We received feedback that Protoss early game options are currently limited in the Protoss vs. Zerg matchup due to the potential of very early Zergling drop builds. Protoss players were having trouble holding off these early attacks without the help of a Stargate and thus gravitated towards opening with a “safe” Stargate in most games. So as to open up the early game for Protoss players, we’ll looking to change the Overlord’s “Mutate Ventral Sacs” upgrade requirement from Evolution Chamber to Lair.
Zerg
*Overlord’s “Mutate Ventral Sacs” upgrade requirement changed from Evolution Chamber to Lair.
Next, we’ve been seeing a lot of games where Anti-Armor Missile spam becomes the determining factor in the late game in all three Terran matchups. The Anti-Armor Missile is intended to combo with core units such as Marines, Marauders, Liberators, and Cyclones—not to be massed purely for damage, as is currently the case. Thus, we’d like to reduce the damage of Anti-Armor missiles to reinforce its intended function.
At the same time, since Terrans are currently relying on the Raven for their late-game power, reducing the Anti-Armor Missile’s damage would help rein that strategy in. We think this would provide a good opportunity to give Terrans a bit more late-game help in the form of a buff to the Viking.
Vikings are often perceived as being weaker in the current metagame than they were before, partially due to recent changes to other races. We’re proposing a health buff, from 125 to 135, which will not only change the unit’s relationship against anti-air ground units and late-game air units, but also against area-of-effect spells commonly used against them, such as Parasitic Bomb and Psionic Storm.
Terran
*Raven’s Anti-Armor missile damage reduced from 30 impact damage with splash fall-off to 5 flat area of effect damage. *Viking health increased from 125 to 135.
These changes are currently available in the testing matchmaking queue. After testing, we would like to publish the finalized balance changes to live Versus on Monday 3/19. However, keep in mind that this date is subject to change. As always, thanks for you continued interest and please let us know what you think on the forums or any other community sites.
Do they just want the raven to be gone from late game..? like I fail to see how giving the raven 5 AOE damage and 1 range auto turrets will make it a unit anyone would want to spend 100/200 on.. whats worse is that the viking buff is so minor 10 hp isn't going to make a big enough difference to compensate for what we are losing... The only good change here is nerfing dropper lords. This will make PvZ a lot better but changing the raven and slight buffing the viking really isn't the way to go
On March 07 2018 08:00 Ryu3600 wrote: Do they just want the raven to be gone from late game..? like I fail to see how giving the raven 5 AOE damage and 1 range auto turrets will make it a unit anyone would want to spend 100/200 on.. whats worse is that the viking buff is so minor 10 hp isn't going to make a big enough difference to compensate for what we are losing
They want you to just get probably 1-3 ravens and no more just to use them for detection and the reduced armour, they don't want people building 20 ravens and blowing up an army in seconds. The drops to lair tech is pretty huge, opens up twilight and robo openings for PvZ.
I saw it coming, I knew the ravens were not gonna stay, it was really broken.
Also, as a zerg player who recently offraced some protoss, I also saw the ling drop nerf coming. Damn that is really strong when the protoss doesnt have tight build order and good micro and building placement. I had a lot of problems against early ling drop + mass ling flood builds, I always took so much damage.
Overall, 2 really solid changes. I still wonder if mothership reallly needs to be in the game. I know its too cool looking and epic to remove, but balance wise, it doesnt seem fair that only protoss has 1 hero unit. ( 2, with probius) Do they really need an extra recall in the mothership? They already have nexus recalls, which are really clutch...
As for terran late game, the viking buffs is alright.. but...
Battlecruisers!! What are you waiting for? The fix is easy.
The problem with battle cruisers against zerg especially, is that they are DOUBLE hard countered by the corruptors.
I explain. 1) Their armor is armored and massive, meaning they take a LOT of dmg from corruptors. 2) They attack really fast for really little damage, similar to marines. Meaning the corruptors natural high armor of 2 hard counters the BCs attack. Its pretty much like marines shooting at ultralisks.
The fix is obvious, you have to make BCS more like starcraft1 bcs. Attack slower, for high damage. Maybe a tiny bit of cleave damage to 2 close targets? Might be too strong.
Obviously if you buff the BCs, teleport and yamato have to be reworked.
Make the bcs a strong a-move unit. Terran does not have good late game A-move units. Their late game units are all super micro intensive, while the other races late game unit is super a-move.
On March 07 2018 08:11 Nerchio wrote: Ravens are broken but taking away aggressive possibilities from Zerg once again... meh
Maru,struggling against an out-of-form Stats is proof that the Ravens are OP, but Scarlett, who easily won the PC without Macro, isn't enough to consider changes ?
Good changes. Was weird to watch the anti-armor missile spam all the time at IEM. Balance-wise, it'll work out with later changes I guess.
They could also maybe just reduce the raven cost and buff movement speed, so it could work as a detector for once if they are nerfing the abilities that much. I wouldn't mind if they removed the auto-turret again.
Also hopefully they'll get rid of burrowed neural and fungal growth as well some time in the future.
On March 07 2018 08:11 Nerchio wrote: Ravens are broken but taking away aggressive possibilities from Zerg once again... meh
It isn't fair for Zerg to be able to play either aggressive or defensive against Protoss when Protoss doesn't have that choice with how strong Zerg mid and late game is.
Not sure about this entirely. It's a nice change for Protoss in the matchup, but drops were holdable. Imo it's a general scouting issue with Protoss vs Zergs where early tech is hard to scout with adepts and stargate units, but also later tech becomes a scouting issue once hydras are out. A queen and spore per base + hydras on the map make it very hard to keep tabs on things like a spire going up or when hive tech starts, etc.
I'd rather see a change that allows Protoss to scout better for all-ins, but also mid-lategame tech so they can prepare in time.
Ravens I think did need a patch, but hard to say yet if vikings getting buffed in return will be enough to compensate.
On March 07 2018 07:42 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: [i] *Raven’s Anti-Armor missile damage reduced from 30 impact damage with splash fall-off to 5 flat area of effect damage. *Viking health increased from 125 to 135.
30 to 5 seems like a ridiculous difference? It's actual damage is negligible in that case. RIP terran lategame anyway, was cool while it lasted.
The viking change has been necessary for a while now. Hopefully it helps with the voidray allins.
Back to defense only as zerg or go super all-in with that Elazer/Rogue nydus bullshit.
An aggressive option that could set up a cool macro game was too much I guess.
The Stargate problem is a scouting problem and not a "must open stargate to survive ling drops" problem imo.
I am really curious if this will actually mean that we will see less stargates, still think it will be the superior opening for killing overlords and drones, gaining map control and securing a third.
On March 07 2018 08:55 Musicus wrote: Back to defense only as zerg or go super all-in with that Elazer/Rogue nydus bullshit.
An aggressive option that could set up a cool macro game was too much I guess.
The Stargate problem is a scouting problem and not a "must open stargate to survive ling drops" problem imo.
We rarely ever saw "aggressive options that could set up macro games". Sure people occasionally went for some 8 ling drops for some harassment, but overwhelmingly it was 16 lings or ling/ravager or ling/baneling off a minimal drone count that either killed the opponent or lost.
Next, we’ve been seeing a lot of games where Anti-Armor Missile spam becomes the determining factor in the late game in all three Terran matchups.
Next, we’ve been seeing a lot of games where Anti-Terran Nerfhammer spam becomes the determining factor in the late game in all three Terran matchups....
Skytoss is the dermining factor in lategame Protoss for years and never seemed to be a problem...
Storm -> ha ha terran learn to play and learn to split ! Colossus -> ha ha terran learn to play and learn to split ! Baneling -> ha ha terran learn to play and learn to split ! Raven -> ha ha nerf terran ! CQFD
I'd rather nydus get changed that overlord drops if I'm honest. Droperlords at least seemed holdable to some degree in recent pro matches. I don't actually remember the last time I saw a nydus fail
On March 07 2018 09:06 Fango wrote: I'd rather nydus get changed that overlord drops if I'm honest. Droperlords at least seemed holdable to some degree in recent pro matches. I don't actually remember the last time I saw a nydus fail
This might weaken the nydus anyway if you dont have to open stargate the nydus might suck vs a robo opening or twilight.
On March 07 2018 08:55 Musicus wrote: Back to defense only as zerg or go super all-in with that Elazer/Rogue nydus bullshit.
An aggressive option that could set up a cool macro game was too much I guess.
The Stargate problem is a scouting problem and not a "must open stargate to survive ling drops" problem imo.
We rarely ever saw "aggressive options that could set up macro games". Sure people occasionally went for some 8 ling drops for some harassment, but overwhelmingly it was 16 lings or ling/ravager or ling/baneling off a minimal drone count that either killed the opponent or lost.
Well I still think the ling drops were the least all-in option compared to ling/bane, ling/ravager or nydus/roach/queen all-ins. All those will still be viable. Would've rather seen the nydus bs removed for example.
On March 07 2018 09:17 ilikeredheads wrote: Raven nerf seems excessively harsh. They are the only thing keeping terran relevant in late game but let's nerf it
I definitely think that Terran should have a late game army that could put up a fight against Zerg and Protoss, but that being said I don't think that massing casters is a way to go. We all know how massing Infestors in WoL looked like, and although I've seen mass Infestors in one of Serral's games(against Trap I think?) at the Katowice, it was mostly for Neural Parasite on big units and not for spamming Fungal Growth and Infested Terrans like they were used for before.
Any late playstyle that revolves around spamming mostly casters and trading energy for minerals should be eradicated in my opinion no matter the race, casters are there to support the rest of your army. Even having like 10 casters can be overwhelming, but it is still fine I guess, as long as you are not having something like 30 of them. I still have nightmares from those games where I've seen 40+ Infestors and nothing else, pure horror...
On March 07 2018 08:55 Musicus wrote: Back to defense only as zerg or go super all-in with that Elazer/Rogue nydus bullshit.
An aggressive option that could set up a cool macro game was too much I guess.
The Stargate problem is a scouting problem and not a "must open stargate to survive ling drops" problem imo.
We rarely ever saw "aggressive options that could set up macro games". Sure people occasionally went for some 8 ling drops for some harassment, but overwhelmingly it was 16 lings or ling/ravager or ling/baneling off a minimal drone count that either killed the opponent or lost.
Well I still think the ling drops were the least all-in option compared to ling/bane, ling/ravager or nydus/roach/queen all-ins. All those will still be viable. Would've rather seen the nydus bs removed for example.
Nerfing nydus wouldn't improve Protoss opening diversity one wit. And 16 ling drops are just as all-in as the others when you have barely any drones.
I cannot believe anyone is even defending ling drops in their current shape. No one can say with a straight face that they were good for the game post msc removal. Overlords are already so strong in all their forms there's no way blizzard wasn't going to nerf them somehow.
Rogue wins the last 3 major tournaments and we are nerfing terran? We finally saw terran win a couple late game scenarios vs zerg and already killing the raven?? 30 might be too much dmg but 5 is ridiculous..start at 5??? 6 x nerf? Dont try 15 first or even 10 rofl??? What in the fuck am i reading. 1 more corrupter shot on vikings LOL
On March 07 2018 09:17 ilikeredheads wrote: Raven nerf seems excessively harsh. They are the only thing keeping terran relevant in late game but let's nerf it
I definitely think that Terran should have a late game army that could put up a fight against Zerg and Protoss, but that being said I don't think that massing casters is a way to go. We all know how massing Infestors in WoL looked like, and although I've seen mass Infestors in one of Serral's games(against Trap I think?) at the Katowice, it was mostly for Neural Parasite on big units and not for spamming Fungal Growth and Infested Terrans like they were used for before.
Any late playstyle that revolves around spamming mostly casters and trading energy for minerals should be eradicated in my opinion no matter the race, casters are there to support the rest of your army. Even having like 10 casters can be overwhelming, but it is still fine I guess, as long as you are not having something like 30 of them. I still have nightmares from those games where I've seen 40+ Infestors and nothing else, pure horror...
Yah i agree with late game turtle playstyle being retarded..problem is that protoss and zerg both already have it ..carriers and broodlords both need out of the game if terran has no answer..terran air cant fight zerg or protoss air this is clear with a useless raven.
They should just increase the connection time for the AAM so it's more easy to split vs. There's plenty of AOE in the game in which the only counter play is to split. It's a better alternative instead of nerfing the unit to shit so it has 2 nerfed useless abilities.
On March 07 2018 09:17 ilikeredheads wrote: Raven nerf seems excessively harsh. They are the only thing keeping terran relevant in late game but let's nerf it
I definitely think that Terran should have a late game army that could put up a fight against Zerg and Protoss, but that being said I don't think that massing casters is a way to go. We all know how massing Infestors in WoL looked like, and although I've seen mass Infestors in one of Serral's games(against Trap I think?) at the Katowice, it was mostly for Neural Parasite on big units and not for spamming Fungal Growth and Infested Terrans like they were used for before.
Any late playstyle that revolves around spamming mostly casters and trading energy for minerals should be eradicated in my opinion no matter the race, casters are there to support the rest of your army. Even having like 10 casters can be overwhelming, but it is still fine I guess, as long as you are not having something like 30 of them. I still have nightmares from those games where I've seen 40+ Infestors and nothing else, pure horror...
Yah i agree with late game turtle playstyle being retarded..problem is that protoss and zerg both already have it ..carriers and broodlords both need out of the game if terran has no answer..terran air cant fight zerg or protoss air this is clear with a useless raven.
Terrans have never had an issue fighting carriers and it's dishonest to say otherwise. Terran already has plenty of options to fight carriers straight up.
the problem with ling drops is more than just holding them but, as others have said, that it forces out early defense in the main mineral line as well as stargate units to shut down drop ovies.
i have been a Z/P player for years, and i love the new dropperlords, but speaking objectively as someone who plays both matchups there's too much flexibility in how zerg can play out the game. holding the allins is entirely possible, but there's zero margin for error in any detail of your build, your wall and your micro, it's a highly practiced and unforgiving early game interaction that makes the game less fun in PVZ.
i would compare it to when PVZ cannon rushing was extremely safe and extremely frustrating to play against back in HOTS. it's not really that PVZ is imba because of unit interactions (once you get to midgame protoss is fine), but it feels extremely stunted and scripted from the protoss point of view. there's almost no way to mix it up early as toss without dying to a lot of popular high-percentage allins.
i don't feel like it's fair for protoss to be punished for greedy walling the natural when they HAVE TO wall the natural to play a macro game. there's no "safer option" for protoss builds, if you don't gate expand you're fucked. with the mineral growth rate of LOTV you can't even do one base tech builds anymore because the pylon timings aren't right
On March 07 2018 09:17 ilikeredheads wrote: Raven nerf seems excessively harsh. They are the only thing keeping terran relevant in late game but let's nerf it
I definitely think that Terran should have a late game army that could put up a fight against Zerg and Protoss, but that being said I don't think that massing casters is a way to go. We all know how massing Infestors in WoL looked like, and although I've seen mass Infestors in one of Serral's games(against Trap I think?) at the Katowice, it was mostly for Neural Parasite on big units and not for spamming Fungal Growth and Infested Terrans like they were used for before.
Any late playstyle that revolves around spamming mostly casters and trading energy for minerals should be eradicated in my opinion no matter the race, casters are there to support the rest of your army. Even having like 10 casters can be overwhelming, but it is still fine I guess, as long as you are not having something like 30 of them. I still have nightmares from those games where I've seen 40+ Infestors and nothing else, pure horror...
Yah i agree with late game turtle playstyle being retarded..problem is that protoss and zerg both already have it ..carriers and broodlords both need out of the game if terran has no answer..terran air cant fight zerg or protoss air this is clear with a useless raven.
Terrans have never had an issue fighting carriers and it's dishonest to say otherwise. Terran already has plenty of options to fight carriers straight up.
Im not talking about fighting them straight up. Im talking about mothership / tempest/ all splash damage caster/colo comp stats was using. Maru loses that 100% without the 20 ravens. There is no answer. There is literally no arguement that carriers arent a turtlewhores dream unit.
I'm not surprised at all by the Raven change. It's called "Anti Armor Missile", not "Nuke." I'm not sure exactly a minor buff to Vikings is going to mean for the match up though. Feels like something is missing.
If you want the anti-armor missile to be used "as intended" you have to give terrans a way to take effective engagements while the debuff is up. I would argue it currently is being used as intended though because the only time you see large amounts of damage come out of AAM is when units are clumped up from move commands. When they're spread out, very little effective damage is done and very few units get hit by the debuff. In that sense the damage serves as a disincentive for the enemy from just always running away, which clumps up their units.
The compensatory buff to the Viking does absolutely nothing though. This should never reach live without appropriate compensation for a massive late game nerf.
On March 07 2018 10:23 TheWinks wrote: If you want the anti-armor missile to be used "as intended" you have to give terrans a way to take effective engagements while the debuff is up. I would argue it currently is being used as intended though because the only time you see large amounts of damage come out of AAM is when units are clumped up from move commands. When they're spread out, very little effective damage is done and very few units get hit by the debuff. In that sense the damage serves as a disincentive for the enemy from just always running away, which clumps up their units.
The compensatory buff to the Viking does absolutely nothing though. This should never reach live without appropriate compensation for a massive late game nerf.
Are you seriously arguing that ravens are working "as intended" when mass raven is specifically what Blizzard doesn't want to happen? As for "very little effective damage" being done lol
Well, at IEM we did see raven builds where they were not massed... vs. both Zerg and Protoss.
So I am very glad blizzard isn't letting mass raven become the game. The viking buff is a much better buff too, even helps T vs. P.
And the overlord drop nerf is so great... Though scarlett is going to be known by some people as the zerg who made it to the GSL RO8 by overlord drops.
I think the game is in a great spot and I like that they keep fixing little things here and there with community feedback.
On March 07 2018 08:05 Snakestyle1 wrote: I saw it coming, I knew the ravens were not gonna stay, it was really broken.
Also, as a zerg player who recently offraced some protoss, I also saw the ling drop nerf coming. Damn that is really strong when the protoss doesnt have tight build order and good micro and building placement. I had a lot of problems against early ling drop + mass ling flood builds, I always took so much damage.
Overall, 2 really solid changes. I still wonder if mothership reallly needs to be in the game. I know its too cool looking and epic to remove, but balance wise, it doesnt seem fair that only protoss has 1 hero unit. ( 2, with probius) Do they really need an extra recall in the mothership? They already have nexus recalls, which are really clutch...
As for terran late game, the viking buffs is alright.. but...
Battlecruisers!! What are you waiting for? The fix is easy.
The problem with battle cruisers against zerg especially, is that they are DOUBLE hard countered by the corruptors.
I explain. 1) Their armor is armored and massive, meaning they take a LOT of dmg from corruptors. 2) They attack really fast for really little damage, similar to marines. Meaning the corruptors natural high armor of 2 hard counters the BCs attack. Its pretty much like marines shooting at ultralisks.
The fix is obvious, you have to make BCS more like starcraft1 bcs. Attack slower, for high damage. Maybe a tiny bit of cleave damage to 2 close targets? Might be too strong.
Obviously if you buff the BCs, teleport and yamato have to be reworked.
Make the bcs a strong a-move unit. Terran does not have good late game A-move units. Their late game units are all super micro intensive, while the other races late game unit is super a-move.
Capital air units are strong because spell casters are strong. Raven + BC in HOTS,Broodlord + infestors or vipers and of course Carriers + High templars. Those big ass ship can't do shit without support and tier 2 anti air of any race will destroy them all.We can nerf viper or raven but protoss is not the case.This time the carrier itself needs to be nerfed not HTs.
On March 07 2018 10:23 TheWinks wrote: If you want the anti-armor missile to be used "as intended" you have to give terrans a way to take effective engagements while the debuff is up. I would argue it currently is being used as intended though because the only time you see large amounts of damage come out of AAM is when units are clumped up from move commands. When they're spread out, very little effective damage is done and very few units get hit by the debuff. In that sense the damage serves as a disincentive for the enemy from just always running away, which clumps up their units.
The compensatory buff to the Viking does absolutely nothing though. This should never reach live without appropriate compensation for a massive late game nerf.
Are you seriously arguing that ravens are working "as intended" when mass raven is specifically what Blizzard doesn't want to happen? As for "very little effective damage" being done lol
Clearly they are not. You think working as intended should be prioritized over balance tho? Clearly the "intent" does not provide adequate compensation otherwise the best pro gamers in the world would be utilizing it when playing for 150K? If they do this before gsl ro8 its terrible. One terran left lol..we saw rogue steamroll ty and beat maru with the current missle . Should absolutely let gsl play out and see how the 5 brotoss left deal with it.
On March 07 2018 10:23 TheWinks wrote: If you want the anti-armor missile to be used "as intended" you have to give terrans a way to take effective engagements while the debuff is up. I would argue it currently is being used as intended though because the only time you see large amounts of damage come out of AAM is when units are clumped up from move commands. When they're spread out, very little effective damage is done and very few units get hit by the debuff. In that sense the damage serves as a disincentive for the enemy from just always running away, which clumps up their units.
The compensatory buff to the Viking does absolutely nothing though. This should never reach live without appropriate compensation for a massive late game nerf.
Are you seriously arguing that ravens are working "as intended" when mass raven is specifically what Blizzard doesn't want to happen? As for "very little effective damage" being done lol
Mass raven isn't really happening. Anti-armor missile is no seeker missile and simply doesn't do enough damage over a large enough area of effect.The 'very little effective damage' is when anti-armor missile hits mid-engagement. When units are pre-split or in a concave for an engagement, AAM is not all that effective.
Honestly I think they just saw a couple of clips on reddit of ravens killing an anti-micro'd protoss air army and knee jerked terran part of the entire balance update.
On March 07 2018 09:06 Fango wrote: I'd rather nydus get changed that overlord drops if I'm honest. Droperlords at least seemed holdable to some degree in recent pro matches. I don't actually remember the last time I saw a nydus fail
Unstoppable nydus as an cheese option was never blizzard's design choice for it.It never be and whatever it's too strong or not it goes against thier mindset so change is a must here.
On March 07 2018 10:23 TheWinks wrote: If you want the anti-armor missile to be used "as intended" you have to give terrans a way to take effective engagements while the debuff is up. I would argue it currently is being used as intended though because the only time you see large amounts of damage come out of AAM is when units are clumped up from move commands. When they're spread out, very little effective damage is done and very few units get hit by the debuff. In that sense the damage serves as a disincentive for the enemy from just always running away, which clumps up their units.
The compensatory buff to the Viking does absolutely nothing though. This should never reach live without appropriate compensation for a massive late game nerf.
Are you seriously arguing that ravens are working "as intended" when mass raven is specifically what Blizzard doesn't want to happen? As for "very little effective damage" being done lol
Mass raven isn't really happening. Anti-armor missile is no seeker missile and simply doesn't do enough damage over a large enough area of effect.The 'very little effective damage' is when anti-armor missile hits mid-engagement. When units are pre-split or in a concave for an engagement, AAM is not all that effective.
Honestly I think they just saw a couple of clips on reddit of ravens killing an anti-micro'd protoss air army and knee jerked terran part of the entire balance update.
"Mass raven isn't really happening"
So armies like we saw at IEM with 20+ ravens don't count as mass raven? And the missiles don't have to do a lot of damage individually when they stack, are near instantaneous and you have 30 of them at your disposal.
What makes a great game is the variety of how we play it. BW is no exception. Back to SC2, i don't really mind about relying on massing a support unit like Raven in every stages of the game to be the core of the army. It is a proof that the gameplay is various and players is willing to grind the game in every aspects. I think Blizzard should keep that in mind. Recently, under the use of players like Maru, AAM has been changed from the role of support spell to a kill-spell is quite interesting. However, it seems to me that this style of play is very solid that might become the only late game Terran tool in every match up is really, really a bad thing. It definitly contracdicts with what i said earlier - The more various gameplay, the better the game is.
So, late game massing Raven like this must go!
I don't find any problems to nerfing AAM damage from 30 HP to 5 HP or even 0 HP because it should stick with the conception of supporting spell. Something needs to be done to compensate, and i don't think Viking's 10 HP buff is good enough. The idea is either make Terran have a more powerful A-Move unit (like BC BW style) or having a more resilient/reproducible army or even both to deal with strong late game Protoss/Zerg late game.
Just my 2 cents: - Cheaper Viking. - Cheaper and faster Raven (may be adđing more upgrade option?).
I dont get why Raven needs its damage nerfed by 86%. I have never seen a single pro game where it is won single highhandedly due to Ravens. If someone has an example, please post.
sOs lost vs Scarlett in Pyeongchang and Maru in katowice for reasons that exactly call for these two changes. It is clear. Blizzard wants $o$ to lift the trophy again.
By the way, I completely agree that the two changes are solving the right problems but I don't know if they are the best solutions.
Not surprised but still disapointed by the raven nerf. I understand why they want to change it. Late game mass raven meta is aids but I don't see how the hp buff on vikings can compensate for it.
If they want to give terran more lategame they should change the BC, they a fucking block and as microable as cyclone.
What they should do is: - Give it +2 attack range. - Allow them to move while attacking (like campaign BCs or phoenixes, you move them around and they auto attack while moving).
Hitting anything with BC is pretty much imposible because they are slow as hell and they need to stop moving before attacking, making them one of the most unmicroable units in the game (even compared to carriers who can micro with their leash range and broodlords/tempest who can use their long range to do focus fire and pullying back)
The only problematic thing with BCs is the yamate+teleport combo but its not a big deal really, they could just add some shared cooldown so you can't use them both one right after the other.
Probably the most disappointing feedback from TeamBalance (is it team balance or just team of two guys?). I think, people expected more. Vikings with +10 HP can't hold zerg and protoss air army. While Raven was nerfed again. And there still no answer for: useless BCs; auto-win proxy voidrays + batteries vs T; TvP.
Both of these changes seem completely over the top. Moving Overlord drop back to Lair will make the effectively useless at harassing the opponent, and they'll go back to being used for Baneling drops on top of armies. Also, making it so that a unit affected by the armor debuff can't be damaged by another missile would be a much better change for the Raven.
So, two terrans in the TOP12 of IEM ? Terran win nothing since months ? let's nerf Terran !
I get that massing ravens is kinda retarded design-wise, but it only works if the Terran is way ahead and/or opponent doesn't (pre)split at all. So it is mostly a design issue, not really a balance one imo. And it's the only solution to be somewhat competitive in super late game v Toss. (well, if they fuck-up )
Meanwhile huge and real balance concerns are unaddressed. TvP is still totally unplayable in legit macro game, and everyone from master to pro try to win on 1 or 2 bases. Cheeses, kill the probes, 2 base all-in, etc. Viking is utter trash mainly because of viper/ht (and protoss upgrades on collosi in tvP midgame ), a minor hp buff won't change that.
I still sometimes dream they acknowledge their fuck-up with the marauder and mines nerfs and will reverse them. That's the easiest way to get back to a fair and good TvP without bringing up crazy shit (from too strong liberator to mass ravens etc. ). Mines are still ok in strait-ups fights, but the drop mine treat no longer requiring detection opens massive BO advantage for protoss (like the common 3g blink with very delayed robo and fast third base into 2x forge) And for the marauders, they are just so bad in every match-up we nearly don't see them anymore at top level.
Terran finally had an answer to clumped up Carriers with HT support. And you instantly nerf it.
10 more hit points on Vikings does absolut nothing in comparison. Vikings can still not be used against Carrier/HT due to storm plus no native amour so no protection against interceptors.
I could understand the move if Terran was dominating all tournaments. But every finale is a PvZ and there were only 2 Terrans in the top 12 in Katowice.
Terran is not overperforming so why nerf their only answer to the golden armada?
On March 07 2018 14:58 MockHamill wrote: I do not even know what to say.
Terran finally had an answer to clumped up Carriers with HT support. And you instantly nerf it.
10 more hit points on Vikings does absolut nothing in comparison. Vikings can still not be used against Carrier/HT due to storm plus no native amour so no protection against interceptors.
I could understand the move if Terran was dominating all tournaments. But every finale is a PvZ and there were only 2 Terrans in the top 12 in Katowice.
Terran is not overperforming so why nerf their only answer to the golden armada?
Think back to how fast the Liberator air damage was nerfed in early LOTV. I'm starting to believe the marketing department is forcing the balance team to keep terran with no lategame at all so they force an 'action packed' meta for the proscene.
On March 07 2018 14:58 MockHamill wrote: I do not even know what to say.
Terran finally had an answer to clumped up Carriers with HT support. And you instantly nerf it.
10 more hit points on Vikings does absolut nothing in comparison. Vikings can still not be used against Carrier/HT due to storm plus no native amour so no protection against interceptors.
I could understand the move if Terran was dominating all tournaments. But every finale is a PvZ and there were only 2 Terrans in the top 12 in Katowice.
Terran is not overperforming so why nerf their only answer to the golden armada?
I need every Terran to remember when PvT was at 50%, and then Blizzard nerfed the Adept. Or when PvT was at 50% and Khaydarin Amulet was removed.
Terran has consistently had the highest win rates over the course of SC2 history. A small period without huge winrates won't hurt.
Try being Protoss, the only race that has had sub 45% win rates since January 2017. And it has happened 6 times!
On March 07 2018 14:58 MockHamill wrote: I do not even know what to say.
Terran finally had an answer to clumped up Carriers with HT support. And you instantly nerf it.
10 more hit points on Vikings does absolut nothing in comparison. Vikings can still not be used against Carrier/HT due to storm plus no native amour so no protection against interceptors.
I could understand the move if Terran was dominating all tournaments. But every finale is a PvZ and there were only 2 Terrans in the top 12 in Katowice.
Terran is not overperforming so why nerf their only answer to the golden armada?
I need every Terran to remember when PvT was at 50%, and then Blizzard nerfed the Adept. Or when PvT was at 50% and Khaydarin Amulet was removed.
Terran has consistently had the highest win rates over the course of SC2 history. A small period without huge winrates won't hurt.
Try being Protoss, the only race that has had sub 45% win rates since January 2017. And it has happened 6 times!
So the correct way to balance this is to make sure every race takes turn in the gutter. Alright. This still doesn't explain why they keep nerfing it every time terrans have a viable lategame. They could nerf something else to make sure we get our 'turn in the gutter', no?
On March 07 2018 14:58 MockHamill wrote: I do not even know what to say.
Terran finally had an answer to clumped up Carriers with HT support. And you instantly nerf it.
10 more hit points on Vikings does absolut nothing in comparison. Vikings can still not be used against Carrier/HT due to storm plus no native amour so no protection against interceptors.
I could understand the move if Terran was dominating all tournaments. But every finale is a PvZ and there were only 2 Terrans in the top 12 in Katowice.
Terran is not overperforming so why nerf their only answer to the golden armada?
I need every Terran to remember when PvT was at 50%, and then Blizzard nerfed the Adept. Or when PvT was at 50% and Khaydarin Amulet was removed.
Is PvT now at 50%? If I read it right, people are arguing that there's already an imbalance, that the imbalance has just barely started to be figured out, and the way it's been figured out is being nerfed. In other words, the existing imbalance is being made worse.
For my part, I have no idea. Obviously at the highest levels, terran has been doing badly lately overall. I don't know how well it generalises across skill levels. The idea of every late game turning into the same comp with the same ideas sounds like something worth avoiding, but obviously it's not worth avoiding if late game becomes severely imbalanced.
On March 07 2018 08:11 Nerchio wrote: Ravens are broken but taking away aggressive possibilities from Zerg once again... meh
Don't worry, you already got the worst result in group C at IEM. Even with the nerf, you can't possibly get any worst than that. The small zerg nerf will be fine.
On March 07 2018 14:58 MockHamill wrote: I do not even know what to say.
Terran finally had an answer to clumped up Carriers with HT support. And you instantly nerf it.
10 more hit points on Vikings does absolut nothing in comparison. Vikings can still not be used against Carrier/HT due to storm plus no native amour so no protection against interceptors.
I could understand the move if Terran was dominating all tournaments. But every finale is a PvZ and there were only 2 Terrans in the top 12 in Katowice.
Terran is not overperforming so why nerf their only answer to the golden armada?
I need every Terran to remember when PvT was at 50%, and then Blizzard nerfed the Adept. Or when PvT was at 50% and Khaydarin Amulet was removed.
Is PvT now at 50%? If I read it right, people are arguing that there's already an imbalance, that the imbalance has just barely started to be figured out, and the way it's been figured out is being nerfed. In other words, the existing imbalance is being made worse.
For my part, I have no idea. Obviously at the highest levels, terran has been doing badly lately overall. I don't know how well it generalises across skill levels. The idea of every late game turning into the same comp with the same ideas sounds like something worth avoiding, but obviously it's not worth avoiding if late game becomes severely imbalanced.
While PvT win-rates are at 50% approximately on aligulac terrans are still forced into a lot of all-ins to get that win rate (and ofc aligulac has lots of weaknesses). Playing macro Terran against Protoss right now is difficult, because chrono-ed Protoss upgrades outscale terran units really fast, and (to a lesser extent) due to the new colossus absolutely evaporating marines. I'd like to see a few nerfs targeting those two points. Redistributing the colossus's damage to do less versus light would be rather easy since colossi aren't particularly good in PvZ anyways. Nerfing Protoss upgrades is trickier since it also impacts PvZ, but I think increasing the build time for +2 and +3 might be necessary. The golden armada is tbh a rather minor issue when it comes to PvT.
I don't understand why late game Terran is considered bad. I'm a low GM toss and I ALWAYS lose late game Pvt. I just feel like I can't do anything vs Viking ghost, emp rips my ground and Viking my colossus. The end. If I get tempest to chip away the terran army he just a moves into me. I just don't understand it. In pro games this is never the case because the game ends much earlier.
Also seeing in pro games zvt ghost snipes are amazing late game, maybe too hard to pull off due to fungal broods? Possibly increase its range
Raven missles need nerfed for the same reason parasitic bomb needed to be nerfed. Being able to stack AOEs is always going to cause issues in the late game. You end up in the position where the player can create a circle of death because the only limiting factor on how much damage he can deal in the circle instantly is the amount of energy he has. Is the viking buff enough? IDK. TY was doing really well in crazy late game against dark with ghost liberator. He only lost the last game because he attacked into broodlords with all of his liberators and got fungaled. Regardless mass raven missiles is bad for the game and everyone knows it.
On March 07 2018 12:16 Loccstana wrote: I have never seen a single pro game where it is won single highhandedly due to Ravens. If someone has an example, please post.
The above quote is the clearest of all of those who don't understand why the raven nerf is needed. Can someone not on mobile (I am lying in bed writing this) share a couple of raven clips?
On another note: if the terran lategame is so bad why not give late game upgrades to terran? Fusion core required upgrades would be late game options. Upgrade to make marauders shot their old rounds, one shot for 10 damage instead of two shots for 5 each. Upgrade to give thor 2 more javeline missiles and a boost to their single target AA damage. Upgrade hellion/hellbat armour by 1, or give either of them a movement speed upgrade. An increase to ghost range, be it steady target or base attack. The advanced ballistics upgrade is a current late game upgrade. I think terran could use some more of those, but not too many.
Why not just increase raven supply cost. 3 supply per raven and terrans can't spam that many ravens without sacrificing core army. Or just make dmg nerf much smaller. Like 30->20. I think 20 dmg missiles would already to the trick and 5 dmg is pure overkill.
Next, we’ve been seeing a lot of games where Anti-Armor Missile spam becomes the determining factor in the late game in all three Terran matchups.
Next, we’ve been seeing a lot of games where Anti-Terran Nerfhammer spam becomes the determining factor in the late game in all three Terran matchups....
Skytoss is the dermining factor in lategame Protoss for years and never seemed to be a problem...
Storm -> ha ha terran learn to play and learn to split ! Colossus -> ha ha terran learn to play and learn to split ! Baneling -> ha ha terran learn to play and learn to split ! Raven -> ha ha nerf terran ! CQFD
User was banned for this post.
Yeah i was laughing my ass off when Tod said in one game IEM toss has a lot problems with getting used to split units :D Sure its fine if Terrans have to split again banelings, Storms, Colossus, Disrutors, Vipers. But if Toss and Zerg have to learn it naaaaaah to op
Next, we’ve been seeing a lot of games where Anti-Armor Missile spam becomes the determining factor in the late game in all three Terran matchups.
Next, we’ve been seeing a lot of games where Anti-Terran Nerfhammer spam becomes the determining factor in the late game in all three Terran matchups....
Skytoss is the dermining factor in lategame Protoss for years and never seemed to be a problem...
Storm -> ha ha terran learn to play and learn to split ! Colossus -> ha ha terran learn to play and learn to split ! Baneling -> ha ha terran learn to play and learn to split ! Raven -> ha ha nerf terran ! CQFD
User was banned for this post.
Yeah i was laughing my ass off when Tod said in one game IEM toss has a lot problems with getting used to split units :D Sure its fine if Terrans have to split again banelings, Storms, Colossus, Disrutors, Vipers. But if Toss and Zerg have to learn it naaaaaah to op
Zerg and protoss units cant stim and the raven missile is instant. Imagine storm doing all of its dmg in 1s or banelings with blink.
Also funny how people say that drop was zerg's only aggressive option in early ZvP rigth after Rogue and Dark did dropless roach all-ins at IEM. Also a baneling bust in Dark's case (vs Trap).
Solar was trying to micro out from anti armour missiles and failed. Its not possible to outmicro AAM. Its faster than old seeker missile.
Yes. Dorperlords were the only agressive option for Zerg that is not an allin. Those roach pushes or baneling bust, were allins. With droperlord u could still follow up into mavro game.
On March 07 2018 15:41 SCMasterGoD wrote: I don't understand why late game Terran is considered bad. I'm a low GM toss and I ALWAYS lose late game Pvt. I just feel like I can't do anything vs Viking ghost, emp rips my ground and Viking my colossus. The end. If I get tempest to chip away the terran army he just a moves into me. I just don't understand it. In pro games this is never the case because the game ends much earlier.
Also seeing in pro games zvt ghost snipes are amazing late game, maybe too hard to pull off due to fungal broods? Possibly increase its range
I agree 100%, Mass ghosts not only do like 2k dmg in 5 seconds by emping but also melts zealots like they are nothing, its a struggle to cast good storms and the beef of P is demolished so fast
On March 07 2018 17:53 hiroshOne wrote: Solar was trying to micro out from anti armour missiles and failed. Its not possible to outmicro AAM. Its faster than old seeker missile.
Yes. Dorperlords were the only agressive option for Zerg that is not an allin. Those roach pushes or baneling bust, were allins. With droperlord u could still follow up into mavro game.
Let's be real. 90% of the time people went for drop overlords early on it was just an all-in. Sure you could go for harass, but you were most of the time better off all-inning.
On March 07 2018 15:41 SCMasterGoD wrote: I don't understand why late game Terran is considered bad. I'm a low GM toss and I ALWAYS lose late game Pvt. I just feel like I can't do anything vs Viking ghost, emp rips my ground and Viking my colossus. The end. If I get tempest to chip away the terran army he just a moves into me. I just don't understand it. In pro games this is never the case because the game ends much earlier.
Also seeing in pro games zvt ghost snipes are amazing late game, maybe too hard to pull off due to fungal broods? Possibly increase its range
Ghost/viking beating protoss late game armies? Are you still playing HotS?
We lived 7 years of vikings vs colossus. Now vikings live more thanks to the stalker attack cooldown nerf and want to buff them more ? Mass viking no medevac 1-a gg wp
On March 07 2018 17:53 hiroshOne wrote: Solar was trying to micro out from anti armour missiles and failed. Its not possible to outmicro AAM. Its faster than old seeker missile.
Yes. Dorperlords were the only agressive option for Zerg that is not an allin. Those roach pushes or baneling bust, were allins. With droperlord u could still follow up into mavro game.
This was quite new, of course he can't still micro properly.
On March 07 2018 14:58 MockHamill wrote: I do not even know what to say.
Terran finally had an answer to clumped up Carriers with HT support. And you instantly nerf it.
10 more hit points on Vikings does absolut nothing in comparison. Vikings can still not be used against Carrier/HT due to storm plus no native amour so no protection against interceptors.
I could understand the move if Terran was dominating all tournaments. But every finale is a PvZ and there were only 2 Terrans in the top 12 in Katowice.
Terran is not overperforming so why nerf their only answer to the golden armada?
I need every Terran to remember when PvT was at 50%, and then Blizzard nerfed the Adept. Or when PvT was at 50% and Khaydarin Amulet was removed.
Is PvT now at 50%? If I read it right, people are arguing that there's already an imbalance, that the imbalance has just barely started to be figured out, and the way it's been figured out is being nerfed. In other words, the existing imbalance is being made worse.
For my part, I have no idea. Obviously at the highest levels, terran has been doing badly lately overall. I don't know how well it generalises across skill levels. The idea of every late game turning into the same comp with the same ideas sounds like something worth avoiding, but obviously it's not worth avoiding if late game becomes severely imbalanced.
While PvT win-rates are at 50% approximately on aligulac terrans are still forced into a lot of all-ins to get that win rate (and ofc aligulac has lots of weaknesses). Playing macro Terran against Protoss right now is difficult, because chrono-ed Protoss upgrades outscale terran units really fast, and (to a lesser extent) due to the new colossus absolutely evaporating marines. I'd like to see a few nerfs targeting those two points. Redistributing the colossus's damage to do less versus light would be rather easy since colossi aren't particularly good in PvZ anyways. Nerfing Protoss upgrades is trickier since it also impacts PvZ, but I think increasing the build time for +2 and +3 might be necessary. The golden armada is tbh a rather minor issue when it comes to PvT.
At a glance, it seems like Aligulac suggests that PvT win rates are at 50% or so now after a recent drop from P dominance. Do we think this is because of a meta shift toward ravens? Again, honest question. I don't know what to make of it.
Finally ! Droperlords are a nightmare as Protoss if your build / wall / execution isn't perfect. The anti armor missile nerf is good aswell, it is named "ANTI-ARMOR" after all. It isn't supposed to do direct damage but make damage by immensely increasing the dps of an upgraded bioball during the late game, allowing the terran to stay on MMM and do well against its biggest threats like Ultralisks.
Nice buff to the viking, a unit way too fragile for its cost.
I also see some posts asking for nerfs to the colossus in PvT following this patch... And I wonder if these people seriously play this game / watch the pros. Most Protoss have stopped rushing colossus in PvT and don't use them until late (where they're not that amazing) because the terran has a huge window where a bio push with the support of 1 SINGLE raven will absolutely destroy the Protoss army if you just use interference matrix on the colossus (50 energy each, you easily have 2 available when the push hits, and if the Protoss went colossus he clearly doesnt have HT to feedback the raven).
Nice job Blizzard on this one, even though I still think hydras and / or lurkers have to be addressed in some way.
On March 07 2018 15:41 SCMasterGoD wrote: I don't understand why late game Terran is considered bad. I'm a low GM toss and I ALWAYS lose late game Pvt. I just feel like I can't do anything vs Viking ghost, emp rips my ground and Viking my colossus. The end. If I get tempest to chip away the terran army he just a moves into me. I just don't understand it. In pro games this is never the case because the game ends much earlier.
Also seeing in pro games zvt ghost snipes are amazing late game, maybe too hard to pull off due to fungal broods? Possibly increase its range
Many terrans just play their standard "2base push until either the protoss dies or they're way too far behind"-strat and then they blame imbalance when they're outteched. A good late game T is really scary.
On March 07 2018 14:58 MockHamill wrote: I do not even know what to say.
Terran finally had an answer to clumped up Carriers with HT support. And you instantly nerf it.
10 more hit points on Vikings does absolut nothing in comparison. Vikings can still not be used against Carrier/HT due to storm plus no native amour so no protection against interceptors.
I could understand the move if Terran was dominating all tournaments. But every finale is a PvZ and there were only 2 Terrans in the top 12 in Katowice.
Terran is not overperforming so why nerf their only answer to the golden armada?
I need every Terran to remember when PvT was at 50%, and then Blizzard nerfed the Adept. Or when PvT was at 50% and Khaydarin Amulet was removed.
Is PvT now at 50%? If I read it right, people are arguing that there's already an imbalance, that the imbalance has just barely started to be figured out, and the way it's been figured out is being nerfed. In other words, the existing imbalance is being made worse.
For my part, I have no idea. Obviously at the highest levels, terran has been doing badly lately overall. I don't know how well it generalises across skill levels. The idea of every late game turning into the same comp with the same ideas sounds like something worth avoiding, but obviously it's not worth avoiding if late game becomes severely imbalanced.
While PvT win-rates are at 50% approximately on aligulac terrans are still forced into a lot of all-ins to get that win rate (and ofc aligulac has lots of weaknesses). Playing macro Terran against Protoss right now is difficult, because chrono-ed Protoss upgrades outscale terran units really fast, and (to a lesser extent) due to the new colossus absolutely evaporating marines. I'd like to see a few nerfs targeting those two points. Redistributing the colossus's damage to do less versus light would be rather easy since colossi aren't particularly good in PvZ anyways. Nerfing Protoss upgrades is trickier since it also impacts PvZ, but I think increasing the build time for +2 and +3 might be necessary. The golden armada is tbh a rather minor issue when it comes to PvT.
At a glance, it seems like Aligulac suggests that PvT win rates are at 50% or so now after a recent drop from P dominance. Do we think this is because of a meta shift toward ravens? Again, honest question. I don't know what to make of it.
Not enough raven games at all vs protoss at pro level. that's why this subject and nerf-hammer is kinda ironic.
Aligulac stats doesn't means a lot about balance. We already discussed this topic in length, but in short this is this way of seeing this that led to unerfed bl/infestor for a year.... stats were fine, blizzard said (and they were)... Recent shit is probably because some top korean terrans wining foreigners (at IEM) and second class players (in online cups etc). Doesn't means anything.
From aligulac stats, individual MU results of top players means more. Best KR protoss near 80% PvT, while the best terrans are at 60% TvP.
Terran issues in TvP when not 2-base all-ining is first and foremost the openings. Terran begins the race so much behind, Protoss can pay whatever tech-advantage they want (like 2xupgrades and fast 4th and stomr or collosi..) while still having a better army and eco. If Protoss would not start the game so much ahead 2xforge wouldn't be such an issue because, like in PvZ, they you would not afford it without sacrificing a lot of other things.
The Raven change makes a lot of sense but there is no way the health buff to vikings balances things out. Terrans briefly had late game but it's gone again.
On March 07 2018 15:41 SCMasterGoD wrote: I don't understand why late game Terran is considered bad. I'm a low GM toss and I ALWAYS lose late game Pvt. I just feel like I can't do anything vs Viking ghost, emp rips my ground and Viking my colossus. The end. If I get tempest to chip away the terran army he just a moves into me. I just don't understand it. In pro games this is never the case because the game ends much earlier.
Also seeing in pro games zvt ghost snipes are amazing late game, maybe too hard to pull off due to fungal broods? Possibly increase its range
Many terrans just play their standard "2base push until either the protoss dies or they're way too far behind"-strat and then they blame imbalance when they're outteched. A good late game T is really scary.
And why do you think every Terran, even those who played macro for years in the MU, play that ? We are in the situation of "killing the zerg before infestor/bl or die". This may be balanced or not stats-wise but everyone forced into this is trash gameplay.
Late game T may or may not be scary if properly executed. But (except some maps, like neon violet) terran is not allowed to go late game vs Toss, they simply die way earlier. (like, when protoss hits 3/3 and a-move + warp-prism storm to LOL ).
WOW. I think i suggested moving overlord drop to lair tech like 2-3 years ago. Glad Blizzard are listening to the community. Also 10 hp buff to Vikings? if they had made it 100 hp then maybe it would change terrans chances vs air play.
It seems the "balance team" just don't know what to do with the raven. It's undergone so many changes since the major shift last year. They seem to have tunnel vision when it comes to creating an effective late game option without aggravating the community.
On March 07 2018 19:40 Daimai wrote: Cool changes, opens up PvZ quite a lot!
On March 07 2018 15:41 SCMasterGoD wrote: I don't understand why late game Terran is considered bad. I'm a low GM toss and I ALWAYS lose late game Pvt. I just feel like I can't do anything vs Viking ghost, emp rips my ground and Viking my colossus. The end. If I get tempest to chip away the terran army he just a moves into me. I just don't understand it. In pro games this is never the case because the game ends much earlier.
Also seeing in pro games zvt ghost snipes are amazing late game, maybe too hard to pull off due to fungal broods? Possibly increase its range
Many terrans just play their standard "2base push until either the protoss dies or they're way too far behind"-strat and then they blame imbalance when they're outteched. A good late game T is really scary.
And why do you think every Terran, even those who played macro for years in the MU, play that ? We are in the situation of "killing the zerg before infestor/bl or die". This may be balanced or not stats-wise but everyone forced into this is trash gameplay.
Late game T may or may not be scary if properly executed. But (except some maps, like agora) terran is not allowed to go late game vs Toss, they simply die way earlier. (like, when protoss hits 3/3 and a-move + warp-prism storm to LOL ).
Yes the fact that toss can outmacro and outupgrade the terran earlier in the game would be an issue, but late game TvP is not bad at all, terran has all the tools to beat protoss.
On March 07 2018 10:01 brickrd wrote: the problem with ling drops is more than just holding them but, as others have said, that it forces out early defense in the main mineral line as well as stargate units to shut down drop ovies.
i have been a Z/P player for years, and i love the new dropperlords, but speaking objectively as someone who plays both matchups there's too much flexibility in how zerg can play out the game. holding the allins is entirely possible, but there's zero margin for error in any detail of your build, your wall and your micro, it's a highly practiced and unforgiving early game interaction that makes the game less fun in PVZ.
i would compare it to when PVZ cannon rushing was extremely safe and extremely frustrating to play against back in HOTS. it's not really that PVZ is imba because of unit interactions (once you get to midgame protoss is fine), but it feels extremely stunted and scripted from the protoss point of view. there's almost no way to mix it up early as toss without dying to a lot of popular high-percentage allins.
i don't feel like it's fair for protoss to be punished for greedy walling the natural when they HAVE TO wall the natural to play a macro game. there's no "safer option" for protoss builds, if you don't gate expand you're fucked. with the mineral growth rate of LOTV you can't even do one base tech builds anymore because the pylon timings aren't right
This post really nicely sumarizes the problems with hatch droperlords. I'd just add that there is a reason that Protoss has to wall-off against zerg since sc1 - the larva mechanic + fast massable zergling makes that it is really hard to defend against early ling rushes/all-ins. Drop available for zerg so fast allows to bypass the wall and invalid its' purpose. The stategy is not undefendable but it limits the protoss strategies and pigeon-hole protoss play to one build/set of reactions and on top of that requires perfect execution to hold as any mistep with rewalling is game ending even in lower leagues.
Ok, blizzard. I fully support the direction of the changes, but seriously, please consider removing nydus from the game. Lets be honest here: NOONE EVER uses it outside of allins. Its a goddamn forgotten mechanic so that nobody even remembers why it was added to the game (some BW reference i assume). There is no way (literally no way) of scouting it in PvZ. You just cant see it coming, but defending it is such a pain in the ass, you literally need to prepare accrodingly for 2+ minutes. Zerg is out of hand these days,its obvious for everyone. In the early game Zerg has: Speedling floods Speedling drops (and btw if they hit the right timing SG alone wont keep you safe, you simply wont be able to shoot down dropalords fast enough). Baneling busts/drops Ravager/roach timings Nydus Queen drops All these strats needs an apropriate response. You should know exactly what you are doing and how to react. Its much more complicated and punishing than a common: "just go SG and you are safe". Tell that sOs and Classic.
while Protoss has nothing, literally no early game cheeses. Just a 5 min zealot allin that is easily scouted. It's so easy to defend i wont even bother mentioning it.
Then, transitioning into mid game, zerg again can throw in ANY units: mutas, hydra/banes, hydra/roaches into lurkers, all kind of 3rd pushes (with extremely strong timings) with mass banes/mass lurkers etc etc. While protoss... ok we got an option either we go 1 robo or 2 robo... nice.
After deflecting of whatever is coming from zerg in mid game (or may be they just macroed like crazy) we need to start worring about BLs. Should i hit him now with what i got or begin transitioning to tempest/carriers, mmm such an interesting choice.
And then, we got lategame. Ye, those carrier haters are all over the place. But where did the come from? early 2017 when intereceptors were free? These days, it SUPER hard to make a decent lategame comp for protoss. And by decent i mean Carrier based (12+). Any other Tempest/VR BS comps just dont work vs corruptors/mass spores/vipers/etc. Zerg lategame comp is much more flexible and stronger if you ask me. Just look at Classic vs Rogue on neon. What was classic doing wrong? Point it out please because i cant see a single flaw in his game.
Ok, to summ it up. I really dont mind a challenging MU, but zerg has WAY too many options on every stage of the game.
Removing nydus, moving drops to lair, and toning down lurker just a bit (reducing its range by 1 lets say) wont hurt the game at all.
The Viking hitpoint increase is no where near enough to make it possible for Terran to fight against the Carrier/HT combo.
I suggest either 1) Decrease the leach range of Carriers to 10 so that Terran does not have to fly through so many storm just to get to the Carriers OR 2) Make Viking have 1 native armor. It would not change much against most air units but it would be very useful against Carriers, a unit that Vikings are supposed to counter but can not.
On March 07 2018 20:33 MockHamill wrote: The Viking hitpoint increase is no where near enough to make it possible for Terran to fight against the Carrier/HT combo.
I suggest either 1) Decrease the leach range of Carriers to 10 so that Terran does not have to fly through so many storm just to get to the Carriers OR 2) Make Viking have 1 native armor. It would not change much against most air units but it would be very useful against Carriers, a unit that Vikings are supposed to counter but can not.
Is it really a thing: carrier based tvp? no sarcasm, just wondering.
On March 07 2018 20:33 MockHamill wrote: The Viking hitpoint increase is no where near enough to make it possible for Terran to fight against the Carrier/HT combo.
I suggest either 1) Decrease the leach range of Carriers to 10 so that Terran does not have to fly through so many storm just to get to the Carriers OR 2) Make Viking have 1 native armor. It would not change much against most air units but it would be very useful against Carriers, a unit that Vikings are supposed to counter but can not.
Is it really a thing: carrier based tvp? no sarcasm, just wondering.
Yes. I think almost every Protoss I play (if the game goes to late game) transitions to Carrier/HT (plus support). It seems to be the go-to combo for late game Protoss.
On March 07 2018 20:27 insitelol wrote: (...) please consider removing nydus from the game (...)
I think that nydus could be simply reworked to be less of all-in tool and more for fast transfering the armies. I'd propose: Reduce health from 200 to 100 Allow to be attacked when underground but up armour from 1 to 3 or 4 when underground so simple worker pull will not kill it but the actual fighting units could snipe it (armour will remain 1 once the nydus emerges from the ground) reduce the cost from 100/100 to 50/50
Why not adding a anti air special weapon for BC? the same DPS that main weapon but with a little more range, less rate of fire (and more power by shoot) and a special ability that ignore every armor upgrade (so it ignore every point of armor that the corruptor have, but it also ignore the effect of the raven AA missile, so it can't snowball it).
On March 07 2018 20:33 MockHamill wrote: The Viking hitpoint increase is no where near enough to make it possible for Terran to fight against the Carrier/HT combo.
I suggest either 1) Decrease the leach range of Carriers to 10 so that Terran does not have to fly through so many storm just to get to the Carriers OR 2) Make Viking have 1 native armor. It would not change much against most air units but it would be very useful against Carriers, a unit that Vikings are supposed to counter but can not.
Is it really a thing: carrier based tvp? no sarcasm, just wondering.
Yes. I think almost every Protoss I play (if the game goes to late game) transitions to Carrier/HT (plus support).
I can only speak for myself but I usually only do it vs mech comps from Terrans. 2nd robo for immortals -> storm + fast switch to carriers. Sometimes I do go for Carrier/HT vs bio when the opponent decides to turtle heavily after unsuccessful midgame but one may argue that at this it is already over.
Instead of right away nerfing the missile damage into the ground they should try out different nerfs to the ability, e.g. reduce its splash radius, some start-up delay to give opponents the opportunity to micro against it or just reduce the duration of the debuff - plus I don't really see an adequate compensation by giving Vikings plus 10HP instead.
Terran lategame lacks some kind of reliable splash damage to go up against lategame Zerg and Protoss air-based armies.
But for Blizzard's argument regarding the prevention of mass caster build-up, what is considered "massing" them? Having to build 10+ Ghosts in TvZ to deal with Zerg's expensive lategame units is ok? Just wondering what their magic number is...
Or we could try a 3 second cooldown on the missile. That way you can only cast one missile per Raven and the opponent then gets 3 seconds to either kill some Ravens or split their units before the 2nd missile can fire.
It would cut the damage output in half if you do some counter micro without nerfing Ravens into the ground.
Viking buff will hopefully help with late game TvZ air game. TvT will probably turn into cyclone then most vikings wins as it seems to be going. TvP... I’m not the best or fastest player but I feel behind throughout this match up. They have stronger units with quicker warp in times, can get upgrades and probes quicker. I feel I wouldn’t have to rely on late game mass ravens if I had a way or slowing them down during early to mid game. Drops and mines I find are hit and miss. Not going to pretend I know how to fix the issue but maybe abit of a maurader buff to help with cyclones, Protoss and Zerg early to mid game. Maybe blizzard want bio just for early game and I should be transitioning to mech half way through a game? But then I will be behind again. I just need a way of keeping on equal foot with Protoss or slowing them down to make late game more equal?
On March 07 2018 14:58 MockHamill wrote: I do not even know what to say.
Terran finally had an answer to clumped up Carriers with HT support. And you instantly nerf it.
10 more hit points on Vikings does absolut nothing in comparison. Vikings can still not be used against Carrier/HT due to storm plus no native amour so no protection against interceptors.
I could understand the move if Terran was dominating all tournaments. But every finale is a PvZ and there were only 2 Terrans in the top 12 in Katowice.
Terran is not overperforming so why nerf their only answer to the golden armada?
I need every Terran to remember when PvT was at 50%, and then Blizzard nerfed the Adept. Or when PvT was at 50% and Khaydarin Amulet was removed.
Is PvT now at 50%? If I read it right, people are arguing that there's already an imbalance, that the imbalance has just barely started to be figured out, and the way it's been figured out is being nerfed. In other words, the existing imbalance is being made worse.
For my part, I have no idea. Obviously at the highest levels, terran has been doing badly lately overall. I don't know how well it generalises across skill levels. The idea of every late game turning into the same comp with the same ideas sounds like something worth avoiding, but obviously it's not worth avoiding if late game becomes severely imbalanced.
While PvT win-rates are at 50% approximately on aligulac terrans are still forced into a lot of all-ins to get that win rate (and ofc aligulac has lots of weaknesses). Playing macro Terran against Protoss right now is difficult, because chrono-ed Protoss upgrades outscale terran units really fast, and (to a lesser extent) due to the new colossus absolutely evaporating marines. I'd like to see a few nerfs targeting those two points. Redistributing the colossus's damage to do less versus light would be rather easy since colossi aren't particularly good in PvZ anyways. Nerfing Protoss upgrades is trickier since it also impacts PvZ, but I think increasing the build time for +2 and +3 might be necessary. The golden armada is tbh a rather minor issue when it comes to PvT.
At a glance, it seems like Aligulac suggests that PvT win rates are at 50% or so now after a recent drop from P dominance. Do we think this is because of a meta shift toward ravens? Again, honest question. I don't know what to make of it.
Aligulac isn't a perfect showcase of balance. At the elite level none of the good terrans seem to be doing well in TvP. Inno, Ty, Maru, byun, gumiho, alive, and special are all underperforming in the matchup. At least they were last time I checked their ratings.
At the same time classic, stats, zest, dear, sOs, trap etc PvT ratings are all dramatically higher than their historical norm. I doubt that's because they all just got better
On March 07 2018 21:45 JackONeill wrote: I would actually have been in favor of increasing the cost of the missile back to 125 but leaving it as it is.
We can all agree upon that Blizzard gave each race a Spellcaster which has an energy based AOE-spell. Blizzard gave Protoss the High-templar which cast "Storm", they gave Zerg the Infester which cast "Fungal" and they gave Terran the Raven which had Seeker missle / Anti-armor Missle.
With the proposed changes they want to "remove" the AOE possibility for the Raven (which is seen in the reference at the top).
Removing the Terran AOE spellcaster is actually more a redesign than a nerf. The whole idea behind giving each race an energybased AOE spellcaster will be non- existing and an imbalance will appear.
What would a better direction be? - I agree that a spam-able missle is not a good design, but why not look at how fungal / storm is balanced out? The big difference between Storm+Fungal and the seeker missle(Anti-armor-missle) is the stacking of damage. Storm and fungal doesnt stack where the seeker missle(Anti-armor misssle) does.
A more correct balance direction would be to make the damage of the seeker missle (Anti armor missle) unstackable. Eg. when the anti armor is enabled the unit cannot take extra dmg from a new missle. What does this solve? You can no longer spam ravens which is the current issue that blizzard is having.
But with an unspamable missle then you also need to touch the parametres to make it balanced. My proposed changes would be:
Anti Armor Missle 100-125 Energy Deals 50-60-75? (Same dmg range as Storm/Fungal?) Damage in X Radius -3 Armor / -1 Armor / -0 Armor(remove it) Whenever the unit is debuffed a new Missle wont affect the units at all / Make the units that got hit by the seeker orange - when they are orange they cant get hit in X time. Perhaps give it a track time again, so you can split or make a delay like on Parasitic bomb.
On March 07 2018 21:59 Lillekanin wrote: We can all agree upon that Blizzard gave each race a Spellcaster which has an energy based AOE-spell. Blizzard gave Protoss the High-templar which cast "Storm", they gave Zerg the Infester which cast "Fungal" and they gave Terran the Raven which had Seeker missle / Anti-armor Missle.
Isn't ghost more fitting in your description? I've always thought of HT, Infestor and Ghost as main spellcasters for each race
On March 07 2018 21:59 Lillekanin wrote: We can all agree upon that Blizzard gave each race a Spellcaster which has an energy based AOE-spell. Blizzard gave Protoss the High-templar which cast "Storm", they gave Zerg the Infester which cast "Fungal" and they gave Terran the Raven which had Seeker missle / Anti-armor Missle.
Isn't ghost more fitting in your description? I've always thought of HT, Infestor and Ghost as main spellcasters for each race
For me each race has now 2 main spellcasters, a flying and ground ones : Oracle/Raven/Viper and HT/Ghost/Infest
I like how a bunch of people from every races hate the new community feedback, even the Viking buff is "controversial"
As a Terran i think these changes are fine. It's probably hard to balance things when a Race is quite strong in one match up but weak in another one. I don't have strong thoughts about the Droplord but the raven change is needed imo. Maru vs Solar on Backwater at IEM Katowice was, while beeing a good game, the best example why this is needed. nerfing the dmg is the easiest way to prevent AA-missle spam. It's nice that the origami-plane gets some love too.
about TvP: after watching IEM, GSL and some minor tournaments it's fair to say that Terran has still problems to play a straight up macro game vs Protoss (especially with the new raven nerf) but it's difficult to find a solution without destroying the balance in TvZ and PvZ. The solution i came up with is: reduce the widow mine cost to 50/25 (-25 min) or give it +10 extra splashdmg vs shields (40 (+35 vs shields) splash). This change will force protoss to spend more gas and chrono boost for higher tier units and tech instead of upgrades and since widow mines are almost exclusively used in TvP both of this changes won't effect other match ups all that much.
another nice little change would be to get rid of the +25% vision for observer in Surveillance Mode. I'm fine with the Surveillance Mode per se but the +25% vision is just a straight up and unneeded nerf for dropplay imo.
I think everyone expected raven change. I think all mentioned changed are pointing in correct direction but we need more.
Updated raven will clearly be worse unit. From my point of view it will be on similar level as sentry. So make raven cheaper (maybe 50mineral, 100gas) and remove techlab requirement.
To improve terran's late game please wake up and redesign battlecrusers! Reduce attack speed, increase damage per shot and make them shoot while moving (same as Phoenix). With these buffs tactical jump and Yamato cannon need nerf. Make them share cooldown and greatly reduce jump range.
While we are saving SC2, maybe also move Advanced Ballistics upgrade from techlab to Fusion Core.
I came up with some ideas for changes not sure how great they are but they would mostly be to compensate for changing the raven.
Terran changes:
Raven: Shredder missile -5 damage (25 dmg per missile) auto turret +1 range (So 2 range)
Liberator aa +1 range, +1 damage. The liberator has to get too close imo to fight outside of sieging and while I do think it mostly should be used in its siege mode I think its air fighting power is also something that could be explored further. I think giving it more range will allow it to fight units a bit more actively without things just escaping it or giving it more room to maybe kite or fight in safety. As for the damage I think its current AA damage won't really make a big big difference vs something like mutas (Unless heavily upgraded) for the 1 damage to impact things in an overpowered way but I do think it could help it in fights.
Viking +10 hp buff (from this patch not an extra) additionally not sure how to word this but I think changing the firing speed of the viking to match the banshee would be a good change. I say this in the sense that the viking would be able to both shoot and move without having to add a stop within its pattern of moving and shooting (move stop shot move etc) It would also let the viking fire slightly faster which would yes increase its DPS but only to a point where it can kite other air units slightly better
Battlecruisers ground range +1 (Maybe 2) and slight movement speed increase as well as turning speed increase. When say turning speed increase I think the battlecruiser as a unit is a little bit clunky in its rotation speed when firing and having to turn. Additionally I think adding some more movement speed will make it slightly more mobile and active on the map since most people want to save the teleport for defensive uses (like saving the unit) rather than offensive additionally I think an increase to its ground range will let it fight ground units from further away kind of like how the carrier and shoot units further away in a safer spot
Protoss changes:
Carrier interceptor count lowered from 8 to 6 but each interceptor would become 25% stronger. This would mean carriers would reach a max out faster on interceptors and each one would be stronger but splash damage would affect them more and things like losing them to widows would make a bigger impact as less of them would remain alive. Also I am not quite sure if interceptors have an armor tag but I think they should become light units or have a light tag if they don't already.
anyways these are just my thoughts on potential changes not sure if they're great or not but they are suggestions I suppose
On March 07 2018 19:40 Daimai wrote: Cool changes, opens up PvZ quite a lot!
On March 07 2018 15:41 SCMasterGoD wrote: I don't understand why late game Terran is considered bad. I'm a low GM toss and I ALWAYS lose late game Pvt. I just feel like I can't do anything vs Viking ghost, emp rips my ground and Viking my colossus. The end. If I get tempest to chip away the terran army he just a moves into me. I just don't understand it. In pro games this is never the case because the game ends much earlier.
Also seeing in pro games zvt ghost snipes are amazing late game, maybe too hard to pull off due to fungal broods? Possibly increase its range
Many terrans just play their standard "2base push until either the protoss dies or they're way too far behind"-strat and then they blame imbalance when they're outteched. A good late game T is really scary.
And why do you think every Terran, even those who played macro for years in the MU, play that ? We are in the situation of "killing the zerg before infestor/bl or die". This may be balanced or not stats-wise but everyone forced into this is trash gameplay.
Late game T may or may not be scary if properly executed. But (except some maps, like agora) terran is not allowed to go late game vs Toss, they simply die way earlier. (like, when protoss hits 3/3 and a-move + warp-prism storm to LOL ).
Yes the fact that toss can outmacro and outupgrade the terran earlier in the game would be an issue, but late game TvP is not bad at all, terran has all the tools to beat protoss.
I figured out that this upgrade advantage is blizzard's intention to give more opportunities for ravens being used in mid game.But we all have answer does it work or not.
On March 07 2018 08:55 Musicus wrote: Back to defense only as zerg or go super all-in with that Elazer/Rogue nydus bullshit.
An aggressive option that could set up a cool macro game was too much I guess.
The Stargate problem is a scouting problem and not a "must open stargate to survive ling drops" problem imo.
We rarely ever saw "aggressive options that could set up macro games". Sure people occasionally went for some 8 ling drops for some harassment, but overwhelmingly it was 16 lings or ling/ravager or ling/baneling off a minimal drone count that either killed the opponent or lost.
Well I still think the ling drops were the least all-in option compared to ling/bane, ling/ravager or nydus/roach/queen all-ins. All those will still be viable. Would've rather seen the nydus bs removed for example.
Nerfing nydus wouldn't improve Protoss opening diversity one wit. And 16 ling drops are just as all-in as the others when you have barely any drones.
You are right, maybe allowing protoss to be able to scout effectively without a stargate would be better than removing ling drops though. I'd just hate it, if every game is go up to 70 workers without any interaction again and if zerg just has to play defensive every game.
How about you stop patching the game. Seriously. The community will balance it with maps and metagame. Even at the end of WoL, Protoss and Terran were figuring out BL Infestor with timing attacks that didn't let the build set up, and late game ghost play etc. It's unbelievable that we are still seeing balance patches after eight years and two expansions. Somehow it's unforgivable that MARU could make Ravens look abusive at IEM, so they get patched. Are you kidding me? Sometimes it's really hard to stick with this game.
On March 07 2018 20:14 RoflStomped wrote: It seems the "balance team" just don't know what to do with the raven. It's undergone so many changes since the major shift last year. They seem to have tunnel vision when it comes to creating an effective late game option without aggravating the community.
You build science vessels to counter zerg defilers, you build science vessels to counter protoss arbiters. But you don't build those units just to fuck everything up. The raven fails to serve that role in both match up because now the others casters have became stronger to the point they are able to counter thier own counter too.So as long as ravens still can't cast interference matrix safely without being get rekt by feedbacks, PB, fungals and abducts, AAM is the only skill worth to use.
It's the attitude too that every opening should be viable. For many years now, PvZ standard opener in BW has been Stargate. Somehow in SC2, that's a problem.
I dont understand balance team logic.We see alot vikings play right now and almost no see BC for years.And they go buff viking instead of BC.Now we go see mass vikings play, all mass play is bad for viewers like me, i'm not player.
Increasing AA missile cost to 125 is the worst thing they can do. It'll kill the "build a few ravens for support" use case since 125 energy is way too much for the debuff alone, and it won't stop people massing them for damage since they'll just build more or wait longer between volleys.
This change is fine. Maybe they can make Ravens cheaper, or reduce the build time, or even remove the tech-lab requirement if it's too weak, but the damage is dumb and needs to go.
On March 07 2018 20:14 RoflStomped wrote: It seems the "balance team" just don't know what to do with the raven. It's undergone so many changes since the major shift last year. They seem to have tunnel vision when it comes to creating an effective late game option without aggravating the community.
The community will be always aggravated if terran gets a solid lategame. P and Z have used "defend until ultimate army" playstyles for years. If the terran super-lategame is buffed to the point of actually competing, people will always complain because that's not supposed to happen.
I understand the issues people have with the raven, but I didn't personally think it was that overpowered. If it was then terran wouldn't be objectively the worst performing race at the top level. Sky terran has typically never a viable comp, but after 2-3 games of the best terran winning with it it gets nerfed? The viking buff doesn't to enough to compensate for AAM doing negligible damage.
In my opinion the Widow Mine nerf is the what truly screwed TvP. Protoss right now can basically open with any build and not have to worry about widow mine drop openers, whereas in the past, it was something you always had to account for. This would leave T in a better mid-game position.
It also didn't really bother me that Z had aggressive early game options vs Protoss.
On March 08 2018 00:11 Kikirik1 wrote: I dont understand balance team logic.We see alot vikings play right now and almost no see BC for years.And they go buff viking instead of BC.Now we go see mass vikings play, all mass play is bad for viewers like me, i'm not player.
I think they really want to avoid (or at least should) having another carrier which is pretty much uncounterable with units in zvp, and leads to these weird spore-forest+ mass infestor type of guerilla warfare, which sure is fun sometimes, but i dont think it s a dynamic they want to further promote / replicate in other match-ups. From a purely e-sport /viewer point of view, it s more important to incentivize army vs army clashes and trades rather than camping/starving out tactics. .
Viking buff makes more sense from that point of view, Indirectly it might encourage BC usage, because with buffed vikings, going full air might be the way for T lategame (BC-s included), we shall see. What i dont get is why they re messing with the TvZ match-up, when all the stats point to Terrans having more problems in TvP.
Probably they have more data than is publicly available for us.
On March 07 2018 21:59 Lillekanin wrote: Im bringing this up based on the recent proposed changes to the Ravens Anti-Armor missle. The context can be found here: https://us.battle.net/forums/en/sc2/topic/20761897646.
We can all agree upon that Blizzard gave each race a Spellcaster which has an energy based AOE-spell. Blizzard gave Protoss the High-templar which cast "Storm", they gave Zerg the Infester which cast "Fungal" and they gave Terran the Raven which had Seeker missle / Anti-armor Missle.
With the proposed changes they want to "remove" the AOE possibility for the Raven (which is seen in the reference at the top).
Removing the Terran AOE spellcaster is actually more a redesign than a nerf. The whole idea behind giving each race an energybased AOE spellcaster will be non- existing and an imbalance will appear.
What would a better direction be? - I agree that a spam-able missle is not a good design, but why not look at how fungal / storm is balanced out? The big difference between Storm+Fungal and the seeker missle(Anti-armor-missle) is the stacking of damage. Storm and fungal doesnt stack where the seeker missle(Anti-armor misssle) does.
A more correct balance direction would be to make the damage of the seeker missle (Anti armor missle) unstackable. Eg. when the anti armor is enabled the unit cannot take extra dmg from a new missle. What does this solve? You can no longer spam ravens which is the current issue that blizzard is having.
But with an unspamable missle then you also need to touch the parametres to make it balanced. My proposed changes would be:
Anti Armor Missle 100-125 Energy Deals 50-60-75? (Same dmg range as Storm/Fungal?) Damage in X Radius -3 Armor / -1 Armor / -0 Armor(remove it) Whenever the unit is debuffed a new Missle wont affect the units at all / Make the units that got hit by the seeker orange - when they are orange they cant get hit in X time. Perhaps give it a track time again, so you can split or make a delay like on Parasitic bomb.
I hope Blizzard will go in the right direction.
Ravens and Vikings I agree with this completely. The Raven can be a sort of support unit, but there is such an investment to get it that if it isn't powerful no one will build it.
While I appreciate the idea of buffing vikings, the thing that has changed since many years ago when vikings were a powerful air unit is that they could outdistance opponents. At one time Carriers leash range was not as long as it is now, and corrupters were slower and the old macro state meant you weren't dealing with 10-20 of them coming out on the first round, overwhelming your viking numbers in short order.
I propose raising the AA range of vikings by 1. If the way they want to balance the matchup is by raising their HP, they're going to have to give a whole lot more than 10HP per viking.
The Early Game I like seeing some attention on the early game. I think in both TvP and TvZ the late game is a problem because Terran has almost no aggressive options in the early game and a weaker mid-game than in the past with Hydra strength and the Widow Mine nerf. If Terran early game had more variety, there would be much less turtling by P and Z. Here are some ideas:
1. Allow individual bunkers to get neosteel frame. (+2 to cargo space) or an armor buff 2. Give reapers back the attack that destroyed buildings quicker. 3. If widow mines are going to be as bad as they are, remove their friendly splash damage.
On March 08 2018 00:45 BuddhaMonk wrote: In my opinion the Widow Mine nerf is the what truly screwed TvP. Protoss right now can basically open with any build and not have to worry about widow mine drop openers, whereas in the past, it was something you always had to account for. This would leave T in a better mid-game position.
Yep. TvP could be more or less fixed with : -windowmine reverse. So protoss should account for it in their BO. In particular, The blink opening into fast 3rd into 2xforges (like in Maru vs Dear ) which broke the korean PvT, will no longer be that strong vs everything. -A slight bio buff, like marauder reverse, or some speed-up of bio opening (combat shield and stim duration, etc. ), or a buff to medivacs starting mana
On March 07 2018 21:59 Lillekanin wrote: Im bringing this up based on the recent proposed changes to the Ravens Anti-Armor missle. The context can be found here: https://us.battle.net/forums/en/sc2/topic/20761897646.
We can all agree upon that Blizzard gave each race a Spellcaster which has an energy based AOE-spell. Blizzard gave Protoss the High-templar which cast "Storm", they gave Zerg the Infester which cast "Fungal" and they gave Terran the Raven which had Seeker missle / Anti-armor Missle.
With the proposed changes they want to "remove" the AOE possibility for the Raven (which is seen in the reference at the top).
Removing the Terran AOE spellcaster is actually more a redesign than a nerf. The whole idea behind giving each race an energybased AOE spellcaster will be non- existing and an imbalance will appear.
What would a better direction be? - I agree that a spam-able missle is not a good design, but why not look at how fungal / storm is balanced out? The big difference between Storm+Fungal and the seeker missle(Anti-armor-missle) is the stacking of damage. Storm and fungal doesnt stack where the seeker missle(Anti-armor misssle) does.
A more correct balance direction would be to make the damage of the seeker missle (Anti armor missle) unstackable. Eg. when the anti armor is enabled the unit cannot take extra dmg from a new missle. What does this solve? You can no longer spam ravens which is the current issue that blizzard is having.
But with an unspamable missle then you also need to touch the parametres to make it balanced. My proposed changes would be:
Anti Armor Missle 100-125 Energy Deals 50-60-75? (Same dmg range as Storm/Fungal?) Damage in X Radius -3 Armor / -1 Armor / -0 Armor(remove it) Whenever the unit is debuffed a new Missle wont affect the units at all / Make the units that got hit by the seeker orange - when they are orange they cant get hit in X time. Perhaps give it a track time again, so you can split or make a delay like on Parasitic bomb.
I hope Blizzard will go in the right direction.
I think you analysis of the situation and your proposed changes are flawed.
First of all, blizzard don't want to remove the AoE from Terran. the AAM is still in the game and is still designed around a AoE but it works different than the other AoE spells. Storm helps you in fights by damaging or killing enemy units, AAM however buffs you own units by giving them better firepower. I think that's a pretty interesting design because it adds a new flavor to the game.
the stacking problem: All spells that can not stack have something in common, they have an effect over time. This kinda makes sense, the units are under a certain effect but they cannot be under the same effect twice but the dmg of the AAM is not an effect. It would be very unintuitive that you can not be hit by two missiles in a row.
and third, a delay on the AAM would make it super inconsistent. It would create the same problem the old seeker had that the AAM on a single or low number of raven become useless.
I think thay can balance the game with the 5dmg AAM.
On March 07 2018 21:45 JackONeill wrote: I would actually have been in favor of increasing the cost of the missile back to 125 but leaving it as it is.
Agreed, also a very reasonable suggestion.
Increasing the energy cost of the missile is a big nerf against raven usage early on and raven usage as a support unit (while being not as big against mass raven) which isn't good.
Another update, another show of complete misunderstanding. Ventral sacks is greatn I will say that, with more time maybe they finally man up to make ravagers lair tech.
But this raven nerf is undefendable. Terran is strugling right now, because it has midgame window to win the game that closes super quickly. Terran needs valid counterplay options against other races late games (ghosts don't answer vipers really). What do we get? 10 hp on viking - unit thats absolutely bad, it has zero chance to beat airtoss or way too fast corruptors. And raven will be garbage ' which is fine if they make it cheaper for it, but it will still cost me 200 fucking gas and techlab time.
Mech to start upgrading still needs to drop 300/200 on armories, still is striclty timing push strat with no real transition.
On March 08 2018 00:11 Kikirik1 wrote: I dont understand balance team logic.We see alot vikings play right now and almost no see BC for years.And they go buff viking instead of BC.Now we go see mass vikings play, all mass play is bad for viewers like me, i'm not player.
I think they really want to avoid (or at least should) having another carrier which is pretty much uncounterable with units in zvp, and leads to these weird spore-forest+ mass infestor type of guerilla warfare, which sure is fun sometimes, but i dont think it s a dynamic they want to further promote / replicate in other match-ups. From a purely e-sport /viewer point of view, it s more important to incentivize army vs army clashes and trades rather than camping/starving out tactics. .
Viking buff makes more sense from that point of view, Indirectly it might encourage BC usage, because with buffed vikings, going full air might be the way for T lategame (BC-s included), we shall see. What i dont get is why they re messing with the TvZ match-up, when all the stats point to Terrans having more problems in TvP.
Probably they have more data than is publicly available for us.
Good explain, but BC not need to be overpower unit like a carier, to see play they just need to counter effective something, currently they dont counter anything effective, that why they rarely see play.If teran have problem vs something, just force BC(some useless units) to be effective vs this, that is how to balance need to work.Ye my 5cents
On March 07 2018 14:58 MockHamill wrote: I do not even know what to say.
Terran finally had an answer to clumped up Carriers with HT support. And you instantly nerf it.
10 more hit points on Vikings does absolut nothing in comparison. Vikings can still not be used against Carrier/HT due to storm plus no native amour so no protection against interceptors.
I could understand the move if Terran was dominating all tournaments. But every finale is a PvZ and there were only 2 Terrans in the top 12 in Katowice.
Terran is not overperforming so why nerf their only answer to the golden armada?
I need every Terran to remember when PvT was at 50%, and then Blizzard nerfed the Adept. Or when PvT was at 50% and Khaydarin Amulet was removed.
Terran has consistently had the highest win rates over the course of SC2 history. A small period without huge winrates won't hurt.
Try being Protoss, the only race that has had sub 45% win rates since January 2017. And it has happened 6 times!
So the correct way to balance this is to make sure every race takes turn in the gutter. Alright. This still doesn't explain why they keep nerfing it every time terrans have a viable lategame. They could nerf something else to make sure we get our 'turn in the gutter', no?
No that isn't the correct way to balance, I argued against both the changes to Protoss mentioned unless Protoss recieved compensatory buffs. They didn't, and the 50% winrate Protoss had dropped dramatically. So we can't control how Blizzard balances.
But we can man up and control the whining. Terrans have become so used to winning, that when another race starts to win and their winrate turns south of 50%, they cry imbalance, despite the fact the other race was below 50% previously.
What Terran is facing now isn't half of what Protoss has faced since the start of the year. The balance stats don't lie, Protoss wins 43% of games versus Zerg and just under 50% versus Terran.
Remember when they proposed the Thor with the AOE air attack doing full damage vs everything? Give us that again. A great way to combat mass air cancer with actual units instead of caster spam. Toss still has tons of ways to fight mech on the ground, and Zerg has clouds and abducts that make Thors a bad investment already. It can even be a lategame 200/200 upgrade at the fusion core or something.
I would much rather have the game shaken up once a month or once every 2-3 months with ***MAJOR BALANCE CHANGES*** similar to how league of legends does it. I firmly believe league **retains** its player base because they keep the game super fresh and always make changes to keep it interesting.
I came back in november 2017(i think right after the major overhaul(removing msc etc etc) after a several year hiatus. Things were exciting again as I had the opportunity to be creative and experiment with new builds/openings/strategies. With the removal of the MSC, aggressive-fun-to-execute-fun-to-watch-builds/openings/strategies that keep me as a player and spectator engaged were viable again. I felt at home again. I felt passionate again like I did during WOL beta and the first year and a half of WOL.
As a player, there are 4 things that drive me: 1. Aggressive, multitask oriented gameplay-It's exciting to execute, it's exciting to watch. This releases the dopamine in my brain. 2. The ability to be creative and invent builds/openings/playstyles. This releases the dopamine in my brain as well. 3. Discovering things in the game on my own. This also releases dopamine in my brain. 4. Evolution of game-play
Once the game is figured out, all 4 of these go away. It makes me less interested. It makes me not want to play as much. I went from playing 30-40 games a day to on average 5-10. Some days not at all in the recent past.
It's 3-5 months since the latest overhaul and everything has been figured out with in the exception of ultra ultra late game(even this is starting to get figured out now as we have seen in the recent past from major tournies). Things aren't as exciting.
I strongly recommend that blizzard takes a page out of riot's playbook and do major overhauls on a regular basis similar to how they do major overhauls for their champions etc. I believe this will keep players interested and playing sc2.
I sincerely hope blizzard takes this feedback under consideration.
I dont get how fast Blizzard is moving to nerf the raven just because a couple pros at IEM Katowice used ravens in the late game. There are countless other issues that have plagued the game longer that go unnoticed by Blizz, but yet terran late game is the problem they focus on.... even though its widely accepted that terran late game is the weakest of the 3 races.
Its almost as if the people on the balance team are pro-zerg & anti terran... something i've heard professional players allude to before.
Could they not wait a little longer or make a less drastic change? It's not like a Terran won the tournament abusing ravens, there was only 1 Terran in the Ro8, same in GSL. And we see Maru use it against Solar, who didn't attempt to use infestors at all, which can be the proper counter in some cases.
And again, such drastic changes so quickly, while Terran is already underwhelming in a late-game scenario, especially considering recent results.
Not very enthused about these changes. The raven needed a nerf but this is excessive. Carriers have needed a major nerf for a long time but nothing is being done. And when are invincible nydus worms going to be removed? They could increase the HP so they don't die to a worker surround but invincibility is ridiculous.
And the less said about recall, the better. It's laughable and redundant to have two forms of recall in the game - there should only be one recall ability with a hefty cooldown.
Yall, nydus all ins have to be the easiest thing to scout in the game. Here are some of the tells.
1. seeing an abnormally high queen count 2. no third base 3. 3rd base but no drones on it 4. how about actually sending a hallucination into the zerg base and seeing if there is a nydus worm being made 5. lack of hydra
On March 08 2018 05:19 Popparockz wrote: Yall, nydus all ins have to be the easiest thing to scout in the game. Here are some of the tells.
1. seeing an abnormally high queen count 2. no third base 3. 3rd base but no drones on it 4. how about actually sending a hallucination into the zerg base and seeing if there is a nydus worm being made 5. lack of hydra
Watching Serrel vs ShowTime and Classic vs Rogue made me feel like protoss really struggled to move between bases to deal with harass. It felt like Protoss was just on the back foot the whole time and that they are too dependent on their slow late game units templar/carrier/tempest/mothership. It could be that Serrel and Rogue just played far superior but I just don't like the way Protoss has to defend to get to late game deathball (and then loose anyway because they've been outmanouvered the entire game).
I feel Protoss in LOTV would greatly benefit from return of the (dare I say it) Arbiter (and get rid of the mothership superunit) which would allow Protoss to recall small bunches of its units between bases and around the map. This might make them less reliant on the late game deathball, allow them to play less defensively, and not be constantly outmanoeuvred by zerg and terran. Obviously Protoss might need a few nerfs to balance things out, such as to warp prism and/or warp ins, carrier, oracle, whatever.
I might be flogging a dead horse here but certain SC1 units were brought back to SC2 which improved the game, and the msc was removed (thank Aiur!), so I can only hope!
Ravens most likely needed a nerf (although as is this is mostly preventing them from becoming a big issue in the future), but trading 25 damage on the anti armor missile for 10 health on the viking is a terrible deal. This potentially resets TvP late game to beyond undesirable to play as a Terran.
Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
Another factor that is often overlooked is that a raven (with 200 energy) can now disable 4 units instantly for 8 seconds, so a single raven can take out all or most collossi from a fight, which is huge. 3 Raven can disable 12 carriers, 9 raven can keep 12 carriers disabled for 24 seconds.
Not to mention the fact that the AA missile aoe is so huge that you only need 2 raven to blanket an army for 20 seconds, The effect of which equals a +3 Attack uprade when used with marines. Marauders, cyclones and BC will also hugely benefit from it, I think the 20 sec duration is actually a bit too long.
Oh and anyone saying cant force a fight... wtf? terran can just drop toss bases and protoss is forced to defend. And ravens are perfect to accompany and enhance bio drops.
The main reason that ravens are rarely used - unless they are overpowered - is probably the fact that terrans basically never need a techlab on a starport.. you want a reactor for medivacs, libs and vikings.
I would even recommend changing the liberator into a techlab unit and reducing its buildtime and maybe adjusting some other stats, that would make starport techlabs more common and would probably encourage the raven usage a bit more. there are way too many air units that are reactorable to justify building a techlab for ravens only and the liberator is way too powerful too be mass produced in my opinion...
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
You can make all kinds of shit happen in a unit tester. 3 widow mines can kill 50 mutas, one high templar can kill 30 marines etc etc.
The game should be balanced around the pro level. And currently at the pro level terran is by far the worst race. They haven't made a final in 6 months, Katowice had 2 terran in the ro12, GSL has 1 in the ro8, and WCS also had 1 in the ro8. That's why terrans are whining. Maru's performance at Katowice was the only glimmer of hope and it was enough to get terran nerfed again.
On March 08 2018 05:19 Popparockz wrote: Yall, nydus all ins have to be the easiest thing to scout in the game. Here are some of the tells.
1. seeing an abnormally high queen count 2. no third base 3. 3rd base but no drones on it 4. how about actually sending a hallucination into the zerg base and seeing if there is a nydus worm being made 5. lack of hydra
I've said this before but I honestly cannot remember the last nydus cheese that didn't work in a pro tournament. It's far too effective for something that's supposedly "easy to scout". No cheese/allin should have such a high winrate
On March 08 2018 05:30 winsonsonho wrote: Watching Serrel vs ShowTime and Classic vs Rogue made me feel like protoss really struggled to move between bases to deal with harass. It felt like Protoss was just on the back foot the whole time and that they are too dependent on their slow late game units templar/carrier/tempest/mothership. It could be that Serrel and Rogue just played far superior but I just don't like the way Protoss has to defend to get to late game deathball (and then loose anyway because they've been outmanouvered the entire game).
I feel Protoss in LOTV would greatly benefit from return of the (dare I say it) Arbiter (and get rid of the mothership superunit) which would allow Protoss to recall small bunches of its units between bases and around the map. This might make them less reliant on the late game deathball, allow them to play less defensively, and not be constantly outmanoeuvred by zerg and terran. Obviously Protoss might need a few nerfs to balance things out, such as to warp prism and/or warp ins, carrier, oracle, whatever.
I might be flogging a dead horse here but certain SC1 units were brought back to SC2 which improved the game, and the msc was removed (thank Aiur!), so I can only hope!
I agree, though I think the mothership should be removed and the nexus recall be changed to not have a cooldown but instead only teleport a limited number of units or units from a small area. I really don't know what the balance team thinks some times... why would you want a huge teleport with long cooldown? This will favor deathballs obviously since it encourages moving and recalling your army in a big clumped up ball.
The way that terran and zerg can abuse protoss with drops and runbies is just stupid and though it may be hard to execute it is basically not defendable and will trigger a base trade more often than not, when protoss realizes he can't save his expansions.
On March 08 2018 05:19 Popparockz wrote: Yall, nydus all ins have to be the easiest thing to scout in the game. Here are some of the tells.
1. seeing an abnormally high queen count 2. no third base 3. 3rd base but no drones on it 4. how about actually sending a hallucination into the zerg base and seeing if there is a nydus worm being made 5. lack of hydra
I've said this before but I honestly cannot remember the last nydus cheese that didn't work in a pro tournament. It's far too effective for something that's supposedly "easy to scout". No cheese/allin should have such a high winrate
It's still kind of a fringe build though. It goes under the radar because people don't nydus cheese all that often. If it's done more often (which it very well might considering its recent success and the dropperlord nerf) people will either learn to hold if off better or it will become a "visible" problem.
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
You can make all kinds of shit happen in a unit tester. 3 widow mines can kill 50 mutas, one high templar can kill 30 marines etc etc.
The game should be balanced around the pro level. And currently at the pro level terran is by far the worst race. They haven't made a final in 6 months, Katowice had 2 terran in the ro12, GSL has 1 in the ro8, and WCS also had 1 in the ro8. That's why terrans are whining. Maru's performance at Katowice was the only glimmer of hope and it was enough to get terran nerfed again.
Check out the youtube videos then of progamers using them in real games lol...
The recent set of changes has barely been active for a couple of weeks and the widow mine changes obviously disrupted a lot but you can already see the pro players adapting and using them effectively again.
Plus your comparison is not really valid, since 50 mutas still have to fly into the mines and marines have to stand in the storm whereas the AAM has a big range and cant be evaded. Also to be fair widowmines are probably a big reason why mass mutas don't work as well any more and storm is a big reason why mass marine is not the best choice vs a toss with HT. Now also be aware of the fact that the AAM works versus EVERY UNIT IN THE GAME and can only be dimished at all by totally spreading your army.
Why is the balance team (and most of the community) tunnel visioned into ONLY making buffs to improve the game. Why not nerf?!?
Start at the root cause - Protoss Air Deathball was too OP for Zerg (and terran) --> nerf Carrier If Carrier is nerfed, Zerg anti air options may also be nerfed (since they were buffed to help counter Protoss Air) --> nerf corruptor and Hydra back to what it was (80 HP) Now with Protoss Air and Zerg corruptor/hydra nerfed, Terran buffs are not needed
Massing air armies (ie. pure air deathballs) are boring to watch (less positional play/map has no impact). Air may be seen as an option to break seige lines, harass and support the rest of the army. Not something to reach and face roll A-move to victory.
Buffing units to counter other buffed unit messes up things more...for example, buffing the viking has TvT implications. Vikings can now just land on couple of unseiged tanks to snipe them or take on take on more Bio in their ground mode.
TLDR: Please consider nerfing the problem units instead of buffing the counters
I like both changes. Which doesn't mean game will be perfect after, there are surely more changes required.
Interceptor follow range is still a bit high and unforgiving. I would reduce it by 20 to 33%.
Indeed nerfs should be considered instead of buffs. But in this case the viking change is interesting as it also improves the viking's capabilities as a ground unit.
Honestly, I had no problem with the AA missile spam. It does do a lot of damage, but so does storm. The anti-armor component though is a great synergy with Terran bio though.
The overlord drop nerf seems okay, that strategy did not seem to come up much in competitive play but maybe it was causing safe openers like the devs said. The raven nerf seems okay too, they were starting to get massed up in late game. Anyways I agree with the people saying the BC needs a look, it is really the only tier 3 tech and it rarely is built at high level play.
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
You can make all kinds of shit happen in a unit tester. 3 widow mines can kill 50 mutas, one high templar can kill 30 marines etc etc.
The game should be balanced around the pro level. And currently at the pro level terran is by far the worst race. They haven't made a final in 6 months, Katowice had 2 terran in the ro12, GSL has 1 in the ro8, and WCS also had 1 in the ro8. That's why terrans are whining. Maru's performance at Katowice was the only glimmer of hope and it was enough to get terran nerfed again.
Check out the youtube videos then of progamers using them in real games lol...
The recent set of changes has barely been active for a couple of weeks and the widow mine changes obviously disrupted a lot but you can already see the pro players adapting and using them effectively again.
Plus your comparison is not really valid, since 50 mutas still have to fly into the mines and marines have to stand in the storm whereas the AAM has a big range and cant be evaded. Also to be fair widowmines are probably a big reason why mass mutas don't work as well any more and storm is a big reason why mass marine is not the best choice vs a toss with HT. Now also be aware of the fact that the AAM works versus EVERY UNIT IN THE GAME and can only be dimished at all by totally spreading your army.
We just watched youtube videos of pros playing with these changes. And a Terran was able to succeed with this strategy against a zerg, and fail against another zerg who had adapted.
What is the issue? Why nerf or buff anything at this point? They just made some of these changes, let the meta settle down first. It's not like Terran is winning everything with ravens all of a sudden, lol. Not even close.
I think the anti armor is looking to be a good spell for itself. So I'm ok with this patch. But nydus worm needs to be vulnerable again, you can make it even free after network is done.
so how many AAM do we need to deal 80 dmg in an 1.5 radius? 5 AAM are needed. so with only 3 ravens you can lanch a homing-storm that deals its dmg in less than 2s and debuffs -3 armor. lets not forget that ravens are faster than HTs, ignore terrain, have 1 more cast range, stuck together and can cast AAM right from the get go.
Lets imagine blizz only nerfes the AAM to 10 dmg flat. 20 supply of ravens could deal 200 dmg within 2s in an 2.88 radius. good luck dodging 20 AAMs
so how many AAM do we need to deal 80 dmg in an 1.5 radius? 5 AAM are needed. so with only 3 ravens you can lanch a homing-storm that deals its dmg in less than 2s and debuffs -3 armor. lets not forget that ravens are faster than HTs, ignore terrain, have 1 more cast range, stuck together and can cast AAM right from the get go.
Lets imagine blizz only nerfes the AAM to 10 dmg flat. 20 supply of ravens could deal 200 dmg within 2s in an 2.88 radius. good luck dodging 20 AAMs
To be fair units aren't points, air units stack, and players do aim for areas of higher concentration, so 10 dmg flat would still be worse than 30 dmg splash. Still it's a good point, the raven nerf isn't quite as big as it seems--it certainly isn't 6 times worse.
so how many AAM do we need to deal 80 dmg in an 1.5 radius? 5 AAM are needed. so with only 3 ravens you can lanch a homing-storm that deals its dmg in less than 2s and debuffs -3 armor. lets not forget that ravens are faster than HTs, ignore terrain, have 1 more cast range, stuck together and can cast AAM right from the get go.
Lets imagine blizz only nerfes the AAM to 10 dmg flat. 20 supply of ravens could deal 200 dmg within 2s in an 2.88 radius. good luck dodging 20 AAMs
To be fair units aren't points, air units stack, and players do aim for areas of higher concentration, so 10 dmg flat would still be worse than 30 dmg splash. Still it's a good point, the raven nerf isn't quite as big as it seems--it certainly isn't 6 times worse.
of course the unit interaktions are much more complex in game than in my small calculation but i wanted to point out why the current raven is really OP and why the raven will still be a super usefull unit to have in every match up after the patch. I honestly think that the raven will be in the best place ever after these changes. I can not understand why some people acting like they deleting the unit from the game.
Some pretty hilarious whining in this thread. The raven missile is too strong and deserves a nerf, and I don't see how anyone can objectively think otherwise. It also goes completely against Blizzard's aims for the unit and in general, it's just kinda dumb.
No, terran is not dominating right now and no, I don't think the viking change is good enough to offset the Raven nerf. But i find it hilarious that people think they shouldn't fix an obviously broken part of the game, just because the win rates aren't in Terran's favour right now. I am 100% sure the raven in its current state would eventually need changing, so I don't see why they should wait until it becomes a statistical anomaly to do something about it. It's better off nerfing the raven now, so they can patch the lategame without a super ridiculous spell distorting all the relevant data. Yes, they need to make more changes, yes they really need to nerf parasitic bomb, yes, terran late-game overall is still not in a great place. But IMO, all of those things make it even more important to nerf the raven now.
On March 08 2018 09:22 blooblooblahblah wrote: Some pretty hilarious whining in this thread. The raven missile is too strong and deserves a nerf, and I don't see how anyone can objectively think otherwise. It also goes completely against Blizzard's aims for the unit and in general, it's just kinda dumb.
No, terran is not dominating right now and no, I don't think the viking change is good enough to offset the Raven nerf. But i find it hilarious that people think they shouldn't fix an obviously broken part of the game, just because the win rates aren't in Terran's favour right now. I am 100% sure the raven in its current state would eventually need changing, so I don't see why they should wait until it becomes a statistical anomaly to do something about it. It's better off nerfing the raven now, so they can patch the lategame without a super ridiculous spell distorting all the relevant data. Yes, they need to make more changes, yes they really need to nerf parasitic bomb, yes, terran late-game overall is still not in a great place. But IMO, all of those things make it even more important to nerf the raven now.
You said it, Terran isn't dominating therefore it doesn't need a nerf.
@blizzard Nerfing things that are NOT dominating is NOT how you balance a game.
On March 07 2018 08:48 Olli wrote: Not sure about this entirely. It's a nice change for Protoss in the matchup, but drops were holdable. Imo it's a general scouting issue with Protoss vs Zergs where early tech is hard to scout with adepts and stargate units, but also later tech becomes a scouting issue once hydras are out. A queen and spore per base + hydras on the map make it very hard to keep tabs on things like a spire going up or when hive tech starts, etc.
I'd rather see a change that allows Protoss to scout better for all-ins, but also mid-lategame tech so they can prepare in time.
Ravens I think did need a patch, but hard to say yet if vikings getting buffed in return will be enough to compensate.
Indeed, as much as I hate zergling drops (they've felt disproportionately strong for the cost since the stalker nerf. I saw this patch coming), they were a symptom of the issue, not the issue itself. They added the mothership core in HOTS specifically to deal with Protoss' inability to do any form of consistent scouting in the early game since otherwise Protoss had to go down certain tech paths just to scout. I never liked the mothership core but I understood why they added it. I was excited enough to start playing again when they had announced that they were removing the mothership core and were instead going to look at buffing Protoss' early game to make it so it could survive more comfortably. However, it didn't work properly (Stalkers were too good in early-mid game PvT. Let's be honest. They worked in PvZ because they could snipe overlords quickly and were good for holding all-ins) and they walked the stalker nerf back while not replacing it, leaving Protoss' early game weaker than it was before the 4.0 changes. Yes, there are shield batteries now, but they have a very limited role compared to what the mothership core did, and obviously zergling drops allow Zerg to circumvent the batteries anyway.
One idea I had was to make Hallucination cheaper. Right now they cost 2 forcefields worth of energy, which is not a risk Protoss can take since the crucial timing for hallucination to be cast is right before the common times several Zerg all-ins hit. Protoss cannot afford to be down those two forcefields at that time.
Or maybe try a smaller buff to stalkers and tinker with how they interact with armoured units a bit?
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote: Plus your comparison is not really valid, since 50 mutas still have to fly into the mines and marines have to stand in the storm whereas the AAM has a big range and cant be evaded. Also to be fair widowmines are probably a big reason why mass mutas don't work as well any more and storm is a big reason why mass marine is not the best choice vs a toss with HT. Now also be aware of the fact that the AAM works versus EVERY UNIT IN THE GAME and can only be dimished at all by totally spreading your army.
Are you being serious? You made ridiculous claims like "20 supply of ravens can kill a 100 supply toss army", but giving examples equally stupid stuff is invalid? If you leave a 100 suppy army stacked like that you're asking to lose it. The same as if you clump up 30 marines against psistorm, or fly a stacked muta army over widow mines. That's why spreading is a thing. You know that 2 vipers or 2 high templar will kill a 100 supply viking army right? But with a good pre split that number is reduced dramatically.
It's the same with ravens, I just tried fighting 2000 gas of ravens against 2000 gas of corruptors for example. If you stack the corruptors they all die, but if you spread them out you barely lose any (and I'm not talking seperate each unit, just a simple pre split).
And btw mass muta is not often seen nowadays because of thors, and hydras being just being better. Widow mines have been a thing since 2013, they aren't the reason LBM is dead.
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
You can make all kinds of shit happen in a unit tester. 3 widow mines can kill 50 mutas, one high templar can kill 30 marines etc etc.
The game should be balanced around the pro level. And currently at the pro level terran is by far the worst race. They haven't made a final in 6 months, Katowice had 2 terran in the ro12, GSL has 1 in the ro8, and WCS also had 1 in the ro8. That's why terrans are whining. Maru's performance at Katowice was the only glimmer of hope and it was enough to get terran nerfed again.
Check out the youtube videos then of progamers using them in real games lol...
Show me those videos then. From what I can see terran is by far the weakest race currently. Nerfing them even more is just ridiculous. Terran ultra lategame has been weak for years, and now that Maru won a few skyterran games that it apparently suddenly needs nerfing. P and Z players just don't want to adapt to terran actually competing in that area of the game for once.
To summarize a terran feeling, yes mass raven is kinda dumb design-wise. But so is SkyToss+ht (+ the mothership nonsense), so is ht+warp-prism, so is mass vipers/spores and mass infestors/spores (actually the best late game anti-air zergs armies), so was BL/infestors, so was old SH play, so is 15 queens infinite-healing T3 army, etc. Theses things lived years of abuse and some are still in the game.
Then terran have, by error of blizzard (who always don't understand what their redesign and new units will lead to ^^) a similar and strong caster-based late-game defensive army. Well, gg, that lasted two weeks. Make bio and get reckt, terrans =)
Btw from last time bio worked maraudeurs and mines are nerfed, banes hydras ultras zelots stalkers immortals and collosi buffed, and if lighting-speed warp-ins in opponents base was not enough for P mobility, they can now recall every time they are out of position. (lots of toss dosen't even bother to map control now vs T lol) Versus zergs the ghosts and libs are still strong, and mech is stronger than in hots, so the MU is kinda ok, but in LOTV TvP terran only survived thanks to the liberator... then heavily nerfed vs toss.
So yes the raven design was bad, but there are way more urgent issues.
Since this thread is for an update, maybe this is a good place for what appears to be a map bug that can hopefully be fixed
This location seems to make it so liberators have extra range (the circle appears to be away from the liberator). It's on Backwater. You cannot reach it with a stalker. It can shut down the entire mineral line. It requires stargate tech to reach for Protoss to reach and likely Spire tech for Zerg.
On March 08 2018 03:42 ReachTheSky wrote: .@Blizzard Balance team
I would much rather have the game shaken up once a month or once every 2-3 months with ***MAJOR BALANCE CHANGES*** similar to how league of legends does it. I firmly believe league **retains** its player base because they keep the game super fresh and always make changes to keep it interesting.
I came back in november 2017(i think right after the major overhaul(removing msc etc etc) after a several year hiatus. Things were exciting again as I had the opportunity to be creative and experiment with new builds/openings/strategies. With the removal of the MSC, aggressive-fun-to-execute-fun-to-watch-builds/openings/strategies that keep me as a player and spectator engaged were viable again. I felt at home again. I felt passionate again like I did during WOL beta and the first year and a half of WOL.
As a player, there are 4 things that drive me: 1. Aggressive, multitask oriented gameplay-It's exciting to execute, it's exciting to watch. This releases the dopamine in my brain. 2. The ability to be creative and invent builds/openings/playstyles. This releases the dopamine in my brain as well. 3. Discovering things in the game on my own. This also releases dopamine in my brain. 4. Evolution of game-play
Once the game is figured out, all 4 of these go away. It makes me less interested. It makes me not want to play as much. I went from playing 30-40 games a day to on average 5-10. Some days not at all in the recent past.
It's 3-5 months since the latest overhaul and everything has been figured out with in the exception of ultra ultra late game(even this is starting to get figured out now as we have seen in the recent past from major tournies). Things aren't as exciting.
I strongly recommend that blizzard takes a page out of riot's playbook and do major overhauls on a regular basis similar to how they do major overhauls for their champions etc. I believe this will keep players interested and playing sc2.
I sincerely hope blizzard takes this feedback under consideration.
Yeah that's basically how DotA does it as well. It certainly would make the game more interesting to play over longer periods of time. IMO the late game is in serious need of a design overhaul. Everybody in this thread moaning about the Raven nerf is 100% from a balance perspective, but no one actually likes playing or watching late game mass air turtlefest. IMO it would be so much cooler if they just made the Carrier/BC/BL unique units like the Mothership where you can only make one, tune them up to be cool siege units designed to break turtled positions so they act as a kind of game-ending mechanic. Up their build time to something super long, slow, perhaps even make it veryr obvious it is being built (or easy to scout). It would be both fun to watch and fun to play if balanced correctly where it would be really hard to tech to so would be really rare to see in a game.
On March 08 2018 12:15 Ben... wrote: Since this thread is for an update, maybe this is a good place for what appears to be a map bug that can hopefully be fixed
This location seems to make it so liberators have extra range (the circle appears to be away from the liberator). It's on Backwater. You cannot reach it with a stalker. It can shut down the entire mineral line. It requires stargate tech to reach for Protoss to reach and likely Spire tech for Zerg.
As this is a fifth base Blizzard won't fix it since they are of the opinion that at point it isn't unreasonable to require air units. There's a similar spot near the linear fourth on Blackpink.
Wait, are they actually serious about this? :D Terran finally had late game and they are taking it away after 1 Tournament where 1 Terran was in the top 4 and he was the only one actually pretty good at it? (remind me again how long did it take to fix adepts?......) This is a joke... Why not remove Storm and Parasitic bomb them? Or reduce their dmg to 10? :D It would be the same thing. But no, Terran just have to split. The other races don't have to learn that? I don't understand :/ The so called "buff" to Viking is just equally ridiculous, it doesn't solve anything at all.
Wow, I am literally gutted, the game was actually enjoyable and kinda balanced after such a long time and they decide to ruin it again, GJ!
On March 08 2018 18:10 algue wrote: I welcome any buff the viking can get. I love how the unit works and wish its transformation would have more of an impact on the game
Hello Algue ! Where the hell have you been ?
To people finding mass raven based army stupid, how they feel about mass viper spore and mass carrier HT mothership core ?
On March 08 2018 18:10 algue wrote: I welcome any buff the viking can get. I love how the unit works and wish its transformation would have more of an impact on the game
Hello Algue ! Where the hell have you been ?
To people finding mass raven based army stupid, how they feel about mass viper spore and mass carrier HT mothership core ?
The saddest thing is that we didn't even see "Mass" Raven most of the time. Maru in almost all of his games had 7-8 Ravens at maximum. How is that different from having 8 HT for example? It wasn't a core unit it was a support unit. Most of the army were still Vikings, tanks or bio. I really really don't see any problem with Raven aside from maybe that the orange units look a little bit stupid, but that is a cosmetic issue. Well, it was fun while it lasted, seems like another pause from SC for me, I really don't like the game when 1 race is completely irrelevant
The Raven solved the problem that Terran has a very weak late game especially compared to Protoss.
Ravens are not too strong if you look at tournament results, Terran does not win any major tournamanet any more. So why nerf the race that struggle the most at the pro level?
I can agree design wise that maybe mass Ravens are not ideal. But then Terran needs another way of figting Carrier/Tempest/HT.
10 more hitpoints on Vikings is not even close to what is needed. Maybe 20 more hitpoints plus 1 native armor and then lowering the ground attack by 2. Not even then would Vikings be too strong but they could maybe do their job of actually countering capitals ships. Right now Vikings only trade even with Carriers and are hard-countered if Carriers have any splash support (which they always have).
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote: Plus your comparison is not really valid, since 50 mutas still have to fly into the mines and marines have to stand in the storm whereas the AAM has a big range and cant be evaded. Also to be fair widowmines are probably a big reason why mass mutas don't work as well any more and storm is a big reason why mass marine is not the best choice vs a toss with HT. Now also be aware of the fact that the AAM works versus EVERY UNIT IN THE GAME and can only be dimished at all by totally spreading your army.
Are you being serious? You made ridiculous claims like "20 supply of ravens can kill a 100 supply toss army", but giving examples equally stupid stuff is invalid? If you leave a 100 suppy army stacked like that you're asking to lose it. The same as if you clump up 30 marines against psistorm, or fly a stacked muta army over widow mines. That's why spreading is a thing. You know that 2 vipers or 2 high templar will kill a 100 supply viking army right? But with a good pre split that number is reduced dramatically.
It's the same with ravens, I just tried fighting 2000 gas of ravens against 2000 gas of corruptors for example. If you stack the corruptors they all die, but if you spread them out you barely lose any (and I'm not talking seperate each unit, just a simple pre split).
And btw mass muta is not often seen nowadays because of thors, and hydras being just being better. Widow mines have been a thing since 2013, they aren't the reason LBM is dead.
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
You can make all kinds of shit happen in a unit tester. 3 widow mines can kill 50 mutas, one high templar can kill 30 marines etc etc.
The game should be balanced around the pro level. And currently at the pro level terran is by far the worst race. They haven't made a final in 6 months, Katowice had 2 terran in the ro12, GSL has 1 in the ro8, and WCS also had 1 in the ro8. That's why terrans are whining. Maru's performance at Katowice was the only glimmer of hope and it was enough to get terran nerfed again.
Check out the youtube videos then of progamers using them in real games lol...
Show me those videos then. From what I can see terran is by far the weakest race currently. Nerfing them even more is just ridiculous. Terran ultra lategame has been weak for years, and now that Maru won a few skyterran games that it apparently suddenly needs nerfing. P and Z players just don't want to adapt to terran actually competing in that area of the game for once.
Are you being intentionally dense?
To make it clear: Mutas as well as carriers and most air units work best when stacked, in a late game scenario DPS per area is important, you want to do as much damage as possible on every clash (deathball you know?). For that you need only watch any pro game using carriers mutas and even vikings.
In the case of parasitic bomb and psistorm most of the damage can be averted if you split after the fact plus they dont stack. And in the case of psistorm the damage is so low that marauders with medivacs can sometimes even stand in it and win fight.
Not to mention the fact that AAM is as the name suggests an ANTI ARMOR MISSILE NOT A SEEKER MISSILE which everybody hated. And the anti armor part actually is very strong and last 20 seconds, which equals +3 attack for marines for 2+ engagements on one cast. And since the AOE is huge u don't need more than a max of 3 casts to splash an army.
Also:
And this one to showcase how small drop can be crazily boosted by the AAM:
If that doesn't convince you, then you are hopeless.
Terran may or may not need buffs/changes but the AAM was just a replication of the seeker missile problem: unfun, unbalanced and without weakness or counter. Let's wait and see how terrans use the actual anti armor effect and the interference matrix.
We all know terrans are a bit slow to accept changes that are not instantly and obviously overpowered
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote: Plus your comparison is not really valid, since 50 mutas still have to fly into the mines and marines have to stand in the storm whereas the AAM has a big range and cant be evaded. Also to be fair widowmines are probably a big reason why mass mutas don't work as well any more and storm is a big reason why mass marine is not the best choice vs a toss with HT. Now also be aware of the fact that the AAM works versus EVERY UNIT IN THE GAME and can only be dimished at all by totally spreading your army.
Are you being serious? You made ridiculous claims like "20 supply of ravens can kill a 100 supply toss army", but giving examples equally stupid stuff is invalid? If you leave a 100 suppy army stacked like that you're asking to lose it. The same as if you clump up 30 marines against psistorm, or fly a stacked muta army over widow mines. That's why spreading is a thing. You know that 2 vipers or 2 high templar will kill a 100 supply viking army right? But with a good pre split that number is reduced dramatically.
It's the same with ravens, I just tried fighting 2000 gas of ravens against 2000 gas of corruptors for example. If you stack the corruptors they all die, but if you spread them out you barely lose any (and I'm not talking seperate each unit, just a simple pre split).
And btw mass muta is not often seen nowadays because of thors, and hydras being just being better. Widow mines have been a thing since 2013, they aren't the reason LBM is dead.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:57 Fango wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
You can make all kinds of shit happen in a unit tester. 3 widow mines can kill 50 mutas, one high templar can kill 30 marines etc etc.
The game should be balanced around the pro level. And currently at the pro level terran is by far the worst race. They haven't made a final in 6 months, Katowice had 2 terran in the ro12, GSL has 1 in the ro8, and WCS also had 1 in the ro8. That's why terrans are whining. Maru's performance at Katowice was the only glimmer of hope and it was enough to get terran nerfed again.
Check out the youtube videos then of progamers using them in real games lol...
Show me those videos then. From what I can see terran is by far the weakest race currently. Nerfing them even more is just ridiculous. Terran ultra lategame has been weak for years, and now that Maru won a few skyterran games that it apparently suddenly needs nerfing. P and Z players just don't want to adapt to terran actually competing in that area of the game for once.
Are you being intentionally dense?
To make it clear: Mutas as well as carriers and most air units work best when stacked, in a late game scenario DPS per area is important, you want to do as much damage as possible on every clash (deathball you know?). For that you need only watch any pro game using carriers mutas and even vikings.
In the case of parasitic bomb and psistorm most of the damage can be averted if you split after the fact plus they dont stack. And in the case of psistorm the damage is so low that marauders with medivacs can sometimes even stand in it and win fight.
Not to mention the fact that AAM is as the name suggests an ANTI ARMOR MISSILE NOT A SEEKER MISSILE which everybody hated. And the anti armor part actually is very strong and last 20 seconds, which equals +3 attack for marines for 2+ engagements on one cast. And since the AOE is huge u don't need more than a max of 3 casts to splash an army.
If that doesn't convince you, then you are hopeless.
Terran may or may not need buffs/changes but the AAM was just a replication of the seeker missile problem: unfun, unbalanced and without weakness or counter. Let's wait and see how terrans use the actual anti armor effect and the interference matrix.
We all know terrans are a bit slow to accept changes that are not instantly and obviously overpowered
wow those clips are crazy, can't believe people don't see how OP that ability is.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote: Plus your comparison is not really valid, since 50 mutas still have to fly into the mines and marines have to stand in the storm whereas the AAM has a big range and cant be evaded. Also to be fair widowmines are probably a big reason why mass mutas don't work as well any more and storm is a big reason why mass marine is not the best choice vs a toss with HT. Now also be aware of the fact that the AAM works versus EVERY UNIT IN THE GAME and can only be dimished at all by totally spreading your army.
Are you being serious? You made ridiculous claims like "20 supply of ravens can kill a 100 supply toss army", but giving examples equally stupid stuff is invalid? If you leave a 100 suppy army stacked like that you're asking to lose it. The same as if you clump up 30 marines against psistorm, or fly a stacked muta army over widow mines. That's why spreading is a thing. You know that 2 vipers or 2 high templar will kill a 100 supply viking army right? But with a good pre split that number is reduced dramatically.
It's the same with ravens, I just tried fighting 2000 gas of ravens against 2000 gas of corruptors for example. If you stack the corruptors they all die, but if you spread them out you barely lose any (and I'm not talking seperate each unit, just a simple pre split).
And btw mass muta is not often seen nowadays because of thors, and hydras being just being better. Widow mines have been a thing since 2013, they aren't the reason LBM is dead.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:57 Fango wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
You can make all kinds of shit happen in a unit tester. 3 widow mines can kill 50 mutas, one high templar can kill 30 marines etc etc.
The game should be balanced around the pro level. And currently at the pro level terran is by far the worst race. They haven't made a final in 6 months, Katowice had 2 terran in the ro12, GSL has 1 in the ro8, and WCS also had 1 in the ro8. That's why terrans are whining. Maru's performance at Katowice was the only glimmer of hope and it was enough to get terran nerfed again.
Check out the youtube videos then of progamers using them in real games lol...
Show me those videos then. From what I can see terran is by far the weakest race currently. Nerfing them even more is just ridiculous. Terran ultra lategame has been weak for years, and now that Maru won a few skyterran games that it apparently suddenly needs nerfing. P and Z players just don't want to adapt to terran actually competing in that area of the game for once.
Are you being intentionally dense?
To make it clear: Mutas as well as carriers and most air units work best when stacked, in a late game scenario DPS per area is important, you want to do as much damage as possible on every clash (deathball you know?). For that you need only watch any pro game using carriers mutas and even vikings.
In the case of parasitic bomb and psistorm most of the damage can be averted if you split after the fact plus they dont stack. And in the case of psistorm the damage is so low that marauders with medivacs can sometimes even stand in it and win fight.
Not to mention the fact that AAM is as the name suggests an ANTI ARMOR MISSILE NOT A SEEKER MISSILE which everybody hated. And the anti armor part actually is very strong and last 20 seconds, which equals +3 attack for marines for 2+ engagements on one cast. And since the AOE is huge u don't need more than a max of 3 casts to splash an army.
If that doesn't convince you, then you are hopeless.
Terran may or may not need buffs/changes but the AAM was just a replication of the seeker missile problem: unfun, unbalanced and without weakness or counter. Let's wait and see how terrans use the actual anti armor effect and the interference matrix.
We all know terrans are a bit slow to accept changes that are not instantly and obviously overpowered
Wait - so are you saying you can mitigate strong splash damage spells (psistorm/parabomb) by splitting your units? But its OK that Terran has to do it - because Terran units don't do more DPS when stacked together? LOL
Explain why we've yet to see a Terran win a major tournament since this "broken" spell has been patched?
1 terran in r08 gsl - 2 terran in ro12 - IEM - where you had foreigner zergs in both.
Your entire argument becomes funny though when you start to talk about "unfun and no weakness or counter" really?
No counter says we should have seen Terran win something yet no?
Unfun is a not relevant - pro players deserve a balanced game - that should be the number 1 priority - not placating community morons like you. What fucking units don't "work best when stacked"? Is this some kind of epiphany?
Only Terran has to worry about splitting their units - not Protoss not Zerg? You hear Protoss and Zerg players talk about raising their skill ceiling all the time - giving them more micro opportunities - this is a perfect example and as soon as we see Maru win 2 games with it you all shit your pants.
I'm not saying it is perfect as is -and might eventually require SOME kind of nerf - but it should absolutely not be nerfed into the ground like they are proposing.
How many more "hots widow mine nerfs" are we going to see before blizzard learns - DONT NERF RACES THAT AREN'T OVER-PERFORMING. It has literally always done more harm then good.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote: Plus your comparison is not really valid, since 50 mutas still have to fly into the mines and marines have to stand in the storm whereas the AAM has a big range and cant be evaded. Also to be fair widowmines are probably a big reason why mass mutas don't work as well any more and storm is a big reason why mass marine is not the best choice vs a toss with HT. Now also be aware of the fact that the AAM works versus EVERY UNIT IN THE GAME and can only be dimished at all by totally spreading your army.
Are you being serious? You made ridiculous claims like "20 supply of ravens can kill a 100 supply toss army", but giving examples equally stupid stuff is invalid? If you leave a 100 suppy army stacked like that you're asking to lose it. The same as if you clump up 30 marines against psistorm, or fly a stacked muta army over widow mines. That's why spreading is a thing. You know that 2 vipers or 2 high templar will kill a 100 supply viking army right? But with a good pre split that number is reduced dramatically.
It's the same with ravens, I just tried fighting 2000 gas of ravens against 2000 gas of corruptors for example. If you stack the corruptors they all die, but if you spread them out you barely lose any (and I'm not talking seperate each unit, just a simple pre split).
And btw mass muta is not often seen nowadays because of thors, and hydras being just being better. Widow mines have been a thing since 2013, they aren't the reason LBM is dead.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:57 Fango wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
You can make all kinds of shit happen in a unit tester. 3 widow mines can kill 50 mutas, one high templar can kill 30 marines etc etc.
The game should be balanced around the pro level. And currently at the pro level terran is by far the worst race. They haven't made a final in 6 months, Katowice had 2 terran in the ro12, GSL has 1 in the ro8, and WCS also had 1 in the ro8. That's why terrans are whining. Maru's performance at Katowice was the only glimmer of hope and it was enough to get terran nerfed again.
Check out the youtube videos then of progamers using them in real games lol...
Show me those videos then. From what I can see terran is by far the weakest race currently. Nerfing them even more is just ridiculous. Terran ultra lategame has been weak for years, and now that Maru won a few skyterran games that it apparently suddenly needs nerfing. P and Z players just don't want to adapt to terran actually competing in that area of the game for once.
Are you being intentionally dense?
To make it clear: Mutas as well as carriers and most air units work best when stacked, in a late game scenario DPS per area is important, you want to do as much damage as possible on every clash (deathball you know?). For that you need only watch any pro game using carriers mutas and even vikings.
In the case of parasitic bomb and psistorm most of the damage can be averted if you split after the fact plus they dont stack. And in the case of psistorm the damage is so low that marauders with medivacs can sometimes even stand in it and win fight.
Not to mention the fact that AAM is as the name suggests an ANTI ARMOR MISSILE NOT A SEEKER MISSILE which everybody hated. And the anti armor part actually is very strong and last 20 seconds, which equals +3 attack for marines for 2+ engagements on one cast. And since the AOE is huge u don't need more than a max of 3 casts to splash an army.
If that doesn't convince you, then you are hopeless.
Terran may or may not need buffs/changes but the AAM was just a replication of the seeker missile problem: unfun, unbalanced and without weakness or counter. Let's wait and see how terrans use the actual anti armor effect and the interference matrix.
We all know terrans are a bit slow to accept changes that are not instantly and obviously overpowered
Wait - so are you saying you can mitigate strong splash damage spells (psistorm/parabomb) by splitting your units? But its OK that Terran has to do it - because Terran units don't do more DPS when stacked together? LOL
Explain why we've yet to see a Terran win a major tournament since this "broken" spell has been patched?
1 terran in r08 gsl - 2 terran in ro12 - IEM - where you had foreigner zergs in both.
Your entire argument becomes funny though when you start to talk about "unfun and no weakness or counter" really?
No counter says we should have seen Terran win something yet no?
Unfun is a not relevant - pro players deserve a balanced game - that should be the number 1 priority - not placating community morons like you. What fucking units don't "work best when stacked"? Is this some kind of epiphany?
Only Terran has to worry about splitting their units - not Protoss not Zerg? You hear Protoss and Zerg players talk about raising their skill ceiling all the time - giving them more micro opportunities - this is a perfect example and as soon as we see Maru win 2 games with it you all shit your pants.
I'm not saying it is perfect as is -and might eventually require SOME kind of nerf - but it should absolutely not be nerfed into the ground like they are proposing.
How many more "hots widow mine nerfs" are we going to see before blizzard learns - DONT NERF RACES THAT AREN'T OVER-PERFORMING. It has literally always done more harm then good.
Splitting carriers and broods is not exactly equal to splitting stimmed MM. Give movement boost to those units and we can talk about splitting. It is similar to people saying protoss needs to micro high templars (and they do not talk ab out the micro with prism)
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote: Plus your comparison is not really valid, since 50 mutas still have to fly into the mines and marines have to stand in the storm whereas the AAM has a big range and cant be evaded. Also to be fair widowmines are probably a big reason why mass mutas don't work as well any more and storm is a big reason why mass marine is not the best choice vs a toss with HT. Now also be aware of the fact that the AAM works versus EVERY UNIT IN THE GAME and can only be dimished at all by totally spreading your army.
Are you being serious? You made ridiculous claims like "20 supply of ravens can kill a 100 supply toss army", but giving examples equally stupid stuff is invalid? If you leave a 100 suppy army stacked like that you're asking to lose it. The same as if you clump up 30 marines against psistorm, or fly a stacked muta army over widow mines. That's why spreading is a thing. You know that 2 vipers or 2 high templar will kill a 100 supply viking army right? But with a good pre split that number is reduced dramatically.
It's the same with ravens, I just tried fighting 2000 gas of ravens against 2000 gas of corruptors for example. If you stack the corruptors they all die, but if you spread them out you barely lose any (and I'm not talking seperate each unit, just a simple pre split).
And btw mass muta is not often seen nowadays because of thors, and hydras being just being better. Widow mines have been a thing since 2013, they aren't the reason LBM is dead.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:57 Fango wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
You can make all kinds of shit happen in a unit tester. 3 widow mines can kill 50 mutas, one high templar can kill 30 marines etc etc.
The game should be balanced around the pro level. And currently at the pro level terran is by far the worst race. They haven't made a final in 6 months, Katowice had 2 terran in the ro12, GSL has 1 in the ro8, and WCS also had 1 in the ro8. That's why terrans are whining. Maru's performance at Katowice was the only glimmer of hope and it was enough to get terran nerfed again.
Check out the youtube videos then of progamers using them in real games lol...
Show me those videos then. From what I can see terran is by far the weakest race currently. Nerfing them even more is just ridiculous. Terran ultra lategame has been weak for years, and now that Maru won a few skyterran games that it apparently suddenly needs nerfing. P and Z players just don't want to adapt to terran actually competing in that area of the game for once.
Are you being intentionally dense?
To make it clear: Mutas as well as carriers and most air units work best when stacked, in a late game scenario DPS per area is important, you want to do as much damage as possible on every clash (deathball you know?). For that you need only watch any pro game using carriers mutas and even vikings.
In the case of parasitic bomb and psistorm most of the damage can be averted if you split after the fact plus they dont stack. And in the case of psistorm the damage is so low that marauders with medivacs can sometimes even stand in it and win fight.
Not to mention the fact that AAM is as the name suggests an ANTI ARMOR MISSILE NOT A SEEKER MISSILE which everybody hated. And the anti armor part actually is very strong and last 20 seconds, which equals +3 attack for marines for 2+ engagements on one cast. And since the AOE is huge u don't need more than a max of 3 casts to splash an army.
If that doesn't convince you, then you are hopeless.
Terran may or may not need buffs/changes but the AAM was just a replication of the seeker missile problem: unfun, unbalanced and without weakness or counter. Let's wait and see how terrans use the actual anti armor effect and the interference matrix.
We all know terrans are a bit slow to accept changes that are not instantly and obviously overpowered
Wait - so are you saying you can mitigate strong splash damage spells (psistorm/parabomb) by splitting your units? But its OK that Terran has to do it - because Terran units don't do more DPS when stacked together? LOL
Explain why we've yet to see a Terran win a major tournament since this "broken" spell has been patched?
1 terran in r08 gsl - 2 terran in ro12 - IEM - where you had foreigner zergs in both.
Your entire argument becomes funny though when you start to talk about "unfun and no weakness or counter" really?
No counter says we should have seen Terran win something yet no?
Unfun is a not relevant - pro players deserve a balanced game - that should be the number 1 priority - not placating community morons like you. What fucking units don't "work best when stacked"? Is this some kind of epiphany?
Only Terran has to worry about splitting their units - not Protoss not Zerg? You hear Protoss and Zerg players talk about raising their skill ceiling all the time - giving them more micro opportunities - this is a perfect example and as soon as we see Maru win 2 games with it you all shit your pants.
I'm not saying it is perfect as is -and might eventually require SOME kind of nerf - but it should absolutely not be nerfed into the ground like they are proposing.
How many more "hots widow mine nerfs" are we going to see before blizzard learns - DONT NERF RACES THAT AREN'T OVER-PERFORMING. It has literally always done more harm then good.
Splitting carriers and broods is not exactly equal to splitting stimmed MM. Give movement boost to those units and we can talk about splitting. It is similar to people saying protoss needs to micro high templars (and they do not talk ab out the micro with prism)
Yah I didn't say anything about MM - unless you are planning to beat BL/infestor/viper with MM - then good luck.
Ghosts / Liberators/ Tanks / Vikings and a small about of MM (and apparently not fucking ravens anymore) are whats in your army fighting that comp.
Am i the only one who put design over anything else??? I understand terran's struggle but FFS! Keeping the current ravens will leave no room to buff other and what you guys terran players need to bitch about is fucking vikings buff not the raven! Force blizzard be more aggressive with terran favtory units!
On March 07 2018 21:45 JackONeill wrote: I would actually have been in favor of increasing the cost of the missile back to 125 but leaving it as it is.
it would be hard to use it when you have only few ravens
On March 07 2018 21:45 JackONeill wrote: I would actually have been in favor of increasing the cost of the missile back to 125 but leaving it as it is.
it would be hard to use it when you have only few ravens
WASN'T THE REASON WHY NO ONE USES AAM IN BEFORE IS BECAUSE OF IT'S ENERGY COST???
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote: Plus your comparison is not really valid, since 50 mutas still have to fly into the mines and marines have to stand in the storm whereas the AAM has a big range and cant be evaded. Also to be fair widowmines are probably a big reason why mass mutas don't work as well any more and storm is a big reason why mass marine is not the best choice vs a toss with HT. Now also be aware of the fact that the AAM works versus EVERY UNIT IN THE GAME and can only be dimished at all by totally spreading your army.
Are you being serious? You made ridiculous claims like "20 supply of ravens can kill a 100 supply toss army", but giving examples equally stupid stuff is invalid? If you leave a 100 suppy army stacked like that you're asking to lose it. The same as if you clump up 30 marines against psistorm, or fly a stacked muta army over widow mines. That's why spreading is a thing. You know that 2 vipers or 2 high templar will kill a 100 supply viking army right? But with a good pre split that number is reduced dramatically.
It's the same with ravens, I just tried fighting 2000 gas of ravens against 2000 gas of corruptors for example. If you stack the corruptors they all die, but if you spread them out you barely lose any (and I'm not talking seperate each unit, just a simple pre split).
And btw mass muta is not often seen nowadays because of thors, and hydras being just being better. Widow mines have been a thing since 2013, they aren't the reason LBM is dead.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:57 Fango wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
You can make all kinds of shit happen in a unit tester. 3 widow mines can kill 50 mutas, one high templar can kill 30 marines etc etc.
The game should be balanced around the pro level. And currently at the pro level terran is by far the worst race. They haven't made a final in 6 months, Katowice had 2 terran in the ro12, GSL has 1 in the ro8, and WCS also had 1 in the ro8. That's why terrans are whining. Maru's performance at Katowice was the only glimmer of hope and it was enough to get terran nerfed again.
Check out the youtube videos then of progamers using them in real games lol...
Show me those videos then. From what I can see terran is by far the weakest race currently. Nerfing them even more is just ridiculous. Terran ultra lategame has been weak for years, and now that Maru won a few skyterran games that it apparently suddenly needs nerfing. P and Z players just don't want to adapt to terran actually competing in that area of the game for once.
Are you being intentionally dense?
To make it clear: Mutas as well as carriers and most air units work best when stacked, in a late game scenario DPS per area is important, you want to do as much damage as possible on every clash (deathball you know?). For that you need only watch any pro game using carriers mutas and even vikings.
In the case of parasitic bomb and psistorm most of the damage can be averted if you split after the fact plus they dont stack. And in the case of psistorm the damage is so low that marauders with medivacs can sometimes even stand in it and win fight.
Not to mention the fact that AAM is as the name suggests an ANTI ARMOR MISSILE NOT A SEEKER MISSILE which everybody hated. And the anti armor part actually is very strong and last 20 seconds, which equals +3 attack for marines for 2+ engagements on one cast. And since the AOE is huge u don't need more than a max of 3 casts to splash an army.
If that doesn't convince you, then you are hopeless.
Terran may or may not need buffs/changes but the AAM was just a replication of the seeker missile problem: unfun, unbalanced and without weakness or counter. Let's wait and see how terrans use the actual anti armor effect and the interference matrix.
We all know terrans are a bit slow to accept changes that are not instantly and obviously overpowered
Wait - so are you saying you can mitigate strong splash damage spells (psistorm/parabomb) by splitting your units? But its OK that Terran has to do it - because Terran units don't do more DPS when stacked together? LOL
Explain why we've yet to see a Terran win a major tournament since this "broken" spell has been patched?
1 terran in r08 gsl - 2 terran in ro12 - IEM - where you had foreigner zergs in both.
Your entire argument becomes funny though when you start to talk about "unfun and no weakness or counter" really?
No counter says we should have seen Terran win something yet no?
Unfun is a not relevant - pro players deserve a balanced game - that should be the number 1 priority - not placating community morons like you. What fucking units don't "work best when stacked"? Is this some kind of epiphany?
Only Terran has to worry about splitting their units - not Protoss not Zerg? You hear Protoss and Zerg players talk about raising their skill ceiling all the time - giving them more micro opportunities - this is a perfect example and as soon as we see Maru win 2 games with it you all shit your pants.
I'm not saying it is perfect as is -and might eventually require SOME kind of nerf - but it should absolutely not be nerfed into the ground like they are proposing.
How many more "hots widow mine nerfs" are we going to see before blizzard learns - DONT NERF RACES THAT AREN'T OVER-PERFORMING. It has literally always done more harm then good.
Splitting carriers and broods is not exactly equal to splitting stimmed MM. Give movement boost to those units and we can talk about splitting. It is similar to people saying protoss needs to micro high templars (and they do not talk ab out the micro with prism)
Considering their ridiculous pick-up range what‘s so tough about microing Warp Prisms again?
On March 08 2018 22:34 seemsgood wrote: Am i the only one who put design over anything else??? I understand terran's struggle but FFS! Keeping the current ravens will leave no room to buff other and what you guys terran players need to bitch about is fucking vikings buff not the raven! Force blizzard be more aggressive with terran favtory units!
This. Ask for a bigger viking buff, ask for cheaper Ravens or a cheaper missile, but the one thing you shouldn't ask for is to keep the damage the same because it isn't going to happen no matter how much you whine.
Said it in the game thread and saying it again. Maru played a cancerous build this tournament. It was only because he's a fan favourite that people are still arguing for him. You can argue Terrans need balance work all you want but Raven was something that obviously deserves to be nuked, and it has nothing to do with balance. Maru lost his chance to become a patch terran, and I'm glad he did. He will still be my second favourite terran to watch only behind TY though.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote: Plus your comparison is not really valid, since 50 mutas still have to fly into the mines and marines have to stand in the storm whereas the AAM has a big range and cant be evaded. Also to be fair widowmines are probably a big reason why mass mutas don't work as well any more and storm is a big reason why mass marine is not the best choice vs a toss with HT. Now also be aware of the fact that the AAM works versus EVERY UNIT IN THE GAME and can only be dimished at all by totally spreading your army.
Are you being serious? You made ridiculous claims like "20 supply of ravens can kill a 100 supply toss army", but giving examples equally stupid stuff is invalid? If you leave a 100 suppy army stacked like that you're asking to lose it. The same as if you clump up 30 marines against psistorm, or fly a stacked muta army over widow mines. That's why spreading is a thing. You know that 2 vipers or 2 high templar will kill a 100 supply viking army right? But with a good pre split that number is reduced dramatically.
It's the same with ravens, I just tried fighting 2000 gas of ravens against 2000 gas of corruptors for example. If you stack the corruptors they all die, but if you spread them out you barely lose any (and I'm not talking seperate each unit, just a simple pre split).
And btw mass muta is not often seen nowadays because of thors, and hydras being just being better. Widow mines have been a thing since 2013, they aren't the reason LBM is dead.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:57 Fango wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
You can make all kinds of shit happen in a unit tester. 3 widow mines can kill 50 mutas, one high templar can kill 30 marines etc etc.
The game should be balanced around the pro level. And currently at the pro level terran is by far the worst race. They haven't made a final in 6 months, Katowice had 2 terran in the ro12, GSL has 1 in the ro8, and WCS also had 1 in the ro8. That's why terrans are whining. Maru's performance at Katowice was the only glimmer of hope and it was enough to get terran nerfed again.
Check out the youtube videos then of progamers using them in real games lol...
Show me those videos then. From what I can see terran is by far the weakest race currently. Nerfing them even more is just ridiculous. Terran ultra lategame has been weak for years, and now that Maru won a few skyterran games that it apparently suddenly needs nerfing. P and Z players just don't want to adapt to terran actually competing in that area of the game for once.
Are you being intentionally dense?
To make it clear: Mutas as well as carriers and most air units work best when stacked, in a late game scenario DPS per area is important, you want to do as much damage as possible on every clash (deathball you know?). For that you need only watch any pro game using carriers mutas and even vikings.
In the case of parasitic bomb and psistorm most of the damage can be averted if you split after the fact plus they dont stack. And in the case of psistorm the damage is so low that marauders with medivacs can sometimes even stand in it and win fight.
Not to mention the fact that AAM is as the name suggests an ANTI ARMOR MISSILE NOT A SEEKER MISSILE which everybody hated. And the anti armor part actually is very strong and last 20 seconds, which equals +3 attack for marines for 2+ engagements on one cast. And since the AOE is huge u don't need more than a max of 3 casts to splash an army.
If that doesn't convince you, then you are hopeless.
Terran may or may not need buffs/changes but the AAM was just a replication of the seeker missile problem: unfun, unbalanced and without weakness or counter. Let's wait and see how terrans use the actual anti armor effect and the interference matrix.
We all know terrans are a bit slow to accept changes that are not instantly and obviously overpowered
Holy shit the double standards are ridiculous. So vikings and terran units are fine against aoe because you should just split? But protoss and zerg shouldn't have to do the same?
I cannot believe you're showing clips of players stacking literally thousands of resources worth of units on top of eachother then complaining that they die. None of those fights would have ended that way had the players just spread their units out and managed the engagements property. Yet if a skyterran army clumped up like that and died to a couple fungals/parasitic bombs you'd just tell them to split....
Now you say that they have to clump up units to maximise dps? The trade off is that stacking makes them more vulnerable to aoe spells. This is something terran has been dealing with since forever. Like I said before, go load up your precious unit tester and see for yourself. When I tried it, 2000 gas worth of ravens can't kill 2000 gas of corruptors or carriers if they pre-split. The same way 2 vipers cannot kill 20 vikings if they're spread out.
Apparently protoss and Zerg players are just too used to the lategame being an autowin that they don't want to learn how to fight there. They'd rather complain about the objectively weakest race in the game actually having a chance there for once. You can dislike the AAM from a design perspective, but calling it imbalanced is outright stupid. Terran is the worst performing race in tournaments right now by a significant margin. If terran was imba there would be more than one player getting results.
I agree that the Raven needed a change, but I think the frustration I'm seeing from some of the Terrans is because almost everything that used to feel powerful for Terran does not feel that way anymore.
- MMM has dramatically weakened by the loss of the widow mine and ling bane hydra strength as well as zealot legs and mass Immortal/various protoss buffs - Vikings were the real casualty of the buff to both Carrier and Corrupter in order to deal with the Carrier - Reaper grenade nerf, while needed for Byun, took out the only viable rush build
We are left with I would say 2 units that feel powerful for Terran when you get them where you want: Tanks and Liberators, and these are units that have clear and powerful counters. If they are not stopped before they can get set up properly and with their proper support, they are still powerful.
It does not work this way for other races. Immortals are a great unit to have in all circumstances until mega-late game. Ultralisks crash through lines with their support. Speedlings are useful at every stage of a game for Zerg, and they can kill their Terran "counter", the Hellion, at many stages of the game.
Vipers, High Templars, Dark Templar, Hydras, Nydus, the Warp Prism. Having played as the other races, these units feel powerful because they can take control of the game.
I am all for a change besides the Raven that will give Terran options, but my hope is for something more than a 10 HP VIking buff.
1. Show me Blue Flame Hellbats that can hold their own against chargelots. 2. How about Vikings that can take down other air units. (What are Vikings good against?) 3. Give me a reason to make a Cyclone after the five minute mark. (Late game speed buff?) 4. Give me a use for the widow mine. 5. What does the Marauder excel against?
There are a lot of places that could be tweaked for Terran, I hope these are some areas that might be considered.
@Blizzard Your technical support team suspended my b.net support forum account citing "harassment" because i've been inquiring on the forums for 4 MONTHS about a bug on YOUR end for this game that has been neglected to get fixed. This is incredibly unethical and abuse of power. This is the absolute worst consumer experience i've ever had in the 32 years i've been on this planet.
Bug=Green selection box when selecting units and builds doesn't appear. I cannot tell what units i've selected unless I look all the way at the bottom of the screen in the black rectangle box. This makes playing the game incredibly hard. Do you have any idea how hard it is to micro like this? Do you have any idea how hard it is to select/group units late game and confidently know you've selected it? This is ruining my gameplay experience. I'm not a free to play player either. I bought all 3 games. I paid the almost 200 USD for everything. As a paying customer, I have an expectation to have issues fixed within a reasonable amount of time. 4 months is absurd not to mention the unethical suspension of my b.net support forum account.
I'm getting to the point where you will lose my loyalty as a customer and this whole thing makes me want to work against your company. Until this is escalated to a C-level executive and the problem is fixed, i'm going to spread the word on various social media outlets that no one should buy or play blizzard games because at this point i'd rather see you guys lose money/customers due to the way I was treated. What you've done is turn one of your most loyal customers(since the days of d1) into someone who wants to watch you guys lose money and burn. Blizzard has made my gameplay AND technical/bug/customer support experience extremely unenjoyable. I'm very unhappy.
On March 08 2018 23:36 Fango wrote: Yet if a skyterran army clumped up like that and died to a couple fungals/parasitic bombs you'd just tell them to split....
Strangely, at times, an unprepared toss obliterating a 3xtimes superior max out capital stacked ship army in seconds didn't call for an immediate nerf. (well, archon toilet was the only late game hope vs BL/infestor at time )
On March 08 2018 23:36 Fango wrote: Yet if a skyterran army clumped up like that and died to a couple fungals/parasitic bombs you'd just tell them to split....
Strangely, at times, an unprepared toss obliterating a 3xtimes superior max out capital stacked ship army in seconds didn't call for an immediate nerf. (well, archon toilet was the only late game hope vs BL/infestor at time )
I feel like people confuses splitting reactivity (once the storm hits or the banes comes, for example) and pre-spreading an army before taking engagement. Pre-spreading can be made and is made with very slow units like BL, or even siege tanks ! (vs viper blinding cloud).
Personally i feel like this raven iteration was a bad design, but i feel like all mass-air clumped deathball are terrible in SC2, badly designed, frustrating to play with, to play versus, and generally way too powerfull. The abusive clustering of air units is he main part of the issue. This could have been fixed easily in design-patch by adding an air-collision radius (so we can still have clustered mutas and phoenixes with 0 radius but not BL or carriers ) This is a know issue and critique for years, yet blizzard do nothing to it. And then to counter bad design choice effects they make another bad design units/mechanism, and so on...
On March 09 2018 01:35 xongnox wrote: I feel like people confuses splitting reactivity (once the storm hits or the banes comes, for example) and pre-spreading an army before taking engagement. Pre-spreading can be made and is made with very slow units like BL, or even siege tanks ! (vs viper blinding cloud).
Personally i feel like this raven iteration was a bad design, but i feel like all mass-air clumped deathball are terrible in SC2, badly designed, frustrating to play with, to play versus, and generally way too powerfull. The abusive clustering of air units is he main part of the issue. This could have been fixed easily in design-patch by adding an air-collision radius (so we can still have clustered mutas and phoenixes with 0 radius but not BL or carriers ) This is a know issue and critique for years, yet blizzard do nothing to it. And then to counter bad design choice effects they make another bad design units/mechanism, and so on...
And every time there was something in the game or the balance test map that could deal with mass air deathballs, it either never made it or was removed from the game. Lib anti-air? Removed from the game. Seeker missile? Removed from the game. Thor splash attack full damage vs all? Never made it out of the test map. AAM? Removed from the game.
Activision wants toss and zerg to have unstoppable lategames vs terran in order to force 'action packed' games. It sounds like a stupid conspiracy theory but every community update, every patch, reinforces it.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote: Plus your comparison is not really valid, since 50 mutas still have to fly into the mines and marines have to stand in the storm whereas the AAM has a big range and cant be evaded. Also to be fair widowmines are probably a big reason why mass mutas don't work as well any more and storm is a big reason why mass marine is not the best choice vs a toss with HT. Now also be aware of the fact that the AAM works versus EVERY UNIT IN THE GAME and can only be dimished at all by totally spreading your army.
Are you being serious? You made ridiculous claims like "20 supply of ravens can kill a 100 supply toss army", but giving examples equally stupid stuff is invalid? If you leave a 100 suppy army stacked like that you're asking to lose it. The same as if you clump up 30 marines against psistorm, or fly a stacked muta army over widow mines. That's why spreading is a thing. You know that 2 vipers or 2 high templar will kill a 100 supply viking army right? But with a good pre split that number is reduced dramatically.
It's the same with ravens, I just tried fighting 2000 gas of ravens against 2000 gas of corruptors for example. If you stack the corruptors they all die, but if you spread them out you barely lose any (and I'm not talking seperate each unit, just a simple pre split).
And btw mass muta is not often seen nowadays because of thors, and hydras being just being better. Widow mines have been a thing since 2013, they aren't the reason LBM is dead.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:57 Fango wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
You can make all kinds of shit happen in a unit tester. 3 widow mines can kill 50 mutas, one high templar can kill 30 marines etc etc.
The game should be balanced around the pro level. And currently at the pro level terran is by far the worst race. They haven't made a final in 6 months, Katowice had 2 terran in the ro12, GSL has 1 in the ro8, and WCS also had 1 in the ro8. That's why terrans are whining. Maru's performance at Katowice was the only glimmer of hope and it was enough to get terran nerfed again.
Check out the youtube videos then of progamers using them in real games lol...
Show me those videos then. From what I can see terran is by far the weakest race currently. Nerfing them even more is just ridiculous. Terran ultra lategame has been weak for years, and now that Maru won a few skyterran games that it apparently suddenly needs nerfing. P and Z players just don't want to adapt to terran actually competing in that area of the game for once.
Are you being intentionally dense?
To make it clear: Mutas as well as carriers and most air units work best when stacked, in a late game scenario DPS per area is important, you want to do as much damage as possible on every clash (deathball you know?). For that you need only watch any pro game using carriers mutas and even vikings.
In the case of parasitic bomb and psistorm most of the damage can be averted if you split after the fact plus they dont stack. And in the case of psistorm the damage is so low that marauders with medivacs can sometimes even stand in it and win fight.
Not to mention the fact that AAM is as the name suggests an ANTI ARMOR MISSILE NOT A SEEKER MISSILE which everybody hated. And the anti armor part actually is very strong and last 20 seconds, which equals +3 attack for marines for 2+ engagements on one cast. And since the AOE is huge u don't need more than a max of 3 casts to splash an army.
If that doesn't convince you, then you are hopeless.
Terran may or may not need buffs/changes but the AAM was just a replication of the seeker missile problem: unfun, unbalanced and without weakness or counter. Let's wait and see how terrans use the actual anti armor effect and the interference matrix.
We all know terrans are a bit slow to accept changes that are not instantly and obviously overpowered
Holy shit the double standards are ridiculous. So vikings and terran units are fine against aoe because you should just split? But protoss and zerg shouldn't have to do the same?
I cannot believe you're showing clips of players stacking literally thousands of resources worth of units on top of eachother then complaining that they die. None of those fights would have ended that way had the players just spread their units out and managed the engagements property. Yet if a skyterran army clumped up like that and died to a couple fungals/parasitic bombs you'd just tell them to split....
Now you say that they have to clump up units to maximise dps? The trade off is that stacking makes them more vulnerable to aoe spells. This is something terran has been dealing with since forever. Like I said before, go load up your precious unit tester and see for yourself. When I tried it, 2000 gas worth of ravens can't kill 2000 gas of corruptors or carriers if they pre-split. The same way 2 vipers cannot kill 20 vikings if they're spread out.
Apparently protoss and Zerg players are just too used to the lategame being an autowin that they don't want to learn how to fight there. They'd rather complain about the objectively weakest race in the game actually having a chance there for once. You can dislike the AAM from a design perspective, but calling it imbalanced is outright stupid. Terran is the worst performing race in tournaments right now by a significant margin. If terran was imba there would be more than one player getting results.
How are you even going to pre split an air army of broods and carriers? Yes you can pre split it and leave it there, then when you actually decide to move it clumps up again. Free strategy tip: don't attack if it's pre split and wait.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote: Plus your comparison is not really valid, since 50 mutas still have to fly into the mines and marines have to stand in the storm whereas the AAM has a big range and cant be evaded. Also to be fair widowmines are probably a big reason why mass mutas don't work as well any more and storm is a big reason why mass marine is not the best choice vs a toss with HT. Now also be aware of the fact that the AAM works versus EVERY UNIT IN THE GAME and can only be dimished at all by totally spreading your army.
Are you being serious? You made ridiculous claims like "20 supply of ravens can kill a 100 supply toss army", but giving examples equally stupid stuff is invalid? If you leave a 100 suppy army stacked like that you're asking to lose it. The same as if you clump up 30 marines against psistorm, or fly a stacked muta army over widow mines. That's why spreading is a thing. You know that 2 vipers or 2 high templar will kill a 100 supply viking army right? But with a good pre split that number is reduced dramatically.
It's the same with ravens, I just tried fighting 2000 gas of ravens against 2000 gas of corruptors for example. If you stack the corruptors they all die, but if you spread them out you barely lose any (and I'm not talking seperate each unit, just a simple pre split).
And btw mass muta is not often seen nowadays because of thors, and hydras being just being better. Widow mines have been a thing since 2013, they aren't the reason LBM is dead.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:57 Fango wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
You can make all kinds of shit happen in a unit tester. 3 widow mines can kill 50 mutas, one high templar can kill 30 marines etc etc.
The game should be balanced around the pro level. And currently at the pro level terran is by far the worst race. They haven't made a final in 6 months, Katowice had 2 terran in the ro12, GSL has 1 in the ro8, and WCS also had 1 in the ro8. That's why terrans are whining. Maru's performance at Katowice was the only glimmer of hope and it was enough to get terran nerfed again.
Check out the youtube videos then of progamers using them in real games lol...
Show me those videos then. From what I can see terran is by far the weakest race currently. Nerfing them even more is just ridiculous. Terran ultra lategame has been weak for years, and now that Maru won a few skyterran games that it apparently suddenly needs nerfing. P and Z players just don't want to adapt to terran actually competing in that area of the game for once.
Are you being intentionally dense?
To make it clear: Mutas as well as carriers and most air units work best when stacked, in a late game scenario DPS per area is important, you want to do as much damage as possible on every clash (deathball you know?). For that you need only watch any pro game using carriers mutas and even vikings.
In the case of parasitic bomb and psistorm most of the damage can be averted if you split after the fact plus they dont stack. And in the case of psistorm the damage is so low that marauders with medivacs can sometimes even stand in it and win fight.
Not to mention the fact that AAM is as the name suggests an ANTI ARMOR MISSILE NOT A SEEKER MISSILE which everybody hated. And the anti armor part actually is very strong and last 20 seconds, which equals +3 attack for marines for 2+ engagements on one cast. And since the AOE is huge u don't need more than a max of 3 casts to splash an army.
If that doesn't convince you, then you are hopeless.
Terran may or may not need buffs/changes but the AAM was just a replication of the seeker missile problem: unfun, unbalanced and without weakness or counter. Let's wait and see how terrans use the actual anti armor effect and the interference matrix.
We all know terrans are a bit slow to accept changes that are not instantly and obviously overpowered
Wait - so are you saying you can mitigate strong splash damage spells (psistorm/parabomb) by splitting your units? But its OK that Terran has to do it - because Terran units don't do more DPS when stacked together? LOL
Explain why we've yet to see a Terran win a major tournament since this "broken" spell has been patched?
1 terran in r08 gsl - 2 terran in ro12 - IEM - where you had foreigner zergs in both.
Your entire argument becomes funny though when you start to talk about "unfun and no weakness or counter" really?
No counter says we should have seen Terran win something yet no?
Unfun is a not relevant - pro players deserve a balanced game - that should be the number 1 priority - not placating community morons like you. What fucking units don't "work best when stacked"? Is this some kind of epiphany?
Only Terran has to worry about splitting their units - not Protoss not Zerg? You hear Protoss and Zerg players talk about raising their skill ceiling all the time - giving them more micro opportunities - this is a perfect example and as soon as we see Maru win 2 games with it you all shit your pants.
I'm not saying it is perfect as is -and might eventually require SOME kind of nerf - but it should absolutely not be nerfed into the ground like they are proposing.
How many more "hots widow mine nerfs" are we going to see before blizzard learns - DONT NERF RACES THAT AREN'T OVER-PERFORMING. It has literally always done more harm then good.
Splitting carriers and broods is not exactly equal to splitting stimmed MM. Give movement boost to those units and we can talk about splitting. It is similar to people saying protoss needs to micro high templars (and they do not talk ab out the micro with prism)
Yah I didn't say anything about MM - unless you are planning to beat BL/infestor/viper with MM - then good luck.
Ghosts / Liberators/ Tanks / Vikings and a small about of MM (and apparently not fucking ravens anymore) are whats in your army fighting that comp.
The fuck are you writing about? I am talking about SPLITTING! And when Terrans usually split it is bio against storm or banes. Or vikings against zerg. That is not exactly comparable to broods or carriers with their movement speed and mostly - AAM hits much faster than anything mentioned above.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote: Plus your comparison is not really valid, since 50 mutas still have to fly into the mines and marines have to stand in the storm whereas the AAM has a big range and cant be evaded. Also to be fair widowmines are probably a big reason why mass mutas don't work as well any more and storm is a big reason why mass marine is not the best choice vs a toss with HT. Now also be aware of the fact that the AAM works versus EVERY UNIT IN THE GAME and can only be dimished at all by totally spreading your army.
Are you being serious? You made ridiculous claims like "20 supply of ravens can kill a 100 supply toss army", but giving examples equally stupid stuff is invalid? If you leave a 100 suppy army stacked like that you're asking to lose it. The same as if you clump up 30 marines against psistorm, or fly a stacked muta army over widow mines. That's why spreading is a thing. You know that 2 vipers or 2 high templar will kill a 100 supply viking army right? But with a good pre split that number is reduced dramatically.
It's the same with ravens, I just tried fighting 2000 gas of ravens against 2000 gas of corruptors for example. If you stack the corruptors they all die, but if you spread them out you barely lose any (and I'm not talking seperate each unit, just a simple pre split).
And btw mass muta is not often seen nowadays because of thors, and hydras being just being better. Widow mines have been a thing since 2013, they aren't the reason LBM is dead.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:57 Fango wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
You can make all kinds of shit happen in a unit tester. 3 widow mines can kill 50 mutas, one high templar can kill 30 marines etc etc.
The game should be balanced around the pro level. And currently at the pro level terran is by far the worst race. They haven't made a final in 6 months, Katowice had 2 terran in the ro12, GSL has 1 in the ro8, and WCS also had 1 in the ro8. That's why terrans are whining. Maru's performance at Katowice was the only glimmer of hope and it was enough to get terran nerfed again.
Check out the youtube videos then of progamers using them in real games lol...
Show me those videos then. From what I can see terran is by far the weakest race currently. Nerfing them even more is just ridiculous. Terran ultra lategame has been weak for years, and now that Maru won a few skyterran games that it apparently suddenly needs nerfing. P and Z players just don't want to adapt to terran actually competing in that area of the game for once.
Are you being intentionally dense?
To make it clear: Mutas as well as carriers and most air units work best when stacked, in a late game scenario DPS per area is important, you want to do as much damage as possible on every clash (deathball you know?). For that you need only watch any pro game using carriers mutas and even vikings.
In the case of parasitic bomb and psistorm most of the damage can be averted if you split after the fact plus they dont stack. And in the case of psistorm the damage is so low that marauders with medivacs can sometimes even stand in it and win fight.
Not to mention the fact that AAM is as the name suggests an ANTI ARMOR MISSILE NOT A SEEKER MISSILE which everybody hated. And the anti armor part actually is very strong and last 20 seconds, which equals +3 attack for marines for 2+ engagements on one cast. And since the AOE is huge u don't need more than a max of 3 casts to splash an army.
If that doesn't convince you, then you are hopeless.
Terran may or may not need buffs/changes but the AAM was just a replication of the seeker missile problem: unfun, unbalanced and without weakness or counter. Let's wait and see how terrans use the actual anti armor effect and the interference matrix.
We all know terrans are a bit slow to accept changes that are not instantly and obviously overpowered
Wait - so are you saying you can mitigate strong splash damage spells (psistorm/parabomb) by splitting your units? But its OK that Terran has to do it - because Terran units don't do more DPS when stacked together? LOL
Explain why we've yet to see a Terran win a major tournament since this "broken" spell has been patched?
1 terran in r08 gsl - 2 terran in ro12 - IEM - where you had foreigner zergs in both.
Your entire argument becomes funny though when you start to talk about "unfun and no weakness or counter" really?
No counter says we should have seen Terran win something yet no?
Unfun is a not relevant - pro players deserve a balanced game - that should be the number 1 priority - not placating community morons like you. What fucking units don't "work best when stacked"? Is this some kind of epiphany?
Only Terran has to worry about splitting their units - not Protoss not Zerg? You hear Protoss and Zerg players talk about raising their skill ceiling all the time - giving them more micro opportunities - this is a perfect example and as soon as we see Maru win 2 games with it you all shit your pants.
I'm not saying it is perfect as is -and might eventually require SOME kind of nerf - but it should absolutely not be nerfed into the ground like they are proposing.
How many more "hots widow mine nerfs" are we going to see before blizzard learns - DONT NERF RACES THAT AREN'T OVER-PERFORMING. It has literally always done more harm then good.
Splitting carriers and broods is not exactly equal to splitting stimmed MM. Give movement boost to those units and we can talk about splitting. It is similar to people saying protoss needs to micro high templars (and they do not talk ab out the micro with prism)
Considering their ridiculous pick-up range what‘s so tough about microing Warp Prisms again?
A shocker, terran doesn't understand AGAIN, I was talking about microing templars on the ground, not from-to WP.
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
Another factor that is often overlooked is that a raven (with 200 energy) can now disable 4 units instantly for 8 seconds, so a single raven can take out all or most collossi from a fight, which is huge. 3 Raven can disable 12 carriers, 9 raven can keep 12 carriers disabled for 24 seconds.
Not to mention the fact that the AA missile aoe is so huge that you only need 2 raven to blanket an army for 20 seconds, The effect of which equals a +3 Attack uprade when used with marines. Marauders, cyclones and BC will also hugely benefit from it, I think the 20 sec duration is actually a bit too long.
Oh and anyone saying cant force a fight... wtf? terran can just drop toss bases and protoss is forced to defend. And ravens are perfect to accompany and enhance bio drops.
The main reason that ravens are rarely used - unless they are overpowered - is probably the fact that terrans basically never need a techlab on a starport.. you want a reactor for medivacs, libs and vikings.
I would even recommend changing the liberator into a techlab unit and reducing its buildtime and maybe adjusting some other stats, that would make starport techlabs more common and would probably encourage the raven usage a bit more. there are way too many air units that are reactorable to justify building a techlab for ravens only and the liberator is way too powerful too be mass produced in my opinion...
In what planet does a terran have the luxury of going mass raven to support his bio vs a protoss? Certainly not in Masters and above.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote: Plus your comparison is not really valid, since 50 mutas still have to fly into the mines and marines have to stand in the storm whereas the AAM has a big range and cant be evaded. Also to be fair widowmines are probably a big reason why mass mutas don't work as well any more and storm is a big reason why mass marine is not the best choice vs a toss with HT. Now also be aware of the fact that the AAM works versus EVERY UNIT IN THE GAME and can only be dimished at all by totally spreading your army.
Are you being serious? You made ridiculous claims like "20 supply of ravens can kill a 100 supply toss army", but giving examples equally stupid stuff is invalid? If you leave a 100 suppy army stacked like that you're asking to lose it. The same as if you clump up 30 marines against psistorm, or fly a stacked muta army over widow mines. That's why spreading is a thing. You know that 2 vipers or 2 high templar will kill a 100 supply viking army right? But with a good pre split that number is reduced dramatically.
It's the same with ravens, I just tried fighting 2000 gas of ravens against 2000 gas of corruptors for example. If you stack the corruptors they all die, but if you spread them out you barely lose any (and I'm not talking seperate each unit, just a simple pre split).
And btw mass muta is not often seen nowadays because of thors, and hydras being just being better. Widow mines have been a thing since 2013, they aren't the reason LBM is dead.
On March 08 2018 06:10 Freeborn wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:57 Fango wrote:
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Alternatively go and load up the unit tester and have 10+ (20ish supply) shoot at a stacked 100 (air/ground) supply toss army and see it get almost obliterated instantly.
It's really ridiculous.
You can make all kinds of shit happen in a unit tester. 3 widow mines can kill 50 mutas, one high templar can kill 30 marines etc etc.
The game should be balanced around the pro level. And currently at the pro level terran is by far the worst race. They haven't made a final in 6 months, Katowice had 2 terran in the ro12, GSL has 1 in the ro8, and WCS also had 1 in the ro8. That's why terrans are whining. Maru's performance at Katowice was the only glimmer of hope and it was enough to get terran nerfed again.
Check out the youtube videos then of progamers using them in real games lol...
Show me those videos then. From what I can see terran is by far the weakest race currently. Nerfing them even more is just ridiculous. Terran ultra lategame has been weak for years, and now that Maru won a few skyterran games that it apparently suddenly needs nerfing. P and Z players just don't want to adapt to terran actually competing in that area of the game for once.
Are you being intentionally dense?
To make it clear: Mutas as well as carriers and most air units work best when stacked, in a late game scenario DPS per area is important, you want to do as much damage as possible on every clash (deathball you know?). For that you need only watch any pro game using carriers mutas and even vikings.
In the case of parasitic bomb and psistorm most of the damage can be averted if you split after the fact plus they dont stack. And in the case of psistorm the damage is so low that marauders with medivacs can sometimes even stand in it and win fight.
Not to mention the fact that AAM is as the name suggests an ANTI ARMOR MISSILE NOT A SEEKER MISSILE which everybody hated. And the anti armor part actually is very strong and last 20 seconds, which equals +3 attack for marines for 2+ engagements on one cast. And since the AOE is huge u don't need more than a max of 3 casts to splash an army.
If that doesn't convince you, then you are hopeless.
Terran may or may not need buffs/changes but the AAM was just a replication of the seeker missile problem: unfun, unbalanced and without weakness or counter. Let's wait and see how terrans use the actual anti armor effect and the interference matrix.
We all know terrans are a bit slow to accept changes that are not instantly and obviously overpowered
Holy shit the double standards are ridiculous. So vikings and terran units are fine against aoe because you should just split? But protoss and zerg shouldn't have to do the same?
I cannot believe you're showing clips of players stacking literally thousands of resources worth of units on top of eachother then complaining that they die. None of those fights would have ended that way had the players just spread their units out and managed the engagements property. Yet if a skyterran army clumped up like that and died to a couple fungals/parasitic bombs you'd just tell them to split....
Now you say that they have to clump up units to maximise dps? The trade off is that stacking makes them more vulnerable to aoe spells. This is something terran has been dealing with since forever. Like I said before, go load up your precious unit tester and see for yourself. When I tried it, 2000 gas worth of ravens can't kill 2000 gas of corruptors or carriers if they pre-split. The same way 2 vipers cannot kill 20 vikings if they're spread out.
Apparently protoss and Zerg players are just too used to the lategame being an autowin that they don't want to learn how to fight there. They'd rather complain about the objectively weakest race in the game actually having a chance there for once. You can dislike the AAM from a design perspective, but calling it imbalanced is outright stupid. Terran is the worst performing race in tournaments right now by a significant margin. If terran was imba there would be more than one player getting results.
As a zerg, i agree, for me it was completly counterable as soon as you build infestors. With infested terrans, fungal and neural (for BC), + few vipers, it's just about who microes the best.
And yeah, i don't understand why they buff Protoss while it's already P favored on PvT. It seems to be a L2P issue for P too, they have weapons to fight mass raven. HT can feedback, pre-storm when Z approches. Blink stalkers can dodge the missile. WP can pick-up units. SB can heal .
As with WM, at the beginning it was hard, seems OP, but after we used to micro better, and aslo not to send all your army on one wave, but send few units first to trigger WM.
Here if you force T to launch a lot of missile on a small part of your army, suddendly -30 on some 400hp+ units isn't that much and cost a lot of energy.
The only thing that could have been disscussed is -1 range to have same range for storm/PB/AMA (but as zerg with 10+ range with fungal it's unecessary for Zerg, but maybe for protoss).
But yeah, i understand your rage, it's almost like they don't want "Protoss too hard", while it's already ridiculous easier in the lategame...
If i were protoss i felt insulted that Blizzard consider protoss players like kids, that are unable to micro, and should have a really noobfriendly design (like attack on ht lol), else it' will be too hard for them...
You said it, Terran isn't dominating therefore it doesn't need a nerf.
@blizzard Nerfing things that are NOT dominating is NOT how you balance a game.
This. The new balance team is so disappointing. 1/8 Terran left in GSL. Only 2 Terrans made it into the playoffs at IEM. Terran is struggling so they nerf Terran even more.
As a spectator I was very happy with the anti death ball AAM from a game design perspective. The P death ball design has haunted the game from the start spectator wise and anything that punish the death ball is good IMO.
But I don't know really. The P design has been poor from a game design perspective from the start and it didn't get better when they introduced the Disruptor. What were they thinking?
On March 08 2018 22:34 seemsgood wrote: Am i the only one who put design over anything else??? I understand terran's struggle but FFS! Keeping the current ravens will leave no room to buff other and what you guys terran players need to bitch about is fucking vikings buff not the raven! Force blizzard be more aggressive with terran favtory units!
thank god that there are still people left with some sanity!
On March 09 2018 01:35 xongnox wrote: I feel like people confuses splitting reactivity (once the storm hits or the banes comes, for example) and pre-spreading an army before taking engagement. Pre-spreading can be made and is made with very slow units like BL, or even siege tanks ! (vs viper blinding cloud).
Personally i feel like this raven iteration was a bad design, but i feel like all mass-air clumped deathball are terrible in SC2, badly designed, frustrating to play with, to play versus, and generally way too powerfull. The abusive clustering of air units is he main part of the issue. This could have been fixed easily in design-patch by adding an air-collision radius (so we can still have clustered mutas and phoenixes with 0 radius but not BL or carriers ) This is a know issue and critique for years, yet blizzard do nothing to it. And then to counter bad design choice effects they make another bad design units/mechanism, and so on...
And every time there was something in the game or the balance test map that could deal with mass air deathballs, it either never made it or was removed from the game. Lib anti-air? Removed from the game. Seeker missile? Removed from the game. Thor splash attack full damage vs all? Never made it out of the test map. AAM? Removed from the game.
Activision wants toss and zerg to have unstoppable lategames vs terran in order to force 'action packed' games. It sounds like a stupid conspiracy theory but every community update, every patch, reinforces it.
I agree with you. The thing is, when terran have a tool to deal with turtle deathball (air)bullshit style, per definition or so this same tool is itself a turtle deathball (air)bullshit style. So in a perfect world we would nerf raven AND others pre-existent, and way more played, TDABS ( Turtle Deathball (Air) Bullshit Style). Nerfing Raven after 2 Maru games without touching to obvious ugly TDABS played since months is kinda lame (everyone remember Neeb playing mass carrier ht vs Zergs ? Late-game Pvt is kinda the same horror, we simply don't see game during that long anymore..), and doing it without any real help for real huge balance concerns (TvP) during a very weak terran meta is borderline insulting terrans.
But i guess we shouldn't think about malignancy or conspiracy when plain nullity can explain things.
On March 08 2018 22:34 seemsgood wrote: Am i the only one who put design over anything else??? I understand terran's struggle but FFS! Keeping the current ravens will leave no room to buff other and what you guys terran players need to bitch about is fucking vikings buff not the raven! Force blizzard be more aggressive with terran favtory units!
thank god that there are still people left with some sanity!
Factory units were already buffed 42x times. They are strong to play mech, witch for fundamental reasons is only viable vZ and vT. Except mines, they do not affect TvP that much. Mech is arguably already too strong in TvT.
We want BIO great again. tho a mine reverse would help a lot (in limiting too good actual PvT build orders )
Balance wise, TvZ lategame is already ok without ravens thanks to ghost and lib range. (well i d'ont like the design of either, but that's another topic) Meanwhile in TvP the MU is so broken either the terran 2 bases all-in or get destroyed way way before super-late-game. So this Maru vs Stats game was an exception, due to the map and Stats very strange passive play (tbh he seemed sick at the event )
So we need to bitch about bio way to weak =) And toss vT openings way too strong.
When I play Terran and am not playing TvT, I have to split vs storm, parasitic bomb, fungal growth, ravager bile, banelings, sentry force field, Colossus lance, etc. Split, split, split correctly or I die.
What's so wrong with forcing zerg and protoss to also finally learn to split units?
The raven nerf is a joke. Per unit energy, it doesn't even compare to what can be done with fungal growth or storm. IIf anything, remove the interference matrix and return the PDD. I don't even care about the auto turret. You can take the auto-turret away too. But the raven needs a seeker-missile -like massive AOE damage ability.
Without widow mines currently viable as support past the 1/1 upgrade zone, terran need a support unit that can target ground or air and has AOE.
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Umm. Splitting units? Recalling? Moving the units the AAM is going to run into out of the way? There are lots of fictitious answers to this fictitious scenario.
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Umm. Splitting units? Recalling? Moving the units the AAM is going to run into out of the way? There are lots of fictitious answers to this fictitious scenario.
None of your fictitious answers work though since the anti-air missile is near instantaneous and you can spam 20 of them. And I don't even know what to think about your laughable suggestion of recalling.
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Umm. Splitting units? Recalling? Moving the units the AAM is going to run into out of the way? There are lots of fictitious answers to this fictitious scenario.
None of your fictitious answers work though since the anti-air missile is near instantaneous. And I don't even know what to think about your laughable suggestion of recalling.
I never said you had to split AFTER the AAM hits. Just like I don't just split AFTER i get fungal-ed or stormed. I split BEFORE.
Ravens aren't exactly fast, and observers are invisible. You would be able to see the ravens coming and recall well-in-advance if you deemed the engagement threatening.
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Umm. Splitting units? Recalling? Moving the units the AAM is going to run into out of the way? There are lots of fictitious answers to this fictitious scenario.
None of your fictitious answers work though since the anti-air missile is near instantaneous. And I don't even know what to think about your laughable suggestion of recalling.
I never said you had to split AFTER the AAM hits. Just like I don't just split AFTER i get fungal-ed or stormed. I split BEFORE.
Ravens aren't exactly fast, and observers are invisible. You would be able to see the ravens coming and recall well-in-advance if you deemed the engagement threatening.
That makes no sense. You'd just retreat rather than recalling.
Everyone complaining about the raven nerf, exercise some god-damn common sense. Blizzard is not going to compromise on their design approach no matter how you reeeee, but they are giving terran a compensatory buff, and we KNOW that they take community feedback into account, so instead of wasting their time with pointless bitching, advocate for buffs that don't involve keeping missile spam in the game. If you don't think the viking buff is big enough, SAY SO. Hell, the community consensus seems to be that it isn't enough, so any suggestions along those lines will, in all likelihood, be implemented.
On March 08 2018 05:46 Freeborn wrote: Every terran whining please go and check out the recent youtube videos of the raven obliterating a carrier fleet with zero chance of evasion or counter or escape...
Umm. Splitting units? Recalling? Moving the units the AAM is going to run into out of the way? There are lots of fictitious answers to this fictitious scenario.
None of your fictitious answers work though since the anti-air missile is near instantaneous and you can spam 20 of them. And I don't even know what to think about your laughable suggestion of recalling.
Yah true that man - you have so much more time to split vs storm - not like you have a spell that drains all of a units energy and deals damage to it.. or a stronger air force.. or multiple other units that have "free aoe damage" late game - better nerf Terran because they are so over represented in top tournaments right? That missle so unfair Toss or Zerg hasn't won anything lately.. all those foreign Terrans tearing up tournaments it's really sad.
You said it, Terran isn't dominating therefore it doesn't need a nerf.
@blizzard Nerfing things that are NOT dominating is NOT how you balance a game.
This. The new balance team is so disappointing. 1/8 Terran left in GSL. Only 2 Terrans made it into the playoffs at IEM. Terran is struggling so they nerf Terran even more.
PvsT is a joke right now. Fix it Blizzard.
It's hilarious that T of all races is complaining using this particular argument. I remember at least 2 GSLs with no Z in ro8.
The problem with Raven nerf is that Blizzard didn't wait (as always) few months before doing that. Few Maru games on IEM indicated that mass Ravens in the lategame would be imba as shit. Especially vs Solar games and vs Stats games. Basically you are bashin Blizzard now for doing their job- quick reaction. If they won't nerf it as fast, ladder would be broken by ppl like Avilo for example or other Terrans abusing that spell to the extreme.
Everyone that knows the game saw the "imba potential" in that thing. I was on IEM, and after day one it was my first thought- the next nerf will be Anti Armour Missile. And boom- few days later it is. I even met Elazer and talked with him about it- he had the same impression.
The problem with AAM is that it's so easy to spam, and really there is no counterplay. Solar tried splitting, but AAM is almost instant and even if he did Maru was throwing 6 spells at once, which basically covered every unit. Stop being biased. It was really imba.
This is only dmg nerf, so u actually need other units to finish the job. Its easy with -3 armour. And that's what Blizzard wanted. Raven as support unit. Not army of 20 ravens flying happily and wrecking everything as it was back in a day.Especially that the Auto Turret is back. It was the same philosophy that we saw behind nerfing Funghal Growth.
You said it, Terran isn't dominating therefore it doesn't need a nerf.
@blizzard Nerfing things that are NOT dominating is NOT how you balance a game.
This. The new balance team is so disappointing. 1/8 Terran left in GSL. Only 2 Terrans made it into the playoffs at IEM. Terran is struggling so they nerf Terran even more.
PvsT is a joke right now. Fix it Blizzard.
It's hilarious that T of all races is complaining using this particular argument. I remember at least 2 GSLs with no Z in ro8.
Btw, i dont mind the Zerg dropperlord nerf, i tink it s totally uncalled for, but whatever. I havent used the strat all that much in PVZ, barely ever in fact. Probably ladder stats are really scewed in ZvP due to many zergs taking lots of quick wins vs Protosses who didnt know how to defend vs a lingflood+droperlod. Now the win ratios on ladder should be up for a correction.
The knowledge, that protosses are going to play even more abusive 2 base allins, just makes me sad. At least some Ps recently chose to play it safe and invest a bit in early defense instead of teching behind a single zealot to whatever they picked out from the Great Book that day. 9 gate zealot charge + warprism should become real popular after the changes.
Last year the whine was "no Zerg has won a final in 2~ years!"
This year it is "only one terran in gsl season 1 top 8!"
What small sample size silliness statistic will people use next to balance whine?
At least PvZ winrates whine has had some statistics to back it up, even if it is only alligulac. (and PvT for a month or two until it evened out after the stalker nerf)
You said it, Terran isn't dominating therefore it doesn't need a nerf.
@blizzard Nerfing things that are NOT dominating is NOT how you balance a game.
This. The new balance team is so disappointing. 1/8 Terran left in GSL. Only 2 Terrans made it into the playoffs at IEM. Terran is struggling so they nerf Terran even more.
PvsT is a joke right now. Fix it Blizzard.
It's hilarious that T of all races is complaining using this particular argument. I remember at least 2 GSLs with no Z in ro8.
Btw, i dont mind the Zerg dropperlord nerf, i tink it s totally uncalled for, but whatever. I havent used the strat all that much in PVZ, barely ever in fact. Probably ladder stats are really scewed in ZvP due to many zergs taking lots of quick wins vs Protosses who didnt know how to defend vs a lingflood+droperlod. Now the win ratios on ladder should be up for a correction.
The knowledge, that protosses are going to play even more abusive 2 base allins, just makes me sad. At least some Ps recently chose to play it safe and invest a bit in early defense instead of teching behind a single zealot to whatever they picked out from the Great Book that day. 9 gate zealot charge + warprism should become real popular after the changes.
Watching players names now feels like there was really a huge difference in number of good T vs good Z and good P. Watching 2011 Global StarCraft II League August/Code S , best Toss is Huk and best Zerg is Julyzerg... while we have MVP Polt MMA ryung Bomber etc in Terran. MC and Nestea still won a lot during Terrancraft aera. In fact if instead of picking up results we watch Premier Tournaments wins we see: -2010 : 4 T 3Z 3P -2011 : 17T 8P 11Z. In Code S : 4T 2Z 1P. After MC, best toss was InCa, Tassadar, Huk, Naniwa...
So yep that was Terran-dominated and super terran-filled in korea, but the myth of utter dominance and complete imbalance are greatly exaggerated, competent Z and P won shit (vs koreans), from MC to Naniwa and Nestea to Stephano, and there was at time definitely a lack of good toss and zerg in the korean scene. Even good foreign protoss won more at times vs korean terrans than non-MC korean ones lol. That drastically changed the 2 next years.
I still don't know why this obvious and factual argument still stale some while the exact same argument concerning the foreign scene (there are no/very few good Terrans, but a shit ton of good Z) is widely accepted. Besides that, in Wol beginning, a good protoss macro play was very sophisticated, not intuitive, and needed a lot of time to develop (but yeah this was still better than letting them 4gate to win everything )
Btw BW history show same thing, the pool of good players per race is not magically equivalent at all times, and some things needs time to get figured out.
On March 09 2018 23:31 youngjiddle wrote: Last year the whine was "no Zerg has won a final in 2~ years!"
This year it is "only one terran in gsl season 1 top 8!"
What small sample size silliness statistic will people use next to balance whine?
At least PvZ winrates whine has had some statistics to back it up, even if it is only alligulac. (and PvT for a month or two until it evened out after the stalker nerf)
If GSL would be the only tournament where terran underperformed I'd agree with you. But every other tournament tells the same story - WCS Leipzig, IEM Pyeongchang, IEM Katowice - Terran has been underperforming at every tournament since 4.0
You said it, Terran isn't dominating therefore it doesn't need a nerf.
@blizzard Nerfing things that are NOT dominating is NOT how you balance a game.
This. The new balance team is so disappointing. 1/8 Terran left in GSL. Only 2 Terrans made it into the playoffs at IEM. Terran is struggling so they nerf Terran even more.
PvsT is a joke right now. Fix it Blizzard.
It's hilarious that T of all races is complaining using this particular argument. I remember at least 2 GSLs with no Z in ro8.
Btw, i dont mind the Zerg dropperlord nerf, i tink it s totally uncalled for, but whatever. I havent used the strat all that much in PVZ, barely ever in fact. Probably ladder stats are really scewed in ZvP due to many zergs taking lots of quick wins vs Protosses who didnt know how to defend vs a lingflood+droperlod. Now the win ratios on ladder should be up for a correction.
The knowledge, that protosses are going to play even more abusive 2 base allins, just makes me sad. At least some Ps recently chose to play it safe and invest a bit in early defense instead of teching behind a single zealot to whatever they picked out from the Great Book that day. 9 gate zealot charge + warprism should become real popular after the changes.
Ah yes, 2011 balance. The most relevant statistic for LoTV balance discussion.
On March 09 2018 15:02 hiroshOne wrote: The problem with AAM is that it's so easy to spam, and really there is no counterplay. Solar tried splitting, but AAM is almost instant and even if he did Maru was throwing 6 spells at once, which basically covered every unit. Stop being biased. It was really imba.
"Solar tried splitting"...he literally move-commanded into them.
Imagine if Maru never spread or split his air army and lost it all to parasitic bomb/fungal. Would make them look seriously overpowered as well.
Seriously though, I can understand the issues people are having with the raven, but the series against Solar wasn't a good example of it being overpowered. Solar mishandled every fight, no fungal/parasitic bomb, never spreading his air units etc
On March 09 2018 23:31 youngjiddle wrote: Last year the whine was "no Zerg has won a final in 2~ years!"
This year it is "only one terran in gsl season 1 top 8!"
What small sample size silliness statistic will people use next to balance whine?
At least PvZ winrates whine has had some statistics to back it up, even if it is only alligulac. (and PvT for a month or two until it evened out after the stalker nerf)
You're the one using a small sample size there bud. WCS leipzig had 1 terran in the ro8, GSL 1 terran in ro8, IEM had 2 in the ro12 etc. It's been over 6 months since a terran was even in a final. They've done badly in every tournament since 4.0.
On March 09 2018 15:02 hiroshOne wrote: The problem with AAM is that it's so easy to spam, and really there is no counterplay. Solar tried splitting, but AAM is almost instant and even if he did Maru was throwing 6 spells at once, which basically covered every unit. Stop being biased. It was really imba.
"Solar tried splitting"...he literally move-commanded into them.
Imagine if Maru never spread or split his air army and lost it all to parasitic bomb/fungal. Would make them look seriously overpowered as well.
Seriously though, I can understand the issues people are having with the raven, but the series against Solar wasn't a good example of it being overpowered. Solar mishandled every fight, no fungal/parasitic bomb, never spreading his air units etc
Wait, he move commanded INTO THEM? Isn't that intentional throwing? Please correct me if i'm wrong lol
On March 09 2018 15:02 hiroshOne wrote: The problem with AAM is that it's so easy to spam, and really there is no counterplay. Solar tried splitting, but AAM is almost instant and even if he did Maru was throwing 6 spells at once, which basically covered every unit. Stop being biased. It was really imba.
"Solar tried splitting"...he literally move-commanded into them.
Imagine if Maru never spread or split his air army and lost it all to parasitic bomb/fungal. Would make them look seriously overpowered as well.
Seriously though, I can understand the issues people are having with the raven, but the series against Solar wasn't a good example of it being overpowered. Solar mishandled every fight, no fungal/parasitic bomb, never spreading his air units etc
At 24:20 Solar pre-splits the army, but corruptors weren't on hold command and clumped up just as the ravens were about to launch their missiles. Solar tried splitting immediately. Maru had 8 ravens in his army, in two groups of four. At 26:15 Solar pre-splits again. This time without clumping units unintentionally.
Mass liberator: Nerfed in a week after 1 tournament. Raven AAM: Nerfed in a week after 1 tournament. Adepts in early LOTV: 'let the meta settle', nerfed after several months and it wasn't even enough, had to be nerfed again. 8 armor ultras: 'let the meta settle', stayed in the game for over a year, nerfed ultra is still super strong.
The Raven splash damage is required to punish players that like to mass air based deathballs. In fact they should increase the Raven damage even more, not decrease it.
On March 10 2018 07:30 KR_4EVR wrote: I have a simple, elegant solution to terran's lack of Area-of-Effect anti-air which would actually work:
First, give medivacs the ability to pick up seiged tanks. Second, let the tanks fire similarly air-2-air when inside medivac (like shrapnel cloud)
That might be one of the worst balance suggestions I've seen in my life. Siege Tanks boosting around destroying everything in the sky would completely break the game. It was bad enough when you could pick up and put down tanks while they were sieged.
On March 10 2018 01:50 Fango wrote: You're the one using a small sample size there bud. WCS leipzig had 1 terran in the ro8, GSL 1 terran in ro8, IEM had 2 in the ro12 etc. It's been over 6 months since a terran was even in a final. They've done badly in every tournament since 4.0.
Yep. Terran has been struggling for some time. I hope Blizzard fixes it.
Surprisingly I agree with almost all the changes. The AAM damage is clearly OP as there is no counterplay, and it does not fit in the design of the raven as a support unit. The armour-nerf part of this spell synergizes so well with bio that, when Terrans learn to use it, is going to change winning rates by itself (see sOs vs Maru at IEM). Not so sure about the Viking HP buff... clearly T needs late-game buffs in TvP, but Blizzard should explore other alternatives. Moving Z drops to Lair is the right move for ZvP. Lings are simply too good that early in the game, and the all-in almost unscoutable without a Stargate. Again, there is no counterplay: P has to open Stargate to prevent it, and even this way they often fail to.
On March 10 2018 07:47 Loccstana wrote: The Raven splash damage is required to punish players that like to mass air based deathballs. In fact they should increase the Raven damage even more, not decrease it.
usually, it'more : Terran turtle with PF/lib/tank/WM to get air deathball rather than the other camping (at least in ZvT)
You said it, Terran isn't dominating therefore it doesn't need a nerf.
@blizzard Nerfing things that are NOT dominating is NOT how you balance a game.
This. The new balance team is so disappointing. 1/8 Terran left in GSL. Only 2 Terrans made it into the playoffs at IEM. Terran is struggling so they nerf Terran even more.
PvsT is a joke right now. Fix it Blizzard.
It's hilarious that T of all races is complaining using this particular argument. I remember at least 2 GSLs with no Z in ro8.
Btw, i dont mind the Zerg dropperlord nerf, i tink it s totally uncalled for, but whatever. I havent used the strat all that much in PVZ, barely ever in fact. Probably ladder stats are really scewed in ZvP due to many zergs taking lots of quick wins vs Protosses who didnt know how to defend vs a lingflood+droperlod. Now the win ratios on ladder should be up for a correction.
The knowledge, that protosses are going to play even more abusive 2 base allins, just makes me sad. At least some Ps recently chose to play it safe and invest a bit in early defense instead of teching behind a single zealot to whatever they picked out from the Great Book that day. 9 gate zealot charge + warprism should become real popular after the changes.
Ah yes, 2011 balance. The most relevant statistic for LoTV balance discussion.
I think you totally missed the point. Now Terrans are saying looking at GSL top8 race distribution/race of the eventual champions is the most relevant stat ever, while when they dominated for years and argued it s just a difference in skill between the players, and the natural state of things, nothing to fix. Damn, you can see in this very thread some terrans claiming back in the day T dominated cuz of skill. It actually makes me sick. + Show Spoiler +
(Looking back at 2011 mappool -let alone balance- it is actually insane terrans lost maps at all. Like Shakuras plateau was hailed as a zerg map, because the other player s main was more than 10 sec walking distance away. Imagine if the map was included in the current pool, which zerg would leave it unbanned?)
On March 10 2018 19:55 Geo.Rion wrote: (Looking back at 2011 mappool -let alone balance- it is actually insane terrans lost maps at all. Like Shakuras plateau was hailed as a zerg map, because the other player s main was more than 10 sec walking distance away. Imagine if the map was included in the current pool, which zerg would leave it unbanned?)
First, Terrans do not have "dominated for years". Stop making fake news and check facts, like korean premiers tournaments wins per race (hint: pretty balanced). They did have periods of domination, like other races. (remember BL/infestor ? Blink aera ? GomPvP ? )
Second, short maps and early WOL balance wasn't incredibly terran-favored if you account for all people playstyles. Like, 4 gate was broken as hell during a certain amount of time, templar annulet was super strong, early bane burst won tournament (remember fruitdealer ?), even only making DT pushed InCa in GSL finale, etc. Rushs was super strong, but it's not only a Terran thing at all. MC made a fucking lot of money all-inning nearly every game during that time. In foreign-land non-terrans won a lot during 2011, the GomTvT aera.
And yes, Early WOL good KR protoss ? MC and that's all. We can compare it to MVP. Then, comparing the skill of MKP, Polt and, MMA to Tassadar Creator Inca Huk etc is like comparing Serral with Heromarine and Khelazur, or Neeb to uthermal, no offense, but that's simply not the same level.
It's so obvious i don't understand people still arguing over it.
I've posted quite a few solutions on various related threads, ranging from the bizarre (shooting tankivac) to the reasonable (viking acceleration buff and a2a attack buff for better kiting). However, I have thought of another one:
First, look at some stats:
Fungal Growth Energy 75 Range: 10 Duration: 3 s Radius: 2.25 Hotkey: F Target units take 30 damage over 3 seconds and have movement speed reduced by 75%. Reveals cloaked and burrowed units. Psionic Storm Energy 75 Range: 9 Cooldown: 1.43 s Duration: 2.85 s Radius: 1.5 Hotkey: T Creates a storm of psionic energy that lasts 2.85 seconds, causing up to 80 damage to all units in the target area.
Concussive Shells Duration: 1.07 s Slows an enemy's movement speed by 50% when hit. The slowing effect does not stack, but the timer is refreshed by subsequent hits.
I suggest that raven get a range 9-10 castable instant ability that costs 75 energy and could be called concussion matrix that slows units in a 1.5 to 2.25 radius, duration 1-3 seconds, applies to ALL units hit, functions just like concussive shells otherwise, and by itself does zero damage. Would slow movement and attack speed.
Edit: Other possible names: Higgs matrix, sonic blast, shellshock (no disrespect to the TL member of that name). Edit 2: Could be accompanied animation similar to AAM/seekermissile, as that is what it's meant to replace.
On March 11 2018 00:24 KR_4EVR wrote: I've posted quite a few solutions on various related threads, ranging from the bizarre (shooting tankivac) to the reasonable (viking acceleration buff and a2a attack buff for better kiting). However, I have thought of another one:
First, look at some stats:
Fungal Growth Energy 75 Range: 10 Duration: 3 s Radius: 2.25 Hotkey: F Target units take 30 damage over 3 seconds and have movement speed reduced by 75%. Reveals cloaked and burrowed units. Psionic Storm Energy 75 Range: 9 Cooldown: 1.43 s Duration: 2.85 s Radius: 1.5 Hotkey: T Creates a storm of psionic energy that lasts 2.85 seconds, causing up to 80 damage to all units in the target area.
Concussive Shells Duration: 1.07 s Slows an enemy's movement speed by 50% when hit. The slowing effect does not stack, but the timer is refreshed by subsequent hits.
I suggest that raven get a range 9-10 castable instant ability that costs 75 energy and could be called concussion matrix that slows units in a 1.5 to 2.25 radius, duration 1-3 seconds, applies to ALL units hit, functions just like concussive shells otherwise, and by itself does zero damage. Would slow movement and attack speed.
Edit: Other possible names: Higgs matrix, sonic blast, shellshock (no disrespect to the TL member of that name). Edit 2: Could be accompanied animation similar to AAM/seekermissile, as that is what it's meant to replace.
I liked your simple let tanks shoot air solution, all these words and formatting make it less obvious to see how deranged your ideas are, and how completely split from reality you are. Please, whatever your path in life is, please stay away from jobs that involves you looking at a data-set and making decisions that affect other people.
I liked your simple let tanks shoot air solution, all these words and formatting make it less obvious to see how deranged your ideas are, and how completely split from reality you are. Please, whatever your path in life is, please stay away from jobs that involves you looking at a data-set and making decisions that affect other people.
On March 11 2018 00:24 KR_4EVR wrote: I've posted quite a few solutions on various related threads, ranging from the bizarre (shooting tankivac) to the reasonable (viking acceleration buff and a2a attack buff for better kiting). However, I have thought of another one:
First, look at some stats:
Fungal Growth Energy 75 Range: 10 Duration: 3 s Radius: 2.25 Hotkey: F Target units take 30 damage over 3 seconds and have movement speed reduced by 75%. Reveals cloaked and burrowed units. Psionic Storm Energy 75 Range: 9 Cooldown: 1.43 s Duration: 2.85 s Radius: 1.5 Hotkey: T Creates a storm of psionic energy that lasts 2.85 seconds, causing up to 80 damage to all units in the target area.
Concussive Shells Duration: 1.07 s Slows an enemy's movement speed by 50% when hit. The slowing effect does not stack, but the timer is refreshed by subsequent hits.
I suggest that raven get a range 9-10 castable instant ability that costs 75 energy and could be called concussion matrix that slows units in a 1.5 to 2.25 radius, duration 1-3 seconds, applies to ALL units hit, functions just like concussive shells otherwise, and by itself does zero damage. Would slow movement and attack speed.
Edit: Other possible names: Higgs matrix, sonic blast, shellshock (no disrespect to the TL member of that name). Edit 2: Could be accompanied animation similar to AAM/seekermissile, as that is what it's meant to replace.
I liked your simple let tanks shoot air solution, all these words and formatting make it less obvious to see how deranged your ideas are, and how completely split from reality you are. Please, whatever your path in life is, please stay away from jobs that involves you looking at a data-set and making decisions that affect other people.
But isn't his idea just a fungal that deals no damage?
sure you can have super powerful AOE plus a 3-Armor-upgrade-debuff that hits air and ground...
But only if you are willing to give up some power of your basic units which are the most cost efficient in the game. Are you really ready for that?
The AAM is supposed to turn the raven into a support role to change it away from mass raven and also from total niche play into a regular support and for that the armor reduction works well, but stackable AOE air/ground instant damage is too strong and as eerybody with a brain knows, can not be evaded you can only split before the attack.
Now you terran whiners please remind yourselves that terran bio beats EVERYTHING in small numbers and for cost plus is more mobile and airborne. Protoss is fucking balanced around psistorm forcefields and colossus. Gateway units and even immortals just lose in a straight up fight versus mixed bio. When protoss is spread out terran just always wins in smaller engagements. Same goes for pvz.
Nerf bio healing, speed and damage and then sure you can have more AOE, although I doubt that stackable airborne AOE that hits air and ground is a good design in any case.
BTW the videos I posted where almost all high level players, If you watch any pro games you will know that protoss armies are usually stacked because they are vulnerable when separated.
Just look at Maru vs SOS, that was no strategy or tactic that was pure raw micro abusing the DPS and mobility of stimmed bio, while SOS is somehow delusionally thinking that protoss can win with strategy and bigger army without AOE.
I think the more important question is how to make ravens and starport techlabs more accessible and usable without making the units overpowered.
In addition to that protoss is still incredibly weak in spread out engagements or without AOE as showcased in the terrible state of pvz, which is way worse that pvt currently. it would probably have been way better to keep the stalker buff and give terran an early game buff like faster, cheaper combat shields or something like that.
On March 11 2018 00:24 KR_4EVR wrote: I've posted quite a few solutions on various related threads, ranging from the bizarre (shooting tankivac) to the reasonable (viking acceleration buff and a2a attack buff for better kiting). However, I have thought of another one:
First, look at some stats:
Fungal Growth Energy 75 Range: 10 Duration: 3 s Radius: 2.25 Hotkey: F Target units take 30 damage over 3 seconds and have movement speed reduced by 75%. Reveals cloaked and burrowed units. Psionic Storm Energy 75 Range: 9 Cooldown: 1.43 s Duration: 2.85 s Radius: 1.5 Hotkey: T Creates a storm of psionic energy that lasts 2.85 seconds, causing up to 80 damage to all units in the target area.
Concussive Shells Duration: 1.07 s Slows an enemy's movement speed by 50% when hit. The slowing effect does not stack, but the timer is refreshed by subsequent hits.
I suggest that raven get a range 9-10 castable instant ability that costs 75 energy and could be called concussion matrix that slows units in a 1.5 to 2.25 radius, duration 1-3 seconds, applies to ALL units hit, functions just like concussive shells otherwise, and by itself does zero damage. Would slow movement and attack speed.
Edit: Other possible names: Higgs matrix, sonic blast, shellshock (no disrespect to the TL member of that name). Edit 2: Could be accompanied animation similar to AAM/seekermissile, as that is what it's meant to replace.
I liked your simple let tanks shoot air solution, all these words and formatting make it less obvious to see how deranged your ideas are, and how completely split from reality you are. Please, whatever your path in life is, please stay away from jobs that involves you looking at a data-set and making decisions that affect other people.
But isn't his idea just a fungal that deals no damage?
Not quite. The attack speed of slowed units would be slowed also. But when you put it that way, people can see that my proposal is actually quite modest.
On March 11 2018 02:37 Freeborn wrote: Seriously Terrans...
just stop whining.
sure you can have super powerful AOE plus a 3-Armor-upgrade-debuff that hits air and ground...
But only if you are willing to give up some power of your basic units which are the most cost efficient in the game. Are you really ready for that? + Show Spoiler +
The AAM is supposed to turn the raven into a support role to change it away from mass raven and also from total niche play into a regular support and for that the armor reduction works well, but stackable AOE air/ground instant damage is too strong and as eerybody with a brain knows, can not be evaded you can only split before the attack.
Now you terran whiners please remind yourselves that terran bio beats EVERYTHING in small numbers and for cost plus is more mobile and airborne. Protoss is fucking balanced around psistorm forcefields and colossus. Gateway units and even immortals just lose in a straight up fight versus mixed bio. When protoss is spread out terran just always wins in smaller engagements. Same goes for pvz.
Nerf bio healing, speed and damage and then sure you can have more AOE, although I doubt that stackable airborne AOE that hits air and ground is a good design in any case.
BTW the videos I posted where almost all high level players, If you watch any pro games you will know that protoss armies are usually stacked because they are vulnerable when separated.
Just look at Maru vs SOS, that was no strategy or tactic that was pure raw micro abusing the DPS and mobility of stimmed bio, while SOS is somehow delusionally thinking that protoss can win with strategy and bigger army without AOE.
I think the more important question is how to make ravens and starport techlabs more accessible and usable without making the units overpowered.
In addition to that protoss is still incredibly weak in spread out engagements or without AOE as showcased in the terrible state of pvz, which is way worse that pvt currently. it would probably have been way better to keep the stalker buff and give terran an early game buff like faster, cheaper combat shields or something like that.
Actually, if you micro a protoss gateway (win no robo or starport suport) versus a pure bio (no mine, tank, liberator, or medivac support), the protoss gateway beats the bio 100% every time. Force-fields, guardian sheild, charge, resonnating glaves, blink - you have all the tools to win the fight without losing many units.
And don't forget just how expensive medivacs are for a unit that does zero damage by itself.
On March 11 2018 02:37 Freeborn wrote: Seriously Terrans...
just stop whining.
sure you can have super powerful AOE plus a 3-Armor-upgrade-debuff that hits air and ground...
But only if you are willing to give up some power of your basic units which are the most cost efficient in the game. Are you really ready for that?
The AAM is supposed to turn the raven into a support role to change it away from mass raven and also from total niche play into a regular support and for that the armor reduction works well, but stackable AOE air/ground instant damage is too strong and as eerybody with a brain knows, can not be evaded you can only split before the attack.
Now you terran whiners please remind yourselves that terran bio beats EVERYTHING in small numbers and for cost plus is more mobile and airborne. Protoss is fucking balanced around psistorm forcefields and colossus. Gateway units and even immortals just lose in a straight up fight versus mixed bio. When protoss is spread out terran just always wins in smaller engagements. Same goes for pvz.
Nerf bio healing, speed and damage and then sure you can have more AOE, although I doubt that stackable airborne AOE that hits air and ground is a good design in any case.
BTW the videos I posted where almost all high level players, If you watch any pro games you will know that protoss armies are usually stacked because they are vulnerable when separated.
Just look at Maru vs SOS, that was no strategy or tactic that was pure raw micro abusing the DPS and mobility of stimmed bio, while SOS is somehow delusionally thinking that protoss can win with strategy and bigger army without AOE.
I think the more important question is how to make ravens and starport techlabs more accessible and usable without making the units overpowered.
In addition to that protoss is still incredibly weak in spread out engagements or without AOE as showcased in the terrible state of pvz, which is way worse that pvt currently. it would probably have been way better to keep the stalker buff and give terran an early game buff like faster, cheaper combat shields or something like that.
LOL - you talk yourself in complete circles in your posts man. Terran bio beats everything in small numbers - you are a literal genius - please go link this post to the top Kr pro Terrans so they can exploit such an obvious imbalance. I haven't watched numerous pro games where an immortal killed 2 medevacs worth of bio - I was definitely dreaming. You site SOS vs Maru - when SOS plays like no other Protoss does in the world rofl. You might not have realized - but EMP's already hit more than 1 unit when they are cast - so good Protoss players already pre-split their high templar - see any of hundreds of pro games available this year alone. Mass gateway attacks aren't a thing?? Are you fucking serious? You can have 2-2 and charge before Terran finishes 1-1 and a move gateway units - see any of literally hundreds of games this year. Every single post here that wants this nerf has 0 logic for how its a BALANCE issue. You can't argue that it's a balance issue when Terran is clearly the weakest of the 3 races currently. And since you know this - you whine about "design, omg, intent ;( raven not posed to do that ;(" When really what you are saying is "omg - now I can get punished for being lazy with map awareness too?? shit! there goes at least 300 mmr for me.. since I've never had to worry about it in the history of sc2..
Think about what you are saying - like actually try to stop and think about it. Terran isn't winning now - (without all of the insane things you propose doing to bio) and the current missile. And yet people who see how obviously stupid this this (circa hots widow mine nerf) are the crazy ones.
Edit: I think I'm wasting my time - your posts make a lot more sense now LOL
"On January 23 2018 11:48 Freeborn wrote: What exactly is the reason for the stalker nerf? Protoss stalkers feel like a non crappy unit for the first time? Is the ladder being flooded by stalker allins or something?
On March 11 2018 00:24 KR_4EVR wrote: I've posted quite a few solutions on various related threads, ranging from the bizarre (shooting tankivac) to the reasonable (viking acceleration buff and a2a attack buff for better kiting). However, I have thought of another one:
First, look at some stats:
Fungal Growth Energy 75 Range: 10 Duration: 3 s Radius: 2.25 Hotkey: F Target units take 30 damage over 3 seconds and have movement speed reduced by 75%. Reveals cloaked and burrowed units. Psionic Storm Energy 75 Range: 9 Cooldown: 1.43 s Duration: 2.85 s Radius: 1.5 Hotkey: T Creates a storm of psionic energy that lasts 2.85 seconds, causing up to 80 damage to all units in the target area.
Concussive Shells Duration: 1.07 s Slows an enemy's movement speed by 50% when hit. The slowing effect does not stack, but the timer is refreshed by subsequent hits.
I suggest that raven get a range 9-10 castable instant ability that costs 75 energy and could be called concussion matrix that slows units in a 1.5 to 2.25 radius, duration 1-3 seconds, applies to ALL units hit, functions just like concussive shells otherwise, and by itself does zero damage. Would slow movement and attack speed.
Edit: Other possible names: Higgs matrix, sonic blast, shellshock (no disrespect to the TL member of that name). Edit 2: Could be accompanied animation similar to AAM/seekermissile, as that is what it's meant to replace.
I liked your simple let tanks shoot air solution, all these words and formatting make it less obvious to see how deranged your ideas are, and how completely split from reality you are. Please, whatever your path in life is, please stay away from jobs that involves you looking at a data-set and making decisions that affect other people.
But isn't his idea just a fungal that deals no damage?
Not quite. The attack speed of slowed units would be slowed also. But when you put it that way, people can see that my proposal is actually quite modest.
Confirmed, pre-splitting too difficult for Zerg and Toss pros. Balance is done around the skill of the players more than the strength of the race, and let's be real - top terrans have always been stronger mechanically than their Z and P counterparts.
On March 11 2018 02:37 Freeborn wrote: Seriously Terrans...
just stop whining.
sure you can have super powerful AOE plus a 3-Armor-upgrade-debuff that hits air and ground...
But only if you are willing to give up some power of your basic units which are the most cost efficient in the game. Are you really ready for that?
The AAM is supposed to turn the raven into a support role to change it away from mass raven and also from total niche play into a regular support and for that the armor reduction works well, but stackable AOE air/ground instant damage is too strong and as eerybody with a brain knows, can not be evaded you can only split before the attack.
Now you terran whiners please remind yourselves that terran bio beats EVERYTHING in small numbers and for cost plus is more mobile and airborne. Protoss is fucking balanced around psistorm forcefields and colossus. Gateway units and even immortals just lose in a straight up fight versus mixed bio. When protoss is spread out terran just always wins in smaller engagements. Same goes for pvz.
Nerf bio healing, speed and damage and then sure you can have more AOE, although I doubt that stackable airborne AOE that hits air and ground is a good design in any case.
BTW the videos I posted where almost all high level players, If you watch any pro games you will know that protoss armies are usually stacked because they are vulnerable when separated.
Just look at Maru vs SOS, that was no strategy or tactic that was pure raw micro abusing the DPS and mobility of stimmed bio, while SOS is somehow delusionally thinking that protoss can win with strategy and bigger army without AOE.
I think the more important question is how to make ravens and starport techlabs more accessible and usable without making the units overpowered.
In addition to that protoss is still incredibly weak in spread out engagements or without AOE as showcased in the terrible state of pvz, which is way worse that pvt currently. it would probably have been way better to keep the stalker buff and give terran an early game buff like faster, cheaper combat shields or something like that.
I don't like mass ravens but thats not true, this isn't HotS, gateway comps can and DO win vs stimmed bio, colossus no longer is a necessity for TvP and terran no longer plays pure bio with medivacs, WM, tanks and liberators are as important for a terran as colossus was in past expansions.
[B]On March 11 2018 02:37 Freeborn wrote:[/B it would probably have been way better to keep the stalker buff and give terran an early game buff like faster, cheaper combat shields or something like that.
+1 to this, during the nerf discussion I defended shortening stim research time and not nerfing the stalker. This would also have helped bio in TvT.
On March 11 2018 02:37 Freeborn wrote: Seriously Terrans...
just stop whining.
sure you can have super powerful AOE plus a 3-Armor-upgrade-debuff that hits air and ground...
But only if you are willing to give up some power of your basic units which are the most cost efficient in the game. Are you really ready for that?
The AAM is supposed to turn the raven into a support role to change it away from mass raven and also from total niche play into a regular support and for that the armor reduction works well, but stackable AOE air/ground instant damage is too strong and as eerybody with a brain knows, can not be evaded you can only split before the attack.
Now you terran whiners please remind yourselves that terran bio beats EVERYTHING in small numbers and for cost plus is more mobile and airborne. Protoss is fucking balanced around psistorm forcefields and colossus. Gateway units and even immortals just lose in a straight up fight versus mixed bio. When protoss is spread out terran just always wins in smaller engagements. Same goes for pvz.
Nerf bio healing, speed and damage and then sure you can have more AOE, although I doubt that stackable airborne AOE that hits air and ground is a good design in any case.
BTW the videos I posted where almost all high level players, If you watch any pro games you will know that protoss armies are usually stacked because they are vulnerable when separated.
Just look at Maru vs SOS, that was no strategy or tactic that was pure raw micro abusing the DPS and mobility of stimmed bio, while SOS is somehow delusionally thinking that protoss can win with strategy and bigger army without AOE.
I think the more important question is how to make ravens and starport techlabs more accessible and usable without making the units overpowered.
In addition to that protoss is still incredibly weak in spread out engagements or without AOE as showcased in the terrible state of pvz, which is way worse that pvt currently. it would probably have been way better to keep the stalker buff and give terran an early game buff like faster, cheaper combat shields or something like that.
I don't like mass ravens but thats not true, this isn't HotS, gateway comps can and DO win vs stimmed bio, colossus no longer is a necessity for TvP and terran no longer plays pure bio with medivacs, WM, tanks and liberators are as important for a terran as colossus was in past expansions.
Or, you could stim 16 marines up a ramp and win...just ask Maru
I hate the drop nerf for zerg, now it's just back to the way it was before. I imagine there is a better solution to the problem then revert it to the way it was before.
On March 11 2018 02:37 Freeborn wrote: Seriously Terrans...
just stop whining.
sure you can have super powerful AOE plus a 3-Armor-upgrade-debuff that hits air and ground...
But only if you are willing to give up some power of your basic units which are the most cost efficient in the game. Are you really ready for that?
The AAM is supposed to turn the raven into a support role to change it away from mass raven and also from total niche play into a regular support and for that the armor reduction works well, but stackable AOE air/ground instant damage is too strong and as eerybody with a brain knows, can not be evaded you can only split before the attack.
Now you terran whiners please remind yourselves that terran bio beats EVERYTHING in small numbers and for cost plus is more mobile and airborne. Protoss is fucking balanced around psistorm forcefields and colossus. Gateway units and even immortals just lose in a straight up fight versus mixed bio. When protoss is spread out terran just always wins in smaller engagements. Same goes for pvz.
Nerf bio healing, speed and damage and then sure you can have more AOE, although I doubt that stackable airborne AOE that hits air and ground is a good design in any case.
BTW the videos I posted where almost all high level players, If you watch any pro games you will know that protoss armies are usually stacked because they are vulnerable when separated.
Just look at Maru vs SOS, that was no strategy or tactic that was pure raw micro abusing the DPS and mobility of stimmed bio, while SOS is somehow delusionally thinking that protoss can win with strategy and bigger army without AOE.
I think the more important question is how to make ravens and starport techlabs more accessible and usable without making the units overpowered.
In addition to that protoss is still incredibly weak in spread out engagements or without AOE as showcased in the terrible state of pvz, which is way worse that pvt currently. it would probably have been way better to keep the stalker buff and give terran an early game buff like faster, cheaper combat shields or something like that.
I don't like mass ravens but thats not true, this isn't HotS, gateway comps can and DO win vs stimmed bio, colossus no longer is a necessity for TvP and terran no longer plays pure bio with medivacs, WM, tanks and liberators are as important for a terran as colossus was in past expansions.
Or, you could stim 16 marines up a ramp and win...just ask Maru
Of course, every Terran can count on their Protoss opponent to donate a free Oracle and Phoenix to start, then botch their FF placement and lose the rest of their army.
Has anyone asked the big question of "Why is protoss and zerg allowed to have broken late game armies but terran isn't?" This double standard really needs to go. It's like toss/zergs want everything in the world but don't want their opposing counterparts to have anything. Like get real.
On March 11 2018 14:01 ReachTheSky wrote: Has anyone asked the big question of "Why is protoss and zerg allowed to have broken late game armies but terran isn't?" This double standard really needs to go. It's like toss/zergs want everything in the world but don't want their opposing counterparts to have anything. Like get real.
All this raven nerf talk is a bunch of nonsense.
Because 'MUH ESPORTS'. Literally. Someone in Activision's marketing department probably thinks Terran having no lategame leads to more 'action packed' games.
On March 11 2018 00:24 KR_4EVR wrote: I've posted quite a few solutions on various related threads, ranging from the bizarre (shooting tankivac) to the reasonable (viking acceleration buff and a2a attack buff for better kiting). However, I have thought of another one:
First, look at some stats:
Fungal Growth Energy 75 Range: 10 Duration: 3 s Radius: 2.25 Hotkey: F Target units take 30 damage over 3 seconds and have movement speed reduced by 75%. Reveals cloaked and burrowed units. Psionic Storm Energy 75 Range: 9 Cooldown: 1.43 s Duration: 2.85 s Radius: 1.5 Hotkey: T Creates a storm of psionic energy that lasts 2.85 seconds, causing up to 80 damage to all units in the target area.
Concussive Shells Duration: 1.07 s Slows an enemy's movement speed by 50% when hit. The slowing effect does not stack, but the timer is refreshed by subsequent hits.
I suggest that raven get a range 9-10 castable instant ability that costs 75 energy and could be called concussion matrix that slows units in a 1.5 to 2.25 radius, duration 1-3 seconds, applies to ALL units hit, functions just like concussive shells otherwise, and by itself does zero damage. Would slow movement and attack speed.
Edit: Other possible names: Higgs matrix, sonic blast, shellshock (no disrespect to the TL member of that name). Edit 2: Could be accompanied animation similar to AAM/seekermissile, as that is what it's meant to replace.
I liked your simple let tanks shoot air solution, all these words and formatting make it less obvious to see how deranged your ideas are, and how completely split from reality you are. Please, whatever your path in life is, please stay away from jobs that involves you looking at a data-set and making decisions that affect other people.
But isn't his idea just a fungal that deals no damage?
Not quite. The attack speed of slowed units would be slowed also. But when you put it that way, people can see that my proposal is actually quite modest.
yes, a modest request to give a flying unit a fungal that slows attack speed as well. Yes, terran does need that, i agree. But in the meantime, i would also like to make a modest request for Hydralisks to gain a new ability, Battle rage. It would buff movement speed and attack speed, but only for a short while, not unlike the stimpack terrans use, but to make it a bit different, instead of costing health it will add +20 HP for the duration.
Also, as someone very smartly came up with the idea already, the burrow upgrade should make corruptors able to become a ground to ground unit, and while we re at it we need to address somehow the outrageous situatuion that right now Broodlords have no Anti Air. After all its the only racial capitalship that doesnt do A-A and A-G simultaneously, I mean who could argue that this is unfair? 2/3 race have such unit it, and 1/3 dont, like really? where s my pitchfork
On March 11 2018 14:01 ReachTheSky wrote: Has anyone asked the big question of "Why is protoss and zerg allowed to have broken late game armies but terran isn't?" This double standard really needs to go. It's like toss/zergs want everything in the world but don't want their opposing counterparts to have anything. Like get real.
All this raven nerf talk is a bunch of nonsense.
I think it is partly because the onus is on Terran to create exciting games. Terran is aggressive from start to finish to keep Z/P from growing out of control. Terran is splitting against Z/P spells or AoE. Terran's units are squishy and fast and rely on multi-tasking and positioning to win. If every race functioned like Z and P, the game would be a bore-fest.
On March 11 2018 00:24 KR_4EVR wrote: I've posted quite a few solutions on various related threads, ranging from the bizarre (shooting tankivac) to the reasonable (viking acceleration buff and a2a attack buff for better kiting). However, I have thought of another one:
First, look at some stats:
Fungal Growth Energy 75 Range: 10 Duration: 3 s Radius: 2.25 Hotkey: F Target units take 30 damage over 3 seconds and have movement speed reduced by 75%. Reveals cloaked and burrowed units. Psionic Storm Energy 75 Range: 9 Cooldown: 1.43 s Duration: 2.85 s Radius: 1.5 Hotkey: T Creates a storm of psionic energy that lasts 2.85 seconds, causing up to 80 damage to all units in the target area.
Concussive Shells Duration: 1.07 s Slows an enemy's movement speed by 50% when hit. The slowing effect does not stack, but the timer is refreshed by subsequent hits.
I suggest that raven get a range 9-10 castable instant ability that costs 75 energy and could be called concussion matrix that slows units in a 1.5 to 2.25 radius, duration 1-3 seconds, applies to ALL units hit, functions just like concussive shells otherwise, and by itself does zero damage. Would slow movement and attack speed.
Edit: Other possible names: Higgs matrix, sonic blast, shellshock (no disrespect to the TL member of that name). Edit 2: Could be accompanied animation similar to AAM/seekermissile, as that is what it's meant to replace.
I liked your simple let tanks shoot air solution, all these words and formatting make it less obvious to see how deranged your ideas are, and how completely split from reality you are. Please, whatever your path in life is, please stay away from jobs that involves you looking at a data-set and making decisions that affect other people.
But isn't his idea just a fungal that deals no damage?
Not quite. The attack speed of slowed units would be slowed also. But when you put it that way, people can see that my proposal is actually quite modest.
yes, a modest request to give a flying unit a fungal that slows attack speed as well. Yes, terran does need that, i agree. But in the meantime, i would also like to make a modest request for Hydralisks to gain a new ability, Battle rage. It would buff movement speed and attack speed, but only for a short while, not unlike the stimpack terrans use, but to make it a bit different, instead of costing health it will add +20 HP for the duration.
Also, as someone very smartly came up with the idea already, the burrow upgrade should make corruptors able to become a ground to ground unit, and while we re at it we need to address somehow the outrageous situatuion that right now Broodlords have no Anti Air. After all its the only racial capitalship that doesnt do A-A and A-G simultaneously, I mean who could argue that this is unfair? 2/3 race have such unit it, and 1/3 dont, like really? where s my pitchfork
I really wish you wouldn't dismiss my idea like this without serious thought. The proposed spell would be from Ravens only, would (unlike storm or fungal) do zero damage by itself, and would just have slowing effect. That's not as powerful as either of fungal or storm, and it's far less damage than current AAM or Seeker Missile. It really is a good compromise spell. Edit: And quite nicely, duration of slow provides a simple, tweakable, balancing variable.
i would also like to make a modest request for Hydralisks to gain a new ability, Battle rage. It would buff movement speed and attack speed, but only for a short while, not unlike the stimpack terrans use
I think it would be interesting for all races to have an upgrade like stim, upgrades like hydra +1/speed, and an upgrade like charge. The first one you choose costs 100/100, the second one 200/200, the third one 300/300, and the fourth one 400/400.
On March 11 2018 14:01 ReachTheSky wrote: Has anyone asked the big question of "Why is protoss and zerg allowed to have broken late game armies but terran isn't?" This double standard really needs to go. It's like toss/zergs want everything in the world but don't want their opposing counterparts to have anything. Like get real.
All this raven nerf talk is a bunch of nonsense.
The reason for the raven nerf has nothing to do with terran not allowed to have a good late game.
It's getting changed because Blizzard did not intend for the new raven to be massed and anti-armor missile to be spammed like it is, they specifically said that was their goal with the redesign. Which is why it's getting changed so quickly. It has nothing to do with it being really OP and Blizzard saying 'OMG NO WE CANT LET TERRAN HAVE LATEGAME' but Blizzard probably saw it at IEM and thought 'Oh whoops that's specifically the opposite of what we intended'.
On March 11 2018 14:01 ReachTheSky wrote: Has anyone asked the big question of "Why is protoss and zerg allowed to have broken late game armies but terran isn't?" This double standard really needs to go. It's like toss/zergs want everything in the world but don't want their opposing counterparts to have anything. Like get real.
All this raven nerf talk is a bunch of nonsense.
The reason for the raven nerf has nothing to do with terran not allowed to have a good late game.
It's getting changed because Blizzard did not intend for the new raven to be massed and anti-armor missile to be spammed like it is, they specifically said that was their goal with the redesign. Which is why it's getting changed so quickly. It has nothing to do with it really being OP and Blizzard saying 'OMG NO WE CANT LET TERRAN HAVE LATEGAME' but Blizzard probably saw it at IEM and thought 'Oh whoops that's specifically the opposite of what we intended'.
And the reason people are complaining is because Terran lategame (sans Raven) is shit, not to put too fine a point on it (mostly TvP, TvZ is alright). +10 health on the Viking certainly isn't going to change that. Unintended or not, nerfing the Raven without compensation screws over a race that has struggled pretty hard post-4.0.
The struggle is an understandable consequence of a major design patch like 4.0 but a reasonable person would expect Blizzard to take steps to remedy that, not aggravate it. In a vacuum, you are absolutely correct. In this context, not so much.
I haven't even touched the game yet this year (because of workload, thanks ML!) and have been relatively aloof, but even I can see where the complaints coming from.
On March 11 2018 02:37 Freeborn wrote: Seriously Terrans...
just stop whining.
sure you can have super powerful AOE plus a 3-Armor-upgrade-debuff that hits air and ground...
But only if you are willing to give up some power of your basic units which are the most cost efficient in the game. Are you really ready for that?
The AAM is supposed to turn the raven into a support role to change it away from mass raven and also from total niche play into a regular support and for that the armor reduction works well, but stackable AOE air/ground instant damage is too strong and as eerybody with a brain knows, can not be evaded you can only split before the attack.
Now you terran whiners please remind yourselves that terran bio beats EVERYTHING in small numbers and for cost plus is more mobile and airborne. Protoss is fucking balanced around psistorm forcefields and colossus. Gateway units and even immortals just lose in a straight up fight versus mixed bio. When protoss is spread out terran just always wins in smaller engagements. Same goes for pvz.
Nerf bio healing, speed and damage and then sure you can have more AOE, although I doubt that stackable airborne AOE that hits air and ground is a good design in any case.
BTW the videos I posted where almost all high level players, If you watch any pro games you will know that protoss armies are usually stacked because they are vulnerable when separated.
Just look at Maru vs SOS, that was no strategy or tactic that was pure raw micro abusing the DPS and mobility of stimmed bio, while SOS is somehow delusionally thinking that protoss can win with strategy and bigger army without AOE.
I think the more important question is how to make ravens and starport techlabs more accessible and usable without making the units overpowered.
In addition to that protoss is still incredibly weak in spread out engagements or without AOE as showcased in the terrible state of pvz, which is way worse that pvt currently. it would probably have been way better to keep the stalker buff and give terran an early game buff like faster, cheaper combat shields or something like that.
I don't like mass ravens but thats not true, this isn't HotS, gateway comps can and DO win vs stimmed bio, colossus no longer is a necessity for TvP and terran no longer plays pure bio with medivacs, WM, tanks and liberators are as important for a terran as colossus was in past expansions.
Yep, pure bio medivacs in LOTV actually get reck by hydras, by gling/banes/hydra, by gateway units with minimum support (say 1 guardian shield and 1 immortal), by gateway/immo/archons etc. Every decent master player knows theses facts. It's actually probably the weaker composition of the game, the one we nearly never see in pro games. Adding respectively tanks/libs/ghosts and mines/ghosts/libs/ make it way better in frontal fights (but still trash vs Toss) but also take away some advantage of bio (like mobility and ability to engage fast)
Yet some frozen in past people still believes bio is strong, probably dreaming of the so so many terrans who only make marines and medivacs like MKP "1a moving to victory" vs storms and banes. At this point it's not even myths but pure dementia...
Actually Terran problems on the ladder and in tournaments have their source in PvT matchup. The problem is with chronoboost being riddicously strong. Especially when used to pump upgrades, which makes BIO obsolete vs Gateway units. The next step for Blizzard is to tone down Chronoboost, as it's the strongest macro booster right now.
For Terrans- just be careful what u wish for. If Blizzard would buff your lategame more, they would have to nerf your midgame first.
On March 11 2018 13:04 ShambhalaWar wrote: I hate the drop nerf for zerg, now it's just back to the way it was before. I imagine there is a better solution to the problem then revert it to the way it was before.
They couldve just make overlords take longer to morph into droppalords and after lair finishes its faster morph again. That way drop would still be a thing but come out a bit later which is the whole problem.
On March 11 2018 14:01 ReachTheSky wrote: Has anyone asked the big question of "Why is protoss and zerg allowed to have broken late game armies but terran isn't?" This double standard really needs to go. It's like toss/zergs want everything in the world but don't want their opposing counterparts to have anything. Like get real.
All this raven nerf talk is a bunch of nonsense.
The reason for the raven nerf has nothing to do with terran not allowed to have a good late game.
It's getting changed because Blizzard did not intend for the new raven to be massed and anti-armor missile to be spammed like it is, they specifically said that was their goal with the redesign. Which is why it's getting changed so quickly. It has nothing to do with it being really OP and Blizzard saying 'OMG NO WE CANT LET TERRAN HAVE LATEGAME' but Blizzard probably saw it at IEM and thought 'Oh whoops that's specifically the opposite of what we intended'.
On March 11 2018 13:04 ShambhalaWar wrote: I hate the drop nerf for zerg, now it's just back to the way it was before. I imagine there is a better solution to the problem then revert it to the way it was before.
They couldve just make overlords take longer to morph into droppalords and after lair finishes its faster morph again. That way drop would still be a thing but come out a bit later which is the whole problem.
There were few voices here, that problem with droperlords is not about defending the drops, but with scouting for Protoss. So what they should do is to low the energy cost for hallucination. That way, Protoss could not open stargate to scout, but they could just make sentry and scout with hallucination. And Zerg could have some early pressure options.
Instead, they are removing early game pressure for Zerg, so Protoss will be perfectly safe without scouting, without units to defend. Jjust pumping probes and tech. Doesn't seem fair to me.
On March 12 2018 09:52 ilikeredheads wrote: just making the damage unstackable like storm would be a good change, but no, let's nerf it into the ground to ensure terran has no viable late game.
On March 11 2018 13:04 ShambhalaWar wrote: I hate the drop nerf for zerg, now it's just back to the way it was before. I imagine there is a better solution to the problem then revert it to the way it was before.
They couldve just make overlords take longer to morph into droppalords and after lair finishes its faster morph again. That way drop would still be a thing but come out a bit later which is the whole problem.
There were few voices here, that problem with droperlords is not about defending the drops, but with scouting for Protoss. So what they should do is to low the energy cost for hallucination. That way, Protoss could not open stargate to scout, but they could just make sentry and scout with hallucination. And Zerg could have some early pressure options.
Instead, they are removing early game pressure for Zerg, so Protoss will be perfectly safe without scouting, without units to defend. Jjust pumping probes and tech. Doesn't seem fair to me.
Right? The whole reason the MsC was removed from the game was because it let protoss get far ahead safely with no risk. They wanted to open up the options but now regret it?
On March 11 2018 13:04 ShambhalaWar wrote: I hate the drop nerf for zerg, now it's just back to the way it was before. I imagine there is a better solution to the problem then revert it to the way it was before.
They couldve just make overlords take longer to morph into droppalords and after lair finishes its faster morph again. That way drop would still be a thing but come out a bit later which is the whole problem.
There were few voices here, that problem with droperlords is not about defending the drops, but with scouting for Protoss. So what they should do is to low the energy cost for hallucination. That way, Protoss could not open stargate to scout, but they could just make sentry and scout with hallucination. And Zerg could have some early pressure options.
Instead, they are removing early game pressure for Zerg, so Protoss will be perfectly safe without scouting, without units to defend. Jjust pumping probes and tech. Doesn't seem fair to me.
Right? The whole reason the MsC was removed from the game was because it let protoss get far ahead safely with no risk. They wanted to open up the options but now regret it?
The problem is that the MsC provides a whole host of options other than just base defense. MsC provides early game scouting, early game harass, and early game defense. And a lot of LotV was balanced around the MsC.
By taking away the MsC and replacing it with the shield battery + nexus recall, you don't cover all of the things that the MsC did. What you're seeing is the result of getting rid of the MsC without fully accounting for the things that the MsC actually did.
This isn't to say that the MsC should have been in the game just that the MsC covered multiple roles, and the balance issues we're seeing now is a result of the roles not being properly filled by other units/abilities.
Here is an idea: Reduce the cost & research time of the blue flame upgrade for terran. Make research time 1 minute and the cost 100/100. With the current research time & cost, it has pretty much zero place in the game.
On March 11 2018 14:01 ReachTheSky wrote: Has anyone asked the big question of "Why is protoss and zerg allowed to have broken late game armies but terran isn't?" This double standard really needs to go. It's like toss/zergs want everything in the world but don't want their opposing counterparts to have anything. Like get real.
All this raven nerf talk is a bunch of nonsense.
The reason for the raven nerf has nothing to do with terran not allowed to have a good late game.
It's getting changed because Blizzard did not intend for the new raven to be massed and anti-armor missile to be spammed like it is, they specifically said that was their goal with the redesign. Which is why it's getting changed so quickly. It has nothing to do with it being really OP and Blizzard saying 'OMG NO WE CANT LET TERRAN HAVE LATEGAME' but Blizzard probably saw it at IEM and thought 'Oh whoops that's specifically the opposite of what we intended'.
Don't bother like talking to a brick wall
These kinds of posts are plague in these discussions. You patch to BALANCE the game not bc of "stale meta game" or "not designed intent" or any of the other reasons blizzard has used that dont include the word BALANCE. Please someone highlight a single patch that was made for reasons other than imbalance that didnt make the game worse. There is no functioning human that believes plus 10 hp on vikings compensates for nerfhammering the raven.. if it wasnt already clear terran is UNDER performing and needs overcompensation if anything.. this is as batshit nuts as the hots widow mine nerf and a close second to the post 4.0 stalker rofl
On March 11 2018 14:01 ReachTheSky wrote: Has anyone asked the big question of "Why is protoss and zerg allowed to have broken late game armies but terran isn't?" This double standard really needs to go. It's like toss/zergs want everything in the world but don't want their opposing counterparts to have anything. Like get real.
All this raven nerf talk is a bunch of nonsense.
The reason for the raven nerf has nothing to do with terran not allowed to have a good late game.
It's getting changed because Blizzard did not intend for the new raven to be massed and anti-armor missile to be spammed like it is, they specifically said that was their goal with the redesign. Which is why it's getting changed so quickly. It has nothing to do with it being really OP and Blizzard saying 'OMG NO WE CANT LET TERRAN HAVE LATEGAME' but Blizzard probably saw it at IEM and thought 'Oh whoops that's specifically the opposite of what we intended'.
Don't bother like talking to a brick wall
Please someone highlight a single patch that was made for reasons other than imbalance that didnt make the game worse.
the patch after 2016 blizzcon that removed tankivacs
On March 11 2018 14:01 ReachTheSky wrote: Has anyone asked the big question of "Why is protoss and zerg allowed to have broken late game armies but terran isn't?" This double standard really needs to go. It's like toss/zergs want everything in the world but don't want their opposing counterparts to have anything. Like get real.
All this raven nerf talk is a bunch of nonsense.
The reason for the raven nerf has nothing to do with terran not allowed to have a good late game.
It's getting changed because Blizzard did not intend for the new raven to be massed and anti-armor missile to be spammed like it is, they specifically said that was their goal with the redesign. Which is why it's getting changed so quickly. It has nothing to do with it being really OP and Blizzard saying 'OMG NO WE CANT LET TERRAN HAVE LATEGAME' but Blizzard probably saw it at IEM and thought 'Oh whoops that's specifically the opposite of what we intended'.
Don't bother like talking to a brick wall
Please someone highlight a single patch that was made for reasons other than imbalance that didnt make the game worse.
the patch after 2016 blizzcon that removed tankivacs
Yah im not talking about a patch like 3.0 or 4.0. Even tho personally i dont think the game got better in either of those. Im talking about a nerf to a unit or comp in the middle of a 3.0 or 4.0.
And lets be honest. That era your talking about is the last time Terran was winning anything..so there were definitely balance implications of that and not necessarily bad ones. The point here is they are talking about a big nerf to the race which is already struggling .. intent and design should not supercede balance
On March 11 2018 14:01 ReachTheSky wrote: Has anyone asked the big question of "Why is protoss and zerg allowed to have broken late game armies but terran isn't?" This double standard really needs to go. It's like toss/zergs want everything in the world but don't want their opposing counterparts to have anything. Like get real.
All this raven nerf talk is a bunch of nonsense.
The reason for the raven nerf has nothing to do with terran not allowed to have a good late game.
It's getting changed because Blizzard did not intend for the new raven to be massed and anti-armor missile to be spammed like it is, they specifically said that was their goal with the redesign. Which is why it's getting changed so quickly. It has nothing to do with it being really OP and Blizzard saying 'OMG NO WE CANT LET TERRAN HAVE LATEGAME' but Blizzard probably saw it at IEM and thought 'Oh whoops that's specifically the opposite of what we intended'.
Don't bother like talking to a brick wall
Please someone highlight a single patch that was made for reasons other than imbalance that didnt make the game worse.
the patch after 2016 blizzcon that removed tankivacs
Yah im not talking about a patch like 3.0 or 4.0. Even tho personally i dont think the game got better in either of those. Im talking about a nerf to a unit or comp in the middle of a 3.0 or 4.0.
And lets be honest. That era your talking about is the last time Terran was winning anything..so there were definitely balance implications of that and not necessarily bad ones. The point here is they are talking about a big nerf to the race which is already struggling .. intent and design should not supercede balance
You seem nit picky. The 3.0 and 4.0 are patches that answer your question. They were not about balance. Then you say not to count these prime examples. Community feedback has said that at various points in time that patches for design will happen and not always the big ones like 3.0 and 4.0. This raven change is about design. The info from Blizzard say that this is about design. A design change that results in a nerf, for which the viking will receive a compensatory buff.
I can give you an example of a design patch: adept shade will continue with the latest order when shading instead of stopping.
On March 11 2018 13:04 ShambhalaWar wrote: I hate the drop nerf for zerg, now it's just back to the way it was before. I imagine there is a better solution to the problem then revert it to the way it was before.
They couldve just make overlords take longer to morph into droppalords and after lair finishes its faster morph again. That way drop would still be a thing but come out a bit later which is the whole problem.
There were few voices here, that problem with droperlords is not about defending the drops, but with scouting for Protoss. So what they should do is to low the energy cost for hallucination. That way, Protoss could not open stargate to scout, but they could just make sentry and scout with hallucination. And Zerg could have some early pressure options.
Instead, they are removing early game pressure for Zerg, so Protoss will be perfectly safe without scouting, without units to defend. Jjust pumping probes and tech. Doesn't seem fair to me.
Right? The whole reason the MsC was removed from the game was because it let protoss get far ahead safely with no risk. They wanted to open up the options but now regret it?
The problem is that the MsC provides a whole host of options other than just base defense. MsC provides early game scouting, early game harass, and early game defense. And a lot of LotV was balanced around the MsC.
By taking away the MsC and replacing it with the shield battery + nexus recall, you don't cover all of the things that the MsC did. What you're seeing is the result of getting rid of the MsC without fully accounting for the things that the MsC actually did.
This isn't to say that the MsC should have been in the game just that the MsC covered multiple roles, and the balance issues we're seeing now is a result of the roles not being properly filled by other units/abilities.
The MSC was the most cancerous unit in the game. It did not promote interactive gameplay. It promoted 10 minutes of pointless caster banter for years. The MSC will not be coming back.
On March 11 2018 14:01 ReachTheSky wrote: Has anyone asked the big question of "Why is protoss and zerg allowed to have broken late game armies but terran isn't?" This double standard really needs to go. It's like toss/zergs want everything in the world but don't want their opposing counterparts to have anything. Like get real.
All this raven nerf talk is a bunch of nonsense.
The reason for the raven nerf has nothing to do with terran not allowed to have a good late game.
It's getting changed because Blizzard did not intend for the new raven to be massed and anti-armor missile to be spammed like it is, they specifically said that was their goal with the redesign. Which is why it's getting changed so quickly. It has nothing to do with it being really OP and Blizzard saying 'OMG NO WE CANT LET TERRAN HAVE LATEGAME' but Blizzard probably saw it at IEM and thought 'Oh whoops that's specifically the opposite of what we intended'.
Don't bother like talking to a brick wall
Please someone highlight a single patch that was made for reasons other than imbalance that didnt make the game worse.
the patch after 2016 blizzcon that removed tankivacs
Yah im not talking about a patch like 3.0 or 4.0. Even tho personally i dont think the game got better in either of those. Im talking about a nerf to a unit or comp in the middle of a 3.0 or 4.0.
And lets be honest. That era your talking about is the last time Terran was winning anything..so there were definitely balance implications of that and not necessarily bad ones. The point here is they are talking about a big nerf to the race which is already struggling .. intent and design should not supercede balance
You seem nit picky. The 3.0 and 4.0 are patches that answer your question. They were not about balance. Then you say not to count these prime examples. Community feedback has said that at various points in time that patches for design will happen and not always the big ones like 3.0 and 4.0. This raven change is about design. The info from Blizzard say that this is about design. A design change that results in a nerf, for which the viking will receive a compensatory buff.
I can give you an example of a design patch: adept shade will continue with the latest order when shading instead of stopping.
Yah I'm fine disagreeing about whether 3.0 and 4.0 made sense or not - I understand that some people wanted big changes to the game. My problem is your statement along with the few others "The info from Blizzard say that this is about design. A design change that results in a nerf, for which the viking will receive a compensatory buff." First - this logic would be OK if the game was in a balanced state AND the buff was at least comparable in impact to the nerf (which it clearly is not even close). You guys parrot this nonsense as if it's totally logical - when you need only a basic understanding of the game to know that it's not.