While we agree that Infestors are being used too abundantly in many games, we are aiming to address this concern carefully to ensure that we don’t completely discourage the use of Infestors.
Generally speaking, we want to slightly reduce Fungal Growth in all three matchups, and we feel reducing the casting range would help us achieve this goal. Additionally, we anticipate that the reduction in health for Infested Terran eggs will be most noticeable in the PvZ matchup when Psi Storm is used, and feel that the Raven change helps Terran players in late game TvZ scenarios and has the potential to introduce new Terran late game strategies.
On December 4, after a brief maintenance period in each region, the following balance changes will take effect globally:
Terran Raven seeker missile upgrade removed.
Zerg Infested Terran eggs health down from 100 to 70
Fungal Growth range down from 9 to 8
Again, to be clear, these changes will take effect after a short maintenance in each region is complete, and neither a patch nor any other special action will be required to experience them in-game.
Our plan is to apply this balance update and monitor the effects of these changes. The extensive testing and quality of feedback we’ve received on the last two balance maps have allowed us to make this call, however, please keep in mind that our goal with this patch is not to make sudden changes which could have a major impact on play, but to nudge balance in the right direction. With Heart of the Swarm launching in March, we will have more time to address balance concerns further if necessary.
Thank you for helping us playtest and sharing your feedback on the last two balance maps.
I think this is a great patch overall. The health decrease to 70 will allow Protoss to much more easily deal with IT spam, and ITs will only tank 2 siege tank shots once +1 weapons are researched. Seeker missile upgrade being removed will allow for slightly more flexibility with early Raven usage as well.
On December 05 2012 03:15 Alryk wrote: Woah, this is interesting. I dunno if a 1 range reduction will do much, but I like the IT and raven seeker missile changes.
The range reduction should be pretty noticeable I think. Infestors will be much more exposed to tank fire now trying to pull off fungals.
On December 05 2012 03:15 Alryk wrote: Woah, this is interesting. I dunno if a 1 range reduction will do much, but I like the IT and raven seeker missile changes.
The range reduction should be pretty noticeable I think. Infestors will be much more exposed to tank fire now trying to pull off fungals.
True. I play protoss though hehe
Regardless of how effective I think it is though, it's definitely good for them to start minor, instead of breaking the matchup with a -3 range nerf.
Eggs 70 HP (did they forget that eggs regen or something? instead of 80?)
YES! now you can EMP Infestors (even though it's only 0.5 range extra after the radius is included, and EMP isn't instant...) easier
NO SEEKER MISSILE UPGRADE! FUCK YES! This will be awesome for mech openers, even 1 seeker missile to take out 1-2 Immortal shields can help A LOT. Also awesome for air play!
Edit: SORRY, ghosts have 1.5 range (after radius) advantage now for EMP! Instead of the 0.5 earlier! NICE
There we go! Seems like the right direction to nudge things back to 50/50 to finish off WoL. David Kim always brings the noise. Hopefully they continue on the right track for HotS.
Snipe is gonna be SO good vs Infestors now. It will have a 2 range lead on them to snipe before fungal. So having 4-6 ghost will be a lot more forgiving on sniping them. Plus use the left over ghost to launch nukes . However I really think the root effect needs to be gone I mean cmon... this is a big start showing there willing to patch at least.
1 less range = easier to snipe with colossus while they are doing the fungal and run fungal and run thing. Now when the guy goes in with infestors he probably wont escape with them unless he wins fight easily. I almost want to start playing sc2 again.... Maybe one more big change for pvz matchup will get me playing.
I feel like fungals range change is going to be much more relevant in TvZ. Vikings now out range fungal, and though it's only by 1, it at least makes that vikings vs fungal dance potentially easier for Ts.
1 range reduction is great. HT and ghost can feedback/EMP infestor easier without having way too much risk of being caught by fungal. 8 range is still dangerous enough to force careful unit control from both side
and IT egg 70 hp, 1 storm and gone. great for protoss player. and 2 tank shot after upgrade (someone mentioned earlier) will help T and P deal with mass spam much easier
Any change that weakens fungal is a good change so I am happy. Now we can finally feedback without feeling like we are going to be sacrificing that unit no matter what in order to land said feedback.
Also, the 70 health thing actually makes sense. 80 health was pointless, it still required 2 storms because of regeneration.
Would have preferred a more interesting change to infestors instead of a numbers tweak, but overall looks good. Hopefully we see some ravens in proleague.
well, even though i'm zerg i'd appreciate a big patch much more than these small changes. Only because every game i watch is the same and these changes won't help much for that.
This is good news! While the infestor nerf might seem very small, remember that such small changes tend to have a larger impact in practice than on paper (plus Z might seem more OP than they actually are). I've faith that this will make the situation more bearable!
On December 05 2012 03:34 Noocta wrote: I don't really understand why 70 health instead of 50 ( same of the health of infested terrans themselves ) But it's okay.
The range reduction on fungal might be huge. Time will tell
70 health means that they are beefier than normal infested terrans but they still die to one storm.
On December 05 2012 03:35 Raggamuffinoo wrote: Soooo, this is in effect right now? Right as the IEM EU Quals are on? I'm gonna tune in to see if any zerg players land as many fungals ^.^
Might actually ladder on WoL :D
No, this will be added tonight, probably end of the week for korea from experience.
On December 05 2012 03:34 Noocta wrote: I don't really understand why 70 health instead of 50 ( same of the health of infested terrans themselves ) But it's okay.
The range reduction on fungal might be huge. Time will tell
On December 05 2012 03:15 Alryk wrote: Woah, this is interesting. I dunno if a 1 range reduction will do much, but I like the IT and raven seeker missile changes.
Now I feel like mutas are going to be even more useless... Terrans complained that if they looked away from their army for a second, they'd be fully fungaled. Now if I look away from my muta flock for a second, they'll be dead.
I don't think this is enough but we'll see. I guess you'll need a ~2 colossus/stalker/mass HT/archon army as protoss to beat BL/infestor. Though some things are still not addressed: 1) walking spines counting as buildings, 2) Neural parasite on motherships, 3) upgrades on free units.
This seems like a pretty good solution. Wish we had more games coming up to see it in action. There's a lot of TvZ coming up in NASL, but only HerO left for Protoss, so that'll be an okay opportunity to see the effects of this patch. So far so good.
On December 05 2012 03:15 Alryk wrote: Woah, this is interesting. I dunno if a 1 range reduction will do much, but I like the IT and raven seeker missile changes.
Now I feel like mutas are going to be even more useless... Terrans complained that if they looked away from their army for a second, they'd be fully fungaled. Now if I look away from my muta flock for a second, they'll be dead.
God forbid you split them up a bit before attacking.
If your mutas are just idle then they won't be that stacked up anyway.
Waaay easier to split up mutas and pick off a Raven than pray the mutas stack up and land a HSM. Good Zergs already do that against Infestors in ZvZ anyways.
getting a fast armory with +1 vehicle attack is going to be so important for terrans now, since you'll be able to 2-shot infestor eggs with siege tanks.
this wouldn't be possible if infestor eggs had 80 hp, it would be essentially the same as 100 for TvZ
On December 05 2012 03:15 Alryk wrote: Woah, this is interesting. I dunno if a 1 range reduction will do much, but I like the IT and raven seeker missile changes.
Now I feel like mutas are going to be even more useless... Terrans complained that if they looked away from their army for a second, they'd be fully fungaled. Now if I look away from my muta flock for a second, they'll be dead.
God forbid you split them up a bit before attacking.
If your mutas are just idle then they won't be that stacked up anyway.
Waaay easier to split up mutas and pick off a Raven than pray the mutas stack up and land a HSM. Good Zergs already do that against Infestors in ZvZ anyways.
Plus, when was the last time we saw a terran build a raven against mutas? That's just theorycrafting. I mean it's happened, but not that often. The raven is definitely underused, a buff is nice.
On December 05 2012 03:42 jalstar wrote: getting a fast armory with +1 vehicle attack is going to be so important for terrans now, since you'll be able to 2-shot infestor eggs with siege tanks.
this wouldn't be possible if infestor eggs had 80 hp, it would be essentially the same as 100 for TvZ
I wouldn't say it would be any less important than it is now, but it's a nice change.
On December 05 2012 03:15 Alryk wrote: Woah, this is interesting. I dunno if a 1 range reduction will do much, but I like the IT and raven seeker missile changes.
Now I feel like mutas are going to be even more useless... Terrans complained that if they looked away from their army for a second, they'd be fully fungaled. Now if I look away from my muta flock for a second, they'll be dead.
God forbid you split them up a bit before attacking.
If your mutas are just idle then they won't be that stacked up anyway.
Waaay easier to split up mutas and pick off a Raven than pray the mutas stack up and land a HSM. Good Zergs already do that against Infestors in ZvZ anyways.
Not to mention, a raven is still so expensive that if you get it early game, you might just be able to split your mutas and kill it because terran has less stuff, and one you start nearing a max with a muta/ling/bane force, there should be atleast 1 thor if the terran is doing it right.
- 1 range is huge in my opinion. At least for engagements, you have to get way closer to fungal and therefore you lose more infestors and cant just save them every time when they get focused. Also ghost and ht become way more viable. especially ghost can almost snipe/emp infestors before they get hit by fungal.
also you might be able to tech to raven on other maps than metropolis. Just sounds awesome
Seeker missile is one of the more telegraphed actions in the game, imo. You get a good second or more of seeing the raven position itself to fire and then you have seeker travel time on top of that.
Also, holy shit will zergs die to 3 base all ins from protoss now. Forcefield + colossi now outrange fungal which means that infestors are highly vulnerable to a 3 base push composition now.
On December 05 2012 03:15 Alryk wrote: Woah, this is interesting. I dunno if a 1 range reduction will do much, but I like the IT and raven seeker missile changes.
Now I feel like mutas are going to be even more useless... Terrans complained that if they looked away from their army for a second, they'd be fully fungaled. Now if I look away from my muta flock for a second, they'll be dead.
With the speed of ravens and the seeker missile range I think it will take more than 1 second to lose all your muta. It's an interesting point though.
this is good news. Even as a P player i do like the careful approach of Blizzard here, not overly nerfing the infestor in order to keep the small edge of good game balance in mind. Next time pls remove the FF and redesign protoss ( i still have hopes, though they are a bit surreal)
This is great. Here's what I think the important changes are.
Psi Storm: One psi storm to kill. ITs will need to be spread, reducing damage per area. Feedback: You almost can't fungal an HT that's going to feedback you. Huge. Fungal Radius is 2, so you need to hit the HT right at the bare edge of the Fungal at full range in order to avoid the Feedback. Skill based, nice. Tanks: +1 upgrade means 2 shots to kill IT eggs. Spam'n'eggs on top of Tanks decently nerfed. Lowered Fungal range means Tanks will have a much easier time targeting Infestors. Colossus: You'll probably get killed trying to Fungal them without support. Or you can only fungal 1 colossus without getting hit, you can't reach farther back. Ghosts: Easier to snipe and EMP without getting fungaled. Vikings: They don't auto-die to Infestor Broodlord. Deathballs: Much harder to just lay Fungal right on top of deathballs, You'll see people using Fungal on the leading edge of Thor, Colossus, Brood Lord, unsieged Tank armies. Raven: This is small, but I think you can no longer Chain Fungal Ravens without potentially receiving damage from Auto Turrets with the Hi-sec upgrade. Drop range is 3, Turret range is 7. Auto Turrets are actually quite good against Infestors and Ravens take a long time to die from Fungal. Everything: It's just easier for everything to get in range before the Fungal happens. It's also easier for everything to kill IT eggs. I didn't even know they had 100 health! That's quite a lot.
Also, large groups of Infestors become harder to use. When they are all clumped up, the low energy infestors will more easily block the ones you've just commanded to Fungal something.
I think we'll see the Infestor become a support caster in moderate numbers again.
Interesting changes, I really struggle to see a reason for why they waited this long to at least test something. I'll certainly be playing a bit after finals. I like the egg nerf but I don't think it'll help all that much outside of a few niche engagements. Range reduction should help ghosts and vikings, seriously getting fungaled out of emp range just made your heart sink.
The extensive testing and quality of feedback we’ve received on the last two balance maps have allowed us to make this call
Umh.. i know, the incredibly usefull testing on 80hps egg that doesn't die from the storm, i can only guess how many datas blizz have collected about. And you know what, the only sensibile change it's not tested at all.. I know i know, politically correct is good, "power to the community, please help us, we want to hear your feedback bla bla" ...it's ok but please do it better.
Btw.. It's better than nothing. Still, Broodlings walls got more than 8 range and it's very hard to reach the range for Feedback\Emp. IT spam too can block the path.. I don't see the change we all want, i only see a candy for kids.
not as good as i wisehd... still good changes that point torward the right direction... that fungal range reduced was not even mentioned before.. good surprise. and the eggs at 70hp, one storm, insta gib!!! and im terran cheering for my protoss fellows to deal with BL INFESTORRRRRRRRRRRrr
good stuff, this will definitely make PvZ lategame a bit better since you can reliably storm the egg spam and fungal will be slightly less effective vs carrier/void ray compositions. Still wish they would make interceptors immune to fungal though.
Honestly I think it's going to be more than enough and it's far more than I expected them to do. After all small changes tend to have major effects over time. Colossi/HT pushes won't be able to be stopped so easily with infested terran spam so zerg players who mindlessly rush to BL tech behind spine forests every game will hopefully get punished while good zerg players will still be able to win with more aggressive dynamic play (as showcased by Life and Leenock).
I think this a huge but necessary change, well done !
But now colossus with range and 7gateimmortal push need to be change too. I want to see hydra too, i hope we will see more. Maybe nerf broodlord and buff hydra (or hydra +2 for each upgrade?) and all will be nice.
Sounds good, pro players probably will notice the changes. IT will probably be useless vs Protosses with storm.
However, i had hopes that the boring PvZ style is gonna get a change.... Gotta wait for HotS i guess. I'd imagine it stays like it currently is. All-ins will still be deadly as hell, just that the Protosses might often win the late game as well (not sure gotta wait about that one)
Definitely liking these changes, significant but not enough to throw the metagame. Definitely interested to see if ghost TvZ makes itself viable again.
On December 05 2012 03:53 Rhayader wrote: Sensible changes. Can't believe some zergs here are crying about it. You got off very easy on this deal, could have been much worse nerfs.
Not all that much Zerg whining. We all knew this day was coming eventually.
Why not just make seeker missle stronger? Taking off the upgrade is going to make it really fun to deal w/ a resurgence of raven based 1-1-1's as soon as terrans get smart.
On December 05 2012 03:53 Rhayader wrote: Sensible changes. Can't believe some zergs here are crying about it. You got off very easy on this deal, could have been much worse nerfs.
Not all that much Zerg whining. We all knew this day was coming eventually.
Nah, why would I wine? Infestors are boring to play with and watch, it's about time something is done. I'm excited to see if this has any effect on the metagame.
On December 05 2012 03:53 Rhayader wrote: Sensible changes. Can't believe some zergs here are crying about it. You got off very easy on this deal, could have been much worse nerfs.
Not all that much Zerg whining. We all knew this day was coming eventually.
Yet there are still zergs crying about this. They could had it much worse like templar's energy upgrade and emp getting nerfed.
Ravens still take forever to get energy for 1 seeker missile and the range is still less than that of fungal. I see this patch helping PvZ more than TvZ personally.
On December 05 2012 03:53 LgNKane wrote: maybe this will shut up all the balance whining though ravens in late game will be overpowered, just watch.
Raven in late game didn't change at all. Just the transition into it became easier.
You don't have to spend 150/150 now. That's literally the only change.
Well, to be honest there is also the time needed to search the upgrade, meaning it might (or not) allow interesting timing which might (again, or not ^^) be overpowered, but only time and tip top terran will tell us. And we should see if it's not a buff to 1/1/1 build (meaning Puma is gonna rules the world again :p )
On December 05 2012 04:07 willyallthewei wrote: Taking off the upgrade is going to make it really fun to deal w/ a resurgence of raven based 1-1-1's as soon as terrans get smart.
This just occurred to me as well. Ouch. Still think it was a good change though.
On December 05 2012 04:07 willyallthewei wrote: Why not just make seeker missle stronger? Taking off the upgrade is going to make it really fun to deal w/ a resurgence of raven based 1-1-1's as soon as terrans get smart.
WHY DOES EVERYONE THINK THIS IS A BIG CHANGE TO RAVENS?
This is blizzard saying hey terrans we know ravens might not be very good please try using them so we can have a better idea what to do with them in HotS
On December 05 2012 03:53 LgNKane wrote: maybe this will shut up all the balance whining though ravens in late game will be overpowered, just watch.
Raven in late game didn't change at all. Just the transition into it became easier.
You don't have to spend 150/150 now. That's literally the only change.
Well, to be honest there is also the time needed to search the upgrade, meaning it might (or not) allow interesting timing which might (again, or not ^^) be overpowered, but only time and tip top terran will tell us.
I don't think i've EVER seen a game where you wanted to use a Seeker missile, had the energy, but didn't had the upgrade finished.
On December 05 2012 03:53 LgNKane wrote: maybe this will shut up all the balance whining though ravens in late game will be overpowered, just watch.
Raven in late game didn't change at all. Just the transition into it became easier.
You don't have to spend 150/150 now. That's literally the only change.
Well, to be honest there is also the time needed to search the upgrade, meaning it might (or not) allow interesting timing which might (again, or not ^^) be overpowered, but only time and tip top terran will tell us.
I don't think i've EVER seen a game where you wanted to use a Seeker missile, had the energy, but didn't had the upgrade finished.
On December 05 2012 04:07 willyallthewei wrote: Why not just make seeker missle stronger? Taking off the upgrade is going to make it really fun to deal w/ a resurgence of raven based 1-1-1's as soon as terrans get smart.
#2
this raven buff has absolutely nothing to do with lategame. this is an early/midgame buff of the raven. could be useful now in both matchups.
On December 05 2012 04:09 Resistentialism wrote: Seeker missile in a 1/1/1 is a huge waste of gas and techlab starport time. Seeker is scary in MASS raven usage.
I hope you know what you're talking about, cause i don't wanna deal with that $@#$!.
I'm scared of the following situation: 4 cloaked banshees + cloak upgrade = 800 gas = 4 ravens.
So, what if terran player just made 4 ravens, seeker missile in the probe line as harass, then for the push spammed turrets and pdds?
this should give pro terrans more reaction time to split their forces, so it might have a big effect due to this alone. additionally, it means that tanks have a much better chance of killing infestors that come in range to cast fungals. and it means that siege tanks (with +1) can more easily clear hatching IT-fields.
toss will be able to storm away IT-fields and the reduced fungal range also means more infestor vulnerability to blink and colossi.
overall, i really like this patch. making fungal's rooting effect something else than a complete micro-killer would be even better, but this will do as well for now.
On December 05 2012 04:09 nottapro wrote: hellion banshee openings being replaced with hellion raven openings anyone? clean up creep and seeker missle a drone or queen, oooh yeah
No. Stop acting like having a single Missile ready will achieve more than having a unit which deals as much damage to a single target in 5 seconds.
On December 05 2012 04:09 Stress wrote: Ravens still take forever to get energy for 1 seeker missile and the range is still less than that of fungal. I see this patch helping PvZ more than TvZ personally.
This. Stating that “eggs now die in 2 Tank shots” is cool and all, but when meching you hardly have the luxury to focus eggs when there are 30+ Roaches along.
On December 05 2012 04:09 Resistentialism wrote: Seeker missile in a 1/1/1 is a huge waste of gas and techlab starport time. Seeker is scary in MASS raven usage.
I hope you know what you're talking about, cause i don't wanna deal with that $@#$!.
I'm scared of the following situation: 4 cloaked banshees + cloak upgrade = 800 gas = 4 ravens.
I seem to recall QXC mentioning that one of the major issues with tvz ravens is the fact that it requires so long to transition into them with all the upgrades. I hope we'll be seeing much more ravens in the matchup now.
Overall these feel kinda good changes although I still feel fungal is kind of a lame spell. I guess we'll just have to wait and see where it goes from here.
On December 05 2012 03:20 Mastazaka wrote: Snipe is gonna be SO good vs Infestors now. It will have a 2 range lead on them to snipe before fungal. So having 4-6 ghost will be a lot more forgiving on sniping them. Plus use the left over ghost to launch nukes . However I really think the root effect needs to be gone I mean cmon... this is a big start showing there willing to patch at least.
I agree on the root part. I think it would produce more interesting games if fungal didn't root at all so terran and protoss(or even in mirror matchup a zerg) would be able to still micro, even when they do take full damage from it. This in my opinion would produce more interesting gameplay to watch(i don't really play sc2 anymore, but i do like watching it).
I like the patch, to be honest, I don't mind the challenge of still having to split against infestors that can root, and prefer that micro element to be there anyway. The range nerf makes things a lot more balanced though!
I wonder whether the raven will actually see more use in TvT 1-base pushes, since seeker missiles are pretty good for softening up marines.
On December 05 2012 04:09 nottapro wrote: hellion banshee openings being replaced with hellion raven openings anyone? clean up creep and seeker missle a drone or queen, oooh yeah
No. Stop acting like having a single Missile ready will achieve more than having a unit which deals as much damage to a single target in 5 seconds.
People are going to experiment with the composition whether you brow beat them to keeping the statis quo or not.
On December 05 2012 04:09 Resistentialism wrote: Seeker missile in a 1/1/1 is a huge waste of gas and techlab starport time. Seeker is scary in MASS raven usage.
I hope you know what you're talking about, cause i don't wanna deal with that $@#$!.
I'm scared of the following situation: 4 cloaked banshees + cloak upgrade = 800 gas = 4 ravens.
So, what if terran player just made 4 ravens, seeker missile in the probe line as harass, then for the push spammed turrets and pdds?
NOTE: seeker missile is FASTER than probe.
Some people will get a Raven with their 111 just in case the Protoss goes for Dark Templar... but it's not that common. They'll usually want the gas to get Cloak for their Banshees, and so that they can have more Banshees for harassing/their push.
Depending on how long the push is delayed, you're likely to see a raven come along to help marines snipe obs, and then the raven can also immediately contribute a seeker missile onto the immortals or the sentries if it gets the opportunity. Which is great for the terran. So if there aren't a lot of stalkers or too many stalkers and it's not worth it to use PDD, suddenly you can use seeker, that's awesome.
On December 05 2012 04:16 rtem wrote: I seem to recall QXC mentioning that one of the major issues with tvz ravens is the fact that it requires so long to transition into them with all the upgrades. I hope we'll be seeing much more ravens in the matchup now.
Overall these feel kinda good changes although I still feel fungal is kind of a lame spell. I guess we'll just have to wait and see where it goes from here.
The problem with ravens is more that they have so little energy and it takes ages to build up, and 1 or 2 ravens isn't gonna make the difference lategame, you need atleast 5.
On December 05 2012 04:09 Resistentialism wrote: Seeker missile in a 1/1/1 is a huge waste of gas and techlab starport time. Seeker is scary in MASS raven usage.
I hope you know what you're talking about, cause i don't wanna deal with that $@#$!.
I'm scared of the following situation: 4 cloaked banshees + cloak upgrade = 800 gas = 4 ravens.
400 + 200 = 800?
sorry meant, 4 banshees + cloak + 1 raven like the usual raven banshee marine push.
On December 05 2012 04:07 willyallthewei wrote: Taking off the upgrade is going to make it really fun to deal w/ a resurgence of raven based 1-1-1's as soon as terrans get smart.
This just occurred to me as well. Ouch. Still think it was a good change though.
Hmm, I think in a 1.1.1 the PDD (even the turrets) would be far more valuable than a missile. You only get one (don't know of any 1.1.1 all-in's that involve more than one raven) and the Seeker missile doesn't really damage protoss units in a devastating way, compared to the incredible advantage/map-control a PDD offers.
Good changes. Maybe they won't fix everything but at least chain fungaling will be riskier now. I like that Blizzard didn't listen to poeple who wanted to completely destroy infestor. The unit might be boring but without it Zerg would be very underpowered. I think that the game is heading in the right direction.
I hope this will work. Even tho I think they should stop adjusting numbers and make real gameplay changes, like fungal is a projectile or a slow. 8 range in TvZ won't change much I feel, but who knows perhaps it'll work well.
Glad to see the Raven buff. The infestor nerf is will just be a non-factor. The problem with fungal growth is not the range, but rather the root effect.
I have a small question regarding the seeker missile as I've pretty much never faced one. Do you need to run the unit it's tareting away until it dies / the missile disappears basically? Or is there any other way to deal with it?
On December 05 2012 04:16 rtem wrote: I seem to recall QXC mentioning that one of the major issues with tvz ravens is the fact that it requires so long to transition into them with all the upgrades. I hope we'll be seeing much more ravens in the matchup now.
Overall these feel kinda good changes although I still feel fungal is kind of a lame spell. I guess we'll just have to wait and see where it goes from here.
I honestly don't see why the Raven couldn't just take 45 seconds to build instead of a minute. High templars cool down Warp Gates for 55 seconds, and that can be chronoboosted. Plus it's a Warp Gate.. 150 mins no gas building. Infestors take 50 seconds and they can build all at once. Ravens take 60 seconds out of a Tech Labbed Starport, AND they're extremely underused. AND they take twice as long to get energy for their spell.
I mean, if Terrans could just have a few Ravens, without shutting down all of their air support and gas, I'm certain that they would. Just a thought.
I have a better idea, how about they just make the seeker missile range 9?
Can anyone here think of why that would be a BAD idea? I'm a protoss player and i have no worries splitting all my forces vs. a 2.9 speed clump of banelings flying through the air, is essentially what it is.
Think about this, Fungal = insta cast = ensare = AOE damage, ur freaking DEAD = NO MICRO.
Storm = Insta cast = AOE damage = you can mitigate damage by running the hell away.
Seeker missile = SLOW AS HELL = AOE damage = SICK micro means the other guy does NOTHING.
Conclusion: Please just make seeker missile range 9.
On December 05 2012 04:05 SNSDBWooger wrote: P.L.A.C.E.B.O.
Pretty much this, people will be more willing to explore the race a bit more. the same with queens basically.
well look how the queen "placebo" turned out. Speculation is always great, but anyone who thinks they know how this is gonna change things, doesn't know shit at all.
On December 05 2012 04:16 rtem wrote: I seem to recall QXC mentioning that one of the major issues with tvz ravens is the fact that it requires so long to transition into them with all the upgrades. I hope we'll be seeing much more ravens in the matchup now.
Overall these feel kinda good changes although I still feel fungal is kind of a lame spell. I guess we'll just have to wait and see where it goes from here.
The problem with ravens is more that they have so little energy and it takes ages to build up, and 1 or 2 ravens isn't gonna make the difference lategame, you need atleast 5.
Thats exactly the problem on ravens. It's not like the HSM upgrade was inaccessible, the energy buildup time plus the energy cost of HSM made ravens pretty inefficient. You have to plan away ahead, when you are investing in ravens. You need to survive for 3-4 minutes before ravens become effective. I feel it would have been better to simply increase the starting energy of ravens or reduce the cost of HSM rather removing HSM upgrade.
On December 05 2012 04:28 willyallthewei wrote: I have a better idea, how about they just make the seeker missile range 9?
Can anyone here think of why that would be a BAD idea? I'm a protoss player and i have no worries splitting all my forces vs. a 2.9 speed clump of banelings flying through the air, is essentially what it is.
Think about this, Fungal = insta cast = ensare = AOE damage, ur freaking DEAD = NO MICRO.
Storm = Insta cast = AOE damage = you can mitigate damage by running the hell away.
Seeker missile = SLOW AS HELL = AOE damage = SICK micro means the other guy does NOTHING.
Conclusion: Please just make seeker missile range 9.
Seeker missle must not outrange turrets/spores/cannons because ravens are air units and it would be way to powerful to harass with range 9 seeker missiles
Its in the right direction. I dont know if this is enough, we will see, but atleast Blizzard is doing something and openly adressing issues! Their strong cautioness is dangerous.
On December 05 2012 04:30 TeeTS wrote: .... Seeker missle must not outrange turrets/spores/cannons because ravens are air units and it would be way to powerful to harass with range 9 seeker missiles
Yes, but its just a matter of placing turrets/spores/cannons not directly inside your mineral lines, but a bit to the outside. Anyway, if you send in more than 1 Raven, you can negate all anti-air static def with PDD and freely HS with others. So I dont think that would be a great concern.
Edit: also I'm not shure if you may be afraid of Ravens killing spore/turrets/cannons with HS; HS cant target buildings directly.
On December 05 2012 04:24 roym899 wrote: I have a small question regarding the seeker missile as I've pretty much never faced one. Do you need to run the unit it's tareting away until it dies / the missile disappears basically? Or is there any other way to deal with it?
Yep, exactly this. Find the targeted unit (this is the problematic part, especially on a blob of air units) and make it run (like right click the border of the map), or just split it so it doesn't splash on other units.
On December 05 2012 03:53 LgNKane wrote: maybe this will shut up all the balance whining though ravens in late game will be overpowered, just watch.
Raven in late game didn't change at all. Just the transition into it became easier.
You don't have to spend 150/150 now. That's literally the only change.
Well, to be honest there is also the time needed to search the upgrade, meaning it might (or not) allow interesting timing which might (again, or not ^^) be overpowered, but only time and tip top terran will tell us. And we should see if it's not a buff to 1/1/1 build (meaning Puma is gonna rules the world again :p )
The time it takes to get the energy is a lot longer than the time to get the upgrade. Something in the ballpark of 30s longer. That means the gas for the upgrade wasn't even a restrictive factor. You could have literally made a Raven on 1 base at 200 gas, waited for the gas for the upgrade, and the upgrade would have still been done before the Raven could cast HSM.
On December 05 2012 04:24 roym899 wrote: I have a small question regarding the seeker missile as I've pretty much never faced one. Do you need to run the unit it's tareting away until it dies / the missile disappears basically? Or is there any other way to deal with it?
Yep, exactly this. Find the targeted unit and make it run (like right click the border of the map), or just split it so it doesn't splash on other units.
On December 05 2012 04:24 roym899 wrote: I have a small question regarding the seeker missile as I've pretty much never faced one. Do you need to run the unit it's tareting away until it dies / the missile disappears basically? Or is there any other way to deal with it?
Yep, exactly this. Find the targeted unit and make it run (like right click the border of the map), or just split it so it doesn't splash on other units.
Or blink/burrow away. If you lose sight of the unit (except for fog of war), the seeker missile detonates on the last spot.
Oh, so now the game is balanced because Terran will win every game. The Ghost being able to EMP at a range advantage of 1.5 is totally disgusting. It seems like Terran have a way of being able to whine collectively for months until they have an 80% win ratio.
As a Protoss I'm sitting here with a smug grin on my face because Colossus will burn every single infestor that ever comes near. Thermal Lance range 9 vs. Fungal range 8. Feedback Range 9 vs Fungal Growth 8.
I'm facepalming at this patch, it is disgustingly bad.
On December 05 2012 04:34 Corvi wrote: what happened with fungal immunity of bionic units
it was for psionic units and they said it made it was too big of a nerf (i think it was because protoss has quite a few psionic units but I don't remember exactly what the response was)
I like it a lot, don't know if it will be enough but it reeeeeeally helps.
The fungal we'll have to see, don't seem like much but who knows. Probably will just result in people sloppily losing infestors until they're used to it. Pretty good though, and maybe that 1 extra millisecond will help Terrans split or run their units in time.
The IT change is huge though. One storm will kill a big clump of them before they even hatch, really excited about that.
Range reduction makes perfect sense. It's one of the ideas I had. Now Vikings and Feedback finally outrange Fungal, and Infestors no longer have the same range as Brood Lords as a result. Should do a lot to fix the late game.
On December 05 2012 04:24 roym899 wrote: I have a small question regarding the seeker missile as I've pretty much never faced one. Do you need to run the unit it's tareting away until it dies / the missile disappears basically? Or is there any other way to deal with it?
You just run away for 15 seconds, or 20 if they upgrade, and the missile runs out of gas and dies without exploding on anything. ...
Hey... what if Seeker Missiles simply automatically exploded at the end of the timer? Wouldn't that be more interesting, like, always?
I mean, Seeker Missiles running out of gas is the most anticlimactic thing ever. Seriously, how could you make something more boring? Let's just have it disappear and do nothing...at all. wow.
You would have to be really careful of the missiles, you can't just run straight away without thinking, there would be a lot more awesome mine dragging... the thing could flash red when it's about to go off. Damn! That sounds fun.
It would be basically just as easy or hard to outrun as before, but when it's low on time, and close to other units, there would be a VERY interesting dynamic going on.
Plus, you could Seeker missile your own Hellions or stimmed Marines, and have them loop around armies as you try to time it so they're over the enemy army right at the 15 or 20 second mark! If your unit gets picked off, then you essentially lose your indirect control over the missiles. Isn't that cool?
We already have self mine dragging now, but they can only explode where the unit is or where he dies. This generally won't be right on top of anyone.
On December 05 2012 04:36 BounceDJC wrote: Oh, so now the game is balanced because Terran will win every game. The Ghost being able to EMP at a range advantage of 1.5 is totally disgusting. It seems like Terran have a way of being able to whine collectively for months until they have an 80% win ratio.
As a Protoss I'm sitting here with a smug grin on my face because Colossus will burn every single infestor that ever comes near. Thermal Lance range 9 vs. Fungal range 8. Feedback Range 9 vs Fungal Growth 8.
I'm facepalming at this patch, it is disgustingly bad.
When did this even get tested?!
the first zerg whining, worse even because it comes from a protoss.. and ive read ALL THE POSTS UP TILL NOW.... please... make an effort of thinking before saying this.... please do.
I've got an idea, how about they buff Terran and make ghosts into: Chrono Legionnaire
At first Terrans would whine that there was a cooldown period before you could take action, and then David Kim could take that away and then GSL can go back to normal.
Should've chopped neural too. But i'm glad they didn't go crazy with nerfs, I feel these are reasonable adjustments that open a window for pro's to exploit and beat Zerg armies
On December 05 2012 04:40 sylverfyre wrote: I liked the projectile fungal more This still doesn't allow micro, which is a fundamental problem rather than a simple balance problem.
Yeah, I also dislike abilities which just completely shutdown your ability to micro. Same with forcefields. But fixing this matter would need a whole overhaul for Zerg and Protoss, because I believe Toss would just fall apart without forcefields.
On December 05 2012 04:36 BounceDJC wrote: Oh, so now the game is balanced because Terran will win every game. The Ghost being able to EMP at a range advantage of 1.5 is totally disgusting. It seems like Terran have a way of being able to whine collectively for months until they have an 80% win ratio.
As a Protoss I'm sitting here with a smug grin on my face because Colossus will burn every single infestor that ever comes near. Thermal Lance range 9 vs. Fungal range 8. Feedback Range 9 vs Fungal Growth 8.
I'm facepalming at this patch, it is disgustingly bad.
When did this even get tested?!
Terrans have never gained anything from whining. You're thinking of the wrong race
On December 05 2012 04:36 BounceDJC wrote: Oh, so now the game is balanced because Terran will win every game. The Ghost being able to EMP at a range advantage of 1.5 is totally disgusting. It seems like Terran have a way of being able to whine collectively for months until they have an 80% win ratio.
As a Protoss I'm sitting here with a smug grin on my face because Colossus will burn every single infestor that ever comes near. Thermal Lance range 9 vs. Fungal range 8. Feedback Range 9 vs Fungal Growth 8.
I'm facepalming at this patch, it is disgustingly bad.
When did this even get tested?!
The fungal also has a radius of 2 giving it an effective range of 10 if you're just trying to pin a single unit. There's also the fact that spell casters can cast their spell and then get out of the way. It makes it a lot harder to initiate with infestors and also make positioning them harder, but they win the range fight against everything they used to other than a ghost, like you figured out in the first half of your post.
I think the change makes sense for WoL and i hope it brings some hope. Anyways, i really hope they get rid of fungal's current mechanich for HoTS because they will able to overhaul zerg lair tech if needed.
On December 05 2012 04:41 NightOfTheDead wrote: So HT now hardcounter Zerg tier 2? Storm the infested terrans/mutas + feedback infestors. Hm, wonder how that goes.
You have a very interesting definition of hard counter. Infestors counter every single unit 'more' than HT counter Infestors.
Infestor for sure is too strong in certain szenarios and maybe in the lategame. But against some tactics every nerf to infestors will be huge. Like Protoss Sentry-Immortal-allin or a mech-terran especially in midgame. Both really hard to deal with, already right now. It will be even harder to handle after that nerfs.
On December 05 2012 04:41 NightOfTheDead wrote: So HT now hardcounter Zerg tier 2? Storm the infested terrans/mutas + feedback infestors. Hm, wonder how that goes.
Storm already owned infested terrans. Thing is that a storm on your ITs is one less storm on your persistent units.
On December 05 2012 04:41 NightOfTheDead wrote: So HT now hardcounter Zerg tier 2? Storm the infested terrans/mutas + feedback infestors. Hm, wonder how that goes.
You have a very interesting definition of hard counter. Infestors counter every single unit 'more' than HT counter Infestors.
PvZ wont get better anytime soon. This might be the swing in the other direction. Happy for TvZ though, might be something at least.
On December 05 2012 04:45 azzih wrote: Infestor for sure is too strong in certain szenarios and maybe in the lategame. But against some tactics every nerf to infestors will be huge. Like Protoss Sentry-Immortal-allin or a mech-terran especially in midgame. Both really hard to deal with, already right now. It will be even harder to handle after that nerfs.
Well. It's less hideously inelegant than making fungal not effect psionic. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
About what expected from blizzard, a patch that addresses the balance but not the underlying problems that make fungal a boring spell, and the infestor a boring unit. At the least, though, this should shift Zerg focus to other, less boring units, which should be a positive.
I wonder if they didn't make mothership invulnerable to neural because they want toss to not rely on the mothership. It's a stupid unit anyways for serious games, which DB has basically said himself.
On December 05 2012 04:36 BounceDJC wrote: Oh, so now the game is balanced because Terran will win every game. The Ghost being able to EMP at a range advantage of 1.5 is totally disgusting. It seems like Terran have a way of being able to whine collectively for months until they have an 80% win ratio.
As a Protoss I'm sitting here with a smug grin on my face because Colossus will burn every single infestor that ever comes near. Thermal Lance range 9 vs. Fungal range 8. Feedback Range 9 vs Fungal Growth 8.
I'm facepalming at this patch, it is disgustingly bad.
When did this even get tested?!
Actually Zerg whined a lot to get the Buffs... when did Zerg get ever nerfed? when did Terran ever get buffed? (srsly buffed, not the BattleCruiser speed upgrade)
Also the 1 Range difference is not that huge as you write here, Ghosts Snipe&EMP also have 1 more range than Psi-Storm / Feedback, HT's can Storm/Feedback anyways, its not that this completely shuts them down...
On December 05 2012 04:45 azzih wrote: Infestor for sure is too strong in certain szenarios and maybe in the lategame. But against some tactics every nerf to infestors will be huge. Like Protoss Sentry-Immortal-allin or a mech-terran especially in midgame. Both really hard to deal with, already right now. It will be even harder to handle after that nerfs.
Immortal/sentry all-in hits before infestors are out in almost all cases, don't think they will make such a big difference because you will only get a few out anyways.
On December 05 2012 04:31 Sithril wrote: Approved.
Its in the right direction. I dont know if this is enough, we will see, but atleast Blizzard is doing something and openly adressing issues! Their strong cautioness is dangerous.
On December 05 2012 04:30 TeeTS wrote: .... Seeker missle must not outrange turrets/spores/cannons because ravens are air units and it would be way to powerful to harass with range 9 seeker missiles
Yes, but its just a matter of placing turrets/spores/cannons not directly inside your mineral lines, but a bit to the outside. Anyway, if you send in more than 1 Raven, you can negate all anti-air static def with PDD and freely HS with others. So I dont think that would be a great concern.
Edit: also I'm not shure if you may be afraid of Ravens killing spore/turrets/cannons with HS; HS cant target buildings directly.
Can we make a balance suggestion to blizzard on this?
On December 05 2012 04:45 azzih wrote: Infestor for sure is too strong in certain szenarios and maybe in the lategame. But against some tactics every nerf to infestors will be huge. Like Protoss Sentry-Immortal-allin or a mech-terran especially in midgame. Both really hard to deal with, already right now. It will be even harder to handle after that nerfs.
Mech? It's never been a real problem in ZvT pro level. Concerning the sentry immortal all in, it will just need some more careful micro as they still outrange the whole P army.
Infestor nerf is reasonable. However, I don't think the raven change will do much. The energy cost isn't changed so they are still useless supply until 125 energy. Casting range isn't changed either.
I actually like this a lot. Even if it does turn out to not be enough, (who knows). It's a far more mature approach than some of the knee jerk nerfing that we've seen. "cough" thor.
In regards to Seeker missile change this won't affect the early-mid game at all, medivacs and vikings are much more useful during this stage of the game in all matchups. However in TvZ this will allow Terrans to transition into Raven with HSM a little faster, now will this balance things? time will tell but it's going in the positive direction.
The fungal range change is the biggest of all. Before Zerg could kill units by simply trading energy, then going into late game have 20+ infestors easily. Now in order to get good fungals off Zerg will probably need to sacrifice infestors (minerals and gas) since feedback/snipe/tanks/colossus all outrange them now. This should reduce the infestor count in the late game which was the biggest problem.
Overall I like the changes, it nerfs the infestor and buffs Terran in a minor way that can hopefully balance things but doesn't force Zerg into a new metagame with such a short time in WOL. I think big changes are coming in HOTS, this felt like a quick fix.
I think that people worried about this being a huge buff to ravens are forgetting that it still requires 125 energy to use one HSM. HTs for instance would hugely benefit from not having to research storm, since it only requires 75 energy. Ravens will still need to sit around waiting for another 50 energy once they pop... and that's after you get the Corvid reactor upgrade.
The limiting factor for raven usage late-game is two-fold: High energy requirements on all abilities and the need for dedicated infrastructure.
Unless you want to only make a single raven at a time, you would have two otherwise idle tech labs on starports anyway. Just take a miniute to think about this for a second... it's not that people were having trouble because they're sitting around with high-energy ravens just waiting for the upgrade to finish. This change does very little to buff the raven other than encourage people to use them more because of a perceived buff to the unit.
It's not that you just need a starport with tech lab to produce them, you have to get the tech lab to even start the corvid reactor (energy) upgrade in preparation for making them... The whole design of the unit and it's associated tech path is poorly constructed.
On December 05 2012 04:45 azzih wrote: Infestor for sure is too strong in certain szenarios and maybe in the lategame. But against some tactics every nerf to infestors will be huge. Like Protoss Sentry-Immortal-allin or a mech-terran especially in midgame. Both really hard to deal with, already right now. It will be even harder to handle after that nerfs.
Zergs may have to break out one of the 4 units they have not been using due to the infestor being so effective. Maybe its time for the old BL/Ultra tech switch, mid game mutas to abuse mech being slow as crap or considering building units before taking both gasses on their third. Or baneling drops, those were pretty great.
But terrans better build a single mid-game raven to remove creep tumors now, damn it. It comes fully upgraded and is worth the gas cost in mules alone. Plus to get a single hunter seeker missile to bring the fear.
On December 05 2012 04:45 azzih wrote: Infestor for sure is too strong in certain szenarios and maybe in the lategame. But against some tactics every nerf to infestors will be huge. Like Protoss Sentry-Immortal-allin or a mech-terran especially in midgame. Both really hard to deal with, already right now. It will be even harder to handle after that nerfs.
Zergs may have to break out one of the 4 units they have not been using due to the infestor being so effective. Maybe its time for the old BL/Ultra tech switch, mid game mutas to abuse mech being slow as crap or considering building units before taking both gasses on their third. Or baneling drops, those were pretty great.
But terrans better build a single mid-game raven to remove creep tumors now, damn it. It comes fully upgraded and is worth the gas cost in mules alone. Plus to get a single hunter seeker missile to bring the fear.
All your suggestions have nothing to do with the problem he said tough. which is sentry immortal allin will be stronger now.
The real question is does fungal REALLY need to root? I mean would it be so gamebreakingly bad (for zerg) if fungal worked more like plague (no root, slows instead. no kill, reduce to 1hp only. stays on units for much longer) in some way. Would this really be so bad for zerg? because it sure as hell would be better for the other races AND spectators.
On December 05 2012 03:22 Striding Strider wrote: While this is a change in the right direction, it doesn't make Infesters more fun to watch.
You cannot change infestors in the way to make them more fun to watch unless you change everything about them. (and need some serious compensations somewhere else, like lets say hydras)
On December 05 2012 04:45 azzih wrote: Infestor for sure is too strong in certain szenarios and maybe in the lategame. But against some tactics every nerf to infestors will be huge. Like Protoss Sentry-Immortal-allin or a mech-terran especially in midgame. Both really hard to deal with, already right now. It will be even harder to handle after that nerfs.
Zergs may have to break out one of the 4 units they have not been using due to the infestor being so effective. Maybe its time for the old BL/Ultra tech switch, mid game mutas to abuse mech being slow as crap or considering building units before taking both gasses on their third. Or baneling drops, those were pretty great.
But terrans better build a single mid-game raven to remove creep tumors now, damn it. It comes fully upgraded and is worth the gas cost in mules alone. Plus to get a single hunter seeker missile to bring the fear.
All your suggestions have nothing to do with the problem he said tough. which is sentry immortal allin will be stronger now.
Like the other guy said, though, it only helps bad immortal/sentry 2 base all ins. If Parting is doing it then he gets to your base before your infestors are popping, at least versus most 3hatch zergs.
Something that I don't think has been mentioned yet is that the 1/1/1 vs. Protoss could be a lot more deadly now. Say the terran decides to get 3 ravens with HSM instead of banshees, it might be very hard to deal with. But I guess we won't know until the change hits live and people start experimenting.
On December 05 2012 04:36 BounceDJC wrote: Oh, so now the game is balanced because Terran will win every game. The Ghost being able to EMP at a range advantage of 1.5 is totally disgusting. It seems like Terran have a way of being able to whine collectively for months until they have an 80% win ratio.
As a Protoss I'm sitting here with a smug grin on my face because Colossus will burn every single infestor that ever comes near. Thermal Lance range 9 vs. Fungal range 8. Feedback Range 9 vs Fungal Growth 8.
I'm facepalming at this patch, it is disgustingly bad.
When did this even get tested?!
Actually Zerg whined a lot to get the Buffs... when did Zerg get ever nerfed? when did Terran ever get buffed? (srsly buffed, not the BattleCruiser speed upgrade)
Also the 1 Range difference is not that huge as you write here, Ghosts Snipe&EMP also have 1 more range than Psi-Storm / Feedback, HT's can Storm/Feedback anyways, its not that this completely shuts them down...
Off the top of my head - and I'm sure I could think of more - neural parasite nerf
On December 05 2012 04:55 Kyrao wrote: I think that people worried about this being a huge buff to ravens are forgetting that it still requires 125 energy to use one HSM. HTs for instance would hugely benefit from not having to research storm, since it only requires 75 energy. Ravens will still need to sit around waiting for another 50 energy once they pop... and that's after you get the Corvid reactor upgrade.
The limiting factor for raven usage late-game is two-fold: High energy requirements on all abilities and the need for dedicated infrastructure.
Unless you want to only make a single raven at a time, you would have two otherwise idle tech labs on starports anyway. Just take a miniute to think about this for a second... it's not that people were having trouble because they're sitting around with high-energy ravens just waiting for the upgrade to finish. This change does very little to buff the raven other than encourage people to use them more because of a perceived buff to the unit.
It's not that you just need a starport with tech lab to produce them, you have to get the tech lab to even start the corvid reactor (energy) upgrade in preparation for making them... The whole design of the unit and it's associated tech path is poorly constructed.
Its true that a raven switch isn't much easier to execute, but as a terran player I am pretty excited to see what just 1-2 ravens can accomplish in the early and midgame.
Its just a little more incentive for terran players to keep a tech lab on their starport and keep producing banshees and ravens past the early game harass.
JEEEEEEEEEEEESSSS MEEEN VERY good patch its really not that big of a deal but good for PvZ and emp infestors and also raven is perfect love u blizzard and esports <3<3<3<3<3
On December 05 2012 04:52 GARcher wrote: Infestor nerf is reasonable. However, I don't think the raven change will do much. The energy cost isn't changed so they are still useless supply until 125 energy. Casting range isn't changed either.
The Infestor nerf helps Ravens. Can't be chain fungaled over open land. They can drop the upgraded Auto Turret and hit the Infestor as long as he's in Fungal range...
you need 5 fungals to kill a Raven, which takes 20 seconds. It takes approx 10 seconds of sustained fire from one auto turret to kill an Infestor. You can probably place 2 in range, right next to each other.
Fair enough changes. I'm not sure about the direction blizzard wants for Terrans. Marine tank will get a huge buff from these nerfs. Players will go for more mid-game oriented play. .
Zergs will have a hard time adjusting to the fungle range. This makes mid-game play stronger, which doesn't make much sense to me. Blizzard clearly wants to even out the late-game balance, but the infestor nerf will only make mid-game play more prevalent. The raven buff isn't big enough to out weigh the infestor nerfs.
Blizzard should take a different approach to balance changes. Decrease health on Broodlords Increase thor damage on huge units Increase Seeker missile range
On December 05 2012 04:59 PolskaGora wrote: Something that I don't think has been mentioned yet is that the 1/1/1 vs. Protoss could be a lot more deadly now. Say the terran decides to get 3 ravens with HSM instead of banshees, it might be very hard to deal with. But I guess we won't know until the change hits live and people start experimenting.
engage early and force a hsm....run away.....same strat vs raven 1 1 1 before when your trying to force out a pdd
I play Zerg, and I like it. I even feel infestor nerf might not be enough. I like how Blizzard is learning.
Recent past patches did Queen +2 range -> too much buff that changed ZvT forever Ghost snipe nerf -> go-to unit suddenly demoted to don't-go-to unit Phoenix upgrade -> achieved basically nothing
Compared to these past ones, this patch is more promising. Blizzard is very careful not to nerf a unit to death, yet they make sure the patch does something. I'd say infestor is still too mighty, but we'll see how it works out. I hope "my race nerfed = bad, my race buffed = good" mentality that hurts SC2 slowly goes away as well.
- Siege Tanks kill Infested Eggs with 3 shots instead 4. With vechicle weapon upgrades they always can beat eggs with 2 shots. - IT eggs can be killed by storms now for ~3.5 seconds - IT eggs can be killed by colossus by 2 shots instead 3 - Planetary Fortress kills IT eggs for 2 shots too instead 3
On December 05 2012 04:45 azzih wrote: Infestor for sure is too strong in certain szenarios and maybe in the lategame. But against some tactics every nerf to infestors will be huge. Like Protoss Sentry-Immortal-allin or a mech-terran especially in midgame. Both really hard to deal with, already right now. It will be even harder to handle after that nerfs.
Zergs may have to break out one of the 4 units they have not been using due to the infestor being so effective. Maybe its time for the old BL/Ultra tech switch, mid game mutas to abuse mech being slow as crap or considering building units before taking both gasses on their third. Or baneling drops, those were pretty great.
But terrans better build a single mid-game raven to remove creep tumors now, damn it. It comes fully upgraded and is worth the gas cost in mules alone. Plus to get a single hunter seeker missile to bring the fear.
All your suggestions have nothing to do with the problem he said tough. which is sentry immortal allin will be stronger now.
Players have been able to hold off that build without infestors before with good scouting and engagements. There is nothing new about zerg worrying about a two base all in from protoss and nothing that cannot be solved from more diligent scouting, good control and decision making. Fungle will still outrange everything in that build and will still be able to kill sentries, which ar the backbone of that build.
So yeah, it may be a little strong, but not but I have faith in zergs to deal with it.
On December 05 2012 05:08 Existor wrote: For some info:
- Siege Tanks kill Infested Eggs with 3 shots instead 4. With vechicle weapon upgrades they always can beat eggs with 2 shots. - IT eggs can be killed by storms now for ~3.5 seconds - IT eggs can be killed by colossus by 2 shots instead 3 - Planetary Fortress kills IT eggs for 2 shots too instead 3
Awesomee! This is hopefully going to have a big impact on the way the game is played nowadays. Perhaps the Raven will get used a little too much, but we'll see. Now the only thing remaining is to nerf broodlord attackspeed, which makes it possible to clear out waves of broodlings before the next one is launched, making it possible to move closer and closer to the broods for each wave you take out.
On December 05 2012 05:07 Zahir wrote: Just gonna throw this out here...
Poll: Blizz should try to make more fundamental changes to WoL...
Yes, make fungal slow instead of root and reduce hsm energy/increase range! (58)
73%
No, WoL's core game play needs to be preserved (21)
27%
79 total votes
Your vote: Blizz should try to make more fundamental changes to WoL...
(Vote): Yes, make fungal slow instead of root and reduce hsm energy/increase range! (Vote): No, WoL's core game play needs to be preserved
Can't you wait and see how these nerfs works out before proposing even more nerfs to infestors?
I should probably add that fungal nerfs could be balanced by, for example, buffing hydras... The point is not simply to weaken Zerg, but to make a more micro friendly game.
Seems like a step forward. However I'm concerned it just makes deathball end-game Zerg a bit weaker but doesn't really encourage a different style of play.
It should be noted that if you're making tanks in TvZ you'll pretty much always have at least +1 on them to deal with Lings with carapace upgrades. So in reality it is basically your tanks can 2shot eggs unless you have a really late +1 factory timing.
On December 05 2012 05:08 Existor wrote: For some info:
- Siege Tanks kill Infested Eggs with 3 shots instead 4. With vechicle weapon upgrades they always can beat eggs with 2 shots. - IT eggs can be killed by storms now for ~3.5 seconds - IT eggs can be killed by colossus by 2 shots instead 3 - Planetary Fortress kills IT eggs for 2 shots too instead 3
uuhhh i thought colossus attack was 15x2....I think what you meant to say is 3 shots instead of 4
I have to say though, That I really like this infested egg nerf, spamming eggs right on top of an enemy main army never felt right to me. Zerg has always been a race where you have to carefully hide or protect your morphing eggs. Not hurl them in the enemy's face in the midst of a fight to tank some dps.
This is gonna suck for zergs for a few weeks, it is going to zuck ^^ This patch came right before Proleague, thats great I guess. This new fungal thing + new KeSPA maps its gonna be SO MUCH FUN TO WATCH.
How about making fungal only root ground units? It doesn't make much sense for fungal to stop air units anyways.
This way Zerg can still damage air fleets with fungal but can't chain fungal them. Dropships and Warp Prisms can get away while still taking damage. Mutas and Vikings can not all die to a few fungals... a player could react to a fungal by moving away or spitting them before the second fungal.
Guys... MAYBE MUTAS WILL BE THE THING AGAIN! I'd love to see some muta/ling/bling vs marine/tank/medivac. Love the changes. Love blizzard a bit more <3
Progress but still not a solution. When blizzard nerfed ghosts from 45 damage to biological down to 25, THAT was a real nerf. This is a step in the right direction, but certainly not the answer to all our terran cries.
On December 05 2012 05:21 ElMeanYo wrote: How about making fungal only root ground units? It doesn't make much sense for fungal to stop air units anyways.
This way Zerg can still damage air fleets with fungal but can't chain fungal them. Dropships and Warp Prisms can get away while still taking damage. Mutas and Vikings can not all die to a few fungals... a player could react to a fungal by moving away or spitting them before the second fungal.
That would dramatically affect ZvZ in a negative way.
On December 05 2012 04:45 azzih wrote: Infestor for sure is too strong in certain szenarios and maybe in the lategame. But against some tactics every nerf to infestors will be huge. Like Protoss Sentry-Immortal-allin or a mech-terran especially in midgame. Both really hard to deal with, already right now. It will be even harder to handle after that nerfs.
The nerf actually has zero effect on infestors dealin with immortal sentry, fungal still outranges every unit in the army by 2.
On December 05 2012 05:08 Existor wrote: For some info:
- Siege Tanks kill Infested Eggs with 3 shots instead 4. With vechicle weapon upgrades they always can beat eggs with 2 shots. - IT eggs can be killed by storms now for ~3.5 seconds - IT eggs can be killed by colossus by 2 shots instead 3 - Planetary Fortress kills IT eggs for 2 shots too instead 3
uuhhh i thought colossus attack was 15x2....I think what you meant to say is 3 shots instead of 4
On December 05 2012 05:21 ElMeanYo wrote: How about making fungal only root ground units? It doesn't make much sense for fungal to stop air units anyways.
This way Zerg can still damage air fleets with fungal but can't chain fungal them. Dropships and Warp Prisms can get away while still taking damage. Mutas and Vikings can not all die to a few fungals... a player could react to a fungal by moving away or spitting them before the second fungal.
That would dramatically affect ZvZ in a negative way.
Mutas might not just be a gimmicky, timing-based ZvZ strategy then? Keep in mind a good fungal will still do alot of damage to them.
On December 05 2012 05:07 Zahir wrote: Just gonna throw this out here...
Poll: Blizz should try to make more fundamental changes to WoL...
Yes, make fungal slow instead of root and reduce hsm energy/increase range! (58)
73%
No, WoL's core game play needs to be preserved (21)
27%
79 total votes
Your vote: Blizz should try to make more fundamental changes to WoL...
(Vote): Yes, make fungal slow instead of root and reduce hsm energy/increase range! (Vote): No, WoL's core game play needs to be preserved
Can't you wait and see how these nerfs works out before proposing even more nerfs to infestors?
I should probably add that fungal nerfs could be balanced by, for example, buffing hydras... The point is not simply to weaken Zerg, but to make a more micro friendly game.
Thank you! Its ideas like this that need to get noticed. Most non-zerg players spend so much time QQing because infestors are too strong but the truth is all of the match ups are very difficult for zerg if they dont get infestors. The game needs to be changed in a way that if they are getting nerfed, then it is because other lair tech units are getting buffed.
how about we stop trying to make such core changes to WOL at the end of the game play. In around 4 months HOTS will be coming out. Put off all the core game play changes until HOTS.
I fully agree with this patch. IMO we should only worry about changing the numbers in WOL since WOL is being phased out in 4 months.
Sure this is good but i dunno how much it will really change things. It's pointless to speculate to much as we will find out regardless in a few days of laddering
On December 05 2012 05:21 ElMeanYo wrote: How about making fungal only root ground units? It doesn't make much sense for fungal to stop air units anyways.
This way Zerg can still damage air fleets with fungal but can't chain fungal them. Dropships and Warp Prisms can get away while still taking damage. Mutas and Vikings can not all die to a few fungals... a player could react to a fungal by moving away or spitting them before the second fungal.
That would dramatically affect ZvZ in a negative way.
On December 05 2012 05:07 Zahir wrote: Just gonna throw this out here...
Poll: Blizz should try to make more fundamental changes to WoL...
Yes, make fungal slow instead of root and reduce hsm energy/increase range! (58)
73%
No, WoL's core game play needs to be preserved (21)
27%
79 total votes
Your vote: Blizz should try to make more fundamental changes to WoL...
(Vote): Yes, make fungal slow instead of root and reduce hsm energy/increase range! (Vote): No, WoL's core game play needs to be preserved
Can't you wait and see how these nerfs works out before proposing even more nerfs to infestors?
Indeed. If they're just enough, then no further action needs to be taken. If they're too much, then we definitely don't need another nerf on top of what we're currently getting. If they're not enough, then we can talk about more nerfs like Fungal slow.
The most major changes will probably happen in HotS, which is only 4 months away and with a major balance patch for the beta in the near future that should overhaul the game.
These changes are OK but definitely not enough. I think the range should have been nerfed even one more point. Also, they should buff the ghost and bring it back to how it was before. Blizzard is taking now super-baby-steps compared to nerfing stuff to oblivion like they used to do, which is good, but the fact that they are taking THESE baby steps now is actually ridiculous. I lost faith in the balance team :/
On December 05 2012 04:45 azzih wrote: Infestor for sure is too strong in certain szenarios and maybe in the lategame. But against some tactics every nerf to infestors will be huge. Like Protoss Sentry-Immortal-allin or a mech-terran especially in midgame. Both really hard to deal with, already right now. It will be even harder to handle after that nerfs.
Use hydras for sentry/immo =P
Hydralisks are terrible and they may not come out in time. They lose to everything, not to mention their slow speed and squishy HP.
On December 05 2012 05:21 ElMeanYo wrote: How about making fungal only root ground units? It doesn't make much sense for fungal to stop air units anyways.
This way Zerg can still damage air fleets with fungal but can't chain fungal them. Dropships and Warp Prisms can get away while still taking damage. Mutas and Vikings can not all die to a few fungals... a player could react to a fungal by moving away or spitting them before the second fungal.
That would dramatically affect ZvZ in a negative way.
Mutas might not just be a gimmicky, timing-based ZvZ strategy then? Keep in mind a good fungal will still do alot of damage to them.
Yea I mean 1 fungal takes out 25% of a mutas health (correct me if im mistaken) but with out the root and because fungals dont stack, it'd be near impossible to get 4 consecutive fungals on a pack of mutas. And the muta timing attack strat relies on the infestor player wasting fungals on the mutas anyway so that there are less fungals to be used on the incoming roaches.
as a random player i think the biggest impacts this will have:
1. infested terran die in 2 shots now(?) from upgrade tanks or are left at way lower HP. this means mech doesn't kill itself as easily anymore
2. fungal range reduction means ghosts are amore viable counter now, and that infestors will be more exposed. it will be good to see the micro games this creates, instead of fungal almost always being cast from a safe distance
On December 05 2012 05:32 c0sm0naut wrote: as a random player i think the biggest impacts this will have:
1. infested terran die in 2 shots now(?) from upgrade tanks or are left at way lower HP. this means mech doesn't kill itself as easily anymore
2. fungal range reduction means ghosts are amore viable counter now, and that infestors will be more exposed. it will be good to see the micro games this creates, instead of fungal almost always being cast from a safe distance
Won't surviving ITs spawn with full health? The same way every zerg unit does.
On December 05 2012 03:15 Alryk wrote: Woah, this is interesting. I dunno if a 1 range reduction will do much, but I like the IT and raven seeker missile changes.
It will because now it's lower than feedback and EMP.
On December 05 2012 05:32 c0sm0naut wrote: as a random player i think the biggest impacts this will have:
1. infested terran die in 2 shots now(?) from upgrade tanks or are left at way lower HP. this means mech doesn't kill itself as easily anymore
2. fungal range reduction means ghosts are amore viable counter now, and that infestors will be more exposed. it will be good to see the micro games this creates, instead of fungal almost always being cast from a safe distance
Won't surviving ITs spawn with full health? The same way every zerg unit does.
yes. They will. Doesn't say anything about when they spawn.
On December 05 2012 05:30 WhiteSatin wrote: These changes are OK but definitely not enough. I think the range should have been nerfed even one more point. Also, they should buff the ghost and bring it back to how it was before. Blizzard is taking now super-baby-steps compared to nerfing stuff to oblivion like they used to do, which is good, but the fact that they are taking THESE baby steps now is actually ridiculous. I lost faith in the balance team :/
Oh come on. This is getting silly. Before when they nerfed stuff fast it was the "let the game develop blizzard!" and now they said ok, we will play it your way and take our sweet time and try to not break even more stuff its "stop taking baby steps, nerf everything in the ground!" Some people are never happy it seems.
Can a mod add a poll in the OP like we did for all the other balance topics ? I.E. - Right direction, but needs more tweaks, Wrong direction, needs to be redone. etc.etc. ?
On December 05 2012 05:21 ElMeanYo wrote: How about making fungal only root ground units? It doesn't make much sense for fungal to stop air units anyways.
This way Zerg can still damage air fleets with fungal but can't chain fungal them. Dropships and Warp Prisms can get away while still taking damage. Mutas and Vikings can not all die to a few fungals... a player could react to a fungal by moving away or spitting them before the second fungal.
That would dramatically affect ZvZ in a negative way.
Mutas might not just be a gimmicky, timing-based ZvZ strategy then? Keep in mind a good fungal will still do alot of damage to them.
Yea I mean 1 fungal takes out 25% of a mutas health (correct me if im mistaken) but with out the root and because fungals dont stack, it'd be near impossible to get 4 consecutive fungals on a pack of mutas. And the muta timing attack strat relies on the infestor player wasting fungals on the mutas anyway so that there are less fungals to be used on the incoming roaches.
I think your right about 25%. I would just like mutas to become viable again in ZvZ without the huge risk of getting them all chain-fungaled. If you significantly invest in mutas and this happens to you, it's pretty much gg.
On December 05 2012 05:30 WhiteSatin wrote: These changes are OK but definitely not enough. I think the range should have been nerfed even one more point. Also, they should buff the ghost and bring it back to how it was before. Blizzard is taking now super-baby-steps compared to nerfing stuff to oblivion like they used to do, which is good, but the fact that they are taking THESE baby steps now is actually ridiculous. I lost faith in the balance team :/
Oh come on. This is getting silly. Before when they nerfed stuff fast it was the "let the game develop blizzard!" and now they said ok, we will play it your way and take our sweet time and try to not break even more stuff its "stop taking baby steps, nerf everything in the ground!" Some people are never happy it seems.
Great idea I think, this has the potential to fix ZvT/P dramatically, especially ZvT now that Ravens are more viable from the get-go. I think the Fungal nerf is a little too small, but who knows, dropping range from 9 to 8 is fairly big, and maybe Protoss and Terrans can deal with BL/Infestor a bit better. I like the IT egg nerf, it makes eggs finally weak enough to break with a Psi Storm or a few Colossi or two Tank shots with +1, and these are things that should be had by the Infestor stage. Overall, Blizzard is taking the right steps to change Zerg.
On December 05 2012 03:15 Alryk wrote: Woah, this is interesting. I dunno if a 1 range reduction will do much, but I like the IT and raven seeker missile changes.
It will because now it's lower than feedback and EMP.
You can still snare an HT before it can feedback by casting at it when it's just beyond max casting range. 8 range + 2 radius is greater than 9 range and 0 radius.
On December 05 2012 04:55 Kyrao wrote: I think that people worried about this being a huge buff to ravens are forgetting that it still requires 125 energy to use one HSM. HTs for instance would hugely benefit from not having to research storm, since it only requires 75 energy. Ravens will still need to sit around waiting for another 50 energy once they pop... and that's after you get the Corvid reactor upgrade.
The limiting factor for raven usage late-game is two-fold: High energy requirements on all abilities and the need for dedicated infrastructure.
Unless you want to only make a single raven at a time, you would have two otherwise idle tech labs on starports anyway. Just take a miniute to think about this for a second... it's not that people were having trouble because they're sitting around with high-energy ravens just waiting for the upgrade to finish. This change does very little to buff the raven other than encourage people to use them more because of a perceived buff to the unit.
It's not that you just need a starport with tech lab to produce them, you have to get the tech lab to even start the corvid reactor (energy) upgrade in preparation for making them... The whole design of the unit and it's associated tech path is poorly constructed.
Its true that a raven switch isn't much easier to execute, but as a terran player I am pretty excited to see what just 1-2 ravens can accomplish in the early and midgame.
Its just a little more incentive for terran players to keep a tech lab on their starport and keep producing banshees and ravens past the early game harass.
You'll have to sacrifice either tanks or upgrades to spend gas on ravens. It will be interesting to see if people can make that work.
Fi-fucking-nally! Took far too long and tarnished the otherwise great IPL and GSL a bit, but at least the changes seem good. Hope for a lot more Muta-Ling-Baneling ZvT, Muta ZvP / ZvZ and more diversity in general now. Though I dont know if it will do much in ZvZ, it makes it a bit harder to catch the Mutas but if it happens it is still the same.
It's a shame Blizzard is putting all of their Terran buffs into the Raven. It's a cool unit, but I'm not sure how much just getting rid of the upgrade will get it into play. I'm sure it will help Terrans at lower levels, at least, who aren't going to be facing Zergs who can actually micro their Broodlords under pressure like Hyun, but I still think it could use some changes to its energy mechanics. I understand why they wouldn't want a single Raven to be able to save up enough energy to shoot a HSM AND put down a PDD or just to shoot 2 HSMs, but if there could be some way for the Raven to say, regenerate energy faster, that could be amazing. Perhaps bake the +25 starting energy upgrade into the unit so we could potentially see some cool earlyish Raven turret harass, and make the energy upgrade one that allows a 1.5x modifier on energy regen.
...Alternately, restoring some Snipe damage to Ghosts would still be much appreciated. >_>
On December 05 2012 05:41 EnhancedZ wrote: I really feel like mutas will be phased out from ZvT with the raven buff...
As someone who tried seeker missiles vs mutas often enough, let me tell you how to counter it:
Select all your mutas. Fly directly into the terran air. Congratulations, you just killed all the hostile air (And ground units below it) due to friendly fire of the seeker missiles.
Additionally as shown many times now, the only effect of the removal of the upgrade is that you dont have to spend 150/150. While that is appreciated, you really cant tell me that makes a serious difference. Seeker missiles do not become available faster without the upgrade.
On December 05 2012 05:30 WhiteSatin wrote: These changes are OK but definitely not enough. I think the range should have been nerfed even one more point. Also, they should buff the ghost and bring it back to how it was before. Blizzard is taking now super-baby-steps compared to nerfing stuff to oblivion like they used to do, which is good, but the fact that they are taking THESE baby steps now is actually ridiculous. I lost faith in the balance team :/
Oh come on. This is getting silly. Before when they nerfed stuff fast it was the "let the game develop blizzard!" and now they said ok, we will play it your way and take our sweet time and try to not break even more stuff its "stop taking baby steps, nerf everything in the ground!" Some people are never happy it seems.
Especially as there have been other changes that sounded really harmless (f.e. immortals +1 range, queens+2 range) and had quite a huge impact. I'm really excited for the weeks to come
On December 05 2012 04:45 azzih wrote: Infestor for sure is too strong in certain szenarios and maybe in the lategame. But against some tactics every nerf to infestors will be huge. Like Protoss Sentry-Immortal-allin or a mech-terran especially in midgame. Both really hard to deal with, already right now. It will be even harder to handle after that nerfs.
Infestors wont help with immortal sentry ever anyways, unless youre facing silver league immortal sentry allins, you cant get infestors in time anyways.
On December 05 2012 04:59 PolskaGora wrote: Something that I don't think has been mentioned yet is that the 1/1/1 vs. Protoss could be a lot more deadly now. Say the terran decides to get 3 ravens with HSM instead of banshees, it might be very hard to deal with. But I guess we won't know until the change hits live and people start experimenting.
Your 1-1-1 will be so delayed it will be pointless.
Feels like pretty big changes too me. You should bear in mind that infestors are quite large, and high energy ones often gets stuck behind those who just used their energy. Bearing that in mind, the range change of fungal is significant.
Despite being a protoss, I feel that these changes might be to big even. I'd rather see several small steps spread out over many patches, than a big one. Gonna be interesting too see the pro scene develop no matter what.
All the 3 changes are primarily effective in tvz. Terrans should find playing vs infestors more manageable now, and that is great. It is hard for me to realize how substantial the -1 range for fungals actually is but it seems reasonable, now infestors have to be more exposed to cast the spell.
Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
We did it guys, we successfully whined our way to some changes. Mission accomplished. Id like to honestly thank blizzard though. 100% serious they responded to concerns, and...and...Im just really choked up right now. THANK YOU BLIZZARD. Are people seriously complaining about this? Really? They did something go play the damn game and figure out if it worked.
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
I wont deny it does little for lategame, but how do you think it will mess up early/midgame? Because of 150/150 more resources it messes up the midgame? Really I dont see it happening, especially on a unit like the raven.
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
I think the idea is that late game ravens are good enough, or maybe not. But it's hard to tell since it's so hard to get there. Removing seeker missile makes it easier to get ravens earlier -> keep your spellcasters alive and you can maybe transition better to that air army. We'll see if that is true or not. They might be reworking seeker missile in HotS anyway.
On December 05 2012 05:52 Vapaach wrote: All the 3 changes are primarily effective in tvz. Terrans should find playing vs infestors more manageable now, and that is great. It is hard for me to realize how substantial the -1 range for fungals actually is but it seems reasonable, now infestors have to be more exposed to cast the spell.
70HP eggs (instead of the first proposed 80) seems very Storm-specific to me. And -1range helps 9range Templar and Colossi a ton to kill Infestors. Just think of the difference between rang 9 NP and range 7 NP
On December 05 2012 05:08 Existor wrote: For some info:
- Siege Tanks kill Infested Eggs with 3 shots instead 4. With vechicle weapon upgrades they always can beat eggs with 2 shots. - IT eggs can be killed by storms now for ~3.5 seconds - IT eggs can be killed by colossus by 2 shots instead 3 - Planetary Fortress kills IT eggs for 2 shots too instead 3
uuhhh i thought colossus attack was 15x2....I think what you meant to say is 3 shots instead of 4
a collosus attack does 15 x2 becausse 2 beams
yes thats what I was pointing out. 2 shots from a colossus does 60 damage. he has it listed as being able to kill a IT egg with 70hp. Its just a simple error. It kills eggs in 3 shots now instead of 4
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
Nah, it's still a considderable investment for T to get a Raven with a Seeker on the field - It's a techlab on your port instead of reactor, which means less medivacs, then 60gameseconds to build it and then 75 more seconds for it to actually have energy to cast a Missile.
It's still too longterm of an investment for it to be viable in the mid I think
On December 05 2012 04:45 azzih wrote: Infestor for sure is too strong in certain szenarios and maybe in the lategame. But against some tactics every nerf to infestors will be huge. Like Protoss Sentry-Immortal-allin or a mech-terran especially in midgame. Both really hard to deal with, already right now. It will be even harder to handle after that nerfs.
Infestors wont help with immortal sentry ever anyways, unless youre facing silver league immortal sentry allins, you cant get infestors in time anyways.
I thought so too, until I saw Nerchio vs fraer game 1 round of 12 on cloud kingdom of the last Dreamhack. He had infestor of 3 base at 10:30 and used his lings to stall the toss army to get them in time for defense.
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
Nah, it's still a considderable investment for T to get a Raven with a Seeker on the field - It's a techlab on your port instead of reactor, which means less medivacs, then 60gameseconds to build it and then 75 more seconds for it to actually have energy to cast a Missile.
It's still too longterm of an investment for it to be viable in the mid I think
Think of all the money you will save on scans for creep and how you will not need to deal with burrowed infestors dumping crap on your main army. A single raven is worth its weight.
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
Nah, it's still a considderable investment for T to get a Raven with a Seeker on the field - It's a techlab on your port instead of reactor, which means less medivacs, then 60gameseconds to build it and then 75 more seconds for it to actually have energy to cast a Missile.
It's still too longterm of an investment for it to be viable in the mid I think
Sorry, I actually didn't mean "mess up", it was a rather strong wording for what I intended. What I actually meant is that such a change will make it easier to work a handful of new "cheeky" builds/compositions into the current mix.
On December 05 2012 05:41 EnhancedZ wrote: I really feel like mutas will be phased out from ZvT with the raven buff...
As someone who tried seeker missiles vs mutas often enough, let me tell you how to counter it:
Select all your mutas. Fly directly into the terran air. Congratulations, you just killed all the hostile air (And ground units below it) due to friendly fire of the seeker missiles.
Additionally as shown many times now, the only effect of the removal of the upgrade is that you dont have to spend 150/150. While that is appreciated, you really cant tell me that makes a serious difference. Seeker missiles do not become available faster without the upgrade.
You weren't microing correctly. Mutas should have to fly away from your missiles, so if you fly away too, he won't be able to get on the other side of the missile and drag it toward you. It should just land on him when he goes toward you.
And if he is coming right at you, spread out, you just drop PDDs and turrets right as he gets there. You should also have vikings if he's going mutas.
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
Nah, it's still a considderable investment for T to get a Raven with a Seeker on the field - It's a techlab on your port instead of reactor, which means less medivacs, then 60gameseconds to build it and then 75 more seconds for it to actually have energy to cast a Missile.
It's still too longterm of an investment for it to be viable in the mid I think
Think of all the money you will save on scans for creep and how you will not need to deal with burrowed infestors dumping crap on your main army. A single raven is worth its weight.
Indeed. I see Hellion Raven replacing Hellion Banshee as TvZ opener. Free creep contain + PDD works even against Queen ground attack now. Follow up with Banshee added in could do some serious damage too.
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
Nah, it's still a considderable investment for T to get a Raven with a Seeker on the field - It's a techlab on your port instead of reactor, which means less medivacs, then 60gameseconds to build it and then 75 more seconds for it to actually have energy to cast a Missile.
It's still too longterm of an investment for it to be viable in the mid I think
Think of all the money you will save on scans for creep and how you will not need to deal with burrowed infestors dumping crap on your main army. A single raven is worth its weight.
a single raven is definitely not worth it's weight, you have to constantly baby it if you want to actually have it around with your own army. to make a single raven, you also lose out on about 4 medivacs, which are MUCH more useful
edit:^^ why would hellion raven suddenly replace hellion banshee as the tvz opener if it hadn't before?
Woohoo, these changes are pretty decent, as Zerg player I approve! The more we see the Infestor as support unit instead of I-kill-everything caster, the better the game will be.
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
Nah, it's still a considderable investment for T to get a Raven with a Seeker on the field - It's a techlab on your port instead of reactor, which means less medivacs, then 60gameseconds to build it and then 75 more seconds for it to actually have energy to cast a Missile.
It's still too longterm of an investment for it to be viable in the mid I think
Think of all the money you will save on scans for creep and how you will not need to deal with burrowed infestors dumping crap on your main army. A single raven is worth its weight.
I imagine that if early ravens are coming off of Hellion Banshee expands into bio mech or even mech we will see ravens and tanks become very friendly.
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
Nah, it's still a considderable investment for T to get a Raven with a Seeker on the field - It's a techlab on your port instead of reactor, which means less medivacs, then 60gameseconds to build it and then 75 more seconds for it to actually have energy to cast a Missile.
It's still too longterm of an investment for it to be viable in the mid I think
Think of all the money you will save on scans for creep and how you will not need to deal with burrowed infestors dumping crap on your main army. A single raven is worth its weight.
Indeed. I see Hellion Raven replacing Hellion Banshee as TvZ opener. Free creep contain + PDD works even against Queen ground attack now. Follow up with Banshee added in could do some serious damage too.
I don't think so. If you don't kite, lings are going to kill hellions pretty fast.
Glad to see such a fast response after the tard "Z is fine in numbers" statement into 2 ZvZ finals.
Still, those changes are not gonna change the Z lategame superiority. Z will still always have more banked opponent in any even game.
And Infestor will still be a masseable unit. Infested terran cost should be nerfed to avoid that. And root must be remove for the sake of the game. Micro is a beauty to watch and root just fuck it up.
But i agree that the best choice is to make the big balance changes in Hots to then make a strong nerf infestors so Z's can rely in consistently other units.
Hate the IT change. Their most useful property is that they soak up dmg. If they don't do that they will fall off into obscurity again.
They are also virtually immobile, if you're fighting IT's then your doing something wrong. If you are forced to engage at its at your base, you must have lost an earlier engagement. (Besides for that stupid IT timing Z's were doing 6 months ago at the 3rds of Toss, though that never worked anyway)
The Problem has always been with Fungal, would have liked to seen Fungal as a projectile, (fairly fast projectile so Mutas aren't OP in ZvZ, but promotes their use more) and minus 5 dmg.
The range on Fg really only means that Zergs need to be slightly more careful with Infestors.
On December 05 2012 06:11 Cyanocyst wrote: Hate the IT change. Their most useful property is that they soak up dmg. If they don't do that they will fall off into obscurity again.
They are also virtually immobile, if you're fighting IT's then your doing something wrong. If you are forced to engage at its at your base, you must have lost an earlier engagement. (Besides for that stupid IT timing Z's were doing 6 months ago at the 3rds of Toss, though that never worked anyway)
The Problem has always been with Fungal, would have liked to seen Fungal as a projectile, (fairly fast projectile so Mutas aren't OP in ZvZ, but promotes their use more) and minus 5 dmg.
The range on Fg really only means that Zergs need to be slightly more careful with Infestors.
I don't know if you know this, you probably do because of the use of 'Fungal' in your post. But there's this cool spell that makes units not able to move. Generally that spell is used in tandem with infested terran in order to kill certain units immobilized by Fungal growth. I'm not quite sure if I'm doing something wrong when some of my units are unable to move and get rolled by infested Terran.
For meching players as well it's ridiculously hard to back out of an engagement in the time it takes to unsiege and GTFO you've just committed half of your army to death so you might as well stay and see how well you can trade.
On December 05 2012 05:41 EnhancedZ wrote: I really feel like mutas will be phased out from ZvT with the raven buff...
As someone who tried seeker missiles vs mutas often enough, let me tell you how to counter it:
Select all your mutas. Fly directly into the terran air. Congratulations, you just killed all the hostile air (And ground units below it) due to friendly fire of the seeker missiles.
Additionally as shown many times now, the only effect of the removal of the upgrade is that you dont have to spend 150/150. While that is appreciated, you really cant tell me that makes a serious difference. Seeker missiles do not become available faster without the upgrade.
You weren't microing correctly. Mutas should have to fly away from your missiles, so if you fly away too, he won't be able to get on the other side of the missile and drag it toward you. It should just land on him when he goes toward you.
And if he is coming right at you, spread out, you just drop PDDs and turrets right as he gets there. You should also have vikings if he's going mutas.
On December 05 2012 06:11 Cyanocyst wrote: Hate the IT change. Their most useful property is that they soak up dmg. If they don't do that they will fall off into obscurity again.
Their most useful property is definitely the 9-13 DPS.
On December 05 2012 06:11 Cyanocyst wrote: They are also virtually immobile, if you're fighting IT's then your doing something wrong.
Nice changes. Would have liked to see a change to the stun portion of fungal instead, make it a slow so micro is actually doable to a degree. Also Mothership immune to neural just like the ultralisk is would be nice.
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
Nah, it's still a considderable investment for T to get a Raven with a Seeker on the field - It's a techlab on your port instead of reactor, which means less medivacs, then 60gameseconds to build it and then 75 more seconds for it to actually have energy to cast a Missile.
It's still too longterm of an investment for it to be viable in the mid I think
Think of all the money you will save on scans for creep and how you will not need to deal with burrowed infestors dumping crap on your main army. A single raven is worth its weight.
Creep clearing is a valid point, but that has been true all along - However, Seeker Missile change has little to no impact on this. For the midgame, it's still a starport without a reactor that you have to commit to not produce medivacs, which potentially means ~4 less medivacs (1,4 production cycles á 2 medivacs to be exact) for the midgame, thats huge. If a zerg scout you going early raven, that they know are not going to be a direct threat to them for at least a minute and a half, they should either just kill you or go heavy macro.
It might be more significant in lategame though, but in regards to how TvZ early/midgame works, there should be no change
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
Nah, it's still a considderable investment for T to get a Raven with a Seeker on the field - It's a techlab on your port instead of reactor, which means less medivacs, then 60gameseconds to build it and then 75 more seconds for it to actually have energy to cast a Missile.
It's still too longterm of an investment for it to be viable in the mid I think
Sorry, I actually didn't mean "mess up", it was a rather strong wording for what I intended. What I actually meant is that such a change will make it easier to work a handful of new "cheeky" builds/compositions into the current mix.
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
Nah, it's still a considderable investment for T to get a Raven with a Seeker on the field - It's a techlab on your port instead of reactor, which means less medivacs, then 60gameseconds to build it and then 75 more seconds for it to actually have energy to cast a Missile.
It's still too longterm of an investment for it to be viable in the mid I think
Sorry, I actually didn't mean "mess up", it was a rather strong wording for what I intended. What I actually meant is that such a change will make it easier to work a handful of new "cheeky" builds/compositions into the current mix.
The game is so boring right now it's actually dropped below the previous low point of 5rax reaper. I think "a handful of cheeky builds" is about the last thing anyone should be afraid of.
On December 05 2012 03:58 narkissos wrote: Ryung our generations Rosa Parks.
LOL I was just thinking that, Ryung's rant has been heard! But I think they should weaken the damage of fungal, not being able to move is bad enough, then you got bangelings and ultralisk running into you.
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
Nah, it's still a considderable investment for T to get a Raven with a Seeker on the field - It's a techlab on your port instead of reactor, which means less medivacs, then 60gameseconds to build it and then 75 more seconds for it to actually have energy to cast a Missile.
It's still too longterm of an investment for it to be viable in the mid I think
Sorry, I actually didn't mean "mess up", it was a rather strong wording for what I intended. What I actually meant is that such a change will make it easier to work a handful of new "cheeky" builds/compositions into the current mix.
The game is so boring right now it's actually dropped below the previous low point of 5rax reaper. I think "a handful of cheeky builds" is about the last thing anyone should be afraid of.
no.. 5 rax reaper and 4 gate were both worse than the current meta
On December 05 2012 06:11 Cyanocyst wrote: Hate the IT change. Their most useful property is that they soak up dmg. If they don't do that they will fall off into obscurity again.
They are also virtually immobile, if you're fighting IT's then your doing something wrong. If you are forced to engage at its at your base, you must have lost an earlier engagement. (Besides for that stupid IT timing Z's were doing 6 months ago at the 3rds of Toss, though that never worked anyway)
The Problem has always been with Fungal, would have liked to seen Fungal as a projectile, (fairly fast projectile so Mutas aren't OP in ZvZ, but promotes their use more) and minus 5 dmg.
The range on Fg really only means that Zergs need to be slightly more careful with Infestors.
I wish my sieged tanks could run away from ITs.
The egg tank too much damage, that's why they nerf it in case.
Infestor nerf is only really for ZvP midgame, where sentry forcefield range will be larger than infestor's fungal growth range. When it gets to lategame infestor broodlord armies, there will be almost no difference.
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
Nah, it's still a considderable investment for T to get a Raven with a Seeker on the field - It's a techlab on your port instead of reactor, which means less medivacs, then 60gameseconds to build it and then 75 more seconds for it to actually have energy to cast a Missile.
It's still too longterm of an investment for it to be viable in the mid I think
Sorry, I actually didn't mean "mess up", it was a rather strong wording for what I intended. What I actually meant is that such a change will make it easier to work a handful of new "cheeky" builds/compositions into the current mix.
The game is so boring right now it's actually dropped below the previous low point of 5rax reaper. I think "a handful of cheeky builds" is about the last thing anyone should be afraid of.
no.. 5 rax reaper and 4 gate were both worse than the current meta
I'd agree with you if 5 rax reaper and 4 gate were preceded by 15 minutes of building workers, supply depots, and creep tumors.
On December 05 2012 06:32 Butterednuts wrote: Infestor nerf is only really for ZvP midgame, where sentry forcefield range will be larger than infestor's fungal growth range. When it gets to lategame infestor broodlord armies, there will be almost no difference.
There is. 1 storm destroys eggs now. Also feedback > FG now?
On December 05 2012 06:36 SharkStarcraft wrote: Ryung is like: "WHAT?!? NOW?! fuck my life. " Nice changes, definitely balance things, but don't make infestors more fun to watch.
I dunno, Infestors have pretty cool death animations.
Seem like decent enough changes, reducing the unit's effectiveness without nerfing it into the ground. Feeling pretty good about how they approached this and their intended HotS direction, let's see how it works out.
As a zerg i like these changes . I would love to see more ravens being used and infestors are pretty bad right now, hopefully this patch fixes the infestor problem.
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
Nah, it's still a considderable investment for T to get a Raven with a Seeker on the field - It's a techlab on your port instead of reactor, which means less medivacs, then 60gameseconds to build it and then 75 more seconds for it to actually have energy to cast a Missile.
It's still too longterm of an investment for it to be viable in the mid I think
Sorry, I actually didn't mean "mess up", it was a rather strong wording for what I intended. What I actually meant is that such a change will make it easier to work a handful of new "cheeky" builds/compositions into the current mix.
The game is so boring right now it's actually dropped below the previous low point of 5rax reaper. I think "a handful of cheeky builds" is about the last thing anyone should be afraid of.
And I did not mean that I found that bad either. I welcome more variety. I just wanted to point out that this will do very little for the lategame, where terran is at its worst, while opening up things for early- mid-game with are much better off as of now.
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
Nah, it's still a considderable investment for T to get a Raven with a Seeker on the field - It's a techlab on your port instead of reactor, which means less medivacs, then 60gameseconds to build it and then 75 more seconds for it to actually have energy to cast a Missile.
It's still too longterm of an investment for it to be viable in the mid I think
Sorry, I actually didn't mean "mess up", it was a rather strong wording for what I intended. What I actually meant is that such a change will make it easier to work a handful of new "cheeky" builds/compositions into the current mix.
The game is so boring right now it's actually dropped below the previous low point of 5rax reaper. I think "a handful of cheeky builds" is about the last thing anyone should be afraid of.
no.. 5 rax reaper and 4 gate were both worse than the current meta
5 rax reaper was a reasonable micro war and let to interesting mid-game situations/compositions, specifically the timing where reapers became less useful, but the T hasn't been able to fully switch his composition around. The only issues with the build were more around it being a little too weighted in favor of the T as the Z player was burdened with all of the risk (especially around building loss).
That and the tiny maps of that era which were always a core problem for Z back then.
On December 05 2012 05:41 EnhancedZ wrote: I really feel like mutas will be phased out from ZvT with the raven buff...
As someone who tried seeker missiles vs mutas often enough, let me tell you how to counter it:
Select all your mutas. Fly directly into the terran air. Congratulations, you just killed all the hostile air (And ground units below it) due to friendly fire of the seeker missiles.
Additionally as shown many times now, the only effect of the removal of the upgrade is that you dont have to spend 150/150. While that is appreciated, you really cant tell me that makes a serious difference. Seeker missiles do not become available faster without the upgrade.
You weren't microing correctly. Mutas should have to fly away from your missiles, so if you fly away too, he won't be able to get on the other side of the missile and drag it toward you. It should just land on him when he goes toward you.
And if he is coming right at you, spread out, you just drop PDDs and turrets right as he gets there. You should also have vikings if he's going mutas.
what league are you
Master.
If you have a lot of Ravens versus Zerg you'll want just a couple of Vikings and Banshees along so they don't actually have to waste energy to kill little things like lings overlords creep tumors and mostly dead units. Vikings also stop Mutas from just buzzing around forever being annoying. They have to engage or back off.
So wait, "seeker missile upgrade removed" means that the seeker missile no longer has to be upgraded, not that it has been entirely removed from the game, right? Important distinction that I don't see on the front page.
The nerf seems fair and adequate tbh. Now the theorical hard counters to infestors are better vs them. Im talking anti casters such as templar and ghosts, siege tanks and colosus. Im afraid tho that it will result in a even more turtly zvp game because it will be harder to move out without pushing creep and spines.
On December 05 2012 06:48 RobDeBob wrote: So wait, "seeker missile upgrade removed" means that the seeker missile no longer has to be upgraded, not that it has been entirely removed from the game, right? Important distinction that I don't see on the front page.
Yeah, every time they have mentioned this change they've failed to be specific. They're giving you the missile for free.
On December 05 2012 05:53 WigglingSquid wrote: Not bad, but I am perplexed by their choice for the raven. Removing the upgrade will mess up early/midgame and do very little for the lategame, where the real problem is not researching SM but the fact that using it basically means going the way of the baneling with a much more expensive unit.
Nah, it's still a considderable investment for T to get a Raven with a Seeker on the field - It's a techlab on your port instead of reactor, which means less medivacs, then 60gameseconds to build it and then 75 more seconds for it to actually have energy to cast a Missile.
It's still too longterm of an investment for it to be viable in the mid I think
Think of all the money you will save on scans for creep and how you will not need to deal with burrowed infestors dumping crap on your main army. A single raven is worth its weight.
Creep clearing is a valid point, but that has been true all along - However, Seeker Missile change has little to no impact on this. For the midgame, it's still a starport without a reactor that you have to commit to not produce medivacs, which potentially means ~4 less medivacs (1,4 production cycles á 2 medivacs to be exact) for the midgame, thats huge. If a zerg scout you going early raven, that they know are not going to be a direct threat to them for at least a minute and a half, they should either just kill you or go heavy macro.
It might be more significant in lategame though, but in regards to how TvZ early/midgame works, there should be no change
Just do the standard hellion into bashee opener and trade out one banshee and a little extra gas for an early raven. Then kill unlimited creep tumors while transitioning into standard play. Map hacks removed.
As protoss, I hate creep and always get my obs as early as possible to kill it. If my obs cost 125 more and could sometimes shoot an awesome AOE, could block queen shots and drop sweet turrets, I would work that in.
On December 05 2012 05:41 EnhancedZ wrote: I really feel like mutas will be phased out from ZvT with the raven buff...
As someone who tried seeker missiles vs mutas often enough, let me tell you how to counter it:
Select all your mutas. Fly directly into the terran air. Congratulations, you just killed all the hostile air (And ground units below it) due to friendly fire of the seeker missiles.
Additionally as shown many times now, the only effect of the removal of the upgrade is that you dont have to spend 150/150. While that is appreciated, you really cant tell me that makes a serious difference. Seeker missiles do not become available faster without the upgrade.
You weren't microing correctly. Mutas should have to fly away from your missiles, so if you fly away too, he won't be able to get on the other side of the missile and drag it toward you. It should just land on him when he goes toward you.
And if he is coming right at you, spread out, you just drop PDDs and turrets right as he gets there. You should also have vikings if he's going mutas.
what league are you
Master.
If you have a lot of Ravens versus Zerg you'll want Vikings and Banshees along so they don't actually have to waste energy to kill little things like lings overlords creep tumors and mostly dead units. Vikings also stop Mutas from just buzzing around forever being annoying. They have to engage or back off.
Yes I had those units along. Guess which units all died horribly due to friendly fire of the seeker missiles? Nice to tell that I should have dropped PDDs, but guess what killed my units, friendly fire from seeker missiles (not to mention there is no energy for PDDs after launching seekers). Sure the first ones hit fine, but if you launch a missile a fraction too late it hurts your army more than his.
Then add that zerg t2 air is twice as strong as terran t2 air, and you really got a problem since if you dont do massive damage its over. (Vikings roughly trade evenly with mutas, but mutas are way better massable, and as terran you need a reasonable banshee count too, which dont exactly help against mutas). Saying I should spread my vikings while launching seeker missiles, pdds and turets is easier then to actually do it, especially since you dont want your ravens as meatshield. Maybe you should upload a replay to show how it is done.
And in the end you will kill the zerg air, that isnt the problem. The problem was that most times I tried it and the zerg didnt screw up something, at best the result was mutual destruction. And mutual destruction just isnt good enough when the zerg can remake his army so much faster. Even if I could remake at the same speed, I am then with a bunch of ravens lacking energy.
Just do the standard hellion into bashee opener and trade out one banshee and a little extra gas for an early raven. Then kill unlimited creep tumors while transitioning into standard play. Map hacks removed.
While I definately see that as an option, this patch didnt actually change anything about that. That single raven wont be lobbing out seeker missiles, it is much more likely it is used for PDDs.
why not just make infestors more supply, so they can't be massed in these absurd amounts? hsm upgrade removed is not going to change anything, since you still need a techlab on the starport and wait 898721937h until the raven has enough energy - after it's been produced ...
Additionally, we anticipate that the reduction in health for Infested Terran eggs will be most noticeable in the PvZ matchup when Psi Storm is used TvZ is the most broken match-up as of now, the mach-up which is the reason all that hatred is over here for months, but they are making changes virtually for PvZ...
On December 05 2012 06:58 Sworm_MS wrote: Additionally, we anticipate that the reduction in health for Infested Terran eggs will be most noticeable in the PvZ matchup when Psi Storm is used TvZ is the most broken match-up as of now, the mach-up which is the reason all that hatred is over here for months, but they are making changes virtually for PvZ...
DK, how does your mind exactly work, i wonder?!
The range nerf is more for TvZ than PvZ, and we get HSM for free. So 2/3 changes isn't too shabby.
On December 05 2012 06:58 Sworm_MS wrote: Additionally, we anticipate that the reduction in health for Infested Terran eggs will be most noticeable in the PvZ matchup when Psi Storm is used TvZ is the most broken match-up as of now, the mach-up which is the reason all that hatred is over here for months, but they are making changes virtually for PvZ...
DK, how does your mind exactly work, i wonder?!
As a protoss, I will say that PvZ and TvZ are both messed equally, but at different points in the game. 8 range helps out terrans a lot in the end game, since a lot of end game units now outrange fungle and infestors need to get very close to nail a full AOE.
On December 05 2012 06:58 Sworm_MS wrote: Additionally, we anticipate that the reduction in health for Infested Terran eggs will be most noticeable in the PvZ matchup when Psi Storm is used TvZ is the most broken match-up as of now, the mach-up which is the reason all that hatred is over here for months, but they are making changes virtually for PvZ...
On December 05 2012 06:58 Sworm_MS wrote: Additionally, we anticipate that the reduction in health for Infested Terran eggs will be most noticeable in the PvZ matchup when Psi Storm is used TvZ is the most broken match-up as of now, the mach-up which is the reason all that hatred is over here for months, but they are making changes virtually for PvZ...
DK, how does your mind exactly work, i wonder?!
Fungal range is reduced by one, making it easier for tanks and ghosts to take care of them.
IT HP is reduced, making it more of a viable option to kill the eggs instead of ignoring them.
How does your mind exactly work, i wonder?! do you read the full patch notes?
Good changes, but I actually feel that toss might become a bit too strong against zerg now, it was allready a pretty balanced match up (bad, but balanced in terms of win %).
As a zerg player I've mixed feelings about this. First I understand that something had to be done (since half the commuinty has been crying rivers for months by now and since blizz dont want to lose those players ) But this is not the way to go since this wont change much.
Lets see the fungal range change is just marginal and since zerg use burrow and use inferstors together with other units this wont affect zergsmuch. And the infestor 30% reduced hp wont change that much since u only need to add more infestors.
This is what blizz should've done improve counters to infestor. Ghost for terrans could be immune to fungals. And for High templars make feedbak more effective.
On December 05 2012 04:07 willyallthewei wrote: Taking off the upgrade is going to make it really fun to deal w/ a resurgence of raven based 1-1-1's as soon as terrans get smart.
This just occurred to me as well. Ouch. Still think it was a good change though.
Hmm, I think in a 1.1.1 the PDD (even the turrets) would be far more valuable than a missile. You only get one (don't know of any 1.1.1 all-in's that involve more than one raven) and the Seeker missile doesn't really damage protoss units in a devastating way, compared to the incredible advantage/map-control a PDD offers.
Yeah, PDD is wayyyy better than seeker missile for a 1/1/1. You're protected from much more damage than a seeker missile would deliver, which allows you to deal more damage as well.
These may not be game-breaking (or fixing for that matter,) but this may make it a ton more enjoyable to play XvZ. It's not possible to kill Infested Terran Eggs with one measly Psi Storm and that changes quite a bit.
About damn time I say. I was hoping for something more drastic though; I still see Zergs only turtling and massing BL/infestor and Protoss/Terran having to work harder, juggle more units, micro more intently, to combat it. Sure, it's a move in the right direction, and sure match-up percentages might even up a bit, but PvZ percentage has technically been even for a long time and we all know what a shit show that's been. Ultimately this is just an aesthetic change, to improve the numbers but not actual gameplay or watchability, and I feel real change won't be made until anti-skill spells such as fungal are removed or altered drastically.
On December 05 2012 07:34 Sjokola wrote: Both feedback and emp outrange fungal now. Plus infestors have to get closer to tanks aswel etc. Very curious how this works out.
Don't forget that fungal has a 2.0 radius, making it a 10 range spell at best
On December 05 2012 07:35 SHODAN wrote: Patch is live on NA folks!
Thanks for update, time to get playing!
p.s are there any active communities that just talk/play sc2 over voice chat? with different rooms for people who want to go off and practice certain things and a larger room of people just playing/asking for help etc. I've been thinking for a while it might help remove the crushing loneliness that is sc2.
I think it's one of the main reasons so many people watch streams rather than play, for the limited social experience of it.
there was a reason that blizzard buffed infestors in the first place: zerg dies too easily to too many things without them in their current state. I agree that they're boring but it's not just like you can nerf them to magically fix things. I say remove fungal damage entirely, triple the aoe, add a projectile, half infested terran egg life and increase damage and accompany the changes with some zerg buffs to muta or hydra or drop or banelings.
edit: seems a bit whiny. I agree with the nerf, it's just not enough. it's not going to fix the deathball issues, just going to make zergs win less
On December 05 2012 07:41 Lobotomist wrote: there was a reason that blizzard buffed infestors in the first place: zerg dies too easily to too many things without them in their current state. I agree that they're boring but it's not just like you can nerf them to magically fix things. I say remove fungal damage entirely, triple the aoe, add a projectile, half infested terran egg life and increase damage and accompany the changes with some zerg buffs to muta or hydra or drop or banelings.
edit: seems a bit whiny. I agree with the nerf, it's just not enough. it's not going to fix the deathball issues, just going to make zergs win less
But that's all whiners want. They want the enemy/nastybadmen to win less because its just not fair. It works exactly like modern tumblr feminism in that regard.
Really nice change. However, isn't this a huge buff to colossus+void ray compositions? The original problem that resulted in a buff for fungal. Colossus+FF can zone out everything before B'Lord. Maybe colo void ray and HT compositions can go up against Blord infestor.
As a terran, I feel this is a good buff particularly for mech based play which had a serious problem against mass IT spam. I still feel raven, ghost won't see much use since they have different fundamental problems. Ghosts feel like they are not supply efficient and raven takes way too long before a return on the gas investment. At the moment, going raven allows zerg to take his side of the map and bank enough for a tech switch which even raven tech fails to deal with. Of course this is orthogonal to the fact that HSM itself is unreliable in engagements.
IMO the biggest difference in TvZ is going to be the big buff viking+tank synergy got against blord+infestor and tank heavy pre-hive timings are a lot stronger now. Maybe mech will more use in TvZ. Right now fungal + IT spam in maxed out engagements destroys bio+tank pretty hard. BF Hellion+tank atleast has a lot of splash and less clumping.
In any case I expect TvZ to be a lot more playable and PvZ to change big time. With the redesign in HOTS things before Christmas, things are looking good for SC2 .
On December 05 2012 06:58 Sworm_MS wrote: Additionally, we anticipate that the reduction in health for Infested Terran eggs will be most noticeable in the PvZ matchup when Psi Storm is used TvZ is the most broken match-up as of now, the mach-up which is the reason all that hatred is over here for months, but they are making changes virtually for PvZ...
DK, how does your mind exactly work, i wonder?!
Fungal range is reduced by one, making it easier for tanks and ghosts to take care of them.
IT HP is reduced, making it more of a viable option to kill the eggs instead of ignoring them.
How does your mind exactly work, i wonder?! do you read the full patch notes?
Tanks with +1 two shotting eggs is HUGE, can't even emphasize how huge. Basically a nice triangle can deflect IT eggs spammed to splash kill tanks.
On December 05 2012 05:23 iS.Pyre wrote: Progress but still not a solution. When blizzard nerfed ghosts from 45 damage to biological down to 25, THAT was a real nerf. This is a step in the right direction, but certainly not the answer to all our terran cries.
You call it a real nerf, yet I'm sure a lot of people can agree that it just nerfed ghosts completely to the ground (in other words, it went too far). If Infestors were nerfed like that, it could be worse as Zerg is so reliant on Infestors at the minute that it could just make Zerg almost a bad option as a race.
I hope this will enable HerO and TaeJa to overcome Zerg better now and not suffer mindblowing late-game losses. Good that it comes rather quickly now, although I would have liked seeing it for IPL5 already.
On December 05 2012 05:23 iS.Pyre wrote: Progress but still not a solution. When blizzard nerfed ghosts from 45 damage to biological down to 25, THAT was a real nerf. This is a step in the right direction, but certainly not the answer to all our terran cries.
You call it a real nerf, yet I'm sure a lot of people can agree that it just nerfed ghosts completely to the ground (in other words, it went too far). If Infestors were nerfed like that, it could be worse as Zerg is so reliant on Infestors at the minute that it could just make Zerg almost a bad option as a race.
Like terran is ATM?? Hell I`ve played terran SINCE BETA and I`m sticking to it... But please, if a friend of mine were to start playing right now, I`d beg: don`t play Terran.
On December 05 2012 07:34 Sjokola wrote: Both feedback and emp outrange fungal now. Plus infestors have to get closer to tanks aswel etc. Very curious how this works out.
Don't forget that fungal has a 2.0 radius, making it a 10 range spell at best
Feedback is 9
It would be a 9 range spell. 8 range with a +/- 1 for the area of fungal.
I can see this patch changing some things around in TvZ, sadly i don't see how this one could shake up PvZ o.O !? PvZ will still be exactly the same i think.
On December 05 2012 07:49 babyToSS wrote: Really nice change. However, isn't this a huge buff to colossus+void ray compositions? The original problem that resulted in a buff for fungal. Colossus+FF can zone out everything before B'Lord. Maybe colo void ray and HT compositions can go up against Blord infestor.
As a terran, I feel this is a good buff particularly for mech based play which had a serious problem against mass IT spam. I still feel raven, ghost won't see much use since they have different fundamental problems. Ghosts feel like they are not supply efficient and raven takes way too long before a return on the gas investment. At the moment, going raven allows zerg to take his side of the map and bank enough for a tech switch which even raven tech fails to deal with. Of course this is orthogonal to the fact that HSM itself is unreliable in engagements.
IMO the biggest difference in TvZ is going to be the big buff viking+tank synergy got against blord+infestor and tank heavy pre-hive timings are a lot stronger now. Maybe mech will more use in TvZ. Right now fungal + IT spam in maxed out engagements destroys bio+tank pretty hard. BF Hellion+tank atleast has a lot of splash and less clumping.
In any case I expect TvZ to be a lot more playable and PvZ to change big time. With the redesign in HOTS things before Christmas, things are looking good for SC2 .
Hopefully that happens as well. It's not very interesting (or good) to see PvZ rely on a 2 base timing every single game.
On December 05 2012 08:16 MiND.GaMeS wrote: I can see this patch changing some things around in TvZ, sadly i don't see how this one could shake up PvZ o.O !? PvZ will still be exactly the same i think.
Storm killing IT field by themselves is pretty cool Colossi outraging fungal Well placec forcefield make infestors unable to fungal things that were in reach before
On December 05 2012 05:23 iS.Pyre wrote: Progress but still not a solution. When blizzard nerfed ghosts from 45 damage to biological down to 25, THAT was a real nerf. This is a step in the right direction, but certainly not the answer to all our terran cries.
You call it a real nerf, yet I'm sure a lot of people can agree that it just nerfed ghosts completely to the ground (in other words, it went too far). If Infestors were nerfed like that, it could be worse as Zerg is so reliant on Infestors at the minute that it could just make Zerg almost a bad option as a race.
Make zerg a bad option as a race, you mean like terran is now? And I disagree, not all zergs are reliant on infestors, only the bad ones, only the patch zergs. Before infestors started raping, zergs were winning with muta ling bling, hell nestea was winning GSLs. Nerfing infestors to the ground will simply weed out the shitty zergs and let the elite shine and stand out. This is what I would LOVE to see.
Its a start, I'll give them that. Good thing that blizz doesn't rush into these things, but I hope they understand that this most likely is not a full fix to the current situation.
Edit: from a T perspective that is. IT change looks very interesting regarding PvZ.
On December 05 2012 05:23 iS.Pyre wrote: Progress but still not a solution. When blizzard nerfed ghosts from 45 damage to biological down to 25, THAT was a real nerf. This is a step in the right direction, but certainly not the answer to all our terran cries.
You call it a real nerf, yet I'm sure a lot of people can agree that it just nerfed ghosts completely to the ground (in other words, it went too far). If Infestors were nerfed like that, it could be worse as Zerg is so reliant on Infestors at the minute that it could just make Zerg almost a bad option as a race.
Make zerg a bad option as a race, you mean like terran is now? And I disagree, not all zergs are reliant on infestors, only the bad ones, only the patch zergs. Before infestors started raping, zergs were winning with muta ling bling, hell nestea was winning GSLs. Nerfing infestors to the ground will simply weed out the shitty zergs and let the elite shine and stand out. This is what I would LOVE to see.
No, not really, Terran is still an amazing option unless you're a top Terran looking to compete internationally.
I like the reduction in the health of IT eggs. I think this could make a noticable difference in mech TvZ games and PvZ (in general). The fungal reduction range is also nice. It will be that much more risky to try to fungal units now. I still would have liked it if they radically changed fungal to some sort of "slow" type spell but I understand that they don't want to fuss too much with WOL balance at this point. On the whole, the changes are in the right direction.
On December 05 2012 07:34 Sjokola wrote: Both feedback and emp outrange fungal now. Plus infestors have to get closer to tanks aswel etc. Very curious how this works out.
Don't forget that fungal has a 2.0 radius, making it a 10 range spell at best
Feedback is 9
It would be a 9 range spell. 8 range with a +/- 1 for the area of fungal.
This really is about the change I hoped would happen. Terran still can't clump up, but it is a little more forgiving. Infested Terans can still be used to harras just as effecively, but are a little worse in direct engagements. The seeker missile buf allows terran to include some ravens, but doesn't buff mass raven (another mass spellcaster army).
I think this patch is enough. Until we see the consequences of the patch HOTS will be too close that balance changes really matter and everybody will be adapting to HOTS instead of developing new strats if they reöease another balance patch.
On December 05 2012 08:45 thirtyapm wrote: good work.
but what about doing nothing except reverting one of either queen or ol buff?
Blizzard is pretty committed to planting their design philosophy flag that Zerg should always get a free third, balancing around this truism. I doubt it'll ever be changed if at all in WoL.
these changes are not that big, consider most of the community is moving on to HOTS where infestors don't matter much (Idra stated on his stream that they are buffing units like viper/hydra ect when they mass nerf infestor)
So this is only a minor change in WOL, since with proper control of infestors, the -1 range does not mean to much to pros, mabey to lower league players (does not not matter) who have bad micro. The eggs health is also minor, how often do pro protoss go early high temp?? Egg nerf is only some what useful super late game.
WOL still has Bl/infestor turtle the -1 range/egg health does nothing to change this boring play style.
i think these changes are pretty dece, not a huge nerf on the infestor and the raven needed to be changed in some way, hopefully terrans start to use the more
Wont be enough, better than nothing I guess. If they wanted to throw a patch out there with out a major redesign of the infester which is what it needs, should have just made it 3 supply. Then zergs will make something other than 20+ infesters in every game.
On December 05 2012 08:53 Nazeron wrote: i think these changes are pretty dece, not a huge nerf on the infestor and the raven needed to be changed in some way, hopefully terrans start to use the more
The remove of the seeker upgrade will not make terran use it more....this is not even really a buff, consider Ravens need a HUGE time to even gain the energy needed for 1 seeker, and the investment towards ravens is not viable early/mid game.....Only has a late game option, even then it's still risky and a gamble and relies on zerg to have their army clumped up.
Honestly kinda of pointless, Raven needs a entire re work, in which David Kim said will happen in HOTS.
I have a question about the storm vs. infested terrans thing: Whouldn't good players place the infested terrans either in the opponents army or spread them out more?
On December 05 2012 08:45 thirtyapm wrote: good work.
but what about doing nothing except reverting one of either queen or ol buff?
Blizzard is pretty committed to planting their design philosophy flag that Zerg should always get a free third, balancing around this truism. I doubt it'll ever be changed if at all in WoL.
The problem is that before the queen patch you could gain map control, scout, contain and harass with 4 units, at no risk at all, while expanding. That is NOT balanced in any way.
Sure the queen buff was over the top, but the sheer power of reactor hellion was just too much.
On December 05 2012 08:53 Nazeron wrote: i think these changes are pretty dece, not a huge nerf on the infestor and the raven needed to be changed in some way, hopefully terrans start to use the more
The remove of the seeker upgrade will not make terran use it more....this is not even really a buff, consider Ravens need a HUGE time to even gain the energy needed for 1 seeker, and the investment towards ravens is not viable early/mid game.....Only has a late game option, even then it's still risky and a gamble and relies on zerg to have their army clumped up.
Honestly kinda of pointless, Raven needs a entire re work, in which David Kim said will happen in HOTS.
Raven will become more like the science vessel in HotS I think. At least that is the impression they gave at WCS
On December 05 2012 08:57 Gnax wrote: I have a question about the storm vs. infested terrans thing: Whouldn't good players place the infested terrans either in the opponents army or spread them out more?
The infested terran egg nerf will only come into play in the late game, in the PVZ match up, so late game the direct fight with only infested terrans will be some what weaker, but the nerf does not do to much in zvt, where zerg can still use few eggs to force siege tanks to fire on each other or help break siege lines.
I'm happy with all changes. Although i doubt the raven change will do very much, i do think it will make a difference in viability.
the fungal nerf will make sniping infestors a lot more viable as well as infestor micro needed. With a little luck this also makes having a shit load of infestors less powerful because of a lack of flexibility. But that's to be seen.
Overall this is very much a step in the good direction for WOL.
On December 05 2012 08:45 thirtyapm wrote: good work.
but what about doing nothing except reverting one of either queen or ol buff?
Blizzard is pretty committed to planting their design philosophy flag that Zerg should always get a free third, balancing around this truism. I doubt it'll ever be changed if at all in WoL.
The problem is that before the queen patch you could gain map control, scout, contain and harass with 4 units, at no risk at all, while expanding. That is NOT balanced in any way.
Sure the queen buff was over the top, but the sheer power of reactor hellion was just too much.
It wasn't imbalanced, it was strong, but largely solved and dealt with very adequately as zergs adapted to a later third and much faster fourths behind huge midgame swells of compositions containing roaches. And there was always a risk, as zerg abused the shit out of hellion openers with economic 6-7 roach pressure timings that would scuttle to the Terran's natural and kill SCV's for free with only a few unupgraded marines and hellions to oppose them. The disparity in winrates were no where near to where they are now.
I dont understand how this fixes PvZ lategame... call me bad or whatever, but if the fungal range decrease is meant to encourage and buff more high templar use, you would need like 1 ht per 1 or 2 infestors, assuming they dont die to broodlings or spines...
otherwise colossus outranges infestors fungal range, but the broodlords would still be in range.. I mean usually when i play vs broodlord infestor they use that composition defensively and eventually move out once they have crazy amounts of broods and infestors with max energy... but mostly it is me who would have to attack him once hes out of position from his spines, but still... the fungal range is still pretty good and i cant vortex the broods when he splits them... and i am lucky if i can get a clear blink under the broods without being fungaled...
i just thought that they would balance out the infestor broodlord composition in PvZ specifically.. i mean im sure infestors are pretty imba vs terran too... but i thought the serious problem was PvZ.. i mean i'm not gonna just immortal sentry all in every game thats just boring.. but with broodlord infestor its not even challenge, its like almost impossible...
please call me out as a scrub and tell me that i'm wrong, i would like to hear it.. cos i still don't see how i would deal with the zerg deathball without mass carrier... i dont see how the eggs and a minor fungal range change can affect the deathball to an extent that makes a protoss have a chance in the lategame..
Oh nice energy change on the raven! wait, what there wasn't one? oh just kidding then. Looks like blizzard still thinks that seeker missile isn't a coinflip.
Speaking as a zerg I feel the real problem right now is that massing infestors is too good. I would prefer a supply cost change but the range will make a significant difference and at least make infestors more challenging to use so I am in favor. I wonder if it is still worth it to use infested terran in zvz fights..
I'm still not sure how this busts infestor broodlord.
But, in fairness, the fungal change seems more important for T than for P. 1 storm killing eggs oO should be fun for chargelot templar builds.
Edit: I don't think these changes make a lot of sense without fixing the immortal sentry push, especially in light of the fact that this is really a mid game change anyway.
On December 05 2012 09:20 Emzeeshady wrote: Love it
Only I feel now that Zerg will be UP versus Protoss. Toss is already doing good vs Zerg but with the IT nerf I feel Protoss may have an even chance in the late game which is unfair considering how much better they are in the mid game.
Hahaha how would it be unfair for them to have a chance in lategame because they have the choice to won won won.
On December 05 2012 09:27 robopork wrote: Not a bad change for midgame...?
I'm still not sure how this busts infestor broodlord.
But, in fairness, the fungal change seems more important for T than for P. 1 storm killing eggs oO should be fun for chargelot templar builds.
Edit: I don't think these changes make a lot of sense without fixing the immortal sentry push, especially in light of the fact that this is really a mid game change anyway.
It doesn't "bust" infestor broodlord, but it makes it a more even playing field where the player with better micro will be more likely to win.
Zerg will still have to go infestor broodlord very often because there is simply no other consistently viable lategame unit composition for them. But now, surviving until infestor/broodlord is on the field doesn't make the zerg virtually uncounterable.
On December 05 2012 09:20 Emzeeshady wrote: Love it
Only I feel now that Zerg will be UP versus Protoss. Toss is already doing good vs Zerg but with the IT nerf I feel Protoss may have an even chance in the late game which is unfair considering how much better they are in the mid game.
Hahaha how would it be unfair for them to have a chance in lategame because they have the choice to won won won.
I really hope thats sarcasm
Protoss already has a strong advantage in ZvP midgame. If they then are completely even lategame, that will mean that the matchup will be imbalanced towards protoss. He is correct in what he is saying, even if the ultimate truth is that that matchup would end up very badly designed.
On December 05 2012 09:19 Insomni7 wrote: Speaking as a zerg I feel the real problem right now is that massing infestors is too good. I would prefer a supply cost change but the range will make a significant difference and at least make infestors more challenging to use so I am in favor. I wonder if it is still worth it to use infested terran in zvz fights..
Well, there's just not much you can do without redesigning the whole game at this point. Fungal and infested terrans probably shouldn't have been assigned to the same unit. For instance, maybe if infestors only had fungal, and overseers had the option to drop ITs instead of changelings, we'd see a different mix of units being made.
On December 05 2012 09:20 Emzeeshady wrote: Love it
Only I feel now that Zerg will be UP versus Protoss. Toss is already doing good vs Zerg but with the IT nerf I feel Protoss may have an even chance in the late game which is unfair considering how much better they are in the mid game.
Hahaha how would it be unfair for them to have a chance in lategame because they have the choice to won won won.
I really hope thats sarcasm
Protoss already has a strong advantage in ZvP midgame. If they then are completely even lategame, that will mean that the matchup will be imbalanced towards protoss. He is correct in what he is saying, even if the ultimate truth is that that matchup would end up very badly designed.
It allready is the worst designed matchup in the game. I fail to see how it can make it worse. Also protoss doesent have a better midgame, they have pretty much 1 all in they are forced to do, or try for a prehive timing. I woudent called being forced to do an all in being a better midgame
On December 05 2012 09:19 Insomni7 wrote: Speaking as a zerg I feel the real problem right now is that massing infestors is too good. I would prefer a supply cost change but the range will make a significant difference and at least make infestors more challenging to use so I am in favor. I wonder if it is still worth it to use infested terran in zvz fights..
Well, there's just not much you can do without redesigning the whole game at this point. Fungal and infested terrans probably shouldn't have been assigned to the same unit. For instance, maybe if infestors only had fungal, and overseers had the option to drop ITs instead of changelings, we'd see a different mix of units being made.
LOL
Overseers dont cost supply... so you would be able to make 100000000 infested terrans ^^ I definitely dont like that idea
I agree with reducing infestor range, though the problem of chain fungal hasn't been addressed, and I also agree with reducing infested terran health, which would make them much more stormable. However, I don't think making seeker missile upgrade-less is necessarily a good change. It makes seeker missiles come out sooner, yes, but that's not the main issue with seeker missile. Buffing seeker-missile against massive, and adding an upgrade that reduces seeker-missile energy cost to 100 might be a better idea.
On December 05 2012 07:34 Sjokola wrote: Both feedback and emp outrange fungal now. Plus infestors have to get closer to tanks aswel etc. Very curious how this works out.
Don't forget that fungal has a 2.0 radius, making it a 10 range spell at best
Feedback is 9
if the zerg player manages to fungal the templar/templars without getting feedbacked that way then he deserves it, making this interaction overall more skill focused for both sides which is always a great thing.
I was thinking that taking 1 away from fungal range in combo with making it a projectile would be perfect. This will at least make them harder to use when running into tank lines. Hell, as a Terran I'll take just about anything right now.
I do get the feeling like Terrans are like Americans with gas prices. They keep raising up the gas price so high, that when they settle it down to "ONLY 3 DOLLARS A GALLON!" it seems cheap, when it is still stupid expensive. We will be happy about this one range thing because we know that is the best we can hope for. Notice I did not even mention the HSM change. That was not by mistake.
On December 05 2012 03:20 Mastazaka wrote: Snipe is gonna be SO good vs Infestors now. It will have a 2 range lead on them to snipe before fungal. So having 4-6 ghost will be a lot more forgiving on sniping them. Plus use the left over ghost to launch nukes . However I really think the root effect needs to be gone I mean cmon... this is a big start showing there willing to patch at least.
I agree that Snipe will be better vs Infestors, but ghosts's aren't really going to be cost effective vs many other Zerg units, so if Ghosts become more viable maybe Zergs will switch back more inte ling/bling/muta? Probably not, but one can dream...
Really like the patch overall though, nice work Blizz.
I'm thinking I may have to go back to the tried and true Muta Ling Bling style of ZvT. With the 8 range on Fungal Growth, it will be easier for Siege Tanks to pick off my infestors if I try to get close to the Marines to Fungal them. I don't know, I've only played a couple games.
Nothing seems to have changed in ZvP, I will tell you that much. The only thing I think changed is the Siege Tank having an easier time picking off my Infestors. I don't know. ZvZ seems unaffected by these changes, I also think that storm will counter infested terrans because storm does 80~ damage, which is 10 more than the egg life. We will see.
Overall, these don't seem like drastic changes, but thats what people said about the queen range buff.
Dunno why the research is a big deal. The problem wasn't the research, the problem was the energy cost and cost of ravens and how weak the seeker missile is in terms of damage.
You don't wanna have 20 Ravens in your army in order to do something with seeker missile.
On December 05 2012 03:32 phipsL wrote: well, even though i'm zerg i'd appreciate a big patch much more than these small changes. Only because every game i watch is the same and these changes won't help much for that.
I agree with this. It's basically a wrist-slap. How can you tell? Most Zerg players are acting like they're okay with it.
If this was a proper nerf like the infestor deserves you would see more cognitive dissonance, denial, and rage from Zerg players.
On December 05 2012 03:32 phipsL wrote: well, even though i'm zerg i'd appreciate a big patch much more than these small changes. Only because every game i watch is the same and these changes won't help much for that.
I agree with this. It's basically a wrist-slap. How can you tell? Most Zerg players are acting like they're okay with it.
If this was a proper nerf like the infestor deserves you would see more cognitive dissonance, denial, and rage from Zerg players.
Sigh. Do you people really forgot how much 1range and so called wrist-slaps can change? Here is a hint. Immortal and roach range.
Can we please wait how it plays out before saying it won't have effect?
On December 05 2012 10:20 sluggaslamoo wrote: Dunno why the research is a big deal. The problem wasn't the research, the problem was the energy cost and cost of ravens and how weak the seeker missile is in terms of damage.
You don't wanna have 20 Ravens in your army in order to do something with seeker missile.
you don't need 20 ravens...... 6 seeker missiles pretty good
On December 05 2012 03:32 phipsL wrote: well, even though i'm zerg i'd appreciate a big patch much more than these small changes. Only because every game i watch is the same and these changes won't help much for that.
I agree with this. It's basically a wrist-slap. How can you tell? Most Zerg players are acting like they're okay with it.
If this was a proper nerf like the infestor deserves you would see more cognitive dissonance, denial, and rage from Zerg players.
Sigh. Do you people really forgot how much 1range and so called wrist-slaps can change? Here is a hint. Immortal and roach range.
Can we please wait how it plays out before saying it won't have effect?
imo it will help TvZ but not so much in PvZ. How much does 1 range fungle really matter when there are 20 broodlords covering them
On December 05 2012 07:34 Sjokola wrote: Both feedback and emp outrange fungal now. Plus infestors have to get closer to tanks aswel etc. Very curious how this works out.
Don't forget that fungal has a 2.0 radius, making it a 10 range spell at best
Feedback is 9
It would be a 9 range spell. 8 range with a +/- 1 for the area of fungal.
On December 05 2012 07:34 Sjokola wrote: Both feedback and emp outrange fungal now. Plus infestors have to get closer to tanks aswel etc. Very curious how this works out.
Don't forget that fungal has a 2.0 radius, making it a 10 range spell at best
Feedback is 9
if the zerg player manages to fungal the templar/templars without getting feedbacked that way then he deserves it, making this interaction overall more skill focused for both sides which is always a great thing.
Remember that infestors are fat, the casting range is based off the centre of the infestor, but you can feedback it on its nose. that narrows the gap by about another half range.
On December 05 2012 08:45 thirtyapm wrote: good work.
but what about doing nothing except reverting one of either queen or ol buff?
Blizzard is pretty committed to planting their design philosophy flag that Zerg should always get a free third, balancing around this truism. I doubt it'll ever be changed if at all in WoL.
The problem is that before the queen patch you could gain map control, scout, contain and harass with 4 units, at no risk at all, while expanding. That is NOT balanced in any way.
Sure the queen buff was over the top, but the sheer power of reactor hellion was just too much.
And zergs can break that contain with 16-20 speedlings or 3 roaches... They choose not to do it because they found it better to drone up and take a slightly later third. The Queen and OL buff allowed them to drone up optimally AND take a quick third.
The -1 range will be interesting to see. I think one of the issues with infestors was that the top zergs were so good at retaining them. Basically they could trade with terran pretty evenly but save like 4-6 infestors. After 2 engagements, they are up 10+ and it is pretty much gg once those 10 infestors regain energy.
Allowing for counterplay is definitely the better route for fixing infestors rather than reducing their raw power. I think introducing a projectile for fungal would have been just as good as reducing the range, but either way, this should let the things that are supposed to be dealing with the infestors actually do so, rather than infestors being the best answer to the things which supposedly answer them.
While I don't mind the Raven change, I wonder if making autoturrets actually worth placing would have been a more interesting fix.
the fungal range nerf is the biggest deal. Feedback and snipe out ranging fungals make a lot of sense. Fungal was way too strong to be on par with single target counter measures.
This is a step in the right directions. Sure, some might feel like the Infestor wasn't hit hard enough.
However, I'm an optimist and I'll say that I'll definitely take my egg health reduction and Fungal range reduction. I'm willing to try this change out and see if Zerg still feels too strong.
On December 05 2012 04:16 rtem wrote: I seem to recall QXC mentioning that one of the major issues with tvz ravens is the fact that it requires so long to transition into them with all the upgrades. I hope we'll be seeing much more ravens in the matchup now.
Overall these feel kinda good changes although I still feel fungal is kind of a lame spell. I guess we'll just have to wait and see where it goes from here.
The problem with ravens is more that they have so little energy and it takes ages to build up, and 1 or 2 ravens isn't gonna make the difference lategame, you need atleast 5.
Thats exactly the problem on ravens. It's not like the HSM upgrade was inaccessible, the energy buildup time plus the energy cost of HSM made ravens pretty inefficient. You have to plan away ahead, when you are investing in ravens. You need to survive for 3-4 minutes before ravens become effective. I feel it would have been better to simply increase the starting energy of ravens or reduce the cost of HSM rather removing HSM upgrade.
Yep, the raven change like everyone has said previously...it achieves nothing. The only impactful change this patch is -1 fungal range, and it's highly doubtful that is enough.
Should be a pretty decent patch, I just hope they don't do to fungal what they do to neural parasite. Just a decoration spell now because of the trash range. We'll see.
A step in the right direction. The lings of liberty post really turned me on to why when I'm tired and watching GSL vods now I don't watch them, just skip. The hype and micro and multitasking has died from 2011.
Hopefully, this is a step in the right direction, and if it doesn't accomplish it's goal blizz, you better keep going,
decent upgrade but i'm still not convinced this is enough of a nerf. Fungal just does too much damage too easily, usually it's not an issue of the investors being too far away, but i'll give it a chance to play out before i make a conclusion.
blizzard just refuses to try and acutally fix infestors, how is that they are willing to give zerg massive buffs like the queen but when it comes time to nerf infested terrans and fungal they settle on this crap
I dont understand how this fixes PvZ lategame... call me bad or whatever, but if the fungal range decrease is meant to encourage and buff more high templar use, you would need like 1 ht per 1 or 2 infestors, assuming they dont die to broodlings or spines...
otherwise colossus outranges infestors fungal range, but the broodlords would still be in range.. I mean usually when i play vs broodlord infestor they use that composition defensively and eventually move out once they have crazy amounts of broods and infestors with max energy... but mostly it is me who would have to attack him once hes out of position from his spines, but still... the fungal range is still pretty good and i cant vortex the broods when he splits them... and i am lucky if i can get a clear blink under the broods without being fungaled...
i just thought that they would balance out the infestor broodlord composition in PvZ specifically.. i mean im sure infestors are pretty imba vs terran too... but i thought the serious problem was PvZ.. i mean i'm not gonna just immortal sentry all in every game thats just boring.. but with broodlord infestor its not even challenge, its like almost impossible...
please call me out as a scrub and tell me that i'm wrong, i would like to hear it.. cos i still don't see how i would deal with the zerg deathball without mass carrier... i dont see how the eggs and a minor fungal range change can affect the deathball to an extent that makes a protoss have a chance in the lategame..
Ok, for people that dunno what they're talking about here:
Raven seeker missile removed: What does this do?
It does nothing for Terran lategame. It saves Terran a 1 time cost of 150/150 that was affordable in lategame in the first place. The upgrades were never the problem with ravens. The problem is the reaction time and preparation needed when building ravens. You often times have to prepare them 2-3 minutes in advance in a serious game, because seeker missile takes so long to get energy for. The seeker being removed affects none of the above core issue with the raven being able to pay itself off more frequently to make it a more useful unit.
The only changes that occur is when Terran goes 1/1/1 now in TvP, but mostly TvT, with the 1 raven you make you'll possibly have 1 seeker missile. So basically this is a terrible change from blizzard because it does not address the issue with the raven, and it adversely affects 2/3 match-ups that the change is not even targeted at.
Infested Terran Egg HP reduced from 100 to 70. What does this do?
Lategame TvZ, Lategame PvZ now psi storm and collosus more comfortably counter infested Terran spam. Tanks/collosus with upgrades will end up 2 shotting eggs thrown out which is a huge difference. Does this change much? Well, it's arguable because it depends on the volume of infested Terran eggs and other units
OK edit: i'm not sure how the HP works with infested terrans, the eggs start with 80, they take damage, and they pop with I think the same relative health when they hatch.
Better than nothing.
Fungal growth range reduced from 9 to 8. What does this do?
The fungal growth range reduction is arguably the biggest change because in any RTS game when you mess with the range of a core unit or a unit that's used often it can easily swing balance 1 way or the other (you've seen the results of this with the +2 queen range).
It's a good change, tanks/collosus/ghost/templar may often times kill more infestors coming into range of your units to fungal you. But keep in mind once again...
Fungal hasn't been changed. It still roots your units, it still does the same damage, still has the same duration. So whenever your units are snared it's the exact same scenario as pre-patch. So it's arguable whether this change will do anything. Better than nothing once again.
I honestly think a lot of Terran players will be confused or simply read "Terran buff" when it comes to ravens and not realize it's not actually a buff to the unit in any meaningful way for lategame, or for the rest of the game
The infestor nerfs...thank god...and they don't want to make the same mistake they did with ghosts/reapers where they nerf the unit and then it's utterly trash.
Overall, the end goal of the changes obviously is so the answer to everything is not "build an infestor." Dunno if these changes do that, but they're a start.
I would rather they reduce the FG radius (match emp/storm at 1.5 instead of 2) and a change to IT stats. Either way... at least they're being proactive (I also find it funny that they map tested 80 hp eggs and then just went with 70).
These changes are GREAT. Though I really would've liked a change to fundamental fungal mechanics (stunning is bad imo), this is definitely a (big) step in the right direction. 1 range really changes everything.
These changes won't matter for 95% of the players. Playing macro TvZ or PvZ on ladder will still be a joke. Nobody can spare the APM to never get fungaled even with 1 range decrease.
The range nerf on infestor seems really reasonable (especially in TvZ). But i'm not convinced that the health nerf to infested terran eggs will do anything....
We'll find out soon enough tho =P (Cannot FUKIGN WAIT for proleague to start :D:D)
On December 05 2012 03:20 K3Nyy wrote: I rather they do something about the fungal's damage and restriction rather than its range, but we'll see what this patch does.
The damage and prevention of maneuverability (blink) is necessary. I think this is a great start to rebalance infestors, in fact this might be exactly the solutions needed. Fungal can still deal very well with midgame aggression against stalkers/marines but not they aren't able to combat other casters as well which should bring more dynamic battles to the game. In particular storm will be much more useful in the large infestor BL battles (granted the protoss has good positioning).
On December 05 2012 12:06 MateShade wrote: Why don't you want to discourage infestors? It's fucking boring and killing Starcraft, are you blind blizzard???
Thats finnally a good change. The swarm-egg HP nerf is not really that big of a deal.
1 storm seems to kill them (instead of two) and +1 tanks or colossi seem to 2 shot them (instead of 3 shotting). I saw the numbers on the forum, so i'm not realy sure. But it seems quite big.
Finally. Thanks for listening to something Blizzard. Maybe you realized most left to COD Black Ops 2 until this crap got figured out - at least I did. Back again...hopefully with a new perspective.
On December 05 2012 12:28 SirPinky wrote: Finally. Thanks for listening to something Blizzard. Maybe you realized most left to COD Black Ops 2 until this crap got figured out - at least I did. Back again...hopefully with a new perspective.
omg lol i read this while there was a break in rounds in s&d black ops 2 ahaha
On December 05 2012 12:28 SirPinky wrote: Finally. Thanks for listening to something Blizzard. Maybe you realized most left to COD Black Ops 2 until this crap got figured out - at least I did. Back again...hopefully with a new perspective.
omg lol i read this while there was a break in rounds in s&d black ops 2 ahaha
Good time killer, when your true passion is SC, but can't take the balance issues
Why cant blizzard ever listen to the pros? all pros told blizzard to let infestors have more supply cause the late game is broken not the early game. With these changes zerg will be broken early game.
On December 05 2012 12:28 SirPinky wrote: Finally. Thanks for listening to something Blizzard. Maybe you realized most left to COD Black Ops 2 until this crap got figured out - at least I did. Back again...hopefully with a new perspective.
omg lol i read this while there was a break in rounds in s&d black ops 2 ahaha
Good time killer, when your true passion is SC, but can't take the balance issues
Balance issues didn't really bother me much, i just happened to be playing black ops lol Im not good enough to make valid opinions on balance issues im only plat </3 ahahah
On December 05 2012 12:47 iyasq8 wrote: Why cant blizzard ever listen to the pros? all pros told blizzard to let infestors have more supply cause the late game is broken not the early game. With these changes zerg will be broken early game.
It is because Zerg have an easier time in the early game than they did before, that they are capable of comfortably teching to BL/Infestor.
Blizzard continues to show how inept they are. The problem with infestors is the root of fungal growth - not the damage, and not the range. What a bunch of incompetents.
On December 05 2012 12:12 ultratorr wrote: These changes won't matter for 95% of the players. Playing macro TvZ or PvZ on ladder will still be a joke. Nobody can spare the APM to never get fungaled even with 1 range decrease.
It would be much tougher on the zerg to cast his fungals assuming you have colossi and tanks in play. Both these options outrange infestors. They will have to take punishments if they want to cast their spells. Also, people complain about how unforgiving it was to fight against infestors. This gives you more leeway (about 1 second, give or take a few milliseconds) to split/retreat your army accordingly in preparation for fungal. I agree that fungal still sucks anyways, but hey, it's a major improvement, I'd suggest you try it out before complaining on.
It still takes 125 energy to use missiles...I don't understand this patch.. the problem with ravens is the huge time you need to get a proper amount of them with enough energy, and the hsm upgrade doesn't really factor in the equation that much at all, this part of the patch screaaaaaaaams placebo. For all I care, they could've just nerfed the bunker build time, hopefully the range nerf makes a difference.
On December 05 2012 12:47 iyasq8 wrote: Why cant blizzard ever listen to the pros? all pros told blizzard to let infestors have more supply cause the late game is broken not the early game. With these changes zerg will be broken early game.
first post, must be smoking something good thinking Zerg early game is now broken with Infestor being nerfed
While we agree that Infestors are being used too abundantly in many games, we are aiming to address this concern carefully to ensure that we don’t completely discourage the use of Infestors.
Additionally, we anticipate that the reduction in health for Infested Terran eggs will be most noticeable in the PvZ matchup when Psi Storm is used.
Hahaha, yeah because Psi Storm is always high on my list of what to spend 200 gas on in PvZ, which turns out to be my best matchup by far. It is just so useful vs Roaches...
On December 05 2012 11:53 avilo wrote: Ok, for people that dunno what they're talking about here:
Raven seeker missile removed: What does this do?
It does nothing for Terran lategame. It saves Terran a 1 time cost of 150/150 that was affordable in lategame in the first place. The upgrades were never the problem with ravens. The problem is the reaction time and preparation needed when building ravens. You often times have to prepare them 2-3 minutes in advance in a serious game, because seeker missile takes so long to get energy for. The seeker being removed affects none of the above core issue with the raven being able to pay itself off more frequently to make it a more useful unit.
The only changes that occur is when Terran goes 1/1/1 now in TvP, but mostly TvT, with the 1 raven you make you'll possibly have 1 seeker missile. So basically this is a terrible change from blizzard because it does not address the issue with the raven, and it adversely affects 2/3 match-ups that the change is not even targeted at.
Infested Terran Egg HP reduced from 100 to 70. What does this do?
Lategame TvZ, Lategame PvZ now psi storm and collosus more comfortably counter infested Terran spam. Tanks/collosus with upgrades will end up 2 shotting eggs thrown out which is a huge difference. Does this change much? Well, it's arguable because it depends on the volume of infested Terran eggs and other units
You have to remember, the egg HP is reduced, not the infested Terran HP. If the eggs hatch, infested terrans pop out with full HP, meaning the change is targetted purely at more eggs going down when those 5000 eggs are thrown out.
Better than nothing.
Fungal growth range reduced from 9 to 8. What does this do?
The fungal growth range reduction is arguably the biggest change because in any RTS game when you mess with the range of a core unit or a unit that's used often it can easily swing balance 1 way or the other (you've seen the results of this with the +2 queen range).
It's a good change, tanks/collosus/ghost/templar may often times kill more infestors coming into range of your units to fungal you. But keep in mind once again...
Fungal hasn't been changed. It still roots your units, it still does the same damage, still has the same duration. So whenever your units are snared it's the exact same scenario as pre-patch. So it's arguable whether this change will do anything. Better than nothing once again.
I honestly think a lot of Terran players will be confused or simply read "Terran buff" when it comes to ravens and not realize it's not actually a buff to the unit in any meaningful way for lategame, or for the rest of the game
The infestor nerfs...thank god...and they don't want to make the same mistake they did with ghosts/reapers where they nerf the unit and then it's utterly trash.
Overall, the end goal of the changes obviously is so the answer to everything is not "build an infestor." Dunno if these changes do that, but they're a start.
I think it's a pretty big deal. It's not game changing but it opens up alot of new avenues which weren't available before.
I'm just envisioning ravens being incorporated just for hunter seeker missile, or after getting a raven just using that as an added bonus. I think Ravens will finally become standard in TvZ to deal with Creep Tumorso (without becoming too much of an investment).
After all, hunter seeker missiles destroy mutas and can scout vs infestors(within reason, of course, but the new range is only a buff for ravens), so it's like an actual viable option.
Finally, and probably least and not that significant, there is that small window of time where your making ravens but don't have the key hunter seeker missile upgrade yet. It'll limit that time and make it so all you have to do is wait for the energy.
The Infestor Egg nerf was aimed at Toss, can't see any reason why Terran would benefit given they don't really target the IT's anyway.
And I personally never disliked the idea of fungal. Alot of people were like "onoes it ruins micro" but to me it added micro because it encouraged pre-battle spreads that wouldn't have occured had there not been key splash unit spells in the zerg swarm. It was also exciting, and I'm sure you all remember how "OMGOMGOGMOGM" fungals used to be back in the day muta ling bling ruled the TvZ landscape, and to me it was amazing.
I just don't want fungals becoming _the_ zerg answer, which is what I think this patch is succeeding at.
While we agree that Infestors are being used too abundantly in many games, we are aiming to address this concern carefully to ensure that we don’t completely discourage the use of Infestors.
Additionally, we anticipate that the reduction in health for Infested Terran eggs will be most noticeable in the PvZ matchup when Psi Storm is used.
Hahaha, yeah because Psi Storm is always high on my list of what to spend 200 gas on in PvZ, which turns out to be my best matchup by far. It is just so useful vs Roaches...
well it should be now...
it shouldnt be, stop suggesting it. HT first won't be standard.
I guess Blizzard saw the amount of bitching and moaning in tournament chats (IPL/GSL?) over winfestors and brolords that they HAD to do something. A relief, I must say.
I think Raven's spells should deploy much faster though. Seeker missile is still more of a suicide mission when it requires getting up very close and waiting the small delay before it actually goes off. If they are going to make anything have a "chargeup" time or not be completely instant, then it should be a positional spell (you choose the place, not the target). Storms and fungals would be great if they were projectiles of some sort, but stuff like snipe, feedback (currently doesn't), seeker missile all seem like they should have an instant release.
Well, after playing Zergcraft on ladder more, i think every Terran that says this raven change did nothing is right. Still same situation, you get ravens and they have no energy, you die for making them.
Sad that blizzard knows the problem word for word from Terrans is the problem is you don't have 2-3 minutes worth of time to gain energy. Not having to upgrade seeker changed nothing lategame. -_- gl Terrans.
edit: Turns out infested terrans do lose HP after they hatch, not sure how it works, they start with 80 hp but infested terrans pop with only 50 total HP.
Not too optimistic still. Makes infested terrans weaker HP wise, fungal still the same.
On December 05 2012 11:53 avilo wrote: Ok, for people that dunno what they're talking about here:
Raven seeker missile removed: What does this do?
It does nothing for Terran lategame. It saves Terran a 1 time cost of 150/150 that was affordable in lategame in the first place. The upgrades were never the problem with ravens. The problem is the reaction time and preparation needed when building ravens. You often times have to prepare them 2-3 minutes in advance in a serious game, because seeker missile takes so long to get energy for. The seeker being removed affects none of the above core issue with the raven being able to pay itself off more frequently to make it a more useful unit.
The only changes that occur is when Terran goes 1/1/1 now in TvP, but mostly TvT, with the 1 raven you make you'll possibly have 1 seeker missile. So basically this is a terrible change from blizzard because it does not address the issue with the raven, and it adversely affects 2/3 match-ups that the change is not even targeted at.
Infested Terran Egg HP reduced from 100 to 70. What does this do?
Lategame TvZ, Lategame PvZ now psi storm and collosus more comfortably counter infested Terran spam. Tanks/collosus with upgrades will end up 2 shotting eggs thrown out which is a huge difference. Does this change much? Well, it's arguable because it depends on the volume of infested Terran eggs and other units
You have to remember, the egg HP is reduced, not the infested Terran HP. If the eggs hatch, infested terrans pop out with full HP, meaning the change is targetted purely at more eggs going down when those 5000 eggs are thrown out.
Better than nothing.
Fungal growth range reduced from 9 to 8. What does this do?
The fungal growth range reduction is arguably the biggest change because in any RTS game when you mess with the range of a core unit or a unit that's used often it can easily swing balance 1 way or the other (you've seen the results of this with the +2 queen range).
It's a good change, tanks/collosus/ghost/templar may often times kill more infestors coming into range of your units to fungal you. But keep in mind once again...
Fungal hasn't been changed. It still roots your units, it still does the same damage, still has the same duration. So whenever your units are snared it's the exact same scenario as pre-patch. So it's arguable whether this change will do anything. Better than nothing once again.
I honestly think a lot of Terran players will be confused or simply read "Terran buff" when it comes to ravens and not realize it's not actually a buff to the unit in any meaningful way for lategame, or for the rest of the game
The infestor nerfs...thank god...and they don't want to make the same mistake they did with ghosts/reapers where they nerf the unit and then it's utterly trash.
Overall, the end goal of the changes obviously is so the answer to everything is not "build an infestor." Dunno if these changes do that, but they're a start.
I've been saying for awhile that Blizzard is doing a terrible job with SC2 when it comes to balancing and game design. People often say who would take over, and it is posts like me that make me thing there are plenty of people in the community who would do so much better.
They just make so more sense than the posts we get from Blizzard, that talk about Psi Storm vs Infested Terran Eggs...
No one researches Psi Storm in PvZ unless they are facing Mutalisks, and if they are facing Mutalisks, then Zerg isn't getting Infestors in the mid-game because they are both gas intensive units. So this situation is limited to games where Zerg opens Mutalisks then transitions to Infestors and decides to spam Eggs rather than use Fungal.
Now I understand that the egg health reduction helps in lots of other ways, but the fact they highlighted Psi Storm seems foolish to me. How often do we really see Psi Storm in PvZ? I've never seen anyone complain about Psi Storm vs eggs anyway. How did this come up? Why is this what they were thinking about? They are so many other pressing issues...
While we agree that Infestors are being used too abundantly in many games, we are aiming to address this concern carefully to ensure that we don’t completely discourage the use of Infestors.
Additionally, we anticipate that the reduction in health for Infested Terran eggs will be most noticeable in the PvZ matchup when Psi Storm is used.
Hahaha, yeah because Psi Storm is always high on my list of what to spend 200 gas on in PvZ, which turns out to be my best matchup by far. It is just so useful vs Roaches...
well it should be now...
it shouldnt be, stop suggesting it. HT first won't be standard.
He just said it should be "high on the list to get" not first. Since storm kills eggs now and there's a range reduction, hts will deal with infestors significantly better. Pretty good deal, I almost never felt like my templar were any better than just collosus lasers except when the zerg miscontrols badly and I land way more feedbacks than I should.
The seeker missile change is awesome. Now terran players can choose between a defensive spell "PDD" or offensive missile to gain grounds. A choice you can make between 125 energy and 100
While we agree that Infestors are being used too abundantly in many games, we are aiming to address this concern carefully to ensure that we don’t completely discourage the use of Infestors.
Additionally, we anticipate that the reduction in health for Infested Terran eggs will be most noticeable in the PvZ matchup when Psi Storm is used.
Hahaha, yeah because Psi Storm is always high on my list of what to spend 200 gas on in PvZ, which turns out to be my best matchup by far. It is just so useful vs Roaches...
well it should be now...
it shouldnt be, stop suggesting it. HT first won't be standard.
He just said it should be "high on the list to get" not first. Since storm kills eggs now and there's a range reduction, hts will deal with infestors significantly better. Pretty good deal, I almost never felt like my templar were any better than just collosus lasers except when the zerg miscontrols badly and I land way more feedbacks than I should.
I don't think you fully understand. So I can get High Templars and counter Infestors when I have energy, but not Roaches... or I can get Colossus and counter both Infestors and Roaches and not be limited by energy. Remember this egg health reduction and Fungal Growth range reduction helps Colossus too...
Psi Storm just isn't that good against Roaches. Colossus are.
On December 05 2012 14:11 bhfberserk wrote: The seeker missile change is awesome. Now terran players can choose between a defensive spell "PDD" or offensive missile to gain grounds. A choice you can make between 125 energy and 100
Um, once again you have a misconception or a wrong notion. Nothing changed with seeker missile. You still will die if you attempt to make ravens at a point in the game where there's momentum and both players are attacking/defending.
The change makes it so Terran doesn't research a 1 time 150/150 cost. Nothing else changed. The unit was in fact not buffed, which is a shame. The problem is the accessibility and building the raven often does not pay itself off...there's too many situations where you build it and will have no energy for anything useful (1 autoturret? come on).
So yeah...stop saying it's a buff to seeker missile guys. It's not.
When blizzard wants to wake up and actually make the raven be able to pay itself off, make -> Corvid reactor increases raven starting energy to 100. Call me in 2014 when they give in and realize this change is the one that makes the raven more usable without overpowering it or changing any other values in the game
Thank you Blizzard for making these changes! I look forward to seeing them in action! Although most are probably focusing on the infestor changes, I'm also looking forward to ravens being used more.
On December 05 2012 14:03 Blargh wrote: I guess Blizzard saw the amount of bitching and moaning in tournament chats (IPL/GSL?) over winfestors and brolords that they HAD to do something. A relief, I must say.
I think Raven's spells should deploy much faster though. Seeker missile is still more of a suicide mission when it requires getting up very close and waiting the small delay before it actually goes off. If they are going to make anything have a "chargeup" time or not be completely instant, then it should be a positional spell (you choose the place, not the target). Storms and fungals would be great if they were projectiles of some sort, but stuff like snipe, feedback (currently doesn't), seeker missile all seem like they should have an instant release.
THIS!!!! If they want to keep seeker missle so damn slow then it needs to hit an area like psi storm, fungal, emp, so that you can aim it! Only instant cast spells should target a unit, otherwise it should target a location! You should be able to lead the target with slow spells, and then it will ACTUALLY take some skill! The other side of this is that then the spell could miss completely if they just don't move into it if you're leading the target, so they need to buff it to compensate for this. But I would love to see seeker missle be an area attack instead of target a unit.
In response to everyone who says they won't build HTs. If you watch any pro PvZs, there are always high templars in lategame to deal with infested terran eggs and to storm clumped BLs, corruptors, and infestors. If you aren't building them then either you should, or you don't have the apm to use them properly. Obviously you don't build them early game versus roaches, but once the zerg starts going hive they become a staple along with archons. Now they become more powerful, which is really cool.
The raven change will probably affect tvt more than tvz. So far, a step in the right direction. Glad blizzard is doing the nerfs with small changes slowly. .
This is just the size I was hoping for in a balance patch. Very small things. Things of this magnitude are what is needed and not flipping the infestor to a "Why build it?" status. I applaud the Blizzard balance team for using a small change this time, swinging the nerf bat with a measured force and not wildly.
On December 05 2012 14:11 bhfberserk wrote: The seeker missile change is awesome. Now terran players can choose between a defensive spell "PDD" or offensive missile to gain grounds. A choice you can make between 125 energy and 100
Um, once again you have a misconception or a wrong notion. Nothing changed with seeker missile. You still will die if you attempt to make ravens at a point in the game where there's momentum and both players are attacking/defending.
The change makes it so Terran doesn't research a 1 time 150/150 cost. Nothing else changed. The unit was in fact not buffed, which is a shame. The problem is the accessibility and building the raven often does not pay itself off...there's too many situations where you build it and will have no energy for anything useful (1 autoturret? come on).
So yeah...stop saying it's a buff to seeker missile guys. It's not.
When blizzard wants to wake up and actually make the raven be able to pay itself off, make -> Corvid reactor increases raven starting energy to 100. Call me in 2014 when they give in and realize this change is the one that makes the raven more usable without overpowering it or changing any other values in the game
blizzard understands the psychological effects of patches very well. patch 1.4.2 only reduced upgrades by a measly 25 to 50 minerals but all of a sudden toss learnt to rush to 3/3 is a pretty good strat.
now i will wait for inevitable scan+seeker missile worker abuse.
On December 05 2012 11:53 avilo wrote: Ok, for people that dunno what they're talking about here:
Raven seeker missile removed: What does this do?
It does nothing for Terran lategame. It saves Terran a 1 time cost of 150/150 that was affordable in lategame in the first place. The upgrades were never the problem with ravens. The problem is the reaction time and preparation needed when building ravens. You often times have to prepare them 2-3 minutes in advance in a serious game, because seeker missile takes so long to get energy for. The seeker being removed affects none of the above core issue with the raven being able to pay itself off more frequently to make it a more useful unit.
The only changes that occur is when Terran goes 1/1/1 now in TvP, but mostly TvT, with the 1 raven you make you'll possibly have 1 seeker missile. So basically this is a terrible change from blizzard because it does not address the issue with the raven, and it adversely affects 2/3 match-ups that the change is not even targeted at.
Infested Terran Egg HP reduced from 100 to 70. What does this do?
Lategame TvZ, Lategame PvZ now psi storm and collosus more comfortably counter infested Terran spam. Tanks/collosus with upgrades will end up 2 shotting eggs thrown out which is a huge difference. Does this change much? Well, it's arguable because it depends on the volume of infested Terran eggs and other units
You have to remember, the egg HP is reduced, not the infested Terran HP. If the eggs hatch, infested terrans pop out with full HP, meaning the change is targetted purely at more eggs going down when those 5000 eggs are thrown out.
Better than nothing.
Fungal growth range reduced from 9 to 8. What does this do?
The fungal growth range reduction is arguably the biggest change because in any RTS game when you mess with the range of a core unit or a unit that's used often it can easily swing balance 1 way or the other (you've seen the results of this with the +2 queen range).
It's a good change, tanks/collosus/ghost/templar may often times kill more infestors coming into range of your units to fungal you. But keep in mind once again...
Fungal hasn't been changed. It still roots your units, it still does the same damage, still has the same duration. So whenever your units are snared it's the exact same scenario as pre-patch. So it's arguable whether this change will do anything. Better than nothing once again.
I honestly think a lot of Terran players will be confused or simply read "Terran buff" when it comes to ravens and not realize it's not actually a buff to the unit in any meaningful way for lategame, or for the rest of the game
The infestor nerfs...thank god...and they don't want to make the same mistake they did with ghosts/reapers where they nerf the unit and then it's utterly trash.
Overall, the end goal of the changes obviously is so the answer to everything is not "build an infestor." Dunno if these changes do that, but they're a start.
I've been saying for awhile that Blizzard is doing a terrible job with SC2 when it comes to balancing and game design. People often say who would take over, and it is posts like me that make me thing there are plenty of people in the community who would do so much better.
They just make so more sense than the posts we get from Blizzard, that talk about Psi Storm vs Infested Terran Eggs...
No one researches Psi Storm in PvZ unless they are facing Mutalisks, and if they are facing Mutalisks, then Zerg isn't getting Infestors in the mid-game because they are both gas intensive units. So this situation is limited to games where Zerg opens Mutalisks then transitions to Infestors and decides to spam Eggs rather than use Fungal.
Now I understand that the egg health reduction helps in lots of other ways, but the fact they highlighted Psi Storm seems foolish to me. How often do we really see Psi Storm in PvZ? I've never seen anyone complain about Psi Storm vs eggs anyway. How did this come up? Why is this what they were thinking about? They are so many other pressing issues...
Umm...Psi storm is quite common PvZ atm whether they're going mutalisks or not. A fairly popular way to play right now is to go for chargelots immortals and high templars vs infestor players. I can't comment on the effectiveness of this patch but i can assure you that psi storm is much more common than u think.
I feel that they could have kept eggs at 80 health since they're lowering the fungal range as well. It'd make a more interesting interaction with approaching stormed eggs.
Still, it's great to see these nerfs to infestors. May the games get better
On December 05 2012 14:11 bhfberserk wrote: The seeker missile change is awesome. Now terran players can choose between a defensive spell "PDD" or offensive missile to gain grounds. A choice you can make between 125 energy and 100
Um, once again you have a misconception or a wrong notion. Nothing changed with seeker missile. You still will die if you attempt to make ravens at a point in the game where there's momentum and both players are attacking/defending.
The change makes it so Terran doesn't research a 1 time 150/150 cost. Nothing else changed. The unit was in fact not buffed, which is a shame. The problem is the accessibility and building the raven often does not pay itself off...there's too many situations where you build it and will have no energy for anything useful (1 autoturret? come on).
So yeah...stop saying it's a buff to seeker missile guys. It's not.
When blizzard wants to wake up and actually make the raven be able to pay itself off, make -> Corvid reactor increases raven starting energy to 100. Call me in 2014 when they give in and realize this change is the one that makes the raven more usable without overpowering it or changing any other values in the game
blizzard understands the psychological effects of patches very well. patch 1.4.2 only reduced upgrades by a measly 25 to 50 minerals but all of a sudden toss learnt to rush to 3/3 is a pretty good strat.
now i will wait for inevitable scan+seeker missile worker abuse.
Holy shit, I totally forgot about those upgrade changes! And then suddenly after that is when the protoss dominance started. And then suddenly all those "l0l upgrades buffed 25 minerals, great" turned into "FUCK BLIZZARD you overpowered protoss1111"
That's a good point (the psychological thing)!
Also I get what Avilo and others are saying, that it doesn't change many situations, but simply saving 150/150 is helpful enough. They have to be so careful with balance, or everything will tip out of control. This even helps mech openers (like in TvP!) where they get Ravens anyways. Now suddenly you have a SM against Immortals (or if it's more effective to use PDD vs Stalkers, then please correct me, but if he clumps a few immortals together then I'm sure it'll be worth it)
This can make some interesting early-mid situations too. Imagine a player sending a seeker missile to buy time (like for mech). He has to back up his whole army and try to figure out which of his small units he needs to split [if he wants to attack right there] and that can buy precious seconds.
I hope that this turns out to be one of the seemingly miniscule changes that blizzard makes that totally turns the metagame upside down, man we needed this patch really badly.
On December 05 2012 14:11 bhfberserk wrote: The seeker missile change is awesome. Now terran players can choose between a defensive spell "PDD" or offensive missile to gain grounds. A choice you can make between 125 energy and 100
Um, once again you have a misconception or a wrong notion. Nothing changed with seeker missile. You still will die if you attempt to make ravens at a point in the game where there's momentum and both players are attacking/defending.
The change makes it so Terran doesn't research a 1 time 150/150 cost. Nothing else changed. The unit was in fact not buffed, which is a shame. The problem is the accessibility and building the raven often does not pay itself off...there's too many situations where you build it and will have no energy for anything useful (1 autoturret? come on).
So yeah...stop saying it's a buff to seeker missile guys. It's not.
When blizzard wants to wake up and actually make the raven be able to pay itself off, make -> Corvid reactor increases raven starting energy to 100. Call me in 2014 when they give in and realize this change is the one that makes the raven more usable without overpowering it or changing any other values in the game
blizzard understands the psychological effects of patches very well. patch 1.4.2 only reduced upgrades by a measly 25 to 50 minerals but all of a sudden toss learnt to rush to 3/3 is a pretty good strat.
now i will wait for inevitable scan+seeker missile worker abuse.
Psychological thing? What? The change you are referencing globally affected every Protoss ground unit...has nothing to do with psychology. It has to do with the change actually, you know...changing stuff.
No one is ever going to get a raven for "scan + seeker abuse." You live in some dream world where games are decided by epic microz battles between 2 blink stalkers and 1 raven lol.
On December 05 2012 14:11 bhfberserk wrote: The seeker missile change is awesome. Now terran players can choose between a defensive spell "PDD" or offensive missile to gain grounds. A choice you can make between 125 energy and 100
Um, once again you have a misconception or a wrong notion. Nothing changed with seeker missile. You still will die if you attempt to make ravens at a point in the game where there's momentum and both players are attacking/defending.
The change makes it so Terran doesn't research a 1 time 150/150 cost. Nothing else changed. The unit was in fact not buffed, which is a shame. The problem is the accessibility and building the raven often does not pay itself off...there's too many situations where you build it and will have no energy for anything useful (1 autoturret? come on).
So yeah...stop saying it's a buff to seeker missile guys. It's not.
When blizzard wants to wake up and actually make the raven be able to pay itself off, make -> Corvid reactor increases raven starting energy to 100. Call me in 2014 when they give in and realize this change is the one that makes the raven more usable without overpowering it or changing any other values in the game
blizzard understands the psychological effects of patches very well. patch 1.4.2 only reduced upgrades by a measly 25 to 50 minerals but all of a sudden toss learnt to rush to 3/3 is a pretty good strat.
now i will wait for inevitable scan+seeker missile worker abuse.
Holy shit, I totally forgot about those upgrade changes! And then suddenly after that is when the protoss dominance started. And then suddenly all those "l0l upgrades buffed 25 minerals, great" turned into "FUCK BLIZZARD you overpowered protoss1111"
That's a good point (the psychological thing)!
Also I get what Avilo and others are saying, that it doesn't change many situations, but simply saving 150/150 is helpful enough. They have to be so careful with balance, or everything will tip out of control. This even helps mech openers (like in TvP!) where they get Ravens anyways. Now suddenly you have a SM against Immortals (or if it's more effective to use PDD vs Stalkers, then please correct me, but if he clumps a few immortals together then I'm sure it'll be worth it)
This can make some interesting early-mid situations too. Imagine a player sending a seeker missile to buy time (like for mech). He has to back up his whole army and try to figure out which of his small units he needs to split [if he wants to attack right there] and that can buy precious seconds.
Oh yes, this! They feel that the game is statistically balance but the reality and gamers are so vocal about it so they tweak it a little bit so people can have some hope on trying instead of giving up completely. haha great point
I think this is a great patch, though I would definitely like to see a casting range increase on HSM. I think its short range is really the main thing that makes it kind of sucky.
On December 05 2012 15:11 GeneralSnoop wrote: I think this is a great patch, though I would definitely like to see a casting range increase on HSM. I think its short range is really the main thing that makes it kind of sucky.
Raven's have to literally be on top of there target. So sad -_-. Yet, infestors had 9 range fungal since beta. I don't get it. Especially considering the FG isn't dodge-able while HSM is.
On December 05 2012 14:11 bhfberserk wrote: The seeker missile change is awesome. Now terran players can choose between a defensive spell "PDD" or offensive missile to gain grounds. A choice you can make between 125 energy and 100
Um, once again you have a misconception or a wrong notion. Nothing changed with seeker missile. You still will die if you attempt to make ravens at a point in the game where there's momentum and both players are attacking/defending.
The change makes it so Terran doesn't research a 1 time 150/150 cost. Nothing else changed. The unit was in fact not buffed, which is a shame. The problem is the accessibility and building the raven often does not pay itself off...there's too many situations where you build it and will have no energy for anything useful (1 autoturret? come on).
So yeah...stop saying it's a buff to seeker missile guys. It's not.
When blizzard wants to wake up and actually make the raven be able to pay itself off, make -> Corvid reactor increases raven starting energy to 100. Call me in 2014 when they give in and realize this change is the one that makes the raven more usable without overpowering it or changing any other values in the game
blizzard understands the psychological effects of patches very well. patch 1.4.2 only reduced upgrades by a measly 25 to 50 minerals but all of a sudden toss learnt to rush to 3/3 is a pretty good strat.
now i will wait for inevitable scan+seeker missile worker abuse.
Psychological thing? What? The change you are referencing globally affected every Protoss ground unit...has nothing to do with psychology. It has to do with the change actually, you know...changing stuff.
No one is ever going to get a raven for "scan + seeker abuse." You live in some dream world where games are decided by epic microz battles between 2 blink stalkers and 1 raven lol.
no i was just referencing your arguement on how this didnt actually change seeker missile. referring to the fact there was no actual change to protoss upgrades aside from the fact you could start them half a second earlier than you normally would.
now more players will experiment with seeker and im sure will find a way to abuse its autohoming, unavoidable attack.
Change is good. Its a small change but it'll still have a significant impact on the unit. I'm glad they tweaked some numbers rather than going overboard with nerfing/buffing units.
On December 05 2012 11:53 avilo wrote: You have to remember, the egg HP is reduced, not the infested Terran HP. If the eggs hatch, infested terrans pop out with full HP, meaning the change is targetted purely at more eggs going down when those 5000 eggs are thrown out.
This particular point is incorrect. Infested eggs are not like Zerg morph cocoons; when the egg takes damage, the Infested Terran hatches with the same percentage damage taken as the egg (try it in-game). So the change both makes the eggs easier to kill outright and makes the Infested Terran inside take roughly 40% more damage while hatching if the egg survives.
Wow, as a Zerg I'm excited for these changes. I tried to use infestor-less or light styles, but I mean mostly from a spectator standpoint. Maybe I can see a TvT now too? :D
On December 05 2012 14:08 avilo wrote: Well, after playing Zergcraft on ladder more, i think every Terran that says this raven change did nothing is right. Still same situation, you get ravens and they have no energy, you die for making them.
Sad that blizzard knows the problem word for word from Terrans is the problem is you don't have 2-3 minutes worth of time to gain energy. Not having to upgrade seeker changed nothing lategame. -_- gl Terrans.
The other thing is, every Zerg i've played so far still just does infestor brood lol. The EGG HP nerf only affects the eggs. Let's say you do damage to the eggs, and they hatch. It's no biggie, they pop out with 100% infested terran HP, exact same as last patch. That egg change seems to help PvZ more than TvZ and even then I don't know how much it helps there lol. Let's say you don't storm immediately when they infested Terrans go down. You waste 3-4 psi storms on the eggs, and then since you did not do it IMMEDIATELY the infested Terran hatch 100% HP. Then it's same as pre-patch.
Not too optimistic -_-
There's more or less no TvZ change with these "nerfs".
The only reason you see Zergs supporting them is because they're a wrist-slap. Otherwise you would see a lot more angry Zerg players, so that's how you know these nerfs are rather insignificant.
To those that don't understand that the Raven change is actually not a change:
When you build a Raven you cannot cast HSM regardless, because they don't come out with enough energy. This means that, by the time the upgrade finishes researching, you would have enough energy. Therefore pre and post-patch HSM is available at exactly the same time. This change just saves a 150/150 mineral tax, and is irrelevant to any of the major problems with the Raven.
On December 05 2012 15:20 Flonomenalz wrote: Still not sure why avilo's idea wasn't implemented instead of removing HSM upgrade.
It makes so much more sense.
I don't think it's a matter of one buff over another. This buff is being implemented, and there will probably be more buffs to come in HotS beta (see David Kim's plan for the next balance patch).
On December 05 2012 14:11 bhfberserk wrote: The seeker missile change is awesome. Now terran players can choose between a defensive spell "PDD" or offensive missile to gain grounds. A choice you can make between 125 energy and 100
Um, once again you have a misconception or a wrong notion. Nothing changed with seeker missile. You still will die if you attempt to make ravens at a point in the game where there's momentum and both players are attacking/defending.
The change makes it so Terran doesn't research a 1 time 150/150 cost. Nothing else changed. The unit was in fact not buffed, which is a shame. The problem is the accessibility and building the raven often does not pay itself off...there's too many situations where you build it and will have no energy for anything useful (1 autoturret? come on).
So yeah...stop saying it's a buff to seeker missile guys. It's not.
When blizzard wants to wake up and actually make the raven be able to pay itself off, make -> Corvid reactor increases raven starting energy to 100. Call me in 2014 when they give in and realize this change is the one that makes the raven more usable without overpowering it or changing any other values in the game
blizzard understands the psychological effects of patches very well. patch 1.4.2 only reduced upgrades by a measly 25 to 50 minerals but all of a sudden toss learnt to rush to 3/3 is a pretty good strat.
now i will wait for inevitable scan+seeker missile worker abuse.
Holy shit, I totally forgot about those upgrade changes! And then suddenly after that is when the protoss dominance started. And then suddenly all those "l0l upgrades buffed 25 minerals, great" turned into "FUCK BLIZZARD you overpowered protoss1111"
miniscule changes really. Winfestor GGlord will still reign supreme in lategame, and all zergs will still want to go that army always. The problem with fungal has always been the chain root high damage counter everything reality of the spell, especially when combined with Infested Terrans. A lot of zerg have such bad infestor control that their infestors are within 3-8 range when fungalling units anyways (sometimes melee range even).
On December 05 2012 16:03 Zanzabarr wrote: miniscule changes really. Winfestor GGlord will still reign supreme in lategame, and all zergs will still want to go that army always. The problem with fungal has always been the chain root high damage counter everything reality of the spell, especially when combined with Infested Terrans. A lot of zerg have such bad infestor control that their infestors are within 3-8 range when fungalling units anyways (sometimes melee range even).
Exactly, it's not like Zergs are taking full advantage of the massive 9 range anyway
I kinda wish they'd just nerf fungal radius by a little bit. The effect just seems obviously too potent, and this would be a simple way to directly tone it down. I don't know why they're trying out all these roundabout nerfs first. Minor tweaks to damage or radius is the way to go about this without screwing up balance IMO. The spell's so damn good you really don't have to worry about it becoming obsolete if you just tone it down a bit.
On December 05 2012 14:11 bhfberserk wrote: The seeker missile change is awesome. Now terran players can choose between a defensive spell "PDD" or offensive missile to gain grounds. A choice you can make between 125 energy and 100
Um, once again you have a misconception or a wrong notion. Nothing changed with seeker missile. You still will die if you attempt to make ravens at a point in the game where there's momentum and both players are attacking/defending.
The change makes it so Terran doesn't research a 1 time 150/150 cost. Nothing else changed. The unit was in fact not buffed, which is a shame. The problem is the accessibility and building the raven often does not pay itself off...there's too many situations where you build it and will have no energy for anything useful (1 autoturret? come on).
So yeah...stop saying it's a buff to seeker missile guys. It's not.
When blizzard wants to wake up and actually make the raven be able to pay itself off, make -> Corvid reactor increases raven starting energy to 100. Call me in 2014 when they give in and realize this change is the one that makes the raven more usable without overpowering it or changing any other values in the game
blizzard understands the psychological effects of patches very well. patch 1.4.2 only reduced upgrades by a measly 25 to 50 minerals but all of a sudden toss learnt to rush to 3/3 is a pretty good strat.
now i will wait for inevitable scan+seeker missile worker abuse.
Psychological thing? What? The change you are referencing globally affected every Protoss ground unit...has nothing to do with psychology. It has to do with the change actually, you know...changing stuff.
No one is ever going to get a raven for "scan + seeker abuse." You live in some dream world where games are decided by epic microz battles between 2 blink stalkers and 1 raven lol.
no i was just referencing your arguement on how this didnt actually change seeker missile. referring to the fact there was no actual change to protoss upgrades aside from the fact you could start them half a second earlier than you normally would.
now more players will experiment with seeker and im sure will find a way to abuse its autohoming, unavoidable attack.
And those arguments have nothing to do with each other in the slightest. And it did in fact not change seeker missile. Newsflash: players have experimented with ravens and seeker for the past year. It does not work for all reasons mentioned by every Terran ever - too inaccessible, requires minutes at a time to get.
I don't know what effect these changes will have on the game but ugh on the fungal change.
The ability doesn't need a nerf; it needs to be completely redesigned. Even if they get it balanced in it's current form, it's still going to be an utterly boring ability that turns the entire game into a snoozefest. Lowering the range of fungal by one doesn't make it less boring. I'd rather see it do something like a 25% slow over the same area that prevents burrow, blink, and loading into shuttles. Same goal of pinning units so zerg can surround but it forces zerg to actually make other units and still allows the other player's skill (micro) to have an effect on the game. I don't know; just throwing ideas out. Almost anything would be more exciting than an AE root.
On December 05 2012 16:03 Zanzabarr wrote: miniscule changes really. Winfestor GGlord will still reign supreme in lategame, and all zergs will still want to go that army always. The problem with fungal has always been the chain root high damage counter everything reality of the spell, especially when combined with Infested Terrans. A lot of zerg have such bad infestor control that their infestors are within 3-8 range when fungalling units anyways (sometimes melee range even).
if your opponents are using fungal within melee range then I don't think balance should even be mentioned in your argument. you realize you can micro your units to kill off infestors (rather than them auto-targetting the eggs/other units) if they are too close. I think one of the problems before-hand was that fungal was holding units a bit too far away to target the infestors.
I agree that infestor/BL is still going to be too strong, but this gives units like the ghost and HT a slight buff until HotS comes out when they can actually make drastic changes to make the game play more exciting.
On December 05 2012 16:03 Zanzabarr wrote: miniscule changes really. Winfestor GGlord will still reign supreme in lategame, and all zergs will still want to go that army always. The problem with fungal has always been the chain root high damage counter everything reality of the spell, especially when combined with Infested Terrans. A lot of zerg have such bad infestor control that their infestors are within 3-8 range when fungalling units anyways (sometimes melee range even).
Exactly, it's not like Zergs are taking full advantage of the massive 9 range anyway
Yes, but now T's and P's have a better chance of fighting against infestor comps with feedback/storm and emp/snipe. They can't just get rid of the infestor or the infestor/broodlord synergy since it is the only viable playstyle available to zerg in WoL. The design is certainly still flawed (fungal un-fun and low skill, zerg still has no viable macro alternative to festor/bl) but hopefully the balance will be improved.
On December 05 2012 16:31 supernovice007 wrote: I don't know what effect these changes will have on the game but ugh on the fungal change.
The ability doesn't need a nerf; it needs to be completely redesigned. Even if they get it balanced in it's current form, it's still going to be an utterly boring ability that turns the entire game into a snoozefest. Lowering the range of fungal by one doesn't make it less boring. I'd rather see it do something like a 25% slow over the same area that prevents burrow, blink, and loading into shuttles. Same goal of pinning units so zerg can surround but it forces zerg to actually make other units and still allows the other player's skill (micro) to have an effect on the game. I don't know; just throwing ideas out. Almost anything would be more exciting than an AE root.
Agreed 100%. Even if this patch balances everything out, it'll be still boring to watch like PvZ.
We need more units that encourages micro and various engagements throughout the map, not just units that contribute to the 200/200 battle. I want to see bases being taken and denied all over the map, small battles that gives little advantages throughout the game, and games won with multitasking, mechanics and game sense and not just because one person messed up the big engagement.
Glad to see they are finally starting to tackle the issue of the infestor. That being said, I'm not sure if adjusting the range is the right way to go about it. I can see timing pushes being almost too strong in TvZ, as infestors are going to be more susceptible to tank fire. I think the whole spell needs to be reworked, similar to Plague was in BW.
i know people been saying this patch is so little and wont do much but i think 1 range and IT nerf should make a different. not much, but its there. even tho late game zerg is still very good they can win by other factors beside infestors alone. this patch will help terrans for sure but by how much? maybe zerg will lose another infestor or 2 at most when they get 1 range closer to fungal, but thats about it imo. IT egg should make mech stronger. i think 1 range is a huge nerf. since infestor has to get 1 range closer. tanks now has a 2 more range lead and marine has 1 range timing to split and thus can gun down infestors easier. its a snowball effect, a small 1 tho. overall im satisfied.
"First step", "baby step"... i like to see P and T taking advantage of pro gamers problem to demands the end of the infestor (= rape incoming for other zerg than Life or Stephano). I know they just want to roll on us without a chance to loose. If they do more P will be unstopable.
On December 05 2012 03:53 LgNKane wrote: maybe this will shut up all the balance whining though ravens in late game will be overpowered, just watch.
Pretty much my thoughts. I don't think removing the seeker missile research was necessary at all. Terrans usually had too much gas in late game, we're gonna see seeker missiles everywhere -.-
On December 05 2012 03:53 LgNKane wrote: maybe this will shut up all the balance whining though ravens in late game will be overpowered, just watch.
Pretty much my thoughts. I don't think removing the seeker missile research was necessary at all. Terrans usually had too much gas in late game, we're gonna see seeker missiles everywhere -.-
Maybe the logic is just completely lost on me but if the upgrade was irrelevent by the time people started building Ravens then why would removing it suddenly cause a insane incrase to amount of ravens being built.
On December 05 2012 03:53 LgNKane wrote: maybe this will shut up all the balance whining though ravens in late game will be overpowered, just watch.
Pretty much my thoughts. I don't think removing the seeker missile research was necessary at all. Terrans usually had too much gas in late game, we're gonna see seeker missiles everywhere -.-
On December 05 2012 16:42 ViktorSC wrote: nooooooooooooooooo waaayyyy.... no seeker missile? are you for real right now? guess ill have to see for myself
oh yeah and, down with infestors.
I hope you understand it is "no seeker missile research needed" and not "no seeker missile". Just in case as the text is slightly ambiguous.
On December 05 2012 03:53 LgNKane wrote: maybe this will shut up all the balance whining though ravens in late game will be overpowered, just watch.
Pretty much my thoughts. I don't think removing the seeker missile research was necessary at all. Terrans usually had too much gas in late game, we're gonna see seeker missiles everywhere -.-
.... Sir. Do you even play the game?
Lol yes I do. I don't play terran but I see so many terrans not taking many of their gases in the late game of most of their m-u. Of course it depends on their unit composition but gas is rarely their limiting factor I mean.
On December 05 2012 03:53 LgNKane wrote: maybe this will shut up all the balance whining though ravens in late game will be overpowered, just watch.
Pretty much my thoughts. I don't think removing the seeker missile research was necessary at all. Terrans usually had too much gas in late game, we're gonna see seeker missiles everywhere -.-
lol, what?!? this makes no sense....so Terrans late game has excess of gas? and this free spell of 150/150 now frees up use of seeker missile? If this were true Terrans would invest in this upgrade. and by the way...terran has a excess of minerals late game not gas
i see how it helps tvz i dont see how it helps pvz ... vs bl infestor you cant get close enough to the infestor with the ht because if broodlings so nothing changes
On December 05 2012 16:53 Heavenfallz wrote: Interesting. Now terran can start incorporating raven into late game mech comp.
Why do people have to keep making the same claims without for a second looking at what has been posted many times? How do you think this change will make sure significantly more ravens would be used in lategame? The only change this represents is 150/150 less expenses. Now I definately wont complain about that as terran, but it wont mean seeker missiles are available sooner, and late game it really wont do anything.
Early game there is pretty much no reason to use seeker missiles, so also all the 1-1-1 doomscenarios with ravens dont make any sense (not to mention it still takes ages for ravens to have enough energy).
On December 05 2012 03:16 GolemMadness wrote: One range reduction on fungal and less egg health? That's not going to make anybody use infestors less.
+2 range on queens? That's barely going to have an effect in the game.
...
I'm not saying the nerf won't have any significance, but you can't equate a 67% buff to a 12% nerf.
This is the wrong way to look at it. That is like saying +1 carapace for lings is useless vs banelings because it only reduces damage by 2.86%. The point is that those last 2.86% makes a major difference, and percentage of damage is the wrong statistic to use (that 2.86% means it takes 2 banelings instead of 1 to kill your lings). A similar idea applies to this nerf. The important thing is that snipe, emp and feedback now outrange fungal (by 1-2), and it will be easier for colossus to target down infestors. That last 1 range makes a huge difference in how exposed your infestors are.
On December 05 2012 03:53 LgNKane wrote: maybe this will shut up all the balance whining though ravens in late game will be overpowered, just watch.
Pretty much my thoughts. I don't think removing the seeker missile research was necessary at all. Terrans usually had too much gas in late game, we're gonna see seeker missiles everywhere -.-
.... Sir. Do you even play the game?
Lol yes I do. I don't play terran but I see so many terrans not taking many of their gases in the late game of most of their m-u. Of course it depends on their unit composition but gas is rarely their limiting factor I mean.
LOL. What makes you think Terrans did not use ravens? I'll give you a hint *cough*range,and high mana*cough*. The cost of spell wasn't a fucking problem FFS
A nerf is a good thing. -1 *can* be a huge nerf, remains to see if it is. I still don't like the fact they didn't change FG's immobilize and it really annoys me(just because i think it's stupid, not because of balance) that the eggs and IT don't share hp. Don't know, this might adress balance well enough, I don't think it will however make the games much more exciting
On December 05 2012 16:42 ViktorSC wrote: nooooooooooooooooo waaayyyy.... no seeker missile? are you for real right now? guess ill have to see for myself
oh yeah and, down with infestors.
I hope you understand it is "no seeker missile research needed" and not "no seeker missile". Just in case as the text is slightly ambiguous.
On December 05 2012 03:53 LgNKane wrote: maybe this will shut up all the balance whining though ravens in late game will be overpowered, just watch.
Pretty much my thoughts. I don't think removing the seeker missile research was necessary at all. Terrans usually had too much gas in late game, we're gonna see seeker missiles everywhere -.-
.... Sir. Do you even play the game?
hahahahahaha. well put.
OOPS DID I POST THREE TIMES. was kinda busy playing a game. yay seeker missile.
Its funny as in retrospect, all the range changes at first got looked at as not being significant, yet they had the one of the biggest impact on gameplay imo.
+1 immortal range is a night and day difference, +1 roaches obiously, hell even +2 queen range was looked at as not doing anything in the beginning
lets wait and see, the change might just be what the game needed
On December 05 2012 17:13 Tsubbi wrote: +1 immortal range is a night and day difference, +1 roaches obiously, hell even +2 queen range was looked at as not doing anything in the beginning
Lol, when was it not looked as doing anything in the beginning? I believe pretty much everyone(except the zergs that put their heads in the sand, hoping blizz wouldn't notice how insanely big buff it was) saw how crazy of a buff it was.
Edit: When asked about the buff, even idra was not able to say it was a bad buff, paraphrasing he said "it's ok", which should indicate how obvious of a huge buff it was.
Reverting back the queen range , would help more than any 150gas upgrade in lategame. This little changes can help in fights, still, zerg can win turtling and rushing hive to deathball. Maybe we'll see some lategame battle lost more than before, but who cares when Z matchups are awfull and painfull to watch and play. I still don't believe that zergs cant win without bl\inf, but is a justinbrowder dogma i see.
On December 05 2012 03:53 LgNKane wrote: maybe this will shut up all the balance whining though ravens in late game will be overpowered, just watch.
Pretty much my thoughts. I don't think removing the seeker missile research was necessary at all. Terrans usually had too much gas in late game
Yeah, you float so much gas with mech...
Not with mech obviously. I speak as a protoss. I know gas is a limiting factor in TvT, but there are many strats in TvP where it is not, thus where they could afford ravens.
On December 05 2012 03:53 LgNKane wrote: maybe this will shut up all the balance whining though ravens in late game will be overpowered, just watch.
Pretty much my thoughts. I don't think removing the seeker missile research was necessary at all. Terrans usually had too much gas in late game, we're gonna see seeker missiles everywhere -.-
.... Sir. Do you even play the game?
Lol yes I do. I don't play terran but I see so many terrans not taking many of their gases in the late game of most of their m-u. Of course it depends on their unit composition but gas is rarely their limiting factor I mean.
LOL. What makes you think Terrans did not use ravens? I'll give you a hint *cough*range,and high mana*cough*. The cost of spell wasn't a fucking problem FFS
I guess you're right, the research cost was not important compared to the importance of range and mana cost. Still terrans will use it more spontaneously.
On December 05 2012 15:54 Scrubwave wrote: Baby steps forward are still steps forward. Even if the baby is retarded. And is missing half its limbs.
No satisfaction until the Infestor is nerfed into the dust I guess.
Please, tell me where do you think this infestor nerf will play any significant role, I want a good laugh.
Everywhere, because you are just eating more shots than before in every engagement.
I'd hardly go that route. It will have impact vs colossi and vikings, ghosts will still be hard pressed to do anything with broodlords around shelling broodlings+tank fire on them. It's really hard to say the effect though, it will probably be pretty massive against vikings, the problem I still have is, the game is still going to be "lets macro to 3 base, each and every game" and FG is still going to be insanely boring to watch
On December 05 2012 03:53 LgNKane wrote: maybe this will shut up all the balance whining though ravens in late game will be overpowered, just watch.
Pretty much my thoughts. I don't think removing the seeker missile research was necessary at all. Terrans usually had too much gas in late game
Yeah, you float so much gas with mech...
Not with mech obviously. I speak as a protoss. I know gas is a limiting factor in TvT, but there are many strats in TvP where it is not, thus where they could afford ravens.
I was talking about TvZ mech. In TvP you don't have spare gas if you build mass Ghosts and Nukes in lategame, and why would anyone bother to make Ravens while Feedback outranges and instantly kills any Raven with 140+ energy is beyond me.
On December 05 2012 16:42 ViktorSC wrote: nooooooooooooooooo waaayyyy.... no seeker missile? are you for real right now? guess ill have to see for myself
oh yeah and, down with infestors.
I hope you understand it is "no seeker missile research needed" and not "no seeker missile". Just in case as the text is slightly ambiguous.
On December 05 2012 03:53 LgNKane wrote: maybe this will shut up all the balance whining though ravens in late game will be overpowered, just watch.
Pretty much my thoughts. I don't think removing the seeker missile research was necessary at all. Terrans usually had too much gas in late game
Yeah, you float so much gas with mech...
Not with mech obviously. I speak as a protoss. I know gas is a limiting factor in TvT, but there are many strats in TvP where it is not, thus where they could afford ravens.
I was talking about TvZ mech. In TvP you don't have spare gas if you build mass Ghosts and Nukes in lategame, and why would anyone bother to make Ravens when Feedback outranges and instantly kills any Raven with 140+ energy is beyond me.
Ok. well as a terran you obviously have more insight about it than I have. I just have some fear about this terran buff, that's it. It seemed zergs needed to be nerfed, but imo terrans didn't need to be buffed. People always says "it won't do anything" and finally it does have some influence, sometimes leading to imbalance (just like when the queen's range was buffed). I just hope it won't but well, if all you smart guys say it won't, then I must be wrong.
We're going to see how these balance changes play out at the pro level: in Code S, at MLG, in Proleague.
That's where these changes matter most.
Frankly, I'm excited and hope that we'll see some more diverse games. Especially in the late stages of tournaments, the proliferation of Zergs and the single-minded desire to get to the late game super army made for some stale games.
On December 05 2012 15:54 Scrubwave wrote: Baby steps forward are still steps forward. Even if the baby is retarded. And is missing half its limbs.
No satisfaction until the Infestor is nerfed into the dust I guess.
Please, tell me where do you think this infestor nerf will play any significant role, I want a good laugh.
Everywhere, because you are just eating more shots than before in every engagement.
I'd hardly go that route. It will have impact vs colossi and vikings, ghosts will still be hard pressed to do anything with broodlords around shelling broodlings+tank fire on them. It's really hard to say the effect though, it will probably be pretty massive against vikings, the problem I still have is, the game is still going to be "lets macro to 3 base, each and every game" and FG is still going to be insanely boring to watch
but that is a completly different problem. People played like this for more than a year now. 3base just is damn good in SC2, because you get maximum saturation.
After each patch the buffed race says it changes nothing, while the nerfed race says it changes something. This is a sign of a good patch, and it usually changes something.
On December 05 2012 14:11 bhfberserk wrote: The seeker missile change is awesome. Now terran players can choose between a defensive spell "PDD" or offensive missile to gain grounds. A choice you can make between 125 energy and 100
Um, once again you have a misconception or a wrong notion. Nothing changed with seeker missile. You still will die if you attempt to make ravens at a point in the game where there's momentum and both players are attacking/defending.
The change makes it so Terran doesn't research a 1 time 150/150 cost. Nothing else changed. The unit was in fact not buffed, which is a shame. The problem is the accessibility and building the raven often does not pay itself off...there's too many situations where you build it and will have no energy for anything useful (1 autoturret? come on).
So yeah...stop saying it's a buff to seeker missile guys. It's not.
When blizzard wants to wake up and actually make the raven be able to pay itself off, make -> Corvid reactor increases raven starting energy to 100. Call me in 2014 when they give in and realize this change is the one that makes the raven more usable without overpowering it or changing any other values in the game
Not saying you're wrong about how small the change is, but strictly speaking, it is a buff. Maybe a small one, but still a buff.
If the raven change has any impact, it most certainly won't be in late-game. It matters very little in late-game if you're massing ravens (it only saves you 150/150, a paltry amount in late-game); it could matter a little if someone decided to go ravens earlier in the game, when money is scarce and 110 seconds of research time on a tech lab is better spent on corvid reactor than seeker missile; but the place it is most likely to have an effect is a situation in which you got a raven for another purpose, and then just happen to have it sitting around. There aren't a lot of early-game reasons to make a raven, the biggest being mobile detection. So in TvT or maybe TvP, you might have made a raven to deal with banshees or DTs, and then later on you'll happen to have it. If a good opportunity for seeker missile pops up, you have the ability, but pre-patch, you almost certainly wouldn't have researched it.
TvZ this also means that Terrans could get a single raven in TvZ against mutas. The odds of successfully landing your seeker missile on a pack of mutas is pretty low, and spending 250/350 wouldn't have been worth it; but at a cost of 100/200, it's maybe a decent possibility. If it doesn't wind up happening you still have a raven sitting around, which is a decent investment in most circumstances.
So I guess we don't disagree substantively; the change is most likely insignificant. But a buff is a buff, no matter how small.
On December 05 2012 17:37 Sandermatt wrote: After each patch the buffed race says it changes nothing, while the nerfed race says it changes something. This is a sign of a good patch, and it usually changes something.
You may be right. I'm not too sure about the HSM thing, but this patch looks basically good. Anyway I guess it will take a few weeks before we can evaluate its results. I hope it will bring more diversity to the vZ matchups.
Sigh Blizzard needs to understand it shouldn't be about just nerfing zerg. It should be about giving Zerg another viable option in late game. Nerf infestore MORE, but buff ultralisks/hydras to allow for different compositions in the late game. These changes will help balance zerg sure but won't make the game any better to watch
On December 05 2012 15:54 Scrubwave wrote: Baby steps forward are still steps forward. Even if the baby is retarded. And is missing half its limbs.
No satisfaction until the Infestor is nerfed into the dust I guess.
Please, tell me where do you think this infestor nerf will play any significant role, I want a good laugh.
Everywhere, because you are just eating more shots than before in every engagement.
I'd hardly go that route. It will have impact vs colossi and vikings, ghosts will still be hard pressed to do anything with broodlords around shelling broodlings+tank fire on them. It's really hard to say the effect though, it will probably be pretty massive against vikings, the problem I still have is, the game is still going to be "lets macro to 3 base, each and every game" and FG is still going to be insanely boring to watch
but that is a completly different problem. People played like this for more than a year now. 3base just is damn good in SC2, because you get maximum saturation.
No, the problem imo is the fact that there is very little terran can do to a 3 base zerg. Before the queen patch, zergs couldn't just take a free 3rd, they had to actually determine if they could and/or possibly spend resources in roaches to do so. Now, aslong as you can see the CC on the natural, you are stupid if you're not taking your 3rd. Getting that free 3rd is just insanely boring, was a lot more interesting back and forth before the queen patch.
Edit: If we take TvP as an example, neither side is safe in taking a 3rd. Both sides are still taking risks and getting an early 3rd, which opens up timings for the opponent. There are imo many things that suck about the TvP MU, but that particular... dimension is brilliant, something that you could also see for TvZ before instead of this NR 15min snoozefest.
On December 05 2012 05:26 NEEDZMOAR wrote: This is stupid... other casters/aoe damage are still just as strong and gamecontrolling...
Obvious patchzerg is obvious
Nothing in the game dominates the way infestors do, and the only unit that came close was ghost with snipe that got instantly nerfed to uselessness
err.... how about sentries, colossus? sure, infestor is a single unit that basically does what a coloss/sentry timing does for protoss, but it doesnt matter, its not my point.... if u dont know what my point is, 1 dont be so f*cking condescending and 2, dont respond....
On December 05 2012 17:52 zJayy962 wrote: Sigh Blizzard needs to understand it shouldn't be about just nerfing zerg. It should be about giving Zerg another viable option in late game. Nerf infestore MORE, but buff ultralisks/hydras to allow for different compositions in the late game. These changes will help balance zerg sure but won't make the game any better to watch
I'm protoss but I have to agree with this, as long as the buff would be small and done with all the good precautions. But too many changes can't be done in a single patch.
God damn why didn't they buff neural parasite (or at least increase it's range and screw it to uselessness in some other way)?
It's really annoying that zerg have only 2 good spells; heck even the fact that they essentially just have 3 spells in total is also BS.
On December 05 2012 17:52 zJayy962 wrote: Sigh Blizzard needs to understand it shouldn't be about just nerfing zerg. It should be about giving Zerg another viable option in late game. Nerf infestore MORE, but buff ultralisks/hydras to allow for different compositions in the late game. These changes will help balance zerg sure but won't make the game any better to watch
Very much agreed. Both Ultralisk and hydralisk are far too weak and hence get used far too rarely; What's worse is just like virtually every zerg unit, they don't use mucj/any micro. I'm sick of the way Blizzard made zerg in SC2 as a race that can't really take advantage of micro whatsoever. Even mutalisks can't do a whole lot now micro-wise; it pretty much boils down to just having good multitasking for mutas, not micro.
On December 05 2012 16:53 Heavenfallz wrote: Interesting. Now terran can start incorporating raven into late game mech comp.
Why do people have to keep making the same claims without for a second looking at what has been posted many times? How do you think this change will make sure significantly more ravens would be used in lategame? The only change this represents is 150/150 less expenses. Now I definately wont complain about that as terran, but it wont mean seeker missiles are available sooner, and late game it really wont do anything.
Early game there is pretty much no reason to use seeker missiles, so also all the 1-1-1 doomscenarios with ravens dont make any sense (not to mention it still takes ages for ravens to have enough energy).
They could be uses for faster ravens. If that were so, people who already have the tech for it could continue using it in the late game as well, as ravens are pretty good.
On December 05 2012 16:42 ViktorSC wrote: nooooooooooooooooo waaayyyy.... no seeker missile? are you for real right now? guess ill have to see for myself
oh yeah and, down with infestors.
I hope you understand it is "no seeker missile research needed" and not "no seeker missile". Just in case as the text is slightly ambiguous.
On December 05 2012 18:02 lord_nibbler wrote: Newbie question: Will this Raven change affect the infamous 1-1-1 against Protoss or is the timing gone when the energy is build up?
None at all, the time required for your raven to get enough energy for a HSM is too long.
Yay.. i cant wait for more threads in near future after tourneys on how the geniuses on TL foresaw all the impacts of each and every changes + other new discoveries and how everything was so obvious from a game design standpoint.
I think Zerg has plenty of options, it's just that Infest/Broodlord is so much more dominant, and it stood out. It's still going to be super effective, the range decrease is only going to make miscontroling Infestors more costly. The IT change is going to force players into making smart decisions with where they spam them out. It's so much more unforgiving when a stack of ITs are going to die to storm, also we can look forward to Zergs having to spread their eggs. It's going to be a slight adjustment. I like these changes, they are very slight.
The Raven change was necessary, the amount of gas to get the Raven was prohibitive in the early late game where you are scrambling to build Starports, Vikings, etc. This change is pretty huge in my opinion, the Raven already had to wait for 125 energy just to use one SM. This just reduces the time from deciding to build Ravens to using SM. The obvious use is in TvZ, but I think TvT may become affected in the end as well. I'd like to see Ravens against Protoss due to PDD's effectiveness against Stalkers. It could have unexplored uses.
On December 05 2012 15:54 Scrubwave wrote: Baby steps forward are still steps forward. Even if the baby is retarded. And is missing half its limbs.
No satisfaction until the Infestor is nerfed into the dust I guess.
Please, tell me where do you think this infestor nerf will play any significant role, I want a good laugh.
Everywhere, because you are just eating more shots than before in every engagement.
I'd hardly go that route. It will have impact vs colossi and vikings, ghosts will still be hard pressed to do anything with broodlords around shelling broodlings+tank fire on them. It's really hard to say the effect though, it will probably be pretty massive against vikings, the problem I still have is, the game is still going to be "lets macro to 3 base, each and every game" and FG is still going to be insanely boring to watch
but that is a completly different problem. People played like this for more than a year now. 3base just is damn good in SC2, because you get maximum saturation.
No, the problem imo is the fact that there is very little terran can do to a 3 base zerg. Before the queen patch, zergs couldn't just take a free 3rd, they had to actually determine if they could and/or possibly spend resources in roaches to do so. Now, aslong as you can see the CC on the natural, you are stupid if you're not taking your 3rd. Getting that free 3rd is just insanely boring, was a lot more interesting back and forth before the queen patch.
Edit: If we take TvP as an example, neither side is safe in taking a 3rd. Both sides are still taking risks and getting an early 3rd, which opens up timings for the opponent. There are imo many things that suck about the TvP MU, but that particular... dimension is brilliant, something that you could also see for TvZ before instead of this NR 15min snoozefest.
Before the queen patch, every Terran went reactored hellion into triple CC (or did some huge two base cheese) and every zerg went two base double upgrade or roach/ling into something like 7-9min third (or did some huge bust). Two base builds died long before the queen patch...
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they are the only way to cost effectively hold waves of good 2/2 bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from zerg this patch I would be surprised.
On December 05 2012 18:12 justinpal wrote: I think Zerg has plenty of options, it's just that Infest/Broodlord is so much more dominant, and it stood out. It's still going to be super effective, the range decrease is only going to make miscontroling Infestors more costly. The IT change is going to force players into making smart decisions with where they spam them out. It's so much more unforgiving when a stack of ITs are going to die to storm, also we can look forward to Zergs having to spread their eggs. It's going to be a slight adjustment. I like these changes, they are very slight.
The Raven change was necessary, the amount of gas to get the Raven was prohibitive in the early late game where you are scrambling to build Starports, Vikings, etc. This change is pretty huge in my opinion, the Raven already had to wait for 125 energy just to use one SM. This just reduces the time from deciding to build Ravens to using SM. The obvious use is in TvZ, but I think TvT may become affected in the end as well. I'd like to see Ravens against Protoss due to PDD's effectiveness against Stalkers. It could have unexplored uses.
a)I can not remember any game I did not went for Ravens in the lategame bc the 150gas HSM upgrade was to much of an investment. the overall investment ressourcewise (starports, techlabs, ravens) is not really changed.
b) the investment timewise was always and still is only connected to the energy on the raven the change can give you a few seconds earlier missile for the very first Ravens you build nothing else
you get raven energy up half way through you build the first ravens they pop with 75 energy while energy builds up HSM could be in research _______________ all you get (in an optimal szenario) is 150/150 min/gas and a few seconds earlier HSM for the very first ravens you could have.
In reality nothing changes and there will be no unexplored uses since everyone who really tried to make ravens work will realize Blizzard did not even touch the core problems with them yet. the "usage" and "viability" is not changed at all.
the only real buff on Ravens is actually the reduced fungal range since capturing raven before they get in range is a little bit less easy now (outranges HSM still by a lot though)
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
lol Infestors got abused so much they are their "coreunit" now?
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
lol Infestors got abused so much they are their "coreunit" now?
might as well be, they buffed them to be the be all end all and that's what players used them as. Now it's back to roach/hydra/corruptor and ling bane muta
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
lol Infestors got abused so much they are their "coreunit" now?
are they not the "coreunit" now? you are telling me they are not part of infestor broodlord deathball?
without infestors, there will be no zerg deathball at all
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
lol Infestors got abused so much they are their "coreunit" now?
might as well be, they buffed them to be the be all end all and that's what players used them as. Now it's back to roach/hydra/corruptor and ling bane muta
lol... first of all, it's not like infestors are unplayable now. They are still the best unit zerg has. Maybe still the best unit in the game. Second of all, "back to roach/hydra/corruptor and muta/ling/bane". Those playstyles got abbandoned because they didn't work anymore. Well, Muta/ling/bling can work for some time in the midgame vs bio Terran that didn't open 3CC + double ups. Then you transition into Infestors...
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
On December 05 2012 18:12 justinpal wrote: I think Zerg has plenty of options,
Thats nonsense. Zerg always has to go for Brood-Infestor-Corruptor in Lategame. Its our strongest build and for example in PvZ the only one, which can challange the big Protoss-Ball. Sometimes mass-muta works too, but only if your ahead in bases big time.
PvZ imo is the most boring matchup, Zerg has not enough options its always the same thing (try survive and tech to broods). And Toss tries in 90% of the games to do a stupid timing at 2 or 3 base, cause Broodlord-Infestor in Lategame is a hard thing to deal with.
Instead of nerfing things, Blizzard should give races more options and units to increase the variety of strategies. And i dont mean stupid units like the oracle who can only harass mineral-lines.
They should had changed the raven to 50/100, removed autoturret, reduced build time and HSM damage, and made it into a quasi vulture with speed upgrade.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
lol Infestors got abused so much they are their "coreunit" now?
might as well be, they buffed them to be the be all end all and that's what players used them as. Now it's back to roach/hydra/corruptor and ling bane muta
lol... first of all, it's not like infestors are unplayable now. They are still the best unit zerg has. Maybe still the best unit in the game. Second of all, "back to roach/hydra/corruptor and muta/ling/bane". Those playstyles got abbandoned because they didn't work anymore. Well, Muta/ling/bling can work for some time in the midgame vs bio Terran that didn't open 3CC + double ups. Then you transition into Infestors...
You know that blizzard has mentioned they will be nerfing infestors "heavily" and that these changes are far from the only ones right? Infestors wont be even close to what they are now if blizzard intends to follow through. I would expect the infestor to become pretty mediocre.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
lol Infestors got abused so much they are their "coreunit" now?
might as well be, they buffed them to be the be all end all and that's what players used them as. Now it's back to roach/hydra/corruptor and ling bane muta
lol... first of all, it's not like infestors are unplayable now. They are still the best unit zerg has. Maybe still the best unit in the game. Second of all, "back to roach/hydra/corruptor and muta/ling/bane". Those playstyles got abbandoned because they didn't work anymore. Well, Muta/ling/bling can work for some time in the midgame vs bio Terran that didn't open 3CC + double ups. Then you transition into Infestors...
You know that blizzard has mentioned they will be nerfing infestors "heavily" and that these changes are far from the only ones right? Infestors wont be even close to what they are now if blizzard intends to follow through.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
lol Infestors got abused so much they are their "coreunit" now?
might as well be, they buffed them to be the be all end all and that's what players used them as. Now it's back to roach/hydra/corruptor and ling bane muta
lol... first of all, it's not like infestors are unplayable now. They are still the best unit zerg has. Maybe still the best unit in the game. Second of all, "back to roach/hydra/corruptor and muta/ling/bane". Those playstyles got abbandoned because they didn't work anymore. Well, Muta/ling/bling can work for some time in the midgame vs bio Terran that didn't open 3CC + double ups. Then you transition into Infestors...
You know that blizzard has mentioned they will be nerfing infestors "heavily" and that these changes are far from the only ones right? Infestors wont be even close to what they are now if blizzard intends to follow through.
Yes, in a different game.
lol, which will become everyone's game for years in a matter of months.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Zerg is above 60% win rate in TvZ and you want buffs to compensate? Zerg should be happy the nerfs were so small tbh
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
I think zerg needs to get a new buff to some other units in order to let them NOT use infestors heavy composition. It's not only because infestors were strong, it's because muta ling banelings can't cut it eventually.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
lol Infestors got abused so much they are their "coreunit" now?
might as well be, they buffed them to be the be all end all and that's what players used them as. Now it's back to roach/hydra/corruptor and ling bane muta
lol... first of all, it's not like infestors are unplayable now. They are still the best unit zerg has. Maybe still the best unit in the game. Second of all, "back to roach/hydra/corruptor and muta/ling/bane". Those playstyles got abbandoned because they didn't work anymore. Well, Muta/ling/bling can work for some time in the midgame vs bio Terran that didn't open 3CC + double ups. Then you transition into Infestors...
You know that blizzard has mentioned they will be nerfing infestors "heavily" and that these changes are far from the only ones right? Infestors wont be even close to what they are now if blizzard intends to follow through.
Yes, in a different game.
lol, which will become everyone's game for years in a matter of months.
Are you being dense here?
There are new Zerg units in HoTS. If you are arguing that infestors are core unit in WoL, fine whatever. But to make a logical leap that it will remain the case in an expansion with powerful new units/abilities?
Like charging ultras for example. Freaking badass.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
GGlord/winfestor perhaps? Or is the terran PF containing you at 14 mins?
Doesn't this patch have a bigger impact on PvZ than TvZ? It would seem to me that the change simply makes turtling to BL + infestor even more inevitable - protoss imba mid-to-before-BLs-game is even stronger and there is still no other way of fighting it than laategame BL and infestor.
It will be interesting seeing the change in TvZ, but I would have preferred a BL + infestor nerf that didn't impact the choice of ultras over BLs. That composition partly depends on the infestor-eggs allowing zergs to be offensive and not lose before reaching the terran units.
All in all, I fear this change will make the use of BL and infestor even more inevitable than before, because it's the only way to be offensive past 12-13 minutes for zerg.
Maybe an option would be to make speed-upgraded overlords faster. It would improve harass-potential throughout the game and could be effective against the protoss mid-to-before-BLs-game.
On December 05 2012 19:16 m0ck wrote: Doesn't this patch have a bigger impact on PvZ than TvZ? It would seem to me that the change simply makes turtling to BL + infestor even more inevitable - protoss imba mid-to-before-BLs-game is even stronger and there is still no other way of fighting it than laategame BL and infestor.
It will be interesting seeing the change in TvZ, but I would have preferred a BL + infestor nerf that didn't impact the choice of ultras over BLs. That composition partly depends on the infestor-eggs allowing zergs to be offensive and not lose before reaching the terran units.
All in all, I fear this change will make the use of BL and infestor even more inevitable than before, because it's the only way to be offensive past 12-13 minutes for zerg.
Maybe an option would be to make speed-upgraded overlords faster. It would improve harass-potential throughout the game and could be effective against the protoss mid-to-before-BLs-game.
Movement speed of overlords arent whats keeping zerg from herrasing Protoss. Its the simple fact that they dont need too
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
GGlord/winfestor perhaps? Or is the terran PF containing you at 14 mins?
then you are on the same line of thought as me. Zerg are being pushed to use GGlord/winfestor.
But zerg should get buff in other units so we don't HAVE to use GGlord/winfestor.
flanking is awesome, ling baneling muta is awesome, baneling landmine is awesome. But it doesn't work late game, which is why it sucks. Zerg should get a buff in some other units so we don't have to go GGlord/winfestor. We need something that can help zerg to trade more efficiently so that we don't have to go back to the deathball again.
Oh no! They've slightly nerfed the winfestor, I cannot just spam f everywhere from the minimap, now i've to sue carefully a spellcaster or maybe my opponent can kill all of my infestors.. Should I learn to play finally?
A real threat to a patchzerg... I'm sorry for them, dropping from master to platinum will be tough
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
GGlord/winfestor perhaps? Or is the terran PF containing you at 14 mins?
then you are on the same line of thought as me. Zerg are being pushed to use GGlord/winfestor.
But zerg should get buff in other units so we don't HAVE to use GGlord/winfestor.
flanking is awesome, ling baneling muta is awesome, baneling landmine is awesome. But it doesn't work late game, which is why it sucks. Zerg should get a buff in some other units so we don't have to go GGlord/winfestor. We need something that can help zerg to trade more efficiently so that we don't have to go back to the deathball again.
Nope, im not in the same thought as you. I think you're grossly overstating things when you say that GGlord/winfestor amove is the only aggressive potential that zerg has. And Ultras are still in the game as far as i know
Edit: and you're argument with Muta/Ling/bling not working in lategame, well Marine tank hardly works in lategame. Should we buff that comp then so Terran has some lategame potential?
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
Maps are getting bigger and more open. Not all maps, but that's a map design issue. Serious tourneys should not use ridiculous maps. Akilon isn't -that- bad. I see a lot of pathways for attacks. Maybe I'm missing something specific, but again, that's a map design issue.
If Terrans turtle hard, they better be sure to win decisively. Terrans cannot trade and then expect to win (edit: lategame) because A) Zerg remax, B) Zerg tech switch.
On December 05 2012 19:16 m0ck wrote: protoss imba mid-to-before-BLs-game is even stronger and there is still no other way of fighting it than laategame BL and infestor.
Range should change a lot more then people think. Without +1 range to immortals neither pvp nor pvz would be played the way they are right now, hell even pvt would be a lot different. This should make feedback/snipe/emp a lot easier to use vs infestors.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
Maps are getting bigger and more open. Not all maps, but that's a map design issue. Serious tourneys should not use ridiculous maps. Akilon isn't -that- bad. I see a lot of pathways for attacks. Maybe I'm missing something specific, but again, that's a map design issue.
If Terrans turtle hard, they better be sure to win decisively. Terrans cannot trade and then expect to win because A) Zerg remax, B) Zerg tech switch.
The days of Terran turtleling hard are pretty much over since Terran doesent have a lategame that can be reached "easy" You could with ghosts since they could actually combat zerg lategame, but we know how that went
On December 05 2012 19:28 Ragnarork wrote: Those changes seems pretty interesting balance-wise.
I still think the infestor should be completely removed of the game, spectator-wise, and even in terms of gameplay and possibilities...
It's been stated that the infestor will undergo major changes in HoTS. This is just a band aid fix till then, because they know it's a problem, but any drastic changes might hurt Zerg. Aside from that these changes will have a pretty big impact on PvZ being able to actually kill eggs now with storm, players can't mindlessly throw down eggs instantly with a few fungals and with range decrease it adds in more dynamics with the templar.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
GGlord/winfestor perhaps? Or is the terran PF containing you at 14 mins?
then you are on the same line of thought as me. Zerg are being pushed to use GGlord/winfestor.
But zerg should get buff in other units so we don't HAVE to use GGlord/winfestor.
flanking is awesome, ling baneling muta is awesome, baneling landmine is awesome. But it doesn't work late game, which is why it sucks. Zerg should get a buff in some other units so we don't have to go GGlord/winfestor. We need something that can help zerg to trade more efficiently so that we don't have to go back to the deathball again.
Nope, im not in the same thought as you. I think you're grossly overstating things when you say that GGlord/winfestor amove is the only aggressive potential that zerg has. And Ultras are still in the game as far as i know
Edit: and you're argument with Muta/Ling/bling not working in lategame, well Marine tank hardly works in lategame. Should we buff that comp then so Terran has some lategame potential?
infestor broodlord is not the only aggressive potential, of cause. I never said they are except in the case where PFs are set up and terran hard turtles. Ultras will not break split map PFs with their poor pathing and PFs totally make it even worse.
you are the one who also suggested GGlord/winfestors when terran set up PFs.
I also did not say infestor broodlord should get buff. I said Zerg should get another buff somewhere so they don't have to go infestors all the games.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
GGlord/winfestor perhaps? Or is the terran PF containing you at 14 mins?
then you are on the same line of thought as me. Zerg are being pushed to use GGlord/winfestor.
But zerg should get buff in other units so we don't HAVE to use GGlord/winfestor.
flanking is awesome, ling baneling muta is awesome, baneling landmine is awesome. But it doesn't work late game, which is why it sucks. Zerg should get a buff in some other units so we don't have to go GGlord/winfestor. We need something that can help zerg to trade more efficiently so that we don't have to go back to the deathball again.
Flanks don't work lategame? How exactly does a tactic that gives you surround over your opponent's army "not work" in late game?
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
GGlord/winfestor perhaps? Or is the terran PF containing you at 14 mins?
then you are on the same line of thought as me. Zerg are being pushed to use GGlord/winfestor.
But zerg should get buff in other units so we don't HAVE to use GGlord/winfestor.
flanking is awesome, ling baneling muta is awesome, baneling landmine is awesome. But it doesn't work late game, which is why it sucks. Zerg should get a buff in some other units so we don't have to go GGlord/winfestor. We need something that can help zerg to trade more efficiently so that we don't have to go back to the deathball again.
Nope, im not in the same thought as you. I think you're grossly overstating things when you say that GGlord/winfestor amove is the only aggressive potential that zerg has. And Ultras are still in the game as far as i know
Edit: and you're argument with Muta/Ling/bling not working in lategame, well Marine tank hardly works in lategame. Should we buff that comp then so Terran has some lategame potential?
infestor broodlord is not the only aggressive potential, of cause. I never said they are except in the case where PFs are set up and terran hard turtles. Ultras will not break split map PFs with their poor pathing and PFs totally make it even worse.
you are the one who also suggested GGlord/winfestors when terran set up PFs.
I also did not say infestor broodlord should get buff. I said Zerg should get another buff somewhere so they don't have to go infestors all the games.
You're just conveniently ignoring the fact that on split map economy, Zerg can remax and switch tech on the drop of a dime.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
GGlord/winfestor perhaps? Or is the terran PF containing you at 14 mins?
then you are on the same line of thought as me. Zerg are being pushed to use GGlord/winfestor.
But zerg should get buff in other units so we don't HAVE to use GGlord/winfestor.
flanking is awesome, ling baneling muta is awesome, baneling landmine is awesome. But it doesn't work late game, which is why it sucks. Zerg should get a buff in some other units so we don't have to go GGlord/winfestor. We need something that can help zerg to trade more efficiently so that we don't have to go back to the deathball again.
Nope, im not in the same thought as you. I think you're grossly overstating things when you say that GGlord/winfestor amove is the only aggressive potential that zerg has. And Ultras are still in the game as far as i know
Edit: and you're argument with Muta/Ling/bling not working in lategame, well Marine tank hardly works in lategame. Should we buff that comp then so Terran has some lategame potential?
infestor broodlord is not the only aggressive potential, of cause. I never said they are except in the case where PFs are set up and terran hard turtles. Ultras will not break split map PFs with their poor pathing and PFs totally make it even worse.
you are the one who also suggested GGlord/winfestors when terran set up PFs.
I also did not say infestor broodlord should get buff. I said Zerg should get another buff somewhere so they don't have to go infestors all the games.
sry, but there are good ways to go aggressive in the current metagame. Watch Leenocks ZvT, that guy has so many good aggressive strategies.
In split map mass stationary defense games you simply need siege weapons. That's basic Stationary defense design in all RTS games.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
GGlord/winfestor perhaps? Or is the terran PF containing you at 14 mins?
then you are on the same line of thought as me. Zerg are being pushed to use GGlord/winfestor.
But zerg should get buff in other units so we don't HAVE to use GGlord/winfestor.
flanking is awesome, ling baneling muta is awesome, baneling landmine is awesome. But it doesn't work late game, which is why it sucks. Zerg should get a buff in some other units so we don't have to go GGlord/winfestor. We need something that can help zerg to trade more efficiently so that we don't have to go back to the deathball again.
Flanks don't work lategame? How exactly does a tactic that gives you surround over your opponent's army "not work" in late game?
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
GGlord/winfestor perhaps? Or is the terran PF containing you at 14 mins?
then you are on the same line of thought as me. Zerg are being pushed to use GGlord/winfestor.
But zerg should get buff in other units so we don't HAVE to use GGlord/winfestor.
flanking is awesome, ling baneling muta is awesome, baneling landmine is awesome. But it doesn't work late game, which is why it sucks. Zerg should get a buff in some other units so we don't have to go GGlord/winfestor. We need something that can help zerg to trade more efficiently so that we don't have to go back to the deathball again.
Nope, im not in the same thought as you. I think you're grossly overstating things when you say that GGlord/winfestor amove is the only aggressive potential that zerg has. And Ultras are still in the game as far as i know
Edit: and you're argument with Muta/Ling/bling not working in lategame, well Marine tank hardly works in lategame. Should we buff that comp then so Terran has some lategame potential?
infestor broodlord is not the only aggressive potential, of cause. I never said they are except in the case where PFs are set up and terran hard turtles. Ultras will not break split map PFs with their poor pathing and PFs totally make it even worse.
you are the one who also suggested GGlord/winfestors when terran set up PFs.
I also did not say infestor broodlord should get buff. I said Zerg should get another buff somewhere so they don't have to go infestors all the games.
You're just conveniently ignoring the fact that on split map economy, Zerg can remax and switch tech on the drop of a dime.
Heh, I'm pretty sure that all the zergs that are "pushed" to use BL/infestor lategame doesn't flank. For a very simple reason: it's not a composition which is meant to do that!
Time to explore and broaden the play, rather than rely on the same old thing, zergs.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
GGlord/winfestor perhaps? Or is the terran PF containing you at 14 mins?
then you are on the same line of thought as me. Zerg are being pushed to use GGlord/winfestor.
But zerg should get buff in other units so we don't HAVE to use GGlord/winfestor.
flanking is awesome, ling baneling muta is awesome, baneling landmine is awesome. But it doesn't work late game, which is why it sucks. Zerg should get a buff in some other units so we don't have to go GGlord/winfestor. We need something that can help zerg to trade more efficiently so that we don't have to go back to the deathball again.
Flanks don't work lategame? How exactly does a tactic that gives you surround over your opponent's army "not work" in late game?
On December 05 2012 19:32 ETisME wrote:
On December 05 2012 19:22 Solarist wrote:
On December 05 2012 19:19 ETisME wrote:
On December 05 2012 19:15 Solarist wrote:
On December 05 2012 19:13 ETisME wrote:
On December 05 2012 19:02 plogamer wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:50 ETisME wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:47 Moochlol wrote: [quote]
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
GGlord/winfestor perhaps? Or is the terran PF containing you at 14 mins?
then you are on the same line of thought as me. Zerg are being pushed to use GGlord/winfestor.
But zerg should get buff in other units so we don't HAVE to use GGlord/winfestor.
flanking is awesome, ling baneling muta is awesome, baneling landmine is awesome. But it doesn't work late game, which is why it sucks. Zerg should get a buff in some other units so we don't have to go GGlord/winfestor. We need something that can help zerg to trade more efficiently so that we don't have to go back to the deathball again.
Nope, im not in the same thought as you. I think you're grossly overstating things when you say that GGlord/winfestor amove is the only aggressive potential that zerg has. And Ultras are still in the game as far as i know
Edit: and you're argument with Muta/Ling/bling not working in lategame, well Marine tank hardly works in lategame. Should we buff that comp then so Terran has some lategame potential?
infestor broodlord is not the only aggressive potential, of cause. I never said they are except in the case where PFs are set up and terran hard turtles. Ultras will not break split map PFs with their poor pathing and PFs totally make it even worse.
you are the one who also suggested GGlord/winfestors when terran set up PFs.
I also did not say infestor broodlord should get buff. I said Zerg should get another buff somewhere so they don't have to go infestors all the games.
You're just conveniently ignoring the fact that on split map economy, Zerg can remax and switch tech on the drop of a dime.
Heh, I'm pretty sure that all the zergs that are "pushed" to use BL/infestor lategame doesn't flank. For a very simple reason: it's not a composition which is meant to do that!
Time to explore and broaden the play, rather than rely on the same old thing, zergs.
Even a 10-15 supply worth of cracklings will do amazing damage. Even if it only serves to cut off reinforcements and/or to backstab economy. I know that zergs used to park roaches under BL/infestor deathballs in TvP to dissuade stalker blink ins. So it's not that they can't spare the supply.
Zergs really are not as limited as some people here wants to believe.
When it comes to PvZ this change is crap. The range 8 doesnt mean anything as you wont have colossus ever in the frontline. Winfestors can still fungal your stalker/sentry/immortal from behind roach wall ... and if you want to focus them down with colossus you will expose them to being sniped by his ground army.
Imho it's bull ... although egg hp decrease was a much needed nerf imho.
On December 05 2012 19:51 hecticSc wrote: When it comes to PvZ this change is crap. The range 8 doesnt mean anything as you wont have colossus ever in the frontline. Winfestors can still fungal your stalker/sentry/immortal from behind roach wall ... and if you want to focus them down with colossus you will expose them to being sniped by his ground army.
Imho it's bull ... although egg hp decrease was a much needed nerf imho.
8 range means that HTs can feedback a little easier. And really, infested terran was a huuuge deal in ZvP.
Blizz is taking small steps, as they should. I don't want an underpowered Zerg. Despite what some stupid Zergs would assume, I actually want Zergs to do well and not be nerfed into oblivion.
On December 05 2012 20:38 SupLilSon wrote: So has anyone had enough time to test out the changes to any degree? Mostly interested in any new dynamics with the Raven or Fungal range.
just tested it in single player unit tester
the fungal range change is definetly noticable in viking tank vs broodlord infestor scenarios as well as the spine infestor colossus forcefield one
to add to that i just wanna point out +3 is the magic upgrade number for colossus to rape infested terran eggs in 2 shots, where as without upgrades or +2 it takes 3 shots.
before patch with 0-0 it took 4 shots, so big difference there too
On December 05 2012 20:38 SupLilSon wrote: So has anyone had enough time to test out the changes to any degree? Mostly interested in any new dynamics with the Raven or Fungal range.
Yep. Played a bit more games TvZ on ladder, it has not changed much to be honest. The raven change does nothing for TvZ late game either. To the point I felt like analyzing it real time so people stop spouting out non sense about how it's a buff (check spoiler):
If you were just interested about the raven change: + Show Spoiler +
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rgQK3IYTIo#t=8m6s
The only thing I think the -1 fungal range did was make it so players can't be as careless with infestors...it didn't change anything in terms of being able to mass them with broodlord/corruptor imo.
the zergs whining there about its to huge nerf and ff are imba not fungal and fungal now useless usw usw ... damn i think i get cancer from reading such posts
the zergs whining there about its to huge nerf and ff are imba not fungal and fungal now useless usw usw ... damn i think i get cancer from reading such posts
the zergs whining there about its to huge nerf and ff are imba not fungal and fungal now useless usw usw ... damn i think i get cancer from reading such posts
That's why you don't read Battle.Net posts.
Btw it's funny to see usw. in an English sentence. ^^
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
And we all remember the rampage when Queens got +2 range.
+1 range on immortal made a night and day difference because of other Protoss units that would block and prevent immortals from being able to fire. (edit: basically went from doing practically 0 dps to full dps)
+2 range on queens also made a huge difference because they could go against the short ranged hellions much more effectively. (edit: again, went from doing - 0 dps to full dps, since players used to be able to kite queens with hellions)
-1 range on infestor will not be as huge a change because infestors are still very safe behind Broodlord range, broodlings. What makes infestors super safe isn't just their range, but also the fact that tanks have to unseige against broodlords. Tanks are the number 1 killer of infestors in TvZ. I'm hoping more ghosts will be employed due to the changes, since they're slightly less susceptible to broodlings (ie, they won't kill their own units)
Wow 70 hp eggs. I thought 80 hp was enough as you still need 2 storms unless you time it really well. I don't mind 70 hp allows more skill being involved. Now you have to spread your eggs and not just roll your mousewheel.
The Fungal range nerf is actually all that was needed to make up for radius 2. I like this approach more then decreasing the Fungal radius (well I am talking about it for 1,5 years now, so yay smelly me). Now the Range advantages in TvZ are pretty even spread, which will make Broodlord Infestor vs Viking Ghost/tank, really tough for both sides. (well less tough for the terran)
Will be tough for Zerg though, it will take some time to get used to these changes. Because Infestors are easier to snipe now when they Fungal and you need to spread them a little if you want to through enough mass of Infestors (or get closer). I really like when units become harder to use. Sadly Protoss units usually become easier to use.
On December 05 2012 20:38 SupLilSon wrote: So has anyone had enough time to test out the changes to any degree? Mostly interested in any new dynamics with the Raven or Fungal range.
just tested it in single player unit tester
the fungal range change is definetly noticable in viking tank vs broodlord infestor scenarios as well as the spine infestor colossus forcefield one
to add to that i just wanna point out +3 is the magic upgrade number for colossus to rape infested terran eggs in 2 shots, where as without upgrades or +2 it takes 3 shots.
before patch with 0-0 it took 4 shots, so big difference there too
ooh, i definitely hadn't thought of the spine infestor colossus forcefield one. This might have a bit of impact, because of the way zergs always transition to hive and the 3-base push it triggers on for example entombed valley.
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
And we all remember the rampage when Queens got +2 range.
+1 range on immortal made a night and day difference because of other Protoss units that would block and prevent immortals from being able to fire.
+2 range on queens also made a huge difference because they could go against the short ranged hellions much more effectively.
-1 range on infestor will not be as huge a change because infestors are still very safe behind Broodlord range, broodlings. What makes infestors super safe isn't just their range, but also the fact that tanks have to unseige against broodlords. Tanks are the number 1 killer of infestors in TvZ. I'm hoping more ghosts will be employed due to the changes, since they're slightly less susceptible to broodlings (ie, they won't kill their own units)
BUT, it's a a change in the right direction.
Let's wait a while before we say it didn't make much difference. Before both the roach and immortal range + 1 people said exactly the same thing "it barely changes anything". Then a bit later we saw how huge those changes actually were.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
lol Infestors got abused so much they are their "coreunit" now?
are they not the "coreunit" now? you are telling me they are not part of infestor broodlord deathball?
without infestors, there will be no zerg deathball at all
Infestors are still good, you act like they are REMOVED.
Another question you need to ask yourself is: is it normal that the race with the best macro options, has the best army? Ever dealt with broodlord infestor as terran???
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
And we all remember the rampage when Queens got +2 range.
+1 range on immortal made a night and day difference because of other Protoss units that would block and prevent immortals from being able to fire.
+2 range on queens also made a huge difference because they could go against the short ranged hellions much more effectively.
-1 range on infestor will not be as huge a change because infestors are still very safe behind Broodlord range, broodlings. What makes infestors super safe isn't just their range, but also the fact that tanks have to unseige against broodlords. Tanks are the number 1 killer of infestors in TvZ. I'm hoping more ghosts will be employed due to the changes, since they're slightly less susceptible to broodlings (ie, they won't kill their own units)
BUT, it's a a change in the right direction.
Let's wait a while before we say it didn't make much difference. Before both the roach and immortal range + 1 people said exactly the same thing "it barely changes anything". Then a bit later we saw how huge those changes actually were.
I think I explained pretty clearly why immortal and queen buff were a huge changes. Ah, I edited a bit to make it clearer.
The -1 range isn't as big a change because it doesn't have the kind of zero to hero (or in reverse for the infestor) dynamic. Ghosts snipe is what got buffed against infestors since tanks are still impotent to kill infestors when broodlords hit the field.
Here is the edited version for your convenience.
+1 range on immortal made a night and day difference because of other Protoss units that would block and prevent immortals from being able to fire. (edit: basically went from doing practically 0 dps to full dps)
+2 range on queens also made a huge difference because they could go against the short ranged hellions much more effectively. (edit: again, went from doing - 0 dps to full dps, since players used to be able to kite queens with hellions)
People are really funny talking about "patch zergs", they wouldnt pass diamond as zergs, but they dare insult the entire career of some pros because they're new? A guy named Inca made it to the finals of the most competitive tournament we got in SC2, he disappeared since because he's just bad, what race did he play? Oh... And I guess the immortal all in is fine, very balanced, if Blizzard keep listening to gold leagues butthurts and patching in consequence this game will never be stable, they just dont let people adapt to the meta and refine their play, they just patch whenever there's a switch in the winnings, it's actually terrible for the future of this game, temporary fixes but wont look at the fact that Zerg need fungals, an anti-micro spell to stay alive, and same for Protoss with forcefields, I just dont see how esport could last more than 2 years with such poor design in general, the hype will go away, people will slowly switch to mobas when all they'll watch on GSL is immortal allins vs zerg trying to brood infestor, even HotS wont fix the core problems, but hey, on the bright side, the gold leagues wont whine so much on battle.net forums!
I find it weird how many people assume -1 range to fungal won't be impactful when the -2 range to neural parasite completely removed even researching it from the entire zvp gamespan between colossus count hitting 2 and mothership construction. I mean, I know using NP causes a greater window of exposure for the infestors, but that's a *huge* amount of the game that NP got kicked out of. Even an analogous, but much less extreme outcome has room to make significant impact.
Infestors are still good, but we should notice a difference once everyone adjusts.
On December 05 2012 22:24 jumai wrote: I find it weird how many people assume -1 range to fungal won't be impactful when the -2 range to neural parasite completely removed even researching it from the entire zvp gamespan between colossus count hitting 2 and mothership construction. I mean, I know using NP causes a greater window of exposure for the infestors, but that's a *huge* amount of the game that NP got kicked out of. Even an analogous, but much less extreme outcome has room to make significant impact.
Infestors are still good, but we should notice a difference once everyone adjusts.
Because NP with range 9 had the same range as colossi, for example? That change made a difference. What difference does -1 range on fungal make?
Sigh, exactly, I've been presenting the differences and it just falls on deaf ears. These people cannot even point out -how- it could make a difference theoretically. They just assume it will make a huge difference because it happened with other units, when the other units were functioning on very different principles.
On December 05 2012 22:24 jumai wrote: I find it weird how many people assume -1 range to fungal won't be impactful when the -2 range to neural parasite completely removed even researching it from the entire zvp gamespan between colossus count hitting 2 and mothership construction. I mean, I know using NP causes a greater window of exposure for the infestors, but that's a *huge* amount of the game that NP got kicked out of. Even an analogous, but much less extreme outcome has room to make significant impact.
Infestors are still good, but we should notice a difference once everyone adjusts.
Because NP with range 9 had the same range as colossi, for example? That change made a difference. What difference does -1 range on fungal make?
You start by saying that -2 on neural deleted the spell because Colossus had 9 range and NP 9 But you fail to see how Fungal going from 9 to 8 might be impactful against Colossi ?
Also, infestor now outranged by ghost and more vulnerable to tank fire
Still doesn't fix that a bad zerg can max out on roaches by 11 minutes into the game and constantly deny you ever getting a third base safely, still doesnt stop lategame infestor brood lord being way too cos efficient.
Still means I can be 10x the skill of my zerg opponent and lose the game to one missed force field while he makes 100 mistakes and still a-moves to victory with his tier 3 army.
On December 05 2012 22:24 jumai wrote: I find it weird how many people assume -1 range to fungal won't be impactful when the -2 range to neural parasite completely removed even researching it from the entire zvp gamespan between colossus count hitting 2 and mothership construction. I mean, I know using NP causes a greater window of exposure for the infestors, but that's a *huge* amount of the game that NP got kicked out of. Even an analogous, but much less extreme outcome has room to make significant impact.
Infestors are still good, but we should notice a difference once everyone adjusts.
Because NP with range 9 had the same range as colossi, for example? That change made a difference. What difference does -1 range on fungal make?
Sigh, exactly, I've been presenting the differences and it just falls on deaf ears. These people cannot even point out -how- it could make a difference theoretically. They just assume it will make a huge difference because it happened with other units, when the other units were functioning on very different principles.
all your theorycrafting is very nice, but someone like morrow already feels the difference (i thought he said that in this thread, i'll look it up). To be honest, i value his experience higher than your theories. Theorycrafting after testing is useful for understanding. Theorycrafting before testing is above all prone to error. Besides, keeping the possibility of having an impact open is way different than having blind faith in change. The point is you may be right, but you yourself don't actually know.
On December 05 2012 20:38 SupLilSon wrote: So has anyone had enough time to test out the changes to any degree? Mostly interested in any new dynamics with the Raven or Fungal range.
just tested it in single player unit tester
the fungal range change is definetly noticable in viking tank vs broodlord infestor scenarios as well as the spine infestor colossus forcefield one
to add to that i just wanna point out +3 is the magic upgrade number for colossus to rape infested terran eggs in 2 shots, where as without upgrades or +2 it takes 3 shots.
before patch with 0-0 it took 4 shots, so big difference there too
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
+1 on immortals made them stop dancing behind other units, +2 on queens made a difference because helions were no longer viable against queens what does -1 on fungal change?
Give it a short time and see then ? Snipe will simply be amazing vs infestors. On the highest play what seems like small tweeks can already make huge differences.
You can generalise it like this: range reduced by 1/9 - caster 1/9 more vulnerable to attacks. Zergs already lose games when their infestors get too close and get picked off by ranged units or counterspells, that's going to be a more common sight from now on. It's a good balance change, hard to say if it'll be enough though.
On December 05 2012 22:24 jumai wrote: I find it weird how many people assume -1 range to fungal won't be impactful when the -2 range to neural parasite completely removed even researching it from the entire zvp gamespan between colossus count hitting 2 and mothership construction. I mean, I know using NP causes a greater window of exposure for the infestors, but that's a *huge* amount of the game that NP got kicked out of. Even an analogous, but much less extreme outcome has room to make significant impact.
Infestors are still good, but we should notice a difference once everyone adjusts.
Because NP with range 9 had the same range as colossi, for example? That change made a difference. What difference does -1 range on fungal make?
You start by saying that -2 on neural deleted the spell because Colossus had 9 range and NP 9 But you fail to see how Fungal going from 9 to 8 might be impactful against Colossi ?
Also, infestor now outranged by ghost and more vulnerable to tank fire
Oh, poor "infestor now outranged by ghost and more vulnerable to tank fire". You try and snipe infestor while spliting marines and focusfire banelings. This assuming you are sieged.
Great patch!! Seems like a good way to make mass infestor play useless without severely weakening the zerg midgame. Now for the terrans saying the raven change is useless, consider the following:
It makes the transition from mech to late game mech much smoother. You don't have to dump a huge amount of gas for multiple starports to have an effective and quick transition. The 1 tech lab on the banshee producing starport can research corvid reactor while you start mining gas from the 4th. Then you can even start producing ravens out of 1 starport at 13-14 minutes so they can pool enough energy for HSM when the broodlords arrive. And then add additional starports as your income increases and the game turns to end game (and more air focused) compositions.
Also, this means that for bio players that want to incorporate ravens, they can only have 2 starports with tech labs (for the 2 upgrades that are left) and do not need to commit to 3 starports (plus the 150 extra gas cost). This can lead to a smoother transition that does not pin the terran in his base and nullifies all agression (aka no medivac and tank production). If the ravens are produced without the need of a 4 base economy they can be made much earlier, pool more energy and actually be effective without the need for the terran to turtle while the zerg player banks 5k/5k to switch into dozens of ultras.
On December 05 2012 22:24 jumai wrote: I find it weird how many people assume -1 range to fungal won't be impactful when the -2 range to neural parasite completely removed even researching it from the entire zvp gamespan between colossus count hitting 2 and mothership construction. I mean, I know using NP causes a greater window of exposure for the infestors, but that's a *huge* amount of the game that NP got kicked out of. Even an analogous, but much less extreme outcome has room to make significant impact.
Infestors are still good, but we should notice a difference once everyone adjusts.
Because NP with range 9 had the same range as colossi, for example? That change made a difference. What difference does -1 range on fungal make?
You start by saying that -2 on neural deleted the spell because Colossus had 9 range and NP 9 But you fail to see how Fungal going from 9 to 8 might be impactful against Colossi ?
Also, infestor now outranged by ghost and more vulnerable to tank fire
Oh, poor "infestor now outranged by ghost and more vulnerable to tank fire". You try and snipe infestor while spliting marines and focusfire banelings. This assuming you are sieged.
You're not reacting to the posts above you. You can be snide all you want about difficulty, but it's about possiblity of changing unit interactions, not difficulty. Your sentiments are an argument why this should make a difference more than if this makes any difference.
On December 05 2012 22:24 jumai wrote: I find it weird how many people assume -1 range to fungal won't be impactful when the -2 range to neural parasite completely removed even researching it from the entire zvp gamespan between colossus count hitting 2 and mothership construction. I mean, I know using NP causes a greater window of exposure for the infestors, but that's a *huge* amount of the game that NP got kicked out of. Even an analogous, but much less extreme outcome has room to make significant impact.
Infestors are still good, but we should notice a difference once everyone adjusts.
Because NP with range 9 had the same range as colossi, for example? That change made a difference. What difference does -1 range on fungal make?
You start by saying that -2 on neural deleted the spell because Colossus had 9 range and NP 9 But you fail to see how Fungal going from 9 to 8 might be impactful against Colossi ?
Also, infestor now outranged by ghost and more vulnerable to tank fire
Oh, poor "infestor now outranged by ghost and more vulnerable to tank fire". You try and snipe infestor while spliting marines and focusfire banelings. This assuming you are sieged.
On December 05 2012 22:24 jumai wrote: I find it weird how many people assume -1 range to fungal won't be impactful when the -2 range to neural parasite completely removed even researching it from the entire zvp gamespan between colossus count hitting 2 and mothership construction. I mean, I know using NP causes a greater window of exposure for the infestors, but that's a *huge* amount of the game that NP got kicked out of. Even an analogous, but much less extreme outcome has room to make significant impact.
Infestors are still good, but we should notice a difference once everyone adjusts.
Because NP with range 9 had the same range as colossi, for example? That change made a difference. What difference does -1 range on fungal make?
You start by saying that -2 on neural deleted the spell because Colossus had 9 range and NP 9 But you fail to see how Fungal going from 9 to 8 might be impactful against Colossi ?
Also, infestor now outranged by ghost and more vulnerable to tank fire
Oh, poor "infestor now outranged by ghost and more vulnerable to tank fire". You try and snipe infestor while spliting marines and focusfire banelings. This assuming you are sieged.
If you arent sieged that's your problem, Fungal getting a -1 range force infestor to take a heavier punishment before being able to fungal anything now, that's a fact
No, I'm not saying anything deleted NP, you are.
No Im not, someone else did, , still doesnt change anything to what I said
On December 05 2012 22:51 Notfragile wrote: Great patch!! Seems like a good way to make mass infestor play useless without severely weakening the zerg midgame. Now for the terrans saying the raven change is useless, consider the following:
It makes the transition from mech to late game mech much smoother. You don't have to dump a huge amount of gas for multiple starports to have an effective and quick transition. The 1 tech lab on the banshee producing starport can research corvid reactor while you start mining gas from the 4th. Then you can even start producing ravens out of 1 starport at 13-14 minutes so they can pool enough energy for HSM when the broodlords arrive. And then add additional starports as your income increases and the game turns to end game (and more air focused) compositions.
Also, this means that for bio players that want to incorporate ravens, they can only have 2 starports with tech labs (for the 2 upgrades that are left) and do not need to commit to 3 starports (plus the 150 extra gas cost). This can lead to a smoother transition that does not pin the terran in his base and nullifies all agression (aka no medivac and tank production). If the ravens are produced without the need of a 4 base economy they can be made much earlier, pool more energy and actually be effective without the need for the terran to turtle while the zerg player banks 5k/5k to switch into dozens of ultras.
(or anyway I hope it turns out to be that way)
What if Z goes for ultralisk? Isnt the raven too much of and investment at the 13 14 min hoping(fearing) the z goes broodlords? Remember without upgrade raven still needs time for energy.
On December 05 2012 22:51 Notfragile wrote: Great patch!! Seems like a good way to make mass infestor play useless without severely weakening the zerg midgame. Now for the terrans saying the raven change is useless, consider the following:
It makes the transition from mech to late game mech much smoother. You don't have to dump a huge amount of gas for multiple starports to have an effective and quick transition. The 1 tech lab on the banshee producing starport can research corvid reactor while you start mining gas from the 4th. Then you can even start producing ravens out of 1 starport at 13-14 minutes so they can pool enough energy for HSM when the broodlords arrive. And then add additional starports as your income increases and the game turns to end game (and more air focused) compositions.
Also, this means that for bio players that want to incorporate ravens, they can only have 2 starports with tech labs (for the 2 upgrades that are left) and do not need to commit to 3 starports (plus the 150 extra gas cost). This can lead to a smoother transition that does not pin the terran in his base and nullifies all agression (aka no medivac and tank production). If the ravens are produced without the need of a 4 base economy they can be made much earlier, pool more energy and actually be effective without the need for the terran to turtle while the zerg player banks 5k/5k to switch into dozens of ultras.
(or anyway I hope it turns out to be that way)
What if Z goes for ultralisk? Isnt the raven too much of and investment at the 13 14 min hoping(fearing) the z goes broodlords? Remember without upgrade raven still needs time for energy.
You can still drop a seeker missile on infestors when they dont have any energy anymore (happens a lot when the zerg goes ultra). BOOM !
On December 05 2012 22:24 jumai wrote: I find it weird how many people assume -1 range to fungal won't be impactful when the -2 range to neural parasite completely removed even researching it from the entire zvp gamespan between colossus count hitting 2 and mothership construction. I mean, I know using NP causes a greater window of exposure for the infestors, but that's a *huge* amount of the game that NP got kicked out of. Even an analogous, but much less extreme outcome has room to make significant impact.
Infestors are still good, but we should notice a difference once everyone adjusts.
Because NP with range 9 had the same range as colossi, for example? That change made a difference. What difference does -1 range on fungal make?
You start by saying that -2 on neural deleted the spell because Colossus had 9 range and NP 9 But you fail to see how Fungal going from 9 to 8 might be impactful against Colossi ?
Also, infestor now outranged by ghost and more vulnerable to tank fire
Oh, poor "infestor now outranged by ghost and more vulnerable to tank fire". You try and snipe infestor while spliting marines and focusfire banelings. This assuming you are sieged.
Well if terran dunno how to shift click action, yes it can be hard to do. lol :>
meh. I would've preferred they actually did something with the fungals... damage reduction, smaller radius, remove the rooting effect or even allow slow movements.
On December 05 2012 22:51 Notfragile wrote: Great patch!! Seems like a good way to make mass infestor play useless without severely weakening the zerg midgame. Now for the terrans saying the raven change is useless, consider the following:
It makes the transition from mech to late game mech much smoother. You don't have to dump a huge amount of gas for multiple starports to have an effective and quick transition. The 1 tech lab on the banshee producing starport can research corvid reactor while you start mining gas from the 4th. Then you can even start producing ravens out of 1 starport at 13-14 minutes so they can pool enough energy for HSM when the broodlords arrive. And then add additional starports as your income increases and the game turns to end game (and more air focused) compositions.
Also, this means that for bio players that want to incorporate ravens, they can only have 2 starports with tech labs (for the 2 upgrades that are left) and do not need to commit to 3 starports (plus the 150 extra gas cost). This can lead to a smoother transition that does not pin the terran in his base and nullifies all agression (aka no medivac and tank production). If the ravens are produced without the need of a 4 base economy they can be made much earlier, pool more energy and actually be effective without the need for the terran to turtle while the zerg player banks 5k/5k to switch into dozens of ultras.
(or anyway I hope it turns out to be that way)
What if Z goes for ultralisk? Isnt the raven too much of and investment at the 13 14 min hoping(fearing) the z goes broodlords? Remember without upgrade raven still needs time for energy.
I believe it was Taeja that made a crap tons of Ravens against ultralisk and won the game. The raven was used to kill off drones and hatcheries with auto-turrets. Since zerg didn't go broodlords, there were no corruptors on the field and lack of anti-air. The ravens pretty much won him the game.
so this patch should take away the SIGNIFICANT IMBALANCE of 3%. its just horrible blizzard isnt able to balance the game.
/sarcasm off
Take a minute and look at the specifics, where you can see in that same thread that TvZ is at 43,5% / 56,5%. The TvP ratio balances that back out but as there are no Zergs in a TvP you cannot count that for your numbers.
Also take a look at IPL5 (excluding TvP): TvZ: 29-49 PvZ: 31-41
Code S is equally worse (where the game *should* be most balanced) TvZ: 24-39 PvZ: 10-17
On December 05 2012 22:24 jumai wrote: I find it weird how many people assume -1 range to fungal won't be impactful when the -2 range to neural parasite completely removed even researching it from the entire zvp gamespan between colossus count hitting 2 and mothership construction. I mean, I know using NP causes a greater window of exposure for the infestors, but that's a *huge* amount of the game that NP got kicked out of. Even an analogous, but much less extreme outcome has room to make significant impact.
Infestors are still good, but we should notice a difference once everyone adjusts.
Because NP with range 9 had the same range as colossi, for example? That change made a difference. What difference does -1 range on fungal make?
Sigh, exactly, I've been presenting the differences and it just falls on deaf ears. These people cannot even point out -how- it could make a difference theoretically. They just assume it will make a huge difference because it happened with other units, when the other units were functioning on very different principles.
all your theorycrafting is very nice, but someone like morrow already feels the difference (i thought he said that in this thread, i'll look it up). To be honest, i value his experience higher than your theories. Theorycrafting after testing is useful for understanding. Theorycrafting before testing is above all prone to error. Besides, keeping the possibility of having an impact open is way different than having blind faith in change. The point is you may be right, but you yourself don't actually know.
On December 05 2012 20:38 SupLilSon wrote: So has anyone had enough time to test out the changes to any degree? Mostly interested in any new dynamics with the Raven or Fungal range.
just tested it in single player unit tester
the fungal range change is definetly noticable in viking tank vs broodlord infestor scenarios as well as the spine infestor colossus forcefield one
to add to that i just wanna point out +3 is the magic upgrade number for colossus to rape infested terran eggs in 2 shots, where as without upgrades or +2 it takes 3 shots.
before patch with 0-0 it took 4 shots, so big difference there too
You seriously don't understand how queen and immortal buff made them go from doing no damage to full damage and support everyone using those situations that are completely apples to oranges?
Morrow never said how noticeable it is. Don't try to twist his words for your own purpose if you really do respect him. Do you really think he will equate this change to the immortal range buff or the queen range buff?
And really, as far as ZvT is concerned, IT eggs are used to initiate by giving zerg 3 second window to close in when all seige tanks fire their first volley on IT eggs. It matters little how much damage they can take. Infested terran is a bigger problem for protoss than terrans usually.
I repeat: I'm not saying there is no difference. I'm saying that the difference will never be as big as it was with immortal buff or the queen buff that people keep talking about. Don't hide behind morrow and man up with your own arguments on why it's gonna make a big impact.
On December 05 2012 22:51 Notfragile wrote: Great patch!! Seems like a good way to make mass infestor play useless without severely weakening the zerg midgame. Now for the terrans saying the raven change is useless, consider the following:
It makes the transition from mech to late game mech much smoother. You don't have to dump a huge amount of gas for multiple starports to have an effective and quick transition. The 1 tech lab on the banshee producing starport can research corvid reactor while you start mining gas from the 4th. Then you can even start producing ravens out of 1 starport at 13-14 minutes so they can pool enough energy for HSM when the broodlords arrive. And then add additional starports as your income increases and the game turns to end game (and more air focused) compositions.
Also, this means that for bio players that want to incorporate ravens, they can only have 2 starports with tech labs (for the 2 upgrades that are left) and do not need to commit to 3 starports (plus the 150 extra gas cost). This can lead to a smoother transition that does not pin the terran in his base and nullifies all agression (aka no medivac and tank production). If the ravens are produced without the need of a 4 base economy they can be made much earlier, pool more energy and actually be effective without the need for the terran to turtle while the zerg player banks 5k/5k to switch into dozens of ultras.
(or anyway I hope it turns out to be that way)
What if Z goes for ultralisk? Isnt the raven too much of and investment at the 13 14 min hoping(fearing) the z goes broodlords? Remember without upgrade raven still needs time for energy.
I believe it was Taeja that made a crap tons of Ravens against ultralisk and won the game. The raven was used to kill off drones and hatcheries with auto-turrets. Since zerg didn't go broodlords, there were no corruptors on the field and lack of anti-air. The ravens pretty much won him the game.
He pretty much won that game anyhow because he always kicked the zergs 4th and 5th and the zerg never tech switched so taeja had the perfect composition against ultra infestor with a lot of marauders + ravens that dont die because he failed to build antiair. Of course if you build only units that hit the ground and let your infestors die all the time way too easily, then ravens are pretty good because they dont ever die.
so this patch should take away the SIGNIFICANT IMBALANCE of 3%. its just horrible blizzard isnt able to balance the game.
/sarcasm off
Take a minute and look at the specifics, where you can see in that same thread that TvZ is at 43,5% / 56,5%. The TvP ratio balances that back out but as there are no Zergs in a TvP you cannot count that for your numbers.
Also take a look at IPL5 (excluding TvP): TvZ: 29-49 PvZ: 31-41
Code S is equally worse (where the game *should* be most balanced) TvZ: 24-39 PvZ: 10-17
Neh...it's just Z having 2 better tournaments. No imbalance here.
so this patch should take away the SIGNIFICANT IMBALANCE of 3%. its just horrible blizzard isnt able to balance the game.
/sarcasm off
oh hai tvp has a lot to do with tvz !!! almost the same :D
learn to read. these are overall winrates. in PvZ P is even favored and even grubby and nony tweeted that they are surprised to see that P is favored.TvZ is pretty heave Z favored while TvP is pretty heavy T favored.
just tested it myself. some people might not understand or havent actually played with or against the new nerfed infestor.
the changes are HUGE!!!!! like omfg. range 8 to range 6 stalker/marauder/immortals or even higher ranged tanks/colossus/ghosts/feedbacks?! fungal is nerfed very hard with this. it is SO MUCH easier to kill infestors now. the range from a stalker/immo/marauder to snipe an infestor went from range 3 to range 2. that is so close to attacking range, especially with blinking or stimming just 2-4 units ahead to snnipe infestors. there will be a lot more dead infestors, believe me.
IT changes is huge also but i am fine with that one since throwing 240 ITs from 30 infestors shouldnt be viable, so its a nice change vs mass IT play.
most people wont get how hard of a nerf these changes are until they see it on top level play with their own eyes. this will make the infestor a lot weaker (not too weak obv).
now i like to see a +2 rangeupgrade or sth. like that for the hydra. gogo blizzard!
so this patch should take away the SIGNIFICANT IMBALANCE of 3%. its just horrible blizzard isnt able to balance the game.
/sarcasm off
oh hai tvp has a lot to do with tvz !!! almost the same :D
learn to read. these are overall winrates. in PvZ P is even favored and even grubby and nony tweeted that they are surprised to see that P is favored.TvZ is pretty heave Z favored while TvP is pretty heavy T favored.
just tested it myself. some people might not understand or havent actually played with or against the new nerfed infestor.
the changes are HUGE!!!!! like omfg. range 8 to range 6 stalker/marauder/immortals or even higher ranged tanks/colossus/ghosts/feedbacks?! fungal is nerfed very hard with this. it is SO MUCH easier to kill infestors now. the range from a stalker/immo/marauder to snipe an infestor went from range 3 to range 2. that is so close to attacking range, especially with blinking or stimming just 2-4 units ahead to snnipe infestors. there will be a lot more dead infestors, believe me.
IT changes is huge also but i am fine with that one since throwing 240 ITs from 30 infestors shouldnt be viable, so its a nice change vs mass IT play.
most people wont get how hard of a nerf these changes are until they see it on top level play with their own eyes. this will make the infestor a lot weaker (not too weak obv).
now i like to see a +2 rangeupgrade or sth. like that for the hydra. gogo blizzard!
Are you that slow ? I know those are overall winrates. That's why i am laughing my ass off when you are talking about overall winrates like an argument for the current zerg nerf when TvZ winrates are highly zerg favored, hence why i try to recall you about "PvT". You are just whining.
so this patch should take away the SIGNIFICANT IMBALANCE of 3%. its just horrible blizzard isnt able to balance the game.
/sarcasm off
oh hai tvp has a lot to do with tvz !!! almost the same :D
learn to read. these are overall winrates. in PvZ P is even favored and even grubby and nony tweeted that they are surprised to see that P is favored.TvZ is pretty heave Z favored while TvP is pretty heavy T favored.
just tested it myself. some people might not understand or havent actually played with or against the new nerfed infestor.
the changes are HUGE!!!!! like omfg. range 8 to range 6 stalker/marauder/immortals or even higher ranged tanks/colossus/ghosts/feedbacks?! fungal is nerfed very hard with this. it is SO MUCH easier to kill infestors now. the range from a stalker/immo/marauder to snipe an infestor went from range 3 to range 2. that is so close to attacking range, especially with blinking or stimming just 2-4 units ahead to snnipe infestors. there will be a lot more dead infestors, believe me.
IT changes is huge also but i am fine with that one since throwing 240 ITs from 30 infestors shouldnt be viable, so its a nice change vs mass IT play.
most people wont get how hard of a nerf these changes are until they see it on top level play with their own eyes. this will make the infestor a lot weaker (not too weak obv).
now i like to see a +2 rangeupgrade or sth. like that for the hydra. gogo blizzard!
Overall winrates which include tournaments where not one single Korean Zerg was invited don't mean anything. Consider the most recent tournaments where the best of the 3 races were invited (ipl5, gsl code S).
so this patch should take away the SIGNIFICANT IMBALANCE of 3%. its just horrible blizzard isnt able to balance the game.
/sarcasm off
oh hai tvp has a lot to do with tvz !!! almost the same :D
learn to read. these are overall winrates. in PvZ P is even favored and even grubby and nony tweeted that they are surprised to see that P is favored.TvZ is pretty heave Z favored while TvP is pretty heavy T favored.
just tested it myself. some people might not understand or havent actually played with or against the new nerfed infestor.
the changes are HUGE!!!!! like omfg. range 8 to range 6 stalker/marauder/immortals or even higher ranged tanks/colossus/ghosts/feedbacks?! fungal is nerfed very hard with this. it is SO MUCH easier to kill infestors now. the range from a stalker/immo/marauder to snipe an infestor went from range 3 to range 2. that is so close to attacking range, especially with blinking or stimming just 2-4 units ahead to snnipe infestors. there will be a lot more dead infestors, believe me.
IT changes is huge also but i am fine with that one since throwing 240 ITs from 30 infestors shouldnt be viable, so its a nice change vs mass IT play.
most people wont get how hard of a nerf these changes are until they see it on top level play with their own eyes. this will make the infestor a lot weaker (not too weak obv).
now i like to see a +2 rangeupgrade or sth. like that for the hydra. gogo blizzard!
Are you that slow ? I know those are overall winrates. That's why i am laughing my ass off when you are talking about overall winrates like an argument for the current zerg nerf when TvZ winrates are highly zerg favored, hence why i try to recall you about "PvT". You are just whining.
you know that these changes also affect PvZ pretty hard where P was already favored? or do you live in your little terran bubble dreamworld?
and i havent even said anything against the changes. i like them and we´ll have to see if its okay that way. i am just saying most people that thought Z is completely OP should be quiet since a 3% difference is nothing and this patch will even remove that little 3% difference.
What I've never understood is why fungal growth wasn't designed as area control eg. fungalling areas of ground for 30s or more so it slows and damages units that pass across it. Especially if it combined with creep to increase damage and so on.
Still, I like these changes. They're subtle enough that they aren't going to break zerg on the ladder but large enough that it'll shatter the current proTvZ and PvZ consensus.
so this patch should take away the SIGNIFICANT IMBALANCE of 3%. its just horrible blizzard isnt able to balance the game.
/sarcasm off
oh hai tvp has a lot to do with tvz !!! almost the same :D
learn to read. these are overall winrates. in PvZ P is even favored and even grubby and nony tweeted that they are surprised to see that P is favored.TvZ is pretty heave Z favored while TvP is pretty heavy T favored.
just tested it myself. some people might not understand or havent actually played with or against the new nerfed infestor.
the changes are HUGE!!!!! like omfg. range 8 to range 6 stalker/marauder/immortals or even higher ranged tanks/colossus/ghosts/feedbacks?! fungal is nerfed very hard with this. it is SO MUCH easier to kill infestors now. the range from a stalker/immo/marauder to snipe an infestor went from range 3 to range 2. that is so close to attacking range, especially with blinking or stimming just 2-4 units ahead to snnipe infestors. there will be a lot more dead infestors, believe me.
IT changes is huge also but i am fine with that one since throwing 240 ITs from 30 infestors shouldnt be viable, so its a nice change vs mass IT play.
most people wont get how hard of a nerf these changes are until they see it on top level play with their own eyes. this will make the infestor a lot weaker (not too weak obv).
now i like to see a +2 rangeupgrade or sth. like that for the hydra. gogo blizzard!
Overall winrates which include tournaments where not one single Korean Zerg was invited don't mean anything. Consider the most recent tournaments where the best of the 3 races were invited (ipl5, gsl code S).
WCS was not invitation, it was qualification. The Korean zergs didn't participate (well, two did) because they had been knocked out in the Korean qualifiers. Mainly by protoss. But never mind that, your gut-feeling tells you otherwise!
so this patch should take away the SIGNIFICANT IMBALANCE of 3%. its just horrible blizzard isnt able to balance the game.
/sarcasm off
Take a minute and look at the specifics, where you can see in that same thread that TvZ is at 43,5% / 56,5%. The TvP ratio balances that back out but as there are no Zergs in a TvP you cannot count that for your numbers.
Also take a look at IPL5 (excluding TvP): TvZ: 29-49 PvZ: 31-41
Code S is equally worse (where the game *should* be most balanced) TvZ: 24-39 PvZ: 10-17
Neh...it's just Z having 2 better tournaments. No imbalance here.
With only two exceptions, none of the tournaments in the list in that topic have TvZ over 50% for T. As well, my point was that he was using TvP stats as a claim that TvZ/TvX is balanced, which makes no sense.
On December 05 2012 23:53 Decendos wrote: rofl yeah i am really biased lol. i knew that all the noobs even with that patch and the newest balanced winrates wouldnt shut up and keep QQing :D
Are you really as daft as you seem? Look at the actual stats, in case you're not gonna so you can keep crying here they are.
yeah lets all take 1 tournament instead of a lot. TvZ ist 58% Z favored, PvZ is 51% P favored, TvP is 56% T favored. so stop crying or start crying about TvP too. i let you decide which one you want xD
Its a start, but I was really hoping they would make fungal a projectile. I'd enjoy watching Infestor play much more, if that was the case. Obviously, projectile speed would need some tweeking to get it perfect.
On December 05 2012 23:56 Decendos wrote: yeah lets all take 1 tournament instead of a lot. TvZ ist 58% Z favored, PvZ is 51% P favored, TvP is 56% T favored. so stop crying or start crying about TvP too. i let you decide which one you want xD
Woudent it be easier to just write "Yes i am actually this stupid xD"
oh so 58% is imba, 56% is fine after your argumentation. you are beyond stupid and even more biased. i am out of here. no need to waste my time with stupid or actually no arguments
considering the blue flame icon change really inspired every terran to look into the hellion, maybe we will get some good strategies about getting out ravens in the lategame too, even though this doesn't change that much. It's mostly about timing when you get the ravens
Blizzard did not want to change the metageme befor hots, but after recent turnaments they had to do something. The fungal range reduction will bring the infestors more in danger of tank fire or collossi lasers. Even emp/snipe or feedback/storm might be more of an option. This should help and also not change the metagame. I'm pretty sure that blizzard will change fungal / infestet terran more with hots.
The change to the eggs are not as important i feel. Most players disengage when to many infestet terrans are droppt, instead of wasteing tons of storm energy. It might help protos if they have to defend their 4th.
The seeker missle change is interesting as well. I'm not sure how it will play out. I don't think it will promote a huge ammount of raven usage, but it might make the transition for late, late game in tvz easier.
I'd love to see a build time decrease on carriers too, it is impossbile to transition into Carriers at the moment and they also they way to long to remake when you get run over.
Interesting changes, I like how they approached this with a very small nerf. Not so sure though if the range nerf is a good one, at first glance it doesn't seem to match well with their goal of reducing the infestor role in all matchups, for ZvZ for example it doesn't seem to matter at all.
And the balance arguments are so annoying to read. Filled with misinterpretation of statistics, matchup percentages are misunderstood by practically everyone above.
On December 05 2012 23:56 Decendos wrote: yeah lets all take 1 tournament instead of a lot. TvZ ist 58% Z favored, PvZ is 51% P favored, TvP is 56% T favored. so stop crying or start crying about TvP too. i let you decide which one you want xD
[QUOTE]On December 05 2012 23:51 Solarist wrote: [QUOTE]On December 05 2012 23:06 Decendos wrote: [url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=385474¤tpage=7#129]http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=385474¤tpage=7#129[/url]
balance before patch:
- T 49% - P 49% - Z 52%
so this patch should take away the SIGNIFICANT IMBALANCE of 3%. its just horrible blizzard isnt able to balance the game.
/sarcasm off[/QUOTE]
lol I want to see the statistics of terrans actually winning the late game engagements. Those results take account to the 11/11 raxes that terrans seem to be constantly doing to prevent the zerg from reaching the late game. If we have in accout to the late game resutls in terran vs zerg then I think the numbers would not be anywhere cose to a fifty percent win rate for terran
On December 06 2012 00:05 Decendos wrote: oh so 58% is imba, 56% is fine after your argumentation. you are beyond stupid and even more biased. i am out of here. no need to waste my time with stupid or actually no arguments
1) every terran has problem vs zerg. Code S terrans get owned by foreign zergs. 2) every player in the community is sick from all the infestor play, so they want it nerfed hard or gone --> blizzard nerfed them, and in a way they are still viable, so you should be really happy.
so this patch should take away the SIGNIFICANT IMBALANCE of 3%. its just horrible blizzard isnt able to balance the game.
/sarcasm off
oh hai tvp has a lot to do with tvz !!! almost the same :D
learn to read. these are overall winrates. in PvZ P is even favored and even grubby and nony tweeted that they are surprised to see that P is favored.TvZ is pretty heave Z favored while TvP is pretty heavy T favored.
just tested it myself. some people might not understand or havent actually played with or against the new nerfed infestor.
the changes are HUGE!!!!! like omfg. range 8 to range 6 stalker/marauder/immortals or even higher ranged tanks/colossus/ghosts/feedbacks?! fungal is nerfed very hard with this. it is SO MUCH easier to kill infestors now. the range from a stalker/immo/marauder to snipe an infestor went from range 3 to range 2. that is so close to attacking range, especially with blinking or stimming just 2-4 units ahead to snnipe infestors. there will be a lot more dead infestors, believe me.
IT changes is huge also but i am fine with that one since throwing 240 ITs from 30 infestors shouldnt be viable, so its a nice change vs mass IT play.
most people wont get how hard of a nerf these changes are until they see it on top level play with their own eyes. this will make the infestor a lot weaker (not too weak obv).
now i like to see a +2 rangeupgrade or sth. like that for the hydra. gogo blizzard!
Are you that slow ? I know those are overall winrates. That's why i am laughing my ass off when you are talking about overall winrates like an argument for the current zerg nerf when TvZ winrates are highly zerg favored, hence why i try to recall you about "PvT". You are just whining.
you know that these changes also affect PvZ pretty hard where P was already favored? or do you live in your little terran bubble dreamworld?
and i havent even said anything against the changes. i like them and we´ll have to see if its okay that way. i am just saying most people that thought Z is completely OP should be quiet since a 3% difference is nothing and this patch will even remove that little 3% difference.
Balance is not just about looking at percentage win-rates.. Win-rates based on units used is more important. If Z has high win-percentage with a lot of infestors then there might be a problem with them. We don't have access to these kinds of statistics, but I hope blizzard do.. Remember that players, like Parting, are trying to destroy z before they can get to broodfestors.. This means that those win-rates are swayed by a strategy that attempts to negate the strength of the broodfestor combo.
On December 05 2012 03:23 ch33psh33p wrote: Storm is now a viable and extremely effective counter to Infested Terrans!
Yes and no-- it will I think generally help against Infestors spamming IT eggs over a large area, but even in the test map I was noticing some Zerg start to spread out ITs in smaller numbers to prevent them from being hit by a single storm-- in smaller numbers ITs are still straight up energy efficient vs. storms, but this change does help some of the more extreme IT-spam scenarios.
I would have liked to see something like 80 health and zero, or even 1 armor for IT eggs. 2 armor reduces zealot and collosi damage by a pretty incredible amount, since both attack twice. Even if all the IT eggs do is attract fire, 80 health for such a small energy expenditure is pretty decent for tanking-- compare with hallucination.
On December 05 2012 23:56 Decendos wrote: yeah lets all take 1 tournament instead of a lot. TvZ ist 58% Z favored, PvZ is 51% P favored, TvP is 56% T favored. so stop crying or start crying about TvP too. i let you decide which one you want xD
On December 05 2012 03:23 ch33psh33p wrote: Storm is now a viable and extremely effective counter to Infested Terrans!
Yes and no-- it will I think generally help against Infestors spamming IT eggs over a large area, but even in the test map I was noticing some Zerg start to spread out ITs in smaller numbers to prevent them from being hit by a single storm-- in smaller numbers ITs are still straight up energy efficient vs. storms, but this change does help some of the more extreme IT-spam scenarios.
I would have liked to see something like 80 health and zero, or even 1 armor for IT eggs. 2 armor reduces zealot and collosi damage by a pretty incredible amount, since both attack twice. Even if all the IT eggs do is attract fire, 80 health for such a small energy expenditure is pretty decent for tanking-- compare with hallucination.
Whenever I see IT being a problem in PvZ, there's always a HUUUUGE spam of it next to Protoss' base causing a lose lose scenario for the Protoss. Storm should fix that. Also, fungal range nerf means that HT are also -more- useful for feedbacks than before.
... And we are back on mutaling baneling !! I have been sick of seeing broodlord infestor in EVERY single tournament game recently (Ipl5, DH, iSquid). Seriously, nice nerf. But I would have changed FG itself, not the range. I guess I won't use the infestor anymore, just like Terrans have been neglecting ghosts. Waiting for next nerf / buff...
On December 05 2012 22:24 jumai wrote: I find it weird how many people assume -1 range to fungal won't be impactful when the -2 range to neural parasite completely removed even researching it from the entire zvp gamespan between colossus count hitting 2 and mothership construction. I mean, I know using NP causes a greater window of exposure for the infestors, but that's a *huge* amount of the game that NP got kicked out of. Even an analogous, but much less extreme outcome has room to make significant impact.
Infestors are still good, but we should notice a difference once everyone adjusts.
Because NP with range 9 had the same range as colossi, for example? That change made a difference. What difference does -1 range on fungal make?
Sigh, exactly, I've been presenting the differences and it just falls on deaf ears. These people cannot even point out -how- it could make a difference theoretically. They just assume it will make a huge difference because it happened with other units, when the other units were functioning on very different principles.
I haven't done a lot of deep thinking on it (I'm sure I'll learn when people do it to me), but off the top of my head it seems like it'll make a bigger difference to fungal's use against whole armies than it will in duels between specialist units. If a few ghosts or high templar are moving in trying to snipe infestors, it's enough to stop the closest 2-3 at the edge of fungal's aoe and move away. However if, say, a toss's stalkers start pushing forward and looking for an aggressive blink, it's important to catch a lot more under the aoe and you lose the luxury of maximum range.
Fungal has radius 2; while that puts the far edge of the aoe 2 units past the spell's range it also puts the inner edge 2 units inside it. In other words, using a whole fungal now requires the closest targets are within range 6, down from 7. Since you seem to be asking for numbers that line up tidily, I could claim that stalkers(/marauders, +1 row of tanks, etc) now return fire on infestors chain fungaling larger clumps of them. However what's probably just as significant is that zergs will now often choose hitting less targets with a fungal over running in for maximum damage. Less of your army getting hit by fungal is basically what everyone was asking for, right?
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
+1 on immortals made them stop dancing behind other units, +2 on queens made a difference because helions were no longer viable against queens what does -1 on fungal change?
You tell us, you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out. At what range would you like fungal to be nerfed until it reaches the point of suiciding infestors i.e. neural?
On December 05 2012 22:24 jumai wrote: I find it weird how many people assume -1 range to fungal won't be impactful when the -2 range to neural parasite completely removed even researching it from the entire zvp gamespan between colossus count hitting 2 and mothership construction. I mean, I know using NP causes a greater window of exposure for the infestors, but that's a *huge* amount of the game that NP got kicked out of. Even an analogous, but much less extreme outcome has room to make significant impact.
Infestors are still good, but we should notice a difference once everyone adjusts.
Because NP with range 9 had the same range as colossi, for example? That change made a difference. What difference does -1 range on fungal make?
Sigh, exactly, I've been presenting the differences and it just falls on deaf ears. These people cannot even point out -how- it could make a difference theoretically. They just assume it will make a huge difference because it happened with other units, when the other units were functioning on very different principles.
I haven't done a lot of deep thinking on it (I'm sure I'll learn when people do it to me), but off the top of my head it seems like it'll make a bigger difference to fungal's use against whole armies than it will in duels between specialist units. If a few ghosts or high templar are moving in trying to snipe infestors, it's enough to stop the closest 2-3 at the edge of fungal's aoe and move away. However if, say, a toss's stalkers start pushing forward and looking for an aggressive blink, it's important to catch a lot more under the aoe and you lose the luxury of maximum range.
Fungal has radius 2; while that puts the far edge of the aoe 2 units past the spell's range it also puts the inner edge 2 units inside it. In other words, using a whole fungal now requires the closest targets are within range 6, down from 7. Since you seem to be asking for numbers that line up tidily, I could claim that stalkers(/marauders, +1 row of tanks, etc) now return fire on infestors chain fungaling larger clumps of them. However what's probably just as significant is that zergs will now often choose hitting less targets with a fungal over running in for maximum damage. Less of your army getting hit by fungal is basically what everyone was asking for, right?
Your argument kind of seems to complain that fungal's radius is too big. First world zerg problem. If you trade a couple of infestors against a huge portion of Terran army, you wouldn't be happy with it? Trust me, units are meant to die in SC2.
Infestors were not only broken in terms of fungal growth and infested terrans. They also had the best retention of all the spell casters in the game. How many times have you seen ghosts die after they emp/snipe? How many HTs evaporate after they land a couple of feedbacks?
And how many times do you see Zergs retain most of their infestors after a big engagement?
On December 05 2012 03:23 ch33psh33p wrote: Storm is now a viable and extremely effective counter to Infested Terrans!
Yes and no-- it will I think generally help against Infestors spamming IT eggs over a large area, but even in the test map I was noticing some Zerg start to spread out ITs in smaller numbers to prevent them from being hit by a single storm-- in smaller numbers ITs are still straight up energy efficient vs. storms, but this change does help some of the more extreme IT-spam scenarios.
I would have liked to see something like 80 health and zero, or even 1 armor for IT eggs. 2 armor reduces zealot and collosi damage by a pretty incredible amount, since both attack twice. Even if all the IT eggs do is attract fire, 80 health for such a small energy expenditure is pretty decent for tanking-- compare with hallucination.
Whenever I see IT being a problem in PvZ, there's always a HUUUUGE spam of it next to Protoss' base causing a lose lose scenario for the Protoss. Storm should fix that. Also, fungal range nerf means that HT are also -more- useful for feedbacks than before.
Well, imo and from what I've seen, the egg HP nerf only comes into play if the Zerg tries to spam them all over your army. It makes them easier to kill in those scenarios.
The thing is, let's say you are playing a PvZ and you have psi storm. In order for you to feel the effects of this egg HP nerf, you have to always have a templar in range of the eggs ready to storm immediately, or the Zerg has to have thrown them on top of your army in a clump.
In that scenario a storm or collosus can take out the eggs and it'll feel like a good difference.
But now here is the other scenario. The Zerg player throws out eggs near the engagement but closer to their own army so that the eggs hatch before the Protoss ever touches them. In this scenario, the unit interactions are 100% the same as pre-patch because hatched infested terrans have the same amount of HP as they did pre-patch.
So infested terrans were not actually nerfed per se. What was nerfed is when you throw them on top of or right next to the opponent's army. In every other situation they remain the exact same as pre-patch.
As for fungal, the -1 range seems to mean that you lose more infestors if you are not careful with them or don't send other units forward first. Now instead of losing 1-2 infestor from a bad engagement you'll be losing 3-4 because you have to remember infestors size is sorta big, so the infestor in front gets the fungal off but the infestors in the back have to get closer to get their fungals off, meaning you end up moving closer to siege tanks or collosus/stalkers.
They are good nerfs, but I think what is debatable is this: can zerg still just opt to mass infestor broodlord every single game? I think we'll still be seeing infestor broodlord virtually every game to be honest.
As for the raven change, i'm surprised at how people keep saying or believing this is a buff when it does not do anything for lategame TvZ. You can still make ravens and when they pop out they do nothing until almost 2 minutes later. It's bad.
On December 05 2012 03:23 ch33psh33p wrote: Storm is now a viable and extremely effective counter to Infested Terrans!
Yes and no-- it will I think generally help against Infestors spamming IT eggs over a large area, but even in the test map I was noticing some Zerg start to spread out ITs in smaller numbers to prevent them from being hit by a single storm-- in smaller numbers ITs are still straight up energy efficient vs. storms, but this change does help some of the more extreme IT-spam scenarios.
I would have liked to see something like 80 health and zero, or even 1 armor for IT eggs. 2 armor reduces zealot and collosi damage by a pretty incredible amount, since both attack twice. Even if all the IT eggs do is attract fire, 80 health for such a small energy expenditure is pretty decent for tanking-- compare with hallucination.
Whenever I see IT being a problem in PvZ, there's always a HUUUUGE spam of it next to Protoss' base causing a lose lose scenario for the Protoss. Storm should fix that. Also, fungal range nerf means that HT are also -more- useful for feedbacks than before.
Well, imo and from what I've seen, the egg HP nerf only comes into play if the Zerg tries to spam them all over your army. It makes them easier to kill in those scenarios.
The thing is, let's say you are playing a PvZ and you have psi storm. In order for you to feel the effects of this egg HP nerf, you have to always have a templar in range of the eggs ready to storm immediately, or the Zerg has to have thrown them on top of your army in a clump.
In that scenario a storm or collosus can take out the eggs and it'll feel like a good difference.
But now here is the other scenario. The Zerg player throws out eggs near the engagement but closer to their own army so that the eggs hatch before the Protoss ever touches them. In this scenario, the unit interactions are 100% the same as pre-patch because hatched infested terrans have the same amount of HP as they did pre-patch.
So infested terrans were not actually nerfed per se. What was nerfed is when you throw them on top of or right next to the opponent's army. In every other situation they remain the exact same as pre-patch.
As for fungal, the -1 range seems to mean that you lose more infestors if you are not careful with them or don't send other units forward first. Now instead of losing 1-2 infestor from a bad engagement you'll be losing 3-4 because you have to remember infestors size is sorta big, so the infestor in front gets the fungal off but the infestors in the back have to get closer to get their fungals off, meaning you end up moving closer to siege tanks or collosus/stalkers.
They are good nerfs, but I think what is debatable is this: can zerg still just opt to mass infestor broodlord every single game? I think we'll still be seeing infestor broodlord virtually every game to be honest.
As for the raven change, i'm surprised at how people keep saying or believing this is a buff when it does not do anything for lategame TvZ. You can still make ravens and when they pop out they do nothing until almost 2 minutes later. It's bad.
It's not even up for debate, as Blizzard said they're breaking mass infestor in HotS. I don't think they're going to flip the metagame again in WoL trying to re-adjust zerg's options. These nerfs do nothing (nor were they intended) to remove the viability of the composition anyways, just makes it little more engageable.
On December 06 2012 01:09 avilo wrote: They are good nerfs, but I think what is debatable is this: can zerg still just opt to mass infestor broodlord every single game? I think we'll still be seeing infestor broodlord virtually every game to be honest.
And why wouldn't we see this? Mutalisks aside - which lead to terribly gameplay (basetrade as only positive outcome for zerg) - there is no other strategy for PvZ. And on high level PvZ I'm not sure if mutalisks are a viable choice no matter what. Similar for TvZ.
In the end infestors are the only midgame choice for Zerg that cannot be a BO-loss, all other roads in TvZ and PvZ can run into (multiple different) blindcounters.
High level PvZ once storm comes out mutas seem to just evaporate, one templar per base and huge damage to the whole muta ball every time they poke in. I might be wrong but that seems to be the reason. Pre-storm cannons and blink (which is standard and on the way to storm) hold them off pretty well and archons do disgusting damage if you hit a real clumped up ball of mutas. .
While this seems like a reasonable nerf, I hope blizzard dosent consider the infester "balanced", and move this change into heart of the swarm. The infester is soooo boring and the fact that's so powerfull cripples the player who doesn't use it. Can we get a 3 supply infester or a fungle that only roots and doesn't damage for hots please.
Newb question regarding infested terran eggs: How does damage done to the eggs carry over to the hatched infested terran?
If damage doesn't carry over, storm isn't going to be THAT great against them.... If eggs have 70 HP and take 5 seconds to hatch, that means that you'd to storm within 1 second after the egg is thrown or you'd end up doing 40 damage to the egg and 20 damage to the infested terran.
Still pretty nice I suppose, at least storm has the CHANCE to kill eggs before they're hatched.
On December 05 2012 22:24 jumai wrote: I find it weird how many people assume -1 range to fungal won't be impactful when the -2 range to neural parasite completely removed even researching it from the entire zvp gamespan between colossus count hitting 2 and mothership construction. I mean, I know using NP causes a greater window of exposure for the infestors, but that's a *huge* amount of the game that NP got kicked out of. Even an analogous, but much less extreme outcome has room to make significant impact.
Infestors are still good, but we should notice a difference once everyone adjusts.
Because NP with range 9 had the same range as colossi, for example? That change made a difference. What difference does -1 range on fungal make?
Sigh, exactly, I've been presenting the differences and it just falls on deaf ears. These people cannot even point out -how- it could make a difference theoretically. They just assume it will make a huge difference because it happened with other units, when the other units were functioning on very different principles.
all your theorycrafting is very nice, but someone like morrow already feels the difference (i thought he said that in this thread, i'll look it up). To be honest, i value his experience higher than your theories. Theorycrafting after testing is useful for understanding. Theorycrafting before testing is above all prone to error. Besides, keeping the possibility of having an impact open is way different than having blind faith in change. The point is you may be right, but you yourself don't actually know.
there you go:
On December 05 2012 20:43 MorroW wrote:
On December 05 2012 20:38 SupLilSon wrote: So has anyone had enough time to test out the changes to any degree? Mostly interested in any new dynamics with the Raven or Fungal range.
just tested it in single player unit tester
the fungal range change is definetly noticable in viking tank vs broodlord infestor scenarios as well as the spine infestor colossus forcefield one
to add to that i just wanna point out +3 is the magic upgrade number for colossus to rape infested terran eggs in 2 shots, where as without upgrades or +2 it takes 3 shots.
before patch with 0-0 it took 4 shots, so big difference there too
You seriously don't understand how queen and immortal buff made them go from doing no damage to full damage and support everyone using those situations that are completely apples to oranges?
Morrow never said how noticeable it is. Don't try to twist his words for your own purpose if you really do respect him. Do you really think he will equate this change to the immortal range buff or the queen range buff?
And really, as far as ZvT is concerned, IT eggs are used to initiate by giving zerg 3 second window to close in when all seige tanks fire their first volley on IT eggs. It matters little how much damage they can take. Infested terran is a bigger problem for protoss than terrans usually.
I repeat: I'm not saying there is no difference. I'm saying that the difference will never be as big as it was with immortal buff or the queen buff that people keep talking about. Don't hide behind morrow and man up with your own arguments on why it's gonna make a big impact.
I think i read wrongly; The first part of the first sentence of the first quoted post was the following 'I find it weird how many people assume -1 range to fungal won't be impactful'. I thought the posts quoting that were about having impact at all, while they were in fact only towards the second part of the sentence 'when the -2 range to neural ' etc,etc.... That was my mistake. If you read my post again while thinking from that view my post makes perfect sense.
I agree my post looks very stupid in the current conversation.
But on the other hand, wtf is with the overly aggressive wording? was that really necessary?
On December 06 2012 01:48 Ramone wrote: Newb question regarding infested terran eggs: How does damage done to the eggs carry over to the hatched infested terran?
If damage doesn't carry over, storm isn't going to be THAT great against them.... If eggs have 70 HP and take 5 seconds to hatch, that means that you'd to storm within 1 second after the egg is thrown or you'd end up doing 40 damage to the egg and 20 damage to the infested terran.
Still pretty nice I suppose, at least storm has the CHANCE to kill eggs before they're hatched.
Cheers,
Ramone
It does carry over. I tried by letting roaches attack my own it-eggs. The it's came out damaged. Not sure if that being friendly fire makes a difference, but i don't think so.
On December 06 2012 01:48 Ramone wrote: Newb question regarding infested terran eggs: How does damage done to the eggs carry over to the hatched infested terran?
If damage doesn't carry over, storm isn't going to be THAT great against them.... If eggs have 70 HP and take 5 seconds to hatch, that means that you'd to storm within 1 second after the egg is thrown or you'd end up doing 40 damage to the egg and 20 damage to the infested terran.
Still pretty nice I suppose, at least storm has the CHANCE to kill eggs before they're hatched.
Cheers,
Ramone
Damage to the egg carries over as a percentage to the Infested Terran. Example: You do 28 points of damage to an Infested Swarm Egg before it hatches, leaving it with 42 health. That's 42/70 = 60% health remaining. When the Infested Terran hatches, it has 60% health to start, or 50 * 0.60 = 30 health out of the gate (or egg, as it were). So if you do a ton of damage to an egg but not quite enough to kill it, that Infested Terran is still a dead Terran walking when it hatches.
On December 06 2012 02:01 DoNuTs84 wrote: No nerf to Immortal/Senty 2base all-ins? Kind of booring to see every single Protoss get free wins with this in every game they use it
Only bad Zergs let that happened, I haven't seen Leenock or Life lost to that build like ever. They can mass roaches and flank that build easily
On December 06 2012 02:01 DoNuTs84 wrote: No nerf to Immortal/Senty 2base all-ins? Kind of booring to see every single Protoss get free wins with this in every game they use it
You watch some pretty selective games then or you are just making stuff up to complain. I can't be 100% sure.
On December 06 2012 02:01 DoNuTs84 wrote: No nerf to Immortal/Senty 2base all-ins? Kind of booring to see every single Protoss get free wins with this in every game they use it
Only bad Zergs let that happened, I haven't seen Leenock or Life lost to that build like ever. They can mass roaches and flank that build easily
lol this is so ignorant, but it is true that this buildhas become weaker than it used to be in the meta
there are a lot of unexplored options against it, nydus,muta etc. my favorite way to beat this now is to just sac my 3rd base and take a ninja 4th, spine up and counter with mutalisks while he pushes and then nydus drones to the base to mine, spines +transfuse = really good
On December 06 2012 01:48 Ramone wrote: Newb question regarding infested terran eggs: How does damage done to the eggs carry over to the hatched infested terran?
If damage doesn't carry over, storm isn't going to be THAT great against them.... If eggs have 70 HP and take 5 seconds to hatch, that means that you'd to storm within 1 second after the egg is thrown or you'd end up doing 40 damage to the egg and 20 damage to the infested terran.
Still pretty nice I suppose, at least storm has the CHANCE to kill eggs before they're hatched.
Cheers,
Ramone
Damage to the egg carries over as a percentage to the Infested Terran. Example: You do 28 points of damage to an Infested Swarm Egg before it hatches, leaving it with 42 health. That's 42/70 = 60% health remaining. When the Infested Terran hatches, it has 60% health to start, or 50 * 0.60 = 30 health out of the gate (or egg, as it were). So if you do a ton of damage to an egg but not quite enough to kill it, that Infested Terran is still a dead Terran walking when it hatches.
Thanks for that. So I guess storm does hard counter infested terran armies:
Eggs take 5 seconds to hatch and storm lasts 4 seconds doing 80 damage. So if the egg is hit by:
4 seconds of storm, it dies 3 seconds of storm, the infested terran hatches with 7 HP and dies to the next tick of storm 2 seconds of storm, the infested terran hatches with 21 HP and dies to the remaining 2 seconds of storm 1 second of storm, the infested terran hatches with 35 HP and dies to the next two seconds of storm
I think that math is right anyways. Thank god for this change...I actually felt the infested terran were more annoying than the fungals in a lot of ways.
On December 05 2012 05:23 iS.Pyre wrote: Progress but still not a solution. When blizzard nerfed ghosts from 45 damage to biological down to 25, THAT was a real nerf. This is a step in the right direction, but certainly not the answer to all our terran cries.
You call it a real nerf, yet I'm sure a lot of people can agree that it just nerfed ghosts completely to the ground (in other words, it went too far). If Infestors were nerfed like that, it could be worse as Zerg is so reliant on Infestors at the minute that it could just make Zerg almost a bad option as a race.
Make zerg a bad option as a race, you mean like terran is now? And I disagree, not all zergs are reliant on infestors, only the bad ones, only the patch zergs. Before infestors started raping, zergs were winning with muta ling bling, hell nestea was winning GSLs. Nerfing infestors to the ground will simply weed out the shitty zergs and let the elite shine and stand out. This is what I would LOVE to see.
I admit Zerg is OP, but you guys are complaining about how Terran is bad; why make it worse by nerfing Zerg so much that it becomes the bad race option? Two wrongs don't make a right.
The patch doesnt solve a single problem there is at the moment, neither for zerg nor for terran. to be honest i think theyre just making infestor play a bit better engageable until hots is out, and fix the problems there.. dislike :/
On December 05 2012 05:23 iS.Pyre wrote: Progress but still not a solution. When blizzard nerfed ghosts from 45 damage to biological down to 25, THAT was a real nerf. This is a step in the right direction, but certainly not the answer to all our terran cries.
You call it a real nerf, yet I'm sure a lot of people can agree that it just nerfed ghosts completely to the ground (in other words, it went too far). If Infestors were nerfed like that, it could be worse as Zerg is so reliant on Infestors at the minute that it could just make Zerg almost a bad option as a race.
Make zerg a bad option as a race, you mean like terran is now? And I disagree, not all zergs are reliant on infestors, only the bad ones, only the patch zergs. Before infestors started raping, zergs were winning with muta ling bling, hell nestea was winning GSLs. Nerfing infestors to the ground will simply weed out the shitty zergs and let the elite shine and stand out. This is what I would LOVE to see.
I admit Zerg is OP, but you guys are complaining about how Terran is bad; why make it worse by nerfing Zerg so much that it becomes the bad race option? Two wrongs don't make a right.
I agree with you. It's a really common way that players look at balance in this community. Everyone wants everyone else to undergoe the same struggle they supposedly had to go through from previous patches. It's really frustrating, because it can invalidate anyone who claims that something has been overnerfed and that the inbalance has tipped the other way. I mean, even the pros pull this. It's quite bothersome.
On December 06 2012 01:48 Ramone wrote: Newb question regarding infested terran eggs: How does damage done to the eggs carry over to the hatched infested terran?
If damage doesn't carry over, storm isn't going to be THAT great against them.... If eggs have 70 HP and take 5 seconds to hatch, that means that you'd to storm within 1 second after the egg is thrown or you'd end up doing 40 damage to the egg and 20 damage to the infested terran.
Still pretty nice I suppose, at least storm has the CHANCE to kill eggs before they're hatched.
Cheers,
Ramone
Damage to the egg carries over as a percentage to the Infested Terran. Example: You do 28 points of damage to an Infested Swarm Egg before it hatches, leaving it with 42 health. That's 42/70 = 60% health remaining. When the Infested Terran hatches, it has 60% health to start, or 50 * 0.60 = 30 health out of the gate (or egg, as it were). So if you do a ton of damage to an egg but not quite enough to kill it, that Infested Terran is still a dead Terran walking when it hatches.
Thanks for that. So I guess storm does hard counter infested terran armies:
Eggs take 5 seconds to hatch and storm lasts 4 seconds doing 80 damage. So if the egg is hit by:
4 seconds of storm, it dies 3 seconds of storm, the infested terran hatches with 7 HP and dies to the next tick of storm 2 seconds of storm, the infested terran hatches with 21 HP and dies to the remaining 2 seconds of storm 1 second of storm, the infested terran hatches with 35 HP and dies to the next two seconds of storm
I think that math is right anyways. Thank god for this change...I actually felt the infested terran were more annoying than the fungals in a lot of ways.
On December 06 2012 01:48 Ramone wrote: Newb question regarding infested terran eggs: How does damage done to the eggs carry over to the hatched infested terran?
If damage doesn't carry over, storm isn't going to be THAT great against them.... If eggs have 70 HP and take 5 seconds to hatch, that means that you'd to storm within 1 second after the egg is thrown or you'd end up doing 40 damage to the egg and 20 damage to the infested terran.
Still pretty nice I suppose, at least storm has the CHANCE to kill eggs before they're hatched.
Cheers,
Ramone
Damage to the egg carries over as a percentage to the Infested Terran. Example: You do 28 points of damage to an Infested Swarm Egg before it hatches, leaving it with 42 health. That's 42/70 = 60% health remaining. When the Infested Terran hatches, it has 60% health to start, or 50 * 0.60 = 30 health out of the gate (or egg, as it were). So if you do a ton of damage to an egg but not quite enough to kill it, that Infested Terran is still a dead Terran walking when it hatches.
Thanks for that. So I guess storm does hard counter infested terran armies:
Eggs take 5 seconds to hatch and storm lasts 4 seconds doing 80 damage. So if the egg is hit by:
4 seconds of storm, it dies 3 seconds of storm, the infested terran hatches with 7 HP and dies to the next tick of storm 2 seconds of storm, the infested terran hatches with 21 HP and dies to the remaining 2 seconds of storm 1 second of storm, the infested terran hatches with 35 HP and dies to the next two seconds of storm
I think that math is right anyways. Thank god for this change...I actually felt the infested terran were more annoying than the fungals in a lot of ways.
If that is correct, it is awesome. Finally protoss can trade energy for energy and use feedback to pick off the magic space slugs.
On December 05 2012 05:23 iS.Pyre wrote: Progress but still not a solution. When blizzard nerfed ghosts from 45 damage to biological down to 25, THAT was a real nerf. This is a step in the right direction, but certainly not the answer to all our terran cries.
You call it a real nerf, yet I'm sure a lot of people can agree that it just nerfed ghosts completely to the ground (in other words, it went too far). If Infestors were nerfed like that, it could be worse as Zerg is so reliant on Infestors at the minute that it could just make Zerg almost a bad option as a race.
Make zerg a bad option as a race, you mean like terran is now? And I disagree, not all zergs are reliant on infestors, only the bad ones, only the patch zergs. Before infestors started raping, zergs were winning with muta ling bling, hell nestea was winning GSLs. Nerfing infestors to the ground will simply weed out the shitty zergs and let the elite shine and stand out. This is what I would LOVE to see.
I admit Zerg is OP, but you guys are complaining about how Terran is bad; why make it worse by nerfing Zerg so much that it becomes the bad race option? Two wrongs don't make a right.
I assume you're implying Protoss will be too strong now. While Protoss are doing ok (certainly better than terran) at high levels, they're certainly not winning every tournament. GSL, Protoss aren't looking overpowered by a long shot. And IPL5, L....O....L.....
Zerg cost to reach infestation pit + glands : 600/350 (not including extractor or overlord) Terran cost to reach ghost academy + reactor : 550/250(not including refinery or supply depot) Protoss cost to reach templar : 600/300 (not including assimilator or pylon)
Protoss cost for high templar tech is similar without an energy upgrade, should look into balancing that cost imo~
On December 06 2012 02:41 Energizer wrote: le sigh.... so blizzard gives in to the whiners even though they themselves dont believe in the patch.
what makes you think they dont? The fact they previously said it was pretty balanced? How about the fact they now say these changes are good. You assume the former is true and the latter isnt, and for what reason? *cough cough*
On December 05 2012 05:23 iS.Pyre wrote: Progress but still not a solution. When blizzard nerfed ghosts from 45 damage to biological down to 25, THAT was a real nerf. This is a step in the right direction, but certainly not the answer to all our terran cries.
You call it a real nerf, yet I'm sure a lot of people can agree that it just nerfed ghosts completely to the ground (in other words, it went too far). If Infestors were nerfed like that, it could be worse as Zerg is so reliant on Infestors at the minute that it could just make Zerg almost a bad option as a race.
Make zerg a bad option as a race, you mean like terran is now? And I disagree, not all zergs are reliant on infestors, only the bad ones, only the patch zergs. Before infestors started raping, zergs were winning with muta ling bling, hell nestea was winning GSLs. Nerfing infestors to the ground will simply weed out the shitty zergs and let the elite shine and stand out. This is what I would LOVE to see.
I admit Zerg is OP, but you guys are complaining about how Terran is bad; why make it worse by nerfing Zerg so much that it becomes the bad race option? Two wrongs don't make a right.
I assume you're implying Protoss will be too strong now. While Protoss are doing ok (certainly better than terran) at high levels, they're certainly not winning every tournament. GSL, Protoss aren't looking overpowered by a long shot. And IPL5, L....O....L.....
To his defense, this tourney didn't have the best protoss out there(no Rain, Parting, Hero losing to the GSL champion and Creator losing to the BOMBER), whereas zerg had their best possible line-up. And when Zerg has infestors, protoss have Immortal sentry all-in. Terrans are rightfully the only ones who should whine about imbalance.
On December 05 2012 05:23 iS.Pyre wrote: Progress but still not a solution. When blizzard nerfed ghosts from 45 damage to biological down to 25, THAT was a real nerf. This is a step in the right direction, but certainly not the answer to all our terran cries.
You call it a real nerf, yet I'm sure a lot of people can agree that it just nerfed ghosts completely to the ground (in other words, it went too far). If Infestors were nerfed like that, it could be worse as Zerg is so reliant on Infestors at the minute that it could just make Zerg almost a bad option as a race.
Make zerg a bad option as a race, you mean like terran is now? And I disagree, not all zergs are reliant on infestors, only the bad ones, only the patch zergs. Before infestors started raping, zergs were winning with muta ling bling, hell nestea was winning GSLs. Nerfing infestors to the ground will simply weed out the shitty zergs and let the elite shine and stand out. This is what I would LOVE to see.
I admit Zerg is OP, but you guys are complaining about how Terran is bad; why make it worse by nerfing Zerg so much that it becomes the bad race option? Two wrongs don't make a right.
I agree with you. It's a really common way that players look at balance in this community. Everyone wants everyone else to undergoe the same struggle they supposedly had to go through from previous patches. It's really frustrating, because it can invalidate anyone who claims that something has been overnerfed and that the inbalance has tipped the other way. I mean, even the pros pull this. It's quite bothersome.
Same. I main protoss, and I realize that's a recipe for an unsatisfying game with little real progress. I think Blizzard does too and that's why they're trying to change things so slowly and carefully, to avert breaking a race.
On December 06 2012 01:48 Ramone wrote: Newb question regarding infested terran eggs: How does damage done to the eggs carry over to the hatched infested terran?
If damage doesn't carry over, storm isn't going to be THAT great against them.... If eggs have 70 HP and take 5 seconds to hatch, that means that you'd to storm within 1 second after the egg is thrown or you'd end up doing 40 damage to the egg and 20 damage to the infested terran.
Still pretty nice I suppose, at least storm has the CHANCE to kill eggs before they're hatched.
Cheers,
Ramone
Damage to the egg carries over as a percentage to the Infested Terran. Example: You do 28 points of damage to an Infested Swarm Egg before it hatches, leaving it with 42 health. That's 42/70 = 60% health remaining. When the Infested Terran hatches, it has 60% health to start, or 50 * 0.60 = 30 health out of the gate (or egg, as it were). So if you do a ton of damage to an egg but not quite enough to kill it, that Infested Terran is still a dead Terran walking when it hatches.
Thanks for that. So I guess storm does hard counter infested terran armies:
Eggs take 5 seconds to hatch and storm lasts 4 seconds doing 80 damage. So if the egg is hit by:
4 seconds of storm, it dies 3 seconds of storm, the infested terran hatches with 7 HP and dies to the next tick of storm 2 seconds of storm, the infested terran hatches with 21 HP and dies to the remaining 2 seconds of storm 1 second of storm, the infested terran hatches with 35 HP and dies to the next two seconds of storm
I think that math is right anyways. Thank god for this change...I actually felt the infested terran were more annoying than the fungals in a lot of ways.
Is everyone sure this is how IT works, though?
I guess they changed the mechanic to go with the hp nerf. It's either something new or both my memory and the wiki were wrong. Just tested it myself to confirm.
On December 06 2012 01:48 Ramone wrote: Newb question regarding infested terran eggs: How does damage done to the eggs carry over to the hatched infested terran?
If damage doesn't carry over, storm isn't going to be THAT great against them.... If eggs have 70 HP and take 5 seconds to hatch, that means that you'd to storm within 1 second after the egg is thrown or you'd end up doing 40 damage to the egg and 20 damage to the infested terran.
Still pretty nice I suppose, at least storm has the CHANCE to kill eggs before they're hatched.
Cheers,
Ramone
Damage to the egg carries over as a percentage to the Infested Terran. Example: You do 28 points of damage to an Infested Swarm Egg before it hatches, leaving it with 42 health. That's 42/70 = 60% health remaining. When the Infested Terran hatches, it has 60% health to start, or 50 * 0.60 = 30 health out of the gate (or egg, as it were). So if you do a ton of damage to an egg but not quite enough to kill it, that Infested Terran is still a dead Terran walking when it hatches.
Thanks for that. So I guess storm does hard counter infested terran armies:
Eggs take 5 seconds to hatch and storm lasts 4 seconds doing 80 damage. So if the egg is hit by:
4 seconds of storm, it dies 3 seconds of storm, the infested terran hatches with 7 HP and dies to the next tick of storm 2 seconds of storm, the infested terran hatches with 21 HP and dies to the remaining 2 seconds of storm 1 second of storm, the infested terran hatches with 35 HP and dies to the next two seconds of storm
I think that math is right anyways. Thank god for this change...I actually felt the infested terran were more annoying than the fungals in a lot of ways.
Is everyone sure this is how IT works, though?
I guess they changed the mechanic to go with the hp nerf. It's either something new or both my memory and the wiki were wrong. Just tested it myself to confirm.
It's not a new mechanic for infested terrans, but units from some other zerg cocoons do spawn at full health.
The infestor changes may seem small, but it is definitely noticeable, especially in ZvP. HT's are now viable as psi storm just obliterates IT's. The fungal range is just enough to make them even more exposed and picked off. This was only through my experience, but I wonder how much it will affect the pro scene.
As for the Raven seeker missile, after talking with one of my high masters terran friend, seems like that won't change anything at all. The removal of the upgrade only saves the player resources, because when they get ravens they have to wait anyways while they store up enough energy to be able to use the missiles. In the meantime they just get the upgrade. So I wonder what reasons they have for removing it. Waiting to see how that changes things.
On December 06 2012 03:10 Flannman wrote: The infestor changes may seem small, but it is definitely noticeable, especially in ZvP. HT's are now viable as psi storm just obliterates IT's. The fungal range is just enough to make them even more exposed and picked off. This was only through my experience, but I wonder how much it will affect the pro scene.
As for the Raven seeker missile, after talking with one of my high masters terran friend, seems like that won't change anything at all. The removal of the upgrade only saves the player resources, because when they get ravens they have to wait anyways while they store up enough energy to be able to use the missiles. In the meantime they just get the upgrade. So I wonder what reasons they have for removing it. Waiting to see how that changes things.
I like the Raven change, just because it should provide a handful of extra Oooo moments over the next few months. Before, getting a Raven was iffy, but spending 150/150 just so one raven could get a missile... totally useless. That's 250/350 for what amounts to 2 shots from a Siege Tank. Now you can get a Raven for detection, and if you happen to save up enough energy, you get a sweet missile! It's nice.
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
+1 on immortals made them stop dancing behind other units, +2 on queens made a difference because helions were no longer viable against queens what does -1 on fungal change?
You tell us, you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out. At what range would you like fungal to be nerfed until it reaches the point of suiciding infestors i.e. neural?
Oh, I wouldn't nerf its range, I'd nerf its effects, like no more holding units in place. Ever thought about that one? No? Yeah, no wonder you're admitting to not being smart enough to figure it out.
le sigh.... so blizzard gives in to the whiners even though they themselves dont believe in the patch.
Yeah, what were they thinking, giving in to whiners. Now revert tank damage and reapers, since those changes also happened because they gave in to whiners.
Everyone and their grandmother has thought about changing fungals root effect. You're just being a jerk face.
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
+1 on immortals made them stop dancing behind other units, +2 on queens made a difference because helions were no longer viable against queens what does -1 on fungal change?
You tell us, you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out. At what range would you like fungal to be nerfed until it reaches the point of suiciding infestors i.e. neural?
Oh, I wouldn't nerf its range, I'd nerf its effects, like no more holding units in place. Ever thought about that one? No? Yeah, no wonder you're admitting to not being smart enough to figure it out.
le sigh.... so blizzard gives in to the whiners even though they themselves dont believe in the patch.
Yeah, what were they thinking, giving in to whiners. Now revert tank damage and reapers, since those changes also happened because they gave in to whiners.
Everyone and their grandmother has thought about changing fungals root effect. You're just being a jerk face.
Apparently the guy I quoted hadn't thought of that.
No, you're just assuming that he hadn't though of it. The discussion was about range, not the effects. You said, (ill quote it for you buddy).
"what does -1 on fungal change?"
He said
"You tell me."
You two were discussing the range effects, not the root effects. You're the one that went off topic and started discussing ways to nerf it all around, when originally the discussion was PURELY about the range change to fungal.
You're still mean =)) and the irony of your statement regarding his intelligence is hilarious.
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
+1 on immortals made them stop dancing behind other units, +2 on queens made a difference because helions were no longer viable against queens what does -1 on fungal change?
You tell us, you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out. At what range would you like fungal to be nerfed until it reaches the point of suiciding infestors i.e. neural?
Oh, I wouldn't nerf its range, I'd nerf its effects, like no more holding units in place. Ever thought about that one? No? Yeah, no wonder you're admitting to not being smart enough to figure it out.
le sigh.... so blizzard gives in to the whiners even though they themselves dont believe in the patch.
Yeah, what were they thinking, giving in to whiners. Now revert tank damage and reapers, since those changes also happened because they gave in to whiners.
Everyone and their grandmother has thought about changing fungals root effect. You're just being a jerk face.
Apparently the guy I quoted hadn't thought of that.
No, you're just assuming that he hadn't though of it. The discussion was about range, not the effects. You said, (ill quote it for you buddy).
"what does -1 on fungal change?"
He said
"You tell me."
You two were discussing the range effects, not the root effects. You're the one that went off topic and started discussing ways to nerf it all around, when originally the discussion was PURELY about the range change to fungal.
You're still mean =)) and the irony of your statement regarding his intelligence is hilarious.
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
+1 on immortals made them stop dancing behind other units, +2 on queens made a difference because helions were no longer viable against queens what does -1 on fungal change?
You tell us, you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out. At what range would you like fungal to be nerfed until it reaches the point of suiciding infestors i.e. neural?
Oh, I wouldn't nerf its range, I'd nerf its effects, like no more holding units in place. Ever thought about that one? No? Yeah, no wonder you're admitting to not being smart enough to figure it out.
le sigh.... so blizzard gives in to the whiners even though they themselves dont believe in the patch.
Yeah, what were they thinking, giving in to whiners. Now revert tank damage and reapers, since those changes also happened because they gave in to whiners.
Everyone and their grandmother has thought about changing fungals root effect. You're just being a jerk face.
Apparently the guy I quoted hadn't thought of that.
No, you're just assuming that he hadn't though of it. The discussion was about range, not the effects. You said, (ill quote it for you buddy).
"what does -1 on fungal change?"
He said
"You tell me."
You two were discussing the range effects, not the root effects. You're the one that went off topic and started discussing ways to nerf it all around, when originally the discussion was PURELY about the range change to fungal.
You're still mean =)) and the irony of your statement regarding his intelligence is hilarious.
Was about to write the same :-)
In his defense, the other guy asked him to name the range that fungal should be limited to, and he was stating that the range isn't the right way to go.
To answer the question: " At what range would you like fungal to be nerfed until it reaches the point of suiciding infestors i.e. neural?" I think the main thing Terran players in general will be upset about with the fungal range is it still out-ranges the raven's seeker missle. If the seeker missle is supposed to be viable against late-game zerg, the raven needs to actually be able to use it, something that infestors prevent because they are both faster and have longer range.
This doesn't mean we should lower the range of fungal to match the raven's (that would be pretty lame, tanks and colossi would eat infestors alive if that were the case.) Rather, we should increase the range of the seeker missle to be higher than that of the infestor (or match it, at the very least!) This change would at least make the Raven a reliable unit, which is something Terran desperately needs in the late game.
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
+1 on immortals made them stop dancing behind other units, +2 on queens made a difference because helions were no longer viable against queens what does -1 on fungal change?
You tell us, you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out. At what range would you like fungal to be nerfed until it reaches the point of suiciding infestors i.e. neural?
Oh, I wouldn't nerf its range, I'd nerf its effects, like no more holding units in place. Ever thought about that one? No? Yeah, no wonder you're admitting to not being smart enough to figure it out.
le sigh.... so blizzard gives in to the whiners even though they themselves dont believe in the patch.
Yeah, what were they thinking, giving in to whiners. Now revert tank damage and reapers, since those changes also happened because they gave in to whiners.
Everyone and their grandmother has thought about changing fungals root effect. You're just being a jerk face.
Apparently the guy I quoted hadn't thought of that.
No, you're just assuming that he hadn't though of it. The discussion was about range, not the effects. You said, (ill quote it for you buddy).
"what does -1 on fungal change?"
He said
"You tell me."
You two were discussing the range effects, not the root effects.
You're still mean =))
Yes, I asked him a simple question how -1 range changes anything. The discussion was how this fungal nerf would affect the game, my main concern is tvz and my position is that it won't change a damn thing. The answer I got was "lol dunno you tell me". And another fun fact: I only admitted his concern " you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out." I've seen many zerg apologists say that this nerf is HUGE and will change the game in ways we can't even comprehend but so far no one elaborated how, so sad. Think maybe you and your buddy J can do something about it?
In ZvT I am not sure how much change will occur. The range reduction may allow for some ghost usage, but then they only have +1 range advantage. The ghost control would have to be superb. Maybe Blizzard's direction is more ghost usage to counter infestors? I am not sure.
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
+1 on immortals made them stop dancing behind other units, +2 on queens made a difference because helions were no longer viable against queens what does -1 on fungal change?
You tell us, you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out. At what range would you like fungal to be nerfed until it reaches the point of suiciding infestors i.e. neural?
Oh, I wouldn't nerf its range, I'd nerf its effects, like no more holding units in place. Ever thought about that one? No? Yeah, no wonder you're admitting to not being smart enough to figure it out.
le sigh.... so blizzard gives in to the whiners even though they themselves dont believe in the patch.
Yeah, what were they thinking, giving in to whiners. Now revert tank damage and reapers, since those changes also happened because they gave in to whiners.
Everyone and their grandmother has thought about changing fungals root effect. You're just being a jerk face.
Apparently the guy I quoted hadn't thought of that.
No, you're just assuming that he hadn't though of it. The discussion was about range, not the effects. You said, (ill quote it for you buddy).
"what does -1 on fungal change?"
He said
"You tell me."
You two were discussing the range effects, not the root effects.
You're still mean =))
Yes, I asked him a simple question how -1 range changes anything. The discussion was how this fungal nerf would affect the game, my main concern is tvz and my position is that it won't change a damn thing. The answer I got was "lol dunno you tell me". And another fun fact: I only admitted his concern " you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out." I've seen many zerg apologists say that this nerf is HUGE and will change the game in ways we can't even comprehend but so far no one elaborated how, so sad. Think maybe you and your buddy J can do something about it?
Why are you asking if me and somebody named J can do something about it exactly? I feel like your reading comprehension is a bit off. I was never discussing the infestor change, I was simply pointing out how you looked like a fool going off topic from range nerfs to general infestor nerfs whilst not only simultaneously implying that someones an idiot, but suggesting a change that everyone has already considered, making your suggestion double useless.
Talking about said change, I completely agree with you. Having it as a root is something I never wanted, and I've been playing Z since beta. I don't feel the range nerf is enough of a change, but I also don't care at this moment in time. It's obvious that its a bandaid type patch as said before, and it even implicitly states in the original post that they'll look at nerfing it more when march rolls around.
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
+1 on immortals made them stop dancing behind other units, +2 on queens made a difference because helions were no longer viable against queens what does -1 on fungal change?
You tell us, you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out. At what range would you like fungal to be nerfed until it reaches the point of suiciding infestors i.e. neural?
Oh, I wouldn't nerf its range, I'd nerf its effects, like no more holding units in place. Ever thought about that one? No? Yeah, no wonder you're admitting to not being smart enough to figure it out.
le sigh.... so blizzard gives in to the whiners even though they themselves dont believe in the patch.
Yeah, what were they thinking, giving in to whiners. Now revert tank damage and reapers, since those changes also happened because they gave in to whiners.
Everyone and their grandmother has thought about changing fungals root effect. You're just being a jerk face.
Apparently the guy I quoted hadn't thought of that.
No, you're just assuming that he hadn't though of it. The discussion was about range, not the effects. You said, (ill quote it for you buddy).
"what does -1 on fungal change?"
He said
"You tell me."
You two were discussing the range effects, not the root effects.
You're still mean =))
Yes, I asked him a simple question how -1 range changes anything. The discussion was how this fungal nerf would affect the game, my main concern is tvz and my position is that it won't change a damn thing. The answer I got was "lol dunno you tell me". And another fun fact: I only admitted his concern " you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out." I've seen many zerg apologists say that this nerf is HUGE and will change the game in ways we can't even comprehend but so far no one elaborated how, so sad. Think maybe you and your buddy J can do something about it?
Why are you asking if me and somebody named J can do something about it exactly? I feel like your reading comprehension is a bit off. I was never discussing the infestor change, I was simply pointing out how you looked like a fool going off topic from range nerfs to general infestor nerfs whilst not only simultaneously implying that someones an idiot, but suggesting a change that everyone has already considered, making your suggestion double useless.
Talking about the change, I completely agree with you. Having it as a root is something I never wanted, and I've been playing Z since beta.
Guy, I'm gonna use simple words so you'll understand. Nerfing range isn't the only way to fix fungal and infestors. There are many, many better ways to do this and I'm not as closed minded as your buddy to think rage is the only way to go.
Did you not read the rest of what I posted? Or did you just see that I responded to you and you're assuming that I'm defending the range guy?
"Talking about said change, I completely agree with you. Having it as a root is something I never wanted, and I've been playing Z since beta. I don't feel the range nerf is enough of a change, but I also don't care at this moment in time. It's obvious that its a bandaid type patch as said before, and it even implicitly states in the original post that they'll look at nerfing it more when march rolls around."
I hope my words were simple enough that you could understand.
To answer the question: " At what range would you like fungal to be nerfed until it reaches the point of suiciding infestors i.e. neural?" I think the main thing Terran players in general will be upset about with the fungal range is it still out-ranges the raven's seeker missle. If the seeker missle is supposed to be viable against late-game zerg, the raven needs to actually be able to use it, something that infestors prevent because they are both faster and have longer range.
This doesn't mean we should lower the range of fungal to match the raven's (that would be pretty lame, tanks and colossi would eat infestors alive if that were the case.) Rather, we should increase the range of the seeker missle to be higher than that of the infestor (or match it, at the very least!) This change would at least make the Raven a reliable unit, which is something Terran desperately needs in the late game.
Good terran players use siege tank focus-fire on infs + pd drone against corrupters. Ultralategame terran army already stronger then blords-infs. With range nerfed fungal, ghosts can handle them in mid-game bio builds.
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
+1 on immortals made them stop dancing behind other units, +2 on queens made a difference because helions were no longer viable against queens what does -1 on fungal change?
You tell us, you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out. At what range would you like fungal to be nerfed until it reaches the point of suiciding infestors i.e. neural?
Oh, I wouldn't nerf its range, I'd nerf its effects, like no more holding units in place. Ever thought about that one? No? Yeah, no wonder you're admitting to not being smart enough to figure it out.
le sigh.... so blizzard gives in to the whiners even though they themselves dont believe in the patch.
Yeah, what were they thinking, giving in to whiners. Now revert tank damage and reapers, since those changes also happened because they gave in to whiners.
Everyone and their grandmother has thought about changing fungals root effect. You're just being a jerk face.
Apparently the guy I quoted hadn't thought of that.
No, you're just assuming that he hadn't though of it. The discussion was about range, not the effects. You said, (ill quote it for you buddy).
"what does -1 on fungal change?"
He said
"You tell me."
You two were discussing the range effects, not the root effects.
You're still mean =))
Yes, I asked him a simple question how -1 range changes anything. The discussion was how this fungal nerf would affect the game, my main concern is tvz and my position is that it won't change a damn thing. The answer I got was "lol dunno you tell me". And another fun fact: I only admitted his concern " you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out." I've seen many zerg apologists say that this nerf is HUGE and will change the game in ways we can't even comprehend but so far no one elaborated how, so sad. Think maybe you and your buddy J can do something about it?
In ZvT I am not sure how much change will occur. The range reduction may allow for some ghost usage, but then they only have +1 range advantage. The ghost control would have to be superb. Maybe Blizzard's direction is more ghost usage to counter infestors? I am not sure.
Just tuned in DIMAGA's stream a while ago. Zerg now has to put effort in using Infestors instead of mindless IT spamming and chain fungaling.
Hmm, I'd much rather see them just nerfing core damage of infested terrans and/or rooting of fungal growth. All this fiddling with other stuff will either have no effect or render the spells complete useless. - If they nerf the HP of ITs too little they will spawn and kill all and everything in sight; if they nerf them too much they will die before or just after spawning from the eggs. - Infestor casting range is somewhat similar, if they get to close they die to snipe/feedback/focus fire very quickly, rendering them useless bags of energy - but late game when the battle field is filled with broodlings the range reduction have no effect at all, because nobody in their right mind will spend APM killing infestors with broodlings hailing down from 10-15 blords. One effect 8 range instead of 9 might have, is making 3 base colossus pushes much stronger. Currently infestors can hit the edge of a protoss army behind far-range forcefields, but with range lowered to 8 I don't think they can do this - which allows sentries to stay alive longer perhaps casting a second set of forcefields doubling the longevity of the protoss army :o.
Blizzard, please deal with the core issue instead of trying to tiptoe around the real issue with these two spells. Z
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
+1 on immortals made them stop dancing behind other units, +2 on queens made a difference because helions were no longer viable against queens what does -1 on fungal change?
You tell us, you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out. At what range would you like fungal to be nerfed until it reaches the point of suiciding infestors i.e. neural?
Oh, I wouldn't nerf its range, I'd nerf its effects, like no more holding units in place. Ever thought about that one? No? Yeah, no wonder you're admitting to not being smart enough to figure it out.
le sigh.... so blizzard gives in to the whiners even though they themselves dont believe in the patch.
Yeah, what were they thinking, giving in to whiners. Now revert tank damage and reapers, since those changes also happened because they gave in to whiners.
Everyone and their grandmother has thought about changing fungals root effect. You're just being a jerk face.
Apparently the guy I quoted hadn't thought of that.
No, you're just assuming that he hadn't though of it. The discussion was about range, not the effects. You said, (ill quote it for you buddy).
"what does -1 on fungal change?"
He said
"You tell me."
You two were discussing the range effects, not the root effects.
You're still mean =))
Yes, I asked him a simple question how -1 range changes anything. The discussion was how this fungal nerf would affect the game, my main concern is tvz and my position is that it won't change a damn thing. The answer I got was "lol dunno you tell me". And another fun fact: I only admitted his concern " you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out." I've seen many zerg apologists say that this nerf is HUGE and will change the game in ways we can't even comprehend but so far no one elaborated how, so sad. Think maybe you and your buddy J can do something about it?
Yeah I can. If a group of marines gets fungaled while zerglings stream in (very common situation), it will now get fungaled like 0.25 to 0.5 seconds (don't know the exact number, don't care, just giving an example) later, hence the marines will to 10dps*0.25 or 0.5=2.5 to 5damage more (per marine) before dying. (statistically speaking).
This is an example that is true for every situation in which units stream in and fungal is being used as damage support/root and some close combats will inevitably now end in favor of the other player. Every such combat will result in a few extra losses for zerg.
Ghosts, Templar have been mentioned, which can now utilize their maximum range more efficiently.
Anytime units run towards infestors, the situation is slightly more volatile now than before, which will inevitably lead to more mistakes, hence more infestor losses.
Situations like (was it Rain vs Leenock on Ohana? Can't remember...) blink stalkers waiting down a ramp and getting fungaled from above are now harder to pull off and positioning in ways to prevent this is easier.
Units with longer range than Fungal (Tanks) will get off an extra shot sometimes.
Vikings can be poke slightly more and in stale situations (for example tanks defending vikings, BLs defending Infestors) the Vikings are harder to punish.
So yes, it's going to help in nearly every situation against Infestors slightly, certain units (probably ghosts, vikings, mutas, phoenix, dropships) might profit in nice ways from the extra reaction time after spotting infestors and in special situations (cliffs, scrappy situations) it might decide a game.
It's not going to break the metagame or something, but it might just add a few % to the winrates and make the game slightly more volatile for lategame zerg.
Nerfing range doesn't fix the problem of the game being way too unforgiving for terran or protoss. Groups of infestors can still root you into place until your shit explodes into a pool of blood while you're face rolling on your keyboard because you can't do anything about it.
This isn't about balance anymore, it's about exciting unit interactions. ANTI-MICRO MECHANICS AREN'T FUN. When are they going to learn this?
This "anti-micro" idiocy has to stop. The infestor provokes a ton of micro from the terran. You should try microing against stimmed marines. Oh, that's right. You can't. Direct damage is the ultimate anti-micro ability.
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
+1 on immortals made them stop dancing behind other units, +2 on queens made a difference because helions were no longer viable against queens what does -1 on fungal change?
You tell us, you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out. At what range would you like fungal to be nerfed until it reaches the point of suiciding infestors i.e. neural?
Oh, I wouldn't nerf its range, I'd nerf its effects, like no more holding units in place. Ever thought about that one? No? Yeah, no wonder you're admitting to not being smart enough to figure it out.
le sigh.... so blizzard gives in to the whiners even though they themselves dont believe in the patch.
Yeah, what were they thinking, giving in to whiners. Now revert tank damage and reapers, since those changes also happened because they gave in to whiners.
Everyone and their grandmother has thought about changing fungals root effect. You're just being a jerk face.
Apparently the guy I quoted hadn't thought of that.
No, you're just assuming that he hadn't though of it. The discussion was about range, not the effects. You said, (ill quote it for you buddy).
"what does -1 on fungal change?"
He said
"You tell me."
You two were discussing the range effects, not the root effects.
You're still mean =))
Yes, I asked him a simple question how -1 range changes anything. The discussion was how this fungal nerf would affect the game, my main concern is tvz and my position is that it won't change a damn thing. The answer I got was "lol dunno you tell me". And another fun fact: I only admitted his concern " you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out." I've seen many zerg apologists say that this nerf is HUGE and will change the game in ways we can't even comprehend but so far no one elaborated how, so sad. Think maybe you and your buddy J can do something about it?
Why are you asking if me and somebody named J can do something about it exactly? I feel like your reading comprehension is a bit off. I was never discussing the infestor change, I was simply pointing out how you looked like a fool going off topic from range nerfs to general infestor nerfs whilst not only simultaneously implying that someones an idiot, but suggesting a change that everyone has already considered, making your suggestion double useless.
Talking about the change, I completely agree with you. Having it as a root is something I never wanted, and I've been playing Z since beta.
Guy, I'm gonna use simple words so you'll understand. Nerfing range isn't the only way to fix fungal and infestors. There are many, many better ways to do this and I'm not as closed minded as your buddy to think rage is the only way to go.
Problem is there are many ways to nerf fungal and infestors, and all of them are heavily subjective in the scope of an actual fix to the ultimate problem without extreme insight into the game. And with no thorough in-game evaluation over a long period of time consisting of every great mind putting their own weight in, most circumstances this level of insight is generally unobtainable. You should probably stop acting like you know everything. I'm pretty sure you'd never recognize the correct solution as you'd disagree with any that weren't one you advocate anyways: thus materializes the paradox of opinion.
On December 06 2012 04:54 acrimoneyius wrote: Nerfing range doesn't fix the problem of the game being way too unforgiving for terran or protoss. Groups of infestors can still root you into place until your shit explodes into a pool of blood while you're face rolling on your keyboard because you can't do anything about it.
This isn't about balance anymore, it's about exciting unit interactions. ANTI-MICRO MECHANICS AREN'T FUN. When are they going to learn this?
Nerfing range wasn't intended to fix the proposed issue of the game being unforgiving. In no realistic scenario is Blizzard ever going to try and flip the game on it's head months before it's next expansion is out. This is entirely about balance, which is why the patches are focused on it exclusively. It sucks you think theres a problem with the game and that any particularly patch (happens to be this one) isn't addressing it, but it has nothing to do with this patch one way or another.
On December 06 2012 05:00 m0ck wrote: This "anti-micro" idiocy has to stop. The infestor provokes a ton of micro from the terran. You should try microing against stimmed marines. Oh, that's right. You can't. Direct damage is the ultimate anti-micro ability.
On December 05 2012 22:24 jumai wrote: I find it weird how many people assume -1 range to fungal won't be impactful when the -2 range to neural parasite completely removed even researching it from the entire zvp gamespan between colossus count hitting 2 and mothership construction. I mean, I know using NP causes a greater window of exposure for the infestors, but that's a *huge* amount of the game that NP got kicked out of. Even an analogous, but much less extreme outcome has room to make significant impact.
Infestors are still good, but we should notice a difference once everyone adjusts.
Because NP with range 9 had the same range as colossi, for example? That change made a difference. What difference does -1 range on fungal make?
Sigh, exactly, I've been presenting the differences and it just falls on deaf ears. These people cannot even point out -how- it could make a difference theoretically. They just assume it will make a huge difference because it happened with other units, when the other units were functioning on very different principles.
I haven't done a lot of deep thinking on it (I'm sure I'll learn when people do it to me), but off the top of my head it seems like it'll make a bigger difference to fungal's use against whole armies than it will in duels between specialist units. If a few ghosts or high templar are moving in trying to snipe infestors, it's enough to stop the closest 2-3 at the edge of fungal's aoe and move away. However if, say, a toss's stalkers start pushing forward and looking for an aggressive blink, it's important to catch a lot more under the aoe and you lose the luxury of maximum range.
Fungal has radius 2; while that puts the far edge of the aoe 2 units past the spell's range it also puts the inner edge 2 units inside it. In other words, using a whole fungal now requires the closest targets are within range 6, down from 7. Since you seem to be asking for numbers that line up tidily, I could claim that stalkers(/marauders, +1 row of tanks, etc) now return fire on infestors chain fungaling larger clumps of them. However what's probably just as significant is that zergs will now often choose hitting less targets with a fungal over running in for maximum damage. Less of your army getting hit by fungal is basically what everyone was asking for, right?
Your argument kind of seems to complain that fungal's radius is too big. First world zerg problem. If you trade a couple of infestors against a huge portion of Terran army, you wouldn't be happy with it? Trust me, units are meant to die in SC2.
Infestors were not only broken in terms of fungal growth and infested terrans. They also had the best retention of all the spell casters in the game. How many times have you seen ghosts die after they emp/snipe? How many HTs evaporate after they land a couple of feedbacks?
And how many times do you see Zergs retain most of their infestors after a big engagement?
I knew someone would paraphrase me as "complain[ing] that fungal's radius is too big." For clarity's sake, I've no complaints to make about fungal in general, and obviously I'm aware that a bigger radius is an upside. What I *was* trying to do was answer some of the challenges above asking what difference the -1 range could make and how it could make a difference theoretically.
Let me try again.
Getting your infestors close enough to an army to use the whole fungal aoe is a lot risker/more easily punished now. The closest part of the aoe is now at range 6, down from 7. So, maximizing fungal damage now necessarily brings the infestor into range of enemies under many additional circumstances (easy example: when targetting units with range 6). Consequently, in addition to suffering more damage, infestors are now more likely to avoid moving within range to use the entire fungal aoe, resulting in less units hit and less damage dealt for many engagements. Units advancing towards infestors now also cross a smaller the zone between "within range of a whole fungal" and "able to shoot the infestors", meaning they more frequently deal damage (by getting into range before a fungal) or avoid it (by having less units inside an early fungal). For marines, this distance shrank by half, and crossing it should now realistically compete with response times (~0.19 clock seconds assuming stim). These sorts of differences have added up into a very pronounced impact on gameplay with almost every similar circumstance, including one involving a spell cast by the same unit and from the same original range. Therefor, seeing a difference from this change seems like an extremely strong likelyhood to me.
[disclaimer: I reckon infestors are still good, but also less good, and both of those things sound fine to me. I like that a non-destabilizing change is the first thing we're trying.]
Sad to see HSM gone but it was quite strong, so let's see what happens.+ Show Spoiler +
disregard, I suck cox
I'm not of the winfestorlolz-crowd, so it should be interesting to see people adjust to this change.
Implementation-wise, if Infestors have to be patched I'd have liked to see fungal -rather than a range decrease- have the length of the rooting of the spell tweaked. Currently 4 seconds on everything, this is a variable I'd love to see played with. Root Massive units 1 second, Light units 4 seconds, and all others ("size-not specified", not impacted by psi, mech, armored, flying, etc.) get 2-3 seconds.
But then again, I'm just a scrubby-scrub on page 42 theorycrafting so let's just see what Blizzard decides on
How is protoss OK when blizzard specifically states they want to change PvZ by lowering egg health and they say they want to change all 3 matchups. Obviously blizzard doesn't like the current PvZ and I dont either. Glad they are trying to fix both matchups
On December 06 2012 05:26 Snorkels wrote: Sad to see HSM gone but it was quite strong, so let's see what happens. I'm not of the winfestorlolz-crowd, so it should be interesting to see people adjust to this change.
Implementation-wise, if Infestors have to be patched I'd have liked to see fungal -rather than a range decrease- have the length of the rooting of the spell tweaked. Currently 4 seconds on everything, this is a variable I'd love to see played with. Root Massive units 1 second, Light units 4 seconds, and all others ("size-not specified", not impacted by psi, mech, armored, flying, etc.) get 2-3 seconds.
But then again, I'm just a scrubby-scrub on page 42 theorycrafting so let's just see what Blizzard decides on
On December 06 2012 05:26 Snorkels wrote: Sad to see HSM gone but it was quite strong, so let's see what happens. I'm not of the winfestorlolz-crowd, so it should be interesting to see people adjust to this change.
HSM isn't gone... HSM Upgrade is gone, Ravens now start with it
-1 Range, so the infestor has to walk 0,4 seconds more to fungal...
Health form 100 to 70? When there are 30 infested Terrans, they will spawn no matter what and still doing incredible damage for just ENERGY (more DPS then Marines but almost zero costs)
and the raven change. Well if you have the economy to make a raven switch possible without losing right away, then you are also able to afford then upgrade.
Thanks for that sham patch/change.
So far the results of blizzards hard work are not that great, lets see if they can do a real (and fair) change what really changes something....would be nice
On December 06 2012 05:26 Snorkels wrote: Sad to see HSM gone but it was quite strong, so let's see what happens. I'm not of the winfestorlolz-crowd, so it should be interesting to see people adjust to this change.
HSM isn't gone... HSM Upgrade is gone, Ravens now start with it
Thanks, my bad. Let's make every HSM cost 15 minerals scarab style
I wonder if anyone has tested splitting fungal into 2 fifty-ish energy spells, one that dot's and one that snares instead of one mega one that dot's and snares. The dot can reveal cloak and have a longer range and the snare a shorter one. Or hell just split it perfectly 50 energy for the dot/reveal and 25 for the root so it can be better balanced seperatly.
The problem imo is if you get too close, you are rooted and die no matter what you do. The damage itself isnt a problem, it is the chain root.
then you can test things like having the root being projectile based and dot insta cast etc.
On December 06 2012 05:38 3xTr4_FragQuenz wrote: This change is an absolut joke.
-1 Range, so the infestor has to walk 0,4 seconds more to fungal...
Health form 100 to 70? When there are 30 infested Terrans, they will spawn no matter what and still doing incredible damage for just ENERGY (more DPS then Marines but almost zero costs)
and the raven change. Well if you have the economy to make a raven switch possible without losing right away, then you are also able to afford then upgrade.
Thanks for that sham patch/change.
So far the results of blizzards hard work are not that great, lets see if they can do a real (and fair) change what really changes something....would be nice
1range doesnt only have it take longer time, it also makes it alot easier to snipe infestors trying to fungal, be it with tanks, marauders or ghosts. As some guy mentioned earlier, if you are to get 100% use of the fungal the closest units in it will be in 6 range. this means a marauder at the closest range inside the fungal will be able to hit the infestor.
Im not saying its HUGE, but its something. And blizzard really should do this slight tweeks rather then huge changes at this point. I would love if they did them a bit more frequent though.
The IT nerf is pretty big tbh. It will make ITs live 1 tankshot less with +1. This makes the killing tanks with tanksplash alot worse. But honestly, its mainly a ZvP nerf. And there its huge tbh. You often throw IT eggs in the face of the toss army.. this will make ALOT less ITs actually live. And 1storm kills the eggs.. wich is also pretty big.
Lets see how it turns out before we cry about it. Small tweaks have made huge differences before.
On December 06 2012 05:58 Rowrin wrote: I wonder if anyone has tested splitting fungal into 2 fifty-ish energy spells, one that dot's and one that snares instead of one mega one that dot's and snares. The dot can reveal cloak and have a longer range and the snare a shorter one.
The problem imo is if you get too close, you are rooted and die no matter what you do. The damage itself isnt a problem, it is the chain root.
Its a good idea, Ive thought of it myself for a long time. Id rather see it being 2 75 energy spells though but yeah, the combination of damage and stun isnt a good one. As it is now its a bad spell even in theory. I atleast dont like it at all :p They could then remove neural aswell. Only time its truly useful is against MS and honestly... being able to neural a MS seems so silly to me. If any unit is to be immune to Neural it should be that one :p
On December 06 2012 06:18 Ghend wrote: Proof that blizzard listens, but are frustratingly slow to act. Looking forward to see less infestors. Maybe it'll make pvz more interesting.
PvZ atm is 52% in P favor. (there is a thread with all the major tournaments from Sep till yesterday).
Its a stupid matchup though, either the P wins with soul, or they die to deathball.
I hope the inf change does not affect PvZ alot.
Blizz is clueless atm, if they nerf the inf too much zerg is going to dissapear from results, if they keep it this way TvZ is near impossible.
All this due to bad race design. Oh and the PvZ... yeah thats not a real matchup for the reasons stated first thing in the post.
All in all: Zerg design sucks. This is the main problem. And because Zerg had to have a way to win, Blizz buffed the infestor leading to the current situation.
I think the 1 range nerf will help Protoss more than anything. It will make it a little easier for them to feedback infestors. The HSM change I honestly don't think it will matter that much. I mean not having to research it is nice but I think the biggest reason why it isn't used is the fact that it takes a long time to get the energy for it.
I wonder why they never experimented with making Fungal Growth function as a spell where the Infestor spits it onto the ground, and units standing in it take damage over time.
On December 06 2012 07:37 Azhrei16 wrote: I wonder why they never experimented with making Fungal Growth function as a spell where the Infestor spits it onto the ground, and units standing in it take damage over time.
It's too close to how Storm work imo. Is there's one thing you don't want to do in Starcraft it's giving the same spell to each races.
Being 3 completly different faction is what made starcraft so well known back in 1998. It's like core to the name of the game. ( back when other RTS had multiple races, sames units just with different skins > Warcraft 2 )
On December 06 2012 07:37 Azhrei16 wrote: I wonder why they never experimented with making Fungal Growth function as a spell where the Infestor spits it onto the ground, and units standing in it take damage over time.
It's too close to how Storm work imo. Is there's one thing you don't want to do in Starcraft it's giving the same spell to each races.
Being 3 completly different faction is what made starcraft so well known back in 1998. It's like core to the name of the game. ( back when other RTS had multiple races, sames units just with different skins > Warcraft 2 )
Ah yeah I never thought about that, good point. It just seems like most people complain about the stun, and if you change it to a slow then it will conflict with the Oracles new ability in Heart of the Swarm. Should just remove the spell and buff Neural.
If you can afford to get raven and let them build energy, you can afford 150/150 for the upgrade... this change is useless. Maybe if corvid reactor and durable materials also had no upgrade, we'd be having a conversation.
On December 06 2012 06:18 Ghend wrote: Proof that blizzard listens, but are frustratingly slow to act. Looking forward to see less infestors. Maybe it'll make pvz more interesting.
All in all: Zerg design sucks. This is the main problem. And because Zerg had to have a way to win, Blizz buffed the infestor leading to the current situation.
Agreed. But I think HOTS fixes this. Blinding cloud should be a good alternative to fungal growth in large engagements. I'm looking forward to it.
On December 06 2012 06:18 Ghend wrote: Proof that blizzard listens, but are frustratingly slow to act. Looking forward to see less infestors. Maybe it'll make pvz more interesting.
All in all: Zerg design sucks. This is the main problem. And because Zerg had to have a way to win, Blizz buffed the infestor leading to the current situation.
Agreed. But I think HOTS fixes this. Blinding cloud should be a good alternative to fungal growth in large engagements. I'm looking forward to it.
You do know, the infestor was never buffed...but i'll let people think what they want.. The only change they made to the infestor was decreasing stun effect from 8(overpowered) to 4 while keeping the damage the same.
On December 06 2012 06:18 Ghend wrote: Proof that blizzard listens, but are frustratingly slow to act. Looking forward to see less infestors. Maybe it'll make pvz more interesting.
All in all: Zerg design sucks. This is the main problem. And because Zerg had to have a way to win, Blizz buffed the infestor leading to the current situation.
Agreed. But I think HOTS fixes this. Blinding cloud should be a good alternative to fungal growth in large engagements. I'm looking forward to it.
You do know, the infestor was never buffed...but i'll let people think what they want.. The only change they made to the infestor was decreasing stun effect from 8(overpowered) to 4 while keeping the damage the same.
Lol, not this again. It was buffed many times, both directly and indirectly. They reduced it's duration, but that was an indirect buff to it's DPS as it now dealt the same amount of damage (slightly reduced) but twice as fast. Which means, marines can't outheal it and get wiped out in 2 fungals regardless of medivacs. They nerfed the ghost multiple times which indirectly buffs the infestor even more, etc.
But the infestor buffs only made the composition powerful, it didn't make it viable like it is now. The queen patch is much more relevant in this regard.
On December 06 2012 06:18 Ghend wrote: Proof that blizzard listens, but are frustratingly slow to act. Looking forward to see less infestors. Maybe it'll make pvz more interesting.
All in all: Zerg design sucks. This is the main problem. And because Zerg had to have a way to win, Blizz buffed the infestor leading to the current situation.
Agreed. But I think HOTS fixes this. Blinding cloud should be a good alternative to fungal growth in large engagements. I'm looking forward to it.
You do know, the infestor was never buffed...but i'll let people think what they want.. The only change they made to the infestor was decreasing stun effect from 8(overpowered) to 4 while keeping the damage the same.
Lol, not this again. It was buffed many times, both directly and indirectly. They reduced it's duration, but that was an indirect buff to it's DPS as it now dealt the same amount of damage (slightly reduced) but twice as fast. Which means, marines can't outheal it and get wiped out in 2 fungals regardless of medivacs. They nerfed the ghost multiple times which indirectly buffs the infestor even more, etc.
But the infestor buffs only made the composition powerful, it didn't make it viable like it is now. The queen patch is much more relevant in this regard.
Er... patch 1.3.0 changed the damage to 36 damage over 4 seconds instead of 8. That was a buff, don't get me wrong, but that's 9 dps. That's just about the medivac heal rate. So if you had enough medivacs to heal your marines, they didn't die to 2 fungals. That's just not true.
The one thing i do not understand is why didn't they lower the infested terran's hp instead of the eggs, targetting eggs in most cases is useless, since while they are throwing eggs you would be targetting their army, so what the balance team is implying is you should be targeting free units instead of real units? Sounds kind of like hallucination but on steroids, or infested! I thought it was a good patch but the more i think about that change the less it makes sense to me~
On December 06 2012 06:18 Ghend wrote: Proof that blizzard listens, but are frustratingly slow to act. Looking forward to see less infestors. Maybe it'll make pvz more interesting.
All in all: Zerg design sucks. This is the main problem. And because Zerg had to have a way to win, Blizz buffed the infestor leading to the current situation.
Agreed. But I think HOTS fixes this. Blinding cloud should be a good alternative to fungal growth in large engagements. I'm looking forward to it.
You do know, the infestor was never buffed...but i'll let people think what they want.. The only change they made to the infestor was decreasing stun effect from 8(overpowered) to 4 while keeping the damage the same.
Units don't have to be buffed to "suddenly become OP", the meta game can make huge changes without there being any patch changes. Remember mlg anaheim2011? The Slayers terran were all going blue flame hellion and just raping everyone. Then the tournament passed, every terran saw how good that was, and started raping everyone, even though they knew it was going to happen.
You can't then argue that the hellion was never buffed and therefore is fine. The metagame changed, and it was in fact OP. Same applies to the infestor.
On December 06 2012 06:18 Ghend wrote: Proof that blizzard listens, but are frustratingly slow to act. Looking forward to see less infestors. Maybe it'll make pvz more interesting.
All in all: Zerg design sucks. This is the main problem. And because Zerg had to have a way to win, Blizz buffed the infestor leading to the current situation.
Agreed. But I think HOTS fixes this. Blinding cloud should be a good alternative to fungal growth in large engagements. I'm looking forward to it.
You do know, the infestor was never buffed...but i'll let people think what they want.. The only change they made to the infestor was decreasing stun effect from 8(overpowered) to 4 while keeping the damage the same.
So what, doubling the DPS of fungal wasn't a buff? Yes, each casting of fungal deals the same damage, but it lets you cast twice as many fungals in the same time and do twice as much damage. Also they added the bonus damage vs. armoured in that patch.
On December 06 2012 06:18 Ghend wrote: Proof that blizzard listens, but are frustratingly slow to act. Looking forward to see less infestors. Maybe it'll make pvz more interesting.
All in all: Zerg design sucks. This is the main problem. And because Zerg had to have a way to win, Blizz buffed the infestor leading to the current situation.
Agreed. But I think HOTS fixes this. Blinding cloud should be a good alternative to fungal growth in large engagements. I'm looking forward to it.
You do know, the infestor was never buffed...but i'll let people think what they want.. The only change they made to the infestor was decreasing stun effect from 8(overpowered) to 4 while keeping the damage the same.
Units don't have to be buffed to "suddenly become OP", the meta game can make huge changes without there being any patch changes. Remember mlg anaheim2011? The Slayers terran were all going blue flame hellion and just raping everyone. Then the tournament passed, every terran saw how good that was, and started raping everyone, even though they knew it was going to happen.
You can't then argue that the hellion was never buffed and therefore is fine. The metagame changed, and it was in fact OP. Same applies to the infestor.
The metagame changed because of patches that both directly and indirectly buffed the infestor: multiple times. Infestors have nothing in common with this analogy, lol.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
I think zerg needs to get a new buff to some other units in order to let them NOT use infestors heavy composition. It's not only because infestors were strong, it's because muta ling banelings can't cut it eventually.
unless u get ahead big time, muta ling bling is NEVER cost efficient vs a decent player.
its only a way for the zerg to abuse holes in Ts play and to reset pushes (reducing tank-count heavily) in order to transition out of it, the ONLY composition for zerg that actually is costefficient, is BL infestor corruptor...
On December 06 2012 06:18 Ghend wrote: Proof that blizzard listens, but are frustratingly slow to act. Looking forward to see less infestors. Maybe it'll make pvz more interesting.
All in all: Zerg design sucks. This is the main problem. And because Zerg had to have a way to win, Blizz buffed the infestor leading to the current situation.
Agreed. But I think HOTS fixes this. Blinding cloud should be a good alternative to fungal growth in large engagements. I'm looking forward to it.
You do know, the infestor was never buffed...but i'll let people think what they want.. The only change they made to the infestor was decreasing stun effect from 8(overpowered) to 4 while keeping the damage the same.
Yea I hate to tell you this but that decreasing stun effect actually turned out to be a buff.
It doubled the DPS...DOUBLED.
You used to be able to at least somewhat heal the damage you were getting from fungals but now if you land one fungal that second one will kill your marines...period...nothing you can do.
Change is fine, it still makes fungal growth one of the most boring spells ever but hey at least infestors might have to die now to cast it...yay.
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
And we all remember the rampage when Queens got +2 range.
+1 range on immortal made a night and day difference because of other Protoss units that would block and prevent immortals from being able to fire. (edit: basically went from doing practically 0 dps to full dps)
+2 range on queens also made a huge difference because they could go against the short ranged hellions much more effectively. (edit: again, went from doing - 0 dps to full dps, since players used to be able to kite queens with hellions)
-1 range on infestor will not be as huge a change because infestors are still very safe behind Broodlord range, broodlings. What makes infestors super safe isn't just their range, but also the fact that tanks have to unseige against broodlords. Tanks are the number 1 killer of infestors in TvZ. I'm hoping more ghosts will be employed due to the changes, since they're slightly less susceptible to broodlings (ie, they won't kill their own units)
BUT, it's a a change in the right direction.
what if, the T had vikings to battle Broodlords, the infesters wont be able to fungal them without getting massacred by Tanks
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
I think zerg needs to get a new buff to some other units in order to let them NOT use infestors heavy composition. It's not only because infestors were strong, it's because muta ling banelings can't cut it eventually.
unless u get ahead big time, muta ling bling is NEVER cost efficient vs a decent player.
its only a way for the zerg to abuse holes in Ts play and to reset pushes (reducing tank-count heavily) in order to transition out of it, the ONLY composition for zerg that actually is costefficient, is BL infestor corruptor...
Zerg, the race with the best macro options, being cost efficient, well that's scary, isn't it?
And what you say is not true. If you MICRO ling bling muta can be cost efficiënt. 1a it and you can't be cost efficiënt. Split by patrolling your army before engaging, and flank, makes it cost efficiënt. Terran needs code S micro to be able to stay even, just saying.
So many patchzergs on ladder, it's just awesome. Most zergs try muta ling bling now, and damn, they are so bad with it. They are so used to 1a with infestors..
This also means that it's much harder to fungal stalkers without being within the range of colossous!
I think these changes are decent...Not too much but might still have a great affect.
Not that I had a problem with infestors, but at least it might make people shut up just abit....( until they find the next thing to make a billion threads about )
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
And we all remember the rampage when Queens got +2 range.
+1 range on immortal made a night and day difference because of other Protoss units that would block and prevent immortals from being able to fire. (edit: basically went from doing practically 0 dps to full dps)
+2 range on queens also made a huge difference because they could go against the short ranged hellions much more effectively. (edit: again, went from doing - 0 dps to full dps, since players used to be able to kite queens with hellions)
-1 range on infestor will not be as huge a change because infestors are still very safe behind Broodlord range, broodlings. What makes infestors super safe isn't just their range, but also the fact that tanks have to unseige against broodlords. Tanks are the number 1 killer of infestors in TvZ. I'm hoping more ghosts will be employed due to the changes, since they're slightly less susceptible to broodlings (ie, they won't kill their own units)
BUT, it's a a change in the right direction.
what if, the T had vikings to battle Broodlords, the infesters wont be able to fungal them without getting massacred by Tanks
Seige tanks already outrange infestors. This change doesn't suddenly bring infestors into tank fire range. Will make it easier to hit infestors, but that's it. And between cracklings and broodlings, seige mode is a hazard to terrans anyway.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
I think zerg needs to get a new buff to some other units in order to let them NOT use infestors heavy composition. It's not only because infestors were strong, it's because muta ling banelings can't cut it eventually.
unless u get ahead big time, muta ling bling is NEVER cost efficient vs a decent player.
its only a way for the zerg to abuse holes in Ts play and to reset pushes (reducing tank-count heavily) in order to transition out of it, the ONLY composition for zerg that actually is costefficient, is BL infestor corruptor...
Yes, to win, a player has to outplay his opponents. Terran a-move is even less efficient against muta/ling/bling. But they have to set up tank lines, split units, drops to divert army to create position etc. etc. etc. basically, abuse holes in zerg play.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
I think zerg needs to get a new buff to some other units in order to let them NOT use infestors heavy composition. It's not only because infestors were strong, it's because muta ling banelings can't cut it eventually.
unless u get ahead big time, muta ling bling is NEVER cost efficient vs a decent player.
its only a way for the zerg to abuse holes in Ts play and to reset pushes (reducing tank-count heavily) in order to transition out of it, the ONLY composition for zerg that actually is costefficient, is BL infestor corruptor...
Zerg, the race with the best macro options, being cost efficient, well that's scary, isn't it?
And what you say is not true. If you MICRO ling bling muta can be cost efficiënt. 1a it and you can't be cost efficiënt. Split by patrolling your army before engaging, and flank, makes it cost efficiënt. Terran needs code S micro to be able to stay even, just saying.
So many patchzergs on ladder, it's just awesome. Most zergs try muta ling bling now, and damn, they are so bad with it. They are so used to 1a with infestors..
Hahahaha... Why would you go back to Muta/ling/bling, when all that is being done is change the battleoutcomes slightly?
That being said, it's quite funny how every Terran keeps on talking about how zerg should play Muta/ling/bling. Ever opened muta/ling/bling vs thors? Hihi, BO-loss... Ever opened Muta/ling/bling vs 3base double upgrade bio? Hihi, gl hf fighting with 1-1 or 2-2 against 3-3 marines...
Muta/ling/bling died at the end of 2011, when Terrans found out that they don't have to allin of two bases everygame and hope to do damage and instead just start a third command center before 10mins. And the fact that mech got really popular and is often a freewin for T (when realizing mutas are incoming) or a freewin for zerg (when T doesn't realize mutas are coming) doesn't really help - at least not in making games more interesting.
I was there. I stayed with mutas until even the korean zergs stopped using mutas all together, because no matter how good you are, upgrade your lings against marines (and vis-versa) or die trying.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
I think zerg needs to get a new buff to some other units in order to let them NOT use infestors heavy composition. It's not only because infestors were strong, it's because muta ling banelings can't cut it eventually.
unless u get ahead big time, muta ling bling is NEVER cost efficient vs a decent player.
its only a way for the zerg to abuse holes in Ts play and to reset pushes (reducing tank-count heavily) in order to transition out of it, the ONLY composition for zerg that actually is costefficient, is BL infestor corruptor...
Zerg, the race with the best macro options, being cost efficient, well that's scary, isn't it?
And what you say is not true. If you MICRO ling bling muta can be cost efficiënt. 1a it and you can't be cost efficiënt. Split by patrolling your army before engaging, and flank, makes it cost efficiënt. Terran needs code S micro to be able to stay even, just saying.
So many patchzergs on ladder, it's just awesome. Most zergs try muta ling bling now, and damn, they are so bad with it. They are so used to 1a with infestors..
Hahahaha... Why would you go back to Muta/ling/bling, when all that is being done is change the battleoutcomes slightly?
That being said, it's quite funny how every Terran keeps on talking about how zerg should play Muta/ling/bling. Ever opened muta/ling/bling vs thors? Hihi, BO-loss... Ever opened Muta/ling/bling vs 3base double upgrade bio? Hihi, gl hf fighting with 1-1 or 2-2 against 3-3 marines...
I was there. I stayed with mutas until even the korean zergs stopped using mutas all together, because no matter how good you are, upgrade your lings against marines (and vis-versa) or die trying.
I don't say you have to! I say that a lot of zergs THINK that the infestor is now useless, so they switch to muta ling bling.
Muta ling bling is actually still viable, and you see top koreans like leenock and DRG using it again, with great success. The problem is that a ton of zergs became good thanks to the infestor, so going back to ling bling muta would mean those "infestorzergs" drop in skill, and not a little bit. Then those infestorzergs go on the forums, and tell people that muta ling bling is not viable.
On December 05 2012 18:35 birchman wrote: Let's see if this has any positive effect. It would be really nice to not see as many infestors for a while.
Zerg is still going to make Infestor im afraid, they only way to cost effectively hold waves of good bio tank pushes. Also Infester is still the safest way to get to t3 against Toss. If anything you will see more of them to make up for the nerf. If some new game play comes from this patch I would be surprised.
that's how I feel as well, strangely Zerg didn't get any kind of buff in other units to compensate a big nerf of their core unit
Then explain how zergs held bio tank pushes with ling/bling/muta?
Just one example off the top of my head: by setting up flanks with super fast units and good creep spread.
A Zerg that doesn't flank is like a Terran that doesn't use medivac drops. Aside from Stephano, you hardly see flanks nowadays because Zergs simply don't have to. Hopefully this changes.
On December 05 2012 18:56 Serpico wrote:
On December 05 2012 18:52 Finnz wrote: if muta ling bane is played properly its actually more effective than infestors. The problem with muta ling bane is that its a lot harder and apm intensive. The transitions from muta ling bane into the late game is what pretty much kills terran straight up if the zerg has done enough damage to the terran. So all the moaning about infestors being underpowered and what not is pretty silly. This change will be much better for spectators as well as just for playing the game. People need to understand how much infestors were ruining the starcraft 2 viewership.
I think the pros, the guys who can make all the high level plays would have stayed with ling muta bane if that were the case. Infestors and fungal is just straight up better and less risky. The worst part of lings and banes is when you have to run them into tanks and marines and hope they dont all die before they get there. Being melee you have to risk losing large portions of your army before they get to even do a single thing, that's why it isn't fun playing with it. It's really stressful. You absolutely have to catch the terran off guard or have immaculate splits.
Flank. Flank. Flank.
With creep, Zergs get an awesome early warning system. It's also very cheap and easy for Zergs to hold xel'nagas and/or a couple lings running around the map to spot areas without creep and without xel'naga.
So much map control just never put to use because Zergs can just fungal and a-move.
the problem is not all the maps allow you to 'flank' and there comes a point when muta ling baneling just no longer are cost efficient enough. going back to the older maps, shakuras for example, or the newer maps in hots, Akilon Wastes. there aren't much space or room to flank. Once terran set up PFs and turtle hard, there is nothing a zerg can throw at terran to break that defense (ignoring hots new units)
I think zerg needs to get a new buff to some other units in order to let them NOT use infestors heavy composition. It's not only because infestors were strong, it's because muta ling banelings can't cut it eventually.
unless u get ahead big time, muta ling bling is NEVER cost efficient vs a decent player.
its only a way for the zerg to abuse holes in Ts play and to reset pushes (reducing tank-count heavily) in order to transition out of it, the ONLY composition for zerg that actually is costefficient, is BL infestor corruptor...
Zerg, the race with the best macro options, being cost efficient, well that's scary, isn't it?
And what you say is not true. If you MICRO ling bling muta can be cost efficiënt. 1a it and you can't be cost efficiënt. Split by patrolling your army before engaging, and flank, makes it cost efficiënt. Terran needs code S micro to be able to stay even, just saying.
So many patchzergs on ladder, it's just awesome. Most zergs try muta ling bling now, and damn, they are so bad with it. They are so used to 1a with infestors..
Hahahaha... Why would you go back to Muta/ling/bling, when all that is being done is change the battleoutcomes slightly?
That being said, it's quite funny how every Terran keeps on talking about how zerg should play Muta/ling/bling. Ever opened muta/ling/bling vs thors? Hihi, BO-loss... Ever opened Muta/ling/bling vs 3base double upgrade bio? Hihi, gl hf fighting with 1-1 or 2-2 against 3-3 marines...
I was there. I stayed with mutas until even the korean zergs stopped using mutas all together, because no matter how good you are, upgrade your lings against marines (and vis-versa) or die trying.
I don't say you have to! I say that a lot of zergs THINK that the infestor is now useless, so they switch to muta ling bling.
Muta ling bling is actually still viable, and you see top koreans like leenock and DRG using it again, with great success. The problem is that a ton of zergs became good thanks to the infestor, so going back to ling bling muta would mean those "infestorzergs" drop in skill, and not a little bit. Then those infestorzergs go on the forums, and tell people that muta ling bling is not viable.
Oh well, it is viable. But not "no matter what" (so like infestor builds, biomech, mech, bio). Not against Mech, not on a lot of maps (usually the rather smaller ones, but has a lot to do with the base layout). Not in the classical way with mass muta (that is completly dependend on winning a battle or getting quite ahead). In fact, most people just use it as a 2-2 timing attack. Upgrades first, then build like ~8 mutas, force turrets a low tankcount and then crush an oppenent's position with mass ling/bling - assuming it is a somewhat open position.
It's simply not the the "open two base muta, harass, crush attacks and preseve mutas, harass more, crush more attacks and drops, win with 30mutas" - microheavy style anymore, unless you play on whirlewind where you have ages of time to do damage (and morph banelings).
On December 05 2012 21:16 Andr3 wrote: You guys remember how much changed when immortals "ONLY" got a +1 range upgrade?
I think this patch might help a lot, I'm glad Blizzard is making ~small~ adjustments.
And we all remember the rampage when Queens got +2 range.
+1 range on immortal made a night and day difference because of other Protoss units that would block and prevent immortals from being able to fire. (edit: basically went from doing practically 0 dps to full dps)
+2 range on queens also made a huge difference because they could go against the short ranged hellions much more effectively. (edit: again, went from doing - 0 dps to full dps, since players used to be able to kite queens with hellions)
-1 range on infestor will not be as huge a change because infestors are still very safe behind Broodlord range, broodlings. What makes infestors super safe isn't just their range, but also the fact that tanks have to unseige against broodlords. Tanks are the number 1 killer of infestors in TvZ. I'm hoping more ghosts will be employed due to the changes, since they're slightly less susceptible to broodlings (ie, they won't kill their own units)
BUT, it's a a change in the right direction.
what if, the T had vikings to battle Broodlords, the infesters wont be able to fungal them without getting massacred by Tanks
Seige tanks already outrange infestors. This change doesn't suddenly bring infestors into tank fire range. Will make it easier to hit infestors, but that's it. And between cracklings and broodlings, seige mode is a hazard to terrans anyway.
Making it easier to hit infestors is the entire point, though.
Infestors die in 2 tank shots. -1 range means your vikings have a little more freedom in engaging Zerg air, which should mean much more even engagements.
On December 06 2012 21:38 Big J wrote: Hahahaha... Why would you go back to Muta/ling/bling, when all that is being done is change the battleoutcomes slightly?
That being said, it's quite funny how every Terran keeps on talking about how zerg should play Muta/ling/bling. Ever opened muta/ling/bling vs thors? Hihi, BO-loss...
You have really no idea what you're talking about. What does it even mean, “opening muta/ling/bling vs thors”? Dozens of build orders can lead to Zerglings/Banelings/Mutalisks, there is no such thing as a “build order loss” if Terran happens to mech (and even if your BO loss nonsense was true, what prevents you from scouting with an Overseer before morphing a Spire?) and gets two Thors to fend off your initial Mutalisks wave, because the common answer is simply to build a Roach Warren and to switch. Watch Vortix play, he does it all the time. Just because you make some Mutalisks at first doesn't mean you have to keep producing them until you have 30+.
On December 06 2012 21:38 Big J wrote: Ever opened Muta/ling/bling vs 3base double upgrade bio? Hihi, gl hf fighting with 1-1 or 2-2 against 3-3 marines...
Yeah, and gl hf holding a massive speedbanes timing with no or delayed Tanks. Just because you don't know how to react to Terran greed when playing Mutalisks doesn't mean there is no answer. If you're still 1-1 when Terran gets 3-3... I don't know what to say without sounding rude.
On December 06 2012 21:38 Big J wrote: I was there. I stayed with mutas until even the korean zergs stopped using mutas all together
On December 06 2012 21:38 Big J wrote: Hahahaha... Why would you go back to Muta/ling/bling, when all that is being done is change the battleoutcomes slightly?
That being said, it's quite funny how every Terran keeps on talking about how zerg should play Muta/ling/bling. Ever opened muta/ling/bling vs thors? Hihi, BO-loss...
You have really no idea what you're talking about. What does it even mean, “opening muta/ling/bling vs thors”? Dozens of build orders can lead to Zerglings/Banelings/Mutalisks, there is no such thing as a “build order loss” if Terran happens to mech (and even if your BO loss nonsense was true, what prevents you from scouting with an Overseer before morphing a Spire?) and gets two Thors to fend off your initial Mutalisks wave, because the common answer is simply to build a Roach Warren and to switch. Watch Vortix play, he does it all the time. Just because you make some Mutalisks at first doesn't mean you have to keep producing them until you have 30+.
On December 06 2012 21:38 Big J wrote: Ever opened Muta/ling/bling vs 3base double upgrade bio? Hihi, gl hf fighting with 1-1 or 2-2 against 3-3 marines...
Yeah, and gl hf holding a massive speedbanes timing with no or delayed Tanks. Just because you don't know how to react to Terran greed when playing Mutalisks doesn't mean there is no answer. If you're still 1-1 when Terran gets 3-3... I don't know what to say without sounding rude.
On December 06 2012 21:38 Big J wrote: I was there. I stayed with mutas until even the korean zergs stopped using mutas all together
Do you even watch current games?
I am assuming a classic muta style with a "two base" lair opening 9-10min mutas (of course you can build a third base with this, but you don't saturate it). Of course you can go 3base full saturation and 1-1 first and go mutalisks at 11-12min. Why you would still want them after fighting off banshees and hellions differently and after the Terran volatility window of taking a third base, I don't know...
Yeah, you can build an overseer after you reached lair and delay your spire for ~30seconds until you know it's mech. Doesn't change that you are on a two base 4gas BO, after which you can only go two base muta or two base infestor, both without upgrades.
And yes, apart from the GSL semifinals I watch current games. The last times I saw mutalisks it was Leenock on Whirlwind, an extremly good mutalisk map due to size and baselayout. Then the two Life vs MVP final games on Antiga and Daybreak, (both showing the exteme stupidity that is staying two base vs Terran, as it is harder to defend two bases while teching, then three bases while droning). On Antiga Life gged (after taking a lot of damage) the moment he saw Thors, on Daybreak he basically just bought a little bit of time to get back into infestors, as he realized he was facing mech... And then I think I have seen a few ling/bling/mutalisk allins.
So yeah, people use mutalisk openings - which is something different than muta/ling/bling builds btw - but when and how often? Mostly when the map favors mutalisks, and for a midgame allin. And then, most of the time they still transition into infestor/ling+hive asap.
On December 06 2012 23:20 Big J wrote: I am assuming a classic muta style with a "two base" lair opening 9-10min mutas (of course you can build a third base with this, but you don't saturate it).
But why do you think Mutalisk plays only comes down to 2-bases Mutalisks? 3-bases Mutalisks does exist.
On December 06 2012 23:20 Big J wrote: Of course you can go 3base full saturation and 1-1 first and go mutalisks at 11-12min. Why you would still want them after fighting off banshees and hellions differently and after the Terran volatility window of taking a third base, I don't know...
Well... to play Mutalisks, of course. I don't see any link between your Lair tech choice and the fact you deal with Hellions/Banshees without Mutalisks. It's not like their only role is to defend Hellion/Banshee harass.
On December 06 2012 23:20 Big J wrote: Yeah, you can build an overseer after you reached lair and delay your spire for ~30seconds until you know it's mech. Doesn't change that you are on a two base 4gas BO, after which you can only go two base muta or two base infestor, both without upgrades.
2-bases Roaches exist too, and it's deadly against mech. But anyway, why on earth are you thinking that you can't go fast upgrades with 2-bases Lair? It's just flat out wrong. No one forces you to skip upgrades in order to get 2 additional Mutalisks in your initial wave. Well, at least I understand better your 1-1 against 3-3 story now, obviously if you wait 11 minuts before starting 1-1...
Still, building some Mutalisks against mech is not a problem at all since you usually force Thors which are awful against the following Roach agression.
On December 06 2012 23:20 Big J wrote: And yes, apart from the GSL semifinals I watch current games. The last times I saw mutalisks it was Leenock on Whirlwind, an extremly good mutalisk map due to size and baselayout. Then the two Life vs MVP final games on Antiga and Daybreak, (both showing the exteme stupidity that is staying two base vs Terran, as it is harder to defend two bases while teching, then three bases while droning).
In the last big tournament, IPL5, there was Mutalisk play in ZvT: DRG vs Bomber, Polt vs Sniper, MMA vs Shine (if I remember correctly), ... You just can't say Mutalisk play is dead in ZvT.
On December 06 2012 23:20 Big J wrote: On Antiga Life gged (after taking a lot of damage) the moment he saw Thors
Precisely, the primary reason he left was not Thors but the fact that thanks to his usual carelessness, he had allowed Mvp to wipe out his mineral line with Hellions.
On December 06 2012 23:20 Big J wrote: And then I think I have seen a few ling/bling/mutalisk allins.
At which point does it cease to be an attack to become an all-in, though?
On December 06 2012 16:24 ionlyplayPROtoss wrote: The patch is an utter joke. Played 3 games vs a friend and he didn't even realize the patch was in effect. High masters btw so not noob games T_T.
I'm glad you experienced every situation where the range change / IT health change might make a difference in your 3 games. Your conclusion from 3 games is an utter joke.
On December 06 2012 05:38 3xTr4_FragQuenz wrote: This change is an absolut joke.
-1 Range, so the infestor has to walk 0,4 seconds more to fungal...
Health form 100 to 70? When there are 30 infested Terrans, they will spawn no matter what and still doing incredible damage for just ENERGY (more DPS then Marines but almost zero costs)
and the raven change. Well if you have the economy to make a raven switch possible without losing right away, then you are also able to afford then upgrade.
Thanks for that sham patch/change.
So far the results of blizzards hard work are not that great, lets see if they can do a real (and fair) change what really changes something....would be nice
The change makes it so that zerg has to actually look at their army constantly and have less chance of winning the game with 1 lucky fungal. If terran can look away for 2 seconds and lose their whole army to fungal I don't see why zergs can't pick out better engagements with infesters. This would also seperate the good zergs from the bad. The bad patchzergs will run their infesters into tak lines like an idiot while the good ones won't. And the infested terran is a stupid unit late game. You can spawn a whole army for free, with upgrades they are BETTER than marines with 3/3 which is absolutely rediculous coming from a free unit. No other energy unit in the game benefits from upgrades which is why people are saying auto turrets are shit since they do no damage to fully upgraded zerg units.
The infestor is still a viable unit after it's nerf, ghosts still aren't used in tvz after it's nerf.
I wouldn't mind this fact if Blizard could some times atleast admit they might have made a mistake or oversight, that would show to the fans they understand the game fully, this complete refusal to accept that they might have made mistakes just to me shows a lack of full understanding of the game.
Or alternatively a complete and utter lack of care.
Not sure if this has been covered elsewhere in this thread but it looks like the big deal for Raven is not the first Raven with HSM but the second.
Assuming you have a tech lab Starport. Your first Raven pops at 60s with 50 energy. It then takes and additional 134 seconds to hit 125 for your first HSM.
Before the buff you would have spent the that time researching HSM. Now you can spend the 150/150 you would've on HSM on the Corvid reactor.
With this your second Raven pops 60s after the first but with 75 energy and only 8 energy behind the first Raven.
This means about 15s after the first HSM arms the second Raven will have an HSM. This saves both time an resources.
2 HSMs at 3:28 after Raven production starts and an extra 150/150 is definitely better than 2 HSM at 4:12.
On December 07 2012 08:48 DrLOAC wrote: Not sure if this has been covered elsewhere in this thread but it looks like the big deal for Raven is not the first Raven with HSM but the second.
Assuming you have a tech lab Starport. Your first Raven pops at 60s with 50 energy. It then takes and additional 134 seconds to hit 125 for your first HSM.
Before the buff you would have spent the that time researching HSM. Now you can spend the 150/150 you would've on HSM on the Corvid reactor.
With this your second Raven pops 60s after the first but with 75 energy and only 8 energy behind the first Raven.
This means about 15s after the first HSM arms the second Raven will have an HSM. This saves both time an resources.
2 HSMs at 3:28 after Raven production starts and an extra 150/150 is definitely better than 2 HSM at 4:12.
I hadn't tried that (or looked at the math). I've just been going Banshee + corvid reactor followed by my 1st raven... (or JUST 1 raven).
On December 06 2012 06:18 Ghend wrote: Proof that blizzard listens, but are frustratingly slow to act. Looking forward to see less infestors. Maybe it'll make pvz more interesting.
PvZ atm is 52% in P favor. (there is a thread with all the major tournaments from Sep till yesterday).
Its a stupid matchup though, either the P wins with soul, or they die to deathball.
I hope the inf change does not affect PvZ alot.
Blizz is clueless atm, if they nerf the inf too much zerg is going to dissapear from results, if they keep it this way TvZ is near impossible.
All this due to bad race design. Oh and the PvZ... yeah thats not a real matchup for the reasons stated first thing in the post.
All in all: Zerg design sucks. This is the main problem. And because Zerg had to have a way to win, Blizz buffed the infestor leading to the current situation.
Main problem is the fact Zerg early game is bad (at doing anything but trying to defend cheese and all ins) and late game is too strong. (That's how vZ is - P or T tries to all in or cheese the Zerg to win, Zerg tries to defend for that win.)
Somehow even that up and Zerg is fine (on paper anyway >.>).
On December 07 2012 08:48 DrLOAC wrote: Not sure if this has been covered elsewhere in this thread but it looks like the big deal for Raven is not the first Raven with HSM but the second.
Assuming you have a tech lab Starport. Your first Raven pops at 60s with 50 energy. It then takes and additional 134 seconds to hit 125 for your first HSM.
Before the buff you would have spent the that time researching HSM. Now you can spend the 150/150 you would've on HSM on the Corvid reactor.
With this your second Raven pops 60s after the first but with 75 energy and only 8 energy behind the first Raven.
This means about 15s after the first HSM arms the second Raven will have an HSM. This saves both time an resources.
2 HSMs at 3:28 after Raven production starts and an extra 150/150 is definitely better than 2 HSM at 4:12.
Nice I hate when people seem to claim that the buff does nothing, when it really does. It's not hugely significant but anything small helps.
On December 06 2012 16:24 ionlyplayPROtoss wrote: The patch is an utter joke. Played 3 games vs a friend and he didn't even realize the patch was in effect. High masters btw so not noob games T_T.
This is the first post that ever made sense. I just keep going double upgrades and infestor and kill stuff just the same as before.
On December 06 2012 16:24 ionlyplayPROtoss wrote: The patch is an utter joke. Played 3 games vs a friend and he didn't even realize the patch was in effect. High masters btw so not noob games T_T.
This is the first post that ever made sense. I just keep going double upgrades and infestor and kill stuff just the same as before.
Forcefields zone out infestors a lot better during mid game fights.
HT vs Infestor is a bit different.
In most real games it plays out exactly the same in zvp however.
On December 07 2012 13:38 Zombo Joe wrote: The buff doesn't make ravens effective. Which was the issue.
I think it does. Now Raven viking becomes anti-colossus in TvP, possibly Raven only. In any case, a lot less supply must be wasted on air in that matchup. Same goes for TvZ. An early Raven transition works better now when vikings doesn't have to be massed up in order to face the first wave of broodlords. 1 HSM kills off 1 broodlord, it's an almost sure thing that it will go off and hit. It will also become the tank sniper in TvT.
I look at this patch and see a cautious step towards trying to bring the infestor down a few notches but nothing too extreme - now infestors can't lob 30 beach balls without at least SOME prior thinking, whereas before they could just ram everything they have down a Terran's throat and he usually had to give up that position. Not to mention if trends continue then they can just continue beating the festor with the nerf bat until everyone is happy..
My 3 base colossus timing that I usually do seems to work very well now, whereas before it was stopped pretty easily by infestors. Another thing is those crazy infested terran+roach attacks on the third, where I would almost always be guaranteed to lose my third, now I can defend it pretty well. I'm a mid masters P, so I'm wondering if I'm just getting lucky or this is happening for other P players.
That patch nerfed infestor more than people realize. -Now it feels to me that protoss late game - carriers, high templars, few colossi, few else beats easily bl, infestor, corruptor, queens, crawlers. -Now High tempars are the better by far choice for P mid game instead of collossi - for taking 3rd and before brood lord pushes. -Infestors cant fungal terran armies anymore stimmed marauder(almost), siege tanks, thors - get a hit everytime if the fungal is aimed on top of them - with the idea to catch a few units behind - as before. -Terran pushes with siege tanks much easier - the rate of terran pushes is determined by (siege tank range) - (fungal range) -ZvZ got simplified a lot - I feel the muta to infestor switch got huge nerf - it is almost impossible to hold 2 base roach-hydra with +1/1 -Every fungal cast in roach hydra vs roach hydra battles costs 75energy and the infestor's life.
On December 08 2012 04:01 Ewok wrote: Congratulations Terrans you now have a fighting chance vs Zerg!
Actually its still the same as before.
It's way too soon to declare this with any amount of certainty, and given the impending release of HotS, we'll probably never see how this patch ultimately affects TvZ. Chances are if the winrates don't return within 45/55 in a month Blizzard will follow up with one more nerf, and at that point it doesn't really matter anyways, as again, if it isn't an immensely drastic nerf it won't immediately alter the win rates.
On December 08 2012 04:01 Ewok wrote: Congratulations Terrans you now have a fighting chance vs Zerg!
Actually its still the same as before.
Ghosts are a pretty good unit.
Not really. Too mineral heavy for bio and too gas and supply heavy for mech. I can see them being more useful for EMPing Infestors now that they have the range nerf, however, EMP radius is so small and Infestors are so big, I don't know if it is even worth it when tanks can deal with Infestors just fine. Snipe is still shit.
As a Terran I see that zergs now have to be more careful with their infestors pre hive tech, as long as they hold off until hive tech kicks in they benefit far much more than Protoss or Terran regarding t3 units. Infestors are so chubby usually 1 emp lands on one infestor. Ghost require a lot of gas and is not worth it's weight in supply count. If the Terran can work up to a strong mid game while punishing the Zerg for being greedy on drones, the outcome looks a lot brighter for Terran.
IPL5 just released a replay pack, Polt vs Sniper is a great example I believe.
On another note, THOR OPEN kas vs nerchio, as tvz goes longer zergs potential to win increases obviously, more bases, crazy amounts of larva, unit versatility, tech switch. Make the Zerg spend their larva, drops, force an engagement pre hive. Once ultras or brood lords come out to play, not as many zerglings, infestors, or bangelings will be available for them to run into you. This is just what I see, I could be wrong, please correct me if you must. Ryung as our rosa parks!
On December 08 2012 04:01 Ewok wrote: Congratulations Terrans you now have a fighting chance vs Zerg!
Actually its still the same as before.
Ghosts are a pretty good unit.
Not really. Too mineral heavy for bio and too gas and supply heavy for mech. I can see them being more useful for EMPing Infestors now that they have the range nerf, however, EMP radius is so small and Infestors are so big, I don't know if it is even worth it when tanks can deal with Infestors just fine. Snipe is still shit.
On December 08 2012 04:01 Ewok wrote: Congratulations Terrans you now have a fighting chance vs Zerg!
Actually its still the same as before.
Ghosts are a pretty good unit.
Not really. Too mineral heavy for bio and too gas and supply heavy for mech. I can see them being more useful for EMPing Infestors now that they have the range nerf, however, EMP radius is so small and Infestors are so big, I don't know if it is even worth it when tanks can deal with Infestors just fine. Snipe is still shit.
Watch Gumiho in the team league
Old school improved MVP 2011 style.
You mean against StarTale? Life didn't bring overseer and got metagamed because he didn't think Terrans would get ghosts. Then he got all his infestors EMP'd. 2nd time he brought overseer and Gumiho's ghosts were pretty much useless and can only burn off energy on snipes before his ghosts die.
On December 12 2012 12:17 gengka wrote: when is this patch going online? I had checked my current patch (1.5.2) The log didn't mention any balance fix. Only bunch of bugs fixes
On December 08 2012 14:05 GARcher wrote: Not really. Too mineral heavy for bio and too gas and supply heavy for mech. I can see them being more useful for EMPing Infestors now that they have the range nerf, however, EMP radius is so small and Infestors are so big, I don't know if it is even worth it when tanks can deal with Infestors just fine. Snipe is still shit.
Too mineral heavy... for a race that always has minerals? Snipe is shit? It 2 shots Infestors. EMP is for protoss you silly goose. Maybe that would make mech viable, you know, removing 1/3 of an entire protoss death ball's hp.
On December 08 2012 14:05 GARcher wrote: Not really. Too mineral heavy for bio and too gas and supply heavy for mech. I can see them being more useful for EMPing Infestors now that they have the range nerf, however, EMP radius is so small and Infestors are so big, I don't know if it is even worth it when tanks can deal with Infestors just fine. Snipe is still shit.
Too mineral heavy... for a race that always has minerals? Snipe is shit? It 2 shots Infestors. EMP is for protoss you silly goose. Maybe that would make mech viable, you know, removing 1/3 of an entire protoss death ball's hp.
Terran is always mineral starved and has excess gas when going bio.
They are always gas starved when going mech because the minimum cost for one of the mech units is 125 gas and they need alot of it.
On December 08 2012 14:05 GARcher wrote: Not really. Too mineral heavy for bio and too gas and supply heavy for mech. I can see them being more useful for EMPing Infestors now that they have the range nerf, however, EMP radius is so small and Infestors are so big, I don't know if it is even worth it when tanks can deal with Infestors just fine. Snipe is still shit.
Too mineral heavy... for a race that always has minerals? Snipe is shit? It 2 shots Infestors. EMP is for protoss you silly goose. Maybe that would make mech viable, you know, removing 1/3 of an entire protoss death ball's hp.
Terran is always mineral starved and has excess gas when going bio.
They are always gas starved when going mech because the minimum cost for one of the mech units is 125 gas and they need alot of it.
Common man... : /
The problem is a mech army is shit if it's not maxed out. Ghosts cut into supply(tank count) and takes longer to max out.
On December 08 2012 14:05 GARcher wrote: Not really. Too mineral heavy for bio and too gas and supply heavy for mech. I can see them being more useful for EMPing Infestors now that they have the range nerf, however, EMP radius is so small and Infestors are so big, I don't know if it is even worth it when tanks can deal with Infestors just fine. Snipe is still shit.
Too mineral heavy... for a race that always has minerals? Snipe is shit? It 2 shots Infestors. EMP is for protoss you silly goose. Maybe that would make mech viable, you know, removing 1/3 of an entire protoss death ball's hp.
Unless you macro sucks, terrans generally don't float a lot of minerals when playing bio/marine tank because of how fast marines die and their pure mineral costs (additional barracks as well) Snipe is shit against infestors considering ghosts take 2 supply and cost 200 min and 100 gas. Tanks can 2 shot infestors as well and that's what you need anyways in TvZ. Why go through another tech path when you have a unit that can do the same thing?
Some people choose to EMP infestors when they are clumped up to reduce APM.
I, as a zerg player am rather happy with these changes. Finally infestors have absolute counters for each race. Protoss:feedback and vortex now have longer range than fungal and even colossi can zap them at that range. Blink also has the same range as fungal so it comes down to reaction time if you want to o that route Terran: emp can be cast at a range of 10 making it very easy to simply knock out the energy, and since these units do absolutely nothing without energy, it should be no problem to roll them afterwards.
Finally Zerg can stop having all of our wins blamed on "Infestor imbalance"
The raven change has actually helped me more than I thought so far. Even in TvT, if I get an early raven for detection, I can use it to kill a large clump of marines a little later on. Marines < More Marines.