| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
nightshade2109
South Africa5 Posts
I've had games where Terran rushes to fusion core and gets the range upgrade if you haven't opened stargate you are as good as dead. Two base all-ins with adepts are a little overpowered vs zerg the shade ability cool-down should be increased slightly. | ||
Liquid`Snute
Norway839 Posts
4 larva won't save you from the most common loss reasons, be it defense failure, failing to take a 3rd/4th safely, build failure, scouting failure, losing to a counter-drop or a liberator when attempting a moveout, etc. I think that if there are issues with the match-up, one should be asking for changes in other places where it will actually make a difference, not in 3-4 larva. Part 1) Zerg cannot move out 90% of the time because of how strong medivacs are and tankivac/liberator defense. So if you want mobility to have increased rights to leave your base, you need to open up mutalisk as an option again, or SOMETHING that prevents the Terran from counter-dropping you. I think a lot of players are still playing this match-up completely wrong: Zerg is by design an extremely turtly race until you reach hive tech. Zerg aggression does underperform on average given sufficient Terran skill. A lot of the losses in the current, grim, modern TvZ statistics are a result of zergs having a too aggressive approach. But primarily, defense failure seems to be the main culprit. Which takes us to the next part: + Show Spoiler [more on MLB] + 4 larva is nice for MLB but it still doesn't change the fact that MLB sucks on average. Liberator strength vs mutas, widow mine splash, tankivac strength, terran mobility, stuff like that. MLB just isn't cost effective anymore compared to what it used to be because of the changes in LOTV. Baneling speed kicks in late if you're also playing quick 2 chamber (which is a necessity), the spire is expensive, tankivacs are a thing now and Liberators are STRONG. The problem is not 4 larva or having to pay 300 for a macro hatch, it's because the game and compositions changed. Having more larva won't help much because you still have to pay for your units, and if your units kinda suck and get eaten alive by liberators/tankivacs/mines then it hardly matters how they were made. MLB -can- work, but on average in most maps, roach ravager infestor is the clear smart choice. So until they change something, just play proper defense and avoid MLB, you will have enough larva to both develop your build and make units afterwards. If you lose a game to Terran before the 13 minute mark, it's because of defense failure at one stage or another, or because your unit composition wasn't good. Part 2) Defense failure/harass. Terran has a lot of very strong tools to interrupt Zerg's mining with, such as liberators, tankivacs, mine-marine drops, and all the funky combinations. These attacks are very map dependent and vary in strength, it is difficult to pinpoint one obvious nerf-worthy favorite. 3rax reaper dominates some maps, double reactored drops others, there's liberators with range upgrade on dusk towers, the list goes on and on. It's a complex issue with no easy fix in my opinion. Simply nerfing one unit might be a help in terms of stabilizing global winrates towards 50/50, but it might not be appropriate long-term design that will lead to enjoyable gameplay regardless of map. In terms of flat out increasing Zerg's win%, should that be a true identified problem, the primary tool to do so will be to increase Zerg defense strength. Two ways to do so. Buff parts of Zerg or nerf parts of Terran. Defense failure is the primary cause of most losses, and it has very little to do with 3 or 4 larva - this one is about units imo. It's very easy for designers to shift Zerg towards a better win% by, say, buffing the queen range by 1. but the next right move here is a tough one, it's a design choice that needs a lot of consideration. | ||
|
Scarlett`
China2370 Posts
On June 21 2016 19:04 Liquid`Snute wrote: 4 larva won't save Zerg. The opening build orders I use ZvT never demand 4 larva, you take your 3rd when the first inject completes and the first injects in ZvT take you to nearly full mineral saturation and from there you should be developing queen count, technology, and general defense, even then there's still more room for drones. idk if every zerg on the planet is doing something wrong but with 3 larva i never have issues with larva in ZvT and my macro becomes really solid. Always getting the drones out fast. There are enough larva for well designed builds. 4 larva won't save you from the most common loss reasons, be it defense failure, failing to take a 3rd/4th safely, build failure, scouting failure, losing to a counter-drop or a liberator when attempting a moveout, etc. I think that if there are issues with the match-up, one should be asking for changes in other places where it will actually make a difference, not in 3-4 larva. Part 1) Zerg cannot move out 90% of the time because of how strong medivacs are and tankivac/liberator defense. So if you want mobility to have increased rights to leave your base, you need to open up mutalisk as an option again, or SOMETHING that prevents the Terran from counter-dropping you. I think a lot of players are still playing this match-up completely wrong: Zerg is by design an extremely turtly race until you reach hive tech. Zerg aggression does underperform on average given sufficient Terran skill. A lot of the losses in the current, grim, modern TvZ statistics are a result of zergs having a too aggressive approach. But primarily, defense failure seems to be the main culprit. Which takes us to the next part: + Show Spoiler [more on MLB] + 4 larva is nice for MLB but it still doesn't change the fact that MLB sucks on average. Liberator strength vs mutas, widow mine splash, tankivac strength, terran mobility, stuff like that. MLB just isn't cost effective anymore compared to what it used to be because of the changes in LOTV. Baneling speed kicks in late if you're also playing quick 2 chamber (which is a necessity), the spire is expensive, tankivacs are a thing now and Liberators are STRONG. The problem is not 4 larva or having to pay 300 for a macro hatch, it's because the game and compositions changed. Having more larva won't help much because you still have to pay for your units, and if your units kinda suck and get eaten alive by liberators/tankivacs/mines then it hardly matters how they were made. MLB -can- work, but on average in most maps, roach ravager infestor is the clear smart choice. So until they change something, just play proper defense and avoid MLB, you will have enough larva to both develop your build and make units afterwards. If you lose a game to Terran before the 13 minute mark, it's because of defense failure at one stage or another, or because your unit composition wasn't good. Part 2) Defense failure/harass. Terran has a lot of very strong tools to interrupt Zerg's mining with, such as liberators, tankivacs, mine-marine drops, and all the funky combinations. These attacks are very map dependent and vary in strength, it is difficult to pinpoint one obvious nerf-worthy favorite. 3rax reaper dominates some maps, double reactored drops others, there's liberators with range upgrade on dusk towers, the list goes on and on. It's a complex issue with no easy fix in my opinion. Simply nerfing one unit might be a help in terms of stabilizing global winrates towards 50/50, but it might not be appropriate long-term design that will lead to enjoyable gameplay regardless of map. In terms of flat out increasing Zerg's win%, should that be a true identified problem, the primary tool to do so will be to increase Zerg defense strength. Two ways to do so. Buff parts of Zerg or nerf parts of Terran. Defense failure is the primary cause of most losses, and it has very little to do with 3 or 4 larva - this one is about units imo. It's very easy for designers to shift Zerg towards a better win% by, say, buffing the queen range by 1. but the next right move here is a tough one, it's a design choice that needs a lot of consideration. it could open more options though - yes right now with a good build you won't be limited by lack of larvae; but for example cutting overlord speed would give you 200 more resource for drones; or playing a more ling heavy earlygame without spending 200 on rw. 2 base tech builds would be more viable etc. the current builds only line up with larvae because theyre based around it. another example is later 3rd zvp (rather than cutting 2nd queen til 28 supply) would be better ; 3rd before overlord is almost autolose to proxy 3gate on some maps so would be nice if we didnt have to do it | ||
|
Liquid`Snute
Norway839 Posts
 idk if blizz intended for zerg to always play with a 3rd hatchery in zvt, right now it seems to be the case. zvp is a bit of a special case, i've managed to do somewhat okay there using zvt-esque builds there too. i rarely run into trouble with larva because i usually develop tech or add queens anyway. i have no clue if it would be beneficial to the game or not if 4 larva would be re-introduced, for the sake of build variety it might be, but right now i'd take terran/adept nerfs any day over a flat 4larva buff as a solution, if i had to choose. idk | ||
|
Penev
28424 Posts
4 larva is nice for MLB but it still doesn't change the fact that MLB sucks on average. Liberator strength vs mutas, widow mine splash, tankivac strength, terran mobility, stuff like that. MLB just isn't cost effective anymore compared to what it used to be because of the changes in LOTV. Baneling speed kicks in late if you're also playing quick 2 chamber (which is a necessity), the spire is expensive, tankivacs are a thing now and Liberators are STRONG. The problem is not 4 larva or having to pay 300 for a macro hatch, it's because the game and compositions changed. Having more larva won't help much because you still have to pay for your units, and if your units kinda suck and get eaten alive by liberators/tankivacs/mines then it hardly matters how they were made. MLB -can- work, but on average in most maps, roach ravager infestor is the clear smart choice. So until they change something, just play proper defense and avoid MLB, you will have enough larva to both develop your build and make units afterwards. If you lose a game to Terran before the 13 minute mark, it's because of defense failure at one stage or another, or because your unit composition wasn't good. I really miss MLB.. What would you suggest to buff/ nerf to make it viable without affecting other match ups? Big surprise (read my sig): I think liberator has done more bad than good to this game | ||
|
JackONeill
861 Posts
| ||
|
Penev
28424 Posts
On June 21 2016 21:58 JackONeill wrote: Simply toning down terran harass strength mid game, and decreasing zerg's strength late game would even out the pace of games How exactly tho? Keep in mind there's Toss to consider as well | ||
|
Vanadiel
France961 Posts
| ||
|
nachtkap
Germany195 Posts
-significantly (ling speed?) increase spore speed on creep -add cooldown based pdd ability(5-6 range) to spore but disable spore attack afterward. -massively nerf liberator air dmg and/or AOE until you upgrade ship weapons. -give the ravager a instant x% snare shot vs air (that precedes the normal shot) so the liberator dies for sure if it stays -longer then 0.x seconds after bile is cast. -give queen an ability to get +1 range for every X energy spent. | ||
|
hiroshOne
Poland424 Posts
On June 21 2016 19:04 Liquid`Snute wrote: 4 larva won't save Zerg. The opening build orders I use ZvT never demand 4 larva, you take your 3rd when the first inject completes and the first injects in ZvT take you to nearly full mineral saturation and from there you should be developing queen count, technology, and general defense, even then there's still more room for drones. idk if every zerg on the planet is doing something wrong but with 3 larva i never have issues with larva in ZvT and my macro becomes really solid. Always getting the drones out fast. There are enough larva for well designed builds. 4 larva won't save you from the most common loss reasons, be it defense failure, failing to take a 3rd/4th safely, build failure, scouting failure, losing to a counter-drop or a liberator when attempting a moveout, etc. I think that if there are issues with the match-up, one should be asking for changes in other places where it will actually make a difference, not in 3-4 larva. Part 1) Zerg cannot move out 90% of the time because of how strong medivacs are and tankivac/liberator defense. So if you want mobility to have increased rights to leave your base, you need to open up mutalisk as an option again, or SOMETHING that prevents the Terran from counter-dropping you. I think a lot of players are still playing this match-up completely wrong: Zerg is by design an extremely turtly race until you reach hive tech. Zerg aggression does underperform on average given sufficient Terran skill. A lot of the losses in the current, grim, modern TvZ statistics are a result of zergs having a too aggressive approach. But primarily, defense failure seems to be the main culprit. Which takes us to the next part: + Show Spoiler [more on MLB] + 4 larva is nice for MLB but it still doesn't change the fact that MLB sucks on average. Liberator strength vs mutas, widow mine splash, tankivac strength, terran mobility, stuff like that. MLB just isn't cost effective anymore compared to what it used to be because of the changes in LOTV. Baneling speed kicks in late if you're also playing quick 2 chamber (which is a necessity), the spire is expensive, tankivacs are a thing now and Liberators are STRONG. The problem is not 4 larva or having to pay 300 for a macro hatch, it's because the game and compositions changed. Having more larva won't help much because you still have to pay for your units, and if your units kinda suck and get eaten alive by liberators/tankivacs/mines then it hardly matters how they were made. MLB -can- work, but on average in most maps, roach ravager infestor is the clear smart choice. So until they change something, just play proper defense and avoid MLB, you will have enough larva to both develop your build and make units afterwards. If you lose a game to Terran before the 13 minute mark, it's because of defense failure at one stage or another, or because your unit composition wasn't good. Part 2) Defense failure/harass. Terran has a lot of very strong tools to interrupt Zerg's mining with, such as liberators, tankivacs, mine-marine drops, and all the funky combinations. These attacks are very map dependent and vary in strength, it is difficult to pinpoint one obvious nerf-worthy favorite. 3rax reaper dominates some maps, double reactored drops others, there's liberators with range upgrade on dusk towers, the list goes on and on. It's a complex issue with no easy fix in my opinion. Simply nerfing one unit might be a help in terms of stabilizing global winrates towards 50/50, but it might not be appropriate long-term design that will lead to enjoyable gameplay regardless of map. In terms of flat out increasing Zerg's win%, should that be a true identified problem, the primary tool to do so will be to increase Zerg defense strength. Two ways to do so. Buff parts of Zerg or nerf parts of Terran. Defense failure is the primary cause of most losses, and it has very little to do with 3 or 4 larva - this one is about units imo. It's very easy for designers to shift Zerg towards a better win% by, say, buffing the queen range by 1. but the next right move here is a tough one, it's a design choice that needs a lot of consideration. U're much better player than me obviously and i respect your point of viww. It's not only about midgame unit production though.But i feel that u are missing the point how 3 larva inject slows Zerg timings where in the same time slightly nerfed mules combined with LOTV economy keep Terran on much earlier timings with their harrass and bio pushes- look at popular in Korea 2 medivack marines timing. It's instant gg for Zerg as they often cut any unit production to keep their economy going. U say about turtle and faster tech in modern Zerg play, but i still think that it's not how Zerg suppose to look like. And don't take me wrong but i think I often see You on tournaments dying to Terran multi drops or pushes when u try to play as you mentioned.Shit happens when u dont have units to defend because u spend ypir limited larva on drones and tech. I really think Nerchio feels the only player i know who can pull this off in ZvT. And ofc Muta play and LBM is really not possible to work in top level play. And if u dont go muta Terran will abuse drops and choke u sooner or later. Byun showed hiw it works in ZvT more than one time. | ||
|
MaxTa
61 Posts
1- Liberator: They are still damn good ! Remove lib range upgrade or lower their radius/range because it is OP on specific map and can lead to BO win if executed well, also tweak their move speed/accel/siege time just like Snute said... Other than that, looking into increasing their supply to 4 instead or even removing reactor and making them tech lab could be looked at as another option...Of course I would not apply all those changes at the same time but pick the best one of them, which need some testing obviously... 2- Medivacs: They were the best hots unit Terran had and still pretty much are one of their best... The problem I see is that they almost always have an absurd amount of energy that seems to last forever so with like 4 of them T has enough and can switch to mass liberators instead... So why not make their boost cost 25 energy, this would make Terran playing heavy drop play style think way more about what they are doing and also will nerf the healing of bio so stimpack cannot be blindly over abused. Also tweaking their accel/boost speed like Snute proposed is an interesting idea... Then IF those 2 nerfs are applied, we could look into things like removing that 8 armor Ultras, removing tankivacs and boosting siege tanks instead, moving ravager to Lair tech, etc... | ||
|
ecnahc
United States395 Posts
| ||
|
Elentos
55456 Posts
On June 22 2016 05:09 ecnahc wrote: For the short term putting liberators behind a tech lab and armory and putting medic boost on a 100 100 60s tech would give Zerg and Protoss plenty of breathing room. Because if there's anything Protoss needs, it's more breathing room against Terran. Honestly I think people underestimate the effect of moving liberators to tech labs, especially against Protoss. The unit is key in TvP and you need to have a good production rate, but you also have to balance it with medivacs, especially early on (and if the Protoss is aggressive). And you need to be able to fluently switch to making vikings when tempests are out. All of that gets stifled by moving liberators to tech labs. | ||
|
Zulu23
Germany132 Posts
Because if there's anything Protoss needs, it's more breathing room against Terran. Honestly I think people underestimate the effect of moving liberators to tech labs. Especially against Protoss. Frankly speaking, there is no issue in TvP with liberators... The whole discussion is about ZvT and Liberators. As a Terran player I even would be fine with TL requrement for Liberators, but it needs a compensation then. Something that helps mech becoming more viable. I think of a banshee buff or maybe a buff on hellbats or mines. we could think about removing cloak or speed reseach for banshees, that makes TL Starport play more flexible you can then build libs or banshees and get the upgrades at the same time off one starport. A straight damage buff on hellbats (not vs. light) could help much to mech because it makes hellbats more sustainable vs. RR after a Hellion opnening, or you remove friendly fire from mines making them them more reliable and less of a surprize, or reduce at least the visibility while activated. I recognized also that the medivac which is the core unit on Bio comes more and more into question. Zerg can shut down drop play with few well positioned corruptors. It is always too risky to drop with corruptors on the map. | ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24192 Posts
1) remove liberator range and AA splash to open up mutas again 2) buff queens AA range by 1 to help Z dealing with all kinds of early game harass (libs, tankivacs, phoenix, oracles, prisms) 3) heavily nerf adept cooldown so that bad adept micro can actually be punished | ||
|
iamcaustic
Canada1509 Posts
On June 18 2016 03:16 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: These selections would leave us with one map slot, and without any rush maps being represented. Out of the maps that favor rush, we felt Dasan Station is very interesting because it’s a new map as well as a rush map. What...? Can't wait to hear the player comments about it being on the ladder. | ||
|
LSN
Germany696 Posts
| ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24192 Posts
On June 22 2016 06:56 LSN wrote: Liberator to tech lab is not an option, if at all then armory. yeah definitely not. TvP would not even be playable in that state. | ||
|
Zulu23
Germany132 Posts
yeah definitely not. TvP would not even be playable in that state. Why? | ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24192 Posts
you need a fine balance between medivacs and libs production in TvP and with tech labs starports required you would never be able to reach the lib counts you need to deal with P armies | ||
| ||
|
|
WardiTV Invitational
BSL: ProLeague
TerrOr vs Dandy
XuanXuan vs Dark
Korean StarCraft League
Acropolis
SOOP StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
SOOP
herO vs Cure
SC Evo Complete
PassionCraft
BSL: ProLeague
Sziky vs Dienmax
Jimin vs RaNgeD
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
