|
On June 03 2026 20:31 tigera6 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2026 02:20 Captain Peabody wrote:On June 03 2026 00:24 tigera6 wrote:On June 02 2026 20:55 Acrofales wrote:On June 02 2026 19:48 tigera6 wrote:On June 02 2026 12:52 Turbovolver wrote:On June 02 2026 06:38 WSH32 wrote:
Let me restate my point more patiently.
I admit that the Ghost is a strong unit. My issue is that, in late-game TvZ, the Ghost is currently the only reliable spell-based answer Terran has. The Raven is not very useful in this matchup right now.
I have seen people say that the power budget of the Terran army should be reallocated. I am not against that idea in principle. But if that is the direction, then Terran needs real compensation elsewhere, such as bringing back Raven PDD or restoring Seeker Missile damage. You cannot leave Terran with no effective spellcaster in a matchup where Zerg can use both Vipers and Infestors as a late-game spellcaster combination.
Another suggestion I have seen is to nerf the Ghost’s basic combat capability. I do not think that is reasonable in the current situation. Ghosts are already mainly effective against light units. Armored units can kill them very quickly if they are caught out of position.
So my preferred Ghost change is to make it more of a glass cannon. Keep the Ghost as a Light unit, and let its HP go back from 125 to 100, making it easier to kill if mispositioned. But keep the other core values unchanged: 2 supply and 50 energy Steady Targeting. Also keep the change that Steady Targeting is not cancelled by taking damage while channeling.
I think this is a more acceptable compromise. It makes Ghosts more punishable, but still keeps their core role as Terran’s late-game spell-based counterplay.
Ghosts don't function like spellcasters in TvZ, though. You might as well call the Cyclone a "spellcaster". If they were built in small to moderate numbers and used with finesse, then they would feel a lot more like they are supposed to, i.e. specialists. Mass ghosts is not only a gameplay fail (like broodwar TvZ mech inevitability but worse), it's a flavour fail. If you replace Snipe with an AoE spell that also cause oponent unit to be stunned then Terrans dont need mass Ghost. Snipe has becomed an essential tool in TvZ lategame because they have the best chance at punishing retreating Zerg army. Otherwise Zerg can just hit , run back and drop a Fungal to keep Terran from chasing. Snipe should be a tool in the anti-Zerg arsenal. Particularly against Ultralisks, but just generally decent vs large bio units. As a counter to vipers and infestors, EMP should be the weapon of choice, not snipe, but snipe should be a decent backup. And then vs the rest of the Zerg army, ghosts should be good, but not the best. It's like how Storm is mostly useless against a mech army. Or fungal alone is kinda pointless, without an army (preferably with lots of banelings or ultras) to back it up. The problem isn't that ghost is a useful unit. It's that endgame TvZ is basically ghosts countering absolutely everything. Why build vikings against broodlords when ghosts do the trick. And why liberators vs lurkers when ghosts do the trick? And in fact, why MMM/hellbats vs small strikeforce of ling/bane when ghosts do the trick. I think the only unit in the Zerg arsenal that ghosts are truly a subpar option against is roaches. And literally everything else in a lategame Terran arsenal destroys roaches without even trying. Like I said 70% of mass Ghost lategame power coming from Snipe, especially with Cloak. Taking Snipe away and adding something like Maelstrom but only slow down and not stunned, would make Ghost become more of a support unit like other spellcaster. What do you think of the idea of making Snipe unable to target air units? Feels like it would leave the Ghost a powerful unit against Ultras and Lurkers while giving it more of a genuine vulnerability to Broods, Mutas, etc. I think thats a fine idea, although I havent seen many lategame TvZ where mass Ghost straight up fight against mass BLord, you gotta make enough Thors to fight BLord in most instances.
Right, it wouldn't be match-up breaking, but would at least reduce the utility in some scenarios of making a giant blob of ghosts. I don't think the problem with the Ghost is balance fundamentally, it's the "feel" and "frustration" of how flexible they are, such that it's rarely a big problem to "overbuild" Ghosts in late-game. There are all kinds of scenarios where a blob of Ghosts in the right place can punish almost anything Zerg has; this also reduces the impact of tech switches where things start coming out in smaller numbers initially.
The fact that Ghosts already aren't core/ideal to defeating heavy air comps, though, is intended, since it reduces the immediate balance impact and doesn't leave Terran with huge gaping vulnerabilities. Terran already has the tools to deal with Zerg air, this would just make it more important to incorporate more of those tools earlier and more punishing if Terran doesn't anticipate tech switches.
That's the theory, anyway!
|
On May 30 2026 01:26 seopthi wrote:
If the intern is reading this, please consider (an option?) for F2 to ignore units on hold and/or patrol. Hold would make perfect sense imo
Also visual changes to EMP so it is easier to see, and Protoss door (though could be alleviated w/ the first suggestion)
The changling change seems to be strange ad hoc, it'd be easier to make them less spammable, no?
One more suggestion I'd like to propose -- I just watched Tasteless' take on the patch and he mentioned that he thinks that the game should be balanced for pros, which I agree with. The natural problem is that if we get 50% winrate in the GSL, it may be greatly different in GM or Silver on ladder.
Historically it has been like this many times, e.g., Protoss favored in GM while Terran in Bronze. The thing I would love Blizzard to consider, is for ladder MMR to be per matchup and the overall being the average of the three.
There would be no such worry about balance per skill level; for example, if Protoss is easier to play with low apm compare to Zerg, PvZ could be matched against a player that would currently be considered stronger.
The purpose of MMR is to have 50% winrate, which overall players have, but they clearly do not have per matchup; I have had 70% winrate in one and 30% in another, for example. Of course, I can focus on improving on the lowest winrate, but it being uneven is unavoidable.
|
Northern Ireland26936 Posts
On June 03 2026 23:12 seopthi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2026 01:26 seopthi wrote:
If the intern is reading this, please consider (an option?) for F2 to ignore units on hold and/or patrol. Hold would make perfect sense imo
Also visual changes to EMP so it is easier to see, and Protoss door (though could be alleviated w/ the first suggestion)
The changling change seems to be strange ad hoc, it'd be easier to make them less spammable, no? One more suggestion I'd like to propose -- I just watched Tasteless' take on the patch and he mentioned that he thinks that the game should be balanced for pros, which I agree with. The natural problem is that if we get 50% winrate in the GSL, it may be greatly different in GM or Silver on ladder. Historically it has been like this many times, e.g., Protoss favored in GM while Terran in Bronze. The thing I would love Blizzard to consider, is for ladder MMR to be per matchup and the overall being the average of the three. There would be no such worry about balance per skill level; for example, if Protoss is easier to play with low apm compare to Zerg, PvZ could be matched against a player that would currently be considered stronger. The purpose of MMR is to have 50% winrate, which overall players have, but they clearly do not have per matchup; I have had 70% winrate in one and 30% in another, for example. Of course, I can focus on improving on the lowest winrate, but it being uneven is unavoidable.
Giving me a magic wand, the game is balanced for the pros, but fun for us plebs.
I think SC2 can often suffer on the latter, where interactions that are ultimately balanced, just suck to play against at lower levels. Like Serral can dismantle an Airtoss fleet with Templar support, but at lower levels a Zerg is just getting A-moved to death because they lack the ability to pick it apart
I’ve played other games where they’re actively more fun when you suck, and all sorts of things are viable, get good and it’s play meta and skip about 80% of other options
I’ve got zero idea how to actually do that, but just as a general concept.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
