On October 03 2023 06:47 Archeon wrote: Tbh I always thought that Ghosts are way too strong per supply. They are expensive, but most casters have 1-2 spells and then their impact is done for a while. Ghosts have decent fighting stats per supply, especially vs light, which makes them a unit that's desirable to mass, especially with tanks which cover both of their weaknesses (armored units and masses of trash). They can cloak which makes it a lot harder to stop them from spellcasting and have two good spells, one which is devastating against toss and one which is very good vs zerg. To boot snipe in it's old form was decent vs toss too. Even nuke has it's place because of how hard it is for P and Z to get mobile detection that doesn't get shot down by ghosts. Imo they are just way too good per supply overall.
Perhaps the same can be said for banes, but banes are a lot more hit or miss and can just evaporate under aoe.
Even with the old ghosts though Terran wasn't dominant in TvZ. Terrans had that ghost for like what? 6 years now? In that time they've only had a few brief periods where TvZ was clearly T favored. Most of the time it's been Z favored at the top level. 40 snipe damage is a sizable nerf and making that change without a compensating nerf to Zerg would be crazy.
Maybe the baneling nerf goes too far (I don't think so) but it's not that much bigger than the ghost nerf. It could be argued that that's the incorrect type of nerf since the baneling effects mid game while the ghost nerf mostly impacts lategame but to say the ghost should receive a 25% damage nerf without a very significant Zerg nerf happening at the same time (2 less bane damage would not have been anywhere near enough) would just be pure Zergs bias.
i'd say zerg lategame was nerfed significantly in this patch.
in 5.0.11 it took 2 fungals to kill unstimmed marines, in 5.0.12 it takes 3 fungals to do the same. fungal cast range 10->9.
in the meantime, emp cast range does not change, effective range decreases by 0.25 because of the emp radius nerf (1.75->1.5, which is ~27% area reduction, quite substantial) it should be easier to emp or snipe 1-2 infestors because of the +0.75 range diff gain for the ghost.
broodlings got weaker, so thors shit on broodlords even harder
It's been a long time since fungal was used as a way to actually kill bio - it's a control tool to allow other units to catch it. If could do negative damage and still be considered pretty all right.
And if you get to broodlords vs thors alone, as a zerg you're already dead anyway - broodlords are a true siege unit, rather than the all-countering powerhouse they were in earlier versions of the game The one exception is large number of microed broodlords using terrain, that could easily poke/crowd the enemy to death without ever being hit back - that will be even stronger now due to the added mobility
On October 03 2023 06:47 Archeon wrote: Tbh I always thought that Ghosts are way too strong per supply. They are expensive, but most casters have 1-2 spells and then their impact is done for a while. Ghosts have decent fighting stats per supply, especially vs light, which makes them a unit that's desirable to mass, especially with tanks which cover both of their weaknesses (armored units and masses of trash). They can cloak which makes it a lot harder to stop them from spellcasting and have two good spells, one which is devastating against toss and one which is very good vs zerg. To boot snipe in it's old form was decent vs toss too. Even nuke has it's place because of how hard it is for P and Z to get mobile detection that doesn't get shot down by ghosts. Imo they are just way too good per supply overall.
Perhaps the same can be said for banes, but banes are a lot more hit or miss and can just evaporate under aoe.
Even with the old ghosts though Terran wasn't dominant in TvZ. Terrans had that ghost for like what? 6 years now? In that time they've only had a few brief periods where TvZ was clearly T favored. Most of the time it's been Z favored at the top level. 40 snipe damage is a sizable nerf and making that change without a compensating nerf to Zerg would be crazy.
Maybe the baneling nerf goes too far (I don't think so) but it's not that much bigger than the ghost nerf. It could be argued that that's the incorrect type of nerf since the baneling effects mid game while the ghost nerf mostly impacts lategame but to say the ghost should receive a 25% damage nerf without a very significant Zerg nerf happening at the same time (2 less bane damage would not have been anywhere near enough) would just be pure Zergs bias.
i'd say zerg lategame was nerfed significantly in this patch.
in 5.0.11 it took 2 fungals to kill unstimmed marines, in 5.0.12 it takes 3 fungals to do the same. fungal cast range 10->9.
in the meantime, emp cast range does not change, effective range decreases by 0.25 because of the emp radius nerf (1.75->1.5, which is ~27% area reduction, quite substantial) it should be easier to emp or snipe 1-2 infestors because of the +0.75 range diff gain for the ghost.
broodlings got weaker, so thors shit on broodlords even harder
Those changes only affect a slight percentage of games though, since the usual response to terran lategame is to swarm and trade over and over with Hydra Ling Bane + Lurker or Ultra and the Zerg nerfs don't affect this interaction except the Lurker nerf which isn't enough to compensate.
Zerg usually only goes BL/Infestor once the other approach has failed and tbh I rarely see it succeed atm anyways.
well we are talking about the highest level which is Serral, (Reynor?) vs Maru (Cure?), our scene has a very thin top level unfortunatelly; and lategame, where the terran locks his territory with PFs tanks and excellent ghost rotations.
zerg should not throw endless waves of banes against these positions, especially in 5.0.12 after the huge bane nerfs. i would not call the swarmy phase (before ghost and before terran can slow down the game) lategame.
+3 banes will do -6 damage, which seems to be a huge change ~-15%? and that is before mass ghosts hit the field. i see this as a huge nerf to z midgame, not sure that a faster infestor at this stage will compensate.
we will see, i guess.
No, that's how Zergs play currently even against mass Ghosts and PFs. BL transitions are pretty rare and most Zergs avoid doing them if they can due to Thors being so good against them.
On October 03 2023 06:47 Archeon wrote: Tbh I always thought that Ghosts are way too strong per supply. They are expensive, but most casters have 1-2 spells and then their impact is done for a while. Ghosts have decent fighting stats per supply, especially vs light, which makes them a unit that's desirable to mass, especially with tanks which cover both of their weaknesses (armored units and masses of trash). They can cloak which makes it a lot harder to stop them from spellcasting and have two good spells, one which is devastating against toss and one which is very good vs zerg. To boot snipe in it's old form was decent vs toss too. Even nuke has it's place because of how hard it is for P and Z to get mobile detection that doesn't get shot down by ghosts. Imo they are just way too good per supply overall.
Perhaps the same can be said for banes, but banes are a lot more hit or miss and can just evaporate under aoe.
Even with the old ghosts though Terran wasn't dominant in TvZ. Terrans had that ghost for like what? 6 years now? In that time they've only had a few brief periods where TvZ was clearly T favored. Most of the time it's been Z favored at the top level. 40 snipe damage is a sizable nerf and making that change without a compensating nerf to Zerg would be crazy.
Maybe the baneling nerf goes too far (I don't think so) but it's not that much bigger than the ghost nerf. It could be argued that that's the incorrect type of nerf since the baneling effects mid game while the ghost nerf mostly impacts lategame but to say the ghost should receive a 25% damage nerf without a very significant Zerg nerf happening at the same time (2 less bane damage would not have been anywhere near enough) would just be pure Zergs bias.
i'd say zerg lategame was nerfed significantly in this patch.
in 5.0.11 it took 2 fungals to kill unstimmed marines, in 5.0.12 it takes 3 fungals to do the same. fungal cast range 10->9.
in the meantime, emp cast range does not change, effective range decreases by 0.25 because of the emp radius nerf (1.75->1.5, which is ~27% area reduction, quite substantial) it should be easier to emp or snipe 1-2 infestors because of the +0.75 range diff gain for the ghost.
broodlings got weaker, so thors shit on broodlords even harder
It's been a long time since fungal was used as a way to actually kill bio - it's a control tool to allow other units to catch it. If could do negative damage and still be considered pretty all right.
And if you get to broodlords vs thors alone, as a zerg you're already dead anyway - broodlords are a true siege unit, rather than the all-countering powerhouse they were in earlier versions of the game The one exception is large number of microed broodlords using terrain, that could easily poke/crowd the enemy to death without ever being hit back - that will be even stronger now due to the added mobility
yea. so a stimmed bio ball (45 hp marines) running, getting fungaled, will eventually get as low as 15 hp in 5.0.11, or 20 hp in 5.0.12. this is pretty significant, if zerg does not have enough shit to kill the bio, they could survive to join the other dudes and try again later. If this does not matter, let's revert the fungal damage to 30 dmg.
BL: I believe the BL change will affect PvZ mostly. Note the broodlings were also modified/nerfed (lifetime reduced) so this combined with the added mobility of the host BL probably will not matter at all in TvZ. We most probably will not see the sieges you just described and Dark/Reynor executed not too long ago against I forgot who it was.
Even though I'm a fan of the infestor "mid" change, I'm not sure if it makes a difference for the ladder zerg. infestor are slow and cost a lot of gas.
from the feeling late game strength is taken out, which favors Terran with their strong mid game.
I'm glad Wardi's Korean Royale event finished under the old patch. The games in that event can make for an interesting control group in any study of the changes to the meta.
Honestly, it is pretty discouraging as a long time ladder zerg to see my core units constantly nerfed patch after patch for the last 3 years. Other races ( especially terran) keep getting new toys, new tools , buffs, and i just get everything nerfed. Queens, creep multiple times, banelings multiple times, broodlords multiple times, lurkers multiple times, infestors multiple times. They removed infested terrans, made swarm hosts weaker. They even nerfed banelings, one of our most core unit, multiple times. Meanwhile, they keep buffing widowmines...
I might be a bit bias towards my race( Zerg), but it feels to me the entire community is massively bias towards terran, and will use anything to twist the narrative in their favor. The stats were released on reddit for last 3 months, and even before the patch, terran has been favored in both matchups, despite Serral being 93% vs terran. Yet, the patch nerfs EVERYTHING that was good vs terran for both races. Disurptors, banelings, lurkers, infestors, broodlords, all nerfed hard.
Maybe Im crazy, but maybe Zergs players with more credibility need to start speaking up as loud as the terrans. Lets be real, both terran and protoss players favorite matchup is probably playing vs zerg. Zerg has no harass, no all-ins, and its basically playing single player for first 7minutes. If you keep nerfing zergs this hard, you wont have any more zergs to play vs on the ladder guys, its already bad, look at top EU ladder numbers, the number of race they play against, its ridiculous how little zergs get to high GM compared to other races.
Zerg is way too hard to play now compared to other races, and we have very little tools to make the game hard for our opponents.
We need some changes to make Zerg easier for normal players, changes that wont affect Serral or Reynor.
Im talking stuff like: Overlord rally, queen rally, select all queens hotkey, auto attack for spell casters, different egg color for overlords that are morphing, so you know if you actually have overlords coming or not. It is clear from ladder numbers that zerg has become way too hard to play compared to other races. ( It used to be the easiest arguably, but with all the queen nerfs and creep nerfs, zerg became very hard, and is backed up by the fact that the higher you get on ladder, the fewer zergs there are.
On October 03 2023 20:58 Snakestyle1 wrote: Honestly, it is pretty discouraging as a long time ladder zerg to see my core units constantly nerfed patch after patch for the last 3 years. Other races ( especially terran) keep getting new toys, new tools , buffs, and i just get everything nerfed. Queens, creep multiple times, banelings multiple times, broodlords multiple times, lurkers multiple times, infestors multiple times. They removed infested terrans, made swarm hosts weaker. They even nerfed banelings, one of our most core unit, multiple times. Meanwhile, they keep buffing widowmines...
as a ladder player who plays with all 3 races i totally get it. i play 10% of my time and Zerg and 50% as terran and yet my Zerg ranking is consistently higher than my terran ranking. there is no terran equivalent of "ya just throw some zerglings at it".
On October 03 2023 20:58 Snakestyle1 wrote: We need some changes to make Zerg easier for normal players, changes that wont affect Serral or Reynor.
The time for the game being balanced at multiple play levels is over. that was only possible when the game had a giant budget and the "consumer focus groups" to go along with it. I've accepted the fact that Platinum and Diamond level players will no longer be a focus of the games development going forward. Despite that , the game is the most fun I can have... so I still play it even though my player level is being ignored by the balance people.
If you are unhappy with being ignored I suggest you pick another game. ATVI is no longer bankrolling this project.
On October 03 2023 21:34 JimmyJRaynor wrote: as a ladder player who plays with all 3 races i totally get it. i play 10% of my time and Zerg and 50% as terran and yet my Zerg ranking is consistently higher than my terran ranking. there is no terran equivalent of "ya just throw some zerglings at it".
We can throw around anecdotes all we like, but GM is 21% Zerg right now. I'm not sure there has ever been a worse represented race for top of ladder to lower-mid pro level (aside from maybe 2010?) For masters and GM players, there's clearly something going on. After a season or two of these changes, we might even get it to 15%
On October 03 2023 21:34 JimmyJRaynor wrote: as a ladder player who plays with all 3 races i totally get it. i play 10% of my time and Zerg and 50% as terran and yet my Zerg ranking is consistently higher than my terran ranking. there is no terran equivalent of "ya just throw some zerglings at it".
We can throw around anecdotes all we like, but GM is 21% Zerg right now. I'm not sure there has ever been a worse represented race for top of ladder to lower-mid pro level (aside from maybe 2010?) For masters and GM players, there's clearly something going on. After a season or two of these changes, we might even get it to 15%
right, and if u keep reading my post you'll figure out why both your anecdote and my anecdote do not matter. do not expect a game carefully crafted to balance at multiple play levels. that time is over.
On October 03 2023 20:58 Snakestyle1 wrote: Honestly, it is pretty discouraging as a long time ladder zerg to see my core units constantly nerfed patch after patch for the last 3 years. Other races ( especially terran) keep getting new toys, new tools , buffs, and i just get everything nerfed. Queens, creep multiple times, banelings multiple times, broodlords multiple times, lurkers multiple times, infestors multiple times. They removed infested terrans, made swarm hosts weaker. They even nerfed banelings, one of our most core unit, multiple times. Meanwhile, they keep buffing widowmines...
So this patch : nerf ghost, nerf hellbat, nerf raven. Rework cyclone wich is better in some situation and worse in some other, pretty meh and odesn't really change much. Buff (lol) widow mine .. is this even a buff ? It won't change anything tbh.
Last balance patch : nerf raven, nerf ghost, nerd magfield vs armored/buff vs other, amazing buff on banshee speed (lul again), reduction cost lib
The one before : nerf drillings claws
The one before : armory stuff cloaked widow mines, impactful in TvP, not really in TvZ
The one before : nerf BC, nerf raven, nerf libe, small buff Thor (depend of the situation tbh), small cost reduction blue flame
Zerg is not the only race receiving nerfs
On October 03 2023 20:58 Snakestyle1 wrote: I might be a bit bias towards my race( Zerg), but it feels to me the entire community is massively bias towards terran, and will use anything to twist the narrative in their favor. The stats were released on reddit for last 3 months, and even before the patch, terran has been favored in both matchups, despite Serral being 93% vs terran. Yet, the patch nerfs EVERYTHING that was good vs terran for both races. Disurptors, banelings, lurkers, infestors, broodlords, all nerfed hard.
I think there is a ton of way to analyse balance but taking the winrate of 5 best players of each race especially with skill gap among them doesn't seems the most relevant way to me Aligulac is free, feel free to watch it : http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ (probably not the best way to look at balance either, but a bigger sample seems more relevant to me)
On October 03 2023 20:58 Snakestyle1 wrote: Maybe Im crazy, but maybe Zergs players with more credibility need to start speaking up as loud as the terrans. Lets be real, both terran and protoss players favorite matchup is probably playing vs zerg. Zerg has no harass, no all-ins, and its basically playing single player for first 7minutes. If you keep nerfing zergs this hard, you wont have any more zergs to play vs on the ladder guys, its already bad, look at top EU ladder numbers, the number of race they play against, its ridiculous how little zergs get to high GM compared to other races.
All i see on forums at the moment is "cyclone so op" which is : 1. A joke tbh, the is nothing op right there, people are plat or totally unaware of 2 rounds of nerf since the first ptr version 2. Doesn't really seems tarran speaking really loud to me 3 Pretty early to get a good opinion on where the patch will lead the balance
Zerg having no all in .. i mean do you watch Dark sometimes ? From Terran pov it's like i can't do anything in early because queens shut down everything ... Races have strenght and weakness, zerg doesn't feel weak
I'm not sure zerg population is correlated to balance, probably a little but as you can see when zerg was totally op that was already a decreasing population.
On October 03 2023 20:58 Snakestyle1 wrote: Zerg is way too hard to play now compared to other races, and we have very little tools to make the game hard for our opponents.
We need some changes to make Zerg easier for normal players, changes that wont affect Serral or Reynor.
Im talking stuff like: Overlord rally, queen rally, select all queens hotkey, auto attack for spell casters, different egg color for overlords that are morphing, so you know if you actually have overlords coming or not. It is clear from ladder numbers that zerg has become way too hard to play compared to other races. ( It used to be the easiest arguably, but with all the queen nerfs and creep nerfs, zerg became very hard, and is backed up by the fact that the higher you get on ladder, the fewer zergs there are.
"my race is harder than the others ...." is usually a terran thing ! More seriously low zerg count because the race is difficult is your interpretation, doesn't make it true. There are others factors.
On October 03 2023 21:34 JimmyJRaynor wrote: as a ladder player who plays with all 3 races i totally get it. i play 10% of my time and Zerg and 50% as terran and yet my Zerg ranking is consistently higher than my terran ranking. there is no terran equivalent of "ya just throw some zerglings at it".
We can throw around anecdotes all we like, but GM is 21% Zerg right now. I'm not sure there has ever been a worse represented race for top of ladder to lower-mid pro level (aside from maybe 2010?) For masters and GM players, there's clearly something going on. After a season or two of these changes, we might even get it to 15%
right, and if u keep reading my post you'll figure out why both your anecdote and my anecdote do not matter. do not expect a game carefully crafted to balance at multiple play levels. that time is over.
There's a team of people actively working on the balance. I think it's pretty reasonable to expect that the entire upper level of ladder have any zergs in it.
Instead of tinkering with attack upgrades and making them inconsistent & nerfing Bane to 30 HP, they should've instead just reduced the AoE from 2.2 -> 2. This AoE is what makes the Baneling so insane when massed vs. anything. If it had 2 AoE, then we never needed to reduce its damage to non-Light units from 20. Also this nerfs how OP +2 Banes are vs. workers in the same way that the upgrade nerf does. Also the way they buffed Overlord drops, it just brings back the Bane bomb, so the intended nerf has even been lessened.. Also don't remember that the justification for the skytoss Protoss nerf, was that Queen walk was removed, but now with Overlord drop buff, it's back in the game. But airtoss is still made into garbage. So Zerg wins in the end after all this.
Speaking of the big Baneling AoE. Even with the Fungal nerf, it is still OP with its 2.25 radius. You nerfed EMP, but this Fungal AoE still persists, so Infestor > Ghost.
apparently , they can't get pros to play enough games to test the new patch. the pros are too busy in tournaments on the current patch.
so here is a really smart person who is a very good SC2 player effectively "falling on his sword" regarding his previous criticism of the "Balance Council".
Pimpin' AIn't Easy and neither is overseeing the SC2 competitive ecosystem.
On October 06 2023 02:15 ejozl wrote: Instead of tinkering with attack upgrades and making them inconsistent & nerfing Bane to 30 HP, they should've instead just reduced the AoE from 2.2 -> 2. This AoE is what makes the Baneling so insane when massed vs. anything. If it had 2 AoE, then we never needed to reduce its damage to non-Light units from 20. Also this nerfs how OP +2 Banes are vs. workers in the same way that the upgrade nerf does. Also the way they buffed Overlord drops, it just brings back the Bane bomb, so the intended nerf has even been lessened.. Also don't remember that the justification for the skytoss Protoss nerf, was that Queen walk was removed, but now with Overlord drop buff, it's back in the game. But airtoss is still made into garbage. So Zerg wins in the end after all this.
Speaking of the big Baneling AoE. Even with the Fungal nerf, it is still OP with its 2.25 radius. You nerfed EMP, but this Fungal AoE still persists, so Infestor > Ghost.
No. The fact banes are insane comes from the pathfinding movement in RTS which move every units close to each other.
It s unecessary to nerf aoe because it will break the skill curve, so there s a risk of being an useless unit at pro level while being a good unit on the ladder.
The only possible change that could solve this problem is about :
1) supply cost from 0.5 to 1 (+caracteristics update) 2) When bane is dead, it explodes creating an area which deal damage over time (or create acid tag not cumative which deal damage over time)
OR remove +5 health AND decrease gas cost
SC2 popularity is made on this unit, banelings and marines split skill, if you touch it you kill the game imo.
But this would be instead of the +5 health removal. Both are hard nerfs and will affect the Marine vs Baneling interaction. Marines/Tanks shooting down Banes quicker will mean less splitting. While smaller AoE will mean more effective splitting.
Supply nerf on the Baneling is more than fair, though I don't like Supply nerfs with 200 being the max supply. Already the armies are too small upon max-out. This is the reason Protoss doesn't have a late game, they have the least supply efficient army. The most egregious examples being the Void Ray and Tempest and now the Disruptor and Daughtership can join them.
That sums about up how I feel about it. I still don't think that the ghost changes are a huge buff to P considering that the problem is that ghosts effectively remove 30-50% hp on all gateway units and without gateway buffer the tech just melts and P's best unit got nerfed. Like I get that they're trying to make P units better vs emp but emp is still ridiculously good on a ridiculously good unit that just gets massed and cloaks, so who cares about a slightly smaller radius or longer guardian shield duration. An emped toss army can't fight until shields are back and guardian shield isn't going to offset that the Toss army has 33% less hp on zealots and 50% hp less on stalkers.
I still think that comparing the cyclone to the stalker, which are same cost units shows how absurd the cyclone is in every aspect and every TvP I've watched so far was a mass Cyclone stomp where P was contained all game long or lost the moment they moved out on the map. It's like Blizz spent tons of hours trying to find a way that gave P ways to move out just for the balance council to say naah, screw that, Protoss better go back to WoL turtling.
Effectively P traded a sizeable colossus buff for some buffs on niche units and a slight immo buff and a nerf to the disruptor. While Terran got some small ghosts nerfs and got a new toy to play around with. And Zerg got the big nerf stick that Terran should have gotten. I just don't get it and I get even less why every single Terran unit needs to be viable at all stages in all matchups when so many units of Protoss and some of Zerg units just aren't viable in any matchup. Shouldn't the focus of the patch be making Toss better like the balance council writes in the first line of the patch?
That sums about up how I feel about it. I still don't think that the ghost changes are a huge buff to P considering that the problem is that ghosts effectively remove 30-50% hp on all gateway units and without gateway buffer the tech just melts and P's best unit got nerfed. Like I get that they're trying to make P units better vs emp but emp is still ridiculously good on a ridiculously good unit that just gets massed and cloaks, so who cares about a slightly smaller radius or longer guardian shield duration. An emped toss army can't fight until shields are back and guardian shield isn't going to offset that the Toss army has 33% less hp on zealots and 50% hp less on stalkers.
I still think that comparing the cyclone to the stalker, which are same cost units shows how absurd the cyclone is in every aspect and every TvP I've watched so far was a mass Cyclone stomp where P was contained all game long or lost the moment they moved out on the map. It's like Blizz spent tons of hours trying to find a way that gave P ways to move out just for the balance council to say naah, screw that, Protoss better go back to WoL turtling.
Effectively P traded a sizeable colossus buff for some buffs on niche units and a slight immo buff and a nerf to the disruptor. While Terran got some small ghosts nerfs and got a new toy to play around with. And Zerg got the big nerf stick that Terran should have gotten. I just don't get it and I get even less why every single Terran unit needs to be viable at all stages in all matchups when so many units of Protoss and some of Zerg units just aren't viable in any matchup. Shouldn't the focus of the patch be making Toss better like the balance council writes in the first line of the patch?
That sums about up how I feel about it. I still don't think that the ghost changes are a huge buff to P considering that the problem is that ghosts effectively remove 30-50% hp on all gateway units and without gateway buffer the tech just melts and P's best unit got nerfed. Like I get that they're trying to make P units better vs emp but emp is still ridiculously good on a ridiculously good unit that just gets massed and cloaks, so who cares about a slightly smaller radius or longer guardian shield duration. An emped toss army can't fight until shields are back and guardian shield isn't going to offset that the Toss army has 33% less hp on zealots and 50% hp less on stalkers.
I still think that comparing the cyclone to the stalker, which are same cost units shows how absurd the cyclone is in every aspect and every TvP I've watched so far was a mass Cyclone stomp where P was contained all game long or lost the moment they moved out on the map. It's like Blizz spent tons of hours trying to find a way that gave P ways to move out just for the balance council to say naah, screw that, Protoss better go back to WoL turtling.
Effectively P traded a sizeable colossus buff for some buffs on niche units and a slight immo buff and a nerf to the disruptor. While Terran got some small ghosts nerfs and got a new toy to play around with. And Zerg got the big nerf stick that Terran should have gotten. I just don't get it and I get even less why every single Terran unit needs to be viable at all stages in all matchups when so many units of Protoss and some of Zerg units just aren't viable in any matchup. Shouldn't the focus of the patch be making Toss better like the balance council writes in the first line of the patch?
EPT
