Community Feedback Update - January 6

General Discussion
Prev 1 7 8 9 11 Next
Maybe David Kim could hire few cybernetic enegeneers to mathematically balance game for him. Even thou some variables would be hard to take into account, people from Overmind (or how is AI project working with SC called) could tell their mind.
01/08/2017 08:30 AMPosted by HardCorePawn
01/08/2017 08:01 AMPosted by Sergio

Dark Templar are pretty reliable, but instead of letting us get them earlier by reducing the tech path and the buildings required to get to said DTs they gave us the biggest gimmick of all time: DT blink, and just like with any advertisment on TV there is a small fine print in the bottom of the description: Stalker blink doesn't affect dt blink and is a separate upgrade with a long research time


I'm not even going to address your previous statement regarding your Plat level experience... You can get Plat pretty easily with any race without ever taking gas. What your Plat level opponents are doing is really not relevant to a discussion regarding a game that is balanced at the GM and Pro level, try to remember that.

Thank GOD (or DKim more accurately) that DTs are not more accessible and that blink upgrades are not shared. Have you ever played another race? Do you understand why the Meme 'when behind, DT' even exists? it's because they win games that you have no business winning. The mere existence of the DT is borderline gimmickry its-self especially when it is so easy to hide proxied tech. Blink DTs only serve to make an annoying unit even more annoying and where they sit in the tech tree is a necessary investment.

01/08/2017 08:01 AMPosted by Sergio
Adept shade vision has been reduced to 2, When I go up a ramp in the early game I should be able to see what I'm getting myself into, nobody should walk up a ramp and hope for the best. The 9 vision also allowed us to look past the barracks wall and see what they were cooking up in the base


I agree the vision nerf was heavy handed (~4-5 would be better imo) but you understand that no race gets to scout for free without putting a single unit at risk right? The only thing the vision nerf does is stops you shading an adept ball with impunity. If you haven't learned that you only need to reverse the mechanic for scouting then that is on your own head; Fire the shade back wards, actually micro your Adept during the scout (heaven forbid) and time it so the adept doesn't die.

Anyways I'm done, we're heavily OT and derailing the threads purpose here.[/quote]

I do micro the adept and pick up 2 kills at least, 4 if it goes well, not much, but hey, I'm plat remember?
DTs, ever tried bulding a turret/spore or an overseer? Works wonders!
I'm happy we found a point of covergence: the adept shade vision. It's clear we have different opinions, and that's great, I sincerely hope they improve PvT. That's all.
I would be happy with the speed upgrade + 10 HP combined. However, I think it would be more useful to have a second upgrade, for 15-20 HP, that requires Hive. I doubt the Hydra will ever be a core unit. However, Zerg needs some good anti-air against capital ships (mass Carriers, cough, cough), so this would work well.
Protoss
We need some changes. How about this.

1.Stalker, 14 Damage flat. Just try it already, play around with less health and maybe even more damage.
2.Phoenix, increase pickup range, when weapon range upgrade is researched. this will make them less likely to instantly die when picking up tanks or lurkers and generally more viable and dangerous lategame.
3.After seeing Nightmare vs Gumiho, I vote for a faster DT charge upgrade, 90 secs or less. They can actually be used in direct engagements, if the upgrade can be finished before heavy terran aggression hits.
4.An Adept upgrade that allows triggering the shade at any point in time, before the timer runs out.

Aside from that I still vote for a removal of Photon overcharge and the addition of a defensive nexus ability, or defensive structure.
I still think the colossus AoE should be removed as well, and be replaced with a strong single target attack beam, that can move from target to target.
As long as protoss has that much ground AoE, gateway units will probably never be allowed to be really strong.

Don't let down all your protoss fans, Dev team!

Zerg
I'm really not sure what the devs are doing and why Hydras need a buff, but how about one or both of these:
1. Hydras start with 6 Range, no upgrade needed.
2. Hydras gain additional Hive tech upgrade for 7 range. (This probably still too strong but might be okay on hive)
You know what should surprise me but doesn't.

The amount of people puzzled about the Hydra buff they announced was coming yup they said they were going to do so.

They want Hydra to be more then timing attack against protoss unit. They also stated that.
01/06/2017 09:43 AMPosted by Dayvie

Tournaments and balance
Tournaments have started going this year, so we should look for any “absolute must” balance changes that need to happen. We definitely see the concerns such as early/mid game PvT right now, but we’d like to strike a good balance between giving players enough time to adjust to new strategies vs. stepping in to make balance changes.


Two quick PvT suggestions that are slight buffs to gateway units while giving Protoss early/mid-game a bit more flexibility and strength

1. Sentry's Hallucination Energy Cost Reduced from 100 to 75
    -makes up slightly for the Adepts loss of vision range... sentry sends hallucinated phoenix in before the Adept shade-in
    -makes the Sentry a slightly more useful unit overall (needed)


2. Zealot's Charge Upgrade Cost Reduced from 200m 200g to 150m 150g
    -puts Charge more on par with Blink and closer to Glaives
    -Anything to encourage more Zealot play is a plus (hardly see those guys anymore)
    -The cost reduction gets Charge in play sooner and increase Protoss options and strength


Thoughts?
You guys need to seriously start addressing Protoss on the whole. The simple fact is that at the moment for the majority of people, Protoss isn't fun to play as or fun to play against.

I don't think anyone would argue with me if I said that the biggest problem with the race, from both the perspective of the player and the opponent, is that it relies too heavily on annoying gimmicks.
A lot of players like to freestyle on ladder, just play without a specific build in mind and see how it goes. Terran and Zerg have a lot of support for this type of style with 3CC builds and macro Zerg play, Protoss much less so. I think Protoss needs more support for freestyle play to actually draw players in, rather than the current Protoss where a lot of people end up feeling like they're playing the same game over and over with only minor variations.

In short, I think the design intent for Protoss should be this: Reduce the effectiveness of the gimmicky units like Oracles, Adepts, Sentries and Disruptors, and increase the baseline effectiveness of the race.
Note: I don't advocate changing DT's at all. Having a cheesy gimmicky build isn't the same as having only cheesy, gimmicky builds. DT's are DT's and should remain DT's.

Some possibilities in my mind
    Put Zealot Charge on the Cyber Core
    Make Adept Glaives baseline but ditch the shades entirely.
    Move Time Warp from the Mothership Core to the Sentry, replacing Forcefield, and just flat out across the board buff Zealots and Stalkers with more damage, more HP etc (this is fairly radical and I don't actually have much of an idea how it would turn out. It's something I'd love to see tested though. May require Blink to have its research time increased though.)
    Rework the Oracle entirely, Get rid of Pulsar Beam, reduce the cost and build time significantly, Stasis Traps become instant (with an activation delay where they can be killed and seen by any unit of course) but do not affect worker units

Also, I'm not suggesting all of these, but whichever turn out the best. Along with anything else others can come up with.
If this goes through Has Style will have big problems. Aswell as it will make PvZ in generell worse again for people who want to play something else then Archon bomb. I think this Hydra buff is vs Tanks & Carrier. So to make this units still worth building I suggest to make +10 HP an extra upgrade (3 buffs in one upgrade would be too much anyways) and make it HIVE tech. Therefore it would not be too strong vs mid game army compositions
Oh and can we revert the Infestor can cast underground thing? Invis caster are a really really bad idea. Especeally vs terran.
RIP protoss.
These guys are so damn incompetent. I mean, if there are by far fewer players playing protoss right now, specially at diamond/master ranks, they need to address it. Instead, they make zerg even more appealing.
Next update? Decrease widow mine cost?
I like to play random too, so it's fine by me, but I hate playing against terran and zerg every single game.
Protoss
I still think the colossus AoE should be removed as well, and be replaced with a strong single target attack beam, that can move from target to target.
As long as protoss has that much ground AoE, gateway units will probably never be allowed to be really strong.

Zerg
I'm really not sure what the devs are doing and why Hydras need a buff, but how about one or both of these:
1. Hydras start with 6 Range, no upgrade needed.
2. Hydras gain additional Hive tech upgrade for 7 range. (This probably still too strong but might be okay on hive)


Yeah that could could be work for the Colossus and he is way easier to fix then a Siegetank maybe even like in the Campaign of the taldarim and other way do to some changes for early game of toss to put Colossi into robo without the bay they are weaker then in wol or hots but still have only 6 range without the upgrade what allow to fix them easy Compare to siegetanks or disruptor even Marauder match this range and it only change a little bit splash for toss in early stages so they can easier survive /or the other case Disruptor nerf put them fast and give them an upgrade

about Zerg Hydra's they can have 7 range by an upgrade at hive tech.
Because Toss had some problems because they hadn't the range to fight them in the middle game where it was implented they could set hydra range 6 by default and the upgrade requires hive tech and i think it would not break the game like the last time

At Least about Terran
The Zonecontrol units are to powerful in mass
Siegetank why you didn't make the siegetank with 2 Siegemodes like 40 Dmg with splash one with 80-100 without splash
Widowmine Should lose the extra splash dmg against Shield then they could again maybe even more dmg on the main attack as trade
Liberator should more focus to counter Air units instat of Destruct ground units
nerf the ground mode as hell only for a support at the end with +massiv dmg against ultra archon thor and Colossi
The Thing is Terran unit's are deal in the most case to much allround dmg pretty much every ground Combo has no chance against a wall and 10 Siegetanks behind it.

i know you balance for Competitive high players but at the end they are like less then 1% of the players but this shouldn't include never looking on the casual players

At the end you buffed siegetanks?? why?? they are often used!!!! even before 3.8!! way more than a thor why haven't give the thor(way less played unit) the buff instat of Siegetank's because they haven't splash It wouldn't be so brocke as the siegtank now is!!
As a disclaimer, everything I say is from an amateur view point and should be taken with a pinch of salt as I am in no way an expert - just a really big fan of the game. With that out of the way, I've noticed people have been very negative about Protoss and I believe (like many others) PvT to be the huge culprit in this regard.

From my overview of the situation the biggest factor in this seems to be the infamous Liberator (and its circles of death and despair) and then to a lesser extent the Widow Mine. They both can be implemented in-game quite well for harassment, straight-up offense as well as defense and they seem to be very proficient and cost-effective in all these roles. Also, they can both be produced en-mass with relative ease via reactors.

My first suggestion would be that at least one of these 2 (probably the liberator) might have to require a tech lab. This should relieve some of the pressure on the P player in the earlier stages of the game as it would be harder to produce as many in that time. Also, in the later stages of the game T players will be forced to build the more expensive factory/reactor if he/she wishes to produce these units quicker; thus requiring more of an investment by that player for such versatile units.

However, if these changes are too drastic or not drastic enough I have some unit specific suggestion as well which can be applied in any combination required (for those believing I wish T to be nerfed into the ground). I shall however refrain from any specific numbers as well as any dps, dps scaling and hp changes as these are all obvious enough as possibilities (with one notable exception later on):

Liberator:

  • I have mentioned this before but a speed/acceleration change would make the liberator less mobile and more comparable to other units that fit a similar role.
  • Decrease Liberator range and perhaps increase the range gained from researching Advanced Ballistics. This should decrease its early harass potential without affecting its late game impact.
  • Remove the 'armored' tag and replace it with the 'light' tag and perhaps give the Liberator's air attack +shield damage and/or increase the Liberator's base armor. This weakens its early game potential against a stargate opening and in later battles the T player will have to make the tactical decision of engaging the phoenixes first or setting up in defender mode.


Widow Mine:

  • A collision radius change, while burrowed, similar to that recently done for the infestor (for the same reason as well).
  • Make the targeting line (or whatever it's called) more noticeable
  • Reduce (or remove) the +shield damage done by the widow mine. Among other things, a single widow mine will no longer be sufficient for defending against oracle harassment
  • Increased burrow time partnered with an improved and cheaper drilling claws upgrade.


Lastly, if none (especially the 3rd) of the Liberator are implemented it might be worth considering the following changes for the Void Ray:

Void Ray:

Adding a +1 range upgrade at the fleet beacon to aid against liberators (I give a specific number since any more than +1 would have the void ray outrange static defense). If this is too much a slight attack speed decrease for the void ray might be worth considering so that, outside picking off liberators (and outside PvT), the Void Ray does not deal excessively more damage over its lifespan. I do not know, however, how such changes might effect PvZ.

If I have made any oversights feel free to correct me or add any new ideas.
PvT:

Remove +shields widow mine damage
Tech lab liberator and/or
Reduce liberator damage so that it 3 shots stalkers and/or give stalkers 14 flat damage
Reduce siege tank +armored damage or bring back hardened shields, tanks laugh at immortals with barriers as of now
Reduce charge upgrade cost to 200/150 or 150/150
Bring back the bouncing attack on the adept

PvZ:
Instead of buffing hydras to counter carriers, give corruptors +damage to massive units, so that focusing carriers actually works

Is it really that hard?
I main Terran, but play all 3 races. Terran and Zerg are starting to feel really good and fun to play. They remain true to their intended roles. Terran feel like the scrappy resourceful survivors who depend on setting up and taking a tactical advantage of the battlefield. Zerg feels swarmy and wins by attacking with waves and waves of cheap expendible units. These races are moving in the right direction and while there are still some areas and under utilized abilities to address, I feel we should focus a little bit on protoss.

To me Protoss has always been the race with stronger more expensive units. The Protoss race is the one that should feel like they can do alot with alittle. Protoss does not feel this way anymore. I think the introduction of the adept (another weak/cheap unit) is part of the reason for this. I also feel that the adept is basically a better ranged zealot therefore there is not much use for zealots. Anyways my point is that protoss does not feel very protoss. I will include a list of some ideas I have in hopes that some of them may help give you some good ideas for protoss.

Stalker - This unit is does better dmg against armored, but loses to pretty much all the other armored units (marauder, tank, cyclone, roach...)...Not only this, but stalkers lose against light units too (marines/zergling). He is not even good at dealing with mass air threats....This guy needs something changed. Maybe change his weapon/stats/supply/size to feel more like a dragoon or give him a late game upgrade to improve usefulness vs air.

New robo unit? Maybe we can scratch the adept and introduce a new mineral heavy unit from the robo. It would be nice to see army compositions not relient on gateway tech. I think the unit should be able to hit air or be better vs air than the stalker. If this is out of the question to keep the rock-paper-scissors between robo-stargate-twilight more like broodwar than at least make this unit have some unique synergy with something from the stargate to encourage some robo-stargate combo play.

Colossus - I don't want an extra ability, but maybe give it an upgrade for a high dmg single target AA shot? Something good vs carriers, but not vs tempest.

Immortal - Adjust build times or tech tree to allow for a possible defensive immortal that will be done by the time terran has 1-2 cyclones?

Tempest - Revert back to the experimental tempest with less range in ground weapon. Give it some kind of psyonic shield ability that will temporarily buff shields of 1 select unit or structure or create a damaging AOE field around a ground unit. It would be interesting to see something like this used to protect big ground units/defensive structures or temporarily turn a few chargelots into furious fighting shredding machines in the late game.

Robo bay - Eliminate cybernetics core as a requirement to build. Increase immortal build time and make cybernetics core a requirement for observers/warp prism. Let's spice up the tech paths and let toss get immortal early enough to fight 1-2 cyclones.

Warp gates - Reduce research time and move this upgrade to twilight tech. This way we can give the zealot/stalker a early game buff. This will also make late game twilight tech feel really AWESOMEwhen warp gates become available late game (almost feels cinematic like the LOTV preview trailer). We can also revert the warp times/restrictions back to HOTS since there will not be an issue of quick forward pylon early game warp ins (the warp prism will need to be modified?).

Listen to community ideas about the mothership core and photon overcharge.

I hope this helps stir up some ideas! We need some radical changes! You can always revert them if they dont work.

PROTOSS REDESIGN
GIVE ZERG SCOURGES @ GREATER SPIRE TECH!
GIVE ZERG SCOURGES @ GREATER SPIRE TECH![/quote

[quote="207510116221"]GIVE ZERG SCOURGES @ GREATER SPIRE TECH!


Should make it an ability/upgrade for the swarm host. Or maybe let players choose 1 or the other to cast.
01/09/2017 08:58 AMPosted by TeamSC
[quote]GIVE ZERG SCOURGES @ GREATER SPIRE TECH![/quote

01/09/2017 08:50 AMPosted by BenEEeee
GIVE ZERG SCOURGES @ GREATER SPIRE TECH!


Should make it an ability/upgrade for the swarm host. Or maybe let players choose 1 or the other to cast.


Anything to balance out the Golden Armada honestly
What will the team maps be?
01/08/2017 02:30 AMPosted by Learning
What all of those People dont get is that atm the siegetank 3 shoots the hydra anyways. It starts 2 shoting them at +1. 0/0 tanks need 3 shots.

The worst thing you can do is buff health of a glasscannon. Reduce the Price or increase the healing rate.

NEVER and i say never! make a insane dps cannon tanky its bad gamedesign


Then I guess we better revert the tank health buff, right?

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum