We just wanted to let you know that we’ve started putting together a balance test map and a balance test extension mod for the Hellion/Hellbat change.
The exact changes for this test map are: - Removed Transformation Servos upgrade - Changed Hellion/Hellbat transform requirement to Armory
Please keep in mind these changes are not final, and we may test different and/or additional changes as needed during this testing phase. We’ll let you guys know once again when the map is published. Thank you, and we'll be looking forward to further feedback after you've played with the changes.
We’d like to share our current thoughts and gather more detailed feedback from you on the current state of HotS balance.
PvT Following the balance patch and then the Season 2 map update, we’re seeing that this matchup has gotten much better. However, we do believe the matchup is still slightly in favor of Protoss. Whether this is actually the case or another balance adjustment is needed remains in question.
ZvT This matchup may have shifted slightly in-favor of Zerg recently. While we believe full army vs. army-play is fine, Zerg players seem to be getting to the later stages with an advantage more often than not. We’re investigating whether we can make a slight tweak earlier in the game to keep Zerg economy from scaling too quickly.
We believe ZvP is in a good place with a lot of diversity.
While we don’t currently believe that we need to take action hastily, we’d like to continue discussions with you and prepare well-tested changes, if they’re needed. There’s not a clear problem, and we may not issue a balance patch at this time, but we’re constantly on the lookout for signs that we need to get a balance test map going.
With that said, we have a couple of proposed changes that we could test. Please keep in mind, as always, this is an open discussion and nothing is even close to final. We do not yet have a balance test map. Option 1: - Terran infantry level 2 upgrade costs down from 175/175 to 150/150. - Terran infantry level 3 upgrade costs down from 250/250 to 200/200.
The main thought behind this option is to allow Terran to pressure both Protoss and Zerg a bit more, so that they can keep up in army strength throughout the game. As you can see, saving 25/25 per upgrade at level 2 isn’t huge, but because it affects the core Terran army, we believe it will be fairly big in-game. Option 2: - Remove the transformation servos upgrade. - Allow Hellions to transform to Hellbats when Hellbats are enabled with the armory.
This option addresses the concern that PvT is trending better than we expected, and ZvT worse than expected. At this point, we’re fairly certain that Protoss isn’t struggling against Terran (which runs contrary to pro feedback we’ve been receiving), but we’re also receiving pro feedback on ZvT that indicates we might want to have a bigger change lined up.
We saw the strength of not having this upgrade for the transform in the early HotS beta. However, since then, Hellbats have had their damage reduced and require the blue flame upgrade to be at their max strength. The main cool factor of reverting this upgrade is: being able to save the initial Hellions that players use to harass vs. not being able to do so will have a huge impact on the rest of the game. This means that players who are capable of microing well will be rewarded heavily.
Again, we want to hear what you think as we explore the possibilities. Thank you very much for your feedback.
As a zerg, I'm pretty heavily against the upgrade cost change. There will always be a window where terran has 3/3 against 2/2 muta/ling/bling before hive is ready. I just don't want that window to be opened further
Removing transformation servos sounds good. I personally think Hellbats should get unlocked by ebay and so the first big push from terran would have groups of Marines Window mines medivac reaper and hellbats which sounds pretty exciting to me
Seeing as how the upgrade cost change is mostly for TvP, I'd rather they revert the Protoss upgrade cost to what they used to be a long time ago, then to change Terran's upgrade cost.
both options are really good but honestly i think that protoss upgrades should be reverted to its original cost and not lowering terran ones
btw. allins with timewarp are still disgusting, does protoss really need timewarp when they have FF? why such spell wasnt needed in wol but it is in hots? i dont get it.
msc is so valuable already with being flying unit, dealing dmg,having recall and nexus cannon
From a protoss player: Look like good suggestions to improve Terran strength. But surprised they are not looking at Mothership Core. Nexus cannon still shuts down so many early threats and time warp increases strength of all-ins. Allows us both greedy plays and potent all-ins. Which is half the reason that P is so strong at the moment.
ok, i originally read this as blizzard wanting to reduce the cost of either +2 OR +3, not both. both is insane. i'm not disputing that terran is struggling vs z, but bringing back huge 3/3 windows is just solving one problem by bringing back another. i'm usually supportive of blizzard's balance philosophies compared to most, but 3/3 bio mutilating zerg armies is not something that will make the matchup better. just because zerg is doing well that doesn't mean we can suddenly afford fast hive. people were trying fast hive for 3/3 after the widow mine nerf and it still didn't work (and i mean fast enough to line up upgrades)
i wish blizzard would continue pushing overall biomech synergy, as i feel that's what a lot of top koreans have been showing success with, and it's a lot of fun to watch
as for zvp, i imagine a lot of people crying over no swarm host changes, but if you really understand the matchup from zerg's point of view you have to know that a straightup nerf or redesign to swarm hosts will very likely wreck the matchup for anything lategame/macro
On April 30 2014 09:23 Yorkie wrote: As a zerg, I'm pretty heavily against the upgrade cost change. There will always be a window where terran has 3/3 against 2/2 muta/ling/bling before hive is ready. I just don't want that window to be opened further
yes I feel it has the potential to snowball too hard and that might trigger another nerf later down the road lol.
On April 30 2014 09:23 Yorkie wrote: As a zerg, I'm pretty heavily against the upgrade cost change. There will always be a window where terran has 3/3 against 2/2 muta/ling/bling before hive is ready. I just don't want that window to be opened further
Generally speaking, good Terran builds will have enough production facilities to maintain constant production and afford upgrades as soon as possible. It's infrequent to see Terrans struggling for the money to afford +2/2 or +3/3 in an even game, though it can sometimes be an issue for a few seconds. This small change in price may be just enough to allow production of a handful more units in the midgame would could change the tide of the battle, but I expect the actual upgrade situation to remain pretty much the same.
"At this point, we’re fairly certain that Protoss isn’t struggling against Terran (which runs contrary to pro feedback we’ve been receiving), but we’re also receiving pro feedback on ZvT that indicates we might want to have a bigger change lined up."
On April 30 2014 09:23 Yorkie wrote: As a zerg, I'm pretty heavily against the upgrade cost change. There will always be a window where terran has 3/3 against 2/2 muta/ling/bling before hive is ready. I just don't want that window to be opened further
Won't change shit since you still start your upgrade right after the previous finished. Gaining 25/25 per upgrade is kinda nothing yaknow. It's not a huge change like protoss got as upgrade cost reduction.
About option 1: Why are they always buffing bio more and more and when they finally say something like they are willing to cut costs on bio upgrades...why are they not willing to make armories 100/50 to help mech TvP and mech in general? Dkim seems to understand the concept that cutting a few 1 time upgrade costs can change the game entirely...but he's unwilling to do that for mech TvP via armories...
About option 2: Yes, hellions/transform should have been like that since the game came out because we payed for an expansion pack where one of the highlighted units was the hellions gaining the ability to transform but you rarely ever see this in games at all, at least professional games because it's only researched with late late game mech.
So...yeah. About TvP, only the first 10-15 minutes are broken in Protoss favor because of all-ins and proxied stargates + ferraricles and blink all-in + MSC nexus cannon forcing Terran to go reaper expand virtually every game. Nexus cannon alone forces Terran to have to get a 2nd command center because there is no reasonable way to open 1 base banshee or 1 base drop since it will be shut down.
And about TvZ...only reason it looks more Z favored are because of the maps and because the widow mine nerf imo. The mine nerf right now is allowing Zerg to virtually mass 1 unit, the mutalisk almost unimpeded. Revert mine nerf, match-up is back to normal. Of course then Zergs will complain again that they can't box select 200/200 ling bane muta and walk through a mine field...but they should not have been able to like they can right now.
On April 30 2014 09:23 Yorkie wrote: As a zerg, I'm pretty heavily against the upgrade cost change. There will always be a window where terran has 3/3 against 2/2 muta/ling/bling before hive is ready. I just don't want that window to be opened further
This doesn't change the timings of 1/1 and therefore doesn't change the timings of 2/2 or 3/3 in TvZ. 2/2 is already started right as 1/1 finishes and ditto 3/3 after 2/2.
Removing Transformation Servos is a good idea, the upgrades never really used and whenever an ability or research is never used that's probably a sign something should (or at least can) be changed.
Cheapening the upgrades seems incredibly minor (yay 50/50 less, it's like conc shells is free now!) but I'm not one to pass up terran buffs.
Personally I think that the best change for Terran would be to increase the duration of speed boost on the medivacs, allowing them to pressure protoss faster and also to help vs mutas. Faster medivacs mean that you can actually transport the terran army around to deal with muta mobility and also means that if you are being aggressive with medivacs, the muta player has to be more careful when dealing with drops because chasing a medivac down means they will be pulled further out of position which a good terran can then take advantage of.
I like the hellbat upgrade change because I always forget it when I go mass hellion in TvT. I don't think the infantry upgrade change is really needed. If they're going to make TvP terran favored they could increase the research time for storm or something.
The servos thing makes sense now that hellbats have had their damage nerfed. Back in the day they were a bit too much because you could open hellion and then suddenly go into a crazy strong hellbat all-in. With the new damage, that is not the case anymore.
Edit: On the PvT thing, I would like them to perhaps wait just a bit more to see if the match stabilizes more since the most recent balance patch is just barely a month old and we haven't had a lot of time to see the effects of it. Blink is taking the back seat in most cases (except on Sejong), and the Korean pro Terrans seem to be finding new ways of playing the matchup (IE lots of early timings. Widow mine stuff).
The transformation servos thing seems interesting as long as they test it to make sure it doesn't break the game somehow. But, I have to ask, why does Blizzard believe TvZ needs balance changes?
I think the early hellbats would limit the tvt matchup. Bio should always be a viable opening, and I feel hellion openings are already very good vs bio. Change the fact that they can transform into a 50% tankier unit, and 2 base mech player or taking a 3rd would be impossible to defend or pressure. Also 1 base marine, hellion, medivac opening would be 3 times as strong.
TLDR; more imba towards mech, and less variation in army composition
On April 30 2014 09:34 imrusty269 wrote: "At this point, we’re fairly certain that Protoss isn’t struggling against Terran (which runs contrary to pro feedback we’ve been receiving), but we’re also receiving pro feedback on ZvT that indicates we might want to have a bigger change lined up."
Well it is always the same. The people who discreetly know they are in a strong position want to "let the metagame catch up" just like terrans told the protossi during the 1/1/1 period; so naturally the protoss are repeating it back.
The second change appears to affect the way tvz in a meaningful way not so much that it makes a terran army stronger but that it transitions more effectively to the mid game. It's not like you get hellbats earlier since they are keeping the armoury requirement.
The HotS units are such a mess. Swarm Hosts make for awful gameplay, Mines were great but got nerfed to oblivion, Hellbat will always either be useless or broken and their tie to Hellion is useless, Tempest are anecdotal, Oracles are just an opening gimmick, ...
Only Viper and to a minor extend the Mothership core end up okay. No wonder Blizzard is hesitant to add new units to LotV.
Lol I'm not sure if Blizzard is serious...Terran is already fairly powerful in the mid to late game (I play Terran) against Zerg, especially since we unlock 2/2 and 3/3 as soon as we have an Armory and 1/1 is complete. This would just skew the mid game into Terran's favour more without addressing the late game, which is pretty hard to deal with for a Terran player unless you are a God like Mvp or Taeja or Polt or Bomber.
Hellbat upgrade doesn't do much against TvP when it's not even used that much (as far as I can tell). Nor in TvZ or TvT because no one uses Transformation Servos that much anyways.
I think the upgrade change is a decent idea. The cheaper upgrades will help the pro's macro slightly better (get extra production slightly earlier etc) but won't really affect lower level play I don't think. The hell bat change needed to happen long time ago I think.
I think these are just slight changes that may help get a few more terrans in code S (which is the only reason they are doing this BTW, no one is crying that Terran is under powered (I say this as a Terran player). Blizzard just can't have like, no Terrans in code S for another season.)
wtf? do they plan to make big gameplay changes for every new map pool? also, people don't seem to realize terran could just do a 7 minute 12 hellbat 20 scv push and thats hard enough to stop as zerg already when they are just hellions.
On April 30 2014 11:15 Noocta wrote: The HotS units are such a mess. Swarm Hosts make for awful gameplay, Mines were great but got nerfed to oblivion, Hellbat will always either be useless or broken and their tie to Hellion is useless, Tempest are anecdotal, Oracles are just an opening gimmick, ...
Only Viper and to a minor extend the Mothership core end up okay. No wonder Blizzard is hesitant to add new units to LotV.
This pretty much sums up starcraft 2. Why are so many mechanics removed, in brood war, there were so many more things you had to do if you wanted to be a good player.
Things like swarmhosts, storms, mines make sc2 an anti-micro game. Skill-less units should not be allowed in a skillful game.
I dont like this at all. What makes TvP imbalance and overall absolutely not fun to play will remain. Aka : 1 single viable opening and for terran vs 20135674 for toss. 1 single unit comp viable. Impossibility for terran to pressure or allin protoss early game, while they can with 124648 choices. Late game mess.
The first option will favor Terran way too much, 3/3 upgrades for that little, with only needing an armory? Dear god. The second option seems much better, Im not sure how it will work out but it seems like a better approach.
Changing Terran upgrades is another bandaid fix that fails to actually address the problems. Right now with bio and mines (and easier ghosts), Terran has a lot of advantages going into the mid game; the significant weakness is in the limited options in the early game.
The hellion/hellbat change is a decent shot at trying to fix the specific weakness, but it may prove to be too strong in ZvT. Being able to threaten a hellbat/marauder all-in or a 2fact hellion/hellbat attack forces Zerg to have to overreact with roaches in order to defend, but the Terran can actually just go the standard 3CC +2/+2 14:00 bio attack instead. This will have to force very specific scouting from Zerg, but it may be too difficult to scout. We'll have to see where this one goes.
A proposed change is to unnerf stim research time by 10-20 seconds. Dropping the stim research time allows Terran to better hold Protoss all-ins while also being able to pressure slightly earlier in TvP and TvZ. Since numbers are usually fairly small at the point in the game when stim is being researched, this doesn't seem game-breaking or overly powerful. Just a thought.
On April 30 2014 11:39 SC2John wrote:A proposed change is to unnerf stim research time by 10-20 seconds. Dropping the stim research time allows Terran to better hold Protoss all-ins while also being able to pressure slightly earlier in TvP and TvZ. Since numbers are usually fairly small at the point in the game when stim is being researched, this doesn't seem game-breaking or overly powerful. Just a thought.
This is the most logical approach. Those nerfs happened when Steppes of War was still in the map pool and the average game was under 10 minutes.
ZvT seems balanced. Are there some statistics to support the idea that there is a problem? Let's not forget how there were almost no Zergs at Blizzcon due to imba Hellbats and widow mines weeding out all the Zergs in WCS 2013 seasons 1 and 2. It's a very delicate matchup that is close to balanced. Tweaking the balance may be a bad idea.
Hellbat change makes a considerable amount of sense, as it still requires the armory. The players would probably be in the mid-game before the Terran can use this change, so there is little reason to having the upgrade. It's possible that the all-in potential would be too high with this, as SC2John mentioned. So, I do think there should be some testing first.
The upgrade change would be nice for Terran, but I personally think it's a bit unnecessary.
As a few others stated before, the MSC is still a totally shitty unit in terms of design and balance. It's pretty much the least skill-requiring unit out there, except for maybe, just maybe, timing recalls for optimization. Nexus cannon and time warp are pretty much the derpiest actions out there. Surely they can come up with something a bit more creative?
Hope they are removed entirely from LOTV, the entire free unit thing is ridiculous imo. Even if locusts cost 1 mineral per locust sent out, with a "hold locust spawn button" I think it'd make it substantially better. Could even reduce the cost of the swarm host by 25 minerals.
On April 30 2014 11:30 ProBell wrote: Make widow mines or siege tank splash damage not attack friendly units or do less damage to friendlies?
Banelings / Colossus / Archons / Fungals / Ultralisk all don't have friendly-fire.
Actually, that's a not a bad idea. Why does Terran splash have friendly fire anyway?
When artillery or a mine explodes, it doesn't discriminate based on who's it is
Yeah, but why? Colossus mega death beams don't cause friendly fire, baneling explosions don't hurt any other banelings or zerglings. Huge swiping ultralisks arms don't hurt anyone else.
Though, i can see if widow mine friendly fire was taken away it would be really, really hard for a zerg to engage a burrowed widow mine / bio force. But maybe siege tanks?
I know it's lore breaking, but it multi player balance we're talking here.
I think the TvP matchup would benefit by requiring more energy for photon overcharge, if energy is full Protoss could have their main and natural activated which is ridiculous, Terran's depend on that multi-attack aggression, and with Protoss having such a strong defense that scales the main and natural plus their army it's overwhelming.
i like Option 1 but every zerg will cry there eyes out even with the map pool favoring them so i doubt it will happen. and Option 2 wont fix a thing in tvp so another pointless buff to terran like the seige tank attack buff to "please" the terran tear that are coming. nice try blizzard but until you nerf the MSC/photonovercharge you havent help terran at all. and also fix/get rid of the swarmhost already geez how long do we have to have 2hour long games till you get it.
On April 30 2014 11:30 ProBell wrote: Make widow mines or siege tank splash damage not attack friendly units or do less damage to friendlies?
Banelings / Colossus / Archons / Fungals / Ultralisk all don't have friendly-fire.
Actually, that's a not a bad idea. Why does Terran splash have friendly fire anyway?
When artillery or a mine explodes, it doesn't discriminate based on who's it is
Yeah, but why? Colossus mega death beams don't cause friendly fire, baneling explosions don't hurt any other banelings or zerglings. Huge swiping ultralisks arms don't hurt anyone else.
Though, i can see if widow mine friendly fire was taken away it would be really, really hard for a zerg to engage a burrowed widow mine / bio force. But maybe siege tanks?
I know it's lore breaking, but it multi player balance we're talking here.
Because it's actual balance and dynamics that makes the play interesting.
Storm also does friendly fire, woudl you like to see that changed?
People say the changes are too little, people say the changes are too much; people say they change too often, people demand more sweeping and dramatic change; people mindlessly rant and people mindlessly theorycraft.
Comparing to Dota patchnotes and their reception, Starcraft patchnotes evoke so much more negative emotion one way or another; people are so attached at the hip to the race they play they end up taking it personally rather than getting excited for new possibilities in the game.
Just play it out and see what the changes really do and if you can work your way around them.
In my opinion the second change is more dramatic but makes sense, the first change is more interesting. Terran's advantage especially in TvZ was hitting timings with 2/2 or 3/3, so this change is the "keep strengths distinct" style rather than "even everything out" which I think is a valid take, especially as this particular change is so small. Bordering on mindless theorycraft here, but one specific case I can see this helping is where the Terran has been all-in'd and survived with a moderately/severely weakened economy. Now he has a little easier time going to mid/late-game.
On April 30 2014 11:15 Noocta wrote: The HotS units are such a mess. Swarm Hosts make for awful gameplay, Mines were great but got nerfed to oblivion, Hellbat will always either be useless or broken and their tie to Hellion is useless, Tempest are anecdotal, Oracles are just an opening gimmick, ...
Only Viper and to a minor extend the Mothership core end up okay. No wonder Blizzard is hesitant to add new units to LotV.
This pretty much sums up starcraft 2. Why are so many mechanics removed, in brood war, there were so many more things you had to do if you wanted to be a good player.
Things like swarmhosts, storms, mines make sc2 an anti-micro game. Skill-less units should not be allowed in a skillful game.
have you ever played sc1? why mindlessly bashing sc2 for no reason?
already in sc2 its clear that storms and mines at a high level do reward a lot of micro. blink dodging mines, retargetting mines, splitting army vs mines, moving away when pre-fire indicator of mine shows up, etc requires micro
storms require mindgaming and predicting opponent movement, keeping HT alive til they are in position, and take a lot of micro to dodge / handle well on the defense.
only swarmhosts in your example is valid, and i think no one would argue otherwise.
On April 30 2014 11:30 ProBell wrote: Make widow mines or siege tank splash damage not attack friendly units or do less damage to friendlies?
Banelings / Colossus / Archons / Fungals / Ultralisk all don't have friendly-fire.
Actually, that's a not a bad idea. Why does Terran splash have friendly fire anyway?
When artillery or a mine explodes, it doesn't discriminate based on who's it is
Yeah, but why? Colossus mega death beams don't cause friendly fire, baneling explosions don't hurt any other banelings or zerglings. Huge swiping ultralisks arms don't hurt anyone else.
Though, i can see if widow mine friendly fire was taken away it would be really, really hard for a zerg to engage a burrowed widow mine / bio force. But maybe siege tanks?
I know it's lore breaking, but it multi player balance we're talking here.
Because it's actual balance and dynamics that makes the play interesting.
Storm also does friendly fire, woudl you like to see that changed?
Oh you should not have said that, you really shouldn't have said that.
Really do not want a hellbat buff. ZvT has always lead sc2 on a good engaging highly skill based matchup. Hellbats are not highly skillful units. If ZvT is imbalanced buff the tank or the mine I don't care, just do something that makes the game more skill based not this.
On April 30 2014 09:34 imrusty269 wrote: "At this point, we’re fairly certain that Protoss isn’t struggling against Terran (which runs contrary to pro feedback we’ve been receiving), but we’re also receiving pro feedback on ZvT that indicates we might want to have a bigger change lined up."
regarding time warp, it would be interesting to see it moved to the full mothership and maybe buffed a little, it doesn't seem necessary early game when you have forcefields and a nexus cannon
regarding tvz, the winrates have been very zerg favored lately, when you look at any recent tournament you see toss and zerg in the late stages, sure, but it's usually the zerg knocking out the terrans, not the protoss. the second buff (insta hellbat transforms) will help tvz enough and help tvp without breaking it.
basically terran needs help, toss should maybe have one less early game option but is otherwise fine, zerg is mostly fine since swarm hosts aren't popular.
On April 30 2014 09:34 imrusty269 wrote: "At this point, we’re fairly certain that Protoss isn’t struggling against Terran (which runs contrary to pro feedback we’ve been receiving), but we’re also receiving pro feedback on ZvT that indicates we might want to have a bigger change lined up."
hellbat change could be fun. I also dont mind if they change the upgrade costs, it'll promote bio vs zerg again which imo is one of the most fun to play/watch.
also they might want to change the widow mine instead of the hellbat.
pre-patch mines did 60 splash in a 1.75 radius. post-patch mines do 40(+40)/20(+20)/10(+10) damage in a 1.25/1.5/1.75 radius. (parentheses is bonus dmg to shields)
they could change it to 60(+20)/30(+10)/15(+5), this would help tvz and have a very minor impact on tvp.
I just don't see the change to 2/2 doing anything aside from placebo effect - a single scv not dieing at the 5 minute mark would have a far greater effect on the game, in terms of resources
On April 30 2014 13:29 Cyro wrote: I just don't see the change to 2/2 doing anything aside from placebo effect - a single scv not dieing at the 5 minute mark would have a far greater effect on the game, in terms of resources
oh yeah they should also undo the oracle patch from last november.
On April 30 2014 13:24 Cheren wrote: regarding time warp, it would be interesting to see it moved to the full mothership and maybe buffed a little, it doesn't seem necessary early game when you have forcefields and a nexus cannon
regarding tvz, the winrates have been very zerg favored lately, when you look at any recent tournament you see toss and zerg in the late stages, sure, but it's usually the zerg knocking out the terrans, not the protoss. the second buff (insta hellbat transforms) will help tvz enough and help tvp without breaking it.
basically terran needs help, toss should maybe have one less early game option but is otherwise fine, zerg is mostly fine since swarm hosts aren't popular.
Hellion to hellbat will not help tvp because hellions are not made in tvp except for the rare 1 or 2 made along with quick gas, widow mine drops. Those 1 or 2 rarely survive and even if they did having 2 hellbats instead of 2 hellions isn't going to change much of anything.
Most of the complaints I hear even from pros is the mothership core nexus cannon. I don't understand why blizzard won't even entertain the idea of looking at changing it.
On April 30 2014 13:24 Cheren wrote: regarding time warp, it would be interesting to see it moved to the full mothership and maybe buffed a little, it doesn't seem necessary early game when you have forcefields and a nexus cannon
regarding tvz, the winrates have been very zerg favored lately, when you look at any recent tournament you see toss and zerg in the late stages, sure, but it's usually the zerg knocking out the terrans, not the protoss. the second buff (insta hellbat transforms) will help tvz enough and help tvp without breaking it.
basically terran needs help, toss should maybe have one less early game option but is otherwise fine, zerg is mostly fine since swarm hosts aren't popular.
Hellion to hellbat will not help tvp because hellions are not made in tvp except for the rare 1 or 2 made along with quick gas, widow mine drops. Those 1 or 2 rarely survive and even if they did having 2 hellbats instead of 2 hellions isn't going to change much of anything.
Most of the complaints I hear even from pros is the mothership core nexus cannon. I don't understand why blizzard won't even entertain the idea of looking at changing it.
Nerfing nexus cannon will make TvP terran all-ins vs toss all-ins, nerfing time warp will make terran able to survive more all-ins, I really don't see the benefit of going after nexus cannon over time warp, especially since the nexus cannon is pretty much necessary for macro PvP.
Also I think they should buff widow mine not hellbat I had an idea a few posts up.
Protosses were macroing even before the nexus cannon was introduced?
Terrans don't all in protosses anymore because of the threat of oracles. They weren't exactly allining every game before the nexus cannon. Nexus cannons allow the protoss to all in, fail, and still survive. That should not happen in SC2.
On April 30 2014 11:30 ProBell wrote: Make widow mines or siege tank splash damage not attack friendly units or do less damage to friendlies?
Banelings / Colossus / Archons / Fungals / Ultralisk all don't have friendly-fire.
Actually, that's a not a bad idea. Why does Terran splash have friendly fire anyway?
When artillery or a mine explodes, it doesn't discriminate based on who's it is
Yeah, but why? Colossus mega death beams don't cause friendly fire, baneling explosions don't hurt any other banelings or zerglings. Huge swiping ultralisks arms don't hurt anyone else.
Though, i can see if widow mine friendly fire was taken away it would be really, really hard for a zerg to engage a burrowed widow mine / bio force. But maybe siege tanks?
I know it's lore breaking, but it multi player balance we're talking here.
Because it's actual balance and dynamics that makes the play interesting.
Storm also does friendly fire, woudl you like to see that changed?
Oh you should not have said that, you really shouldn't have said that.
as if protoss units care about storm duh. I'd trade storm for mines in that regard any day.
On April 30 2014 13:38 KingofGods wrote: Protosses were macroing even before the nexus cannon was introduced?
Terrans don't all in protosses anymore because of the threat of oracles. They weren't exactly allining every game before the nexus cannon. Nexus cannons allow the protoss to all in, fail, and still survive. That should not happen in SC2.
Nexus cannon also allows map-makers to not have to design maps around protoss being able to survive 1-1-1, which is even stronger now with cheaper banshee cloak and the existence of mines. Nerf the all-ins directly through time warp and reverting the oracle buff, don't remove protoss' ability to defend all ins in PvT and PvP.
I can not read that. Teran is weakest race by very simple reason: There are very little terran in EVERY level of play. That is strongest indicator of balance. Taken that majority players start to play game as terran, I do not know who want to be a slimy zerg or robotic protos, Imbalance in favor of other races is huge.
Why not both options? It makes going bio that much more even mid-game TvP dropping the costs and hellbats become useful meching TvP. Honestly TvZ is pretty even so I'm not sure how that matchup would be effected.
At this point, we’re fairly certain that Protoss isn’t struggling against Terran (which runs contrary to pro feedback we’ve been receiving)
oh those dastardly Protoss pros :p. The union of Rain is strong.
==
Anyway, I think the hellbat change is reasonable. The Upgrade change seems too strong against zerg (faster 3/3 is crippling). I think they should just strongly consider improving the widow mine with regards to TvZ. It's like the snipe nerf all over again, where they went too far.
I'm really alarmed that nothing is mentioned about the continued issues of the SH or the complete failure of the hydralisk buff in breaking the roach dominance of ZvZ and diversifying ZvT. Seems as though they've been put on the back burner to be forgotten...
On April 30 2014 13:38 KingofGods wrote: Protosses were macroing even before the nexus cannon was introduced?
Terrans don't all in protosses anymore because of the threat of oracles. They weren't exactly allining every game before the nexus cannon. Nexus cannons allow the protoss to all in, fail, and still survive. That should not happen in SC2.
Nexus cannon also allows map-makers to not have to design maps around protoss being able to survive 1-1-1, which is even stronger now with cheaper banshee cloak and the existence of mines. Nerf the all-ins directly through time warp and reverting the oracle buff, don't remove protoss' ability to defend all ins in PvT and PvP.
You seem to think PvP will revert back to 4 gate vs. 4 gate if they remove the nexus cannon. The matchup hasn't been like that since WoL beta. One of the classic (read: historically good) struggles in starcraft is the player trying to be economically greedy (ie. getting a quick expo) vs. the other player trying to punish the greed.
In a fast paced game like sc2, at the middle stage of the game it takes you a blink of the eye to get 25/25 for 2/2 and even shorter than that when its time to upgrade 3/3. The only problem you worry about is not to forget the upgrade. And so Option 1 is not a significant buff at all.
I like the transformation servos. (pushes something that isn't used at all) Not so much the Upgrade Cost reduction. (pushes one of the already strongest tools)
The real problem though in TvZ are mass mutalisk numbers in the lategame. Imo, nerf mutalisk speed by 0.25 (to 3.75), nerf mutalisk regeneration by 0.33 (to 0.66). Nerf phoenix speed by 0.25.
Ghost super expensive, harder than HT to use and still weaker than HT is what I'm feeling is the problem. Egen playing P, I sometimes make ridiculous comebacks with storm, and as terran I kinda always mess up when getting ghosts into battle... I'm really bad though
On April 30 2014 14:00 KingofGods wrote: You seem to think PvP will revert back to 4 gate vs. 4 gate if they remove the nexus cannon. The matchup hasn't been like that since WoL beta.
I don't think you know what you're talking about lol. 4gate was the dominant strategy well into 2012, and was completely viable on most maps up until HotS.
On April 30 2014 14:00 KingofGods wrote: You seem to think PvP will revert back to 4 gate vs. 4 gate if they remove the nexus cannon. The matchup hasn't been like that since WoL beta.
I don't think you know what you're talking about lol. 4gate was the dominant strategy well into 2012, and was completely viable on most maps up until HotS.
On April 30 2014 14:00 KingofGods wrote: You seem to think PvP will revert back to 4 gate vs. 4 gate if they remove the nexus cannon. The matchup hasn't been like that since WoL beta.
I don't think you know what you're talking about lol. 4gate was the dominant strategy well into 2012, and was completely viable on most maps up until HotS.
Yeah, in silver.
well I remember sos killing bomber with 4gates a year or so ago, but it was a super risky ninja allin on a 4 players map and bomber went cc first iirc.
On April 30 2014 14:00 KingofGods wrote: You seem to think PvP will revert back to 4 gate vs. 4 gate if they remove the nexus cannon. The matchup hasn't been like that since WoL beta.
I don't think you know what you're talking about lol. 4gate was the dominant strategy well into 2012, and was completely viable on most maps up until HotS.
Yeah, in silver.
Go look up a handful Korean PvP VODs from 2011-12. Not going to make a specific guess in terms of the percentages, but I would guess that almost all of them are going to be either 4gate, 3-stalker rush, or blink all-in.
On April 30 2014 14:00 KingofGods wrote: You seem to think PvP will revert back to 4 gate vs. 4 gate if they remove the nexus cannon. The matchup hasn't been like that since WoL beta.
I don't think you know what you're talking about lol. 4gate was the dominant strategy well into 2012, and was completely viable on most maps up until HotS.
Yeah, in silver.
well I remember sos killing bomber with 4gates a year or so ago, but it was a super risky ninja allin on a 4 players map and bomber went cc first iirc.
Exactly. And the Nexus Canon wouldn't really have helped Bomber
On April 30 2014 14:00 KingofGods wrote: You seem to think PvP will revert back to 4 gate vs. 4 gate if they remove the nexus cannon. The matchup hasn't been like that since WoL beta.
I don't think you know what you're talking about lol. 4gate was the dominant strategy well into 2012, and was completely viable on most maps up until HotS.
Yeah, in silver.
Even in pro games 4 gate was super popular as a strategy. Many games wound up being variants of 4 gates as well, ranging from 4 gate warp prism to the korean 4 gate, or 4 gate blink, etc.
PvP never got past 1 base vs 1 base in all of WoL regularly. Towards the end as robo expands became popular on maps like cloud kingdom, you sometimes saw longer games when players went with builds that couldn't get a heavy advantage vs. the other. Then the standard was to go straight to +3 weapons off of double robo and have one giant attack, but that only happened when neither player could kill the other. Even at the end of WoL, it wasn't unusual to see 4 gates.
Meh. They need to make the mothership core stay home more and make it so that protoss can't afford to stay on just a couple of units while they tech. The photon overcharge as a concept is one of the best recent changes since SC2 is all about attacking, so we need a terran and zerg counterpart to that. For zerg I’ve been suggesting summoning a couple of mutalisks that have limited range around the hatchery. For terran either some shield which increases armour around the CC, or a boost for a bunker, either a temporary turret addon or something to make it more durable.
Also they really need to polish the maps. I love how open they are but most of them need a couple of rocks to help protoss getting a third base.
First of all: ZvT is heavily Zerg favoured and second of all army vs army is not fine. Zerg just amove banelings and mutas into Terran army and wins... The proposed "buffs" are a joke as always...Protoss and Zerg get huge unit buffs, Terran just upgade costs LOL.
It's sad how people keep giving Rain shit about his comments about balance. I recall Zergs saying the same sort of comments during the overpowered BL/Infestor era and no one laughed at them for whining about it. Funny how biased the community is towards certain players/races.
On April 30 2014 14:45 mangofrancesco wrote: It's sad how people keep giving Rain shit about his comments about balance. I recall Zergs saying the same sort of comments during the overpowered BL/Infestor era and no one laughed at them for whining about it. Funny how biased the community is towards certain players/races.
Rain said that Terran was as overpowered as BL/Infestor as Protoss won all but one of the past 8 (?) major tournies. But we're not supposed to find that ridiculous, because of your anecdotal evidence that some Zerg players did the same thing and you don't remember an uproar?
On April 30 2014 09:31 Waise wrote: i wish blizzard would continue pushing overall biomech synergy, as i feel that's what a lot of top koreans have been showing success with, and it's a lot of fun to watch
On April 30 2014 14:45 mangofrancesco wrote: It's sad how people keep giving Rain shit about his comments about balance. I recall Zergs saying the same sort of comments during the overpowered BL/Infestor era and no one laughed at them for whining about it. Funny how biased the community is towards certain players/races.
Rain said that Terran was as overpowered as BL/Infestor as Protoss won all but one of the past 8 (?) major tournies. But we're not supposed to find that ridiculous, because of your anecdotal evidence that some Zerg players did the same thing and you don't remember an uproar?
So you really don't remember the Zerg whining about Protoss allins during BL/Infestor era?
On April 30 2014 14:45 mangofrancesco wrote: It's sad how people keep giving Rain shit about his comments about balance. I recall Zergs saying the same sort of comments during the overpowered BL/Infestor era and no one laughed at them for whining about it. Funny how biased the community is towards certain players/races.
Rain said that Terran was as overpowered as BL/Infestor as Protoss won all but one of the past 8 (?) major tournies. But we're not supposed to find that ridiculous, because of your anecdotal evidence that some Zerg players did the same thing and you don't remember an uproar?
So you really don't remember the Zerg whining about Protoss allins during BL/Infestor era?
Really a completely different situation. PvZ during BL/Infestor was a total coinflip because every game was a 2-base (or 3-base for Creator) all-in that entirely depended on how good the forcefields were, or if the game mysteriously reached the late phase, how good the Vortex/archon toilets were. The game design was terrible. I don't recall any zergs crying "wahh! wahh!! Protoss is winning everyyyyythiiiing!"
Rain wasn't complaining that PvT was rock-paper-scissors and poorly designed. He complained that it's impossible to beat Terran and they're going to dominate the whole scene. Hasn't exactly happened has it?
On April 30 2014 14:00 KingofGods wrote: You seem to think PvP will revert back to 4 gate vs. 4 gate if they remove the nexus cannon. The matchup hasn't been like that since WoL beta.
I don't think you know what you're talking about lol. 4gate was the dominant strategy well into 2012, and was completely viable on most maps up until HotS.
Yeah, in silver.
Go look up a handful Korean PvP VODs from 2011-12. Not going to make a specific guess in terms of the percentages, but I would guess that almost all of them are going to be either 4gate, 3-stalker rush, or blink all-in.
So I have gone through the MC vs Seed series. Despite being an incredibly cheesy series with tons of 1base allins, not one 4gate. Then I randomly chose Rain vs HerO from Season 4 2012. In g2 Hero did a 4gate, because he had a hidden probe in Rains main. Rain still held the inbase 4gate and proceeded to win the game. The other two games? No 4gate rushes.
4gate as a standard build was dead in 2012. Don't care about 2011, that was never the discussion, nor is it relevant for how PvP played out towards the end of WoL.
On April 30 2014 14:00 KingofGods wrote: You seem to think PvP will revert back to 4 gate vs. 4 gate if they remove the nexus cannon. The matchup hasn't been like that since WoL beta.
I don't think you know what you're talking about lol. 4gate was the dominant strategy well into 2012, and was completely viable on most maps up until HotS.
Yeah, in silver.
Go look up a handful Korean PvP VODs from 2011-12. Not going to make a specific guess in terms of the percentages, but I would guess that almost all of them are going to be either 4gate, 3-stalker rush, or blink all-in.
So I have gone through the MC vs Seed series. Despite being an incredibly cheesy series with tons of 1base allins, not one 4gate. Then I randomly chose Rain vs HerO from Season 4 2012. In g2 Hero did a 4gate, because he had a hidden probe in Rains main. Rain still held the inbase 4gate and proceeded to win the game. The other two games? No 4gate rushes.
4gate as a standard build was dead in 2012. Don't care about 2011, that was never the discussion, nor is it relevant for how PvP played out towards the end of WoL.
lol okay, so I guess that means Liquid'HerO is silver league because he 4gated?
The upgrade cost buff. What is that supposed to fix? Terran upgrades happen later than the Protoss upgrades and cannot be boosted either, so the cost difference is negligable. Allowing autocast on the next tier upgrades would make the windows faster than this buff. No to the upgrade buff
Transformation Servos... I'm very unsure of this. The Hellion Reaper poke can turn into a vicious attack with 1/1 Stim and 6/8 Hellbats. Zerg should be on a low but snipable baneling count to hold this attack. I could see that becoming a bit of a problem. I do like the upgrade gone, as it makes early game hellions have a use later on.
Conclusion; Buff 1 is worthless, buff 2 is good, but might be too much.
Other suggestions; Faster Stim, to deal with Protoss shenanigans better, Weaken Overcharge one way or another, to allow both races to pick a strategy instead of only one race, buff Siege Tanks, because it's one of the best designed and most iconic units in the game and the Steppes of War nerfs is received are way to hard for Alterzim with it's quadruple rush distance. They're apparantly happy with swarmhosts. I'm not. Redesign them.
All in all, slightly disappointed by Davids comments, but at least they admit they have to take some action.
The upgrades? Of all things to address in TvZ they choose the one thing where terran is already at its strongest (upgrade timings) and they wanna buff that? That doesn't make sense to me.
On April 30 2014 14:45 mangofrancesco wrote: It's sad how people keep giving Rain shit about his comments about balance. I recall Zergs saying the same sort of comments during the overpowered BL/Infestor era and no one laughed at them for whining about it. Funny how biased the community is towards certain players/races.
Rain said that Terran was as overpowered as BL/Infestor as Protoss won all but one of the past 8 (?) major tournies. But we're not supposed to find that ridiculous, because of your anecdotal evidence that some Zerg players did the same thing and you don't remember an uproar?
So you really don't remember the Zerg whining about Protoss allins during BL/Infestor era?
They did that while at the same time dodging all the Protoss players saying "If you take away immortal/sentry, then PvZ will become 20%+ skewed in Zerg's favour". I seem to remember someone looking at all the Korean pro level PvZs and factoring out immortal/sentry games and seeing what the PvZ winrate percentage was. From what I remember it was pretty ugly. The matchup only stayed near 50% because of immortal/sentry.
Only near the start of HOTS/end of WOL did non-immortal/sentry strategies (usually colossus pre-hive timings) start to become prevalent. Still all-ins usually (except that madness MC did where he went mass carrier/void/HT and rolled a Zerg who went broodlord/infestor/queen/mass static defence on Akilon Flats. That entire series was insane. It was MC playing pure turtle to a massive air army and rolling his opponent), but just not immortal/sentry.
On April 30 2014 14:00 KingofGods wrote: You seem to think PvP will revert back to 4 gate vs. 4 gate if they remove the nexus cannon. The matchup hasn't been like that since WoL beta.
I don't think you know what you're talking about lol. 4gate was the dominant strategy well into 2012, and was completely viable on most maps up until HotS.
Yeah, in silver.
Even in pro games 4 gate was super popular as a strategy. Many games wound up being variants of 4 gates as well, ranging from 4 gate warp prism to the korean 4 gate, or 4 gate blink, etc.
yeah, but Prism+4gate is not what "revert back to 4gate vs 4gate" means. And yes, 1base play was very dominant even at the end of WoL. I don't see the difference though. It's not like PvP isn't rush vs rush anymore, it's just the rushes that changed because the existance of the MsC beats certain bruteforce rushes (like 4gate or 4gate prism), while it's existance causes Protoss players to play blink and DTs or Oracles off of 1gate and thus be very vulnerable to proxy gates. Not to mention how the builds themselves are still superaggressive.
On April 30 2014 14:00 KingofGods wrote: You seem to think PvP will revert back to 4 gate vs. 4 gate if they remove the nexus cannon. The matchup hasn't been like that since WoL beta.
I don't think you know what you're talking about lol. 4gate was the dominant strategy well into 2012, and was completely viable on most maps up until HotS.
Yeah, in silver.
Go look up a handful Korean PvP VODs from 2011-12. Not going to make a specific guess in terms of the percentages, but I would guess that almost all of them are going to be either 4gate, 3-stalker rush, or blink all-in.
So I have gone through the MC vs Seed series. Despite being an incredibly cheesy series with tons of 1base allins, not one 4gate. Then I randomly chose Rain vs HerO from Season 4 2012. In g2 Hero did a 4gate, because he had a hidden probe in Rains main. Rain still held the inbase 4gate and proceeded to win the game. The other two games? No 4gate rushes.
4gate as a standard build was dead in 2012. Don't care about 2011, that was never the discussion, nor is it relevant for how PvP played out towards the end of WoL.
lol okay, so I guess that means Liquid'HerO is silver league because he 4gated?
If your understanding of "being the dominant strategy" is that out of 8games it is being done once, then I guess so.
On April 30 2014 15:04 Big J wrote: If your understanding of "being the dominant strategy" is that out of 8games it is being done once, then I guess so.
Dominant PvP strategy of WoL can be measured by two PvP series?
Getting past this nonsense. The claim was that PvP being all 1base all-ins around the time WoL beta ended. So, tell me, of the VODs you saw, how many of them were 1base all-ins (primarily 4gate but also 3-stalker rush, DT rush, blink all-in, et al.)?
ZvP I think the matchup is in a good place atm, the sentry/msc bullshit is still as aggravating as always but what to do.
ZvT I think the matchup is good, maybe the terrans hasn't really adapted after the wm nerf though. Which they should, they sure as hell as adapted to the wm buff in TvP =P Just outragous that Z is not supposed to be able to get the eco going. T is disgustingly cost efficient against Z if controlled well, especially early game. Slow banes against well microed marines is just lol, and speedlings against a marine ball in a corner is just even more lol.
"we accept zerg has very strong late composition vs terran, that is why we want terran to be stronger midgame". David Kim as always tries to avoid the problem instead of working on it.
On April 30 2014 15:38 Strelok wrote: "we accept zerg has very strong late composition vs terran, that is why we want terran to be stronger midgame". David Kim as always tries to avoid the problem instead of working on it.
Please tell me that this "strong late game composition" doesn't involve ultras cuz it makes me kinda tilted. Supply depots kinda good counter to the ultras LOL
I honestly don't understand what some people are saying in this thread. So much complaining it's making my head hurt.
About the upgrades, I don't think It is that relevant since the terran economy at this point is usually strong enough to afford those at current price anyway, so, like many said, what's the point? Is it to allow for a faster switch to ghost? Ot is it to make terran reach 3-3 easier vs zerg? There needs to be some clarification on that.
About the hellbats, given the fact that no matter the upgrades (blue flame etc) hellbats destroy any lings based composition, that mean that zerg will have to have roaches early game to defend against even something like the usual 6 hellions + 2 reapers poke. Which in my opinion sucks for the game. For the TvP side of things, I would love to see more hellbats in the matchups but I don't believe the servo upgrade is behind the lack of hellbats/ mech in general in TvP. Maybe I'm wrong though.
And I know I shouldn't but I just want to say to those that want to nerf the msc that protoss units are FAR more expensive than any of the other races, so making a lot of units early game to defend is a huge deal. It will mean that protoss is entering the midgame with a huge deficit. That will mean revert back to turtling strats and hoping the 200/200 death army or some other 2 base all in will win the game. Even if msc has its flaws, I believe it's a good thing
The way I see it, the game is pretty good in terms of balance atm (at least from what I've watched in the past couple of weeks), and even if terran seems sometimes on the backfoot, it's more due to their lack of options (like vsZ and vsP is almost always bio-only). Maybe the hellbat change could be in the right direction, but I fear the Z's early game will suffer greatly from it. Also would it be possible to explore ways to give terran the option to transition into starport based tech later on? I saw what It can do vs Z and it's pretty amazing, and maybe it coud be good against Protoss? who knows.
On April 30 2014 15:38 Strelok wrote: "we accept zerg has very strong late composition vs terran, that is why we want terran to be stronger midgame". David Kim as always tries to avoid the problem instead of working on it.
Please tell me that this "strong late game composition" doesn't involve ultras cuz it makes me kinda tilted. Supply depots kinda good counter to the ultras LOL
If you opponent uses depots to kill your Ultralisk, why aren't you microing or expandin?
both options are really good but honestly i think that protoss upgrades should be reverted to its original cost and not lowering terran ones
btw. allins with timewarp are still disgusting, does protoss really need timewarp when they have FF? why such spell wasnt needed in wol but it is in hots? i dont get it.
msc is so valuable already with being flying unit, dealing dmg,having recall and nexus cannon
Why? I don´t understand the changes: - Buff Bio upgrades: OK you get your upgrades a little early so you can have a couple of timing attacks but besides that, what, nothing changes, same strategies, same problems, same complains about all-ins, etc... - Transformation Servos: besides transform some of your early helions to Hellbats and make a nice transition in TvZ, I don´t know how this is going to improve Sc2 playing as T.
Really disappointing, Is this the so called "strategy" game where you are limited to 1 strategy (Bio) against P y 1 strategy against Z?
On April 30 2014 15:04 Big J wrote: If your understanding of "being the dominant strategy" is that out of 8games it is being done once, then I guess so.
Dominant PvP strategy of WoL can be measured by two PvP series?
Getting past this nonsense. The claim was that PvP being all 1base all-ins around the time WoL beta ended. So, tell me, of the VODs you saw, how many of them were 1base all-ins (primarily 4gate but also 3-stalker rush, DT rush, blink all-in, et al.)?
Lol... It was you who suggested to measure by random series. I only delivered. If you don't like that as an argument, don't request it in the first place.
On April 30 2014 14:31 LightSpectra wrote:Go look up a handful Korean PvP VODs from 2011-12.
Most of them were 1base plays. That wasn't the point. The point was that a) 4gate was not dominant. It was a rare rush that you'd sometimes mix in. b) that despite the existance of the MsC, PvP still does not feature expansion builds. You are still not safe early game without doing some form of rush yourself. It's nice to see that on Maze or in general rather stargate favored maps PvP can be quite stable, but you also get sOs vs herO series filled with 1base cheeses and Stork just randomly throwing in a 5:30 3warpgate rush in proleague. Lots and lots of BO losses still...
Option 2 definetely. Like David said they have already made nerfs to the hellbat so this is a small change that will benefit hellion openers and maybe, just maybe promote mech a bit more.
I think people are blowing the suggested upgrade buff way out of proportion. Terran players in TvZ already start the next set of upgrades as soon as first one finishes anyway and the cost reduction is not so high to make a huge difference. It means basically having a few extra units out.
But if there is a problem in TvZ, it isn't upgrades for terran. The bigger problem when going bio is dealing with mutas. All terran anti air options stayed the same compared to WoL (while mutas got much stronger) and WM got nerfed. So if there is any buff we need in TvZ, it would be thor speed buff. Right now, when playing bio, you must go for thors because mines alone are not good enough anymore. And using 1.88 speed thors obviously slows down bio and in a way removes one of its strengths -mobility, which means zerg with a big muta flock can buy a lot of time to get to hive tech units like ultras, even if they are losing the game. Especially when we consider that maps are overall getting bigger and bigger. It made sense to increase overlord speed for better scouting, I don't see why thors should move at 1.88 considering the map sizes in Hots.
I like the hellbat/hellion change. The transformation ability is very useful but basically impossible to afford when going mech so it is usually something you would get basically around the time you are getting turret range and building armor in current gameplay which means a alot of missed opportunity to use the ability during the game.
On April 30 2014 16:01 Qwerty85 wrote: I think people are blowing the suggested upgrade buff way out of proportion. Terran players in TvZ already start the next set of upgrades as soon as first one finishes anyway and the cost reduction is not so high to make a huge difference. It means basically having a few extra units out.
But if there is a problem in TvZ, it isn't upgrades for terran. The bigger problem when going bio is dealing with mutas. All terran anti air options stayed the same compared to WoL (while mutas got much stronger) and WM got nerfed. So if there is any buff we need in TvZ, it would be thor speed buff. Right now, when playing bio, you must go for thors because mines alone are not good enough anymore. And using 1.88 speed thors obviously slows down bio and in a way removes one of its strengths -mobility, which means zerg with a big muta flock can buy a lot of time to get to hive tech units like ultras, even if they are losing the game. Especially when we consider that maps are overall getting bigger and bigger. It made sense to increase overlord speed for better scouting, I don't see why thors should move at 1.88 considering the map sizes in Hots.
About the hellbats, given the fact that no matter the upgrades (blue flame etc) hellbats destroy any lings based composition, that mean that zerg will have to have roaches early game to defend against even something like the usual 6 hellions + 2 reapers poke. Which in my opinion sucks for the game.
what do you mean by this, why would zergs have to get roaches for the 6 hellions+ 2 reapers, you dont get hellbats right away you still need the armory(which i guess terran can get). if you mean for the later push with like 1-1 medivacs hellions and such sure i kinda understand that but you dont need roaches for 6 hellions and 2 reapers, 5-6 queens and lings(with good creep) is fine vs this. but getting a couple roachs doesnt hurt but there not needed.
On April 30 2014 16:01 Qwerty85 wrote: I think people are blowing the suggested upgrade buff way out of proportion. Terran players in TvZ already start the next set of upgrades as soon as first one finishes anyway and the cost reduction is not so high to make a huge difference. It means basically having a few extra units out.
But if there is a problem in TvZ, it isn't upgrades for terran. The bigger problem when going bio is dealing with mutas. All terran anti air options stayed the same compared to WoL (while mutas got much stronger) and WM got nerfed. So if there is any buff we need in TvZ, it would be thor speed buff. Right now, when playing bio, you must go for thors because mines alone are not good enough anymore. And using 1.88 speed thors obviously slows down bio and in a way removes one of its strengths -mobility, which means zerg with a big muta flock can buy a lot of time to get to hive tech units like ultras, even if they are losing the game. Especially when we consider that maps are overall getting bigger and bigger. It made sense to increase overlord speed for better scouting, I don't see why thors should move at 1.88 considering the map sizes in Hots.
Stayed the same? Like....Mines not shooting up?
mines don't do the trick. See the recent life-fantasy game, where life was flying mutas quite carelessly and didn't give much shit about clusters of mines, which zergs usually refer to as deadly, "one mistake per game" kind of stuff. In fact I remember exactly one game where an entire flock of mutas was destroyed while stacking by mines (revival vs mma(?)).
About the hellbats, given the fact that no matter the upgrades (blue flame etc) hellbats destroy any lings based composition, that mean that zerg will have to have roaches early game to defend against even something like the usual 6 hellions + 2 reapers poke. Which in my opinion sucks for the game.
what do you mean by this, why would zergs have to get roaches for the 6 hellions+ 2 reapers, you dont get hellbats right away you still need the armory(which i guess terran can get). if you mean for the later push with like 1-1 medivacs hellions and such sure i kinda understand that but you dont need roaches for 6 hellions and 2 reapers, 5-6 queens and lings(with good creep) is fine vs this. but getting a couple roachs doesnt hurt but there not needed.
yeah, if you can make sure there is no armory I don't think you need roaches. I'd love to have that change on a testmap to just try it out. But I can see Elitos point, like a Terran doing a reaper/hellion opening and commiting harder to hellions than they do now (like the 8hellions some terrans do now; possibly even more) and getting the armory behind - which is much cheaper than adding banshees - and then transforming like 6-10hellions to hellbats sounds like it is going to take down the third 100% of the time if you are not going roach. Though being forced into some defensive roaches is not necessarily a problem, right?
Here are my 2 cents about the proposed changes: Firstly as Mech player I certainly like the 2nd option (remove transformation servos) better, because the Bio upgrades buff (option 1) wouldn't give me anything. Apart from that I don't think that option 1 addresses the real problems of terran, which mainly is a hard early- to midgame. Especially in TvP the high number of possible Protoss openings and pressure builds can end the game before the Terran would even get to the point where he could research level 2 Bio upgrades. Overall having more Hellbats earlier (pre-produce Hellions and transform them to Hellbats, right when Armory done), could help Terrans to hold early pressure better and may give them some options to pressure the opponent themselves as well (e.g. Hellbat drops). This may force Protoss and Zerg to play a little safer in the early- and midgame, so the Terran has a chance to stay on even footing macro-wise.
On April 30 2014 16:01 Qwerty85 wrote: I think people are blowing the suggested upgrade buff way out of proportion. Terran players in TvZ already start the next set of upgrades as soon as first one finishes anyway and the cost reduction is not so high to make a huge difference. It means basically having a few extra units out.
But if there is a problem in TvZ, it isn't upgrades for terran. The bigger problem when going bio is dealing with mutas. All terran anti air options stayed the same compared to WoL (while mutas got much stronger) and WM got nerfed. So if there is any buff we need in TvZ, it would be thor speed buff. Right now, when playing bio, you must go for thors because mines alone are not good enough anymore. And using 1.88 speed thors obviously slows down bio and in a way removes one of its strengths -mobility, which means zerg with a big muta flock can buy a lot of time to get to hive tech units like ultras, even if they are losing the game. Especially when we consider that maps are overall getting bigger and bigger. It made sense to increase overlord speed for better scouting, I don't see why thors should move at 1.88 considering the map sizes in Hots.
Stayed the same? Like....Mines not shooting up?
Mines were mostly a problem against zerg ground units. A good mine shot would blow up a lot of lings or banes, or both. But the mine got a nerf to air as well even though muta regen is almost 4x faster compared to WoL.
So yeah, as I said, anti air options we had in WoL stayed the same, mutas got better and mine damage got nerfed. So that obviously weakens terran anti air.
apparently Blizzard get their PvT feedback from Rain. as a Terran player (not that i really play anymore), i think the upgrade change doesn't make sense but the hellbat change sounds good to me
This option addresses the concern that PvT is trending better than we expected, and ZvT worse than expected. At this point, we’re fairly certain that Protoss isn’t struggling against Terran (which runs contrary to pro feedback we’ve been receiving), but we’re also receiving pro feedback on ZvT that indicates we might want to have a bigger change lined up.
Always wondered how Blizz make these kind of statements. They have Pro players (the most skilled and knowledgeable of the players) giving feedback and they convince themselves that it is not the case. A sample of Winrates can only get you so far. Would be even worse if they are gathering data all the way down to bronze league. Makes me wonder what kind of feedback they are willing to consider.
They are right about TvZ Bio play, Zergs have learned to deal with the now weaker widow mines so it is reasonable to give them a slight buff - but do not change the upgrades, Terran has it easier to get ahead in ups anyways, making an even stronger 2/2 timing possible is the wrong way to go imo, since this is the second strongest moment of the Terran in a bio TvZ (the strongest being the time window from 3/3 to Zergs 3/3).
This option addresses the concern that PvT is trending better than we expected, and ZvT worse than expected. At this point, we’re fairly certain that Protoss isn’t struggling against Terran (which runs contrary to pro feedback we’ve been receiving), but we’re also receiving pro feedback on ZvT that indicates we might want to have a bigger change lined up.
Always wondered how Blizz make these kind of statements. They have Pro players (the most skilled and knowledgeable of the players) giving feedback and they convince themselves that it is not the case. A sample of Winrates can only get you so far. Would be even worse if they are gathering data all the way down to bronze league. Makes me wonder what kind of feedback they are willing to consider.
Pro feedback that is not super biased, like for example this statement from Rain
That additional damage against shield was really big. Now Protoss can’t play using a templar build order. Once Terrans realized that, they are now so much more daring. And even without all that, Terran is still too strong. It’s like WoL Brood Lord/Infestor/Corruptor level.
Yes! Get rid of transformation servoes! Nobody ever used it because it's so expensive, hellions and hellbats are practically different units now instead of transformations of each other. I actually proposed this change months ago!
The upgrade cost change is difficult, terran 3/3 is so strong I don't know if it's a good idea to get it earlier.
TvZ can be and should be fixed with maps. Ridiculous maps like Frost and Alterzim should go.
Removing maps as above should also help out TvP. It may or may not be enough but at least that's the right way to go about it first. Right now T is often in the dark in those gigantic maps while P can pull off cheese and greed, and 234908573567 things in between.
I am of the opinion that maps will be enough to fix most of the issues, but if map changes are not enough then perhaps MSC should be looked at. But again I think if maps are more dangerous to protoss (and less friendly to blink) then terrans can do their things.
I rarely play anymore but the major problem terran has is the ability to keep up in tech. If they lowered the build time of the factory by 5 seconds (which would not factor in to the transitioning of a factory to a reactor'd rax) and the build time of the starport by 5 seconds I think you could see a lot more variety in terran play, as banshee openers would be 10 seconds faster as well as widow mine drops. I think it would definitely help increase the threat level of terran early game which is severely lacking. Ultra late game terran imho on maps that are splittable is the best, but on the 3-4 player maps terran late game is horrendous due to mobility.
this is stupid, terran already only has 4 upgrades compared to the 5 of zerg and protoss, and now they want to decrease the cost, this is too unfair, i think that also zerg shouldn't need hive for 3/3, cuz toss and terran only need twilight, and armory for 3/3 respectively, terran just sucks as a race, really only 4 upgrades for crying out loud
On April 30 2014 14:45 mangofrancesco wrote: It's sad how people keep giving Rain shit about his comments about balance. I recall Zergs saying the same sort of comments during the overpowered BL/Infestor era and no one laughed at them for whining about it. Funny how biased the community is towards certain players/races.
Rain said that Terran was as overpowered as BL/Infestor as Protoss won all but one of the past 8 (?) major tournies. But we're not supposed to find that ridiculous, because of your anecdotal evidence that some Zerg players did the same thing and you don't remember an uproar?
Rain is obviously wrong but he was complaining about widow mines, considering 6-7 of those tourney wins were before widow mines were buffed this doesn't really make sense.
About option 1: Why are they always buffing bio more and more and when they finally say something like they are willing to cut costs on bio upgrades...why are they not willing to make armories 100/50 to help mech TvP and mech in general? Dkim seems to understand the concept that cutting a few 1 time upgrade costs can change the game entirely...but he's unwilling to do that for mech TvP via armories...
About option 2: Yes, hellions/transform should have been like that since the game came out because we payed for an expansion pack where one of the highlighted units was the hellions gaining the ability to transform but you rarely ever see this in games at all, at least professional games because it's only researched with late late game mech.
So...yeah. About TvP, only the first 10-15 minutes are broken in Protoss favor because of all-ins and proxied stargates + ferraricles and blink all-in + MSC nexus cannon forcing Terran to go reaper expand virtually every game. Nexus cannon alone forces Terran to have to get a 2nd command center because there is no reasonable way to open 1 base banshee or 1 base drop since it will be shut down.
And about TvZ...only reason it looks more Z favored are because of the maps and because the widow mine nerf imo. The mine nerf right now is allowing Zerg to virtually mass 1 unit, the mutalisk almost unimpeded. Revert mine nerf, match-up is back to normal. Of course then Zergs will complain again that they can't box select 200/200 ling bane muta and walk through a mine field...but they should not have been able to like they can right now.
Also: People should take into consideration what maps are chosen by P or Z against T when they're given a choice. A lot of tournaments lets losers choose the map for the successive match, and a lot of times that is when maps like Alterzim and Frost are chosen. Removing those options should help even out things.
On April 30 2014 16:31 usethis2 wrote: Also: People should take into consideration what maps are chosen by P or Z against T when they're given a choice. A lot of tournaments lets losers choose the map for the successive match, and a lot of times that is when maps like Alterzim and Frost are chosen. Removing those options should help even out things.
Terran should be playable on large maps, the issue will never go away if you just map design for a race but never fix the issue. They will crop back up eventually as always.. Terran has always sucked on these maps back in WOL and the issue was never addressed and it has occurred again.
On April 30 2014 16:31 usethis2 wrote: Also: People should take into consideration what maps are chosen by P or Z against T when they're given a choice. A lot of tournaments lets losers choose the map for the successive match, and a lot of times that is when maps like Alterzim and Frost are chosen. Removing those options should help even out things.
Terran should be playable on large maps, the issue will never go away if you just map design for a race but never fix the issue. They will crop back up eventually as always.. Terran has always sucked on these maps back in WOL and the issue was never addressed and it has occurred again.
Terran was more than able on maps like Tal'darim, Daybreak and even Whirlwind. Alterzim and Frost are basically terran-killing maps, not just big maps.
Besides, you can look at it the other way around, too. Regardless of map size, there is always way to make maps unfriendly to certain race(s). (e.g. Kulas Ravine or Lost Temple)
Every hyperbole has a nugget of truth behind it, and if Korean Protosses like Rain and Alicia are struggling against Terran late-game, then it would be a VERY bad idea to make bio upgrades cheaper. I think the Transformation Servos thing is minor, but a minor buff might be just enough with this current map pool.
I'm actually not as surprised as I thought I'd be that there's no PvZ change in mind for Blizz. Swarm Host usage against Protoss seems a lot more offensively-oriented lately, which means that win or lose, it's over quick.
On April 30 2014 09:27 Zoku wrote: Seeing as how the upgrade cost change is mostly for TvP, I'd rather they revert the Protoss upgrade cost to what they used to be a long time ago, then to change Terran's upgrade cost.
On April 30 2014 16:33 Wombat_NI wrote: How's about reverting previous patches?
Oracle speed, lower upgrade costs for P are two that I would take a look at with reference to the current state of the game.
This! In TvZ upgrades arent really the problem but more so in TvP. And the Oracle....it just didnt need a buff
On April 30 2014 16:31 usethis2 wrote: Also: People should take into consideration what maps are chosen by P or Z against T when they're given a choice. A lot of tournaments lets losers choose the map for the successive match, and a lot of times that is when maps like Alterzim and Frost are chosen. Removing those options should help even out things.
Terran should be playable on large maps, the issue will never go away if you just map design for a race but never fix the issue. They will crop back up eventually as always.. Terran has always sucked on these maps back in WOL and the issue was never addressed and it has occurred again.
Terran was more than able on maps like Tal'darim, Daybreak and even Whirlwind. Alterzim and Frost are basically terran-killing maps, not just big maps.
Besides, you can look at it the other way around, too. Regardless of map size, there is always way to make maps unfriendly to certain race(s). (e.g. Kulas Ravine or Lost Temple)
This was in another metagame and with slower mutalisk and less dangerous Ultralisk as well, and those maps had some anti-Zerg features as well (hard 4rth on Daybreak, rocks at the third of TDA)
I'm glad that they are looking at both TvX MU's, the T population in tournaments is still very low (shown by having several times fever TvT MUs on record, than PvP and especially ZvZ MUs). It looks like top-end T are still struggling to beat even mediocre opponents from the other races. The previous patch merely stopped the bleeding, stabilizing it at `if you're something like a top 3 T, you can beat foreigners and mid-tier opponents 50% of the time).
But the solutions they talk about (but don't even test on a balance test map...) won't do anything. The upgrades might be cheaper, but they would come out at the same time. The tiny cost reductions won't give any considerable oomph to terran pushes. Instead, mass ling-bling into an unkillable muta ball will still dominate ZvT.
And P still has the same luxury to tech into whatever they want with the nexus cannon. Sure, they are taking damage from mines now, but ZvT in the beginning of HotS demonstrated quite well that mines require a period of learning to play against them. I have no doubts that once P builds accommodate mines, and players (like MC) stop ignoring their existence, even while they are inside their base, the MU will be equally broken.
Help, a noob here, arent the new maps bad for protoss already? Arent gold bases a big problem for protoss? Especially vs zerg? Also from what ive seen isnt a 3rd very hard on most of the new maps?
Well, I am not against terran buff if map changes are not enough. But I really don't want to see maps like Alterzim and Frost in any match ups anway so I want to see those gone first. If T still has it tough then buff them as necessary. Removing hellbat transformation sounds reasonable regardless of map changes.
Improving an unused feature such as the transformation of Hellions into Hellbats is definitely a good thing. More variation, promotes Mech in TvP, helps in TvZ the supposedly hard matchup now that maps are bigger. However going Mech as Terran already spend nothing on research. No Siege upgrade/Strike Cannon/Seeker Missile and combined air and ground upgrades. I'd rather they remove Hellbat from Factory, remove Armory requirement for Transformation Servos and half the duration between transformation to 2 seconds, together with putting cargo size back to 2. That way it's an investment for a very strong possibility.
I don't understand why people think the 25/25 and 50/50 lowered cost is a bad thing. The time to upgrade is much more of an impact than a bit less in cost.
Faster 3/3 ? hum... I'm not to sure but i stoped playing so ... But i don't see a really big difference. 100/100 less is like 2 units. I wasn't aware ZvT was Zerg favored though.
I'm kind of surprise of ZvP. Maybe it's harder to play at low level but when i was gold/plat last season i got a really nice WR vs Protoss as a Z. I felt that ZvP was really Z favored at some point. As a gold, i won all my vs Diamond games vs Protoss. Which is kind of weird.
TvP is kind of stabilized i feel. I think they should wait a little. They should just be carefull when chosing / creating maps in the future.
I only watch PL so there's not much diversity but i don't see Z at the top of the ranking (but they are less played and there are so much P in PL that statisticly it's "normal" to have more P in the rankings). Also Terrans player are at the top. But PL is different since it's Bo1.
On April 30 2014 16:55 alphaproxy wrote: Help, a noob here, arent the new maps bad for protoss already? Arent gold bases a big problem for protoss? Especially vs zerg? Also from what ive seen isnt a 3rd very hard on most of the new maps?
Well soul train on gold was kind of unstopable for me as a Z on Habitation Station. But i'm not high level. Maybe some higher level player can enlight us
Poor Zergies, their ling only tech race never worked when Hellions could go into Hellbat mode right in front of their base and the wallin they made against the Hellions was their demise once the Hellbats ran over that part. But people wanted changes, it is a really sweet way to go Mech. But with the last tank buff, I kinda doubt this will go live. But they might make the Servos 25/25 or so. But Korean Terrans will take the cheaper upgrades and kill Zergs for a while with 3/3, before Zergs manage to solidify their Hive tech again, which is currently the point of can't win for a Terran.
I'd say wait some more time, the meta seems to be in a state without gross imbalances at least and the remaining issues might go away once the pros had more time to adapt to the new map pool.
On April 30 2014 16:39 Circumstance wrote: Every hyperbole has a nugget of truth behind it, and if Korean Protosses like Rain and Alicia are struggling against Terran late-game, then it would be a VERY bad idea to make bio upgrades cheaper. I think the Transformation Servos thing is minor, but a minor buff might be just enough with this current map pool.
I'm actually not as surprised as I thought I'd be that there's no PvZ change in mind for Blizz. Swarm Host usage against Protoss seems a lot more offensively-oriented lately, which means that win or lose, it's over quick.
Not every hyperbole does necessarily have a grain of truth behind it. This one specifically seems to be a case of blaming a personal slump on balance and some 2nd tier pros jumping at the opportunity to whine along. Which is why the community found the bl/infestor comment so hillarious and is still using it whenever possble
On April 30 2014 17:22 gobbledydook wrote: They should just leave it as it is... it's been barely two months (?) and now they want to change it again. Meanwhile the meta keeps evolving...
2months... I wish they would give us updates on the balance & metagame every two weeks and release a patch every month if the same concerns were in two consecutive updates.
People making a big fuss out of the upgrade buff, it's really not that huge. It saves you about 1 medivac at the 15 minute mark! boohoo! The timing doesn't hit faster since it is all continuous after 1/1, which isn't sped up by this.
On April 30 2014 17:22 gobbledydook wrote: They should just leave it as it is... it's been barely two months (?) and now they want to change it again. Meanwhile the meta keeps evolving...
Race? Terran is in a less good spot, see pro results. Nothing changed in TvZ since the 'anti-stale' patch that nerfed T for no apparant reason other than to just nerf something for the sake of it.
On April 30 2014 17:22 gobbledydook wrote: They should just leave it as it is... it's been barely two months (?) and now they want to change it again. Meanwhile the meta keeps evolving...
2months... I wish they would give us updates on the balance & metagame every two weeks and release a patch every month if the same concerns were in two consecutive updates.
Errr. No. Strategy Games require some time to let the metagame catch up. If you patch that furiously, nobody will ever determine builds and the winning race is determined by luck of the draw only. More reports, sure, more communication is better. More patches, no thanks.
David Kim: ZvT is becoming stale. I have a great idea: Let's nerf Terran and see what happens... I have even a greater idea let's make hydralisks cost almost no gas...Or even better let's make dark templars move at the same speed as a stimmed marine...
Because of Hellion change Z will have to play more defensively, make more army at early stage, what means less economy, what means less army and mutas in the midgame and so on..
Don't forget that hellbats drops will be available a lot earlier with the free transformation.
I hope that with this patch things will get even again
I don't see the upgrade cost changing much in TvZ. Terrans going bio could already afford them easily without sacrificing units and could get a upgrade lead over zergs anyway. The issues is that bio vs zerg doesn't seem to be able to compete any more given that WM where nerfed and siege tanks just aren't an appropriate alternative.
And despite a really strong 2 months or so of testing and trying mech by a lot of pro gamers, it seems a lot of them have come to the inevitable conclusion that, mech still has massive flaws in its gameplay that are easily exploited, so they gave up on it.
The change might actually help TvP where gas is a issue when building an army with bio + vikings + ghosts while trying to not fall behind toss in terms of upgrades. However it doesn't really address the real issue of terrans still having a really hard time hitting any early timings because of how strong defense is, or not having any stronger transition in the late game, or having a hard time closing out the game.
The removal of transformation servos is a good idea and is possibly the most impactful of the new changes. The reason being that terrans could possibly hit some new timings in all MUs. Weather it be for drops or just pushes, and particularly in TvZ, if said timings are strong enough to force a more defensive reaction from the zerg, then it could mean they can't drone as hard and terran could enter the mid game with more of an advantage, maybe enough to be on even footing. However it, again, won't address the mid and late game problems where bio just doesn't trade well any more against ling, bling muta.
Overall I give a big yes to the transformation servos upgrade, a big no to the upgrade change, and a really big sigh to the entire patch idea. I dunno, it feels like Blizzard doesn't know how to actually fix the real issues here.
On April 30 2014 17:22 gobbledydook wrote: They should just leave it as it is... it's been barely two months (?) and now they want to change it again. Meanwhile the meta keeps evolving...
2months... I wish they would give us updates on the balance & metagame every two weeks and release a patch every month if the same concerns were in two consecutive updates.
Errr. No. Strategy Games require some time to let the metagame catch up. If you patch that furiously, nobody will ever determine builds and the winning race is determined by luck of the draw only. More reports, sure, more communication is better. More patches, no thanks.
What games are you talking about? The never-patched late Broodwar, so we can't know? The early WoL, which was developing its metagame regardless of the many patches?
Which other highly competitive Strategy Games are out there that I don't know about and from which you draw that fundamental knowledge to conclude things about CnC, SupCom, CoH, BfME...?
They changed the upgrade costs for protoss, so I don´t see how the upgrade change would be so dramatic for terran as some people feel. However, I just don´t see the point and it feels just another band-aid fix.
Removing transformation servos could be interesting. We could see stronger early-mid game pushes especially if you keep your first hellions alive, however, needing armory would still slow down such a push.
Anyway, both changes are again upgrade changes. It seems that whenever Blizzard sees terran struggling they come in and meddle with the upgrades and that approach is just dubious to me.
On April 30 2014 17:22 gobbledydook wrote: They should just leave it as it is... it's been barely two months (?) and now they want to change it again. Meanwhile the meta keeps evolving...
2months... I wish they would give us updates on the balance & metagame every two weeks and release a patch every month if the same concerns were in two consecutive updates.
Are you serious? A fortnightly update would be like dropping a load of shit over and over again for the community flies.
As to monthly patches, this is meant to be Starcraft not DOTA.
On April 30 2014 17:32 p14c wrote: David Kim: ZvT is becoming stale. I have a great idea: Let's nerf Terran and see what happens... I have even a greater idea let's make hydralisks cost almost no gas...Or even better let's make dark templars move at the same speed as a stimmed marine...
On April 30 2014 17:39 Destructicon wrote: I don't see the upgrade cost changing much in TvZ. Terrans going bio could already afford them easily without sacrificing units and could get a upgrade lead over zergs anyway. The issues is that bio vs zerg doesn't seem to be able to compete any more given that WM where nerfed and siege tanks just aren't an appropriate alternative.
And despite a really strong 2 months or so of testing and trying mech by a lot of pro gamers, it seems a lot of them have come to the inevitable conclusion that, mech still has massive flaws in its gameplay that are easily exploited, so they gave up on it.
The change might actually help TvP where gas is a issue when building an army with bio + vikings + ghosts while trying to not fall behind toss in terms of upgrades. However it doesn't really address the real issue of terrans still having a really hard time hitting any early timings because of how strong defense is, or not having any stronger transition in the late game, or having a hard time closing out the game.
The removal of transformation servos is a good idea and is possibly the most impactful of the new changes. The reason being that terrans could possibly hit some new timings in all MUs. Weather it be for drops or just pushes, and particularly in TvZ, if said timings are strong enough to force a more defensive reaction from the zerg, then it could mean they can't drone as hard and terran could enter the mid game with more of an advantage, maybe enough to be on even footing. However it, again, won't address the mid and late game problems where bio just doesn't trade well any more against ling, bling muta.
Overall I give a big yes to the transformation servos upgrade, a big no to the upgrade change, and a really big sigh to the entire patch idea. I dunno, it feels like Blizzard doesn't know how to actually fix the real issues here.
This is a dumb remark from me but... Why do Terrans continues to try to early push when it's absolutly impossible to do damage. Maybe it's a bad analogy but when Oov revolutionized Terrans, the vultures he made where kept in his base rather than harassing. And because of that he always had more units on defense to take an earlier base.
So why don't completly give up on the early timings and solidify the laters ? I want to see what people say about that.
Also Destructicon, keep in mind that Balance is affecting every player on the planet, that it requires tests and whatnot. We don't know what they test internally. They may already have tried all of what was suggested and it didn't work. This game is great. balance is not really that broken (but yes it might need of few tweeks). They made great games, they'll made great patch.
Remember that in BW at some point Terrans had 90% WR on some maps, then SaviOr came and won convingcibly on those maps. SC2 is still young.
KEEP IN MIND. I AM NOT INSTIGATING A BW VS SC2 MATCH. NOR A SAVIOR DISCUSSION.
On April 30 2014 17:44 Daswollvieh wrote: Yeah, but what about the bunker?
What the... If you want to talk about that, i want the planet cracker back, and the infinite time neural parasite.
On April 30 2014 17:22 gobbledydook wrote: They should just leave it as it is... it's been barely two months (?) and now they want to change it again. Meanwhile the meta keeps evolving...
The meta was now again changed by direct Blizzard interference. They intentionally weakened maps for blink but also for reaper scouts. Maps now favor zerg and are worse for blink play but also for reaper scouting so all of a sudden zerg is doing better.
So by that logic, they should also keep the map pool unchanged as well to let the meta to stabilize, otherwise they will never know if it is the right time to patch or not.
But while that is going on, we have a precedent in history of SC2.
There was never a time period in which a certain race was without a premier tournament win for 6 months until now. Terran is without a win since November 2013.
This didn't even happen during GomTvT or broodlord-infestor era. So I am sure Blizzard feels the pressure to do something about it.
Well Hellbat/Hellion change saves me some gas when meching, but other than that I don't really see the point.
What I really really really don't understand is making Terran upgrades cheaper. I already didn't get making protoss upgrades cheaper, overbuffing the living shit out of spores (wasn't it great how even ovies died in 2 seconds when Jaedong tried to baneling drop that foreigners @dreamhack? Well thank the spore buff for that) and removing the siege mode upgrade among other things.
But hey if you feel like you have to patch you might as well role the dice on something. You could also listen to most Korean pros and leave the game untouched and let progamers figure it out, but god forbid we may actually get a stable meta and people wouldn't magically stop dominating after a few weeks because the game changed.
On April 30 2014 17:39 Destructicon wrote: I don't see the upgrade cost changing much in TvZ. Terrans going bio could already afford them easily without sacrificing units and could get a upgrade lead over zergs anyway. The issues is that bio vs zerg doesn't seem to be able to compete any more given that WM where nerfed and siege tanks just aren't an appropriate alternative.
And despite a really strong 2 months or so of testing and trying mech by a lot of pro gamers, it seems a lot of them have come to the inevitable conclusion that, mech still has massive flaws in its gameplay that are easily exploited, so they gave up on it.
The change might actually help TvP where gas is a issue when building an army with bio + vikings + ghosts while trying to not fall behind toss in terms of upgrades. However it doesn't really address the real issue of terrans still having a really hard time hitting any early timings because of how strong defense is, or not having any stronger transition in the late game, or having a hard time closing out the game.
The removal of transformation servos is a good idea and is possibly the most impactful of the new changes. The reason being that terrans could possibly hit some new timings in all MUs. Weather it be for drops or just pushes, and particularly in TvZ, if said timings are strong enough to force a more defensive reaction from the zerg, then it could mean they can't drone as hard and terran could enter the mid game with more of an advantage, maybe enough to be on even footing. However it, again, won't address the mid and late game problems where bio just doesn't trade well any more against ling, bling muta.
Overall I give a big yes to the transformation servos upgrade, a big no to the upgrade change, and a really big sigh to the entire patch idea. I dunno, it feels like Blizzard doesn't know how to actually fix the real issues here.
This is a dumb remark from me but... Why do Terrans continues to try to early push when it's absolutly impossible to do damage. Maybe it's a bad analogy but when Oov revolutionized Terrans, the vultures he made where kept in his base rather than harassing. And because of that he always had more units on defense to take an earlier base.
[...]
Because Terran has to play an even harder lategame. In WOL, you'd damage and delay the Protoss so you could enter the lategame 'ahead' and as a result of that, be 'even' in the long run. In HOTS, you cannot do the damage, start lategame 'even' and because of that, you are behind.
On April 30 2014 17:39 Destructicon wrote: I don't see the upgrade cost changing much in TvZ. Terrans going bio could already afford them easily without sacrificing units and could get a upgrade lead over zergs anyway. The issues is that bio vs zerg doesn't seem to be able to compete any more given that WM where nerfed and siege tanks just aren't an appropriate alternative.
And despite a really strong 2 months or so of testing and trying mech by a lot of pro gamers, it seems a lot of them have come to the inevitable conclusion that, mech still has massive flaws in its gameplay that are easily exploited, so they gave up on it.
The change might actually help TvP where gas is a issue when building an army with bio + vikings + ghosts while trying to not fall behind toss in terms of upgrades. However it doesn't really address the real issue of terrans still having a really hard time hitting any early timings because of how strong defense is, or not having any stronger transition in the late game, or having a hard time closing out the game.
The removal of transformation servos is a good idea and is possibly the most impactful of the new changes. The reason being that terrans could possibly hit some new timings in all MUs. Weather it be for drops or just pushes, and particularly in TvZ, if said timings are strong enough to force a more defensive reaction from the zerg, then it could mean they can't drone as hard and terran could enter the mid game with more of an advantage, maybe enough to be on even footing. However it, again, won't address the mid and late game problems where bio just doesn't trade well any more against ling, bling muta.
Overall I give a big yes to the transformation servos upgrade, a big no to the upgrade change, and a really big sigh to the entire patch idea. I dunno, it feels like Blizzard doesn't know how to actually fix the real issues here.
This is a dumb remark from me but... Why do Terrans continues to try to early push when it's absolutly impossible to do damage. Maybe it's a bad analogy but when Oov revolutionized Terrans, the vultures he made where kept in his base rather than harassing. And because of that he always had more units on defense to take an earlier base.
[...]
Because Terran has to play an even harder lategame. In WOL, you'd damage and delay the Protoss so you could enter the lategame 'ahead' and as a result of that, be 'even' in the long run. In HOTS, you cannot do the damage, start lategame 'even' and because of that, you are behind.
Well, maybe there's a really defensive style with crazy expansions that have not been explore yet. I feel you respond to my question with knowledge of what it is now (well... that's understandable). But i'm sure there's stuff we didn't figure out yet.
For exemple. In TvZ. The ****ink turtle terran mech into mass air is something that poped out recently (well... fairly recently)
Oh and i see a lot of people saying TvZ is really harder now. Is that because of new maps ? Are they that zerg favored ?
On April 30 2014 17:18 Squat wrote: Cheaper upgrades will just make it even easier to beat zerg to 3/3, which terrans does comfortably already. The hellbat change is good.
I think giving mines back a little of their oomph(not all of it) would be a better idea than making upgrades even easier to get.
Well said. Upgrade buff will break TvZ hard , hence the change won't happen.
Upgrade change seems weird, it was already weird for Protoss (more so given their ability to Chrono their upgrades). It pushes the upgrade advantage more for Terran in TvZ (as Zerg needs Infestation Pit + Hive for 3/3) and does nothing for TvP.
Hellion change does seem good, the unit required a multitude of upgrades to come into its own (Blueflame, Servos and attack/armor) so it's nice to see this improved. It might make early hellion pushes more flexible as you can shift them into Hellbats later. Might make Hellion/Hellbat drops more interesting as well.
I just wish Blizzard would just modify Photon Overcharge already. Protoss cannot be touched in the first 10 minutes but can throw a mountain range of all-ins at you. I'd be willing to accept the all-in part if I could atleast return the favor or actually punish Protoss if the all-in fails. As it is, you cannot do any damage yourself, and an all-in can only break you even in the best case.
Just reduce the range to 8 and increase the energy cost to 150 to avoid insta-recall and Photon Overcharge on the spot. It is way too much of a catch-all safety net right now.
I am the only one to think the hellbat buff to be HUGE ? I mean it allows defence against roach all ins/counter-pressure in TvZ, and gives the helion opening in TvP much more solidity.
I really think we are close to see biomech (a la reality in TvZ) popularized. In TvP, we already see biomines (with few marau) and sometimes added hellbats (ala ForGG). This patch could seal the deal.
On April 30 2014 18:01 Thezzy wrote: Upgrade change seems weird, it was already weird for Protoss (more so given their ability to Chrono their upgrades). It pushes the upgrade advantage more for Terran in TvZ (as Zerg needs Infestation Pit + Hive for 3/3) and does nothing for TvP.
Hellion change does seem good, the unit required a multitude of upgrades to come into its own (Blueflame, Servos and attack/armor) so it's nice to see this improved. It might make early hellion pushes more flexible as you can shift them into Hellbats later. Might make Hellion/Hellbat drops more interesting as well.
I just wish Blizzard would just modify Photon Overcharge already. Protoss cannot be touched in the first 10 minutes but can throw a mountain range of all-ins at you. I'd be willing to accept the all-in part if I could atleast return the favor or actually punish Protoss if the all-in fails. As it is, you cannot do any damage yourself, and an all-in can only break you even in the best case.
Just reduce the range to 8 and increase the energy cost to 150 to avoid insta-recall and Photon Overcharge on the spot. It is way too much of a catch-all safety net right now.
Photon Overcharge is fine, you cant recall and expect to hold a counter attack early game (not enough energy). Some Terrans think WoL days is normal, no, it was broken and that is why Photon Overcharge was introduced.
And yes, you can punish Toss early, it is risky, but all aggressive strats have higher risk.
On April 30 2014 18:01 Thezzy wrote: Upgrade change seems weird, it was already weird for Protoss (more so given their ability to Chrono their upgrades). It pushes the upgrade advantage more for Terran in TvZ (as Zerg needs Infestation Pit + Hive for 3/3) and does nothing for TvP.
Hellion change does seem good, the unit required a multitude of upgrades to come into its own (Blueflame, Servos and attack/armor) so it's nice to see this improved. It might make early hellion pushes more flexible as you can shift them into Hellbats later. Might make Hellion/Hellbat drops more interesting as well.
I just wish Blizzard would just modify Photon Overcharge already. Protoss cannot be touched in the first 10 minutes but can throw a mountain range of all-ins at you. I'd be willing to accept the all-in part if I could atleast return the favor or actually punish Protoss if the all-in fails. As it is, you cannot do any damage yourself, and an all-in can only break you even in the best case.
Just reduce the range to 8 and increase the energy cost to 150 to avoid insta-recall and Photon Overcharge on the spot. It is way too much of a catch-all safety net right now.
I'd actually prefer to increase the energy cost of recall to 150. In it's current form it's mostly a tool to be able to make mistakes and avoid being punished or to attack without committing anything.
Well, maybe there's a really defensive style with crazy expansions that have not been explore yet.
There soon will be no terans to explore anything. For example, lets imagine that teran finally buffed so they can force others races to react to 100 terans opening. There still will be no terans around, because there are no teran below pros. Level of buffs proposed are ridiculously low.
Personally I believe that mateship core should give NO vision and have no attack. So, reaper can stick around and see what protos doing. If protos want to scout they have to warp senteries. They have free scouting from that.
Right now mama core does everything - deny scouting, defend, scout, help attack and can kill couple marines. It is completely ridiculous unit.
Well, maybe there's a really defensive style with crazy expansions that have not been explore yet.
There soon will be no terans to explore anything. For example, lets imagine that teran finally buffed so they can force others races to react to 100 terans opening. There still will be no terans around, because there are no teran below pros. Level of buffs proposed are ridiculously low.
Personally I believe that mateship core should give NO vision and have no attack. So, reaper can stick around and see what protos doing. If protos want to scout they have to warp senteries. They have free scouting from that.
Right now mama core does everything - deny scouting, defend, scout, help attack and can kill couple marines. It is completely ridiculous unit.
Again, you want Terran to have an advantage in early scouting ? cos that is what you propose. Terran gets to scout early (reaper), and Toss much later with sentry (need to wait for 100 energy). So terran knows what is going on early but Toss cannot? Yeah right.
Well, maybe there's a really defensive style with crazy expansions that have not been explore yet.
There soon will be no terans to explore anything. For example, lets imagine that teran finally buffed so they can force others races to react to 100 terans opening. There still will be no terans around, because there are no teran below pros. Level of buffs proposed are ridiculously low.
Personally I believe that mateship core should give NO vision and have no attack. So, reaper can stick around and see what protos doing. If protos want to scout they have to warp senteries. They have free scouting from that.
Right now mama core does everything - deny scouting, defend, scout, help attack and can kill couple marines. It is completely ridiculous unit.
The problem is that msc change would break PvP
And if you look at the numbers there is quite a number of terran. Don't overexagerate
Well, maybe there's a really defensive style with crazy expansions that have not been explore yet.
There soon will be no terans to explore anything. For example, lets imagine that teran finally buffed so they can force others races to react to 100 terans opening. There still will be no terans around, because there are no teran below pros. Level of buffs proposed are ridiculously low.
Personally I believe that mateship core should give NO vision and have no attack. So, reaper can stick around and see what protos doing. If protos want to scout they have to warp senteries. They have free scouting from that.
Right now mama core does everything - deny scouting, defend, scout, help attack and can kill couple marines. It is completely ridiculous unit.
Again, you want Terran to have an advantage in early scouting ? cos that is what you propose. Terran gets to scout early (reaper), and Toss much later with sentry (need to wait for 100 energy). So terran knows what is going on early but Toss cannot? Yeah right.
Well early scouting is still really important. And protoss can defend a lot early game so it's not that big of deal for them to have later scouting. But maybe i'm wrong
Starcraft is a 3 difference race strategy game so it's hard to tweek something in a mu that doesn't break another.
On April 30 2014 17:39 Destructicon wrote: I don't see the upgrade cost changing much in TvZ. Terrans going bio could already afford them easily without sacrificing units and could get a upgrade lead over zergs anyway. The issues is that bio vs zerg doesn't seem to be able to compete any more given that WM where nerfed and siege tanks just aren't an appropriate alternative.
And despite a really strong 2 months or so of testing and trying mech by a lot of pro gamers, it seems a lot of them have come to the inevitable conclusion that, mech still has massive flaws in its gameplay that are easily exploited, so they gave up on it.
The change might actually help TvP where gas is a issue when building an army with bio + vikings + ghosts while trying to not fall behind toss in terms of upgrades. However it doesn't really address the real issue of terrans still having a really hard time hitting any early timings because of how strong defense is, or not having any stronger transition in the late game, or having a hard time closing out the game.
The removal of transformation servos is a good idea and is possibly the most impactful of the new changes. The reason being that terrans could possibly hit some new timings in all MUs. Weather it be for drops or just pushes, and particularly in TvZ, if said timings are strong enough to force a more defensive reaction from the zerg, then it could mean they can't drone as hard and terran could enter the mid game with more of an advantage, maybe enough to be on even footing. However it, again, won't address the mid and late game problems where bio just doesn't trade well any more against ling, bling muta.
Overall I give a big yes to the transformation servos upgrade, a big no to the upgrade change, and a really big sigh to the entire patch idea. I dunno, it feels like Blizzard doesn't know how to actually fix the real issues here.
This is a dumb remark from me but... Why do Terrans continues to try to early push when it's absolutly impossible to do damage. Maybe it's a bad analogy but when Oov revolutionized Terrans, the vultures he made where kept in his base rather than harassing. And because of that he always had more units on defense to take an earlier base.
[...]
Because Terran has to play an even harder lategame. In WOL, you'd damage and delay the Protoss so you could enter the lategame 'ahead' and as a result of that, be 'even' in the long run. In HOTS, you cannot do the damage, start lategame 'even' and because of that, you are behind.
Well, maybe there's a really defensive style with crazy expansions that have not been explore yet. I feel you respond to my question with knowledge of what it is now (well... that's understandable). But i'm sure there's stuff we didn't figure out yet.
For exemple. In TvZ. The ****ink turtle terran mech into mass air is something that poped out recently (well... fairly recently)
Oh and i see a lot of people saying TvZ is really harder now. Is that because of new maps ? Are they that zerg favored ?
Undoubtedly there is stuff to figure out, always. I just don't expect there to be, because in my humble opinion, you need a next 'stage' to make hyperdefensive play worthwhile, a stage of superiority either via tech or via massing units. Massing units vs Protoss is a bad idea, because their army scales better. There's also no Tech you can head for, because Protoss has the stronger endgame army, Collosus/Templar/Tempest/Filler beats pretty much every Terran composition. So, I suppose that is what I have to say about that.
As for TvZ, people have been complaining about that for longer, but Protoss was a bigger problem. Now, with the mine patch making midgame MMMM pressure REALLY lethal and Terrans learning to scout and beat the Protoss 'bullshit builds', people now notice Zerg. Which is a combination of the new maps being pretty good for Zerg, as well as that silly patch that had no explanation other than 'we feel like it'.
The Hellion/ Hellbat changes is the no brainer. Mind you, it should have been done the moment the Helbat dmg was nerfed.
Also, TvP is a terrible MU that's all about what cheese Protoss will bring to the table, and Terran being restricted in openings and tech/composition no matter what.
Blizz must have terribly low expectations if they think this is a fine status quo.
On April 30 2014 17:18 Squat wrote: Cheaper upgrades will just make it even easier to beat zerg to 3/3, which terrans does comfortably already. The hellbat change is good.
I think giving mines back a little of their oomph(not all of it) would be a better idea than making upgrades even easier to get.
Well said. Upgrade buff will break TvZ hard , hence the change won't happen.
rofl. You're clueless. Upgrades won't hit faster, they're limited by research time, not cost.
On April 30 2014 18:01 Thezzy wrote: Upgrade change seems weird, it was already weird for Protoss (more so given their ability to Chrono their upgrades). It pushes the upgrade advantage more for Terran in TvZ (as Zerg needs Infestation Pit + Hive for 3/3) and does nothing for TvP.
Hellion change does seem good, the unit required a multitude of upgrades to come into its own (Blueflame, Servos and attack/armor) so it's nice to see this improved. It might make early hellion pushes more flexible as you can shift them into Hellbats later. Might make Hellion/Hellbat drops more interesting as well.
I just wish Blizzard would just modify Photon Overcharge already. Protoss cannot be touched in the first 10 minutes but can throw a mountain range of all-ins at you. I'd be willing to accept the all-in part if I could atleast return the favor or actually punish Protoss if the all-in fails. As it is, you cannot do any damage yourself, and an all-in can only break you even in the best case.
Just reduce the range to 8 and increase the energy cost to 150 to avoid insta-recall and Photon Overcharge on the spot. It is way too much of a catch-all safety net right now.
I'd actually prefer to increase the energy cost of recall to 150. In it's current form it's mostly a tool to be able to make mistakes and avoid being punished or to attack without committing anything.
I'd prefer Photon Overcharge to be upgrade that needs to be researched (in Cybercore maybe at like 100/100?). That way Protoss can choose not to research it and put all resources into an all-in, but therefor be vulnerable to counters, if the all-in fails. Or the Protoss does research it to be safe, but it will make his early pressure weaker.
Protoss can hold a hell of a lot blindly in the matchup, so a disparity in scouting ability isn't a massive deal. Personally I prefer the ability to scout better and reactively prepare than having solid catch-all defensive units though.
We'll see how things turn out. I'd also prefer to see previous changes reversed especially:
1. Protoss upgrade costs. A change rooted in WoL where Protoss had to invest hundreds of gas in sentries still in place when they don't. Not to mention all ground units share these ups unlike the bio/mech melee/ranged splits that Terran and Zerg have.
2. Oracle speed buff. Holdable but annoying as hell and the ostensible reason for it - lategame utility didn't change at all.
On April 30 2014 18:01 Thezzy wrote: Upgrade change seems weird, it was already weird for Protoss (more so given their ability to Chrono their upgrades). It pushes the upgrade advantage more for Terran in TvZ (as Zerg needs Infestation Pit + Hive for 3/3) and does nothing for TvP.
Hellion change does seem good, the unit required a multitude of upgrades to come into its own (Blueflame, Servos and attack/armor) so it's nice to see this improved. It might make early hellion pushes more flexible as you can shift them into Hellbats later. Might make Hellion/Hellbat drops more interesting as well.
I just wish Blizzard would just modify Photon Overcharge already. Protoss cannot be touched in the first 10 minutes but can throw a mountain range of all-ins at you. I'd be willing to accept the all-in part if I could atleast return the favor or actually punish Protoss if the all-in fails. As it is, you cannot do any damage yourself, and an all-in can only break you even in the best case.
Just reduce the range to 8 and increase the energy cost to 150 to avoid insta-recall and Photon Overcharge on the spot. It is way too much of a catch-all safety net right now.
Photon Overcharge is fine, you cant recall and expect to hold a counter attack early game (not enough energy). Some Terrans think WoL days is normal, no, it was broken and that is why Photon Overcharge was introduced.
And yes, you can punish Toss early, it is risky, but all aggressive strats have higher risk.
How do you do it? Build 2 rax near the Nexus and hope he ignores them? Or trust in the P micro vs hellions (never forget Maru vs Stats i think it was on Starstation (edit: on Belshir, source: SC2Toastie))
Terran is the hardest race with its mechanics imo (no decent foreigner plays it), it should get the necessary buffs to make it worthwhile to play the race. The presented buffs in the OP are kinda lackluster.
On April 30 2014 18:01 Thezzy wrote: Upgrade change seems weird, it was already weird for Protoss (more so given their ability to Chrono their upgrades). It pushes the upgrade advantage more for Terran in TvZ (as Zerg needs Infestation Pit + Hive for 3/3) and does nothing for TvP.
Hellion change does seem good, the unit required a multitude of upgrades to come into its own (Blueflame, Servos and attack/armor) so it's nice to see this improved. It might make early hellion pushes more flexible as you can shift them into Hellbats later. Might make Hellion/Hellbat drops more interesting as well.
I just wish Blizzard would just modify Photon Overcharge already. Protoss cannot be touched in the first 10 minutes but can throw a mountain range of all-ins at you. I'd be willing to accept the all-in part if I could atleast return the favor or actually punish Protoss if the all-in fails. As it is, you cannot do any damage yourself, and an all-in can only break you even in the best case.
Just reduce the range to 8 and increase the energy cost to 150 to avoid insta-recall and Photon Overcharge on the spot. It is way too much of a catch-all safety net right now.
I'd actually prefer to increase the energy cost of recall to 150. In it's current form it's mostly a tool to be able to make mistakes and avoid being punished or to attack without committing anything.
I'd prefer Photon Overcharge to be upgrade that needs to be researched (in Cybercore maybe at like 100/100?). That way Protoss can choose not to research it and put all resources into an all-in, but therefor be vulnerable to counters, if the all-in fails. Or the Protoss does research it to be safe, but it will make his early pressure weaker.
On April 30 2014 18:01 Thezzy wrote: Upgrade change seems weird, it was already weird for Protoss (more so given their ability to Chrono their upgrades). It pushes the upgrade advantage more for Terran in TvZ (as Zerg needs Infestation Pit + Hive for 3/3) and does nothing for TvP.
Hellion change does seem good, the unit required a multitude of upgrades to come into its own (Blueflame, Servos and attack/armor) so it's nice to see this improved. It might make early hellion pushes more flexible as you can shift them into Hellbats later. Might make Hellion/Hellbat drops more interesting as well.
I just wish Blizzard would just modify Photon Overcharge already. Protoss cannot be touched in the first 10 minutes but can throw a mountain range of all-ins at you. I'd be willing to accept the all-in part if I could atleast return the favor or actually punish Protoss if the all-in fails. As it is, you cannot do any damage yourself, and an all-in can only break you even in the best case.
Just reduce the range to 8 and increase the energy cost to 150 to avoid insta-recall and Photon Overcharge on the spot. It is way too much of a catch-all safety net right now.
Photon Overcharge is fine, you cant recall and expect to hold a counter attack early game (not enough energy). Some Terrans think WoL days is normal, no, it was broken and that is why Photon Overcharge was introduced.
And yes, you can punish Toss early, it is risky, but all aggressive strats have higher risk.
How do you do it? Build 2 rax near the Nexus and hope he ignores them? Or trust in the P micro vs hellions (never forget Maru vs Stats i think it was on Starstation)
Terran is the hardest race with its mechanics imo (no decent foreigner plays it), it should get the necessary buffs to make it worthwhile to play the race. The presented buffs in the OP are kinda lackluster.
Maru v Stats was Bel Shir Vestige.
Protoss and Zerg are hard races too, don't be so cocky.
If you look at the numbers, then there are four times less terrans in tournaments:
Note that there are 184 TvTs while there are over 400 PvPs and ZvZs. It's more than double the population!
This means that only the best of the best among terrans are even competing anymore, and they can barely manage to remain even with Protoss. But they are at a bigger disadvantage against Z. This means that T is not repopulating tournaments. Instead, we're seeing the race slowly die away.
Blizzard should buff terran in such a way that we'd balance out the populations. It's not balance if top 4 terrans in the world get a 50% winrate against foreigner Protosses and Zergs.
On April 30 2014 18:17 Wombat_NI wrote: Protoss can hold a hell of a lot blindly in the matchup, so a disparity in scouting ability isn't a massive deal. Personally I prefer the ability to scout better and reactively prepare than having solid catch-all defensive units though.
We'll see how things turn out. I'd also prefer to see previous changes reversed especially:
1. Protoss upgrade costs. A change rooted in WoL where Protoss had to invest hundreds of gas in sentries still in place when they don't. Not to mention all ground units share these ups unlike the bio/mech melee/ranged splits that Terran and Zerg have.
2. Oracle speed buff. Holdable but annoying as hell and the ostensible reason for it - lategame utility didn't change at all.
Nothing to help with protoss allins which sucks. Upgrade change: In tvz terran already have the upgrade advantage and in tvp it will make terran stronger in the midgame where they already are very strong. I don't think it will change much but I am scared that many of the buffs to terran midgame is gonna have to get reverted when (if ever) tvp early game is addressed. So in my opinion bad change. Transformation change. Not much so say. No one ever got that upgrade so hellbats and hellions where basically two different units. Now people may start to use the transformation ability more which is cool I guess. Good change
You could find a workaround, like sticking one or both of PO/Timewarp on the Nexus but in such a way that you can research and build probes simultaneously.
I would like a bit more pre-planning in the early game in that sense, not necessarily that specific change mind or something that leads to blind losses where you pick wrongly.
On April 30 2014 18:22 Wombat_NI wrote: You could find a workaround, like sticking one or both of PO/Timewarp on the Nexus but in such a way that you can research and build probes simultaneously.
I would like a bit more pre-planning in the early game in that sense, not necessarily that specific change mind or something that leads to blind losses where you pick wrongly.
I suppose another option is to research them at the MSC, 50/50/60 (Concussive Shells time/cost) each. Unlock the upgrades before you can use it. Also makes the MSC a 250/250 unit if fully upgraded, maybe some tosses will be less sloppy then :D
On April 30 2014 18:27 AaronChance wrote: Neither will solve the muta problem, so it doesn't matter which option Blizzard goes with.
The hellbat change might, in the same way the queen buff made broodlord infestor OP.
Having 6 hellbats instead of 6 hellions (or even more!) in that 1/1 timing to clear creep might make for a HUGE difference, forcing Zerg to invest more into army (roaches/banes/queens) which delays mutalisk, and with that, delays the snowball effect.
On April 30 2014 18:27 AaronChance wrote: Neither will solve the muta problem, so it doesn't matter which option Blizzard goes with.
The hellbat change might, in the same way the queen buff made broodlord infestor OP.
Having 6 hellbats instead of 6 hellions (or even more!) in that 1/1 timing to clear creep might make for a HUGE difference, forcing Zerg to invest more into army (roaches/banes/queens) which delays mutalisk, and with that, delays the snowball effect.
Yeah... 6hellions/2Reapers is not the same thing as 6hellbars/2reaper. Also mass muta is more a problem in ZvP right ?
I like the overcharge upgrade that people talked about. It would make... 1less sentry ? But yeah why not. I have no idea if that would make something different, because everyone research WG. So everyone would research overcharge. But if it's in the cyber core you would have to choose what you want first. Mabe that's a good idea.
Oh and toastie thx for your insight. As i don't play anymore and don't have time to watch as many tournaments as before i lack a lot of insight in the game now.
On April 30 2014 18:27 AaronChance wrote: Neither will solve the muta problem, so it doesn't matter which option Blizzard goes with.
The hellbat change might, in the same way the queen buff made broodlord infestor OP.
Having 6 hellbats instead of 6 hellions (or even more!) in that 1/1 timing to clear creep might make for a HUGE difference, forcing Zerg to invest more into army (roaches/banes/queens) which delays mutalisk, and with that, delays the snowball effect.
That would be nice and i think it would really help the MU. Right now it is way too ez for Zerg to get 30+ Mutas
On April 30 2014 18:27 AaronChance wrote: Neither will solve the muta problem, so it doesn't matter which option Blizzard goes with.
The hellbat change might, in the same way the queen buff made broodlord infestor OP.
Having 6 hellbats instead of 6 hellions (or even more!) in that 1/1 timing to clear creep might make for a HUGE difference, forcing Zerg to invest more into army (roaches/banes/queens) which delays mutalisk, and with that, delays the snowball effect.
I've seen zergs lose almost all their drones at the natural to a hellion run by, and still gotten to mutas fast enough to crush the terran. Zergs are pretty resilient in the early game. They can even lose a hatch and come back. What the terran needs is to sustain through the mid-game, which is roaches or mutas. Now with this change it'll definitely be mutas. So a heavy hellion investment early will cripple them in the mid-game.
On April 30 2014 17:18 Squat wrote: Cheaper upgrades will just make it even easier to beat zerg to 3/3, which terrans does comfortably already. The hellbat change is good.
I think giving mines back a little of their oomph(not all of it) would be a better idea than making upgrades even easier to get.
Well said. Upgrade buff will break TvZ hard , hence the change won't happen.
rofl. You're clueless. Upgrades won't hit faster, they're limited by research time, not cost.
If they are cheaper they can be gained sooner, I will ignore the rest of your childish jibberish.
On April 30 2014 17:18 Squat wrote: Cheaper upgrades will just make it even easier to beat zerg to 3/3, which terrans does comfortably already. The hellbat change is good.
I think giving mines back a little of their oomph(not all of it) would be a better idea than making upgrades even easier to get.
Well said. Upgrade buff will break TvZ hard , hence the change won't happen.
rofl. You're clueless. Upgrades won't hit faster, they're limited by research time, not cost.
If they are cheaper they can be gained sooner, I will ignore the rest of your childish jibberish.
So yeah, they would break TvZ hard.
Wut? you do realize that they can be currently gotten directly after 11 finishes. And 33 after 22 finishes. So, if you don't get 11 any earlier, how on earth can you get 22 and 33 earlier by only changing the cost of 22 and 33?
TvZ main problem is the nerf of the WM in the first place. Revert the WM nerf and the problem will be solved. as for TvP the problem is protoss now can do all-ins or rush strategies without having to worry about any aggression from the terran due to the Nex-canon, the whole problem is in the MSC, unless they figure out away to nerf it, TvP will never be balanced! changing the upgrade cost will change almost nothing, in TvP in particular. The hellbats upgrade is necessary I believe, but with reverting the WM damage it will change the game too much.
Blizzard always buff the Terran too much by the realse of the new expansion package, then spends all effort to nerf it until it's un-winnable! Same thing happened in WoL at its late stages, it only happened faster in HoTS!
On April 30 2014 17:18 Squat wrote: Cheaper upgrades will just make it even easier to beat zerg to 3/3, which terrans does comfortably already. The hellbat change is good.
I think giving mines back a little of their oomph(not all of it) would be a better idea than making upgrades even easier to get.
Well said. Upgrade buff will break TvZ hard , hence the change won't happen.
rofl. You're clueless. Upgrades won't hit faster, they're limited by research time, not cost.
If they are cheaper they can be gained sooner, I will ignore the rest of your childish jibberish.
So yeah, they would break TvZ hard.
Most players generally align their upgrade timings in such a way that when 1/1 is about to be completed, they have the 175/175 x2 needed to research 2/2. While this will be reduced to 150/150 x2, it doesn't affect the timing at all because 1/1 has not changed. The starting point is still the same, with the same research time and cost. If you start 1/1 at 8:00, you can still only start 2/2 at 10:40, regardless of the upgrade cost. Even if 1/1 was made cheaper, you'd still need to start 1/1 sooner to get the upgrades faster.
On April 30 2014 17:18 Squat wrote: Cheaper upgrades will just make it even easier to beat zerg to 3/3, which terrans does comfortably already. The hellbat change is good.
I think giving mines back a little of their oomph(not all of it) would be a better idea than making upgrades even easier to get.
Well said. Upgrade buff will break TvZ hard , hence the change won't happen.
rofl. You're clueless. Upgrades won't hit faster, they're limited by research time, not cost.
If they are cheaper they can be gained sooner, I will ignore the rest of your childish jibberish.
So yeah, they would break TvZ hard.
Wut? you do realize that they can be currently gotten directly after 11 finishes. And 33 after 22 finishes. So, if you don't get 11 any earlier, how on earth can you get 22 and 33 earlier by only changing the cost of 22 and 33?
From what I remember seeing in tournaments, terran rarely gets 3/3 right after 2/2 finishes.
DK still amazes me to this day. Lets reduce Terran upgrade costs to address some of the concerns!
He could have looked into multiple things like: -Turret without the need for engineering bay -Oracle Speed -Timewarp and Recall -Protoss upgarde cost -Tanks and WM -Armory cost -Mutalisks regen/speed -Swarmhosts <-------- THIS
So many things.. except somehow the terran upgrades were the issue all along. Its like as if Terran needed a break from spending less gas than they already do.
MSC should be bound to the nexi like originally planned, and become a freestanding unit with upgrade to mothership. I don't mind protoss with a strong defense in the early game, but they shouldn't have an easy to get air unit in the early game, complete with a get out of jail free card for his whole army.
Terran turrets need an upgrade to increase their power in mid to late game. They're absurdly weak to muta flocks.
On April 30 2014 18:42 JorSharky wrote: TvZ main problem is the nerf of the WM in the first place. Revert the WM nerf and the problem will be solved. as for TvP the problem is protoss now can do all-ins or rush strategies without having to worry about any aggression from the terran due to the Nex-canon, the whole problem is in the MSC, unless they figure out away to nerf it, TvP will never be balanced! changing the upgrade cost will change almost nothing, in TvP in particular. The hellbats upgrade is necessary I believe, but with reverting the WM damage it will change the game too much.
Blizzard always buff the Terran too much by the realse of the new expansion package, then spends all effort to nerf it until it's un-winnable! Same thing happened in WoL at its late stages, it only happened faster in HoTS!
MY GOD NO ! I remember losing 50army supply on two mines. I don't have the reaction time of life. Two forgotten mines on the map have sometime been game changing in my own TvZ because i injected and lost my army
It took a half year, 13 premier tournaments with no Terran winner in a row with only two runner ups, two seasons of Code S with 3 or 4 Terrans for them to understand that TvZ and TvP are slightly in favor for the non Terran race. I wonder how much time it will take them to understand that its not just slightly, its greatly!
#1 - i don't see it helping the Terrans. its not touching the core problems of TvP, and seems that in TvZ it will only help Terrans who got hit on their eco and cant afford this upgrades otherwise. the problem is that lake of AOE for the T to deal with the swarm of the zerg (this MU was balanced until they nerfed the mine)
#2 - this might help vs roach all ins, but i don't that this is the solution. if you can't scout it its your problem. its not like the zerg can hide their tech so easly and has tons of possibles all ins like the P that the Terran need a buff to stop them, Terrans need their AOE back. helping them out by removing options from the zerg will only make the game less entertaining.
What about increasing the receeding speed of creep? IF you kill a huge field, it still takes minutes to go away, if that'd happen faster, Terran could push on more easilly.
On April 30 2014 18:50 c0olL wrote: It took a half year, 13 premier tournaments with no Terran winner in a row with only two runner ups, two seasons of Code S with 3 or 4 Terrans for them to understand that TvZ and TvP are slightly in favor for the non Terran race. I wonder how much time it will take them to understand that its not just slightly, its greatly!
#1 - i don't see it helping the Terrans. its not touching the core problems of TvP, and seems that in TvZ it will only help Terrans who got hit on their eco and cant afford this upgrades otherwise. the problem is that lake of AOE for the T to deal with the swarm of the zerg (this MU was balanced until they nerfed the mine)
#2 - this might help vs roach all ins, but i don't that this is the solution. if you can't scout it its your problem. its not like the zerg can hide their tech so easly and has tons of possibles all ins like the P that the Terran need a buff to stop them, Terrans need their AOE back. helping them out by removing options from the zerg will only make the game less entertaining.
I'm sorry but this MU wasn't balanced with the old mines. It was a fucking invisible Brood War tank in SC2. As a NON pro players, mines were REAAAALLLLYYY hard to deal with.
On April 30 2014 18:52 SC2Toastie wrote: What about increasing the receeding speed of creep? IF you kill a huge field, it still takes minutes to go away, if that'd happen faster, Terran could push on more easilly.
That could be an idea too. The further it is from a tumor the faster it receeds ? Could be that creep spread a little less by tumor ?
The only opinion I have on this matter is that it is dumb that they want to fix Terran's fundamental early and late game issues with another mid game buff. I am disappointed that this is the approach Blizzard wants to take with SC2, but I understand. I don't think I will continue to be a part of the game though if this is their design philosophy. I think that both changes are meh at best (the first option is just straight up ridiculous) and they just kind of layer on top of Terran's powerful mid game without fixing the other issues Terran has.
I don't think anyone on Teamliquid or any forum has ever thought Terran had a weak mid game. I don't know why Blizzard keeps wanting to make solutions to Terran's problems mid game buffs. They've done this throughout all of HotS.
I'm sorry but this MU wasn't balanced with the old mines. It was a fucking invisible Brood War tank in SC2. As a NON pro players, mines were REAAAALLLLYYY hard to deal with.
It was starting to when zergs finally caught on to using overseers to sight and even take the hit. I remember a game with DRG before the nerf where he made mines insignificant. Of course, now they're nearly useless, as Bbyong just demonstrated with his GSL game.
On April 30 2014 18:50 c0olL wrote: It took a half year, 13 premier tournaments with no Terran winner in a row with only two runner ups, two seasons of Code S with 3 or 4 Terrans for them to understand that TvZ and TvP are slightly in favor for the non Terran race. I wonder how much time it will take them to understand that its not just slightly, its greatly!
#1 - i don't see it helping the Terrans. its not touching the core problems of TvP, and seems that in TvZ it will only help Terrans who got hit on their eco and cant afford this upgrades otherwise. the problem is that lake of AOE for the T to deal with the swarm of the zerg (this MU was balanced until they nerfed the mine)
#2 - this might help vs roach all ins, but i don't that this is the solution. if you can't scout it its your problem. its not like the zerg can hide their tech so easly and has tons of possibles all ins like the P that the Terran need a buff to stop them, Terrans need their AOE back. helping them out by removing options from the zerg will only make the game less entertaining.
I'm sorry but this MU wasn't balanced with the old mines. It was a fucking invisible Brood War tank in SC2. As a NON pro players, mines were REAAAALLLLYYY hard to deal with.
On April 30 2014 18:52 SC2Toastie wrote: What about increasing the receeding speed of creep? IF you kill a huge field, it still takes minutes to go away, if that'd happen faster, Terran could push on more easilly.
That could be an idea too. The further it is from a tumor the faster it receeds ? Could be that creep spread a little less by tumor ?
Storm and Colossi are also hard to deal with for NON pros. Also DRG showed the way with his bane splits.
I think if they would bring the old snipe / old EMP back the Ghost will get a Comeback especially in TvZ. Additional I would Nuke a huge Buff ( e.g. +DMG against shields ) because it is a pure joke compared with the Cost and the Countdown of a Nuke..
About option 1: Why are they always buffing bio more and more and when they finally say something like they are willing to cut costs on bio upgrades...why are they not willing to make armories 100/50 to help mech TvP and mech in general? Dkim seems to understand the concept that cutting a few 1 time upgrade costs can change the game entirely...but he's unwilling to do that for mech TvP via armories...
About option 2: Yes, hellions/transform should have been like that since the game came out because we payed for an expansion pack where one of the highlighted units was the hellions gaining the ability to transform but you rarely ever see this in games at all, at least professional games because it's only researched with late late game mech.
So...yeah. About TvP, only the first 10-15 minutes are broken in Protoss favor because of all-ins and proxied stargates + ferraricles and blink all-in + MSC nexus cannon forcing Terran to go reaper expand virtually every game. Nexus cannon alone forces Terran to have to get a 2nd command center because there is no reasonable way to open 1 base banshee or 1 base drop since it will be shut down.
And about TvZ...only reason it looks more Z favored are because of the maps and because the widow mine nerf imo. The mine nerf right now is allowing Zerg to virtually mass 1 unit, the mutalisk almost unimpeded. Revert mine nerf, match-up is back to normal. Of course then Zergs will complain again that they can't box select 200/200 ling bane muta and walk through a mine field...but they should not have been able to like they can right now.
About option 1: Why are they always buffing bio more and more and when they finally say something like they are willing to cut costs on bio upgrades...why are they not willing to make armories 100/50 to help mech TvP and mech in general? Dkim seems to understand the concept that cutting a few 1 time upgrade costs can change the game entirely...but he's unwilling to do that for mech TvP via armories...
About option 2: Yes, hellions/transform should have been like that since the game came out because we payed for an expansion pack where one of the highlighted units was the hellions gaining the ability to transform but you rarely ever see this in games at all, at least professional games because it's only researched with late late game mech.
So...yeah. About TvP, only the first 10-15 minutes are broken in Protoss favor because of all-ins and proxied stargates + ferraricles and blink all-in + MSC nexus cannon forcing Terran to go reaper expand virtually every game. Nexus cannon alone forces Terran to have to get a 2nd command center because there is no reasonable way to open 1 base banshee or 1 base drop since it will be shut down.
And about TvZ...only reason it looks more Z favored are because of the maps and because the widow mine nerf imo. The mine nerf right now is allowing Zerg to virtually mass 1 unit, the mutalisk almost unimpeded. Revert mine nerf, match-up is back to normal. Of course then Zergs will complain again that they can't box select 200/200 ling bane muta and walk through a mine field...but they should not have been able to like they can right now.
Hard so say for me but Avilo is right.
Yes, this seemes quite about right overall and in line with my own thoughts.
I'm sorry but this MU wasn't balanced with the old mines. It was a fucking invisible Brood War tank in SC2. As a NON pro players, mines were REAAAALLLLYYY hard to deal with.
It was starting to when zergs finally caught on to using overseers to sight and even take the hit. I remember a game with DRG before the nerf where he made mines insignificant. Of course, now they're nearly useless, as Bbyong just demonstrated with his GSL game.
And the second game between Bbyong vs. Dark demonstrates why mech is so frustfrating to play with. Eventually you will be fighting against waves of locusts.
On April 30 2014 18:54 FFW_Rude wrote: I'm sorry but this MU wasn't balanced with the old mines. It was a fucking invisible Brood War tank in SC2. As a NON pro players, mines were REAAAALLLLYYY hard to deal with.
That's the attitude that gave us a game where we can't see someone like Flash outmakro a slightly lesser pro gamer. The game should not be balanced around non pro gamers, in fact game balance should completely ignore the problems/opinions etc. pp. of non pro gamers. Mines were starting to get figured out on a pro level, just as mutas zvz began to get figured out when they overbuffed spores. Blizzard is continuing to fuck this game up, partially because the fundamental design has a lot of flaws that make it really hard to balance around (free units, forcefields etc.) and partially because they keep nerfing/buffing things as they get figured out on a pro level.
Stop rolling the dice on some weird unnecessary changes, hots is full of them. Roach burrow movement, hydra attack speed, spore massive over buff, oracle speed/acceleration buff and warp prism speed buff. Just stop already and let progamers figure out these problems. We'll never see anyone dominate the game for more than a few months when the game just keeps on changing and changing. If you feel like you have to change all the time maybe address the issue that the entire economy system of star 2 still has small maps and 15-20 minute games in mind. It should make sense to take more than 3 bases for other purposes than having more gas geysers.
I like that Blizzard is doing this "following up on balance" posts regularly now. That's a thing I want to continue.
I believe the upgrade cost change wouldn't be very effective, I don't think terran has a problem reaching the money they need to insta-build 2-2 or 3-3 already, and the upgrades still take the same (really long) time, so I'd argue nothing changes there. The savings are really meager. A reaper and a medivac extra? Not game changing I believe.
The Hellbat change, though, that feels good for me, and I do think that opens up interesting aggressive options in TvP (marauder hellbat?) and TvZ, though it might honestly be too strong (said as a Terran). But it's good to experiment, they can always just make the upgrade cheap/fast a la concussive shell if it's too much.
I'm surprised at the negativity. They are just giving us a heads up, proving they still look at the games, and offering ideas to make the game better. How's this a bad thing?
Probably the word 'slightly,' and the fact neither of these changes are going to keep terran from slipping further out of the pro scene, aside from one shot matches in proleague.
Option 1: - Terran infantry level 2 upgrade costs down from 175/175 to 150/150. - Terran infantry level 3 upgrade costs down from 250/250 to 200/200.
Not needed, but not a big deal, so why not. I have no idea why people think this will make Terrans get 3/3 faster in TvZ since the upgrades are supposed to be started as soon as the previous ones are done, and resources are not a problem for that. Unless reducing the upgrade cost magically implements Chrono boost on Orbitals, the 2/2 and 3/3 timings will be completely unchanged. At best this will make triple OC builds a bit smoother and that's all, really. The idea that 3/3 bio totally dominates 2/2 lings/banes/mutas is also wrong, you still lose most fights even with that temporary advantage (Zergs could already compete with 2/2 vs 3/3 + the old Mines, so now that the 3/3 vs 2/2 window is shorter [weaker Terran midgame = faster Hive] and the Mines are weaker, there is really no reason at all to freak out). Actually this change would be more helpful in TvP than in TvZ because Ghosts/Vikings are horribly expensive.
Option 2: - Remove the transformation servos upgrade. - Allow Hellions to transform to Hellbats when Hellbats are enabled with the armory.
This sounds insane. Having Terran automatically have 6-8 Hellbats in their Medivac push in TvZ (yep, the Armory is done at this time) is simply a bad idea. Having ForGG's mech style being able to turn 30 Hellions into 30 AoE Zealots in TvT is a terrible idea as well for bio. Just no.
To fix TvZ, address the real concerns:
- Halve muta regen. - Have Drilling Claws (remember this upgrade isn't done before 14' at best) boost a bit the AoE to an intermediate state between the pre-nerf Mines and the current ones. For example this:
Up to 1.25 radius: 40 (unchanged) From 1.25 to 1.5: 30 (up from 20) From 1.5 to 1.75: 15 (up from 10)
(For reference, the old Mine was 40 for the 3 values.)
Boom, TvZ bio fixed.
And please revert the Stim nerf so a bunch of TvP 2-bases timings just reap their long due death.
Balance aside, the tvz mu were alot better with the old widow mine. Both to watch and play. I see no reason why they cant go that way, AND if there are balance issues do something fun for zerg?
Infestors can block widowmines from shooting with their root. 3-3 upgrades for lings/banes at lair Iam sure there are other "easy" solutions to this, i say easy cuz blizzard have this philosophy "Carrers of the line"
These two things are very easy to get into the game, especially the infestor one since it only affect zvt and not any other mu.
After 1year of hots, they finally have a plan to encourage the transform of hellbat, a hellbat which have small amount of micro. To be completely honest, why do they wanna do this now, its much funnier seeing the old widowmine in place cuz it encourage micro and positioning for both sides while the hellbat isnt even close to ecnourage those things.
Removing Servos, for TvZ at least, gives Terran a more strength against Baneling Bursts. Verz Terran no real different vs Bio and the most I have seen a Terran make Hellions against Protoss is usually 2-4 and they are immediately suicided to keep Protoss from attacking.
On April 30 2014 19:48 Foxxan wrote: Balance aside, the tvz mu were alot better with the old widow mine. Both to watch and play. I see no reason why they cant go that way, AND if there are balance issues do something fun for zerg?
Infestors can block widowmines from shooting with their root. 3-3 upgrades for lings/banes at lair Iam sure there are other "easy" solutions to this, i say easy cuz blizzard have this philosophy "Carrers of the line"
These two things are very easy to get into the game, especially the infestor one since it only affect zvt and not any other mu.
After 1year of hots, they finally have a plan to encourage the transform of hellbat, a hellbat which have small amount of micro. To be completely honest, why do they wanna do this now, its much funnier seeing the old widowmine in place cuz it encourage micro and positioning for both sides while the hellbat isnt even close to ecnourage those things.
infestors ling style was not viable against old bio mine style because how mobile terran bio is and parade push basically pushes non stop and infestors just don't have enough energy and get snowballed. the amount of mobility makes it extremely easy to get infestors out of positioned and ling infestors itself is a difficult to split up defend drop and multi-prong aggression unit composition.
imo the widow mine is great for now except may need a buff in TvZ but certainly not old mines level.
The fact that terran no longer parade push is good because we have more positional games that relies on army movement with muta harass and drop defense and transition into bio mech rather than non stop poking, into zerg commit engagement that last less than 2 seconds because widow mine splashes everything.
Not to mention widow mine is far too "luck dependent" for a zone control unit, for an momentum based matchup, this much randomness swings the momentum way too quickly. I also like how pros are stacking up mines for muta defense, it makes the units more of a zone defense control unit that it should be.
Despite my constant bash on thedwf, I do agree that muta does need a nerf on regen and that mines do need some aoe buff. On the other hand, I wouldn't mind if bio mech gets a buff instead and not necessarily a muta nerf
About option 1: Why are they always buffing bio more and more and when they finally say something like they are willing to cut costs on bio upgrades...why are they not willing to make armories 100/50 to help mech TvP and mech in general? Dkim seems to understand the concept that cutting a few 1 time upgrade costs can change the game entirely...but he's unwilling to do that for mech TvP via armories...
About option 2: Yes, hellions/transform should have been like that since the game came out because we payed for an expansion pack where one of the highlighted units was the hellions gaining the ability to transform but you rarely ever see this in games at all, at least professional games because it's only researched with late late game mech.
So...yeah. About TvP, only the first 10-15 minutes are broken in Protoss favor because of all-ins and proxied stargates + ferraricles and blink all-in + MSC nexus cannon forcing Terran to go reaper expand virtually every game. Nexus cannon alone forces Terran to have to get a 2nd command center because there is no reasonable way to open 1 base banshee or 1 base drop since it will be shut down.
And about TvZ...only reason it looks more Z favored are because of the maps and because the widow mine nerf imo. The mine nerf right now is allowing Zerg to virtually mass 1 unit, the mutalisk almost unimpeded. Revert mine nerf, match-up is back to normal. Of course then Zergs will complain again that they can't box select 200/200 ling bane muta and walk through a mine field...but they should not have been able to like they can right now.
Hard so say for me but Avilo is right.
He is actually right most of the time. It's just his insufferable personality that makes people discredit his thoughts.
I really like the idea of implementing changes in favor of Terran, as the race has been a bit weak for quite some time now. However, again removing the morph upgrade or lowering the costs of bio upgrades is not the optimal approach, as it makes the game easier for Terran instead of making it harder for Zerg and Protoss (much like the Ghost energy upgrade buff).
Timewarp (if not removed from the game completely) needs to be an upgrade that Protoss has to spend research time and resources on (in Cybercore maybe), that would weaken any hard pressure Protoss can pull off, since that ability is not hard to execute at all and gives the opponent a huge disadvantage which he can't avoid in most defensive situations.
Also revert the splash nerf of Widow Mines to make them somewhat viable against Zerg again.
If I had to choose on of the proposed thoughts, I'd go with the morph upgrade, making bio upgrades cheaper is a really lackluster approach...
On April 30 2014 18:52 SC2Toastie wrote: What about increasing the receeding speed of creep? IF you kill a huge field, it still takes minutes to go away, if that'd happen faster, Terran could push on more easilly.
This is something I was hoping blizzard would have done during WoL BL/Infestor era. The standard 6 queen opening gave zerg crazy creep spread and it felt terran could never clear it effectively.
I still think it is something Blizzard should consider.
On April 30 2014 09:16 HelloSon wrote: Option 1: - Terran infantry level 2 upgrade costs down from 175/175 to 150/150. - Terran infantry level 3 upgrade costs down from 250/250 to 200/200.
An idea from the depths of hell! Given how amazingly well infantry upgrades scale against buildings, this would just allow medivac drops to focus fire a hatchery/nexus/OC and destroy it even faster, without worrying about any static defence or almost anything else there. If anything, I'd rather see the upgrades get a little stronger and then a buff to something else that affects bio troops, although not any sort of direct buffs to marines or marauders. -__-
Option 2: - Remove the transformation servos upgrade. - Allow Hellions to transform to Hellbats when Hellbats are enabled with the armory.
Yeah, sure, we don't see much of them any more thanks to the combination of the two changes. Nerfed (previously) hellbats but with the ability to transform with just an armoury does seem like the best option that comes to mind to buff terran. This might help Mech vs Protoss ever so slightly too.
On April 30 2014 18:52 SC2Toastie wrote: What about increasing the receeding speed of creep? IF you kill a huge field, it still takes minutes to go away, if that'd happen faster, Terran could push on more easilly.
This is something I was hoping blizzard would have done during WoL BL/Infestor era. The standard 6 queen opening gave zerg crazy creep spread and it felt terran could never clear it effectively.
I still think it is something Blizzard should consider.
Different races are different. Thats the unique feature of the Zerg race. And if you want to make creep to receede quicker, then give us creep-upgrade in lategame, or give overlord creep spread at tier1 with Evolution Chamber.
On April 30 2014 18:52 SC2Toastie wrote: What about increasing the receeding speed of creep? IF you kill a huge field, it still takes minutes to go away, if that'd happen faster, Terran could push on more easilly.
This is something I was hoping blizzard would have done during WoL BL/Infestor era. The standard 6 queen opening gave zerg crazy creep spread and it felt terran could never clear it effectively.
I still think it is something Blizzard should consider.
Yeah, the now-common usage of decent creep spread gives Zerg a HUGE comfort zone, that paired with Overlord spread gives Zerg players huge amounts of time spotting aggression early and reacting accordingly (let's not talk about the Zerg army gaining huge value while fighting on creep).
While I know it requires rather good mechanics to maintain that aggressive creep spread, there should be more efficient methods to deny creep IMO.
On April 30 2014 09:16 HelloSon wrote: Option 1: - Terran infantry level 2 upgrade costs down from 175/175 to 150/150. - Terran infantry level 3 upgrade costs down from 250/250 to 200/200.
An idea from the depths of hell! Given how amazingly well infantry upgrades scale against buildings, this would just allow medivac drops to focus fire a hatchery/nexus/OC and destroy it even faster, without worrying about any static defence or almost anything else there.
Sorry, but did you even think before writing this? Lowering the cost of upgrades changes nothing to the amount of damage bio deals...
On April 30 2014 18:52 SC2Toastie wrote: What about increasing the receeding speed of creep? IF you kill a huge field, it still takes minutes to go away, if that'd happen faster, Terran could push on more easilly.
This is something I was hoping blizzard would have done during WoL BL/Infestor era. The standard 6 queen opening gave zerg crazy creep spread and it felt terran could never clear it effectively.
I still think it is something Blizzard should consider.
Different races are different. Thats the unique feature of the Zerg race. And if you want to make creep to receede quicker, then give us creep-upgrade in lategame, or give overlord creep spread at tier1 with Evolution Chamber.
But you do see the difference between having almost complete map vision as long as tumors are spread and having to scan for one small area (which is also temporarily - detection capabilities not considered in this case)?
In a way i like the idea of cutting down upgrade prices since the protoss has chronoboost to get them faster then why would terran not have his own tweak to be a little faster too ? But maybe it would be unfair to zergs.
Also the upgrade has always been bull, removing it would be a great idea !
On April 30 2014 09:16 HelloSon wrote: Option 1: - Terran infantry level 2 upgrade costs down from 175/175 to 150/150. - Terran infantry level 3 upgrade costs down from 250/250 to 200/200.
An idea from the depths of hell! Given how amazingly well infantry upgrades scale against buildings, this would just allow medivac drops to focus fire a hatchery/nexus/OC and destroy it even faster, without worrying about any static defence or almost anything else there.
Sorry, but did you even think before writing this? Lowering the cost of upgrades changes nothing to the amount of damage bio deals...
Dont waste your time Mr. Downfall. Whats your opinion on these 2 proposed changes? Do you think the transformation upgrade could make a difference?
On April 30 2014 18:50 c0olL wrote: It took a half year, 13 premier tournaments with no Terran winner in a row with only two runner ups, two seasons of Code S with 3 or 4 Terrans for them to understand that TvZ and TvP are slightly in favor for the non Terran race. I wonder how much time it will take them to understand that its not just slightly, its greatly!
#1 - i don't see it helping the Terrans. its not touching the core problems of TvP, and seems that in TvZ it will only help Terrans who got hit on their eco and cant afford this upgrades otherwise. the problem is that lake of AOE for the T to deal with the swarm of the zerg (this MU was balanced until they nerfed the mine)
#2 - this might help vs roach all ins, but i don't that this is the solution. if you can't scout it its your problem. its not like the zerg can hide their tech so easly and has tons of possibles all ins like the P that the Terran need a buff to stop them, Terrans need their AOE back. helping them out by removing options from the zerg will only make the game less entertaining.
I'm sorry but this MU wasn't balanced with the old mines. It was a fucking invisible Brood War tank in SC2. As a NON pro players, mines were REAAAALLLLYYY hard to deal with.
On April 30 2014 18:52 SC2Toastie wrote: What about increasing the receeding speed of creep? IF you kill a huge field, it still takes minutes to go away, if that'd happen faster, Terran could push on more easilly.
That could be an idea too. The further it is from a tumor the faster it receeds ? Could be that creep spread a little less by tumor ?
Storm and Colossi are also hard to deal with for NON pros. Also DRG showed the way with his bane splits.
That's very true. But colossus and templar aren't cloacked and need to fire from a long distance. Mines shoot from short distance. You see them, you hope you react as quick as possible
I'm no DWF but I could definitely see the meatier Hellbat form help out vs pesky Roach/Bane builds, while not sacrificing the map control gained by the standard reaper/hellion opener
On April 30 2014 18:54 FFW_Rude wrote: I'm sorry but this MU wasn't balanced with the old mines. It was a fucking invisible Brood War tank in SC2. As a NON pro players, mines were REAAAALLLLYYY hard to deal with.
That's the attitude that gave us a game where we can't see someone like Flash outmakro a slightly lesser pro gamer. The game should not be balanced around non pro gamers, in fact game balance should completely ignore the problems/opinions etc. pp. of non pro gamers. Mines were starting to get figured out on a pro level, just as mutas zvz began to get figured out when they overbuffed spores. Blizzard is continuing to fuck this game up, partially because the fundamental design has a lot of flaws that make it really hard to balance around (free units, forcefields etc.) and partially because they keep nerfing/buffing things as they get figured out on a pro level.
Stop rolling the dice on some weird unnecessary changes, hots is full of them. Roach burrow movement, hydra attack speed, spore massive over buff, oracle speed/acceleration buff and warp prism speed buff. Just stop already and let progamers figure out these problems. We'll never see anyone dominate the game for more than a few months when the game just keeps on changing and changing. If you feel like you have to change all the time maybe address the issue that the entire economy system of star 2 still has small maps and 15-20 minute games in mind. It should make sense to take more than 3 bases for other purposes than having more gas geysers.
I know that you are kind of right (kind of). But if normal people can't play the game because it's too hard. They lose interest. If they lose interest, why watch ? It's a tricky situation really. I'm not trying ot be an ass. I'm just trying to talk about this (and broken english doesn't help :p)
There's lot of different opinions even in the pro scene of what should or should not be done. It's hard to have a list in mind of all the possibilities.
On April 30 2014 18:52 SC2Toastie wrote: What about increasing the receeding speed of creep? IF you kill a huge field, it still takes minutes to go away, if that'd happen faster, Terran could push on more easilly.
This is something I was hoping blizzard would have done during WoL BL/Infestor era. The standard 6 queen opening gave zerg crazy creep spread and it felt terran could never clear it effectively.
I still think it is something Blizzard should consider.
Different races are different. Thats the unique feature of the Zerg race. And if you want to make creep to receede quicker, then give us creep-upgrade in lategame, or give overlord creep spread at tier1 with Evolution Chamber.
But you do see the difference between having almost complete map vision as long as tumors are spread and having to scan for one small area (which is also temporarily - detection capabilities not considered in this case)?
I don't see why. Do you know that an aggressive scan of Terran can kill a huge area of creep tumors - which still means nothing because the creep will remain for 3 more minutes? T1 creep spew will easily become OP with roaches / expo denial / wall denial. I'm fine with a nerf to creep spread and a hive upgrade to make creep stronger again!
ZvP This matchup may have shifted slightly in-favor of Zerg recently.
Why you think this? I see a lot of Korean Sc2 and Toss all time wins this matchup in early and in lategame. If the zerg plays Mass muta it can only work if the zerg have 6 or 7 base eco. Other one imba Tossball voids colloss hightemplar is unstoppable. i never have seen a zerg can win vs this ball.
On April 30 2014 09:16 HelloSon wrote: Option 1: - Terran infantry level 2 upgrade costs down from 175/175 to 150/150. - Terran infantry level 3 upgrade costs down from 250/250 to 200/200.
An idea from the depths of hell! Given how amazingly well infantry upgrades scale against buildings, this would just allow medivac drops to focus fire a hatchery/nexus/OC and destroy it even faster, without worrying about any static defence or almost anything else there.
Sorry, but did you even think before writing this? Lowering the cost of upgrades changes nothing to the amount of damage bio deals...
Dont waste your time Mr. Downfall. Whats your opinion on these 2 proposed changes? Do you think the transformation upgrade could make a difference?
On April 30 2014 09:16 HelloSon wrote: Option 1: - Terran infantry level 2 upgrade costs down from 175/175 to 150/150. - Terran infantry level 3 upgrade costs down from 250/250 to 200/200.
An idea from the depths of hell! Given how amazingly well infantry upgrades scale against buildings, this would just allow medivac drops to focus fire a hatchery/nexus/OC and destroy it even faster, without worrying about any static defence or almost anything else there.
Sorry, but did you even think before writing this? Lowering the cost of upgrades changes nothing to the amount of damage bio deals...
Dont waste your time Mr. Downfall. Whats your opinion on these 2 proposed changes? Do you think the transformation upgrade could make a difference?
On April 30 2014 09:16 HelloSon wrote: Option 1: - Terran infantry level 2 upgrade costs down from 175/175 to 150/150. - Terran infantry level 3 upgrade costs down from 250/250 to 200/200.
An idea from the depths of hell! Given how amazingly well infantry upgrades scale against buildings, this would just allow medivac drops to focus fire a hatchery/nexus/OC and destroy it even faster, without worrying about any static defence or almost anything else there.
Sorry, but did you even think before writing this? Lowering the cost of upgrades changes nothing to the amount of damage bio deals...
Dont waste your time Mr. Downfall. Whats your opinion on these 2 proposed changes? Do you think the transformation upgrade could make a difference?
bunch of terran noobs whining, toss was already nerfed, and terran is buffed, and now they 'buff' terran a bit more, this is insane, terran players don't suck, but toss and zerg players are just way ahead of the metagame, also, terran has been dominating in 2010, 2011, (a-bit of 2012) and 2013, NO-ONE complained, WHY ARE PPL COMPLAINING NOW THAT TERRANS ARE NOT IN THAT STAGE, toss sucked last year, like only 6-8 champions and fuking 15 for terran and 13 for zerg, no-one complained, now toss (and zerg, a bit) dominates and everyone complains, just shows how fked up terran players are, bunch of noobs really, im a toss and zerg player, im teling you, in my league terran is actually pretty hard to beat, its just you guys don't know how to play. And also, why continue to decrease the cost of terran army, no difference in time, and this upgrade affects vZ more than vP, because zergs can't get 3/3 as fast as terran due to hive issue, unless they deal critical amounts of damage in the early game, so Tosses are still not affected that much this 'buff' is useless against toss only against zerg, so still useless upgrade in TvP
On April 30 2014 18:54 FFW_Rude wrote: I'm sorry but this MU wasn't balanced with the old mines. It was a fucking invisible Brood War tank in SC2. As a NON pro players, mines were REAAAALLLLYYY hard to deal with.
That's the attitude that gave us a game where we can't see someone like Flash outmakro a slightly lesser pro gamer. The game should not be balanced around non pro gamers, in fact game balance should completely ignore the problems/opinions etc. pp. of non pro gamers. Mines were starting to get figured out on a pro level, just as mutas zvz began to get figured out when they overbuffed spores. Blizzard is continuing to fuck this game up, partially because the fundamental design has a lot of flaws that make it really hard to balance around (free units, forcefields etc.) and partially because they keep nerfing/buffing things as they get figured out on a pro level.
Stop rolling the dice on some weird unnecessary changes, hots is full of them. Roach burrow movement, hydra attack speed, spore massive over buff, oracle speed/acceleration buff and warp prism speed buff. Just stop already and let progamers figure out these problems. We'll never see anyone dominate the game for more than a few months when the game just keeps on changing and changing. If you feel like you have to change all the time maybe address the issue that the entire economy system of star 2 still has small maps and 15-20 minute games in mind. It should make sense to take more than 3 bases for other purposes than having more gas geysers.
I know that you are kind of right (kind of). But if normal people can't play the game because it's too hard. They lose interest. If they lose interest, why watch ? It's a tricky situation really. I'm not trying ot be an ass. I'm just trying to talk about this (and broken english doesn't help :p)
There's lot of different opinions even in the pro scene of what should or should not be done. It's hard to have a list in mind of all the possibilities.
People watched and loved BW for almost 15 years, hell they still do, and it's probably the hardest RTS ever played at a competitive level. How many people who watch champion's league can play football properly? It's all about the entertainment value for the viewer.
On April 30 2014 09:16 HelloSon wrote: Option 1: - Terran infantry level 2 upgrade costs down from 175/175 to 150/150. - Terran infantry level 3 upgrade costs down from 250/250 to 200/200.
An idea from the depths of hell! Given how amazingly well infantry upgrades scale against buildings, this would just allow medivac drops to focus fire a hatchery/nexus/OC and destroy it even faster, without worrying about any static defence or almost anything else there.
Sorry, but did you even think before writing this? Lowering the cost of upgrades changes nothing to the amount of damage bio deals...
Dont waste your time Mr. Downfall. Whats your opinion on these 2 proposed changes? Do you think the transformation upgrade could make a difference?
Still would've preferred to see some Muta regen nerf or a Tank buff. I miss tanks in TvZ. It was so much fun to watch and play in WoL vs Ling/Bane/Muta.
Why was the regen even added in HotS? I get the speed buff to catch up to boosted Medivacs but why was the regen needed? It just meant Tanks could be picked off without any cost to the Mutas. (and Zerg also has Blinding Cloud)
On April 30 2014 18:52 SC2Toastie wrote: What about increasing the receeding speed of creep? IF you kill a huge field, it still takes minutes to go away, if that'd happen faster, Terran could push on more easilly.
This is something I was hoping blizzard would have done during WoL BL/Infestor era. The standard 6 queen opening gave zerg crazy creep spread and it felt terran could never clear it effectively.
I still think it is something Blizzard should consider.
Different races are different. Thats the unique feature of the Zerg race. And if you want to make creep to receede quicker, then give us creep-upgrade in lategame, or give overlord creep spread at tier1 with Evolution Chamber.
But you do see the difference between having almost complete map vision as long as tumors are spread and having to scan for one small area (which is also temporarily - detection capabilities not considered in this case)?
I don't see why. Do you know that an aggressive scan of Terran can kill a huge area of creep tumors - which still means nothing because the creep will remain for 3 more minutes? T1 creep spew will easily become OP with roaches / expo denial / wall denial. I'm fine with a nerf to creep spread and a hive upgrade to make creep stronger again!
That statement seems a little bit contradictionary to me :D But I agree ^^
It's not that I think creep is insanely OP, but Zerg players nowadays often don't seem to appreciate the luxuary of having such a wide and permanent field of vision, while Terrans struggle to restrain that to gain more options for harassment going through undetected.
On April 30 2014 18:54 FFW_Rude wrote: I'm sorry but this MU wasn't balanced with the old mines. It was a fucking invisible Brood War tank in SC2. As a NON pro players, mines were REAAAALLLLYYY hard to deal with.
That's the attitude that gave us a game where we can't see someone like Flash outmakro a slightly lesser pro gamer. The game should not be balanced around non pro gamers, in fact game balance should completely ignore the problems/opinions etc. pp. of non pro gamers. Mines were starting to get figured out on a pro level, just as mutas zvz began to get figured out when they overbuffed spores. Blizzard is continuing to fuck this game up, partially because the fundamental design has a lot of flaws that make it really hard to balance around (free units, forcefields etc.) and partially because they keep nerfing/buffing things as they get figured out on a pro level.
Stop rolling the dice on some weird unnecessary changes, hots is full of them. Roach burrow movement, hydra attack speed, spore massive over buff, oracle speed/acceleration buff and warp prism speed buff. Just stop already and let progamers figure out these problems. We'll never see anyone dominate the game for more than a few months when the game just keeps on changing and changing. If you feel like you have to change all the time maybe address the issue that the entire economy system of star 2 still has small maps and 15-20 minute games in mind. It should make sense to take more than 3 bases for other purposes than having more gas geysers.
I know that you are kind of right (kind of). But if normal people can't play the game because it's too hard. They lose interest. If they lose interest, why watch ? It's a tricky situation really. I'm not trying ot be an ass. I'm just trying to talk about this (and broken english doesn't help :p)
There's lot of different opinions even in the pro scene of what should or should not be done. It's hard to have a list in mind of all the possibilities.
People watched and loved BW for almost 15 years, hell they still do, and it's probably the hardest RTS ever played at a competitive level. How many people who watch champion's league can play football properly? It's all about the entertainment value for the viewer.
Yeah.. maybe you're right.
One missclick can't kill you in BW. but.. yeah i think i'm talking crap. In fact i stopped playing and still watch so... you ARE right.
On April 30 2014 21:03 MiniFotToss wrote: bunch of terran noobs whining, toss was already nerfed, and terran is buffed, and now they 'buff' terran a bit more, this is insane, terran players don't suck, but toss and zerg players are just way ahead of the metagame, also, terran has been dominating in 2010, 2011, (a-bit of 2012) and 2013, NO-ONE complained, WHY ARE PPL COMPLAINING NOW THAT TERRANS ARE NOT IN THAT STAGE, toss sucked last year, like only 6-8 champions and fuking 15 for terran and 13 for zerg, no-one complained, now toss (and zerg, a bit) dominates and everyone complains, just shows how fked up terran players are, bunch of noobs really, im a toss and zerg player, im teling you, in my league terran is actually pretty hard to beat, its just you guys don't know how to play. And also, why continue to decrease the cost of terran army, no difference in time, and this upgrade affects vZ more than vP, because zergs can't get 3/3 as fast as terran due to hive issue, unless they deal critical amounts of damage in the early game, so Tosses are still not affected that much this 'buff' is useless against toss only against zerg, so still useless upgrade in TvP
Upgrade buff seems useless but meh, you might have a bit more ressource to prod 2 marines or so. I wonder how removing the Cervos upgrade will do. Might be too strong in midgame TvZ, but this is where terran are lacking at the moment (mainly because of new mappool). In TvT it might change or might not, I don't see ForGG transforming his 20 hellions into hellbat in the middlle of the opponent's army tho. Will see.
On April 30 2014 21:11 Faust852 wrote: Upgrade buff seems useless but meh, you might have a bit more ressource to prod 2 marines or so. I wonder how removing the Cervos upgrade will do. Might be too strong in midgame TvZ, but this is where terran are lacking at the moment (mainly because of new mappool). In TvT it might change or might not, I don't see ForGG transforming his 20 hellions into hellbat in the middlle of the opponent's army tho. Will see.
Not in the battle, of course; I meant before the engagement.
On April 30 2014 18:54 FFW_Rude wrote: I'm sorry but this MU wasn't balanced with the old mines. It was a fucking invisible Brood War tank in SC2. As a NON pro players, mines were REAAAALLLLYYY hard to deal with.
That's the attitude that gave us a game where we can't see someone like Flash outmakro a slightly lesser pro gamer. The game should not be balanced around non pro gamers, in fact game balance should completely ignore the problems/opinions etc. pp. of non pro gamers. Mines were starting to get figured out on a pro level, just as mutas zvz began to get figured out when they overbuffed spores. Blizzard is continuing to fuck this game up, partially because the fundamental design has a lot of flaws that make it really hard to balance around (free units, forcefields etc.) and partially because they keep nerfing/buffing things as they get figured out on a pro level.
Stop rolling the dice on some weird unnecessary changes, hots is full of them. Roach burrow movement, hydra attack speed, spore massive over buff, oracle speed/acceleration buff and warp prism speed buff. Just stop already and let progamers figure out these problems. We'll never see anyone dominate the game for more than a few months when the game just keeps on changing and changing. If you feel like you have to change all the time maybe address the issue that the entire economy system of star 2 still has small maps and 15-20 minute games in mind. It should make sense to take more than 3 bases for other purposes than having more gas geysers.
I know that you are kind of right (kind of). But if normal people can't play the game because it's too hard. They lose interest. If they lose interest, why watch ? It's a tricky situation really. I'm not trying ot be an ass. I'm just trying to talk about this (and broken english doesn't help :p)
There's lot of different opinions even in the pro scene of what should or should not be done. It's hard to have a list in mind of all the possibilities.
Well the majority of people who watched Brood War didn't really play Brood War. When they booted up the game they played UMS and only a small minority actually laddered continuously. This holds true for Korean fans and foreigners. Sadly Blizzard decided to launch the game without arcade and chat channels so a shit ton of people who'd be playing UMS are already gone. However, Starcraft 2 is one of the few games in eSports that has people watching who don't play. I don't necessarily believe one has to play to enjoy watching. I think eSports is about watching Progamers do shit that you can't even imagine doing yourself and having your mind blown by the insane skill level displayed in pro matches.
Korean pros seem to mainly agree that leaving the game alone is the correct approach and, no offense to foreigners, but I'd much rather listen to the people playing this game 12+ hours a day in team houses over those playing from home for a couple hours a day. Sadly, Blizzard seems to prefer to mainly listen to caster feedback.
I understand that the game needs to be approachable even for bad players, but if you loose a game under Diamond, no matter how broken the game is on a pro level, you probably lost it because you messed up more than your opponent, not because the game is too hard.
On April 30 2014 19:48 TheDwf wrote: To fix TvZ, address the real concerns:
- Halve muta regen.
That's solid, the only problem with it is Blizzard really don't like reverting patches. They have weird pride/face issues.
On April 30 2014 19:48 TheDwf wrote: - Have Drilling Claws (remember this upgrade isn't done before 14' at best) boost a bit the AoE to an intermediate state between the pre-nerf Mines and the current ones. For example this:
Up to 1.25 radius: 40 (unchanged) From 1.25 to 1.5: 30 (up from 20) From 1.5 to 1.75: 15 (up from 10)
I like the idea of a slight splash damage boost instead of drilling claws. But it has to be well balanced to the expected upgrade state. It can't be oneshotting 30 lings, it was way too severe an effect for an easily made micro error. Drilling claws seems a cheap as it opens up run mass mines under the army gimmicks. Forgetting to burrow your mines should be a bad mistake like failing to siege your tanks.
If you reduce muta regen tanks become more viable again anyway and a tank mine mix can work fairly nicely. I think they need to go the other way, stop slashing upgrades and add a late game tank upgrade that increases tank splash. IF you want to push it later put it on the armoury instead of the tech lab so its a choice of mech/air ups or tanks (or more armouries).
I like free servos, if it means hellbats need to lose a bit of hp or splash range to balance it that's fine, other than the transformers bit the units boring and pretty muich unmicroable anyway.
On April 30 2014 21:03 MiniFotToss wrote: bunch of terran noobs whining, toss was already nerfed, and terran is buffed, and now they 'buff' terran a bit more, this is insane, terran players don't suck, but toss and zerg players are just way ahead of the metagame, also, terran has been dominating in 2010, 2011, (a-bit of 2012) and 2013, NO-ONE complained, WHY ARE PPL COMPLAINING NOW THAT TERRANS ARE NOT IN THAT STAGE, toss sucked last year, like only 6-8 champions and fuking 15 for terran and 13 for zerg, no-one complained, now toss (and zerg, a bit) dominates and everyone complains, just shows how fked up terran players are, bunch of noobs really, im a toss and zerg player, im teling you, in my league terran is actually pretty hard to beat, its just you guys don't know how to play. And also, why continue to decrease the cost of terran army, no difference in time, and this upgrade affects vZ more than vP, because zergs can't get 3/3 as fast as terran due to hive issue, unless they deal critical amounts of damage in the early game, so Tosses are still not affected that much this 'buff' is useless against toss only against zerg, so still useless upgrade in TvP
Answer 1 (if you are joking): you spent 5 minutes of your precious life very well.
Answer 2 (if you are serious): -Precedent statuses of the game are irrelevant balance-wise. -I can see that in ZvT there is a slight imbalance towards Z (nothing big obviously). -PvT is also slightly imbalanced towards P and it's very frustrating to play because coin flips -Your personal experience is not relevant when we speak about the top level
And this comes from a Z player, for your information.
On April 30 2014 09:16 HelloSon wrote: Option 1: - Terran infantry level 2 upgrade costs down from 175/175 to 150/150. - Terran infantry level 3 upgrade costs down from 250/250 to 200/200.
An idea from the depths of hell! Given how amazingly well infantry upgrades scale against buildings, this would just allow medivac drops to focus fire a hatchery/nexus/OC and destroy it even faster, without worrying about any static defence or almost anything else there.
Sorry, but did you even think before writing this? Lowering the cost of upgrades changes nothing to the amount of damage bio deals...
Dont waste your time Mr. Downfall. Whats your opinion on these 2 proposed changes? Do you think the transformation upgrade could make a difference?
haha I was "temporarily suspended" on the bnet forums for 4,166 days for "harassment" for stating that the best balance update that can happen to sc2 is the removal of david kim from the balance team just as diablo 3 did for jay wilson.
On April 30 2014 21:20 shivver wrote: haha I was "temporarily suspended" on the bnet forums for 4,166 days for "harassment" for stating that the best balance update that can happen to sc2 is the removal of david kim from the balance team just as diablo 3 did for jay wilson.
truth hurts and I guess I hit a sweet spot
nofuksgiven/
It just makes you a respectless pos, wouldn't be too proud of that.
On April 30 2014 21:06 Wombat_NI wrote: Rofl aye that's it man Zerg and Protoss players just too damn smart
It was amazing to watch how protoss would constantly outsmart terrans using nothing but blink stalkers. Clearly it was just a matter of insufficient intelligence on the part of the terrans.
On April 30 2014 21:20 shivver wrote: haha I was "temporarily suspended" on the bnet forums for 4,166 days for "harassment" for stating that the best balance update that can happen to sc2 is the removal of david kim from the balance team just as diablo 3 did for jay wilson.
truth hurts and I guess I hit a sweet spot
nofuksgiven/
Careful folks, we have a badass amongst us.
Relating back to thread, just watched Bbyongb vs Dark on Waystation, my first experience of that map. Another map that is IMO far, far too big. Can we have less sillily large maps and perhaps we'll see a difference
On April 30 2014 21:15 Lorch wrote: Korean pros seem to mainly agree that leaving the game alone is the correct approach
And it is indeed, but for that the game needs to be at least in a decent state. There were opportunities like this earlier in HotS but Blizzard kept randomly patching.
On April 30 2014 21:20 shivver wrote: haha I was "temporarily suspended" on the bnet forums for 4,166 days for "harassment" for stating that the best balance update that can happen to sc2 is the removal of david kim from the balance team just as diablo 3 did for jay wilson.
truth hurts and I guess I hit a sweet spot
nofuksgiven/
Careful folks, we have a badass amongst us.
Relating back to thread, just watched Bbyongb vs Dark on Waystation, my first experience of that map. Another map that is IMO far, far too big. Can we have less sillily large maps and perhaps we'll see a difference
I've written fucking essays on the map topic, suffice to say Sc2 map making is beyond fucked. So many crippling restrictions, and more being added constantly because it's easier to blame maps than actually fixing broken shit in the game(blink all ins come to mind). The only thing that isn't broken is to just make huge maps so players are almost forced to macro at least for a while.
Making good maps for this game is a labour worthy of Hercules, and I'm not sure I wouldn't rather take on a Hydra.
On April 30 2014 21:20 shivver wrote: haha I was "temporarily suspended" on the bnet forums for 4,166 days for "harassment" for stating that the best balance update that can happen to sc2 is the removal of david kim from the balance team just as diablo 3 did for jay wilson.
truth hurts and I guess I hit a sweet spot
nofuksgiven/
Careful folks, we have a badass amongst us.
Relating back to thread, just watched Bbyongb vs Dark on Waystation, my first experience of that map. Another map that is IMO far, far too big. Can we have less sillily large maps and perhaps we'll see a difference
I think the large map actually helped bbyong in that game. There was a moment where bbyong looked away from his army to run his scvs away from banelings in the third base and lost it. If the map was smaller he would have lost right there.
On April 30 2014 21:20 shivver wrote: haha I was "temporarily suspended" on the bnet forums for 4,166 days for "harassment" for stating that the best balance update that can happen to sc2 is the removal of david kim from the balance team just as diablo 3 did for jay wilson.
truth hurts and I guess I hit a sweet spot
nofuksgiven/
Careful folks, we have a badass amongst us.
Relating back to thread, just watched Bbyongb vs Dark on Waystation, my first experience of that map. Another map that is IMO far, far too big. Can we have less sillily large maps and perhaps we'll see a difference
I think the large map actually helped bbyong in that game. There was a moment where bbyong looked away from his army to run his scvs away from banelings in the third base and lost it. If the map was smaller he would have lost right there.
If it was smaller Dark couldn't get away taking that much funding from his main army at the first place.
That was a 1/1 poke being shut down WHILE 10 banelings killed a third mineral line. On decent maps (where Terran was nerfed/balanced for) that poke is like, not going to be killed when you miss that much from your army.
aha PvT is imba cause P is OP TvZ is imba because Z is OP
So nothing new here, but it takes too long for you blizzard to make changes, but it is nice to see that it is not only the communitys opinion, but also blizzard recognized it.
So nothing new here, but it takes too long for you blizzard to make changes, but it is nice to see that it is not only the communitys opinion, but also blizzard recognized it.
a bit too late, another PvZ, ZvZ, PvP code S ahead. That sucks.
Still, if Blizzard releases the patch before another Ts play in Code S, it will be so unfair for Bbyong.
So nothing new here, but it takes too long for you blizzard to make changes, but it is nice to see that it is not only the communitys opinion, but also blizzard recognized it.
a bit too late, another PvZ, ZvZ, PvP code S ahead. That sucks.
will be a while that way, since you don't get the already qualified ones out of the system that fast. Also showing how long this imbalance has been there.
interesting, that the "pro players" are complaining about how stront T is in TvP (crying in the Rain). Maybe there are patchzergs and patchprotosses and ofc patchterrans. Speaking of the last ones: Where is my bunker build time change?
On April 30 2014 21:54 TW wrote: I diidn't look at the nr of viewers for Code S today, but wonder if there is a difference between the group with T and without them.
You don't have to wonder about that, it's clear that tons of viewers don't tune in for PvPvZvPvZvZ
On April 30 2014 21:54 TW wrote: I diidn't look at the nr of viewers for Code S today, but wonder if there is a difference between the group with T and without them. (sorry a bit off topic)
So nothing new here, but it takes too long for you blizzard to make changes, but it is nice to see that it is not only the communitys opinion, but also blizzard recognized it.
a bit too late, another PvZ, ZvZ, PvP code S ahead. That sucks.
Still, if Blizzard releases the patch before another Ts play in Code S, it will be so unfair for Bbyong.
Blizzcon will be ZvP fest to. Basically, we need to wait until LotV to see terrans agaim.
Can someone explain me why they expect 150/150 "bonus" money for terran to actually help them? It seems random and almost unsignificant from a watcher perspective.
Personally I'd like to see creep maybe looked at come to think of it, at least recession speed. It's clear that creep spread is far far better on average than it used to be and makes a huge difference especially on large maps vT
On April 30 2014 21:59 nojok wrote: Can someone explain me why they expect 150/150 "bonus" money for terran to actually help them? It seems random and almost unsignificant from a watcher perspective.
Because they are afraid to do real changes since it could hurt the careers of professional zerg and protoss players obviously.
So nothing new here, but it takes too long for you blizzard to make changes, but it is nice to see that it is not only the communitys opinion, but also blizzard recognized it.
a bit too late, another PvZ, ZvZ, PvP code S ahead. That sucks.
Still, if Blizzard releases the patch before another Ts play in Code S, it will be so unfair for Bbyong.
Blizzcon will be ZvP fest to. Basically, we need to wait until LotV to see terrans agaim.
From a money standpoint there is no need to make the game balanced or better, we are going to buy the next expansion anyway. I hope it doesnt get as bad as the end of WoL.
So nothing new here, but it takes too long for you blizzard to make changes, but it is nice to see that it is not only the communitys opinion, but also blizzard recognized it.
a bit too late, another PvZ, ZvZ, PvP code S ahead. That sucks.
Still, if Blizzard releases the patch before another Ts play in Code S, it will be so unfair for Bbyong.
Blizzcon will be ZvP fest to. Basically, we need to wait until LotV to see terrans agaim.
From a money standpoint there is no need to make the game balanced or better, we are going to buy the next expansion anyway. I hope it doesnt get as bad as the end of WoL.
I'll not buy it at this rate, know many of my friends who quit playing and say the same, even good players. For the most part Terrans sick of how hard they feel they have to work, but don't want to race switch.
Then again there will also be drop offs just because of oversaturation/being bored of the game and wanting to do other things.
On April 30 2014 21:15 Lorch wrote: Korean pros seem to mainly agree that leaving the game alone is the correct approach
And it is indeed, but for that the game needs to be at least in a decent state. There were opportunities like this earlier in HotS but Blizzard kept randomly patching.
And that is why I would like to see most changes reverted so we actually have that chance again. Generally speaking, there are two approaches to balancing: Acting immediately as an issue occurs and waiting as long as you can to ensure that the issue cannot be fixed by progamers. Sadly, Blizzard takes a wierd middle road where they often act as progamers are starting to resolve the issues.
On April 30 2014 21:54 TW wrote: I diidn't look at the nr of viewers for Code S today, but wonder if there is a difference between the group with T and without them.
You don't have to wonder about that, it's clear that tons of viewers don't tune in for PvPvZvPvZvZ
And I turned off DreamHack once all the Protoss were out. I can't imagine I was the only one. So what..?
Ok, good to know!
Sadly, it happens to a lot more tournaments that all Terrans go out, than all Protoss going out.
On April 30 2014 21:59 nojok wrote: Can someone explain me why they expect 150/150 "bonus" money for terran to actually help them? It seems random and almost unsignificant from a watcher perspective.
Because they are afraid to do real changes since it could hurt the careers of professional zerg and protoss players obviously.
Blizzard wants foreigners to stay competitive, because it correlates to the popularity of the game in the West. Thus they tend to err on the side of not overbuffing terran.
Also what's with thor's focus priority? Wouldn't it be nice if mutas became the prior target again? Most of the times I see thors wasting shots at zerglings/whatever because it's hard to always target mutas especially drop-microing thors at the same time.
I just tend to tune out if you have a ton of the same matchup a consecutively regardless of what the races are. It's why I loved IEM Cologne so much, a pretty good racial mix and epic Bo5s
Case with most tournaments for me these days I end up religiously watching the group stages and tune out towards the business end when it's XvX tons of times in a row.
On April 30 2014 22:23 juvenal wrote: Also what's with thor's focus priority? Wouldn't it be nice if mutas became the prior target again? Most of the times I see thors wasting shots at zerglings/whatever because it's hard to always target mutas especially drop-microing thors at the same time.
On April 30 2014 22:23 juvenal wrote: Also what's with thor's focus priority? Wouldn't it be nice if mutas became the prior target again? Most of the times I see thors wasting shots at zerglings/whatever because it's hard to always target mutas especially drop-microing thors at the same time.
They used to IIRC, was changed for some reason.
Talking WOL beta here
yeah I remember it changing, I think postbeta even.
i can't understand while they say "they try to buff mech TvP" they constantly come up with ideas that buff bio even more while in all matchups Terran bio is strongly over present. Goths, mines, and now this Nr #1 option.
On April 30 2014 21:54 TW wrote: I diidn't look at the nr of viewers for Code S today, but wonder if there is a difference between the group with T and without them.
You don't have to wonder about that, it's clear that tons of viewers don't tune in for PvPvZvPvZvZ
And I turned off DreamHack once all the Protoss were out. I can't imagine I was the only one. So what..?
You haven't been turning tournament streams off to often though.
On April 30 2014 21:54 TW wrote: I diidn't look at the nr of viewers for Code S today, but wonder if there is a difference between the group with T and without them.
You don't have to wonder about that, it's clear that tons of viewers don't tune in for PvPvZvPvZvZ
And I turned off DreamHack once all the Protoss were out. I can't imagine I was the only one. So what..?
Ok, good to know!
Sadly, it happens to a lot more tournaments that all Terrans go out, than all Protoss going out.
Well, since you initially spoke about GSL, I'm pretty sure that the GSL numbers are where they are because the previous map-pools have been quite heavily Blink favoured. The maps were designed before two-base Blink all-ins became a thing and that showed. It's going to take a while for that to equalise now that the maps aren't disastrously bad for Terran vs. Blink all-ins. Aside from Blink, I don't see (and have not seen) any convincing arguments that point to something specifically imbalanced about Protoss or Zerg... not that I would claim to understand TvZ enough to judge!
How much more convincing do you want, with both winrates being near 45% WHILST the representation is bordering 15%-20%...?
Yes for the hellbat change. That upgrade was a drag to research and not justified since the several hellbat nerfs. The bio upgrade change seems a bit futile. First, at the point you're researching Lvl 2 and up, you're not struggling for gas, so you gain like a single marine worth of minerals with both upgrades? It's not doing much. And second, Terran bio doesn't really need a buff, it's fine where it is.
Either way, I'm not convinced either of those will help Terran. And I think Terran is way worse off than David Kim lets it sound like in his post. The very best players of Terran haven't been doing shit against the mid-range class of the two other races for like months now.
Disclaimer: I don't actually know a lot about this game
Why change the upgrade cost? Isn't it normal to start them right away? It doesn't really seem like upgrades are such a big deal in this matchup. I've lost count how many times the casters go: 'Terran has the upgrade lead now, this is their advantage!' and then the fight seem to go the same was as they did with 2-2 vs 2-2. This change seems so....useless even?
Hellbat change: I love watching bio/mech compositions, but I don't know if this might be to good for those early TvZ pushes. Remember that hellbats can be healed by medivacs aswel. And I don't even want to think about TvT with those mass hellion openings
On April 30 2014 21:54 TW wrote: I diidn't look at the nr of viewers for Code S today, but wonder if there is a difference between the group with T and without them.
You don't have to wonder about that, it's clear that tons of viewers don't tune in for PvPvZvPvZvZ
And I turned off DreamHack once all the Protoss were out. I can't imagine I was the only one. So what..?
Ok, good to know!
Sadly, it happens to a lot more tournaments that all Terrans go out, than all Protoss going out.
Well, since you initially spoke about GSL, I'm pretty sure that the GSL numbers are where they are because the previous map-pools have been quite heavily Blink favoured. The maps were designed before two-base Blink all-ins became a thing and that showed. It's going to take a while for that to equalise now that the maps aren't disastrously bad for Terran vs. Blink all-ins. Aside from Blink, I don't see (and have not seen) any convincing arguments that point to something specifically imbalanced about Protoss or Zerg... not that I would claim to understand TvZ enough to judge!
How much more convincing do you want, with both winrates being near 45% WHILST the representation is bordering 15%-20%...?
Aligulac is down for me right now, but I know that the last time I looked the winrates were not at 45%. If you're cherry-picking data from GSL only then I'm not interested in discussing that
Representation (I assume you mean GSL numbers) will take seasons to sort out, and the seasons are hardly short. It took a while for GomTvT to sort itself out even after Terran became balanced. Remember?
Here you are.
Also, with only 8 players in Code S and Code A being openly accesible, it should sort out kinda fast. This season, it stayed the same.
On April 30 2014 21:54 TW wrote: I diidn't look at the nr of viewers for Code S today, but wonder if there is a difference between the group with T and without them.
You don't have to wonder about that, it's clear that tons of viewers don't tune in for PvPvZvPvZvZ
And I turned off DreamHack once all the Protoss were out. I can't imagine I was the only one. So what..?
Ok, good to know!
Sadly, it happens to a lot more tournaments that all Terrans go out, than all Protoss going out.
Well, since you initially spoke about GSL, I'm pretty sure that the GSL numbers are where they are because the previous map-pools have been quite heavily Blink favoured. The maps were designed before two-base Blink all-ins became a thing and that showed. It's going to take a while for that to equalise now that the maps aren't disastrously bad for Terran vs. Blink all-ins. Aside from Blink, I don't see (and have not seen) any convincing arguments that point to something specifically imbalanced about Protoss or Zerg... not that I would claim to understand TvZ enough to judge!
How much more convincing do you want, with both winrates being near 45% WHILST the representation is bordering 15%-20%...?
Aligulac is down for me right now, but I know that the last time I looked the winrates were not at 45%. If you're cherry-picking data from GSL only then I'm not interested in discussing that
Representation (I assume you mean GSL numbers) will take seasons to sort out, and the seasons are hardly short. It took a while for GomTvT to sort itself out even after Terran became balanced. Remember?
Here you are.
Also, with only 8 players in Code S and Code A being openly accesible, it should sort out kinda fast. This season, it stayed the same.
I'm surprised that TvZ is that bad, skirting the edge of that 55% win-rate Blizzard always talk about. TvP seems fine.
TvP is not fine if there are literally half the terrans in tournaments (see the PvP, TvT and ZvZ numbers for population). This means that the very best T are barely even with mediocre P players.
On April 30 2014 21:54 TW wrote: I diidn't look at the nr of viewers for Code S today, but wonder if there is a difference between the group with T and without them.
You don't have to wonder about that, it's clear that tons of viewers don't tune in for PvPvZvPvZvZ
And I turned off DreamHack once all the Protoss were out. I can't imagine I was the only one. So what..?
Ok, good to know!
Sadly, it happens to a lot more tournaments that all Terrans go out, than all Protoss going out.
Well, since you initially spoke about GSL, I'm pretty sure that the GSL numbers are where they are because the previous map-pools have been quite heavily Blink favoured. The maps were designed before two-base Blink all-ins became a thing and that showed. It's going to take a while for that to equalise now that the maps aren't disastrously bad for Terran vs. Blink all-ins. Aside from Blink, I don't see (and have not seen) any convincing arguments that point to something specifically imbalanced about Protoss or Zerg... not that I would claim to understand TvZ enough to judge!
How much more convincing do you want, with both winrates being near 45% WHILST the representation is bordering 15%-20%...?
Aligulac is down for me right now, but I know that the last time I looked the winrates were not at 45%. If you're cherry-picking data from GSL only then I'm not interested in discussing that
Representation (I assume you mean GSL numbers) will take seasons to sort out, and the seasons are hardly short. It took a while for GomTvT to sort itself out even after Terran became balanced. Remember?
Here you are.
Also, with only 8 players in Code S and Code A being openly accesible, it should sort out kinda fast. This season, it stayed the same.
I'm surprised that TvZ is that bad, skirting the edge of that 55% win-rate Blizzard always talk about. TvP seems fine.
Not really, no. Given Terran has had a period of over 4 months now in which every Terran is being slapped down, you may assume only the very best of the best remain at the top. This process should equalize winrates and show itself in reduced representation.
The fact that 4 months of weeding out Terran players STILL makes for negative balance is very worrysome.
On April 30 2014 21:54 TW wrote: I diidn't look at the nr of viewers for Code S today, but wonder if there is a difference between the group with T and without them.
You don't have to wonder about that, it's clear that tons of viewers don't tune in for PvPvZvPvZvZ
And I turned off DreamHack once all the Protoss were out. I can't imagine I was the only one. So what..?
Ok, good to know!
Sadly, it happens to a lot more tournaments that all Terrans go out, than all Protoss going out.
Well, since you initially spoke about GSL, I'm pretty sure that the GSL numbers are where they are because the previous map-pools have been quite heavily Blink favoured. The maps were designed before two-base Blink all-ins became a thing and that showed. It's going to take a while for that to equalise now that the maps aren't disastrously bad for Terran vs. Blink all-ins. Aside from Blink, I don't see (and have not seen) any convincing arguments that point to something specifically imbalanced about Protoss or Zerg... not that I would claim to understand TvZ enough to judge!
How much more convincing do you want, with both winrates being near 45% WHILST the representation is bordering 15%-20%...?
Aligulac is down for me right now, but I know that the last time I looked the winrates were not at 45%. If you're cherry-picking data from GSL only then I'm not interested in discussing that
Representation (I assume you mean GSL numbers) will take seasons to sort out, and the seasons are hardly short. It took a while for GomTvT to sort itself out even after Terran became balanced. Remember?
Here you are.
Also, with only 8 players in Code S and Code A being openly accesible, it should sort out kinda fast. This season, it stayed the same.
Like I said before, I wouldn't claim to understand TvZ enough to judge what impact these changes would have on that match-up. I don't get the impression that upgrades are a big problem for Terran though, so I don't think that will make much difference. Hellbats are something I'd like to see more of personally, but I don't know anything about how good MMMHellbat is compared to 4M.
Well, it isn't good. The only thing it could do is make for an easier mech transition, and it might open up a very powerful attack with the 6/8 hellions you make early game. With the 1/1 push, instead of 6/8 hellions there can be 6/8 hellbats, which are a lot more powerful in a straight up fight.
The upgrade buff is rubbish, unnecessary and covers nothing.
On April 30 2014 22:36 matthy wrote: i can't understand while they say "they try to buff mech TvP" they constantly come up with ideas that buff bio even more while in all matchups Terran bio is strongly over present. Goths, mines, and now this Nr #1 option.
Gotta reiterate what you posted, i've said it a million times as well. Dkim is continually willing to buff bio repeatedly, even the last patch remember they buffed the ghost claiming to help mech lol.
It'd be nice for mech TvP for tanks to not suck :D
On April 30 2014 21:54 TW wrote: I diidn't look at the nr of viewers for Code S today, but wonder if there is a difference between the group with T and without them.
You don't have to wonder about that, it's clear that tons of viewers don't tune in for PvPvZvPvZvZ
And I turned off DreamHack once all the Protoss were out. I can't imagine I was the only one. So what..?
Ok, good to know!
Sadly, it happens to a lot more tournaments that all Terrans go out, than all Protoss going out.
Well, since you initially spoke about GSL, I'm pretty sure that the GSL numbers are where they are because the previous map-pools have been quite heavily Blink favoured. The maps were designed before two-base Blink all-ins became a thing and that showed. It's going to take a while for that to equalise now that the maps aren't disastrously bad for Terran vs. Blink all-ins. Aside from Blink, I don't see (and have not seen) any convincing arguments that point to something specifically imbalanced about Protoss or Zerg... not that I would claim to understand TvZ enough to judge!
How much more convincing do you want, with both winrates being near 45% WHILST the representation is bordering 15%-20%...?
Aligulac is down for me right now, but I know that the last time I looked the winrates were not at 45%. If you're cherry-picking data from GSL only then I'm not interested in discussing that
Representation (I assume you mean GSL numbers) will take seasons to sort out, and the seasons are hardly short. It took a while for GomTvT to sort itself out even after Terran became balanced. Remember?
Here you are.
Also, with only 8 players in Code S and Code A being openly accesible, it should sort out kinda fast. This season, it stayed the same.
Like I said before, I wouldn't claim to understand TvZ enough to judge what impact these changes would have on that match-up. I don't get the impression that upgrades are a big problem for Terran though, so I don't think that will make much difference. Hellbats are something I'd like to see more of personally, but I don't know anything about how good MMMHellbat is compared to 4M.
Well, it isn't good. The only thing it could do is make for an easier mech transition, and it might open up a very powerful attack with the 6/8 hellions you make early game. With the 1/1 push, instead of 6/8 hellions there can be 6/8 hellbats, which are a lot more powerful in a straight up fight.
The upgrade buff is rubbish, unnecessary and covers nothing.
Slightly better defensively off of standard TvZ hellion - bio vs things like Roaches too I'd imagine, not sure though
On April 30 2014 17:39 Destructicon wrote: I don't see the upgrade cost changing much in TvZ. Terrans going bio could already afford them easily without sacrificing units and could get a upgrade lead over zergs anyway. The issues is that bio vs zerg doesn't seem to be able to compete any more given that WM where nerfed and siege tanks just aren't an appropriate alternative.
And despite a really strong 2 months or so of testing and trying mech by a lot of pro gamers, it seems a lot of them have come to the inevitable conclusion that, mech still has massive flaws in its gameplay that are easily exploited, so they gave up on it.
The change might actually help TvP where gas is a issue when building an army with bio + vikings + ghosts while trying to not fall behind toss in terms of upgrades. However it doesn't really address the real issue of terrans still having a really hard time hitting any early timings because of how strong defense is, or not having any stronger transition in the late game, or having a hard time closing out the game.
The removal of transformation servos is a good idea and is possibly the most impactful of the new changes. The reason being that terrans could possibly hit some new timings in all MUs. Weather it be for drops or just pushes, and particularly in TvZ, if said timings are strong enough to force a more defensive reaction from the zerg, then it could mean they can't drone as hard and terran could enter the mid game with more of an advantage, maybe enough to be on even footing. However it, again, won't address the mid and late game problems where bio just doesn't trade well any more against ling, bling muta.
Overall I give a big yes to the transformation servos upgrade, a big no to the upgrade change, and a really big sigh to the entire patch idea. I dunno, it feels like Blizzard doesn't know how to actually fix the real issues here.
This is a dumb remark from me but... Why do Terrans continues to try to early push when it's absolutly impossible to do damage. Maybe it's a bad analogy but when Oov revolutionized Terrans, the vultures he made where kept in his base rather than harassing. And because of that he always had more units on defense to take an earlier base.
So why don't completly give up on the early timings and solidify the laters ? I want to see what people say about that.
Also Destructicon, keep in mind that Balance is affecting every player on the planet, that it requires tests and whatnot. We don't know what they test internally. They may already have tried all of what was suggested and it didn't work. This game is great. balance is not really that broken (but yes it might need of few tweeks). They made great games, they'll made great patch.
Remember that in BW at some point Terrans had 90% WR on some maps, then SaviOr came and won convingcibly on those maps. SC2 is still young.
KEEP IN MIND. I AM NOT INSTIGATING A BW VS SC2 MATCH. NOR A SAVIOR DISCUSSION.
On April 30 2014 17:44 Daswollvieh wrote: Yeah, but what about the bunker?
What the... If you want to talk about that, i want the planet cracker back, and the infinite time neural parasite.
Because zerg becomes much, much harder to handle if you leave it alone for too long. Due to larva mechanics the zerg can setup a really strong economy and then use that economy to explode into a super strong army really quickly, or to tech to hive.
Thus its really, really important for both terran and protoss to keep zerg economy in check somehow. A lot of the toss build have some kind of pressure built in just to slow down the zerg. Even the most turtly of toss style still includes some form of harass.
Comparing BW to SC2 isn't accurate. In SC2 there are tons more pro gamers and information sharing is way easier. Thus SC2 is easier to figure out and has been figured out way faster then BW, not only that but the games are vastly different, the unit interactions and unit design in general means that the games are almost as different as night and day. Also SC2 isn't as young any more, its reaching into its 5th year of life. A repeat of what Savior did in BW is extremely unlikely to happen in SC2. Big changes in SC2 have either happened after big balance changes or map changes.
On April 30 2014 21:54 TW wrote: I diidn't look at the nr of viewers for Code S today, but wonder if there is a difference between the group with T and without them.
You don't have to wonder about that, it's clear that tons of viewers don't tune in for PvPvZvPvZvZ
And I turned off DreamHack once all the Protoss were out. I can't imagine I was the only one. So what..?
Ok, good to know!
Sadly, it happens to a lot more tournaments that all Terrans go out, than all Protoss going out.
Well, since you initially spoke about GSL, I'm pretty sure that the GSL numbers are where they are because the previous map-pools have been quite heavily Blink favoured. The maps were designed before two-base Blink all-ins became a thing and that showed. It's going to take a while for that to equalise now that the maps aren't disastrously bad for Terran vs. Blink all-ins. Aside from Blink, I don't see (and have not seen) any convincing arguments that point to something specifically imbalanced about Protoss or Zerg... not that I would claim to understand TvZ enough to judge!
How much more convincing do you want, with both winrates being near 45% WHILST the representation is bordering 15%-20%...?
Aligulac is down for me right now, but I know that the last time I looked the winrates were not at 45%. If you're cherry-picking data from GSL only then I'm not interested in discussing that
Representation (I assume you mean GSL numbers) will take seasons to sort out, and the seasons are hardly short. It took a while for GomTvT to sort itself out even after Terran became balanced. Remember?
Here you are.
Also, with only 8 players in Code S and Code A being openly accesible, it should sort out kinda fast. This season, it stayed the same.
Thanks for the image! While it does point in a direction, the statistics is a bit on the low side. :o)
The one-sided p-value for the TvZ result from a true win-rate of 50% is 0.87 (http://stattrek.com/online-calculator/binomial.aspx). And that is assuming independent games, which is really isn't, so true p-value is larger, probably by quite a bit, if you would take that into account.
Two sided p-value (balance can go either way) give 1.7%, and with multiple hypothesis testing (we got three matchups), the adjusted p-value for independent games goes to around 5%.
In other words, we see that kind of numbers more than one week in twenty, even with an exact 50% balance, which for some reason usually is the limit people use.
Is it possible to get the stats over a bit longer time, say a month or two? That should probably give enough power to detect a 5% imbalance. Thanks.
wow about ZvT and THAT suggestion for T upgrades... Between >T has already 3-3 and zerg hasn't started hive< (happens about 80% of all games) is the most imbalanced space of time in ZvT until zerg has 3-3, then zerg is slightly better than terran.
On April 30 2014 10:01 ROOTiaguz wrote: Removing Transformation Servos is a good idea, the upgrades never really used and whenever an ability or research is never used that's probably a sign something should (or at least can) be changed.
Cheapening the upgrades seems incredibly minor (yay 50/50 less, it's like conc shells is free now!) but I'm not one to pass up terran buffs.
I agree. I mean, the upgrade reduction can't possibly be BAD for Terran, but it doesn't seem like it will make a big difference. You can build what... an extra Reaper now? I guess Terran can use that Reaper to scout for allins trolololololol.
But I support the Hellion change. I agree that being able to save those initial Hellions is going to help T a bit. I'm a big advocate of Marines + Hellbats vs Z (it's how I play all my TvZs when I offrace).
On April 30 2014 21:54 TW wrote: I diidn't look at the nr of viewers for Code S today, but wonder if there is a difference between the group with T and without them.
You don't have to wonder about that, it's clear that tons of viewers don't tune in for PvPvZvPvZvZ
And I turned off DreamHack once all the Protoss were out. I can't imagine I was the only one. So what..?
Ok, good to know!
Sadly, it happens to a lot more tournaments that all Terrans go out, than all Protoss going out.
Well, since you initially spoke about GSL, I'm pretty sure that the GSL numbers are where they are because the previous map-pools have been quite heavily Blink favoured. The maps were designed before two-base Blink all-ins became a thing and that showed. It's going to take a while for that to equalise now that the maps aren't disastrously bad for Terran vs. Blink all-ins. Aside from Blink, I don't see (and have not seen) any convincing arguments that point to something specifically imbalanced about Protoss or Zerg... not that I would claim to understand TvZ enough to judge!
How much more convincing do you want, with both winrates being near 45% WHILST the representation is bordering 15%-20%...?
Aligulac is down for me right now, but I know that the last time I looked the winrates were not at 45%. If you're cherry-picking data from GSL only then I'm not interested in discussing that
Representation (I assume you mean GSL numbers) will take seasons to sort out, and the seasons are hardly short. It took a while for GomTvT to sort itself out even after Terran became balanced. Remember?
Here you are.
Also, with only 8 players in Code S and Code A being openly accesible, it should sort out kinda fast. This season, it stayed the same.
Thanks for the image! While it does point in a direction, the statistics is a bit on the low side. :o)
The one-sided p-value for the TvZ result from a true win-rate of 50% is 0.87 (http://stattrek.com/online-calculator/binomial.aspx). And that is assuming independent games, which is really isn't, so true p-value is larger, probably by quite a bit, if you would take that into account.
Two sided p-value (balance can go either way) give 1.7%, and with multiple hypothesis testing (we got three matchups), the adjusted p-value for independent games goes to around 5%.
In other words, we see that kind of numbers more than one week in twenty, even with an exact 50% balance, which for some reason usually is the limit people use.
Is it possible to get the stats over a bit longer time, say a month or two? That should probably give enough power to detect a 5% imbalance. Thanks.
It's easy to get longer periods, just grab Aligulac periods (this one is 109, the previous one is: http://aligulac.com/periods/108) but Aligulac is down currently.
On April 30 2014 23:15 Dingodile wrote: wow about ZvT and THAT suggestion for T upgrades... Between >T has already 3-3 and zerg hasn't started hive< (happens about 80% of all games) is the most imbalanced space of time in ZvT until zerg has 3-3, then zerg is slightly better than terran.
And what do you suggest? That 3/3 timing is all of a sudden active for 5 more minutes?
On April 30 2014 22:54 t0ssboy wrote: As a BW player,i really miss Khaydarin Amulet.Bring it back please!.
Now we can all agree that the BW way to do is OP thanks to warpgates, however Blizzard also felt removing was much better than even trying to have it give you less extra energy, have it increase max energy or even have it increase energy regeneration.
I would really like them to buff some underused units like thor, banshee, nydus, corrupors, carriers, mb hydras, mb phoenix, mb ravens. I really think that it is more important that games are diverse (and like 95% balanced) than that they are 100% balanced. I dont care about 5% (overall) imbalance at all tbh.
On April 30 2014 22:54 t0ssboy wrote: As a BW player,i really miss Khaydarin Amulet.Bring it back please!.
Now we can all agree that the BW way to do is OP thanks to warpgates, however Blizzard also felt removing was much better than even trying to have it give you less extra energy, have it increase max energy or even have it increase energy regeneration.
Bw Khaydarian didnt allow you to storm immediately, so it is far from being as powerful. That being said i just see no reason why it should be implemented, it's not interesting imo, it's just a lategame balance change that we dont need atm.
With the widow mine splash reduction and the muta buff Terran is a bit lacking in splash damage or is too immobile vs. ling bane muta.
I think removing the transformation servos requirement rewards players who are able to preserve their first few hellions with a bit more splash damage in the midgame to help them out, so it's positive. Whether or not that's enough to make a difference remains to be seen.
On April 30 2014 23:15 Dingodile wrote: wow about ZvT and THAT suggestion for T upgrades... Between >T has already 3-3 and zerg hasn't started hive< (happens about 80% of all games) is the most imbalanced space of time in ZvT until zerg has 3-3, then zerg is slightly better than terran.
Please, there is nothing imbalanced when terran is one set of upgrades ahead. Zerg is still perfectly capable of trading effectively against bio as of now, actually lately there has been many games where 2/2 muta ling bane is more cost-effective than 3/3 MMMM.
Zergs have also started to get upgrades quite early lately so I have seen multiple games where zerg is ahead in upgrades. The reason why they can do this is that maps are larger and WM is weaker, so they can get away with more than before when terran is trying to do their ~10 minute push.
Servos change is much needed. Hellions are nice early and mid game vs all match ups, but you never want to overdue it since most Terran skipped the servo upgrade and just put that money into Blue Flame and Hellbats.
On April 30 2014 23:31 DinoMight wrote: The way I see it the problem in TvZ is:
With the widow mine splash reduction and the muta buff Terran is a bit lacking in splash damage or is too immobile vs. ling bane muta.
I think removing the transformation servos requirement rewards players who are able to preserve their first few hellions with a bit more splash damage in the midgame to help them out, so it's positive. Whether or not that's enough to make a difference remains to be seen.
Its really small though and it will act more as a buff to a timing. Reason being that bio styles usually want to trade a lot, so while retaining the initial 6-8 hellions helps the first push it does nothing on the follow ups. What it does theoretically do is make zergs play more defensive to not take damage from these pushes. If the zerg plays more defensive there is a small possibility he won't be as far ahead in eco and the terran enters the mid game on better footing.
There are a lot of ifs in that series of arguments though. It could very well wind up to do nothing once zergs find the most optimal way to defend against that particular push while still getting a solid eco.
On April 30 2014 23:15 Dingodile wrote: wow about ZvT and THAT suggestion for T upgrades... Between >T has already 3-3 and zerg hasn't started hive< (happens about 80% of all games) is the most imbalanced space of time in ZvT until zerg has 3-3, then zerg is slightly better than terran.
Please, there is nothing imbalanced when terran is one set of upgrades ahead. Zerg is still perfectly capable of trading effectively against bio as of now, actually lately there has been many games where 2/2 muta ling bane is more cost-effective than 3/3 MMMM.
the economy should be included in the term "cost-efficiency" as a denominator sort of - the normalizing factor. In that sense zerg is almost always trading cost-efficiently, which is wrong. Takes a major fuck up on zerg's side/huge mine hit for terran to really gain momentum afterwards.
The reason pro players are giving that feedback about TvP is because they're using the new units, the new buffs, and the new maps to their full potential. The new maps have thirds that are incredibly difficult for Protoss to defend and a lot more open mains which makes drop defense a lot more difficult. In addition, the shorter rush distances and high ground chokes on maps like Overgrowth, Waystation and Merry Go Round make it simultaneously harder to break Mech as well as easier to push out while using Mech. I can say as a former Random player and now Protoss who has played since the WoL Beta, this is by far the toughest map pool for Protoss that I can remember.
Many of the more casual players that continue to use straight-up Bio with none of the new buffed mines, no tank support, and without abusing the wide-open drop paths are still losing more often than not because they're still doing the same thing they have been for so long. It's not Blizzard's job to bludgeon Terrans over the head with buffs to try and force outdated, one-dimensional styles to work, but with the recent WM buff and these proposed buffs, that's what they seem hell-bent on doing. The players need to figure out what options their race has for themselves and it's their fault if they don't - it's what got told to Protoss players who were having a ridiculously hard time (and still are) with Mutalisks.
On April 30 2014 23:45 Psychobabas wrote: So pros are telling Blizzard that TvP needs addressing.
Blizzard still thinks it's fine.
What is the point of even listening to pros then. LOL
Just to clarify, they're saying that pro players are saying Protoss is struggling against Terran and they don't agree.
I think as more Terran players learn to use the new maps and buffed widow mines to their advantage the MU will get a lot harder for P. But it should be manageable I think.
It's really really hard to open Templar against anyone who knows that they're doing with Widow Mines these days.. I think that's what Rain was talking about when they inteviewed him at GSL and what other pro Ps are saying too. Go Templar and face MMMM or go Colossus and face SCV pulls (just look at Illusion yesterday....)
I'm ok with seeing how that MU goes though. I think P can adapt and if not hopefully something will change.
On April 30 2014 23:45 Psychobabas wrote: So pros are telling Blizzard that TvP needs addressing.
Blizzard still thinks it's fine.
What is the point of even listening to pros then. LOL
Just to clarify, they're saying that pro players are saying Protoss is struggling against Terran and they don't agree.
I think as more Terran players learn to use the new maps and buffed widow mines to their advantage the MU will get a lot harder for P. But it should be manageable I think.
It's really really hard to open Templar against anyone who knows that they're doing with Widow Mines these days.. I think that's what Rain was talking about when they inteviewed him at GSL and what other pro Ps are saying too. Go Templar and face MMMM or go Colossus and face SCV pulls (just look at Illusion yesterday....)
I'm ok with seeing how that MU goes though. I think P can adapt and if not hopefully something will change.
Oh wow I misread that. So some pros are saying that Protoss is struggling vs Terran.
On April 30 2014 23:45 Psychobabas wrote: So pros are telling Blizzard that TvP needs addressing.
Blizzard still thinks it's fine.
What is the point of even listening to pros then. LOL
Just to clarify, they're saying that pro players are saying Protoss is struggling against Terran and they don't agree.
I think as more Terran players learn to use the new maps and buffed widow mines to their advantage the MU will get a lot harder for P. But it should be manageable I think.
It's really really hard to open Templar against anyone who knows that they're doing with Widow Mines these days.. I think that's what Rain was talking about when they inteviewed him at GSL and what other pro Ps are saying too. Go Templar and face MMMM or go Colossus and face SCV pulls (just look at Illusion yesterday....)
I'm ok with seeing how that MU goes though. I think P can adapt and if not hopefully something will change.
Oh wow I misread that. So some pros are saying that Protoss is struggling vs Terran.
I.. don't even know what to say lol.
You are not aware of the latest news?
Terran is like BL/Infestor level imba. Rain confirmed it.
The reason pro players are giving that feedback about TvP is because they're using the new units, the new buffs, and the new maps to their full potential. The new maps have thirds that are incredibly difficult for Protoss to defend and a lot more open mains which makes drop defense a lot more difficult. In addition, the shorter rush distances and high ground chokes on maps like Overgrowth, Waystation and Merry Go Round make it simultaneously harder to break Mech as well as easier to push out while using Mech. I can say as a former Random player and now Protoss who has played since the WoL Beta, this is by far the toughest map pool for Protoss that I can remember.
Many of the more casual players that continue to use straight-up Bio with none of the new buffed mines, no tank support, and without abusing the wide-open drop paths are still losing more often than not because they're still doing the same thing they have been for so long. It's not Blizzard's job to bludgeon Terrans over the head with buffs to try and force outdated, one-dimensional styles to work, but with the recent WM buff and these proposed buffs, that's what they seem hell-bent on doing. The players need to figure out what options their race has for themselves and it's their fault if they don't - it's what got told to Protoss players who were having a ridiculously hard time (and still are) with Mutalisks.
Give it time, Blizz. The season just started.
Right, because Blizzard never buffed the phoenix range to counter Mutas...
Funny you mention high ground chokes making it easier for mech. Doesn't that also make it better to protoss defend due to their AoE vs bio? And about casual players, so I guess all the pro terrans should be rolling over protosses with their new mines and tanks, right?
As for TvZ, blizzard mentioned that the zergs usually comes out ahead after the mid game. I think a lot of that has to do with the muta harass. Terran drop play has drawbacks in that if you get spotted, you can get your medivacs picked off. With zerg, pro zergs are good enough that they rarely lose anything even if defense is in place. They just pull back and attack else where and after enough attempts(with muta regen), you will find pick offs here and there. How about giving Thors a relevation type spell. So if your mutas get tagged by a thor, you can't easily harass again for 60 seconds. It doesn't really hurt in straight up fights but it will make defending mutas more rewarding just like defending a drop can be rewarding.
On April 30 2014 21:54 TW wrote: I diidn't look at the nr of viewers for Code S today, but wonder if there is a difference between the group with T and without them.
You don't have to wonder about that, it's clear that tons of viewers don't tune in for PvPvZvPvZvZ
And I turned off DreamHack once all the Protoss were out. I can't imagine I was the only one. So what..?
Ok, good to know!
Sadly, it happens to a lot more tournaments that all Terrans go out, than all Protoss going out.
Well, since you initially spoke about GSL, I'm pretty sure that the GSL numbers are where they are because the previous map-pools have been quite heavily Blink favoured. The maps were designed before two-base Blink all-ins became a thing and that showed. It's going to take a while for that to equalise now that the maps aren't disastrously bad for Terran vs. Blink all-ins. Aside from Blink, I don't see (and have not seen) any convincing arguments that point to something specifically imbalanced about Protoss or Zerg... not that I would claim to understand TvZ enough to judge!
How much more convincing do you want, with both winrates being near 45% WHILST the representation is bordering 15%-20%...?
Aligulac is down for me right now, but I know that the last time I looked the winrates were not at 45%. If you're cherry-picking data from GSL only then I'm not interested in discussing that
Representation (I assume you mean GSL numbers) will take seasons to sort out, and the seasons are hardly short. It took a while for GomTvT to sort itself out even after Terran became balanced. Remember?
Here you are.
Also, with only 8 players in Code S and Code A being openly accesible, it should sort out kinda fast. This season, it stayed the same.
Like I said before, I wouldn't claim to understand TvZ enough to judge what impact these changes would have on that match-up. I don't get the impression that upgrades are a big problem for Terran though, so I don't think that will make much difference. Hellbats are something I'd like to see more of personally, but I don't know anything about how good MMMHellbat is compared to 4M.
Well, it isn't good. The only thing it could do is make for an easier mech transition, and it might open up a very powerful attack with the 6/8 hellions you make early game. With the 1/1 push, instead of 6/8 hellions there can be 6/8 hellbats, which are a lot more powerful in a straight up fight.
The upgrade buff is rubbish, unnecessary and covers nothing.
You know what though? It's actually good if there are possibilities for Terrans to win games early on...
In the current state of the game Terran has very few "all-ins" and ways to win early on versus Zerg and Protoss. While Protoss have the opposite issue - too many all-ins and ways to win early. Zerg has some nice all-ins with roaches and ling banes...so if hellbat transformation upgrade removal adds in another attack or two possible for Terran...that is actually really good and WILL help the balance of the game out more to not be so 1 sided in terms of aggressive options.
Most of Terran's aggressive options were repeatedly nerfed to the point most games involving T are 100% macro games nowadays.
I was happy when i read about option one and though to play again my favorite rts .. but then i read opinion ppl i think you'll lose a lot of player bye bye ! Those who vote are those who've not stop playin ... gg ! Byebye sc2 if you listen this poll...
On April 30 2014 21:54 SC2Toastie wrote: [quote] You don't have to wonder about that, it's clear that tons of viewers don't tune in for PvPvZvPvZvZ
And I turned off DreamHack once all the Protoss were out. I can't imagine I was the only one. So what..?
Ok, good to know!
Sadly, it happens to a lot more tournaments that all Terrans go out, than all Protoss going out.
Well, since you initially spoke about GSL, I'm pretty sure that the GSL numbers are where they are because the previous map-pools have been quite heavily Blink favoured. The maps were designed before two-base Blink all-ins became a thing and that showed. It's going to take a while for that to equalise now that the maps aren't disastrously bad for Terran vs. Blink all-ins. Aside from Blink, I don't see (and have not seen) any convincing arguments that point to something specifically imbalanced about Protoss or Zerg... not that I would claim to understand TvZ enough to judge!
How much more convincing do you want, with both winrates being near 45% WHILST the representation is bordering 15%-20%...?
Aligulac is down for me right now, but I know that the last time I looked the winrates were not at 45%. If you're cherry-picking data from GSL only then I'm not interested in discussing that
Representation (I assume you mean GSL numbers) will take seasons to sort out, and the seasons are hardly short. It took a while for GomTvT to sort itself out even after Terran became balanced. Remember?
Here you are.
Also, with only 8 players in Code S and Code A being openly accesible, it should sort out kinda fast. This season, it stayed the same.
Like I said before, I wouldn't claim to understand TvZ enough to judge what impact these changes would have on that match-up. I don't get the impression that upgrades are a big problem for Terran though, so I don't think that will make much difference. Hellbats are something I'd like to see more of personally, but I don't know anything about how good MMMHellbat is compared to 4M.
Well, it isn't good. The only thing it could do is make for an easier mech transition, and it might open up a very powerful attack with the 6/8 hellions you make early game. With the 1/1 push, instead of 6/8 hellions there can be 6/8 hellbats, which are a lot more powerful in a straight up fight.
The upgrade buff is rubbish, unnecessary and covers nothing.
You know what though? It's actually good if there are possibilities for Terrans to win games early on...
In the current state of the game Terran has very few "all-ins" and ways to win early on versus Zerg and Protoss. While Protoss have the opposite issue - too many all-ins and ways to win early. Zerg has some nice all-ins with roaches and ling banes...so if hellbat transformation upgrade removal adds in another attack or two possible for Terran...that is actually really good and WILL help the balance of the game out more to not be so 1 sided in terms of aggressive options.
Most of Terran's aggressive options were repeatedly nerfed to the point most games involving T are 100% macro games nowadays.
It's not good if that possibility to outright win the game comes with a 3cc opener, though. I'm sure you and your followers 'd like that, but I play the other races as well. Don't underestimate the effect this might have - just like the queen patch increased the speed Zerg got lategame, this might substantially delay that.
On April 30 2014 23:31 DinoMight wrote: The way I see it the problem in TvZ is:
With the widow mine splash reduction and the muta buff Terran is a bit lacking in splash damage or is too immobile vs. ling bane muta.
I think removing the transformation servos requirement rewards players who are able to preserve their first few hellions with a bit more splash damage in the midgame to help them out, so it's positive. Whether or not that's enough to make a difference remains to be seen.
I think there is pretty clearly going to be a difference with adding those 6-8 hellions as hellbats in the early bio pushes. As a combination of bigger more open maps and the mine nerf zergs have been trading really well vs early bio pushes. What we are seeing now are cases where after we beat a Terran attack we look down and see that we still have an army left over. So cool sddddddd->20 drones. Whereas if due to hellbats we lost more lings and banelings, we would need to replace some of what we lost which slows down the economy somewhat. And that is just if terrans don't change up their meta. If they start adding in more hellbat rushes than it would be another thing zergs have to accout for in the early game.
On April 30 2014 22:36 matthy wrote: i can't understand while they say "they try to buff mech TvP" they constantly come up with ideas that buff bio even more while in all matchups Terran bio is strongly over present. Goths, mines, and now this Nr #1 option.
Gotta reiterate what you posted, i've said it a million times as well. Dkim is continually willing to buff bio repeatedly, even the last patch remember they buffed the ghost claiming to help mech lol.
It'd be nice for mech TvP for tanks to not suck :D
Thank you for supporting it. Kim also talked about that siege tanks is not needed in every match up and therefore tanks need no buff vs toss mech. but has anyone ever seen real mech without siege tanks? That is the spine of mech. I think they just want to stretch it to LOTV to improve sales or something. but i hope not because LOTV will probably take 2 more years or so.
You never see Mech TvP well avilo sometimes and painuser but never in GSL, WCS because it just sucks :/
these new tests are useless. changing the cost of upgrades isn't necessary the hellions changing to hellbats for free. ok but that ain't gonna change the balance they need to fix their mech so terran can transition from bio which is strong early game to mech which SHOULD be strong LATE game (which it absolutely isn't)
On May 01 2014 00:28 MagnuMizer wrote: make orbital command center unable to lift off.......................
The orbital being able to lift off is probably the only thing that allows terrans to recover from Zerg 2 base allin or semi allins. I don't think you really thought that suggestion through.
The reason pro players are giving that feedback about TvP is because they're using the new units, the new buffs, and the new maps to their full potential. The new maps have thirds that are incredibly difficult for Protoss to defend and a lot more open mains which makes drop defense a lot more difficult. In addition, the shorter rush distances and high ground chokes on maps like Overgrowth, Waystation and Merry Go Round make it simultaneously harder to break Mech as well as easier to push out while using Mech. I can say as a former Random player and now Protoss who has played since the WoL Beta, this is by far the toughest map pool for Protoss that I can remember.
Many of the more casual players that continue to use straight-up Bio with none of the new buffed mines, no tank support, and without abusing the wide-open drop paths are still losing more often than not because they're still doing the same thing they have been for so long. It's not Blizzard's job to bludgeon Terrans over the head with buffs to try and force outdated, one-dimensional styles to work, but with the recent WM buff and these proposed buffs, that's what they seem hell-bent on doing. The players need to figure out what options their race has for themselves and it's their fault if they don't - it's what got told to Protoss players who were having a ridiculously hard time (and still are) with Mutalisks.
Give it time, Blizz. The season just started.
Exactly. Protoss players figure out that phoenix is pretty good against mutalisks, especially with RANGE! Such innovative!
The reason pro players are giving that feedback about TvP is because they're using the new units, the new buffs, and the new maps to their full potential. The new maps have thirds that are incredibly difficult for Protoss to defend and a lot more open mains which makes drop defense a lot more difficult. In addition, the shorter rush distances and high ground chokes on maps like Overgrowth, Waystation and Merry Go Round make it simultaneously harder to break Mech as well as easier to push out while using Mech. I can say as a former Random player and now Protoss who has played since the WoL Beta, this is by far the toughest map pool for Protoss that I can remember.
Many of the more casual players that continue to use straight-up Bio with none of the new buffed mines, no tank support, and without abusing the wide-open drop paths are still losing more often than not because they're still doing the same thing they have been for so long. It's not Blizzard's job to bludgeon Terrans over the head with buffs to try and force outdated, one-dimensional styles to work, but with the recent WM buff and these proposed buffs, that's what they seem hell-bent on doing. The players need to figure out what options their race has for themselves and it's their fault if they don't - it's what got told to Protoss players who were having a ridiculously hard time (and still are) with Mutalisks.
Give it time, Blizz. The season just started.
Exactly. Protoss players figure out that phoenix is pretty good against mutalisks, especially with RANGE! Such innovative!
While your sarcasm is well-directed when it comes to WoL, in the era of HoTS super-mutas Protoss would be truly horrible to play vs a Muta player in ZvP without that range upgrade to zone them out
On April 30 2014 22:20 SatedSC2 wrote: [quote] And I turned off DreamHack once all the Protoss were out. I can't imagine I was the only one. So what..?
Ok, good to know!
Sadly, it happens to a lot more tournaments that all Terrans go out, than all Protoss going out.
Well, since you initially spoke about GSL, I'm pretty sure that the GSL numbers are where they are because the previous map-pools have been quite heavily Blink favoured. The maps were designed before two-base Blink all-ins became a thing and that showed. It's going to take a while for that to equalise now that the maps aren't disastrously bad for Terran vs. Blink all-ins. Aside from Blink, I don't see (and have not seen) any convincing arguments that point to something specifically imbalanced about Protoss or Zerg... not that I would claim to understand TvZ enough to judge!
How much more convincing do you want, with both winrates being near 45% WHILST the representation is bordering 15%-20%...?
Aligulac is down for me right now, but I know that the last time I looked the winrates were not at 45%. If you're cherry-picking data from GSL only then I'm not interested in discussing that
Representation (I assume you mean GSL numbers) will take seasons to sort out, and the seasons are hardly short. It took a while for GomTvT to sort itself out even after Terran became balanced. Remember?
Here you are.
Also, with only 8 players in Code S and Code A being openly accesible, it should sort out kinda fast. This season, it stayed the same.
Like I said before, I wouldn't claim to understand TvZ enough to judge what impact these changes would have on that match-up. I don't get the impression that upgrades are a big problem for Terran though, so I don't think that will make much difference. Hellbats are something I'd like to see more of personally, but I don't know anything about how good MMMHellbat is compared to 4M.
Well, it isn't good. The only thing it could do is make for an easier mech transition, and it might open up a very powerful attack with the 6/8 hellions you make early game. With the 1/1 push, instead of 6/8 hellions there can be 6/8 hellbats, which are a lot more powerful in a straight up fight.
The upgrade buff is rubbish, unnecessary and covers nothing.
You know what though? It's actually good if there are possibilities for Terrans to win games early on...
In the current state of the game Terran has very few "all-ins" and ways to win early on versus Zerg and Protoss. While Protoss have the opposite issue - too many all-ins and ways to win early. Zerg has some nice all-ins with roaches and ling banes...so if hellbat transformation upgrade removal adds in another attack or two possible for Terran...that is actually really good and WILL help the balance of the game out more to not be so 1 sided in terms of aggressive options.
Most of Terran's aggressive options were repeatedly nerfed to the point most games involving T are 100% macro games nowadays.
It's not good if that possibility to outright win the game comes with a 3cc opener, though. I'm sure you and your followers 'd like that, but I play the other races as well. Don't underestimate the effect this might have - just like the queen patch increased the speed Zerg got lategame, this might substantially delay that.
No i think everyone that plays/watches SC2 would like it that the game is more fair and it's not only P/Z that have early game aggressive or all-in options. I said it ages ago that if they are going to leave it so P/Z have more all-ins than Terran or ways to win the game early then they either have to:
a) reduce the all-ins from the other races b) give Terran equally aggressive/all-in options
Right now in the current game, everyone knows PvT and PvZ...there are a ton of Protoss all-ins which is why the design of Protoss gets a ton of flak for good reason.
They should reduce the number of those and then TvP will be more balanced early game, or give Terran more early game aggro options vs Protoss by nerfing the nexus cannon.
It's a bit ridiculous you think only Z/P should be allowed to win games early. Maybe you are not up with the state of SC2, but it's usually Terran as the one defending all-ins and Z/P choose whether to do them or to play straight up macro. There currently are no such options for Terran. Terran right now 100% has to play "straight up macro" for the majority of games.
I still don't understand why the cost of Armories isn't reduced to either 100/100 or back to its BW cost. Option #2 is a good step but one of the primary prohibitive factors for a Hellbat/mech related timing is the cost of Armory + Factory(ies) + Upgrades. Since Terran has to build multiple production facilities and/or add-ons + armory + upgrades there's really a bottleneck in the early/early-midgame of resources.
On May 01 2014 00:37 mythandier wrote: I still don't understand why the cost of Armories isn't reduced to either 100/100 or back to its BW cost. Option #2 is a good step but one of the primary prohibitive factors for a Hellbat/mech related timing is the cost of Armory + Factory(ies) + Upgrades. Since Terran has to build multiple production facilities and/or add-ons + armory + upgrades there's really a bottleneck in the early/early-midgame of resources.
Typical current Terran openings involve 4-8 hellions and double evo continuous upgrades. Providing they keep those initial hellions alive it literally costs them nothing to add hellbats to their army.
On April 30 2014 22:21 SC2Toastie wrote: [quote] Ok, good to know!
Sadly, it happens to a lot more tournaments that all Terrans go out, than all Protoss going out.
Well, since you initially spoke about GSL, I'm pretty sure that the GSL numbers are where they are because the previous map-pools have been quite heavily Blink favoured. The maps were designed before two-base Blink all-ins became a thing and that showed. It's going to take a while for that to equalise now that the maps aren't disastrously bad for Terran vs. Blink all-ins. Aside from Blink, I don't see (and have not seen) any convincing arguments that point to something specifically imbalanced about Protoss or Zerg... not that I would claim to understand TvZ enough to judge!
How much more convincing do you want, with both winrates being near 45% WHILST the representation is bordering 15%-20%...?
Aligulac is down for me right now, but I know that the last time I looked the winrates were not at 45%. If you're cherry-picking data from GSL only then I'm not interested in discussing that
Representation (I assume you mean GSL numbers) will take seasons to sort out, and the seasons are hardly short. It took a while for GomTvT to sort itself out even after Terran became balanced. Remember?
Here you are.
Also, with only 8 players in Code S and Code A being openly accesible, it should sort out kinda fast. This season, it stayed the same.
Like I said before, I wouldn't claim to understand TvZ enough to judge what impact these changes would have on that match-up. I don't get the impression that upgrades are a big problem for Terran though, so I don't think that will make much difference. Hellbats are something I'd like to see more of personally, but I don't know anything about how good MMMHellbat is compared to 4M.
Well, it isn't good. The only thing it could do is make for an easier mech transition, and it might open up a very powerful attack with the 6/8 hellions you make early game. With the 1/1 push, instead of 6/8 hellions there can be 6/8 hellbats, which are a lot more powerful in a straight up fight.
The upgrade buff is rubbish, unnecessary and covers nothing.
You know what though? It's actually good if there are possibilities for Terrans to win games early on...
In the current state of the game Terran has very few "all-ins" and ways to win early on versus Zerg and Protoss. While Protoss have the opposite issue - too many all-ins and ways to win early. Zerg has some nice all-ins with roaches and ling banes...so if hellbat transformation upgrade removal adds in another attack or two possible for Terran...that is actually really good and WILL help the balance of the game out more to not be so 1 sided in terms of aggressive options.
Most of Terran's aggressive options were repeatedly nerfed to the point most games involving T are 100% macro games nowadays.
It's not good if that possibility to outright win the game comes with a 3cc opener, though. I'm sure you and your followers 'd like that, but I play the other races as well. Don't underestimate the effect this might have - just like the queen patch increased the speed Zerg got lategame, this might substantially delay that.
No i think everyone that plays/watches SC2 would like it that the game is more fair and it's not only P/Z that have early game aggressive or all-in options. I said it ages ago that if they are going to leave it so P/Z have more all-ins than Terran or ways to win the game early then they either have to:
a) reduce the all-ins from the other races b) give Terran equally aggressive/all-in options
Right now in the current game, everyone knows PvT and PvZ...there are a ton of Protoss all-ins which is why the design of Protoss gets a ton of flak for good reason.
They should reduce the number of those and then TvP will be more balanced early game, or give Terran more early game aggro options vs Protoss by nerfing the nexus cannon.
It's a bit ridiculous you think only Z/P should be allowed to win games early. Maybe you are not up with the state of SC2, but it's usually Terran as the one defending all-ins and Z/P choose whether to do them or to play straight up macro. There currently are no such options for Terran. Terran right now 100% has to play "straight up macro" for the majority of games.
I honestly can't take you serious this way. First you put words into my mouth, and you're going after me on the words you've made up yourself? Good job buddy!
I agree Terran has the less prevalent early game aggression. So what? There's always going to be one race with less, except if you carefully calculate they all exactly have X amount of different all ins at every stage of the game. It's one of the things that comes with a game with multiple races - They aren't the same.
I am up with the state of SC2, Terran can do some fun aggression vs Protoss via gas first, Terran can skip the third CC for some nasty pushes, Hellion banshee can do the same, even reapers can do so. Terran has a good couple of effective cheeses.
You've got less aggressive options, but you have plenty of means to scout and defend other races' aggression in this map pool. I don't even know why I am putting in the effort to argue with you, it's useless.
On May 01 2014 00:37 mythandier wrote: I still don't understand why the cost of Armories isn't reduced to either 100/100 or back to its BW cost. Option #2 is a good step but one of the primary prohibitive factors for a Hellbat/mech related timing is the cost of Armory + Factory(ies) + Upgrades. Since Terran has to build multiple production facilities and/or add-ons + armory + upgrades there's really a bottleneck in the early/early-midgame of resources.
Typical current Terran openings involve 4-8 hellions and double evo continuous upgrades. Providing they keep those initial hellions alive it literally costs them nothing to add hellbats to their army.
Indeed. Apparantly, I am the only one fearing the 8 hellbat 16 marine 2 medivac 1/1 stim timing just before spire and probably bane speed, but well, who am I...
Small changes, not bad at all imo. Upgrades changes are pretty small and shouldn't affect TvZ that much. Hellbat transformation removal so that it's enabled by the armory is also a good idea since I seldom see it used.
On April 30 2014 22:21 SC2Toastie wrote: [quote] Ok, good to know!
Sadly, it happens to a lot more tournaments that all Terrans go out, than all Protoss going out.
Well, since you initially spoke about GSL, I'm pretty sure that the GSL numbers are where they are because the previous map-pools have been quite heavily Blink favoured. The maps were designed before two-base Blink all-ins became a thing and that showed. It's going to take a while for that to equalise now that the maps aren't disastrously bad for Terran vs. Blink all-ins. Aside from Blink, I don't see (and have not seen) any convincing arguments that point to something specifically imbalanced about Protoss or Zerg... not that I would claim to understand TvZ enough to judge!
How much more convincing do you want, with both winrates being near 45% WHILST the representation is bordering 15%-20%...?
Aligulac is down for me right now, but I know that the last time I looked the winrates were not at 45%. If you're cherry-picking data from GSL only then I'm not interested in discussing that
Representation (I assume you mean GSL numbers) will take seasons to sort out, and the seasons are hardly short. It took a while for GomTvT to sort itself out even after Terran became balanced. Remember?
Here you are.
Also, with only 8 players in Code S and Code A being openly accesible, it should sort out kinda fast. This season, it stayed the same.
Like I said before, I wouldn't claim to understand TvZ enough to judge what impact these changes would have on that match-up. I don't get the impression that upgrades are a big problem for Terran though, so I don't think that will make much difference. Hellbats are something I'd like to see more of personally, but I don't know anything about how good MMMHellbat is compared to 4M.
Well, it isn't good. The only thing it could do is make for an easier mech transition, and it might open up a very powerful attack with the 6/8 hellions you make early game. With the 1/1 push, instead of 6/8 hellions there can be 6/8 hellbats, which are a lot more powerful in a straight up fight.
The upgrade buff is rubbish, unnecessary and covers nothing.
You know what though? It's actually good if there are possibilities for Terrans to win games early on...
In the current state of the game Terran has very few "all-ins" and ways to win early on versus Zerg and Protoss. While Protoss have the opposite issue - too many all-ins and ways to win early. Zerg has some nice all-ins with roaches and ling banes...so if hellbat transformation upgrade removal adds in another attack or two possible for Terran...that is actually really good and WILL help the balance of the game out more to not be so 1 sided in terms of aggressive options.
Most of Terran's aggressive options were repeatedly nerfed to the point most games involving T are 100% macro games nowadays.
It's not good if that possibility to outright win the game comes with a 3cc opener, though. I'm sure you and your followers 'd like that, but I play the other races as well. Don't underestimate the effect this might have - just like the queen patch increased the speed Zerg got lategame, this might substantially delay that.
No i think everyone that plays/watches SC2 would like it that the game is more fair and it's not only P/Z that have early game aggressive or all-in options. I said it ages ago that if they are going to leave it so P/Z have more all-ins than Terran or ways to win the game early then they either have to:
a) reduce the all-ins from the other races b) give Terran equally aggressive/all-in options
Right now in the current game, everyone knows PvT and PvZ...there are a ton of Protoss all-ins which is why the design of Protoss gets a ton of flak for good reason.
They should reduce the number of those and then TvP will be more balanced early game, or give Terran more early game aggro options vs Protoss by nerfing the nexus cannon.
It's a bit ridiculous you think only Z/P should be allowed to win games early. Maybe you are not up with the state of SC2, but it's usually Terran as the one defending all-ins and Z/P choose whether to do them or to play straight up macro. There currently are no such options for Terran. Terran right now 100% has to play "straight up macro" for the majority of games.
11/11 proxy 2 rax is very common and strong in TvZ. There are other Terran all ins/cheeses that are quite strong like MKP's float CC to gold 4 rax on Habitation Station. Maru has been developing 4M in TvP since the last patch. The style is still new and needs more development. Day[9] did a Daily on it.
It's okay for the races to have different strengths and weaknesses. Generally, Terran is the strongest race in the mid-game and in the Super Late Game. There was some Terran -- I can't remember his name -- who innovated a mass Raven with mass CC/planetary super late game style that is pretty amazing.
On May 01 2014 00:37 mythandier wrote: I still don't understand why the cost of Armories isn't reduced to either 100/100 or back to its BW cost. Option #2 is a good step but one of the primary prohibitive factors for a Hellbat/mech related timing is the cost of Armory + Factory(ies) + Upgrades. Since Terran has to build multiple production facilities and/or add-ons + armory + upgrades there's really a bottleneck in the early/early-midgame of resources.
Typical current Terran openings involve 4-8 hellions and double evo continuous upgrades. Providing they keep those initial hellions alive it literally costs them nothing to add hellbats to their army.
Indeed. Apparantly, I am the only one fearing the 8 hellbat 16 marine 2 medivac 1/1 stim timing just before spire and probably bane speed, but well, who am I...
You're not, I wrote something similar some pages ago (here). I don't understand why people vote against the first proposal (a fairly insignificant one), while they vote in favor of the second which may spiral out of control in TvZ and mech vs bio.
On May 01 2014 00:37 mythandier wrote: I still don't understand why the cost of Armories isn't reduced to either 100/100 or back to its BW cost. Option #2 is a good step but one of the primary prohibitive factors for a Hellbat/mech related timing is the cost of Armory + Factory(ies) + Upgrades. Since Terran has to build multiple production facilities and/or add-ons + armory + upgrades there's really a bottleneck in the early/early-midgame of resources.
Typical current Terran openings involve 4-8 hellions and double evo continuous upgrades. Providing they keep those initial hellions alive it literally costs them nothing to add hellbats to their army.
Indeed. Apparantly, I am the only one fearing the 8 hellbat 16 marine 2 medivac 1/1 stim timing just before spire and probably bane speed, but well, who am I...
Forcing the zerg being not so greedy and droning like crazy with a 4rd at 9' might be beneficial for the terran, whatcha think ?
On May 01 2014 00:37 mythandier wrote: I still don't understand why the cost of Armories isn't reduced to either 100/100 or back to its BW cost. Option #2 is a good step but one of the primary prohibitive factors for a Hellbat/mech related timing is the cost of Armory + Factory(ies) + Upgrades. Since Terran has to build multiple production facilities and/or add-ons + armory + upgrades there's really a bottleneck in the early/early-midgame of resources.
Typical current Terran openings involve 4-8 hellions and double evo continuous upgrades. Providing they keep those initial hellions alive it literally costs them nothing to add hellbats to their army.
Indeed. Apparantly, I am the only one fearing the 8 hellbat 16 marine 2 medivac 1/1 stim timing just before spire and probably bane speed, but well, who am I...
You're not, I wrote something similar some pages ago (here). I don't understand why people vote against the first proposa (a fairly insignificant one), while they vote in favor of the second which may spiral out of control in TvZ and mech vs bio.
On May 01 2014 00:37 mythandier wrote: I still don't understand why the cost of Armories isn't reduced to either 100/100 or back to its BW cost. Option #2 is a good step but one of the primary prohibitive factors for a Hellbat/mech related timing is the cost of Armory + Factory(ies) + Upgrades. Since Terran has to build multiple production facilities and/or add-ons + armory + upgrades there's really a bottleneck in the early/early-midgame of resources.
Typical current Terran openings involve 4-8 hellions and double evo continuous upgrades. Providing they keep those initial hellions alive it literally costs them nothing to add hellbats to their army.
Indeed. Apparantly, I am the only one fearing the 8 hellbat 16 marine 2 medivac 1/1 stim timing just before spire and probably bane speed, but well, who am I...
Forcing the zerg being not so greedy and droning like crazy with a 4rd at 9' might be beneficial for the terran, whatcha think ?
What exactly are you saying? Is it good that the push might be really strong or is it a bad case? This comes down as a sarcastic remark without any practical use...
"The main thought behind this option is to allow Terran to pressure both Protoss and Zerg a bit more" - is this a joke?
The hellbat thing sounds okay ,but that unit had so many problems throughout the expansion, blizzard always changed something 'cause it's poorly designed and can never be balanced properly.
PS: They should take a look at the Swarm Host, not hellbats.
On May 01 2014 00:37 mythandier wrote: I still don't understand why the cost of Armories isn't reduced to either 100/100 or back to its BW cost. Option #2 is a good step but one of the primary prohibitive factors for a Hellbat/mech related timing is the cost of Armory + Factory(ies) + Upgrades. Since Terran has to build multiple production facilities and/or add-ons + armory + upgrades there's really a bottleneck in the early/early-midgame of resources.
Typical current Terran openings involve 4-8 hellions and double evo continuous upgrades. Providing they keep those initial hellions alive it literally costs them nothing to add hellbats to their army.
Indeed. Apparantly, I am the only one fearing the 8 hellbat 16 marine 2 medivac 1/1 stim timing just before spire and probably bane speed, but well, who am I...
You're not, I wrote something similar some pages ago (here). I don't understand why people vote against the first proposa (a fairly insignificant one), while they vote in favor of the second which may spiral out of control in TvZ and mech vs bio.
On May 01 2014 00:37 mythandier wrote: I still don't understand why the cost of Armories isn't reduced to either 100/100 or back to its BW cost. Option #2 is a good step but one of the primary prohibitive factors for a Hellbat/mech related timing is the cost of Armory + Factory(ies) + Upgrades. Since Terran has to build multiple production facilities and/or add-ons + armory + upgrades there's really a bottleneck in the early/early-midgame of resources.
Typical current Terran openings involve 4-8 hellions and double evo continuous upgrades. Providing they keep those initial hellions alive it literally costs them nothing to add hellbats to their army.
Indeed. Apparantly, I am the only one fearing the 8 hellbat 16 marine 2 medivac 1/1 stim timing just before spire and probably bane speed, but well, who am I...
Forcing the zerg being not so greedy and droning like crazy with a 4rd at 9' might be beneficial for the terran, whatcha think ?
What exactly are you saying? Is it good that the push might be really strong or is it a bad case? This comes down as a sarcastic remark without any practical use...
Sorry if you read that as sarcasm, it wasn't at all. I think it might be, or not be a good thing. Imo, the zerg is too strong in the midgame, which force the T to be reallly passive in the midgame or else being overrun once mutas are out. The 11min push with marine medivacs hellion kindof force the zerg to produce some army supply, but I think this is not enough because at this timing the Z has already a full saturated 3rd and is at around 70 drones. Meaning the terran is behind once the muta are out. A strong push with Hellbat will force much more baneling, hence fewer mutas and drones to be able to repel the agression. That's what we need imho, a stronger midgame against Z so you can even things out in the late game. Thus said, this might be too much, I don't know, I need to try it
I think reverting the widow mine change would be good. Its the massive amounts of zerglings that is the problem on top of banelings. Widow mines need to be able to take out more zerglings to make zergs more cautious.
On May 01 2014 00:28 MagnuMizer wrote: make orbital command center unable to lift off.......................
The orbital being able to lift off is probably the only thing that allows terrans to recover from Zerg 2 base allin or semi allins. I don't think you really thought that suggestion through.
Not to mention it's probably the only way to have a chance of end up ahead against Blink stalker builds.
On April 30 2014 22:35 SatedSC2 wrote: [quote] Well, since you initially spoke about GSL, I'm pretty sure that the GSL numbers are where they are because the previous map-pools have been quite heavily Blink favoured. The maps were designed before two-base Blink all-ins became a thing and that showed. It's going to take a while for that to equalise now that the maps aren't disastrously bad for Terran vs. Blink all-ins. Aside from Blink, I don't see (and have not seen) any convincing arguments that point to something specifically imbalanced about Protoss or Zerg... not that I would claim to understand TvZ enough to judge!
How much more convincing do you want, with both winrates being near 45% WHILST the representation is bordering 15%-20%...?
Aligulac is down for me right now, but I know that the last time I looked the winrates were not at 45%. If you're cherry-picking data from GSL only then I'm not interested in discussing that
Representation (I assume you mean GSL numbers) will take seasons to sort out, and the seasons are hardly short. It took a while for GomTvT to sort itself out even after Terran became balanced. Remember?
Here you are.
Also, with only 8 players in Code S and Code A being openly accesible, it should sort out kinda fast. This season, it stayed the same.
Like I said before, I wouldn't claim to understand TvZ enough to judge what impact these changes would have on that match-up. I don't get the impression that upgrades are a big problem for Terran though, so I don't think that will make much difference. Hellbats are something I'd like to see more of personally, but I don't know anything about how good MMMHellbat is compared to 4M.
Well, it isn't good. The only thing it could do is make for an easier mech transition, and it might open up a very powerful attack with the 6/8 hellions you make early game. With the 1/1 push, instead of 6/8 hellions there can be 6/8 hellbats, which are a lot more powerful in a straight up fight.
The upgrade buff is rubbish, unnecessary and covers nothing.
You know what though? It's actually good if there are possibilities for Terrans to win games early on...
In the current state of the game Terran has very few "all-ins" and ways to win early on versus Zerg and Protoss. While Protoss have the opposite issue - too many all-ins and ways to win early. Zerg has some nice all-ins with roaches and ling banes...so if hellbat transformation upgrade removal adds in another attack or two possible for Terran...that is actually really good and WILL help the balance of the game out more to not be so 1 sided in terms of aggressive options.
Most of Terran's aggressive options were repeatedly nerfed to the point most games involving T are 100% macro games nowadays.
It's not good if that possibility to outright win the game comes with a 3cc opener, though. I'm sure you and your followers 'd like that, but I play the other races as well. Don't underestimate the effect this might have - just like the queen patch increased the speed Zerg got lategame, this might substantially delay that.
No i think everyone that plays/watches SC2 would like it that the game is more fair and it's not only P/Z that have early game aggressive or all-in options. I said it ages ago that if they are going to leave it so P/Z have more all-ins than Terran or ways to win the game early then they either have to:
a) reduce the all-ins from the other races b) give Terran equally aggressive/all-in options
Right now in the current game, everyone knows PvT and PvZ...there are a ton of Protoss all-ins which is why the design of Protoss gets a ton of flak for good reason.
They should reduce the number of those and then TvP will be more balanced early game, or give Terran more early game aggro options vs Protoss by nerfing the nexus cannon.
It's a bit ridiculous you think only Z/P should be allowed to win games early. Maybe you are not up with the state of SC2, but it's usually Terran as the one defending all-ins and Z/P choose whether to do them or to play straight up macro. There currently are no such options for Terran. Terran right now 100% has to play "straight up macro" for the majority of games.
11/11 proxy 2 rax is very common and strong in TvZ. There are other Terran all ins/cheeses that are quite strong like MKP's float CC to gold 4 rax on Habitation Station. Maru has been developing 4M in TvP since the last patch. The style is still new and needs more development. Day[9] did a Daily on it.
It's okay for the races to have different strengths and weaknesses. Generally, Terran is the strongest race in the mid-game and in the Super Late Game. There was some Terran -- I can't remember his name -- who innovated a mass Raven with mass CC/planetary super late game style that is pretty amazing.
The strength of the terran mid game is exactly the problem right now. Yes, Terran has the strongest mid game. So where is the problem you ask?
In PvT, P has (even worse with the previous maps) so many strong early game builds that terrans are usually on the back foot. Once P gets their quick 3rd up and defended, it is no longer mid game but late game since P can get their late game army on 3 bases. So basically the terran is stuck either dropping and hoping for protoss to split their army wrong or go for a SCV pull.
In ZvT, again, with good creep spread and lings blings that don't have to worry about the mines as much, zergs are taking their fourth much early and thus enter the late game. Many times, the 3 base aggression from terran gets run over when they try to go on creep with muta ling bling.
So you see, even tho terrans do have a stronger mid game. The mid game window is much much smaller in the current meta. So that is why terrans aren't doing well. As for the Super late game, you could argue terran is stronger but I think it depends on the comp. However, the length of the late game is long enough for most zergs and protoss to do enough damage. Imagine if there were maps where terran mech can take 4 bases easily, I am sure you would see mech dominate in TvZ.
The Hellbat change is interesting. Could see this opening up some possibilities for a more pressure oriented play. But I also see the danger of this being absused to create unstoppable allins (marauder/hellbat), so I don´t know, if this is a good idea.
On May 01 2014 00:37 mythandier wrote: I still don't understand why the cost of Armories isn't reduced to either 100/100 or back to its BW cost. Option #2 is a good step but one of the primary prohibitive factors for a Hellbat/mech related timing is the cost of Armory + Factory(ies) + Upgrades. Since Terran has to build multiple production facilities and/or add-ons + armory + upgrades there's really a bottleneck in the early/early-midgame of resources.
Typical current Terran openings involve 4-8 hellions and double evo continuous upgrades. Providing they keep those initial hellions alive it literally costs them nothing to add hellbats to their army.
Indeed. Apparantly, I am the only one fearing the 8 hellbat 16 marine 2 medivac 1/1 stim timing just before spire and probably bane speed, but well, who am I...
Forcing the zerg being not so greedy and droning like crazy with a 4rd at 9' might be beneficial for the terran, whatcha think ?
Disagree that zergs really are that greedy. Economywise it's very even (when you take into account mules) in the early game, and if you buff one race in that phase it very easily snowballs. Terran already has the chance of winning the game outright with Hellion/Reaper into two medivac +1/1 at 10:30 if he outmicro's the zerg, and for instance Maru has been good at doing that.
But the issue is that when the zerg just plays solid in the early game, his midgame production is significantly stronger than of that of the terran player. Widow Mines can no longer be used to neutralizie that advantage, which makes the matchup imbalanced.
There are some easy small changes that can be made;
- Just reduce research cost of transformation Servos to 50/50. This will benefit all matchups I think without creating a significant early game imbalance in TvZ (which already works pretty well IMO). - Reduce cost of Drilling Claws/research time + reduce BT of Widow Mines from 40 to 35 seconds.
The latter change will help terran in the midgame TvZ and make 1/1/1 a bit stronger in TvP (which I believe is good).
On May 01 2014 00:37 mythandier wrote: I still don't understand why the cost of Armories isn't reduced to either 100/100 or back to its BW cost. Option #2 is a good step but one of the primary prohibitive factors for a Hellbat/mech related timing is the cost of Armory + Factory(ies) + Upgrades. Since Terran has to build multiple production facilities and/or add-ons + armory + upgrades there's really a bottleneck in the early/early-midgame of resources.
Typical current Terran openings involve 4-8 hellions and double evo continuous upgrades. Providing they keep those initial hellions alive it literally costs them nothing to add hellbats to their army.
Indeed. Apparantly, I am the only one fearing the 8 hellbat 16 marine 2 medivac 1/1 stim timing just before spire and probably bane speed, but well, who am I...
Forcing the zerg being not so greedy and droning like crazy with a 4rd at 9' might be beneficial for the terran, whatcha think ?
Disagree that zergs really are that greedy. Economywise it's very even (when you take into account mules) in the early game, and if you buff one race in that phase it very easily snowballs. Terran already has the chance of winning the game outright with Hellion/Reaper into two medivac +1/1 at 10:30 if he outmicro's the zerg, and for instance Maru has been good at doing that.
But the issue is that when the zerg just plays solid in the early game, his midgame production is significantly stronger than of that of the terran player. Widow Mines can no longer be used to neutralizie that advantage, which makes the matchup imbalanced.
There are some easy small changes that can be made;
- Just reduce research cost of transformation Servos to 50/50. This will benefit all matchups I think without creating a significant early game imbalance in TvZ (which already works pretty well IMO). - Reduce cost of Drilling Claws/research time + reduce BT of Widow Mines from 40 to 35 seconds.
The latter change will help terran in the midgame TvZ and make 1/1/1 a bit stronger in TvP (which I believe is good).
You say they have a stronger production in the midgame, and I think this is caused by the fact that they can drone that easily in the early stage of the game. Sure you can win with 6 hellions, a bunch of marines and a couple of medivac, but only if the zergs is greedy as fuck. Remember Inno vs Life g3 of DH ? Life had already his 4th finished when Inno wanted to put pressure, and mutalisk, that was a 11'30". It means that already this early, the Zerg can have a full saturated 3rd, a 4th finishing, and muta incoming. Imo, forcing the Zerg to produce a bigger army at 10' will help terran to deal with early mutalisk and being more agressive as we used to be before the mine nerf.
On May 01 2014 00:37 mythandier wrote: I still don't understand why the cost of Armories isn't reduced to either 100/100 or back to its BW cost. Option #2 is a good step but one of the primary prohibitive factors for a Hellbat/mech related timing is the cost of Armory + Factory(ies) + Upgrades. Since Terran has to build multiple production facilities and/or add-ons + armory + upgrades there's really a bottleneck in the early/early-midgame of resources.
Typical current Terran openings involve 4-8 hellions and double evo continuous upgrades. Providing they keep those initial hellions alive it literally costs them nothing to add hellbats to their army.
Indeed. Apparantly, I am the only one fearing the 8 hellbat 16 marine 2 medivac 1/1 stim timing just before spire and probably bane speed, but well, who am I...
You're not, I wrote something similar some pages ago (here). I don't understand why people vote against the first proposal (a fairly insignificant one), while they vote in favor of the second which may spiral out of control in TvZ and mech vs bio.
Well, people vote against the first one because they have been told that "Terran upgrades so strong" repeatedly.
And they vote for the second because it sounds like something that actually changes something in the game. Even if it turns out broken, it may be interesting to see. At least that is my take on it. I believe it would be nice to see it in a testmap. Sure, this kind of pushes sound very scary, or just the possibility of doing some hellion--> "wait you don't have roaches, transform, kill the third" not to mention dedicated 1-2base hellion pressure into bio/hellbat rush could all prove to be very strong. But for a testmap, I don't mind. Blizzard isn't going through with most of the changes on testmaps, especially if the pro-feedback is negative. But they usually test something else instead then, so I think it wouldn't be bad to just get anything out there for an experiment. That's why I gave 2upvotes.
As i can see, blizzard totally dont understand the problem in TvP. Its not even about makro games. Its about early and mid game protoss mechanics. We do need to change very strong capability of protoss in early stages of the game, especially potential off allins and things like oracle ( very strong early game unit witch actually doesnt really slows your eco ). Thanks to mothership core, protoss can not be punished till like 10 minute mark. No need of making units makes protoss very strong in later stages of the game. Photon overcharge basicly denies everything till 10 min mark and witch is important - soaks so much damage in fights as it counts as enemy unit so half of the army is hitting nexus as far as you dont focus all the time. As a terran i am fine with upgrades, with dead helbats etc. But hey, maybe fix unit witch is very very very strong flying/shooting/giving HG vision caster and perfect defense system? My thought is to make it starts with 0 energy and making overchage cost 125 energy, or letting it be as it is but forcing it to stay in base to be used for defence ( as it was wanted to be ), for example making it to be placed on nexus ( switch is free, 15sec cd, can use PO only on current nexus )
On May 01 2014 02:13 gosublade wrote: I think it would be good if hellions could turn into hellbats MID MOVEMENT. When transformation starts, they start moving at the speed of a hellbat
On April 30 2014 09:30 frozzz wrote: both options are really good but honestly i think that protoss upgrades should be reverted to its original cost and not lowering terran ones
I completely agree. I feel like terran upgrades are only really a problem in tvp, and I can see why zergs would have a negative reaction to the buff. Reverting the price for protoss helps the upgrade situation in tvp without hurting tvz.
Really, you guys think Protoss are changing the world with that half a stalker? That upgrade cost buff didn't do anything beyond make it so you could do the math for the upgrades easier.
On April 30 2014 22:35 SatedSC2 wrote: [quote] Well, since you initially spoke about GSL, I'm pretty sure that the GSL numbers are where they are because the previous map-pools have been quite heavily Blink favoured. The maps were designed before two-base Blink all-ins became a thing and that showed. It's going to take a while for that to equalise now that the maps aren't disastrously bad for Terran vs. Blink all-ins. Aside from Blink, I don't see (and have not seen) any convincing arguments that point to something specifically imbalanced about Protoss or Zerg... not that I would claim to understand TvZ enough to judge!
How much more convincing do you want, with both winrates being near 45% WHILST the representation is bordering 15%-20%...?
Aligulac is down for me right now, but I know that the last time I looked the winrates were not at 45%. If you're cherry-picking data from GSL only then I'm not interested in discussing that
Representation (I assume you mean GSL numbers) will take seasons to sort out, and the seasons are hardly short. It took a while for GomTvT to sort itself out even after Terran became balanced. Remember?
Here you are.
Also, with only 8 players in Code S and Code A being openly accesible, it should sort out kinda fast. This season, it stayed the same.
Like I said before, I wouldn't claim to understand TvZ enough to judge what impact these changes would have on that match-up. I don't get the impression that upgrades are a big problem for Terran though, so I don't think that will make much difference. Hellbats are something I'd like to see more of personally, but I don't know anything about how good MMMHellbat is compared to 4M.
Well, it isn't good. The only thing it could do is make for an easier mech transition, and it might open up a very powerful attack with the 6/8 hellions you make early game. With the 1/1 push, instead of 6/8 hellions there can be 6/8 hellbats, which are a lot more powerful in a straight up fight.
The upgrade buff is rubbish, unnecessary and covers nothing.
You know what though? It's actually good if there are possibilities for Terrans to win games early on...
In the current state of the game Terran has very few "all-ins" and ways to win early on versus Zerg and Protoss. While Protoss have the opposite issue - too many all-ins and ways to win early. Zerg has some nice all-ins with roaches and ling banes...so if hellbat transformation upgrade removal adds in another attack or two possible for Terran...that is actually really good and WILL help the balance of the game out more to not be so 1 sided in terms of aggressive options.
Most of Terran's aggressive options were repeatedly nerfed to the point most games involving T are 100% macro games nowadays.
It's not good if that possibility to outright win the game comes with a 3cc opener, though. I'm sure you and your followers 'd like that, but I play the other races as well. Don't underestimate the effect this might have - just like the queen patch increased the speed Zerg got lategame, this might substantially delay that.
No i think everyone that plays/watches SC2 would like it that the game is more fair and it's not only P/Z that have early game aggressive or all-in options. I said it ages ago that if they are going to leave it so P/Z have more all-ins than Terran or ways to win the game early then they either have to:
a) reduce the all-ins from the other races b) give Terran equally aggressive/all-in options
Right now in the current game, everyone knows PvT and PvZ...there are a ton of Protoss all-ins which is why the design of Protoss gets a ton of flak for good reason.
They should reduce the number of those and then TvP will be more balanced early game, or give Terran more early game aggro options vs Protoss by nerfing the nexus cannon.
It's a bit ridiculous you think only Z/P should be allowed to win games early. Maybe you are not up with the state of SC2, but it's usually Terran as the one defending all-ins and Z/P choose whether to do them or to play straight up macro. There currently are no such options for Terran. Terran right now 100% has to play "straight up macro" for the majority of games.
I honestly can't take you serious this way. First you put words into my mouth, and you're going after me on the words you've made up yourself? Good job buddy!
I agree Terran has the less prevalent early game aggression. So what? There's always going to be one race with less, except if you carefully calculate they all exactly have X amount of different all ins at every stage of the game. It's one of the things that comes with a game with multiple races - They aren't the same.
I am up with the state of SC2, Terran can do some fun aggression vs Protoss via gas first, Terran can skip the third CC for some nasty pushes, Hellion banshee can do the same, even reapers can do so. Terran has a good couple of effective cheeses.
You've got less aggressive options, but you have plenty of means to scout and defend other races' aggression in this map pool. I don't even know why I am putting in the effort to argue with you, it's useless.
So... Deal with it.
You say, "I agree Terran has the less prevalent early game aggression. So what?" Here is "so what": There are 4 Terran's in the Code S Ro32. So what the race is gradually disappearing at high levels and in the tournament scene. So what late game T1 units are trash versus Protoss deathball if you don't have 300 APM. So what that it takes little skill to execute a 2-base all-in that, if not scouted, outtright kills the Terran (2-base roach, 2-base blink, roach bane all-in). Not to mention the one base proxy oracle; proxy dt; proxy vray; immortal proxy; even the oracle into tempest proxy...that's a new one...or maybe they just feign aggression, let the Terran d-up, and go into double forge/templar. I'm sure i missed a ton more but these all-in's pretty much end the game for Terran if they do not "guess" correctly and are EXTREMELY easy to execute. You mention aggression versus Protoss going gas first; however, you are not comparing apples-to-apples. Going gas first into WM or helion does not outright win the game unless you have a super greedy Protoss going Nexus first. Also the risk/reward is comletely different: Terran significantly sacrafices his/her economy to do this early aggression, but with Protoss, a failed Blink all-in does not hurt their economy - they just sit there and defend with Nexus cannon while maintaining map control with Stalkers (while Terran has to pull SCVS and usually make at least 4 bunkers to defend). I think your criticism fails to see that Terran is notorious for having a weak late game; therefore, they need to inflict some level of damage early on to slow Protoss tech and Zerg economy from bursting out of control. Now that this is taken away from them, it is difficult to be on even footing with the other two races. I also see the new map pool as being an issue (esp with Zerg and the time it takes to execute any 2 base drops and aggression) with the larger 3 player + maps.
At the moment i dont think a balance change is necessary~ I would much rather see Blizzard trying to rework stuff, providing us a playground to test stuff. (feedback for upcoming possible changes MstrJinbo)
- Changing Warp in for example, to a later tech with disadvantage! when i take 1 bad fight, there is no comeback possible if 10 zealots get warp in instantly (2 base all ins are still possible but less luck) - Highground advantage, yes even dota2 has 25% miss chance ... (smaller army can hold a position etc) - swarm host: make it more interesting or remove the unit, try the impaler etc so much stuff can be done by giving us a testmap~ we have to play/watch this game ... dont get me started about bnet 0.2 ^_^ ---- im wasting my time because i care about the game
On May 01 2014 02:23 ionONE wrote: At the moment i dont think a balance change is necessary~ I would much rather see Blizzard trying to rework stuff, providing us a playground to test stuff.
- Changing Warp in for example, to a later tech with disadvantage! when i take 1 bad fight, there is no comeback possible if 10 zealots get warp in instantly (2 base all ins are still possible but less luck) - Highground advantage, yes even dota2 has 25% miss chance ... (smaller army can hold a position etc) - swarm host: make it more interesting or remove the unit, try the impaler etc so much stuff can be done by giving us a testmap~
Bliz has already stated this type of change would only be considered for an expansion and is more or less a nonstarter for a balance patch change. Not sure why people keep wasting their time suggesting it every balance patch discussion.
On May 01 2014 00:37 mythandier wrote: I still don't understand why the cost of Armories isn't reduced to either 100/100 or back to its BW cost. Option #2 is a good step but one of the primary prohibitive factors for a Hellbat/mech related timing is the cost of Armory + Factory(ies) + Upgrades. Since Terran has to build multiple production facilities and/or add-ons + armory + upgrades there's really a bottleneck in the early/early-midgame of resources.
Typical current Terran openings involve 4-8 hellions and double evo continuous upgrades. Providing they keep those initial hellions alive it literally costs them nothing to add hellbats to their army.
Indeed. Apparantly, I am the only one fearing the 8 hellbat 16 marine 2 medivac 1/1 stim timing just before spire and probably bane speed, but well, who am I...
Forcing the zerg being not so greedy and droning like crazy with a 4rd at 9' might be beneficial for the terran, whatcha think ?
Disagree that zergs really are that greedy. Economywise it's very even (when you take into account mules) in the early game, and if you buff one race in that phase it very easily snowballs. Terran already has the chance of winning the game outright with Hellion/Reaper into two medivac +1/1 at 10:30 if he outmicro's the zerg, and for instance Maru has been good at doing that.
But the issue is that when the zerg just plays solid in the early game, his midgame production is significantly stronger than of that of the terran player. Widow Mines can no longer be used to neutralizie that advantage, which makes the matchup imbalanced.
There are some easy small changes that can be made;
- Just reduce research cost of transformation Servos to 50/50. This will benefit all matchups I think without creating a significant early game imbalance in TvZ (which already works pretty well IMO). - Reduce cost of Drilling Claws/research time + reduce BT of Widow Mines from 40 to 35 seconds.
The latter change will help terran in the midgame TvZ and make 1/1/1 a bit stronger in TvP (which I believe is good).
You say they have a stronger production in the midgame, and I think this is caused by the fact that they can drone that easily in the early stage of the game. Sure you can win with 6 hellions, a bunch of marines and a couple of medivac, but only if the zergs is greedy as fuck. Remember Inno vs Life g3 of DH ? Life had already his 4th finished when Inno wanted to put pressure, and mutalisk, that was a 11'30". It means that already this early, the Zerg can have a full saturated 3rd, a 4th finishing, and muta incoming. Imo, forcing the Zerg to produce a bigger army at 10' will help terran to deal with early mutalisk and being more agressive as we used to be before the mine nerf.
In that particular game, though, wasn't Life able to hold his 4th so easily because his drone count wasn't that high (~65, just a few higher than Innovation) and he made a lot of preemtive banes and stuff? Not saying I totally disagree, but that game wasn't how, say, DRG might've played it out (more drones smaller army).
On May 01 2014 02:13 gosublade wrote: I think it would be good if hellions could turn into hellbats MID MOVEMENT. When transformation starts, they start moving at the speed of a hellbat
wait... Mutas had a buff in HOTS? HOLY CRAP!!!! No wonder they were not dying UGH!!! Haven't played since HOTS release and I was wondering how the Mutas kept coming and coming after storming them lol...
On May 01 2014 02:13 gosublade wrote: I think it would be good if hellions could turn into hellbats MID MOVEMENT. When transformation starts, they start moving at the speed of a hellbat
On May 01 2014 02:51 FreeZEternal wrote: wait... Mutas had a buff in HOTS? HOLY CRAP!!!! No wonder they were not dying UGH!!! Haven't played since HOTS release and I was wondering how the Mutas kept coming and coming after storming them lol...
On May 01 2014 02:51 FreeZEternal wrote: wait... Mutas had a buff in HOTS? HOLY CRAP!!!! No wonder they were not dying UGH!!! Haven't played since HOTS release and I was wondering how the Mutas kept coming and coming after storming them lol...
LMAO.
Yeah they regenerate stupid fast. You need Phoenixes to fight them.
The Hellbat upgrade could be very interesting to see, Dayshi's PvT hellion hug could be very funny to see but I am not 100% behind it without a test map of some sort.
Neither of these things are going to balance the game - I love how so many people vote for the helion HB transform - It actually makes me lol - it's definitely all zerg players lolling at it saying please yes please another useless mech buff! As if now meching will be more viable because you don't have to get the transform upgrade? Seriously, that's the problem with mech? Even the upgrade cost is inconsequential nonsense - it takes about 10 in game seconds to mine that much..
Tvz: lets see - pre mine nerf but post hellbat nerf and overseer buff it was statistically balanced ( as acknowledged by Blizzard) - You were urged not to patch the game while it was statistically balanced (by people other than zergs that didn't want to learn how to micro) but you did anyway to fix a "stale metagame" and now you got what so many people said you would and what you asked another imbalanced match-up. Think about it logically - you took away the only viable composition that has demonstrated capability to win games at the highest level of play through reducing the damage output of a core unit of it by 50%. What did you think was going to happen? Now your answer to fix it is to change 2 totally unrelated things? How does transformation servos help even bio/hellbat? This one is so easy its ridiculous - you already have the solution you just broke it - man up and admit your mistake.
Tvp - yess please transform servos the answer we've been waiting for. Nothing on strengthening Terrans' early game defense or weakening / limiting Protoss' early game options? It's obvious that the warp gate mechanic and the adv it provides late game isn't going to be fixed but you could at least take away the ridiculous adv that the race has in early game by forcing T to prepare for a multitude of cheese and allowing P to choose whether to exploit those or to fake them and greed out. There are COUNTLESS pro level games that highlight this. Why is this necessary for the game?
Why refuse to address these things and in place of them throw out totally unrelated "buffs" (tanks/servos/bio up cost??)
If you aren't going to fix them at least man up and respond to your position on them specifically and why you think they are actually beneficial to the game at present.
On May 01 2014 00:37 mythandier wrote: I still don't understand why the cost of Armories isn't reduced to either 100/100 or back to its BW cost. Option #2 is a good step but one of the primary prohibitive factors for a Hellbat/mech related timing is the cost of Armory + Factory(ies) + Upgrades. Since Terran has to build multiple production facilities and/or add-ons + armory + upgrades there's really a bottleneck in the early/early-midgame of resources.
Typical current Terran openings involve 4-8 hellions and double evo continuous upgrades. Providing they keep those initial hellions alive it literally costs them nothing to add hellbats to their army.
Indeed. Apparantly, I am the only one fearing the 8 hellbat 16 marine 2 medivac 1/1 stim timing just before spire and probably bane speed, but well, who am I...
Forcing the zerg being not so greedy and droning like crazy with a 4rd at 9' might be beneficial for the terran, whatcha think ?
Disagree that zergs really are that greedy. Economywise it's very even (when you take into account mules) in the early game, and if you buff one race in that phase it very easily snowballs. Terran already has the chance of winning the game outright with Hellion/Reaper into two medivac +1/1 at 10:30 if he outmicro's the zerg, and for instance Maru has been good at doing that.
But the issue is that when the zerg just plays solid in the early game, his midgame production is significantly stronger than of that of the terran player. Widow Mines can no longer be used to neutralizie that advantage, which makes the matchup imbalanced.
There are some easy small changes that can be made;
- Just reduce research cost of transformation Servos to 50/50. This will benefit all matchups I think without creating a significant early game imbalance in TvZ (which already works pretty well IMO). - Reduce cost of Drilling Claws/research time + reduce BT of Widow Mines from 40 to 35 seconds.
The latter change will help terran in the midgame TvZ and make 1/1/1 a bit stronger in TvP (which I believe is good).
You say they have a stronger production in the midgame, and I think this is caused by the fact that they can drone that easily in the early stage of the game. Sure you can win with 6 hellions, a bunch of marines and a couple of medivac, but only if the zergs is greedy as !@#$%^&*. Remember Inno vs Life g3 of DH ? Life had already his 4th finished when Inno wanted to put pressure, and mutalisk, that was a 11'30". It means that already this early, the Zerg can have a full saturated 3rd, a 4th finishing, and muta incoming. Imo, forcing the Zerg to produce a bigger army at 10' will help terran to deal with early mutalisk and being more agressive as we used to be before the mine nerf.
The way zerg macromechanics work they always have stronger midgame production. Thas has always been the case at any time in the life of Sc2 and in any matchup.
The argument I used to argue against buffing terran early game is how easily it actually snowballs. If you buff terran by 10% in the early game, it's not just gonna make zerg midgame weaker by 10%. Rather, it's gonna nerf zerg by something much larger than that.
Now look at how early game TvZ works. Both races can be aggressive and its very microintensive. Overall, it has a really fun dynamic which rewards skills for both players. Previously in HOTS Blizzard changed a dynamic that worked pretty well: That was when they nerfed the Widow Mine in TvZ, which hurt terran a lot in the midgame. Previously terran wasn't dominanting in the mid-or lategame. Rather, it was a close and microintensive battle.
Simply put, when Blizzard is looking for simple/easy to fix small changes, they should be very very careful about changing the phases of the game that works well and where both races overall are pretty satifised. So touching something that impacts TvZ early game is IMO a big error.
FYI, In Inno vs life g3, Innovation went for double ebay before 2nd and 3rd rax, which obv means that Life can take a 4th on a map like Frosts very early.
On May 01 2014 02:13 gosublade wrote: I think it would be good if hellions could turn into hellbats MID MOVEMENT. When transformation starts, they start moving at the speed of a hellbat
On May 01 2014 03:16 Hider wrote: In Inno vs life g3, Innovation went for double ebay before 2nd and 3rd rax, which obv means that Life can take a 4th on a map like Frosts very early.
Zerg can take a quick fourth if Terran goes for triple OC regardless of +2 rax or +2 EBs first.
On May 01 2014 03:16 Hider wrote: In Inno vs life g3, Innovation went for double ebay before 2nd and 3rd rax, which obv means that Life can take a 4th on a map like Frosts very early.
Zerg can take a quick fourth if Terran goes for triple OC regardless of +2 rax or +2 EBs first.
Well the context here is that Life easily reflected aggression from Innovation while having high worker count. Doing that is a lot harder vs non double ebay builds since the 2 Medivac timing attack comes later.
The way zerg works they can always take bases fast as long as they just sascrifice worker count, however there is always a tradeoff. Taking a quick 4th against nongreedy teran builds isn't really benefical in most situations.
On May 01 2014 02:58 DomeGetta wrote: Sorry but this is pretty ridiculous.
Neither of these things are going to balance the game - I love how so many people vote for the helion HB transform - It actually makes me lol - it's definitely all zerg players lolling at it saying please yes please another useless mech buff! As if now meching will be more viable because you don't have to get the transform upgrade? Seriously, that's the problem with mech? Even the upgrade cost is inconsequential nonsense - it takes about 10 in game seconds to mine that much..
Tvz: lets see - pre mine nerf but post hellbat nerf and overseer buff it was statistically balanced ( as acknowledged by Blizzard) - You were urged not to patch the game while it was statistically balanced (by people other than zergs that didn't want to learn how to micro) but you did anyway to fix a "stale metagame" and now you got what so many people said you would and what you asked another imbalanced match-up. Think about it logically - you took away the only viable composition that has demonstrated capability to win games at the highest level of play through reducing the damage output of a core unit of it by 50%. What did you think was going to happen? Now your answer to fix it is to change 2 totally unrelated things? How does transformation servos help even bio/hellbat? This one is so easy its ridiculous - you already have the solution you just broke it - man up and admit your mistake.
Tvp - yess please transform servos the answer we've been waiting for. Nothing on strengthening Terrans' early game defense or weakening / limiting Protoss' early game options? It's obvious that the warp gate mechanic and the adv it provides late game isn't going to be fixed but you could at least take away the ridiculous adv that the race has in early game by forcing T to prepare for a multitude of cheese and allowing P to choose whether to exploit those or to fake them and greed out. There are COUNTLESS pro level games that highlight this. Why is this necessary for the game?
Why refuse to address these things and in place of them throw out totally unrelated "buffs" (tanks/servos/bio up cost??)
If you aren't going to fix them at least man up and respond to your position on them specifically and why you think they are actually beneficial to the game at present.
The patch notes were quite specific on how the Transformation Servos removal helps TvZ.
There's a growing number of pros talking about TvP favoring T at the moment, even if results don't reflect it quite as obviously. If we're going to take feedback from pros then we should take it not just when it suits the argument we want to make.
Therefore I'm okay with Blizzard waiting a little on TvP.
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
On May 01 2014 03:16 Hider wrote: In Inno vs life g3, Innovation went for double ebay before 2nd and 3rd rax, which obv means that Life can take a 4th on a map like Frosts very early.
Zerg can take a quick fourth if Terran goes for triple OC regardless of +2 rax or +2 EBs first.
Well the context here is that Life easily reflected aggression from Innovation while having high worker count. Doing that is a lot harder vs non double ebay builds since the 2 Medivac timing attack comes later.
The way zerg works they can always take bases fast as long as they just sascrifice worker count, however there is always a tradeoff. Taking a quick 4th against nongreedy teran builds isn't really benefical in most situations.
Life easily blocked the agression because Bogus went 8 Hellions. Getting extra Hellions delays the Medivac timing while the Spire timing is unchanged; if your Medivac push/drop hits when mutas are already there you can't do anything. It's even worse if Terran went rax 11 3 Reapers instead of 2 with rax 12 but I don't remember how many Reapers he had.
On May 01 2014 03:16 Hider wrote: In Inno vs life g3, Innovation went for double ebay before 2nd and 3rd rax, which obv means that Life can take a 4th on a map like Frosts very early.
Zerg can take a quick fourth if Terran goes for triple OC regardless of +2 rax or +2 EBs first.
Well the context here is that Life easily reflected aggression from Innovation while having high worker count. Doing that is a lot harder vs non double ebay builds since the 2 Medivac timing attack comes later.
The way zerg works they can always take bases fast as long as they just sascrifice worker count, however there is always a tradeoff. Taking a quick 4th against nongreedy teran builds isn't really benefical in most situations.
Life easily blocked the agression because Bogus went 8 Hellions. Getting extra Hellions delays the Medivac timing while the Spire timing is unchanged; if your Medivac push/drop hits when mutas are already there you can't do anything. It's even worse if Terran went rax 11 3 Reapers instead of 2 with rax 12 but I don't remember how many Reapers he had.
It also should be noted that any push terran tries gets much weaker when you spawn cross positions on Frost. Terran suffers when all your units walk from your main base slowly, without the help of creep or warp ins.
On May 01 2014 02:58 DomeGetta wrote: Sorry but this is pretty ridiculous.
Neither of these things are going to balance the game - I love how so many people vote for the helion HB transform - It actually makes me lol - it's definitely all zerg players lolling at it saying please yes please another useless mech buff! As if now meching will be more viable because you don't have to get the transform upgrade? Seriously, that's the problem with mech? Even the upgrade cost is inconsequential nonsense - it takes about 10 in game seconds to mine that much..
Tvz: lets see - pre mine nerf but post hellbat nerf and overseer buff it was statistically balanced ( as acknowledged by Blizzard) - You were urged not to patch the game while it was statistically balanced (by people other than zergs that didn't want to learn how to micro) but you did anyway to fix a "stale metagame" and now you got what so many people said you would and what you asked another imbalanced match-up. Think about it logically - you took away the only viable composition that has demonstrated capability to win games at the highest level of play through reducing the damage output of a core unit of it by 50%. What did you think was going to happen? Now your answer to fix it is to change 2 totally unrelated things? How does transformation servos help even bio/hellbat? This one is so easy its ridiculous - you already have the solution you just broke it - man up and admit your mistake.
Tvp - yess please transform servos the answer we've been waiting for. Nothing on strengthening Terrans' early game defense or weakening / limiting Protoss' early game options? It's obvious that the warp gate mechanic and the adv it provides late game isn't going to be fixed but you could at least take away the ridiculous adv that the race has in early game by forcing T to prepare for a multitude of cheese and allowing P to choose whether to exploit those or to fake them and greed out. There are COUNTLESS pro level games that highlight this. Why is this necessary for the game?
Why refuse to address these things and in place of them throw out totally unrelated "buffs" (tanks/servos/bio up cost??)
If you aren't going to fix them at least man up and respond to your position on them specifically and why you think they are actually beneficial to the game at present.
The patch notes were quite specific on how the Transformation Servos removal helps TvZ.
There's a growing number of pros talking about TvP favoring T at the moment, even if results don't reflect it quite as obviously. If we're going to take feedback from pros then we should take it not just when it suits the argument we want to make.
Therefore I'm okay with Blizzard waiting a little on TvP.
Yes - because if you choose to open helion harass and dont lose any 6 hellbats instead of helions will certainly compensate for 50% less effective mines - very astute.
And to your second point - stats not opinions should be what dictate patches (actual imbalance vs. stale metagame)
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
On May 01 2014 03:16 Hider wrote: In Inno vs life g3, Innovation went for double ebay before 2nd and 3rd rax, which obv means that Life can take a 4th on a map like Frosts very early.
Zerg can take a quick fourth if Terran goes for triple OC regardless of +2 rax or +2 EBs first.
Well the context here is that Life easily reflected aggression from Innovation while having high worker count. Doing that is a lot harder vs non double ebay builds since the 2 Medivac timing attack comes later.
The way zerg works they can always take bases fast as long as they just sascrifice worker count, however there is always a tradeoff. Taking a quick 4th against nongreedy teran builds isn't really benefical in most situations.
Life easily blocked the agression because Bogus went 8 Hellions. Getting extra Hellions delays the Medivac timing while the Spire timing is unchanged; if your Medivac push/drop hits when mutas are already there you can't do anything. It's even worse if Terran went rax 11 3 Reapers instead of 2 with rax 12 but I don't remember how many Reapers he had.
Rewatched the game. I don't think the 8 hellions hurt him at all had he followed it up correctly.. Sure it delayed his timing, but given how cost-effective they were, I think he would have been in a worse position with only the standard 6 hellions. It definitely seemed to catch Life off guard a bit that he couldn't just defend with Lings.
But the problem (as I see it), was that he didn't adjust correctly. Perhaps he thought the initial 8 hellions had done so much damage that he could just kill him with follow up-attack. But given that it was delayed + he landed his 3rd OC and used Hellions to prevent counterattacks from Life (so he could safely mine from the 3rd), he way overcommited with his Medivac timing. Maybe he thought Life was on 80 drones (which would imply Mutas around 13 minute mark), but in fact he was just on 69 workers to the 63 of Innovation, and Innovation would have been in decent shape had he just send in his medivacs + marins to clear up creep and then went back home and follow up with 2/2 timing.
Anyway, my point was that, that game was a very poor example to attempt to argue that terran needs a buff early game. I definitely feel that TvZ is gonna be a alot more volatile if terran can transform Hellbats for free.
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
You know the month before the nerf, there was exactly 50% winrate in TvZ ?
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
You know the month before the nerf, there was exactly 50% winrate in TvZ ?
Yes, read my above post. That's because all terrans were doing was 3CC 2ebay. If zergs did roach bane all in, they won. If they tried to macro, they lost most of the time. It's like nobody remembers what they watched a year ago. It was agonizing because tvz had become a slaughter one way or the other (mine power or roach allin)
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of !@#$%^&*, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
Eh TvZ win/rates were below 50% according to Aliguac while terran were still significiantly underrepresented. This roughly implies that top 0.8% terran were losing against top 1% zergs. From a balanceperspective - nerfing terran in that matchup made little sense.
I personally had the "pleausre" of offracing zerg a bit last week, and honestly playing vs Widow Mines feel dumb. You basically just amove your whole army in as zerglings almost always detonate all the Widow Mines. Maybe you right click a bit with the zerglings so they injure the terrans army more than your own. Maybe you do a bit of baneling spreading, and maybe you FF Medivacs a bit with Mutalisks, but neither of these micro tricks are really neccasasry in order to win at this level. Meanwhile my diamond terran opponents were trying to micro their assess off, but it was very rarely enough as I simply had a lot more stuff and terrans AOE is too weak.
On May 01 2014 02:58 DomeGetta wrote: Sorry but this is pretty ridiculous.
Neither of these things are going to balance the game - I love how so many people vote for the helion HB transform - It actually makes me lol - it's definitely all zerg players lolling at it saying please yes please another useless mech buff! As if now meching will be more viable because you don't have to get the transform upgrade? Seriously, that's the problem with mech? Even the upgrade cost is inconsequential nonsense - it takes about 10 in game seconds to mine that much..
Tvz: lets see - pre mine nerf but post hellbat nerf and overseer buff it was statistically balanced ( as acknowledged by Blizzard) - You were urged not to patch the game while it was statistically balanced (by people other than zergs that didn't want to learn how to micro) but you did anyway to fix a "stale metagame" and now you got what so many people said you would and what you asked another imbalanced match-up. Think about it logically - you took away the only viable composition that has demonstrated capability to win games at the highest level of play through reducing the damage output of a core unit of it by 50%. What did you think was going to happen? Now your answer to fix it is to change 2 totally unrelated things? How does transformation servos help even bio/hellbat? This one is so easy its ridiculous - you already have the solution you just broke it - man up and admit your mistake.
Tvp - yess please transform servos the answer we've been waiting for. Nothing on strengthening Terrans' early game defense or weakening / limiting Protoss' early game options? It's obvious that the warp gate mechanic and the adv it provides late game isn't going to be fixed but you could at least take away the ridiculous adv that the race has in early game by forcing T to prepare for a multitude of cheese and allowing P to choose whether to exploit those or to fake them and greed out. There are COUNTLESS pro level games that highlight this. Why is this necessary for the game?
Why refuse to address these things and in place of them throw out totally unrelated "buffs" (tanks/servos/bio up cost??)
If you aren't going to fix them at least man up and respond to your position on them specifically and why you think they are actually beneficial to the game at present.
The patch notes were quite specific on how the Transformation Servos removal helps TvZ.
There's a growing number of pros talking about TvP favoring T at the moment, even if results don't reflect it quite as obviously. If we're going to take feedback from pros then we should take it not just when it suits the argument we want to make.
Therefore I'm okay with Blizzard waiting a little on TvP.
Yes - because if you choose to open helion harass and dont lose any 6 hellbats instead of helions will certainly compensate for 50% less effective mines - very astute.
And to your second point - stats not opinions should be what dictate patches (actual imbalance vs. stale metagame)
yes but don't tell me that 6 extra Hellbats for a 2 base Hellbat + bio timing push pre Muta is not scary for the zerg.
I find it funny how fast people dismiss changes in the game like that without even trying the balance maps or anything.
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
You know the month before the nerf, there was exactly 50% winrate in TvZ ?
Yes, read my above post. That's because all terrans were doing was 3CC 2ebay. If zergs did roach bane all in, they won. If they tried to macro, they lost most of the time. It's like nobody remembers what they watched a year ago. It was agonizing because tvz had become a slaughter one way or the other (mine power or roach allin)
I remember a DRG that was in a huge slump beating Innovation (at the time by far the best player in the world) in one of the sickest bo3 of the year.
If you ask, I can provide you a shit tons of awesome game prepatch. Much more than now.
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
The reason it was "balanced" was because half the time Terran played extremely greedily and got away with it,and with Widow mines it was very hard for the Zerg to stop the parade push. The other half of the time, the Zerg wisened up and Roach/Bane busted the greedy Terran who had nothing to defend with.
Terran has ALL the tools to scout these Roach/bane busts. 3CC first, ask questions later is really the only reason they lose to them.
Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs
On May 01 2014 05:29 DinoMight wrote: The reason it was "balanced" was because half the time Terran played extremely greedily and got away with it,and with Widow mines it was very hard for the Zerg to stop the parade push. The other half of the time, the Zerg wisened up and Roach/Bane busted the greedy Terran who had nothing to defend with.
Terran has ALL the tools to scout these Roach/bane busts. 3CC first, ask questions later is really the only reason they lose to them.
Please, wonder why all the pro still play 3cc fast 2ebay even now then. Builds didn't change at all. Because they are the only viable. Your argument is really poor.
On May 01 2014 05:29 DinoMight wrote: The reason it was "balanced" was because half the time Terran played extremely greedily and got away with it,and with Widow mines it was very hard for the Zerg to stop the parade push. The other half of the time, the Zerg wisened up and Roach/Bane busted the greedy Terran who had nothing to defend with.
Terran has ALL the tools to scout these Roach/bane busts. 3CC first, ask questions later is really the only reason they lose to them.
Terrans don't play perfectly. I think that's reason enough for them to lose everything.
On May 01 2014 05:30 Varroth wrote: Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs
On May 01 2014 05:29 DinoMight wrote: The reason it was "balanced" was because half the time Terran played extremely greedily and got away with it,and with Widow mines it was very hard for the Zerg to stop the parade push. The other half of the time, the Zerg wisened up and Roach/Bane busted the greedy Terran who had nothing to defend with.
Terran has ALL the tools to scout these Roach/bane busts. 3CC first, ask questions later is really the only reason they lose to them.
Please, wonder why all the pro still play 3cc fast 2ebay even now then. Builds didn't change at all. Because they are the only viable. Your argument is really poor.
People talk about "the only viable build" all the time. Go back and look at what people were posting about last year as "the only viable build."
You see a lot of guys getting fast banshee and things like that to delay the Zerg's 3rd. Fast 3 CC is a style that is very weak to certain things (like Roach bust).
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro.
Things IMO that need to be looked into
-phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
On May 01 2014 05:29 DinoMight wrote: The reason it was "balanced" was because half the time Terran played extremely greedily and got away with it,and with Widow mines it was very hard for the Zerg to stop the parade push. The other half of the time, the Zerg wisened up and Roach/Bane busted the greedy Terran who had nothing to defend with.
Terran has ALL the tools to scout these Roach/bane busts. 3CC first, ask questions later is really the only reason they lose to them.
Please, wonder why all the pro still play 3cc fast 2ebay even now then. Builds didn't change at all. Because they are the only viable. Your argument is really poor.
People talk about "the only viable build" all the time. Go back and look at what people were posting about last year as "the only viable build."
You see a lot of guys getting fast banshee and things like that to delay the Zerg's 3rd. Fast 3 CC is a style that is very weak to certain things (like Roach bust).
Innovation build is by far the more popular, with 2 reapers, 6 hellions, fast 3rd, then either 2 raxs or 2 ebays. That's the ultimate build right now, probably used in 80% of TvZ games. This build is around since like 1 year.
On May 01 2014 05:29 DinoMight wrote: The reason it was "balanced" was because half the time Terran played extremely greedily and got away with it,and with Widow mines it was very hard for the Zerg to stop the parade push. The other half of the time, the Zerg wisened up and Roach/Bane busted the greedy Terran who had nothing to defend with.
Terran has ALL the tools to scout these Roach/bane busts. 3CC first, ask questions later is really the only reason they lose to them.
Why do people always have to rewrite history with those dumb "50% of the time Zergs all-inned with Roaches and won, 50% of the time Terrans won macro game with parade push". This is WRONG. The builds played back then were the same as the current ones and nothing changed regarding triple OC vs Roaches/Banelings busts scenarii (except Mines are a bit weaker for defence). Just because there was a brief surge of Roaches/Banelings busts at some time doesn't mean it was the only way Zergs won.
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro.
Things IMO that need to be looked into
-phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
Dude no offense, you're not pro, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves balancing things.
See ?
Zerg 2/2 deal with terran 3/3 without any problem, and you want to put 3/3 on fusion core? How do you want mine to be manually activated ? By pressing on button ? Or by target firing ? The later is impossible even at the highest level of play. I remember Happy losing a macrogame vs Z with sth like 20 ravens. But meh, not like Happy has one of the best micro in the world, Koreans included.
On May 01 2014 05:29 DinoMight wrote: The reason it was "balanced" was because half the time Terran played extremely greedily and got away with it,and with Widow mines it was very hard for the Zerg to stop the parade push. The other half of the time, the Zerg wisened up and Roach/Bane busted the greedy Terran who had nothing to defend with.
Terran has ALL the tools to scout these Roach/bane busts. 3CC first, ask questions later is really the only reason they lose to them.
Please, wonder why all the pro still play 3cc fast 2ebay even now then. Builds didn't change at all. Because they are the only viable. Your argument is really poor.
People talk about "the only viable build" all the time. Go back and look at what people were posting about last year as "the only viable build."
You see a lot of guys getting fast banshee and things like that to delay the Zerg's 3rd. Fast 3 CC is a style that is very weak to certain things (like Roach bust).
LOL at this point it seems like you are trolling. The root of your argument is "ez - Terran just shouldn't play macro-games - u have to attack the zerg and see what happens hopefully he doesn't defend well and you win" The whole problem with what your saying is that you don't have to "commit" to a big roach bust - you can build a roach warren and then macro up if it gets scouted - an overlord into the main sees a banshee coming and it is totally useless - honestly I'm trying to be as open minded as possible if you can please point me in the direction of some vods that show good Korean T's beating down other good Korean Z's in the last few weeks I will definitely take a look for myself - at this point though fixing the mine needs to happen imo - we already have data that shows the matchup being balanced with it - and contrary to your statements a bunch of macrogame examples to go off.
On May 01 2014 05:30 Varroth wrote: Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs
Don't think hellbats had anything to do with TvZ of 55% in May. Rather, terran win/rates in competitive play simply had to go up as too many zergs who had entered the level required to play competively in the end of the WOL era, didn't actually had the required skill-set to play at that level in a "balanced" game. So to say it in another way: Superior terrans were being matched up against patch-zergs, and thus naturally won more than 50% of the time
When that is said, there is also some truth to zergs needing time to learn to play against Widow Mines, but Hellbats weren't actually that dominant in TvZ.
One easy way to see that terran never in any phase during HOTS was actually overpowered (statistically) is to look at representation. If you go back in time and look at the numbers during phases of the game where it was obvious that one race was too strong you notice the following patterns;
Early WOL --> There was a terran represented in around 70% of non-mirror matches in competitive play Late WOL --> Zerg had 70%+ race distribution in nonmirrormatches in competitive play Last 6 months of HOTS --> Toss had 70%+ race distribution
Terran, however, was at around 60% during its height in HOTS. If anything, terran was still statistically underpowered, however one could ofc point to the fact that top top-terrans (such as Innovation) were during well, but that only supports the argument of not buffing terran further.
Actually, nerfing terran in a matchup that worked pretty well is one of the biggest mistakes Blizzard ever made.
On May 01 2014 05:30 Varroth wrote: Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs
Don't think hellbats had anything to do with TvZ of 55% in May. Rather, terran win/rates in competitive play simply had to go up as too many zergs who had entered the level required to play competively in the end of the WOL era, didn't actually had the required skill-set to play at that level in a "balanced" game. So to say it in another way: Superior terrans were being matched up against patch-zergs, and thus naturally won more than 50% of the time
When that is said, there is also some truth to zergs needing time to learn to play against Widow Mines, but Hellbats weren't actually that dominant in TvZ.
Drophellbat not dominant ? Lol. Every game we saw dropHB in everyMU.
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro.
Things IMO that need to be looked into
-phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
And it's posts like these that make me hate myself for even bothering to post here lol.
On May 01 2014 05:30 Varroth wrote: Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs
Don't think hellbats had anything to do with TvZ of 55% in May. Rather, terran win/rates in competitive play simply had to go up as too many zergs who had entered the level required to play competively in the end of the WOL era, didn't actually had the required skill-set to play at that level in a "balanced" game. So to say it in another way: Superior terrans were being matched up against patch-zergs, and thus naturally won more than 50% of the time
When that is said, there is also some truth to zergs needing time to learn to play against Widow Mines, but Hellbats weren't actually that dominant in TvZ.
Drophellbat not dominant ? Lol. Every game we saw dropHB in everyMU.
No only TvT. It was just one TvZ option terrans had back then, but it wasn't the standard opening. Your clearly rewriting history.
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro.
Things IMO that need to be looked into
-phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
Dude no offense, you're not pro, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves balancing things.
See ?
Zerg 2/2 deal with terran 3/3 without any problem, and you want to put 3/3 on fusion core? How do you want mine to be manually activated ? By pressing on button ? Or by target firing ? The later is impossible even at the highest level of play. I remember Happy losing a macrogame vs Z with sth like 20 ravens. But meh, not like Happy has one of the best micro in the world, Koreans included.
Maybe I am not pro, but I have beaten almost every code s Korean on ladder numerous times, granted ladder means little. I've played against happy for years ( since wc3) and while his micro is arguably one of the best in the world, he lacks in other areas. Ravens do not get better with micro... they are more about map awareness and strategy. Perhaps with the widow mine, keep the current damage, but if manually selected it does the old mine damage. Reward the terrans for controlling them rather than having them as slot machines. Also, 2-2 zerg does not deal with 3-3 terran cost effectively.
On May 01 2014 05:30 Varroth wrote: Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs
Don't think hellbats had anything to do with TvZ of 55% in May. Rather, terran win/rates in competitive play simply had to go up as too many zergs who had entered the level required to play competively in the end of the WOL era, didn't actually had the required skill-set to play at that level in a "balanced" game. So to say it in another way: Superior terrans were being matched up against patch-zergs, and thus naturally won more than 50% of the time
When that is said, there is also some truth to zergs needing time to learn to play against Widow Mines, but Hellbats weren't actually that dominant in TvZ.
Drophellbat not dominant ? Lol. Every game we saw dropHB in everyMU.
No only TvT. It was just one TvZ option terrans had back then, but it wasn't the standard opening. Your clearly rewriting history.
I rewrite nothing. DropHellbat was clearly a very used build. I recall Mvp doing it everytime. I don't say RealT vs PatchZ is wrong, I think it is too, but denying Hellbat drop was a thing is wrong. Remember the MLG Life won ? In April I think. So many hellbat drop this month.
On May 01 2014 05:30 Varroth wrote: Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs
Don't think hellbats had anything to do with TvZ of 55% in May. Rather, terran win/rates in competitive play simply had to go up as too many zergs who had entered the level required to play competively in the end of the WOL era, didn't actually had the required skill-set to play at that level in a "balanced" game. So to say it in another way: Superior terrans were being matched up against patch-zergs, and thus naturally won more than 50% of the time
When that is said, there is also some truth to zergs needing time to learn to play against Widow Mines, but Hellbats weren't actually that dominant in TvZ.
Drophellbat not dominant ? Lol. Every game we saw dropHB in everyMU.
No only TvT. It was just one TvZ option terrans had back then, but it wasn't the standard opening. Your clearly rewriting history.
I rewrite nothing. DropHellbat was clearly a very used build. I recall Mvp doing it everytime. I don't say RealT vs PatchZ is wrong, I think it is too, but denying Hellbat drop was a thing is wrong. Remember the MLG Life won ? In April I think. So many hellbat drop this month.
I don't remember any Hellbat drop at the MLG. I think they came a bit later, perhaps May in Europe and in the summer in Korea from memory (unsure).
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro.
Things IMO that need to be looked into
-phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
Dude no offense, you're not pro, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves balancing things.
See ?
Zerg 2/2 deal with terran 3/3 without any problem, and you want to put 3/3 on fusion core? How do you want mine to be manually activated ? By pressing on button ? Or by target firing ? The later is impossible even at the highest level of play. I remember Happy losing a macrogame vs Z with sth like 20 ravens. But meh, not like Happy has one of the best micro in the world, Koreans included.
Maybe I am not pro, but I have beaten almost every code s Korean on ladder numerous times, granted ladder means little. I've played against happy for years ( since wc3) and while his micro is arguably one of the best in the world, he lacks in other areas. Ravens do not get better with micro... they are more about map awareness and strategy. Perhaps with the widow mine, keep the current damage, but if manually selected it does the old mine damage. Reward the terrans for controlling them rather than having them as slot machines. Also, 2-2 zerg does not deal with 3-3 terran cost effectively.
As I said, manually selected how ? You put them in a control group and press X so they explode close unit ? Or you need to focus fire with them ? If the later, I say it again, but it is impossible, and it would make the unit even worst. If so 2/2 does not deal with 3/3 T, explain why the current patch ? Why Terran are losing so much right now ? They always have 3/3 before 2/2, and usually lose before the Z reachs 3/3.
On May 01 2014 05:30 Varroth wrote: Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs
Don't think hellbats had anything to do with TvZ of 55% in May. Rather, terran win/rates in competitive play simply had to go up as too many zergs who had entered the level required to play competively in the end of the WOL era, didn't actually had the required skill-set to play at that level in a "balanced" game. So to say it in another way: Superior terrans were being matched up against patch-zergs, and thus naturally won more than 50% of the time
When that is said, there is also some truth to zergs needing time to learn to play against Widow Mines, but Hellbats weren't actually that dominant in TvZ.
Drophellbat not dominant ? Lol. Every game we saw dropHB in everyMU.
No only TvT. It was just one TvZ option terrans had back then, but it wasn't the standard opening. Your clearly rewriting history.
I rewrite nothing. DropHellbat was clearly a very used build. I recall Mvp doing it everytime. I don't say RealT vs PatchZ is wrong, I think it is too, but denying Hellbat drop was a thing is wrong. Remember the MLG Life won ? In April I think. So many hellbat drop this month.
I don't remember any Hellbat drop at the MLG. I think they came a bit later, perhaps May in Europe and in the summer in Korea from memory (unsure).
You may be right, it's been a year, I don't remember everygame after such a long time tho.
On May 01 2014 05:30 Varroth wrote: Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs
Don't think hellbats had anything to do with TvZ of 55% in May. Rather, terran win/rates in competitive play simply had to go up as too many zergs who had entered the level required to play competively in the end of the WOL era, didn't actually had the required skill-set to play at that level in a "balanced" game. So to say it in another way: Superior terrans were being matched up against patch-zergs, and thus naturally won more than 50% of the time
When that is said, there is also some truth to zergs needing time to learn to play against Widow Mines, but Hellbats weren't actually that dominant in TvZ.
Drophellbat not dominant ? Lol. Every game we saw dropHB in everyMU.
No only TvT. It was just one TvZ option terrans had back then, but it wasn't the standard opening. Your clearly rewriting history.
I rewrite nothing. DropHellbat was clearly a very used build. I recall Mvp doing it everytime. I don't say RealT vs PatchZ is wrong, I think it is too, but denying Hellbat drop was a thing is wrong. Remember the MLG Life won ? In April I think. So many hellbat drop this month.
I actually think its comparable to Banshee openings in TvZ today. If you open mech, going banshee with lots of hellions is kinda standard. The same thing was the case for mech back then, and MVP was obviously more of a mech player. However, very few actually mech'ed in early HOTS and just normal hellion into double ebay + 3rd CC was the common build.
So using MVP as the example of a typical terran player to demonstrate your point is very misleading. Innovations style is much closer to that of the typicaly pro terran player. In the final against Soulkey, he also only Hellbat dropped once as I remember it.
On May 01 2014 05:30 Varroth wrote: Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs
Don't think hellbats had anything to do with TvZ of 55% in May. Rather, terran win/rates in competitive play simply had to go up as too many zergs who had entered the level required to play competively in the end of the WOL era, didn't actually had the required skill-set to play at that level in a "balanced" game. So to say it in another way: Superior terrans were being matched up against patch-zergs, and thus naturally won more than 50% of the time
When that is said, there is also some truth to zergs needing time to learn to play against Widow Mines, but Hellbats weren't actually that dominant in TvZ.
Drophellbat not dominant ? Lol. Every game we saw dropHB in everyMU.
No only TvT. It was just one TvZ option terrans had back then, but it wasn't the standard opening. Your clearly rewriting history.
I rewrite nothing. DropHellbat was clearly a very used build. I recall Mvp doing it everytime. I don't say RealT vs PatchZ is wrong, I think it is too, but denying Hellbat drop was a thing is wrong. Remember the MLG Life won ? In April I think. So many hellbat drop this month.
I actually think its comparable to Banshee openings in TvZ now o days. If you open mech, going banshee with lots of hellions is kinda standard. The same thing was the case for mech back then, and MVP was obviously more of a mech player. However, very few actually mech'ed in early HOTS and just normal hellion into double ebay + 3rd CC was the common build.
So using MVP as the example of a typical terran player, is a really poor argument. Innovations style is much closer to that of the typicaly pro terran player. In the final against Soulkey, he also only Hellbat dropped once as I remember it.
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of !@#$%^&*, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro.
Things IMO that need to be looked into
-phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
Dude no offense, you're not pro, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves balancing things.
See ?
Zerg 2/2 deal with terran 3/3 without any problem, and you want to put 3/3 on fusion core? How do you want mine to be manually activated ? By pressing on button ? Or by target firing ? The later is impossible even at the highest level of play. I remember Happy losing a macrogame vs Z with sth like 20 ravens. But meh, not like Happy has one of the best micro in the world, Koreans included.
Maybe I am not pro, but I have beaten almost every code s Korean on ladder numerous times, granted ladder means little. I've played against happy for years ( since wc3) and while his micro is arguably one of the best in the world, he lacks in other areas. Ravens do not get better with micro... they are more about map awareness and strategy. Perhaps with the widow mine, keep the current damage, but if manually selected it does the old mine damage. Reward the terrans for controlling them rather than having them as slot machines. Also, 2-2 zerg does not deal with 3-3 terran cost effectively.
Better solution is to make Widow Mine timer not reset when you manually target them IMO.
On May 01 2014 05:30 Varroth wrote: Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs
Don't think hellbats had anything to do with TvZ of 55% in May. Rather, terran win/rates in competitive play simply had to go up as too many zergs who had entered the level required to play competively in the end of the WOL era, didn't actually had the required skill-set to play at that level in a "balanced" game. So to say it in another way: Superior terrans were being matched up against patch-zergs, and thus naturally won more than 50% of the time
When that is said, there is also some truth to zergs needing time to learn to play against Widow Mines, but Hellbats weren't actually that dominant in TvZ.
Drophellbat not dominant ? Lol. Every game we saw dropHB in everyMU.
No only TvT. It was just one TvZ option terrans had back then, but it wasn't the standard opening. Your clearly rewriting history.
I rewrite nothing. DropHellbat was clearly a very used build. I recall Mvp doing it everytime. I don't say RealT vs PatchZ is wrong, I think it is too, but denying Hellbat drop was a thing is wrong. Remember the MLG Life won ? In April I think. So many hellbat drop this month.
I actually think its comparable to Banshee openings in TvZ now o days. If you open mech, going banshee with lots of hellions is kinda standard. The same thing was the case for mech back then, and MVP was obviously more of a mech player. However, very few actually mech'ed in early HOTS and just normal hellion into double ebay + 3rd CC was the common build.
So using MVP as the example of a typical terran player, is a really poor argument. Innovations style is much closer to that of the typicaly pro terran player. In the final against Soulkey, he also only Hellbat dropped once as I remember it.
On April 30 2014 11:30 ProBell wrote: Make widow mines or siege tank splash damage not attack friendly units or do less damage to friendlies?
Banelings / Colossus / Archons / Fungals / Ultralisk all don't have friendly-fire.
Actually, that's a not a bad idea. Why does Terran splash have friendly fire anyway?
When artillery or a mine explodes, it doesn't discriminate based on who's it is
Yeah, but why? Colossus mega death beams don't cause friendly fire, baneling explosions don't hurt any other banelings or zerglings. Huge swiping ultralisks arms don't hurt anyone else.
Though, i can see if widow mine friendly fire was taken away it would be really, really hard for a zerg to engage a burrowed widow mine / bio force. But maybe siege tanks?
I know it's lore breaking, but it multi player balance we're talking here.
Because it's actual balance and dynamics that makes the play interesting.
Storm also does friendly fire, woudl you like to see that changed?
I'm speaking off topic here, but its kind of funny how archons, "pure beings of psionic energy" dont splash their own units but their separated counterparts do splash with storm.. presumably using the same type of energy as when they are fused or whatever..
On topic: hellbat attacks are hell for an unprepared zerg, but i do think T needs some help in that matchup (both matchups really) ZvP seems pretty fine but the swarmhosts don't seem very fun in ZvZ. maybe take away that spore buff to make mutas viable, or scale it back down a bit?
On May 01 2014 04:53 Zenbrez wrote: [quote] Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.[quote] This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro.
Things IMO that need to be looked into
-phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
Dude no offense, you're not pro, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves balancing things.
See ?
Zerg 2/2 deal with terran 3/3 without any problem, and you want to put 3/3 on fusion core? How do you want mine to be manually activated ? By pressing on button ? Or by target firing ? The later is impossible even at the highest level of play. I remember Happy losing a macrogame vs Z with sth like 20 ravens. But meh, not like Happy has one of the best micro in the world, Koreans included.
Maybe I am not pro, but I have beaten almost every code s Korean on ladder numerous times, granted ladder means little. I've played against happy for years ( since wc3) and while his micro is arguably one of the best in the world, he lacks in other areas. Ravens do not get better with micro... they are more about map awareness and strategy. Perhaps with the widow mine, keep the current damage, but if manually selected it does the old mine damage. Reward the terrans for controlling them rather than having them as slot machines. Also, 2-2 zerg does not deal with 3-3 terran cost effectively.
As I said, manually selected how ? You put them in a control group and press X so they explode close unit ? Or you need to focus fire with them ? If the later, I say it again, but it is impossible, and it would make the unit even worst. If so 2/2 does not deal with 3/3 T, explain why the current patch ? Why Terran are losing so much right now ? They always have 3/3 before 2/2, and usually lose before the Z reachs 3/3.
focus fire, and its not impossible just difficult, but the old mines were too strong. There is no argument about that. If the terran chooses not to micro them then they autofire and do their current underwhelming damage. I guess best option is to buff the damage/aoe somewhat inbetween what it was and is now.
I've only been playing CG"s, and the terran I play with only has been doing mech, but I assume zergs are winning because of the maps. They seem like zerg is able to either be overly greedy and get away with it or do some random attack that kills workers and still make drones while being able to defend a counter attack. At that point zergs econ is too far ahead for 3-3 to matter.
On May 01 2014 04:53 Zenbrez wrote: [quote] Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.[quote] This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro.
Things IMO that need to be looked into
-phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
Dude no offense, you're not pro, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves balancing things.
See ?
Zerg 2/2 deal with terran 3/3 without any problem, and you want to put 3/3 on fusion core? How do you want mine to be manually activated ? By pressing on button ? Or by target firing ? The later is impossible even at the highest level of play. I remember Happy losing a macrogame vs Z with sth like 20 ravens. But meh, not like Happy has one of the best micro in the world, Koreans included.
Maybe I am not pro, but I have beaten almost every code s Korean on ladder numerous times, granted ladder means little. I've played against happy for years ( since wc3) and while his micro is arguably one of the best in the world, he lacks in other areas. Ravens do not get better with micro... they are more about map awareness and strategy. Perhaps with the widow mine, keep the current damage, but if manually selected it does the old mine damage. Reward the terrans for controlling them rather than having them as slot machines. Also, 2-2 zerg does not deal with 3-3 terran cost effectively.
Better solution is to make Widow Mine timer not reset when you manually target them IMO.
That would be SO broken in early game/small numbers of units scenarios. Or massed widow mines. 125 damage from a cloaked 75/25 unit every 5 seconds? Sign me up, please.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro.
Things IMO that need to be looked into
-phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
Dude no offense, you're not pro, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves balancing things.
See ?
Zerg 2/2 deal with terran 3/3 without any problem, and you want to put 3/3 on fusion core? How do you want mine to be manually activated ? By pressing on button ? Or by target firing ? The later is impossible even at the highest level of play. I remember Happy losing a macrogame vs Z with sth like 20 ravens. But meh, not like Happy has one of the best micro in the world, Koreans included.
Maybe I am not pro, but I have beaten almost every code s Korean on ladder numerous times, granted ladder means little. I've played against happy for years ( since wc3) and while his micro is arguably one of the best in the world, he lacks in other areas. Ravens do not get better with micro... they are more about map awareness and strategy. Perhaps with the widow mine, keep the current damage, but if manually selected it does the old mine damage. Reward the terrans for controlling them rather than having them as slot machines. Also, 2-2 zerg does not deal with 3-3 terran cost effectively.
As I said, manually selected how ? You put them in a control group and press X so they explode close unit ? Or you need to focus fire with them ? If the later, I say it again, but it is impossible, and it would make the unit even worst. If so 2/2 does not deal with 3/3 T, explain why the current patch ? Why Terran are losing so much right now ? They always have 3/3 before 2/2, and usually lose before the Z reachs 3/3.
focus fire, and its not impossible just difficult, but the old mines were too strong. There is no argument about that. If the terran chooses not to micro them then they autofire and do their current underwhelming damage. I guess best option is to buff the damage/aoe somewhat inbetween what it was and is now.
I've only been playing CG"s, and the terran I play with only has been doing mech, but I assume zergs are winning because of the maps. They seem like zerg is able to either be overly greedy and get away with it or do some random attack that kills workers and still make drones while being able to defend a counter attack. At that point zergs econ is too far ahead for 3-3 to matter.
1) I Agree map are shit for terrans nowadays.
About the focus firing with mines, imagine how hard if will in big engagement. Pro players never focus fire in big engagement because saving the bio is more important. How can you with llike 15 mines, clic on each of them, focus a unit, then switch to another mines etc, while splitting your entire army ? It's nearly impossible. Really good players do focus with mine, but when it's a little fight, they have a couple of mines and some clumped bane for the opponent, that's all.
IMO they should just leave the game for a few months and see what happens, maybe change maps in the middle. The patches are so fast that the meta has no time to mature at all. Don't they remember sc1? Freaking everything was OP in there lol.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro.
Things IMO that need to be looked into
-phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
Dude no offense, you're not pro, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves balancing things.
See ?
Zerg 2/2 deal with terran 3/3 without any problem, and you want to put 3/3 on fusion core? How do you want mine to be manually activated ? By pressing on button ? Or by target firing ? The later is impossible even at the highest level of play. I remember Happy losing a macrogame vs Z with sth like 20 ravens. But meh, not like Happy has one of the best micro in the world, Koreans included.
Maybe I am not pro, but I have beaten almost every code s Korean on ladder numerous times, granted ladder means little. I've played against happy for years ( since wc3) and while his micro is arguably one of the best in the world, he lacks in other areas. Ravens do not get better with micro... they are more about map awareness and strategy. Perhaps with the widow mine, keep the current damage, but if manually selected it does the old mine damage. Reward the terrans for controlling them rather than having them as slot machines. Also, 2-2 zerg does not deal with 3-3 terran cost effectively.
Better solution is to make Widow Mine timer not reset when you manually target them IMO.
That would be SO broken in early game/small numbers of units scenarios. Or massed widow mines. 125 damage from a cloaked 75/25 unit every 5 seconds? Sign me up, please.
I am not talking about the 40second cooldown, but the 1.5 second timer that is being reset when you manualy focus fire it. IMO that makes it unpractical to focus fire with it in a lot of sitautions.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro.
Things IMO that need to be looked into
-phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
Dude no offense, you're not pro, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves balancing things.
See ?
Zerg 2/2 deal with terran 3/3 without any problem, and you want to put 3/3 on fusion core? How do you want mine to be manually activated ? By pressing on button ? Or by target firing ? The later is impossible even at the highest level of play. I remember Happy losing a macrogame vs Z with sth like 20 ravens. But meh, not like Happy has one of the best micro in the world, Koreans included.
Maybe I am not pro, but I have beaten almost every code s Korean on ladder numerous times, granted ladder means little. I've played against happy for years ( since wc3) and while his micro is arguably one of the best in the world, he lacks in other areas. Ravens do not get better with micro... they are more about map awareness and strategy. Perhaps with the widow mine, keep the current damage, but if manually selected it does the old mine damage. Reward the terrans for controlling them rather than having them as slot machines. Also, 2-2 zerg does not deal with 3-3 terran cost effectively.
Better solution is to make Widow Mine timer not reset when you manually target them IMO.
That would be SO broken in early game/small numbers of units scenarios. Or massed widow mines. 125 damage from a cloaked 75/25 unit every 5 seconds? Sign me up, please.
He's talking about the 1,5 second delay between locking a target and firing a missile.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro.
Things IMO that need to be looked into
-phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
Dude no offense, you're not pro, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves balancing things.
See ?
Zerg 2/2 deal with terran 3/3 without any problem, and you want to put 3/3 on fusion core? How do you want mine to be manually activated ? By pressing on button ? Or by target firing ? The later is impossible even at the highest level of play. I remember Happy losing a macrogame vs Z with sth like 20 ravens. But meh, not like Happy has one of the best micro in the world, Koreans included.
Maybe I am not pro, but I have beaten almost every code s Korean on ladder numerous times, granted ladder means little. I've played against happy for years ( since wc3) and while his micro is arguably one of the best in the world, he lacks in other areas. Ravens do not get better with micro... they are more about map awareness and strategy. Perhaps with the widow mine, keep the current damage, but if manually selected it does the old mine damage. Reward the terrans for controlling them rather than having them as slot machines. Also, 2-2 zerg does not deal with 3-3 terran cost effectively.
Better solution is to make Widow Mine timer not reset when you manually target them IMO.
That would be SO broken in early game/small numbers of units scenarios. Or massed widow mines. 125 damage from a cloaked 75/25 unit every 5 seconds? Sign me up, please.
I think he wanted to say, that when you focus a unit manually with a mine, it resets the timer currently. Not the timer after the mine hit, but the delay right before it explodes.
As said before by some smart people : win ratio means NOTHING. Since the players who don't win as often stop to get qualified or invited to tournaments, win ratio naturally equals out with time. You have to consider the players distribution. A 50% win ratio when the 5 best T are competing against the 15 best Z and 15 best P is not an indicator of balance. What in reality happens is that the top 3 T can't really touch the top 3 Z/P, but can compete with the top 10 Z/P, and can easily beat the bottom top 15, which makes the win ratio somewhat 50%ish and gives the illusion of balance. It is in fact, the definition itself of imbalance : you have to be significantly better than your opponent to win reliably, if you're equal to your opponent in terms of skill, you will lose most of the times.
On May 01 2014 06:10 SiroKO wrote: As said before by some smart people : win ratio means NOTHING. Since the players who don't win as often stop to get qualified or invited to tournaments, win ratio naturally equals out with time. You have to consider the players distribution. A 50% win ratio when the 5 best T are competing against the 15 best Z and 15 best P is not an indicator of balance. What in reality happens is that the top 3 T can't really touch the top 3 Z/P, but can compete with the top 10 Z/P, and can easily beat the bottom top 15, which makes the win ratio somewhat 50%ish and gives the illusion of balance. It is in fact, the definition itself of imbalance : you have to be significantly better than your opponent to win reliably, if you're equal to your opponent in terms of skill, you will lose most of the times.
We can use this argument too. Check how few terrans there is. Maybe 1/5 of the racial distribution in pro games.
B...b...but I thought the best players naturally gravited toward Protoss, due to design? Is that wrong? Plus most of the inspiring and revered bonjwas in Broodwar were Protoss, like SlayerS_Prox'yOracl'er, iloveProtLotV, NaDarkShrine and MaflashipCore, so you know, most people wanted to imitate them?
As a terran player I don't see an upgrade cost change making much difference, I think t rarely struggles to afford 2-2, maybe sometimes 3-3 is out of reach in tvp though if you are going for a very late game focused mass viking ghost transition off 3 base, and you will only be able to afford 3 attack but not armor, so their is a little potential their. But everyone saying it means T will get their upgrades so much faster really does not understand how any double upgrade build in tvz works, 2-2 is always on the way at the same time regardless of its cost and that is right when 1-1 finishes. So its ridicules to think this would change much at all in tvz.
I do however like the hellbat change, it may let terran add 4-6 hellbats to their 10 minute push which will force zerg to commit to a fair amount of banes at the time they get spire up, this will delay the mutas which usualy zerg produce to clean up this push and therefore let terran continue to push and put pressure on the zerg, and help tilt that first engagement back into t's favor. still I dont think it addresses the bigest problem of Tvz right now which is that once zerg get like 30 mutas T is either forced to take huge losses at thier base/possible denial of thier fourth if they push out, or t has to go on the defensive and zerg gets to take an ez 5th/6th base and get to the late game before t can really abuse their 3-3 timing window. because after the 3-3 timing window the game tends to drift heavily in z's favor if they are up enough on bases to keep up a large bank and the game starts to spiral out of control. On smaller maps this is not as big of an issue because generally bases past 4 for zerg are prity damn hard to hold but on bigger maps this becomes a real problem for Terran. Terran needs to be able to threaten zerg enough that they force mutas to fight in engagements, and in these engagement Terran need to be able to kill off mutas. Widowmines used to serve this roll and as such mutas were balanced but since the widow mine nerf you just dont see zerg losing mutas in fights and this leads to a snowball effect. It resembles how in pre mine nerf tvz Terran would seem to never lose their medvac cloud, since zerg lost mutas in fights. They would eventually have like 17 medvacs and that made it so that zerg was only ever trading with the cheap bio units and not the expensive flying units in the Terran composition and t would therefore be able to snowball their army supply and cost effeceny.
As for Tvp i actualy agree with blizzard I think that terran is in a better spot now, but the match is still a little p favored. The new maps however have helped tremendously as blink is a lot worse on them. you even see t sometimes go into a fast factory now because its alot less lickley to get an ato bo loss to blink nowadays. maybe give the mtach some time if t at the top level cuntinue to suffer than look into it agian and possibly consider early game or late game t buffs/ p nerfs.
Also as for all the whine about PvZ I just don't understand it. To me that mu seems to be in a really good spot, their are tons of strategies for both sides, both races have valid ways to play the late game, and it offers alot of strategic depth. Sure swarmhosts are a problem but I think Protoss will start to figure them out. maybe they already are as I've seen substantially less swarmhost zvp recently at the pro level, especially in korea where it really matters. Maybe you p and z could enlighten me as to why people complain about a balanced mu?
On May 01 2014 06:48 ZenithM wrote: B...b...but I thought the best players naturally gravited toward Protoss, due to design? Is that wrong? Plus most of the inspiring and revered bonjwas in Broodwar were Protoss, like SlayerS_Prox'yOracl'er, iloveProtLotV, NaDarkShrine and MaflashipCore, so you know, most people wanted to imitate them?
On May 01 2014 06:48 ZenithM wrote: B...b...but I thought the best players naturally gravited toward Protoss, due to design? Is that wrong? Plus most of the inspiring and revered bonjwas in Broodwar were Protoss, like SlayerS_Prox'yOracl'er, iloveProtLotV, NaDarkShrine and MaflashipCore, so you know, most people wanted to imitate them?
On May 01 2014 06:48 ZenithM wrote: B...b...but I thought the best players naturally gravited toward Protoss, due to design? Is that wrong? Plus most of the inspiring and revered bonjwas in Broodwar were Protoss, like SlayerS_Prox'yOracl'er, iloveProtLotV, NaDarkShrine and MaflashipCore, so you know, most people wanted to imitate them?
On April 30 2014 21:54 TW wrote: I diidn't look at the nr of viewers for Code S today, but wonder if there is a difference between the group with T and without them.
You don't have to wonder about that, it's clear that tons of viewers don't tune in for PvPvZvPvZvZ
And I turned off DreamHack once all the Protoss were out. I can't imagine I was the only one. So what..?
there is a difference between a race that has like 80% of stream time lately (Toss in TvP,PvP,PvZ) and the others underrepresented. Ofc seeing always the same race gets boring over time. And that is why more ppl tune in when terrans play, cause they are cooler to watch for the most, because there is always more action involved (not babysit one hughe army ball until toss has enough... or watch the 100th blink or whatever allin which isn't really an allin.) and also it is more entertaining to see the "fresher" race, which is the one ofc that hasn't been shown that much.
On May 01 2014 06:48 ZenithM wrote: B...b...but I thought the best players naturally gravited toward Protoss, due to design? Is that wrong? Plus most of the inspiring and revered bonjwas in Broodwar were Protoss, like SlayerS_Prox'yOracl'er, iloveProtLotV, NaDarkShrine and MaflashipCore, so you know, most people wanted to imitate them?
On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote: I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong. I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno. Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?).
Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it.
If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games.
It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage.
Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate.
So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you.
Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever.
What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games.
I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game.
I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation.
and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight.
If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro.
Things IMO that need to be looked into
-phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
Dude no offense, you're not pro, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves balancing things.
See ?
Zerg 2/2 deal with terran 3/3 without any problem, and you want to put 3/3 on fusion core? How do you want mine to be manually activated ? By pressing on button ? Or by target firing ? The later is impossible even at the highest level of play. I remember Happy losing a macrogame vs Z with sth like 20 ravens. But meh, not like Happy has one of the best micro in the world, Koreans included.
Maybe I am not pro, but I have beaten almost every code s Korean on ladder numerous times, granted ladder means little. I've played against happy for years ( since wc3) and while his micro is arguably one of the best in the world, he lacks in other areas. Ravens do not get better with micro... they are more about map awareness and strategy. Perhaps with the widow mine, keep the current damage, but if manually selected it does the old mine damage. Reward the terrans for controlling them rather than having them as slot machines. Also, 2-2 zerg does not deal with 3-3 terran cost effectively.
Sorry but the fact that you can beat code S players as Zerg worked against your argument. Guess mines weren't too strong after all. Manually selecting individual mines sound very trollish. It isn't like terran already has to do the most micro even with the old mines.
This option addresses the concern that PvT is trending better than we expected, and ZvT worse than expected. At this point, we’re fairly certain that Protoss isn’t struggling against Terran (which runs contrary to pro feedback we’ve been receiving), but we’re also receiving pro feedback on ZvT that indicates we might want to have a bigger change lined up.
Always wondered how Blizz make these kind of statements. They have Pro players (the most skilled and knowledgeable of the players) giving feedback and they convince themselves that it is not the case. A sample of Winrates can only get you so far. Would be even worse if they are gathering data all the way down to bronze league. Makes me wonder what kind of feedback they are willing to consider.
Pro feedback that is not super biased, like for example this statement from Rain
That additional damage against shield was really big. Now Protoss can’t play using a templar build order. Once Terrans realized that, they are now so much more daring. And even without all that, Terran is still too strong. It’s like WoL Brood Lord/Infestor/Corruptor level.
I know it's probably a stretch but I kind of get where Rain is coming from in a way. He plays pretty much the least exploitative and most 'straight-up' style of PvT there is so I imagine his experiences in the matchup differ from those of other Protoss players.
While he can be criticised for his predictability I do think it raises an interesting point, namely that in the absence of 'Protoss bullshit' to keep your opponent honest, does Protoss have as much scope to play safe, with the hope of outplaying your opponent straight-up?
I'd argue that frankly all things being equal it doesn't IF you factor out the BS. Obviously for balance purposes this is irrelevant but I have long, long held the belief that Protoss without the variability is pretty weak, been the case for god knows how long.
This is a somewhat drunken post so hope it isn't misconstrued haha
This option addresses the concern that PvT is trending better than we expected, and ZvT worse than expected. At this point, we’re fairly certain that Protoss isn’t struggling against Terran (which runs contrary to pro feedback we’ve been receiving), but we’re also receiving pro feedback on ZvT that indicates we might want to have a bigger change lined up.
Always wondered how Blizz make these kind of statements. They have Pro players (the most skilled and knowledgeable of the players) giving feedback and they convince themselves that it is not the case. A sample of Winrates can only get you so far. Would be even worse if they are gathering data all the way down to bronze league. Makes me wonder what kind of feedback they are willing to consider.
Pro feedback that is not super biased, like for example this statement from Rain
That additional damage against shield was really big. Now Protoss can’t play using a templar build order. Once Terrans realized that, they are now so much more daring. And even without all that, Terran is still too strong. It’s like WoL Brood Lord/Infestor/Corruptor level.
I know it's probably a stretch but I kind of get where Rain is coming from in a way. He plays pretty much the least exploitative and most 'straight-up' style of PvT there is so I imagine his experiences in the matchup differ from those of other Protoss players.
While he can be criticised for his predictability I do think it raises an interesting point, namely that in the absence of 'Protoss bullshit' to keep your opponent honest, does Protoss have as much scope to play safe, with the hope of outplaying your opponent straight-up?
I'd argue that frankly all things being equal it doesn't IF you factor out the BS. Obviously for balance purposes this is irrelevant but I have long, long held the belief that Protoss without the variability is pretty weak, been the case for god knows how long.
This is a somewhat drunken post so hope it isn't misconstrued haha
Ya sorry totally disagree even to the point where I think he was trolling that interview. It's nice that you admit that with the BS it's imbalanced but I'd argue that even without it's borderline. T has to gain a big advantage in the mid-game to make late game compositions work from games I've seen which include most of Taeja's games who I consider one of the best TvP players in the history of sc2.
The only thing the mine buff did was provide a counter to one of the unit compositions that toss can go for (mass zealot/templar/archon). Colossus comps deal with mines very effectively unless you keep sniping their observer (which has speed upgrade). I really think any Protoss arguing that the game doesn't move in their favor the longer it goes is very confused - does anyone have a link to TvP winrates in games that go past 20 minutes?
I'd venture to say that they are very skewed for Protoss and the same would go for Zerg but you'd probably have to use 25 minutes or so once they reach ultra / infestor tech. I haven't seen the stats so it's a total guess prove me wrong pls !
Mines would have been much easier to deal with if stalkers weren't stupid enough to walk into them. Stalker vs mine in 1vs1 isn't a problem, but what about on the battle field?
I found the upgrade cost reduction notably more impactful when playing Protoss than people gave it credit for and anticipate similar when playing T. VERY frequently with T (this is also partly due to my playstyle), I find myself being able to afford +2 weapons and only have 130 gas and 4 geysers and can't afford +2 armor. I often forget to go back and get +2 armor as well. Will definitely make it more fluid, for me.
On May 01 2014 10:15 FabledIntegral wrote: I found the upgrade cost reduction notably more impactful when playing Protoss than people gave it credit for and anticipate similar when playing T. VERY frequently with T (this is also partly due to my playstyle), I find myself being able to afford +2 weapons and only have 130 gas and 4 geysers and can't afford +2 armor. I often forget to go back and get +2 armor as well. Will definitely make it more fluid, for me.
That's actually a good point. In theory it doesn't change much, but mechanically it will probably make the upgrading more smooth (for less-than-top players, I mean), you have way less chance of not having enough at the point where you try to hit your 2/2 and 3/3.
On May 01 2014 10:15 FabledIntegral wrote: I found the upgrade cost reduction notably more impactful when playing Protoss than people gave it credit for and anticipate similar when playing T. VERY frequently with T (this is also partly due to my playstyle), I find myself being able to afford +2 weapons and only have 130 gas and 4 geysers and can't afford +2 armor. I often forget to go back and get +2 armor as well. Will definitely make it more fluid, for me.
That's actually a good point. In theory it doesn't change much, but mechanically it will probably make the upgrading more smooth (for less-than-top players, I mean), you have way less chance of not having enough at the point where you try to hit your 2/2 and 3/3.
Also a cheaper upgrade means, that a well planned timing attack is just that much stronger.
On May 01 2014 10:15 FabledIntegral wrote: I found the upgrade cost reduction notably more impactful when playing Protoss than people gave it credit for and anticipate similar when playing T. VERY frequently with T (this is also partly due to my playstyle), I find myself being able to afford +2 weapons and only have 130 gas and 4 geysers and can't afford +2 armor. I often forget to go back and get +2 armor as well. Will definitely make it more fluid, for me.
That's actually a good point. In theory it doesn't change much, but mechanically it will probably make the upgrading more smooth (for less-than-top players, I mean), you have way less chance of not having enough at the point where you try to hit your 2/2 and 3/3.
Also a cheaper upgrade means, that a well planned timing attack is just that much stronger.
I don't know about that... 25 minerals is like, less than what you get by stacking workers at the start? It doesn't change the timings that much. Doesn't make it that much faster, doesn't really give you more units. I don't know, I could be wrong but it doesn't seem really game changing from a pure theoretical stand point.
Blizzard's First Aid profession must be at Zen Master proficiency, because they've been throwing band aids at this game since WOL Beta.
The Hellbat change is pretty interesting, but you know it's not going to have any huge effect because Zerg and Protoss aren't up in arms about it. Meanwhile MSC still has the two worst spells in the game both on the same unit, mech is still useless in TvP, Swarm Hosts still exist, and four Terrans made it into Code S this season by the skin of their teeth.
But by all means, keep removing upgrades from this game, because if nothing else, pros abusing timing windows like their careers depend on it makes the game look balanced.
On April 30 2014 21:20 shivver wrote: haha I was "temporarily suspended" on the bnet forums for 4,166 days for "harassment" for stating that the best balance update that can happen to sc2 is the removal of david kim from the balance team just as diablo 3 did for jay wilson.
truth hurts and I guess I hit a sweet spot
nofuksgiven/
It just makes you a respectless pos, wouldn't be too proud of that.
I'll never understand why some people don't think respect is earned.
On April 30 2014 21:20 shivver wrote: haha I was "temporarily suspended" on the bnet forums for 4,166 days for "harassment" for stating that the best balance update that can happen to sc2 is the removal of david kim from the balance team just as diablo 3 did for jay wilson.
truth hurts and I guess I hit a sweet spot
nofuksgiven/
It just makes you a respectless pos, wouldn't be too proud of that.
I'll never understand why some people don't think respect is earned.
I haven't watched every game in korea, but I watch a lot, and I haven't watched a lategame TvP in months that ended in a terran victory. MMA beat Zest in a macro game, but it was a slight snowball from earlier good play where the toss was at a disadvantage.
Honestly, I think that this is the problem: Terran has no tier 3 bio, and terran is super weak pre-10 minutes.
Terran reaches max strength at the midgame as shields, stim, medivacs and 2/2 hit. Widow mines and hellbats are available at this time too, but that's about it. 3/3 is a boost, but they have no lategame army composition except the addition of a few ghosts/vikings to counter specific threats. They don't have anything of their own to transition into.
By comparison, protoss has tempests, storms, colossus, archons, carriers (sos vs jjakji), immortals, and massive massive warpins become available over time. Zerg has broodlords and ultralisks, infestors, vipers, swarmhosts, muta switches and baneling mines.
Terran can transition into what, ravens? Lategame mech transition? They max out around 12-16 minutes in strength except for a second answer to a second toss AOE source, and then they either win in that window or die after it.
TLDR: terrans need an early game buff that kicks in before 10 minutes and a lategame tier 3 unit that's viable to add in. And lets not encourage mass ravens- Avilo has shown us what that looks like.
On May 01 2014 15:28 scypio wrote: Terran needs a whining buff. The amount of nerfs they get and how badly they perform clearly points out to the real problem: very poor whining skills.
Alternatively they could build more ravens.
Maybe you could write Mr. Chae, he shall then spread the word of the forgotten terran unit, the raven. The metagame will change for sure!
On May 01 2014 15:28 scypio wrote: Terran needs a whining buff. The amount of nerfs they get and how badly they perform clearly points out to the real problem: very poor whining skills.
Alternatively they could build more ravens.
I am sure raven is the answer versus muta/ling/bane and high templars.
If only Ravens didn't require a whole Tech-Lab Starport and take a whole minute to produce at 200 gas each so you could actually get a few of them at the same time.
I thought zergs were whiny when they were complaining about the widow mine after the overseer buff, but jesus people are all up in arms about terran being UP.
On May 01 2014 15:28 scypio wrote: Terran needs a whining buff. The amount of nerfs they get and how badly they perform clearly points out to the real problem: very poor whining skills.
Alternatively they could build more ravens.
I am sure raven is the answer versus muta/ling/bane and high templars.
raven 10 times the caster high templar can ever be! Takes great effort to split your 10 templars so they don't all die to one HSM (or two?).
On May 01 2014 15:28 scypio wrote: Terran needs a whining buff. The amount of nerfs they get and how badly they perform clearly points out to the real problem: very poor whining skills.
Alternatively they could build more ravens.
I am sure raven is the answer versus muta/ling/bane and high templars.
raven 10 times the caster high templar can ever be! Takes great effort to split your 10 templars so they don't all die to one HSM (or two?).
Just give us a level 4 infantry for late game we do good fine in early and mid for terran, its the late game that been a hassle with zerg and protoss doing tech switch
On May 01 2014 18:07 desertfrog817 wrote: Just give us a level 4 infantry for late game we do good fine in early and mid for terran, its the late game that been a hassle with zerg and protoss doing tech switch
They would never do it in balance patch, too dramatic change. I can imagine them doing something like this in expansion.
On May 01 2014 18:07 desertfrog817 wrote: Just give us a level 4 infantry for late game we do good fine in early and mid for terran, its the late game that been a hassle with zerg and protoss doing tech switch
That might just be a little bit too much for Zerg to handle. 3/3 already shreds through muta/ling/baneling if microes correctly, 4/4 would just make a joke out of it, especially with the way the damage output of a ball of marines scales.
I am still convinced that a lot of Terran woes can be solved by just giving the siege tank its original damage back.
On May 01 2014 14:56 CutTheEnemy wrote: I haven't watched every game in korea, but I watch a lot, and I haven't watched a lategame TvP in months that ended in a terran victory. MMA beat Zest in a macro game, but it was a slight snowball from earlier good play where the toss was at a disadvantage.
Honestly, I think that this is the problem: Terran has no tier 3 bio, and terran is super weak pre-10 minutes.
Terran reaches max strength at the midgame as shields, stim, medivacs and 2/2 hit. Widow mines and hellbats are available at this time too, but that's about it. 3/3 is a boost, but they have no lategame army composition except the addition of a few ghosts/vikings to counter specific threats. They don't have anything of their own to transition into.
By comparison, protoss has tempests, storms, colossus, archons, carriers (sos vs jjakji), immortals, and massive massive warpins become available over time. Zerg has broodlords and ultralisks, infestors, vipers, swarmhosts, muta switches and baneling mines.
Terran can transition into what, ravens? Lategame mech transition? They max out around 12-16 minutes in strength except for a second answer to a second toss AOE source, and then they either win in that window or die after it.
TLDR: terrans need an early game buff that kicks in before 10 minutes and a lategame tier 3 unit that's viable to add in. And lets not encourage mass ravens- Avilo has shown us what that looks like.
What about a Techreactor for 50/50/25 as soon fusion core finishes? Both techlabs and reactors could be upgraded. This would help a lot with tech transitions and remaxing in late game situations.
This would basically remove the infrastructure bottleneck from terran once they are in place. Transitions to high tech units and battlecruiser in particular would be a lot smoother.
That might help the lategame production a bit and provide a bit more compositional flexibility. A Fusion Core would be late enough not to affect the midgame. It would be best if you could upgrade existing Tech-Labs and Reactors as well otherwise it wouldn't affect much. Each Tech Lab could for instance be upgraded for 25/25/15 and Reactors for 50/0/15.
On May 01 2014 15:28 scypio wrote: Terran needs a whining buff. The amount of nerfs they get and how badly they perform clearly points out to the real problem: very poor whining skills.
Alternatively they could build more ravens.
I am sure raven is the answer versus muta/ling/bane and high templars.
raven 10 times the caster high templar can ever be! Takes great effort to split your 10 templars so they don't all die to one HSM (or two?).
What, you just feedback them so they can not HSM.
And yet when you tell people that they should just EMP Templar so that they can't Storm, everyone loses their minds!
=P
EMP can't kill a Templar. To add insult to injury, the Templar can then just flip the finger to the Ghost and morph into an Archon on the spot.
On May 01 2014 18:40 Thezzy wrote: That might help the lategame production a bit and provide a bit more compositional flexibility. A Fusion Core would be late enough not to affect the midgame. It would be best if you could upgrade existing Tech-Labs and Reactors as well otherwise it wouldn't affect much. Each Tech Lab could for instance be upgraded for 25/25/15 and Reactors for 50/0/15.
Yeah, totally agree, was editing my post with the same ideas while you were typing :D Too bad such a drastic change won't happen with a balance patch One can dream, right :D
In reased siege tank damage! I've been watchen the WoL MLB v Marine Tank games and there's so much positional and clever play going on we never see anymore because the tanks is a piece of rubbish :-(
On May 01 2014 18:07 desertfrog817 wrote: Just give us a level 4 infantry for late game we do good fine in early and mid for terran, its the late game that been a hassle with zerg and protoss doing tech switch
That might just be a little bit too much for Zerg to handle. 3/3 already shreds through muta/ling/baneling if microes correctly, 4/4 would just make a joke out of it, especially with the way the damage output of a ball of marines scales.
I am still convinced that a lot of Terran woes can be solved by just giving the siege tank its original damage back.
Is the siegetank dmg output nerfed? damn that migth explain why they suck so hard now.
Really surprised that there's nothing here about the SH. From playing random for the last 6 months its still the most striking issue in P v Z (although in winrate terms that MU looks balanced). I would love to see them experiment with changes involving a small cost per locust (with trade-offs such as no more time-life, makes the unit carrier-esque).
in T v Z the main issue is dealing with Zergs that like to Mass 30+ Muta, definitely feels OP when you have that many on the map. I'm not sure what would help here, but it doesn't seem like the xform change would address much, and Terran is usually getting 3/3 faster than Zerg anyway. Still, I welcome the xform change even if it doesn't address the issues, because it encourages more use of the ability.
in T v P the problem for players remains the lack of early options for terran vs the abundance of options for Protoss. These changes won't really have much affect here at all. I would like to see them consider reverting the upgrade costs for Protoss ground, and then explore bringing other Terran units into that wonderful venn-diagram-centre of viability, such as the tank. Improving the tank in the MU would unlock a much greater set of options for Terran, both in terms of timings and compositions. If they can do it for the Widow Mine, they can do it for the tank.
Siegetanks suck because of the strong counters P and Z has, it has more dps and no siegemode upgrade since a WoL beta nerf. Mutas, speedlings on creep and chargelots are were already good, but then blinding cloud, immortals, phoenix lift, voidrays, broodlords, viper yank etc. make tanks rubbish.
The last dps buff and combined upgrades already killed pure bio in tvt, so the my dear tank is in a hard to buff as well...
in T v Z the main issue is dealing with Zergs that like to Mass 30+ Muta, definitely feels OP when you have that many on the map. I'm not sure what would help here, but it doesn't seem like the xform change would address much, and Terran is usually getting 3/3 faster than Zerg anyway. Still, I welcome the xform change even if it doesn't address the issues, because it encourages more use of the ability.
30+ mutalisks don't just appear out of nowhere. It's due to favorable engagements in the midgame that lets Zerg take extra bases and build up their muta flock. Mass muta tvz is every bit a midgame problem. If in a game it feels otherwise, you were probably dead at 16 min but it took you 10 min to realize it. So a looking for a buff to the midgame like the transformation servos removal is very appropriate.
in T v Z the main issue is dealing with Zergs that like to Mass 30+ Muta, definitely feels OP when you have that many on the map. I'm not sure what would help here, but it doesn't seem like the xform change would address much, and Terran is usually getting 3/3 faster than Zerg anyway. Still, I welcome the xform change even if it doesn't address the issues, because it encourages more use of the ability.
30+ mutalisks don't just appear out of nowhere. It's due to favorable engagements in the midgame that lets Zerg take extra bases and build up their muta flock. Mass muta tvz is every bit a midgame problem. If in a game it feels otherwise, you were probably dead at 16 min but it took you 10 min to realize it. So a looking for a buff to the midgame like the transformation servos removal is very appropriate.
To prevent the 30 Mutalisk flock, you have to constantly engage zerg and force to lose units or at least harass. If you don't get the zerg to lose mutas he fly's out and regens health, increases number. You are 100% correct, that it is hard work to get the economy that way and to not lose mutas, but on the other hand the terran has to either make perfect harassement (drops are hard when mutas are out, so is harassement with banshees). What is left is walking parts of the army towards the opponent, which is often, if the moveout scouted, countered before the army gets there, countered on creep. And the longer the zergs eco stays untouched, the game snowballs.
If Zerg has already a number of mutas, lets say 15, he can keep you in your base like forever, so he can freely expand. IF(!) he controls the units right, he won't lose a muta but moreover grow the numbers.
Theorycrafted enough, that is the pessimistic view on zerg out of the terrans vision. But that can be turned around: Terran have their weapons as well, i know.
Terran is really strong because of Hellbats. Let's nerf the Hellbats! Terran is really weak now because we nerfed Hellbats. Let's try to make mech work. Mech isn't working and isn't as popular as hoped. Fuck it, have your Hellbats again.
On May 01 2014 22:16 Butterednuts wrote: Blizzard logic.
Terran is really strong because of Hellbats. Let's nerf the Hellbats! Terran is really weak now because we nerfed Hellbats. Let's try to make mech work. Mech isn't working and isn't as popular as hoped. Fuck it, have your Hellbats again.
If you read DKims post in the OP, the reasoning behind the proposed hellbat buff is pretty solid.
in T v Z the main issue is dealing with Zergs that like to Mass 30+ Muta, definitely feels OP when you have that many on the map. I'm not sure what would help here, but it doesn't seem like the xform change would address much, and Terran is usually getting 3/3 faster than Zerg anyway. Still, I welcome the xform change even if it doesn't address the issues, because it encourages more use of the ability.
30+ mutalisks don't just appear out of nowhere. It's due to favorable engagements in the midgame that lets Zerg take extra bases and build up their muta flock. Mass muta tvz is every bit a midgame problem. If in a game it feels otherwise, you were probably dead at 16 min but it took you 10 min to realize it. So a looking for a buff to the midgame like the transformation servos removal is very appropriate.
To prevent the 30 Mutalisk flock, you have to constantly engage zerg and force to lose units or at least harass. If you don't get the zerg to lose mutas he fly's out and regens health, increases number. You are 100% correct, that it is hard work to get the economy that way and to not lose mutas, but on the other hand the terran has to either make perfect harassement (drops are hard when mutas are out, so is harassement with banshees). What is left is walking parts of the army towards the opponent, which is often, if the moveout scouted, countered before the army gets there, countered on creep. And the longer the zergs eco stays untouched, the game snowballs.
If Zerg has already a number of mutas, lets say 15, he can keep you in your base like forever, so he can freely expand. IF(!) he controls the units right, he won't lose a muta but moreover grow the numbers.
Theorycrafted enough, that is the pessimistic view on zerg out of the terrans vision. But that can be turned around: Terran have their weapons as well, i know.
I don't like the notion of trying to balance the game around "preventing that the opponent can get X mutalisks". The problem is not that Zerg can get 30mutalisks, since mutalisks are a really good unit in that scenario. It's not like the Zerg is making a mistake by stockpiling mutalisks. Basically you are trying to find a balance sweet spot, which is really hard to do. It's usually going to swing the one or other way once the metagame around it gets figured out. (denying doesn't work well enough, mutalisks eventually still dominate; denying works too well, Zerg doesn't make a real mistake but still just gets worn down) It would be easier to create diverse scenarios, in which there are better and worse decisions, like, creating a scenario in which it is strategically worse to play mass mutalisks, by directly nerfing them (or buffing their counters).
Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
I still love how Stephano only uses 4 Hotkeys. Why should he use more?? He doesn't need to! And, I even said this in WoL, I have no clue how pre-hotkeying larva should automatically roll into Zergs total army composition hotkey when they hatch. No other race can do this - P and T have to reselct all units coming out of their gates/rax/factories etc. This small, but significant, feature just adds to the mass 1a effect on Zerg meta.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
I still love how Stephano only uses 4 Hotkeys. Why should he use more?? He doesn't need to! And, I even said this in WoL, I have no clue how pre-hotkeying larva should automatically roll into Zergs total army composition hotkey when they hatch. No other race can do this - P and T have to reselct all units coming out of their gates/rax/factories etc. This small, but significant, feature just adds to the mass 1a effect on Zerg meta.
Technically we pre hotkey eggs, not larva, in our 1 Ctrl group
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
I still love how Stephano only uses 4 Hotkeys. Why should he use more?? He doesn't need to! And, I even said this in WoL, I have no clue how pre-hotkeying larva should automatically roll into Zergs total army composition hotkey when they hatch. No other race can do this - P and T have to reselct all units coming out of their gates/rax/factories etc. This small, but significant, feature just adds to the mass 1a effect on Zerg meta.
P can just hotkey while it is warping in, so that leaves only T
or keep bio in TvT with 35(65to armored) to we actually can fight against a Colossi storm zealot ball? and add shield dmg so a tank does more than 35 to an archon without ruining ZvT
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
You are completely clueless.
Typically you are not the kind of guy to make such posts...
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
You are completely clueless.
Typically you are not the kind of guy to make such posts...
yup, but I'm getting annoyed that this kind of stuff does not get warnings here. It's just a massive whine post based on made up "facts" like Terrans using ghosts to counter infestors or using ravens with their bio. Not to mention what happens when you 1a banelings and mutalisks into a player that has mines set up and is using Thors and Marauders. Everything just blows up on the wrong stuff, takes massive splash hits and the marines stim forward and kill the 5remaining mutalisks and zerglings. It's such a disgusting way to dennounce a third of the playerbase, not to mention so many progamers.
Not to mention that it completely misses the mark on what the actual problems in ZvT are, which is Terran not being able to get the needed economy in the lategame and being stuck on a max of 4bases once the Zerg player gets enough mutas.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
Actually, will it be a good idea to ask BZ to implement one extra kind of movement such that units will automatically try not to clump together (probably in a not too smart way so that good players can further micro)? One step further will be to enable kiting automatically. Frankly speaking kiting is just pretty standard in professional play anyway. This is probably the exact buff terran needs in TvZ mid to late game, as well as TvP late game.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
Actually, will it be a good idea to ask BZ to implement one extra kind of movement such that units will automatically try not to clump together (probably in a not too smart way so that good players can further micro)? One step further will be to enable kiting automatically. Frankly speaking kiting is just pretty standard in professional play anyway. This is probably the exact buff terran needs in TvZ mid to late game, as well as TvP late game.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
You are completely clueless.
Typically you are not the kind of guy to make such posts...
yup, but I'm getting annoyed that this kind of stuff does not get warnings here. It's just a massive whine post based on made up "facts" like Terrans using ghosts to counter infestors or using ravens with their bio. Not to mention what happens when you 1a banelings and mutalisks into a player that has mines set up and is using Thors and Marauders. Everything just blows up on the wrong stuff, takes massive splash hits and the marines stim forward and kill the 5remaining mutalisks and zerglings. It's such a disgusting way to dennounce a third of the playerbase, not to mention so many progamers.
Not to mention that it completely misses the mark on what the actual problems in ZvT are, which is Terran not being able to get the needed economy in the lategame and being stuck on a max of 4bases once the Zerg player gets enough mutas.
I guess you don't watch Avilo stream. He uses Ravens with Bio all the time and uses 6+ hotkeys. I don't see how that is a "made up" fact.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
You are completely clueless.
Typically you are not the kind of guy to make such posts...
yup, but I'm getting annoyed that this kind of stuff does not get warnings here. It's just a massive whine post based on made up "facts" like Terrans using ghosts to counter infestors or using ravens with their bio. Not to mention what happens when you 1a banelings and mutalisks into a player that has mines set up and is using Thors and Marauders. Everything just blows up on the wrong stuff, takes massive splash hits and the marines stim forward and kill the 5remaining mutalisks and zerglings. It's such a disgusting way to dennounce a third of the playerbase, not to mention so many progamers.
Not to mention that it completely misses the mark on what the actual problems in ZvT are, which is Terran not being able to get the needed economy in the lategame and being stuck on a max of 4bases once the Zerg player gets enough mutas.
I guess you don't watch Avilo stream. He uses Ravens with Bio all the time and uses 6+ hotkeys. I don't see how that is a "made up" fact.
Avilo is indeed the epitome of an excellent player with great mechanics. Also, he plays obnoxious styles that usually only work because his opponent either hasn't ever faced it, or they just don't feel like playing verse somebody willing to turtle for literally 90 minutes and just troll and have fun. Have I already said Avilo never loses a legitimate game, only to "fuckers who cheese and have no skill and all in and doom drop and amove because op"?
And he refers to people who criticize him as haters so he can ignore them instead of going for a confrontation. rofl. Nope, don't use Avilo as an example for anything.
Somebody that respectless to everybody for no real reason doesn't deserve to be respected either.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
You are completely clueless.
Typically you are not the kind of guy to make such posts...
yup, but I'm getting annoyed that this kind of stuff does not get warnings here. It's just a massive whine post based on made up "facts" like Terrans using ghosts to counter infestors or using ravens with their bio. Not to mention what happens when you 1a banelings and mutalisks into a player that has mines set up and is using Thors and Marauders. Everything just blows up on the wrong stuff, takes massive splash hits and the marines stim forward and kill the 5remaining mutalisks and zerglings. It's such a disgusting way to dennounce a third of the playerbase, not to mention so many progamers.
Not to mention that it completely misses the mark on what the actual problems in ZvT are, which is Terran not being able to get the needed economy in the lategame and being stuck on a max of 4bases once the Zerg player gets enough mutas.
I guess you don't watch Avilo stream. He uses Ravens with Bio all the time and uses 6+ hotkeys. I don't see how that is a "made up" fact.
Just like apm, the amount of hotkeys you use to control your army isn't particularly relevant. More doesn't always mean better control.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
Actually, will it be a good idea to ask BZ to implement one extra kind of movement such that units will automatically try not to clump together (probably in a not too smart way so that good players can further micro)? One step further will be to enable kiting automatically. Frankly speaking kiting is just pretty standard in professional play anyway. This is probably the exact buff terran needs in TvZ mid to late game, as well as TvP late game.
More automation is really not what SC2 needs.
Well, it's not about more automation but instead I think is to put the micro needed for each race to be at more similar levels. You don't want to see good terran players getting wrist injuries every now and then!
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
Actually, will it be a good idea to ask BZ to implement one extra kind of movement such that units will automatically try not to clump together (probably in a not too smart way so that good players can further micro)? One step further will be to enable kiting automatically. Frankly speaking kiting is just pretty standard in professional play anyway. This is probably the exact buff terran needs in TvZ mid to late game, as well as TvP late game.
More automation is really not what SC2 needs.
Well, it's not about more automation but instead I think is to put the micro needed for each race to be at more similar levels. You don't want to see good terran players getting wrist injuries every now and then!
The best way for that is to provide strong AoE to bio play so the Zerg and Protoss armies have to be more careful in their approach.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
Actually, will it be a good idea to ask BZ to implement one extra kind of movement such that units will automatically try not to clump together (probably in a not too smart way so that good players can further micro)? One step further will be to enable kiting automatically. Frankly speaking kiting is just pretty standard in professional play anyway. This is probably the exact buff terran needs in TvZ mid to late game, as well as TvP late game.
More automation is really not what SC2 needs.
Well, it's not about more automation but instead I think is to put the micro needed for each race to be at more similar levels. You don't want to see good terran players getting wrist injuries every now and then!
I'm pretty sure most people on TL would rather see Protoss and Zerg have to micro a ton more than have Terran control less.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
Actually, will it be a good idea to ask BZ to implement one extra kind of movement such that units will automatically try not to clump together (probably in a not too smart way so that good players can further micro)? One step further will be to enable kiting automatically. Frankly speaking kiting is just pretty standard in professional play anyway. This is probably the exact buff terran needs in TvZ mid to late game, as well as TvP late game.
More automation is really not what SC2 needs.
Well, it's not about more automation but instead I think is to put the micro needed for each race to be at more similar levels. You don't want to see good terran players getting wrist injuries every now and then!
The best way for that is to provide strong AoE to bio play so the Zerg and Protoss armies have to be more careful in their approach.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
You are completely clueless.
Typically you are not the kind of guy to make such posts...
yup, but I'm getting annoyed that this kind of stuff does not get warnings here. It's just a massive whine post based on made up "facts" like Terrans using ghosts to counter infestors or using ravens with their bio. Not to mention what happens when you 1a banelings and mutalisks into a player that has mines set up and is using Thors and Marauders. Everything just blows up on the wrong stuff, takes massive splash hits and the marines stim forward and kill the 5remaining mutalisks and zerglings. It's such a disgusting way to dennounce a third of the playerbase, not to mention so many progamers.
Not to mention that it completely misses the mark on what the actual problems in ZvT are, which is Terran not being able to get the needed economy in the lategame and being stuck on a max of 4bases once the Zerg player gets enough mutas.
I guess you don't watch Avilo stream. He uses Ravens with Bio all the time and uses 6+ hotkeys. I don't see how that is a "made up" fact.
Avilo is indeed the epitome of an excellent player with great mechanics. Also, he plays obnoxious styles that usually only work because his opponent either hasn't ever faced it, or they just don't feel like playing verse somebody willing to turtle for literally 90 minutes and just troll and have fun. Have I already said Avilo never loses a legitimate game, only to "fuckers who cheese and have no skill and all in and doom drop and amove because op"?
And he refers to people who criticize him as haters so he can ignore them instead of going for a confrontation. rofl. Nope, don't use Avilo as an example for anything.
Somebody that respectless to everybody for no real reason doesn't deserve to be respected either.
I am reading these comments and I am like "did he really just use Avilo as an example of professional level Terran player?" ROFL indeed. :D
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
You are completely clueless.
Typically you are not the kind of guy to make such posts...
yup, but I'm getting annoyed that this kind of stuff does not get warnings here. It's just a massive whine post based on made up "facts" like Terrans using ghosts to counter infestors or using ravens with their bio. Not to mention what happens when you 1a banelings and mutalisks into a player that has mines set up and is using Thors and Marauders. Everything just blows up on the wrong stuff, takes massive splash hits and the marines stim forward and kill the 5remaining mutalisks and zerglings. It's such a disgusting way to dennounce a third of the playerbase, not to mention so many progamers.
Not to mention that it completely misses the mark on what the actual problems in ZvT are, which is Terran not being able to get the needed economy in the lategame and being stuck on a max of 4bases once the Zerg player gets enough mutas.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
Actually, will it be a good idea to ask BZ to implement one extra kind of movement such that units will automatically try not to clump together (probably in a not too smart way so that good players can further micro)? One step further will be to enable kiting automatically. Frankly speaking kiting is just pretty standard in professional play anyway. This is probably the exact buff terran needs in TvZ mid to late game, as well as TvP late game.
More automation is really not what SC2 needs.
Well, it's not about more automation but instead I think is to put the micro needed for each race to be at more similar levels. You don't want to see good terran players getting wrist injuries every now and then!
The best way for that is to provide strong AoE to bio play so the Zerg and Protoss armies have to be more careful in their approach.
#2014BuffSiegeTank
the man lasted 4games in starbow channel til he got banned
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
Actually, will it be a good idea to ask BZ to implement one extra kind of movement such that units will automatically try not to clump together (probably in a not too smart way so that good players can further micro)? One step further will be to enable kiting automatically. Frankly speaking kiting is just pretty standard in professional play anyway. This is probably the exact buff terran needs in TvZ mid to late game, as well as TvP late game.
More automation is really not what SC2 needs.
Well, it's not about more automation but instead I think is to put the micro needed for each race to be at more similar levels. You don't want to see good terran players getting wrist injuries every now and then!
Just like apm, the amount of hotkeys you use to control your army isn't particularly relevant. More doesn't always mean better control.
Though i do find it heart breaking when i see even top pros using one or two controls. This shouldn't work in SC.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
Actually, will it be a good idea to ask BZ to implement one extra kind of movement such that units will automatically try not to clump together (probably in a not too smart way so that good players can further micro)? One step further will be to enable kiting automatically. Frankly speaking kiting is just pretty standard in professional play anyway. This is probably the exact buff terran needs in TvZ mid to late game, as well as TvP late game.
More automation is really not what SC2 needs.
Well, it's not about more automation but instead I think is to put the micro needed for each race to be at more similar levels. You don't want to see good terran players getting wrist injuries every now and then!
The best way for that is to provide strong AoE to bio play so the Zerg and Protoss armies have to be more careful in their approach.
Though i do find it heart breaking when i see even top pros using one or two controls. This shouldn't work in SC.
There is no time for complex control groups when you can lose 75 supply in 5 seconds. In lategame TvP controlling 3 hotkeys of fragile units is already a nightmare with the short duration of battles.
As a few others stated before, the MSC is still a totally shitty unit in terms of design and balance. It's pretty much the least skill-requiring unit out there, except for maybe, just maybe, timing recalls for optimization. Nexus cannon and time warp are pretty much the derpiest actions out there. Surely they can come up with something a bit more creative?
Yeah, aside from the Swarmhost, the MSC is the biggest problem with the game. I mean, just consider, what's the different between a bronze level Photon Overcharge and a GM level one? It's a gimmicky ability that requires no micro on the part of the user. SC is all about micro. Micro is what made BW so great. And now we have units like the SH and MSC that deal damage automatically and provide no entertainment from a spectator's perspective.
about larva hotkeys: If you have ~40 larvas, you cant use all larvas, it stops at ~35 (35 units). You have to select the last ~5 larvas again to build units. I noticed it pretty often, but only if you have ~40 larvas or more.
On May 02 2014 01:28 Dingodile wrote: about larva hotkeys: If you have ~40 larvas, you cant use all larvas, it stops at ~35 (35 units). You have to select the last ~5 larvas again to build units. I noticed it pretty often, but only if you have ~40 larvas or more.
This "problem" didnt exist in WoL.
Why is problem in quotation marks? Are you insinuating that it isn't an issue but then also proclaiming it as one in the sentence before?
On May 02 2014 01:28 Dingodile wrote: about larva hotkeys: If you have ~40 larvas, you cant use all larvas, it stops at ~35 (35 units). You have to select the last ~5 larvas again to build units. I noticed it pretty often, but only if you have ~40 larvas or more.
This "problem" didnt exist in WoL.
Why is problem in quotation marks? Are you insinuating that it isn't an issue but then also proclaiming it as one in the sentence before?
He's probably just saying that not a lot of games have been lost because of this ^^. Seems like a bug nonetheless if it's true.
On May 02 2014 02:30 scypio wrote: great change that will make absolutely no difference in 95% of games whatsoever
Fairly sure TvT and TvZ represent more than 5% of the games played.
TvT balance is not all that crucial... and for TvZ - hmm... I wonder how many T players have the APM to spare while fighting LBM muta balls to do even more micro.
One thing that may be helpful - T keeps his 6/8 initial hellions and hits a timing transforming them into hellbats. If it works... then T will get nerfed again.
if this goes through I can imagine 1/1 Zergling openings becoming obsolete. having 6-8 hellbats in your push is incredibly powerful, along with rallying hellions to your attack and then transforming. TvZ could use changes to mutas or tanks, but this is a terrible idea.
On May 02 2014 02:54 Franscar wrote: if this goes through I can imagine 1/1 Zergling openings becoming obsolete. having 6-8 hellbats in your push is incredibly powerful, along with rallying hellions to your attack and then transforming. TvZ could use changes to mutas or tanks, but this is a terrible idea.
no it isnt, back when hellbats were good it was possible to do thes kind of pushes yet rairly would you see terran kill zerg with a 6 hellbat push. It will however force zerg into a greater commitment to groundbased gas units which is something the mu needs because it will delay mutas and then if t continues to push it will force z to make more banes and less mutas so that z has to at least fight for the ability to make 30+ mutas and contain t on 3-4 bases. right now z gets mutas out so fast that drop play on a lot of maps prity much ends by the 11 minute mark, and once a zerg has mutas unless they are forced to fight with them they will never lose them, provided they have good control.
On May 02 2014 01:28 Dingodile wrote: about larva hotkeys: If you have ~40 larvas, you cant use all larvas, it stops at ~35 (35 units). You have to select the last ~5 larvas again to build units. I noticed it pretty often, but only if you have ~40 larvas or more.
This "problem" didnt exist in WoL.
Why is problem in quotation marks? Are you insinuating that it isn't an issue but then also proclaiming it as one in the sentence before?
In my country you can use quotation marks on noun if it didnt existed before. Make only clear that something has changed.
On May 02 2014 02:54 Franscar wrote: if this goes through I can imagine 1/1 Zergling openings becoming obsolete. having 6-8 hellbats in your push is incredibly powerful, along with rallying hellions to your attack and then transforming. TvZ could use changes to mutas or tanks, but this is a terrible idea.
no it isnt, back when hellbats were good it was possible to do thes kind of pushes yet rairly would you see terran kill zerg with a 6 hellbat push. It will however force zerg into a greater commitment to groundbased gas units which is something the mu needs because it will delay mutas and then if t continues to push it will force z to make more banes and less mutas so that z has to at least fight for the ability to make 30+ mutas and contain t on 3-4 bases. right now z gets mutas out so fast that drop play on a lot of maps prity much ends by the 11 minute mark, and once a zerg has mutas unless they are forced to fight with them they will never lose them, provided they have good control.
these kinds of pushes were much less effective because building Hellbats required an armory, so any hellbat/medivac/bio push arrived much later unless you sacrificed your upgrade timing for an early armory. now you can hit the same exact 1-1 timing as before, with hellbats, without sacrificing upgrades.
On May 02 2014 02:30 scypio wrote: great change that will make absolutely no difference in 95% of games whatsoever
Fairly sure TvT and TvZ represent more than 5% of the games played.
TvT balance is not all that crucial... and for TvZ - hmm... I wonder how many T players have the APM to spare while fighting LBM muta balls to do even more micro.
One thing that may be helpful - T keeps his 6/8 initial hellions and hits a timing transforming them into hellbats. If it works... then T will get nerfed again.
It's not? Hellion openings are already very common in TvT and mech really doesn't seem very weak in midgame (unlike in WOL). So any earlygame midgame buff to mech could have a significant effect. If this goes through, I am definitely gonna use mech as my standard play.
TvZ - Already pointed out previously that I think it creates a totally unncesary buff to terran early game. If you buff terran early game by x%, then the effect it will have in the midgame (balancewise) will be much larger than x% due to the snowball effect.
So assuming David Kim is aware that TvZ midgame perhaps is favored of zerg by roughly 10%, then making a change that buffs terran by 10% in the early game (or around 10-11 minute mark) is suddenly gonna make the matchup very terran favored in the midgame.
I think he should just reduce cost to 50/50 for this upgrade instead of making it free.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
Actually, will it be a good idea to ask BZ to implement one extra kind of movement such that units will automatically try not to clump together (probably in a not too smart way so that good players can further micro)? One step further will be to enable kiting automatically. Frankly speaking kiting is just pretty standard in professional play anyway. This is probably the exact buff terran needs in TvZ mid to late game, as well as TvP late game.
More automation is really not what SC2 needs.
Well, it's not about more automation but instead I think is to put the micro needed for each race to be at more similar levels. You don't want to see good terran players getting wrist injuries every now and then!
Just like apm, the amount of hotkeys you use to control your army isn't particularly relevant. More doesn't always mean better control.
Though i do find it heart breaking when i see even top pros using one or two controls. This shouldn't work in SC.
You know, reading this on the bus earlier today, I really wanted to make a cheeky edit to your quote saying "This shouldn't work in SC(2)," ahaha.
As for proposed changes...I don't agree with upgrade cost nerfs unless they just homogenize them all to the same exact prices for every race (which it already seems like they are going to do)...
I also don't really enjoy the trend of just removing upgrades from the game altogether - granted the hellion transformation upgrade is pretty useless and a waste of gas until the lategame anyhow (more of referring to siege, among other examples) and never should have been an upgrade in the first place...
On May 02 2014 02:54 Franscar wrote: if this goes through I can imagine 1/1 Zergling openings becoming obsolete. having 6-8 hellbats in your push is incredibly powerful, along with rallying hellions to your attack and then transforming. TvZ could use changes to mutas or tanks, but this is a terrible idea.
People said the same thing at the HotS beta and beginning of HotS with pre nerfed hellbats. It didn't happen then, I am skeptical that it will happen now.
On May 02 2014 02:30 scypio wrote: great change that will make absolutely no difference in 95% of games whatsoever
Fairly sure TvT and TvZ represent more than 5% of the games played.
TvT balance is not all that crucial...
It's not a matter of balance (a mirror match-up cannot be "imbalanced") but of diversity. If this thing is implemented and TvT suddenly goes backwards into 95% Hellbats nonsense, people will start e-flipping tables again.
On May 02 2014 02:54 Franscar wrote: if this goes through I can imagine 1/1 Zergling openings becoming obsolete. having 6-8 hellbats in your push is incredibly powerful, along with rallying hellions to your attack and then transforming. TvZ could use changes to mutas or tanks, but this is a terrible idea.
no it isnt, back when hellbats were good it was possible to do thes kind of pushes yet rairly would you see terran kill zerg with a 6 hellbat push. It will however force zerg into a greater commitment to groundbased gas units which is something the mu needs because it will delay mutas and then if t continues to push it will force z to make more banes and less mutas so that z has to at least fight for the ability to make 30+ mutas and contain t on 3-4 bases. right now z gets mutas out so fast that drop play on a lot of maps prity much ends by the 11 minute mark, and once a zerg has mutas unless they are forced to fight with them they will never lose them, provided they have good control.
This is a bit of a logical fallacy from the zerg's point of view. You can't have your mutas in position to stop the drops AND harass at the same time. Yeah, it might be scary to load up dropships with mutas on the map, but if you get a drop in while mutas are away from home, that can really sting.
I always thought z was overpowered in tvz slightly. That's why I switched to z. But upgrade cost, I think that's stupid thing to change. Give Terran a little help in late game. The removal of servo upgrade might be just the thing.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
You are completely clueless.
Typically you are not the kind of guy to make such posts...
yup, but I'm getting annoyed that this kind of stuff does not get warnings here. It's just a massive whine post based on made up "facts" like Terrans using ghosts to counter infestors or using ravens with their bio. Not to mention what happens when you 1a banelings and mutalisks into a player that has mines set up and is using Thors and Marauders. Everything just blows up on the wrong stuff, takes massive splash hits and the marines stim forward and kill the 5remaining mutalisks and zerglings. It's such a disgusting way to dennounce a third of the playerbase, not to mention so many progamers.
Not to mention that it completely misses the mark on what the actual problems in ZvT are, which is Terran not being able to get the needed economy in the lategame and being stuck on a max of 4bases once the Zerg player gets enough mutas.
I guess you don't watch Avilo stream. He uses Ravens with Bio all the time and uses 6+ hotkeys. I don't see how that is a "made up" fact.
Avilo is indeed the epitome of an excellent player with great mechanics. Also, he plays obnoxious styles that usually only work because his opponent either hasn't ever faced it, or they just don't feel like playing verse somebody willing to turtle for literally 90 minutes and just troll and have fun. Have I already said Avilo never loses a legitimate game, only to "fuckers who cheese and have no skill and all in and doom drop and amove because op"?
And he refers to people who criticize him as haters so he can ignore them instead of going for a confrontation. rofl. Nope, don't use Avilo as an example for anything.
Somebody that respectless to everybody for no real reason doesn't deserve to be respected either.
I am reading these comments and I am like "did he really just use Avilo as an example of professional level Terran player?" ROFL indeed. :D
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
You are completely clueless.
Typically you are not the kind of guy to make such posts...
yup, but I'm getting annoyed that this kind of stuff does not get warnings here. It's just a massive whine post based on made up "facts" like Terrans using ghosts to counter infestors or using ravens with their bio. Not to mention what happens when you 1a banelings and mutalisks into a player that has mines set up and is using Thors and Marauders. Everything just blows up on the wrong stuff, takes massive splash hits and the marines stim forward and kill the 5remaining mutalisks and zerglings. It's such a disgusting way to dennounce a third of the playerbase, not to mention so many progamers.
Not to mention that it completely misses the mark on what the actual problems in ZvT are, which is Terran not being able to get the needed economy in the lategame and being stuck on a max of 4bases once the Zerg player gets enough mutas.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
Actually, will it be a good idea to ask BZ to implement one extra kind of movement such that units will automatically try not to clump together (probably in a not too smart way so that good players can further micro)? One step further will be to enable kiting automatically. Frankly speaking kiting is just pretty standard in professional play anyway. This is probably the exact buff terran needs in TvZ mid to late game, as well as TvP late game.
More automation is really not what SC2 needs.
Well, it's not about more automation but instead I think is to put the micro needed for each race to be at more similar levels. You don't want to see good terran players getting wrist injuries every now and then!
The best way for that is to provide strong AoE to bio play so the Zerg and Protoss armies have to be more careful in their approach.
#2014BuffSiegeTank
the man lasted 4games in starbow channel til he got banned
Me? I never go to Starbow channel, tried it a few times and decided I didn't like it.
I don't understand why people think hellions turning into hellbats is particularly cool.
I don't have a major problem with it but it's surprising to see so many approval votes for it... just seems... a little weird to be perfectly honest (the concept in general.)
Still think tier 3 moving sieged tanks is the answer. I'm sticking to this one lol.
On May 02 2014 03:42 Vasoline73 wrote: I don't understand why people think hellions turning into hellbats is particularly cool.
I don't have a major problem with it but it's surprising to see so many approval votes for it... just seems... a little weird to be perfectly honest (the concept in general.)
Still think tier 3 moving sieged tanks is the answer. I'm sticking to this one lol.
Moving Siege Tanks goes straight against what we should get. It makes them like Collosi.
Higher damage is what they need. Lower the attack speed, increase the damage so you will actually have a OH FUCK moment when you walk into Siege Lines, and not be like, rofl, there he is, amove! Lower attack speed higher damage is actually not too bad for Marine based armies. As for Zergling/Baneling, I want them to die in the secondary splash radius with +3 attack, preferably, so MLB is on a serious timer to transition as well.
Use overkill and low attack speed to make the Siege Tank an unique and feared unit :D
Siege tanks definitely needs an attack buff at +3. Right now swarmhosts are too easily thwarting even enormous mech armies. Zerg should be more hard pressed to withstand a maxed mech push, with vipers and such.. more micro than just mindless rally.
also swarmhosts are so god damn boring to watch that it's becoming ridiculous. Does not create epic games at all.
On May 02 2014 04:27 cheekymonkey wrote: Siege tanks definitely needs an attack buff at +3. Right now swarmhosts are too easily thwarting even enormous mech armies. Zerg should be more hard pressed to withstand a maxed mech push, with vipers and such.. more micro than just mindless rally.
also swarmhosts are so god damn boring to watch that it's becoming ridiculous. Does not create epic games at all.
What a joke? 5-10 siege tanks can hold tons of locusts, you know that?
On May 02 2014 04:27 cheekymonkey wrote: Siege tanks definitely needs an attack buff at +3. Right now swarmhosts are too easily thwarting even enormous mech armies. Zerg should be more hard pressed to withstand a maxed mech push, with vipers and such.. more micro than just mindless rally.
also swarmhosts are so god damn boring to watch that it's becoming ridiculous. Does not create epic games at all.
What a joke? 5-10 siege tanks can hold tons of locusts, you know that?
On May 02 2014 04:27 cheekymonkey wrote: Siege tanks definitely needs an attack buff at +3. Right now swarmhosts are too easily thwarting even enormous mech armies. Zerg should be more hard pressed to withstand a maxed mech push, with vipers and such.. more micro than just mindless rally.
also swarmhosts are so god damn boring to watch that it's becoming ridiculous. Does not create epic games at all.
What a joke? 5-10 siege tanks can hold tons of locusts, you know that?
point is, it's not just about defending swarm hosts, it's about being able to push forward with some sort of mobility. You see terran edging their way across the maps only get get all their expansions harassed or killed because they need their entire maxed army to deal with swarmhosts.
On May 02 2014 04:27 cheekymonkey wrote: Siege tanks definitely needs an attack buff at +3. Right now swarmhosts are too easily thwarting even enormous mech armies. Zerg should be more hard pressed to withstand a maxed mech push, with vipers and such.. more micro than just mindless rally.
also swarmhosts are so god damn boring to watch that it's becoming ridiculous. Does not create epic games at all.
What a joke? 5-10 siege tanks can hold tons of locusts, you know that?
It's a bit sad Tanks are only used to hold Locusts and some Roaches busts in TvZ.
On May 02 2014 04:27 cheekymonkey wrote: Siege tanks definitely needs an attack buff at +3. Right now swarmhosts are too easily thwarting even enormous mech armies. Zerg should be more hard pressed to withstand a maxed mech push, with vipers and such.. more micro than just mindless rally.
also swarmhosts are so god damn boring to watch that it's becoming ridiculous. Does not create epic games at all.
What a joke? 5-10 siege tanks can hold tons of locusts, you know that?
It's a bit sad Tanks are only used to hold Locusts and some Roaches busts in TvZ.
That's why they need more damage, less attack speed :-) KABBBBBBOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMM
It's a fucking Siege Tank, not a large assault rifle on a car...
On May 02 2014 02:30 scypio wrote: great change that will make absolutely no difference in 95% of games whatsoever
Fairly sure TvT and TvZ represent more than 5% of the games played.
TvT balance is not all that crucial... and for TvZ - hmm... I wonder how many T players have the APM to spare while fighting LBM muta balls to do even more micro.
One thing that may be helpful - T keeps his 6/8 initial hellions and hits a timing transforming them into hellbats. If it works... then T will get nerfed again.
It's not? Hellion openings are already very common in TvT and mech really doesn't seem very weak in midgame (unlike in WOL). So any earlygame midgame buff to mech could have a significant effect. If this goes through, I am definitely gonna use mech as my standard play.
TvZ - Already pointed out previously that I think it creates a totally unncesary buff to terran early game. If you buff terran early game by x%, then the effect it will have in the midgame (balancewise) will be much larger than x% due to the snowball effect.
So assuming David Kim is aware that TvZ midgame perhaps is favored of zerg by roughly 10%, then making a change that buffs terran by 10% in the early game (or around 10-11 minute mark) is suddenly gonna make the matchup very terran favored in the midgame.
I think he should just reduce cost to 50/50 for this upgrade instead of making it free.
OK, sorry, I found out the hellbat madness all too funny to make it stop so I'd happily see it happen once again.
The TvZ - yeah, that's a buff, it opens timings etc. But - just as I said - a timing-base game is something rather disappointing. Blizzard already fixed TvP by letting terran have 0 timings, no point in having one in TvZ too.
On May 02 2014 02:30 scypio wrote: great change that will make absolutely no difference in 95% of games whatsoever
Fairly sure TvT and TvZ represent more than 5% of the games played.
TvT balance is not all that crucial... and for TvZ - hmm... I wonder how many T players have the APM to spare while fighting LBM muta balls to do even more micro.
One thing that may be helpful - T keeps his 6/8 initial hellions and hits a timing transforming them into hellbats. If it works... then T will get nerfed again.
It's not? Hellion openings are already very common in TvT and mech really doesn't seem very weak in midgame (unlike in WOL). So any earlygame midgame buff to mech could have a significant effect. If this goes through, I am definitely gonna use mech as my standard play.
TvZ - Already pointed out previously that I think it creates a totally unncesary buff to terran early game. If you buff terran early game by x%, then the effect it will have in the midgame (balancewise) will be much larger than x% due to the snowball effect.
So assuming David Kim is aware that TvZ midgame perhaps is favored of zerg by roughly 10%, then making a change that buffs terran by 10% in the early game (or around 10-11 minute mark) is suddenly gonna make the matchup very terran favored in the midgame.
I think he should just reduce cost to 50/50 for this upgrade instead of making it free.
OK, sorry, I found out the hellbat madness all too funny to make it stop so I'd happily see it happen once again.
The TvZ - yeah, that's a buff, it opens timings etc. But - just as I said - a timing-base game is something rather disappointing. Blizzard already fixed TvP by letting terran have 0 timings, no point in having one in TvZ too.
Dude, don't be so negative. This change can open up a ton of different builds we know nothing about yet!
Also, Hellbat TvT was not funny - at all. Get's kinda lame to play rock paper scissors games for 10 minutes every TvT.
On May 02 2014 04:39 cheekymonkey wrote: point is, it's not just about defending swarm hosts, it's about being able to push forward with some sort of mobility. You see terran edging their way across the maps only get get all their expansions harassed or killed because they need their entire maxed army to deal with swarmhosts.
Thats why Terrans have biggest amount of AOE weapons of all races, and half of these AOE weapons are semi-free. So don't try to argue about free units, when you have:
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
You are completely clueless.
Typically you are not the kind of guy to make such posts...
yup, but I'm getting annoyed that this kind of stuff does not get warnings here. It's just a massive whine post based on made up "facts" like Terrans using ghosts to counter infestors or using ravens with their bio. Not to mention what happens when you 1a banelings and mutalisks into a player that has mines set up and is using Thors and Marauders. Everything just blows up on the wrong stuff, takes massive splash hits and the marines stim forward and kill the 5remaining mutalisks and zerglings. It's such a disgusting way to dennounce a third of the playerbase, not to mention so many progamers.
Not to mention that it completely misses the mark on what the actual problems in ZvT are, which is Terran not being able to get the needed economy in the lategame and being stuck on a max of 4bases once the Zerg player gets enough mutas.
I guess you don't watch Avilo stream. He uses Ravens with Bio all the time and uses 6+ hotkeys. I don't see how that is a "made up" fact.
Avilo is indeed the epitome of an excellent player with great mechanics. Also, he plays obnoxious styles that usually only work because his opponent either hasn't ever faced it, or they just don't feel like playing verse somebody willing to turtle for literally 90 minutes and just troll and have fun. Have I already said Avilo never loses a legitimate game, only to "fuckers who cheese and have no skill and all in and doom drop and amove because op"?
And he refers to people who criticize him as haters so he can ignore them instead of going for a confrontation. rofl. Nope, don't use Avilo as an example for anything.
Somebody that respectless to everybody for no real reason doesn't deserve to be respected either.
Your reply completely side-stepped the point. The post was about multiple hotkey control with Terran versus Zerg and you claimed compositions like Raven and Bio are a baseless example - when indeed it is not - Avilo uses it regularly. I've said numerous times control groups and player execution and/or mechanics are set to different standards for different races. The fact you have a player like Stephano only require 4 hotkeys to play the race is pretty shocking if you ask me (even GoOdy uses 5 hotkeys). Furthermore, the fact that Zerg can pre-hotkey eggs and set them as part of the control group with their army (before they hatch), also speaks to reducing the skill ceiling - why can't terran pre-hotkey units in production? The reduced WM damage rewards Zergs that are not as micro oriented. You're right, Zergs used to be punished far more for "clumping" units with the higher level splash, but now it has made it easier for muta/banse to roll through a WM line. And don't even get me started on SH as a unit that requires "skill." This "annoying" style has been created by Blizzard and anyone that wants to go mech has to sit there and build up Raven energy - real fun.
And there are some finer points about Avilo that you missed: He does bm's peoples playstyle but not the person; therefore, holding lack of respect for a persons ability in the game, is far different from not respecting the person. For instance, Idra would attack the person instead of the play. Contrary to Idra, who arguably had little respect for anyone, Avilo comments on playstyle, which usually evolves from his opponents cheesy play or comments on balance. I think someone who can beat Nestea on a meta ladder game demands some level of respect in their playstyle.
On May 02 2014 05:12 NLWiNtER wrote: Do both, I don't mind as a protoss, but please Delete SH! That unit gonna kill the game eventually. So boring to watch an paly against!!
SH must be redesigned, not deleted. Make him more close-range (remove enduring locust), buff locusts, so make Swarm Hosts more close-range (like tempest). Right now Swarm Hosts are semi-22 range, like old Tempests were
On May 02 2014 02:30 scypio wrote: great change that will make absolutely no difference in 95% of games whatsoever
Fairly sure TvT and TvZ represent more than 5% of the games played.
TvT balance is not all that crucial... and for TvZ - hmm... I wonder how many T players have the APM to spare while fighting LBM muta balls to do even more micro.
One thing that may be helpful - T keeps his 6/8 initial hellions and hits a timing transforming them into hellbats. If it works... then T will get nerfed again.
It's not? Hellion openings are already very common in TvT and mech really doesn't seem very weak in midgame (unlike in WOL). So any earlygame midgame buff to mech could have a significant effect. If this goes through, I am definitely gonna use mech as my standard play.
TvZ - Already pointed out previously that I think it creates a totally unncesary buff to terran early game. If you buff terran early game by x%, then the effect it will have in the midgame (balancewise) will be much larger than x% due to the snowball effect.
So assuming David Kim is aware that TvZ midgame perhaps is favored of zerg by roughly 10%, then making a change that buffs terran by 10% in the early game (or around 10-11 minute mark) is suddenly gonna make the matchup very terran favored in the midgame.
I think he should just reduce cost to 50/50 for this upgrade instead of making it free.
OK, sorry, I found out the hellbat madness all too funny to make it stop so I'd happily see it happen once again.
The TvZ - yeah, that's a buff, it opens timings etc. But - just as I said - a timing-base game is something rather disappointing. Blizzard already fixed TvP by letting terran have 0 timings, no point in having one in TvZ too.
Dude, don't be so negative. This change can open up a ton of different builds we know nothing about yet!
Also, Hellbat TvT was not funny - at all. Get's kinda lame to play rock paper scissors games for 10 minutes every TvT.
I remember a discussion regarding TvP, where one dude said "Hey, you are not supposed to attack before 10 minute mark!". That's the right highlight of the "correct" TvX opening, with ideally only one valid option per MU. Things are looking pretty good right now: - open reaper-expand in TvP and go for a poke at 10 minutes (just saw Kas met by 11 stalkers, 6 sentries and MSC off 3 base at this time - Frost, lol). - open reaper-hellion-banshee in TvZ and get chased away by a bunch of queens.
Everything else (like potential 11-minute 6-hellbat biotank timing) will be called unstoppable and nerfed into the ground.
Yeah, once in a blue moon something gimmicky will work (2rax on habitation station?), still this will make no difference.
On May 02 2014 04:39 cheekymonkey wrote: point is, it's not just about defending swarm hosts, it's about being able to push forward with some sort of mobility. You see terran edging their way across the maps only get get all their expansions harassed or killed because they need their entire maxed army to deal with swarmhosts.
Thats why Terrans have biggest amount of AOE weapons of all races, and half of these AOE weapons are semi-free. So don't try to argue about free units, when you have:
Remember that 15 Siege tanks can hold 30 Swarm Hosts. Not including vipers, vikings, widow mine shots, seekers, broodlords, etc
Mines friendly fire and do laughable splash vs not Zealots/clumped banelings, HSM comes off a 100/200/60 unit requiring a 200/125 production building and fires once per 2 and a half minutes, hardly free, Hellbats deal hardly any damage in larger fights, mostly soak damage, Yamato isn't splash, Siege Tanks are rubbish vs non zerg all ins/tvt, everybody knows that, Anti-air Thor only vs Mass Mutalisk.
The problem is Siege Tanks not being able to move forward. Not that they can't hold them.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
You are completely clueless.
Typically you are not the kind of guy to make such posts...
yup, but I'm getting annoyed that this kind of stuff does not get warnings here. It's just a massive whine post based on made up "facts" like Terrans using ghosts to counter infestors or using ravens with their bio. Not to mention what happens when you 1a banelings and mutalisks into a player that has mines set up and is using Thors and Marauders. Everything just blows up on the wrong stuff, takes massive splash hits and the marines stim forward and kill the 5remaining mutalisks and zerglings. It's such a disgusting way to dennounce a third of the playerbase, not to mention so many progamers.
Not to mention that it completely misses the mark on what the actual problems in ZvT are, which is Terran not being able to get the needed economy in the lategame and being stuck on a max of 4bases once the Zerg player gets enough mutas.
I guess you don't watch Avilo stream. He uses Ravens with Bio all the time and uses 6+ hotkeys. I don't see how that is a "made up" fact.
Avilo is indeed the epitome of an excellent player with great mechanics. Also, he plays obnoxious styles that usually only work because his opponent either hasn't ever faced it, or they just don't feel like playing verse somebody willing to turtle for literally 90 minutes and just troll and have fun. Have I already said Avilo never loses a legitimate game, only to "fuckers who cheese and have no skill and all in and doom drop and amove because op"?
And he refers to people who criticize him as haters so he can ignore them instead of going for a confrontation. rofl. Nope, don't use Avilo as an example for anything.
Somebody that respectless to everybody for no real reason doesn't deserve to be respected either.
Your reply completely side-stepped the point. The post was about multiple hotkey control with Terran versus Zerg and you claimed compositions like Raven and Bio are a baseless example - when indeed it is not - Avilo uses it regularly. I've said numerous times control groups and player execution and/or mechanics are set to different standards for different races. The fact you have a player like Stephano only require 4 hotkeys to play the race is pretty shocking if you ask me (even GoOdy uses 5 hotkeys). Furthermore, the fact that Zerg can pre-hotkey eggs and set them as part of the control group with their army (before they hatch), also speaks to reducing the skill ceiling - why can't terran pre-hotkey units in production? The reduced WM damage rewards Zergs that are not as micro oriented. You're right, Zergs used to be punished far more for "clumping" units with the higher level splash, but now it has made it easier for muta/banse to roll through a WM line. And don't even get me started on SH as a unit that requires "skill." This "annoying" style has been created by Blizzard and anyone that wants to go mech has to sit there and build up Raven energy - real fun.
And there are some finer points about Avilo that you missed: He does bm's peoples playstyle but not the person; therefore, holding lack of respect for a persons ability in the game, is far different from not respecting the person. For instance, Idra would attack the person instead of the play. Contrary to Idra, who arguably had little respect for anyone, Avilo comments on playstyle, which usually evolves from his opponents cheesy play or comments on balance. I think someone who can beat Nestea on a meta ladder game demands some level of respect in their playstyle.
Dude. You're so obviously an Avilo fanboy. Those rare times I enjoy myself laughing at him on his stream he says this kind of rubbish all the time.
4 Hotkeys for Zerg can still mean 3 hotkeys for army, 1 for hatches and the queens can be controlled via screen locations, a way a lot of Zergs inject.
Avilo Bms people regularly. Every game, mostly. BMing a style for being retarded and skillless etcetera is exactly the same as BMing the person executing said style, by the way. Especially for a hypocrite that uses his own made up strategy of which the succes rate is the highest only because nobody plays that stupid. IdrA actually did respect good players, just not the scrubs. He had oither problems. Also, he was succesful. But I'm not going for a Avilo vs Idra debate. Nestea isn't the pro he once was, and the fact you need to draw off one game against a player who has never experienced a certain style before is... well, it kinda speaks for itself.
do you guys really need to start a fight about everything? i find tvp really hard to win, so i practice it with a partner and try to find faults instead of qq. maybe everyone needs to work together and solve problems instead of fixing units that really aren't the root of the issue. one thing everyone needs to realize is, the player beat you, not the race.
On May 02 2014 05:31 MattMannion wrote: do you guys really need to start a fight about everything? i find tvp really hard to win, so i practice it with a partner and try to find faults instead of qq. maybe everyone needs to work together and solve problems instead of fixing units that really aren't the root of the issue. one thing everyone needs to realize is, the player beat you, not the race.
If you play the game and you aren't in GSL code S or WCS Premier AM / EU then clearly there is room for improvement, no matter which race you play.
If you are watching the game and feel that it's a bit stale / dull / too predictable and oftentimes one-sided at top level then improving from silver to gold will not help.
On May 02 2014 04:39 cheekymonkey wrote: point is, it's not just about defending swarm hosts, it's about being able to push forward with some sort of mobility. You see terran edging their way across the maps only get get all their expansions harassed or killed because they need their entire maxed army to deal with swarmhosts.
Thats why Terrans have biggest amount of AOE weapons of all races, and half of these AOE weapons are semi-free. So don't try to argue about free units, when you have:
Remember that 15 Siege tanks can hold 30 Swarm Hosts. Not including vipers, vikings, widow mine shots, seekers, broodlords, etc
Mines friendly fire and do laughable splash vs not Zealots/clumped banelings, HSM comes off a 100/200/60 unit requiring a 200/125 production building and fires once per 2 and a half minutes, hardly free, Hellbats deal hardly any damage in larger fights, mostly soak damage, Yamato isn't splash, Siege Tanks are rubbish vs non zerg all ins/tvt, everybody knows that, Anti-air Thor only vs Mass Mutalisk.
The problem is Siege Tanks not being able to move forward. Not that they can't hold them.
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
You are completely clueless.
Typically you are not the kind of guy to make such posts...
yup, but I'm getting annoyed that this kind of stuff does not get warnings here. It's just a massive whine post based on made up "facts" like Terrans using ghosts to counter infestors or using ravens with their bio. Not to mention what happens when you 1a banelings and mutalisks into a player that has mines set up and is using Thors and Marauders. Everything just blows up on the wrong stuff, takes massive splash hits and the marines stim forward and kill the 5remaining mutalisks and zerglings. It's such a disgusting way to dennounce a third of the playerbase, not to mention so many progamers.
Not to mention that it completely misses the mark on what the actual problems in ZvT are, which is Terran not being able to get the needed economy in the lategame and being stuck on a max of 4bases once the Zerg player gets enough mutas.
I guess you don't watch Avilo stream. He uses Ravens with Bio all the time and uses 6+ hotkeys. I don't see how that is a "made up" fact.
Avilo is indeed the epitome of an excellent player with great mechanics. Also, he plays obnoxious styles that usually only work because his opponent either hasn't ever faced it, or they just don't feel like playing verse somebody willing to turtle for literally 90 minutes and just troll and have fun. Have I already said Avilo never loses a legitimate game, only to "fuckers who cheese and have no skill and all in and doom drop and amove because op"?
And he refers to people who criticize him as haters so he can ignore them instead of going for a confrontation. rofl. Nope, don't use Avilo as an example for anything.
Somebody that respectless to everybody for no real reason doesn't deserve to be respected either.
Your reply completely side-stepped the point. The post was about multiple hotkey control with Terran versus Zerg and you claimed compositions like Raven and Bio are a baseless example - when indeed it is not - Avilo uses it regularly. I've said numerous times control groups and player execution and/or mechanics are set to different standards for different races. The fact you have a player like Stephano only require 4 hotkeys to play the race is pretty shocking if you ask me (even GoOdy uses 5 hotkeys). Furthermore, the fact that Zerg can pre-hotkey eggs and set them as part of the control group with their army (before they hatch), also speaks to reducing the skill ceiling - why can't terran pre-hotkey units in production? The reduced WM damage rewards Zergs that are not as micro oriented. You're right, Zergs used to be punished far more for "clumping" units with the higher level splash, but now it has made it easier for muta/banse to roll through a WM line. And don't even get me started on SH as a unit that requires "skill." This "annoying" style has been created by Blizzard and anyone that wants to go mech has to sit there and build up Raven energy - real fun.
And there are some finer points about Avilo that you missed: He does bm's peoples playstyle but not the person; therefore, holding lack of respect for a persons ability in the game, is far different from not respecting the person. For instance, Idra would attack the person instead of the play. Contrary to Idra, who arguably had little respect for anyone, Avilo comments on playstyle, which usually evolves from his opponents cheesy play or comments on balance. I think someone who can beat Nestea on a meta ladder game demands some level of respect in their playstyle.
Dude. You're so obviously an Avilo fanboy. Those rare times I enjoy myself laughing at him on his stream he says this kind of rubbish all the time.
4 Hotkeys for Zerg can still mean 3 hotkeys for army, 1 for hatches and the queens can be controlled via screen locations, a way a lot of Zergs inject.
Avilo Bms people regularly. Every game, mostly. BMing a style for being retarded and skillless etcetera is exactly the same as BMing the person executing said style, by the way. Especially for a hypocrite that uses his own made up strategy of which the succes rate is the highest only because nobody plays that stupid. IdrA actually did respect good players, just not the scrubs. He had oither problems. Also, he was succesful. But I'm not going for a Avilo vs Idra debate. Nestea isn't the pro he once was, and the fact you need to draw off one game against a player who has never experienced a certain style before is... well, it kinda speaks for itself.
Avilo made up his own play style? Nobody plays TvZ mech? I think you need to watch more Sc2 - GoOdy, Strelok, HTOMario, Dayshi. And I really can't believe you are defending <=4 hotkey play from top Pro's - it's not like I put my Rax, CC, Starport, Factory all on one hotkey. As for Avilo, he has never told someone to "get cancer and die" or "David Kim should get raped by a tire iron." I can't say the same for Idra, so defending someone that spews such comments says a lot about the kind of people you support.
On May 02 2014 02:30 scypio wrote: great change that will make absolutely no difference in 95% of games whatsoever
Fairly sure TvT and TvZ represent more than 5% of the games played.
TvT balance is not all that crucial... and for TvZ - hmm... I wonder how many T players have the APM to spare while fighting LBM muta balls to do even more micro.
One thing that may be helpful - T keeps his 6/8 initial hellions and hits a timing transforming them into hellbats. If it works... then T will get nerfed again.
It's not? Hellion openings are already very common in TvT and mech really doesn't seem very weak in midgame (unlike in WOL). So any earlygame midgame buff to mech could have a significant effect. If this goes through, I am definitely gonna use mech as my standard play.
TvZ - Already pointed out previously that I think it creates a totally unncesary buff to terran early game. If you buff terran early game by x%, then the effect it will have in the midgame (balancewise) will be much larger than x% due to the snowball effect.
So assuming David Kim is aware that TvZ midgame perhaps is favored of zerg by roughly 10%, then making a change that buffs terran by 10% in the early game (or around 10-11 minute mark) is suddenly gonna make the matchup very terran favored in the midgame.
I think he should just reduce cost to 50/50 for this upgrade instead of making it free.
OK, sorry, I found out the hellbat madness all too funny to make it stop so I'd happily see it happen once again.
The TvZ - yeah, that's a buff, it opens timings etc. But - just as I said - a timing-base game is something rather disappointing. Blizzard already fixed TvP by letting terran have 0 timings, no point in having one in TvZ too.
Dude, don't be so negative. This change can open up a ton of different builds we know nothing about yet!
Also, Hellbat TvT was not funny - at all. Get's kinda lame to play rock paper scissors games for 10 minutes every TvT.
I remember a discussion regarding TvP, where one dude said "Hey, you are not supposed to attack before 10 minute mark!". That's the right highlight of the "correct" TvX opening, with ideally only one valid option per MU. Things are looking pretty good right now: - open reaper-expand in TvP and go for a poke at 10 minutes (just saw Kas met by 11 stalkers, 6 sentries and MSC off 3 base at this time - Frost, lol). - open reaper-hellion-banshee in TvZ and get chased away by a bunch of queens.
Everything else (like potential 11-minute 6-hellbat biotank timing) will be called unstoppable and nerfed into the ground.
Yeah, once in a blue moon something gimmicky will work (2rax on habitation station?), still this will make no difference.
That's kind of like saying that PvT is silly because you almost always open 1-gate expand, or ZvT is silly because hatch first into speedling / mass queen is common.
Just because reaper-expand is so prevalent doesn't mean anything - follow-ups into 1/1/1, 3rax, 2rax/factory, 2rax/eng bay, are all utilized in TvP.
Same with the hellion opening; you see fast third cc's, fast 3rax (polt), or banshee play following up the reaper production quite commonly.
On May 02 2014 05:31 MattMannion wrote: do you guys really need to start a fight about everything? i find tvp really hard to win, so i practice it with a partner and try to find faults instead of qq. maybe everyone needs to work together and solve problems instead of fixing units that really aren't the root of the issue. one thing everyone needs to realize is, the player beat you, not the race.
If you play the game and you aren't in GSL code S or WCS Premier AM / EU then clearly there is room for improvement, no matter which race you play.
If you are watching the game and feel that it's a bit stale / dull / too predictable and oftentimes one-sided at top level then improving from silver to gold will not help.
sure but that doesn't mean people can't work together and solve the problems they have. if the game feels that way then you(or who ever) should maybe find something else to do or take a break, its doesn't always mean you need to mess with the game.
theres tons of strategies and stuff to work on and figure out, even the people at the top are still getting better. i just watched a gsl 2012 vod earlier and they looked like diamond players. point is, its not the games fault entirely for peoples issues .
I know there is a ridiculous amount of things I can improve off to compete with my peers, the issue is how much you can be reasonably expected to do relative to said peers for many people, as well as how the game is functioning at the top level as a spectator activity.
just focus on you, there's no need to worry about those things in my opinion. just do you/play your game. sure the game can feel one sided, but sometimes the most frustrating games were just even matches. hell i can't change the way everyone feels about it, but i figured i'd chime in since the complaining is always so fierce when im on a stream or reading these forums :/.
On May 02 2014 05:12 NLWiNtER wrote: Do both, I don't mind as a protoss, but please Delete SH! That unit gonna kill the game eventually. So boring to watch an paly against!!
SH must be redesigned, not deleted. Make him more close-range (remove enduring locust), buff locusts, so make Swarm Hosts more close-range (like tempest). Right now Swarm Hosts are semi-22 range, like old Tempests were
I thought about making the locust footprint bigger somehow and reducing their speed. That'd make the more resilient to splash but way less mobile and have way less DPS/Area. That might encourage spreading them out more.
On May 02 2014 02:30 scypio wrote: great change that will make absolutely no difference in 95% of games whatsoever
Fairly sure TvT and TvZ represent more than 5% of the games played.
TvT balance is not all that crucial... and for TvZ - hmm... I wonder how many T players have the APM to spare while fighting LBM muta balls to do even more micro.
One thing that may be helpful - T keeps his 6/8 initial hellions and hits a timing transforming them into hellbats. If it works... then T will get nerfed again.
It's not? Hellion openings are already very common in TvT and mech really doesn't seem very weak in midgame (unlike in WOL). So any earlygame midgame buff to mech could have a significant effect. If this goes through, I am definitely gonna use mech as my standard play.
TvZ - Already pointed out previously that I think it creates a totally unncesary buff to terran early game. If you buff terran early game by x%, then the effect it will have in the midgame (balancewise) will be much larger than x% due to the snowball effect.
So assuming David Kim is aware that TvZ midgame perhaps is favored of zerg by roughly 10%, then making a change that buffs terran by 10% in the early game (or around 10-11 minute mark) is suddenly gonna make the matchup very terran favored in the midgame.
I think he should just reduce cost to 50/50 for this upgrade instead of making it free.
OK, sorry, I found out the hellbat madness all too funny to make it stop so I'd happily see it happen once again.
The TvZ - yeah, that's a buff, it opens timings etc. But - just as I said - a timing-base game is something rather disappointing. Blizzard already fixed TvP by letting terran have 0 timings, no point in having one in TvZ too.
Dude, don't be so negative. This change can open up a ton of different builds we know nothing about yet!
Also, Hellbat TvT was not funny - at all. Get's kinda lame to play rock paper scissors games for 10 minutes every TvT.
I remember a discussion regarding TvP, where one dude said "Hey, you are not supposed to attack before 10 minute mark!". That's the right highlight of the "correct" TvX opening, with ideally only one valid option per MU. Things are looking pretty good right now: - open reaper-expand in TvP and go for a poke at 10 minutes (just saw Kas met by 11 stalkers, 6 sentries and MSC off 3 base at this time - Frost, lol). - open reaper-hellion-banshee in TvZ and get chased away by a bunch of queens.
Everything else (like potential 11-minute 6-hellbat biotank timing) will be called unstoppable and nerfed into the ground.
Yeah, once in a blue moon something gimmicky will work (2rax on habitation station?), still this will make no difference.
In TvP it won't change much I am afraid, but TvZ, it might be lethal.
On May 02 2014 05:56 MattMannion wrote: just focus on you, there's no need to worry about those things in my opinion. just do you/play your game. sure the game can feel one sided, but sometimes the most frustrating games were just even matches. hell i can't change the way everyone feels about it, but i figured i'd chime in since the complaining is always so fierce when im on a stream or reading these forums :/.
This has little to do with playing the game, it's more about watching it really. Well, maybe it matters a bit for guys like TheDwf, as he is at least trying to get to WCS challenger league etc.
I've been watching this game for a couple of years, it had it's high and lows and I'd say things a looking rather grim right now.
On May 02 2014 04:39 cheekymonkey wrote: point is, it's not just about defending swarm hosts, it's about being able to push forward with some sort of mobility. You see terran edging their way across the maps only get get all their expansions harassed or killed because they need their entire maxed army to deal with swarmhosts.
Thats why Terrans have biggest amount of AOE weapons of all races, and half of these AOE weapons are semi-free. So don't try to argue about free units, when you have:
Remember that 15 Siege tanks can hold 30 Swarm Hosts. Not including vipers, vikings, widow mine shots, seekers, broodlords, etc
Mines friendly fire and do laughable splash vs not Zealots/clumped banelings, HSM comes off a 100/200/60 unit requiring a 200/125 production building and fires once per 2 and a half minutes, hardly free, Hellbats deal hardly any damage in larger fights, mostly soak damage, Yamato isn't splash, Siege Tanks are rubbish vs non zerg all ins/tvt, everybody knows that, Anti-air Thor only vs Mass Mutalisk.
The problem is Siege Tanks not being able to move forward. Not that they can't hold them.
On May 02 2014 05:16 SirPinky wrote:
On May 02 2014 00:33 SC2Toastie wrote:
On May 02 2014 00:26 SirPinky wrote:
On May 02 2014 00:01 Big J wrote:
On May 01 2014 23:54 The_Red_Viper wrote:
On May 01 2014 23:47 Big J wrote:
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
You are completely clueless.
Typically you are not the kind of guy to make such posts...
yup, but I'm getting annoyed that this kind of stuff does not get warnings here. It's just a massive whine post based on made up "facts" like Terrans using ghosts to counter infestors or using ravens with their bio. Not to mention what happens when you 1a banelings and mutalisks into a player that has mines set up and is using Thors and Marauders. Everything just blows up on the wrong stuff, takes massive splash hits and the marines stim forward and kill the 5remaining mutalisks and zerglings. It's such a disgusting way to dennounce a third of the playerbase, not to mention so many progamers.
Not to mention that it completely misses the mark on what the actual problems in ZvT are, which is Terran not being able to get the needed economy in the lategame and being stuck on a max of 4bases once the Zerg player gets enough mutas.
I guess you don't watch Avilo stream. He uses Ravens with Bio all the time and uses 6+ hotkeys. I don't see how that is a "made up" fact.
Avilo is indeed the epitome of an excellent player with great mechanics. Also, he plays obnoxious styles that usually only work because his opponent either hasn't ever faced it, or they just don't feel like playing verse somebody willing to turtle for literally 90 minutes and just troll and have fun. Have I already said Avilo never loses a legitimate game, only to "fuckers who cheese and have no skill and all in and doom drop and amove because op"?
And he refers to people who criticize him as haters so he can ignore them instead of going for a confrontation. rofl. Nope, don't use Avilo as an example for anything.
Somebody that respectless to everybody for no real reason doesn't deserve to be respected either.
Your reply completely side-stepped the point. The post was about multiple hotkey control with Terran versus Zerg and you claimed compositions like Raven and Bio are a baseless example - when indeed it is not - Avilo uses it regularly. I've said numerous times control groups and player execution and/or mechanics are set to different standards for different races. The fact you have a player like Stephano only require 4 hotkeys to play the race is pretty shocking if you ask me (even GoOdy uses 5 hotkeys). Furthermore, the fact that Zerg can pre-hotkey eggs and set them as part of the control group with their army (before they hatch), also speaks to reducing the skill ceiling - why can't terran pre-hotkey units in production? The reduced WM damage rewards Zergs that are not as micro oriented. You're right, Zergs used to be punished far more for "clumping" units with the higher level splash, but now it has made it easier for muta/banse to roll through a WM line. And don't even get me started on SH as a unit that requires "skill." This "annoying" style has been created by Blizzard and anyone that wants to go mech has to sit there and build up Raven energy - real fun.
And there are some finer points about Avilo that you missed: He does bm's peoples playstyle but not the person; therefore, holding lack of respect for a persons ability in the game, is far different from not respecting the person. For instance, Idra would attack the person instead of the play. Contrary to Idra, who arguably had little respect for anyone, Avilo comments on playstyle, which usually evolves from his opponents cheesy play or comments on balance. I think someone who can beat Nestea on a meta ladder game demands some level of respect in their playstyle.
Dude. You're so obviously an Avilo fanboy. Those rare times I enjoy myself laughing at him on his stream he says this kind of rubbish all the time.
4 Hotkeys for Zerg can still mean 3 hotkeys for army, 1 for hatches and the queens can be controlled via screen locations, a way a lot of Zergs inject.
Avilo Bms people regularly. Every game, mostly. BMing a style for being retarded and skillless etcetera is exactly the same as BMing the person executing said style, by the way. Especially for a hypocrite that uses his own made up strategy of which the succes rate is the highest only because nobody plays that stupid. IdrA actually did respect good players, just not the scrubs. He had oither problems. Also, he was succesful. But I'm not going for a Avilo vs Idra debate. Nestea isn't the pro he once was, and the fact you need to draw off one game against a player who has never experienced a certain style before is... well, it kinda speaks for itself.
Avilo made up his own play style? Nobody plays TvZ mech? I think you need to watch more Sc2 - GoOdy, Strelok, HTOMario, Dayshi. And I really can't believe you are defending <=4 hotkey play from top Pro's - it's not like I put my Rax, CC, Starport, Factory all on one hotkey. As for Avilo, he has never told someone to "get cancer and die" or "David Kim should get raped by a tire iron." I can't say the same for Idra, so defending someone that spews such comments says a lot about the kind of people you support.
Yes he did. That BioRaven style is something only he does, that MechRaven turtle, he and goody are the only ones that play it that way, turret PDD tank into 90 minute game. HTOMario retired and used more mines, Strelok plays way more aggressive with hellbat tank, Dayshi hardly does this vs Z unless he's dead. What's the problem with using 4 hotkeys in total? As I explained, that is 1 for production and 3 for army, for Zerg having 1 on production is sufficient if you use camera locations. Are you going to whine about the different races having different production? Sidenote, a good number of players have Rax/Fact/SP on 1 key.
And well, as for the last part, I'm sorry I offended your little idol, but the truth is, Avilo is a really nasty bitch in almost every game, insults constantly. You don't need to wish somebody dead to bm. The fact I explain the behaviour IdrA isn't the same as me approving of how he acted, but at least he was good for this community, Avilo is just a really bad example and a sad troll. Stop putting words in my mouth if you disagree and can't win the argument.
tvp is pretty diverse if you want it to be, you can do all sorts of stuff if you are willing to open your mind. you don't have to copy pro builds to win games, but it will make you a better player faster at the cost of some ladder points.
HOTS has way more things you can do than in WoL, its definitely and improvement.
On May 02 2014 05:56 MattMannion wrote: just focus on you, there's no need to worry about those things in my opinion. just do you/play your game. sure the game can feel one sided, but sometimes the most frustrating games were just even matches. hell i can't change the way everyone feels about it, but i figured i'd chime in since the complaining is always so fierce when im on a stream or reading these forums :/.
This has little to do with playing the game, it's more about watching it really. Well, maybe it matters a bit for guys like TheDwf, as he is at least trying to get to WCS challenger league etc.
I've been watching this game for a couple of years, it had it's high and lows and I'd say things a looking rather grim right now.
im sorry you feel that way, maybe its time to move on? go play csgo for a bit, or BW both are quite fun and may break the cycle for you. sometimes you just need to come back to something with fresh eyes.
On May 02 2014 05:56 MattMannion wrote: just focus on you, there's no need to worry about those things in my opinion. just do you/play your game. sure the game can feel one sided, but sometimes the most frustrating games were just even matches. hell i can't change the way everyone feels about it, but i figured i'd chime in since the complaining is always so fierce when im on a stream or reading these forums :/.
This has little to do with playing the game, it's more about watching it really. Well, maybe it matters a bit for guys like TheDwf, as he is at least trying to get to WCS challenger league etc.
I've been watching this game for a couple of years, it had it's high and lows and I'd say things a looking rather grim right now.
It's not nearly as grim as Broodlord Infestor times, as there's still 3 matchups and while Terran representation is low, they aren't extinct. And the quality of ZvP and PvP is considerably higher.
On May 02 2014 05:56 MattMannion wrote: just focus on you, there's no need to worry about those things in my opinion. just do you/play your game. sure the game can feel one sided, but sometimes the most frustrating games were just even matches. hell i can't change the way everyone feels about it, but i figured i'd chime in since the complaining is always so fierce when im on a stream or reading these forums :/.
This has little to do with playing the game, it's more about watching it really. Well, maybe it matters a bit for guys like TheDwf, as he is at least trying to get to WCS challenger league etc.
I've been watching this game for a couple of years, it had it's high and lows and I'd say things a looking rather grim right now.
It's not nearly as grim as Broodlord Infestor times, as there's still 3 matchups and while Terran representation is low, they aren't extinct. And the quality of ZvP and PvP is considerably higher.
Yeah, I agree. I've seen worse, also - I've seen better
Moreover, I think this Avilo discussion is rather pointless as he did nothing. Did he manage to get into ro8 of a meaningful tournament? I'm following SC2 pretty closely and I can't recall anything.
On May 02 2014 02:54 Franscar wrote: if this goes through I can imagine 1/1 Zergling openings becoming obsolete. having 6-8 hellbats in your push is incredibly powerful, along with rallying hellions to your attack and then transforming. TvZ could use changes to mutas or tanks, but this is a terrible idea.
no it isnt, back when hellbats were good it was possible to do thes kind of pushes yet rairly would you see terran kill zerg with a 6 hellbat push. It will however force zerg into a greater commitment to groundbased gas units which is something the mu needs because it will delay mutas and then if t continues to push it will force z to make more banes and less mutas so that z has to at least fight for the ability to make 30+ mutas and contain t on 3-4 bases. right now z gets mutas out so fast that drop play on a lot of maps prity much ends by the 11 minute mark, and once a zerg has mutas unless they are forced to fight with them they will never lose them, provided they have good control.
This is a bit of a logical fallacy from the zerg's point of view. You can't have your mutas in position to stop the drops AND harass at the same time. Yeah, it might be scary to load up dropships with mutas on the map, but if you get a drop in while mutas are away from home, that can really sting.
I always thought z was overpowered in tvz slightly. That's why I switched to z. But upgrade cost, I think that's stupid thing to change. Give Terran a little help in late game. The removal of servo upgrade might be just the thing.
Ok, I suppose its an exaggeration. I guess its more accurate to say that any drop past 12 minutes is a one way trip suicide mission. you can still drop and deal damage but this is mostly to force the muta cloud or ground army out of position. You don't see drops really do alot of damage to a zerg with mutas+creep+overlords and that drop will die shortly after its seen. Its also a significant risk because if you get spotted its as good as throwing away 8 marines + a medivac. I think on the pro level that's why you mostly see drops to gain a positional advantage past the 11 minute mark but rarely do they do efficient amounts of direct damage to the zerg, unless zerg is obligated to ignore them.
On May 02 2014 05:12 NLWiNtER wrote: Do both, I don't mind as a protoss, but please Delete SH! That unit gonna kill the game eventually. So boring to watch an paly against!!
SH must be redesigned, not deleted. Make him more close-range (remove enduring locust), buff locusts, so make Swarm Hosts more close-range (like tempest). Right now Swarm Hosts are semi-22 range, like old Tempests were
I thought about making the locust footprint bigger somehow and reducing their speed. That'd make the more resilient to splash but way less mobile and have way less DPS/Area. That might encourage spreading them out more.
Nah, Existor is actually right if we aim for Swarm Hosts to be good and fun units.
You have to change them to be closer ranged units with very high dps but being at risk of being sniped. Then you will constantly trade, your army of Roaches/Hydras/Swarm Hosts/whatever for enemy army. There will be high risk of losing Swarm Hosts that costs a lot, but reward will also be very high if you are good at controlling them.
Right now, Swarm Hosts are no-risk-high-reward units. You just camp with them on creep, with ton of Spines, Spores, Corruptors, Vipers, Queens, Infestors and you send Locusts across the half of the map.
That is why I love to see players that use Swarm Hosts offensively, because you can clearly see the difference between players that are not comfortable with using them, and those that are actually good with Swarm Hosts, because when used offensively they are one of the most demanding and micro intensive units that Zerg has(unless you are already in such huge advantage that you can just rally Locusts and forget about Swarm Hosts altogether). Problem is that not so many players use them offensively anymore because they see their weakness in that regard, multi-prong attacks, drops etc, and they just keep playing turtling style with them.
I would probably reduce Locust duration to 10 seconds, and leave their cooldown on 15-20 seconds, but buff their dps and movement speed. Instead of Enduring Locusts, I would put upgrade that improves Swarm Host speed and reduces the burrow time by 1 second.
They really need to be those aggressive burrow-spawn-unburrow-retreat units instead of burrow-and-forget kind.
On May 02 2014 05:56 MattMannion wrote: just focus on you, there's no need to worry about those things in my opinion. just do you/play your game. sure the game can feel one sided, but sometimes the most frustrating games were just even matches. hell i can't change the way everyone feels about it, but i figured i'd chime in since the complaining is always so fierce when im on a stream or reading these forums :/.
This has little to do with playing the game, it's more about watching it really. Well, maybe it matters a bit for guys like TheDwf, as he is at least trying to get to WCS challenger league etc.
I've been watching this game for a couple of years, it had it's high and lows and I'd say things a looking rather grim right now.
It's not nearly as grim as Broodlord Infestor times, as there's still 3 matchups and while Terran representation is low, they aren't extinct. And the quality of ZvP and PvP is considerably higher.
Yeah, I agree. I've seen worse, also - I've seen better
Moreover, I think this Avilo discussion is rather pointless as he did nothing. Did he manage to get into ro8 of a meaningful tournament? I'm following SC2 pretty closely and I can't recall anything.
I dont think the SH concept is good tbh. Easy to say after extensive testing throughout HotS and I donz blame anyone for it. But thats just how it is imo. The Sh fails to do what you want from an artillery (kill stuff from long range) and fails to be interesting (it sits there and now you gotta sit here). Just give us one standard groundbased zerg artillery unit. Not the SH that is completely deniable and thus just a way to keep the opponent busy, not the BL/Guardian stuff that requires you to have airdominance while being unable to beat T1 GtA units without support. Not the energybased fungals that cannot kill walls and defenses. Just something normal that shoots at 9+ range.
On May 02 2014 07:04 mikumegurine wrote: there might be ways to make SH only work offensively and not defensively, then this would solve most of the turtling SH problems
extreme examples of a change to do this would be to make SH lose HP when near your own hatchers/lair/hive
so your SH would only survive and be used far away from your own base, ie only can be used on your opponents side of the map
On May 02 2014 07:04 mikumegurine wrote: there might be ways to make SH only work offensively and not defensively, then this would solve most of the turtling SH problems
extreme examples of a change to do this would be to make SH lose HP when near your own hatchers/lair/hive
so your SH would only survive and be used far away from your own base, ie only can be used on your opponents side of the map
basically cant use SH for defense anymore
That's pretty ludicrous. A way of making SH more offensive rather than defensive would be to make both SH's and locusts much faster but with far less HP, longer lifespan and less damage output. Thus making them pretty bad vs mass tank, but open for quick harassment around the map and scouting.
Tank vs SH needs to go, it's very bad design. I think zerg has more interesting options vs mech, including heavy viper usage. Maybe it's not currently as good as SH, or even viable at all for that matter, but that can also be changed. One suggestion is the broodlord which is now gradually losing its role.
Zerg is most entertaining when their goal is harassment & big fast engagements. Not WoL TvT tank vs tank level stalemates.
Part of the problem is that T players need to be more active about pressing forward with their tanks. I've had so many games where I sit there killing locusts for about 10 minutes when I could have been crawling forward with my tanks if I spared the APM for it.
On May 02 2014 07:04 mikumegurine wrote: there might be ways to make SH only work offensively and not defensively, then this would solve most of the turtling SH problems
extreme examples of a change to do this would be to make SH lose HP when near your own hatchers/lair/hive
so your SH would only survive and be used far away from your own base, ie only can be used on your opponents side of the map
basically cant use SH for defense anymore
Yeah but if i want fast, cheap groundbased harassment i have lings/blings and roaches at my disposal. Zerg has no need and probably not even a usage for another unit that is good at dealing damage to unprotected locations.
What zerg needs (instead) is something that can actually tackle an opponent that is going full retard PF/tank/viking turtle to get 20ravens and 15 extra OCs. Or a Protoss that just builds those 20Tempests behind his Collossus/HT bunker. And not in a retarted way like with SHs where the solution to that kind of Zerg offense is to do the turtlestyle that the zerg wanted to tackle originally, because (only) that way you can prevent damage from the Z artillery. And not by actually dealing with the artillery...
On May 02 2014 07:04 mikumegurine wrote: there might be ways to make SH only work offensively and not defensively, then this would solve most of the turtling SH problems
extreme examples of a change to do this would be to make SH lose HP when near your own hatchers/lair/hive
so your SH would only survive and be used far away from your own base, ie only can be used on your opponents side of the map
basically cant use SH for defense anymore
What zerg needs (instead) is something that can actually tackle an opponent that is going full retard PF/tank/viking turtle to get 20ravens and 15 extra OCs. Or a Protoss that just builds those 20Tempests behind his Collossus/HT bunker.
It could be solved differently than with SH for sure. Blizzard could reconsider Scourge as a unit to deal with mass viking/raven. Sitting tight on SH's doesn't fit Zerg very well.
On May 02 2014 02:30 scypio wrote: great change that will make absolutely no difference in 95% of games whatsoever
Fairly sure TvT and TvZ represent more than 5% of the games played.
TvT balance is not all that crucial... and for TvZ - hmm... I wonder how many T players have the APM to spare while fighting LBM muta balls to do even more micro.
One thing that may be helpful - T keeps his 6/8 initial hellions and hits a timing transforming them into hellbats. If it works... then T will get nerfed again.
It's not? Hellion openings are already very common in TvT and mech really doesn't seem very weak in midgame (unlike in WOL). So any earlygame midgame buff to mech could have a significant effect. If this goes through, I am definitely gonna use mech as my standard play.
TvZ - Already pointed out previously that I think it creates a totally unncesary buff to terran early game. If you buff terran early game by x%, then the effect it will have in the midgame (balancewise) will be much larger than x% due to the snowball effect.
So assuming David Kim is aware that TvZ midgame perhaps is favored of zerg by roughly 10%, then making a change that buffs terran by 10% in the early game (or around 10-11 minute mark) is suddenly gonna make the matchup very terran favored in the midgame.
I think he should just reduce cost to 50/50 for this upgrade instead of making it free.
OK, sorry, I found out the hellbat madness all too funny to make it stop so I'd happily see it happen once again.
The TvZ - yeah, that's a buff, it opens timings etc. But - just as I said - a timing-base game is something rather disappointing. Blizzard already fixed TvP by letting terran have 0 timings, no point in having one in TvZ too.
Dude, don't be so negative. This change can open up a ton of different builds we know nothing about yet!
Also, Hellbat TvT was not funny - at all. Get's kinda lame to play rock paper scissors games for 10 minutes every TvT.
it was the exact opposite of randomness, just raw mechanical skill.
On May 02 2014 04:39 cheekymonkey wrote: point is, it's not just about defending swarm hosts, it's about being able to push forward with some sort of mobility. You see terran edging their way across the maps only get get all their expansions harassed or killed because they need their entire maxed army to deal with swarmhosts.
Thats why Terrans have biggest amount of AOE weapons of all races, and half of these AOE weapons are semi-free. So don't try to argue about free units, when you have:
Remember that 15 Siege tanks can hold 30 Swarm Hosts. Not including vipers, vikings, widow mine shots, seekers, broodlords, etc
Mines friendly fire and do laughable splash vs not Zealots/clumped banelings, HSM comes off a 100/200/60 unit requiring a 200/125 production building and fires once per 2 and a half minutes, hardly free, Hellbats deal hardly any damage in larger fights, mostly soak damage, Yamato isn't splash, Siege Tanks are rubbish vs non zerg all ins/tvt, everybody knows that, Anti-air Thor only vs Mass Mutalisk.
The problem is Siege Tanks not being able to move forward. Not that they can't hold them.
On May 02 2014 05:16 SirPinky wrote:
On May 02 2014 00:33 SC2Toastie wrote:
On May 02 2014 00:26 SirPinky wrote:
On May 02 2014 00:01 Big J wrote:
On May 01 2014 23:54 The_Red_Viper wrote:
On May 01 2014 23:47 Big J wrote:
On May 01 2014 22:52 odem wrote: Zerg can win lategame ZvT by 1-A deathball (muta,ling,bling,ultralisk,infestor) while only needing 1 control group to easily still use fungal growth.
Terran needs like how many control groups to effectively counter that shit? bio (stim), mines (burrow) vs bling clumps, raven (pdd/hsm) vs muta clumps, ghost (emp) vs infestor... [alternatively replace mines with tanks (siege) vs bling clumps]
--> thats like 4 control groups and absolutely impossible to micro even for the top world korean terrans
--> so u have to choose less caster units and will be in a disadvantage (OR U NEED 2 PLAYERS TO MICRO A TERRAN ARMY IN TVZ)
on the other hand mech just too fucking slow and doesnt really work on big maps
EXACTLY THIS is the reason there has never been successful terran foreigners (compared to zerg ez mode foreigners all over the place) + that is the reason why ZvT will always be fucked up.
not to mention in ZvZ or PvP a foreigner can always beat a korean but in TvT the foreigners get completely annihilated by koreans. guess what, terran takes actual skill to control.
so u either need to ensure terran has a way to effectively (!) counter muta clumps without needing 3 players to micro their army (by nerfig muta or buffing terran counters like dude above just said). or just ensure zerg actually needs to micro their own fucking units (f.e. bling friendly fire) to make it equal hard to play - not even speaking about protoss 1click early game defense.
You are completely clueless.
Typically you are not the kind of guy to make such posts...
yup, but I'm getting annoyed that this kind of stuff does not get warnings here. It's just a massive whine post based on made up "facts" like Terrans using ghosts to counter infestors or using ravens with their bio. Not to mention what happens when you 1a banelings and mutalisks into a player that has mines set up and is using Thors and Marauders. Everything just blows up on the wrong stuff, takes massive splash hits and the marines stim forward and kill the 5remaining mutalisks and zerglings. It's such a disgusting way to dennounce a third of the playerbase, not to mention so many progamers.
Not to mention that it completely misses the mark on what the actual problems in ZvT are, which is Terran not being able to get the needed economy in the lategame and being stuck on a max of 4bases once the Zerg player gets enough mutas.
I guess you don't watch Avilo stream. He uses Ravens with Bio all the time and uses 6+ hotkeys. I don't see how that is a "made up" fact.
Avilo is indeed the epitome of an excellent player with great mechanics. Also, he plays obnoxious styles that usually only work because his opponent either hasn't ever faced it, or they just don't feel like playing verse somebody willing to turtle for literally 90 minutes and just troll and have fun. Have I already said Avilo never loses a legitimate game, only to "fuckers who cheese and have no skill and all in and doom drop and amove because op"?
And he refers to people who criticize him as haters so he can ignore them instead of going for a confrontation. rofl. Nope, don't use Avilo as an example for anything.
Somebody that respectless to everybody for no real reason doesn't deserve to be respected either.
Your reply completely side-stepped the point. The post was about multiple hotkey control with Terran versus Zerg and you claimed compositions like Raven and Bio are a baseless example - when indeed it is not - Avilo uses it regularly. I've said numerous times control groups and player execution and/or mechanics are set to different standards for different races. The fact you have a player like Stephano only require 4 hotkeys to play the race is pretty shocking if you ask me (even GoOdy uses 5 hotkeys). Furthermore, the fact that Zerg can pre-hotkey eggs and set them as part of the control group with their army (before they hatch), also speaks to reducing the skill ceiling - why can't terran pre-hotkey units in production? The reduced WM damage rewards Zergs that are not as micro oriented. You're right, Zergs used to be punished far more for "clumping" units with the higher level splash, but now it has made it easier for muta/banse to roll through a WM line. And don't even get me started on SH as a unit that requires "skill." This "annoying" style has been created by Blizzard and anyone that wants to go mech has to sit there and build up Raven energy - real fun.
And there are some finer points about Avilo that you missed: He does bm's peoples playstyle but not the person; therefore, holding lack of respect for a persons ability in the game, is far different from not respecting the person. For instance, Idra would attack the person instead of the play. Contrary to Idra, who arguably had little respect for anyone, Avilo comments on playstyle, which usually evolves from his opponents cheesy play or comments on balance. I think someone who can beat Nestea on a meta ladder game demands some level of respect in their playstyle.
Dude. You're so obviously an Avilo fanboy. Those rare times I enjoy myself laughing at him on his stream he says this kind of rubbish all the time.
4 Hotkeys for Zerg can still mean 3 hotkeys for army, 1 for hatches and the queens can be controlled via screen locations, a way a lot of Zergs inject.
Avilo Bms people regularly. Every game, mostly. BMing a style for being retarded and skillless etcetera is exactly the same as BMing the person executing said style, by the way. Especially for a hypocrite that uses his own made up strategy of which the succes rate is the highest only because nobody plays that stupid. IdrA actually did respect good players, just not the scrubs. He had oither problems. Also, he was succesful. But I'm not going for a Avilo vs Idra debate. Nestea isn't the pro he once was, and the fact you need to draw off one game against a player who has never experienced a certain style before is... well, it kinda speaks for itself.
Avilo made up his own play style? Nobody plays TvZ mech? I think you need to watch more Sc2 - GoOdy, Strelok, HTOMario, Dayshi. And I really can't believe you are defending <=4 hotkey play from top Pro's - it's not like I put my Rax, CC, Starport, Factory all on one hotkey. As for Avilo, he has never told someone to "get cancer and die" or "David Kim should get raped by a tire iron." I can't say the same for Idra, so defending someone that spews such comments says a lot about the kind of people you support.
Yes he did. That BioRaven style is something only he does, that MechRaven turtle, he and goody are the only ones that play it that way, turret PDD tank into 90 minute game. HTOMario retired and used more mines, Strelok plays way more aggressive with hellbat tank, Dayshi hardly does this vs Z unless he's dead. What's the problem with using 4 hotkeys in total? As I explained, that is 1 for production and 3 for army, for Zerg having 1 on production is sufficient if you use camera locations. Are you going to whine about the different races having different production? Sidenote, a good number of players have Rax/Fact/SP on 1 key.
And well, as for the last part, I'm sorry I offended your little idol, but the truth is, Avilo is a really nasty bitch in almost every game, insults constantly. You don't need to wish somebody dead to bm. The fact I explain the behaviour IdrA isn't the same as me approving of how he acted, but at least he was good for this community, Avilo is just a really bad example and a sad troll. Stop putting words in my mouth if you disagree and can't win the argument.
Lol, so much spite. Did you have some sort of history with Avilo? Did he BM you on stream or something? The only thing I see in this thread is that you show extreme hate toward Avilo (and his fans) without any provocation. That's pretty BM, considering you are relatively anonymous. You also defend Idra who BM just as much if not more, who more than once told the entire community to go fuck themselves.
I'd argue Avilo is good for community. He is a good player who put up a consistent stream with good viewer numbers, manage to be somewhat entertaining. I've watched his metagame vods and he doesn't look like a super bias troll who wants to nerf the shit out of protoss random forum posters would like you to believe.
People don't like Avilo because he never takes accountability for his losses. He accuses people of stream cheating, being cheesy or anything else that can remove the blame him. He whines endlessly about balance and will even talk a little trash when he is beat by Korean pros.
Avilo has fans and that is great, but he is still a whiner and a cry baby and thats not how you become a champion.
On May 02 2014 07:04 mikumegurine wrote: there might be ways to make SH only work offensively and not defensively, then this would solve most of the turtling SH problems
extreme examples of a change to do this would be to make SH lose HP when near your own hatchers/lair/hive
so your SH would only survive and be used far away from your own base, ie only can be used on your opponents side of the map
basically cant use SH for defense anymore
Yeah but if i want fast, cheap groundbased harassment i have lings/blings and roaches at my disposal. Zerg has no need and probably not even a usage for another unit that is good at dealing damage to unprotected locations.
What zerg needs (instead) is something that can actually tackle an opponent that is going full retard PF/tank/viking turtle to get 20ravens and 15 extra OCs. Or a Protoss that just builds those 20Tempests behind his Collossus/HT bunker. And not in a retarted way like with SHs where the solution to that kind of Zerg offense is to do the turtlestyle that the zerg wanted to tackle originally, because (only) that way you can prevent damage from the Z artillery. And not by actually dealing with the artillery...
Sorry but you don't need a buff for that.. there's a reason you almost never see it in professional play. Take the whole map, spread creep and wait.. it's not fun I'll admit but Z definitely doesn't need a buff lol.
On May 02 2014 07:57 Plansix wrote: People don't like Avilo because he never takes accountability for his losses. He accuses people of stream cheating, being cheesy or anything else that can remove the blame him. He whines endlessly about balance and will even talk a little trash when he is beat by Korean pros.
Avilo has fans and that is great, but he is still a whiner and a cry baby and thats not how you become a champion.
Please stop railroading the balance thread talking about Avilo this is not the forum.
What I'm wondering is if this is a good idea at all. If a Terran player micros correctly and saves their hellions to be included in their 11-12 min push 1 or 2 things can happen.
1) The push will be very strong and Terran players will start abusing the timing against zergs.
2) The push will fail and Terran will transition into 4M which was what they were playing before.
The patch addresses a timing, not the other 75% of the mid and late game. Terrans will stop making hellbats after that initial push fails or win right there. If they want to help Terran they should revert the WM nerf, because that is what the other 90% of the game is played on. By fixing the WM they will fix a bigger picture of the game. Who says that a Zerg having to micro against WM shots is a bad thing. As it is now they usually just make so many lings and LOL as they move onto a Terran army ignoring the WM shots.
On May 02 2014 02:30 scypio wrote: great change that will make absolutely no difference in 95% of games whatsoever
Fairly sure TvT and TvZ represent more than 5% of the games played.
TvT balance is not all that crucial... and for TvZ - hmm... I wonder how many T players have the APM to spare while fighting LBM muta balls to do even more micro.
One thing that may be helpful - T keeps his 6/8 initial hellions and hits a timing transforming them into hellbats. If it works... then T will get nerfed again.
It's not? Hellion openings are already very common in TvT and mech really doesn't seem very weak in midgame (unlike in WOL). So any earlygame midgame buff to mech could have a significant effect. If this goes through, I am definitely gonna use mech as my standard play.
TvZ - Already pointed out previously that I think it creates a totally unncesary buff to terran early game. If you buff terran early game by x%, then the effect it will have in the midgame (balancewise) will be much larger than x% due to the snowball effect.
So assuming David Kim is aware that TvZ midgame perhaps is favored of zerg by roughly 10%, then making a change that buffs terran by 10% in the early game (or around 10-11 minute mark) is suddenly gonna make the matchup very terran favored in the midgame.
I think he should just reduce cost to 50/50 for this upgrade instead of making it free.
OK, sorry, I found out the hellbat madness all too funny to make it stop so I'd happily see it happen once again.
The TvZ - yeah, that's a buff, it opens timings etc. But - just as I said - a timing-base game is something rather disappointing. Blizzard already fixed TvP by letting terran have 0 timings, no point in having one in TvZ too.
Dude, don't be so negative. This change can open up a ton of different builds we know nothing about yet!
Also, Hellbat TvT was not funny - at all. Get's kinda lame to play rock paper scissors games for 10 minutes every TvT.
it was the exact opposite of randomness, just raw mechanical skill.
On May 02 2014 04:39 cheekymonkey wrote: point is, it's not just about defending swarm hosts, it's about being able to push forward with some sort of mobility. You see terran edging their way across the maps only get get all their expansions harassed or killed because they need their entire maxed army to deal with swarmhosts.
Thats why Terrans have biggest amount of AOE weapons of all races, and half of these AOE weapons are semi-free. So don't try to argue about free units, when you have:
Remember that 15 Siege tanks can hold 30 Swarm Hosts. Not including vipers, vikings, widow mine shots, seekers, broodlords, etc
Mines friendly fire and do laughable splash vs not Zealots/clumped banelings, HSM comes off a 100/200/60 unit requiring a 200/125 production building and fires once per 2 and a half minutes, hardly free, Hellbats deal hardly any damage in larger fights, mostly soak damage, Yamato isn't splash, Siege Tanks are rubbish vs non zerg all ins/tvt, everybody knows that, Anti-air Thor only vs Mass Mutalisk.
The problem is Siege Tanks not being able to move forward. Not that they can't hold them.
On May 02 2014 05:16 SirPinky wrote:
On May 02 2014 00:33 SC2Toastie wrote:
On May 02 2014 00:26 SirPinky wrote:
On May 02 2014 00:01 Big J wrote:
On May 01 2014 23:54 The_Red_Viper wrote:
On May 01 2014 23:47 Big J wrote: [quote]
You are completely clueless.
Typically you are not the kind of guy to make such posts...
yup, but I'm getting annoyed that this kind of stuff does not get warnings here. It's just a massive whine post based on made up "facts" like Terrans using ghosts to counter infestors or using ravens with their bio. Not to mention what happens when you 1a banelings and mutalisks into a player that has mines set up and is using Thors and Marauders. Everything just blows up on the wrong stuff, takes massive splash hits and the marines stim forward and kill the 5remaining mutalisks and zerglings. It's such a disgusting way to dennounce a third of the playerbase, not to mention so many progamers.
Not to mention that it completely misses the mark on what the actual problems in ZvT are, which is Terran not being able to get the needed economy in the lategame and being stuck on a max of 4bases once the Zerg player gets enough mutas.
I guess you don't watch Avilo stream. He uses Ravens with Bio all the time and uses 6+ hotkeys. I don't see how that is a "made up" fact.
Avilo is indeed the epitome of an excellent player with great mechanics. Also, he plays obnoxious styles that usually only work because his opponent either hasn't ever faced it, or they just don't feel like playing verse somebody willing to turtle for literally 90 minutes and just troll and have fun. Have I already said Avilo never loses a legitimate game, only to "fuckers who cheese and have no skill and all in and doom drop and amove because op"?
And he refers to people who criticize him as haters so he can ignore them instead of going for a confrontation. rofl. Nope, don't use Avilo as an example for anything.
Somebody that respectless to everybody for no real reason doesn't deserve to be respected either.
Your reply completely side-stepped the point. The post was about multiple hotkey control with Terran versus Zerg and you claimed compositions like Raven and Bio are a baseless example - when indeed it is not - Avilo uses it regularly. I've said numerous times control groups and player execution and/or mechanics are set to different standards for different races. The fact you have a player like Stephano only require 4 hotkeys to play the race is pretty shocking if you ask me (even GoOdy uses 5 hotkeys). Furthermore, the fact that Zerg can pre-hotkey eggs and set them as part of the control group with their army (before they hatch), also speaks to reducing the skill ceiling - why can't terran pre-hotkey units in production? The reduced WM damage rewards Zergs that are not as micro oriented. You're right, Zergs used to be punished far more for "clumping" units with the higher level splash, but now it has made it easier for muta/banse to roll through a WM line. And don't even get me started on SH as a unit that requires "skill." This "annoying" style has been created by Blizzard and anyone that wants to go mech has to sit there and build up Raven energy - real fun.
And there are some finer points about Avilo that you missed: He does bm's peoples playstyle but not the person; therefore, holding lack of respect for a persons ability in the game, is far different from not respecting the person. For instance, Idra would attack the person instead of the play. Contrary to Idra, who arguably had little respect for anyone, Avilo comments on playstyle, which usually evolves from his opponents cheesy play or comments on balance. I think someone who can beat Nestea on a meta ladder game demands some level of respect in their playstyle.
Dude. You're so obviously an Avilo fanboy. Those rare times I enjoy myself laughing at him on his stream he says this kind of rubbish all the time.
4 Hotkeys for Zerg can still mean 3 hotkeys for army, 1 for hatches and the queens can be controlled via screen locations, a way a lot of Zergs inject.
Avilo Bms people regularly. Every game, mostly. BMing a style for being retarded and skillless etcetera is exactly the same as BMing the person executing said style, by the way. Especially for a hypocrite that uses his own made up strategy of which the succes rate is the highest only because nobody plays that stupid. IdrA actually did respect good players, just not the scrubs. He had oither problems. Also, he was succesful. But I'm not going for a Avilo vs Idra debate. Nestea isn't the pro he once was, and the fact you need to draw off one game against a player who has never experienced a certain style before is... well, it kinda speaks for itself.
Avilo made up his own play style? Nobody plays TvZ mech? I think you need to watch more Sc2 - GoOdy, Strelok, HTOMario, Dayshi. And I really can't believe you are defending <=4 hotkey play from top Pro's - it's not like I put my Rax, CC, Starport, Factory all on one hotkey. As for Avilo, he has never told someone to "get cancer and die" or "David Kim should get raped by a tire iron." I can't say the same for Idra, so defending someone that spews such comments says a lot about the kind of people you support.
Yes he did. That BioRaven style is something only he does, that MechRaven turtle, he and goody are the only ones that play it that way, turret PDD tank into 90 minute game. HTOMario retired and used more mines, Strelok plays way more aggressive with hellbat tank, Dayshi hardly does this vs Z unless he's dead. What's the problem with using 4 hotkeys in total? As I explained, that is 1 for production and 3 for army, for Zerg having 1 on production is sufficient if you use camera locations. Are you going to whine about the different races having different production? Sidenote, a good number of players have Rax/Fact/SP on 1 key.
And well, as for the last part, I'm sorry I offended your little idol, but the truth is, Avilo is a really nasty bitch in almost every game, insults constantly. You don't need to wish somebody dead to bm. The fact I explain the behaviour IdrA isn't the same as me approving of how he acted, but at least he was good for this community, Avilo is just a really bad example and a sad troll. Stop putting words in my mouth if you disagree and can't win the argument.
Lol, so much spite. Did you have some sort of history with Avilo? Did he BM you on stream or something? The only thing I see in this thread is that you show extreme hate toward Avilo (and his fans) without any provocation. That's pretty BM, considering you are relatively anonymous. You also defend Idra who BM just as much if not more, who more than once told the entire community to go fuck themselves.
I'd argue Avilo is good for community. He is a good player who put up a consistent stream with good viewer numbers, manage to be somewhat entertaining. I've watched his metagame vods and he doesn't look like a super bias troll who wants to nerf the shit out of protoss random forum posters would like you to believe.
Yes, as said, this is not the place for being an Avilo Fan. I do have a history with him going on a rampage on me after I called him out and he banned me, so well. I do have my reason not to like him. On the other hand, there's some fanatics around who will defend him at all cost, and those fanatics are not worth my time.
PS He is bad for the community; people that act THAT immature are a burden to the growth of esports as a whole and do nothing but strenghten certain misconceptions people have over gamers.
On May 02 2014 07:57 Plansix wrote: People don't like Avilo because he never takes accountability for his losses. He accuses people of stream cheating, being cheesy or anything else that can remove the blame him. He whines endlessly about balance and will even talk a little trash when he is beat by Korean pros.
Avilo has fans and that is great, but he is still a whiner and a cry baby and thats not how you become a champion.
Well said. Now please just call us all haters so you can ignore our opinions, the rest of the discussion can be held in PM with me. TY
On May 02 2014 08:28 Wombat_NI wrote: In terms of Shost, why not lurkers? They seem to work ok in Starbow as well so they would work in the SC2 engine
It's impossible to implement a new unit midway through an expansion. Lurkers might have a role, but IMO, they kinda overlap with burrowed banelings or infestors quite a lot... Sad, because I like Lurkers :D
Everyone likes Lurkers, they were my favorite SCBW units, but they really don't fulfill the role that Swarm Hosts do. Only thing that these units have in common is that they both need to burrow to be able to attack, but the things they do, how they do, what they counter and what counters them are completely different.
In a game with Colossi, Thors, Immortals, Roaches and Marauders, I really don't think that Lurkers would do much.
On May 02 2014 08:28 Wombat_NI wrote: In terms of Shost, why not lurkers? They seem to work ok in Starbow as well so they would work in the SC2 engine
Because lurkers will work only against terran bio. In all other cases they can ruin the game more badly than Swarm Hosts.
Versus protoss - stalkers and colossies outrange lurkers, versus bio - same as swarm host, versus mech - yeah, against seeker missiles / thors / banshees really "good", versus zerg - may be a good idea, but I love swarmy stuff more. Zergs in sc2 already lost their swarmy feeling, and Swarm Hosts bringing it back a bit.
On May 02 2014 08:28 Wombat_NI wrote: In terms of Shost, why not lurkers? They seem to work ok in Starbow as well so they would work in the SC2 engine
Because lurkers will work only against terran bio. In all other cases they can ruin the game more badly than Swarm Hosts.
Versus protoss - stalkers and colossies outrange lurkers, versus bio - same as swarm host, versus mech - yeah, against seeker missiles / thors / banshees really "good", versus zerg - may be a good idea, but I love swarmy stuff more. Zergs in sc2 already lost their swarmy feeling, and Swarm Hosts bringing it back a bit.
Talking about that, what could we do to get out of the srrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr ZvZ? Lurkers might actually help there.
I also feel like giving Lurkers 7 range might be pretty decent.
Alas, there'sso much testing required for that, don't expect it before LOTV.
On May 02 2014 09:01 ZenithM wrote: Zerg needs Impalers. Yes, from the campaign. That shit was guuuud.
They were strong, sure, but they looked way too much like "Zerg Siege Tanks" to me, just without splash, but they maybe could work better than Lurkers just to force engagements or snipe important units like Thors/Colossi/Infestors with target firing.
The campaign unit I liked the most was probably Creeper(Swarm Host strain), unit that is spreading creep by itself and has the ability to "teleport" all over the map when there is creep, who needs Nydus? It is even better that it is Swarm Host with those abilities!
On May 02 2014 09:01 ZenithM wrote: Zerg needs Impalers. Yes, from the campaign. That shit was guuuud.
They were strong, sure, but they looked way too much like "Zerg Siege Tanks" to me, just without splash, but they maybe could work better than Lurkers just to force engagements or snipe important units like Thors/Colossi/Infestors with target firing.
The campaign unit I liked the most was probably Creeper(Swarm Host strain), unit that is spreading creep by itself and has the ability to "teleport" all over the map when there is creep, who needs Nydus? It is even better that it is Swarm Host with those abilities!
Haha I feel you, at the end I was just spamming the teleporting swarmhosts, that was so ridiculous :D
On May 02 2014 09:01 ZenithM wrote: Zerg needs Impalers. Yes, from the campaign. That shit was guuuud.
They were strong, sure, but they looked way too much like "Zerg Siege Tanks" to me, just without splash, but they maybe could work better than Lurkers just to force engagements or snipe important units like Thors/Colossi/Infestors with target firing.
The campaign unit I liked the most was probably Creeper(Swarm Host strain), unit that is spreading creep by itself and has the ability to "teleport" all over the map when there is creep, who needs Nydus? It is even better that it is Swarm Host with those abilities!
Why not give Terran a stim pack research time decrease? That can help against Protoss all-in's and give Terran some more build order to work with. Or you could tweek the Ghosts or Vikings for better late game. I am not sure, if the upgrade change will be effective (as we have seen with the upgrade buff for Terran mech).
Yeah, I realised the OP had been updated a little while after I posted that. Oh well.
As to these threads, I do mostly skim them. Also the time difference means that a lot of thread traffic goes through when I'm not online. I usually cbf catching up on all the pages - most of which opinion I'm certain I'd disagree with anyway. :D
I suspect that the option 2 buff is encouraging Terrans to utilize bio bat thor compositions in TvZ as opposed to bio mine thor. The mine buff encouraged Terrans to go bio mine in TvP when it was rarely used and now I suspect that this phenomenon will occur in TvZ with the hellion/hellbat buff. I also expect more mech to be utilized as well in TvZ and TvT. I'm eager to test it out on the balance test map as option 2 is far superior to option 1 as a spectator and a player.
Im really glad people went nuts about cutting ubgrade cost of 22 and 33 for terran since when you actually use your brain and think about it, it doesnt make the 33 window vs zerg any shorter as so many zerg heros claimed, it only gives you resources to build 3 more mines which is nothing lol. Thats why Im happy people went crazy calling it op, imba and game destorying so Blizz decided to go with hellbats.
Now as for the buff theyre trying to test, I think its long overdue due to bajilion nerfs to hellbats that took place. The thing that TvZ needs is some serious love to siege tank and thor. Those 2 units with marines and medevacs vs LBM are amazing to watch, but thats only the composition I think would be better to watch. The main problem of TvZ is tge muta cloud that doesnt give a fuck about turrets and leads to containment of terran on 3-4 bases alongside with mines being so random and well acustomed to by zergs by now that Z can just a move into them and 95% of the time they win or go even with the latter also leading to loss for terran since rally is so long on most maps.
Im also disappointed that theres no mention of swarm hosts - I for eg and Im sure many other terrans will never play mech no matter how good it is because hour long tank turtle to ravens vs sh is just stupid and not fun for both parties and theres nothing terran can vs that play from zerg.
As for TvP #everyprotoss #listensto #Rain In TvP the problem is that Protoss has so many options in early game vs Terran that can win the game out right very often and the fact that protoss doesnt have any all ins vs terran. Indeed, they dont because all that used to be an all in no can easily be transitioned out of with MSC. Protoss cannot be killed 90%of the time while theyre on 2 bases as TY cs MC series showcased. MC should have just lost after neglecting the presence of mines in his mineral line for so long. If it was the other way around and TY lost 20 scvs to MC, MC would just a move up a bunkered ramp and win while terran cannot touch the fuckin protoss. I dont know what should be changed about TvP but one thing is certain: protoss is imba as fuck in that match up in so many stages of it its insane. Revert oracle speed would be an amazing place to start but we know how blizz goes about reverting shit
On May 03 2014 19:22 Detri wrote: Can someone who played BW confirm this, but didn't marines have a +1 range upgrade and did that put them to 5 or 6 range with the upgrade?
Would it be terrible if it unlocked in the tech lab with a fusion core in SC2?
Simplifying the game and removing upgrades is the wrong direction imho.
Marines defaulted at 4 range so the upgrade put them at 5.
On May 03 2014 19:22 Detri wrote: Can someone who played BW confirm this, but didn't marines have a +1 range upgrade and did that put them to 5 or 6 range with the upgrade?
Would it be terrible if it unlocked in the tech lab with a fusion core in SC2?
Simplifying the game and removing upgrades is the wrong direction imho.
Yeah, cause breaking the balance by giving perfectly fine units unnecessary upgrades is what helps balance. If an upgrade is as out of place as the hellbat one removing/changing it is a good idea - they should also look into the others e.g. medivac energy up, overlord drop, bunker capacity, ...
On May 02 2014 08:26 Umami wrote: What I'm wondering is if this is a good idea at all. If a Terran player micros correctly and saves their hellions to be included in their 11-12 min push 1 or 2 things can happen.
1) The push will be very strong and Terran players will start abusing the timing against zergs.
2) The push will fail and Terran will transition into 4M which was what they were playing before.
The patch addresses a timing, not the other 75% of the mid and late game. Terrans will stop making hellbats after that initial push fails or win right there. If they want to help Terran they should revert the WM nerf, because that is what the other 90% of the game is played on. By fixing the WM they will fix a bigger picture of the game. Who says that a Zerg having to micro against WM shots is a bad thing. As it is now they usually just make so many lings and LOL as they move onto a Terran army ignoring the WM shots.
Another thing I don't like with including Hellbats in the push is that it just replaces the Hellion in that push (though it's possible that stuff like 8-10 hellion openings might be standard instead of 6 hellions). The problem with that is that the Hellion can actually be microed during the battle, while the Hellbat is just a big a-move unit. So basically this specific change (compared to making it a 50/50 upgrade) is bad for two reasons;
1) Creates a potential early game balance issue, which could snowball and suddenly make the matchup terran favored (instead of simply making a few lowrisk tweaks which buffs terran in the midgame)
2) Replaces a microable unit with a nonmicroable unit.
On May 03 2014 19:22 Detri wrote: Can someone who played BW confirm this, but didn't marines have a +1 range upgrade and did that put them to 5 or 6 range with the upgrade?
Would it be terrible if it unlocked in the tech lab with a fusion core in SC2?
Simplifying the game and removing upgrades is the wrong direction imho.
People should just stop with this "upgrade at the Fusion core" cliché. If you think Terrans would wait 25 minuts before unlocking a +1 Marine range upgrade when they can build a Fusion Core in midgame without problem...
On May 02 2014 08:26 Umami wrote: What I'm wondering is if this is a good idea at all. If a Terran player micros correctly and saves their hellions to be included in their 11-12 min push 1 or 2 things can happen.
1) The push will be very strong and Terran players will start abusing the timing against zergs.
2) The push will fail and Terran will transition into 4M which was what they were playing before.
The patch addresses a timing, not the other 75% of the mid and late game. Terrans will stop making hellbats after that initial push fails or win right there. If they want to help Terran they should revert the WM nerf, because that is what the other 90% of the game is played on. By fixing the WM they will fix a bigger picture of the game. Who says that a Zerg having to micro against WM shots is a bad thing. As it is now they usually just make so many lings and LOL as they move onto a Terran army ignoring the WM shots.
Another thing I don't like with including Hellbats in the push is that it just replaces the Hellion in that push (though it's possible that stuff like 8-10 hellion openings might be standard instead of 6 hellions). The problem with that is that the Hellion can actually be microed during the battle, while the Hellbat is just a big a-move unit. So basically this specific change (compared to making it a 50/50 upgrade) is bad for two reasons;
1) Creates a potential early game balance issue, which could snowball and suddenly make the matchup terran favored (instead of simply making a few lowrisk tweaks which buffs terran in the midgame)
2) Replaces a microable unit with a nonmicroable unit.
The Hellbat is an a-click unit but you would have to split them against banes or they would all die inefficiently. You can't really hit & run with Hellions while simultaneously splitting Marines either so the micro would be about the same in the end.
wow what an amazing buff this will sertainly make 8 min armory into 10min 6 hellion runby worth beind ages behind in eco i am waiting to start playing terran as protoss with mech.. oh wait im not playing this game
how came every terran change makes tvt more coinflippy cant wait to see 4 hellion drop in my main while 6 hellions runby to natural and turn into hellbats.. oh right i quit the game ez life
On May 03 2014 21:08 protosskappa wrote: wow what an amazing buff this will sertainly make 8 min armory into 10min 6 hellion runby worth beind ages behind in eco i am waiting to start playing terran as protoss with mech.. oh wait im not playing this game
how came every terran change makes tvt more coinflippy cant wait to see 4 hellion drop in my main while 6 hellions runby to natural and turn into hellbats.. oh right i quit the game ez life
So. What exactly are you whining about?
There's a buff, but you dont play the game, but it might possibly have an impossible to predict effect on TvT, but you dont play the game. But there's tactics that might kill you even without hellbat transformation, but right you quit the game.
YOu quit the game already. What the fuck are you complaining about?
Learn to play, actually play, at least don't come into a thread with some random blablabla because you feel like it. If you've got nothing interesting to say, just be silent. Please. >seriously resisting putting a kappaface picture here<
On May 03 2014 21:08 protosskappa wrote: wow what an amazing buff this will sertainly make 8 min armory into 10min 6 hellion runby worth beind ages behind in eco i am waiting to start playing terran as protoss with mech.. oh wait im not playing this game
how came every terran change makes tvt more coinflippy cant wait to see 4 hellion drop in my main while 6 hellions runby to natural and turn into hellbats.. oh right i quit the game ez life
So. What exactly are you whining about?
There's a buff, but you dont play the game, but it might possibly have an impossible to predict effect on TvT, but you dont play the game. But there's tactics that might kill you even without hellbat transformation, but right you quit the game.
YOu quit the game already. What the fuck are you complaining about?
Learn to play, actually play, at least don't come into a thread with some random blablabla because you feel like it. If you've got nothing interesting to say, just be silent. Please. >seriously resisting putting a kappaface picture here<
On May 03 2014 21:08 protosskappa wrote: wow what an amazing buff this will sertainly make 8 min armory into 10min 6 hellion runby worth beind ages behind in eco i am waiting to start playing terran as protoss with mech.. oh wait im not playing this game
how came every terran change makes tvt more coinflippy cant wait to see 4 hellion drop in my main while 6 hellions runby to natural and turn into hellbats.. oh right i quit the game ez life
So. What exactly are you whining about?
There's a buff, but you dont play the game, but it might possibly have an impossible to predict effect on TvT, but you dont play the game. But there's tactics that might kill you even without hellbat transformation, but right you quit the game.
YOu quit the game already. What the fuck are you complaining about?
Learn to play, actually play, at least don't come into a thread with some random blablabla because you feel like it. If you've got nothing interesting to say, just be silent. Please. >seriously resisting putting a kappaface picture here<
He probably likes to watch sc2
His attitude and nickname make me think that's not true...
On May 03 2014 21:08 protosskappa wrote: wow what an amazing buff this will sertainly make 8 min armory into 10min 6 hellion runby worth beind ages behind in eco i am waiting to start playing terran as protoss with mech.. oh wait im not playing this game
how came every terran change makes tvt more coinflippy cant wait to see 4 hellion drop in my main while 6 hellions runby to natural and turn into hellbats.. oh right i quit the game ez life
So. What exactly are you whining about?
There's a buff, but you dont play the game, but it might possibly have an impossible to predict effect on TvT, but you dont play the game. But there's tactics that might kill you even without hellbat transformation, but right you quit the game.
YOu quit the game already. What the fuck are you complaining about?
Learn to play, actually play, at least don't come into a thread with some random blablabla because you feel like it. If you've got nothing interesting to say, just be silent. Please. >seriously resisting putting a kappaface picture here<
He probably likes to watch sc2
His attitude and nickname make me think that's not true...
I think it's a safe bet to say he's not a PvP fan.
On May 03 2014 22:27 protosskappa wrote: im actually better at the game than u 2 combined together but i will be back when something good will happen w terran
For who was wondering; I ment that attitude. PS doubt it.
Hellbats need to be reverted to release but with some restrictions to avoid drop abuse. Honestly I do not mind the drops, however their potential to do massive amounts of damage was stupid. Maybe we can lower their damage, increase their fire rate (keeping dps the same), and make them benefit from both infantry and mech upgrades, whichever is higher.
On May 03 2014 23:53 shadymmj wrote: Hellbats need to be reverted to release but with some restrictions to avoid drop abuse. Honestly I do not mind the drops, however their potential to do massive amounts of damage was stupid. Maybe we can lower their damage, increase their fire rate (keeping dps the same), and make them benefit from both infantry and mech upgrades, whichever is higher.
Always have to worry about changes like that, for example lowering damage but increasing fire rate would have other effects such as making BF Hellbats no longer oneshots lings.
Not necessarily a bad thing, but possibly unintended consequence.
I am still little concerned about the mutas problem, but maybe after this patch Zs will have to play more defensively so their macro won't be that good to support so many of them.
Still, what about giving turrets an upgrade that will add them splash or better attack. This upgrade could be researched within Turret itself.
So in a late game, when Z has 20+ mutas, T can defend with several upgraded Turrets.
I'm more in favour of toning mutas down than buffing static defences a lot, as the latter will see yet more turtling potentially, but the former will still reward players who are diligent in looking after their flock.
Personally I haven't really liked super mutas since release, in terms of them having both the move speed by default. The speed of them lets them get around defences and can help with map control and defence, but to me the regen just doesn't see carelessness punished as much as it should be IMO.
Anyway, I'd like to see other issues explored, but for now see if TvP stabilisation is a trend that's going to continue and what is figures out with tweaked hellions for a bit before further changes.
On May 04 2014 18:55 Wombat_NI wrote: I'm more in favour of toning mutas down than buffing static defences a lot, as the latter will see yet more turtling potentially, but the former will still reward players who are diligent in looking after their flock.
Personally I haven't really liked super mutas since release, in terms of them having both the move speed by default. The speed of them lets them get around defences and can help with map control and defence, but to me the regen just doesn't see carelessness punished as much as it should be IMO.
Anyway, I'd like to see other issues explored, but for now see if TvP stabilisation is a trend that's going to continue and what is figures out with tweaked hellions for a bit before further changes.
Yup. Let's talk about Protoss shields on harassment units. Same principle, just stronger mechanic.
On May 04 2014 18:55 Wombat_NI wrote: I'm more in favour of toning mutas down than buffing static defences a lot, as the latter will see yet more turtling potentially, but the former will still reward players who are diligent in looking after their flock.
Personally I haven't really liked super mutas since release, in terms of them having both the move speed by default. The speed of them lets them get around defences and can help with map control and defence, but to me the regen just doesn't see carelessness punished as much as it should be IMO.
Anyway, I'd like to see other issues explored, but for now see if TvP stabilisation is a trend that's going to continue and what is figures out with tweaked hellions for a bit before further changes.
Yup. Let's talk about Protoss shields on harassment units. Same principle, just stronger mechanic.
Protoss Harassment units usually have more health than shields; can usually not escape marines (the Oracle being the poor exception here) and most of all, the strenght of a flock of mutalisk in both offense and defense with that massive speed is uncomparable to what P/T can do.
In theory, you should never lose a mutalisk, ever. Their speed + regen just makes them so hard to kill, which allows them to snowball easilly.
On May 04 2014 18:55 Wombat_NI wrote: I'm more in favour of toning mutas down than buffing static defences a lot, as the latter will see yet more turtling potentially, but the former will still reward players who are diligent in looking after their flock.
Personally I haven't really liked super mutas since release, in terms of them having both the move speed by default. The speed of them lets them get around defences and can help with map control and defence, but to me the regen just doesn't see carelessness punished as much as it should be IMO.
Anyway, I'd like to see other issues explored, but for now see if TvP stabilisation is a trend that's going to continue and what is figures out with tweaked hellions for a bit before further changes.
Yup. Let's talk about Protoss shields on harassment units. Same principle, just stronger mechanic.
Protoss Harassment units usually have more health than shields; can usually not escape marines (the Oracle being the poor exception here) and most of all, the strenght of a flock of mutalisk in both offense and defense with that massive speed is uncomparable to what P/T can do.
In theory, you should never lose a mutalisk, ever. Their speed + regen just makes them so hard to kill, which allows them to snowball easilly.
Mising range.. in theory a mutaliak should never get away. Also Im just against the fundamental argumentation of his...
On May 02 2014 03:42 Vasoline73 wrote: I don't understand why people think hellions turning into hellbats is particularly cool.
I don't have a major problem with it but it's surprising to see so many approval votes for it... just seems... a little weird to be perfectly honest (the concept in general.)
Still think tier 3 moving sieged tanks is the answer. I'm sticking to this one lol.
Moving Siege Tanks goes straight against what we should get. It makes them like Collosi.
Kind of why I think PvT is "bad" (rather: difficult for teran) matchup . My advice is in jest, mostly poking fun at Blizzard's refusal to really do anything cool with the tank .
I do hope that they take a look at the siege tank... hellbats are just... like... not that exciting (do like hellions though.)
Oh well, what can ya do but watch PL and enjoy what you have. Blizz will be Blizz.
On May 04 2014 18:55 Wombat_NI wrote: I'm more in favour of toning mutas down than buffing static defences a lot, as the latter will see yet more turtling potentially, but the former will still reward players who are diligent in looking after their flock.
Personally I haven't really liked super mutas since release, in terms of them having both the move speed by default. The speed of them lets them get around defences and can help with map control and defence, but to me the regen just doesn't see carelessness punished as much as it should be IMO.
Anyway, I'd like to see other issues explored, but for now see if TvP stabilisation is a trend that's going to continue and what is figures out with tweaked hellions for a bit before further changes.
Yup. Let's talk about Protoss shields on harassment units. Same principle, just stronger mechanic.
Phoenixes don't snowball nearly as much, or regen nearly as quickly either, but yeah similar in that they do regen. I've always liked Phoenixes, a finesse unit that for the most point you don't build 20 of and require a degree of babysitting.
On May 04 2014 18:55 Wombat_NI wrote: I'm more in favour of toning mutas down than buffing static defences a lot, as the latter will see yet more turtling potentially, but the former will still reward players who are diligent in looking after their flock.
Personally I haven't really liked super mutas since release, in terms of them having both the move speed by default. The speed of them lets them get around defences and can help with map control and defence, but to me the regen just doesn't see carelessness punished as much as it should be IMO.
Anyway, I'd like to see other issues explored, but for now see if TvP stabilisation is a trend that's going to continue and what is figures out with tweaked hellions for a bit before further changes.
Yup. Let's talk about Protoss shields on harassment units. Same principle, just stronger mechanic.
Phoenixes don't snowball nearly as much, or regen nearly as quickly either, but yeah similar in that they do regen. I've always liked Phoenixes, a finesse unit that for the most point you don't build 20 of and require a degree of babysitting.
That's great, isn't it! Those are the units we need more of, Phoenix, expensive yet efficient DTs, Oracles should be that kind of unit, expensive but strong in harrassment Mutalisk, Banshees (which are so underwhelming it isn't even funny), Medivac Drops, etcetera!
On May 04 2014 22:29 Frex wrote: I feel that they might as well remove Durable Materials upgrade from raven and just grant it to them automatically.
They could also rething Neosteel Frames upgrade
You can't simply give every unit all its upgrades for free.
It removes diversity from the game and makes timings more powerful without actually putting effort in.
IMO small changes like this are a step in the right direction and while it is removing an upgrade, its an upgrade whose initial implementation was always very very contentious.
On May 04 2014 22:29 Frex wrote: I feel that they might as well remove Durable Materials upgrade from raven and just grant it to them automatically.
They could also rething Neosteel Frames upgrade
You can't simply give every unit all its upgrades for free.
It removes diversity from the game and makes timings more powerful without actually putting effort in.
IMO small changes like this are a step in the right direction and while it is removing an upgrade, its an upgrade whose initial implementation was always very very contentious.
I don´t know if you are familiar with Durable Materials, but all it does is increase the duration of Auto-Turret and PDD from 3 minutes to 4 minutes.
I was also suggesting to redesign Neosteel Frames upgrade, which I have not seen in use in any game during HotS. Having new upgrades would actually add diversity. They could also do something Caduceus Reactor upgrade (another upgarde which I have never seen upgraded in a live game), they did play around with it in beta, but just left as it was in WoL.
On May 04 2014 22:29 Frex wrote: I feel that they might as well remove Durable Materials upgrade from raven and just grant it to them automatically.
They could also rething Neosteel Frames upgrade
You can't simply give every unit all its upgrades for free.
It removes diversity from the game and makes timings more powerful without actually putting effort in.
IMO small changes like this are a step in the right direction and while it is removing an upgrade, its an upgrade whose initial implementation was always very very contentious.
I don´t know if you are familiar with Durable Materials, but all it does is increase the duration of Auto-Turret and PDD from 3 minutes to 4 minutes.
I was also suggesting to redesign Neosteel Frames upgrade, which I have not seen in use in any game during HotS. Having new upgrades would actually add diversity. They could also do something Caduceus Reactor upgrade (another upgarde which I have never seen upgraded in a live game), they did play around with it in beta, but just left as it was in WoL.
Regarding Caduceus Reactor: some people have started it to fake Cloak research.
On May 04 2014 22:29 Frex wrote: I feel that they might as well remove Durable Materials upgrade from raven and just grant it to them automatically.
They could also rething Neosteel Frames upgrade
You can't simply give every unit all its upgrades for free.
It removes diversity from the game and makes timings more powerful without actually putting effort in.
IMO small changes like this are a step in the right direction and while it is removing an upgrade, its an upgrade whose initial implementation was always very very contentious.
I don´t know if you are familiar with Durable Materials, but all it does is increase the duration of Auto-Turret and PDD from 3 minutes to 4 minutes.
I was also suggesting to redesign Neosteel Frames upgrade, which I have not seen in use in any game during HotS. Having new upgrades would actually add diversity. They could also do something Caduceus Reactor upgrade (another upgarde which I have never seen upgraded in a live game), they did play around with it in beta, but just left as it was in WoL.
Regarding Caduceus Reactor: some people have started it to fake Cloak research.
Do you actually play the game? It's better to just fake with the actual cloak upgrade itself as the cost is lower
On May 04 2014 22:29 Frex wrote: I feel that they might as well remove Durable Materials upgrade from raven and just grant it to them automatically.
They could also rething Neosteel Frames upgrade
You can't simply give every unit all its upgrades for free.
It removes diversity from the game and makes timings more powerful without actually putting effort in.
IMO small changes like this are a step in the right direction and while it is removing an upgrade, its an upgrade whose initial implementation was always very very contentious.
I don´t know if you are familiar with Durable Materials, but all it does is increase the duration of Auto-Turret and PDD from 3 minutes to 4 minutes.
I was also suggesting to redesign Neosteel Frames upgrade, which I have not seen in use in any game during HotS. Having new upgrades would actually add diversity. They could also do something Caduceus Reactor upgrade (another upgarde which I have never seen upgraded in a live game), they did play around with it in beta, but just left as it was in WoL.
Regarding Caduceus Reactor: some people have started it to fake Cloak research.
HotS even killed this only use; now you can fake Cloak with Cloak. (:
On May 04 2014 22:29 Frex wrote: I feel that they might as well remove Durable Materials upgrade from raven and just grant it to them automatically.
They could also rething Neosteel Frames upgrade
You can't simply give every unit all its upgrades for free.
It removes diversity from the game and makes timings more powerful without actually putting effort in.
IMO small changes like this are a step in the right direction and while it is removing an upgrade, its an upgrade whose initial implementation was always very very contentious.
I don´t know if you are familiar with Durable Materials, but all it does is increase the duration of Auto-Turret and PDD from 3 minutes to 4 minutes.
I was also suggesting to redesign Neosteel Frames upgrade, which I have not seen in use in any game during HotS. Having new upgrades would actually add diversity. They could also do something Caduceus Reactor upgrade (another upgarde which I have never seen upgraded in a live game), they did play around with it in beta, but just left as it was in WoL.
Regarding Caduceus Reactor: some people have started it to fake Cloak research.
HotS even killed this only use; now you can fake Cloak with Cloak. (:
The energy boost ups would be a lot more meaningful if it upped the max energy or regen rate.
On May 04 2014 22:29 Frex wrote: I feel that they might as well remove Durable Materials upgrade from raven and just grant it to them automatically.
They could also rething Neosteel Frames upgrade
You can't simply give every unit all its upgrades for free.
It removes diversity from the game and makes timings more powerful without actually putting effort in.
IMO small changes like this are a step in the right direction and while it is removing an upgrade, its an upgrade whose initial implementation was always very very contentious.
I don´t know if you are familiar with Durable Materials, but all it does is increase the duration of Auto-Turret and PDD from 3 minutes to 4 minutes.
I was also suggesting to redesign Neosteel Frames upgrade, which I have not seen in use in any game during HotS. Having new upgrades would actually add diversity. They could also do something Caduceus Reactor upgrade (another upgarde which I have never seen upgraded in a live game), they did play around with it in beta, but just left as it was in WoL.
Oh thats right sorry
Also yeah a redesign could work but what would it benefit really?
IDK i still think this is the wrong way to look at things is upgrades necessarily.
On May 04 2014 22:29 Frex wrote: I feel that they might as well remove Durable Materials upgrade from raven and just grant it to them automatically.
They could also rething Neosteel Frames upgrade
You can't simply give every unit all its upgrades for free.
It removes diversity from the game and makes timings more powerful without actually putting effort in.
IMO small changes like this are a step in the right direction and while it is removing an upgrade, its an upgrade whose initial implementation was always very very contentious.
I don´t know if you are familiar with Durable Materials, but all it does is increase the duration of Auto-Turret and PDD from 3 minutes to 4 minutes.
I was also suggesting to redesign Neosteel Frames upgrade, which I have not seen in use in any game during HotS. Having new upgrades would actually add diversity. They could also do something Caduceus Reactor upgrade (another upgarde which I have never seen upgraded in a live game), they did play around with it in beta, but just left as it was in WoL.
Oh thats right sorry
Also yeah a redesign could work but what would it benefit really?
IDK i still think this is the wrong way to look at things is upgrades necessarily.
I thought it also extended the range of seeker missles??
EDIT: Holy crap it doesn't. I've always been getting it for that purpose, lol...
On May 04 2014 22:29 Frex wrote: I feel that they might as well remove Durable Materials upgrade from raven and just grant it to them automatically.
They could also rething Neosteel Frames upgrade
You can't simply give every unit all its upgrades for free.
It removes diversity from the game and makes timings more powerful without actually putting effort in.
IMO small changes like this are a step in the right direction and while it is removing an upgrade, its an upgrade whose initial implementation was always very very contentious.
I don´t know if you are familiar with Durable Materials, but all it does is increase the duration of Auto-Turret and PDD from 3 minutes to 4 minutes.
I was also suggesting to redesign Neosteel Frames upgrade, which I have not seen in use in any game during HotS. Having new upgrades would actually add diversity. They could also do something Caduceus Reactor upgrade (another upgarde which I have never seen upgraded in a live game), they did play around with it in beta, but just left as it was in WoL.
Oh thats right sorry
Also yeah a redesign could work but what would it benefit really?
IDK i still think this is the wrong way to look at things is upgrades necessarily.
I thought it also extended the range of seeker missles??
EDIT: Holy crap it doesn't. I've always been getting it for that purpose, lol...
It used to increase the previous Missile tracking time from 10 to 15s.
actually i like none of these changes... hellbats/hellion transition doesnt help any in TvP. upgrade cost reduction doesnt help either... they should rather go on by fixing some protoss units...
On May 04 2014 22:48 Loccstana wrote: When are we going to get the siege tank buff to make mech viable?
Needs +15 dmg to shields (unless armored).
I propose a flat out buff to like 45 (60 armored) or even 60 flat with a slower attack speed.
And more splash. I want siege tanks to be scary again, not something you just attack head on with a pack of lings.
ya i agree siege tanks are way to bad against Z and P! blink stalkers and lings raping siege tanks... not a word about those "new" mutas... god do i hate them...
On May 05 2014 18:16 KOtical wrote: actually i like none of these changes... hellbats/hellion transition doesnt help any in TvP. upgrade cost reduction doesnt help either... they should rather go on by fixing some protoss units...
Only if mines are removed. You cannot have your cake and eat it too.
On May 05 2014 18:44 TT1 wrote: PvT "However, we do believe the matchup is still slightly in favor of Protoss" -__________________-
so clueless
Disciple of Rain spotted.
hahaha, its true tho. protoss is forced to open 1 way now due to the mine/ghost buffs (blink + collo) and that makes us extremely predictable. its a low econ style so all that terran has to do is scv pull at 13-14mins and were dead, watch illusion vs jyp on overgrowth for reference
On May 05 2014 18:44 TT1 wrote: PvT "However, we do believe the matchup is still slightly in favor of Protoss" -__________________-
so clueless
Disciple of Rain spotted.
hahaha, its true tho. protoss is forced to open 1 way now due to the mine/ghost buffs (blink + collo) and that makes us extremely predictable. its a low econ style so all that terran has to do is scv pull at 13-14mins and were dead, watch illusion vs jyp on overgrowth for reference
What really prevent you to open oracle, blink, or dts ? There is only one opening if you want to play greedy, but terran has only one viablle opening for months now.
On May 04 2014 22:29 Frex wrote: I feel that they might as well remove Durable Materials upgrade from raven and just grant it to them automatically.
They could also rething Neosteel Frames upgrade
You can't simply give every unit all its upgrades for free.
It removes diversity from the game and makes timings more powerful without actually putting effort in.
IMO small changes like this are a step in the right direction and while it is removing an upgrade, its an upgrade whose initial implementation was always very very contentious.
I don´t know if you are familiar with Durable Materials, but all it does is increase the duration of Auto-Turret and PDD from 3 minutes to 4 minutes.
I was also suggesting to redesign Neosteel Frames upgrade, which I have not seen in use in any game during HotS. Having new upgrades would actually add diversity. They could also do something Caduceus Reactor upgrade (another upgarde which I have never seen upgraded in a live game), they did play around with it in beta, but just left as it was in WoL.
Regarding Caduceus Reactor: some people have started it to fake Cloak research.
HotS even killed this only use; now you can fake Cloak with Cloak. (:
The energy boost ups would be a lot more meaningful if it upped the max energy or regen rate.
Blizzard did try adding an increased regen rate to the upgrade back in the HotS beta, but it turned out to be too powerful in conjunctiom with medivac boost so they reverted it back to the more boring version.
On May 05 2014 18:44 TT1 wrote: PvT "However, we do believe the matchup is still slightly in favor of Protoss" -__________________-
so clueless
Disciple of Rain spotted.
hahaha, its true tho. protoss is forced to open 1 way now due to the mine/ghost buffs (blink + collo) and that makes us extremely predictable. its a low econ style so all that terran has to do is scv pull at 13-14mins and were dead, watch illusion vs jyp on overgrowth for reference
What really prevent you to open oracle, blink, or dts ? There is only one opening if you want to play greedy, but terran has only one viablle opening for months now.
i shoulda phrased that differently, i meant early-midd game comps. you can open with blink/oracles but you have to go into blink collo from there because chargelot/ht isnt viable anymore vs bio mine
On May 06 2014 05:27 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: I'd personally like more changes in the "buff tank, nerf mine" department. Although I do like the hellbat change as well.
Why the fuck does the Mine gotta be nerfed for the Tank to be buffed? I didn't understand it when Blizzard thought it up, I don't understand it now that you're bringing it up months later. The best possible result is that people will stop using Mines and start using Tanks instead. You know what else gets that result? Just buffing Tanks without nerfing anything!!! Their strengths and weaknesses overlap.
Bio tank will be a hundred times scarier with a buffed Siege Tank than tank/mine.
On May 05 2014 18:44 TT1 wrote: PvT "However, we do believe the matchup is still slightly in favor of Protoss" -__________________-
so clueless
Disciple of Rain spotted.
hahaha, its true tho. protoss is forced to open 1 way now due to the mine/ghost buffs (blink + collo) and that makes us extremely predictable. its a low econ style so all that terran has to do is scv pull at 13-14mins and were dead, watch illusion vs jyp on overgrowth for reference
What really prevent you to open oracle, blink, or dts ? There is only one opening if you want to play greedy, but terran has only one viablle opening for months now.
i shoulda phrased that differently, i meant early-midd game comps. you can open with blink/oracles but you have to go into blink collo from there because chargelot/ht isnt viable anymore vs bio mine
and what about terran? not much option there either. We still see protoss still mix in phoenix with their compositions as well. Bottom line is that both in openings and compositionwise protoss have many more options than terran.
I think Protoss can still hold strong in macro games by accelerating chargelot archon transitions against scv pulls. Mixing in the usual full on colossi style and things like two colossi with range into charge + archons/storm or one colossus with no range into very fast templar (that can adapt in more standard colossus play in case of heavy mine play) could help us get less predictable and keep the Terran guessing because the scv pull timing that'll be hard to deal with differs with every of those styles.
Then again, I'm nowhere near TT1 level. Just a noob's point of view.
On May 05 2014 18:44 TT1 wrote: PvT "However, we do believe the matchup is still slightly in favor of Protoss" -__________________-
so clueless
Disciple of Rain spotted.
hahaha, its true tho. protoss is forced to open 1 way now due to the mine/ghost buffs (blink + collo) and that makes us extremely predictable. its a low econ style so all that terran has to do is scv pull at 13-14mins and were dead, watch illusion vs jyp on overgrowth for reference
What really prevent you to open oracle, blink, or dts ? There is only one opening if you want to play greedy, but terran has only one viablle opening for months now.
i shoulda phrased that differently, i meant early-midd game comps. you can open with blink/oracles but you have to go into blink collo from there because chargelot/ht isnt viable anymore vs bio mine
So when protoss can't exactly a move 2/2 charglot/archon timings vs properly placed widow mines, and bio it means it's not viable? I still see plenty of good Korean Protoss playing that style, only difference now is that they have to flank and spread out with their zealots and keep a few observers around instead, they still have no issue transitioning into storm and playing a macro game from there, later on adding additional tech. Protoss actually have to have additional micro now vs widow mine comp....
It's a lot harder for the Terran early and mid game, Protoss still have dozens of different options and openings, Terran still has to play 2 base and open Reaper Fe every single game.
On May 05 2014 18:44 TT1 wrote: PvT "However, we do believe the matchup is still slightly in favor of Protoss" -__________________-
so clueless
Disciple of Rain spotted.
hahaha, its true tho. protoss is forced to open 1 way now due to the mine/ghost buffs (blink + collo) and that makes us extremely predictable. its a low econ style so all that terran has to do is scv pull at 13-14mins and were dead, watch illusion vs jyp on overgrowth for reference
What really prevent you to open oracle, blink, or dts ? There is only one opening if you want to play greedy, but terran has only one viablle opening for months now.
i shoulda phrased that differently, i meant early-midd game comps. you can open with blink/oracles but you have to go into blink collo from there because chargelot/ht isnt viable anymore vs bio mine
Well, yes. The mine buff was intended to remove the double forge-HT fast-teching option, and it seems to have mostly succeeded (some trickery is needed to make it work now). But that doesn't mean that Protoss is weak against terran, not by a long shot.
On May 05 2014 18:44 TT1 wrote: PvT "However, we do believe the matchup is still slightly in favor of Protoss" -__________________-
so clueless
Disciple of Rain spotted.
hahaha, its true tho. protoss is forced to open 1 way now due to the mine/ghost buffs (blink + collo) and that makes us extremely predictable. its a low econ style so all that terran has to do is scv pull at 13-14mins and were dead, watch illusion vs jyp on overgrowth for reference
What really prevent you to open oracle, blink, or dts ? There is only one opening if you want to play greedy, but terran has only one viablle opening for months now.
i shoulda phrased that differently, i meant early-midd game comps. you can open with blink/oracles but you have to go into blink collo from there because chargelot/ht isnt viable anymore vs bio mine
Well, yes. The mine buff was intended to remove the double forge-HT fast-teching option, and it seems to have mostly succeeded (some trickery is needed to make it work now). But that doesn't mean that Protoss is weak against terran, not by a long shot.
Well I'd rather have both colo & fast HT openings/compostions/styles viable. In my understanding mine buff was meant to help dealing with mass chargelots and theirs fast warp-in reinforcements than outright killing chargelot/ht comp. Maybe chargelot/ht is still possible to play with proper positioning etc. however I must say that since mine buff I hardly remember any P doing it. We have to wait and see.
On May 05 2014 18:44 TT1 wrote: PvT "However, we do believe the matchup is still slightly in favor of Protoss" -__________________-
so clueless
Disciple of Rain spotted.
hahaha, its true tho. protoss is forced to open 1 way now due to the mine/ghost buffs (blink + collo) and that makes us extremely predictable. its a low econ style so all that terran has to do is scv pull at 13-14mins and were dead, watch illusion vs jyp on overgrowth for reference
What really prevent you to open oracle, blink, or dts ? There is only one opening if you want to play greedy, but terran has only one viablle opening for months now.
i shoulda phrased that differently, i meant early-midd game comps. you can open with blink/oracles but you have to go into blink collo from there because chargelot/ht isnt viable anymore vs bio mine
Well, yes. The mine buff was intended to remove the double forge-HT fast-teching option, and it seems to have mostly succeeded (some trickery is needed to make it work now). But that doesn't mean that Protoss is weak against terran, not by a long shot.
Well I'd rather have both colo & fast HT openings/compostions/styles viable. In my understanding mine buff was meant to help dealing with mass chargelots and theirs fast warp-in reinforcements than outright killing chargelot/ht comp. Maybe chargelot/ht is still possible to play with proper positioning etc. however I must say that since mine buff I hardly remember any P doing it. We have to wait and see.
The comp isn't dead, MC just killed TY with it (colossus was the stepping stone, and colossus was also added at the very end when the game was already over, but the killing blow was chargelot,archon,HT). It's only a different transition now.
I really like this idea , because the nice thing about hellbat when they annouced it was this hybrid status of the unit, fast and weak as an hellion and slow but strong as a Hellbat. But the transformation actually almost never occured since the released of HoTS so it a step in the right direction in my opinion.
Nevertheless, as much as I like it design wise... I guess it will be too strong as a buff for TvZ (even if I agree that a buff is needed).
Not sure about PvT, maybe there will be some new hellion opening, but I don't think it would be that problematic. As for TvT, isn't it a BIG buff for mech, as these kind of playstyle usually start with a lot of Hellions?
On May 07 2014 00:49 Vanadiel wrote: I really like this idea , because the nice thing about hellbat when they annouced it was this hybrid status of the unit, fast and weak as an hellion and slow but strong as a Hellbat. But the transformation actually almost never occured since the released of HoTS so it a step in the right direction in my opinion.
Nevertheless, as much as I like it design wise... I guess it will be too strong as a buff for TvZ (even if I agree that a buff is needed).
Not sure about PvT, maybe there will be some new hellion opening, but I don't think it would be that problematic. As for TvT, isn't it a BIG buff for mech, as these kind of playstyle usually start with a lot of Hellions?
I only see it strong for some cheesy two base all-in play TvT. But, as a mech player myself, most meching Terran's want helions and not Hellbats (until late game); it is too easy for a double medicvac drop to kite all your Hellbats to death.
On May 05 2014 18:44 TT1 wrote: PvT "However, we do believe the matchup is still slightly in favor of Protoss" -__________________-
so clueless
Disciple of Rain spotted.
hahaha, its true tho. protoss is forced to open 1 way now due to the mine/ghost buffs (blink + collo) and that makes us extremely predictable. its a low econ style so all that terran has to do is scv pull at 13-14mins and were dead, watch illusion vs jyp on overgrowth for reference
What really prevent you to open oracle, blink, or dts ? There is only one opening if you want to play greedy, but terran has only one viablle opening for months now.
i shoulda phrased that differently, i meant early-midd game comps. you can open with blink/oracles but you have to go into blink collo from there because chargelot/ht isnt viable anymore vs bio mine
I think this remains to be seen since I've seen Protoss players opening HT still at the highest levels, but if this is true then it's a serious flaw in the way Blizzard addressed the TvP problems. Terran doesn't exactly have more options now than they did before, and if all they've done to 'balance' TvP is reduce Protoss options, it's going to create a very stale metagame. There should be a balance between reducing Protoss options (without removing them completely) and increasing Terran ones.
On May 05 2014 18:44 TT1 wrote: PvT "However, we do believe the matchup is still slightly in favor of Protoss" -__________________-
so clueless
Disciple of Rain spotted.
hahaha, its true tho. protoss is forced to open 1 way now due to the mine/ghost buffs (blink + collo) and that makes us extremely predictable. its a low econ style so all that terran has to do is scv pull at 13-14mins and were dead, watch illusion vs jyp on overgrowth for reference
What really prevent you to open oracle, blink, or dts ? There is only one opening if you want to play greedy, but terran has only one viablle opening for months now.
i shoulda phrased that differently, i meant early-midd game comps. you can open with blink/oracles but you have to go into blink collo from there because chargelot/ht isnt viable anymore vs bio mine
Well, yes. The mine buff was intended to remove the double forge-HT fast-teching option, and it seems to have mostly succeeded (some trickery is needed to make it work now). But that doesn't mean that Protoss is weak against terran, not by a long shot.
Well I'd rather have both colo & fast HT openings/compostions/styles viable. In my understanding mine buff was meant to help dealing with mass chargelots and theirs fast warp-in reinforcements than outright killing chargelot/ht comp. Maybe chargelot/ht is still possible to play with proper positioning etc. however I must say that since mine buff I hardly remember any P doing it. We have to wait and see.
The comp isn't dead, MC just killed TY with it (colossus was the stepping stone, and colossus was also added at the very end when the game was already over, but the killing blow was chargelot,archon,HT). It's only a different transition now.
I'm not sure which game You're refering to. I only watched MC vs TY dreamhack games. First one was blink all-in, 2nd was immo bust into macro attempt only 3rd game had macro opening with stargate pheonix into double forge + colo where only after 3rd colossus MC added templar archive and proceeded to take 3rd base. When I was mentioning HT openings I was refering to quick robo for obs forge for +1 aromour and then twilight for charge/+2 armour and templar archives and in comparison to pre-patch times there this build rarely ever occurs. I haven't seen it for a while from sOs/herO/Rain however as I said maybe Protosses needs to adapt and adjust their play so we could see again HT openings.
Is the whole point of mech v Z in general just to defend until mass raven? That's what I gather from watching bbyong vs life, and countless useless mech vs Z games, where Terran simply has more than enough all game defending against SH.
I was just thinking, since we all hate how ubgrades just disappear, why dont we go with the buff n2 but make transformation servos stay in the game but actually change what they do. Make them cut down the time tanks need to siege from 4 to 3 seconds, it would be a decent buff for TvZ and also TvP.
In general in TvP I think the problem is that toss can do anything behind msc protection while terran is scouting the shit out of their reaper. The other viable option is reaper expo. Protoss has to many "all ins" that have to be prepared for with such investment from terran that protoss can on the fly change their mind and go macro totally fine. Theres way too many things that protoss can outright kill terran with early game while protoss is entirely safe. Thanks to msc.
In TvZ problems started when you guys nerfed wm at a tome where many top level zergs had innovation figured out and now zerg no longer has to try to triger mines, they can just a move right into them Mutas are currently also a huge problem, they eat turrets no problemo while theyre also amazing in fights thanks to their regen. You guys should consider buff to turrets bio tag. Turret without ebay should also be done since zerg got it for the same exact reason terran should.