EPT5.0.14 Balance PTR: Updates - (October 31st, 2024) - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Locutos
Brazil272 Posts
| ||
|
Blitzball04
191 Posts
Ghost got a supply nerf, I highly doubt it really matters since pros will still get the same amount of ghosts and a couple less marine. Hardly a nerf I rather see they nerf the ghost emp. Protoss shield will never get lower than 25% due to emps | ||
|
Vision_
874 Posts
On November 02 2024 02:25 Blitzball04 wrote: Good that it remove some of the absolutely nonsense changes such as the savage turrets Ghost got a supply nerf, I highly doubt it really matters since pros will still get the same amount of ghosts and a couple less marine. Hardly a nerf I rather see they nerf the ghost emp. Protoss shield will never get lower than 25% due to emps In SC2 some units are specialized to be more end or start game efficient. I don t know why you are underestimating this change because ultra late game of Terran is full of ghosts, do you watch clem or maru endgame seriously ? If your are a football manager then someone told you because you have 11 messi that you should play only with 7 players, i have some personal doubts about your chance of winning. | ||
|
Vision_
874 Posts
Aim to change the vikings damage bonus from 'armored' to 'mechanical' which means only zerg flying unit would be an issue. But as they aren t so important compared to protoss flying units, i mean you can nerf a little bit corrupter, there s no problem about it (14+ 6 against massive to 12 + 8 against massive) and broodlords have no attack so it can be 'ignored' Vikings is hard counter of colossus since many years, i m demanding a change | ||
|
Creager
Germany1923 Posts
Sure, the Thor change might turn out to be really good, but that still doesn't seem to address the problem of mech naturally leaning towards a defensive if not turtly composition with the Siege Tank, Liberators and Thors, which also is something they apparently don't want. As having favored defensive macro-oriented mech play whenever possible, with this iteration of the game I find myself countered by so many different things that despite TvT there's really not much of a point going down that old factory route, maybe against Zerg if you add a shit ton of Ghosts, ofc. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16118 Posts
On November 02 2024 03:27 Creager wrote: What I wonder specifically about the Cyclone revert is how this kinda invalidates their self-proclaimed goals of trying to make mech play more viable across all matchups, or doesn't it? Are they going to still address that or is this more like a 'whew, we were just slinging stuff at the wall and that at least didn't break the game.' moment and we just move on with more wall-slinging random stuff to shake up the meta a bit? Sure, the Thor change might turn out to be really good, but that still doesn't seem to address the problem of mech naturally leaning towards a defensive if not turtly composition with the Siege Tank, Liberators and Thors, which also is something they apparently don't want. As having favored defensive macro-oriented mech play whenever possible, with this iteration of the game I find myself countered by so many different things that despite TvT there's really not much of a point going down that old factory route, maybe against Zerg if you add a shit ton of Ghosts, ofc. Buffing the Cyclone doesn't really do anything in making Mech play viable though, that's the problem. The Cyclone doesn't fit in a Mech army well. It's fragile and wants to move around, and that doesn't play nice with Siege Tanks and Thors that definitely don't want to move around. The only thing that buffing Cyclones does is make them a more enticing general purpose opener, which naturally transitions into Mech. But that comes with all kinds of drawbacks like absolutely ruining TvT and invalidating Protoss Stargate openers regardless of what unit composition Terran is going for. Terran can just as easily build Bio out of a Cyclone opener as they can build Mech. Cyclones are never used in a Mech composition past the early to early midgame unless your entire gameplan is to JUST mass Cyclones and Hellions and that doesn't work against Protoss anyway that only works against Zerg. It just isn't designed to synergize with the other units in a Factory based army other than the Hellion. If they want to make Mech more viable, especially vs Protoss, fucking around with Cyclones isn't the answer. | ||
|
MJG
United Kingdom1399 Posts
On November 02 2024 03:04 Vision_ wrote: In SC2 some units are specialized to be more end or start game efficient. I don t know why you are underestimating this change because ultra late game of Terran is full of ghosts, do you watch clem or maru endgame seriously ? If your are a football manager then someone told you because you have 11 messi that you should play only with 7 players, i have some personal doubts about your chance of winning. 11 John O'Sheas would beat 11 Messis.  | ||
|
machinus
United States291 Posts
| ||
|
Xamo
Spain884 Posts
Protoss will still suffer as it is, with yet another round of totally unjustified nerfs. As the clear lagging race, it is the one that has to get buffs, not Zerg. | ||
|
Creager
Germany1923 Posts
On November 02 2024 03:43 Vindicare605 wrote: Buffing the Cyclone doesn't really do anything in making Mech play viable though, that's the problem. The Cyclone doesn't fit in a Mech army well. It's fragile and wants to move around, and that doesn't play nice with Siege Tanks and Thors that definitely don't want to move around. The only thing that buffing Cyclones does is make them a more enticing general purpose opener, which naturally transitions into Mech. But that comes with all kinds of drawbacks like absolutely ruining TvT and invalidating Protoss Stargate openers regardless of what unit composition Terran is going for. Terran can just as easily build Bio out of a Cyclone opener as they can build Mech. Cyclones are never used in a Mech composition past the early to early midgame unless your entire gameplan is to JUST mass Cyclones and Hellions and that doesn't work against Protoss anyway that only works against Zerg. It just isn't designed to synergize with the other units in a Factory based army other than the Hellion. If they want to make Mech more viable, especially vs Protoss, fucking around with Cyclones isn't the answer. Totally agree with your points, my intention was not trying to advocate for a "more general purpose" version of the unit or that the Cyclone is the unit to "fix mech", but question the general direction and philosophy behind any changes made at this point beyond adjusting and hopefully improving overall balance. What's the point in stating goals behind changes when they get reverted in future patches due the need of fixing other stated goals? Don't remember who, but somebody said that it at times feels like the reasoning behind a change is formulated after the change, not the other way round and I sort of have to agree with that assessment. And in this case I'd prefer the game balance not being touched by arbitrary changes. | ||
|
Vision_
874 Posts
On November 02 2024 05:29 machinus wrote: Hatchery still 275?? How is this going to help fix the problem? weird change.... and i think people who think that s better than nothing missunderstand the problem. | ||
|
CicadaSC
United States1865 Posts
| ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16118 Posts
On November 02 2024 06:03 Creager wrote: Totally agree with your points, my intention was not trying to advocate for a "more general purpose" version of the unit or that the Cyclone is the unit to "fix mech", but question the general direction and philosophy behind any changes made at this point beyond adjusting and hopefully improving overall balance. What's the point in stating goals behind changes when they get reverted in future patches due the need of fixing other stated goals? Don't remember who, but somebody said that it at times feels like the reasoning behind a change is formulated after the change, not the other way round and I sort of have to agree with that assessment. And in this case I'd prefer the game balance not being touched by arbitrary changes. It needs to be made clear by now that the Balance Council is not acting in any kind of coordinated or planned manner. They're reactionary, and their changes are not always thought out. The Cyclone patch should have made that abundantly clear. That was a change no one asked for, on a unit no one likes, that had consequences that everyone with a brain saw coming. You watch videos of known members of the balance council stating they were surprised and confused that the Cyclone Changes ever made it to the live servers, meaning that not even they knew what the hell was going on with that patch. I wish I knew who the actual final decision makers were in this entire process. Is it someone at Blizzard? Is it someone at ESL? Who was the person that pushed those Cyclone Changes through when seemingly no one on the balance council wanted them because it was obvious what kind of impact they would have? Probably the same person who thought buffing the Void Ray 4 times in the last patch Blizzard did was a good idea when that was an even BIGGER set of brain dead decisions. My point in this rant is there isn't a consistent or even always rational set of decision makers here. I don't know why and I don't know who is to blame for it. But if you're wondering why their logic keeps jumping about like this, that probably has something to do with it. | ||
|
CicadaSC
United States1865 Posts
| ||
|
Tommy131313
Germany156 Posts
On November 02 2024 07:52 CicadaSC wrote: The balance council may have succeeded in making Protoss viable without battery overcharge, let's just accept that premise for a moment, so people are liking the changes but overall Protoss is still not being buffed. It's just being made to survive without that crutch. Show me 1 change in here that you look at and go "Yeah, herO/Classic are gonna beat Serral now." Maybe herO/Classic shouldn't beat Serral (aka the better player...) by getting buffed with protoss buffs? Protoss is mostly OP in the lower playlevels, it obviously isn't weak. But on the highest level it's the mechanical and tactical better player, that matters most, so Protoss isn't auto-dominant | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12389 Posts
On November 02 2024 07:52 CicadaSC wrote: The balance council may have succeeded in making Protoss viable without battery overcharge, let's just accept that premise for a moment, so people are liking the changes but overall Protoss is still not being buffed. It's just being made to survive without that crutch. Show me 1 change in here that you look at and go "Yeah, herO/Classic are gonna beat Serral now." herO went 2-3 vs Serral and 3-0 vs Reynor at the world cup, I'd say that's pretty competitive already. The pro consensus is not that protoss is weak in PvZ, so if protoss doesn't die to zerg pushes due to the lack of photon overcharge I think we'll continue to see the same matchup, which is fine. If protoss becomes the slightly better race in PvT as well which I suspect it will, then protoss will be in a very good position. I'm not saying it's going to be broodlord infestor or something silly like that but I would certainly start getting my hopes up. | ||
|
Blitzball04
191 Posts
On November 02 2024 03:04 Vision_ wrote: In SC2 some units are specialized to be more end or start game efficient. I don t know why you are underestimating this change because ultra late game of Terran is full of ghosts, do you watch clem or maru endgame seriously ? If your are a football manager then someone told you because you have 11 messi that you should play only with 7 players, i have some personal doubts about your chance of winning. Terrible comparison and just shows you don’t know much about how late game works. You need to watch more games and improve your knowledge | ||
|
Vision_
874 Posts
On November 02 2024 11:10 Blitzball04 wrote: Terrible comparison and just shows you don’t know much about how late game works. You need to watch more games and improve your knowledge I don t need you to tell me what i need to do. The patch is literally called "ghost patch". If you think it won t impact enought the game i suggest you to open a new thread for explaining us why this patch is useless | ||
|
BlackEyed
12 Posts
| ||
|
Vision_
874 Posts
On November 02 2024 19:37 BlackEyed wrote: The nerf to the ghost looks like a bribe to stop the masses from grumbling. They whined - here you go, shut up. In reality, they are completely satisfied with the current pew pew and are not at all embarrassed by the fact that the ghost is a stupid universal deathball unit, which in the same TvZ counters just all the Zerg units. Just all. Lurkers? Pew pew. Ultralisks? Pew pew. Broodlords? Pew pew. Hydra or roaches? Pew pew. You don't even need to spend pew pew on lings. It is also very convenient that this unit also counters all casters. Well, just a magical unit. If the Terran guesses to build a couple of tanks to protect against banelings, then that's it - the game is a success, sit and build houses for 40 minutes and do pew pew. Very interesting games are turning out..... Yes and so ? Zerglings have one of the best dps and speed of the game, you can win a game with just injection and spamming them from eggs. So technically, it s the same, they are a good all around unit if they are followed by banelings If i want write about what seems good into the patch i will, despite your bad manners. Dev team works on ghosts tweak since a long time, they are many patchs concerning this unit, you are again complaining on something while the idea will reduce the possibility for terrans to answer to multiple and various army composition. The only bad thing is the fact that Zerg or Protoss will oftenly max out to 200 and the late game style will occur oftenly (but it s like that since 12 workers blizzard decision , despite the agreement of the community) anyway even a five year old child can understand that a change supply cost is a radical decision | ||
| ||
