"Thanks for everyone’s feedback on our recent update and suggested balance changes. After some consideration, we’d like to begin testing the following changes soon.
Widow Mine splash radius increase This will allow Terran to be stronger in the mid/late games in both matchups. We’ve also seen feedback that the Widow Mine splash radius increase doesn’t buff late game Terran, however we feel that this type of mid-game buff also carries over into a late game buff.
Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5.
Thor Attack priority changed to use AA weapon first Because Thors are mostly core against Zerg, and the AA weapon is the preferred weapon when using Thors, we’d like to try this change.
Time Warp duration decreased from 30 to 15 We’d like to try out this change for 3 reasons: Reduce the strength of various all-ins that combo with offensive Time Warps, reduce general Protoss main army strength, and hopefully increase micro opportunities against the spell.
Please remember these aren’t the final changes, but only the first batch of changes being tested in the next balance test map. Thanks again for the feedback and we look forward to hearing your thoughts on these new changes."
Overall decent changes, although I'd still prefer to see the Widow Mine reverted to its former state and then removing the +shield damage. I just wish they consider improving other units and abilities, rather than just slightly improving the few builds that already exist.
For those wondering, the new Widow Mine radius Blizzard is considering: Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
I wonder if thor priority will help (I'm Protoss so I don't know TvZ).
Lowering the time warp duration is interesting... I feel that most of the battle will already be over in 15 seconds (or, at least, the opponent will move out of the time warp during that time) so I feel like a decrease in the duration of photon overcharge would make more sense.
Noooooo... Why the fuck change my Thors to use their 8-16dps air attack over their 924819412785621784687dps ground attack? This is so fucked up. Are they even aware of their units stats at all???
On July 09 2014 02:18 Big J wrote: Noooooo... Why the fuck change my Thors to use their 8-16dps air attack over their 924819412785621784687dps ground attack? This is so fucked up. Are they even aware of their units stats at all???
Honestly it doesn't really matter all that much. If a Thor gets surrounded by lings and Mutas at the same time, you'll order them to attack the Mutas anyway. Whatever gets the priority is what you'll order them to attack. I do wonder if this would mean that Thors now prioritize Overlords/Overseers when you only give a general attack order.
On July 09 2014 02:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I wonder if thor priority will help (I'm Protoss so I don't know TvZ).
Lowering the time warp duration is interesting... I feel that most of the battle will already be over in 15 seconds (or, at least, the opponent will move out of the time warp during that time) so I feel like a decrease in the duration of photon overcharge would make more sense.
Can't really nerf photon overcharge without ruining PvP again
Time Warp duration decreased from 30 to 15 We’d like to try out this change for 3 reasons: Reduce the strength of various all-ins that combo with offensive Time Warps, reduce general Protoss main army strength, and hopefully increase micro opportunities against the spell.
I don't think this is a very effective TvP chnage. In fact, I think there are several better solutions;
- If Blizzard wants to nerf Timewarp, it's better to reduce the reduction in movement speed from 50% to 25%. The issue with the duration of Timewarp is mainly the initial effect where you do not give players any time to remicro/reposition their units. But they get instantly "stuck" in this area where they barely can move around.
- If blizzard wants to adress early game TvP, a Stim research time reduction to 140 seconds from 170 would be better. First of all, that would make it easier to deal with blink all ins and secondly it would add more aggressive options.
- If Blizzard wants to adress lategame TvP, I suggest a reduction in Ghost cost from 200/100 to 150/100 would be better.
Can't really nerf photon overcharge without ruining PvP again; should just make time warp not slow attack speed or something rather than a duration change.
On July 09 2014 02:18 Big J wrote: Noooooo... Why the fuck change my Thors to use their 8-16dps air attack over their 924819412785621784687dps ground attack? This is so fucked up. Are they even aware of their units stats at all???
On July 09 2014 02:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I wonder if thor priority will help (I'm Protoss so I don't know TvZ).
Lowering the time warp duration is interesting... I feel that most of the battle will already be over in 15 seconds (or, at least, the opponent will move out of the time warp during that time) so I feel like a decrease in the duration of photon overcharge would make more sense.
Can't really nerf photon overcharge without ruining PvP again; should just make time warp not slow attack speed or something rather than a duration change. That's what it's being used for in all ins anyways; just plop on top of grouped up units whether they're moving or not ~_~ pretty boring
Not defensively no, but offensively you could give the MSC a nerf. I'd propose slowing the MSC down to the old Overlord speed (around 0.88) and adding a MSC speed upgrade to the Cybernetics Core at 50/50/110. It would delay any straight up MSC attack on the mineral line by quite a bit and by putting the upgrade at the Cybernetics Core you cannot have Warp Gate and MSC Speed at the same time early on, weakening a Blink all-in. It wouldn't weaken any defensive play with the MSC as you can still park it between the main and the natural to cast Photon Overcharge.
Like the widow mine buff in TvZ, don't like it in TvP (already strong enough). Terran needs a stronger lategame army to transition to, not even more ability to pressure the protoss in the midgame and deny their third base even longer. That only leads to templar openings dying even more and SCV pulls.
Thor change would make army control easier I guess.
Time warp change... why? I'm not a big fan of the spell but this, once again, is going to influence mostly PvP and make it more coinflippy/unforgiving. Against it. Charge/archon/immortal relies on timewarp A LOT, with a huge nerf like this you can be sure that colossus will reign supreme again.
If only they'd start SERIOUSLY looking at tanks and why they're never used vZ and vP D:
For those wondering, the new Widow Mine radius Blizzard is considering: Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
This seems pretty big actually. Not unlikely, they will tone it down slightly before implementing it in the patch (which I am almost certain will occur).
It's going to make the unit annoying to use in TvT where it can serve a pretty important role of a Tank buster unit, this also makes the unit a huge liability to use vs Bio forces since they'll attack the Medivacs now by default.
It's simply replacing one kind of annoyance for another.
On July 09 2014 02:18 Big J wrote: Noooooo... Why the fuck change my Thors to use their 8-16dps air attack over their 924819412785621784687dps ground attack? This is so fucked up. Are they even aware of their units stats at all???
Honestly it doesn't really matter all that much. If a Thor gets surrounded by lings and Mutas at the same time, you'll order them to attack the Mutas anyway. Whatever gets the priority is what you'll order them to attack. I do wonder if this would mean that Thors now prioritize Overlords/Overseers when you only give a general attack order.
These attack priorities matter rarely at all. But it's retarted. Why would a unit use an attack that only does a fourth of another attacks damage. Also, though these scenarios are hardly common these days, back in the days you didn't want Thors to shoot broodlords over roaches/ultra/infestors... Now they will do so by themselves.
Also busting tanks when there is a viking around becomes suddenly more stupid for no reason.
For those wondering, the new Widow Mine radius Blizzard is considering: Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
This seems pretty big actually. Not unlikely, they will tone it down slightly before implementing it in the patch (which I am almost certain will occur).
It's most likely needed until Tanks become more viable than their current state. Their original intention was to encourage more usage of siege tanks in TvZ, but the first nerf on their radius never really changed the state of the matchup. Tanks are just too unwieldy in a MMMM composition.
On July 09 2014 02:27 Vindicare605 wrote: I'm not a huge fan of the Thor change.
It's going to make the unit annoying to use in TvT where it can serve a pretty important role of a Tank buster unit, this also makes the unit a huge liability to use vs Bio forces since they'll attack the Medivacs now by default.
It's simply replacing one kind of annoyance for another.
I am confused actually: Doesn't it attack banshee's before it attack tanks (?) At least it feels that way. I would just have gone with faster movement speed/0 damage point on the Thor in order to increase it's micro potenital while making it easier to deal with Mutalisk harass late game.
On July 09 2014 02:27 Vindicare605 wrote: I'm not a huge fan of the Thor change.
It's going to make the unit annoying to use in TvT where it can serve a pretty important role of a Tank buster unit, this also makes the unit a huge liability to use vs Bio forces since they'll attack the Medivacs now by default.
It's simply replacing one kind of annoyance for another.
I don't understand this change actually. Atm it does attack banshee's before it attack tanks (?) At least it feels that way.
They often attack lings/banes instead of mutas. It's probably a matter of what unit they see first.
On July 09 2014 02:27 Vindicare605 wrote: I'm not a huge fan of the Thor change.
It's going to make the unit annoying to use in TvT where it can serve a pretty important role of a Tank buster unit, this also makes the unit a huge liability to use vs Bio forces since they'll attack the Medivacs now by default.
It's simply replacing one kind of annoyance for another.
I am confused actually: Doesn't it attack banshee's before it attack tanks (?) At least it feels that way. I would just have gone with faster movement speed/0 damage point on the Thor in order to increase it's micro potenital while making it easier to deal with Mutalisk harass late game.
Yes, it does so anyways, because of the bigger antiair range. But now it will also attack banshees if it could attack a tank instead.
On July 09 2014 02:27 Vindicare605 wrote: I'm not a huge fan of the Thor change.
It's going to make the unit annoying to use in TvT where it can serve a pretty important role of a Tank buster unit, this also makes the unit a huge liability to use vs Bio forces since they'll attack the Medivacs now by default.
It's simply replacing one kind of annoyance for another.
I don't understand this change actually. Atm it does attack banshee's before it attack tanks (?) At least it feels that way.
It depends what enters range first. Its ground attack is preferred at the moment if two available targets are both in range.
The reason Thors will often default to their AA attack is because the range on the AA attack is much longer.
With this change the AA will be the default attack if two available targets one ground and one air are both in range at the same time. AKA Zerglings vs Mutalisks.
It's most likely needed until Tanks become more viable than their current state. Their original intention was to encourage more usage of siege tanks in TvZ, but the first nerf on their radius never really changed the state of the matchup. Tanks are just too unwieldy in a MMMM composition.
Given the track-record of Blizzard, they tend to advocate for larger changes in their test maps and then go for more moderate versions of the changes when implementing in. As this is really large AOE buff to Mines, I believe they are likely to tone it down when implementing it.
It depends what enters range first. Its ground attack is preferred at the moment if two available targets are both in range.
The reason Thors will often default to their AA attack is because the range on the AA attack is much longer.
With this change the AA will be the default attack if two available targets one ground and one air are both in range at the same time. AKA Zerglings vs Mutalisks.
Yeh I figured this. Probably not a good change as it will !@#$%^&* up the AI vs Medivacs. Not sure why they don't try out a movement speed around 2-2.25 instead. Alternatively, they could buff the splash damage of the Thor in a similar fashion as they plan to buff the Widow Mine (add a larger splash radius to the Thor but with a lower % damage so there still is a reward for magix boxing).
Glad they didnt go with the Medivac change. Bio play does not need to be promoted more.
The Mine splash is interesting. So they want to make it larger? Like from 1.75 (thats how it is now I think correct me here if Im wrong) to 2?
The Thor change is interesting too. But I think they should decrease the AA attackspeed too. Thors still do pretty bad vs mutas. But I had a game some weeks ago where my opponent attacked with Broodlords and Mutas. I had Vikings and Thors. Instead of shooting the mutas they were busy shooting broodlings -_- . The attack priority should help in this type of situation.
Time Warp seems interesting too. Didnt thought they were coming up with that. But like DarkPlasmaBall mentioned above. Most battles feel that they are over before 15 secs. We will see.Funny thing is most Protoss players that I face use it even on Units that arent moving (tanks) or when I put my units on hold. They must think it lowers attackspeed too.
On July 09 2014 02:27 Vindicare605 wrote: I'm not a huge fan of the Thor change.
It's going to make the unit annoying to use in TvT where it can serve a pretty important role of a Tank buster unit, this also makes the unit a huge liability to use vs Bio forces since they'll attack the Medivacs now by default.
It's simply replacing one kind of annoyance for another.
I don't understand this change actually. Atm it does attack banshee's before it attack tanks (?) At least it feels that way.
Actually it makes a pretty big difference. In a MMMM plus thor composition, you no longer need to focus fire the flock of mutas which frees up potential APM for other actions such as increasing survivability of your marines. In TvT u'd mostly need to focus Tanks with your thors anyway or target down banshees, since that particular Thor you're building is a banshee deterrent for when you have no air superiority.
+shields splash needs to be adjusted with such high radius splash. Widow mines are already pretty good in TvP and if the buff goes through they shouldn't just have TvZ in mind but think about TvP too (how many probes can a widow mine drop reasonably kill, how many zealots will a widow mine kill, etc).
I really like the Thor change, simply because in tvz, it reduces some of the micro required in fights, for which Terran at every level should be thankful for.
On July 09 2014 02:18 Big J wrote: Noooooo... Why the fuck change my Thors to use their 8-16dps air attack over their 924819412785621784687dps ground attack? This is so fucked up. Are they even aware of their units stats at all???
Honestly it doesn't really matter all that much. If a Thor gets surrounded by lings and Mutas at the same time, you'll order them to attack the Mutas anyway. Whatever gets the priority is what you'll order them to attack. I do wonder if this would mean that Thors now prioritize Overlords/Overseers when you only give a general attack order.
Thors already like to attack Overlords/Overseers. Now that someone mentioned: Didnt they changed the attack priority against Medivacs a long time ago? So that they attack the things they should attack?
On July 09 2014 02:18 Big J wrote: Noooooo... Why the fuck change my Thors to use their 8-16dps air attack over their 924819412785621784687dps ground attack? This is so fucked up. Are they even aware of their units stats at all???
Honestly it doesn't really matter all that much. If a Thor gets surrounded by lings and Mutas at the same time, you'll order them to attack the Mutas anyway. Whatever gets the priority is what you'll order them to attack. I do wonder if this would mean that Thors now prioritize Overlords/Overseers when you only give a general attack order.
Thors already like to attack Overlords/Overseers. Now that someone mentioned: Didnt they changed the attack priority against Medivacs a long time ago? So that they attack the things they should attack?
Yeah they did. Offensive units have higher attack priority. Casters like HTs and workers are usually ignored in presence of other 'assault' units provided they are in range.
On July 09 2014 02:38 Musicus wrote: Hm I wonder if that Thor change does anything.
It doesn't, not at the higher levels anyway.
It just means that Thors when being mixed with Bio forces will default to attacking mutalisks but it also means they'll default to attacking Overlords, Overseers, and Medivacs in TvT which aren't necessarily what you always want.
Like I said before, it's just replacing one kind of annoyance for another.
Can't they just make mutalisks high priority for Thors ? Otherwise Thors will again shoot overlords instead of roaches or medivacs instead of units (for instance).
I'm quite worried about the widow mine change. I'd have much preferred an increase of their general damage output vs Z (remove +shields and go for simple 125/80/40/20). That new widow mine would one shot probes in a radius of 2 and maybe put a nail in the coffin of templar openings (which some players still dare to use).
Time Warp change is the only thing I'm quite confident about, though I'd prefer to just see that spell gone. Seriously, Protoss don't need it in any situation other than twisted all-ins. Just build sentries.
On July 09 2014 02:38 Code wrote: Random/dumb question but will a Thor now target a Colossus if a Protoss army engages it? Wondering if that High Impact payload mode could be useful..?
I remember reading somewhere in past blizzard notes that the Thor will always consider the collossus as a ground target. Even if you switch to HIP, it still uses the dual cannons.
Everyone arguing about TW and Thors, but guys, the WM buff would be OP as fuck. Ok for full damage in 1,5 instead of 1,25, that would be the middle between pre and post nerf, but going this far as doing AoE in 2,5 is freaking huge. The WM will be wayyy more OP than before its nerf.
meh, i just wish the would nerf PO into the ground. like, give it a super short duration/range and higher energy cost. that alone could fix TvP and make it more exciting.
On July 09 2014 02:48 Paljas wrote: meh, i just wish the would nerf PO into the ground. like, give it a super short duration/range and higher energy cost. that alone could fix TvP and make it more exciting.
Reckon a range nerf is sufficient. 13 is just too huge for a defensive spell.
Time Warp change is beautiful. Thor change is fine but adding the mine buff will make the marine/medivac/mine/thor combo nigh impossible for a Zerg to defeat. Hopefully if they do buff the mine, it's teeny tiny. Pre nerf mines were absolutely and completely fucked up.
i really dislike the thor priority change, because it makes the game easier for terran and they are known to be a micro intensive race.
timewarp, i don't know about that either, maybe the san 4 gate against zerg will completely die off. i think it's way too much to cut half of the duration time. but we already know that blizzard loves to be extreme.
the third one just negates the last patch regarding widow mines doesn't it? i am not sure. but i like buffing the mines, maybe they should consider now getting rid of the extra damage for shield units. not sure how it will work out with that in place, we'll see i guess.
I don't mind this, it's not as good as changing the terran lategame, but it's not like I really expected them to make design decisions now so I'm not really disappointed.
On July 09 2014 02:47 Faust852 wrote: Everyone arguing about TW and Thors, but guys, the WM buff would be OP as fuck. Ok for full damage in 1,5 instead of 1,25, that would be the middle between pre and post nerf, but going this far as doing AoE in 2,5 is freaking huge. The WM will be wayyy more OP than before its nerf.
Banelings have pretty big splash too. Its 2.2 for such a cheap unit. And it does full damage in the WHOLE radius.
On July 09 2014 02:59 Ghanburighan wrote: I don't expect any noticeable change in balance after these changes. WM could have an impact but not enough banes get the full hit.
They need to reduce widow mine supply to one and also reduce the reload time
On July 09 2014 02:59 Ghanburighan wrote: I don't expect any noticeable change in balance after these changes. WM could have an impact but not enough banes get the full hit.
They need to reduce widow mine supply to one and also reduce the reload time
You would never be able to engage cuz there would be 30 mines everywhere. Its not meant to be a core unit, its a support unit.
As I said in another thread I am convinced that the best nerf for photon overcharge is to make it have a 10 second "power up" time before it activates. This would mean that someone who sees an attack coming in advance can activate overcharge and be safe whereas someone who only sees units when they are in their base has 10 seconds of free damage done against them - this rewards a protoss player who is on top of their scouting while someone who gets caught off guard is punished.
On July 09 2014 02:47 Faust852 wrote: Everyone arguing about TW and Thors, but guys, the WM buff would be OP as fuck. Ok for full damage in 1,5 instead of 1,25, that would be the middle between pre and post nerf, but going this far as doing AoE in 2,5 is freaking huge. The WM will be wayyy more OP than before its nerf.
Banelings have pretty big splash too. Its 2.2 for such a cheap unit. And it does full damage in the WHOLE radius.
I'm scared of the friendly fire WM splash coming my way.
On July 09 2014 02:38 Musicus wrote: Hm I wonder if that Thor change does anything.
It doesn't, not at the higher levels anyway.
It just means that Thors when being mixed with Bio forces will default to attacking mutalisks but it also means they'll default to attacking Overlords, Overseers, and Medivacs in TvT which aren't necessarily what you always want.
Like I said before, it's just replacing one kind of annoyance for another.
Not necessarily. Making overlords less priority overall should be an easy fix. Medivacs can have this priority to.
On July 09 2014 02:47 Faust852 wrote: Everyone arguing about TW and Thors, but guys, the WM buff would be OP as fuck. Ok for full damage in 1,5 instead of 1,25, that would be the middle between pre and post nerf, but going this far as doing AoE in 2,5 is freaking huge. The WM will be wayyy more OP than before its nerf.
Banelings have pretty big splash too. Its 2.2 for such a cheap unit. And it does full damage in the WHOLE radius.
I'm scared of the friendly fire WM splash coming my way.
Here's something I've been thinking about recently. What if they buffed tanks vs gateway units specifically? As in: make zealots and stalkers psionic units (sentries already are) and then for example introduce a tank upgrade at the tech lab that increases damage output against psionic units.
Not only could that help vs blink stalker all ins and allow some more breathing room back for map makers, it could also let terrans punish a failed blink all in. Contain-based strategies could make a return, early aggression with tanks might be viable (1-1-1 ?!). AND it would also help zone high templar in the lategame.
If tanks were overall more powerful vs protoss, that would give people a reason to invest in vehicle upgrades earlier -> earlier upgrades for vikings -> better ability to deal with lategame colossus/protoss air transitions -> etc.etc. Of course you'd have to play around with numbers and all to make sure it doesn't break things entirely.
Against zerg I see the problems mostly being their immobility and how easy it is to pick them apart with mutas.
Well, I guess, as a community, we need to stop imagining/theorycrafting and massively go and test this balance map whatever our level is, so we can base our opinion on actual data and give consistent feedback.
I'm just plat but I ll go anyway; hope I ll see you all there
On July 09 2014 03:07 DarkLordOlli wrote: Here's something I've been thinking about recently. What if they buffed tanks vs gateway units specifically? As in: make zealots and stalkers psionic units (sentries already are) and then for example introduce a tank upgrade at the tech lab that increases damage output against psionic units.
Not only could that help vs blink stalker all ins and allow some more breathing room back for map makers, it could also let terrans punish a failed blink all in. Contain-based strategies could make a return, early aggression with tanks might be viable (1-1-1 ?!). Of course you'd have to play around with numbers and all to make sure it doesn't break things entirely. AND it would also help zone high templar in the lategame.
But if tanks were overall more powerful vs protoss, that would give people a reason to invest in vehicle upgrades earlier -> earlier upgrades for vikings -> better ability to deal with lategame colossus/protoss air transitions -> etc.etc.
Against zerg I see the problems mostly being their immobility and how easy it is to pick them apart with mutas.
They should give tanks a late game upgrade that either does more single target damage or +damage to shields. Also, buff Thor's AA damage against armored and change immortal's attack to a projectile so that PDD can stop it.
Tanks could be buffed with a generic damage upgrade at the Armory. (like the Maelstrom rounds in WoL campaign)
By tweaking primary target damage (for Protoss) vs splash damage (for Zerg) you could make the Tank more powerful against one without overpowering it against the other.
Splash damage is what makes most of the power vs Zerg and Terran so a higher primary damage could work. Marines with Combat Shields have 55 HP vs Zerglings and Banelings having 35 HP and 30 HP. By setting the splash damage to say...40, you could make it more powerful against Zerg without instantly vaporizing Marines. The primary damage could go much higher as it doesn't have as much of an effect against Zerg or Terran than it would against Protoss. Immortals would still be an issue, although theDwf's suggestion on that (reducing any damage above 20 by half rather than reducing it to 10) could help there.
On July 09 2014 02:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I wonder if thor priority will help (I'm Protoss so I don't know TvZ).
Lowering the time warp duration is interesting... I feel that most of the battle will already be over in 15 seconds (or, at least, the opponent will move out of the time warp during that time) so I feel like a decrease in the duration of photon overcharge would make more sense.
Can't really nerf photon overcharge without ruining PvP again
Why all this concern about PvP, you're not changing races are you?
On July 09 2014 02:47 Faust852 wrote: Everyone arguing about TW and Thors, but guys, the WM buff would be OP as fuck. Ok for full damage in 1,5 instead of 1,25, that would be the middle between pre and post nerf, but going this far as doing AoE in 2,5 is freaking huge. The WM will be wayyy more OP than before its nerf.
Banelings have pretty big splash too. Its 2.2 for such a cheap unit. And it does full damage in the WHOLE radius.
On July 09 2014 02:47 Faust852 wrote: Everyone arguing about TW and Thors, but guys, the WM buff would be OP as fuck. Ok for full damage in 1,5 instead of 1,25, that would be the middle between pre and post nerf, but going this far as doing AoE in 2,5 is freaking huge. The WM will be wayyy more OP than before its nerf.
Banelings have pretty big splash too. Its 2.2 for such a cheap unit. And it does full damage in the WHOLE radius.
I'm scared of the friendly fire WM splash coming my way.
On July 09 2014 03:11 Thezzy wrote: Tanks could be buffed with a generic damage upgrade at the Armory. (like the Maelstrom rounds in WoL campaign)
By tweaking primary target damage (for Protoss) vs splash damage (for Zerg) you could make the Tank more powerful against one without overpowering it against the other.
Splash damage is what makes most of the power vs Zerg and Terran so a higher primary damage could work. Marines with Combat Shields have 55 HP vs Zerglings and Banelings having 35 HP and 30 HP. By setting the splash damage to say...40, you could make it more powerful against Zerg without instantly vaporizing Marines. The primary damage could go much higher as it doesn't have as much of an effect against Zerg or Terran than it would against Protoss. Immortals would still be an issue, although theDwf's suggestion on that (reducing any damage above 20 by half rather than reducing it to 10) could help there.
They could also shift additional damage to vehicle upgrades affecting siege tanks. So for instance, tanks will do more with +1 than they did before with +1. That would be incredibly useful against later games and has a negligible impact in the early to mid game phase since armouries are usually built later in TvP or TvT.
On July 09 2014 03:07 DarkLordOlli wrote: Here's something I've been thinking about recently. What if they buffed tanks vs gateway units specifically? As in: make zealots and stalkers psionic units (sentries already are) and then for example introduce a tank upgrade at the tech lab that increases damage output against psionic units.
Not only could that help vs blink stalker all ins and allow some more breathing room back for map makers, it could also let terrans punish a failed blink all in. Contain-based strategies could make a return, early aggression with tanks might be viable (1-1-1 ?!). AND it would also help zone high templar in the lategame.
If tanks were overall more powerful vs protoss, that would give people a reason to invest in vehicle upgrades earlier -> earlier upgrades for vikings -> better ability to deal with lategame colossus/protoss air transitions -> etc.etc. Of course you'd have to play around with numbers and all to make sure it doesn't break things entirely.
Against zerg I see the problems mostly being their immobility and how easy it is to pick them apart with mutas.
two things. first why the hell would you want one of the most boring units in the game to be buffed?
now for real, let's start theorycrafting. let's say a toss is on top of his scouting > sees you go tanks > if he is not on tilt he will 100% not go for collossus, so no lategame collossus for terran to deal with, i guess the upgrades would be helpful in dealing with toss air, but toss air supported by HTs will not be broken by a terran and therefore in the later stages of the game we would get a toss containing a terran because of the tempests not the other way around.
i guess early terran agression (similar to 1/1/1) would be stronger but we see that already quite often maybe because of habitation station but i don't know if we need more of this.
i really disagree with buffing tanks. they would make for boring games and we already have enough boring games.
against zerg i agree with you they are just useless because of their immobility.
Aren't widow mines going to be too strong vs Protoss? Since they already oneshot every gateway unit in the early game, 1 widow mine can potentially stop a gateway attack.
I think i have a better idea: -The Thor should have anti ground and anti air mode. It can either fire at air or at ground targets. You as the player have to switch modes. The transition would be similar to the tank or hellion an it would take around 4 seconds. -The current high impact payload mode will be removed. -The ground attack stays the same or maybe gets a small buff. -The anti air mode gets a strong buff. Better air splash + higher single target damage
Effects: When used as mutalisk defense in a base, a single thor in anti air mode would have more firepower. In large fights the terran has to decide how many thors he needs in anti air or anti ground mode.
On July 09 2014 03:10 DarkLordOlli wrote: If PDD stops immortal shots then mech becomes unbeatable.
That's the problem with mech in TvP, imo. The Immortal is absolutely necessary for the Protoss to be able to deal with it, but the Immortal also hilariously overhardcounters mech.
On July 09 2014 03:17 Extenz wrote: Aren't widow mines going to be too strong vs Protoss? Since they already oneshot every gateway unit in the early game, 1 widow mine can potentially stop a gateway attack.
On July 09 2014 03:18 submarine wrote: The Thor change seems rather odd and not needed.
I think i have a better idea: -The Thor should have anti ground and anti air mode. It can either fire at air or at ground targets. You as the player have to switch modes. The transition would be similar to the tank or hellion an it would take around 4 seconds. -The current high impact payload mode will be removed. -The ground attack stays the same or maybe gets a small buff. -The anti air mode gets a strong buff. Better air splash + higher single target damage
Effects: When used as mutalisk defense in a base, a single thor in anti air mode would have more firepower. In large fights the terran has to decide how many thors he needs in anti air or anti ground mode.
Interesting. Thors should really be looked at, but given Blizzard's tendencies, we're unlikely to see something that drastic to go through. So far outside of Beta patches, changes are limited to altering damage/speed/acceleration values rather than the intrinsic way of how units behave. Hopefully they realise Thors need to be addressed and this should be done properly with an adequate unit 'remake' in Lotv.
On July 09 2014 02:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I wonder if thor priority will help (I'm Protoss so I don't know TvZ).
Lowering the time warp duration is interesting... I feel that most of the battle will already be over in 15 seconds (or, at least, the opponent will move out of the time warp during that time) so I feel like a decrease in the duration of photon overcharge would make more sense.
Can't really nerf photon overcharge without ruining PvP again
The thor change seems completely random? should ignore buffing the widow mines which are a skilless unit that anyone can use effectively and are completely luck based, and make tanks( a skilled unit) better. Marine tank is more fun to play vs/watch as well IMO.
MSC change is pointless as the damage is basically done in the first 15 seconds anyway...
On July 09 2014 02:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I wonder if thor priority will help (I'm Protoss so I don't know TvZ).
Lowering the time warp duration is interesting... I feel that most of the battle will already be over in 15 seconds (or, at least, the opponent will move out of the time warp during that time) so I feel like a decrease in the duration of photon overcharge would make more sense.
Can't really nerf photon overcharge without ruining PvP again
If we are to save TvP, there must be sacrifices.
Reduce range or duration of Photon Overcharge ... give it bonus damage to shields?
It could even be something like an "activation" time of a few seconds for it to charge up or make the casting range really small so the MSC has to be almost over the Nexus to activate it, and it punishes poor positioning.
I don't like the mine buff, it's just going to go back to killing 30 per shots like it was prenerf, which are still going to be random because splitting is a higher priority than focus-mine fire.
On July 09 2014 02:23 DarkLordOlli wrote: Like the widow mine buff in TvZ, don't like it in TvP (already strong enough). Terran needs a stronger lategame army to transition to, not even more ability to pressure the protoss in the midgame and deny their third base even longer. That only leads to templar openings dying even more and SCV pulls.
I agree with your assessment. However, I counter propose that widow mine splash radius increase with weapon upgrade. Changes nothing for TvP (unless mech gets big anytime soon) but with mech being more viable in TvZ and armories more common, the +1/2/3 weapons upgrade is actually researched and gives widow mines more presence late game.
I agree with your assessment. However, I counter propose that widow mine splash radius increase with weapon upgrade. Changes nothing for TvP (unless mech gets big anytime soon) but with mech being more viable in TvZ and armories more common, the +1/2/3 weapons upgrade is actually researched and gives widow mines more presence late game.
I think you forgot that terran have shared air and mech upgrades and gets weapon upgrades for Vikings. Also this is just another unncesary "special" rule they would need to add to the game. It's really completley unncesary as they just can reduce splash bonus vs shields. No need to overcomplicate it here.
On July 09 2014 03:23 duckk wrote: The thor change seems completely random? should ignore buffing the widow mines which are a skilless unit that anyone can use effectively and are completely luck based, and make tanks( a skilled unit) better. Marine tank is more fun to play vs/watch as well IMO.
MSC change is pointless as the damage is basically done in the first 15 seconds anyway...
No raven nerf? -_-
15 seconds is a HUGE difference especially when you consider defense from a Terran perspective. The fact that timewarps disappear faster means MM can be in a better position (concave) for the next warp gate cycle and SCVs can reach the bunkers faster for repair. Often, the difference between holding and losing the game for a Terran is solely dependent on whether the bunkers are standing or not.
In regards to the Ravens, Terrans have no real way of defending against swarmhosts using a mech composition without losing precious gas units. Ravens are the only option that prevents them from taking inefficient trades. If you want them to be nerfed, something has to be done to Swarmhosts.
Honestly with all the rant, plus the feedback plus the various balance articles, it doesn't seems like a little balance patch would be enough to fix everything. Shouldn't they try to start from something fresh like LotV ?
Whoaa the mine buff is very big. After the mega over-nerf last time...
Seems definitively like Bli's balance team doesn't have a clue how to calculate an aera from a radius LOL. ( tip : for a circle, it's proportionate to the square of the radius )
Because going to 1.75 to 2.5 is more than doubling the eara, and going from 1.5 to 2 multiply the surface by 1.7.
At this rate mines should probably be OP a bit but friendly fire will be super hurtful nearly every time. So i guess from the test map the well go down a bit on numbers.
Btw a better way to fix mines should be a slight increase in radius + no friendly-fire. Proposed mine change will be strong but mainly random-as-shit, you either blow out Z army or your own marines lol
On July 09 2014 02:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I wonder if thor priority will help (I'm Protoss so I don't know TvZ).
Lowering the time warp duration is interesting... I feel that most of the battle will already be over in 15 seconds (or, at least, the opponent will move out of the time warp during that time) so I feel like a decrease in the duration of photon overcharge would make more sense.
Can't really nerf photon overcharge without ruining PvP again
If we are to save TvP, there must be sacrifices.
Photon overcharge could be changed to 20 flat damage -> 12 dmg + 13 vs shields. IDK JUST A THOUGHT
33% increase in probe killing powers, jesus christ.. AA priority might be helpful, but at highest level they target fire to make the biggest splash on mutas anyhow. And half duration on Time Warp will weaken the space control element of the spell, which is what I like about the spell the most. A decrease in effect would weaken the effect of storms, forcefields and colossus splash, a decrease in duration will weaken players who cast well placed Time Warps and longevity in fights. If there's something Protoss lacks, it's longevity in fights, whereas they excel in burst damage.
I'm not for these changes, I'd rather they differentiate the role of the Widow Mine a little from the role of the Tank, maybe remove +shield damage and give it a bonus to light units and buff Siege Tanks vs armoured units a bit. That way we can see Siege Tanks and Mines in conjunction with each other, +Light damage would be super helpful vs the very devastating Muta clumps and Siege Tanks would see much more play in general.
On July 09 2014 03:34 renkin wrote: Honestly with all the rant, plus the feedback plus the various balance articles, it doesn't seems like a little balance patch would be enough to fix everything. Shouldn't they try to start from something fresh like LotV ?
They can do both. Whatever minor patches they put in now doesn't preclude major overhauls in LotV.
Widow Mine buff: think Templar openings not dead enough? Well now's the final nail in the coffin. On the plus side though, I'm happy with this cuz it'll help Terran against Zerg, and Templar openings are pretty much dead anyways.
Thor priority change: never really thought about it. I think it's a good change and something that's hard to go disastrously wrong (unlike Oracle buffs and so forth).
Time Warp: if we're gonna nerf the effectiveness of this spell by HALF how about we change the energy cost back to 75?
As it has been pointed out in previous posts, is going to be double now. Is going to be ridiculous either when it hits the zerg or it hits the terran with friendly fire.
Let alone mention how it will completely wreck Protoss armies with the stupid +shields damage LOL
Disappointing patch for Terrans that prefer keeping up an aggressive play style throughout the game, as we're still pigeon-holed into either WM drops or hellbat timings in TvZ. Oh well, at least WMs will be less sucky. I'm on the fence about the Thor change because it could have negative ramifications in late game TvZ if Zergs start bringing out bait overlords/overseers to initially tank for their ultras, but I'll have to test around that; might just be that ultras have a higher attack priority in general than overlords and it doesn't affect anything.
It's just mostly annoying being blind hard-countered every TvZ because the Zerg knows exactly what you'll be doing, scouting or not (and they always get the early scouting to verify it anyway). I was really hoping for a stim research time buff to allow more varied TvZ openings and open punishment against Zergs who currently just wander their overlords into the base with the expectation they're completely safe. Going marine-first hampers scouting, which is critically important due to the fragility of Terran's currently viable openings.
As for TvP, I think it just makes WMs more annoying for Protoss and shuts down Templar styles even more, rather than really addressing a lot of the early game cheese Protoss can throw at the Terran. I see Terrans continuing to dread early game, while Protoss have more reason to complain about Terran drops on top of a whole tech option getting shut down. Bleh.
Why is crying about "it will break pvp" for any suggested nerf to Protoss? This has been their argument since WOL. Changing a few things to the MSC won't break pvp......TVP is need of a dire change.
Instead of increasing splash radius, maybe lower the supply cost. Late game in tvp Terran is cranking out Mauraders/ghost which already eat up a big chunk of supply, and widow mines on top is too supply inefficient, I feel.
Edit: It'd probably help more in mech compositions, too.
On July 09 2014 03:44 LingBlingBling wrote: Why is crying about "it will break pvp" for any suggested nerf to Protoss? This has been their argument since WOL. Changing a few things to the MSC won't break pvp......TVP is need of a dire change.
Warp in takes away defenders advantage so in PvP the Msc helps stop the 4gate vs 4gate scenario every game. The duration of the Photon Overcharge helps defend a cycle of warp-ins and stablizes the matchup so it can be macro-orientated.
It is a horribly designed bandaid solution though.
On July 09 2014 03:43 Storm-Giant wrote: That radius change is so stupid lol.
As it has been pointed out in previous posts, is going to be double now. Is going to be ridiculous either when it hits the zerg or it hits the terran with friendly fire.
Let alone mention how it will completely wreck Protoss armies with the stupid +shields damage LOL
agreed. gas first WM drops = RIP 30 PROBES
A more reasonable change is to decrease friendly fire DMG or completely remove it
On July 09 2014 03:43 Storm-Giant wrote: That radius change is so stupid lol.
As it has been pointed out in previous posts, is going to be double now. Is going to be ridiculous either when it hits the zerg or it hits the terran with friendly fire.
Let alone mention how it will completely wreck Protoss armies with the stupid +shields damage LOL
I still want to see a tank buff. I have a feeling widow mine is going to be the new bunker build time, they're just gonna keep going back and forth and minor tweaking it when it really isn't all that neccissary. Mines aren't a problem right now. The Thor change is whatever, I have no strong feelings about it at all. And any nerf to the MSC is a good change in my eyes, I'd say it almost doesn't go far enough. Most battles are pretty much decided in 15 seconds, so the damage is still going to be done.
Terran, however we feel that this type of mid-game buff also carries over into a late game buff.
Great feeling but no, nothing carries over. The main problem is that Terran doesn't even want it to go to late game since their army composition is lackluster. Buffing the splash radius is a completely early/mid game buff.
and hopefully increase micro opportunities against the spell.
How about removing it completely if you want to increase micro opportunities?
Also wheres the tank buffs?? edit: Going to be great fun to watch those WM shots killing workers to create some hype around nothing micro'd.
On July 09 2014 02:23 DarkLordOlli wrote: Like the widow mine buff in TvZ, don't like it in TvP (already strong enough). Terran needs a stronger lategame army to transition to, not even more ability to pressure the protoss in the midgame and deny their third base even longer. That only leads to templar openings dying even more and SCV pulls.
I agree with your assessment. However, I counter propose that widow mine splash radius increase with weapon upgrade. Changes nothing for TvP (unless mech gets big anytime soon) but with mech being more viable in TvZ and armories more common, the +1/2/3 weapons upgrade is actually researched and gives widow mines more presence late game.
Widow mines have weapon upgrades? I thought it only applied to the armor, the splash effect non-changing?
EDIT: Yeah I don't see anywhere that weapon upgrade effects damage on the WM
I don't know about the Thor change. It might make Roaches a lot stronger.
Time Warp duration doesn't fix a damn thing.
Why don't they actually fix the core problem in TvP? Can we get a real balance team and actually make good changes? Why is DK still in charge over there? He has no idea what he's doing.
On July 09 2014 03:44 LingBlingBling wrote: Why is crying about "it will break pvp" for any suggested nerf to Protoss? This has been their argument since WOL. Changing a few things to the MSC won't break pvp......TVP is need of a dire change.
Warp in takes away defenders advantage so in PvP the Msc helps stop the 4gate vs 4gate scenario every game. The duration of the Photon Overcharge helps defend a cycle of warp-ins and stablizes the matchup so it can be macro-orientated.
It is a horribly designed bandaid solution though.
I've always said that warp-ins cool down time should be based on distance from the gateway. It doesn't have to be a drastic increase in cooldown time, like an extra 7 seconds or something for a crossmap warp in. This would not only give PvP a defenders advantage, it would make doing large crossmap warp-ins a big riskier at all points in the game, and would make all-ins less potent as well. It would remove all need for the MSC.
On July 09 2014 03:43 Storm-Giant wrote: That radius change is so stupid lol.
As it has been pointed out in previous posts, is going to be double now. Is going to be ridiculous either when it hits the zerg or it hits the terran with friendly fire.
Let alone mention how it will completely wreck Protoss armies with the stupid +shields damage LOL
agreed. gas first WM drops = RIP 30 PROBES
A more reasonable change is to decrease friendly fire DMG or completely remove it
I don't get these changes at all, the WM is fine in PvT as is,that radius is just going to explode entire gateway armies in one go leaving stimmed bio to clean up the rest of the P army. Then there's the fact that Terran can just rush to Factory, get a WM and drop it in the P mineral line and boop, P economy is dead beyond repair.
As for the Time Warp change, half duration, ehh I'm not sure, it's a really useful tool when holding off Z aggression, especially with the current Hydra attack speed. I don't get why we can't just have it as an upgrade in the Twilight Council, given that the main issue with it is it's early game potential with Blink and Blink is also Twilight tech. Put Time Warp there too, P has to choose what they'd rather have earlier, Blink or Time Warp.
All in all, this doesn't address a damn thing about late game PvT. Terran will still have no late game tech choices that are effective against P.
Nor does it address the scouting ability of T in the early game.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
Wow, that's a massive difference. So the widow mine is going to have about double the AoE?
Yes, double the friendly fire
I suppose it would be cool if they wanted to make play WM a bit of a riskier strat, since you can theoretically kill either you or your opponents entire army off in one hit.
We’ve also seen feedback that the Widow Mine splash radius increase doesn’t buff late game Terran, however we feel that this type of mid-game buff also carries over into a late game buff.
Welp...I'm at a loss.
The +shield damage was basically a band-aid to an original nerf and now this is another band-aid on top of that. Bigger radius and +shield damage is such an overkill, I'm fearful of what DK would propose should mines become the go-to TvP. Just revert the mine to it's original state already.
The thor priority is nice although I'm besides myself at how there's a handful of underused units that continue to get ignored. I prefer watching bio and all, but variety is a good thing.
On July 09 2014 03:44 LingBlingBling wrote: Why is crying about "it will break pvp" for any suggested nerf to Protoss? This has been their argument since WOL. Changing a few things to the MSC won't break pvp......TVP is need of a dire change.
Warp in takes away defenders advantage so in PvP the Msc helps stop the 4gate vs 4gate scenario every game. The duration of the Photon Overcharge helps defend a cycle of warp-ins and stablizes the matchup so it can be macro-orientated.
It is a horribly designed bandaid solution though.
Maybe you can't nerf it defensively, but offensively you could give the MSC a nerf. I'd propose slowing the MSC down to the old Overlord speed (around 0.88) and adding a MSC speed upgrade to the Cybernetics Core at 50/50/110. It would delay any straight up MSC attack on the mineral line by quite a bit and by putting the upgrade at the Cybernetics Core you cannot have Warp Gate and MSC Speed at the same time early on, weakening a Blink all-in. It wouldn't weaken any defensive play with the MSC as you can still park it between the main and the natural to cast Photon Overcharge.
On July 09 2014 03:44 LingBlingBling wrote: Why is crying about "it will break pvp" for any suggested nerf to Protoss? This has been their argument since WOL. Changing a few things to the MSC won't break pvp......TVP is need of a dire change.
Warp in takes away defenders advantage so in PvP the Msc helps stop the 4gate vs 4gate scenario every game. The duration of the Photon Overcharge helps defend a cycle of warp-ins and stablizes the matchup so it can be macro-orientated.
It is a horribly designed bandaid solution though.
Maybe you can't nerf it defensively, but offensively you could give the MSC a nerf. I'd propose slowing the MSC down to the old Overlord speed (around 0.88) and adding a MSC speed upgrade to the Cybernetics Core at 50/50/110. It would delay any straight up MSC attack on the mineral line by quite a bit and by putting the upgrade at the Cybernetics Core you cannot have Warp Gate and MSC Speed at the same time early on, weakening a Blink all-in. It wouldn't weaken any defensive play with the MSC as you can still park it between the main and the natural to cast Photon Overcharge.
This is one of the better MsC ideas I've ever seen, actually.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
Wow, that's a massive difference. So the widow mine is going to have about double the AoE?
Yes, double the friendly fire
I suppose it would be cool if they wanted to make play WM a bit of a riskier strat, since you can theoretically kill either you or your opponents entire army off in one hit.
Please remember these aren’t the final changes, but only the first batch of changes being tested in the next balance test map. Thanks again for the feedback and we look forward to hearing your thoughts on these new changes."
I'm not sure i'm reading that right. Does it mean more changes are planed to be tested at a later date, or is it just the usual Blizz PR?
Please remember these aren’t the final changes, but only the first batch of changes being tested in the next balance test map. Thanks again for the feedback and we look forward to hearing your thoughts on these new changes."
I'm not sure i'm reading that right. Does it mean more changes are planed to be tested at a later date, or is it just the usual Blizz PR?
It means if it turns out to be broken those aren't the numbers that will ship, either testing new numbers or putting out a toned-down version.
Please remember these aren’t the final changes, but only the first batch of changes being tested in the next balance test map. Thanks again for the feedback and we look forward to hearing your thoughts on these new changes."
I'm not sure i'm reading that right. Does it mean more changes are planed to be tested at a later date, or is it just the usual Blizz PR?
It means if it turns out to be broken those aren't the numbers that will ship, either testing new numbers or putting out a toned-down version.
Ah ok. To me it sounded like it's the first of a series of changes planed, so more is to follow.
This seems like a bit much for WM. Perhaps something along the lines of 1.25: 40, 1.5: 30, 1.75: 20, 2: 10 would be more reasonable. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the main issues with TvZ are excessive muta regen and mass banelings later in the game, and it would be a pity to make the entire lingblingmuta style a bit outmatched. Besudesm if they added a fourth level of splash inside the other levels at like .5 or .25 that did 60 damage, they'd have more flexibility to balance it against the direct threats they're trying to nerf. In this example, WM could take out large muta flocks easier, if the zerg didn't spread them properly.
Better yet, give mutas normal 0.27/second regen for 10 seconds after taking damage, and then a new, slightly higher regen of 2.27 kicks in. This allows mutas that are at roughl 1-20 HP to heal to full health faster, but every other scenario, they heal slower, and also have to engage slightly less frequently. This increases their potency as harass units, but not as frontline fighters en masse.
Nerf Time Warp totally solves the problem that Photon Overcharge last too long and makes Protoss unattackable. Time warp usually sits worthlessly on the field for around 15 seconds anyways so thats pointless.
Blizzard really has no idea what they are doing...
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
Wow, that's a massive difference. So the widow mine is going to have about double the AoE?
Yes, double the friendly fire
I suppose it would be cool if they wanted to make play WM a bit of a riskier strat, since you can theoretically kill either you or your opponents entire army off in one hit.
On July 09 2014 04:32 Orcasgt24 wrote: Nerf Time Warp totally solves the problem that Photon Overcharge last too long and makes Protoss unattackable. Time warp usually sits worthlessly on the field for around 15 seconds anyways so thats pointless.
Blizzard really has no idea what they are doing...
Ya, the more I think about it the sillier the MSC nerf really is. This does pretty much nothing at all. The battle is already won or loss in the first 15 seconds so it doesn't matter.
On July 09 2014 04:20 ssxsilver wrote: variety is a good thing.
Exactly, that's another issue with PvT currently, especially from the Protoss side of things. It's really simple to guess what the overall composition the Terran player is going for in the end so all we have to do is make sure we can hold off the harrass in the midgame, get to our dominant lategame and roll the Terran. There's little we have to worry about (except maybe playing TOO greedy to the point where an early bio push can kill or losing the MSC while poking early on.)
If T had more options in regards to builds, with viable mech or whatever then I don't think you'd see Protoss pull off anywhere near as much shit of as it does now, it'd be less predictable on our end. PvP is terrifying to play because it's difficult to guess what your opponent is doing, there's so much variety, you have to be on top of your game with scouting and reacting to what you see. PvZ, you need to keep tabs on what tech the Z is going for, if they tech switch, if they're droning or building up an army. You need to make sure you're not liable to die to ling runbys when you move out.
PvT is just, "well it's a Terran, so it's gonna be bio, if they try to do a super early rush I'll have PO to help hold while I build up what I need. Midgame, just have observers in the right place to spot drops and deal with them as they come. Get to deathball, make sure I switch to Templar for the inevitable Viking switch to deal with my Collossus tech, don't fuck up too bad taking the engagement and win (hopefully)"
Consider general unit AI with regards to the thor change. While it may pre-fire at the first thing it sees, say a medivac or overlord, units will always favour shooting at anything that will fight back. A viking will always shoot at another viking over a banshee, for instance. If blizzard write the AI code well, thors should still run at a tank shooting at it (assuming it is within sight range) rather than persistently firing at vikings/medivacs/overlords while getting shot at.
I don't like this change however. If the thors wound up in combat VS ground units and air units at the same time, you could grab them and tell them to target fire the most clumped up area and they'd almost immediately respond because their ground attack did not trigger a long cooldown. In an instance of any air-to-ground being A-moved, this would heavily punish the poor micro. However now they'll shoot right away and considering their anti-air's long cooldown, the air-to-ground cloud will be shot at, then close the distance, clump, shoot, then automatically space out before the next thor shots are fired.
Regarding all the rest of the changes, I'd like to see buffs to other units rather than mines and particularily other than mine damage/radius, i think mines are in a good spot right now in single combat instances. I just wish they'd give terran's goliaths as thors are just the clunkiest, most unmicro-able unit. Maybe if thors could use both sets of weapons independently they'd be good, but as is, nobody likes them. Nobody will ever like them.
I wish they'd rework turrets, either cost less or improve turret effectiveness, maybe through an Ebay upgrade.
And then reduce ghost cost cause holy crap they're expensive? However Bio is mineral choked and Mech is Gas choked, so that might be very complicated.
The fact time warp exists is silly... "Here's the most supreme defensive unit in the game...let's give it an offensive ability perfect for all-ins!" I very much preferred MSCs when they were tied to nexi and would return units home to them like in the early beta. Admittingly the only match up i refuse to watch entirely is PvP, but a mirror is a mirror. Period.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
FUUUUUCK YES, I'm all for these changes. I hated it when I had to manually check the thors to hit the mutas and not the zerglings. Mines help significantly in my marine-marauder-medivac-hellbat-mine-thor style.
I love the buff to Terran lategame, I really like how Blizzard takes the community response in mind when proposing these changes.
Seriously, TW nerf does nothing except for pvp, thor buff realy isn't needed nor useful, mine buff is stupid because it's just a coinflippy unit to rely on for aoe.
On July 09 2014 03:43 Storm-Giant wrote: That radius change is so stupid lol.
As it has been pointed out in previous posts, is going to be double now. Is going to be ridiculous either when it hits the zerg or it hits the terran with friendly fire.
Let alone mention how it will completely wreck Protoss armies with the stupid +shields damage LOL
agreed. gas first WM drops = RIP 30 PROBES
A more reasonable change is to decrease friendly fire DMG or completely remove it
The radius will be nerfed if it ever gets released. However, is it really that different to what Terran deal with today? If I do not see your proxied oracle my SCVs are mostly dead. If I do not see your HT storm drop all of my SCVs are dead. If I do not see your zealot warp in all of my SCVs are dead. Experience some of the stress that Terrans suffer when they play Protoss.
Many lower APM Terrans either build marines, static defenses or widow mines to protect the mineral line early on, perhaps a couple of stalkers will be able to hold the line, or a photon cannon?
Widow mine change is ehhhh, they nerfed it to where it is for a reason. But i suppose it makes sense to try this.
Thor change makes me sad as a zerg. It was fun watching thors try to kill banelings as mutas reigned down on them but i'm afraid that this will completely destroy any viability of mutas vs thor based armies :c (especially with mines or ravens around which already make things difficult)
I like the nerf on the msc. BUT i hate their reasons xD you don't micro against it. You can't. You're either in it or you're not. its so big that you can't preemptive split like you can with storms. Heck on these new maps 1 takes up an entire attack path lol. (Specifically the cloud kingdom remake). You make is smaller to make it easier to micro against it. Changing the time that it is down doesn't change that. (Also 15 seconds still lasts an entire battle. now it just wont be there for the 2nd battle of a zerg remax so yay)
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
On July 09 2014 04:38 SC2Toastie wrote: I love the buff to Terran lategame, I really like how Blizzard takes the community response in mind when proposing these changes.
Seriously, TW nerf does nothing except for pvp, thor buff realy isn't needed nor useful, mine buff is stupid because it's just a coinflippy unit to rely on for aoe.
the thor buff is super useful. its very difficult to target mutalisks with your thors in the initiation of the fight where normally youd spend time splitting or queing the ultralisks with marauders. this will help a lot or at the very least make it easier to control your army in tvz
Fucking pitiful, wait till Protoss wins ALL 3 MAJOR tournaments to finally do something about it? And this is all...? Something better than nothing but Blizzard already stabbed it's own game in the fcuking face.
1. Mines are already kinda ridicilous but I'm curious on how the effect will be, will it destroy large clumps of units (banes) or just damage them heavily? The simple answer seems, build more mines, they hit more stuff now! (Mind friendly fire lolololol > terrible terrible dmg).
2. This change is kinda iffy, especially in combination with the mines. All the change does is tell the terran he can now a-move his thors and not worry about them anymore. Terran now no longer has to use his vision with medivacs/scans to target the mutaflock, it just kinda happens automatically. I could see this also working out the other way, thors might target random overlords/overseers or stray muta's instead of the clump. And maybe, just maybe, it might have an effect on how thors buffer banelings. Normally if a zerg engages, he might have some banelings a-moving and circling around a thor. Right now a thor would attack those and make it a pretty decent exchange for the terran. With the patch, it might not target the banes giving the zerg more time to micro them around or get a slightly better trade, because the thor didn't shoot anything on the ground.
3. The change seems fine although with the recent energy cost nerf, I'm not sure how it will pan out. Personally I like the change for the reasons stated by Blizzard.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Good changes. But they might just need to give the tank a flat out buff to make the state of the game less stale. You don't see this amazing unit anymore nowadays
On July 09 2014 04:38 SC2Toastie wrote: I love the buff to Terran lategame, I really like how Blizzard takes the community response in mind when proposing these changes.
Seriously, TW nerf does nothing except for pvp, thor buff realy isn't needed nor useful, mine buff is stupid because it's just a coinflippy unit to rely on for aoe.
the thor buff is super useful. its very difficult to target mutalisks with your thors in the initiation of the fight where normally youd spend time splitting or queing the ultralisks with marauders. this will help a lot or at the very least make it easier to control your army in tvz
On July 09 2014 04:49 Jerom wrote: Good changes. But they might just need to give the tank a flat out buff to make the state of the game less stale. You don't see this amazing unit anymore nowadays
As long as the Immortal exists you'll never see tanks in PvT. As long as the Swarm Host exists most Terrans won't try them in TvZ due to the threat of a week long match
I think I don't like these changes that much, but it's worth testing a buffed mine.
If they would nerf Time Warp, I feel a 1.5/2sec cast time with an indicator where it would land like a nuke would be more exciting by making it possible to micro against it.
I'm kind of shocked people are so satisfied about these proposed changes. I think it's kind of ridiculous to think that the TW change will do anything at all, and yet people seem really happy with it.
On July 09 2014 04:38 SC2Toastie wrote: I love the buff to Terran lategame, I really like how Blizzard takes the community response in mind when proposing these changes.
Seriously, TW nerf does nothing except for pvp, thor buff realy isn't needed nor useful, mine buff is stupid because it's just a coinflippy unit to rely on for aoe.
the thor buff is super useful. its very difficult to target mutalisks with your thors in the initiation of the fight where normally youd spend time splitting or queing the ultralisks with marauders. this will help a lot or at the very least make it easier to control your army in tvz
haha yes indeed, then rewatch it and look at what the zerg does in that engagement. absolutely nothing. still its extremely close and off-creep. thats why this thor change is such a nice one
At last they gave up on reducing mine usage. There was never any chance that Blizzard would provide terran with a workable alternative.
On the other hand that mine range buff might be going too far and thor change seems unnecessary. Time warp nerf makes a modicum of sense but I doubt it was a major part of TvP issues.
Also: Bonus points for ignoring every suggestion about tackling terran late-game.
Its funny that the Lurker "overlapped" too much with the Baneling and couldnt find a place in the game and yet WM make Tanks obsolete in everything but TvT.
You know, with a bigger radius, it means that more friendly forces will get hit. Terran players die more from the friendly fire of the Mines than it does kill Zerglings.
Widow Mine buff will help a LOT. It used to do 40 damage flat, but now the AOE is much huger. The AOE from 1.75 to 2.5 is 9.6 units to 19.6. That's more than 2 times the area! This re-geared WM will surely be interesting; the increased splash (despite still doing 40/20/10 damage) will help its effectiveness in the lategame and help terran's lategame in general. Increased friendly fire splash can potentially create cool micro situations for both sides (namely bio) while it could be much less of a problem for mech. It wouldn't hurt to help mech out more! The splash will also make them a much more reliable substitute for banshees/ghosts to deal with Immortal's shields and Archons and help mech be more aggressive early on and not have to always wait it out so long.
Can't wait for aggressive WM focused Mech styles to be strong again!
Thor change is interesting. Didn't it prioritize air units in WoL? Anyway, great that it's reverted (?) as having to click on mutas sorta sucks.
Time Warp? Doesn't really matter but it looks good. 30 seconds seems unnecessary; 15 seconds really is long enough.
These changes are not enough and really do nothing to fix tvp especially. Anytime I see a timewarp thrown down all I can think is "well he actually didnt even need that to be honest."
On July 09 2014 05:12 eviltomahawk wrote: Does this mean that Thors will prioritize their AA attack against Colossi or am I mistaken?
Maybe for the first shot as it's AA has longer range? Good question..
Yes, it will surely use its ground attack against Colossi, because it's programmed so that the Colossi count as ground units first. I think back then when priority was for air units, it could hit Colossi with the air attack when they were out of the ground attack's range. Not sure how the cooldown works, if you have to wait for the full air attack cooldown or you can start shooting with the ground one.
On July 09 2014 03:43 Storm-Giant wrote: That radius change is so stupid lol.
As it has been pointed out in previous posts, is going to be double now. Is going to be ridiculous either when it hits the zerg or it hits the terran with friendly fire.
Let alone mention how it will completely wreck Protoss armies with the stupid +shields damage LOL
agreed. gas first WM drops = RIP 30 PROBES
A more reasonable change is to decrease friendly fire DMG or completely remove it
The radius will be nerfed if it ever gets released. However, is it really that different to what Terran deal with today? If I do not see your proxied oracle my SCVs are mostly dead. If I do not see your HT storm drop all of my SCVs are dead. If I do not see your zealot warp in all of my SCVs are dead. Experience some of the stress that Terrans suffer when they play Protoss.
Many lower APM Terrans either build marines, static defenses or widow mines to protect the mineral line early on, perhaps a couple of stalkers will be able to hold the line, or a photon cannon?
Good point, protoss have lots of great harassment tools. Drops aren't scary compared to them in terms of losing workers. Also unless you stack up all your probes you won't lose 30; otherwise Terrans can say HT drops will kill 30 workers and it's OP. Just don't stack em or pull em away early enough.
On July 09 2014 05:12 eviltomahawk wrote: Does this mean that Thors will prioritize their AA attack against Colossi or am I mistaken?
Maybe for the first shot as it's AA has longer range? Good question..
They should just allow the Thor to fire its AA and ground weapon at the same time, like the Multi-lockWeaponsSystem upgrade for goliath in the campaign
We can all only hope they buff the widow mine enough to provide a real threat to P/Z so that there is an equivalent amount of micro required from the Protoss/Zergs in spitting chargelots and banelings or just not taking the engagement.
Everyone remembers the shredder from the beta that was supposed to provide space control, and then along the way somewhere Blizzard lost focus and because siege tanks cannot really stand up to being aggressive on the map, there's no real form of space control. So hopefully the new mine buff will provide that in some capacity.
As for the time warp nerf, that does nothing to address the balance issues of TvP early game and late game. It's disappointing that they do not understand the true balance issue with TvP and do stuff that will have really no effect on that match-up which is already frustrating for a lot of people to play.
The thor attack priority change is not really a buff...don't let them trick you into thinking it is a buff, it's just simply a luxury change because in big battles Terran want their thors targetting mutas, not lings/banes, and good Terrans already did that in the first place so it really it's not so much an actual unit or statistic buff so much as it is just an ease of use change.
edit: actually, now that i think about it, the thor targetting priority change might really, really back fire and be a nerf or bad change and let me explain why.
Previously, when Zerg reached lategame and Terran has thors in their army, there would still be mutas/overseers or what not in the battle but with a ton of ultralisks underneath. If the ultras are not being shot, then the thors just die really fast to the ultras.
It's the same situation there though, good Terrans could decide which to focus fire, guess we'll see how it pans out.
It will be laughable if that widow mine change goes through without nerfing the +shield damage buff on the splash damage put in recently. I feel like they added that change to compensate for the loss of widow mine radius. Now the mines are more powerful than they ever were against protoss. 1 shotting probes at a radius of 2 instead of 1.75 like at release. Mine drops every game baby. A single mine 1 shotting entire mineral lines. Stronger than pre-nerf hellbat drops. Any perceived imbalance with Terran llies in the late game, not with the widow mine.
Previously, when Zerg reached lategame and Terran has thors in their army, there would still be mutas/overseers or what not in the battle but with a ton of ultralisks underneath. If the ultras are not being shot, then the thors just die really fast to the ultras.
I wonder about how this will work as well, and it's kinda why I don't believe the change will make it into the game because it's simply gonna target overseers all the time.
If it were up to me, just delete the MSC unit from the game and find a better solution to balance protoss. But that is not gonna happen, so i would love to see just for testing purposes, a nerf to photon overcharge. Mainly because protoss can play greedy and punish greedy plays while being greedy themselves and not being punished by it because of force fields and photon overcharge.
I personally don't like the idea of buffing Widow mines radius mainly because of ZvT, I feel zerg has to play twice as hard to deal with the extra range of widow mines :/.
Also i would love to see some sort of significant buff to zerg, maybe tier 1 hydras? Zerg barely has any answers to early game air units other than spore and queen.
On July 09 2014 02:27 Vindicare605 wrote: I'm not a huge fan of the Thor change.
It's going to make the unit annoying to use in TvT where it can serve a pretty important role of a Tank buster unit, this also makes the unit a huge liability to use vs Bio forces since they'll attack the Medivacs now by default.
It's simply replacing one kind of annoyance for another.
You have no idea, medivac is not a offensive unit so they will not take aggro from the thors if there are bio forces.
The Thor attack priority and the mothership core changes is ok but the widow mine buff is awful. I honestly won't even bother playing till something is changed for mid game terran to help Zerg. Like at the moment its hard with the hellbat change but if this goes through it will just push everything over the edge.
I kinda like where they're going with the thor change i guess, however as avilo already stated, a good terran is already controlling where his/her thors are shooting. but for the lower leagues, I like it. Not sure about the widow mine change.
As for the time warp nerf, that does nothing to address the balance issues of TvP early game and late game. It's disappointing that they do not understand the true balance issue with TvP and do stuff that will have really no effect on that match-up which is already frustrating for a lot of people to play.
For once, I'm going to agree with Avilo. The propsed TW nerf is pointless.
On July 09 2014 05:13 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: Excellent!
Widow Mine buff will help a LOT. It used to do 40 damage flat, but now the AOE is much huger. The AOE from 1.75 to 2.5 is 9.6 units to 19.6. That's more than 2 times the area! This re-geared WM will surely be interesting; the increased splash (despite still doing 40/20/10 damage) will help its effectiveness in the lategame and help terran's lategame in general. Increased friendly fire splash can potentially create cool micro situations for both sides (namely bio) while it could be much less of a problem for mech. It wouldn't hurt to help mech out more! The splash will also make them a much more reliable substitute for banshees/ghosts to deal with Immortal's shields and Archons and help mech be more aggressive early on and not have to always wait it out so long.
Can't wait for aggressive WM focused Mech styles to be strong again!
Thor change is interesting. Didn't it prioritize air units in WoL? Anyway, great that it's reverted (?) as having to click on mutas sorta sucks.
Time Warp? Doesn't really matter but it looks good. 30 seconds seems unnecessary; 15 seconds really is long enough.
When was mech+WMs ever a thing? I hardly ever see any WM usage with mech, save the occasional TvT where one gets surprised by a BC switch.
Its sad to see so many people satisfied by these changes. I guess this is because David kim accustomed us to horrible changes.
1- This change is terrible. Window mine has very random effect, sometimes very good detonation, sometimes very bad. The increase of the splash radius only increase the variance of the results. What does it mean ? It means that we will have stupid games where the terran gets 2 very good detonations then goes straight for the kill, or some lucky shots for the zerg like 2 zerglings dying and take 20 marines with them allowing the zerg to snowball and win the game. In a game where the goal is to have 2 opponents face each other and react to opponent decisions, what's the point to let the random decide the outcome of the fight ?
2- It seems not to be a big change, i don't really know what to think about this one, good players will of course focus units so it might be a useless change.
3- I guess that too many protoss won tournaments, and there are too many whine, so David Kim decided to do some random useless nerf to believe that the game is more and more balanced. This change is, in most case, useless. The units caught under a timewarp never live more than 10 seconds. This spell should have a downside, i think friendly fire could be a good idea, protoss players will no longer be able to throw 2 random timewarp and leaving the opponent with 2 choices : attack and lose their army for nothing or back and lose some units for free (and sometime one base).
Again, this patch is coming at the wrong moment, the new map pool disturbs a lot the meta . Why patch the game now ? The new map pool is terran favored, why not wait a little bit ?
On July 09 2014 06:09 Larkin wrote: Mines even stronger vs P now ;; get rid of +shields bullshit and just have more splash.
why. You are already stronger than T.
Because the WM splash + it's bonus damage to shields makes zealot templar styles far weaker - we already saw this style decreasing a lot after the previous buff to WM, so that the current meta is far more favorable towards colossus first instead of storm first play. Adding this new WM buff without changing this, would just eliminate the entire style from existence, greatly hurting diversity in the matchup while doing nothing against the things that make terran struggle so much in tvp.
On July 09 2014 06:09 Larkin wrote: Mines even stronger vs P now ;; get rid of +shields bullshit and just have more splash.
why. You are already stronger than T.
Because the WM splash + it's bonus damage to shields makes zealot templar styles far weaker - we already saw this style decreasing a lot after the previous buff to WM, so that the current meta is far more favorable towards colossus first instead of storm first play. Adding this new WM buff without changing this, would just eliminate the entire style from existence, greatly hurting diversity in the matchup while doing nothing against the things that make terran struggle so much in tvp.
Too bad for them. Restricting the number of opening they can do is always good for T. You won't wonder for 10min if it's a 2nd starport or a ghost accademy that you will need. And it will be more punitive to moveclic without micro for the P.
On July 09 2014 06:09 Larkin wrote: Mines even stronger vs P now ;; get rid of +shields bullshit and just have more splash.
why. You are already stronger than T.
Because the WM splash + it's bonus damage to shields makes zealot templar styles far weaker - we already saw this style decreasing a lot after the previous buff to WM, so that the current meta is far more favorable towards colossus first instead of storm first play. Adding this new WM buff without changing this, would just eliminate the entire style from existence, greatly hurting diversity in the matchup while doing nothing against the things that make terran struggle so much in tvp.
Too bad for them. Restricting the number of opening they can do is always good for T. You won't wonder for 10min if it's a 2nd starport or a ghost accademy that you will need. And it will be more punitive to moveclic without micro for the P.
Bullshit. We shouldn't limit the styles of protoss and remove one of their major techpaths as an opener because you want to make terran stronger. Why do people always argue they want mech to work against protoss? Because it's a completely different playstyle which will make the matchup more diverse. Zealot templar style has been around for a long time, and it existed in WOL during eras of terran dominance. There is no reason to make it useless.
It is quite easy to identify as well.. but if scouting is a problem for terran why not make their scouting better instead of removing an entire playstyle. Or do you want to see colossus blink stalkers play opening in literally every pvt macrogame?
The timewarp change is really good and I would implement that too. Will make the ability way more fair and give opportunities for counterplay. The other changes though are pretty horrible and won´t help terran a bit in TvZ.
On July 09 2014 06:09 Larkin wrote: Mines even stronger vs P now ;; get rid of +shields bullshit and just have more splash.
why. You are already stronger than T.
Because the WM splash + it's bonus damage to shields makes zealot templar styles far weaker - we already saw this style decreasing a lot after the previous buff to WM, so that the current meta is far more favorable towards colossus first instead of storm first play. Adding this new WM buff without changing this, would just eliminate the entire style from existence, greatly hurting diversity in the matchup while doing nothing against the things that make terran struggle so much in tvp.
Too bad for them. Restricting the number of opening they can do is always good for T. You won't wonder for 10min if it's a 2nd starport or a ghost accademy that you will need. And it will be more punitive to moveclic without micro for the P.
Bullshit. We shouldn't limit the styles of protoss and remove one of their major techpaths as an opener because you want to make terran stronger. Why do people always argue they want mech to work against protoss? Because it's a completely different playstyle which will make the matchup more diverse. Zealot templar style has been around for a long time, and it existed in WOL during eras of terran dominance. There is no reason to make it useless.
It is quite easy to identify as well.. but if scouting is a problem for terran why not make their scouting better instead of removing an entire playstyle. Or do you want to see colossus blink stalkers play opening in literally every pvt macrogame?
Everything is problematic in TvP. While midgame is quite strong for T if the P decide to go macro, it sucks ass against big 2 bases allin. There is no way to mke efficient scouting in TvP with the state of the game now. We will have to wait for LotV. In the meantime, I wouldn't mind P being forced to play a much more predictable style for the time being. All in all you would still see all the tecch unit protoss have, like it is nowadays, and T will be much more solid since they will know what will happen. Mech in TvP won't come before LotV too, so I don't care about this style. HT first or Colo first don't change, in fine, everything is the same since 2010. The MU is exactly identical.
I don't think the time warp change really does anything for TvP. It affects ZvP for sure, but if it's also a TvP targeted change, maybe they should consider halving the effect instead of the duration. The first 15 seconds is usually when the terran loses the fight or even the game in the first place, so halving the duration isn't going to significantly going to change that. At 15 seconds it loses some zoning ability late game, I guess, but it's far better to combine it with storm than zone out the terran army.
When people say 'the game/XvX is balanced' what I believe they're saying is 'I'm ok with how the game is being played now'. I can't help but notice that the majority of people I hear/read saying these things are not Terran... Bottom line? The game will not be balanced until there is an approximately equal representation for each race in each league. Say what you will, but Terran has been thin in the upper leagues and majorly over-represented in the lower leagues for quite some time now. Let's not get so used to this fact that we define 'balance' as 'I'm used to the way things are'. (keep in mind, if, by some miracle, Blizz helps out T in LotV and it actually becomes equal, all you P and Z players are going to want to yell imbalance because you're used to Terran being so behind. You're used to the race that naturally floods the Bronze league. Resist the temptation to yell "imba") That being said, I still don't like the change to the widow mine... I feel like the unit as a whole was a quick fix for a long standing problem... It might help things out for the top 1% of Terrans to whom targeting them in the middle of a battle is a possibility, but for the majority of Terrans, this is not going to go too far to help the rest of us overcome the Deathballs and eternally replaceable swarms we have to micro our hearts out against just to break even. Neither will Thor target priorities or 15 secs off timewarp. And why is Terran the only race that actually has to deal with friendly splash damage? How does that make sense? Any solution that doesn't change the fundamental way the Terran race works will not change the balance BUT for the top pros and M/GMs.
On July 09 2014 06:16 FireCake wrote: Its sad to see so many people satisfied by these changes. I guess this is because David kim accustomed us to horrible changes.
My thoughts exactly. I think people just want a protoss nerf and they don't care how they get it.
On July 09 2014 06:57 TwiggyWan wrote: Changes aren't bad in themselves but they are still dodging the photon overcharge problem by trying to patch the hull somewhere else :/
Also as a mech player i very welcome a thor buff but it's like they remove yet another micro aspect of the game :/
You will have to target fire Thors every time there is an overlord or overseer or medivac around.
Everything is problematic in TvP. While midgame is quite strong for T if the P decide to go macro, it sucks ass against big 2 bases allin. There is no way to mke efficient scouting in TvP with the state of the game now. We will have to wait for LotV. In the meantime, I wouldn't mind P being forced to play a much more predictable style for the time being. All in all you would still see all the tecch unit protoss have, like it is nowadays, and T will be much more solid since they will know what will happen. Mech in TvP won't come before LotV too, so I don't care about this style. HT first or Colo first don't change, in fine, everything is the same since 2010. The MU is exactly identical.
This is quite true. Each individual opening is not a major threat for T, but the extent of possibilities and the difference in responding to them forces the terran to have to accept whatever the P does without being able to take advantage of it.
This is, I think, the core problem of the matchup. If the T knew what the P would do, they would be more or less on equal footing, whereas the P has all the information he needs if he knows there's an expansion.
I don't think the answer is giving T a free maphack, and I enjoy the variety of opening of P. I actually think it's an incredibly fine balance without simple magical solution, and D. Kim is not doing a bad job. A tough job for sure.
Just realized mine splash radius is going to double tank splash radius...i get the feeling DKim played protoss in BW. Where else could you acquire a loathing of siege tanks this much?
On July 09 2014 06:48 Disciple7seveN wrote: And why is Terran the only race that actually has to deal with friendly splash damage? How does that make sense?
No idea how colossi, archons, fungal or ultras manage to not splash their own units. I can 100% see why banelings splashing themselves would be detrimental (but then hey! a reason to remove them for lurkers!)
What the hell are these changes? It would take an essay to explain the thought process behind choosing this batch of changes for testing!
We have like 50 pages of analysis right now of what's wrong with Terran in TvP and TvZ. We have a compiled list of pros' feedback that AGREES WITH THAT. Not enough variety, not enough lategame power, some Protoss options too easy or too versatile or too strong... and we know Blizzard read them because they scrapped that ridiculous Medivac buff.
So we get an insignificant Thor CHANGE (not buff) and a USELESS nerf of TW which won't change anything about its burst anti-micro potency?
Why don't we make Time Warp not affect Siege Tanks and Thors while we're at it?! That's a buff! That'll totally solve everything!
I find it strange that alot of protoss are complaining that 1 unit that needs detection can end the game now. Its what DTs have always been.
They need to buff tanks. Make a strong defense based on units (not a high HP building like photon overcharge) and the other races will learn to attack better. I don't like everyone's assumption that a stronger defense makes for a boring game. Its because of such a strong defense that other races will learn how to attack better and the game gets a higher skill cap. Until a small supply can make very effective trades versus a larger supply because of map design the game will never be that good.
My personal "first talk no touch" opinion is that the first 2 changes aren't good..
1st change - not a fan of that one (we already had a period of large mine splash), but this time they might be nailing it cause the overall damage is more "tank-like" as opposed to one big splash "uniformed" "blob"
2nd change will cause Zergs make Roaches and Overseers and "disorient" the Thors, lol, but they'll also be "self-aware" on shooting Vipers, so IDK TBH..
The third one is a good one (albeit maybe a bit too "rapid" for a "first touch", a 20 sec (down from 30) would suffice for start)
Though must say GJ on these ones.. Much better than the previous..
I'm surprised that DK kept his cool though.. Not bad for what actually massively happened, lol
Tvz - I'm a little skeptical - I really think reverting to the old mine would have been a better first step.. if even only by 60-70%. The increased radius seems strange.. someone please do the math on at what point you stop killing 2/2 lings and banes in the splash radius.. the real problem is that hurting zerg units doesn't do anything unless you have a winning army. The mutas will clean everything up on most occasions (or the excess of banes) in which case a majority of the lings and banes that were "hurt" either still got to detonate or regen for the next battle.
2/2 is the important time frame as this is when most of the standard play large scale battles happen. If you still only kill units in the first of 3 radius than you really haven't done much in terms of helping T.
Tvp - less timewarp is a good start but you still haven't addressed the caution that Terran needs to utilize in order to not fall victim to 1 of 10 different 1 or 2 base all ins - not to mention the issue of late-game Tempest/Colo/Templar/Archon/Zealot being basically unbeatable for Terran - Colo take care of mines - Templar take care of ghosts - Tempest take care of the vikings and instant remax on zealot/templar is lollable.
On July 09 2014 07:31 DomeGetta wrote: Tvz - I'm a little skeptical - I really think reverting to the old mine would have been a better first step.. if even only by 60-70%. The increased radius seems strange.. someone please do the math on at what point you stop killing 2/2 lings and banes in the splash radius.. the real problem is that hurting zerg units doesn't do anything unless you have a winning army. The mutas will clean everything up on most occasions (or the excess of banes) in which case a majority of the lings and banes that were "hurt" either still got to detonate or regen for the next battle.
2/2 is the important time frame as this is when most of the standard play large scale battles happen. If you still only kill units in the first of 3 radius than you really haven't done much in terms of helping T.
Tvp - less timewarp is a good start but you still haven't addressed the caution that Terran needs to utilize in order to not fall victim to 1 of 10 different 1 or 2 base all ins - not to mention the issue of late-game Tempest/Colo/Templar/Archon/Zealot being basically unbeatable for Terran - Colo take care of mines - Templar take care of ghosts - Tempest take care of the vikings and instant remax on zealot/templar is lollable.
Don't forget that the mine buff applies in TvP also - less "whining" would be a good start..
(I know I said it in a rude way, but feels like Terran's got what they wanted, - and still not enough)
the widow mine radius increase is massive :l tbh i expected a smaller buff with the damage scaling on it rather than the radius , but i suppose the radius lets us zergies bait them into his bio too
i like the thor aa change, itll help that the thor doesnt need to be targeted when the terran is busy splitting his marines, tho ida thought maybe something like a movespeed buff would help out by making it more mobile to support bio
i like the timewarp change too, though that could be influenced by bias because while just as frustrating as forcefiled, a timewarp doesnt require near the level of precision that at least make FFs bearable :L
On July 09 2014 07:31 DomeGetta wrote: Tvz - I'm a little skeptical - I really think reverting to the old mine would have been a better first step.. if even only by 60-70%. The increased radius seems strange.. someone please do the math on at what point you stop killing 2/2 lings and banes in the splash radius.. the real problem is that hurting zerg units doesn't do anything unless you have a winning army. The mutas will clean everything up on most occasions (or the excess of banes) in which case a majority of the lings and banes that were "hurt" either still got to detonate or regen for the next battle.
2/2 is the important time frame as this is when most of the standard play large scale battles happen. If you still only kill units in the first of 3 radius than you really haven't done much in terms of helping T.
Tvp - less timewarp is a good start but you still haven't addressed the caution that Terran needs to utilize in order to not fall victim to 1 of 10 different 1 or 2 base all ins - not to mention the issue of late-game Tempest/Colo/Templar/Archon/Zealot being basically unbeatable for Terran - Colo take care of mines - Templar take care of ghosts - Tempest take care of the vikings and instant remax on zealot/templar is lollable.
Don't forget that the mine buff applies in TvP also - less "whining" would be a good start..
(I know I said it in a rude way, but feels like Terran's got what they wanted, - and still not enough)
I wonder if thor priority will help (I'm Protoss so I don't know TvZ).
Lowering the time warp duration is interesting... I feel that most of the battle will already be over in 15 seconds (or, at least, the opponent will move out of the time warp during that time) so I feel like a decrease in the duration of photon overcharge would make more sense.
the fight between an allining protoss (2base) and a defending zerg lasts waaaay longer than 15 or 30 seconds and a timewarp on a thin place or on the ramp is just the most annoying this as a zerg! i guess some terrans would agree with that too
I LOVE all the people complaining about the WM…"oh wait, as a zerg or protoss I now have to micro my death ball instead of 1aing???"…terrans have had to stutter step and split their hearts out in everymatchup since the beginning. Its nice seeing the shoe on the other foot
On July 09 2014 06:09 Larkin wrote: Mines even stronger vs P now ;; get rid of +shields bullshit and just have more splash.
why. You are already stronger than T.
Because the WM splash + it's bonus damage to shields makes zealot templar styles far weaker - we already saw this style decreasing a lot after the previous buff to WM, so that the current meta is far more favorable towards colossus first instead of storm first play. Adding this new WM buff without changing this, would just eliminate the entire style from existence, greatly hurting diversity in the matchup while doing nothing against the things that make terran struggle so much in tvp.
Too bad for them. Restricting the number of opening they can do is always good for T. You won't wonder for 10min if it's a 2nd starport or a ghost accademy that you will need. And it will be more punitive to moveclic without micro for the P.
This is a terrible mentality to have. It's understandable, in the sense that frustration can lead to desiring "pay back", but honestly it's changes like this, resulting in a limiting of options, that put Terran in its current predicament in the first place. One only needs to think back to early WoL to remember how many options Terran had to play each match up, while the other two races were pigeon-holed into 1 or 2 builds. It's what made Terran OP back then, it's what makes Terran UP now.
The more I think about the widow mine change, the more I hate it as a Terran player. We need our early game options back, then we can look at buffing late game. I'm not expecting much from Blizzard for this balance patch, though. We'll see what they do for LotV.
On July 09 2014 07:21 Unsane wrote: Just realized mine splash radius is going to double tank splash radius...i get the feeling DKim played protoss in BW. Where else could you acquire a loathing of siege tanks this much?
I don't know but I really wish he would just either A: own up to it or B: stop letting his personal hatred of the unit affect his balancing decisions.
Blizzard will never support an idea from the community and this will eventually lead to their downfall (at least for RTS–MMOs/casual games are different). No wonder Day9 is working on a new RTS. This is a sad time, IMO. There is so much potential in this game and it's squandered away by negligence and incompetence (it obviously must not make much money for Blizz). Starcraft II WASN'T always like this. We're just used to now.
Blizzard, what happened? Did the monetary success of WOW completely change your values? Starcraft II is the most one dimensional RTS I've ever seen. There's basically one build order per matchup. There's no strategy in that. Only tactics. I will always be a fan of Starcraft, but GOD I cannot WAIT until LotV.
On July 09 2014 07:56 WhaleOFaTale wrote: I LOVE all the people complaining about the WM…"oh wait, as a zerg or protoss I now have to micro my death ball instead of 1aing???"…terrans have had to stutter step and split their hearts out in everymatchup since the beginning. Its nice seeing the shoe on the other foot
Thats not the problem about wm. its very random shots is very disgusting and unpredictable if you play with lings&blings, wm is ok/fine against all other zerg units.
On July 09 2014 07:56 WhaleOFaTale wrote: I LOVE all the people complaining about the WM…"oh wait, as a zerg or protoss I now have to micro my death ball instead of 1aing???"…terrans have had to stutter step and split their hearts out in everymatchup since the beginning. Its nice seeing the shoe on the other foot
Thats not the problem about wm. its very random shots is very disgusting and unpredictable if you play with lings&blings, wm is ok/fine against all other zerg units.
The Thor attack priority have always been a little awkward. It's easier with Queens and BC's because they both have definite better attacks vs the one target. But where Thors hit, it's so different how good that hit will be.
That thor change is interesting since the dopey bastards tend to ignore mutas during the big TvZ fights unless you target them and sod that I've got marines to split. Definitely would like to see what that means for terrans, perhaps more dead mutas? Let's hope so.
Mine buff is yea whatever, as is time warp nerf (amused to see the MSC has been nerfed three times since release). Doesn't address the fact that we're primarily a midgame oriented race but I think blizzard wants it that way, so ok I guess?
On July 09 2014 07:56 WhaleOFaTale wrote: I LOVE all the people complaining about the WM…"oh wait, as a zerg or protoss I now have to micro my death ball instead of 1aing???"…terrans have had to stutter step and split their hearts out in everymatchup since the beginning. Its nice seeing the shoe on the other foot
Thats not the problem about wm. its very random shots is very disgusting and unpredictable if you play with lings&blings, wm is ok/fine against all other zerg units.
It's not random. You have to micro against WM.
I mean I can see how it can seem random to zerg players not used to micro. When you're only a-moving and not watching the fights, you don't really need to know the rules of auto targetting for Starcraft units.
I'm reading again justifications for the Time Warp change : there's no such thing as "micro opportunities" against Time Warp. Say your change multiplies the "micro opportunities" by 10, 0*10 is still equal to 0. Consider removing the spell instead of trying to bandaid fix it because it's one of many spells that are very boring and borderline OP.
Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5.
I see this drastically changing all three matchups in the early and mid game and not changing anything in the late game like a Terran buff would need to be viable in this meta. Against bad players, this is going to effectively destroy entire armies with a cheap unit. Against good players who know how to split and trick the mine AI (like everyone was doing in the beginning of HOTS. I personally used mass Overseers), Terran is now going to have tons of WM splash killing their marines again. Versus Protoss, chargelots are once again going to force the same splash and destroy the marine lines like kamikaze pilots.
Thor Attack priority changed to use AA weapon first
Now players who split their mutalisks to avoid splash are going to wreck Thors because their roach/ling army (which is doing the DPS to the thors in the first place) aren't going to be prioritized. I think this is a nerf to the Thor and only affects Broodlords, which no one makes in the first place.
Time Warp duration decreased from 30 to 15
This is just silly, in no way will this affect anything but the mirror matchup of PvP. The problem with timewarp in ZvP and TvP is that it prevents micro instantly. Very rarely will a player keep their units in the timewarp longer than 5 seconds, let alone 15 or 30. What needs to be done to timewarp is a 25% movement reduction instead of 50% so everything in the timewarp doesn't die instantly.
Thor Attack priority changed to use AA weapon first
Now players who split their mutalisks to avoid splash are going to wreck Thors because their roach/ling army (which is doing the DPS to the thors in the first place) aren't going to be prioritized. I think this is a nerf to the Thor and only affects Broodlords, which no one makes in the first place.
This is an interesting thought. Originally Thors were used because of its high collision size to soak up baneling hits. Now that Thors target mutalisks first will banelings ignore the thor because of attack priority which in turn makes it even easier for Zerg ? Or am I confusing myself?
The more I think about it the more I think the time warp change is OK. The first half of the spell it does its slow thing and then basically acts as a triple size forcefield since no player in their right mind would ever attack a protoss army under timewarp willingly unless there were massive (and nothing short of massive) positioning issues with the protoss army. Like so massive we are talking all the HT's bunched up at the front and the Protoss players dealing with a drop.
So the time warp nerf gets rid of the "big forcefield" side effect
The widow-mine buff wouldn't help imho. In most cases [implying the game is played on a high level] this buff would cause more friendly fire than it'd help dealing with enemy units.To this there's one exception: Widow Mine drops as opening - with the buff it'd be incredibly strong, even stronger than it is now. It also doesn't change the fact that most widow mines compositions get simply overrun by Ling/Bane/Muta/Overseer on creep and barely detonate at all.
The Thor buff is something I like a lot as it makes adding Thors to your bio composition TvZ more viable and gives Terran a better way to handle huge Muta flocks.
The Time-warp change is overdue, even as a Terran player it seems obvious that this spell is way to strong in zoning and delaying engagements in PvZ. I still think though it shouldn't slow as much as it does rather than having the time it last shortened [obviously I'd like to see both]
Please keep in mind that this is all from my perspective and not meant to be taken as facts
On July 09 2014 07:31 DomeGetta wrote: Tvz - I'm a little skeptical - I really think reverting to the old mine would have been a better first step.. if even only by 60-70%. The increased radius seems strange.. someone please do the math on at what point you stop killing 2/2 lings and banes in the splash radius.. the real problem is that hurting zerg units doesn't do anything unless you have a winning army. The mutas will clean everything up on most occasions (or the excess of banes) in which case a majority of the lings and banes that were "hurt" either still got to detonate or regen for the next battle.
2/2 is the important time frame as this is when most of the standard play large scale battles happen. If you still only kill units in the first of 3 radius than you really haven't done much in terms of helping T.
Tvp - less timewarp is a good start but you still haven't addressed the caution that Terran needs to utilize in order to not fall victim to 1 of 10 different 1 or 2 base all ins - not to mention the issue of late-game Tempest/Colo/Templar/Archon/Zealot being basically unbeatable for Terran - Colo take care of mines - Templar take care of ghosts - Tempest take care of the vikings and instant remax on zealot/templar is lollable.
Thor Attack priority changed to use AA weapon first
Now players who split their mutalisks to avoid splash are going to wreck Thors because their roach/ling army (which is doing the DPS to the thors in the first place) aren't going to be prioritized. I think this is a nerf to the Thor and only affects Broodlords, which no one makes in the first place.
This is an interesting thought. Originally Thors were used because of its high collision size to soak up baneling hits. Now that Thors target mutalisks first will banelings ignore the thor because of attack priority which in turn makes it even easier for Zerg ? Or am I confusing myself?
im pretty certain thors are mixed in to help deal with a huge cloud of 25+ mutas , also stops you from bunching the muta to 1 shot mines/ medivacs
On July 09 2014 07:56 WhaleOFaTale wrote: I LOVE all the people complaining about the WM…"oh wait, as a zerg or protoss I now have to micro my death ball instead of 1aing???"…terrans have had to stutter step and split their hearts out in everymatchup since the beginning. Its nice seeing the shoe on the other foot
Thats not the problem about wm. its very random shots is very disgusting and unpredictable if you play with lings&blings, wm is ok/fine against all other zerg units.
It's not random. You have to micro against WM.
I mean I can see how it can seem random to zerg players not used to micro. When you're only a-moving and not watching the fights, you don't really need to know the rules of auto targetting for Starcraft units.
Is this post for real? WM is pretty fucking random, dude.
@mikumegurine I'd actually like something like it more because widow mine drops are already quite good in TvP, and an unit that can one shot probes in a 2 radius doesn't sound fair to me. At least they should think about reworking that stupid +shields damage that already nearly forces colossus openings if you're not going for cheese/all-in.
These changes do please me, as a Terran player, but I would like to see them develop other units and abilities a bit more. These very slight changes seem like patchwork to me, rather than genuine balance updates.
On July 09 2014 07:56 WhaleOFaTale wrote: I LOVE all the people complaining about the WM…"oh wait, as a zerg or protoss I now have to micro my death ball instead of 1aing???"…terrans have had to stutter step and split their hearts out in everymatchup since the beginning. Its nice seeing the shoe on the other foot
Thats not the problem about wm. its very random shots is very disgusting and unpredictable if you play with lings&blings, wm is ok/fine against all other zerg units.
It's not random. You have to micro against WM.
I mean I can see how it can seem random to zerg players not used to micro. When you're only a-moving and not watching the fights, you don't really need to know the rules of auto targetting for Starcraft units.
Is this post for real? WM is pretty fucking random, dude.
Not really, they are random if the Z 1a the army, and mainly innefficient against a microed army. With a bigger range, they will be cost efficient against 1a, and inneficient against microed army.
On July 09 2014 09:02 Shellshock wrote: Didnt thors used to prioritize air in WoL or am I imagining that? I'm probably wrong but I thought that was the case
Yes, and they were derping on overlord and shit like that.
None of these changes address the issues leaving so many Terrans back in Bronze. The way I see it, Blizz better really have some great things in store for LotV because if they release that game with the same types of 'improvements' they've been patching WoL and HotS with (namely leaving T on WoL while Z and P get upgrades and new units/strats) It's going to be really bad for them as viewership and players/sales will drop off dramatically. SC is a 3 race game, Blizz. Act like it.
Widow Mine splash radius increase This will allow Terran to be stronger in the mid/late games in both matchups. We’ve also seen feedback that the Widow Mine splash radius increase doesn’t buff late game Terran, however we feel that this type of mid-game buff also carries over into a late game buff.
Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5.
Good. Very good. Well, let's recap the different states of the Mine throughout HotS:
1 = Original Mine 2 = Post-nerf Mine after patch 2.0.12 3 = Mine after +shields buff 4 = Mine with the proposed change
Against Zerg specifically (comparison between the original Mine and the proposed one):
The critical one-shot of banes in the current secondary area (from 1.25 to 1.5) is here again. That's perfect. For the rest, we'll have to see if the average amount of damage in the extra area (from 1.75 to 2.5) is adequate.
Additionally, people shouldn't forget that Mines deal friendly fire, and Terran has to deal with that too. ForGG may not be pleased with that aspect.
Against Protoss specifically (comparison between the original Mine and the proposed one):
*Depending on the amount of shield left. **Probes are one-shot.
The positive points:
Mine drops and thus 1-1-1 builds would be a powerful early game threat anew. Those Mines would be even more deadly than the original ones for Protoss' mineral lines (they would kill Probes in one shot up to 2 radius, instead of 1.75 at the beginning of HotS), but of course Protoss have mastered the defence of such attacks since then and would deal with it better. That being said, sloppiness would be heavily punished and that's a good thing (risky builds without detection in time would also suffer more). By repercussion, Protoss might have to concede Cannons in their mineral lines and maybe some extra stalks if they can't rule out a Mine drop, thus toning down their builds a bit. That's a good point.
7g blink would die. You can't all-in without detection if a Mine reaching your mineral line threatens to kill 10 Probes every 40 seconds. Someone explained that recently in some lengthy post; can't remember where though. Oh well.
Drops with Mines would be more powerful in midgame. There may be more incentive for Terran to use Mines against blink/colo (while they're currently mostly useless against that style).
Mines might now be useful in lategame? Written with a big question mark, but they might have some use to hold the scenario of a quick Zealots/Archons remax.
The negative point:
Protoss will be further pushed away from Templar openings, a style allowing better distinction and producing better games than the dreadful blink colo dual forge boredom.
Another problem to consider is that Blizzard tends to propose a bigger change for their test maps compared with the actual values they aim for. For instance, they had initially announced a reduction of the Mine radius to 1.1 (!) to sweeten the pill.
Thor Attack priority changed to use AA weapon first Because Thors are mostly core against Zerg, and the AA weapon is the preferred weapon when using Thors, we’d like to try this change.
Will be practical/useful in some situations and a pain in others, so we'll have to see. As for aberrant priorities, how about 25 Vikings in autopilot don't shoot at the first Observer they see while your bio evaporates to the 6 colos behind?
Time Warp duration decreased from 30 to 15 We’d like to try out this change for 3 reasons: Reduce the strength of various all-ins that combo with offensive Time Warps, reduce general Protoss main army strength, and hopefully increase micro opportunities against the spell.
Why not, but in most situations the trapped units will already be dead in the span of the first 15 seconds (no idea what kind of micro they expect against Time Warp other than right clicking trapped units out of the area), so in many scenarii this is mostly cosmetic as far as TvP goes. A reduced radius or a lesser slowing would be better tracks to explore. Implementing a cast point and a casting backswing animation to the MSC so it doesn't instantly cast its spells (except Recall given the use) would also be nice. That being said, there are situations in which this change would come in handy, and all in all it cannot hurt (in TvP) so OK.
Time warp change is useless in PvT except maybe weakening blink all ins. They should consider either allowing time warp to affect friendly units or lowering the cast range to 0, making time warp a preemptive positional advantage type of spell rather than something thrown down on bio mid-battle. Messing with the cast range might make colossi weaker in PvP though.
On July 09 2014 04:38 SC2Toastie wrote: I love the buff to Terran lategame, I really like how Blizzard takes the community response in mind when proposing these changes.
Seriously, TW nerf does nothing except for pvp, thor buff realy isn't needed nor useful, mine buff is stupid because it's just a coinflippy unit to rely on for aoe.
the thor buff is super useful. its very difficult to target mutalisks with your thors in the initiation of the fight where normally youd spend time splitting or queing the ultralisks with marauders. this will help a lot or at the very least make it easier to control your army in tvz
No. In big engagements mutalisk are either not participatibg or magic boxed. Thors are mostly used for zoning and forcing said magic box, something this buffnerf does notging for
I can't even imagine the change to the mine making it through without at least a nerf to +shields damage. I'm pretty sure the change is intended for TvZ and this mine would be ridiculously good at wiping out mineral lines, and by ridiculously good I mean too good. I'm ready to test this change but I don't like its potential conjunction to the bandaid +shields damage that was applied some time ago.
Tldr, decrease +shields damage if you go with this change so that the mine fulfills its role again in TvZ but doesn't become too powerful of a threat in TvP.
On July 09 2014 09:02 Shellshock wrote: Didnt thors used to prioritize air in WoL or am I imagining that? I'm probably wrong but I thought that was the case
I think that was changed a couple of times because of overseers and medivacs.
On July 09 2014 09:22 stuchiu wrote: That Thor thing was random.
Not sure about that. It happened to me quite a lot that my thor didn't shoot one voley on a flock of mutas because there was a zergling nearby, and This thor voley could have done so much. The main point of thor are to kill mutas, and if they focus them first, there is a higher chance for them to hit a big chunk of it instead of a lone muta.
On July 09 2014 04:38 SC2Toastie wrote: I love the buff to Terran lategame, I really like how Blizzard takes the community response in mind when proposing these changes.
Seriously, TW nerf does nothing except for pvp, thor buff realy isn't needed nor useful, mine buff is stupid because it's just a coinflippy unit to rely on for aoe.
the thor buff is super useful. its very difficult to target mutalisks with your thors in the initiation of the fight where normally youd spend time splitting or queing the ultralisks with marauders. this will help a lot or at the very least make it easier to control your army in tvz
No. In big engagements mutalisk are either not participatibg or magic boxed. Thors are mostly used for zoning and forcing said magic box, something this buffnerf does notging for
All in all I am very disappointed with these changes and frankly very sad there's a) people thinking these are good/useful changes and b) people saying Terrans are never happy witg what they get.
This completely ignores what the game needs and the outcry of intelligent people for things such as a Terran late game, or viable Siege Tanks. This 75/25 unit already does more damage in a battle than the 150/125 unit it overlaps with. Meanwhile, it is faster, easier to use, faster to produce, earlier in the game, and random as fuck.
On July 09 2014 07:31 DomeGetta wrote: Tvz - I'm a little skeptical - I really think reverting to the old mine would have been a better first step.. if even only by 60-70%. The increased radius seems strange.. someone please do the math on at what point you stop killing 2/2 lings and banes in the splash radius.. the real problem is that hurting zerg units doesn't do anything unless you have a winning army. The mutas will clean everything up on most occasions (or the excess of banes) in which case a majority of the lings and banes that were "hurt" either still got to detonate or regen for the next battle.
2/2 is the important time frame as this is when most of the standard play large scale battles happen. If you still only kill units in the first of 3 radius than you really haven't done much in terms of helping T.
Tvp - less timewarp is a good start but you still haven't addressed the caution that Terran needs to utilize in order to not fall victim to 1 of 10 different 1 or 2 base all ins - not to mention the issue of late-game Tempest/Colo/Templar/Archon/Zealot being basically unbeatable for Terran - Colo take care of mines - Templar take care of ghosts - Tempest take care of the vikings and instant remax on zealot/templar is lollable.
Don't forget that the mine buff applies in TvP also - less "whining" would be a good start..
(I know I said it in a rude way, but feels like Terran's got what they wanted, - and still not enough)
Which of my points were u disagreeing with?
Feel free to link me to a vod where Terran steamrolls that army late game vs P on 4 base - I'd love to copy the godliness. And you probably said the same thing after the last 2 buffs lol - crazy Terran's for thinking they were stupid and wouldn't change the balance problem.
I stated in my threat in Tvz that I was skeptical of the change because I'm not sure how it affects what% of units die at what radius - thanks to DWF for putting that together - Terran's just making useless whiny posts everywhere - gotta watch out for them
Basically you'll one shot banelings again in a 1.5 radius.
I have difficulties in thinking the consequences of that patch for TvZ too, but I can see very well that the Widow Mine would one shot probes in a 2 radius. I guess David Kim will say more about the exact nature of the radius buff in the upcoming days because I don't think a new mine like Downfall described some posts ago would be balanced for TvP (aside from putting the final nail in the coffin of templar openings which are anyway quite dead already).
Protoss will be further pushed away from Templar openings, a style allowing better distinction and producing better games than the dreadful blink colo dual forge boredom.
I really don't think this can be stressed enough. Blink stalker/colossus is literally the most skilless and unexciting way to play PvT. Do people really want this??? Really???????
On July 09 2014 09:02 Shellshock wrote: Didnt thors used to prioritize air in WoL or am I imagining that? I'm probably wrong but I thought that was the case
In beta yes, and it was really aggravating. Then they changed it so they'd prioritize ground except they somehow forgot to alter it for medivacs, so during big mech vs bio fights the thors would tickle the medivacs until they patched it.
If they do the change they ideally should make Thors prioritize air units that can hurt them over ground units, but leave pure air to air target priority as is right now. Whatever they do, Thors shouldn't ever prioritize things like medivacs or overlords over ground targets.
Protoss will be further pushed away from Templar openings, a style allowing better distinction and producing better games than the dreadful blink colo dual forge boredom.
I really don't think this can be stressed enough. Blink stalker/colossus is literally the most skilless and unexciting way to play PvT. Do people really want this??? Really???????
Hey, there are charglots in there that just yolo right at the target....
Yeah, its boring as fuck. If only there was a way we could have both....
On July 09 2014 09:56 Terence Chill wrote: couldnt we just organize a strike, where the community does not play the game a whole day? just to show blizz our trust in them?
A whole day?!
Blizzard doesn't profit from battle.net games. The only way we have to make change happen against blizzards wishes is to get the pros, casters, and community leaders talking about the totality of their dissatisfaction on a regular basis. "Imbaimbaimbaimba" style. The problem is that's not going to happen, not in the West, certainly not in Korea, and absolutely not while ladder heroes stand to benefit from the current state of affairs.
If the most we get after two seasons with 3-4 terrans in Code S is Tasteless making jokes while Artosis, who played Terran in BW, shuts him down every time, nothing is happening. The ZParCraft is as close as we get, and half of that thread is calling it biased whining trash.
Look at Nathanias, cool guy, before WCS NA picked him up he was known to speak his mind about balance on stream, and I haven't heard a owed about it since he was hired. It makes sense, its professional, he's right to do it, but the situation is hopeless.
Look at Nathanias, cool guy, before WCS NA picked him up he was known to speak his mind about balance on stream, and I haven't heard a owed about it since he was hired. It makes sense, its professional, he's right to do it, but the situation is hopeless.
Eh last time I watched his streams he made comments like this;
"Any fucking retard can play zerg".
And a lot more venting.... He was whining big time dude
On July 09 2014 04:38 SC2Toastie wrote: I love the buff to Terran lategame, I really like how Blizzard takes the community response in mind when proposing these changes.
Seriously, TW nerf does nothing except for pvp, thor buff realy isn't needed nor useful, mine buff is stupid because it's just a coinflippy unit to rely on for aoe.
the thor buff is super useful. its very difficult to target mutalisks with your thors in the initiation of the fight where normally youd spend time splitting or queing the ultralisks with marauders. this will help a lot or at the very least make it easier to control your army in tvz
No. In big engagements mutalisk are either not participatibg or magic boxed. Thors are mostly used for zoning and forcing said magic box, something this buffnerf does notging for
I think Morrow knows more than you lol.
No offense, but Morrow doesn't have the authority he once had, and I think he is wrong. Maybe use a real argument lol
On July 09 2014 09:56 Terence Chill wrote: couldnt we just organize a strike, where the community does not play the game a whole day? just to show blizz our trust in them?
A whole day?!
Blizzard doesn't profit from battle.net games. The only way we have to make change happen against blizzards wishes is to get the pros, casters, and community leaders talking about the totality of their dissatisfaction on a regular basis. "Imbaimbaimbaimba" style. The problem is that's not going to happen, not in the West, certainly not in Korea, and absolutely not while ladder heroes stand to benefit from the current state of affairs.
If the most we get after two seasons with 3-4 terrans in Code S is Tasteless making jokes while Artosis, who played Terran in BW, shuts him down every time, nothing is happening. The ZParCraft is as close as we get, and half of that thread is calling it biased whining trash.
Look at Nathanias, cool guy, before WCS NA picked him up he was known to speak his mind about balance on stream, and I haven't heard a owed about it since he was hired. It makes sense, its professional, he's right to do it, but the situation is hopeless.
its not about achieving something its about putting down a marker. dont you think they would realize if the number of games would decrease drasticly for one day?
On July 09 2014 09:56 Terence Chill wrote: couldnt we just organize a strike, where the community does not play the game a whole day? just to show blizz our trust in them?
A whole day?!
Blizzard doesn't profit from battle.net games. The only way we have to make change happen against blizzards wishes is to get the pros, casters, and community leaders talking about the totality of their dissatisfaction on a regular basis. "Imbaimbaimbaimba" style. The problem is that's not going to happen, not in the West, certainly not in Korea, and absolutely not while ladder heroes stand to benefit from the current state of affairs.
If the most we get after two seasons with 3-4 terrans in Code S is Tasteless making jokes while Artosis, who played Terran in BW, shuts him down every time, nothing is happening. The ZParCraft is as close as we get, and half of that thread is calling it biased whining trash.
Look at Nathanias, cool guy, before WCS NA picked him up he was known to speak his mind about balance on stream, and I haven't heard a owed about it since he was hired. It makes sense, its professional, he's right to do it, but the situation is hopeless.
its not about achieving something its about putting down a marker. dont you think they would realize if the number of games would decrease drasticly for one day?
The number of Platinum league games would slightly drop, that's about it.
that moment when you wish david kim steps on a lego or 2. Why no buff siege tanks , doble hit instead of 1, and make them hit harder vs shield or something so they can be massacred by inmortals -.-
On July 09 2014 10:23 Requiem- wrote: that moment when you wish david kim steps on a lego or 2. Why no buff siege tanks , doble hit instead of 1, and make them hit harder vs shield or something so they can be massacred by inmortals -.-
Because they already one shot like anything zerg that isn't an ultra or queen seems to me that the immortal's shields needs to be nerfed more than the siege tank buffed.
Look at Nathanias, cool guy, before WCS NA picked him up he was known to speak his mind about balance on stream, and I haven't heard a owed about it since he was hired. It makes sense, its professional, he's right to do it, but the situation is hopeless.
Eh last time I watched his streams he made comments like this;
"Any fucking retard can play zerg".
And a lot more venting.... He was whining big time dude
I never said everything that came from him was pearls! But I'd rather take honest whining than dishonest civility in this case. Honest whining has a chance of being productive.
On July 09 2014 10:10 Doodsmack wrote: This means Thors will target overlords if you're purposely trying to use them against an army with no mutas.
Overlords are non attacking and will have 0 priority. They are not going to be attacked if something else near by is attacking. This will make Thors target mutas vs lings though which will help out those people who are not good at focus firing them or are doing other things.
Protoss will be further pushed away from Templar openings, a style allowing better distinction and producing better games than the dreadful blink colo dual forge boredom.
I really don't think this can be stressed enough. Blink stalker/colossus is literally the most skilless and unexciting way to play PvT. Do people really want this??? Really???????
Or protoss can learn not open greedy, learn to split zealots vs mine fields and flank/split better with HT, just a thought. Instead of yolo a moving them into mine fields. Widow mine forces more micro from both zerg and protoss which is a good thing.
Protoss has tons of openings vs Terrans, you are not forced into 1 build like Terran is vs protoss come on now. So much variety has been shown from Korean Protoss.....from stargate play to tons of different timings ect ect.
On July 09 2014 09:56 Terence Chill wrote: couldnt we just organize a strike, where the community does not play the game a whole day? just to show blizz our trust in them?
A whole day?!
Blizzard doesn't profit from battle.net games. The only way we have to make change happen against blizzards wishes is to get the pros, casters, and community leaders talking about the totality of their dissatisfaction on a regular basis. "Imbaimbaimbaimba" style. The problem is that's not going to happen, not in the West, certainly not in Korea, and absolutely not while ladder heroes stand to benefit from the current state of affairs.
If the most we get after two seasons with 3-4 terrans in Code S is Tasteless making jokes while Artosis, who played Terran in BW, shuts him down every time, nothing is happening. The ZParCraft is as close as we get, and half of that thread is calling it biased whining trash.
Look at Nathanias, cool guy, before WCS NA picked him up he was known to speak his mind about balance on stream, and I haven't heard a owed about it since he was hired. It makes sense, its professional, he's right to do it, but the situation is hopeless.
its not about achieving something its about putting down a marker. dont you think they would realize if the number of games would decrease drasticly for one day?
What would it matter? I mean seriously, I would rather any company stick to their guns and build the game they want than give into a "protest" of their games. What if someone puts together a protest in favor of a really terrible change? Which is not like, out of the question. Its not like we are all shitting diamonds out here.
On July 09 2014 10:10 Doodsmack wrote: This means Thors will target overlords if you're purposely trying to use them against an army with no mutas.
Overlords are non attacking and will have 0 priority. They are not going to be attacked if something else near by is attacking. This will make Thors target mutas vs lings though which will help out those people who are not good at focus firing them or are doing other things.
This problem existed in the past though when Thors preferred their air attack over their ground attack, that's why people are concerned.
If only they'd start SERIOUSLY looking at tanks and why they're never used vZ and vP D:
Fo realz. I feel that tanks are seriously underused in both of these matchups and the height of entertaining TvZ was middle of WOL when tanks were still used a lot in combination with Bio, and before infestor/broodlord era. This was, for me, the most fun TvZ to play and to watch. Also increasing the viability of tanks could increase diversity of gameplay; while I wouldn't want, for example, to see pure mech entirely replace pure bio (or 4M) as a standard, if bio mech, mech and bio all became more viable options in both non-mirror Terran matchups this would be great. I don't think anyone would disagree. And the tank is a core unit for creating these diverse compositions. But I seem to remember reading somewhere that David Kim did not like tanks. If that is true, it's a shame that some odd personal bias is dictating gameplay decisions, especially when it involves a terran unit with a long and dignified history back to days of ye old brood war - the siege tank.
On July 09 2014 10:10 Doodsmack wrote: This means Thors will target overlords if you're purposely trying to use them against an army with no mutas.
Overlords are non attacking and will have 0 priority. They are not going to be attacked if something else near by is attacking. This will make Thors target mutas vs lings though which will help out those people who are not good at focus firing them or are doing other things.
This problem existed in the past though when Thors preferred their air attack over their ground attack, that's why people are concerned.
I read back in the threads. I was never aware of the issue in WOL. I do think they changed the targeting system in HOTS though so maybe it wont be as bad?
On July 09 2014 10:10 Doodsmack wrote: This means Thors will target overlords if you're purposely trying to use them against an army with no mutas.
Overlords are non attacking and will have 0 priority. They are not going to be attacked if something else near by is attacking. This will make Thors target mutas vs lings though which will help out those people who are not good at focus firing them or are doing other things.
This problem existed in the past though when Thors preferred their air attack over their ground attack, that's why people are concerned.
This is a very real problem because until something is attacking the Thor, it isn't going to prioritize. If someone uses a cloud of overlords like many players did to widow mines in early HOTS, it will make the Thor miss the first shot or two and then the army can get right on-top of them.
Look at Nathanias, cool guy, before WCS NA picked him up he was known to speak his mind about balance on stream, and I haven't heard a owed about it since he was hired. It makes sense, its professional, he's right to do it, but the situation is hopeless.
Eh last time I watched his streams he made comments like this;
"Any fucking retard can play zerg".
And a lot more venting.... He was whining big time dude
Well he's probably a lot happier since he got all those casting gigs, caster money is imba as fuck
Damn, new Widow Mine buff would be like getting the Reaver back from BW. Random shots that blow up entire mineral lines or armies. Despite its drawbacks (randomness, lack of micro potential, complete game-changing shots) it can't be said it's not exciting. Everyone always talks about them Reaver drops from BW, after all
So all this patch will do is make bio mine the choice of build again for terran players eliminating the need to try new styles like biomech variations. TvT will revert back to mine drop openings in every game and the bio mine style in TvP will be buffed. Terran will be buffed at the cost of spectator value, Terran match ups which are often said to be the most interesting to watch due it's fast pace and diversity will take a hit here as blizzard is buffing one particular style to the point where all others are not worth playing due to being so inferior to the staple biomine style that the blizz team is tunnel visioned into patching over and over again.
The time warp nerf goes to show that Blizzard doesn't really know what they want to accomplish. It's already been changed. They want to change it yet again... why? It's just a random change that will yield very random results.
Another widow mine buff. Does terran need a buff in TvZ? From what I've hear as of late, not at all. As for TvP, what does a widow mine buff accomplish? It kills templar styles even more and encourage protoss players to follow the same tech path in the midgame every single time. Widow mines are perfectly fine as of now. And worst of all, just like time warp, widow mines have already been patched.
How can Blizzard be so narrow-minded? Further buffing and nerfing things that have been recently patched is really stupid, unless there's a clear reason for it. These changes are like the oracle speed buff - they're coming out of nowhere and serve no real purpose in the grand scheme of things.
As a toss player, I've even been asking for a time warp nerf, forever. It's hard to even focus in the long battles, because I'm usually drawn to the time warp and can't stop thinking how crazy it is that it never seems to go away.
As for widow mines, I have to give credit to the team for saying, before they released the game, how hard it was to balance the widow mine. I've watched Terran win every game, without a care in the world, for months. Then a change comes, and, low and behold, Zergs are now winning their games blindfolded. Maybe the new balance is giving each race free wins for a few months, against each other, so, in the long term it's "balanced." I hope it's more balanced, though, because it's not really watchable when you can't ignore the imbalance.
Instead of fixing the things that actually need fixed, they just keep changing the widow mine over and over, now buffing it, pigeonholing not just Terran, but Protoss and to a lesser extent Zerg in their Terran matchups. Protoss is forced to open colossi every game, and while they have found methods to beat SCV pulls in this way, it just makes everything so stale. Terran will only ever play biomine in TvZ again, and were going to get the same redundant stuff over and over.
Something as simple as +10 damage vs shields would go a long way ( since it could be in theory not effected by light/heavy/psionic ). If you worded it as +10 damage vs shields regardless of unit type, you could even have it to 20 damage vs an immortal instead of 10. Immortals already ez mode vs tanks.
As someone who plays both Protoss and Terran about equally, I would much prefer a nerf to Photon Overcharge than to Timewarp. It's true that it would affect PvP negatively, but of the two spells it's the one that most promotes a boring early-mid phase of the game in PvT. Holding against early game attacks in WoL was pretty hard, but it was also really fun.
And also, the concept of defending against an attack for ONE MINUTE just by activating an automatic canon is kind of lame.
Just dumb changes. Why do we allow blizzard to ruin our game?
Is anyone else surprised that the patch changes seem uniquely targeted towards buffing terran against zerg? The mine change is going to hurt zerg far more than protoss, and the thor change is just a F.U to mutas.
Why do the bastards ask for community input, then implement nonsensical changes that only prove they do not even play the game?
On July 09 2014 14:32 BruMeister wrote: I would like to see a buff to tanks instead of mines. We see mines in all matchups as it already is. We (basically) only see tanks in TvT.
David kim is thinking that if more Terrans wins in TVZ / TVP we will see more TVT games. Therefore, more tanks will be used
On July 09 2014 02:27 Vindicare605 wrote: I'm not a huge fan of the Thor change.
It's going to make the unit annoying to use in TvT where it can serve a pretty important role of a Tank buster unit, this also makes the unit a huge liability to use vs Bio forces since they'll attack the Medivacs now by default.
It's simply replacing one kind of annoyance for another.
Why would you ever build Thors vs Bio?!?!
And you're supposed to focus fire Tanks anyway, so it's not even remotely an issue.
Terran vs non-Terran micro requirements are already absurdly high. You can't expect a Terran to pull back and split his Marines, burrow his Widow Mines, and focus down Mutas with Thors when you're pushing a Zerg on creep (even off creep, it's asking a lot). I mean, if it was a standard dps vs dps battle, yeah, of course you easily could do it. But versus the burst AoE of Banelings... Noooooooooooooope. High priorities are burrowing Mines and splitting Marines, especially since having 0 Marines means push is over.
Realistically, a general overhaul of mech would be the best way to go, but I don't see that happening, not even in LotV...
On July 09 2014 14:32 BruMeister wrote: I would like to see a buff to tanks instead of mines. We see mines in all matchups as it already is. We (basically) only see tanks in TvT.
Tanks would need a pretty drastic buff. It's pretty bad outside the early game in TvP, and it's wayyyyyyyyyy too slow in TvZ. Tanks require a solid count before they get really scary, whereas Widow Mines don't (they do well with it, but they don't NEED massive numbers). And that would be all well and good if getting a big Tank count didn't mean giving your opponent the opportunity to get a better army that simply shits on everything.
On July 09 2014 13:58 Nerski wrote: Thor change might hurt more then help, send in a few muta's with ovies plus mass ground forces = Useless thors hurray!
Overlords have a lower target prio due to being non combat units, the only thing they would accomplish would be to absorb the initial volley if timed right. But you're taking a great risk in using overlords in each battle, and could lose them if things go sour and risk getting supply blocked.
On July 09 2014 13:04 Empirimancer wrote: As someone who plays both Protoss and Terran about equally, I would much prefer a nerf to Photon Overcharge than to Timewarp. It's true that it would affect PvP negatively, but of the two spells it's the one that most promotes a boring early-mid phase of the game in PvT. Holding against early game attacks in WoL was pretty hard, but it was also really fun.
And also, the concept of defending against an attack for ONE MINUTE just by activating an automatic canon is kind of lame.
Wow, is it really a full minute? I guess I never paid perfect attention to that. Isn't the average SC2 game length between 15 and 20 minutes? If you activate overcharge twice early on, you're getting a safety card for 1/10th the total game time. That's absurd, lol.
I just disagree with buffing anything that works as fire-and-forget-super-auto-mode like widow mines. Make it better - ok, but remove automation or add some additional actions around it.
Two-three of these negate a lot of compositions, 1s of no-focus and your mutas/phoenixes/... die - it's just too much for 75/25 per unit and auto-mode.
On July 09 2014 16:18 pieroog wrote: I just disagree with buffing antything that works as fire-and-forget-super-auto-mode like widow mines. Make it better - ok, but remove automation or add some additional actions around it.
This single unit negates a lot of compositions, 1s of no-focus and your mutas/phoenixes/... die - it's just too much for 75/25 and auto-mode.
There's plenty micro to widow mines. If you don't spread them out they get murdered by banes/storm plus the terran has to try and make sure he doesn't get too badly owned by lings dragging them across his units. There's micro to the unit, just not in how they do their attack, which is fine.
On July 09 2014 16:18 pieroog wrote: I just disagree with buffing anything that works as fire-and-forget-super-auto-mode like widow mines. Make it better - ok, but remove automation or add some additional actions around it.
Two-three of these negate a lot of compositions, 1s of no-focus and your mutas/phoenixes/... die - it's just too much for 75/25 per unit and auto-mode.
If you plant and forget your widow mines, they'll just be spotted by an overseer, and do superficial damage at best before they're destroyed.
I can understand that the development team do not want to make big changes when we are the last season into the WCS year. So a minor tweak on the mines is their choice in this balance patch.
But LOTV really is going to be my last stop on the SC2 scene. If epic dynamic games are not develop in LOTV, I think most people will also slowly lose interest in sc2 and fade away.
pulling all my overlords as zerg when facing thors if patch goes through :D seriously stuff like this is gonna happen, thors shooting useless airstuff (hallucinations, overlords, medivacs?) while they get rekt by roaches,ultra, hydra, siegetanks, hellions, hellbats, archon... (can't find many toss ground units thor's good against but you get the point) which can normally be easily handled by thors. guess they will need to find a fix before they launch this patch
On July 09 2014 16:42 Pandahunterz wrote: pulling all my overlords as zerg when facing thors if patch goes through :D seriously stuff like this is gonna happen, thors shooting useless airstuff (hallucinations, overlords, medivacs?) while they get rekt by roaches,ultra, hydra, siegetanks, hellions, hellbats, archon... (can't find many toss ground units thor's good against but you get the point) which can normally be easily handled by thors. guess they will need to find a fix before they launch this patch
it won't happen for the same reason drops/air fire at a nexus instead of workers when its overcharged
On July 09 2014 14:32 BruMeister wrote: I would like to see a buff to tanks instead of mines. We see mines in all matchups as it already is. We (basically) only see tanks in TvT.
David kim is thinking that if more Terrans wins in TVZ / TVP we will see more TVT games. Therefore, more tanks will be used
Ahahah that is a serious level of Tankception. David Kim is outthinking all of us. Fools we are.
WM is ridiculous. It should address TvZ problem, but it is a buff in TvP? WTF?! Did I miss something or what? I can live with this buff as long as it is not decimating my probes. You cannot compare it to Oracle, maybe to several Oracles... this is just insanely stupid change... it can be proudly compared to Oracle speed buff...
Thor - why not, don§t care.
Time Warp? Pfff, not enough. Reduce it to 5 or 10s, give us(P) an upgrade to twilight council. Also, if they are hurting duration of time warp, maybe they should re-thing energy cost. Though I still don't understand why they don't nerf the MSC and give some upgrades to Fleet Beacon or Twilight Council, revert recall back to WoL state...
Oh my, oh my, maybe it's really time to say goodbye... these changes are... weird at least.
blizzards random change generator should get an update, these are hardly better than the previous ones, try again...
why is their focus on tvz when protoss dominates harder than any race ever before? this tiny time warp change is nothing and wont change anything about protoss play and builds at all
If they really want to make Thor more useful they should make this attack in-depended, meaning they attack both types of units if available in range of each abilities. Now imagine Thor will try to move to attack that overlord when surround by lings.
how many times do I need to explain that units don't attack other units that are not considered harmfull to them when units that are harmfull are nearby, if a wave of roaches/overlords moves to a thor the thor will prioritize firing at roaches as they can attack him while overlords can not, just like voidrays will always prioritize shooting at marines over banshees or vikings over marauders.
On July 09 2014 17:30 Mutineer wrote: If they really want to make Thor more useful they should make this attack in-depended, meaning they attack both types of units if available in range of each abilities. Now imagine Thor will try to move to attack that overlord when surround by lings.
These would only be %10 of what needs to be changed.
-Timewarp : Have you ever watched a VOD? In which game have you seen units trapped in the time warp for 30 seconds? Or even 15? They are dead anyways in like 10 seconds.
-Thor: This is the weirdest change i have ever heard. You nerf Ghost to make it more difficult for players to micro , then change the priority of Thor attack. Dont you understand that terran is used to micro , so making the thors focus fire mutas are way easier then preventing storm hits or splitting against banelings.
-Mine: I think thats way over powered. Not only for the opponent but for the player as well , because the friendly fire , especially against zerg is very hard to prevent as their units are quiet fast. So now , they will send approx 10 zerglings in front to damage the army and then there wont even be a need to banelings.
Blizzard needs to look at MSC really carefully , out of nowhere , there is a unit which can "TimeWarp" , "Attack Groung Units" "Engage Nexus Cannon" and ofcourse "Teleport" , didnt you think that would significantly change the balance?
I dont really understand the ment after protoss build. They have a range of options to cheese , They have the ability to fight whereever they want , whenever they want , they have the best all ins in the game , even if they fail to do something you cannot punish them but in return you can be punished by a dark templar.
I'm not saying protoss is unbeatable , you can easily say that there are lots of games toss looses buıt check those games out and you will see that either protoss made the stupidest mistake of all time or terran played 3 times better.
If the game will be balanced , its should be balanced in all the aspects of the game. From lower to higher league.So its not just saying "Oh we checked and everything is good according to pro games and tournaments" , If tournaments are %0,1 of the game , the rest is casual players. And most of them are Gold (according to stats) , now if you make those players hate the game and rest love it then you can continue what you are failing to do.
Look at Nathanias, cool guy, before WCS NA picked him up he was known to speak his mind about balance on stream, and I haven't heard a owed about it since he was hired. It makes sense, its professional, he's right to do it, but the situation is hopeless.
Eh last time I watched his streams he made comments like this;
"Any fucking retard can play zerg".
And a lot more venting.... He was whining big time dude
I never said everything that came from him was pearls! But I'd rather take honest whining than dishonest civility in this case. Honest whining has a chance of being productive.
Eh point was that he did this like 5 days ago. So don't worry, his employment in WCS hasn't changed his attitude.
On July 09 2014 17:52 akinsoyleyen wrote: These would only be %10 of what needs to be changed.
-Timewarp : Have you ever watched a VOD? In which game have you seen units trapped in the time warp for 30 seconds? Or even 15? They are dead anyways in like 10 seconds.
-Thor: This is the weirdest change i have ever heard. You nerf Ghost to make it more difficult for players to micro , then change the priority of Thor attack. Dont you understand that terran is used to micro , so making the thors focus fire mutas are way easier then preventing storm hits or splitting against banelings.
-Mine: I think thats way over powered. Not only for the opponent but for the player as well , because the friendly fire , especially against zerg is very hard to prevent as their units are quiet fast. So now , they will send approx 10 zerglings in front to damage the army and then there wont even be a need to banelings.
I think for timewarp the 30 second duration allowed it to be used like a long forcefield - using it on chokepoint essentially prevented the opponent from coming in to attack, and block access to that area, which then the protoss can use the time to prepare for the push. Now with the nerf time warp can't be used to delay pushes that much, but obviously this would have no effect on battles that are already taking place.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
With this buff (may be make it an upgrade), they should try to change widow mine into a 50/50 unit. This way, mines will be less accessible in early to mid game (where terran is already very strong) but more accessible at late game (where a buffed widow mine will help).
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
Did you completely miss the patch notes here? Widow Mines AOE is going to be buffed. Thus, if Widow Mine bonus vs shield is maintained it's gonna make TvP Widow Mines retarded. Thus, in order to maintain it's strenght, it needs to be reduced.
Further, Widow Mines doesn't really matter that much for TvP balance. It's not used vs Robo-openings. All it does is to prevent the existinence of twilight-openings for protoss. So since it's bad vs robo openings it's almost never used anyway atm.
And at last, TvP is imbalanced anyway, so the "again" statement doesn't make sense either.
On July 09 2014 20:42 AiLillekanin wrote: Zergs just pull your overlords against mech terrans WHO uses Thors. You will fuck up the Ai. GJ blizzard.
On July 09 2014 17:35 19Meavis93 wrote: how many times do I need to explain that units don't attack other units that are not considered harmfull to them when units that are harmfull are nearby, if a wave of roaches/overlords moves to a thor the thor will prioritize firing at roaches as they can attack him while overlords can not, just like voidrays will always prioritize shooting at marines over banshees or vikings over marauders.
Huuu the widow mine radius increase seems really big to me? I mean won't they be even more powerful overall than before they made the aoe damage decrease with the radius? I'm terran so I would be selfishly happy with it, but I'm afraid this might be broken again. The thor AA thing is good, because it's way too hard to focus them on mutas while microing to be honest. Even the top top player can't do it consistently.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
Looks like a "quick" fix to me, and buffing what is the most annoying unit in the game will just force more people away from it too other games if you ask me.
Will these changes plus smaller maps help Terran, yes they will most definitely, but the price will be a further decline in the games viewership and player base.
Its clear Blizzard dont want to spend too much time on this game and fix the core issues
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Quite troubling if we hope to continue to call SC2 the most competitive esports. Lets hope that the proposed changes are thoroughly tested and eventually implemented in a manner that will resolve the apparent imbalance - whatever/whenever those changes might be.
I really fear that this widow mines buff brings back the op mine taking out 20 zerglings (500 minerals) in one shot.
Otherwise, I think the thor's change ought to be tried since bringing a few zergling with the mutalisks was enough to suffer no damage.
I fear the time warp nerf is out of purpose since it is definitly not the most annoying problem with protoss. It would probably be much more effective to work on the oracle and the warp prism.
On July 09 2014 21:19 Topdoller wrote: Looks like a "quick" fix to me, and buffing what is the most annoying unit in the game will just force more people away from it too other games if you ask me.
Will these changes plus smaller maps help Terran, yes they will most definitely, but the price will be a further decline in the games viewership and player base.
Its clear Blizzard dont want to spend too much time on this game and fix the core issues
There are a few reasons why I feel that buffing widow mines might be the right move. I am far from higher league play, but it just seems reasonable for the following reasons:
- With a single buff, it may also address TvZ to a very significant degree at almost all stages of the game;
- It arguably has a much greater impact on the early to mid-game (oracle timings, blink play) in TvP;
- It could also help Mech, which is also needed. It could give it safer and more economical openers, just like bio. Other changes such as engineering bay/stim upgrades might not have offered this;
- Since widow mines are not all that utilized in TvT, it does not destroy the good play that we now see after Hellbat changes and Cloaked Banshee buff;
- There is a secondary perhaps difficult to grasp aspect of the new expanded half/quarter damage area (which is not all that far from +100% area coverage). Protoss and Zerg rely quite a bit on closing melee range. That expanded but reduced damage might end up reducing melee dps-time in an engagement by much more than 50%. Essentially, there is probably a scaling on the new expanded damage area that might not be unlike the "critial mass" effect that we see from siege tanks - for example where units simply do not get the opportunity to get in firing range of the Terran army at all and end up doing nil damage in certain cases. Imagine many more half-health banelings melting to stimed bio before they are even able to connect at all.
- It seems to offer a "single solution" to a few Protoss "coin-flip" cheeses that were not spoted. Maybe you still need to hang on to a scan or two from your orbitals in case of DT's, but oracles and blink should both end up to be much weaker strategies than currently; and
- It doesn't have a "direct" or tremendous impact on end-game tactics/engagements in TvP. It just sets up Terran to be able to compete from an economical standpoint and not let the Protoss get away with "excessively greedy play" with Terrans that turtle to be safe while still dying to losing out on the "coin-flip" in many cases. Basically, it might change the meta to allow for a fairer mid/late game, at least for TvP.
Just my way of seeing it at this point. We shall see. On another note - by the time 10 seconds of Time Warp have expired, either it was already quite devastating to the Terran, or was not going to make a difference. 15 seconds still seems like too much.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
That's actually all the statistic from korea for the last month, I don't see any cherry picking. Just you being owned quite hard tbh.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
Someone says the game is Terran favoured in TvP.
TheDwf points out the statistic for the highest level of Starcraft play, showing Terran is very weak.
You say he whines alot for pointing out truth and not just a persons "feeling" that the match up is Terran favoured?
I dont even... O.o
Its like running out of arguments and just deciding to bitch slap the other person and tell him "you are annoying" when you have no arguments left what so ever. That kid is you.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
I'm sure choosing to assess the current state of the game with strong tools like Seacraft Weekly or GO4SC2 yields much better results indeed for your goal.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
That's actually all the statistic from korea for the last month, I don't see any cherry picking. Just you being owned quite hard tbh.
Choosing to only use Korean data is by definition cherry picking. Very good Korean players play in tournaments outside of Korea as well as in Korean tournaments. Ignoring those stats is silly. Since Aligulac includes all tournament games, I'll stick to using Aligulac.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
Someone says the game is Terran favoured in TvP.
TheDwf points out the statistic for the highest level of Starcraft play, showing Terran is very weak.
You say he whines alot for pointing out truth and not just a persons "feeling" that the match up is Terran favoured?
I dont even... O.o
Its like running out of arguments and just deciding to bitch slap the other person and tell him "you are annoying" when you have no arguments left what so ever. That kid is you.
I didn't say Terran was favoured, I said that Aligulac seems to show that. I then explained why that's probably not accurate. I'm perfectly aware that there is a problem, I just think people blow it up too large.
On "highest level of Starcraft play", I'll repeat what I just typed: Choosing to only use Korean data is by definition cherry picking. Very good Korean players play in tournaments outside of Korea as well as in Korean tournaments. Ignoring those stats is silly. Since Aligulac includes all tournament games, I'll stick to using Aligulac.
Frankly, this is exactly why I didn't bother posting in TheDwf's whine-article. The Terran circle-jerk is strong. Might as well go and debate balance with Avilo, the affect is basically same =/
Very good korean play outside of korea, that is true. But they not always have the best oponents outside of korea. That is a fact, Polt 2:0'ing puCk at MLG Anaheim is not showing much about balance of the game.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
That's actually all the statistic from korea for the last month, I don't see any cherry picking. Just you being owned quite hard tbh.
Choosing to only use Korean data is by definition cherry picking. Very good Korean players play in tournaments outside of Korea as well as in Korean tournaments. Ignoring those stats is silly. Since Aligulac includes all tournament games, I'll stick to using Aligulac.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
Someone says the game is Terran favoured in TvP.
TheDwf points out the statistic for the highest level of Starcraft play, showing Terran is very weak.
You say he whines alot for pointing out truth and not just a persons "feeling" that the match up is Terran favoured?
I dont even... O.o
Its like running out of arguments and just deciding to bitch slap the other person and tell him "you are annoying" when you have no arguments left what so ever. That kid is you.
I didn't say Terran was favoured, I said that Aligulac seems to show that and I then explained why that's probably not accurate. I'm perfectly aware that there is a problem with Protoss right now, I just think people blow it up to be larger than it is.
On "highest level of Starcraft play", I'll repeat what I just typed: Choosing to only use Korean data is by definition cherry picking. Very good Korean players play in tournaments outside of Korea as well as in Korean tournaments. Ignoring those stats is silly. Since Aligulac includes all tournament games, I'll stick to using Aligulac.
Frankly, this is exactly why I didn't bother posting in TheDwf's whine-article. The Terran circle-jerk is just too strong. It already ruins most of my ladder experience (can't beat a Terran without getting whined at for days, even though PvT is my weakest match-up) and it's slowly ruining tournament watching as well. It already ruined the LR threads. I might as well go and debate balance with Avilo, the affect is basically same:
You are funny, first you claim DwF is whining hard, and now you are backing by saying "You are cherry picking, blabla, you are using only statistic from the highest level of play without interference like go4sc2 that totallly destroy the meaning of w/r ratio since topkr are farming lowEU players"
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
That's actually all the statistic from korea for the last month, I don't see any cherry picking. Just you being owned quite hard tbh.
Choosing to only use Korean data is by definition cherry picking. Very good Korean players play in tournaments outside of Korea as well as in Korean tournaments. Ignoring those stats is silly. Since Aligulac includes all tournament games, I'll stick to using Aligulac.
On July 09 2014 22:04 Glorfindel! wrote:
On July 09 2014 21:58 SatedSC2 wrote:
On July 09 2014 21:08 TheDwf wrote:
On July 09 2014 20:49 SatedSC2 wrote:
On July 09 2014 18:40 Glorfindel! wrote:
On July 09 2014 18:28 Hider wrote:
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
Someone says the game is Terran favoured in TvP.
TheDwf points out the statistic for the highest level of Starcraft play, showing Terran is very weak.
You say he whines alot for pointing out truth and not just a persons "feeling" that the match up is Terran favoured?
I dont even... O.o
Its like running out of arguments and just deciding to !@#$%^&* slap the other person and tell him "you are annoying" when you have no arguments left what so ever. That kid is you.
I didn't say Terran was favoured, I said that Aligulac seems to show that and I then explained why that's probably not accurate. I'm perfectly aware that there is a problem with Protoss right now, I just think people blow it up to be larger than it is.
On "highest level of Starcraft play", I'll repeat what I just typed: Choosing to only use Korean data is by definition cherry picking. Very good Korean players play in tournaments outside of Korea as well as in Korean tournaments. Ignoring those stats is silly. Since Aligulac includes all tournament games, I'll stick to using Aligulac.
Frankly, this is exactly why I didn't bother posting in TheDwf's whine-article. The Terran circle-jerk is just too strong. It already ruins most of my ladder experience (can't beat a Terran without getting whined at for days, even though PvT is my weakest match-up) and it's slowly ruining tournament watching as well. It already ruined the LR threads. I might as well go and debate balance with Avilo, the affect is basically same:
You are funny, first you claim DwF is whining hard, and now you are backing by saying "You are cherry picking, blabla, you are using only statistic from the highest level of play without interference like go4sc2 that totallly destroy the meaning of w/r ratio since topkr are farming lowEU players"
"Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position."
The emboldened part is literally what TheDwf is doing by picking and choosing which pro-level tournaments he considers relevant. I don't see how you can argue against the fact that this is happening. If you consider it okay to pick and choose which tournaments you use as evidence then fair enough, we'll have to agree to disagree, but you cannot even slightly deny that it's happening. Seriously:
Except your way of interpreting statistics is nonsense and has been refuted multiple times. Win/rates is a flawed way of looking at the data if your ignoring the distribtion of the races. If you instead take a more comprehensive look at Aliguac data, you clearly get to the conclusion that terran statistically is significantly underpowered.
And using the newest korean-based data is quite relevant here as it gives a better picture of how the races fares at the highest levels. E.g. are the best terrans capable of winning against protosses?
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
That's actually all the statistic from korea for the last month, I don't see any cherry picking. Just you being owned quite hard tbh.
Choosing to only use Korean data is by definition cherry picking. Very good Korean players play in tournaments outside of Korea as well as in Korean tournaments. Ignoring those stats is silly. Since Aligulac includes all tournament games, I'll stick to using Aligulac.
On July 09 2014 22:04 Glorfindel! wrote:
On July 09 2014 21:58 SatedSC2 wrote:
On July 09 2014 21:08 TheDwf wrote:
On July 09 2014 20:49 SatedSC2 wrote:
On July 09 2014 18:40 Glorfindel! wrote:
On July 09 2014 18:28 Hider wrote:
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
Someone says the game is Terran favoured in TvP.
TheDwf points out the statistic for the highest level of Starcraft play, showing Terran is very weak.
You say he whines alot for pointing out truth and not just a persons "feeling" that the match up is Terran favoured?
I dont even... O.o
Its like running out of arguments and just deciding to bitch slap the other person and tell him "you are annoying" when you have no arguments left what so ever. That kid is you.
I didn't say Terran was favoured, I said that Aligulac seems to show that. I then explained why that's probably not accurate. I'm perfectly aware that there is a problem, I just think people blow it up too large.
On "highest level of Starcraft play", I'll repeat what I just typed: Choosing to only use Korean data is by definition cherry picking. Very good Korean players play in tournaments outside of Korea as well as in Korean tournaments. Ignoring those stats is silly. Since Aligulac includes all tournament games, I'll stick to using Aligulac.
Frankly, this is exactly why I didn't bother posting in TheDwf's whine-article. The Terran circle-jerk is strong. Might as well go and debate balance with Avilo, the affect is basically same =/
Very good korean play outside of korea, that is true. But they not always have the best oponents outside of korea. That is a fact, Polt 2:0'ing puCk at MLG Anaheim is not showing much about balance of the game.
If you want to take into account only matches that show something about balance of the game, you have to be more precise than just "Korea". You have to exclude games where superior koreans beat inferior koreans. You have to exclude games where throws happened. You have to exclude games where someone reacted wrongly to something they scouted. You have to exclude games where map specific things happened that influenced the result in a way that can't be ignored.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
That's actually all the statistic from korea for the last month, I don't see any cherry picking. Just you being owned quite hard tbh.
Choosing to only use Korean data is by definition cherry picking. Very good Korean players play in tournaments outside of Korea as well as in Korean tournaments. Ignoring those stats is silly. Since Aligulac includes all tournament games, I'll stick to using Aligulac.
On July 09 2014 22:04 Glorfindel! wrote:
On July 09 2014 21:58 SatedSC2 wrote:
On July 09 2014 21:08 TheDwf wrote:
On July 09 2014 20:49 SatedSC2 wrote:
On July 09 2014 18:40 Glorfindel! wrote:
On July 09 2014 18:28 Hider wrote:
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
Someone says the game is Terran favoured in TvP.
TheDwf points out the statistic for the highest level of Starcraft play, showing Terran is very weak.
You say he whines alot for pointing out truth and not just a persons "feeling" that the match up is Terran favoured?
I dont even... O.o
Its like running out of arguments and just deciding to bitch slap the other person and tell him "you are annoying" when you have no arguments left what so ever. That kid is you.
I didn't say Terran was favoured, I said that Aligulac seems to show that and I then explained why that's probably not accurate. I'm perfectly aware that there is a problem with Protoss right now, I just think people blow it up to be larger than it is.
On "highest level of Starcraft play", I'll repeat what I just typed: Choosing to only use Korean data is by definition cherry picking. Very good Korean players play in tournaments outside of Korea as well as in Korean tournaments. Ignoring those stats is silly. Since Aligulac includes all tournament games, I'll stick to using Aligulac.
Frankly, this is exactly why I didn't bother posting in TheDwf's whine-article. The Terran circle-jerk is just too strong. It already ruins most of my ladder experience (can't beat a Terran without getting whined at for days, even though PvT is my weakest match-up) and it's slowly ruining tournament watching as well. It already ruined the LR threads. I might as well go and debate balance with Avilo, the affect is basically same:
You are funny, first you claim DwF is whining hard, and now you are backing by saying "You are cherry picking, blabla, you are using only statistic from the highest level of play without interference like go4sc2 that totallly destroy the meaning of w/r ratio since topkr are farming lowEU players"
"Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position."
The emboldened part is literally what TheDwf is doing by picking and choosing which pro-level tournaments he considers relevant. I don't see how you can argue against the fact that this is happening. If you consider that it's okay to pick and choose which tournaments you use as evidence then fair enough, we'll have to agree to disagree, but you cannot even slightly deny that it's happening.
Seriously:
Your argument is weak. Korean level of play is much higher than anywhere else and all the data suggests that top-level protosses have a distinct advantage over their terran counterparts. Nobody cares if a bunch of top korean terrans can smash foreigner z and p before getting smashed themselves by random korean protoss X in the semis or finals. Seriously, you think all these protoss champions are just the cream of the crop right now and thats why they keep winning tournaments? I wonder how much more they practice to reach their godlike levels lol
Also, the reason why noone wants to argue with you anymore, in a nutshell:
On July 09 2014 22:21 SatedSC2 wrote: I didn't say Terran was favoured, I said that Aligulac seems to show that and I then explained why that's probably not accurate.
On July 09 2014 22:47 Hider wrote: Except your way of interpreting statistics is nonsense and has been refuted multiple times. Win/rates is a flawed way of looking at the data if your ignoring the distribtion of the races.
Your way of proving he's wrong is by saying something he's already said, and claiming he denies it.
Never even thought about the Thor change. That is a smart and elegant solution. I always hated when my Thors would just start railing on some lings instead of firing on the muta clump. It is also one of those "Help out the newbies but leave the pro scene the same" changes which are generally good.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
In addition: TvZ in June Korea: 28-22 = 56% TvZ in Code A qualifiers: 30-15 = 66% TvZ in IEM qualifier: 15-13 = 53%
So after the hellbat change the matchup has changed quite a bit and I have no idea why blizzard addresses this matchup again instead of nerfig protoss overall strength
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
In addition: TvZ in June Korea: 28-22 = 56% TvZ in Code A qualifiers: 30-15 = 66% TvZ in IEM qualifier: 15-13 = 53%
So after the hellbat change the matchup has changed quite a bit and I have no idea why blizzard addresses this matchup again instead of nerfig protoss overall strength
Wait, those stats don't fit well with the narrative, so we're going to have to add a disclaimer that stats aren't a good indication of balance, sorry.
Perfectly summarizes the feeling that gives us your approach:
Polt 2-0 puCk Polt 2-0 HuK Polt 2-0 puCk Polt 0-6 Trap 50/50 game is balanced. Move along!
For winrates to matter, there needs to be a relatively homogenous sample (i.e. players equal or close in skill). As Nebuchad says, you'd also need to correct it from a few other things, but then people like you would yell "cherry-picking!" At any rate Aligulac does not match this condition, so 50/50 doesn't necessarily mean balance. And you know it yourself because you talked earlier about the phenomenon of Terran players being, on average, matched against worse opponents.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
In addition: TvZ in June Korea: 28-22 = 56% TvZ in Code A qualifiers: 30-15 = 66% TvZ in IEM qualifier: 15-13 = 53%
So after the hellbat change the matchup has changed quite a bit and I have no idea why blizzard addresses this matchup again instead of nerfig protoss overall strength
Given that less Terrans are being played, I think this doesn't immidiatly mean that everything is fine, yet, I do agree there seems to be a difference in degree of imbalance currently - at least since the hellbat buff.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
In addition: TvZ in June Korea: 28-22 = 56% TvZ in Code A qualifiers: 30-15 = 66% TvZ in IEM qualifier: 15-13 = 53%
So after the hellbat change the matchup has changed quite a bit and I have no idea why blizzard addresses this matchup again instead of nerfig protoss overall strength
Wait, those stats don't fit well with the narrative, so we're going to have to add a disclaimer that stats aren't a good indication of balance, sorry.
Ok, so terrans finally break 50% tvz (barely) following a buff patch. Give zergs time to adjust and the rates will probably even out and maybe even go back into the zerg's favor because zerg lategame is still more potent than terran. The difference between these tvz stats and tvp stats is that tvp has been out of whack through numerous changes over a long period of time. Also, lets not forget to mention the numerous high level korean terrans who can't even maintain code s status and are forced to play in these lower-level korean tournaments like the code a qualifiers. Are people really trying to argue that terran is fine at the moment? How could anyone believe that? Do they even watch pro games?
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
That's actually all the statistic from korea for the last month, I don't see any cherry picking. Just you being owned quite hard tbh.
Choosing to only use Korean data is by definition cherry picking. Very good Korean players play in tournaments outside of Korea as well as in Korean tournaments. Ignoring those stats is silly. Since Aligulac includes all tournament games, I'll stick to using Aligulac.
On July 09 2014 22:04 Glorfindel! wrote:
On July 09 2014 21:58 SatedSC2 wrote:
On July 09 2014 21:08 TheDwf wrote:
On July 09 2014 20:49 SatedSC2 wrote:
On July 09 2014 18:40 Glorfindel! wrote: [quote]
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
Someone says the game is Terran favoured in TvP.
TheDwf points out the statistic for the highest level of Starcraft play, showing Terran is very weak.
You say he whines alot for pointing out truth and not just a persons "feeling" that the match up is Terran favoured?
I dont even... O.o
Its like running out of arguments and just deciding to !@#$%^&* slap the other person and tell him "you are annoying" when you have no arguments left what so ever. That kid is you.
I didn't say Terran was favoured, I said that Aligulac seems to show that and I then explained why that's probably not accurate. I'm perfectly aware that there is a problem with Protoss right now, I just think people blow it up to be larger than it is.
On "highest level of Starcraft play", I'll repeat what I just typed: Choosing to only use Korean data is by definition cherry picking. Very good Korean players play in tournaments outside of Korea as well as in Korean tournaments. Ignoring those stats is silly. Since Aligulac includes all tournament games, I'll stick to using Aligulac.
Frankly, this is exactly why I didn't bother posting in TheDwf's whine-article. The Terran circle-jerk is just too strong. It already ruins most of my ladder experience (can't beat a Terran without getting whined at for days, even though PvT is my weakest match-up) and it's slowly ruining tournament watching as well. It already ruined the LR threads. I might as well go and debate balance with Avilo, the affect is basically same:
You are funny, first you claim DwF is whining hard, and now you are backing by saying "You are cherry picking, blabla, you are using only statistic from the highest level of play without interference like go4sc2 that totallly destroy the meaning of w/r ratio since topkr are farming lowEU players"
"Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position."
The emboldened part is literally what TheDwf is doing by picking and choosing which pro-level tournaments he considers relevant. I don't see how you can argue against the fact that this is happening. If you consider it okay to pick and choose which tournaments you use as evidence then fair enough, we'll have to agree to disagree, but you cannot even slightly deny that it's happening. Seriously:
Except your way of interpreting statistics is nonsense and has been refuted multiple times. Win/rates is a flawed way of looking at the data if your ignoring the distribtion of the races. If you instead take a more comprehensive look at Aliguac data, you clearly get to the conclusion that terran statistically is significantly underpowered.
And using the newest korean-based data is quite relevant here as it gives a better picture of how the races fares at the highest levels. E.g. are the best terrans capable of winning against protosses?
"Win/rates [sic] is [sic] a flawed way of looking at the data if your [sic] ignoring the distribtion [sic] of the races." "Using the newest korean-based data... gives a better picture of how the races fare"
Either win rates are flawed or using the newest Korean win rates gives a better picture. You can't have both. Basically, your argument isn't even internally consistent, so why should I listen to anything you have to say?
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
That's actually all the statistic from korea for the last month, I don't see any cherry picking. Just you being owned quite hard tbh.
Choosing to only use Korean data is by definition cherry picking. Very good Korean players play in tournaments outside of Korea as well as in Korean tournaments. Ignoring those stats is silly. Since Aligulac includes all tournament games, I'll stick to using Aligulac.
On July 09 2014 22:04 Glorfindel! wrote:
On July 09 2014 21:58 SatedSC2 wrote:
On July 09 2014 21:08 TheDwf wrote:
On July 09 2014 20:49 SatedSC2 wrote:
On July 09 2014 18:40 Glorfindel! wrote: [quote]
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
Yes. You whine a lot. Strong trend.
I'll continue choosing not to cherry pick data, thanks
Someone says the game is Terran favoured in TvP.
TheDwf points out the statistic for the highest level of Starcraft play, showing Terran is very weak.
You say he whines alot for pointing out truth and not just a persons "feeling" that the match up is Terran favoured?
I dont even... O.o
Its like running out of arguments and just deciding to bitch slap the other person and tell him "you are annoying" when you have no arguments left what so ever. That kid is you.
I didn't say Terran was favoured, I said that Aligulac seems to show that and I then explained why that's probably not accurate. I'm perfectly aware that there is a problem with Protoss right now, I just think people blow it up to be larger than it is.
On "highest level of Starcraft play", I'll repeat what I just typed: Choosing to only use Korean data is by definition cherry picking. Very good Korean players play in tournaments outside of Korea as well as in Korean tournaments. Ignoring those stats is silly. Since Aligulac includes all tournament games, I'll stick to using Aligulac.
Frankly, this is exactly why I didn't bother posting in TheDwf's whine-article. The Terran circle-jerk is just too strong. It already ruins most of my ladder experience (can't beat a Terran without getting whined at for days, even though PvT is my weakest match-up) and it's slowly ruining tournament watching as well. It already ruined the LR threads. I might as well go and debate balance with Avilo, the affect is basically same:
You are funny, first you claim DwF is whining hard, and now you are backing by saying "You are cherry picking, blabla, you are using only statistic from the highest level of play without interference like go4sc2 that totallly destroy the meaning of w/r ratio since topkr are farming lowEU players"
"Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position."
The emboldened part is literally what TheDwf is doing by picking and choosing which pro-level tournaments he considers relevant. I don't see how you can argue against the fact that this is happening. If you consider that it's okay to pick and choose which tournaments you use as evidence then fair enough, we'll have to agree to disagree, but you cannot even slightly deny that it's happening.
Seriously:
Your argument is weak. Korean level of play is much higher than anywhere else and all the data suggests that top-level protosses have a distinct advantage over their terran counterparts. Nobody cares if a bunch of top korean terrans can smash foreigner z and p before getting smashed themselves by random korean protoss X in the semis or finals.
Except the same argument applies to the Korean data. Does sOs beating some mid-tier Terran prove anything? Does Maru beating some mid-tier Zerg prove anything? Departure went 0-7 in Proleague, so should his stats count? Why is it okay to have skill differentials within your Korean data but not in the non-Korean data?
Your argument is fucking terrible. Cherry picking is rarely a good idea unless you have a very stringent set of conditions to do it with and "tournaments played in the nation of South Korea" isn't particularly stringent re: the aim you're trying to achieve by excluding non-KR data. I'm done with this argument...
No you are wrong! Stop trying to logically argue otherwise! Protoss is overpowered! Stop defending protoss! *Insert a veiled insult that may or may not question your sexuality and make reference to a possible negative aspect of your mothers'*
The Dwf is right! (I hope he notices me. All I want is his approval.)
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
In addition: TvZ in June Korea: 28-22 = 56% TvZ in Code A qualifiers: 30-15 = 66% TvZ in IEM qualifier: 15-13 = 53%
So after the hellbat change the matchup has changed quite a bit and I have no idea why blizzard addresses this matchup again instead of nerfig protoss overall strength
Counted 24-21 for Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague and 28-18 for Code A qualifiers but whatever. I explained elsewhere why TvZ winrates are not as bad:
On July 04 2014 19:09 TheDwf wrote: Bio in TvZ needs as much help, yes; Terrans in Korea mostly win thanks to 2 rax, mech and Hellbat timings. This is why winrates are not 35:65 like in TvP, but the fact many Korean Terrans do their best to stay away from triple OC bio macro games scenarii is a pretty telling tale in itself. If you were to run tests for normal 4M vs lings/banes/mutas games, you could expect similarly depressing results.
2 rax = cheese = cannot be used as a standard on all maps. Hellbat timings = new timings so will get weaker over time + likely won't have enough impact to fix bio play because of how 3 hatch builds work (talked about it in the ZParcraft article). Mech = map-dependent + likely will get weaker over time as Zergs refine their answers (soO vs TY on King Sejong is another example of the 7v5 bases stuff).
And none of this changes anything to the fact bio play has issues. You would have a point if the patch further buffed mech or Hellbat timings but that's not the case.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
In addition: TvZ in June Korea: 28-22 = 56% TvZ in Code A qualifiers: 30-15 = 66% TvZ in IEM qualifier: 15-13 = 53%
So after the hellbat change the matchup has changed quite a bit and I have no idea why blizzard addresses this matchup again instead of nerfig protoss overall strength
Wait, those stats don't fit well with the narrative, so we're going to have to add a disclaimer that stats aren't a good indication of balance, sorry.
Are people really trying to argue that terran is fine at the moment? How could anyone believe that? Do they even watch pro games?
Can you please direct me to the post where Sated or I argued that terran was fine at the moment? I appear to have missed it.
Thor just got better against ling muta and especially if you go for medivac kiting, the thing were the Thor is faster then mutas which is freaking fun as it triggers Zerg rage. Thor ai also got way easier to abuse, you could get them to use air first before and make them shoot a overlord, while your ground army rushed over them. Now everyone can do it and its hard to control the thors already. Oh and a roach doom drop buff as well, as Thors will be useless against this now.
But quiet interested on how the ai change will help. Would be funny if Thors would use their anti air against colossus now.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
In addition: TvZ in June Korea: 28-22 = 56% TvZ in Code A qualifiers: 30-15 = 66% TvZ in IEM qualifier: 15-13 = 53%
So after the hellbat change the matchup has changed quite a bit and I have no idea why blizzard addresses this matchup again instead of nerfig protoss overall strength
Wait, those stats don't fit well with the narrative, so we're going to have to add a disclaimer that stats aren't a good indication of balance, sorry.
Are people really trying to argue that terran is fine at the moment? How could anyone believe that? Do they even watch pro games?
Can you please direct me to the post where Sated or I argued that terran was fine at the moment? I appear to have missed it.
Ok, so you are basically arguing that tvp is not at its most broken state because when hots first came out terrans enjoyed a brief statistical w/l advantage according to algulac (prior to hellbat/mine nerf oracle x2 buff). Ok, cool story, we are talking about the past 6 months. You should join our discussion.
On July 09 2014 07:56 WhaleOFaTale wrote: I LOVE all the people complaining about the WM…"oh wait, as a zerg or protoss I now have to micro my death ball instead of 1aing???"…terrans have had to stutter step and split their hearts out in everymatchup since the beginning. Its nice seeing the shoe on the other foot
Thats not the problem about wm. its very random shots is very disgusting and unpredictable if you play with lings&blings, wm is ok/fine against all other zerg units.
It's not random. You have to micro against WM.
Thats not the problem... wm detects a ling, but marines (especially 3-3) are there too and kill it within 1,5sec before wm wanted to kill that ling. With that terran play you cant micro succesfully as zerg. pre-split and then a move into terran army, wm wont shot the first ling (marines killed them quicker), after 1,5 sec basically all zerg units are within wm radius, the begins the random shot and high hopes that it works well with friendly fire.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
In addition: TvZ in June Korea: 28-22 = 56% TvZ in Code A qualifiers: 30-15 = 66% TvZ in IEM qualifier: 15-13 = 53%
So after the hellbat change the matchup has changed quite a bit and I have no idea why blizzard addresses this matchup again instead of nerfig protoss overall strength
Counted 24-21 for Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague and 28-18 for Code A qualifiers but whatever. I explained elsewhere why TvZ winrates are not as bad:
On July 04 2014 19:09 TheDwf wrote: Bio in TvZ needs as much help, yes; Terrans in Korea mostly win thanks to 2 rax, mech and Hellbat timings. This is why winrates are not 35:65 like in TvP, but the fact many Korean Terrans do their best to stay away from triple OC bio macro games scenarii is a pretty telling tale in itself. If you were to run tests for normal 4M vs lings/banes/mutas games, you could expect similarly depressing results.
2 rax = cheese = cannot be used as a standard on all maps. Hellbat timings = new timings so will get weaker over time + likely won't have enough impact to fix bio play because of how 3 hatch builds work (talked about it in the ZParcraft article). Mech = map-dependent + likely will get weaker over time as Zergs refine their answers (soO vs TY on King Sejong is another example of the 7v5 bases stuff).
And none of this changes anything to the fact bio play has issues. You would have a point if the patch further buffed mech or Hellbat timings but that's not the case.
That argument that "Zergs refine their answers" is pretty weak though, because what hinders Terran to refine their strategies to begin with to deal with the answers - that might not even exist to begin with. Balancing has to be done on a current status, everything else is vodoo. The current status is 4Terrans in Code S to ~10Zergs, 5foreign Terrans in EU Premier to ~8foreign Zergs and the winrates swinging both ways. With that status being like that for longer. Hence Terran is a little weaker (though it has already been adressed once lately), yet, it looks like rather a small degree compared to TvP issues.
Also, if the only problem was that bio play became the roach/hydra of Terran there wouldn't be any need to patch.
I don't think the timewarp change will matter alot, not in tvp anyway, because 15 seconds is enough for the terran army to melt or micro away from the timewarp anyway. Mabie nerf the movement reduction from 50% to 30% or something like that?
Either win rates are flawed or using the newest Korean win rates gives a better picture. You can't have both. Basically, your argument isn't even internally consistent, so why should I listen to anything you have to say?
Win/rates can be flawed to look at isolated, but can still be an indicator. When win/rates are below 40% that's a strong indicator of a balnace issue - especailly as terran in general is largely underpresented which means that they in most tournaments should have win/rates above 50% assuming equal balance.
Win/rates around 50% on the other hand isn't an indiactor of balance as the adjusted skillbased win/rates couuld easliy be above 55%.
Oh and yes, this is a oneway thing. It's terran that is underpresented, so it's the terran win/rates that (in general) are "supposed" to be above 50%. It's quite rarely that terran is overrepresented in tournaments (I don't believe that's the case for the tournaments DWF mentioned at least).
I just wish they consider improving other units and abilities, rather than just slightly improving the few builds that already exist.
This is what I dream about. The best part is, if they buff other units and abilities new viable strategies will exist, in addition to the existing ones!
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
In addition: TvZ in June Korea: 28-22 = 56% TvZ in Code A qualifiers: 30-15 = 66% TvZ in IEM qualifier: 15-13 = 53%
So after the hellbat change the matchup has changed quite a bit and I have no idea why blizzard addresses this matchup again instead of nerfig protoss overall strength
Counted 24-21 for Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague and 28-18 for Code A qualifiers but whatever. I explained elsewhere why TvZ winrates are not as bad:
On July 04 2014 19:09 TheDwf wrote: Bio in TvZ needs as much help, yes; Terrans in Korea mostly win thanks to 2 rax, mech and Hellbat timings. This is why winrates are not 35:65 like in TvP, but the fact many Korean Terrans do their best to stay away from triple OC bio macro games scenarii is a pretty telling tale in itself. If you were to run tests for normal 4M vs lings/banes/mutas games, you could expect similarly depressing results.
2 rax = cheese = cannot be used as a standard on all maps. Hellbat timings = new timings so will get weaker over time + likely won't have enough impact to fix bio play because of how 3 hatch builds work (talked about it in the ZParcraft article). Mech = map-dependent + likely will get weaker over time as Zergs refine their answers (soO vs TY on King Sejong is another example of the 7v5 bases stuff).
And none of this changes anything to the fact bio play has issues. You would have a point if the patch further buffed mech or Hellbat timings but that's not the case.
That argument that "Zergs refine their answers" is pretty weak though, because what hinders Terran to refine their strategies to begin with to deal with the answers - that might not even exist to begin with.
No, that's a central argument and it's historically proven. Remember Hellions/Banshees at the end of WoL? 20-30 Drones kills on average during the first days. A few weeks later, losing 10 Drones was considered sloppy. Or just Zerg's play vs 4M at the beginning of HotS and a few months later. There were clear differences in control. You have to factor realistic possibilities of improvement.
This process cannot continue forever for both sides because there is a ceiling. What you call "voodoo" is forced, otherwise you can never claim something is imbalanced. Perhaps Terran and Protoss were missing something critical at the end of WoL and broods/infests would have been solved over time?
Balancing has to be done on a current status, everything else is vodoo. The current status is 4Terrans in Code S to ~10Zergs, 5foreign Terrans in EU Premier to ~8foreign Zergs and the winrates swinging both ways. With that status being like that for longer. Hence Terran is a little weaker (though it has already been adressed once lately), yet, it looks like rather a small degree compared to TvP issues.
Also, if the only problem was that bio play became the roach/hydra of Terran there wouldn't be any need to patch.
Indeed. That's why I specifically mention that the current alternative forms of play that maintain Terran out of the water won't remain as strong to compensate. There needs to be a viable all-around standard.
I feel maps need to made a focus in balancing. Patches are good, but there are a lot of stuff you can possibly fix just by maps.
For example in BW there were some maps you simply could not build in the middle of the map. If that was implemented in SC2 the issue of Swarmhost's Camping the middle of a map with Spores and Spines.
More Narrow pathways, might help with Mech. IDK but, its worth a try and being that we have such a large map pool, Blizzard should take advantage and throw some curve balls in that people could just as well veto.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
In addition: TvZ in June Korea: 28-22 = 56% TvZ in Code A qualifiers: 30-15 = 66% TvZ in IEM qualifier: 15-13 = 53%
So after the hellbat change the matchup has changed quite a bit and I have no idea why blizzard addresses this matchup again instead of nerfig protoss overall strength
Counted 24-21 for Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague and 28-18 for Code A qualifiers but whatever. I explained elsewhere why TvZ winrates are not as bad:
On July 04 2014 19:09 TheDwf wrote: Bio in TvZ needs as much help, yes; Terrans in Korea mostly win thanks to 2 rax, mech and Hellbat timings. This is why winrates are not 35:65 like in TvP, but the fact many Korean Terrans do their best to stay away from triple OC bio macro games scenarii is a pretty telling tale in itself. If you were to run tests for normal 4M vs lings/banes/mutas games, you could expect similarly depressing results.
2 rax = cheese = cannot be used as a standard on all maps. Hellbat timings = new timings so will get weaker over time + likely won't have enough impact to fix bio play because of how 3 hatch builds work (talked about it in the ZParcraft article). Mech = map-dependent + likely will get weaker over time as Zergs refine their answers (soO vs TY on King Sejong is another example of the 7v5 bases stuff).
And none of this changes anything to the fact bio play has issues. You would have a point if the patch further buffed mech or Hellbat timings but that's not the case.
That argument that "Zergs refine their answers" is pretty weak though, because what hinders Terran to refine their strategies to begin with to deal with the answers - that might not even exist to begin with.
No, that's a central argument and it's historically proven. Remember Hellions/Banshees at the end of WoL? 20-30 Drones kills on average during the first days. A few weeks later, losing 10 Drones was considered sloppy. Or just Zerg's play vs 4M at the beginning of HotS and a few months later. There were clear differences in control. You have to factor realistic possibilities of improvement.
This process cannot continue forever for both sides because there is a ceiling. What you call "voodoo" is forced, otherwise you can never claim something is imbalanced. Perhaps Terran and Protoss were missing something critical at the end of WoL and broods/infests would have been solved over time?
Balancing has to be done on a current status, everything else is vodoo. The current status is 4Terrans in Code S to ~10Zergs, 5foreign Terrans in EU Premier to ~8foreign Zergs and the winrates swinging both ways. With that status being like that for longer. Hence Terran is a little weaker (though it has already been adressed once lately), yet, it looks like rather a small degree compared to TvP issues.
Also, if the only problem was that bio play became the roach/hydra of Terran there wouldn't be any need to patch.
Indeed. That's why I specifically mention that the current alternative forms of play that maintain Terran out of the water won't remain as strong to compensate. There needs to be a viable all-around standard.
Perhaps BL/Infestor would have been solved. But that's where part two of what I wrote strikes, balancing has to be done on the status quo.
The question is why it is realistical that Zergs solve their problems, but Terrans do not. 11/11 exists up to this day and is playable in ZvT. It has never been solved completely. Maybe hellbats will get solved so that they won't be playable anymore, but maybe they will just become part of the metagame where a Zerg has to play against a possible hellbat push, whether it comes or not. It's not realistical to assume something is solveable without that adapation weakening the race in another scenario (like macro games when a zerg opens defensive roach against possible hellbats).
On July 10 2014 00:19 Doodsmack wrote: How can blizzard be so obtuse that photon overcharge nerf would not be the first thing on their list of balance changes?
Because it would return PvP to the 4g vs 4g era thanks to Warp Gate. Nerfing the defensive portion of the MSC is thusly tricky, but the offensive portion could do with a change.
To help TvP early game I'd propose to slow the MSC down to the old Overlord speed (around 0.88) and adding a MSC speed upgrade to the Cybernetics Core at 50/50/110. It would delay any straight up MSC attack on the mineral line by quite a bit and by putting the upgrade at the Cybernetics Core you cannot have Warp Gate and MSC Speed at the same time early on, weakening a Blink all-in. It wouldn't weaken any defensive play with the MSC as you can still park it between the main and the natural to cast Photon Overcharge.
On July 10 2014 00:19 Doodsmack wrote: How can blizzard be so obtuse that photon overcharge nerf would not be the first thing on their list of balance changes?
On July 10 2014 00:19 Doodsmack wrote: How can blizzard be so obtuse that photon overcharge nerf would not be the first thing on their list of balance changes?
Photon Overcharge isn't the major issue here, yes it needs tweaking without completely obliterating PvP but there are waaay more pressing issues in regards to PvT.
Like Time Warp, the non-existance of Terran lategame and lack of scouting opportunities for Terran early on.
I know these numbers are random, but I seriously doubt it is that hard for Blizzard to test it out in the next balance test map. Adding Shield Damage can soften the hard counter done by the Immortal. It will knock down 30 shield of immortal at this first idea.
If there are enough people interested, we can make a group channel in SC2 and start posting results on the forum. Would be quite sick if you can go marine Tank in TvP!
On July 09 2014 23:49 Hider wrote: especailly as terran in general is largely underpresented which means that they in most tournaments should have win/rates above 50% assuming equal balance.
Are you dumb or only dumb?
Balanced means 50% win-rate in average if opponents of same caliber, preferably across the whole spectrum (pros and GM to bronze). Not that tournaments should always have the holy 1/3 repartition up to the final.
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine.
Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o
No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate.
TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate
You don't see a trend here?
In addition: TvZ in June Korea: 28-22 = 56% TvZ in Code A qualifiers: 30-15 = 66% TvZ in IEM qualifier: 15-13 = 53%
So after the hellbat change the matchup has changed quite a bit and I have no idea why blizzard addresses this matchup again instead of nerfig protoss overall strength
Counted 24-21 for Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague and 28-18 for Code A qualifiers but whatever. I explained elsewhere why TvZ winrates are not as bad:
On July 04 2014 19:09 TheDwf wrote: Bio in TvZ needs as much help, yes; Terrans in Korea mostly win thanks to 2 rax, mech and Hellbat timings. This is why winrates are not 35:65 like in TvP, but the fact many Korean Terrans do their best to stay away from triple OC bio macro games scenarii is a pretty telling tale in itself. If you were to run tests for normal 4M vs lings/banes/mutas games, you could expect similarly depressing results.
2 rax = cheese = cannot be used as a standard on all maps. Hellbat timings = new timings so will get weaker over time + likely won't have enough impact to fix bio play because of how 3 hatch builds work (talked about it in the ZParcraft article). Mech = map-dependent + likely will get weaker over time as Zergs refine their answers (soO vs TY on King Sejong is another example of the 7v5 bases stuff).
And none of this changes anything to the fact bio play has issues. You would have a point if the patch further buffed mech or Hellbat timings but that's not the case.
That argument that "Zergs refine their answers" is pretty weak though, because what hinders Terran to refine their strategies to begin with to deal with the answers - that might not even exist to begin with.
No, that's a central argument and it's historically proven. Remember Hellions/Banshees at the end of WoL? 20-30 Drones kills on average during the first days. A few weeks later, losing 10 Drones was considered sloppy. Or just Zerg's play vs 4M at the beginning of HotS and a few months later. There were clear differences in control. You have to factor realistic possibilities of improvement.
This process cannot continue forever for both sides because there is a ceiling. What you call "voodoo" is forced, otherwise you can never claim something is imbalanced. Perhaps Terran and Protoss were missing something critical at the end of WoL and broods/infests would have been solved over time?
Balancing has to be done on a current status, everything else is vodoo. The current status is 4Terrans in Code S to ~10Zergs, 5foreign Terrans in EU Premier to ~8foreign Zergs and the winrates swinging both ways. With that status being like that for longer. Hence Terran is a little weaker (though it has already been adressed once lately), yet, it looks like rather a small degree compared to TvP issues.
Also, if the only problem was that bio play became the roach/hydra of Terran there wouldn't be any need to patch.
Indeed. That's why I specifically mention that the current alternative forms of play that maintain Terran out of the water won't remain as strong to compensate. There needs to be a viable all-around standard.
Perhaps BL/Infestor would have been solved. But that's where part two of what I wrote strikes, balancing has to be done on the status quo.
The question is why it is realistical that Zergs solve their problems, but Terrans do not. 11/11 exists up to this day and is playable in ZvT. It has never been solved completely.
But neither 2 rax nor Hellbat timings nor mech are a problem for Zerg in the sense they would yield an excessive winrate between opponents of equal skill. I'm not saying 2 rax is bad, just that you can't expect Terrans to use that to maintain winrates in the long run. It's not an unviable opening by any means but it's still primarily an attack metagaming hatch first and requiring a certain rush distance to work (from the outset, it means 2 rax is less usable/less efficient on 4p maps). If Maru keeps opening 2 rax on Merry Go Round, for instance, he'll end up running into a Zerg opening Speedling expand to shut him out, or simply a gasless pool first into lead like Hydra did.
It is not realistic for Terran to solve certain issues because of the ceiling. That's why I used the Automaton 2000 video to highlight this point for the mass Marines vs mass banes scenario. Theoretically Terran can win the fight offcreep with zero loss, but in practice it doesn't matter since it's not humanely doable. Taking a 7th base on a 6v6 map against a meching Terran is not beyond human potential.
Maybe hellbats will get solved so that they won't be playable anymore, but maybe they will just become part of the metagame where a Zerg has to play against a possible hellbat push, whether it comes or not. It's not realistical to assume something is solveable without that adapation weakening the race in another scenario (like macro games when a zerg opens defensive roach against possible hellbats).
It depends on the weight of the threat for standard builds. If you craft a 1-base Battlecruiser all-in in TvP, it will have zero result on Protoss standard builds because you don't force anything. MSC expand into whatever would bash your nonsense. Protoss would barely need to scout what you're doing.
Hellbat timings do carry a serious threat to pure lings/queens builds, but for reasons I already explained Zerg don't need to adopt a middle-of-the-road answer if they can get the "triple OC or 1-1-1 tech" information, for instance. On the long run the impact on standard builds ends up being the price of the information.
On July 10 2014 00:19 Doodsmack wrote: How can blizzard be so obtuse that photon overcharge nerf would not be the first thing on their list of balance changes?
Photon Overcharge isn't the major issue here, yes it needs tweaking without completely obliterating PvP but there are waaay more pressing issues in regards to PvT.
Like Time Warp, the non-existance of Terran lategame and lack of scouting opportunities for Terran early on.
You could half its damage against non-shield or something.
On July 10 2014 00:19 Doodsmack wrote: How can blizzard be so obtuse that photon overcharge nerf would not be the first thing on their list of balance changes?
Because it would return PvP to the 4g vs 4g era thanks to Warp Gate.
I don't understand this argument.
1. PvP was no longer a 4g mirror fest at the end of WoL. 2. Quality of life in a mirror matters less than balance in a non-mirror match-up, unless the mirror is made particularly horrible and one-dimensional by the change(s). 3. Do macro PvP even produce better games than 1-base mirrors? 4. You could add +shields damage anyway to Overcharge to compensate a bit in certain situations.
On July 10 2014 01:47 [PkF] Wire wrote: I think Photon Overcharge is fine and no one would have ever legitimately complained about it if Time Warp didn't exist in the first place.
Really? I find it a whole lot more problematic than Time Warp, it let's you blindly neuter all sorts of offensive options and has huge range.
Sorry I can't give credit but someone mentioned adding a 10 second charge up phase with PO, quite liked this idea actually as if you panic and hit it with bio steaming into your base and you have no units, you should be taking damage. Meanwhile diligent players or players with good forward scouting can benefit from their defensive prep.
On July 10 2014 00:19 Doodsmack wrote: How can blizzard be so obtuse that photon overcharge nerf would not be the first thing on their list of balance changes?
Because it would return PvP to the 4g vs 4g era thanks to Warp Gate.
I don't understand this argument.
1. PvP was no longer a 4g mirror fest at the end of WoL. 2. Quality of life in a mirror matters less than balance in a non-mirror match-up, unless the mirror is made particularly horrible and one-dimensional by the change(s). 3. Do macro PvP even produce better games than 1-base mirrors? 4. You could add +shields damage anyway to Overcharge to compensate a bit in certain situations.
The more recent PvP's I've seen were often quite aggressive though, with one side often relying entirely on Photon Overcharge to stay alive (which granted feels bad) but you have a good point (War of the Worlds or mass Stalker wars...blegh). I suppose the best change then would be a range reduction to say 8. (that way Siege units and Colossi can whack at the Nexus and a PO on the natural wouldn't cover the main entrance as much)
I still dislike any +shields damage, it's just too specific. (I suppose +armored damage could work against Stalker pushes?) Atleast EMP also decloaks and neutralizes energy so it still has uses outside of TvP.
As I mentioned earlier, I'd still like to see a reduction in the MSC's aggression (via movement speed). It can provide too much support too quickly for a Blink all-in whilst still providing the PO option at the same time.
On July 09 2014 23:49 Hider wrote: especailly as terran in general is largely underpresented which means that they in most tournaments should have win/rates above 50% assuming equal balance.
Are you dumb or only dumb?
Balanced means 50% win-rate in average if opponents of same caliber, preferably across the whole spectrum (pros and GM to bronze). Not that tournaments should always have the holy 1/3 repartition up to the final.
Why do you make these types of posts to insult other people when you in fact do not understand how the system works at all. You are not gonna have players of equal (skill)caliber playing each other if one race is UP. The stronger race is gonna have more of lesser skilled player taking advantage of their race and thus gets further in tournaments + qualifies for more tournaments than the weaker race. Those players should not have a win/rate of 50/50 against the very few terran players manging to qualify for the same tournament.
That's why it's especially alarming when terran win/rates are below 50%, but not alarming when ZvT or PvT win/rates are below 50%.
On July 09 2014 02:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I wonder if thor priority will help (I'm Protoss so I don't know TvZ).
Lowering the time warp duration is interesting... I feel that most of the battle will already be over in 15 seconds (or, at least, the opponent will move out of the time warp during that time) so I feel like a decrease in the duration of photon overcharge would make more sense.
Can't really nerf photon overcharge without ruining PvP again
Good point. Maybe instead of nerfing duration they could decrease the damage it does but make it do bonus damage vs units with shields.
On July 10 2014 01:47 [PkF] Wire wrote: I think Photon Overcharge is fine and no one would have ever legitimately complained about it if Time Warp didn't exist in the first place.
Really? I find it a whole lot more problematic than Time Warp, it let's you blindly neuter all sorts of offensive options and has huge range.
Sorry I can't give credit but someone mentioned adding a 10 second charge up phase with PO, quite liked this idea actually as if you panic and hit it with bio steaming into your base and you have no units, you should be taking damage. Meanwhile diligent players or players with good forward scouting can benefit from their defensive prep.
With 10 seconds as charge up time PO would be a lot worse against drops, and mine drops in particular.
Another idea that i read a while back was also quite interesting: What if you could not build workers as long as the photon overcharge is active? PvP should not be a counter argument to this change. And the other races also have to sacrifice economy to hold of pressure. Terran has to pull workers to repair, while spores and spines also cost drones. Toss would be a little bit worse of in the midgame if they play greedy without a lot of units.
On July 10 2014 01:56 Thezzy wrote: I still dislike any +shields damage, it's just too specific. (I suppose +armored damage could work against Stalker pushes?) Atleast EMP also decloaks and neutralizes energy so it still has uses outside of TvP.
We have units and spells that are only used in one match-up, modifiers to massive, biological and psionic that already seem specifically targeted. +shields already exists for the widow mine. I know there's a slippery scope if you start to be careless with this, throwing many modifiers and special rules around to the point that no new player can ever understand the game, but giving photon overcharge a bonus to shield component seems only a minor transgression and it can improve balance and gameplay in the mean time.
Furthermore, looking at damage modifiers is not the right way to understand unit dynamics for a new player. You are better off looking at pro replays, playing the campaign, trying a unit tester, doing nexus wars, even consulting Blizzard's counter chart. The bonus damage values play a role under the surface but you can play the game without ever needing to know them. I'll admit that the widow mine is rather extreme though. The unit deals so much more damage to protoss units than to zerg units that it can be confusing. However, small damage bonuses neatly fit into an understanding of the game based on experience of units fighting each other. In practice you won't notice that marauders are good vs stalkers specifically because of a +armored component. (even pro players often can't give you specific values)
Blizzard could be encouraged to fix the balance at all costs in between expansions, because the player base will be already acquainted with the game and will care more about a solid ladder and tournament experience. Blizzard could then use the expansions to go back and find different solutions.
Of course Blizzard won't because they've stopped caring, which is personally why I'm against specific fixes because they just leave the game with weird artifacts that will never be resolved, but in theory it might be a good idea.
These changes seem like they're totally missing the core issues. It's just going to encourage more of the same play we've been seeing all along.
- Some better early game results vs. Protoss with the decreased Time Warp duration - Some better early/mid game results vs. Zerg with the mine buffs. Possibly the same vs. Protoss - Lots of late game suffering if P or Z manage to survive mid and get their AoE out
On July 10 2014 01:47 [PkF] Wire wrote: I think Photon Overcharge is fine and no one would have ever legitimately complained about it if Time Warp didn't exist in the first place.
Really? I find it a whole lot more problematic than Time Warp, it let's you blindly neuter all sorts of offensive options and has huge range.
Sorry I can't give credit but someone mentioned adding a 10 second charge up phase with PO, quite liked this idea actually as if you panic and hit it with bio steaming into your base and you have no units, you should be taking damage. Meanwhile diligent players or players with good forward scouting can benefit from their defensive prep.
With 10 seconds as charge up time PO would be a lot worse against drops, and mine drops in particular.
Another idea that i read a while back was also quite interesting: What if you could not build workers as long as the photon overcharge is active? PvP should not be a counter argument to this change. And the other races also have to sacrifice economy to hold of pressure. Terran has to pull workers to repair, while spores and spines also cost drones. Toss would be a little bit worse of in the midgame if they play greedy without a lot of units.
3 probes for complete safety? I'm sure Protosses would take that trade any day if we said we have to nerf their precious PO at all cost. The only place where that might make a difference is PvP... again.
On July 10 2014 01:47 [PkF] Wire wrote: I think Photon Overcharge is fine and no one would have ever legitimately complained about it if Time Warp didn't exist in the first place.
Really? I find it a whole lot more problematic than Time Warp, it let's you blindly neuter all sorts of offensive options and has huge range.
Sorry I can't give credit but someone mentioned adding a 10 second charge up phase with PO, quite liked this idea actually as if you panic and hit it with bio steaming into your base and you have no units, you should be taking damage. Meanwhile diligent players or players with good forward scouting can benefit from their defensive prep.
With 10 seconds as charge up time PO would be a lot worse against drops, and mine drops in particular.
Another idea that i read a while back was also quite interesting: What if you could not build workers as long as the photon overcharge is active? PvP should not be a counter argument to this change. And the other races also have to sacrifice economy to hold of pressure. Terran has to pull workers to repair, while spores and spines also cost drones. Toss would be a little bit worse of in the midgame if they play greedy without a lot of units.
3 probes for complete safety? I'm sure Protosses would take that trade any day if we said we have to nerf their precious PO at all cost. The only place where that might make a difference is PvP... again.
i would like to point out that thor anti air outranges colossus. i have been suggesting this as a colo counter since HotS changed the ability to switch to single target AA. this will make is much more manageable in a larger army. thor change is good, and i would like to see them used more in TvP even if its just one or two. i would really hope that pros utilize this thor payload switch more often, i think it has more uses than we see.
On July 10 2014 04:31 fenix404 wrote: i would like to point out that thor anti air outranges colossus. i have been suggesting this as a colo counter since HotS changed the ability to switch to single target AA. this will make is much more manageable in a larger army. thor change is good, and i would like to see them used more in TvP even if its just one or two. i would really hope that pros utilize this thor payload switch more often, i think it has more uses than we see.
On July 10 2014 04:31 fenix404 wrote: i would like to point out that thor anti air outranges colossus. i have been suggesting this as a colo counter since HotS changed the ability to switch to single target AA. this will make is much more manageable in a larger army. thor change is good, and i would like to see them used more in TvP even if its just one or two. i would really hope that pros utilize this thor payload switch more often, i think it has more uses than we see.
I think the reason you don't see High Impact Payload used to counter colossus is the AA dps vs a colossus is 12, which is pretty low for a four-food unit. Two vikings give you 20 dps and have way better maneuverability.
Mines are already extremely strong vs Templar builds, if this also goes through i think it'll be the end of them because even presently mines absolutely devastate zealots (which is sad because they are far, far superiors for spectators, and require more skill than Colossus builds). It's not about having detection, but about actually being able to win fights
On July 10 2014 05:32 Teoita wrote: Farewell Templar openings, it was nice knowing you
I fail to see how that's the case with these changes? With the WM radius increase I assume?
Yep, gotta prioritise detection or many probes could die.
Not really the reason though, it's more because without colossi, protoss can't really deal with WM because there is nothing with enough range (stalkers take too much time and have barely the range to do so). But imho it won't prevent P from playing like Sjaak did vs Ryung today, with HTs drops.
On July 10 2014 05:32 Teoita wrote: Farewell Templar openings, it was nice knowing you
I fail to see how that's the case with these changes? With the WM radius increase I assume?
Yep, gotta prioritise detection or many probes could die.
I won't cry if toss loses one of their many openings
It's not about losing a few openings, it's about killing off a whole playstyle that is considerably less stupid than making colossi and amoving to victory with 3/3 or dieing to an scv pull.
On July 10 2014 05:53 Teoita wrote: Mines are already extremely strong vs Templar builds, if this also goes through i think it'll be the end of them because even presently mines absolutely devastate zealots (which is sad because they are far, far superiors for spectators, and require more skill than Colossus builds). It's not about having detection, but about actually being able to win fights
I don't really see they require more skill. One is aclic zealot with storm, the other is aclic colo stalker and blink/focus vikings. Both are boring as fuck for the spectator. What the spectator like is how the terran deal with this, with big split and kite.
On July 10 2014 05:32 Teoita wrote: Farewell Templar openings, it was nice knowing you
I fail to see how that's the case with these changes? With the WM radius increase I assume?
Yep, gotta prioritise detection or many probes could die.
I won't cry if toss loses one of their many openings
It's not about losing a few openings, it's about killing off a whole playstyle that is considerably less stupid than making colossi and amoving to victory with 3/3 or dieing to an scv pull.
Well, I agree with you there. However, what option has the Terran had? Make bio and hope the toss makes a mistake or misread an scv pull?
On July 10 2014 05:53 Teoita wrote: Mines are already extremely strong vs Templar builds, if this also goes through i think it'll be the end of them because even presently mines absolutely devastate zealots (which is sad because they are far, far superiors for spectators, and require more skill than Colossus builds). It's not about having detection, but about actually being able to win fights
I don't really see they require more skill. One is aclic zealot with storm, the other is aclic colo stalker and blink/focus vikings. Both are boring as fuck for the spectator. What the spectator like is how the terran deal with this, with big split and kite.
That is so untrue. Templar openings encourage both sides to micro way more, and make up for much more back and forth games because templar are (relatively) more replacable than Colossi. Also zealots can be split off more easily from your main army, so both sides have lots of opportunities to outplay and outmultitask each other.
Losing a single colossus is almost game ending, missing a storm isn't. At the same time, the very best terrans can truly show off their micro when dodging storms, which isn't nearly the case with colossi.
On July 10 2014 04:31 fenix404 wrote: i would like to point out that thor anti air outranges colossus. i have been suggesting this as a colo counter since HotS changed the ability to switch to single target AA. this will make is much more manageable in a larger army. thor change is good, and i would like to see them used more in TvP even if its just one or two. i would really hope that pros utilize this thor payload switch more often, i think it has more uses than we see.
I think the reason you don't see High Impact Payload used to counter colossus is the AA dps vs a colossus is 12, which is pretty low for a four-food unit. Two vikings give you 20 dps and have way better maneuverability.
since thors cost 6 food and not 4, this reason is even more to the point.
On July 10 2014 05:59 Teoita wrote: i agree that it sucks Terran has too few options in PvT. Also giving Protoss too few options isn't the way to go though.
Yeah I would personally rather see a ghost buff and/or a tank buff with a +shield damage.
On July 10 2014 04:31 fenix404 wrote: i would like to point out that thor anti air outranges colossus. i have been suggesting this as a colo counter since HotS changed the ability to switch to single target AA. this will make is much more manageable in a larger army. thor change is good, and i would like to see them used more in TvP even if its just one or two. i would really hope that pros utilize this thor payload switch more often, i think it has more uses than we see.
I think the reason you don't see High Impact Payload used to counter colossus is the AA dps vs a colossus is 12, which is pretty low for a four-food unit. Two vikings give you 20 dps and have way better maneuverability.
since thors cost 6 food and not 4, this reason is even more to the point.
The main reason why you dont see high impact payload is that it is impossible to make Thors use it vs Colossi, as far as I know. They simply dont attacl them until they are in 7ground attack range and then use their 46dps attack instead of the 8-12 antair one.
Why no Buff to the Tank. I think the tank is almost fine in ZvsT. But they could just make it better against Protoss shields. To make mech stronger against Protoss late. Buff the SIEG TANK!!!!!!!
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
Protoss doesn't struggle in PvT at all so that would just be pointless. The matchup will just be more boring. I mean it would kind of work, but it's not something that is going to happen any time soon.
On July 10 2014 04:31 fenix404 wrote: i would like to point out that thor anti air outranges colossus. i have been suggesting this as a colo counter since HotS changed the ability to switch to single target AA. this will make is much more manageable in a larger army. thor change is good, and i would like to see them used more in TvP even if its just one or two. i would really hope that pros utilize this thor payload switch more often, i think it has more uses than we see.
I think the reason you don't see High Impact Payload used to counter colossus is the AA dps vs a colossus is 12, which is pretty low for a four-food unit. Two vikings give you 20 dps and have way better maneuverability.
since thors cost 6 food and not 4, this reason is even more to the point.
The main reason why you dont see high impact payload is that it is impossible to make Thors use it vs Colossi, as far as I know. They simply dont attacl them until they are in 7ground attack range and then use their 46dps attack instead of the 8-12 antair one.
It is possible to attack colossi with the alternative anti air mode:
The problem is that the DPS is so low that your bio will be dead before the colossi start to die.
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
On July 10 2014 04:31 fenix404 wrote: i would like to point out that thor anti air outranges colossus. i have been suggesting this as a colo counter since HotS changed the ability to switch to single target AA. this will make is much more manageable in a larger army. thor change is good, and i would like to see them used more in TvP even if its just one or two. i would really hope that pros utilize this thor payload switch more often, i think it has more uses than we see.
I think the reason you don't see High Impact Payload used to counter colossus is the AA dps vs a colossus is 12, which is pretty low for a four-food unit. Two vikings give you 20 dps and have way better maneuverability.
since thors cost 6 food and not 4, this reason is even more to the point.
The main reason why you dont see high impact payload is that it is impossible to make Thors use it vs Colossi, as far as I know. They simply dont attacl them until they are in 7ground attack range and then use their 46dps attack instead of the 8-12 antair one.
It is possible to attack colossi with the alternative anti air mode: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi-057UPkjs The problem is that the DPS is so low that your bio will be dead before the colossi start to die.
Oh cool. I didnt know that. Is that different to the normal GtA or can you do it with that as well?
On July 10 2014 04:31 fenix404 wrote: i would like to point out that thor anti air outranges colossus. i have been suggesting this as a colo counter since HotS changed the ability to switch to single target AA. this will make is much more manageable in a larger army. thor change is good, and i would like to see them used more in TvP even if its just one or two. i would really hope that pros utilize this thor payload switch more often, i think it has more uses than we see.
I think the reason you don't see High Impact Payload used to counter colossus is the AA dps vs a colossus is 12, which is pretty low for a four-food unit. Two vikings give you 20 dps and have way better maneuverability.
since thors cost 6 food and not 4, this reason is even more to the point.
The main reason why you dont see high impact payload is that it is impossible to make Thors use it vs Colossi, as far as I know. They simply dont attacl them until they are in 7ground attack range and then use their 46dps attack instead of the 8-12 antair one.
It is possible to attack colossi with the alternative anti air mode: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi-057UPkjs The problem is that the DPS is so low that your bio will be dead before the colossi start to die.
Oh cool. I didnt know that. Is that different to the normal GtA or can you do it with that as well?
They should just bring back the 250mm cannons with a 50 second cooldown. 12 dps without splash is a joke for a 6 supply unit that costs 300/200
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
Protoss doesn't struggle in PvT at all so that would just be pointless. The matchup will just be more boring. I mean it would kind of work, but it's not something that is going to happen any time soon.
It would be just a number change. Same as the change to the radius or damage of the widow mine.
Why exactly would the Mu be more boring if HT openings were possible?
The way i see it is: 1. The mine buff will result in a few more early to early mid game victories for terran. 2. Toss might play a tad more conservative over all; this will lead to a few more mid game victories for terran. 3. HT openings will be even more dead. And they are already not viable.
If you add the health reduction on top of the radius buff you will still achieve 1 and 2 while making HT openings a possibility again. Terran does not really have a problem to scout if toss goes for colossus or HT. Toss will not really win more games if they can choose between both routes. The game is just more interesting if both routes are possible.
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
would be 1 bane less I think, not good.
Add one base armor then. I am not even sure if this is even needed, because mines will be a lot stronger with the proposed radius change. Even with reduced health mines will be a far better over all.
On July 10 2014 04:31 fenix404 wrote: i would like to point out that thor anti air outranges colossus. i have been suggesting this as a colo counter since HotS changed the ability to switch to single target AA. this will make is much more manageable in a larger army. thor change is good, and i would like to see them used more in TvP even if its just one or two. i would really hope that pros utilize this thor payload switch more often, i think it has more uses than we see.
I think the reason you don't see High Impact Payload used to counter colossus is the AA dps vs a colossus is 12, which is pretty low for a four-food unit. Two vikings give you 20 dps and have way better maneuverability.
since thors cost 6 food and not 4, this reason is even more to the point.
The main reason why you dont see high impact payload is that it is impossible to make Thors use it vs Colossi, as far as I know. They simply dont attacl them until they are in 7ground attack range and then use their 46dps attack instead of the 8-12 antair one.
It is possible to attack colossi with the alternative anti air mode: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi-057UPkjs The problem is that the DPS is so low that your bio will be dead before the colossi start to die.
Oh cool. I didnt know that. Is that different to the normal GtA or can you do it with that as well?
Sorry I don't know, and I am not able to test it myself right now. But I am sure it would be even worse^^
I just realized: If they go through with the change to the target priority of thors this will be yet another nail in the coffin of Mech TvP because colossi could be used to tank 12 DPS thors.
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
Protoss doesn't struggle in PvT at all so that would just be pointless. The matchup will just be more boring. I mean it would kind of work, but it's not something that is going to happen any time soon.
It would be just a number change. Same as the change to the radius or damage of the widow mine.
Why exactly would the Mu be more boring if HT openings were possible?
The way i see it is: 1. The mine buff will result in a few more early to early mid game victories for terran. 2. Toss might play a tad more conservative over all; this will lead to a few more mid game victories for terran. 3. HT openings will be even more dead. And they are already not viable.
If you add the health reduction on top of the radius buff you will still achieve 1 and 2 while making HT openings a possibility again. Terran does not really have a problem to scout if toss goes for colossus or HT. Toss will not really win more games if they can choose between both routes. The game is just more interesting if both routes are possible.
Widow mines do not make templar openings impossible. Such a statement is the same as saying templar openings make opening with bio impossible. A well landed storm can do far more damage than a well landed widow mine hit, especially since Protoss units have large collision radius and high hitpoints. They just require that the Protoss micro and split their units.
Is balance really the biggest issue? The game's not that fun to play. It needs more dynamic, interesting units... less weird bs like cannon rushing, though weedamins is awesome.
Does anyone else have this in common with me?
I only watch streams for the storylines or for big meta changes. I've went from 5 friends who played to 0. I can't even get anyone to watch it with me anymore. 1 friend refused to buy hots after wol.
It ain't right.
Can we help spread the word and create pressure to get Rob Pardo to replace Browder as head of Sc2? Pardo led the team for broodwar, frozen throne, and wow/BC. We need to make this a thing before LotV development starts. Think about it.
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
Protoss doesn't struggle in PvT at all so that would just be pointless. The matchup will just be more boring. I mean it would kind of work, but it's not something that is going to happen any time soon.
It would be just a number change. Same as the change to the radius or damage of the widow mine.
Why exactly would the Mu be more boring if HT openings were possible?
The way i see it is: 1. The mine buff will result in a few more early to early mid game victories for terran. 2. Toss might play a tad more conservative over all; this will lead to a few more mid game victories for terran. 3. HT openings will be even more dead. And they are already not viable.
If you add the health reduction on top of the radius buff you will still achieve 1 and 2 while making HT openings a possibility again. Terran does not really have a problem to scout if toss goes for colossus or HT. Toss will not really win more games if they can choose between both routes. The game is just more interesting if both routes are possible.
Widow mines do not make templar openings impossible. Such a statement is the same as saying templar openings make opening with bio impossible. A well landed storm can do far more damage than a well landed widow mine hit, especially since Protoss units have large collision radius and high hitpoints. They just require that the Protoss micro and split their units.
Ok; impossible is a quite hard way to put it. Still, HT openings seem to be less common right now, and widowmines seem to be the reason. With even stronger mines they might be a even worse choice. I do not like this, because i think HT openings are more fun to watch, to play and to play against.
On July 10 2014 07:05 CutTheEnemy wrote: Can we help spread the word and create pressure to get Rob Pardo to replace Browder as head of Sc2? Pardo led the team for broodwar, frozen throne, and wow/BC. We need to make this a thing before LotV development starts. Think about it.
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
Protoss doesn't struggle in PvT at all so that would just be pointless. The matchup will just be more boring. I mean it would kind of work, but it's not something that is going to happen any time soon.
I agree completely about Templar openings being much more entertaining. My question is: are they really unviable right now? Or are they simply less reliable than Colossus openings? Because those aren't the same thing. PvT lategame (Colossus) was Protoss favored at the end of WOL, it's only gotten more so in HOTS.
What if we make Colo opening even less viable than Templar will be with new WM? (I don't know how yet, I'm just testing the waters.) Templar opening will be less godly than it was 3 months ago, that's a plus, but Protoss will still use it (because lack of clearly superior alternative).
Obviously giving Terrans more options is preferable to taking options away from Protoss, but I don't think Blizzard sees it that way.
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
Protoss doesn't struggle in PvT at all so that would just be pointless. The matchup will just be more boring. I mean it would kind of work, but it's not something that is going to happen any time soon.
I agree completely about Templar openings being much more entertaining. My question is: are they really unviable right now? Or are they simply less reliable than Colossus openings? Because those aren't the same thing. PvT lategame (Colossus) was Protoss favored at the end of WOL, it's only gotten more so in HOTS.
What if we make Colo opening even less viable than Templar will be with new WM? (I don't know how yet, I'm just testing the waters.) Templar opening will be less godly than it was 3 months ago, that's a plus, but Protoss will still use it (because lack of clearly superior alternative).
Obviously giving Terrans more options is preferable to taking options away from Protoss, but I don't think Blizzard sees it that way.
They're pretty non-viable right now, yeah. Bio/mine pushes make the zealots that accompany them pretty worthless. Even if you split your zealots perfectly, it's still efficient for terran to kill only 1 zealot with a mine at the engagement. Even if you land a couple storms, it doesn't matter because no other units are left alive to finish off the weakened bio.
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
Protoss doesn't struggle in PvT at all so that would just be pointless. The matchup will just be more boring. I mean it would kind of work, but it's not something that is going to happen any time soon.
I agree completely about Templar openings being much more entertaining. My question is: are they really unviable right now? Or are they simply less reliable than Colossus openings? Because those aren't the same thing. PvT lategame (Colossus) was Protoss favored at the end of WOL, it's only gotten more so in HOTS.
What if we make Colo opening even less viable than Templar will be with new WM? (I don't know how yet, I'm just testing the waters.) Templar opening will be less godly than it was 3 months ago, that's a plus, but Protoss will still use it (because lack of clearly superior alternative).
Obviously giving Terrans more options is preferable to taking options away from Protoss, but I don't think Blizzard sees it that way.
They're pretty non-viable right now, yeah. Bio/mine pushes make the zealots that accompany them pretty worthless. Even if you split your zealots perfectly, it's still efficient for terran to kill only 1 zealot with a mine at the engagement. Even if you land a couple storms, it doesn't matter because no other units are left alive to finish off the weakened bio.
Would you happen to know of any Korean games where this happened? I'd love to see how it plays out, but I haven't come across any post-patch.
On July 10 2014 04:31 fenix404 wrote: i would like to point out that thor anti air outranges colossus. i have been suggesting this as a colo counter since HotS changed the ability to switch to single target AA. this will make is much more manageable in a larger army. thor change is good, and i would like to see them used more in TvP even if its just one or two. i would really hope that pros utilize this thor payload switch more often, i think it has more uses than we see.
I think the reason you don't see High Impact Payload used to counter colossus is the AA dps vs a colossus is 12, which is pretty low for a four-food unit. Two vikings give you 20 dps and have way better maneuverability.
since thors cost 6 food and not 4, this reason is even more to the point.
The main reason why you dont see high impact payload is that it is impossible to make Thors use it vs Colossi, as far as I know. They simply dont attacl them until they are in 7ground attack range and then use their 46dps attack instead of the 8-12 antair one.
It is possible to attack colossi with the alternative anti air mode: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi-057UPkjs The problem is that the DPS is so low that your bio will be dead before the colossi start to die.
That was such a bad example lol.. Basically it's not Thors that won that one, but instead the 2 PDDs placed near
I guess that maybe Thors could use some vs Shield AA buff in the HIP mode, but, kinda "stylish" to ever work well that one
Also - TRUE that mech wins over that one, BUT Protoss should've scouted and got Stargate units instead.. Basically every "smart" Protoss does that one - scout mech ? - get Voidray/Tempest and "roast" Terran to the ground (the difference though is I that never had nor my opponents has PDDs to make that mech really count )
On July 10 2014 08:44 pure.Wasted wrote: Would you happen to know of any Korean games where this happened? I'd love to see how it plays out, but I haven't come across any post-patch.
Watch today's Ryung vs Sjaak Habitation-Station game.. Ryung had mass BioMine instead of BioVac
i mean i guess the changes are good....(a buff is better than nothing, especially to the widow mine), however i feel lately blizz is not really paying as good attention to the playerbase as they have been over the past 2 or so years.
these changes don't really affect the terran late game at all...
and thors don't need that buff either.
widow mine is a decent change, but the issue is still avoided...
that's my opinion at least, and i have a few professional player friends that agree.
i guess the benefit of having a test map first is to see how it plays out...i wish more players actually tested it though xd
On July 10 2014 07:05 CutTheEnemy wrote: Can we help spread the word and create pressure to get Rob Pardo to replace Browder as head of Sc2? Pardo led the team for broodwar, frozen throne, and wow/BC. We need to make this a thing before LotV development starts. Think about it.
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
Protoss doesn't struggle in PvT at all so that would just be pointless. The matchup will just be more boring. I mean it would kind of work, but it's not something that is going to happen any time soon.
I agree completely about Templar openings being much more entertaining. My question is: are they really unviable right now? Or are they simply less reliable than Colossus openings? Because those aren't the same thing. PvT lategame (Colossus) was Protoss favored at the end of WOL, it's only gotten more so in HOTS.
What if we make Colo opening even less viable than Templar will be with new WM? (I don't know how yet, I'm just testing the waters.) Templar opening will be less godly than it was 3 months ago, that's a plus, but Protoss will still use it (because lack of clearly superior alternative).
Obviously giving Terrans more options is preferable to taking options away from Protoss, but I don't think Blizzard sees it that way.
They're pretty non-viable right now, yeah. Bio/mine pushes make the zealots that accompany them pretty worthless. Even if you split your zealots perfectly, it's still efficient for terran to kill only 1 zealot with a mine at the engagement. Even if you land a couple storms, it doesn't matter because no other units are left alive to finish off the weakened bio.
Would you happen to know of any Korean games where this happened? I'd love to see how it plays out, but I haven't come across any post-patch.
There are a few that were very recently post-patch, but there aren't many. It took a very short amount of time for protoss players to abandon templar play before colossus, it wasn't working for them at all in practice.
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
Protoss doesn't struggle in PvT at all so that would just be pointless. The matchup will just be more boring. I mean it would kind of work, but it's not something that is going to happen any time soon.
I agree completely about Templar openings being much more entertaining. My question is: are they really unviable right now? Or are they simply less reliable than Colossus openings? Because those aren't the same thing. PvT lategame (Colossus) was Protoss favored at the end of WOL, it's only gotten more so in HOTS.
What if we make Colo opening even less viable than Templar will be with new WM? (I don't know how yet, I'm just testing the waters.) Templar opening will be less godly than it was 3 months ago, that's a plus, but Protoss will still use it (because lack of clearly superior alternative).
Obviously giving Terrans more options is preferable to taking options away from Protoss, but I don't think Blizzard sees it that way.
They're pretty non-viable right now, yeah. Bio/mine pushes make the zealots that accompany them pretty worthless. Even if you split your zealots perfectly, it's still efficient for terran to kill only 1 zealot with a mine at the engagement. Even if you land a couple storms, it doesn't matter because no other units are left alive to finish off the weakened bio.
Would you happen to know of any Korean games where this happened? I'd love to see how it plays out, but I haven't come across any post-patch.
There are a few that were very recently post-patch, but there aren't many. It took a very short amount of time for protoss players to abandon templar play before colossus, it wasn't working for them at all in practice.
Yeah but the problem with that is, it doesn't tell us if Templar is actually underpowered or simply balanced. If Colossus is OP and Templar is "just right," mediocre Protoss players will start losing a lot of their Templar games and perceive Templar openings to be relatively underpowered. That doesn't mean they're actually underpowered. What could be happening is that Terran is finally performing at a 1/1/1 ratio which would lead to Terran re-filling the ladder and tournaments, which is what we ultimately want. Let's say Crank goes Templar against Innovation and loses a game he wouldn't have lost 2 months ago, that doesn't mean Templar is terrible, it could just mean Crank never had any right to beat Innovation period.
In this case, it would be in our best interests to nerf Colo harder than Templar, so that Templar, weak as it is, still seems the superior option.
I haven't seen any of these games, and the one between Ryung and Sjaak isn't available anywhere that I can see, so I can't begin to guess if Templar is actually underpowered or just the first fair Protoss lategame since they learned to survive 1/1/1 (by getting it nerfed).
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
Protoss doesn't struggle in PvT at all so that would just be pointless. The matchup will just be more boring. I mean it would kind of work, but it's not something that is going to happen any time soon.
I agree completely about Templar openings being much more entertaining. My question is: are they really unviable right now? Or are they simply less reliable than Colossus openings? Because those aren't the same thing. PvT lategame (Colossus) was Protoss favored at the end of WOL, it's only gotten more so in HOTS.
What if we make Colo opening even less viable than Templar will be with new WM? (I don't know how yet, I'm just testing the waters.) Templar opening will be less godly than it was 3 months ago, that's a plus, but Protoss will still use it (because lack of clearly superior alternative).
Obviously giving Terrans more options is preferable to taking options away from Protoss, but I don't think Blizzard sees it that way.
They're pretty non-viable right now, yeah. Bio/mine pushes make the zealots that accompany them pretty worthless. Even if you split your zealots perfectly, it's still efficient for terran to kill only 1 zealot with a mine at the engagement. Even if you land a couple storms, it doesn't matter because no other units are left alive to finish off the weakened bio.
Would you happen to know of any Korean games where this happened? I'd love to see how it plays out, but I haven't come across any post-patch.
There are a few that were very recently post-patch, but there aren't many. It took a very short amount of time for protoss players to abandon templar play before colossus, it wasn't working for them at all in practice.
Yeah but the problem with that is, it doesn't tell us if Templar is actually underpowered or simply balanced. If Colossus is OP and Templar is "just right," mediocre Protoss players will start losing a lot of their Templar games and perceive Templar openings to be relatively underpowered. That doesn't mean they're actually underpowered. What could be happening is that Terran is finally performing at a 1/1/1 ratio which would lead to Terran re-filling the ladder and tournaments, which is what we ultimately want. Let's say Crank goes Templar against Innovation and loses a game he wouldn't have lost 2 months ago, that doesn't mean Templar is terrible, it could just mean Crank never had any right to beat Innovation period.
In this case, it would be in our best interests to nerf Colo harder than Templar, so that Templar, weak as it is, still seems the superior option.
I haven't seen any of these games, and the one between Ryung and Sjaak isn't available anywhere that I can see, so I can't begin to guess if Templar is actually underpowered or just the first fair Protoss lategame since they learned to survive 1/1/1 (by getting it nerfed).
We had players like Rain losing to random terrans that he is much better than while going templar openings. Every korean toss has abandoned templar openings, which they had previously MUCH preferred. Players regularly die to scv all-ins while going colossus, it took a player like herO to show a metagame move that held just fine against the scv pull, but was a gamble because it abandoned all later tech and would have died hard to a heavier viking marine/marauder push a minute or two later.
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
Protoss doesn't struggle in PvT at all so that would just be pointless. The matchup will just be more boring. I mean it would kind of work, but it's not something that is going to happen any time soon.
I agree completely about Templar openings being much more entertaining. My question is: are they really unviable right now? Or are they simply less reliable than Colossus openings? Because those aren't the same thing. PvT lategame (Colossus) was Protoss favored at the end of WOL, it's only gotten more so in HOTS.
What if we make Colo opening even less viable than Templar will be with new WM? (I don't know how yet, I'm just testing the waters.) Templar opening will be less godly than it was 3 months ago, that's a plus, but Protoss will still use it (because lack of clearly superior alternative).
Obviously giving Terrans more options is preferable to taking options away from Protoss, but I don't think Blizzard sees it that way.
They're pretty non-viable right now, yeah. Bio/mine pushes make the zealots that accompany them pretty worthless. Even if you split your zealots perfectly, it's still efficient for terran to kill only 1 zealot with a mine at the engagement. Even if you land a couple storms, it doesn't matter because no other units are left alive to finish off the weakened bio.
Would you happen to know of any Korean games where this happened? I'd love to see how it plays out, but I haven't come across any post-patch.
There are a few that were very recently post-patch, but there aren't many. It took a very short amount of time for protoss players to abandon templar play before colossus, it wasn't working for them at all in practice.
Yeah but the problem with that is, it doesn't tell us if Templar is actually underpowered or simply balanced. If Colossus is OP and Templar is "just right," mediocre Protoss players will start losing a lot of their Templar games and perceive Templar openings to be relatively underpowered. That doesn't mean they're actually underpowered. What could be happening is that Terran is finally performing at a 1/1/1 ratio which would lead to Terran re-filling the ladder and tournaments, which is what we ultimately want. Let's say Crank goes Templar against Innovation and loses a game he wouldn't have lost 2 months ago, that doesn't mean Templar is terrible, it could just mean Crank never had any right to beat Innovation period.
In this case, it would be in our best interests to nerf Colo harder than Templar, so that Templar, weak as it is, still seems the superior option.
I haven't seen any of these games, and the one between Ryung and Sjaak isn't available anywhere that I can see, so I can't begin to guess if Templar is actually underpowered or just the first fair Protoss lategame since they learned to survive 1/1/1 (by getting it nerfed).
We had players like Rain losing to random terrans that he is much better than while going templar openings. Every korean toss has abandoned templar openings, which they had previously MUCH preferred. Players regularly die to scv all-ins while going colossus, it took a player like herO to show a metagame move that held just fine against the scv pull, but was a gamble because it abandoned all later tech and would have died hard to a heavier viking marine/marauder push a minute or two later.
SCV all-ins are stupid. If I had my way, they wouldn't exist.
Also they wouldn't need to exist, because Terrans would feel comfortable going up against late-game Protoss armies.
SCV all-ins beating Colossus openings doesn't mean Colossus is balanced. Archon toilet beat plenty of BL/Infestor compositions... and Archon toilet was still stupid, and BL/Infestor was still imbalanced.
On July 09 2014 02:47 Faust852 wrote: Everyone arguing about TW and Thors, but guys, the WM buff would be OP as fuck. Ok for full damage in 1,5 instead of 1,25, that would be the middle between pre and post nerf, but going this far as doing AoE in 2,5 is freaking huge. The WM will be wayyy more OP than before its nerf.
Banelings have pretty big splash too. Its 2.2 for such a cheap unit. And it does full damage in the WHOLE radius.
I'm scared of the friendly fire WM splash coming my way.
People are actually satisfied by this? 1. They don't understand how radius works... prepare for some cringeworthy WM hits. Seriously, fuck all the Widow Mine back and forth, get the fucking Tanks/BCs/lategame on level! 2. Whatever. Less zergling overkill. 3. Does almost nothing for TvP in all seriousness.
I would much rather see the following changes to the widow mine than a radius increase:
1) Reduce widow mine supply to 1 2) Reduce widow mine build/reload time to 25 seconds 3) Add a hold fire option to the widow mine 4) Allow widow to target but not reveal cloaked units, like brood war spider mines.
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
Protoss doesn't struggle in PvT at all so that would just be pointless. The matchup will just be more boring. I mean it would kind of work, but it's not something that is going to happen any time soon.
I agree completely about Templar openings being much more entertaining. My question is: are they really unviable right now? Or are they simply less reliable than Colossus openings? Because those aren't the same thing. PvT lategame (Colossus) was Protoss favored at the end of WOL, it's only gotten more so in HOTS.
What if we make Colo opening even less viable than Templar will be with new WM? (I don't know how yet, I'm just testing the waters.) Templar opening will be less godly than it was 3 months ago, that's a plus, but Protoss will still use it (because lack of clearly superior alternative).
Obviously giving Terrans more options is preferable to taking options away from Protoss, but I don't think Blizzard sees it that way.
They're pretty non-viable right now, yeah. Bio/mine pushes make the zealots that accompany them pretty worthless. Even if you split your zealots perfectly, it's still efficient for terran to kill only 1 zealot with a mine at the engagement. Even if you land a couple storms, it doesn't matter because no other units are left alive to finish off the weakened bio.
Would you happen to know of any Korean games where this happened? I'd love to see how it plays out, but I haven't come across any post-patch.
There are a few that were very recently post-patch, but there aren't many. It took a very short amount of time for protoss players to abandon templar play before colossus, it wasn't working for them at all in practice.
Yeah but the problem with that is, it doesn't tell us if Templar is actually underpowered or simply balanced. If Colossus is OP and Templar is "just right," mediocre Protoss players will start losing a lot of their Templar games and perceive Templar openings to be relatively underpowered. That doesn't mean they're actually underpowered. What could be happening is that Terran is finally performing at a 1/1/1 ratio which would lead to Terran re-filling the ladder and tournaments, which is what we ultimately want. Let's say Crank goes Templar against Innovation and loses a game he wouldn't have lost 2 months ago, that doesn't mean Templar is terrible, it could just mean Crank never had any right to beat Innovation period.
In this case, it would be in our best interests to nerf Colo harder than Templar, so that Templar, weak as it is, still seems the superior option.
I haven't seen any of these games, and the one between Ryung and Sjaak isn't available anywhere that I can see, so I can't begin to guess if Templar is actually underpowered or just the first fair Protoss lategame since they learned to survive 1/1/1 (by getting it nerfed).
We had players like Rain losing to random terrans that he is much better than while going templar openings. Every korean toss has abandoned templar openings, which they had previously MUCH preferred. Players regularly die to scv all-ins while going colossus, it took a player like herO to show a metagame move that held just fine against the scv pull, but was a gamble because it abandoned all later tech and would have died hard to a heavier viking marine/marauder push a minute or two later.
SCV all-ins are stupid. If I had my way, they wouldn't exist.
Also they wouldn't need to exist, because Terrans would feel comfortable going up against late-game Protoss armies.
SCV all-ins beating Colossus openings doesn't mean Colossus is balanced. Archon toilet beat plenty of BL/Infestor compositions... and Archon toilet was still stupid, and BL/Infestor was still imbalanced.
Part of the problem is WM health and Protoss detection ability. WM survive full storm hit(90hp vs 80 dmg storm) and can kill an observer if terran just scans over a minefield(and moves fast). So you have problems with detection, you need a stupid building for detection and if you think about it - when you have robo, you need more observers, why don't go colossus which is boring, stupid as hell, but can reliably kill a widow mine while the observer is with the army and safer. Also the problem is scan + vikings, but that's like specialized build and no pro does it, at least I cannot remember this(basically with the absence of other flying units - yup, colossus - the observer is hit much easier to kill).
So - that's the problem, with templar opening you cannot go for oracle detection(which is farer AFAIK), because gas cost. But you cannot lower gas cost of an Oracle(though I can see a gas upgrade to make an Oracle a killer, so you can lower the gas cost and use it as a cheap detection while it cannot kill anything, because the beam wasn't researched). I think part of the solution can be upgrade of observer with better detection radius(not vision!), but I expect this in robo bay and since you need robo bay to have templar opening viable, why not go colossus - again.
The most viable solution as a templar opening - cannon outposts. But you need 500 - 600 minerals to secure a post on a map which is killed in a few seconds by a small amount of bio with healing dropship, in a midgame this is heavy nonono...
I think that maybe the following would be best changes ATM:
1 - Reduce Factory cost from 150/100 to 150/75 2 - Reduce Armory cost from 150/100 to 100/50 (or even 100//75 if it proves to be much) 3 - Reduce Tempest base damage for 5 - i.e. - 30 instead of 35 4 - Reduce Tempest bonus vs Massive Air from +50 to +25 and +15 vs Shields or sth (I know that the latter one will affect PvP greatly, Tempests doing 10 more damage, that damage bonus would appeal only vs Shields, once those're depleted - Tempest will do 5 less damage overall, ofc. - poor Archon..)
However - here's the impact:
1 - People could play mech (or bio-mech better) if they want cause the gas investments aren't that high anymore 2 - Vikings will instead of 3-shotted get 4 or even 5 shotted (depending on upgrades) from Tempests 3 - Tempest base damage vs massive air will be 55 instead of 80 = much more versatile play - BCs will tank 10 shots or even 11 with better upgrades (which in air vs air battles it's so "natural" for Terran to be ahead in ups cause Protoss needs to invest in the ups if using air - Double) 4 - BroodLords will be 4-shotted instead of 3 (or 5, lol, missed a 5HP extra from BLords, but - something could hit those for 5hp remainder, lol), regardless - my point is - we might see in ZvP those 5 - Colossi will be 6-shotted instead of 5, but 5 shots would leave Colossi on 10HP, or so.. (ofc. the greatest change will be the vs Archon PvP which will take 45 Damage from Tempests instead of 35, but that might still not be that bad cause Stalkers could be made vs Tempests too TBH)
OH, and IDK about this one, but Terran might be too strong vs Zerg with those cost reductions so the Transformation Servos upg. requirement should get back in the game again.. (this time Terran will have had to have invested less gas for 75 though)
And TvT - (well it's a TvT, ppl could do the very same thing they do now only with a couple of more mines peppered here & there , should not change the matchup on the long run IMO)
Those changes are like the "slight" ones (if we wanted to make mech work, would need to be much more radical)
On July 10 2014 14:05 Loccstana wrote: I would much rather see the following changes to the widow mine than a radius increase:
1) Reduce widow mine supply to 1 2) Reduce widow mine build/reload time to 25 seconds 3) Add a hold fire option to the widow mine 4) Allow widow to target but not reveal cloaked units, like brood war spider mines.
Absolutely agree with #3 and the rest makes sense. I hope blizzard actually does something aggressive like make widow mines 0 supply because late late game situations are not fun for a terran. Protoss/zerg death balls are not fun to deal with. Every race should have a sort of 0 supply unit that helps them consolidate advantages with big economic leads at max supply. I really miss the brood war days of mine fields that let terrans actually control space without worrying about their army in perfect formation to deal with big pushes/rushes. Buffed tanks is still something that should be considered as well. Although I feel perfect terran macro sort of solves a lot balance issues at the top end today, I feel the game should reward terran micro/mechanics/tactical players just as much. I'd rather see a few well placed mines/tanks/turrets be adequate defense for ling/muta counters rather than the usual base trade scenario because holding anything without a main army is impossible. Turrets do not stop mutas anymore. Just some ranting but I hope Blizzard considers more fundamental gameplay changes for Terran.
On July 10 2014 14:05 Loccstana wrote: I would much rather see the following changes to the widow mine than a radius increase:
1) Reduce widow mine supply to 1 2) Reduce widow mine build/reload time to 25 seconds 3) Add a hold fire option to the widow mine 4) Allow widow to target but not reveal cloaked units, like brood war spider mines.
Absolutely agree with #3 and the rest makes sense. I hope blizzard actually does something aggressive like make widow mines 0 supply because late late game situations are not fun for a terran. Protoss/zerg death balls are not fun to deal with. Every race should have a sort of 0 supply unit that helps them consolidate advantages with big economic leads at max supply. I really miss the brood war days of mine fields that let terrans actually control space without worrying about their army in perfect formation to deal with big pushes/rushes. Buffed tanks is still something that should be considered as well. Although I feel perfect terran macro sort of solves a lot balance issues at the top end today, I feel the game should reward terran micro/mechanics/tactical players just as much. I'd rather see a few well placed mines/tanks/turrets be adequate defense for ling/muta counters rather than the usual base trade scenario because holding anything without a main army is impossible. Turrets do not stop mutas anymore. Just some ranting but I hope Blizzard considers more fundamental gameplay changes for Terran.
hold fire on mines would remove any counterplay to mines ( that is baiting shots before the engagement), and 0 supply mines would make it far too easy to turtle it seems that the pople who want mech all just want bw unbreakable seige lines into unstoppable maxed out moveout back ...
A big help would be to get rid of friendly fire from tanks and widow mines. No other splash damage has it. Bar storm, which is a castable spell which you have control over. With this widow mine buff. I can see zergs using the old tactic of rushing one or to zerglings into the bio force to set of the mine. Except more bio will die. Nerfing splash damage will buff the tank and the mine.
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
Protoss doesn't struggle in PvT at all so that would just be pointless. The matchup will just be more boring. I mean it would kind of work, but it's not something that is going to happen any time soon.
I agree completely about Templar openings being much more entertaining. My question is: are they really unviable right now? Or are they simply less reliable than Colossus openings? Because those aren't the same thing. PvT lategame (Colossus) was Protoss favored at the end of WOL, it's only gotten more so in HOTS.
What if we make Colo opening even less viable than Templar will be with new WM? (I don't know how yet, I'm just testing the waters.) Templar opening will be less godly than it was 3 months ago, that's a plus, but Protoss will still use it (because lack of clearly superior alternative).
Obviously giving Terrans more options is preferable to taking options away from Protoss, but I don't think Blizzard sees it that way.
They're pretty non-viable right now, yeah. Bio/mine pushes make the zealots that accompany them pretty worthless. Even if you split your zealots perfectly, it's still efficient for terran to kill only 1 zealot with a mine at the engagement. Even if you land a couple storms, it doesn't matter because no other units are left alive to finish off the weakened bio.
Would you happen to know of any Korean games where this happened? I'd love to see how it plays out, but I haven't come across any post-patch.
There are a few that were very recently post-patch, but there aren't many. It took a very short amount of time for protoss players to abandon templar play before colossus, it wasn't working for them at all in practice.
Yeah but the problem with that is, it doesn't tell us if Templar is actually underpowered or simply balanced. If Colossus is OP and Templar is "just right," mediocre Protoss players will start losing a lot of their Templar games and perceive Templar openings to be relatively underpowered. That doesn't mean they're actually underpowered. What could be happening is that Terran is finally performing at a 1/1/1 ratio which would lead to Terran re-filling the ladder and tournaments, which is what we ultimately want. Let's say Crank goes Templar against Innovation and loses a game he wouldn't have lost 2 months ago, that doesn't mean Templar is terrible, it could just mean Crank never had any right to beat Innovation period.
In this case, it would be in our best interests to nerf Colo harder than Templar, so that Templar, weak as it is, still seems the superior option.
I haven't seen any of these games, and the one between Ryung and Sjaak isn't available anywhere that I can see, so I can't begin to guess if Templar is actually underpowered or just the first fair Protoss lategame since they learned to survive 1/1/1 (by getting it nerfed).
We had players like Rain losing to random terrans that he is much better than while going templar openings.
Every korean toss has abandoned templar openings, which they had previously MUCH preferred.
Of course since they were completely broken after Council openings.
Yes they're much rarer now, but they still appear from time to time:
Oh, perhaps this is the "random Terran" you were talking about:
(Yes Rain loses, but not because of Mines.)
Templar openings were abandoned not because Mines made them completely unviable, but because blink colo dual forge is simultaneously easier and stronger. Why would you take risks when you have an unbreakable opening? Templar openings give room for Terran to play and multitask; blink colo locks everything.
Players regularly die to scv all-ins while going colossus, it took a player like herO to show a metagame move that held just fine against the scv pull, but was a gamble because it abandoned all later tech and would have died hard to a heavier viking marine/marauder push a minute or two later.
Nope, herO could perfectly defend a max SCV pull too with what he does...
I have a question about the Thor's AA weapon first. There are some king of pripriority? if for example there a ling+overlord attack the thor will attack the overlord first??
Templar openings were abandoned not because Mines made them completely unviable, but because blink colo dual forge is simultaneously easier and stronger. Why would you take risks when you have an unbreakable opening? Templar openings give room for Terran to play and multitask; blink colo locks everything.
Sorry but this is cherry-picking. You can also go back in time and find some games where the robo-player losses to scv-pulls and then come to the conclusion that Collosus-openings are unviable (through the same cherrypicking). Just after the Widow Mine buff, Innovation argued that he thought the matchup looked very good for terrran as the Widow Mine-buff changed the meta to more Collosus-openings. But over time, protoss players learned to open Collosus without dying to scv-pulls and it obviously became protoss favored, but prior to the Widow Mine I don't believe the Collosus opening was considered more "safe". And when ever protoss player in the world say they do not like templar openings anymore due to the Widow Mine and that the facts actually do support this (the meta was changed before and after the Mine-nerf), you cannot just put up a couple of VODs where the templar player losses in order to support your theory that goes against what everyone else says.
On July 10 2014 17:50 SuperHofmann wrote: I have a question about the Thor's AA weapon first. There are some king of pripriority? if for example there a ling+overlord attack the thor will attack the overlord first??
Hmm, don't know about thor & ovies, but colossus tends to attack buildings because nothing is attacking it... once something start shooting at colossus and it is able to return fire, it returns the fire.
@dwf: you are right that the newer colossus builds are hard as hell to break, but so are defensive templar openings, especially if the Protoss plays smart and gets a warp prism out; both sides have room to outplay and outmultitask each other really.
I agree that they are still viable to a certain extent, but if this buff also goes through, they will arguably die outright, which again, is bad for the matchup exclusively from a spectator's persective. Obviously there are other priorities for the balance team right now (and even they dont seem to guess which xD); i just wish they'd kill off colossi openings instead of templar, if they decided to limit the number of PvT builds.
Templar openings were abandoned not because Mines made them completely unviable, but because blink colo dual forge is simultaneously easier and stronger. Why would you take risks when you have an unbreakable opening? Templar openings give room for Terran to play and multitask; blink colo locks everything.
Sorry but this is cherry-picking. You can also go back in time and find some games where the robo-player losses to scv-pulls and then come to the conclusion that Collosus-openings are unviable (through the same cherrypicking). Just after the Widow Mine buff, Innovation argued that he thought the matchup looked very good for terrran as the Widow Mine-buff changed the meta to more Collosus-openings. But over time, protoss players learned to open Collosus without dying to scv-pulls and it obviously became protoss favored, but prior to the Widow Mine I don't believe the Collosus opening was considered more "safe". And when ever protoss player in the world say they do not like templar openings anymore due to the Widow Mine and that the facts actually do support this (the meta was changed before and after the Mine-nerf), you cannot just put up a couple of VODs where the templar player losses in order to support your theory that goes against what everyone else says.
Read my post again and you will realize "my theory" precisely explains "what everyone else says". The only difference is my conclusion is "?" rather than "non-viable," because there is still some Templar play (hence VODs as examples), unlike for instance something like mech TvP that is never seen.
Templar openings were abandoned not because Mines made them completely unviable, but because blink colo dual forge is simultaneously easier and stronger. Why would you take risks when you have an unbreakable opening? Templar openings give room for Terran to play and multitask; blink colo locks everything.
Sorry but this is cherry-picking. You can also go back in time and find some games where the robo-player losses to scv-pulls and then come to the conclusion that Collosus-openings are unviable (through the same cherrypicking). Just after the Widow Mine buff, Innovation argued that he thought the matchup looked very good for terrran as the Widow Mine-buff changed the meta to more Collosus-openings. But over time, protoss players learned to open Collosus without dying to scv-pulls and it obviously became protoss favored, but prior to the Widow Mine I don't believe the Collosus opening was considered more "safe". And when ever protoss player in the world say they do not like templar openings anymore due to the Widow Mine and that the facts actually do support this (the meta was changed before and after the Mine-nerf), you cannot just put up a couple of VODs where the templar player losses in order to support your theory that goes against what everyone else says.
Read my post again and you will realize "my theory" precisely explains "what everyone else says". The only difference is my conclusion is "?" rather than "non-viable," because there is still some Templar play (hence VODs as examples), unlike for instance something like mech TvP that is never seen.
These templar builds are now used as a surprise IMO. It's like StarDust's play. Everyone expects him do some cheese and then he plays or games without any ;] It would be much better if the Colossus build was a surprise build, templar openings are IMO much better to watch.
On July 10 2014 18:02 Teoita wrote: @dwf: you are right that the newer colossus builds are hard as hell to break, but so are defensive templar openings, especially if the Protoss plays smart and gets a warp prism out; both sides have room to outplay and outmultitask each other really.
I agree that they are still viable to a certain extent, but if this buff also goes through, they will arguably die outright, which again, is bad for the matchup exclusively from a spectator's persective. Obviously there are other priorities for the balance team right now (and even they dont seem to guess which xD); i just wish they'd kill off colossi openings instead of templar, if they decided to limit the number of PvT builds.
I totally agree, I also would rather watch templar opening than colo based. The mine buff went as I feared, right now almost no one plays chargelot/storm, even sOs
Mine change won't change the fact that the Widow Mine is an all or nothing kind of unit. Good Z players can still snipe them with mutas before a shot is fired, etc. While this will increase their power against 1-a deathballs, it'll also make mine drops even more aggravating.
Time Warp change is meh. At the end of 15 seconds everything in time warp should be dead or moved away, right? I think it's overcharge that needs to be tuned down. PvP was moving past 1base play for the most part even in WoL: PvP will still be okay with a shorter overcharge.
Thor change: meh, okay. Maybe this will help, maybe not.
On July 09 2014 03:44 LingBlingBling wrote: Why is crying about "it will break pvp" for any suggested nerf to Protoss? This has been their argument since WOL. Changing a few things to the MSC won't break pvp......TVP is need of a dire change.
Warp in takes away defenders advantage so in PvP the Msc helps stop the 4gate vs 4gate scenario every game. The duration of the Photon Overcharge helps defend a cycle of warp-ins and stablizes the matchup so it can be macro-orientated.
It is a horribly designed bandaid solution though.
Maybe you can't nerf it defensively, but offensively you could give the MSC a nerf. I'd propose slowing the MSC down to the old Overlord speed (around 0.88) and adding a MSC speed upgrade to the Cybernetics Core at 50/50/110. It would delay any straight up MSC attack on the mineral line by quite a bit and by putting the upgrade at the Cybernetics Core you cannot have Warp Gate and MSC Speed at the same time early on, weakening a Blink all-in. It wouldn't weaken any defensive play with the MSC as you can still park it between the main and the natural to cast Photon Overcharge.
This is a very creative idea, and sounds absolutely amazing for the game. I love this solution.
Imagine a blink all in where the Terran could actually snipe the slower moving MSC. And, at the same time, in PvP the slower moving MSC would suffice fine for Photon Overcharge defenses.
Well done sir. I hope enough people quote this so that it gets into the hands of DK.
On July 09 2014 11:24 AlaxWayLaxed wrote: So all this patch will do is make bio mine the choice of build again for terran players eliminating the need to try new styles like biomech variations. TvT will revert back to mine drop openings in every game and the bio mine style in TvP will be buffed. Terran will be buffed at the cost of spectator value, Terran match ups which are often said to be the most interesting to watch due it's fast pace and diversity will take a hit here as blizzard is buffing one particular style to the point where all others are not worth playing due to being so inferior to the staple biomine style that the blizz team is tunnel visioned into patching over and over again.
This is the kind of idiocy that makes me want to throw up when I get on these forums.
It really sounds like it might be trolling, but I don't think it is..not to pick on the individual who made this specific post but in general I keep seeing this, saw it b4 the first mine nerf and wanted to puke then and I really do think there are people who genuinely think like this.
We went from 1 viable unit comp (balanced viable unit comp that put you on even footing) - to this kind of nonsense being spewed all over TL about "stale meta stale meta" to mine nerf and ZERO viable unit comps that put you on even footing.
Lo and behold broken game - imbalance.
Now they are trying to fix it and we still want to bitch (even tho I am still really confused as to why they don't just go back to the old mine instead of adding an untested variable we have no data for) because "Now there will only be 1 comp thats used!! I love tanks!! I can't micro!! Pls give Terran a unit comp that's easy to play!" Do you even play Terran? I can't possibly believe you do.. you must play a different race if you would bitch because mines are getting buffed and Terran might now actually have ONE viable unit composition that can trade cost effectively with zerg again.
You can't go from ZERO viable compositions to 10 with a patch. That will take the type of development that will wait for LOTV.
The game is played professionally for hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. It's very clear to anyone who plays it at a high level that Terran is being fucked right now quite hard. Yet people advocate we should continue to "experiment" and "create new meta" when we don't even have 1 working meta in the current state. Why don't we start getting back to 1 unit comp that works - then we can work on making it diverse.
Good point about this game being the livelihood for so many young men at the moment when they could be going to school or starting lifelong careers. Taken into account, the fact that blizzard has left the game in the state it is for so long now is a fucking shameful disgrace.
On July 09 2014 23:49 Hider wrote: especailly as terran in general is largely underpresented which means that they in most tournaments should have win/rates above 50% assuming equal balance.
Are you dumb or only dumb?
Balanced means 50% win-rate in average if opponents of same caliber, preferably across the whole spectrum (pros and GM to bronze). Not that tournaments should always have the holy 1/3 repartition up to the final.
Why do you make these types of posts to insult other people when you in fact do not understand how the system works at all. You are not gonna have players of equal (skill)caliber playing each other if one race is UP. The stronger race is gonna have more of lesser skilled player taking advantage of their race and thus gets further in tournaments + qualifies for more tournaments than the weaker race. Those players should not have a win/rate of 50/50 against the very few terran players manging to qualify for the same tournament.
That's why it's especially alarming when terran win/rates are below 50%, but not alarming when ZvT or PvT win/rates are below 50%.
That's assuming all Z and P are worse than T players BECAUSE they're more numerous. If we take a bell curve more PorZ simply means more very good players.
On July 09 2014 23:49 Hider wrote: especailly as terran in general is largely underpresented which means that they in most tournaments should have win/rates above 50% assuming equal balance.
Are you dumb or only dumb?
Balanced means 50% win-rate in average if opponents of same caliber, preferably across the whole spectrum (pros and GM to bronze). Not that tournaments should always have the holy 1/3 repartition up to the final.
Why do you make these types of posts to insult other people when you in fact do not understand how the system works at all. You are not gonna have players of equal (skill)caliber playing each other if one race is UP. The stronger race is gonna have more of lesser skilled player taking advantage of their race and thus gets further in tournaments + qualifies for more tournaments than the weaker race. Those players should not have a win/rate of 50/50 against the very few terran players manging to qualify for the same tournament.
That's why it's especially alarming when terran win/rates are below 50%, but not alarming when ZvT or PvT win/rates are below 50%.
That's assuming all Z and P are worse than T players BECAUSE they're more numerous. If we take a bell curve more PorZ simply means more very good players.
The overall population is not P or Z favoured, it's merely that there are less T games in tournaments (because they get knocked out in earlier rounds/not selected by coaches (proleague specific).
On July 09 2014 23:49 Hider wrote: especailly as terran in general is largely underpresented which means that they in most tournaments should have win/rates above 50% assuming equal balance.
Are you dumb or only dumb?
Balanced means 50% win-rate in average if opponents of same caliber, preferably across the whole spectrum (pros and GM to bronze). Not that tournaments should always have the holy 1/3 repartition up to the final.
Why do you make these types of posts to insult other people when you in fact do not understand how the system works at all. You are not gonna have players of equal (skill)caliber playing each other if one race is UP. The stronger race is gonna have more of lesser skilled player taking advantage of their race and thus gets further in tournaments + qualifies for more tournaments than the weaker race. Those players should not have a win/rate of 50/50 against the very few terran players manging to qualify for the same tournament.
That's why it's especially alarming when terran win/rates are below 50%, but not alarming when ZvT or PvT win/rates are below 50%.
That's assuming all Z and P are worse than T players BECAUSE they're more numerous. If we take a bell curve more PorZ simply means more very good players.
No, we already know that the amount of active terran, p and z players are very similar (nios.kr for source here). Assuming the average T player = the average P and Z player in skill, then there shold be roughly equally amount of P, T and Z player egible for competitive play.
But there isn't. Instead, the top X% of T players are playing at a competiive players and being faced up against top X +Y% of P/Z players, where Y > 0.
According to the bell curve, the top X% should have a win/rate above 50% against the top X%+Y%. The fact that this isn't the case is quite alarming.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
On July 10 2014 06:22 submarine wrote: Concerning Templar openings vs Widowmines:
What if they reduced the health of Mines from 90 to something under 80? -Sniping mines before they borrow would be a little bit easier -HTs would be a soft counter to widowmines even without detection, because they could use 1 storm to clear mines
I think this should be enough to make HT openings viable again.
Protoss doesn't struggle in PvT at all so that would just be pointless. The matchup will just be more boring. I mean it would kind of work, but it's not something that is going to happen any time soon.
I agree completely about Templar openings being much more entertaining. My question is: are they really unviable right now? Or are they simply less reliable than Colossus openings? Because those aren't the same thing. PvT lategame (Colossus) was Protoss favored at the end of WOL, it's only gotten more so in HOTS.
What if we make Colo opening even less viable than Templar will be with new WM? (I don't know how yet, I'm just testing the waters.) Templar opening will be less godly than it was 3 months ago, that's a plus, but Protoss will still use it (because lack of clearly superior alternative).
Obviously giving Terrans more options is preferable to taking options away from Protoss, but I don't think Blizzard sees it that way.
They're pretty non-viable right now, yeah. Bio/mine pushes make the zealots that accompany them pretty worthless. Even if you split your zealots perfectly, it's still efficient for terran to kill only 1 zealot with a mine at the engagement. Even if you land a couple storms, it doesn't matter because no other units are left alive to finish off the weakened bio.
Would you happen to know of any Korean games where this happened? I'd love to see how it plays out, but I haven't come across any post-patch.
There are a few that were very recently post-patch, but there aren't many. It took a very short amount of time for protoss players to abandon templar play before colossus, it wasn't working for them at all in practice.
Yeah but the problem with that is, it doesn't tell us if Templar is actually underpowered or simply balanced. If Colossus is OP and Templar is "just right," mediocre Protoss players will start losing a lot of their Templar games and perceive Templar openings to be relatively underpowered. That doesn't mean they're actually underpowered. What could be happening is that Terran is finally performing at a 1/1/1 ratio which would lead to Terran re-filling the ladder and tournaments, which is what we ultimately want. Let's say Crank goes Templar against Innovation and loses a game he wouldn't have lost 2 months ago, that doesn't mean Templar is terrible, it could just mean Crank never had any right to beat Innovation period.
In this case, it would be in our best interests to nerf Colo harder than Templar, so that Templar, weak as it is, still seems the superior option.
I haven't seen any of these games, and the one between Ryung and Sjaak isn't available anywhere that I can see, so I can't begin to guess if Templar is actually underpowered or just the first fair Protoss lategame since they learned to survive 1/1/1 (by getting it nerfed).
We had players like Rain losing to random terrans that he is much better than while going templar openings. Every korean toss has abandoned templar openings, which they had previously MUCH preferred. Players regularly die to scv all-ins while going colossus, it took a player like herO to show a metagame move that held just fine against the scv pull, but was a gamble because it abandoned all later tech and would have died hard to a heavier viking marine/marauder push a minute or two later.
SCV all-ins are stupid. If I had my way, they wouldn't exist.
Also they wouldn't need to exist, because Terrans would feel comfortable going up against late-game Protoss armies.
SCV all-ins beating Colossus openings doesn't mean Colossus is balanced. Archon toilet beat plenty of BL/Infestor compositions... and Archon toilet was still stupid, and BL/Infestor was still imbalanced.
Actually, it would imply that colossus is underpowered.
Units don't exist in a void where the only thing that matters is how that unit interacts on its own. Timings matter, costs matter, so on and so forth. If a timing exists where terran can pull workers and attack and win more than half the time against colossus openings, then colossus openings are weak.
Now, I don't actually think it's underpowered, because I think it's possible for protoss to make adjustments to deal with the scv all-in. If you skip templar tech entirely and never go for it, you can have more gateway units, afford more sentries, and make use of guardian shield and forcefield to help out against the pull. The problem with that is if the scv all-in doesn't come, your templar are going to be late, meaning bio/viking is way strong for a good period of time. It's a meta-game move, you have to predict an scv all-in: a move that has few tells because terran goes for the third base before hand and can always choose to just not do it.
Safe colossus builds are overall decent even though an scv pull doesnt come; at worst the delay they force in templar tech translates in a 3/3 timing with a few less archons than normal.
Still, going colossus every game makes the matchup really damn boring.
On July 11 2014 01:08 Teoita wrote: Safe colossus builds are overall decent even though an scv pull doesnt come; at worst the delay they force in templar tech translates in a 3/3 timing with a few less archons than normal.
Still, going colossus every game makes the matchup really damn boring.
I suspect there's a strong timing terran could hit against them with a good amount of vikings before 3/3 finishes, but until we actually see someone attempt it we won't know.
All timings can be held, which is why I'm not calling anything imba =p. Just because something is hard does not mean it's impossible. People in these discussions often confuse hard with imbalanced or underpowered. If it's possible for the best player in the world to do it, it's not underpowered, others are just lacking skill.
That said, I'll bet that timing beats a lot of players in practice for Flash.
Still, I'm struggling to see how templar openings will be viable after another mine buff.
I don't know if LotV is going to be more like BW, but HotS did so many things wrong LotV needs to happen quickly. I really hope msc is going to get a serious rework, oracles, Tempest and SH will be removed and Terran lategame will get some love.
Edit : by the way, still no hint about LotV release ? Are we going to have an announcement in Blizzcon ?
On July 11 2014 02:24 [PkF] Wire wrote: I don't know if LotV is going to be more like BW, but HotS did so many things wrong LotV needs to happen quickly. I really hope msc is going to get a serious rework, oracles, Tempest and SH will be removed and Terran lategame will get some love.
Edit : by the way, still no hint about LotV release ? Are we going to have an announcement in Blizzcon ?
It's fortunate you aren't in charge of game design, or we'd be back in GomTvT.
When discussing design, your first decision should not be "remove everything I don't like".
Tempest is necessary for protoss so that PvZ isn't a horrid nightmare. It's also the only thing making it so that super late game TvP isn't super terran favored like it was in WoL. Oracle is a good idea that just happens to be a little bit too quick, it should have its speed reverted and add a speed upgrade that can be researched. Swarm hosts are fine at the moment.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds like a stormdrop.
Stormdrops rarely kill that many workers. They usually get a few. It's not hard to pull your workers out of the storm in time, as it takes 3 seconds of sitting in the storms before they die, and workers typically move out of them on their own for enough of that. Stormdrops also can't come as early in the game as mine drops. It's not hard to see that killing 12 workers at the 8 minute mark is more impactful than killing 14 workers at the 15 minute mark.
I don't like the comparison, but I don't think mine drops are unfair or imbalanced, so don't think I'm arguing that they shouldn't be buffed or should be nerfed because of drops.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds like a stormdrop.
Stormdrops rarely kill that many workers. They usually get a few. It's not hard to pull your workers out of the storm in time, as it takes 3 seconds of sitting in the storms before they die, and workers typically move out of them on their own for enough of that. Stormdrops also can't come as early in the game as mine drops. It's not hard to see that killing 12 workers at the 8 minute mark is more impactful than killing 14 workers at the 15 minute mark.
I don't like the comparison, but I don't think mine drops are unfair or imbalanced, so don't think I'm arguing that they shouldn't be buffed or should be nerfed because of drops.
It's also not hard to pull away your workers before the mines go off though, if you have an eye on the minimap. In either case, if you are not watching, you are going to pull too late.
But of course the timing when the one or other can occur is very different. Yet, like you say, it's not like we currently have overpowered minedrops in the game. That's of course mucuh more complicated than "has the potential to kill X units in Y seconds". I would rather have blizzard remove shit that fucks up mineral lines in 2-3seconds, rather than add more of that stuff. Imo, hellions are a good benchmark for a strong workerkiller. Anything that has the potential to be stronger is very, very frustrating to deal with.
I have a feeling that a change in the effect of Time Warp (reducing it to 30% or even 25%) is going to be more meaningful than a duration change. I mean, a lot of engagements are decided before 15 seconds is up anyway, especially early game.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds like a stormdrop.
Stormdrops rarely kill that many workers. They usually get a few. It's not hard to pull your workers out of the storm in time, as it takes 3 seconds of sitting in the storms before they die, and workers typically move out of them on their own for enough of that. Stormdrops also can't come as early in the game as mine drops. It's not hard to see that killing 12 workers at the 8 minute mark is more impactful than killing 14 workers at the 15 minute mark.
I don't like the comparison, but I don't think mine drops are unfair or imbalanced, so don't think I'm arguing that they shouldn't be buffed or should be nerfed because of drops.
It's also not hard to pull away your workers before the mines go off though, if you have an eye on the minimap. In either case, if you are not watching, you are going to pull too late.
But of course the timing when the one or other can occur is very different. Yet, like you say, it's not like we currently have overpowered minedrops in the game. That's of course mucuh more complicated than "has the potential to kill X units in Y seconds". I would rather have blizzard remove !@#$%^&* that fucks up mineral lines in 2-3seconds, rather than add more of that stuff. Imo, hellions are a good benchmark for a strong workerkiller. Anything that has the potential to be stronger is very, very frustrating to deal with.
Oracles are kinda the only unit here that kills anything superfast. Blue Flame Hellbat drops really come to late in the game to be that annoying.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds like a stormdrop.
Stormdrops rarely kill that many workers. They usually get a few. It's not hard to pull your workers out of the storm in time, as it takes 3 seconds of sitting in the storms before they die, and workers typically move out of them on their own for enough of that. Stormdrops also can't come as early in the game as mine drops. It's not hard to see that killing 12 workers at the 8 minute mark is more impactful than killing 14 workers at the 15 minute mark.
I don't like the comparison, but I don't think mine drops are unfair or imbalanced, so don't think I'm arguing that they shouldn't be buffed or should be nerfed because of drops.
It's also not hard to pull away your workers before the mines go off though, if you have an eye on the minimap. In either case, if you are not watching, you are going to pull too late.
But of course the timing when the one or other can occur is very different. Yet, like you say, it's not like we currently have overpowered minedrops in the game. That's of course mucuh more complicated than "has the potential to kill X units in Y seconds". I would rather have blizzard remove !@#$%^&* that fucks up mineral lines in 2-3seconds, rather than add more of that stuff. Imo, hellions are a good benchmark for a strong workerkiller. Anything that has the potential to be stronger is very, very frustrating to deal with.
Oracles are kinda the only unit here that kills anything superfast. Blue Flame Hellbat drops really come to late in the game to be that annoying.
On July 11 2014 03:21 Whitewing wrote: Stormdrops rarely kill that many workers. They usually get a few. It's not hard to pull your workers out of the storm in time, as it takes 3 seconds of sitting in the storms before they die, and workers typically move out of them on their own for enough of that. Stormdrops also can't come as early in the game as mine drops. It's not hard to see that killing 12 workers at the 8 minute mark is more impactful than killing 14 workers at the 15 minute mark.
I don't like the comparison, but I don't think mine drops are unfair or imbalanced, so don't think I'm arguing that they shouldn't be buffed or should be nerfed because of drops.
Current mine drops aren't unfair or imbalanced at all, but the possibily of a ~6:00 widow mine drop must be taken into careful consideration before buffing its splash radius without any decrease of the +shields damage.
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds like a stormdrop.
Stormdrops rarely kill that many workers. They usually get a few. It's not hard to pull your workers out of the storm in time, as it takes 3 seconds of sitting in the storms before they die, and workers typically move out of them on their own for enough of that. Stormdrops also can't come as early in the game as mine drops. It's not hard to see that killing 12 workers at the 8 minute mark is more impactful than killing 14 workers at the 15 minute mark.
I don't like the comparison, but I don't think mine drops are unfair or imbalanced, so don't think I'm arguing that they shouldn't be buffed or should be nerfed because of drops.
It's also not hard to pull away your workers before the mines go off though, if you have an eye on the minimap. In either case, if you are not watching, you are going to pull too late.
But of course the timing when the one or other can occur is very different. Yet, like you say, it's not like we currently have overpowered minedrops in the game. That's of course mucuh more complicated than "has the potential to kill X units in Y seconds". I would rather have blizzard remove !@#$%^&* that fucks up mineral lines in 2-3seconds, rather than add more of that stuff. Imo, hellions are a good benchmark for a strong workerkiller. Anything that has the potential to be stronger is very, very frustrating to deal with.
Oracles are kinda the only unit here that kills anything superfast. Blue Flame Hellbat drops really come to late in the game to be that annoying.
Dt are quite strong too
Personally, I think the whole design around one race not having any detection and the cloaked unit being able to get inifinite kills is dumb. I think static defense should be able to be build without an Ebay, but then isntead the detection range should be lower so the DT/banshee needs to get into detection range to kill/fire a shot, but can go back of detection range before getting killed.
DT's are unfun becasue they get hardcountered by static defense and static defense hardcounters it. It's such a poor interaction.
Yeah, it's mainly Oracles vs Terran. Agree fully with what you aaid about DTs. Also good old hellbat drops were extremly frustrating in that regard.
Banshees in TvT are great, phoenixes vs zerg are great. Also oracles vs zerg. Hellions vs zerg. Immortal drops are sickly entertaining when they happen. Many great things in this game, but losing in a second or two is not one of them.
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds like a stormdrop.
Stormdrops rarely kill that many workers. They usually get a few. It's not hard to pull your workers out of the storm in time, as it takes 3 seconds of sitting in the storms before they die, and workers typically move out of them on their own for enough of that. Stormdrops also can't come as early in the game as mine drops. It's not hard to see that killing 12 workers at the 8 minute mark is more impactful than killing 14 workers at the 15 minute mark.
I don't like the comparison, but I don't think mine drops are unfair or imbalanced, so don't think I'm arguing that they shouldn't be buffed or should be nerfed because of drops.
It's also not hard to pull away your workers before the mines go off though, if you have an eye on the minimap. In either case, if you are not watching, you are going to pull too late.
But of course the timing when the one or other can occur is very different. Yet, like you say, it's not like we currently have overpowered minedrops in the game. That's of course mucuh more complicated than "has the potential to kill X units in Y seconds". I would rather have blizzard remove !@#$%^&* that fucks up mineral lines in 2-3seconds, rather than add more of that stuff. Imo, hellions are a good benchmark for a strong workerkiller. Anything that has the potential to be stronger is very, very frustrating to deal with.
Oracles are kinda the only unit here that kills anything superfast. Blue Flame Hellbat drops really come to late in the game to be that annoying.
Dt are quite strong too
Personally, I think the whole design around one race not having any detection and the cloaked unit being able to get inifinite kills is dumb. I think static defense should be able to be build without an Ebay, but then isntead the detection range should be lower so the DT/banshee needs to get into detection range to kill/fire a shot, but can go back of detection range before getting killed.
DT's are unfun becasue they get hardcountered by static defense and static defense hardcounters it. It's such a poor interaction.
When used properly in the late game it doesn't work that way at all. DT rushes are exactly as you say, but those are a risky gamble and should be punished for failing. In the late game, warping in a few DT's to harass with a few zealots in multiple locations makes it quite difficult to defend, even if you have detection. It's not that hard to snipe a spore and then go to town on the hatchery, or kill a missile turret and start wiping out workers, or a cannon, etc.
Either way, if there isn't anything there to kill the DT, it'll still get kills even if detected.
On July 09 2014 04:47 linuxguru1 wrote: [quote] The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds like a stormdrop.
Stormdrops rarely kill that many workers. They usually get a few. It's not hard to pull your workers out of the storm in time, as it takes 3 seconds of sitting in the storms before they die, and workers typically move out of them on their own for enough of that. Stormdrops also can't come as early in the game as mine drops. It's not hard to see that killing 12 workers at the 8 minute mark is more impactful than killing 14 workers at the 15 minute mark.
I don't like the comparison, but I don't think mine drops are unfair or imbalanced, so don't think I'm arguing that they shouldn't be buffed or should be nerfed because of drops.
It's also not hard to pull away your workers before the mines go off though, if you have an eye on the minimap. In either case, if you are not watching, you are going to pull too late.
But of course the timing when the one or other can occur is very different. Yet, like you say, it's not like we currently have overpowered minedrops in the game. That's of course mucuh more complicated than "has the potential to kill X units in Y seconds". I would rather have blizzard remove !@#$%^&* that fucks up mineral lines in 2-3seconds, rather than add more of that stuff. Imo, hellions are a good benchmark for a strong workerkiller. Anything that has the potential to be stronger is very, very frustrating to deal with.
Oracles are kinda the only unit here that kills anything superfast. Blue Flame Hellbat drops really come to late in the game to be that annoying.
Dt are quite strong too
Personally, I think the whole design around one race not having any detection and the cloaked unit being able to get inifinite kills is dumb. I think static defense should be able to be build without an Ebay, but then isntead the detection range should be lower so the DT/banshee needs to get into detection range to kill/fire a shot, but can go back of detection range before getting killed.
DT's are unfun becasue they get hardcountered by static defense and static defense hardcounters it. It's such a poor interaction.
When used properly in the late game it doesn't work that way at all. DT rushes are exactly as you say, but those are a risky gamble and should be punished for failing. In the late game, warping in a few DT's to harass with a few zealots in multiple locations makes it quite difficult to defend, even if you have detection. It's not that hard to snipe a spore and then go to town on the hatchery, or kill a missile turret and start wiping out workers, or a cannon, etc.
Either way, if there isn't anything there to kill the DT, it'll still get kills even if detected.
True. They are ok in the later game, but units like DT's, Oracles are so boring to face in the early game. I would really hope that Blizzard looks into protoss openings and creating better interactions in the early game.
On July 11 2014 04:26 WhiteZetsu wrote: EZ late-game fixes for Terran:
1. Increase Thor air splash damage 2. Decrease BC build time to 60 3. Yamato cooldown instead of energy 4. Yamato splash damage
You only need #3, the rest is overkill.
Honestly 2 and 3.
Although I really miss the redline reactor (?) that enabled the BC to warp a short distance to get up in the enemys face, or as a slight escape.
No, if you make the transition too fast or easy, you take away the opponent's ability to react to it. Yamato on cooldown with no energy is EXTREMELY powerful. TvP you wouldn't need vikings anymore, you could just go Ghost/BC/Medivac. EMP + yamato takes out a colossus in one shot, and nothing but colossus can take out ghost/medivac. If you make the transition too quick and easy, protoss will just roll over and die every time. There needs to be time for protoss to react and get out tempests to force a wider range of composition from terran (add in ravens for PDD), at which point the engagements come down to control as both races have tools to deal with the other race's tools (templar attempt to storm and nullify ravens, ghosts nullify templar, colossus deal with ghosts, BC's deal with colossus, tempests deal with BC's, ravens deal with tempests, etc.).
The BC's build time isn't the issue at the moment, it's mostly that it kind of sucks right now.
TvZ would be impacted as well, as terran would have a switch to aim for out of bio.
When I transition into BCs I find that they come out in a decent time, I also don't think that their build time is an issue, they just kind of suck. Maybe change their attack to how it was back in brood war, so you can kind of micro it?
The issue with the BC is that it got hard countered out of the game, never to return. Something drastic would have to happen to become a norm in games. T1/T2 Terran too strong for a viable T3 I guess.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds like a stormdrop.
The difference being that a buffed widow mine drop would deal terrible terrible damage to Protoss worker lines and just terrible damage to Terran and Zerg worker lines due to bonus damage vs shields.
... whereas stormdrops just outright kill any worker line if left unnoticed for 4 seconds
On July 11 2014 02:24 [PkF] Wire wrote: I don't know if LotV is going to be more like BW, but HotS did so many things wrong LotV needs to happen quickly. I really hope msc is going to get a serious rework, oracles, Tempest and SH will be removed and Terran lategame will get some love.
Edit : by the way, still no hint about LotV release ? Are we going to have an announcement in Blizzcon ?
I think that the way how expansions work is that you think of a "concept" first rather than "get rid" of old stuff.. That being said - there will be a "concept" rework for each race - for example, (just "throwing it out there", just an example) say:
Terran have no Disabler units, therefore they can't fight deathballs - they'll get a disabler unit - whether from Factory or Starport - doesn't matter (right now the Raven is the "supposed to be disabler" but doesn't work, or when it does it's too much for the other races to handle, simply because they're more used for "fireworks" ATM rather than disabling and gaining ground over the opponent..
Terran have no "light-harass" unit, therefore probably change Banshee with something that isn't that destructive and doesn't have cloak, but can defent itself (and maybe cheaper, smaller, faster, perhaps even resistable to Fungals/Storms).. But yah - really been "serious" about this one - NO CLOAK - cloak atm is just for openers and for annoying Zerg (unfortunately), really nothing more.. Terran as opposed to BW has much more scans now, so cloak does sh*t (let's be honest - we certainly won't see 10 BCs falling to cloaked units as in BW, like - that will NEVER happen, lol) overall..
Zerg - they for example (IMO ATM) lack what I like to call "backdoor" - Protoss has it with Warp-Prisms, Terran has always had it since WoL, but right now Zerg's only form of backdoor is the Nydus which is "clumsy" and not working well - either too safe, or too uneffective.. e.t.c.. And yes - I really think that Zerg should get more backdoor potential (providing that either the other races got good "dynamic & easy scalable" solution vs the Mutas)
IDK about Protoss though, they seem to have everything that a race needs.. , so they might go on a "rework" rather than "evolve"..
When HotS came out - Blizz had very "clear" goals they wanted to achieve - Air openers for Protoss, choke-control and base-assault for Zerg, "mech" for Terran.. Only that they were so BAD at the Terran one that everyone wonders how that Warhoud could ever make it into the game, so the moment they took it out - they were "forced" to launch an (what I'd describe as) "incomplete solution" to the design idea/problem
Either the way - my point is - there will quite a few good changes (or at least I hope so) and all of them will be PLANNED, as opposed to go back and copy BW..
If anything - I'm really AGAINST that, though the game might get better, still - we want NEW UNITS yo..
Ofc. - that would be true under the premise that the moment the new units get into the game when Beta is closed it's already decided clearly on what they should do.. One of the many "reasons" as why we don't like HotS as much as we could is that like HALF of the new units are a complete "enigma" to what they should be doing..
Tempest ?? - what to use for ?, SHost - same - that thing was supposed to "ram defences" as opposed to be the anti-ram itself (more like - keep several of us at home and don't worry on opponent attacking, lol)..
WMine - same - were designed to "control" bane/ling numbers, but ppl used it for drops in mineral lines and end the game immediately or sth so it got nerfs..
So - all those were never clear what/why they should get used, as opposed for the Viper and the Oracle for example (which were clear from DAY 1 what they were intended to do - some of us might hate those, but only cause of personal reasons as opposed to design reasons, and - in general - we all like those units cause they're very clear purposed overall).. :D
B.T.W. - those "throwing it out" aren't just that, those are my "overall observations" for the races in the game ATM (but whatever the case is - the new units better have a clear purpose like the Viper or Oracle, rather than "meh" of the Tempest, WMine, SHost), and as long as those "few" principles are met - we'll see a lot better game than reverting back to BW IMO
The difference being that a buffed widow mine drop would deal terrible terrible damage to Protoss worker lines and just terrible damage to Terran and Zerg worker lines due to bonus damage vs shields.
... whereas stormdrops just outright kill any worker line if left unnoticed for 4 seconds
... and, maybe even more importantly, the timing at which it's going to hit.
The difference being that a buffed widow mine drop would deal terrible terrible damage to Protoss worker lines and just terrible damage to Terran and Zerg worker lines due to bonus damage vs shields.
... whereas stormdrops just outright kill any worker line if left unnoticed for 4 seconds
... and, maybe even more importantly, the timing at which it's going to hit.
well the real tragedy of that one is that Terran won't feel it cause SCVs will still survive the mine splash hit, lol
WMine - same - were designed to "control" bane/ling numbers, but ppl used it for drops in mineral lines and end the game immediately or sth so it got nerfs..
That's absolutely not why they nerfed it. From my perspective, they realize they fucked up with the nerf and now they are looking to correct their mistake.
When HotS came out - Blizz had very "clear" goals they wanted to achieve - Air openers for Protoss, choke-control and base-assault for Zerg, "mech" for Terran.. Only they were so BAD at the Terran one that everyone wonders how that Warhoud could ever make it into the game, lol.. So the moment they took it out - they were "forced" to launch an (what I'd describe as) "incomplete solution" to the design idea/problem
They did all of their major goals poorly. I mean swarm hosts, protoss air and terran mech (except in TvT) are probably the three worst things about Sc2 atm.
On the good things: Speedmedviacs makes bio-play an incredible playing experience for those who take pride in their unit control/multitasking. That unit simply saved the expansion for me. Hellbat actually makes TvT mech a lot less turtly (especially combined with medivacs). 4M creates a much more better playing experience and more micro than 3M.
The difference being that a buffed widow mine drop would deal terrible terrible damage to Protoss worker lines and just terrible damage to Terran and Zerg worker lines due to bonus damage vs shields.
... whereas stormdrops just outright kill any worker line if left unnoticed for 4 seconds
... and, maybe even more importantly, the timing at which it's going to hit.
Storm drops are an example of harass done well in the game. They aren't usable until the mid-game at the earliest, and usually not until later on in the mid-game as you need storms at home to not die. That means they usually aren't being used before 3 bases for the opponent. That means one successful storm drop doesn't end the game, it just hurts and helps the player who used it get ahead. Replacing most of a mineral line when you're on 3 bases hurts but isn't, in itself, usually enough to end the game. Storm drops risk important and expensive assets: you need at least 2 high templar in a warp prism to do anything effective with storm drops, and that's 300 gas. Add in the fact that the timing means the opponent is capable of dealing with it with proper scouting and response rather than it happening early when it might be a blind counter, and you get a really well done harass tool that fits good game design.
WMine - same - were designed to "control" bane/ling numbers, but ppl used it for drops in mineral lines and end the game immediately or sth so it got nerfs..
That's absolutely not why they nerfed it. From my perspective, they realize they fucked up with the nerf and now they are looking to correct their mistake.
Mines got nerfed because they wanted to see variety in TvZ: they wanted bio/tank to be viable (and gave tanks a small attack speed buff), and wanted to see mines used with tanks as well. The problem is that they underestimated the power of the mutalisk buff they doled out at the start of HOTS, so tanks are just non-viable, and the mine nerf wound up making nothing viable rather than promoting different styles.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds about right. A Terran who is unprepared for an oracle and goes afk for 4.5 seconds (the amount of time it takes a mine to burrow and detonate) will lose all their harvesters, too. It's really annoying.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds about right. A Terran who is unprepared for an oracle and goes afk for 4.5 seconds (the amount of time it takes a mine to burrow and detonate) will lose all their harvesters, too. It's really annoying.
That's so not true - the first difference is that Oracles kill worker one by one as opposed to 10 in one blob.. The second difference is that the "game-adjutant" will warn you after you lose few workers.. What's the point in the game-adjutant warning you to see all your base mining gone (except maybe few) ??, so not the same thing, NOT BY A DIAMETER, lol..
I know that the better/higher-skilled players are better at watching the map, but even those can insta-lose games to a hit or two from the "buffed" WM..
AND - the third real difference is - Oracle is energy based unit so you know when/what to expect if you carefully observe it's energy though
AND EVEN 4th - you won't even KNOW if there was a mine burrowed unless you actually SEE that rocket coming out of the ground and doing damage.. Instead you might think you got "harassed" while trying to fight, or do other things lol
Like - that last one is maybe the most important - I personally think mines would be much more fair if they got invulnerable for 5-10 seconds (or probably only vulnerable to spells like fungal or storm) after a launch but actually being visible even if burrowed so not having to have the "hawk-eye" for something that might "lurk" around, AND Terran could safely "retract" that thing back into his army provided that it's not too far away though
OK, not to "argue" about it, nor whine/redesign, but I "posted" that "invulnerable but visible" "fix" - so you'd know what's the mine's biggest problem IMO.. It doesn't "raise" 2 fingers and say "it was me" after doing a huge damage, so you'll not know if it was there if you were like 2 seconds late to "check on everything" or so.. So - THAT might be the greatest problem with the mine TBH - they're basically a "self-revivable DT" in a manner of speaking - that you have to "see it on work" in order to clean it up before it fires again though
WMine - same - were designed to "control" bane/ling numbers, but ppl used it for drops in mineral lines and end the game immediately or sth so it got nerfs..
That's absolutely not why they nerfed it. From my perspective, they realize they fucked up with the nerf and now they are looking to correct their mistake.
Mines got nerfed because they wanted to see variety in TvZ: they wanted bio/tank to be viable (and gave tanks a small attack speed buff), and wanted to see mines used with tanks as well. The problem is that they underestimated the power of the mutalisk buff they doled out at the start of HOTS, so tanks are just non-viable, and the mine nerf wound up making nothing viable rather than promoting different styles.
I actually think their mistakes were even larger than that. If you read David Kim's explanation, he didn't just want bio/tank to be viable. No, it should be bio + mines + tanks vs zerg. Like it was clear that he didn't wanna make Mines useless since they only worked vs Zerg along with bio in the first place.
But, in that proces the blizzard balance team completely missed the fact that Mines and tanks have pretty poor synergy. It would simply be impossible to create realistic scenarios where terrans would mix in mines and Tanks. Instead, it was always gonna be one or the other one along with bio play.
The difference being that a buffed widow mine drop would deal terrible terrible damage to Protoss worker lines and just terrible damage to Terran and Zerg worker lines due to bonus damage vs shields.
... whereas stormdrops just outright kill any worker line if left unnoticed for 4 seconds
... and, maybe even more importantly, the timing at which it's going to hit.
Storm drops are an example of harass done well in the game. They aren't usable until the mid-game at the earliest, and usually not until later on in the mid-game as you need storms at home to not die. That means they usually aren't being used before 3 bases for the opponent. That means one successful storm drop doesn't end the game, it just hurts and helps the player who used it get ahead. Replacing most of a mineral line when you're on 3 bases hurts but isn't, in itself, usually enough to end the game. Storm drops risk important and expensive assets: you need at least 2 high templar in a warp prism to do anything effective with storm drops, and that's 300 gas. Add in the fact that the timing means the opponent is capable of dealing with it with proper scouting and response rather than it happening early when it might be a blind counter, and you get a really well done harass tool that fits good game design.
Except this isn't what we see. The problem is that there's no counter to them which would kill them. If the templars unload then you're taking damage as running away generally makes it worse. And if you scout it, the WP is too fast to kill unless the P isn't paying attention. So P can risk very little for large amounts of gain. There's also very little micro involved, you fly in or turn back. If it's the former, you drop, press t, and fly away. The only time P is risking their WP is when they are not paying attention to them and they fly into static D or into a clump of units.
They keep making Protoss more boring every time they buff the widow mine and force Protoss to go colossus. They should nerf the colossus instead since it's a boring unit anyway, or buff counters to colossus like the viking.
And most players get their units out of the time warp by 15 seconds anyway, so that's a really small nerf.
That's so not true - the first difference is that Oracles kill worker one by one as opposed to 10 in one blob.. The second difference is that the "game-adjutant" will warn you after you lose few workers.. What's the point in the game-adjutant warning you to see all your base mining gone (except maybe few) ??, so not the same thing, NOT BY A DIAMETER, lol..
Idk why people think the thor change is bad. its actually really helpful to Terran, because in battle you want to prioritize splitting and stutter stepping your bio its a real pain to have to manually target all your Thors as well. Thors attacking zerglings are useless but thors splashing mutas are alot more helpful. this is somewhat a quality of life change but it will help terran in tvz engagements. as a terran player i would appreciate such a change. Pros though it probably does not matter all that much. This is just a small change that would help Terran who are not on that top level were players have godlike apm. its nice to see them doing something to make Terran a tad more forgiving for us scrubs in diamond. Also they are listening to player feedback I cant recall were but some one suggested this in the Tl thread were these changes were being discussed.
On July 11 2014 07:43 Cheren wrote: They keep making Protoss more boring every time they buff the widow mine and force Protoss to go colossus. They should nerf the colossus instead since it's a boring unit anyway, or buff counters to colossus like the viking.
And most players get their units out of the time warp by 15 seconds anyway, so that's a really small nerf.
I would like to see the Collosus damage get change from 15 to 10 + 5 light
On July 11 2014 07:43 Cheren wrote: They keep making Protoss more boring every time they buff the widow mine and force Protoss to go colossus. They should nerf the colossus instead since it's a boring unit anyway, or buff counters to colossus like the viking.
And most players get their units out of the time warp by 15 seconds anyway, so that's a really small nerf.
I would like to see the Collosus damage get change from 15 to 10 + 5 light
That fucks up PvZ in such a large way though. Without Colossi, roaches are probably out of control. Yes: Immortals are still great against them. But Immortals are weak against zerglings and only break even with hydralisks. Not to mention that a nerf against static defense, queens, infestors, ultras is pretty much uncalled for and could cause severe problems with the ling/ultra/queen/infestor style, that is very powerful on bigger maps. And I think Colossi are in a great spot in PvP currently. They are not the only strong option for a ground army - Archon/Immortal based play seems to hold its own very well against lower Colossi numbers - and mass Colossus can be countered so hard by Tempests, that it is a very questionable compositional choice.
Neither do I think this is justified in PvT. Colossi don't shred Marauders that hard anyways, I think that's rather on zealots eating so many shots, that it sometimes seems like Colossi are a powerhouse vs marauders. And more generally speaking, I don't think Protoss needs a nerf in the midgame. They often have a hard time as is to grab a third base and defend it or surviving an SCV pull. It's really on Terran's own lategame transitions in my opinion. Like, (the few times) when I play bio in TvP and get into the midgame everything feels fine. You harass, maybe even snipe a nexus. You build up your viking count vs Colossi and take your bases... and then you just start hand wringing because your options seem to come down to suiciding your army on buildings (massive dropping/nexus sniping) and suiciding your economy on army (SCV pulling). There is no third option that says, he has Colossi and Templar on the battlefield, so build something that doesn't get torn apart by them.
On July 11 2014 07:43 Cheren wrote: They keep making Protoss more boring every time they buff the widow mine and force Protoss to go colossus. They should nerf the colossus instead since it's a boring unit anyway, or buff counters to colossus like the viking.
And most players get their units out of the time warp by 15 seconds anyway, so that's a really small nerf.
I would like to see the Collosus damage get change from 15 to 10 + 5 light
That doesn't help anything. Protoss have 50 other units that shut down mech, Colo is too strong against bio. (Or bio is too weak, take your pick) Just 10 would be much better.
WM buff kinda sucks but it is the only way T can survive like 70 banelings, I mean literally the only way.
Buffing tanks wont help at all, in the mid game tanks are hard countered by Mutas, in the late game hard countered by Vipers and Mutas
and if you happen to find yourself unsieged ...
At the current design Tanks are just useless vs Z and thats it.
I think it was Cure vs Terror or Departure at IEM qualifiers just a few days ago, when Cure had like 8 tanks spread in front of Z's 3rd base, and then 3 blinding clouds and suddenly T does not have any splash damage -> GG.
So once again no matter how stupid WM buff is, it is the only way to fix TvZ at least until LOTV.
Alternatively add sth to Thors so that they can tank more banelings damage I dont know.
This change sucks even more in PvT, as every T will now open with mines, and still dies in late game if P survives.
On July 11 2014 07:43 Cheren wrote: They keep making Protoss more boring every time they buff the widow mine and force Protoss to go colossus. They should nerf the colossus instead since it's a boring unit anyway, or buff counters to colossus like the viking.
And most players get their units out of the time warp by 15 seconds anyway, so that's a really small nerf.
I would like to see the Collosus damage get change from 15 to 10 + 5 light
Probably the other way round - more like 10 + 10 vs armored, but the real problem would be LINGS though
But NO - Blizz would never touch the Marine, Hydralisk, nor Collo.. They're the "glass cannon" units and those affect game performance by huge margains and the gameplay the most.. They once tried to propose a "change" to Hydralisks that everyone was like w.t.f. lol
i would like to see how a different change to the widow mine splash damage could work - probably return to the initial flat damage of 40 plus maybe 35 vs shields in a 1.5 or 1.75 radius?
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds about right. A Terran who is unprepared for an oracle and goes afk for 4.5 seconds (the amount of time it takes a mine to burrow and detonate) will lose all their harvesters, too. It's really annoying.
That's so not true - the first difference is that Oracles kill worker one by one as opposed to 10 in one blob.. The second difference is that the "game-adjutant" will warn you after you lose few workers.. What's the point in the game-adjutant warning you to see all your base mining gone (except maybe few) ??, so not the same thing, NOT BY A DIAMETER, lol..
I know that the better/higher-skilled players are better at watching the map, but even those can insta-lose games to a hit or two from the "buffed" WM..
AND - the third real difference is - Oracle is energy based unit so you know when/what to expect if you carefully observe it's energy though
AND EVEN 4th - you won't even KNOW if there was a mine burrowed unless you actually SEE that rocket coming out of the ground and doing damage.. Instead you might think you got "harassed" while trying to fight, or do other things lol
Like - that last one is maybe the most important - I personally think mines would be much more fair if they got invulnerable for 5-10 seconds (or probably only vulnerable to spells like fungal or storm) after a launch but actually being visible even if burrowed so not having to have the "hawk-eye" for something that might "lurk" around, AND Terran could safely "retract" that thing back into his army provided that it's not too far away though
OK, not to "argue" about it, nor whine/redesign, but I "posted" that "invulnerable but visible" "fix" - so you'd know what's the mine's biggest problem IMO.. It doesn't "raise" 2 fingers and say "it was me" after doing a huge damage, so you'll not know if it was there if you were like 2 seconds late to "check on everything" or so.. So - THAT might be the greatest problem with the mine TBH - they're basically a "self-revivable DT" in a manner of speaking - that you have to "see it on work" in order to clean it up before it fires again though
No the real difference is that you need a critcal mass (6 marines) to deal with Oracles. If you don't, you get fucked. You don't need critical mass at all to deal with Widow Mines. You only need micro. That's why the former has terrible designed and the latter ins't.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds about right. A Terran who is unprepared for an oracle and goes afk for 4.5 seconds (the amount of time it takes a mine to burrow and detonate) will lose all their harvesters, too. It's really annoying.
That's so not true - the first difference is that Oracles kill worker one by one as opposed to 10 in one blob.. The second difference is that the "game-adjutant" will warn you after you lose few workers.. What's the point in the game-adjutant warning you to see all your base mining gone (except maybe few) ??, so not the same thing, NOT BY A DIAMETER, lol..
I know that the better/higher-skilled players are better at watching the map, but even those can insta-lose games to a hit or two from the "buffed" WM..
AND - the third real difference is - Oracle is energy based unit so you know when/what to expect if you carefully observe it's energy though
AND EVEN 4th - you won't even KNOW if there was a mine burrowed unless you actually SEE that rocket coming out of the ground and doing damage.. Instead you might think you got "harassed" while trying to fight, or do other things lol
Like - that last one is maybe the most important - I personally think mines would be much more fair if they got invulnerable for 5-10 seconds (or probably only vulnerable to spells like fungal or storm) after a launch but actually being visible even if burrowed so not having to have the "hawk-eye" for something that might "lurk" around, AND Terran could safely "retract" that thing back into his army provided that it's not too far away though
OK, not to "argue" about it, nor whine/redesign, but I "posted" that "invulnerable but visible" "fix" - so you'd know what's the mine's biggest problem IMO.. It doesn't "raise" 2 fingers and say "it was me" after doing a huge damage, so you'll not know if it was there if you were like 2 seconds late to "check on everything" or so.. So - THAT might be the greatest problem with the mine TBH - they're basically a "self-revivable DT" in a manner of speaking - that you have to "see it on work" in order to clean it up before it fires again though
No the real difference is that you need a critcal mass (6 marines) to deal with Oracles. If you don't, you get fucked. You don't need critical mass at all to deal with Widow Mines. You only need micro. That's why the former has terrible designed and the latter ins't.
Nope, both designs are fucked. Even before the WM nerf it was stated several times, that if you do not react quickly enough, it is better to not care because you do not clump your probes(therefore you lose more probes, but you still can play). If this patch goes through, now you will lose so many probes either way, YOU HAVE TO REACT ON TIME, otherwise the game ended right there. Same exact scenario like oracle. You didn't reacted properly? You are fucked, game ended. Bye. It's not about micro with this change - as stated above - 2 WM can clear WHOLE mining base!!! This isn't even near an ORacle level, this is far beyond...
It reminds me beginning of HotS, where the only surviving worker to WM drop was SCV. Zerg and Protoss players called WM drops too much, but terrans called them OKish, because, well, it wasn't their problem at all. Give WM buff that ALL workers dies in radius 2, then we can talk about this again with no P hate ,-) Right now I feel just P hate and mean enjoyment from "P is fucked, but we can pretend this buff will affect only TvZ and 70+ banes plays", which is not true.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds about right. A Terran who is unprepared for an oracle and goes afk for 4.5 seconds (the amount of time it takes a mine to burrow and detonate) will lose all their harvesters, too. It's really annoying.
That's so not true - the first difference is that Oracles kill worker one by one as opposed to 10 in one blob.. The second difference is that the "game-adjutant" will warn you after you lose few workers.. What's the point in the game-adjutant warning you to see all your base mining gone (except maybe few) ??, so not the same thing, NOT BY A DIAMETER, lol..
I know that the better/higher-skilled players are better at watching the map, but even those can insta-lose games to a hit or two from the "buffed" WM..
AND - the third real difference is - Oracle is energy based unit so you know when/what to expect if you carefully observe it's energy though
AND EVEN 4th - you won't even KNOW if there was a mine burrowed unless you actually SEE that rocket coming out of the ground and doing damage.. Instead you might think you got "harassed" while trying to fight, or do other things lol
Like - that last one is maybe the most important - I personally think mines would be much more fair if they got invulnerable for 5-10 seconds (or probably only vulnerable to spells like fungal or storm) after a launch but actually being visible even if burrowed so not having to have the "hawk-eye" for something that might "lurk" around, AND Terran could safely "retract" that thing back into his army provided that it's not too far away though
OK, not to "argue" about it, nor whine/redesign, but I "posted" that "invulnerable but visible" "fix" - so you'd know what's the mine's biggest problem IMO.. It doesn't "raise" 2 fingers and say "it was me" after doing a huge damage, so you'll not know if it was there if you were like 2 seconds late to "check on everything" or so.. So - THAT might be the greatest problem with the mine TBH - they're basically a "self-revivable DT" in a manner of speaking - that you have to "see it on work" in order to clean it up before it fires again though
No the real difference is that you need a critcal mass (6 marines) to deal with Oracles. If you don't, you get fucked. You don't need critical mass at all to deal with Widow Mines. You only need micro. That's why the former has terrible designed and the latter ins't.
you need a critical mass for everything though. The difference between an oracle and a banshee (for which you also need a critical mass of units) is that the one happens way earlier. Even for a single mutalisk you'd need "a critical mass" (like 2-3) of marines in position. But all that stuff does not happen that early.
Actually, the oracle is very underpowered for its damagepotential. You cannot just go midgame into oracles to deal with anything. It's just not good enough against anything. It's only good for 5min rushes, because then the opponent may not even have that anything. It's a retarted place it is in and would need 1-2 patches to be fun, imo.
On July 11 2014 07:43 Cheren wrote: They keep making Protoss more boring every time they buff the widow mine and force Protoss to go colossus. They should nerf the colossus instead since it's a boring unit anyway, or buff counters to colossus like the viking.
And most players get their units out of the time warp by 15 seconds anyway, so that's a really small nerf.
I would like to see the Collosus damage get change from 15 to 10 + 5 light
That fucks up PvZ in such a large way though. Without Colossi, roaches are probably out of control. Yes: Immortals are still great against them. But Immortals are weak against zerglings and only break even with hydralisks. Not to mention that a nerf against static defense, queens, infestors, ultras is pretty much uncalled for and could cause severe problems with the ling/ultra/queen/infestor style, that is very powerful on bigger maps. And I think Colossi are in a great spot in PvP currently. They are not the only strong option for a ground army - Archon/Immortal based play seems to hold its own very well against lower Colossi numbers - and mass Colossus can be countered so hard by Tempests, that it is a very questionable compositional choice.
Neither do I think this is justified in PvT. Colossi don't shred Marauders that hard anyways, I think that's rather on zealots eating so many shots, that it sometimes seems like Colossi are a powerhouse vs marauders. And more generally speaking, I don't think Protoss needs a nerf in the midgame. They often have a hard time as is to grab a third base and defend it or surviving an SCV pull. It's really on Terran's own lategame transitions in my opinion. Like, (the few times) when I play bio in TvP and get into the midgame everything feels fine. You harass, maybe even snipe a nexus. You build up your viking count vs Colossi and take your bases... and then you just start hand wringing because your options seem to come down to suiciding your army on buildings (massive dropping/nexus sniping) and suiciding your economy on army (SCV pulling). There is no third option that says, he has Colossi and Templar on the battlefield, so build something that doesn't get torn apart by them.
Theoretically MMMGV is as strong as colossi+templar. The problem is that even the best terrans will fuck up if toss does all the right things (force multitasking while the fight happens). The margin for terran is just very slim.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds about right. A Terran who is unprepared for an oracle and goes afk for 4.5 seconds (the amount of time it takes a mine to burrow and detonate) will lose all their harvesters, too. It's really annoying.
That's so not true - the first difference is that Oracles kill worker one by one as opposed to 10 in one blob.. The second difference is that the "game-adjutant" will warn you after you lose few workers.. What's the point in the game-adjutant warning you to see all your base mining gone (except maybe few) ??, so not the same thing, NOT BY A DIAMETER, lol..
I know that the better/higher-skilled players are better at watching the map, but even those can insta-lose games to a hit or two from the "buffed" WM..
AND - the third real difference is - Oracle is energy based unit so you know when/what to expect if you carefully observe it's energy though
AND EVEN 4th - you won't even KNOW if there was a mine burrowed unless you actually SEE that rocket coming out of the ground and doing damage.. Instead you might think you got "harassed" while trying to fight, or do other things lol
Like - that last one is maybe the most important - I personally think mines would be much more fair if they got invulnerable for 5-10 seconds (or probably only vulnerable to spells like fungal or storm) after a launch but actually being visible even if burrowed so not having to have the "hawk-eye" for something that might "lurk" around, AND Terran could safely "retract" that thing back into his army provided that it's not too far away though
OK, not to "argue" about it, nor whine/redesign, but I "posted" that "invulnerable but visible" "fix" - so you'd know what's the mine's biggest problem IMO.. It doesn't "raise" 2 fingers and say "it was me" after doing a huge damage, so you'll not know if it was there if you were like 2 seconds late to "check on everything" or so.. So - THAT might be the greatest problem with the mine TBH - they're basically a "self-revivable DT" in a manner of speaking - that you have to "see it on work" in order to clean it up before it fires again though
No the real difference is that you need a critcal mass (6 marines) to deal with Oracles. If you don't, you get fucked. You don't need critical mass at all to deal with Widow Mines. You only need micro. That's why the former has terrible designed and the latter ins't.
you need a critical mass for everything though. The difference between an oracle and a banshee (for which you also need a critical mass of units) is that the one happens way earlier. Even for a single mutalisk you'd need "a critical mass" (like 2-3) of marines in position. But all that stuff does not happen that early.
Actually, the oracle is very underpowered for its damagepotential. You cannot just go midgame into oracles to deal with anything. It's just not good enough against anything. It's only good for 5min rushes, because then the opponent may not even have that anything. It's a retarted place it is in and would need 1-2 patches to be fun, imo.
IMHO banshees in TvT especially without cloak are the perfect harassment unit designwise. The defending player will nearly always have the tools to hold off the harass but the outcome is decided by unit control. The interaction between banshees and marines is perfect. Both players can sink apm into the micro and gain an advantage. The better player can gain a significant, but not game ending lead. The banshee player can still do some damage even when turrets and/or vikings are up, because of the range and the same airspeed. The interaction between banshees and the possible defense is very deep and always offers options.
Oracels in TvP on the other hand are a lot more "digital". You can do damage to workers wherever there are less then 6 marines or no turrets. There is no longer interaction where both sides have to put in apm to decide the outcome. On top of that the unit forces terran to choose between a very limited amount of possible builds.
On July 11 2014 07:43 Cheren wrote: They keep making Protoss more boring every time they buff the widow mine and force Protoss to go colossus. They should nerf the colossus instead since it's a boring unit anyway, or buff counters to colossus like the viking.
And most players get their units out of the time warp by 15 seconds anyway, so that's a really small nerf.
I would like to see the Collosus damage get change from 15 to 10 + 5 light
That fucks up PvZ in such a large way though. Without Colossi, roaches are probably out of control. Yes: Immortals are still great against them. But Immortals are weak against zerglings and only break even with hydralisks. Not to mention that a nerf against static defense, queens, infestors, ultras is pretty much uncalled for and could cause severe problems with the ling/ultra/queen/infestor style, that is very powerful on bigger maps. And I think Colossi are in a great spot in PvP currently. They are not the only strong option for a ground army - Archon/Immortal based play seems to hold its own very well against lower Colossi numbers - and mass Colossus can be countered so hard by Tempests, that it is a very questionable compositional choice.
Neither do I think this is justified in PvT. Colossi don't shred Marauders that hard anyways, I think that's rather on zealots eating so many shots, that it sometimes seems like Colossi are a powerhouse vs marauders. And more generally speaking, I don't think Protoss needs a nerf in the midgame. They often have a hard time as is to grab a third base and defend it or surviving an SCV pull. It's really on Terran's own lategame transitions in my opinion. Like, (the few times) when I play bio in TvP and get into the midgame everything feels fine. You harass, maybe even snipe a nexus. You build up your viking count vs Colossi and take your bases... and then you just start hand wringing because your options seem to come down to suiciding your army on buildings (massive dropping/nexus sniping) and suiciding your economy on army (SCV pulling). There is no third option that says, he has Colossi and Templar on the battlefield, so build something that doesn't get torn apart by them.
Theoretically MMMGV is as strong as colossi+templar. The problem is that even the best terrans will fuck up if toss does all the right things (force multitasking while the fight happens). The margin for terran is just very slim.
Not sure what you understand as theoretically. Practically, your composition will just be worse, since with the modern early game Protoss allins, you are not going to be able to tech somewhat straight to ghosts. You have to make units/techs very early which leads to having to attack in the midgame. Imo, in WoL you could actually play passively (mix in a drop or two, posture, but never really attack in) with Terran against Protoss and it was actually on the Protoss to prevent massive ghost armies from happening OR to adpat and play greedier himself.
So, yeah, theoretically there are biobased armies that can combat Protoss lategame. Just practically, you can hardly ever get there since you are stuck massing the wrong units all game long, hence, where - at least - I am getting stuck looking for counters by compositional choices, instead of counters by being ahead from macro/gameplay choices. In general, I don't like it when you only have one minimax composition that then works against everything. I like the dynamics of PvZ, TvT (TvZ to a lesser extend as well) much more, where both players have a few transition/composition choices that can exploit an opponent not keeping up. It makes for a good circular unit balancing, that makes matchups more robust and less reliant on "hitting certain timings, else your composition doesn't work".
On July 11 2014 17:19 SC2Toastie wrote: You should start reading the post you reply to. An Oracle flying in is nothing like a mine flying in.
Oracle: got no marines? Gg Mine: you're too slow + unprepped? Gg
Now guess what is well designed and what is a stupid bo limitation?
You are right, having to build robo for a possible 6:00 mine drop that could destroy a whole mineral line is a stupid bo limitation
you don't have to. You can build an oracle, sac 1 worker per mine and then clean them up. Or you can build a forge and a canon per mineral line.
Yep, get a forge and a cannon per mineral line at 6:00 without the option to scout if I play a standard macro game. That means putting cannons blind. The only way you can scout a terran base before 6:00 is going 1 base oracle which is easily scouted. No more MSC scout thx to vision nerf. The fastest allucination will arrive at terran base after 6:00 And oracle isn't a reliable form of detection as observer is, and then having to still build a robo because ht openings are dead makes the oracle a 300/300 observer as you can't use it to harrass anymore.
David Kim doesn't understand that the problem Terran has, and to a small extent Zerg, which is why those races got creative about all ins or spamming festor brood lord, is stalker colossus, or more specifically, colossus. Not to say that T or Z wouldn't be OP vs P without colossus, but we have to gauge the game by brood war, since a ton of the core units of SC2 come from brood war.
First, there's a problem with the massable late game armies of high tech BL/festor, Coloss/VR/Archon, etc. Why? Because cost structures are more similar than differentiating from Brood War. For instance, why do we have double gas yet the cost of the High Templar is the same as Brood War (single gas)?
Second, due to the original setup of SC1 in the three races, the balance of P more or less was due to units of high power being slow, expensive, and difficult to move around. Goons and speedlots were core to the army as long as there was consistent army trading. Building up a deathball was more difficult because of first the gas restriction, and second the constant attrition.
Colossus is a real game changer to P from Brood War because it's extremely mobile. requires no mineral upkeep to continue attacking like reaver, and not only that but reaver itself had a longer production cycle for scarabs compared to the firing rate, which meant it could "run dry" and it's attack speed would slow slightly. Colossus has more range, more durability, and a constant stream of unmitigated damage that is AoE.
It seems like P got more powerful in a lot of ways while T got nerfed in a lot of ways. Siege tank, emp, etc. I really miss emp being on a flying unit like a sci vessel rather than on the easily killable and more terrain confined ghost.
On July 11 2014 07:43 Cheren wrote: They keep making Protoss more boring every time they buff the widow mine and force Protoss to go colossus. They should nerf the colossus instead since it's a boring unit anyway, or buff counters to colossus like the viking.
And most players get their units out of the time warp by 15 seconds anyway, so that's a really small nerf.
I would like to see the Collosus damage get change from 15 to 10 + 5 light
That fucks up PvZ in such a large way though. Without Colossi, roaches are probably out of control. Yes: Immortals are still great against them. But Immortals are weak against zerglings and only break even with hydralisks. Not to mention that a nerf against static defense, queens, infestors, ultras is pretty much uncalled for and could cause severe problems with the ling/ultra/queen/infestor style, that is very powerful on bigger maps. And I think Colossi are in a great spot in PvP currently. They are not the only strong option for a ground army - Archon/Immortal based play seems to hold its own very well against lower Colossi numbers - and mass Colossus can be countered so hard by Tempests, that it is a very questionable compositional choice.
Neither do I think this is justified in PvT. Colossi don't shred Marauders that hard anyways, I think that's rather on zealots eating so many shots, that it sometimes seems like Colossi are a powerhouse vs marauders. And more generally speaking, I don't think Protoss needs a nerf in the midgame. They often have a hard time as is to grab a third base and defend it or surviving an SCV pull. It's really on Terran's own lategame transitions in my opinion. Like, (the few times) when I play bio in TvP and get into the midgame everything feels fine. You harass, maybe even snipe a nexus. You build up your viking count vs Colossi and take your bases... and then you just start hand wringing because your options seem to come down to suiciding your army on buildings (massive dropping/nexus sniping) and suiciding your economy on army (SCV pulling). There is no third option that says, he has Colossi and Templar on the battlefield, so build something that doesn't get torn apart by them.
Theoretically MMMGV is as strong as colossi+templar. The problem is that even the best terrans will fuck up if toss does all the right things (force multitasking while the fight happens). The margin for terran is just very slim.
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds about right. A Terran who is unprepared for an oracle and goes afk for 4.5 seconds (the amount of time it takes a mine to burrow and detonate) will lose all their harvesters, too. It's really annoying.
That's so not true - the first difference is that Oracles kill worker one by one as opposed to 10 in one blob.. The second difference is that the "game-adjutant" will warn you after you lose few workers.. What's the point in the game-adjutant warning you to see all your base mining gone (except maybe few) ??, so not the same thing, NOT BY A DIAMETER, lol..
I know that the better/higher-skilled players are better at watching the map, but even those can insta-lose games to a hit or two from the "buffed" WM..
AND - the third real difference is - Oracle is energy based unit so you know when/what to expect if you carefully observe it's energy though
AND EVEN 4th - you won't even KNOW if there was a mine burrowed unless you actually SEE that rocket coming out of the ground and doing damage.. Instead you might think you got "harassed" while trying to fight, or do other things lol
Like - that last one is maybe the most important - I personally think mines would be much more fair if they got invulnerable for 5-10 seconds (or probably only vulnerable to spells like fungal or storm) after a launch but actually being visible even if burrowed so not having to have the "hawk-eye" for something that might "lurk" around, AND Terran could safely "retract" that thing back into his army provided that it's not too far away though
OK, not to "argue" about it, nor whine/redesign, but I "posted" that "invulnerable but visible" "fix" - so you'd know what's the mine's biggest problem IMO.. It doesn't "raise" 2 fingers and say "it was me" after doing a huge damage, so you'll not know if it was there if you were like 2 seconds late to "check on everything" or so.. So - THAT might be the greatest problem with the mine TBH - they're basically a "self-revivable DT" in a manner of speaking - that you have to "see it on work" in order to clean it up before it fires again though
No the real difference is that you need a critcal mass (6 marines) to deal with Oracles. If you don't, you get fucked. You don't need critical mass at all to deal with Widow Mines. You only need micro. That's why the former has terrible designed and the latter ins't.
you need a critical mass for everything though. The difference between an oracle and a banshee (for which you also need a critical mass of units) is that the one happens way earlier. Even for a single mutalisk you'd need "a critical mass" (like 2-3) of marines in position. But all that stuff does not happen that early.
Actually, the oracle is very underpowered for its damagepotential. You cannot just go midgame into oracles to deal with anything. It's just not good enough against anything. It's only good for 5min rushes, because then the opponent may not even have that anything. It's a retarted place it is in and would need 1-2 patches to be fun, imo.
IMHO banshees in TvT especially without cloak are the perfect harassment unit designwise. The defending player will nearly always have the tools to hold off the harass but the outcome is decided by unit control. The interaction between banshees and marines is perfect. Both players can sink apm into the micro and gain an advantage. The better player can gain a significant, but not game ending lead. The banshee player can still do some damage even when turrets and/or vikings are up, because of the range and the same airspeed. The interaction between banshees and the possible defense is very deep and always offers options.
Oracels in TvP on the other hand are a lot more "digital". You can do damage to workers wherever there are less then 6 marines or no turrets. There is no longer interaction where both sides have to put in apm to decide the outcome. On top of that the unit forces terran to choose between a very limited amount of possible builds.
Excellent post. Oracle play is indeed binary. It either wins you the game or it was useless. The only caveat to this might be in some sort of three gate expansion that converts into either frontal pressure with oracle harass or expansion defense with oracle harass.
I think there's some real potential there. Most terrans don't expect "late" oracle play.
As to bio being out of control without colossus, psi storm still rapes them madly. This would be even more true if Protoss forced engagements in chokes. Archon/storm is quite strong vs bio.
On July 11 2014 17:19 SC2Toastie wrote: You should start reading the post you reply to. An Oracle flying in is nothing like a mine flying in.
Oracle: got no marines? Gg Mine: you're too slow + unprepped? Gg
Now guess what is well designed and what is a stupid bo limitation?
You are right, having to build robo for a possible 6:00 mine drop that could destroy a whole mineral line is a stupid bo limitation
you don't have to. You can build an oracle, sac 1 worker per mine and then clean them up. Or you can build a forge and a canon per mineral line.
Yep, get a forge and a cannon per mineral line at 6:00 without the option to scout if I play a standard macro game. That means putting cannons blind. The only way you can scout a terran base before 6:00 is going 1 base oracle which is easily scouted. No more MSC scout thx to vision nerf. The fastest allucination will arrive at terran base after 6:00 And oracle isn't a reliable form of detection as observer is, and then having to still build a robo because ht openings are dead makes the oracle a 300/300 observer as you can't use it to harrass anymore.
6:00 is a gas first opening, which you will always see with your worker scout, because he cannot afford a rax+depot+depot wall with it, and his marine will be late to try and deny scouting.
On July 11 2014 17:19 SC2Toastie wrote: You should start reading the post you reply to. An Oracle flying in is nothing like a mine flying in.
Oracle: got no marines? Gg Mine: you're too slow + unprepped? Gg
Now guess what is well designed and what is a stupid bo limitation?
You are right, having to build robo for a possible 6:00 mine drop that could destroy a whole mineral line is a stupid bo limitation
you don't have to. You can build an oracle, sac 1 worker per mine and then clean them up. Or you can build a forge and a canon per mineral line.
Yep, get a forge and a cannon per mineral line at 6:00 without the option to scout if I play a standard macro game. That means putting cannons blind. The only way you can scout a terran base before 6:00 is going 1 base oracle which is easily scouted. No more MSC scout thx to vision nerf. The fastest allucination will arrive at terran base after 6:00 And oracle isn't a reliable form of detection as observer is, and then having to still build a robo because ht openings are dead makes the oracle a 300/300 observer as you can't use it to harrass anymore.
So it's fine that Terran can't scout with Reapers because of stupid Blink All-in, and Terran has to open 6 Marines or risk death against Oracle, but a Protoss having to build two Cannons behind his impenetrable wall of MSC to be 100% safe is inhuman cruelty. I gotcha.
On July 11 2014 17:19 SC2Toastie wrote: You should start reading the post you reply to. An Oracle flying in is nothing like a mine flying in.
Oracle: got no marines? Gg Mine: you're too slow + unprepped? Gg
Now guess what is well designed and what is a stupid bo limitation?
You are right, having to build robo for a possible 6:00 mine drop that could destroy a whole mineral line is a stupid bo limitation
you don't have to. You can build an oracle, sac 1 worker per mine and then clean them up. Or you can build a forge and a canon per mineral line.
Yep, get a forge and a cannon per mineral line at 6:00 without the option to scout if I play a standard macro game. That means putting cannons blind. The only way you can scout a terran base before 6:00 is going 1 base oracle which is easily scouted. No more MSC scout thx to vision nerf. The fastest allucination will arrive at terran base after 6:00 And oracle isn't a reliable form of detection as observer is, and then having to still build a robo because ht openings are dead makes the oracle a 300/300 observer as you can't use it to harrass anymore.
So it's fine that Terran can't scout with Reapers because of stupid Blink All-in, and Terran has to open 6 Marines or risk death against Oracle, but a Protoss having to build two Cannons behind his impenetrable wall of MSC to be 100% safe is inhuman cruelty. I gotcha.
You scout 1 base opening before MSC is even out and later on you can sacrifice a reaper and get the scout no matter what. You can't deny a whole scout of your base with just a MSC and a stalker. And just to let you know, a MSC and a stalker are way more expansive than 6 marines. Oh, but you were comparing 6 marine that you still would make while able to scout any early aggression to 2 completely blind cannons made on the assumption that the terran MAY be going for a mine drop. Or u may as well build a robo and go into the same build order from 2011.
On July 09 2014 04:02 SNSeigifried wrote: can someone add these values to the post Splash radius changed from 1.25/1.5/1.75 to 1.5/2/2.5
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds about right. A Terran who is unprepared for an oracle and goes afk for 4.5 seconds (the amount of time it takes a mine to burrow and detonate) will lose all their harvesters, too. It's really annoying.
That's so not true - the first difference is that Oracles kill worker one by one as opposed to 10 in one blob.. The second difference is that the "game-adjutant" will warn you after you lose few workers.. What's the point in the game-adjutant warning you to see all your base mining gone (except maybe few) ??, so not the same thing, NOT BY A DIAMETER, lol..
I know that the better/higher-skilled players are better at watching the map, but even those can insta-lose games to a hit or two from the "buffed" WM..
AND - the third real difference is - Oracle is energy based unit so you know when/what to expect if you carefully observe it's energy though
AND EVEN 4th - you won't even KNOW if there was a mine burrowed unless you actually SEE that rocket coming out of the ground and doing damage.. Instead you might think you got "harassed" while trying to fight, or do other things lol
Like - that last one is maybe the most important - I personally think mines would be much more fair if they got invulnerable for 5-10 seconds (or probably only vulnerable to spells like fungal or storm) after a launch but actually being visible even if burrowed so not having to have the "hawk-eye" for something that might "lurk" around, AND Terran could safely "retract" that thing back into his army provided that it's not too far away though
OK, not to "argue" about it, nor whine/redesign, but I "posted" that "invulnerable but visible" "fix" - so you'd know what's the mine's biggest problem IMO.. It doesn't "raise" 2 fingers and say "it was me" after doing a huge damage, so you'll not know if it was there if you were like 2 seconds late to "check on everything" or so.. So - THAT might be the greatest problem with the mine TBH - they're basically a "self-revivable DT" in a manner of speaking - that you have to "see it on work" in order to clean it up before it fires again though
No the real difference is that you need a critcal mass (6 marines) to deal with Oracles. If you don't, you get fucked. You don't need critical mass at all to deal with Widow Mines. You only need micro. That's why the former has terrible designed and the latter ins't.
you need a critical mass for everything though. The difference between an oracle and a banshee (for which you also need a critical mass of units) is that the one happens way earlier. Even for a single mutalisk you'd need "a critical mass" (like 2-3) of marines in position. But all that stuff does not happen that early.
Actually, the oracle is very underpowered for its damagepotential. You cannot just go midgame into oracles to deal with anything. It's just not good enough against anything. It's only good for 5min rushes, because then the opponent may not even have that anything. It's a retarted place it is in and would need 1-2 patches to be fun, imo.
1 Marine can kill a Widow mine though. The importance of critical mass declines when it's no longer only about numbers, but more about micro.
On July 11 2014 17:19 SC2Toastie wrote: You should start reading the post you reply to. An Oracle flying in is nothing like a mine flying in.
Oracle: got no marines? Gg Mine: you're too slow + unprepped? Gg
Now guess what is well designed and what is a stupid bo limitation?
You are right, having to build robo for a possible 6:00 mine drop that could destroy a whole mineral line is a stupid bo limitation
you don't have to. You can build an oracle, sac 1 worker per mine and then clean them up. Or you can build a forge and a canon per mineral line.
Yep, get a forge and a cannon per mineral line at 6:00 without the option to scout if I play a standard macro game. That means putting cannons blind. The only way you can scout a terran base before 6:00 is going 1 base oracle which is easily scouted. No more MSC scout thx to vision nerf. The fastest allucination will arrive at terran base after 6:00 And oracle isn't a reliable form of detection as observer is, and then having to still build a robo because ht openings are dead makes the oracle a 300/300 observer as you can't use it to harrass anymore.
So it's fine that Terran can't scout with Reapers because of stupid Blink All-in, and Terran has to open 6 Marines or risk death against Oracle, but a Protoss having to build two Cannons behind his impenetrable wall of MSC to be 100% safe is inhuman cruelty. I gotcha.
You scout 1 base opening before MSC is even out and later on you can sacrifice a reaper and get the scout no matter what. You can't deny a whole scout of your base with just a MSC and a stalker. And just to let you know, a MSC and a stalker are way more expansive than 6 marines. Oh, but you were comparing 6 marine that you still would make while able to scout any early aggression to 2 completely blind cannons made on the assumption that the terran MAY be going for a mine drop. Or u may as well build a robo and go into the same build order from 2011.
Unless the protoss base is well sim-citied and... that stargate could be proxied somewhere in the map along with the possiblity of twilight councils to DT shrines. A reaper scout DOES NOT guarantee that you'll see everything. Sometimes two reapers ain't enough.
And just to let you know, that 1 MSC and stalker is all you need for the first 6 to 8 mins (or more) depending on how you contain the Terran say a single oracle or two. Theres no downside of putting down cannons for protoss. Nothing is slowed down because unlike WoL, your not having to sink minerals/gas in early gateways, sentries or w/e to hold off any early pushes coming your way thanks to... nexus cannon! .. As long as you can minimize or even shut down the 2 medivac timing, its all too easy for most protoss unless your a korean Terran pro.
And no Protoss from my memory is using any builds from 2011.
To put that into perspective: this would make widow mines have a larger radius than storm/EMP/fungal. Storm and EMP have 1.5 radius and fungal has 2 (according to liquipedia).
Actually it would provide the same damage 40+40 (shields) as psionic storm does(80 over 4 seconds), with the same radius of 1.5, if the new patch goes through. Sounds fair to me.
Oh, and storm is instantly cast
The furthest range of 2.5 would do a whopping...wait for it... 10+10(shield) i.e. not that material..
The "casting time" of a widow mine shot is not even near 4 seconds though.
I'm sorry if I come across as a nitpicker. I just fear for the lives of my dear probes
Oh no worries. I was just trying to draw damage comparison.
You're right.... RIP probes lol.. 2 radius doing 40 damage is going to obliterate probes. I like it
EDIT: Hell, if you have 2 nicely placed widow mines where the 2.5 radius intersected... say bye bye to all the probes.
Exactly my point...
Sounds about right. A Terran who is unprepared for an oracle and goes afk for 4.5 seconds (the amount of time it takes a mine to burrow and detonate) will lose all their harvesters, too. It's really annoying.
That's so not true - the first difference is that Oracles kill worker one by one as opposed to 10 in one blob.. The second difference is that the "game-adjutant" will warn you after you lose few workers.. What's the point in the game-adjutant warning you to see all your base mining gone (except maybe few) ??, so not the same thing, NOT BY A DIAMETER, lol..
I know that the better/higher-skilled players are better at watching the map, but even those can insta-lose games to a hit or two from the "buffed" WM..
AND - the third real difference is - Oracle is energy based unit so you know when/what to expect if you carefully observe it's energy though
AND EVEN 4th - you won't even KNOW if there was a mine burrowed unless you actually SEE that rocket coming out of the ground and doing damage.. Instead you might think you got "harassed" while trying to fight, or do other things lol
Like - that last one is maybe the most important - I personally think mines would be much more fair if they got invulnerable for 5-10 seconds (or probably only vulnerable to spells like fungal or storm) after a launch but actually being visible even if burrowed so not having to have the "hawk-eye" for something that might "lurk" around, AND Terran could safely "retract" that thing back into his army provided that it's not too far away though
OK, not to "argue" about it, nor whine/redesign, but I "posted" that "invulnerable but visible" "fix" - so you'd know what's the mine's biggest problem IMO.. It doesn't "raise" 2 fingers and say "it was me" after doing a huge damage, so you'll not know if it was there if you were like 2 seconds late to "check on everything" or so.. So - THAT might be the greatest problem with the mine TBH - they're basically a "self-revivable DT" in a manner of speaking - that you have to "see it on work" in order to clean it up before it fires again though
No the real difference is that you need a critcal mass (6 marines) to deal with Oracles. If you don't, you get fucked. You don't need critical mass at all to deal with Widow Mines. You only need micro. That's why the former has terrible designed and the latter ins't.
you need a critical mass for everything though. The difference between an oracle and a banshee (for which you also need a critical mass of units) is that the one happens way earlier. Even for a single mutalisk you'd need "a critical mass" (like 2-3) of marines in position. But all that stuff does not happen that early.
Actually, the oracle is very underpowered for its damagepotential. You cannot just go midgame into oracles to deal with anything. It's just not good enough against anything. It's only good for 5min rushes, because then the opponent may not even have that anything. It's a retarted place it is in and would need 1-2 patches to be fun, imo.
1 Marine can kill a Widow mine though. The importance of critical mass declines when it's no longer only about numbers, but more about micro.
yeah that's of course true and something really cool about the mine. It can be dealt with by having anything+detection, sometimes even without detection due to how it attacks. Makes it a really cool unit imo.
On July 11 2014 17:19 SC2Toastie wrote: You should start reading the post you reply to. An Oracle flying in is nothing like a mine flying in.
Oracle: got no marines? Gg Mine: you're too slow + unprepped? Gg
Now guess what is well designed and what is a stupid bo limitation?
You are right, having to build robo for a possible 6:00 mine drop that could destroy a whole mineral line is a stupid bo limitation
you don't have to. You can build an oracle, sac 1 worker per mine and then clean them up. Or you can build a forge and a canon per mineral line.
Yep, get a forge and a cannon per mineral line at 6:00 without the option to scout if I play a standard macro game. That means putting cannons blind. The only way you can scout a terran base before 6:00 is going 1 base oracle which is easily scouted. No more MSC scout thx to vision nerf. The fastest allucination will arrive at terran base after 6:00 And oracle isn't a reliable form of detection as observer is, and then having to still build a robo because ht openings are dead makes the oracle a 300/300 observer as you can't use it to harrass anymore.
So it's fine that Terran can't scout with Reapers because of stupid Blink All-in, and Terran has to open 6 Marines or risk death against Oracle, but a Protoss having to build two Cannons behind his impenetrable wall of MSC to be 100% safe is inhuman cruelty. I gotcha.
You scout 1 base opening before MSC is even out and later on you can sacrifice a reaper and get the scout no matter what. You can't deny a whole scout of your base with just a MSC and a stalker. And just to let you know, a MSC and a stalker are way more expansive than 6 marines. Oh, but you were comparing 6 marine that you still would make while able to scout any early aggression to 2 completely blind cannons made on the assumption that the terran MAY be going for a mine drop. Or u may as well build a robo and go into the same build order from 2011.
Unless the protoss base is well sim-citied and... that stargate could be proxied somewhere in the map along with the possiblity of twilight councils to DT shrines. A reaper scout DOES NOT guarantee that you'll see everything. Sometimes two reapers ain't enough.
And just to let you know, that 1 MSC and stalker is all you need for the first 6 to 8 mins (or more) depending on how you contain the Terran say a single oracle or two. Theres no downside of putting down cannons for protoss. Nothing is slowed down because unlike WoL, your not having to sink minerals/gas in early gateways, sentries or w/e to hold off any early pushes coming your way thanks to... nexus cannon! .. As long as you can minimize or even shut down the 2 medivac timing, its all too easy for most protoss unless your a korean Terran pro.
And no Protoss from my memory is using any builds from 2011.
With the forst reaper scout you know if there are proxy on the map and easily find it.. and there is no way to deny that as you have no unit when the reaper gets into the base. Once scouted the 1 base play all you have to do is to stay on 1 base(lifting your cc from the natural eventually), build a turret in the mineral line and you are safe from DT or oracle or blink. And you can still scout the expansion. with the reaper. To contain the terran you need to spend the 300/300 for the oracle, not much different from getting extra gates and sentries. The benefit is that you get some harrass, but sill you'll have to build gates before even thinking of taking a 3rd
And Colossi/blink double forge is so 2011, really it is. I am not talking about the specific build order the the main idea behind it that hasn't changed. Sure there may be a mine drop or an oracle harrass in the early-mid game but everyting else is just the same.
On July 11 2014 17:19 SC2Toastie wrote: You should start reading the post you reply to. An Oracle flying in is nothing like a mine flying in.
Oracle: got no marines? Gg Mine: you're too slow + unprepped? Gg
Now guess what is well designed and what is a stupid bo limitation?
You are right, having to build robo for a possible 6:00 mine drop that could destroy a whole mineral line is a stupid bo limitation
you don't have to. You can build an oracle, sac 1 worker per mine and then clean them up. Or you can build a forge and a canon per mineral line.
Yep, get a forge and a cannon per mineral line at 6:00 without the option to scout if I play a standard macro game. That means putting cannons blind. The only way you can scout a terran base before 6:00 is going 1 base oracle which is easily scouted. No more MSC scout thx to vision nerf. The fastest allucination will arrive at terran base after 6:00 And oracle isn't a reliable form of detection as observer is, and then having to still build a robo because ht openings are dead makes the oracle a 300/300 observer as you can't use it to harrass anymore.
So it's fine that Terran can't scout with Reapers because of stupid Blink All-in, and Terran has to open 6 Marines or risk death against Oracle, but a Protoss having to build two Cannons behind his impenetrable wall of MSC to be 100% safe is inhuman cruelty. I gotcha.
You scout 1 base opening before MSC is even out and later on you can sacrifice a reaper and get the scout no matter what. You can't deny a whole scout of your base with just a MSC and a stalker. And just to let you know, a MSC and a stalker are way more expansive than 6 marines. Oh, but you were comparing 6 marine that you still would make while able to scout any early aggression to 2 completely blind cannons made on the assumption that the terran MAY be going for a mine drop. Or u may as well build a robo and go into the same build order from 2011.
Unless the protoss base is well sim-citied and... that stargate could be proxied somewhere in the map along with the possiblity of twilight councils to DT shrines. A reaper scout DOES NOT guarantee that you'll see everything. Sometimes two reapers ain't enough.
And just to let you know, that 1 MSC and stalker is all you need for the first 6 to 8 mins (or more) depending on how you contain the Terran say a single oracle or two. Theres no downside of putting down cannons for protoss. Nothing is slowed down because unlike WoL, your not having to sink minerals/gas in early gateways, sentries or w/e to hold off any early pushes coming your way thanks to... nexus cannon! .. As long as you can minimize or even shut down the 2 medivac timing, its all too easy for most protoss unless your a korean Terran pro.
And no Protoss from my memory is using any builds from 2011.
With the forst reaper scout you know if there are proxy on the map and easily find it.. and there is no way to deny that as you have no unit when the reaper gets into the base. Once scouted the 1 base play all you have to do is to stay on 1 base(lifting your cc from the natural eventually), build a turret in the mineral line and you are safe from DT or oracle or blink. And you can still scout the expansion. with the reaper. To contain the terran you need to spend the 300/300 for the oracle, not much different from getting extra gates and sentries. The benefit is that you get some harrass, but sill you'll have to build gates before even thinking of taking a 3rd
And Colossi/blink double forge is so 2011, really it is. I am not talking about the specific build order the the main idea behind it that hasn't changed. Sure there may be a mine drop or an oracle harrass in the early-mid game but everyting else is just the same.
This is just not true. Yes, you are going to scout that there is a pylon missing (though I'm not 100% certain that a Protoss couldn't fake a normal third pylon and still proxy with a 15second delay) if it is the fastest possible proxy. You are not however going to "easily find it". A proxy dark shrine and twilight can be anywhere. a proxy oracle can be deadly, even if it is only half map proxied. A proxy 3rd pylon to fake a proxy tech can be anywhere again. It's very uncertain to find a hidden stargate before the first oracle finishes, by running your reaper all the way back and zickzacking half the map. To find a dark shrine, a twilight or just the fake out pylon on a 4player map you have to hugely luck out. The only thing you can really find in time if you are looking for it is a proxy robo immortal bust, but for which you still have to play reaper to begin with.
Sorry, but what you are talking about is pure whining. You don't want to be forced into observer openings (which you probably aren't), but on the same page you pretend a reaper opening doesn't limit the Terran hugely and on top of that falsely overestimate its scouting power. Yes, if you do inbase stuff a good reaper player is going to find it. That's good. That's what the reaper was built for. All the outdoor proxy capabilites however still exist and cannot be ruled out that easily.
Meanwhile, Terran can go for Widow Mine drops, Hellion drops, or Cloaked Banshees,
And protoss can also go for Tempests and Carrier openings.... What's your point by listing openings for terrans that sucks (besides mines).
If you don't know what your opponent is doing (but you do know they didn't FE) and you don't get detection/put units in position for harassment, you fucked up. This type of whining doesn't help the balance designers at all, because it is unjustified...
Protoss doens't lose to a terran player that goes Widow Mine drops unless his unit control sucks balls. This isn't about build-orders. The difference between T and P is that protoss actually has openings that can kill the terran player (through all ins) as well as harass openings (DT, Oracle) while terran only has mine-drops basically. Each protoss opening requires a different response from the terran player while the protoss can do his stuff against w/e the terran is doing.
And Mine-openings are pretty easy to scout.
Both races have options to defend both harassment possibilities. Neither race is forced to go down a particular tech path because a Terran can open with either Mines or Marines or Turrets for defence,
Nonsense. A terran always has to get a critical amount of Marines out. Mines/turret can only help, but they cannot be the only AA in itself.
They can open Factory and have a Widow Mine positioned to deal with an Oracle. Once the timing has passed for an Oracle to move in,
This is big problem though. Terrans do this all the time, and it's basically conflipping becasue the protoss player can take advantage of this expected behavour and simply go in with Oracles later than the normal timing.
They can open Stargate and use an Oracle for detection. Once the timing has passed for a Widow Mine drop or a proxy Widow Mine to move in, those units can be re-positioned to deal with other threats. Cannons can be used as static defence/detection as well.
The difference here is that if you have no protection in your mineral line vs an Oracle then your going lose the whole fucking mineral line. A widow mine it self has limited damage potential. You can be caught offguard against Widow Mines and still be in a fine position.
Protoss can deflect scouting information using the MSC+Stalker combination (or proxy their tech) whereas Terran can deflect scouting with a Marine or a Reaper (or proxy their tech).
Your missing the point here. Protoss doesn't need to scout besides knowing whether terran goes gas first or not, and even that isn't really 100% neccesity anyway. Protoss can still do safe builds wihtout knowing what terran opens with. Terran on the other hand, dies to a shitton of things if they guess wrong.
On July 11 2014 17:19 SC2Toastie wrote: You should start reading the post you reply to. An Oracle flying in is nothing like a mine flying in.
Oracle: got no marines? Gg Mine: you're too slow + unprepped? Gg
Now guess what is well designed and what is a stupid bo limitation?
You are right, having to build robo for a possible 6:00 mine drop that could destroy a whole mineral line is a stupid bo limitation
you don't have to. You can build an oracle, sac 1 worker per mine and then clean them up. Or you can build a forge and a canon per mineral line.
Yep, get a forge and a cannon per mineral line at 6:00 without the option to scout if I play a standard macro game. That means putting cannons blind. The only way you can scout a terran base before 6:00 is going 1 base oracle which is easily scouted. No more MSC scout thx to vision nerf. The fastest allucination will arrive at terran base after 6:00 And oracle isn't a reliable form of detection as observer is, and then having to still build a robo because ht openings are dead makes the oracle a 300/300 observer as you can't use it to harrass anymore.
So it's fine that Terran can't scout with Reapers because of stupid Blink All-in, and Terran has to open 6 Marines or risk death against Oracle, but a Protoss having to build two Cannons behind his impenetrable wall of MSC to be 100% safe is inhuman cruelty. I gotcha.
And on top of this, pure.Wasted, am I correct to think that you only need to blindly put the Canon down by 6:00 min. if you scouted a gas first opening with your probe?
On July 11 2014 20:17 SatedSC2 wrote: Meanwhile, Terran can go for Widow Mine drops, Hellion drops, or Cloaked Banshees, which are again all strong options that are essentially countered by having units in position along with some sort of detection.
Avoid talking about Cloak Banshees being "a strong option" in TvP if you want to conserve the slightest ounce of credibility.
On July 11 2014 20:17 SatedSC2 wrote: This Oracle/Mine discussion is ridiculous.
The Terran can open with Marines and have them positioned defensively to deal with an Oracle. They can open Factory and have a Widow Mine positioned to deal with an Oracle. Once the timing has passed for an Oracle to move in, those units can be re-positioned to deal with other threats. Turrets can be used as static defence/detection as well.
The Protoss can open with Stalkers and have them positioned defensively to deal with a Widow Mine. They can open Robo and have an Observer for detection to deal with a Widow Mine. They can open Stargate and use an Oracle for detection. Once the timing has passed for a Widow Mine drop or a proxy Widow Mine to move in, those units can be re-positioned to deal with other threats. Cannons can be used as static defence/detection as well.
Both races have options to defend both harassment possibilities. Neither race is forced to go down a particular tech path because a Terran can open with either Mines or Marines or Turrets for defence, whereas a Protoss can open Robo or Stargate or Twilight to defend. Neither race is guaranteed scouting information either: Protoss can deflect scouting information using the MSC+Stalker combination (or proxy their tech) whereas Terran can deflect scouting with a Marine or a Reaper (or proxy their tech).
This is basically a really silly slap-fight. Both races have early harassment options that can do a lot of damage if the opponent makes even the slightest mistake. Protoss can obviously go Dark Templar or Oracles, both of which are very strong, but both of these things are essentially countered by having Marines in position or having Turrets. Meanwhile, Terran can go for Widow Mine drops, Hellion drops, or Cloaked Banshees, which are again all strong options that are essentially countered by having units in position along with some sort of detection. If you don't know what your opponent is doing (but you do know they didn't FE) and you don't get detection/put units in position for harassment, you fucked up. This type of whining doesn't help the balance designers at all, because it is unjustified...
That's silly.
Mines are Factory which means that to have defense against the fastest oracle cheese, you have to have blindly built factory+mine anyway. If you build factory on the off chance of an oracle build, and it's fake-out all in instead, you're dead.
If you build factory for a WM and it turns out to be DT proxy instead, you're probably dead. They can break your wall (if you made one in TvP), and walk inside while you're trying to micro your 3 second burrow mine to deal with it, and that mine dies before finishing burrowing.
Below is it 6? marines, oracle can wipe them out.
Anyone who's complaining about how much it costs for fast oracle seems to be forgetting that producing anti-oracle stuff weakens transition to mid-game for T, and you don't have to go oracle anyway. It's a choice.
As for defending a Widow Mine cheese, dropship widow mine is easily killed by just go attack the terran's damn base. If you're scared of the drop, MSC charge your nexus and focus down the dropship or the mine. If you've expanded, just micro your workers to the other base while you get detection up. The T is on one base, and has no significant army. Wait for observer and then sac a probe on the WM and clean it up with a stalker and split probes back to proper mining.
Oracle doesn't give you 3 seconds to make a good decision. It comes fast and ends the game if you didn't see it coming and have enough stuff. WM is completely opposite, since not only will you see it run or dropship in, but you get another 3 seconds before it does anything. Even if it gets one shot off, it might killl 5 workers or one.
With the forst reaper scout you know if there are proxy on the map and easily find it.. and there is no way to deny that as you have no unit when the reaper gets into the base. Once scouted the 1 base play all you have to do is to stay on 1 base(lifting your cc from the natural eventually), build a turret in the mineral line and you are safe from DT or oracle or blink. And you can still scout the expansion. with the reaper. To contain the terran you need to spend the 300/300 for the oracle, not much different from getting extra gates and sentries. The benefit is that you get some harrass, but sill you'll have to build gates before even thinking of taking a 3rd
And Colossi/blink double forge is so 2011, really it is. I am not talking about the specific build order the the main idea behind it that hasn't changed. Sure there may be a mine drop or an oracle harrass in the early-mid game but everyting else is just the same.
With the first reaper scout we know that there is unknown gas play coming. We don't necessarily "find the proxy". Same as if you scout gas first from Terran and don't see the follow-up buildings/production. If Terran has to abandon the natural, give up map control and begin preparations for whatever all-in the Protoss might have thrown down already - why should it be so big of a deal if Protoss must blindly build forge/canons, or produce robo/observer upon scouting a more aggressive Terran opening without a quick CC being thrown down?
If terran is going CC-first or 1-rax gasless fast expand - are you still going to throw down the early forge or robo just to stay safe? Because I wouldn't be as worried about your proxies or any Oracle/Blink if I see you drop an early Nexus with my SCV/reaper scout. I'd just think - I should be safe with a greedier build as well, just like Protoss could.
Is it just me or have Protoss been spoon fed free greedier builds for too long, while Terran are almost 100% completely shut out of theirs?
On July 11 2014 20:53 eusoc wrote: yep tell me how building 6 marines is such a huge investment.
Because you'd have to get them blind.
Imagine if you had to get 3 zealots EVERY PvT you played in order to not die at the five minute mark. No fast Stalker, no you have to get 3 zealots every single PvT.
It restricts what you can do in the early game unless you want to risk a coinflip. Mines require a Factory and Turrets require an Engineering Bay, both of which further restrict what you can do in the early game. Any TvP build has to take a response to Proxy Oracle into account or risk dying to it.
It's not that 6 marines is a huge investment, it's that you HAVE to get them unless you get a Factory + Mine or Engineering Bay + Turret.
or produce robo/observer upon scouting a more aggressive Terran opening without a quick CC being thrown down?
Which is basically what they would be doing anyway...
Is it just me or have Protoss been spoon fed free greedier builds for too long, while Terran are almost 100% completely shut out of theirs?
I think there is an "accustomed to" argument. Some protoss players can be somewhat objective, especially if they have experiences from a different time, while others too easily get accustomed to the easiness of playing protoss early game and being able to do w/e you want to and then expecting that to be the "norm".
Someone like Sated clearly has very little experince being on the other sides of the spectrum having played 0 terran games on his account.
hard to say but ever vote is like this if it nerfs p its always GOOD and if it buffs terran its always GOOD ... its just seems like 80% are terrans here ... aweful changes btw
On July 11 2014 20:53 eusoc wrote: yep tell me how building 6 marines is such a huge investment.
It's not, and neither is placing down a forge/canon or robo/observer, if your opponent is not going to be mining the natural any time soon.
The problem at the moment for Terran is that we can't use those six marines and a few extra units to saturate our natural or have any map control. In many cases, we are forced to assume that impending doom is coming, while the Protoss is enjoying a natural or planning a 2-base tech push. Usually, we have no map control (short of maybe coin flipping a reaper to see the aggression), and no hope of doing serious damage even if we were to guess that the Protoss has expanded at the natural in lieu or any heavy pressure. However, if we chose to follow the same builds that the Protoss can rely upon and go into heavy gas openings while taking our natural behind them, the Protoss would normally just fall back on their economy/tech or just outright kill us in certain cases.
If we could, as Terran, upon scouting Protoss double gas go the 1/1/1 route with our own double gas and secure our natural - we would be in much better shape. However, we can't do that. In fact, we sometimes cannot even survive if the 2nd CC is place inside of our main base. Furthermore, if Protoss currently scouts a Terran going for double gas early on with no 2nd CC, are Protoss usually afraid of dying? Is Protoss left turtling in fear in the main base at the 8-9 min. mark with cloaked banshees/tanks hovering around the perimeter, while the Terran is unknowingly beginning to saturate the natural geisers? No. If Terran is doing that, he's probably dead in 2 min.
That seems out of place to me given that Protoss can throw down two early gas, choose from a variety of openings based off of those two gases, and almost always keep map control and expand safely behind it (switching to greed/teching up if the game is not auto-win because Terran didn't follow "the right build" in response). Terran just can't play like this, at all. In fact, I think that any Terran build that allows for knowledge of whether you can take your natural at reasonable times are considered very bad play (banshee, hellions, 3+ reapers, etc.). Protoss would normally know if (and perhaps as importantly, when) its natural can be safely taken with fairly simple and standard play (and often even with very aggressive/strong play).
On July 11 2014 20:53 eusoc wrote: yep tell me how building 6 marines is such a huge investment.
Because you'd have to get them blind.
Imagine if you had to get 3 zealots EVERY PvT you played in order to not die at the five minute mark. No fast Stalker, no you have to get 3 zealots every single PvT.
It restricts what you can do in the early game unless you want to risk a coinflip. Mines require a Factory and Turrets require an Engineering Bay, both of which further restrict what you can do in the early game. Any TvP build has to take a response to Proxy Oracle into account or risk dying to it.
It's not that 6 marines is a huge investment, it's that you HAVE to get them unless you get a Factory + Mine or Engineering Bay + Turret.
Oh, well, 1stalker + 1 MSC it's 225/150 adn you have to get it every single PvT no matter what. If you delay that you cannot deny any scouting nor get out of your base. If I could make 3 zealot instead I would be really happy to do so.
/*The Thor changes are terrible. The attack priority for should only be higher for Mutas or BL, but not for air in gerneral. Like *imagine 4 Roaches and a Overlord vs 1 Thor. normally the Thor wins easy. Now the Terran has to micro to avoid hitting the *overlord, wich is stupid and in the end maybe a buff in 1 example but a disadvantage in many other. *Or for example when u attack a Base (where overlords are way more common)... Your Thor will never attack any buildings by its *own or any Ground units, which is a unnecessary increase in micro needed ... */ I forgot :D
better give the reaper a token he can throw wich is invisible for 10 sec and can be destroyed or fades after 30sec so they can be used to scout later in the game or cover more area .. some extra utility than jumping in and out (they are killing nearly nothing, because most pro players can handle them)
Give Sigetanks the ability to shoot on targets wich are only seen by a SensorTower, but also in thier range (which will never get used anyway :D)
I just don't particularly like Oracles annihilating mineral lines or doing very little. Such an all or nothing unit sometimes.
It baffles me that they stuck that death cannon on it. Its got other abilities that were great for fleshing out Stargate tech and should have been kept in a support caster role IMO.
They are among the worst examples of 'harass' units, no real finesse to differentiate a skilled player from one who isn't. Of all the units in the Protoss arsenal, the one most people don't complain about and is a good finesse unit is the Phoenix, an APM sink that requires careful control and outside of rare instances doesn't end games in the early game.
This doesn't really pertain to balance, just frustrates me. Take a functional unit that actually makes you feel skilful when you use it and add a unit that has game-ending potential and can be proxied to overlap with that role.
On the actual balance front, Protoss need to get more expensive tech back. The DT shrine is cheaper than in WoL, despite the MSC enabling you to cut 600 or so gas (sorry DwF if this is an incorrect stat) from units and enabled harder teching. Similarly Protoss has cheaper ups than they used to, despite all their ground units sharing them and the ability to chrono them hardcore.
If you're not going to tweak PO, then you have to add the risk to things like fast DTs or proxy oracles via resource costs IMO. It's the combo of these tricky builds with relative safety in choosing them which is problematic to me. In WoL if a DT rush gets shut down hard, you died to counter pressure.
On July 11 2014 21:29 Levi wrote: The Thor changes are terrible. The attack priority for should only be higher for Mutas or BL, but not for air in gerneral. Like imagine 4 Roaches and a Overlord vs 1 Thor. normally the Thor wins easy. Now the Terran has to micro to avoid hitting the overlord, wich is stupid and in the end maybe a buff in 1 example but a disadvantage in many other. Or for example when u attack a Base (where overlords are way more common)... Your Thor will never attack any buildings by its own or any Ground units, which is a unnecessary increase in micro needed ...
On July 09 2014 17:35 19Meavis93 wrote: how many times do I need to explain that units don't attack other units that are not considered harmfull to them when units that are harmfull are nearby, if a wave of roaches/overlords moves to a thor the thor will prioritize firing at roaches as they can attack him while overlords can not, just like voidrays will always prioritize shooting at marines over banshees or vikings over marauders.
On July 11 2014 20:53 eusoc wrote: yep tell me how building 6 marines is such a huge investment.
Because you'd have to get them blind.
Imagine if you had to get 3 zealots EVERY PvT you played in order to not die at the five minute mark. No fast Stalker, no you have to get 3 zealots every single PvT.
It restricts what you can do in the early game unless you want to risk a coinflip. Mines require a Factory and Turrets require an Engineering Bay, both of which further restrict what you can do in the early game. Any TvP build has to take a response to Proxy Oracle into account or risk dying to it.
It's not that 6 marines is a huge investment, it's that you HAVE to get them unless you get a Factory + Mine or Engineering Bay + Turret.
Oh, well, 1stalker + 1 MSC it's 225/150 adn you have to get it every single PvT no matter what. If you delay that you cannot deny any scouting nor get out of your base. If I could make 3 zealot instead I would be really happy to do so.
With 3 zealots on a single mining base with no map control, and only a coin flip of a chance if you begin to mine your natural, you would be happy? I doubt that.
Six marines are not going to secure a main and a natural from Oracle destruction or the Blink play. Perhaps a MSC+Stalker will allow you to expand to the natural safely as Protoss? But, tell me... what combination of two gas opening units from Terran will guarantee us a safe natural and some form of map presence?
Also, those Six Marines and Turrets are not going to become one of the most powerful caster units in the game in 5 minutes, defensively and offensively. Maybe if six marines, a tank, and a medivac could seriously threathen a Protoss natural/main by casting spells, or maybe if they could somehow merge into a Planetary Fortress for a while at the natural chokepoint...
Maybe I exaggerate in my example. I would never expect such buffs or gameplay design. However, I do not see any scenario where the Terran can spend similar resources to the Protoss (after taking two gas even to open up aggressive and defensive options) and then secure its natural expansion safely. The blind six marines/turrets are not going to assist in pressuring, taking a natural, and in many cases even in allowing the Terran to feel like he should be able to survive up to the point of having to take a third. We're talking equal skill levels/league here.
Behind that Stalker + MSC, you have quite a few options and the ability to move in an collect the information necessary to decide on your best course of action, without risking a significant part of your forces. Terran doesn't have this luxury, even after throwing down two early gas before the 2nd CC.
I don't know why you are all comparing the race. Reaper can always do early pressure to zerg, I don't see zerg has any pressure build that can transition as comfortable and actually can do some sort of damage/poking
On July 11 2014 22:34 ETisME wrote: I don't know why you are all comparing the race. Reaper can always do early pressure to zerg, I don't see zerg has any pressure build that can transition as comfortable and actually can do some sort of damage/poking
Zerg can almost always take a Natural. Zerg always knows if Terran has a Natural. Zerg can always take a third if Terran has a Natural.
It is not merely a question of one race having all of the offensive options, but it is also a question of being in a position to know the time when you should begin to play more economically rather than simply trying to avoid death. Does Terran always know if/when Protoss has a natural down? If Protoss does have the natural down, is Terran always safe in immediately take its own natural and beginning to mine? What if Zerg had to sacrifice (as in lose) two overlords into the Protoss Natural every game to confirm if they have expanded, and if they haven't and are still doing a one-base blink all-in Zerg would also feel like they have to sac two overlords again in 2 min just to avoid failing at that stage of the game/transition?
You see, even if Terran had no aggressive options whatsoever, but both races could see/feel the entire map and know exactly when to transition our tech/economy to "follow" the opponent - we would be in a much better position already even if Protoss was the only player with the early aggressive options in TvP. It wouldn't matter so much if our only available build was a defensive reaper expand that allows for adaptation. We could win/lose based on our own mistakes or slight differences in skill level/execution.
I'd argue that if there was no fog of war at all for both races in TvP, things would be so much better right now in the early game. Can you really say that the same logic applies to TvZ? It doesn't, because the races know how/when transition is needed to keep up in economy even when under pressure, all skill being equal and with good execution.
I am not sure that the point you make applies in TvP.
On July 11 2014 22:34 ETisME wrote: I don't know why you are all comparing the race. Reaper can always do early pressure to zerg, I don't see zerg has any pressure build that can transition as comfortable and actually can do some sort of damage/poking
A good zerg doesn't lose a single unit vs a standard reaper opening. Zerg has some very strong allins with roaches and ling/baneling which give a free win vs fast 3 CC builds.
On July 11 2014 22:34 ETisME wrote: I don't know why you are all comparing the race. Reaper can always do early pressure to zerg, I don't see zerg has any pressure build that can transition as comfortable and actually can do some sort of damage/poking
DIfference betwen pressure openings that rewards micro and openings that kill you if you chose the wrong build.
On July 11 2014 22:34 ETisME wrote: I don't know why you are all comparing the race. Reaper can always do early pressure to zerg, I don't see zerg has any pressure build that can transition as comfortable and actually can do some sort of damage/poking
A good zerg doesn't lose a single unit vs a standard reaper opening. Zerg has some very strong allins with roaches and ling/baneling which give a free win vs fast 3 CC builds.
yes, only loses minerals from makings spores and forces early lings. I am not talking about all ins, if you like to compare reaper and oracle early pressure whatever. where is zerg's early pressure build in zvt that is not all in?
On July 11 2014 22:34 ETisME wrote: I don't know why you are all comparing the race. Reaper can always do early pressure to zerg, I don't see zerg has any pressure build that can transition as comfortable and actually can do some sort of damage/poking
DIfference betwen pressure openings that rewards micro and openings that kill you if you chose the wrong build.
There is no pressure opening that rewards anything in zvt. there is only the "do the 10 or earlier pool into playing from behind" build.
Nope, you're the one spouting nonsense. You don't always need to get a "critical amount of Marines out" blindly, you only need them if you scout the Protoss going for two gas geysers. If they go for one gas geyser then they're doing a 1GFE and you don't need to worry about Oracles or Dark Templar. Your hyperbole is ridiculous.
Lol. You really need to start playing terran vs protoss once in a while in order to get a better understanding of the matchup. Protoss gets two early geysers as standard-build vs terran. I think this discussion ends here.
There is no pressure opening that rewards anything in zvt. there is only the "do the 10 or earlier pool into playing from behind" build.
And people wouldn't mind Oracles, DT's or Stalkers if they encouraged micro. But they don't, they encourage to put good at gussing. I don't mind protoss having offensive options vs terran, but they are simply extremely lame and create really boring gameplay.
The idea that Dark Templar and Oracles are effective if you don't micro them is laughable. Oracles need babysitting quite heavily to get the best out of them, especially if there are Marines or Turrets around, and Dark Templar are much more effective if you put in the time to focus dodging in and out of Scans until the Terran gets more permanent detection. The idea that Stalkers don't need microing is especially laughable since Blink Stalkers are one of the most microable units in the game.
Lol. They don't encourage terran micro. That's why we say there is nothing you can do vs Oracles if you have less than 6 mariens. That's why you need to start playing terran ASAP if you are to continue this discussion without everything laughintg at you because everything you say here clearly demonstrates you have no perspective on the matchup at all.
On July 11 2014 22:34 ETisME wrote: I don't know why you are all comparing the race. Reaper can always do early pressure to zerg, I don't see zerg has any pressure build that can transition as comfortable and actually can do some sort of damage/poking
A good zerg doesn't lose a single unit vs a standard reaper opening. Zerg has some very strong allins with roaches and ling/baneling which give a free win vs fast 3 CC builds.
yes, only loses minerals from makings spores and forces early lings. I am not talking about all ins, if you like to compare reaper and oracle early pressure whatever. where is zerg's early pressure build in zvt that is not all in?
On July 11 2014 22:34 ETisME wrote: I don't know why you are all comparing the race. Reaper can always do early pressure to zerg, I don't see zerg has any pressure build that can transition as comfortable and actually can do some sort of damage/poking
DIfference betwen pressure openings that rewards micro and openings that kill you if you chose the wrong build.
There is no pressure opening that rewards anything in zvt. there is only the "do the 10 or earlier pool into playing from behind" build.
It is not about Terran needing an aggressive option early on that is rewarding to transition out of. In fact, if we have none, we could still compete.
It is instead about forcing Protoss to spend a certain amount of resources before having access to powerful aggressive builds that do not set them back if very well defended.
Let's just imagine a world where Zerg could be in a position where a certain Terran 1-base play could kill the Zerg 3rd base 100% of the time. And every time you are going to scout our natural, Terran has a guaranteed kill on two overlords. Pretty harsh? Often, for Terran to take a peak at Protoss natural while the blink/oracle play is going on, that is the cost (a mule in lieu of supply).
When/how do you decide to take your third? Do you play on 2-hatch blindly? Do you lose two overlords and weaken your two hatch defense if the strong Terran 1-base all-in is coming? What if you choose not to scout to stay alive, and then when you finally feel safe to move out or lose overlords, you see both gases mining on the Terran natural behind a unbreakable defense to your 2nd hatch that is just now completing? Kind of late to get your 3rd isn't it?
Even if you don't get a new efficient Zerg all-in to fix this hypothetical problem, wouldn't you just be happy that Terran will have the added requirement of an Armory (hypothetical buff) to access this magic 1-base pressure that can most of the time deny the zerg 2nd hatch? Going forward when you scout that natural at your cost of 200+ minerals (two overlords, or say our scan) at least you could then know that because of this increased cost opening by Terran (making the armory to have the good aggressive build):
- either all you have to do as Zerg is defend the expensive Terran one-base play and you should win on two hatches; or
- If you see that Terran natural down, you would generally be safe to get your third base.
You see, as Terran, even if we spot one-base play and stay on one base, there is a good chance that our economy will be behind. Protoss natural will probably be mining gas before our own. And instead, if do confirm that a 2nd Nexus is down at the natural, we might still die to 2-base blink/oracle if we choose to land at the natural and defend two locations.
Was there not a time before queen buffs when Terran 1-base play would prevent Zerg from holding a 2nd hatch? It probably didn't feel good when Terran could be mining the natural before as the Zerg completed its 2nd hatch... Maybe made Zerg want to leave the game...
On July 11 2014 22:34 ETisME wrote: I don't know why you are all comparing the race. Reaper can always do early pressure to zerg, I don't see zerg has any pressure build that can transition as comfortable and actually can do some sort of damage/poking
A good zerg doesn't lose a single unit vs a standard reaper opening. Zerg has some very strong allins with roaches and ling/baneling which give a free win vs fast 3 CC builds.
yes, only loses minerals from makings spores and forces early lings. I am not talking about all ins, if you like to compare reaper and oracle early pressure whatever. where is zerg's early pressure build in zvt that is not all in?
On July 11 2014 22:49 Hider wrote:
On July 11 2014 22:34 ETisME wrote: I don't know why you are all comparing the race. Reaper can always do early pressure to zerg, I don't see zerg has any pressure build that can transition as comfortable and actually can do some sort of damage/poking
DIfference betwen pressure openings that rewards micro and openings that kill you if you chose the wrong build.
There is no pressure opening that rewards anything in zvt. there is only the "do the 10 or earlier pool into playing from behind" build.
It is not about Terran needing an aggressive option early on that is rewarding to transition out of. In fact, if we have none, we could still compete.
It is instead about forcing Protoss to spend a certain amount of resources before having access to powerful aggressive builds that do not set them back if very well defended.
Let's just say Zerg was in a position where a certain Terran 1-base play could kill Zerg 3rd base 100% of the time. And every time you are going to scout our natural, Terran has a guaranteed kill on two overlords. Pretty harsh? Often, for Terran to take a peak at Protoss natural while the blink/oracle play is going on, that is the cost (a mule in lieu of supply).
When/how do you decide to take your third? Do you play on 2-hatch blindly? Do you lose two overlords and weaken your two hatch defense if the strong Terran 1-base all-in that killed you in the two prior games is coming? What if you choose not to scout to stay alive, and then when you finally feel safe to move out or lose overlords, you see both gases mining on the Terran natural behind a unbreakable defense to your 2nd hatch that just completed? Kind of late to get your 3rd?
Even if you don't get a new efficient all-in as Zerg to fix this, wouldn't you just be happy that Terran will have the added requirement of an Armory to access this stronger 1-base pressure that can actually deny a zerg 2nd hatch? Going forward when you scout that natural at your cost of 200+ minerals (two overlords, or say our scan) you could know that:
- either all I have to do is defend his expensive one-base play and I should win on my two hatches; or
- If I do see that Terran natural down, I am usually safe to get my third base.
You see, as Terran, even if we spot one-base play and stay on one base, there is a good chance that our economy will be behind. Protoss natural will probably be mining gas before our own. Also, if we can in fact confirm that a 2nd Nexus is down at the natural, we might still die to 2-base blink/oracle if we choose to land at the natural and defend two locations.
Was there not a time before queen buffs when Terran 1-base play would prevent Zerg from holding a 2nd hatch? Probably didn't feel good when Terran could be mining the natural before as the Zerg completed its 2nd hatch... Maybe made Zerg want to leave the game...
A well defended oracle puts you behind. It's 300/300 resources early on that could have been observer+colossus tech much earlier.. Not even counting the delayed expansion. An oracle build must do damage or the terran is ahead and, as it is still true that you will get a natural, you won't see a third up to too late.
I dream of seeing 20 replays of TvP where SatedSC2 (as Terran) opens up proxied Cloaked Banshees and proceeds to win a majority of his games as the Terran. Good luck saturating your natural before the Protoss has saturated their 3rd (assuming that you get to saturate anything).
On July 11 2014 20:17 SatedSC2 wrote: Meanwhile, Terran can go for Widow Mine drops, Hellion drops, or Cloaked Banshees, which are again all strong options that are essentially countered by having units in position along with some sort of detection.
Avoid talking about Cloak Banshees being "a strong option" in TvP if you want to conserve the slightest ounce of credibility.
They're basically the same as Dark Templar except they fly. By that I mean that they're both just detection checks. Neither Dark Templar nor Banshees should do damage if you scout the opponent getting early gas, or you scout the opponent with a late expansion. The number of Terrans that I play who scout me with two gases and don't get any detection whatsoever, before proceeding to whine about Dark Templar being overpowered is disgusting...
I can't believe how deeply one has to bury his head in the sand not to acknowledge DTs and Cloak Banshees are drastically different in TvP. Do you even realize Cloak Banshees have been used in TvP a grand total of 3 times at the highest level in the span of one year, and you still call them "strong option"? Your way of arguing is absurd. You can prove literally anything with your method. "They're basically the same as Dark Templar except they fly." No kidding. I truely admire your self-control to state something like that while keeping a straight face. Look how much you can do with your "science":
Marines, Zealots and Zerglings are basically the same as they're cheap, easily reproducible mineral-only units often forming the bulk of the army of their respective races. Marauders, Stalkers and Roaches are basically the same as they're the tier 1.5, secondary ground ranged unit from their respective races. Marines and ultras are basically the same since they're living organisms benefiting from a certain amount of technology. Bla, bla, bla.
All you do is abstract a few common points while completely dismissing the practical environement, the infrastructures, the dynamics of the match-up; in short everything that matters. So have fun proving that a circle and a square are "basically the same" because they're both geometric figures ruled by a few common laws.
On July 11 2014 23:40 SatedSC2 wrote:I don't need to play Terran to know how Protoss build orders work, and to know that if Protoss gets two geysers you should be thinking about getting ready for harassment. If you choose not to, then you fucked up and you have nothing to whine about. Acting as if you blindly need six Marines all the time is a farce. You don't need them unless you see two gases and that isn't 99% of the time despite what you may think. I've not even spoken about counting Pylons to know whether or not something is proxied (which you should also do) because counting the geysers and the Probes within them is more than enough to gauge a decent response.
Have you considered that the upcoming four consecutive balance patches centered around the PvT matchup might weaken your assertion that Terrans are simply "fucking up" on a global scale for upwards of 9 months?
On July 11 2014 23:58 eusoc wrote:A well defended oracle puts you behind. It's 300/300 resources early on that could have been observer+colossus tech much earlier.. Not even counting the delayed expansion. An oracle build must do damage or the terran is ahead and, as it is still true that you will get a natural, you won't see a third up to too late.
Debatable. A well defended oracle puts you behind in the sense that if you had a collosi instead of that oracle, you would be in a better position all else being equal.
On the other hand, the decision to build that oracle has also put the terran far behind. The terran is incapable of leaving his base for several minutes, has been forced to commit to a very uneconomical opening, and will be completely blind for a significant portion of the matchup. Its not like an oracle needs to kill 10+ workers to put you on even ground, I wouldn't be surprised if a "well defended" oracle opening still led into a 50% win rate just because defending the oracle requires an enormous opportunity cost from the terran.
Sure, a standard opening will leave the protoss in a better economic position than a proxy, but it will also leave the terran in a better economic position as well.
The mere existance of options changes a matchup, even if the options aren't particularly effective.
If you go back to the 1/1/1 days, winrates out of protoss were horrible despite the fact that the 1/1/1 build was almost never played (and had a fairly low win rate when actually used). The truth was that the option to open 1/1/1 forced horribly inefficient builds out of Protoss that put them massively behind.
The protoss had to play cautiously in all situations because the terran was completely unscoutable. There could be 0 units and 3cc up that ramp; or two banshees and three tanks. You just had no way of knowing, so you always had to prepare for the worst case.
You don't have to build a unit for its impact to be felt. The oracle dramatically changes every PvT regardless of whether it gets built.
About Protoss Nerf, meh, the problem is not Time Warp, it is Photon Over, and they keep it as always.
Now, the Thor change I don't get it, I mean, it is perfect, but I have a video where it shows that Thor was working like that time ago, I never realized when they changed it, so basically they are reverting an old change they already made.
On July 12 2014 00:41 Sogetsu wrote: Why is the Widow Mine buff so big? I mean, it was
1.25 / 1.5 / 1.75
And now instead trying
1.5 / 1.75 / 2
They go directly to
1.5 / 2 / 2.5
WTF?!
About Protoss Nerf, meh, the problem is not Time Warp, it is Photon Over, and they keep it as always.
Now, the Thor change I don't get it, I mean, it is perfect, but I have a video where it shows that Thor was working like that time ago, I never realized when they changed it, so basically they are reverting an old change they already made.
So other players will accept it more easily once he a week from now opts for a more moderate value.
If you go back to the 1/1/1 days, winrates out of protoss were horrible despite the fact that the 1/1/1 build was almost never played (and had a fairly low win rate when actually used). The truth was that the option to open 1/1/1 forced horribly inefficient builds out of Protoss that put them massively behind.
Let's be fair here. This is a debateable statement. Further, it wasn't very long after the 1/1/1 era that EMP was nerfed, which win/rates as well.
A "standard" 1GFE -> 3 Gate Robo does not get two gas geysers because you get the second geyser after expanding in order to get an early Nexus.
Not really a standard PvT build. Almost all protosses to go early robo with the occational Stargate or Twilight. Again, you should consider playing terran: It would give you a better understanding of builds protoss players actual use and the requirement to deal with them.
Meh... a big widow mine buff and an almost irrelevent change to the thor in terms of unit efficiency (since the change have some downsides). They should have changed more the thor instead, specially with a protoss nerf. But i always felt that time warp lasted for an eternity, so that is a good change. Right now its more than a useful spell for an engagement, it can zone out the enemy army for quite long. I think widow mines are already good, specially vs protoss. So yeah, lets make this already useful unit much stronger. The result is biomine vs protoss and zerg, reducing the diversity between matchups. All that practice time to try hellbats and suddenly widow mine is the way and hellbats are useless after the first push again. At least this might improve balance, specially if they keep all changes with a smaller buff for mines.
I agree with r691175002. To add to what was said, when the 1/1/1 used to force inefficient Protoss builds, there was no Photon Overcharge opening to fall back on.
This new 1/1/1 mine drop threat might be the opening that lets us have the same types of options as the Protoss player:
- ward off aggressive 1-base early gas builds that are scouted; and - safely expand to the natural when the opponent has already revealed his own expanding.
The mine change could be a good way of accomplishing this because:
- it should help to defend oracle; - it should help to ward off heavy blink aggression, and DTs; - it could force protoss into detection allowing Terran to expand when it should be able to; - it should not be game-ending for Protoss if Terran early gas is scouted; and - it does not impact the Terran/Protoss end-game battles/compositions, and only really has a very significant impact on openings/natural expansion.
Obviously, if the Terran player is going CC-first or 1-rax gasless expand, the Protoss player isn't going to need to be rushing detection quite as fast at the expense of Protoss economy or more aggressive builds. It can match Terran greedy play because no early mine drop is coming.
On July 11 2014 23:40 SatedSC2 wrote:I don't need to play Terran to know how Protoss build orders work, and to know that if Protoss gets two geysers you should be thinking about getting ready for harassment. If you choose not to, then you fucked up and you have nothing to whine about. Acting as if you blindly need six Marines all the time is a farce. You don't need them unless you see two gases and that isn't 99% of the time despite what you may think. I've not even spoken about counting Pylons to know whether or not something is proxied (which you should also do) because counting the geysers and the Probes within them is more than enough to gauge a decent response.
Have you considered that the upcoming four consecutive balance patches centered around the PvT matchup might weaken your assertion that Terrans are simply "fucking up" on a global scale for upwards of 9 months?
Nope. I'm only talking about the early-game/inadequate responses to basic harassment in the post you quoted, and I don't believe that Terran is weak in the early-game. It's the late-game that Terran players need help with, and that's where I feel balance patches should be aimed. I in no way think that Terran are just "fucking up on a global scale". I just think that whining about having to build six Marines/Turrets when you scout harassment potential is a bit of a stretch, just like whining about needing an Observer would be.
I'm not whining about having to build six Marines and turrets if you go double gas early. Just that if you get an oracle in the sky or own the map with blink stalkers, and you will be in very healthy standing from my response to not die from that (rines/turrets), how about if you let me see what you are doing at home?
This way, we can stop after the six marines and two/three turret (which I will happily make), and when you begin to chrono-boost storm or double upgrades and get your two additional gas geisers - I'll also be getting my own extra refineries, selling bunkers, getting all SCV's back to mining, and dropping down my choice of armory/ghosts/cloak while I start to mule for my 3rd CC. Unfortunately, Terran cannot peak in and out with an overlord to see if Protoss geisers are going up. If we could, I think we would be in much better shape.
Absent the Terran race getting overlords to peek in and out at the natural/geisers every now and then, and absent the fog of war being lifted before the 10 min mark, perhaps it would make for more interesting games if the meta game supported T and P having some potential map presence, similar economies (naturals), and a slight advantage to the defender after the mine drop has been fended off (or after it just didn't come). I wonder how the game would look in the later stages if both sides could open up with a bit later 2nd CC's, but take them rather safely.
One of the reasons I enjoy TvZ so much (from either side), is that both sides get to scout, see, and react. There is this expected "back and forth" knock at the front door and decide game where good players will not die before the 10 min. mark and they will hope to often be in position to take a 3rd/4th base (depending on race). These 1-base proxy TvP map control builds are feeling less like chess or feeling out your opponent, and instead feeling much more like slot machines after you have made those turrets and 6 marines. Even TvT, ZvP can be played like this mostly to the players' choices. Nobody truly has to be blind until the natural is mining gas.
Note: we debate the Protoss also needing to expend 300/300 in resources to proxy the oracle. What about the cost for Terran to react if you fail to have your reaper locate the proxied buildings:
- Engineering bay - 3/4 bunkers - 2/3 turrets - more than 6 marines produced (sorry, you ain't holding off aggressive blink with only 6 rines) - scans instead of mules - SCVs not mining and standing idle beside bunkers (else timewarp or blink on top of bunkers before repair) - often, if you survive, the protoss taking four geisers earlier than you
Assuming no free SCV kills (oracle picking off builders or blink picking off repairers) in addition to all of this. The cost of all of this is researching blink or producing one oracle? It "seems" like a good deal even if you don't do what the SCV line might call "considerable damage".
This is getting to be a bit more expensive than 6 marines and two turrets. This is what happens once a few stalkers push out your reaper and all you know is "double gas proxy somewhere".
^^ exactly. Also, if you pull the workers too early, it will hurt your economy even more. Repairing cost money as well. Pull the workers too late and its gg. Soft contain = keep scv's at the bunker. Using CC energy for scan to see if the agresion will holds or use it for a mule because you are already behind in eco.... And even scouted properly some builds are still insane hard to hold, that would be fine, if that build requires insane good micro/macro. But that is often not the case. That makes the feeling of losing a game like that so frustrating.
Regarding the Thor adjustment, currently they are already shooting at overseers/overlords and not at muta's or lings. Will they adjust it so it will fire (finally) at muta's first or do i miss something?
Some viable early agression vs toss, some late game improvement and add a scouting tool and will have an awesome game again.
Alright, let's "generalize" the problem.. This poll might not be as good, but will still show some "info" to us all..
TvP Poll
Poll: TvP Terran greatest problem
MS Core (13)
54%
I have to play all the time Bio (8)
33%
Colossus Deathball (2)
8%
Blink Stalker (1)
4%
DT opener (0)
0%
Immortal bust (0)
0%
Warp Prism backdoor (0)
0%
24 total votes
Your vote: TvP Terran greatest problem
(Vote): Blink Stalker (Vote): DT opener (Vote): Immortal bust (Vote): Warp Prism backdoor (Vote): Colossus Deathball (Vote): MS Core (Vote): I have to play all the time Bio
TvZ Poll
Poll: Which do you consider to be Terran's greatest TvZ problem ?
Mutalisk Backdoor (14)
70%
Mass Baneling (4)
20%
Mass Queen opener (1)
5%
No problem (1)
5%
Roach/Bane/Ling (0)
0%
SwarmHost (0)
0%
Ultralisk later on (0)
0%
20 total votes
Your vote: Which do you consider to be Terran's greatest TvZ problem ?
(Vote): Mass Queen opener (Vote): Roach/Bane/Ling (Vote): Mass Baneling (Vote): Mutalisk Backdoor (Vote): SwarmHost (Vote): Ultralisk later on (Vote): No problem
I think currently it works like this for the Thor: If a flying target and a ground target are in range, it chooses ground. If it is already attacking a target, it will keep attacking that target until it is dead before making a new target choice.
Since the GtA has 10range and the GtG only 7, the Thor will indeed often kill an air unit anyways before switching to a ground target.
Nope, you're the one spouting nonsense. You don't always need to get a "critical amount of Marines out" blindly, you only need them if you scout the Protoss going for two gas geysers. If they go for one gas geyser then they're doing a 1GFE and you don't need to worry about Oracles or Dark Templar. Your hyperbole is ridiculous.
Lol. You really need to start playing terran vs protoss once in a while in order to learn how it is to play vs your race. Protoss gets two early geysers almost 99% of the time vs terran. I think this discussion ends here.
Yep, it ends with you being wrong, which is much like how it started. "Protoss gets two early geysers almost 99% of the time vs terran" is a ridiculous statement and, in keeping with all your other reasoning, it really is laughable logic. Please remove your Terran blinkers.
EDIT:
Even your edited quote, that Protoss gets them as "standard", is ridiculous. A "standard" 1GFE -> 3 Gate Robo does not get two gas geysers because you get the second geyser after expanding in order to get an early Nexus. The only reason to get two gas geysers before expanding if you're doing an optimised expansion build is if you're going for Dark Templar or Oracles before expanding or if you're going for really fast tech (usually Blink, rarely Oracles) after expanding. As for two geysers -> one-base all-in, that can be scouted by the lack of a Nexus and defended as stated in my previous post. You don't even need to know what all-in it is, just that it's an all-in. All of these arguments apply to Protoss in a similar manner, but with different units involved.
On July 11 2014 23:25 Hider wrote: And people wouldn't mind Oracles, DT's or Stalkers if they encouraged micro. But they don't, they encourage to put good at gussing. I don't mind protoss having offensive options vs terran, but they are simply extremely lame and create really boring gameplay.
The idea that Dark Templar and Oracles are effective if you don't micro them is laughable. Oracles need babysitting quite heavily to get the best out of them, especially if there are Marines or Turrets around, and Dark Templar are much more effective if you put in the time to focus dodging in and out of Scans until the Terran gets more permanent detection. The idea that Stalkers don't need microing is especially laughable since Blink Stalkers are one of the most microable units in the game.
#TerranLogic
I agree with you that scouting 2 vs 1 gas is significant.
What you seem to forget is that Protoss can catch up from two gas opening by not making units and relying on photon overcharge while they dump all their chrono on nexus.
/edit
Leave your Terran hate before you enter balance threads please. You probably intended only to insult Hider but #Terranlogic is aggravating and not conducive to calm dialogue.
How "big" will the new WM splash radius be exactly? Can you kill an entire mineral line with 2 WMs? Assuming you target correctly so the splash doesnt overkill eachother. Talking about TvP btw
On July 11 2014 20:53 eusoc wrote: yep tell me how building 6 marines is such a huge investment.
6 Marines aren't a huge investment at 20 minutes... do you understand the term opening? That's 300 minerals. Add 100 more and get a CC instead for getting into the macro game. You know, since probes can be chrono and T has to sit scvs out every time they want to build something. Another CC early to keep pace is why CC first has become popular vs Z. It'd be done vs P too if there wasn't a risk of proxy gate.
How "big" will the new WM splash radius be exactly? Can you kill an entire mineral line with 2 WMs? Assuming you target correctly so the splash doesnt overkill eachother. Talking about TvP btw
One shot will kill Probes within a Fungal Growth AoE and deal 10+10 damage in an even bigger radius than Banelings. So to answer your question, yes they will kill your entire mineral line, with 2 well placed shots.
On July 12 2014 03:54 BlackCompany wrote: How "big" will the new WM splash radius be exactly? Can you kill an entire mineral line with 2 WMs? Assuming you target correctly so the splash doesnt overkill eachother. Talking about TvP btw
Increase of 1.75 --> 2.5 radius on the outermost level, dealing 10 +10(shield), so theoretically two mines spaced correctly apart would have their outermost rings intersecting for 40 total damage, killing probes. ( I assume the damage would stack.)
It is quite possible that the current suggestion will be too strong. The mine can be toned down if needed before it goes live, or other changes may be suggested instead.
Note: Something tells me that good Protoss players are going to maybe lose 1-2 probes per game to this. They will of course have gotten detection, and move their probes and/or micro a few into the mines. We've seen it before in early HOTS. Talking about having entire mineral lines wiped out is like saying that good Terrans always lose half of their only mineral line to the oracle - we make our 6 marines, turret and mine instead of losing most of our SCVs.
The chances of a quick mine drop having two perfectly placed mines that both go off in such a way that all the probes are destroyed is very unlikly and is definitely the result of a bad defense/reaction ont he part of the protoss player. The toss player can:
1. Scout that a possible drop is incoming 2. See the drop early with pylons/structures/units placed near the edge of the base 3. Pull probes before: A. The medivac finishes unloading B. The mines are completely burrowed C. The mine target timer initiates the explosion
There is plenty of time to pull and split workers and it is even possible to cannon your mineral line prior to the drop even happening based off of good scouting information. If an oracle flies into my mineral line and I don't react right away, I can easily lose 10+ scvs.
On July 12 2014 04:24 johnbongham wrote: The chances of a quick mine drop having two perfectly placed mines that both go off in such a way that all the probes are destroyed is very unlikly and is definitely the result of a bad defense/reaction ont he part of the protoss player. The toss player can:
1. Scout that a possible drop is incoming 2. See the drop early with pylons/structures/units placed near the edge of the base 3. Pull probes before: A. The medivac finishes unloading B. The mines are completely burrowed C. The mine target timer initiates the explosion
There is plenty of time to pull and split workers and it is even possible to cannon your mineral line prior to the drop even happening based off of good scouting information. If an oracle flies into my mineral line and I don't react right away, I can easily lose 10+ scvs.
Yes but they don't see it that way. If something could happen terribly to them because of them just being exceptionally bad players (or minimizing SC2 to dick around something else), then it's overpowered. If a T could lose an entire game because of hampered intel or being just a tad late on reacting, then it's fair.
TBH I think T's that complain about oracles have a short memory in their WoL days of banshee cheesing Z. The same complaint about having to blind make ebays is similar to Z complaining about having to blind make evos or extra queens and get early lair in case of cloak.
It seems like round-robin hypocrisy to me, but that's why spores get to be made without evo chamber now. I also think oracle is bullshit. It's an auto-win or specific anti-oracle bulding by T which hobbles T advancement into the macro game.
On July 12 2014 03:54 BlackCompany wrote: How "big" will the new WM splash radius be exactly? Can you kill an entire mineral line with 2 WMs? Assuming you target correctly so the splash doesnt overkill eachother. Talking about TvP btw
Increase of 1.75 --> 2.5 radius on the outermost level, dealing 10 +10(shield), so theoretically two mines spaced correctly apart would have their outermost rings intersecting for 40 total damage, killing probes. ( I assume the damage would stack.)
How "big" will the new WM splash radius be exactly? Can you kill an entire mineral line with 2 WMs? Assuming you target correctly so the splash doesnt overkill eachother. Talking about TvP btw
One shot will kill Probes within a Fungal Growth AoE and deal 10+10 damage in an even bigger radius than Banelings. So to answer your question, yes they will kill your entire mineral line, with 2 well placed shots.
thanks. Thats indeed quite a lot of damage though Ps will probably micro the probes away. Makes Zealot/Templer much worse too i guess :/ hopefully they reduce the +shields damage accordingly
On July 12 2014 04:24 johnbongham wrote: The chances of a quick mine drop having two perfectly placed mines that both go off in such a way that all the probes are destroyed is very unlikly and is definitely the result of a bad defense/reaction ont he part of the protoss player. The toss player can:
1. Scout that a possible drop is incoming 2. See the drop early with pylons/structures/units placed near the edge of the base 3. Pull probes before: A. The medivac finishes unloading B. The mines are completely burrowed C. The mine target timer initiates the explosion
There is plenty of time to pull and split workers and it is even possible to cannon your mineral line prior to the drop even happening based off of good scouting information. If an oracle flies into my mineral line and I don't react right away, I can easily lose 10+ scvs.
Yes but they don't see it that way. If something could happen terribly to them because of them just being exceptionally bad players (or minimizing SC2 to dick around something else), then it's overpowered. If a T could lose an entire game because of hampered intel or being just a tad late on reacting, then it's fair.
TBH I think T's that complain about oracles have a short memory in their WoL days of banshee cheesing Z. The same complaint about having to blind make ebays is similar to Z complaining about having to blind make evos or extra queens and get early lair in case of cloak.
It seems like round-robin hypocrisy to me, but that's why spores get to be made without evo chamber now. I also think oracle is bullshit. It's an auto-win or specific anti-oracle bulding by T which hobbles T advancement into the macro game.
Certainly I believe that removing the evo-requirement and reducing Cloak cost to 100/100 was a good decision. It makes the opening much less coinflippy and more about unit control.
Increase of 1.75 --> 2.5 radius on the outermost level, dealing 10 +10(shield), so theoretically two mines spaced correctly apart would have their outermost rings intersecting for 40 total damage, killing probes. ( I assume the damage would stack.)
Pretty sure this is not the case, since the first shot would remove 10 shield, then deal 10 damage, putting the Probe to 20 health/0 shield, which means the second shot won't deal +10 shield damage. Still devastating damage though
And the reverse argument could also be made by the Terran, that if the Protoss is required to have made such a colossal effort to defend his mineral line(s) from two mines spotted on the minimap 6 seconds prior to detonating, it is only because the Terran has already invested a massive amount of resources to put the Medivac/mines into the sky with such early refinery timing... 350 gas for two dropped mines?
On July 12 2014 04:37 Elendur wrote: Johnbongham is right.
And the reverse argument could also be made by the Terran, that if the Protoss is required to have made such a colossal effort to defend his mineral line(s) from two mines spotted on the minimap 6 seconds prior to detonating, it is only because the Terran has already invested a massive amount of resources to put the Medivac/mines into the sky with such early refinery timing... 350 gas for two dropped mines?
(like the oracle 300/300 cost argument)
But it's not really the same because an unscouted and undefended oracle wins the game immediately. An unscouted WM drop can still be run away from, and since it doesn't shoot buildings or cloaked units, a cannon or observer will clean it up.
On July 12 2014 04:37 Elendur wrote: Johnbongham is right.
And the reverse argument could also be made by the Terran, that if the Protoss is required to have made such a colossal effort to defend his mineral line(s) from two mines spotted on the minimap 6 seconds prior to detonating, it is only because the Terran has already invested a massive amount of resources to put the Medivac/mines into the sky with such early refinery timing... 350 gas for two dropped mines?
(like the oracle 300/300 cost argument)
But it's not really the same because an unscouted and undefended oracle wins the game immediately. An unscouted WM drop can still be run away from, and since it doesn't shoot buildings or cloaked units, a cannon or observer will clean it up.
You can run from an oracle, run towards your marines and have the marines come back. Unscouted oracles usually get maybe 4-5 kills. That's damage certainly, not game ending damage. If by unscouted you actually meant unscouted and terran has no anti-air at all and got blind countered in his build, then that's also the fault of the terran for doing a bad build.
On July 12 2014 04:37 Elendur wrote: Johnbongham is right.
And the reverse argument could also be made by the Terran, that if the Protoss is required to have made such a colossal effort to defend his mineral line(s) from two mines spotted on the minimap 6 seconds prior to detonating, it is only because the Terran has already invested a massive amount of resources to put the Medivac/mines into the sky with such early refinery timing... 350 gas for two dropped mines?
(like the oracle 300/300 cost argument)
But it's not really the same because an unscouted and undefended oracle wins the game immediately. An unscouted WM drop can still be run away from, and since it doesn't shoot buildings or cloaked units, a cannon or observer will clean it up.
You can run from an oracle, run towards your marines and have the marines come back. Unscouted oracles usually get maybe 4-5 kills. That's damage certainly, not game ending damage. If by unscouted you actually meant unscouted and terran has no anti-air at all and got blind countered in his build, then that's also the fault of the terran for doing a bad build.
What if I didn't make Marines, I made Marauders?
edit: so you're fine with Protoss getting two Cannons to shut down WM drops completely? That'll be a good build now.
On July 12 2014 04:37 Elendur wrote: Johnbongham is right.
And the reverse argument could also be made by the Terran, that if the Protoss is required to have made such a colossal effort to defend his mineral line(s) from two mines spotted on the minimap 6 seconds prior to detonating, it is only because the Terran has already invested a massive amount of resources to put the Medivac/mines into the sky with such early refinery timing... 350 gas for two dropped mines?
(like the oracle 300/300 cost argument)
But it's not really the same because an unscouted and undefended oracle wins the game immediately. An unscouted WM drop can still be run away from, and since it doesn't shoot buildings or cloaked units, a cannon or observer will clean it up.
You can run from an oracle, run towards your marines and have the marines come back. Unscouted oracles usually get maybe 4-5 kills. That's damage certainly, not game ending damage. If by unscouted you actually meant unscouted and terran has no anti-air at all and got blind countered in his build, then that's also the fault of the terran for doing a bad build.
What if I didn't make Marines, I made Marauders?
By Whitewing's logic, you don't have a choice because you play Terran.
On July 12 2014 04:37 Elendur wrote: Johnbongham is right.
And the reverse argument could also be made by the Terran, that if the Protoss is required to have made such a colossal effort to defend his mineral line(s) from two mines spotted on the minimap 6 seconds prior to detonating, it is only because the Terran has already invested a massive amount of resources to put the Medivac/mines into the sky with such early refinery timing... 350 gas for two dropped mines?
(like the oracle 300/300 cost argument)
But it's not really the same because an unscouted and undefended oracle wins the game immediately. An unscouted WM drop can still be run away from, and since it doesn't shoot buildings or cloaked units, a cannon or observer will clean it up.
You can run from an oracle, run towards your marines and have the marines come back. Unscouted oracles usually get maybe 4-5 kills. That's damage certainly, not game ending damage. If by unscouted you actually meant unscouted and terran has no anti-air at all and got blind countered in his build, then that's also the fault of the terran for doing a bad build.
What if I didn't make Marines, I made Marauders?
edit: so you're fine with Protoss getting two Cannons to shut down WM drops completely? That'll be a good build now.
Nearly all protoss on Korean ladder seem to be making Pylon behind their minerals to build their WG or Cores anyway. Makes getting a cannon on reaction to WM drop even more intuitive.
On July 12 2014 04:50 SC2Toastie wrote: TL should start handing out warnings to people who bait, troll, just don't read, ignore arguments and clearly change facts for own benefit.
Sated and Eusoc et al. are dragging the quality of the thread down majorly and consistently derail any conversation with their 'posts'.
Sated has had to say like 5 different times that he wasn't saying there's nothing wrong with terran, so... be careful what you wish for.
On July 12 2014 04:50 SC2Toastie wrote: TL should start handing out warnings to people who bait, troll, just don't read, ignore arguments and clearly change facts for own benefit.
Sated and Eusoc et al. are dragging the quality of the thread down majorly and consistently derail any conversation with their 'posts'.
Sated has had to say like 5 different times that he wasn't saying there's nothing wrong with terran, so... be careful what you wish for.
Toastie wasn't saying Sated was denying the problem entirely, he was remarking on the quality of the posts.
On July 12 2014 04:37 Elendur wrote: Johnbongham is right.
And the reverse argument could also be made by the Terran, that if the Protoss is required to have made such a colossal effort to defend his mineral line(s) from two mines spotted on the minimap 6 seconds prior to detonating, it is only because the Terran has already invested a massive amount of resources to put the Medivac/mines into the sky with such early refinery timing... 350 gas for two dropped mines?
(like the oracle 300/300 cost argument)
But it's not really the same because an unscouted and undefended oracle wins the game immediately. An unscouted WM drop can still be run away from, and since it doesn't shoot buildings or cloaked units, a cannon or observer will clean it up.
You can run from an oracle, run towards your marines and have the marines come back. Unscouted oracles usually get maybe 4-5 kills. That's damage certainly, not game ending damage. If by unscouted you actually meant unscouted and terran has no anti-air at all and got blind countered in his build, then that's also the fault of the terran for doing a bad build.
What if I didn't make Marines, I made Marauders?
edit: so you're fine with Protoss getting two Cannons to shut down WM drops completely? That'll be a good build now.
Nearly all protoss on Korean ladder seem to be making Pylon behind their minerals to build their WG or Cores anyway. Makes getting a cannon on reaction to WM drop even more intuitive.
Our builds have to incorporate an early forge to deal with them and we have to be ready to get cannons finished before widow mines show up, that's not really any different than you having to be ready to make turrets or have marines ready to go if an oracle comes. Sometimes you do a gamble build and it doesn't pay off, but any build which does not incorporate complete scouting and knows an oracle isn't coming (which is very hard to do for sure) or does not feature enough marines in position to deal with an oracle is a gamble.
You know, sort of the same way sometimes protoss players gamble and take a 3rd base with twilight council mass gateway units vs. terran without a robo and then die to cloak banshee (yeah that's rare but it happens).
On July 11 2014 20:17 SatedSC2 wrote: This Oracle/Mine discussion is ridiculous.
The Terran can open with Marines and have them positioned defensively to deal with an Oracle. They can open Factory and have a Widow Mine positioned to deal with an Oracle. Once the timing has passed for an Oracle to move in, those units can be re-positioned to deal with other threats. Turrets can be used as static defence/detection as well.
The Protoss can open with Stalkers and have them positioned defensively to deal with a Widow Mine. They can open Robo and have an Observer for detection to deal with a Widow Mine. They can open Stargate and use an Oracle for detection. Once the timing has passed for a Widow Mine drop or a proxy Widow Mine to move in, those units can be re-positioned to deal with other threats. Cannons can be used as static defence/detection as well.
Both races have options to defend both harassment possibilities. Neither race is forced to go down a particular tech path because a Terran can open with either Mines or Marines or Turrets for defence, whereas a Protoss can open Robo or Stargate or Twilight/Forge to defend. Neither race is guaranteed scouting information either: Protoss can deflect scouting information using the MSC+Stalker combination (or proxy their tech) whereas Terran can deflect scouting with a Marine or a Reaper (or proxy their tech).
This is basically a really silly slap-fight. Both races have early harassment options that can do a lot of damage if the opponent makes even the slightest mistake. Protoss can obviously go Dark Templar or Oracles, both of which are very strong, but both of these things are essentially countered by having Marines in position or having Turrets. Meanwhile, Terran can go for Widow Mine drops, Hellion drops, or Cloaked Banshees, which are again all strong options that are essentially countered by having units in position along with some sort of detection. If you don't know what your opponent is doing (but you do know they didn't FE) and you don't get detection/put units in position for harassment, you fucked up. This type of whining doesn't help the balance designers at all, because it is unjustified...
And what can ZERG do vs buffed WM drops ?
The poll I made earlier is a clear indicative of what Terrans want:
1 - vs Protoss they want to nerf the MSC (that poor thing can't stand up for a single patch alone, lol), which is kinda "considerate", but the problem is that it's a very needed unit in PvZ/PvP, and I doubt that there's still a "maneuverable space" for it to be nerfed furthermore
2 - vs Zerg however the problem are Mutalisks, which CAN be addressed upon
Now the problem is that buffing the WMines DO address that problem, but - the real question is - in what way, AND - at what cost ? - we'll end up seeing (or playing) shitty games again where 2WMs dropped in a mineral line solve the whole game right then & there vs BOTH Protoss and Zerg.. Don't get me wrong - I want to watch & see (or play) Terran win, BUT - certainly NOT in that way lol
What I'm surprised about however is that nearly no-one voted for the "Colossus deathball" being a big Terran problem option, and yet - in the pole I made a week ago - nearly 70% of people voted for late-game TvP was the real problem overall (well probably because of the discrepancy of the fact that in that previous poll I guess all could've voted, whilest this one is probably "asking only Terrans" more)..
Now if that same option (under the name of "Colossus deathball") was voted the most again - THAT might've been a very easy solvable solution overall - cause both "petitions" would be indicative on nearly the same thing - buffing the Viking anti-air missile vs both Shields and Light Armor.. Like - both would "Scream" buff the Vikings in any way possible
This way - buffing the WM - it's just no bueno IMO.. Let's not mistake - It DOES address the both most-voted problems vs Zerg, BUT - at what gameplay cost ?
On July 12 2014 18:39 Godwrath wrote: You will need to play it safer for that not to happen, so you don't get to play silly builds against terran.
Gee what can I say ? - thank you your Honour, no further questions (try better than that pls, cause that's NOT a solution)
How is it not a solution ? Unpredictable play with a predictable race with barely decent scouting options is obviously a problem in TvP. Keeping protoss honest is not a your "but at what cost?" issue. There has to be ways for terran to put real pressure and fear for protoss on early game, where, paired with lategame, the true problems lies in the match up.
On July 12 2014 18:39 Godwrath wrote: You will need to play it safer for that not to happen, so you don't get to play silly builds against terran.
Gee what can I say ? - thank you your Honour, no further questions (try better than that pls, cause that's NOT a solution)
How is it not a solution ? Unpredictable play with a predictable race with barely decent scouting options is obviously a problem in TvP. Keeping protoss honest is not a your "but at what cost?" issue. There has to be ways for terran to put real pressure and fear for protoss on early game, where, paired with lategame, the true problems lies in the match up.
yes, god forbid Terran has a threat that Protoss actually has to consider when choosing their style of play and <shudder> Adapt !
On July 12 2014 04:50 SC2Toastie wrote: TL should start handing out warnings to people who bait, troll, just don't read, ignore arguments and clearly change facts for own benefit.
Sated and Eusoc et al. are dragging the quality of the thread down majorly and consistently derail any conversation with their 'posts'.
Sated has had to say like 5 different times that he wasn't saying there's nothing wrong with terran, so... be careful what you wish for.
Toastie wasn't saying Sated was denying the problem entirely, he was remarking on the quality of the posts.
Thanks. Nice to see some people still have some reading comprehension and a little less of the 5- year old style of arguing!
On July 12 2014 04:50 SC2Toastie wrote: TL should start handing out warnings to people who bait, troll, just don't read, ignore arguments and clearly change facts for own benefit.
Sated and Eusoc et al. are dragging the quality of the thread down majorly and consistently derail any conversation with their 'posts'.
Sated has had to say like 5 different times that he wasn't saying there's nothing wrong with terran, so... be careful what you wish for.
Toastie wasn't saying Sated was denying the problem entirely, he was remarking on the quality of the posts.
Thanks. Nice to see some people still have some reading comprehension and a little less of the 5- year old style of arguing!
Hey, you're baiting. That gets you a warning in your own rules.
When someone like you talks about warning people for baiting, not reading things, ignoring arguments and clearly changing facts for their own benefit, it is offensive. I remember you attacking me like not a week ago for saying something you thought I said, except we were both saying the exact same thing and you didn't read well. That lowered the debate then.
And yet I never thought you should get warnings for what you said. Cause, you know, it's a forum, you get to say stuff. But what do I know, I'm probably a 5-year-old who can't read.
This way - buffing the WM - it's just no bueno IMO.. Let's not mistake - It DOES address the both most-voted problems vs Zerg, BUT - at what gameplay cost ?
Cost? It's gonna create much better gameplay as zerg now needs to micro in order to engage terran which is gonna reward zers who are actually good relative to zergs who aren't.
On July 12 2014 04:37 Elendur wrote: Johnbongham is right.
And the reverse argument could also be made by the Terran, that if the Protoss is required to have made such a colossal effort to defend his mineral line(s) from two mines spotted on the minimap 6 seconds prior to detonating, it is only because the Terran has already invested a massive amount of resources to put the Medivac/mines into the sky with such early refinery timing... 350 gas for two dropped mines?
(like the oracle 300/300 cost argument)
But it's not really the same because an unscouted and undefended oracle wins the game immediately. An unscouted WM drop can still be run away from, and since it doesn't shoot buildings or cloaked units, a cannon or observer will clean it up.
You can run from an oracle, run towards your marines and have the marines come back. Unscouted oracles usually get maybe 4-5 kills. That's damage certainly, not game ending damage. If by unscouted you actually meant unscouted and terran has no anti-air at all and got blind countered in his build, then that's also the fault of the terran for doing a bad build.
What if I didn't make Marines, I made Marauders?
edit: so you're fine with Protoss getting two Cannons to shut down WM drops completely? That'll be a good build now.
Seeing as no sensible Terran build has delayed stim, +1, combat shield, factory and starport tech for early mass marauders since before Oracles were even designed, if you make them instead of marines then you are doing a bad build anyway
On July 12 2014 04:37 Elendur wrote: Johnbongham is right.
And the reverse argument could also be made by the Terran, that if the Protoss is required to have made such a colossal effort to defend his mineral line(s) from two mines spotted on the minimap 6 seconds prior to detonating, it is only because the Terran has already invested a massive amount of resources to put the Medivac/mines into the sky with such early refinery timing... 350 gas for two dropped mines?
(like the oracle 300/300 cost argument)
But it's not really the same because an unscouted and undefended oracle wins the game immediately. An unscouted WM drop can still be run away from, and since it doesn't shoot buildings or cloaked units, a cannon or observer will clean it up.
You can run from an oracle, run towards your marines and have the marines come back. Unscouted oracles usually get maybe 4-5 kills. That's damage certainly, not game ending damage. If by unscouted you actually meant unscouted and terran has no anti-air at all and got blind countered in his build, then that's also the fault of the terran for doing a bad build.
What if I didn't make Marines, I made Marauders?
edit: so you're fine with Protoss getting two Cannons to shut down WM drops completely? That'll be a good build now.
Seeing as no sensible Terran build has delayed stim, +1, combat shield, factory and starport tech for early mass marauders since before Oracles were even designed, if you make them instead of marines then you are doing a bad build anyway
But it was so fun going early marauders in WoL and poking/harassing the protoss. Some early micro war is so much fun. More of this, no?
On July 12 2014 04:37 Elendur wrote: Johnbongham is right.
And the reverse argument could also be made by the Terran, that if the Protoss is required to have made such a colossal effort to defend his mineral line(s) from two mines spotted on the minimap 6 seconds prior to detonating, it is only because the Terran has already invested a massive amount of resources to put the Medivac/mines into the sky with such early refinery timing... 350 gas for two dropped mines?
(like the oracle 300/300 cost argument)
But it's not really the same because an unscouted and undefended oracle wins the game immediately. An unscouted WM drop can still be run away from, and since it doesn't shoot buildings or cloaked units, a cannon or observer will clean it up.
You can run from an oracle, run towards your marines and have the marines come back. Unscouted oracles usually get maybe 4-5 kills. That's damage certainly, not game ending damage. If by unscouted you actually meant unscouted and terran has no anti-air at all and got blind countered in his build, then that's also the fault of the terran for doing a bad build.
What if I didn't make Marines, I made Marauders?
edit: so you're fine with Protoss getting two Cannons to shut down WM drops completely? That'll be a good build now.
Seeing as no sensible Terran build has delayed stim, +1, combat shield, factory and starport tech for early mass marauders since before Oracles were even designed, if you make them instead of marines then you are doing a bad build anyway
But it was so fun going early marauders in WoL and poking/harassing the protoss. Some early micro war is so much fun. More of this, no?
It'd be nice to see micro encouraged at all stages of the game. It makes the game exponentially more exciting. We should really band together and ask for a mechanics overhaul or even a slower game play speed to allow for more precision micro based play.
On July 12 2014 04:37 Elendur wrote: Johnbongham is right.
And the reverse argument could also be made by the Terran, that if the Protoss is required to have made such a colossal effort to defend his mineral line(s) from two mines spotted on the minimap 6 seconds prior to detonating, it is only because the Terran has already invested a massive amount of resources to put the Medivac/mines into the sky with such early refinery timing... 350 gas for two dropped mines?
(like the oracle 300/300 cost argument)
But it's not really the same because an unscouted and undefended oracle wins the game immediately. An unscouted WM drop can still be run away from, and since it doesn't shoot buildings or cloaked units, a cannon or observer will clean it up.
You can run from an oracle, run towards your marines and have the marines come back. Unscouted oracles usually get maybe 4-5 kills. That's damage certainly, not game ending damage. If by unscouted you actually meant unscouted and terran has no anti-air at all and got blind countered in his build, then that's also the fault of the terran for doing a bad build.
What if I didn't make Marines, I made Marauders?
edit: so you're fine with Protoss getting two Cannons to shut down WM drops completely? That'll be a good build now.
Seeing as no sensible Terran build has delayed stim, +1, combat shield, factory and starport tech for early mass marauders since before Oracles were even designed, if you make them instead of marines then you are doing a bad build anyway
But it was so fun going early marauders in WoL and poking/harassing the protoss. Some early micro war is so much fun. More of this, no?
It'd be nice to see micro encouraged at all stages of the game. It makes the game exponentially more exciting. We should really band together and ask for a mechanics overhaul or even a slower game play speed to allow for more precision micro based play.
Game speed doesn't change how you micro. It just makes the execution of the already too low amount of micro easier.
One area where they could slow down the pace is the projectile speed. It would actually be a ton more fun if abilities like EMP, Fungal and Abduct could be avoided through good micro (and then compensated in different ways).
On July 12 2014 04:37 Elendur wrote: Johnbongham is right.
And the reverse argument could also be made by the Terran, that if the Protoss is required to have made such a colossal effort to defend his mineral line(s) from two mines spotted on the minimap 6 seconds prior to detonating, it is only because the Terran has already invested a massive amount of resources to put the Medivac/mines into the sky with such early refinery timing... 350 gas for two dropped mines?
(like the oracle 300/300 cost argument)
But it's not really the same because an unscouted and undefended oracle wins the game immediately. An unscouted WM drop can still be run away from, and since it doesn't shoot buildings or cloaked units, a cannon or observer will clean it up.
You can run from an oracle, run towards your marines and have the marines come back. Unscouted oracles usually get maybe 4-5 kills. That's damage certainly, not game ending damage. If by unscouted you actually meant unscouted and terran has no anti-air at all and got blind countered in his build, then that's also the fault of the terran for doing a bad build.
What if I didn't make Marines, I made Marauders?
edit: so you're fine with Protoss getting two Cannons to shut down WM drops completely? That'll be a good build now.
Seeing as no sensible Terran build has delayed stim, +1, combat shield, factory and starport tech for early mass marauders since before Oracles were even designed, if you make them instead of marines then you are doing a bad build anyway
But it was so fun going early marauders in WoL and poking/harassing the protoss. Some early micro war is so much fun. More of this, no?
It'd be nice to see micro encouraged at all stages of the game. It makes the game exponentially more exciting. We should really band together and ask for a mechanics overhaul or even a slower game play speed to allow for more precision micro based play.
Game speed doesn't change how you micro. It just makes the execution of the already too low amount of micro easier.
One area where they could slow down the pace is the projectile speed. It would actually be a ton more fun if abilities like EMP, Fungal and Abduct could be avoided through good micro (and then compensated in different ways).
To be honest, it's difficult to get used to the slow pace of projectiles in Starbow. I think it would be different if I didn't have Starcraft II to compare it with, but sometimes it's sluggish enough to draw attention to itself.
On July 11 2014 20:17 SatedSC2 wrote: This Oracle/Mine discussion is ridiculous.
The Terran can open with Marines and have them positioned defensively to deal with an Oracle. They can open Factory and have a Widow Mine positioned to deal with an Oracle. Once the timing has passed for an Oracle to move in, those units can be re-positioned to deal with other threats. Turrets can be used as static defence/detection as well.
The Protoss can open with Stalkers and have them positioned defensively to deal with a Widow Mine. They can open Robo and have an Observer for detection to deal with a Widow Mine. They can open Stargate and use an Oracle for detection. Once the timing has passed for a Widow Mine drop or a proxy Widow Mine to move in, those units can be re-positioned to deal with other threats. Cannons can be used as static defence/detection as well.
Both races have options to defend both harassment possibilities. Neither race is forced to go down a particular tech path because a Terran can open with either Mines or Marines or Turrets for defence, whereas a Protoss can open Robo or Stargate or Twilight/Forge to defend. Neither race is guaranteed scouting information either: Protoss can deflect scouting information using the MSC+Stalker combination (or proxy their tech) whereas Terran can deflect scouting with a Marine or a Reaper (or proxy their tech).
This is basically a really silly slap-fight. Both races have early harassment options that can do a lot of damage if the opponent makes even the slightest mistake. Protoss can obviously go Dark Templar or Oracles, both of which are very strong, but both of these things are essentially countered by having Marines in position or having Turrets. Meanwhile, Terran can go for Widow Mine drops, Hellion drops, or Cloaked Banshees, which are again all strong options that are essentially countered by having units in position along with some sort of detection. If you don't know what your opponent is doing (but you do know they didn't FE) and you don't get detection/put units in position for harassment, you fucked up. This type of whining doesn't help the balance designers at all, because it is unjustified...
And what can ZERG do vs buffed WM drops ?
The poll I made earlier is a clear indicative of what Terrans want:
1 - vs Protoss they want to nerf the MSC (that poor thing can't stand up for a single patch alone, lol), which is kinda "considerate", but the problem is that it's a very needed unit in PvZ/PvP, and I doubt that there's still a "maneuverable space" for it to be nerfed furthermore
2 - vs Zerg however the problem are Mutalisks, which CAN be addressed upon
Now the problem is that buffing the WMines DO address that problem, but - the real question is - in what way, AND - at what cost ? - we'll end up seeing (or playing) shitty games again where 2WMs dropped in a mineral line solve the whole game right then & there vs BOTH Protoss and Zerg.. Don't get me wrong - I want to watch & see (or play) Terran win, BUT - certainly NOT in that way lol
What I'm surprised about however is that nearly no-one voted for the "Colossus deathball" being a big Terran problem option, and yet - in the pole I made a week ago - nearly 70% of people voted for late-game TvP was the real problem overall (well probably because of the discrepancy of the fact that in that previous poll I guess all could've voted, whilest this one is probably "asking only Terrans" more)..
Now if that same option (under the name of "Colossus deathball") was voted the most again - THAT might've been a very easy solvable solution overall - cause both "petitions" would be indicative on nearly the same thing - buffing the Viking anti-air missile vs both Shields and Light Armor.. Like - both would "Scream" buff the Vikings in any way possible
This way - buffing the WM - it's just no bueno IMO.. Let's not mistake - It DOES address the both most-voted problems vs Zerg, BUT - at what gameplay cost ?
No, i think the difference in the pool is different because the question is different. Colossus deathball is not the same as colossus, high templar and archon deathball. As for the MSC core votes, people think that terran is not as weak in the early game as they are in late game TvP, but the MSC is effective in all stages of the game.
I think this widow mine buff will just reduce the diversity in TvZ and TvP, so its a bad change. People might be in a hurry to take any buff, but terran was buffed recently and other changes (in my opinion) should take the proper time, since its no emergency. For TvP protoss is just going to get robo or forge earlier, or both, so stargate and twilight concil openers are going to be worse. For TvZ zerg will have to engage carefully and micro is going to be harder, but terran is relying on luck since you cannot manually target 10 mines while splitting. Its a big buff vs mass banes but a small buff vs mutas on your backdoor, since the radius was already good vs clumped mutas (and they always are when harassing mineral lines), while the damage is unchanged.
Lastly, i think the other changes are good, since they help with balance with no relevant harmful effects.
On July 12 2014 04:37 Elendur wrote: Johnbongham is right.
And the reverse argument could also be made by the Terran, that if the Protoss is required to have made such a colossal effort to defend his mineral line(s) from two mines spotted on the minimap 6 seconds prior to detonating, it is only because the Terran has already invested a massive amount of resources to put the Medivac/mines into the sky with such early refinery timing... 350 gas for two dropped mines?
(like the oracle 300/300 cost argument)
But it's not really the same because an unscouted and undefended oracle wins the game immediately. An unscouted WM drop can still be run away from, and since it doesn't shoot buildings or cloaked units, a cannon or observer will clean it up.
You can run from an oracle, run towards your marines and have the marines come back. Unscouted oracles usually get maybe 4-5 kills. That's damage certainly, not game ending damage. If by unscouted you actually meant unscouted and terran has no anti-air at all and got blind countered in his build, then that's also the fault of the terran for doing a bad build.
What if I didn't make Marines, I made Marauders?
edit: so you're fine with Protoss getting two Cannons to shut down WM drops completely? That'll be a good build now.
Seeing as no sensible Terran build has delayed stim, +1, combat shield, factory and starport tech for early mass marauders since before Oracles were even designed, if you make them instead of marines then you are doing a bad build anyway
But it was so fun going early marauders in WoL and poking/harassing the protoss. Some early micro war is so much fun. More of this, no?
It'd be nice to see micro encouraged at all stages of the game. It makes the game exponentially more exciting. We should really band together and ask for a mechanics overhaul or even a slower game play speed to allow for more precision micro based play.
Game speed doesn't change how you micro. It just makes the execution of the already too low amount of micro easier.
One area where they could slow down the pace is the projectile speed. It would actually be a ton more fun if abilities like EMP, Fungal and Abduct could be avoided through good micro (and then compensated in different ways).
To be honest, it's difficult to get used to the slow pace of projectiles in Starbow. I think it would be different if I didn't have Starcraft II to compare it with, but sometimes it's sluggish enough to draw attention to itself.
Hmm it's only really EMP which is slow. All other projectiles are fast. Ensnare at one point was slow as well, but IMO the issue here was that it just sucked in every other way as well.
Abilities that just hits instantly and doesn't create any dynamic after they have been casted are IMO absolutely pointless for the game besides functioning as APM-spam for the spellcaster race.
Wouldn't it be cool if there was a skill-element to dodging? What if you could watch a game and people would go crazy over a specific players ability to split his units against Fungal Growth, EMP or Abduct? (rather than just presplitting before the battle).
On July 12 2014 04:37 Elendur wrote: Johnbongham is right.
And the reverse argument could also be made by the Terran, that if the Protoss is required to have made such a colossal effort to defend his mineral line(s) from two mines spotted on the minimap 6 seconds prior to detonating, it is only because the Terran has already invested a massive amount of resources to put the Medivac/mines into the sky with such early refinery timing... 350 gas for two dropped mines?
(like the oracle 300/300 cost argument)
But it's not really the same because an unscouted and undefended oracle wins the game immediately. An unscouted WM drop can still be run away from, and since it doesn't shoot buildings or cloaked units, a cannon or observer will clean it up.
You can run from an oracle, run towards your marines and have the marines come back. Unscouted oracles usually get maybe 4-5 kills. That's damage certainly, not game ending damage. If by unscouted you actually meant unscouted and terran has no anti-air at all and got blind countered in his build, then that's also the fault of the terran for doing a bad build.
What if I didn't make Marines, I made Marauders?
edit: so you're fine with Protoss getting two Cannons to shut down WM drops completely? That'll be a good build now.
Seeing as no sensible Terran build has delayed stim, +1, combat shield, factory and starport tech for early mass marauders since before Oracles were even designed, if you make them instead of marines then you are doing a bad build anyway
But it was so fun going early marauders in WoL and poking/harassing the protoss. Some early micro war is so much fun. More of this, no?
It'd be nice to see micro encouraged at all stages of the game. It makes the game exponentially more exciting. We should really band together and ask for a mechanics overhaul or even a slower game play speed to allow for more precision micro based play.
Game speed doesn't change how you micro. It just makes the execution of the already too low amount of micro easier.
One area where they could slow down the pace is the projectile speed. It would actually be a ton more fun if abilities like EMP, Fungal and Abduct could be avoided through good micro (and then compensated in different ways).
To be honest, it's difficult to get used to the slow pace of projectiles in Starbow. I think it would be different if I didn't have Starcraft II to compare it with, but sometimes it's sluggish enough to draw attention to itself.
Hmm it's only really EMP which is slow. All other projectiles are fast. Ensnare at one point was slow as well, but IMO the issue here was that it just sucked in every other way as well.
I might be wrong, I took a break from Starbow&SC2 for several months and Starbow probably changed a lot in between. I was specifically thinking of viking missiles being slow, but I noticed those had been changed recently, and maybe other projectiles have been adjusted too.
I watched the recent Xiphias casts and constantly had to remind myself that it was played on the highest game speed, it's just that the units and animations all feel a bit slower. I don't see it as a dark side to Starbow, but I'm simply more used to SC2. And I also suspect that there are some projectiles you can't slow down without breaking suspension of disbelief. It's one thing for self-propelled guided bombs to be slow, and quite another for cannon shots to move at snail-pace after all.
It reminds me of WC3 actually, a game that always felt a little bit slow to me when watching (I would watch replays for enjoyment on 2x, and actually YouTube casters sometimes do the same). However, you never notice this slowness while playing because there is enough to do in the game. Similarly, I never played Brood War on the fastest game speeds because I played the game mostly offline and the high speed felt oppressive and too mechanically taxing to me. There was enough to do in the game after all, yet I suspect that if you would watch my replays on the same speed I played them that they would be quite uneventful (and I don't have horrible mechanics or anything). Starcraft II is different though.
On July 13 2014 04:13 Hider wrote: ...
Abilities that just hits instantly and doesn't create any dynamic after they have been casted are IMO absolutely pointless for the game besides functioning as APM-spam for the spellcaster race.
Wouldn't it be cool if there was a skill-element to dodging? What if you could watch a game and people would go crazy over a specific players ability to split his units against Fungal Growth, EMP or Abduct? (rather than just presplitting before the battle).
I don't think you can make fungal growth too slow because it's a standard projectile and therefore it needs a certain speed to be believable. EMP is similar. I know the Starbow team has done well with what little resources they have, but I don't think they can be expected to create new spell effects that live up to Blizzard's standards. So I don't mind it too much, but I never thought all the spell effects looked absolutely amazing.
Also, I never liked Flamestrike in Warcraft 3, it punishes newer players and is useless at a high level. Psionic storm is superior as it does guaranteed damage but some of it can still be mitigated by skilled maneuvering.
I might be wrong, I took a break from Starbow&SC2 for several months and Starbow probably changed a lot in between. I was specifically thinking of viking missiles being slow, but I noticed those had been changed recently, and maybe other projectiles have been adjusted too.
Oh Vikings missile used to be annoyingly slow. I aree it felt much better with Sc2-missiles as that slow attack speed never really accomplished anything (besides more overkill I guess) as you still couldn't avoid it.
I watched the recent Xiphias casts and constantly had to remind myself that it was played on the highest game speed, it's just that the units and animations all feel a bit slower.
Game is way too slow indeed. It's basically 7% slower, but all that accomplishes is to reduce the skill-cap. The argument that we want to incentvize longer battles is bascially nonsense IMO since that can be accomplished by increasing the HP of certain units/reducing damage. For most units that should be somewhat easy to "rebalance". Reducing the movement speed as well makes the control feel annoying.
I like Sc2 more, but even then I think there is room for improvement. I would like to see large maps as default, and units which are good at harassing/light pressure gets an increase in movement speed, while "killer-units" gets slower. That will increase the defenders advantage, but at the same time incentivize pressure and overall increase the skillcap of controlling units (because there simply is more you can do with the units when they move faster).
It reminds me of WC3 actually, a game that always felt a little bit slow to me when watching (I would watch replays for enjoyment on 2x, and actually YouTube casters sometimes do the same). However, you never notice this slowness while playing because there is enough to do in the game. Similarly, I never played Brood War on the fastest game speeds because I played the game mostly offline and the high speed felt oppressive and too mechanically taxing to me. There was enough to do in the game after all, yet I suspect that if you would watch my replays on the same speed I played them that they would be quite uneventful (and I don't have horrible mechanics or anything). Starcraft II is different though.
Well Wc3 isn't alone here. It seems to me after watching clips of many other RTS, that they generally are a ton slower. That's unfortunate, becasue I actually think that Starcraft has a ton of weakness's to it's overall design. But controlling and moving around with units just seems a ton better than in any other game (at least when you look at it from a competitive POV).
I don't think you can make fungal growth too slow because it's a standard projectile and therefore it needs a certain speed to be believable. EMP is similar. I know the Starbow team has done well with what little resources they have, but I don't think they can be expected to create new spell effects that live up to Blizzard's standards. So I don't mind it too much, but I never thought all the spell effects looked absolutely amazing.
It depends on the radius though. I think you can make it even slower with a 25%-40% larger radius. As I remember it, the speed is around 13 now, but I think you can go down to around 8.Further, it should also slow instead of lock and then deal more damage instead.
For Abduct, here is what could have been done;
- Energy cost reduced to 50 from 75 - Projectile speed of Abduct reduced to around 7. - A dot shows on a the targetted unit (perhaps also a casting range increase)
This bascially means that the enemy can pull back his Collosus/immortals/Thors when the enemy casts Abduct to it. Right now Abduct is one of the most lame abilities in the game, but it could easily have a lot of countermicro to it. Second thing to though is get rid of the Viking as the counter AA vs armored counter since that creates some really terrible interactions. What BW did made a ton more sense.
I really feel like there is a ton of potenital for adding countermicro to abilities in Sc2. The game could be fucking awesome if the developers had simply made sure that there actually existed practical countermicro after abilties were casted so it wasn't just about "prebattle micro".
On July 13 2014 06:08 Hider wrote: Game is way too slow indeed. It's basically 7% slower, but all that accomplishes is to reduce the skill-cap. The argument that we want to incentvize longer battles is bascially nonsense IMO since that can be accomplished by increasing the HP of certain units/reducing damage. For most units that should be somewhat easy to "rebalance". Reducing the movement speed as well makes the control feel annoying.
I don't know, I think it's fine for playing the game. It's an interesting dilemma though: should you balance game speeds keeping spectators in mind, or just players?
Maybe this is funny: I used to campaign for a +20%game-speed-replay-watching mode in WoL beta because I thought this could be a preferable speed to the standard. In retrospect it was a bad idea, but in my defense I was only familiar with "replay of the week" & YouTube casts, not with live e-sports broadcasting. I think we're stuck with watching the game at the same speed it's been played.
On July 13 2014 06:08 Hider wrote: Game is way too slow indeed. It's basically 7% slower, but all that accomplishes is to reduce the skill-cap. The argument that we want to incentvize longer battles is bascially nonsense IMO since that can be accomplished by increasing the HP of certain units/reducing damage. For most units that should be somewhat easy to "rebalance". Reducing the movement speed as well makes the control feel annoying.
I don't know, I think it's fine for playing the game. It's an interesting dilemma though: should you balance game speeds keeping spectators in mind, or just players?
Maybe this is funny: I used to campaign for a +20%game-speed-replay-watching mode in WoL beta because I thought this could be a preferable speed to the standard. In retrospect it was a bad idea, but in my defense I was only familiar with "replay of the week" & YouTube casts, not with live e-sports broadcasting. I think we're stuck with watching the game at the same speed it's been played.
I think both comeptitive players and viewers would like to see units with faster movement speed, but perhaps slightly slower damage values in some situations (as it rewards more micro and slightly longer battles).
Casuals might want to see both slower movement speed damage values. However, I agree with Lalush's argument that you cannot design the games for both casuals and competitve players. You need different "products" for each target group.
Reading over the Thor comments, do people not realize Thor targeted AA as priority in WoL? This is just reverting to WoL. They also specifically addressed that it would only target air that aggroed (ie. ground is targeted over ovies or medivacs). I'm assuming Blizzard is smart enough to revert back to this.
On July 13 2014 06:08 Hider wrote: Game is way too slow indeed. It's basically 7% slower, but all that accomplishes is to reduce the skill-cap. The argument that we want to incentvize longer battles is bascially nonsense IMO since that can be accomplished by increasing the HP of certain units/reducing damage. For most units that should be somewhat easy to "rebalance". Reducing the movement speed as well makes the control feel annoying.
I don't know, I think it's fine for playing the game. It's an interesting dilemma though: should you balance game speeds keeping spectators in mind, or just players?
Maybe this is funny: I used to campaign for a +20%game-speed-replay-watching mode in WoL beta because I thought this could be a preferable speed to the standard. In retrospect it was a bad idea, but in my defense I was only familiar with "replay of the week" & YouTube casts, not with live e-sports broadcasting. I think we're stuck with watching the game at the same speed it's been played.
I think both comeptitive players and viewers would like to see units with faster movement speed, but perhaps slightly slower damage values in some situations (as it rewards more micro and slightly longer battles).
Casuals might want to see both slower movement speed damage values. However, I agree with Lalush's argument that you cannot design the games for both casuals and competitve players. You need different "products" for each target group.
Reminds me of real sports. I'm a part of, say, the recreational sports circuit at university and I've done basketball, football, squash, tennis, volleyball, and it's interesting to note that rules are often different for us compared to professional variants of those games.
With squash we use heavier balls that are less fickle. Our tennis courts are extremely slow. The baskets are lower for basketball, the net is lower for volleyball. With football we play on artificial grass where you can't tackle, the field is smaller and we don't use offside, and we don't have goalies but instead you have to shoot the ball directly into the net.
I'm sure there are more differences, but the point is that casual Starcraft players should not be forced to play on Alterzim Stronghold on the fastest game speeds. There is precedent from many other games after all, even for Brood War I doubt that most players played on fastest for the first few years of its existence, before the only players left playing ladder were too influenced by the Korean scene to care for anything else. But for some reason Blizzard had the brilliant idea to force everyone into the 1v1 ladder scene.
I'm sure there are more differences, but the point is that casual Starcraft players should not be forced to play on Alterzim Stronghold on the fastest game speeds. There is precedent from many other games after all, even for Brood War I doubt that most players played on fastest for the first few years of its existence, before the only players left playing ladder were too influenced by the Korean scene to care for anything else. But for some reason Blizzard had the brilliant idea to force everyone into the 1v1 ladder scene.
Yes, there should have been a 10 tims larger focus on making the Arcade as casualfriendly as possible, and centered the game around the arcade too a much larger extent. That could have freed up the 1on1 ladder as only something that was relevant for "competitive" players
On July 13 2014 07:53 FabledIntegral wrote: Reading over the Thor comments, do people not realize Thor targeted AA as priority in WoL? This is just reverting to WoL. They also specifically addressed that it would only target air that aggroed (ie. ground is targeted over ovies or medivacs). I'm assuming Blizzard is smart enough to revert back to this.
After I tested the balance map, I came to realize that the Thors will still prioritize aggressive ground units over passive air. That was basically the key concern for a lot of people. Still, one can't help but feel like this sort of change is just another reduction in micro. A-move is increasingly becoming the more ideal method of engagement, and that upsets me; Thors derping on lings vs. Thors crushing muta flocks was a key indicator of a better player exercising unit control.
On July 13 2014 07:53 FabledIntegral wrote: Reading over the Thor comments, do people not realize Thor targeted AA as priority in WoL? This is just reverting to WoL. They also specifically addressed that it would only target air that aggroed (ie. ground is targeted over ovies or medivacs). I'm assuming Blizzard is smart enough to revert back to this.
After I tested the balance map, I came to realize that the Thors will still prioritize aggressive ground units over passive air. That was basically the key concern for a lot of people. Still, one can't help but feel like this sort of change is just another reduction in micro. A-move is increasingly becoming the more ideal method of engagement, and that upsets me; Thors derping on lings vs. Thors crushing muta flocks was a key indicator of a better player exercising unit control.
You're still better off targeting thors on the muta most centralized to try to maximize splash, this is merely so you can actually micro your other units and have the thor not be an idiot at the start of the fight, and so during the fight your thor isn't shooting lings every time it's muta target died.
On July 13 2014 07:53 FabledIntegral wrote: Reading over the Thor comments, do people not realize Thor targeted AA as priority in WoL? This is just reverting to WoL. They also specifically addressed that it would only target air that aggroed (ie. ground is targeted over ovies or medivacs). I'm assuming Blizzard is smart enough to revert back to this.
After I tested the balance map, I came to realize that the Thors will still prioritize aggressive ground units over passive air. That was basically the key concern for a lot of people. Still, one can't help but feel like this sort of change is just another reduction in micro. A-move is increasingly becoming the more ideal method of engagement, and that upsets me; Thors derping on lings vs. Thors crushing muta flocks was a key indicator of a better player exercising unit control.
You're still better off targeting thors on the muta most centralized to try to maximize splash, this is merely so you can actually micro your other units and have the thor not be an idiot at the start of the fight, and so during the fight your thor isn't shooting lings every time it's muta target died.
I suppose it depends on the army composition. Bio + Thor, what you're saying makes sense. Mech... right now Thors are the only thing I have to micro, really. Well, aside from placing down a PDD or two.
On July 13 2014 07:53 FabledIntegral wrote: Reading over the Thor comments, do people not realize Thor targeted AA as priority in WoL? This is just reverting to WoL. They also specifically addressed that it would only target air that aggroed (ie. ground is targeted over ovies or medivacs). I'm assuming Blizzard is smart enough to revert back to this.
After I tested the balance map, I came to realize that the Thors will still prioritize aggressive ground units over passive air. That was basically the key concern for a lot of people. Still, one can't help but feel like this sort of change is just another reduction in micro. A-move is increasingly becoming the more ideal method of engagement, and that upsets me; Thors derping on lings vs. Thors crushing muta flocks was a key indicator of a better player exercising unit control.
You're still better off targeting thors on the muta most centralized to try to maximize splash, this is merely so you can actually micro your other units and have the thor not be an idiot at the start of the fight, and so during the fight your thor isn't shooting lings every time it's muta target died.
I suppose it depends on the army composition. Bio + Thor, what you're saying makes sense. Mech... right now Thors are the only thing I have to micro, really. Well, aside from placing down a PDD or two.
That's pretty arbitrary micro to add, having thors deliberately target the wrong units so you're forced to retarget.
On July 13 2014 07:53 FabledIntegral wrote: Reading over the Thor comments, do people not realize Thor targeted AA as priority in WoL? This is just reverting to WoL. They also specifically addressed that it would only target air that aggroed (ie. ground is targeted over ovies or medivacs). I'm assuming Blizzard is smart enough to revert back to this.
After I tested the balance map, I came to realize that the Thors will still prioritize aggressive ground units over passive air. That was basically the key concern for a lot of people. Still, one can't help but feel like this sort of change is just another reduction in micro. A-move is increasingly becoming the more ideal method of engagement, and that upsets me; Thors derping on lings vs. Thors crushing muta flocks was a key indicator of a better player exercising unit control.
Not really. Thors barely were effective vs mutas as is. Think about it - Thors had this priority in WoL, mutas were slower AND didn't regen and Thors STILL did not dominate mutas. They were good, and they were mixed in, but they absolutely were not the solution, and that's why so many Terrans still didn't make them in WoL. They were simply neutered in HOTS to be a desperate measure more than anything.
Yeah, the Thor AI was really annoying. Say the zerg comes to attack you and flies mutas in (a bit stacked but gradually splits them more and more). The Thors won't attack the mutas though, so they waste at least one hit, unless you want to see terrans having to click Mutas at ~10 range away and find that impressive and entertaining to watch. Thors are to zone out mutas, it should start attacking them ASAP, not punish players for not clicking mutas that are 10 units away.