to revolutionize the meta--I think Mech will still suck badly in TvP at least, but that's ok.
I do agree that this is not going to play out like "mech bio" at all. For one thing, the tempo is much higher because you don't rely on medivacs for your mobility. Whether you think it's good or bad, it's still going to be something new.
Also, for those worried that this will overshadow "traditional" mech, bear in mind that every time battlemech's been viable in the past, it's always as part of either a partial or full transition to the standard mech power units (tanks, thors, liberators).
Finally, there's one subtle difference that people are overlooking with lock-on's move-and-shoot mechanic, namely that you must stop to re-acquire a lock when the lock-on target either dies or moves out of range, so in that sense it's like stutter stepping except without a fixed rhythm. I think this will have significant implications on how pros micro the unit--it's not just a "ground phoenix" or a "mech marauder".
|
Northern Ireland26412 Posts
I’m still unsure why when P is clearly the lagging race why there’s so much focus on trying to bolster Terran mech
I mean I don’t super disagree with the latter by any means as a goal but it seems a curious focus
|
On September 01 2023 04:51 WombaT wrote:
I’m still unsure why when P is clearly the lagging race why there’s so much focus on trying to bolster Terran mech
I mean I don’t super disagree with the latter by any means as a goal but it seems a curious focus
You can do two things at once, and this arguably the only change aimed at making Mech more viable. And you don't need to redesign a unit to buff Protoss anyway.
|
On September 01 2023 04:51 WombaT wrote:
I’m still unsure why when P is clearly the lagging race why there’s so much focus on trying to bolster Terran mech
I mean I don’t super disagree with the latter by any means as a goal but it seems a curious focus
mech openings have been very unstable vZ for a long time. going straight into factories is only playable when zerg gets completely blind-sided. opening with factories is insta-GG if Z reads the situation properly and goes for a ravager / queen all-in (+ corruptors if you opened battlecruiser)
on the current patch, it's almost impossible to defend that attack. you can't pump out enough factory units in time
the reduced supply cost and removal of the techlab requirement are a direct fix for this specific problem. it's been a glaringly obvious balance issue for years
I don't understand why they made a big point of stating in the balance notes: "we want to make mech viable vP". the issues vZ are much more relevant. there is a big history of mech in that matchup and it's still occassionally played at the top level in a boX. I find it strange that they made vP the center of the discussion
|
Northern Ireland26412 Posts
On September 01 2023 04:55 Athenau wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2023 04:51 WombaT wrote:
I’m still unsure why when P is clearly the lagging race why there’s so much focus on trying to bolster Terran mech
I mean I don’t super disagree with the latter by any means as a goal but it seems a curious focus You can do two things at once, and this arguably the only change aimed at making Mech more viable. And you don't need to redesign a unit to buff Protoss anyway.
Why does mech have to be more viable? Why can’t SkyToss be potent in both matchups? Why can’t Zergs build whatever the fuck they want and prosper?
Throughout SC2 only Terran get these continual tweaks to enable a ‘style’ that isn’t even consistently defined
|
On September 01 2023 07:10 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2023 04:55 Athenau wrote:On September 01 2023 04:51 WombaT wrote:
I’m still unsure why when P is clearly the lagging race why there’s so much focus on trying to bolster Terran mech
I mean I don’t super disagree with the latter by any means as a goal but it seems a curious focus You can do two things at once, and this arguably the only change aimed at making Mech more viable. And you don't need to redesign a unit to buff Protoss anyway. Why does mech have to be more viable? Why can’t SkyToss be potent in both matchups? Why can’t Zergs build whatever the fuck they want and prosper? Throughout SC2 only Terran get these continual tweaks to enable a ‘style’ that isn’t even consistently defined
The question we should ask is: Would it be good for the game?
If you think the answer is yes, then it's legitimate to ask for mech being made viable.
I don't think this Cyclone fulfills that goal though, unless it's so strong it kills everything and then it's not interesting at all
|
On September 01 2023 07:10 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2023 04:55 Athenau wrote:On September 01 2023 04:51 WombaT wrote:
I’m still unsure why when P is clearly the lagging race why there’s so much focus on trying to bolster Terran mech
I mean I don’t super disagree with the latter by any means as a goal but it seems a curious focus You can do two things at once, and this arguably the only change aimed at making Mech more viable. And you don't need to redesign a unit to buff Protoss anyway. Why does mech have to be more viable? Why can’t SkyToss be potent in both matchups? Why can’t Zergs build whatever the fuck they want and prosper? Throughout SC2 only Terran get these continual tweaks to enable a ‘style’ that isn’t even consistently defined
Mech should be more viable because there are certain units that simply won't get used outside of the early game otherwise, because they have no/limited synergy with bio, like cyclones and banshees, and arguably hellions. And, again, I'm not asking for mech to be viable in both non-mirrors, but it would be nice if it worked in at least one (TvZ).
Zerg doesn't have this problem. Every combat unit is viable in at least one army composition that is playable at the highest level. And Skytoss is a lategame transition that we see in both non-mirrors, so I'm not sure why you're complaining.
Again, why are you treating this as a zero-sum game? I would be happy if, for example, the adept got a redesign to make it more generally useful. Units that go unused outside of very specific scenarios are wasted potential.
|
Northern Ireland26412 Posts
On September 01 2023 07:40 Athenau wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2023 07:10 WombaT wrote:On September 01 2023 04:55 Athenau wrote:On September 01 2023 04:51 WombaT wrote:
I’m still unsure why when P is clearly the lagging race why there’s so much focus on trying to bolster Terran mech
I mean I don’t super disagree with the latter by any means as a goal but it seems a curious focus You can do two things at once, and this arguably the only change aimed at making Mech more viable. And you don't need to redesign a unit to buff Protoss anyway. Why does mech have to be more viable? Why can’t SkyToss be potent in both matchups? Why can’t Zergs build whatever the fuck they want and prosper? Throughout SC2 only Terran get these continual tweaks to enable a ‘style’ that isn’t even consistently defined Mech should be more viable because there are certain units that simply won't get used outside of the early game otherwise, because they have no/limited synergy with bio, like cyclones and banshees, and arguably hellions. And, again, I'm not asking for mech to be viable in both non-mirrors, but it would be nice if it worked in at least one (TvZ). Zerg doesn't have this problem. Every combat unit is viable in at least one army composition that is playable at the highest level. And Skytoss is a lategame transition that we see in both non-mirrors, so I'm not sure why you're complaining. Again, why are you treating this as a zero-sum game? I would be happy if, for example, the adept got a redesign to make it more generally useful. Units that go unused outside of very specific scenarios are wasted potential.
It’s not a zero-sum scenario, but if the major current balance issue is Protoss kind of sucking it seems a weird angle to focus on broadening Terran compositional variety.
Bio sucks ass in BW TvP outside of some specific timings and forever has, SK Terran is generally superior but mech is viable in TvZ and you don’t have consistent complaints that this isn’t in the case.
They’re focusing as much on broadening Terran compositional variety as they are on making Protoss as a race viable and that seems a weird focus to me
|
On September 01 2023 07:40 Athenau wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2023 07:10 WombaT wrote:On September 01 2023 04:55 Athenau wrote:On September 01 2023 04:51 WombaT wrote:
I’m still unsure why when P is clearly the lagging race why there’s so much focus on trying to bolster Terran mech
I mean I don’t super disagree with the latter by any means as a goal but it seems a curious focus You can do two things at once, and this arguably the only change aimed at making Mech more viable. And you don't need to redesign a unit to buff Protoss anyway. Why does mech have to be more viable? Why can’t SkyToss be potent in both matchups? Why can’t Zergs build whatever the fuck they want and prosper? Throughout SC2 only Terran get these continual tweaks to enable a ‘style’ that isn’t even consistently defined Mech should be more viable because there are certain units that simply won't get used outside of the early game otherwise, because they have no/limited synergy with bio. This, right here, is why I think mech is never going to be viable. I think any unit that fills the role mech needs will inevitably be stronger with bio than it will be with mech.
Blizzard missed their chance to nerf the Marine early in Wings of Liberty, instead opting to nerf almost everything else that was being used with Marines, and now every potential Terran unit has to be evaluated through the lens of "What if people build this with Marines?"
Full list of nerfed units from the first ~six months of WoL:
+ Show Spoiler +[list]
[*]SCV - early WoL beta, health nerfed from 60 to 45 because a Marine SCV all in against Protoss.
[*]Ghost - assorted nerfs to EMP, snipe, and its cost.
[*]Siege Tank - Siege mode damage reduced from 60 to 50* and then to 35 + 15 to armored.
[*]Thor - 250mm Strike Cannon changed back to costing energy because of a proxy factory Thor rush (with SCV pull) against Protoss. This also caused Blizzard to increase the targeting priority of repairing SCVs.
[*]Medivac - speed and acceleration reduced*. This was also the patch that saw Nexus health and shields increased to 1000/1000. Both were for more or less the same reason - drops were too effective at killing Nexuses, even with units around.
[*]Battlecruiser - ground attack damage reduced from 10 to 8. This was in the same patch that nerfed siege tank damage to 35 + 15, and I'm pretty sure both changes were a result of an incredibly brutal no-scout 1 base all-in against Protoss early on in Wings of Liberty.
*I'm pretty sure Marauders share some of the credit for this. Like Marines, Marauders were not nerfed except by the early repeated changes to stim research time. And making concussive shell require research.
The common thread for all of the all-ins was "marines providing incredible damage output, and something else to keep units from effectively attacking the marines," so I don't think we're ever going to get a mech unit that can just be a wall between a Protoss or Zerg army and Siege Tanks the way Vultures and Spider mines could. It will end up being a wall between Marines and the Protoss or Zerg in an effective all-in or mixed composition timing attack before it has strong enough stats to work in a mech composition.
On September 01 2023 08:04 WombaT wrote:It’s not a zero-sum scenario, but if the major current balance issue is Protoss kind of sucking it seems a weird angle to focus on broadening Terran compositional variety.
Bio sucks ass in BW TvP outside of some specific timings and forever has, SK Terran is generally superior but mech is viable in TvZ and you don’t have consistent complaints that this isn’t in the case.
They’re focusing as much on broadening Terran compositional variety as they are on making Protoss as a race viable and that seems a weird focus to me It's also relevant that strengthening any aspect of Terran to make mech viable - and just keeping mech being viable as a priority goal - shrinks the design space for removing the suck from Protoss.
|
On September 01 2023 08:04 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2023 07:40 Athenau wrote:On September 01 2023 07:10 WombaT wrote:On September 01 2023 04:55 Athenau wrote:On September 01 2023 04:51 WombaT wrote:
I’m still unsure why when P is clearly the lagging race why there’s so much focus on trying to bolster Terran mech
I mean I don’t super disagree with the latter by any means as a goal but it seems a curious focus You can do two things at once, and this arguably the only change aimed at making Mech more viable. And you don't need to redesign a unit to buff Protoss anyway. Why does mech have to be more viable? Why can’t SkyToss be potent in both matchups? Why can’t Zergs build whatever the fuck they want and prosper? Throughout SC2 only Terran get these continual tweaks to enable a ‘style’ that isn’t even consistently defined Mech should be more viable because there are certain units that simply won't get used outside of the early game otherwise, because they have no/limited synergy with bio, like cyclones and banshees, and arguably hellions. And, again, I'm not asking for mech to be viable in both non-mirrors, but it would be nice if it worked in at least one (TvZ). Zerg doesn't have this problem. Every combat unit is viable in at least one army composition that is playable at the highest level. And Skytoss is a lategame transition that we see in both non-mirrors, so I'm not sure why you're complaining. Again, why are you treating this as a zero-sum game? I would be happy if, for example, the adept got a redesign to make it more generally useful. Units that go unused outside of very specific scenarios are wasted potential. It’s not a zero-sum scenario, but if the major current balance issue is Protoss kind of sucking it seems a weird angle to focus on broadening Terran compositional variety. Bio sucks ass in BW TvP outside of some specific timings and forever has, SK Terran is generally superior but mech is viable in TvZ and you don’t have consistent complaints that this isn’t in the case. They’re focusing as much on broadening Terran compositional variety as they are on making Protoss as a race viable and that seems a weird focus to me
Wrt BW:
1. Bio is viable in TvZ, so viable in one non-mirror, which is what I'd like to see for mech in SC2.
2. There's no point in complaining anyway because the game hasn't received a balance patch for 20 years.
I also disagree with your assessment of the patch. They're redesigning one Terran unit. That's it. There are multiple changes, direct and indirect, meant to address Protoss weakness, and it's not clear that the person who suggested the Cyclone redesign had anything to do with other changes.
It's fine if you think that the Protoss buffs are insufficient or misguided, but I don't see any evidence to suggest that the situation would change if they tossed the Cyclone redesign out the window tomorrow.
|
Even though I am disappointed with the lack of Protoss buffs, I agree that you can make Protoss stronger by making other units weaker. Things like the Immortal buff are going to make them better against Lurkers, EMP nerf helps Protoss, baneling nerf (which imo people are underestimating) definitely helps Protoss because it makes banelings unable to 1 shot workers.
Still, easier to get excited over buffs.
|
On September 01 2023 07:10 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2023 04:55 Athenau wrote:On September 01 2023 04:51 WombaT wrote:
I’m still unsure why when P is clearly the lagging race why there’s so much focus on trying to bolster Terran mech
I mean I don’t super disagree with the latter by any means as a goal but it seems a curious focus You can do two things at once, and this arguably the only change aimed at making Mech more viable. And you don't need to redesign a unit to buff Protoss anyway. Why does mech have to be more viable? Why can’t SkyToss be potent in both matchups? Why can’t Zergs build whatever the fuck they want and prosper? Throughout SC2 only Terran get these continual tweaks to enable a ‘style’ that isn’t even consistently defined
It's a bit hard to compare since races aren't 1:1, but this is how I see it.
Protoss is a tech-focused race, and designed to be split mainly into 3 tech paths: Templar, Robo, Stargate. This is how their buildings are designed. Each tech path is used as a compliment/support to Gateway core units, though in the lategame we've seen that you can mass the tech units and shrink the amount of Gateway in your army.
The dev team has made significant efforts to make all 3 tech paths viable in all 3 MUs, and I believe the case is still true today. (Each tech path is used more commonly than Mech, or at least more overall throughout the history of SC2, whereas Mech for example is almost never used in TvP, but has been used many times in TvZ and TvT).
With Terran, they are a production-focused race, and designed to be split mainly into Bio, Mech, and Starport. This is reinforced by how their upgrades are split up distinctly between the 3 types of production (though at some point vehicle and ship armor got merged). Your army naturally will be made up of mainly bio units, factory units, or starport units.
For a long time, Mech has been pretty neglected in SC2. TvZ and TvT have had a good amount of times where Mech was strong, even OP, and many times where it is at least viable enough to be used occasionally. However, TvP mech has been very heavily neglected for 13 years now, it was never really viable at the top level, though it is viable enough as a once-in-a-few-hundreds games strategy. It makes sense to finally try to make Mech play in TvP more viable as it's long overdue. David Kim and the dev team tried to make it finally viable in LotV, but as we know the Tornado Blaster wasn't enough. Though it did do a pretty good job holding off stalkers in the early game, it was still a bit gas heavy and it was still hard to add tanks and take your 3rd.
What would be a bit too much, is if they tried to make Terran Starport comp viable in all 3 MUs. Not only because that'd be really ambitious, but because Starport is the highest tech, and it would be kind of crazy if you could just mass air units in Starcraft in general. However, even so air-based openings are present, and even mass air strats have been viable as a rare strategy you pull out (like mass BCs), or as a late game transition. Protoss also can go mass air as a late game transition, or sometimes even transition from Stargate openers to just rushing to a mass air comp. Mech in TvP though? Nopee, nothing really at all.
With Zerg, they are an economy-focused race, and their army comp is especially versatile. It really feels like all their units can be used in every MU in one way or another. They can transition between comps flexibly. So I don't think they are lacking any attention in terms of unit viability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
