|
On December 03 2012 20:09 phodacbiet wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2012 19:04 dukem wrote:![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fhRDc.jpg) Pretty bad "split", but got catched off guard really hard. This shouldn't be allowed to happen nonetheless. Kinda like how sometimes people accidentally right click and lose all their mutas to thors. Yes, it was the right clicker's fault but its the exact same thing, "you messed up, now pay the iron price"
Thors don't root mutas in place though, so unless you run into a huge group of them you should be able to salvage the situation.
Also, mutas can be considered a somewhat fragile midgame unit that you transition out of once your opponent gets too many counter-units such as thors. Vikings have no such luxury, you need to keep making them despite your opponent having all the perfect counter units. Imagine if terran had a magical flying siege unit that could be only damaged by mutalisks, and he also had 8 thors marching underneath them. Then the situation would be more comparable to what terrans are dealing with right now.
|
Anyway, I never understood why broodlords shoot broodlings AND do high burst damage at the same time (20 per shot IIRC). I mean, broodlings alone have some weaknesses against high armored targets (mech, PF) and AoE damage, which seems fair to me. But, and that is especially true in conjunction with fungal, those 20 damage makes the broodlord a bit too versatile.
|
Hey, lower the range of vikings or get higher range on corruptors so that an engagement can be forced without having to run into marines or thor range, and it is all good.
But the reason for using fungal is because otherwise it is impossible to force an engagement with the vikings - they can kite you into thor, marine (protected by tanks), turret range too easily without taking damage.
|
On December 03 2012 20:09 phodacbiet wrote:
Kinda like how sometimes people accidentally right click and lose all their mutas to thors. Yes, it was the right clicker's fault but its the exact same thing, "you messed up, now pay the iron price"
Thors cant exactly burrow and then unburrow anywhere though.
|
Yup, these innovations are quite bogus.
|
On December 03 2012 16:47 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2012 16:25 the_business_og wrote:
tbh its just (fucking) lazy on blizzards part, for the last maybe 4 months-6 moths? they have been saying they are waiting for the meta game to change and adapt to infestors, and when they finally can no longer deny the clamor for balance change, they come out with minimal changes which do not only not fix inherent game design problems of the infestor, but also they give changes that serve nothing more than to band aid the problem till HOTS. the problem is the wound is still bleeding,HSM is a good change, but the egg chance literally changes nothing. they make claims like global statistics are balanced but they show us no proof, they expect us to take their word for it Let me see the statistics and link a source... its common procedure.
As i see it, they are three major problems with the WOL:
1. Infestor is too powerful, and all-purpose unit
2. Late Game PvZ is a based on one or two key spells in an engagement, made worse by a well timed Neural Parasite which gives zerg ability to hold both keys to win
3. Siege Tanks don't control space well enough, and thus Late game T suffers
Not only is this lazy of blizzard, worse, its greedy. They know people LOVE sc2, and will spring for HOTS regardless of badly they fucked up the game design of WOL. They've left it for dead and are focusing their attention on HOTS, but its so wrong and fucked up to dedicated WOL players. Blizzard shouldnt be able to fuck up so badly and then make shit tons of money of the expansion... you cant have you cake and eat it too. I don't believe it's laziness, I think it's a lack of creative and lateral thinking on Blizzard's part. Consider the problem I mentioned is actually a problem, like Blizzard can't really understand certain problems in terms of, but they know people hate certain things because they hear a lot of it about the place. All Blizzard would have to do is hire a couple of people to do community research as a full time job, literally all they're paid to do. Their task is not to find out what people's problems are with the game, in a 'Z OP' way, but to find interesting/constructive posts regarding stuff Blizzard hadn't considered. Their sole role: Find things that Blizz hadn't previously considered in their thinking, no matter the source. Relay/discuss this issue directly to the design team so the design team can at least try to implement certain thingsYou could apply this central idea to unit creation as well. Blizzard may not necessarily create a unit based on a post here, but they might think 'oh that's cool, we could work that into something'. It's a shame I can't find the post, but I remember someone's idea for like a kind of 'mech ball' that was beautiful conceptually. It kind of seemed like it 'fit' mech in terms of base design/ideas, regardless of the stats the OP had arbitrarily given it. By the way, anybody who can think of the unit I mean, PLEASE PM me, I tried for a good hour to find the thread the other day, but couldn't remember the title. Now, let's say they find one of say, my posts and relay this to the design team. They'll maybe think my ideas/solutions are terrible, but say, that the critique I made had validity and was something they hadn't thought about. I mean, they're not idiots, they just can't be aware of everything at once. It's probably why they always say they want to encourage multitasking/stop deathballs etc, but often get it wrong in implementation. They get that there's a problem, but they don't look at certain little things that kind of explain WHY we dislike that kind of play? It's quite hard to fix something, if you don't know the rationales that underpin peoples objections. This is a better way to approach problem solving in pretty much every respect. I believe say, the initial small investment in a few members of staff to really, REALLY scour the depths of forums and do this, would pay off many times over. Consider Blizzard spent a ton of money on WCS, which I loved, but in terms of the return in sales etc that they'll get from say, investing in that over making HoTS amazing? Well the latter will probably pay off more on an investment/return level.
The community is being completely unreasonable about this. Yes, the infestor is broken - as a terran I hate the unit and want to see it nerfed so I can feel like I'm competing with zerg on a relatively even level. However half of these "solutions" don't actually do anything. Retuning fungal to a slow doesn't change very much except to make repeat fungals harder to pull off and right now, repeat fungals are not the problem with the unit. Changing fungal to a slow does nothing to stop the flood of infested terrans which utterly break PvZ nor does it do anything to stop the fact that fungal makes it virtually impossible to break through late game Zerg compositions.
You're all saying "let us micro out of it". I'm sorry, what? If you hit a marine with a 50% slow, they move around 0.1 speed slower than a battlecruiser. When was the last time you saw complicated splits out of a friggin battlecruiser? There is no micro to be had in that situation. If psi storm had a slow attached to it, you could wipe a kiting terran army out with three of them because they'd never actually get out of the damn thing. All you are doing is altering how the zerg uses the infestor to kill you. The late game composition we are talking about literally shits on tanks and it is basically impossible to pressure them with micro. This is not something that can be solved by "microing more". It has to be solved with the mechanics of the infestor.
There are two main problems with the infestor that need to be solved.
1. Fungal growth is far more powerful than its opportunity cost should allow it to be. It is a long ranged, instant, damage over time spell that hits both ground and air and locks down both. Removing the snare won't allow people to deal with fungal. It'll just make zergs slightly more aggressive with their infestors and this is not hard to do lategame.
2. Infested terrans scale far too effectively in large numbers. How many times have you heard the term "trading energy for minerals" in a game? That's fine but infested terrans are essentially allowing a zerg to add 30 supply to their army for free.
The first is easily solvable with the solution Blizzard themselves mooted - give fungal a projectile that takes around a second to get there. This allows ravens to deal with infestors. It also allows stalkers to blink out of the way of a mass fungal. That's all the counters you really need. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with an army getting fungaled - it means you fucked up. It just needs a solid counter and a way to punished the opportunity cost for someone who is absolutely relying on fungal growth. Why is this preferable to a slow?
- opens up new tactics such as raven/ghost advances. Any balance change should work within the present balance to find new ways to counter things.
- allows for genuine pre-engagement micro
- allows fungal growth to stay as a punishing means to deal with large clumped up armies which, given zerg have next to no splash, is something they sorely need
The second is solvable by numbers. Reduce the health of the infested terran to 30, reduce the health of their egg to 60. Make it so that if an opponent has detection (see above) and enough tanks/colossi and a few storms, they can't just be overwhelmed by infested terrans.
These two changes or something similar will do an awful lot to blunt the effect of late game BL infestor.
Oh, one more thing. This problem is entirely community caused and community driven. They implemented the buff to the infestor as a result of community whining and pro whining about how weak and useless the infestor was and the zerg race in general was. You made your own bed, people - don't blame Blizzard for listening to your whining once and then not listening to it a second time.
|
Northern Ireland27199 Posts
On December 03 2012 20:01 DemigodcelpH wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2012 16:50 USvBleakill wrote:
There is just no way of fixing the Zerg vs X problem just by nerving the infestor alone. It´s not the fault of the zergs to being abusive and massing infestors it´s just their only option mid/lategame. This is completely/utterly false, and is a myth perpetrated out of either sheer ignorance or people trying to avoid nerfs. Some games at IPL5 already blatantly disprove it.
Basically the problem is not that it's their only option at all, otherwise Zergs would never have won with other lategame compositions, or played other styles in the lategame and ever won games that they hadn't already got a massive advantage in.
It's kind of a combination between design flaws coming into focus. Patches enabled parts of it to be easier or more viable, Zergs getting better strategical understanding is part of it. Zergs getting better execution in terms of Bl/Infestor control is part of it.
However, it's why I don't agree with the idea of Patchzergs as most people conceive them, as not really existing.
Consider BL Infestor and general Zerg lategame complaints, and I'll try describe the rough sequence, in as close to chronological fashion as I can
1. Zerg have the capacity, theoretically to do things that other races cannot physically do due to design-.
This design philosophy in itself is not bad either. Hatches are their one production building, and larva enables not simultaneous army or worker production, but a way to focus on one or the other to really extreme levels. I like the actual idea of this, and it's good design philosophy in terms of giving races distinct identities.
2. BL/Infestor is recognised as the 'ideal' endgame composition- Zergs have known about this for a while. It synergises well, the problem was refining the process of getting there. Other races have similar 'god-tier' compositions, but either haven't figured them out yet, or in practical terms, actually impossible to get unless their opponent really screws up.
3. The Queen patch enabled Zergs to achieve their endgame faster. By letting them focus harder on economy in the early game, which let them speed up the transitions to every phase. Infestors may first come out at say, the same rough timings as before, but there may be more gas available to build more of them in the first swell, by virtue of say, skipping Roaches and the gas investment there and relying on Queens.
4 Risk-reward/decision-making importance is lessened This is all fine, if the Queen patch had enabled this to happen, but only due to conscious strategical decisions to cut corners being made. The problem is that the Queen covers the downsides of cutting corners and being risky - exposing yourself to being exploited by your opponent, TOO well. Perhaps not in any one specific area, but definitely as a catch-all unit.
5. Infestors are another catch-all unit. There's not really any downside to making them either. They synergise really well with close to any tech progression that a Zerg chooses to pursue. The aforementioned ability to get the tech earlier than before, or being able to produce MORE of them at a certain timing makes the transition to lategame comps smoother in close to every way. Infestors either hard or soft counter so many things, and naturally dovetail well with both ultra tech and Broodlord tech.
6. Zergs are getting bettter - Think of ways BL/Infestor used to lose games. It got hit either by vortexes much more frequently, or pulled apart by Warp Prisms. Think of the difference between the Infestor control of high level Zergs between now, and 6 months ago. Zergs are getting better at these aspects, partly because they're trying to improve their play, but also because they have a lot more experience in pursuing the 'play greedy, get to BL/Infestor fast' kind of style. When it was hard or relatively rare to see, the flaws in the composition weren't as apparent, so Zergs didn't refine their control as much. When it became common, other races found viable counters to the compositions that worked. The next stage logically is for Zerg to plug these holes, and a combination of more experience in transitioning to the comp and controlling the composition did this.
7. Other races can't currently play a variety of styles to counter the overall trend, due to design flaws or nerfs Protoss can't really pursue a harassed-based style at the timings you need to do economic damage with Zerg noncommittally, or without doing specific timings. They CAN harass noncommittally, as HerO exemplifies, but it's after the Zergs have already got their economy and tech up. Compare HerO's successes of a few months ago, vs lately vs Zerg. Part of it is his opponent's countering his stylistic preferences for sure, but another part is part 6. Zergs have plugged the hole that was losing to mass warpins, they may still lose to it from time to time. HerO's probably the best example of PvZ, even if it's not terribly imbalanced at the minute statistically, sucking so hard. He's a guy with a clear style and one of the few that routinely actually bases his style around the lategame, beyond even 3 bases. to 4 or 5 or parts beyond. He has a relatively unique approach in this sense, that should maybe not be considered 'optimal' play, but when people post things like 'shouldn't have got that 4th base' it's incredibly sad. HerO's style is losing effectiveness sadly, because it exposed some of the flaws in Zerg's lategame play, that they subsequently then had incentive to improve. The incentive was created by HerO's overarching strategy and him employing it, so ironically he pretty much indirectly negated the effectiveness of his own preferred style 
|
Oh, I should add that if they do nerf infestors, hydralisks are long overdue a buff.
|
On December 03 2012 19:04 dukem wrote:Pretty bad "split", but got catched off guard really hard. This shouldn't be allowed to happen nonetheless.
You know, we don't necessarily need fungal to be a slow to prevent this from happening. Just make fungal not allow units to move (instead of snaring). It would still allow air units to spread out, like they naturally do when stopped.
|
^ That is a pretty good suggestion.
|
Norway10161 Posts
On December 03 2012 20:22 aebriol wrote:
Hey, lower the range of vikings or get higher range on corruptors so that an engagement can be forced without having to run into marines or thor range, and it is all good.
But the reason for using fungal is because otherwise it is impossible to force an engagement with the vikings - they can kite you into thor, marine (protected by tanks), turret range too easily without taking damage.
I'm pretty sure every T/P in the world would agree to 20 range corruptors in exchange for all air being immune to fungal
|
On December 03 2012 21:00 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2012 19:04 dukem wrote:Pretty bad "split", but got catched off guard really hard. This shouldn't be allowed to happen nonetheless. You know, we don't necessarily need fungal to be a slow to prevent this from happening. Just make fungal not allow units to move (instead of snaring). It would still allow air units to spread out, like they naturally do when stopped.
Not much of a fix tbh. They'd be stuck anyway, so 1 or 2 fungals required to keep killing them isn't really that big of a deal, aslong as you can still guranteed keep killing them. Furthermore the units that would spread to the back could move out of range(while previously would be in range) which would be infuriating and would make it, in that case even more dangerous than current FG.
|
On December 03 2012 20:46 Evangelist wrote:
Oh, I should add that if they do nerf infestors, hydralisks are long overdue a buff.
Regarding Hydras, is there any large balance reason why hydralisks are so slow off creep? Roaches have the lair upgrade so they are not as potent at hatch tech (May not be true, just an assumption) but hydras are tier 2 so it would't be too impactful. Independent of other buffs that I really have no idea whether they are due or not, a little added speed doesn't seem like it would hurt WOL balance too much. Are they so slow to be heavy incentive to spread creep?
|
On December 03 2012 21:08 ToKoreaWithLove wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2012 20:22 aebriol wrote:
Hey, lower the range of vikings or get higher range on corruptors so that an engagement can be forced without having to run into marines or thor range, and it is all good.
But the reason for using fungal is because otherwise it is impossible to force an engagement with the vikings - they can kite you into thor, marine (protected by tanks), turret range too easily without taking damage. I'm pretty sure every T/P in the world would agree to 20 range corruptors in exchange for all air being immune to fungal
As a protoss player, agree to this. I can kill anything if I can move my units.
|
Northern Ireland27199 Posts
On December 03 2012 20:30 Evangelist wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2012 16:47 Wombat_NI wrote:On December 03 2012 16:25 the_business_og wrote:
tbh its just (fucking) lazy on blizzards part, for the last maybe 4 months-6 moths? they have been saying they are waiting for the meta game to change and adapt to infestors, and when they finally can no longer deny the clamor for balance change, they come out with minimal changes which do not only not fix inherent game design problems of the infestor, but also they give changes that serve nothing more than to band aid the problem till HOTS. the problem is the wound is still bleeding,HSM is a good change, but the egg chance literally changes nothing. they make claims like global statistics are balanced but they show us no proof, they expect us to take their word for it Let me see the statistics and link a source... its common procedure.
As i see it, they are three major problems with the WOL:
1. Infestor is too powerful, and all-purpose unit
2. Late Game PvZ is a based on one or two key spells in an engagement, made worse by a well timed Neural Parasite which gives zerg ability to hold both keys to win
3. Siege Tanks don't control space well enough, and thus Late game T suffers
Not only is this lazy of blizzard, worse, its greedy. They know people LOVE sc2, and will spring for HOTS regardless of badly they fucked up the game design of WOL. They've left it for dead and are focusing their attention on HOTS, but its so wrong and fucked up to dedicated WOL players. Blizzard shouldnt be able to fuck up so badly and then make shit tons of money of the expansion... you cant have you cake and eat it too. I don't believe it's laziness, I think it's a lack of creative and lateral thinking on Blizzard's part. Consider the problem I mentioned is actually a problem, like Blizzard can't really understand certain problems in terms of, but they know people hate certain things because they hear a lot of it about the place. All Blizzard would have to do is hire a couple of people to do community research as a full time job, literally all they're paid to do. Their task is not to find out what people's problems are with the game, in a 'Z OP' way, but to find interesting/constructive posts regarding stuff Blizzard hadn't considered. Their sole role: Find things that Blizz hadn't previously considered in their thinking, no matter the source. Relay/discuss this issue directly to the design team so the design team can at least try to implement certain thingsYou could apply this central idea to unit creation as well. Blizzard may not necessarily create a unit based on a post here, but they might think 'oh that's cool, we could work that into something'. It's a shame I can't find the post, but I remember someone's idea for like a kind of 'mech ball' that was beautiful conceptually. It kind of seemed like it 'fit' mech in terms of base design/ideas, regardless of the stats the OP had arbitrarily given it. By the way, anybody who can think of the unit I mean, PLEASE PM me, I tried for a good hour to find the thread the other day, but couldn't remember the title. Now, let's say they find one of say, my posts and relay this to the design team. They'll maybe think my ideas/solutions are terrible, but say, that the critique I made had validity and was something they hadn't thought about. I mean, they're not idiots, they just can't be aware of everything at once. It's probably why they always say they want to encourage multitasking/stop deathballs etc, but often get it wrong in implementation. They get that there's a problem, but they don't look at certain little things that kind of explain WHY we dislike that kind of play? It's quite hard to fix something, if you don't know the rationales that underpin peoples objections. This is a better way to approach problem solving in pretty much every respect. I believe say, the initial small investment in a few members of staff to really, REALLY scour the depths of forums and do this, would pay off many times over. Consider Blizzard spent a ton of money on WCS, which I loved, but in terms of the return in sales etc that they'll get from say, investing in that over making HoTS amazing? Well the latter will probably pay off more on an investment/return level. The community is being completely unreasonable about this. Yes, the infestor is broken - as a terran I hate the unit and want to see it nerfed so I can feel like I'm competing with zerg on a relatively even level. However half of these "solutions" don't actually do anything. Retuning fungal to a slow doesn't change very much except to make repeat fungals harder to pull off and right now, repeat fungals are not the problem with the unit. Changing fungal to a slow does nothing to stop the flood of infested terrans which utterly break PvZ nor does it do anything to stop the fact that fungal makes it virtually impossible to break through late game Zerg compositions. You're all saying "let us micro out of it". I'm sorry, what? If you hit a marine with a 50% slow, they move around 0.1 speed slower than a battlecruiser. When was the last time you saw complicated splits out of a friggin battlecruiser? There is no micro to be had in that situation. If psi storm had a slow attached to it, you could wipe a kiting terran army out with three of them because they'd never actually get out of the damn thing. All you are doing is altering how the zerg uses the infestor to kill you. The late game composition we are talking about literally shits on tanks and it is basically impossible to pressure them with micro. This is not something that can be solved by "microing more". It has to be solved with the mechanics of the infestor. There are two main problems with the infestor that need to be solved. 1. Fungal growth is far more powerful than its opportunity cost should allow it to be. It is a long ranged, instant, damage over time spell that hits both ground and air and locks down both. Removing the snare won't allow people to deal with fungal. It'll just make zergs slightly more aggressive with their infestors and this is not hard to do lategame. 2. Infested terrans scale far too effectively in large numbers. How many times have you heard the term "trading energy for minerals" in a game? That's fine but infested terrans are essentially allowing a zerg to add 30 supply to their army for free. The first is easily solvable with the solution Blizzard themselves mooted - give fungal a projectile that takes around a second to get there. This allows ravens to deal with infestors. It also allows stalkers to blink out of the way of a mass fungal. That's all the counters you really need. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with an army getting fungaled - it means you fucked up. It just needs a solid counter and a way to punished the opportunity cost for someone who is absolutely relying on fungal growth. Why is this preferable to a slow? - opens up new tactics such as raven/ghost advances. Any balance change should work within the present balance to find new ways to counter things. - allows for genuine pre-engagement micro - allows fungal growth to stay as a punishing means to deal with large clumped up armies which, given zerg have next to no splash, is something they sorely need The second is solvable by numbers. Reduce the health of the infested terran to 30, reduce the health of their egg to 60. Make it so that if an opponent has detection (see above) and enough tanks/colossi and a few storms, they can't just be overwhelmed by infested terrans. These two changes or something similar will do an awful lot to blunt the effect of late game BL infestor. Oh, one more thing. This problem is entirely community caused and community driven. They implemented the buff to the infestor as a result of community whining and pro whining about how weak and useless the infestor was and the zerg race in general was. You made your own bed, people - don't blame Blizzard for listening to your whining once and then not listening to it a second time.
Again, your post is great but you're agreeing with me. I tend to explain myself in analogies, so maybe I'm picking the wrong ones
Imagine Blizzard is a child, and you're their parent. Almost every child at some point raises the question 'If poor people don't have enough money, why don't we just print more money?' They are not wrong to think this. It's entirely logical to think this based on a young child's understanding of the world. They would, if hypothetically in a position of authority, pursue this as a solution to the issue of poverty.
When they're old enough to cognitively understand the concept of inflation at a base level, they'll understand WHY their solution is wrong, or wouldn't work.
I'm saying that the problem (Zerg 'imbalance') is understood by the community, or at least discussed tonally at the same kind of 'level' as the child before the variable of inflation introduced helps them understand the issue in a more nuanced way. Blizzard's design decisions are reflecting what they perceive the desires of the community to be, based on the feedback they're getting. The people who talk about the variables that need to be considered, like 'inflation' may be right or wrong about their potential solutions, but they're right in HOW they acknowledge that these variables have to be considered.
My idea isn't to force my own solutions on Blizzard. I believe that they do, or at least claim to attempt to address the concerns of the community. It's why they are seeking the feedback of the pros, for example. They are not against this conceptually, so they aren't .
However, they aren't getting the kind of feedback, at least in regards to volume, that they need to address the root causes of some people's frustration with the game. They're able to address the symptoms, but not the condition because it's hard to diagnose, due to a lack of information.
My idea is entirely about finding a way around this problem by thinking of a method to enable this to happen, you CAN do this by thinking laterally. There are good/better ideas lurking in Team Liquid, than some of the ideas I hear talked about by pro players publicly. Now, I haven't ever seen the Pro Corner of the HoTS site, so that's conjecture, it may be amazing in terms of the discussion for all I know.
Blizzard need to address the above issues I outlined to maximise the game's potential because of the symbiotic relationship they have with the community. They rely on us for revenue, we rely on them for the fun and enjoyment of Starcraft. They have a reason beyond altruism to do this!
Hence, the example I used, while maybe not the 'best' solution, would explain a potential way of thinking of the issue to stir debate. The issue of Blizzard not comprehending certain parts of why people find aspects of the game frustrating, and thus messing up certain design decisions is based not on incompetence, but on incomplete information.
This isn't elitism at all either. Indeed I used a less developed rationale to argue against certain changes that were made with the aim of keeping casual players interested in the game. I felt in that instance, that the changes that were being made (at least in regards to the casual guys I play with), that weren't actually what annoyed the guys I know about Starcraft.
|
On December 03 2012 20:24 dukem wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2012 20:09 phodacbiet wrote:
Kinda like how sometimes people accidentally right click and lose all their mutas to thors. Yes, it was the right clicker's fault but its the exact same thing, "you messed up, now pay the iron price" Thors cant exactly burrow and then unburrow anywhere though.
No, but the thor's range is one less than muta's sight radius. Considering the human reflexes, dodging a thor shot as you see the thor is not possible.
|
On December 03 2012 21:08 ToKoreaWithLove wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2012 20:22 aebriol wrote:
Hey, lower the range of vikings or get higher range on corruptors so that an engagement can be forced without having to run into marines or thor range, and it is all good.
But the reason for using fungal is because otherwise it is impossible to force an engagement with the vikings - they can kite you into thor, marine (protected by tanks), turret range too easily without taking damage. I'm pretty sure every T/P in the world would agree to 20 range corruptors in exchange for all air being immune to fungal
20 range corrupters?
I would rather let 'em fungal air lol. Can't kite 20 range corruptors!
|
Why can't blizz balance the game so that every end-game army is equal, like in BW. TvP is a race against time for terran, as is PvZ and TvZ for the zerg opponents...
|
On December 03 2012 21:00 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2012 19:04 dukem wrote:Pretty bad "split", but got catched off guard really hard. This shouldn't be allowed to happen nonetheless. You know, we don't necessarily need fungal to be a slow to prevent this from happening. Just make fungal not allow units to move (instead of snaring). It would still allow air units to spread out, like they naturally do when stopped.
I actually really like this idea
|
Problem with that idea is that you get vikings or whatever that would be shooting whilst moving which is illegal!
unless it's a phoenix of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
