First off, I want to say that I know it's beta, and I know that "by definition" that implies that it is imbalanced. Having said that...
The Terrans seem OP to me.
- The Reaper is ridiculous. The thing is available early, it can jump cliffs, it's fast as hell, it's strong, it can harass your eco big-time, and to add insult to injury, it has a ridiculously strong special ability against buildings, and can take them down in no time. The effort required by you to counter this thing early game is not matched by the ease with which the Terran player can deploy this thing and harass your eco to death, as well as take down buildings.
- That Hellion is a nasty early harass unit too. It is strong against early light units (i.e. probes, drones, zerglings, basic infantry) and it is fast as hell. I mean, between the Reaper and the Hellion, the average Terran opponent can kiss the game goodbye.
- Marauders just seem overly powerful to me.
- That EMP shockwave from the Ghost just seems to royally fuck Protoss.
Protoss seem UP to me.
- The Stalker seems too weak in terms of hit points and attack (they drop like flies to Terrans), and blink seems to take a long time to recharge, where as Terrans just seem to spam the hell out of their special abilities.
- The Collossus just seems to be a totally underpowered hunk of junk that auto-explodes every time an enemy unit gets within sight range. I mean, they pop like helium balloons. Weirdly, they seem to have nerfed it even more with their last patch, where as if anything it needed a substantial buff.
I mean, the only time I see a Protoss or Zerg beat a Terran is if the Protoss/Zerg is just a way better player.
Your thoughts?
Here is a link to a explanation of the patch changes from Blizzard. I personally didn't think it was that big of a buff.
What I personally find crazy is Blizzard's definition of a moving shot. There has been a relatively large clamor by top players for Blizzard to implement better 'moving shot' mechanics where you can fire then move away very quickly, and if timed right, fire and move off before coming to a complete stop from before attacking. Blizzard clearly has no idea what this means because they implemented 'moving shot' on the Phoenix where you literally shoot while moving. This includes shooting in any direction while moving in any direction. It's really quite ridiculous. Demonstration
I actually like the changes to the phoenix. I'm sure I'm in the minority, but I'm actually not a big fan of micro. I don't think "strategy" games should be based on micro, and I don't think they should be played like arcade games. I also thought phoenixes were a little weak for dedicated anti-air units, so the buff definitely helps. This is one of the things they got right, but I'm predicting this will be totally reverted, in favor of a mechanic more like the one you describe above.
EDIT: I also think there's too many people listening to Team Liquid as far as design and balance. I'm not a fan of a lot of their ideas, especially what constitutes injecting "skill" into the game. Just because Team Liquid says it doesn't make it automatically right, but people seem to think they are gods gracing us all with their wisdom from on high.
Most people on TL, just like on any forum(though Stardock forums do tend to have a smaller idiot:poster ratio), is full of idiots who think they know what they're talking about. However, that said there are tons of top players on TL who do know what they're talking about.
I also don't think strategy games should be based solely on micro. However, I do think micro should be an important part of the game that separates players. This comes from a top(lol) silver league player who sucks at micro.
Also, the Phoenix does it's thing regardless if you attack move or regular move. Another reason I think it's ridiculous.
They should do that moving shot thing for all vehicles, if they don't do it already (I'm not in the beta). It makes no sense for something as big as the Thor or the Siege Tank to not be able to fire their weapons while stomping towards the enemy base, especially since siege tanks probably aren't worth buying unless your Siege Mode them.
I actually don't fault their skill - those top TL guys would stomp me in a microsecond. I also don't fault their knowledge - they certainly know what they are talking about. I fault their philosophy on game design, i.e. how much "skill" should be in the game, what constitutes "skill," etc.
Basically, they are the type people who think it's good to remove advanced user interface and automation elements from the game, so as to inject more tedious bullshit into it in order to "inject skill." Basically, they think the more clicks you are forced to do in order to do a tedious task, the better, where as I'd like tedium and "BS" minimized, automated, etc.
Glad to know I'm not the only one that feels that way.
I love phoenix now. They were good before. Now they're just straight up sex.
Blink is awesome particularly on maps where you can blink up back doors. Very good for harass.
Never had any problems with a reaper rush as Protoss. I love it when they go reapers since I typically start off massing stalkers vs terran.
Worst matchup for me is vs random on a huge map like that kulas ravine. I hate that map.
I agree with the general sentiment.
Rally on minerals to harvest, one spell at once from a group of casters, these are all good things and the players complaining can gtfo.
Attack animation cancelling though, I consider that skill as opposed to tedious bullshit. The change to the phoenix was a buff, not a removal of tediousness. If they did that to all units it would take a massive dose of skill out of micro. There'd be less to separate the good players from the slightly less good.
No, units being able to fire on the move wouldn't reduce micro, but it would certainly feel like Blizzard updated the SC franchise to the 21st Century. My biggest problem with SC2 is that it plays just like StarCraft1, despite it being ten years in development which is plenty of time for new ideas. Even Capcom realized that Resident Evil gameplay was outdated and revamped it when they made RE4, which was an awesome game yet still felt like a Resident Evil game. Do you want to know why it wouldn't reduce micro? Because it is hard to kite with a group of units and manage everything else that isn't kiting.
Agreed! Those TL guys are zealots on a holy crusade for increased "skill". And just because THEY like it they have the arrogant attitude that everyone else must like it as well. And if they do not, "oh but they're noobs"....
There has been massive debates about the improved UI on both GameReplays and TL (and most probably every StarCraft fansite.) On GameReplays, I was very pleased to see that the whole first two pages (except the arrogant person known as Avilo who started the thread) supported modern UIs.
About balance, I'd claim that Protoss have the advantage since they got the most options and can adapt to everything.
I actually don't understand why every Protoss don't train lots of Dark Templars midgame. Just send one DT to make the Terran waste scans. After 4 scans he must be out of energy and must either tech up to a Raven (which you'll snipe) or be forced to build Missile Turrets everywhere (which you'll destroy with other units.)
It's like the last mission in the BroodWar campaign "Omega". Damn Protoss had Dark Templar most places and sniped the Overlords....was so frustrating....
When I win it's because my race is overpowered. Whenever I lose it's because I suck.
Some Rank 5 plat zerg player did some hidden hatchery in my base cheese and proceeded to contain me with sunkens and roaches. I was able to get a robo up and fight it off with immortals, then continue to push and take the win. "Protoss is so OP" he says.
Yeah, because your 'all-in' zerg cheese didn't work, protoss must be OP. I think he's on Blizzard's balance team.
Dark templars are strong but I would only consider them if I feel like my army wasn't threatened by my opponents army. For example, if he's massing banshees or mutas, I don't see how dark temps are gonna help me. I need phoenix asap. If he's got a nasty mmm blob, I'm gonna need colossus or storm to deal with that.
If I feel like I have an army that can take his, then sure, dark temps are nice supplement. But I feel like they're more of a luxury unit- unless you're specifically rushing to DTs in a matchup like toss vs toss where your opponent is doing some kind of all-in gateway push with minimal detection.
Another patch, another epic failure. Terran buffed again, protoss and zerg nerfed again. Terran is so OP now it isn't funny, yet they are continuously buffed ever more. Despite terran newbs screaming about void rays, they weren't OP at all. ALL AIR can be "OP" (ever been hit by a mass of banshees, or battlecruisers)? Yet the void ray was nerfed.
At this point I have decided that Blizzard truly doesn't know what the hell it is doing. My guess is they just hired a bunch of idiots to balance the game - people who weren't involved with SC1, but that's just a guess.
The tech is expensive, takes a long time to get, and doesn't really have anything else useful in the tree. Most protosses are frantically trying to pump out whatever they can to somehow not get rolled by terran. They can't afford to spend money and time on some exotic, expensive dt tech.
Still, it's probably better than ht tech, which sucks major balls.
The Platinum ladders (I've heard) have Protoss and Zerg in them with few Terrans.
The Void Ray had good range, could hit both ground & air and did incredible damage after 4 seconds.
The HDH invitational didn't have many Terrans. 3 Randoms, 5 Protoss and don't remember the rest.
Also from what I've heard, Protoss continue to win over Terran.
Dark Templars
I'm not in the beta myself but am a veteran SC 1 player since it was new. Have also played some SC 2 against A.I and watched almost every game that Husky got on his channel.
If I was in beta I would definetly try (in midgame, once things stabilize a bit) to send Dark Templars at different targets. He would have to use scans to get rid off them (and he may not manage to kill them!) which means less mules! I would simply continue to send DTs until he either dies or gets Turrents and/or Ravens. He would be contained.
From a theorycrafting perspective, Dark Templars seem like MURDER against Terrans. Terrans may have the most detection capabilities but also the worst. Expensive support flyer (which they don't get against Protoss) and OC energy that you then can't use for mules. So using DTs would slow the Terrans economy
High Templars are the COUNTER to the M&M&M ball. Can't believe you've missed that....
Feedback can mean destroyed Medivac and 8 Terran infantry units. Multiple Psi Storms WILL kill infantry blobs. I believe HTs feedback got greater range then Ghosts EMP.
Work against Zerg as well. One Protoss who was contained to one base against Zerg had 15 High Templars, some stalkers and a Collussuss and simply stormed the Zerg whenever he tried to attack. In the end the Protoss got runover but the Zerg did have the entire map except the Protoss main and natural (Lost Temple).
But tell you what, once the game hits, we'll play as many games as we need and I'll try to defeat you 100-0 with Protoss vs Terran
Meh, Terran's are saving 200/200 on their M&M ball. Just makes an early push is a little harder, not much of a buff really.
The Void Ray and Force Field nerfs were pretty warranted, imo, and this comes from a Protoss player. Void ray could sit at the edge of cliffs and snipe anything even with the crappiest micro ever(mine) and marines could do nothing, and they're supposed to be a viable counter. As it is now, if you suck at unit control like myself, it will be much harder to get their full benefit, but still possible to out-range marines(range 6 vs range 5).
I've been doing alright P v T. I generally try to get colossus or phoenix as early as possible. If they don't wall in I might do a 4x gateway timed push. My typical mid game anti terran army is speed zealots, phoenix, colossus, couple sentries. Lift tanks with phoenix/protect colossus from vikings while the colossus and zealots clean up the ground. Always have obs and catch their army unexpectedly.
The bigger outrage here is that being able to move and fire at the same time is considered controversial in SC 1.5. RTS engines have been able to do this since the original C&C. Now while being unable to move and fire makes sense with medieval games and heavy/seige weapons, it seems to me that the entire point of a fast moving fighter is to attack on the move. Total Annihilation and C&C: RA both offered far more realistic flight mechanics than 'ground units that hover' over a decade ago! What happened to the company that made Warcraft 3, a game that took all kinds of risks in its design? Why are so many people praising SC2 as the saviour of the PC when it's just a rehash of SC1? And the best question, why do the hardcore SC players think that clicking a lot is mad skill?
As much as I dislike some of the changes Dawn of War 2 made compared to DoW1 and Company of Heroes, at least it's trying to innovate and more the genre forward.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
