EPTActually, the Hydra and Shroud changes are clearly supposed to be the counter-buff; and I think this is a smart direction to take to allow ground to be more competitive against Protoss late-game armies. This might not be enough, though I also feel like Shroud was already pretty good; I'll be interested to see how it plays when it's finally tested. As people say, late game is the hardest area to test bc so few games go to late game.
5.0.14 Balance PTR: Updates - (October 31st, 2024) - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Captain Peabody
United States3134 Posts
Actually, the Hydra and Shroud changes are clearly supposed to be the counter-buff; and I think this is a smart direction to take to allow ground to be more competitive against Protoss late-game armies. This might not be enough, though I also feel like Shroud was already pretty good; I'll be interested to see how it plays when it's finally tested. As people say, late game is the hardest area to test bc so few games go to late game. | ||
|
Vision_
875 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 So is the title enought big for you ? | ||
|
kusdjwjdj
1 Post
| ||
|
-KG-
Denmark1219 Posts
On November 03 2024 01:06 kusdjwjdj wrote: --- Nuked --- Please escort this individual to the exit. | ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10373 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. I think the overall goal is to make more unit comps viable in every MU (this was always Blizz's goal and one of SC2's strengths over BW) But the cyclone limited PvT openers/strategies a lot, compared to just making Mech TvP a little less fringe viable The Cyclone was definitely very helpful for Mech TvP btw and does synergize with traditional Tank based play, you can think of it as a Goliath on skates - a cheap, rounded unit with accessible AA, a decent mineral sink and trades decently with other race's T1 units, and in small numbers beats Blink Stalkers slightly, but around ~8 Cyclone mark or when blink stalkers can 1 shot cyclones it starts leaning Stalker favor again, but at least it does provide some additional Mech openings vs Blink stalker openings to help you get that 3rd up that Mech TvP struggles with so much more in LotV due to econ+timing changes, rather than just opening up tanks each game which struggles vs Blink Stalkers. The Cylcone being cheap and reactorable also meant that you could use it as a rounded reinforcement unit after trading some supply after a battle, and better reinforce any position on the map you might have after an engagement. Example game is G5 of Byun vs Maxpax recently. Great TvP mech game with heavy use of Cyclone, but still revolving around a traditional tank core. He even setup forward positions with turrets that controlled the middle of the map and was in striking position of the opponent's bases. It was one of those great mech games that involved fortifying positions around the map and being active + aggressive. I'm not sure if it was, but being able to salvage turrets would help Mech setup these fortified positions and be a bit less scared of random air switch surprises, and it helps tank damage and give detection in general. But i understand reverting this cus that idea was pretty wild and i don't like the idea of getting money back on things you invested to defend early harass/cheeses. The Thor explosive payload buff will already help vs Interceptors, and being even stronger vs Muta - at first I was a little afraid if Thor becomes too strong of an AA unit, but as with Golaith vs Carrier in BW, the Thor/Goliath will still be relatively clunky and immobile compared to flying units that can bypass terrain, so it's OK. Being able to rely more on Thors (which have a strong ground attack) and have slightly less Thors frees up supply for your Mech army, indirectly buffing its ground strength without having to fuck with units like the Tank that would fuck with Bio play as well. I do think the current Cyclone as I always said had a bad design (in a vacuum), though it has merit in filling some flaws in LotV Mech especially TvP. But Mech really could use some help (even just a tiny bit!) to secure 3rd faster and safer vs Blink stalker and hold your first 3-4 bases easier vs mass gateway/chargelot. Cyclone still lost to Blink Stalker as the previous Cyclone did, but at least this one doesn't get countered so easily by blinking away and interrupting the Lockon. It's sad that the blue flame buff is being reverted, without any other kind of buff to Hellion. I've been advocating for making Blue Flame give +2 (+3 vs Light) instead of just +5 vs Light, to make Hellions trade a bit less shittily against Stalkers (and Marauder/Roach too), and help Mech's early game out with just a tiny bit more damage. Hellions will still lose to Stalker/Marauder/Roach with a little basic splitting, and it would require Blue Flame upgrade which Bio usually doesn't get. Bio usually never goes beyond ~8 Hellions or so, and if they do it's the very rare Blue Flame harass opening. It's a bit sad but, the community doesn't like mech and doesn't want to waste energy trying to test things out for mech. Almost all players who liked mech play (whether traditional positional tank style, battle mech, or turtle mech) have already stopped playing and following the game, of course. It would be very commendable if they tried a bit more to make Mech a tiny bit more viable in TvP (and lesser extent TvT - Raven Matrix is terrible), despite the large majority of community not caring about mech and many even hating it, keeping in mind survivor bias and that we should ideally make a game that allows for more playstyles that appeal to more different players and not just focus on the playstyles that the current remaining players enjoy. A bit of a tangent, but i hear sometimes pros or casters say "i don't want to play/see a 20-25 minute game that's boring!" and i just scratch my head. Because whenever I see a back and forth 25-40 min macro game in BW (or even SC2), that's when it gets very fun to watch. I don't like watching games that end in the first or second push where things are decided so early. But that is an example of "survivor bias". The people remaining end up wanting short "exciting" and "aggressive" 10-15 minute games that end quickly because that's how SC2 has been for a large part of its history. My 2c: having a strong dynamic and constrast between a defender and an aggressor makes for very exciting games as well, if not more than 2 players both just attacking each other. When 1 is on the defensive, there is more tension, and the tactics of the aggressor can become even more cool and fun to watch. For example picking apart defenses in BW, it was more methodical and took more effort. A good example in SC2 is the classic and most liked TvZ MU. Usually Zerg is on the defender (at least in WoL+HotS), with Terran keeping them in check with constant harass. In recent LotV, it's shifted moreso towards Terran defending and surviving against Zerg swarms. An example where picking apart defenses in SC2 is too easy and makes for boring gameplay is TvT for example, all you do now is build more Ravens to counter more Ravens, and very easily disable a tank line and A move into it. Not exciting or tense to watch. TvT used to be great and fun to watch and positional before Interference Matrix, and it got worse when they made Raven cheaper and quicker to build while keeping Matrix at 11 secs. Another issue is that they shifted too much power away from Raven to Ghost, leading to overreliance of Ghost in TvZ and also problems in TvP. Bio now has 2 spellcasters - (Raven compliments Bio more than Mech), and Mech is left without a mech spellcaster, giving even less reason to go Mech in TvT. Sorry for the rambling lol. It's pretty futile unfortunately, too many changes have been made that gutted Mech more and more and it's difficult to fix now without reverting things like Raven Matrix and the high dps and low duration auto turret which have been in the game too long now. And there aren't enough players left who like mech for the balance council to care about. | ||
|
CicadaSC
United States1934 Posts
On November 03 2024 01:06 kusdjwjdj wrote: --- Nuked --- Calm down bud. You can disagree with a patch but when you articulate it like this no one will listen. | ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10373 Posts
1) It restores 200 Energy over 10 seconds. 2) It restores 100 Shield in addition to 100 Energy. 3) It restores 100 Shield and Energy over 10 seconds. I think these are pretty self-explanatory: -Making it restore over time would allow you to buff the total amount of energy restored, so it's more closer to a direct replacement of Battery Overcharge (Batteries only have 100 Energy max) when cast on a Battery. Restoring only 100 Energy on a Battery is a bit underwhelming compared to using it on a Sentry or HT. -Making it restore Energy (or both Energy + Shield) over time makes EMP less effective in a way: They have to choose between EMP earlier to stop Protoss from using the Shield/Energy, or wait til they have 100 Shield/Energy to use a EMP at its fullest, or wait until 75 Energy to stop a HT from Storm. Also, it might seem like 200 energy (2-3 storms) over 10 secs could be way too much storms, but keep in mind the opponent now has time to react and back off or EMP. With instant energy restoration, Protoss can restore energy instantly after EMP and cast storm before getting EMP'd again. I think it'd lead to a bit of a silly test in speed and be unnecessarily volatile. Also, HTs likely have some energy already, so it more likely would gain roughly 150 Energy at most (if the opponent retreats - if not then HTs can cast storm to expend energy and then gain the full 200 total energy over time), while giving 200 energy over time to a Battery even if opponent disengages still allows you to utilize the 200 energy for healing. -It would become visually much clearer to see and give the opponent more time to recognize and react. -Restoring Shield might feel like it's too strong and similar to Battery Overcharge, but keep in mind it'd be for 1 specific unit, you can't change the unit that's being healed like with Battery Overcharge -Same with the idea of restoring 200 energy over 10 secs; it would be for 1 specific unit/building, you can't change it The numbers are rough and can be tweaked, but I feel one of these is the way to go and intuitive/clear enough game design wise for the ability, and makes sure Protoss early isn't too weak without Battery Overcharge. It also allows for as much or more skill expression and choices. It also gives choices for the opponent, such as when to EMP and how/when to engage. | ||
|
Vision_
875 Posts
In my mind stalkers are these units which are in this bad spot, they are 'armored' while they are fast, able to harass and be played with micro. I feel some people don t want to tweak stalkers, but they should. If you looks closer, armored units aren t defined to be fast, except in zerg races but usually it s balanced by a very short range attack. Stalkers are clearly a strong unit until mid game and i feel they are fine like this but in switching their armor to light, it could open a new place for a new armored unit. PS: Surprisingly, tech lab units are defined to be armored and reactor units mean to be light. Then cyclone become the first armored unit able to be 'reactored' which is a none sense. Then if the question is about the reactor i would allow cyclones to have two lock on targets counterbalanced by increasing supply cost from 2 to 3 | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16122 Posts
On November 03 2024 20:14 Vision_ wrote: to me the problem with cyclones can be resumed because of the addition of another armored unit while the balance between armored and light was still in favor of armored unit. In my mind stalkers are these units which are in this bad spot, they are 'armored' while they are fast, able to harass and be played with micro. I feel some people don t want to tweak stalkers, but they should. If you looks closer, armored units aren t defined to be fast, except in zerg races but usually it s balanced by a very short range attack. Stalkers are clearly a strong unit until mid game and i feel they are fine like this but in switching their armor to light, it could open a new place for a new armored unit. PS: Surprisingly, tech lab units are define to be armored and reactor units mean to be light. Then cyclone become the first armored unit able to be 'reactored' which is a none sense. Then if the question is about the reactor i would allow cyclones to have two lock on targets counterbalanced by increasing supply cost from 2 to 3 Changing Stalkers to Light is a ridiculous idea. That would mean they suddenly take bonus damage from Banelings, Hellions/Helbats and most importantly Phoenixes. It would be a huge nerf to all 3 match ups. ZvP because Zerg doesn't really have a lot of anti-armored damage and giving them the Light tag would just make them extra fragile vs Banelings. vs Terran because now Hellions deal bonus damage to literally EVERY unit off of the Gateway. And PvP it would absolutely ruin the match up because now the only unit you can make in the early to midgame to counter Phoenixes other than Phoenixes gets absolutely demolished by them, when they already were a pretty poor counter unit to begin with. The only way I could see this working was if you completely redesigned the Stalker into a harassment unit and gave Protoss the Dragoon to replace it as the core ranged damage dealer in the army. But that's far too radical of a change for any balance patch so it will never happen. We're not going to start adding new core combat units to the game. So this would just end up being a big nerf to Protoss in all 3 match ups. | ||
|
Vision_
875 Posts
What if stalkers would be allowed to blink while they are lifted (...) For hellions it could be considered as a buff for Terrans, Banelings are a really cost efficient unit and it s clearly an issue because they would be again a threat for Protoss but without any tests i can figure out. I will try some tests maybe first with banelings, then if they are good, i will test against a bio ball. If you compare ZvP and ZvT for banelings interaction, i feel like there s a small gap in term of potential or sustain against banelings. Maybe Protoss can handle this kind of nerf against banelings; just check forcefield/biles interaction, if they were balanced with the common sense, biles won t break forcefields with a single shot for obvious reason. So this thing help to consider the suggestion. | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3503 Posts
On November 03 2024 16:26 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: Btw few ideas to consider for Energy Charge, to help compensate for weaker early game with no Battery Overcharge: 1) It restores 200 Energy over 10 seconds. 2) It restores 100 Shield in addition to 100 Energy. 3) It restores 100 Shield and Energy over 10 seconds. I think these are pretty self-explanatory: -Making it restore over time would allow you to buff the total amount of energy restored, so it's more closer to a direct replacement of Battery Overcharge (Batteries only have 100 Energy max) when cast on a Battery. Restoring only 100 Energy on a Battery is a bit underwhelming compared to using it on a Sentry or HT. -Making it restore Energy (or both Energy + Shield) over time makes EMP less effective in a way: They have to choose between EMP earlier to stop Protoss from using the Shield/Energy, or wait til they have 100 Shield/Energy to use a EMP at its fullest, or wait until 75 Energy to stop a HT from Storm. Also, it might seem like 200 energy (2-3 storms) over 10 secs could be way too much storms, but keep in mind the opponent now has time to react and back off or EMP. With instant energy restoration, Protoss can restore energy instantly after EMP and cast storm before getting EMP'd again. I think it'd lead to a bit of a silly test in speed and be unnecessarily volatile. Also, HTs likely have some energy already, so it more likely would gain roughly 150 Energy at most (if the opponent retreats - if not then HTs can cast storm to expend energy and then gain the full 200 total energy over time), while giving 200 energy over time to a Battery even if opponent disengages still allows you to utilize the 200 energy for healing. -It would become visually much clearer to see and give the opponent more time to recognize and react. -Restoring Shield might feel like it's too strong and similar to Battery Overcharge, but keep in mind it'd be for 1 specific unit, you can't change the unit that's being healed like with Battery Overcharge -Same with the idea of restoring 200 energy over 10 secs; it would be for 1 specific unit/building, you can't change it The numbers are rough and can be tweaked, but I feel one of these is the way to go and intuitive/clear enough game design wise for the ability, and makes sure Protoss early isn't too weak without Battery Overcharge. It also allows for as much or more skill expression and choices. It also gives choices for the opponent, such as when to EMP and how/when to engage. I think it would help if it also gave +100 max energy for a duration. But it still wouldn't be sufficient to what a 100% battery overcharge, or mothership core pylon overcharge used to do. | ||
|
Vision_
875 Posts
I think Colossus/Vikings interaction when terran push is becoming an issue. Terran only build vikings because of colossus, and vikings tweaks have been adressed since a long time. It can be absolutely balanced, but in my mind, if Terran still build vikings then there s maybe a problem (rigged) In applying the same idea to colossus : Colossus 250/100 to 150/100 armored removed, light added It could be balanced in TvP and don t impact too much ZvP | ||
|
Beelzebub1
1004 Posts
- Mothership can be abducted, but the abduct pull is only half of what it is normally. This is to leave some Viper counter play, but now you need 2 Vipers to fully pull it into the Zerg forces. This means it requires a 400 gas investment from Zerg to be able to instantly kill the MS. - Guardian Shield now reduces ranged damage by 3 instead of 2. This will make early game Sentries much more powerful defensively with Energy Overcharge against Terran aggression, and in the later parts of the game will make GW armies more durable against bio and hydra play. - Adept attack changed from projectile to hitscan attack (correct me if the wording here is wrong) like a marine. This will increase Adepts damage by all but eliminating overkill, and make them more micro friendly. 2 birds with one stone, a GW unit is better but only if you have the micro to utilize it. | ||
|
Vision_
875 Posts
Protoss Meta (Showtime/Clem) : blink into colossus thermal lance. Looks like Colossus push have no impact on the bio ball. In patch 4.0.0, the range was increased from 6 to 7 but they decreased also the damage, i m wondering if the damage can be restored Patch 4.0.0: Thermal Lance damage changed from 12 to 10 (+5 light). Hellions push (Clem/Solar) It looks hard to handle for Solar maybe due to the new queen price. Damage Queen increase from 2 x 4 to 2 x (4 + 1) against armored Terran Meta : Medivacs slight nerf : medivacs healing point is 800, i think it s a bit too much so the rate should be decreased from 4 to 3 but the healing rate could be the same. | ||
|
Vision_
875 Posts
On November 03 2024 22:29 ejozl wrote: I think it would help if it also gave +100 max energy for a duration. But it still wouldn't be sufficient to what a 100% battery overcharge, or mothership core pylon overcharge used to do. I didn t see many matchup but Protoss seems to have more difficulties to hold terran push especially the three tanks push. | ||
|
MJG
United Kingdom1451 Posts
On November 04 2024 02:33 Vision_ wrote: Hellions push (Clem/Solar) It looks hard to handle for Solar maybe due to the new queen price. Damage Queen increase from 2 x 4 to 2 x (4 + 1) against armored Oh no! Zerg might have to make units that aren't Queens? What a shame... This is the exact intention of the nerf. We don't need to buff Queen damage to make up for Queens costing more, Zergs need to stop being greedy with their overreliance on Queens. EDIT: I posted this earlier: Please can the OP be updated to include the Lurker changes in the "full updated changelog" so that they're visible to everyone despite the Balance Council's inability to write their own patch notes properly? Pretty please?  | ||
|
Vision_
875 Posts
But you re right let s say it s too simple as a suggestion. Medivacs are now the best unit of Terran, their heal affect hellbat which can kill zerglings by millions if they are constantly heal. The heal of medivacs cancel one attack of a queen, which mean that Zerg will oftenly try to catch the medivacs but it s a desperate move. Let s be honest, we like the fact that some interactions between units are extremely deadly but sometimes i have to suggest the first idea which comes to my mind even if it s bad. In reality there s no downside to make hydralisk T1, you can also remove banelings nest and switch centrifugal hooks to the spawning pool unlocked with the T2 technology (lair). One of the advantage of putting hydralisk T1 is the gamble for Zerg to make multiple hatchery before his lair upgrade. As the cost of hydralisk is pretty insane at start, Zerg can spend ressource for his defense but it has to be really cautious because if he gambles to counter attack then he could be stopped by the technology of Terran (or Protoss in the other case) Plus, Baneling nest all-in T1 is not a used strategy at pro level, so the building is never exploited and his position in the tree can arguably be discussed PS : this suggestion can be figured out if it really exists a difficulty for Zerg to hold hellbat push Then there s maybe an idea beside moving hydralisks T1. Indeed, hydralisks is the first unit with three upgrades, so probably grooved spines can be available without Lair (which could open new build order and strategy) | ||
|
bela.mervado
Hungary408 Posts
| ||
|
Vision_
875 Posts
On November 04 2024 19:26 bela.mervado wrote: I love your ideas Vision, please keep on posting those We have pretty basics lines of lecture (brood war), thank you Wouldn t that be fun to have a race with three basic unit T1. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7244 Posts
| ||
| ||
