|
These has not be confirmed to be true, but might be of interest nonetheless.
+ Show Spoiler +[14:34] <dignitas\nani> For your information, according to our stats, here are the matchup win percentages at the highest level of EU ladder with skill of players factored in: [14:30] <dignitas\nani> PvT – 41% [14:30] <dignitas\nani> PvZ – 45% [14:30] <dignitas\nani> TvZ – 53% [14:34] <dignitas\nani> This next list are some issues we’re looking at, but aren’t sure if they should make it into the patch: [14:34] <dignitas\nani> 1. Bunker [14:34] <dignitas\nani> a. Build time increased from 35 to 40 [14:35] <dignitas\nani> 2. Baneling [14:35] <dignitas\nani> a. Morph time decreased 20 to 10 – probably wont do this one[ [14:35] <dignitas\nani> 3. Ghost emp [14:35] <dignitas\nani> a.Making it an upgrade - Again, probably won’t make this change, but we’re getting quite a few reports from pro players that the early emp push is too strong [14:38] <dignitas\nani>Infestor [14:38] <dignitas\nani> a. +20 or +30 health [14:37] <dignitas\nani> c. Fungal is a movement speed slow instead of stun 50~70% speed penalty [14:38] <dignitas\nani> b. Fungal does +50% more damage vs. armored [14:38] <dignitas\nani> Corruptor [14:38] <dignitas\nani> a. Change +6 massive damage to +4 arm [14:40] <dignitas\nani> 3. Stimpack [14:40]I<dignitas\nani> a. Research time increased from 140 to 170
IRC log was copied from - http://pastie.org/1578669 Found at - http://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/fo5tv/naniwa_leaks_potential_balance_changes/
I apologize if this is against the rules of tl.net, I searched about but could not find any FAQ or guidelines other than the one showing before creating a thread.
Also, if this really is a leak, just for the lulz.
Originally written by WoozleWuzzly @ screddit Pro players: "Blizzard doesn't ask us for our advice" later Blizzard: "Okay we're asking you." Pro players: "I'm posting this to the internet... Problem?"
|
I'm not sure I understand why Naniwa would have this information.
|
I wouldn't mind the Stimpack time increase.
|
Potential balance changes should not be secret in the first place.
|
Fungal slow change would be really weird.
And if they push trough the stim&emp nerf I will be dissapointed beyond belief
|
Thanks, very interesting stuff, might change though before it goes live as it will probably be tested via PTR.
|
it'll never be true, why anyone would reduce massive damage of corruptor's if zerg are already having big troubles with Colossus/voidray?
|
Nerfing corruptors is very bad IMO. Less damage to collusi would screw z much more vs a deathball.
|
i think terran has been nerfed enough with the new giant maps. I think they should focus on terran and zerg's lategame to be up to par with protoss's. Maybe make terran a lil weaker early game if they choose that route.
|
On February 19 2011 10:28 Triscuit wrote: I'm not sure I understand why Naniwa would have this information.
Keep in mind Blizzard is constantly in contact with professionals for their opinions.
|
Baneling morph will be heavenly if it comes out.
|
No Protoss nerfs I see. Well I wouldn't read too much into this anyways
|
On February 19 2011 10:28 Fa1nT wrote: Potential balance changes should not be secret in the first place. They should be, if they are not final. Otherwise you'd have tons of people going crazy over nothing. (like the fungal growth nerf in 1.2)
|
I would wait for the official announcement.
|
|
Looks like it's time for me to switch from Terran to Protoss.
|
On February 19 2011 10:29 antilyon wrote: it'll never be true, why anyone would reduce massive damage of corruptor's if zerg are already having big troubles with Colossus/voidray?
They do extra damage to void rays then, instead of just the colossus.
|
Stim research time increase and infestor health increase make the most sense out of all of those. I hope we at least see those 2.
|
On February 19 2011 10:33 Terr wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2011 10:28 Fa1nT wrote: Potential balance changes should not be secret in the first place. They should be, if they are not final. Otherwise you'd have tons of people going crazy over nothing. (like the fungal growth nerf in 1.2)
Which might have actually came in and ruined the game if people didn't complain about it?
The point is that they are using a PTR and people will know about the effects before they are ever in the real game anyway, so why not get feedback of what to try in the PTR?
|
Love how Blizzard is still tweaking the game to get balance just right. It's wonderful to know that even though they have an expansion coming out in the months or years ahead they're still taking the time to give WoL a bit of TLC (tender loving care).
On a side note, looks like Blizzard will "ban" Naniwa from any future consultations. Can't have your private meetings go public now can we?
|
I'm not sure if I have this right but is this supposedly that blizzard told Naniwa about some potential changes and then Naniwa goes and posts that on the internet?
If it is that seems like a really stupid decision on Naniwa's part, it doesn't matter if you think that this information should be public or not, if we want blizzard to talk to pro players then betraying their trust like this is just.... incredibly stupid.
Sorry if I misunderstood how this leak was released
|
Dominican Republic913 Posts
On February 19 2011 10:30 Motat wrote: Nerfing corruptors is very bad IMO. Less damage to collusi would screw z much more vs a deathball.
Do u know how much Protoss need to do to get there? The problem is that after u lose your colosi there no way u can make then again because the Z will have 12 corruptors hagging arround, and they just have to rollover u with mass roaches.
|
I find this hard to believe. Nerfing terran in TvP is pretty bad given that P is usually > T.
|
I wouldn't really believe it tbh. Making emp an upgrade and stim longer research time to nerf terran early game but not a single nerf to protoss late game? Yea right, blizzard must be out of their minds...
and then nerfing corruptors when void ray colusus is already ridiculously dumb? Seems more like to me this is nani's wishlist
|
On February 19 2011 10:36 2GRe-Play- wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2011 10:30 Motat wrote: Nerfing corruptors is very bad IMO. Less damage to collusi would screw z much more vs a deathball. Do u know how much Protoss need to do to get there? The problem is that after u lose your colosi there no way u can make then again because the Z will have 12 corruptors hagging arround, and they just have to rollover u with mass roaches. Your not playing protoss right if your losing to zerg in late game.
|
On February 19 2011 10:28 Fa1nT wrote: Potential balance changes should not be secret in the first place. Yes they should. Ppl go apeshit over the smallest thing. now imagine everytime they thought of something (potentional change) they posted it. You will pray they never started it in a few months.
|
|
On February 19 2011 10:29 antilyon wrote: it'll never be true, why anyone would reduce massive damage of corruptor's if zerg are already having big troubles with Colossus/voidray?
On February 19 2011 10:30 Motat wrote: Nerfing corruptors is very bad IMO. Less damage to collusi would screw z much more vs a deathball.
Not a nerf imo, you want to focus down the Void Rays anyway.
|
As a Zerg I dream of the day they cut baneling time in half
|
Hope the baneling change is not true.
|
I think these balance changes are the best ones so far. Bunker nerf, Zerg can handle void rays better, and no Toss nerf.
|
very interesting... i wonder how "legit" these are
|
(Assuming this is no BS) I didn't expect these kind of PvZ percentages. Even if Zerg were overpowered in the matchup (which, according to basically every high level player, isn't true and the opposite is the case), a 5% difference is really big (10% more wins for Zerg than for Protoss!).
What might be the reason for this? Are high-level European Protosses 4 Gating so much, or have they not figured out a way to play longer games against Zerg? (Or is Zerg really overpowered and the Korean Zergs haven't quite figured something out themselves?)
|
On February 19 2011 10:35 Fa1nT wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2011 10:33 Terr wrote:On February 19 2011 10:28 Fa1nT wrote: Potential balance changes should not be secret in the first place. They should be, if they are not final. Otherwise you'd have tons of people going crazy over nothing. (like the fungal growth nerf in 1.2) Which might have actually came in and ruined the game if people didn't complain about it? The point is that they are using a PTR and people will know about the effects before they are ever in the real game anyway, so why not get feedback of what to try in the PTR? There's a big difference between complaining and giving constructive criticism. I suppose they asked pro-gamers about the potential balance changes just to avoid people going crazy over patches. So that when they start the PTR things will be a lot calmer and generally better.
|
On February 19 2011 10:35 sword_siege wrote: Love how Blizzard is still tweaking the game to get balance just right. It's wonderful to know that even though they have an expansion coming out in the months or years ahead they're still taking the time to give WoL a bit of TLC (tender loving care).
On a side note, looks like Blizzard will "ban" Naniwa from any future consultations. Can't have your private meetings go public now can we?
Perhaps OP should quickly edit his post and title removing all instances of said player name?
|
On February 19 2011 10:38 Gigaudas wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2011 10:29 antilyon wrote: it'll never be true, why anyone would reduce massive damage of corruptor's if zerg are already having big troubles with Colossus/voidray? Show nested quote +On February 19 2011 10:30 Motat wrote: Nerfing corruptors is very bad IMO. Less damage to collusi would screw z much more vs a deathball. Not a nerf imo, you want to focus down the Void Rays anyway. Haha, you're joking, right? If you focus down the VR and not the Colo, you just lost.
|
Wow, I'm sorry, but Naniwa is really unprofessional. This information was almost certainly given under some form of a NDA.
Also, according to the stats, Z is very good at the highest level on the EU server, which explains the nerf on the corruptors... And T is killing P, Jesus. Are any of this statistics right?
|
Would the bane change turn zvz back into a bane vs bane fest again?
|
Wait why are the timestamps not in order?
|
On February 19 2011 10:35 Fa1nT wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2011 10:33 Terr wrote:On February 19 2011 10:28 Fa1nT wrote: Potential balance changes should not be secret in the first place. They should be, if they are not final. Otherwise you'd have tons of people going crazy over nothing. (like the fungal growth nerf in 1.2) Which might have actually came in and ruined the game if people didn't complain about it? The point is that they are using a PTR and people will know about the effects before they are ever in the real game anyway, so why not get feedback of what to try in the PTR?
I don't know if I understand you right but I'd say there's still an Blizzard-internal step before the PTR.
They don't just come to the office one morning and go like "I had this idea this morning, baneling morph from 20 to 10 seconds! BOOT UP THE PTRs THE WORLD NEEDS TO TEST THIS!!"
|
Aren't these pretty heavy changes to happen all at once after so long of letting the game settle? Or are these just the various options on the table?
|
On February 19 2011 10:43 Essentia wrote: Would the bane change turn zvz back into a bane vs bane fest again?
I would assume so...everyone would rush for banelings and be in each others mineral lines in no time...
|
Those stats are really interesting. Lately I have found pvt to be really easy, but blizzard's data says differently.
|
On February 19 2011 10:41 heishe wrote: (Assuming this is no BS) I didn't expect these kind of PvZ percentages. Even if Zerg were overpowered in the matchup (which, according to basically every high level player, isn't true and the opposite is the case), a 5% difference is really big (10% more wins for Zerg than for Protoss!).
What might be the reason for this? Are high-level European Protosses 4 Gating so much, or have they not figured out a way to play longer games against Zerg? (Or is Zerg really overpowered and the Korean Zergs haven't quite figured something out themselves?)
honestly it's because most pro korean zergs dont play the matchup properly, look at nestea, the guy is flat out unbeatable in zvp, and it's not because he has some magical powers that make him so much better at decision making, it's simply cause he's the only player that understands the matchup and how to exploit the serious holes in the protoss race, the roach fundamentally breaks the matchup as it's far too strong in the early -mid game and somewhat useless/possibly overused in the late game
also there is some really neat zvp zergling roach infestor builds, that due to the paralyzing effect of fungal is actually virtually unbeatable
|
LOL if they nerf terran and add in these new gsl maps PvT is actually going to be hilariously unloseable... looking forward to it :D
|
On February 19 2011 10:43 Nysze wrote: Wait why are the timestamps not in order?
kek, ya, wtf?
|
This. Is the worst balance notes I've ever seen for Terran. Why 170 for stimpack. That's stupid. That's stupid. Baneling one is just as stupid. Its so bad in my opinion. Why would you do that though, it would ruin the game.
|
On February 19 2011 10:30 Motat wrote: Nerfing corruptors is very bad IMO. Less damage to collusi would screw z much more vs a deathball.
It's actually a buff. -2 damage to Collosus at the gain of +4 damage to Void Rays.
Delaying early stim and EMP would be hella dank to my 1 gate FE, oh baby
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49052 Posts
WTF?If this is true then Terran will be useless early mid and lategame,please reduce siege tank gas cost to 100,Thor supply to 5 instead of 6 and please buff raven speed and make seeker missiles imba again.
Then maybe early game nerf makes sense.
|
Would be interesting if true. EMP needing research would make a lot more sense IMO, the stim nerf I'm not sure on, the infestor/fungal changes would be a massive buff even with it 'only' slowing units, and the corruptor change would significantly help zerg ZvP and ZvT (maybe too much).
I think if they want to look at ZvP, look at the roach, often unused in ZvT, too useful ZvZ mid-late game, and incredibly good early game ZvP yet quite mediocre late game. I'm not sure what they could do, I just don't like where the roach is at right now.
|
Stop saying corrupter nerf it's actually a buff void rays are hard to deal with the collos will die eventuallly it's the leftover vrs that ar difficult
|
On February 19 2011 10:46 Coramoor wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2011 10:41 heishe wrote: (Assuming this is no BS) I didn't expect these kind of PvZ percentages. Even if Zerg were overpowered in the matchup (which, according to basically every high level player, isn't true and the opposite is the case), a 5% difference is really big (10% more wins for Zerg than for Protoss!).
What might be the reason for this? Are high-level European Protosses 4 Gating so much, or have they not figured out a way to play longer games against Zerg? (Or is Zerg really overpowered and the Korean Zergs haven't quite figured something out themselves?) honestly it's because most pro korean zergs dont play the matchup properly, look at nestea, the guy is flat out unbeatable in zvp, and it's not because he has some magical powers that make him so much better at decision making, it's simply cause he's the only player that understands the matchup and how to exploit the serious holes in the protoss race, the roach fundamentally breaks the matchup as it's far too strong in the early -mid game and somewhat useless/possibly overused in the late game also there is some really neat zvp zergling roach infestor builds, that due to the paralyzing effect of fungal is actually virtually unbeatable Care to elaborate? I've never heard of this unit composition being used before in ZvP. Is this some small timing window in the midgame before colossus get out?
|
Originally written by WoozleWuzzly @ screddit Pro players: "Blizzard doesn't ask us for our advice" later Blizzard: "Okay we're asking you." Pro players: "I'm posting this to the internet... Problem?" I really think Naniwa was being a bit unprofessional leaking this information to the internet, even if it would generate community discussion from the community. The information was never intended to be made public, I believe that it should've remained within the realms of the Blizzard offices and the minds of pros.
This next list are some issues we’re looking at, but aren’t sure if they should make it into the patch: I wouldn't be surprised if none of these changes even make it into the next patch, especially considering that some are quite drastic and may need very, very extensive internal testing. This is probably a reason why it's not a good idea to leak potential balance changes; we would basically argue over nothing. Until they release an official statement about balance changes, I think this leaked information is a bit too shady for my taste.
|
fungal as slow is a real hit to Zerg, I personally really don't like that possible change.
|
On February 19 2011 10:43 Nysze wrote: Wait why are the timestamps not in order? If it's real, then I guess someone just copied and pasted that and later noticed that he missed the first time stamp. Then he just copied and pasted one of the time stamps from the next messages, failing to notice that it wasn't right.
|
Colossus and voids are so imba PvZ winrate is 45%...
Anyway, I specially like the stim and fungal updates, and glad to see Blizzard asking pro players for opinion.
|
Just to be fair it wasn't only Naniwa, who these possible changes have been leaked from: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=193936
It is just speculation though at this point and was probably information only given to some top players for obvious reasons. I doubt Blizz would trust them this much anymore from now on though
|
On February 19 2011 10:50 Tachion wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2011 10:46 Coramoor wrote:On February 19 2011 10:41 heishe wrote: (Assuming this is no BS) I didn't expect these kind of PvZ percentages. Even if Zerg were overpowered in the matchup (which, according to basically every high level player, isn't true and the opposite is the case), a 5% difference is really big (10% more wins for Zerg than for Protoss!).
What might be the reason for this? Are high-level European Protosses 4 Gating so much, or have they not figured out a way to play longer games against Zerg? (Or is Zerg really overpowered and the Korean Zergs haven't quite figured something out themselves?) honestly it's because most pro korean zergs dont play the matchup properly, look at nestea, the guy is flat out unbeatable in zvp, and it's not because he has some magical powers that make him so much better at decision making, it's simply cause he's the only player that understands the matchup and how to exploit the serious holes in the protoss race, the roach fundamentally breaks the matchup as it's far too strong in the early -mid game and somewhat useless/possibly overused in the late game also there is some really neat zvp zergling roach infestor builds, that due to the paralyzing effect of fungal is actually virtually unbeatable Care to elaborate? I've never heard of this unit composition being used before in ZvP. Is this some small timing window in the midgame before colossus get out?
it works until they have 4 colossus on the field, 2 or 3 can be mind controlled, as well as allowing the fungals which protect the infestors from any damage, it's quite brilliant
|
Please don't speculate on balance changes or future patches, until Blizzard posts something no one will know for certain what is being added.
|
|
|
|