avilo Profile Blog Joined November 2007 United States 4099 Posts #1 Hello everyone, decided to put this thread together to discuss something i feel is a gameplay issue in LOTV - air units from all 3 races are basically taking over the game.



Why is this an issue? Here is some background knowledge that is necessary:



A lot of you may know that throughout WOL and HOTS i play mech a lot and helped popularize the mass viking/raven late game versus Protoss and Zerg.



A lot of people that don't understand the game well or were just learning the game thought i was doing this because i wanted to the entire time or because it was broken. But the reason myself and a lot of other Terrans adopted this style of late game is because mech has no good anti-air unit in the game that can be made from the factory, likewise bio.



The only counter to an opponent who began amassing broodlord/infestor or mass carrier/tempest was to inevitably begin amassing starport units yourself - aka the viking and raven because BCS a lot of times were too difficult to get in a high quantity to compete.



There simply never was a way as a meching Terran to attack cost efficiently into those mass air compositions from the opponent, so you were forced into making air units yourself which of course stalls out the game making it take forever.



So what does that have to do with LOTV? Well, the above issue that forced myself and other mech Terrans to turtle into mass ravens...now is spreading to the entire game across all 3 races because every race now has air units that completely trump the ground anti-air from all other races.



I have played beta from the perspective of all 3 races, and when a Protoss begins to amass carriers and tempests with high templar underneath...there is no unit composition in the game of any race that can counter this from the ground.



When a Zerg begins to amass broodlords and mass amounts of vipers for parasitic bomb...no ground composition in the game can beat this or even compete against it when "they get there."



And wait for it...the same is true of Terran with liberators. Once Terran starts making mass liberators and gets up to that 10-12 mark...no ground army can beat this, especially once there's some support underneath them.



So a problem that originally was only an issue for mech vs Z/P...now has spread to the ENTIRE LOTV GAME. Maybe it is not so apparent now because the relative skill level of beta may not be high and games may not be going long on average...but from the games i've played and seen from the smarter players...games are already trending to accumulating your race's OP air unit.



This leads to stalemate types of games and not as much action because if one player gets enough of their OP air unit the person that has the bigger ground army no longer can do anything until they amass air themselves.



In some cases, such as T mech vs Z...you now autolose because those air units u need to counter your opponents (vikings) are all instantly killed from parasitic bomb.



This is not a good trend for LOTV gameplay. My opinion is that SC2 is meant to have action and ground armies fighting each other - not this amassing of air units where 4-6 carriers immediately make a 200/200 mech army or a 200/200 hydralisk army completely worthless (i played a PvZ game in beta and killed 55 hydras with 8 carriers and 8 high templar with no economy off 2 base and won the game -_-).



Blizzard may not understand this is an issue - it is APPARENT they do not understand this is an issue at all because in their last update yesterday on Oct. 15th they said they liked parasitic bomb and that carriers were fine essentially...



Does this SC2 community find this to be a problem? I suppose that is a question to everyone that plays this game. This is beta, this forum is meant for discussion and feedback, please give your thoughts about the discussion points i've provided.



If you agree with me that's great, maybe some anecdotes about your in-game play can point out the issue more to blizzard.



If you disagree with me that's great too, perhaps you have not run into these types of games or have a different gameplay experience, or have not run into this meta.



Summation: liberators, carriers, brood/viper are all too strong and there are no ground units from any race that can counter these units when they are amassed.



Perhaps air units need to be toned down, ground anti-air needs to be toned up, or a combination of both.









Sup

Musicus Profile Joined August 2011 Germany 23393 Posts #2 I fully agree with this statement, my personal solution to this was to just run around with cracklings and ultralisks. Straight up it seems impossible to beat air armies with ground. Maru and Serral are probably top 5.

purakushi Profile Joined August 2012 United States 3259 Posts Last Edited: 2015-10-16 18:51:30 #3 - goliath

- scourge

- arbiter (better stasis)



sigh :\ June 2010 - August 2017: waiting for the return of Starcraft

NinjaDuckBob Profile Joined March 2014 167 Posts Last Edited: 2015-10-16 19:55:13 #4 Honestly, I think PB and the Liberator were meant to solve this issue by giving powerful anti-air tools that are not equal to their anti-ground functions. The Carrier simply is good vs both ground and air, but they are looking into nerfing it some -- the build time was a big thing, I'm interested to see what its reversion will do. Personally, though, I would have rather tried an increase in supply (starting with 8 per Carrier) -or- a reduction of max Interceptors per Carrier (to 6).



As far as PB is concerned, it takes a ton of energy, but is super strong. It has less of the affect of breaking up air balls as it does forcing a single unit away. I think if the radius was decreased, and/or was given various damage rates depending on how far away you are from the target unit, combined with a moderate energy cost decrease, it could be a more appropriate support against mass air.



As far as the Liberator is concerned, I think it should have more focus on its anti-air than its anti-ground aspect. Where to buff its anti-air, I don't know, maybe start with higher splash burst? There are a couple things I would like to see tested concerning its anti-ground. One of them is a simple radius decrease. The other is trading DPS and/or range for a faster transform time, to make it more of a skirmishing unit and differentiate it more from the Tank.



Another Liberator option is to completely get rid of its anti-ground capabilities (or at least make them Wraith-level), balancing it around its anti-air capabilities. In turn, the Thor could lose its anti-air and be given a second anti-ground mode that targets a zone with its cannons, similar to the Liberator.



As far as ground-to-air buffs are concerned, I'm interested to see what the Cyclone changes are going to do for Terran. For Zerg, I'm not entirely sure they need something depending on what the Carrier nerf(s) accomplish. Also, it's been tested, it takes absolutely forever for Carriers to kill Ultras on max vs max, so Zerg has a lot of base trade power there against mass Carrier (though nothing's stopping the Protoss from also making Void Rays if they scout and react well). I say just wait and see for Zerg and Terran. Maybe if Zerg is having some trouble, the Corruptor can get an anti-air or general damage/slow/SOMETHING ability in addition to its attack to replace Caustic Spray.



As far as Protoss is concerned, I'd really like to see a buff to the Stalker's anti-air tested, maybe accompanied by a decrease in their anti-ground capabilities or a cost increase (though I don't know if either actually necessary, that's what the testing is for). Honestly, once they get the Adept fine-tuned under its new design, I think Protoss Gateway will be fine on the ground, or at least the Stalker won't add much more than an Adept or Chargelot would do -- I just wish the Adept had more normalized damage instead of being super strong vs Light. I'm not saying equal damage Armored and Light, but just a little less Light and a little more Armored, that would give some wiggle room for changes to the Stalker.



I also wouldn't mind seeing some anti-air splash from the Tempest tested. NinjaDuckBob ~ Fear the fuzzy!

TorkkSC Profile Blog Joined September 2015 29 Posts #5 Yes this is a definite problem that has always existed and always been really frustrating to deal with when you're a player who prefers ground base play over air base play. I'm of the personal opinion that they should make ground to air stronger, rather than just nerfing sky units. I feel like adding a modifier like, "Does x bonus damage vs Flying" might be a good way to go. The sucky part of it is that it adds another layer of complexity to the game by adding another rule, but I think it would be a good solution.



Starcraft is supposed to be a game where every unit is viable from the moment it is made to the end game via upgrades and good control. Bio is the most apparent of this due to Stim and Combat Shield along with Engie Bay upgrades. With support from other high tier units such as the Medivac and Liberators, this let's this low tier army compete with higher tiers due to their upgrades. The point of upgrades is to essentially bump your Tier 1 and Tier 2 units to Tier 3 level.



When it comes to mass flying units, though, they feel like they're really a Tier 4 unit, which these units are unable to deal with. The problem with my solution, as far as I see, would be like if you made the Stalker do, as an example, +10 vs flying, you would only need 4 Stalkers to 2 shot a medivac instead of 6, and only 8 Stalkers to 1 shot a medivac instead of 12, which could cause problems in PvT. An argument could be made that, vs Bio, this could be a buff that would help Protoss deal with multi-pronged drop harass more effectively and deal with Liberators more effectively and is something toss needs, but I don't think that could be the best way to go about it.



Though nerfing specific air units could, in the long term, be the best solution, since you're just nerfing the capabilities of specific units rather than all air units, it would take a lot more time to fully balance the Carrier, Liberator, Viper, Tempest, etc rather than just adding a bonus damage to the core ground-air units. Also, the fact that Mutalisks are pretty important in ZvT for Zerg to harass and snipe off Medivacs, adding a special case could make this a very Terran favored situation if they were to add it to, say, the Thor.



It's a difficult situation to handle, and I don't know the absolute best way to go about it. I think both options are valid, but come with their own problems (as everything does). I don't think there can be a perfect solution.



Though, I can say, the Strength of air units should come from their mobility from not being affeced by terrain, not by their pure strength in DPS or ability to tank shots. Mutalisks and Phoenix are perfect example of this kind of strength, as they are good because they are very mobile units that can get in and out of combat to do damage, but aren't very good in a straight up fight.

RoomOfMush Profile Joined March 2015 1296 Posts #6 I dont like the design of air units in SC2 in general. Air units in SC2 seem to be core units (Void Ray, Banshee, Viking, Corrupter) in comparison to broodwars air units which were support or harassment. But air units make horrible core units because they dont care at all about terrain, walls or chokes.

CrazyBread92 Profile Joined March 2013 United States 53 Posts #7 I agree. Maybe they can look to nerf the liberators AG mode somehow but improve the AA splash? Many times it feels like I need like 5+ liberators to take out a group of mutas.

NEEDZMOAR Profile Blog Joined December 2011 Sweden 1272 Posts #8 On October 17 2015 04:34 CrazyBread92 wrote:

I agree. Maybe they can look to nerf the liberators AG mode somehow but improve the AA splash? Many times it feels like I need like 5+ liberators to take out a group of mutas.





considering you can make liberators out of reactors, is that a bad thing that you need 5+? considering you can make liberators out of reactors, is that a bad thing that you need 5+?

manniefresh Profile Joined July 2011 United States 74 Posts #9 good points Avilo, I agree as well. Air units should be inherently weaker since they can dodge terrain. Every race needs some AA splash from the ground that is legit imho.

cactus555 Profile Joined October 2015 47 Posts #10

i agree that air units are too strong but some of the points you make are straight up silly, for example On October 17 2015 03:23 avilo wrote:

(i played a PvZ game in beta and killed 55 hydras with 8 carriers and 8 high templar with no economy off 2 base and won the game -_-).









hydras arent supposed to counter storm, and that toss army is way more expensive than 55 hydras so its rly dumb to say this to make a point about air being too strong hydras arent supposed to counter storm, and that toss army is way more expensive than 55 hydras so its rly dumb to say this to make a point about air being too strong

Spyridon Profile Joined April 2010 United States 996 Posts Last Edited: 2015-10-16 23:09:43 #11 On the topic of air units in general being too strong, I agree. I also think there are far TOO MANY air units in SC2.



With that said, as a Zerg player since BW, honestly I felt air was too strong ever since this beginning of SC2. This was a much bigger issue than it needed to be as a Zerg player, as with no true T1 anti air units, Zerg has always been a lil weaker to air units than the other races.



I feel that Zerg PB in lotv is intended to be an AIR COUNTER similar to how Dev/Scourge was in BW. A very strong air counter. Which, I believe is how it should be, not just for Zerg. All races should be able to reasonably defend against air. IMO, air should only have a huge advantage against unprepared/undefended locations.



In this case, I believe the problem for Zerg is not parasitic bomb directly, as it only kills OTHER AIR UNITS, rather it is the power of Broodlords alongside PB that is the problem, as BL allows the Zerg air army to turn from a harrassment/anti air force, to a complete offensive powerhouse.



If the developers insist on air units being as strong as they are in this game, I believe all races should have strong anti air such as PB.



With so many air units, especially super powerful air units that many are stronger than ground units, anti air should be a more reasonable option.

91matt Profile Joined March 2013 United Kingdom 131 Posts #12 On October 17 2015 08:07 Spyridon wrote:

On the topic of air units in general being too strong, I agree. I also think there are far TOO MANY air units in SC2.



With that said, as a Zerg player since BW, honestly I felt air was too strong ever since this beginning of SC2. This was a much bigger issue than it needed to be as a Zerg player, as with no true T1 anti air units, Zerg has always been a lil weaker to air units than the other races.



I feel that Zerg PB in lotv is intended to be an AIR COUNTER similar to how Dev/Scourge was in BW. A very strong air counter. Which, I believe is how it should be, not just for Zerg. All races should be able to reasonably defend against air. IMO, air should only have a huge advantage against unprepared/undefended locations.



In this case, I believe the problem for Zerg is not parasitic bomb directly, as it only kills OTHER AIR UNITS, rather it is the power of Broodlords alongside PB that is the problem, as BL allows the Zerg air army to turn from a harrassment/anti air force, to a complete offensive powerhouse.



If the developers insist on air units being as strong as they are in this game, I believe all races should have strong anti air such as PB.



With so many air units, especially super powerful air units that many are stronger than ground units, anti air should be a more reasonable option.



They shouldve taken the opportunity to remove some of the air units in the game and nerf some aswel at the start of LoTV. Air units are the reason for the existence of turtle games and the worst part of sc2. They shouldve taken the opportunity to remove some of the air units in the game and nerf some aswel at the start of LoTV. Air units are the reason for the existence of turtle games and the worst part of sc2.

pure.Wasted Profile Blog Joined December 2008 Canada 4701 Posts Last Edited: 2015-10-16 23:45:32 #13 On October 17 2015 08:07 Spyridon wrote:

If the developers insist on air units being as strong as they are in this game, I believe all races should have strong anti air such as PB.



On October 17 2015 04:00 RoomOfMush wrote:

I dont like the design of air units in SC2 in general. Air units in SC2 seem to be core units (Void Ray, Banshee, Viking, Corrupter) in comparison to broodwars air units which were support or harassment. But air units make horrible core units because they dont care at all about terrain, walls or chokes.



These two posts sum up my thought on the matter.



Although I don't necessarily agree on the particular air units cited in RoomOfMush's post. Only the Void Ray attempts to be a true core unit. These two posts sum up my thought on the matter.Although I don't necessarily agree on the particular air units cited in RoomOfMush's post. Only the Void Ray attempts to be a true core unit. INna Maru-da-FanTa, Bbaby, TY Dream that I'm Flashing you

oOOoOphidian Profile Joined January 2011 United States 1400 Posts #14 On October 17 2015 08:18 91matt wrote:

Show nested quote +

On October 17 2015 08:07 Spyridon wrote:

On the topic of air units in general being too strong, I agree. I also think there are far TOO MANY air units in SC2.



With that said, as a Zerg player since BW, honestly I felt air was too strong ever since this beginning of SC2. This was a much bigger issue than it needed to be as a Zerg player, as with no true T1 anti air units, Zerg has always been a lil weaker to air units than the other races.



I feel that Zerg PB in lotv is intended to be an AIR COUNTER similar to how Dev/Scourge was in BW. A very strong air counter. Which, I believe is how it should be, not just for Zerg. All races should be able to reasonably defend against air. IMO, air should only have a huge advantage against unprepared/undefended locations.



In this case, I believe the problem for Zerg is not parasitic bomb directly, as it only kills OTHER AIR UNITS, rather it is the power of Broodlords alongside PB that is the problem, as BL allows the Zerg air army to turn from a harrassment/anti air force, to a complete offensive powerhouse.



If the developers insist on air units being as strong as they are in this game, I believe all races should have strong anti air such as PB.



With so many air units, especially super powerful air units that many are stronger than ground units, anti air should be a more reasonable option.



They shouldve taken the opportunity to remove some of the air units in the game and nerf some aswel at the start of LoTV. Air units are the reason for the existence of turtle games and the worst part of sc2. They shouldve taken the opportunity to remove some of the air units in the game and nerf some aswel at the start of LoTV. Air units are the reason for the existence of turtle games and the worst part of sc2.

They really just need to make some of the super powerful units cost more supply, especially the ones that are very strong when massed such as carriers and ravens. With parasitic bomb the way it is now I could see viper's supply being increased too. They really just need to make some of the super powerful units cost more supply, especially the ones that are very strong when massed such as carriers and ravens. With parasitic bomb the way it is now I could see viper's supply being increased too. Creator of sc2unmasked.com

Destructicon Profile Blog Joined September 2011 4637 Posts Last Edited: 2015-10-17 00:04:42 #15 I think the problem lies in the fact that Blizzard made way too many siege range air units. A part of what balanced air in BW is that most of the units were fast, nimble, but low range. The low range is important because it meant the units had to take on certain risks to do damage, keeping the riks/reward ratio alive and making air units overall very skillful to use and very interesting overall.



From what I know, there were only 2 exceptions to that rule, guardians and carriers. However, despite being the same range as goliaths, the trusty mech were still generally cheaper, more mobile and easier to produce, and on open ground would still annihilate air. Air only really shined on maps were you could abuse cliffs, otherwise your units got shredded.



SC2 air units however don't share those characteristics, BLs have a frigging 225 health, and in HotS 9.5 range, more then a Thor.

As for Thor vs Carrier, well Thors just suck against capital ships even with high impact payload. Writer Never give up, never surrender! https://www.youtube.com/user/DestructiconSC

brickrd Profile Blog Joined March 2014 United States 4894 Posts #16 unfortunately i think it's too late to see blizzard fix the design of air units in sc2. the best i think we can hope for is that as lotv goes forward if mass air is clearly dominating fans will show their displeasure and we'll see mass air nerfed out of the meta. this probably means units like carriers, broods and BCs could slip back toward irrelevancy, but i think that's genuinely preferable to a bunch of mass air turtle garbage being legit top level play, which we saw hints of in tvz at the end of hots meta

RoomOfMush Profile Joined March 2015 1296 Posts Last Edited: 2015-10-17 00:28:16 #17 On October 17 2015 09:03 Destructicon wrote:

I think the problem lies in the fact that Blizzard made way too many siege range air units. A part of what balanced air in BW is that most of the units were fast, nimble, but low range. The low range is important because it meant the units had to take on certain risks to do damage, keeping the riks/reward ratio alive and making air units overall very skillful to use and very interesting overall.



From what I know, there were only 2 exceptions to that rule, guardians and carriers. However, despite being the same range as goliaths, the trusty mech were still generally cheaper, more mobile and easier to produce, and on open ground would still annihilate air. Air only really shined on maps were you could abuse cliffs, otherwise your units got shredded.



SC2 air units however don't share those characteristics, BLs have a frigging 225 health, and in HotS 9.5 range, more then a Thor.

As for Thor vs Carrier, well Thors just suck against capital ships even with high impact payload.

Most air units in BW were also incredibly fragile for their cost and didnt do much damage against ground. Wraiths, Scouts and Mutalisks all had pitiful anti-ground DPS. Valkyries, Corsairs and Devourers did not have any secondary anti-ground attacks, and BC's, Guardians and Carriers, although powerful, still lost in an even engagement against g2a units.

In SC2 Banshees, Liberators, Void Rays and more are pretty powerful against ground. G2a also suffered pretty bad in SC2 compared to BW. No goliath, no Dragoons, no Hydras with explosive damage. All these units were very effective (in terms of damage type and attack range, note that all 3 of these units had attack range upgrades!) against most air units.



As I said earlier, Blizzard seems to try to make air units into core units but that simply doesnt work. Air units are boring when they become core. Most air units in BW were also incredibly fragile for their cost and didnt do much damage against ground. Wraiths, Scouts and Mutalisks all had pitiful anti-ground DPS. Valkyries, Corsairs and Devourers did not have any secondary anti-ground attacks, and BC's, Guardians and Carriers, although powerful, still lost in an even engagement against g2a units.In SC2 Banshees, Liberators, Void Rays and more are pretty powerful against ground. G2a also suffered pretty bad in SC2 compared to BW. No goliath, no Dragoons, no Hydras with explosive damage. All these units were very effective (in terms of damage type and attack range, note that all 3 of these units had attack range upgrades!) against most air units.As I said earlier, Blizzard seems to try to make air units into core units but that simply doesnt work. Air units are boring when they become core.

brickrd Profile Blog Joined March 2014 United States 4894 Posts #18 On October 17 2015 08:31 oOOoOphidian wrote:

Show nested quote +

On October 17 2015 08:18 91matt wrote:

On October 17 2015 08:07 Spyridon wrote:

On the topic of air units in general being too strong, I agree. I also think there are far TOO MANY air units in SC2.



With that said, as a Zerg player since BW, honestly I felt air was too strong ever since this beginning of SC2. This was a much bigger issue than it needed to be as a Zerg player, as with no true T1 anti air units, Zerg has always been a lil weaker to air units than the other races.



I feel that Zerg PB in lotv is intended to be an AIR COUNTER similar to how Dev/Scourge was in BW. A very strong air counter. Which, I believe is how it should be, not just for Zerg. All races should be able to reasonably defend against air. IMO, air should only have a huge advantage against unprepared/undefended locations.



In this case, I believe the problem for Zerg is not parasitic bomb directly, as it only kills OTHER AIR UNITS, rather it is the power of Broodlords alongside PB that is the problem, as BL allows the Zerg air army to turn from a harrassment/anti air force, to a complete offensive powerhouse.



If the developers insist on air units being as strong as they are in this game, I believe all races should have strong anti air such as PB.



With so many air units, especially super powerful air units that many are stronger than ground units, anti air should be a more reasonable option.



They shouldve taken the opportunity to remove some of the air units in the game and nerf some aswel at the start of LoTV. Air units are the reason for the existence of turtle games and the worst part of sc2. They shouldve taken the opportunity to remove some of the air units in the game and nerf some aswel at the start of LoTV. Air units are the reason for the existence of turtle games and the worst part of sc2.

They really just need to make some of the super powerful units cost more supply, especially the ones that are very strong when massed such as carriers and ravens. With parasitic bomb the way it is now I could see viper's supply being increased too. They really just need to make some of the super powerful units cost more supply, especially the ones that are very strong when massed such as carriers and ravens. With parasitic bomb the way it is now I could see viper's supply being increased too.

i think a more elegant solution is separate air supply. supply nerfs won't ultimately fix the dichotomy between "good enough to make/too strong when massed" vs "not overpowered but also not worth making". it's like the new swarm host - they're theoretically useful, but the supply nerf, which was intended to end massing, also made them not really worth having



separate air supply will never actually happen, but i truly think it should happen i think a more elegant solution is separate air supply. supply nerfs won't ultimately fix the dichotomy between "good enough to make/too strong when massed" vs "not overpowered but also not worth making". it's like the new swarm host - they're theoretically useful, but the supply nerf, which was intended to end massing, also made them not really worth havingseparate air supply will never actually happen, but i truly think it should happen

Destructicon Profile Blog Joined September 2011 4637 Posts #19 Yep, I agree air units are boring when they become core units, and the only reason carriers became a honorable mention is because of how much micro one had to put into them to get the most out of them. Writer Never give up, never surrender! https://www.youtube.com/user/DestructiconSC

A_Scarecrow Profile Joined March 2013 Australia 721 Posts #20 i agree something needs to be done but as a zerg we have few options to deal with air units. hope see some better changes to air battles.

1 2 3 4 Next All