|
I would like to remind people that there are some huge benefits design wise and balance wise for all races. This might change the minds of many people who still dont know if macro mechanics removal is good.
Protoss
Every upgarade, every timing has been nerfed for the sole reason of chrono boost, they had to balance everything in case protoss used chrono boost to prepare some powerful timings.
This didnt help the game at all, tho you could choose what upgrade you want to chrono boost and think you had some "chooice" , you where then very limited if you wanted to transition into another composition with some decent upgrades.
Not to mention most Chrono Boosts would go to workers.
Removing Chrono Boost would give more way for Protoss to transition, get more specific upgrades.
Basically more freedom of chooice.
Zerg
Inject Larva with 4 larvas is the worst thing that ever happened to the true nature of Zerg, the true swarm. Basically every unit was heavily nerfed in WoL Beta just because zerg had potential of huge remax that where totally IMBA
This lead to Zerg doing timings in most games, also having to remax over and over again to win a battle, but the big problem is that there is no REWARD for expanding alot in WoL and HotS, people would just stay on 3-4 bases and so the Zerg remax was not that beneficial in the most cases, not to mention alot of supply was in drones and queens, making the Zerg army look small.... with some units having alot of supply just to tone down the possiblity of insane remax.
This also lead to another terrible design to help Zerg... the "free units" concept that alot of people hate.
With larva inject being nerfed to 2, Zerg could get a 1 supply unit finally, we might get to be swarmy and maybe supply for other units could go down as well, Zerg units might get some buffs, to do remax being heavily nerfed in ealry and mid game.
Auto-Inject leads to less punishing macro, injects being to punishable, tho i would prefer a change to hatchery that could spawn larva at a higher rate, and a change for Queens to nurture like they do in Stabow and Spread Creep.
Terran
MULE was mostly put in the game to play catch up with the Zerg production, but over time it has turned into a very gimmick and sometime OP mechanic, mostly in late game when you dont even need SCV's and you kill them for a bigger army then your enemy. We also saw some very strong comebacks that could never be possible for a Protoss or a Zerg
Killing SCV's also sometime feels that is not rewarding for both Protoss and Zerg and even other Terrans.
The benefits to removing the MULE is that some Terran units might get cheaper, you will have more SCANS, and that means more map awarness, you could still get supply drops that are basically 120 free minerals.
I guess you might say Terran gets a little less rewards then Z and P but in truth Terran was way to forgiving from the start in my opinion.
|
Do you guys think it will be a good idea to make inject a channel spell that decreases the time it takes for 1 larva to spawn and increasing the limit of larva to maybe 10?
|
On August 17 2015 19:01 DragonFrend wrote:
Do you guys think it will be a good idea to make inject a channel spell that decreases the time it takes for 1 larva to spawn and increasing the limit of larva to maybe 10?
I think the best idea at the moment is to wait and see what happens with the next patch.
|
Nice post. Agree with it 100%.
As long as blizzard buffs stuff accordingly this changes will only improve the game.
|
On August 17 2015 19:01 DragonFrend wrote:
Do you guys think it will be a good idea to make inject a channel spell that decreases the time it takes for 1 larva to spawn and increasing the limit of larva to maybe 10?
It would counter what blizz does... removing them.
Tho yeah auto-inject is not the best solution, faster larva spawn at hatches, more larvas etc.
The queen could be a support unit and you could still spread creep, they would need to give another ability to remplace Inject larva i guess.
|
On August 17 2015 19:01 DragonFrend wrote:
Do you guys think it will be a good idea to make inject a channel spell that decreases the time it takes for 1 larva to spawn and increasing the limit of larva to maybe 10?
That actually doesnt sound so bad.
As long as a queen is close to a hatchery the hatchery would spawn larva faster. This way you would still get one queen per hatchery but you can get additional queens for transfure and creep tumors.
|
On August 17 2015 19:01 DragonFrend wrote:
Do you guys think it will be a good idea to make inject a channel spell that decreases the time it takes for 1 larva to spawn and increasing the limit of larva to maybe 10?
I think it wouldn't make much of a difference from the current implementation assuming numbers were tweaked to match each others larvae output.
although making larvae naturally spawn up to a limit of 10 (with a queen attending it)
is not the same as
queen-generated larvae stack up to 19
because in the first example the larvae from the hatchery itself will continue to spawn even past the initial 3, while in the second they would not, therefore it would be easier to collect larvae for remaxing in the first compared to the second, although the second has a higher max limit.
|
bla bla bla macromechanics no good for balance bla bla bla
Thank you for this opinion which has been exposed in many topics since the strat of sc2.
bwt, chrono works also on buildings like robo and stargate it's really good to chrono oracle, for example, when u want to harass.
Queen has no changes (nerf inject only) so free creep, Same for terran (no more mule but still scan and supply) and protoss well....piouf...
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
It's weird because I never saw anyone complaining in huge numbers about inject or chrono boost before. Yet for some resson blizzard has decided to totally change them because. .. Yeh you have given some points but it isn't like blizzard voices these opinions or promised any other changes . have they given zerg a one supply unit or buffed other units? Or give an alternate mechanic.? No
If this change was so thought out with good ideas why wait this long and implement it so haphazardly. It just feels like a change they made because they can, not because it has any real benefits. This massive overhaul will need huge amounts of testing and there should be a clear design purpose in mind which I fail to see.
This comes down to "some pepole said inject is boring so let's change that , oh and that means chrono I'd boring so let's change that. Then see what happens "
|
On August 17 2015 20:24 KelsierSC wrote:
It's weird because I never saw anyone complaining in huge numbers about inject or chrono boost before. Yet for some resson blizzard has decided to totally change them because. .. Yeh you have given some points but it isn't like blizzard voices these opinions or promised any other changes . have they given zerg a one supply unit or buffed other units? Or give an alternate mechanic.? No
If this change was so thought out with good ideas why wait this long and implement it so haphazardly. It just feels like a change they made because they can, not because it has any real benefits. This massive overhaul will need huge amounts of testing and there should be a clear design purpose in mind which I fail to see.
This comes down to "some pepole said inject is boring so let's change that , oh and that means chrono I'd boring so let's change that. Then see what happens "
People that where at Califoria summit have confirmed that Korean community had a very hot topic of LotV being way to hard.
So they want to make easier on macro side to balance it out with the excesive changes to micro side.
So they balance that ratio... by giving the player more focus on micro.
And like David kim said if this changes stick alot of balange things will happen... it wont be small changes.
And one thing was already said in the post... reducing the time on some portoss upgrades.
So they know what mainly they have to balance when they cut macro mechanics.
|
On August 17 2015 20:36 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 20:24 KelsierSC wrote:
It's weird because I never saw anyone complaining in huge numbers about inject or chrono boost before. Yet for some resson blizzard has decided to totally change them because. .. Yeh you have given some points but it isn't like blizzard voices these opinions or promised any other changes . have they given zerg a one supply unit or buffed other units? Or give an alternate mechanic.? No
If this change was so thought out with good ideas why wait this long and implement it so haphazardly. It just feels like a change they made because they can, not because it has any real benefits. This massive overhaul will need huge amounts of testing and there should be a clear design purpose in mind which I fail to see.
This comes down to "some pepole said inject is boring so let's change that , oh and that means chrono I'd boring so let's change that. Then see what happens "
People that where at Califoria summit have confirmed that Korean community had a very hot topic of LotV being way to hard. So they want to make easier on macro side to balance it out with the excesive changes to micro side. So they balance that ratio... by giving the player more focus on micro. And like David kim said if this changes stick alot of balange things will happen... it wont be small changes. And one thing was already said in the post... reducing the time on some portoss upgrades. So they know what mainly they have to balance when they cut macro mechanics.
You literally were just in snute's chat,asked him his thoughts, and he literally said the opposite about macro mechanics. :/ Why do you even ask for progamers opinions if you just ignore them? I mean seriously what is wrong with you?
|
On August 17 2015 20:13 Cazimirbzh wrote:
bla bla bla macromechanics no good for balance bla bla bla
Thank you for this opinion which has been exposed in many topics since the strat of sc2.
bwt, chrono works also on buildings like robo and stargate it's really good to chrono oracle, for example, when u want to harass.
Queen has no changes (nerf inject only) so free creep, Same for terran (no more mule but still scan and supply) and protoss well....piouf...
That can solve protoss production by reducing build times by 5s.
And queens will not be giving free creep since they will still be using their energy for now automated inject. And since it will be automated that one queen will never have extra energy.
|
While for a lot of people this might seem sudden it's actually not. This forced macro mechanics weren't part of broodwar and were created to fill a role that no longer existed due to a better engine (not having to select all your building productions to make stuff).
Having said that u need not look any further than the HotS campaign which already has the Inject removed. They probably already felt it was not a mechanic worth keeping at the time and just left it in the game cause of the status quo.
The mule only makes part of the campaign as an after thought which u might not get if your distracted since it comes fairly late.
This macro mechanics were created to fill the role of going constantly bk to base present in Broodwar, instead they created many problems not only in terms of balance but also in terms of design which even tho they probably will never admit it are very real.
Just 2 examples of design problems.
With chrono in the game all protoss timings have to be made around the fact u rush to them with chrono so basically all the upgrades and unit creation has to be inherently slower. Essentially u're either using chrono boost or your slower than u should be. It's not a advantage as much as it is a system to not fall behind.
The inject is exactly the same, all the supply costs of the zerg have to be made around the fact that inject exists, unfortunately unlike the chrono if left unchecked the inject would make the race unbeatable in the early game since Zerg would essentially start with a massive advantage in production from the get go so guess what the roach got pushed to 2 supply so that ur forced to spend a lot of your minerals in the early game in overlords and be unable to overrun the opponent which then created a problem on the max army size making the roach a bad unit at max supply.
Essentially all this mechanics created a lot more problems then the advantages they brought imo and I'm glad their trying to remove them. Even if it doesn't stay I'm very happy with them for trying.
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
"A lot of balance things will happen "
That is my point, they haven't thought the change through. They just did this because apparently some people found the game hard? That is a pathetic reason, it is supposed to be a difficult game that is why Korean pros have 300 apm.
If they said we want to make zerg feel more swarm by giving them some stronger units of low supply but not be able to re max. But no they are changing inject first for reasons and then balancing the game around it.
My personal opinion is starcraft is supposed to be a difficult game with a focus on macro, it isnot supposed to be wc3 or a moba. It feels like a big fuck you to loyal players by making the game more appealing to casuals and removing the things that we worked hard on.
|
On August 17 2015 20:44 KelsierSC wrote:
"A lot of balance things will happen "
That is my point, they haven't thought the change through. They just did this because apparently some people found the game hard? That is a pathetic reason, it is supposed to be a difficult game that is why Korean pros have 300 apm.
If they said we want to make zerg feel more swarm by giving them some stronger units of low supply but not be able to re max. But no they are changing inject first for reasons and then balancing the game around it.
My personal opinion is starcraft is supposed to be a difficult game with a focus on macro, it isnot supposed to be wc3 or a moba. It feels like a big fuck you to loyal players by making the game more appealing to casuals and removing the things that we worked hard on.
BW didnt have all this and it was more fun and better overall.
This might be your opinion.... tho i suspect you're more angry that you had to sink in alot of time to get "perfect" injects or close to perfect.
But SC2 is not minecraft... and their not doing this change for the sake of change, if the community in korea who is hardcore tells you the game is to hard you kind have to balance somehow the game for all players.
Right now LotV is so focused on harass, micro and you can die to so many things if you dont pay 1 sec attention.... everyone loves how the game is faster but some things need to either be toned down a bit ( and they dont want that ) or they need to give players alot more freedom to focus on those things instead of macroing.
On August 17 2015 20:41 tokinho wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 20:36 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 17 2015 20:24 KelsierSC wrote:
It's weird because I never saw anyone complaining in huge numbers about inject or chrono boost before. Yet for some resson blizzard has decided to totally change them because. .. Yeh you have given some points but it isn't like blizzard voices these opinions or promised any other changes . have they given zerg a one supply unit or buffed other units? Or give an alternate mechanic.? No
If this change was so thought out with good ideas why wait this long and implement it so haphazardly. It just feels like a change they made because they can, not because it has any real benefits. This massive overhaul will need huge amounts of testing and there should be a clear design purpose in mind which I fail to see.
This comes down to "some pepole said inject is boring so let's change that , oh and that means chrono I'd boring so let's change that. Then see what happens "
People that where at Califoria summit have confirmed that Korean community had a very hot topic of LotV being way to hard. So they want to make easier on macro side to balance it out with the excesive changes to micro side. So they balance that ratio... by giving the player more focus on micro. And like David kim said if this changes stick alot of balange things will happen... it wont be small changes. And one thing was already said in the post... reducing the time on some portoss upgrades. So they know what mainly they have to balance when they cut macro mechanics. You literally were just in snute's chat,asked him his thoughts, and he literally said the opposite about macro mechanics. :/ Why do you even ask for progamers opinions if you just ignore them? I mean seriously what is wrong with you?
He said he has mix feelings, that his not sure. The fact that he likes chrono invalidates what i said ? how ?
I know he said he dosent like auto-inject cuz he likes the feeling of injects, but he also said that it would benefit him in pro screne.
Overall he doenst know yet.
|
I've been saying this since the WOL beta.
The three mechanics (Larva inject, Mules, Chrono Boost) damaged the game. Everything was too fast, too extreme, too many units, just TOO MUCH EVERYTHING.
This and nothing else caused the MAX FIGHT -> REMAX FIGHT -> REMAX FIGHT cycle.
In LOTV they tried to fix it with way less ressources on the map. It's working fine, but as the OP stated, nerfing or removing these thre mechanics would have solved the issues in their core.
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
I don't know why you keep making some shit analogy about minecraft.
In my opinion this change has not been thought through and the approach is wrong. They should not make a huge macro change and then balance around it with no goal in mind.
For me starcraft is a mechanical test with a focus on macro and players who can do that whilst controlling units, scouting etc are the best. Shifting the focus from macro to controlling my units meticulously moves away from the reasons I love starcraft and makes it similar to other games rather than something unique.
I'm sure some people love this change but to me it moves the game in the wrong direction for a bad reason and with little thought behind it whilst kicking the crotch of loyal players. If the change goes through I probably won't get lotv
|
On August 17 2015 20:44 KelsierSC wrote:
"A lot of balance things will happen "
That is my point, they haven't thought the change through. They just did this because apparently some people found the game hard? That is a pathetic reason, it is supposed to be a difficult game that is why Korean pros have 300 apm.
If they said we want to make zerg feel more swarm by giving them some stronger units of low supply but not be able to re max. But no they are changing inject first for reasons and then balancing the game around it.
My personal opinion is starcraft is supposed to be a difficult game with a focus on macro, it isnot supposed to be wc3 or a moba. It feels like a big fuck you to loyal players by making the game more appealing to casuals and removing the things that we worked hard on.
I agree starcraft is a good mixture of macro and micro, these changes lessen multitasking.
But as snute just said. These items help to differentiate good and great players. The truth is just like you said in snute chat. "I just wanted to said to snute that scvs are too overpowered and they do a trash idea that never be in the game." Why don't you put your words in the post, Zerglingshepherd?? I know your english is aweful, but i'm tired of you insulting pros. You ask his opinion and he says that macro mechanics won't bring or remove players from the game and that they are good overall because they differentiate skill. After he disagrees with you, you make this post.
Say what you just said, you piece of trash, who is really complaining that mules are op. Go ahead and tell other pros that they're ideas are dumb too. You already are insulting beastyqt and snute. Who else do you want to be a dick to today? You were never a brood war player. You don't know anything about it. Don't even think of talking about brood war like you know about what makes a game better or worse.
|
On August 17 2015 20:49 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 20:44 KelsierSC wrote:
"A lot of balance things will happen "
That is my point, they haven't thought the change through. They just did this because apparently some people found the game hard? That is a pathetic reason, it is supposed to be a difficult game that is why Korean pros have 300 apm.
If they said we want to make zerg feel more swarm by giving them some stronger units of low supply but not be able to re max. But no they are changing inject first for reasons and then balancing the game around it.
My personal opinion is starcraft is supposed to be a difficult game with a focus on macro, it isnot supposed to be wc3 or a moba. It feels like a big fuck you to loyal players by making the game more appealing to casuals and removing the things that we worked hard on. BW didnt have all this and it was more fun and better overall. This might be your opinion.... tho i suspect you're more angry that you had to sink in alot of time to get "perfect" injects or close to perfect. But SC2 is not minecraft... and their not doing this change for the sake of change, if the community in korea who is hardcore tells you the game is to hard you kind have to balance somehow the game for all players. Right now LotV is so focused on harass, micro and you can die to so many things if you dont pay 1 sec attention.... everyone loves how the game is faster but some things need to either be toned down a bit ( and they dont want that ) or they need to give players alot more freedom to focus on those things instead of macroing. Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 20:41 tokinho wrote:On August 17 2015 20:36 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 17 2015 20:24 KelsierSC wrote:
It's weird because I never saw anyone complaining in huge numbers about inject or chrono boost before. Yet for some resson blizzard has decided to totally change them because. .. Yeh you have given some points but it isn't like blizzard voices these opinions or promised any other changes . have they given zerg a one supply unit or buffed other units? Or give an alternate mechanic.? No
If this change was so thought out with good ideas why wait this long and implement it so haphazardly. It just feels like a change they made because they can, not because it has any real benefits. This massive overhaul will need huge amounts of testing and there should be a clear design purpose in mind which I fail to see.
This comes down to "some pepole said inject is boring so let's change that , oh and that means chrono I'd boring so let's change that. Then see what happens "
People that where at Califoria summit have confirmed that Korean community had a very hot topic of LotV being way to hard. So they want to make easier on macro side to balance it out with the excesive changes to micro side. So they balance that ratio... by giving the player more focus on micro. And like David kim said if this changes stick alot of balange things will happen... it wont be small changes. And one thing was already said in the post... reducing the time on some portoss upgrades. So they know what mainly they have to balance when they cut macro mechanics. You literally were just in snute's chat,asked him his thoughts, and he literally said the opposite about macro mechanics. :/ Why do you even ask for progamers opinions if you just ignore them? I mean seriously what is wrong with you? He said he has mix feelings, that his not sure. The fact that he likes chrono invalidates what i said ? how ? I know he said he dosent like auto-inject cuz he likes the feeling of injects, but he also said that it would benefit him in pro screne. Overall he doenst know yet.
He did not say he had mixed feelings. There were several hundred people there. He said that really its not going to change the player base so he's not sure if that purpose is helpful.
He likes the macro mechanics overall and wouldn't want to see them go. He also said that mules/scans, chronoboost, and the idea of having creep tumours vs injects all give more choices to the game. Zerg benefits less from the choices, so having autoinject means his multitasking would be more like a korean, which would benefit him since in general their multitasking is better. By removing these macro mechanics there are less choices and overall less variety in the game. You literally just ignored that he was against having these changes, while you kept typing in chat a bunch of crap about chrono and scv's being op.
|
On August 17 2015 21:01 KelsierSC wrote:
I don't know why you keep making some shit analogy about minecraft.
In my opinion this change has not been thought through and the approach is wrong. They should not make a huge macro change and then balance around it with no goal in mind.
For me starcraft is a mechanical test with a focus on macro and players who can do that whilst controlling units, scouting etc are the best. Shifting the focus from macro to controlling my units meticulously moves away from the reasons I love starcraft and makes it similar to other games rather than something unique.
I'm sure some people love this change but to me it moves the game in the wrong direction for a bad reason and with little thought behind it whilst kicking the crotch of loyal players. If the change goes through I probably won't get lotv
Yeah the anology could be shitty.
I already told you their goal... to balance out the new improved "harder" micro with an easier macro.
I know alot of people like macro to so i can respect that, its what you like, i just dont feel like SC was ever that when i played.
But maybe that is the difference between a micro focused played and a micro focused player.
On August 17 2015 20:44 Bazik wrote:
While for a lot of people this might seem sudden it's actually not. This forced macro mechanics weren't part of broodwar and were created to fill a role that no longer existed due to a better engine (not having to select all your building productions to make stuff).
Having said that u need not look any further than the HotS campaign which already has the Inject removed. They probably already felt it was not a mechanic worth keeping at the time and just left it in the game cause of the status quo.
The mule only makes part of the campaign as an after thought which u might not get if your distracted since it comes fairly late.
This macro mechanics were created to fill the role of going constantly bk to base present in Broodwar, instead they created many problems not only in terms of balance but also in terms of design which even tho they probably will never admit it are very real.
Just 2 examples of design problems.
With chrono in the game all protoss timings have to be made around the fact u rush to them with chrono so basically all the upgrades and unit creation has to be inherently slower. Essentially u're either using chrono boost or your slower than u should be. It's not a advantage as much as it is a system to not fall behind.
The inject is exactly the same, all the supply costs of the zerg have to be made around the fact that inject exists, unfortunately unlike the chrono if left unchecked the inject would make the race unbeatable in the early game since Zerg would essentially start with a massive advantage in production from the get go so guess what the roach got pushed to 2 supply so that ur forced to spend a lot of your minerals in the early game in overlords and be unable to overrun the opponent which then created a problem on the max army size making the roach a bad unit at max supply.
Essentially all this mechanics created a lot more problems then the advantages they brought imo and I'm glad their trying to remove them. Even if it doesn't stay I'm very happy with them for trying.
I totally agree with this. I think everyone can relate to this also... this macro mechanics did more bad then good overall.
Ald let be hones it turned alot of people down and annoyed BW people even more.
On August 17 2015 20:57 MapleLeafSirup wrote:
I've been saying this since the WOL beta.
The three mechanics (Larva inject, Mules, Chrono Boost) damaged the game. Everything was too fast, too extreme, too many units, just TOO MUCH EVERYTHING.
This and nothing else caused the MAX FIGHT -> REMAX FIGHT -> REMAX FIGHT cycle.
In LOTV they tried to fix it with way less ressources on the map. It's working fine, but as the OP stated, nerfing or removing these thre mechanics would have solved the issues in their core.
Yeah overall we might not see so many deathballs, so many battles ending in 2-3 sec.
|
Nice post.With the inject nerf i would love to see now hydra change
Hydra now hatch tech(raoch still as well)hydra got 70 hp,4 range(lair upgrade only make them 5 range),same AS and 7 damage,1 supply,cost 100/25.
With this lair focus more on more advanced unites like muta/luker/raveger(its removed to lair tech)
Also it will reward players who will expand in order to get more money and making more stuff
|
@-Archangel-
That can solve protoss production by reducing build times by 5s.
In what way that will help against scans??
And if queen produce 2 larva per inject you can skip a cycle for ez def creep.
@ZergLingShepherd1
BW didnt have all this and it was more fun and better overall.
Blizzard tried with adding specifics mechanics for each race. Didnt work (a bit sad). How long do you think it will take blizzard to complete regain sanity ? ( comsat requirement, no more creep and inject)
|
On August 17 2015 20:44 KelsierSC wrote:
"A lot of balance things will happen "
That is my point, they haven't thought the change through. They just did this because apparently some people found the game hard? That is a pathetic reason, it is supposed to be a difficult game that is why Korean pros have 300 apm.
If they said we want to make zerg feel more swarm by giving them some stronger units of low supply but not be able to re max. But no they are changing inject first for reasons and then balancing the game around it.
My personal opinion is starcraft is supposed to be a difficult game with a focus on macro, it isnot supposed to be wc3 or a moba. It feels like a big fuck you to loyal players by making the game more appealing to casuals and removing the things that we worked hard on.
or they know that a huge number of changes will be needed and many of those will only come up once the macro changes are implemented. No need to make huge lists now with beta still going on for 4-5 months.
|
On August 17 2015 21:43 Cazimirbzh wrote:@-Archangel- In what way that will help against scans?? And if queen produce 2 larva per inject you can skip a cycle for ez def creep.
I got no idea what is your point here. come back when you have one.
|
On August 17 2015 21:43 Cazimirbzh wrote:@-Archangel- In what way that will help against scans?? And if queen produce 2 larva per inject you can skip a cycle for ez def creep. @ZergLingShepherd1 Blizzard tried with adding specifics mechanics for each race. Didnt work (a bit sad). How long do you think it will take blizzard to complete regain sanity ? ( comsat requirement, no more creep and inject)
Maybe in starcraft 3, its to late for a complete ovehaul of Sc2
|
If Terran doesn't have MULE, it also rebalances their race in terms of mineral/gas ratio. Although Supply Drop may offset that a bit. Right now Terran just gets more minerals compared to the other races, which may be warping their builds.
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On August 17 2015 22:06 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 20:44 KelsierSC wrote:
"A lot of balance things will happen "
That is my point, they haven't thought the change through. They just did this because apparently some people found the game hard? That is a pathetic reason, it is supposed to be a difficult game that is why Korean pros have 300 apm.
If they said we want to make zerg feel more swarm by giving them some stronger units of low supply but not be able to re max. But no they are changing inject first for reasons and then balancing the game around it.
My personal opinion is starcraft is supposed to be a difficult game with a focus on macro, it isnot supposed to be wc3 or a moba. It feels like a big fuck you to loyal players by making the game more appealing to casuals and removing the things that we worked hard on. or they know that a huge number of changes will be needed and many of those will only come up once the macro changes are implemented. No need to make huge lists now with beta still going on for 4-5 months.
Well apparently they are doing this to make the game easier so they have no idea how to balance the game afterwards. If they had a vision of how they wanted the game to look they would have released a statement about it and this change would have Benn released at the start of beta. This is nothing more than a band aid solution to appease players who cant handle a difficult game.
|
@-Archangel-
My point is that after the barrack, terran has a scan for only mineral cost (no requirement). or still in late game when the terran will have a unlimited amount of scans. Or even we can see where scans go in TvZ and PvZ.
If there is no limit to scan what's the point of invisible units ?
Creep in early game is very good for defense purpose. To be able to sacrifice only 2 larva for that kind of advantage is too much.
I am more concern about late game where we will still have the mass scan vs mass creep vs mass home.
|
Finally an objective, positive post! Good job!
|
On August 17 2015 22:59 Cazimirbzh wrote:
@-Archangel-
My point is that after the barrack, terran has a scan for only mineral cost (no requirement). or still in late game when the terran will have a unlimited amount of scans. Or even we can see where scans go in TvZ and PvZ.
If there is no limit to scan what's the point of invisible units ?
Creep in early game is very good for defense purpose. To be able to sacrifice only 2 larva for that kind of advantage is too much.
I am more concern about late game where we will still have the mass scan vs mass creep vs mass home.
They said in the post that a rebalance between scans and supply drop must happen.
But also that creep might be looked at for a tone down, if its to problamatic.
|
On August 17 2015 22:59 Cazimirbzh wrote:
@-Archangel-
My point is that after the barrack, terran has a scan for only mineral cost (no requirement). or still in late game when the terran will have a unlimited amount of scans. Or even we can see where scans go in TvZ and PvZ.
If there is no limit to scan what's the point of invisible units ?
Creep in early game is very good for defense purpose. To be able to sacrifice only 2 larva for that kind of advantage is too much.
I am more concern about late game where we will still have the mass scan vs mass creep vs mass home.
So how is this different than BW where terrans ONLY had scans and as you say unlimited ones?
Why the slowest faction should not have lots of scans in late game?
Toss has fast invisible observers and zerg has creep and overlords (and burrowed lings).
Invisibly units will have a bigger point due not not being able to recover fast by using Mules. Each SCV kill will mean more.
It is not only 2 larva as whole zerg production is slower now. That is same sacrifice as before because all factions macro is still at equal relative strength. And everyone makes extra queens for creep anyways.
On August 17 2015 22:21 KelsierSC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 22:06 -Archangel- wrote:On August 17 2015 20:44 KelsierSC wrote:
"A lot of balance things will happen "
That is my point, they haven't thought the change through. They just did this because apparently some people found the game hard? That is a pathetic reason, it is supposed to be a difficult game that is why Korean pros have 300 apm.
If they said we want to make zerg feel more swarm by giving them some stronger units of low supply but not be able to re max. But no they are changing inject first for reasons and then balancing the game around it.
My personal opinion is starcraft is supposed to be a difficult game with a focus on macro, it isnot supposed to be wc3 or a moba. It feels like a big fuck you to loyal players by making the game more appealing to casuals and removing the things that we worked hard on. or they know that a huge number of changes will be needed and many of those will only come up once the macro changes are implemented. No need to make huge lists now with beta still going on for 4-5 months. Well apparently they are doing this to make the game easier so they have no idea how to balance the game afterwards. If they had a vision of how they wanted the game to look they would have released a statement about it and this change would have Benn released at the start of beta. This is nothing more than a band aid solution to appease players who cant handle a difficult game.
You are just looking at their statement and seeing what you want to see. Of course they understand it is going to change the game a lot, that is why they said balance changes will be coming after it once people start playing with macro changes and they decide to stick with it.
|
@ZergLingShepherd1
It will.
Big maps + late game (no more need for supply drop, macro hatch) free map control ....
and that's why i dont understand this halfjob policy.
-Archangel-
scan or nuclear silo  academy + gas requirement.
Dt in mid game to force scan so no mule = -250 minerals. Late game, vs PF, no limit to scan how can you try to take it ? :S But i agree that now "Each SCV kill will mean more."
PvZ We'll see about warp buff but chronoboost helped a lot to push before creep was ready
|
On August 17 2015 20:44 KelsierSC wrote:
"A lot of balance things will happen "
That is my point, they haven't thought the change through. They just did this because apparently some people found the game hard? That is a pathetic reason, it is supposed to be a difficult game that is why Korean pros have 300 apm.
If they said we want to make zerg feel more swarm by giving them some stronger units of low supply but not be able to re max. But no they are changing inject first for reasons and then balancing the game around it.
My personal opinion is starcraft is supposed to be a difficult game with a focus on macro, it isnot supposed to be wc3 or a moba. It feels like a big fuck you to loyal players by making the game more appealing to casuals and removing the things that we worked hard on.
How is that a pathetic reason? And who said Starcraft is supposed to be difficult? What you call "difficulty" I call brainless menial tasks about as interesting as doing the dishes. I realize people play games for different reasons, but I play Starcraft because it's supposed to be a strategy game that's mainly about decisionmaking. Right now any strategy in this game is being completely overwhelmed by mechanics and poor game design and that's why I don't play. I am hopeful that these LOTV changes will make it possible to win games strategically rather than mechanically.
|
On August 17 2015 23:18 Cazimirbzh wrote:
@ZergLingShepherd1
It will.
Big maps + late game (no more need for supply drop, macro hatch) free map control ....
and that's why i dont understand this halfjob policy.
I agree with blizzard to first test the vanillia changes for a week or so. It's very hard to predict which direction everything will go. We can theorycraft all day, but if at the end of the day this change is so drastic that it needs at least a few days of gameplay to see whether something of this dimension can even be implemented with the short timeframe left for this beta.
|
On August 17 2015 23:18 Cazimirbzh wrote:@ZergLingShepherd1 It will. Big maps + late game (no more need for supply drop, macro hatch) free map control .... and that's why i dont understand this halfjob policy. -Archangel- scan or nuclear silo academy + gas requirement. Dt in mid game to force scan so no mule = -250 minerals. Late game, vs PF, no limit to scan how can you try to take it ? :S But i agree that now "Each SCV kill will mean more." PvZ We'll see about warp buff but chronoboost helped a lot to push before creep was ready
Bad news they wont make only big maps.
So it wont be fixed that way.
|
Not quite convinced by it
Early game terran will suffer due to mules not making up for scv away on building without proper mule replacement, and protoss upgrades were geared to be chronoboosted so without proper tweaks on either, it could either become too good or way worse off than before
|
I went back to read this post because several people were saying what a good and objective OP it was. I was really hoping it would be!
On August 17 2015 18:45 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
I would like to remind people that there are some huge benefits design wise and balance wise for all races. This might change the minds of many people who still dont know if macro mechanics removal is good.
Protoss
Every upgarade, every timing has been nerfed for the sole reason of chrono boost, they had to balance everything in case protoss used chrono boost to prepare some powerful timings.
This didnt help the game at all, tho you could choose what upgrade you want to chrono boost and think you had some "chooice" , you where then very limited if you wanted to transition into another composition with some decent upgrades.
Not to mention most Chrono Boosts would go to workers.
Removing Chrono Boost would give more way for Protoss to transition, get more specific upgrades.
Basically more freedom of chooice.
Zerg
Inject Larva with 4 larvas is the worst thing that ever happened to the true nature of Zerg, the true swarm. Basically every unit was heavily nerfed in WoL Beta just because zerg had potential of huge remax that where totally IMBA
This lead to Zerg doing timings in most games, also having to remax over and over again to win a battle, but the big problem is that there is no REWARD for expanding alot in WoL and HotS, people would just stay on 3-4 bases and so the Zerg remax was not that beneficial in the most cases, not to mention alot of supply was in drones and queens, making the Zerg army look small.... with some units having alot of supply just to tone down the possiblity of insane remax.
This also lead to another terrible design to help Zerg... the "free units" concept that alot of people hate.
With larva inject being nerfed to 2, Zerg could get a 1 supply unit finally, we might get to be swarmy and maybe supply for other units could go down as well, Zerg units might get some buffs, to do remax being heavily nerfed in ealry and mid game.
Auto-Inject leads to less punishing macro, injects being to punishable, tho i would prefer a change to hatchery that could spawn larva at a higher rate, and a change for Queens to nurture like they do in Stabow and Spread Creep.
Terran
MULE was mostly put in the game to play catch up with the Zerg production, but over time it has turned into a very gimmick and sometime OP mechanic, mostly in late game when you dont even need SCV's and you kill them for a bigger army then your enemy. We also saw some very strong comebacks that could never be possible for a Protoss or a Zerg
Killing SCV's also sometime feels that is not rewarding for both Protoss and Zerg and even other Terrans.
The benefits to removing the MULE is that some Terran units might get cheaper, you will have more SCANS, and that means more map awarness, you could still get supply drops that are basically 120 free minerals.
I guess you might say Terran gets a little less rewards then Z and P but in truth Terran was way to forgiving from the start in my opinion.
PROTOSS
It's a hard argument to make that not being able to intermittently dedicate double-speed production on anything you want is going to enhance freedom of choice. I think Protoss is getting hit really hard with this. Their play will become significantly more predictable. However, their timings will probably end up getting buffed, and will probably split the different between chrono and now. Overall, I think this will probably be a loss for Protoss.
ZERG
Why do you keep saying that Zerg doesn't have a 1-supply unit? Seriously: what are you talking about? The Zergling, bro. The Baneling, bro. Those are two staple, and incredibly good units. You have two 1-supply units--technically, they are half supply, which is even better. It's literally a BOGO unit. I'd be completely fine with a small buff to the ling/bane if you want them to become 1 supply each : )
And you get free units, dude. Zero supply, lol! Locusts, broodlings, but more notably, the Overseer. A tanky, supply-free flying spellcaster / detector with energy-scouting spells.
The only 1-supply units in the game--other than workers--are Marines and Zealots. Your half-supply units can completely wreck these units, unless they have substantial upgrade leads and high-tech support units in play.
Inject larva doesn't change the way larva works. You could always just build more hatches. It is the nature of larva itself that required the balance tweakings of the Zerg units. Even if inject was completely removed (like it probably should be), you'd still have access to insane tech switches and remaxes.
The Zerg nerf is going to end up being a buff. Just wait and see.
TERRAN
They are going to remove the MULE. Nothing will get cheaper, lol. Maybe we get some new unit abilities, or maybe call-down supply will enhance the HP of the depot, or something. It will feel like a gigantic nerf at first, until everyone has to find a way to deal with PF's at every natural, and cloaked openers become much weaker.
Terran will end up having the same amount, or less scans in the long run, because there will be less OC's built.
Hopefully they give detection to another unit, like the Reaper (hint, hint), to compensate for the diminished number of scans Terrans will have in the early and mid-game.
|
This kind of "I know the future" post is really the kind of quality post needed.
Anyway, I advise reading the rest of the thread cause some of the other posts add insight to the OP comments.
Also I would like to refute the argument that u have double speed when ur chronoing tech, u should instead think of it as standard speed when being chronnoed and not the other way around. That's why blizzard said they will prob have to buff many of the tech paths of Protoss.
Zerg having access to less larva at the start via having less (2) larva at the start is prob just an attempt to curb the effects of no chrono which will mean less probes and a slower eco start and the same is true for no mules which in turn makes everything slower for the terran at the start.
People need to chill and try the changes before trying to predict the meta before the changes are even made.
|
On August 18 2015 00:18 TimeSpiral wrote:I went back to read this post because several people were saying what a good and objective OP it was. I was really hoping it would be! Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 18:45 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
I would like to remind people that there are some huge benefits design wise and balance wise for all races. This might change the minds of many people who still dont know if macro mechanics removal is good.
Protoss
Every upgarade, every timing has been nerfed for the sole reason of chrono boost, they had to balance everything in case protoss used chrono boost to prepare some powerful timings.
This didnt help the game at all, tho you could choose what upgrade you want to chrono boost and think you had some "chooice" , you where then very limited if you wanted to transition into another composition with some decent upgrades.
Not to mention most Chrono Boosts would go to workers.
Removing Chrono Boost would give more way for Protoss to transition, get more specific upgrades.
Basically more freedom of chooice.
Zerg
Inject Larva with 4 larvas is the worst thing that ever happened to the true nature of Zerg, the true swarm. Basically every unit was heavily nerfed in WoL Beta just because zerg had potential of huge remax that where totally IMBA
This lead to Zerg doing timings in most games, also having to remax over and over again to win a battle, but the big problem is that there is no REWARD for expanding alot in WoL and HotS, people would just stay on 3-4 bases and so the Zerg remax was not that beneficial in the most cases, not to mention alot of supply was in drones and queens, making the Zerg army look small.... with some units having alot of supply just to tone down the possiblity of insane remax.
This also lead to another terrible design to help Zerg... the "free units" concept that alot of people hate.
With larva inject being nerfed to 2, Zerg could get a 1 supply unit finally, we might get to be swarmy and maybe supply for other units could go down as well, Zerg units might get some buffs, to do remax being heavily nerfed in ealry and mid game.
Auto-Inject leads to less punishing macro, injects being to punishable, tho i would prefer a change to hatchery that could spawn larva at a higher rate, and a change for Queens to nurture like they do in Stabow and Spread Creep.
Terran
MULE was mostly put in the game to play catch up with the Zerg production, but over time it has turned into a very gimmick and sometime OP mechanic, mostly in late game when you dont even need SCV's and you kill them for a bigger army then your enemy. We also saw some very strong comebacks that could never be possible for a Protoss or a Zerg
Killing SCV's also sometime feels that is not rewarding for both Protoss and Zerg and even other Terrans.
The benefits to removing the MULE is that some Terran units might get cheaper, you will have more SCANS, and that means more map awarness, you could still get supply drops that are basically 120 free minerals.
I guess you might say Terran gets a little less rewards then Z and P but in truth Terran was way to forgiving from the start in my opinion. PROTOSS It's a hard argument to make that not being able to intermittently dedicate double-speed production on anything you want is going to enhance freedom of choice. I think Protoss is getting hit really hard with this. Their play will become significantly more predictable. However, their timings will probably end up getting buffed, and will probably split the different between chrono and now. Overall, I think this will probably be a loss for Protoss. ZERG Why do you keep saying that Zerg doesn't have a 1-supply unit? Seriously: what are you talking about? The Zergling, bro. The Baneling, bro. Those are two staple, and incredibly good units. You have two 1-supply units--technically, they are half supply, which is even better. It's literally a BOGO unit. I'd be completely fine with a small buff to the ling/bane if you want them to become 1 supply each : ) And you get free units, dude. Zero supply, lol! Locusts, broodlings, but more notably, the Overseer. A tanky, supply-free flying spellcaster / detector with energy-scouting spells. The only 1-supply units in the game--other than workers--are Marines and Zealots. Your half-supply units can completely wreck these units, unless they have substantial upgrade leads and high-tech support units in play. Inject larva doesn't change the way larva works. You could always just build more hatches. It is the nature of larva itself that required the balance tweakings of the Zerg units. Even if inject was completely removed (like it probably should be), you'd still have access to insane tech switches and remaxes. The Zerg nerf is going to end up being a buff. Just wait and see. TERRAN They are going to remove the MULE. Nothing will get cheaper, lol. Maybe we get some new unit abilities, or maybe call-down supply will enhance the HP of the depot, or something. It will feel like a gigantic nerf at first, until everyone has to find a way to deal with PF's at every natural, and cloaked openers become much weaker. Terran will end up having the same amount, or less scans in the long run, because there will be less OC's built. Hopefully they give detection to another unit, like the Reaper (hint, hint), to compensate for the diminished number of scans Terrans will have in the early and mid-game.
PROTOSS
Not by a long shot, having more freedom to get certain upgrades and actually transtion better into some composition will be great for protoss. Basically protoss is the most predictable race since they cant really change up their game.
They always can do some tweaks to some builds... but once they follow a build they cant really try anything else.
Im talking about macro game not cheese.
ZERG
I keep saying that cuz in BW zerg has 1 supply unit, zerlings and banelings are 0,5 and Zerg is supposed to be the swarm rane, instead they have more supply in units then Terran, its almost like you where playing protoss except the cost of units is not that high and the units are not that great.
All people agree that Terran Bio is way swarmier then Zerg.
That is the problem free units is a dumb concept, it was made to help zerg feel swarmy but its acttualy very annoying for both players.
I dont know in what league you are but zerlings alone cant wreck marines or zealots without support, unless your better in upgrades.
Its never a cost efficient trade.
Again you fail to understand that in order to make tech switches on a large scale you need alot of larva, macro hatches take time, you dont build 8 hatches in early or mid game. Remax possibility could work in late game, and i doubt it will happen more then once, resource will already be mined by then, killing even more the possibility of a super remax.
Its going to be a buff and a nerf, but like i said it will need alot of balance to help zerg in early and mind game
TERRAN
Again your lack of knowledge here, if some units are cheaper you wont need the MULE in mid or late game cuz the units themself arent as costly as they where.
Supply Drop is 120 minerals free, tho it will be balanced with SCANS in order to prevent abuse.
If anything is worse for Terran economy they could reduce the time of some buildings so the SVC's could return faster to mining.
Only a plat terran would make PF's at natural and third, you still need to lift up as defense, and you still need to move into another mineral line without consuming the time of making another CC and minerals.
Also like i said no one would throw away free supply and 120 minerals.
Blizz said the number of SCANS will need to be balanced cuz they will be to many not to less.
Overall your post is a total fail.
|
i only use mules on the enemies armies when im winning, it's clearly op as it makes them leave the game
|
can't seem to have zerglingshepard thread without balance whines- it started out so well too.
Anyway, from here, its cleaer that protoss and terran has most to lose from this while zerg has least- since the major skill gaps with zerg race is dealt with the macro aspects even more so than other races- The weekly all in article did mention this very well.
Protoss loses the chronoboost balanced timings/upgrades from the removal- The compromise may be hard to balance out-protoss followup to all ins will be weaker with lack of chrono boost as well.
Terran loses the early mineral deficit from upgrading to Orbital command/building with scvs. early-midgame terran will suffer- Morrow made point about this
Zerg loses 3 larvae per hatch cycle in exchange for autoinject-early game zerg will suffer- maybe time for some zerg buffs as zerglingshepard did bring out. Maybe restrict bank per hatch do prevent the same problem with lategame remax and get zerg to build more macro hatch?
|
Mules influenced the meta alot. It was one of the worst things that could happen to sc2.
Terran on early 3OC basically meant that any early own economical commitment on harrassing the terran (eco) leads into auto lose if you didn't kill the terran with it with p or z. Therefore in ZvT/PvT matchups almost only all-in or defensive macro play was viable but nothing inbetween (yeah, oracles where introduced then to give protoss at least something).
This was one of the main reasons that SC2 became boring to me. I am glad it changes now.
|
On August 18 2015 06:04 LSN wrote:
Mules influenced the meta alot. It was one of the worst things that could happen to sc2.
Terran on early 3OC basically meant that any early own economical commitment on harrassing the terran (eco) leads into auto lose if you didn't kill the terran with it with p or z. Therefore in ZvT/PvT matchups almost only all-in or defensive macro play was viable but nothing inbetween (yeah, oracles where introduced then to give protoss at least something).
This was one of the main reasons that SC2 became boring to me. I am glad it changes now.
An orbital command is 4 unkillable SCVs, that's it. Without MULEs terran would have some way to boost mining to be on par with the other two races if the other macro mechanics stayed.
|
When is the new patch going online anyway?
|
It's not bad to remove these things, but I think they should have done this sooner in the beta... It's going to take so much balance tweaking to get everything back in sync (especially with Protoss). Do they have time to do this before release?
|
On August 17 2015 18:45 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
Protoss
Every upgarade, every timing has been nerfed for the sole reason of chrono boost, they had to balance everything in case protoss used chrono boost to prepare some powerful timings.
This didnt help the game at all, tho you could choose what upgrade you want to chrono boost and think you had some "chooice" , you where then very limited if you wanted to transition into another composition with some decent upgrades.
Not to mention most Chrono Boosts would go to workers.
Removing Chrono Boost would give more way for Protoss to transition, get more specific upgrades.
Basically more freedom of chooice.
Removing chronoboost does not give more choice. People will still do the same builds, just without chrono. This doesn't change the game, just its timings. You don't get more freedom of transition by removing chrono because you're not going to start researching +2 air weapons simply because chronoboost is removed. If anything, chronoboost has been protoss's tool for transitioning. The protoss player, on big maps like Alterzhim Stronghold, would attack into a zerg or terran to free up supply and allow for air transitions that were only possible because of chrono(see sOs vs jjajki). Chrono allowed you to sneak in these upgrades very quickly so that we could transition if we wanted to, not the other way around. Removing chronoboost just means they'll have to basically revert all of their nerfs to protoss timings to allow for protoss to hit at the same time as before. That doesn't give us more choice. It leaves us with the exact same choices as before with just less ability to mess up because I no longer have to worry about perfect chronoboosting to hit my +2 blink timing exactly at 11:30.
|
On August 18 2015 06:04 LSN wrote:
Mules influenced the meta alot. It was one of the worst things that could happen to sc2.
Terran on early 3OC basically meant that any early own economical commitment on harrassing the terran (eco) leads into auto lose if you didn't kill the terran with it with p or z. Therefore in ZvT/PvT matchups almost only all-in or defensive macro play was viable but nothing inbetween (yeah, oracles where introduced then to give protoss at least something).
This was one of the main reasons that SC2 became boring to me. I am glad it changes now.
This was always a problem for Protoss and so we got the Oracle that everyone complains about.
I do agree wtih macro mechanics being removed, things might return to normal.
On August 18 2015 06:51 NKexquisite wrote:
It's not bad to remove these things, but I think they should have done this sooner in the beta... It's going to take so much balance tweaking to get everything back in sync (especially with Protoss). Do they have time to do this before release?
They might wait alot if this changes happen. I dont see a 2015 release if this changes stay.
|
On August 18 2015 00:41 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2015 00:18 TimeSpiral wrote:I went back to read this post because several people were saying what a good and objective OP it was. I was really hoping it would be! On August 17 2015 18:45 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
I would like to remind people that there are some huge benefits design wise and balance wise for all races. This might change the minds of many people who still dont know if macro mechanics removal is good.
Protoss
Every upgarade, every timing has been nerfed for the sole reason of chrono boost, they had to balance everything in case protoss used chrono boost to prepare some powerful timings.
This didnt help the game at all, tho you could choose what upgrade you want to chrono boost and think you had some "chooice" , you where then very limited if you wanted to transition into another composition with some decent upgrades.
Not to mention most Chrono Boosts would go to workers.
Removing Chrono Boost would give more way for Protoss to transition, get more specific upgrades.
Basically more freedom of chooice.
Zerg
Inject Larva with 4 larvas is the worst thing that ever happened to the true nature of Zerg, the true swarm. Basically every unit was heavily nerfed in WoL Beta just because zerg had potential of huge remax that where totally IMBA
This lead to Zerg doing timings in most games, also having to remax over and over again to win a battle, but the big problem is that there is no REWARD for expanding alot in WoL and HotS, people would just stay on 3-4 bases and so the Zerg remax was not that beneficial in the most cases, not to mention alot of supply was in drones and queens, making the Zerg army look small.... with some units having alot of supply just to tone down the possiblity of insane remax.
This also lead to another terrible design to help Zerg... the "free units" concept that alot of people hate.
With larva inject being nerfed to 2, Zerg could get a 1 supply unit finally, we might get to be swarmy and maybe supply for other units could go down as well, Zerg units might get some buffs, to do remax being heavily nerfed in ealry and mid game.
Auto-Inject leads to less punishing macro, injects being to punishable, tho i would prefer a change to hatchery that could spawn larva at a higher rate, and a change for Queens to nurture like they do in Stabow and Spread Creep.
Terran
MULE was mostly put in the game to play catch up with the Zerg production, but over time it has turned into a very gimmick and sometime OP mechanic, mostly in late game when you dont even need SCV's and you kill them for a bigger army then your enemy. We also saw some very strong comebacks that could never be possible for a Protoss or a Zerg
Killing SCV's also sometime feels that is not rewarding for both Protoss and Zerg and even other Terrans.
The benefits to removing the MULE is that some Terran units might get cheaper, you will have more SCANS, and that means more map awarness, you could still get supply drops that are basically 120 free minerals.
I guess you might say Terran gets a little less rewards then Z and P but in truth Terran was way to forgiving from the start in my opinion. PROTOSS It's a hard argument to make that not being able to intermittently dedicate double-speed production on anything you want is going to enhance freedom of choice. I think Protoss is getting hit really hard with this. Their play will become significantly more predictable. However, their timings will probably end up getting buffed, and will probably split the different between chrono and now. Overall, I think this will probably be a loss for Protoss. ZERG Why do you keep saying that Zerg doesn't have a 1-supply unit? Seriously: what are you talking about? The Zergling, bro. The Baneling, bro. Those are two staple, and incredibly good units. You have two 1-supply units--technically, they are half supply, which is even better. It's literally a BOGO unit. I'd be completely fine with a small buff to the ling/bane if you want them to become 1 supply each : ) And you get free units, dude. Zero supply, lol! Locusts, broodlings, but more notably, the Overseer. A tanky, supply-free flying spellcaster / detector with energy-scouting spells. The only 1-supply units in the game--other than workers--are Marines and Zealots. Your half-supply units can completely wreck these units, unless they have substantial upgrade leads and high-tech support units in play. Inject larva doesn't change the way larva works. You could always just build more hatches. It is the nature of larva itself that required the balance tweakings of the Zerg units. Even if inject was completely removed (like it probably should be), you'd still have access to insane tech switches and remaxes. The Zerg nerf is going to end up being a buff. Just wait and see. TERRAN They are going to remove the MULE. Nothing will get cheaper, lol. Maybe we get some new unit abilities, or maybe call-down supply will enhance the HP of the depot, or something. It will feel like a gigantic nerf at first, until everyone has to find a way to deal with PF's at every natural, and cloaked openers become much weaker. Terran will end up having the same amount, or less scans in the long run, because there will be less OC's built. Hopefully they give detection to another unit, like the Reaper (hint, hint), to compensate for the diminished number of scans Terrans will have in the early and mid-game. PROTOSS Not by a long shot, having more freedom to get certain upgrades and actually transtion better into some composition will be great for protoss. Basically protoss is the most predictable race since they cant really change up their game. They always can do some tweaks to some builds... but once they follow a build they cant really try anything else. Im talking about macro game not cheese. Overall your post is a total fail.
Nope. You don't free up choice by removing what makes getting that choice 50% faster. You're making a statement that makes absolutely no sense. Please, understand how the race operates at the top level first before you tell people who play the race they don't understand what they're doing or how the race plays.
|
I don't really know for terran or Zerg, but i completely disagree with the removal of chronoboost. Your argument about it limiting design from blizzard is correct.. how you come to the conclusion that the existence of chronoboost REDUCES strategic diversity for players is beyond me. It's an important thing to scout for if you're against protoss; one of the tells, in fact, of a gateway attack - seeing what things protoss chronoboosts tells you a lot about his intentions.
I actually don't feel as inclined to write a long post as I thought, but I guess the tl;dr is that the removal of chronoboost reduces strategic diversity IMO.
|
I always disliked larva inject for zerg, especially later in the game with the allowance for a large amount of idle larva per hatchery. While Terran and Protoss had to invest a significant amount of minerals/gas in building additional buildings for production as their economy ramped up, larva inject allowed Zerg to use all of the resources they didn't have to spend to sit on a healthy bank or build mass spines / spores. I'd much have preferred the game be like broodwar in this aspect, with zerg having to invest resources in many additional macro hatcheries to ramp up production, and have the game be balanced around this.
|
one thought for zerg now. - seem like it will go from the most punishing race (miss injects = lose game) to the easiest race to macro, Since if toss or terran stop building probes/scv's then they are behind. If zerg takes an extra 10 seconds to cycle and build drones, no big deal, you can still build them all.
On August 18 2015 08:13 monomo wrote:
I don't really know for terran or Zerg, but i completely disagree with the removal of chronoboost. Your argument about it limiting design from blizzard is correct.. how you come to the conclusion that the existence of chronoboost REDUCES strategic diversity for players is beyond me. It's an important thing to scout for if you're against protoss; one of the tells, in fact, of a gateway attack - seeing what things protoss chronoboosts tells you a lot about his intentions.
I actually don't feel as inclined to write a long post as I thought, but I guess the tl;dr is that the removal of chronoboost reduces strategic diversity IMO.
At low levels of play, it might reduce strategic diversity, but at high levels, it will make toss less dependent on hitting all in timing windows and play an overall larger more complete game.
|
On August 18 2015 07:48 StasisField wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2015 00:41 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 18 2015 00:18 TimeSpiral wrote:I went back to read this post because several people were saying what a good and objective OP it was. I was really hoping it would be! On August 17 2015 18:45 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
I would like to remind people that there are some huge benefits design wise and balance wise for all races. This might change the minds of many people who still dont know if macro mechanics removal is good.
Protoss
Every upgarade, every timing has been nerfed for the sole reason of chrono boost, they had to balance everything in case protoss used chrono boost to prepare some powerful timings.
This didnt help the game at all, tho you could choose what upgrade you want to chrono boost and think you had some "chooice" , you where then very limited if you wanted to transition into another composition with some decent upgrades.
Not to mention most Chrono Boosts would go to workers.
Removing Chrono Boost would give more way for Protoss to transition, get more specific upgrades.
Basically more freedom of chooice.
Zerg
Inject Larva with 4 larvas is the worst thing that ever happened to the true nature of Zerg, the true swarm. Basically every unit was heavily nerfed in WoL Beta just because zerg had potential of huge remax that where totally IMBA
This lead to Zerg doing timings in most games, also having to remax over and over again to win a battle, but the big problem is that there is no REWARD for expanding alot in WoL and HotS, people would just stay on 3-4 bases and so the Zerg remax was not that beneficial in the most cases, not to mention alot of supply was in drones and queens, making the Zerg army look small.... with some units having alot of supply just to tone down the possiblity of insane remax.
This also lead to another terrible design to help Zerg... the "free units" concept that alot of people hate.
With larva inject being nerfed to 2, Zerg could get a 1 supply unit finally, we might get to be swarmy and maybe supply for other units could go down as well, Zerg units might get some buffs, to do remax being heavily nerfed in ealry and mid game.
Auto-Inject leads to less punishing macro, injects being to punishable, tho i would prefer a change to hatchery that could spawn larva at a higher rate, and a change for Queens to nurture like they do in Stabow and Spread Creep.
Terran
MULE was mostly put in the game to play catch up with the Zerg production, but over time it has turned into a very gimmick and sometime OP mechanic, mostly in late game when you dont even need SCV's and you kill them for a bigger army then your enemy. We also saw some very strong comebacks that could never be possible for a Protoss or a Zerg
Killing SCV's also sometime feels that is not rewarding for both Protoss and Zerg and even other Terrans.
The benefits to removing the MULE is that some Terran units might get cheaper, you will have more SCANS, and that means more map awarness, you could still get supply drops that are basically 120 free minerals.
I guess you might say Terran gets a little less rewards then Z and P but in truth Terran was way to forgiving from the start in my opinion. PROTOSS It's a hard argument to make that not being able to intermittently dedicate double-speed production on anything you want is going to enhance freedom of choice. I think Protoss is getting hit really hard with this. Their play will become significantly more predictable. However, their timings will probably end up getting buffed, and will probably split the different between chrono and now. Overall, I think this will probably be a loss for Protoss. ZERG Why do you keep saying that Zerg doesn't have a 1-supply unit? Seriously: what are you talking about? The Zergling, bro. The Baneling, bro. Those are two staple, and incredibly good units. You have two 1-supply units--technically, they are half supply, which is even better. It's literally a BOGO unit. I'd be completely fine with a small buff to the ling/bane if you want them to become 1 supply each : ) And you get free units, dude. Zero supply, lol! Locusts, broodlings, but more notably, the Overseer. A tanky, supply-free flying spellcaster / detector with energy-scouting spells. The only 1-supply units in the game--other than workers--are Marines and Zealots. Your half-supply units can completely wreck these units, unless they have substantial upgrade leads and high-tech support units in play. Inject larva doesn't change the way larva works. You could always just build more hatches. It is the nature of larva itself that required the balance tweakings of the Zerg units. Even if inject was completely removed (like it probably should be), you'd still have access to insane tech switches and remaxes. The Zerg nerf is going to end up being a buff. Just wait and see. TERRAN They are going to remove the MULE. Nothing will get cheaper, lol. Maybe we get some new unit abilities, or maybe call-down supply will enhance the HP of the depot, or something. It will feel like a gigantic nerf at first, until everyone has to find a way to deal with PF's at every natural, and cloaked openers become much weaker. Terran will end up having the same amount, or less scans in the long run, because there will be less OC's built. Hopefully they give detection to another unit, like the Reaper (hint, hint), to compensate for the diminished number of scans Terrans will have in the early and mid-game. PROTOSS Not by a long shot, having more freedom to get certain upgrades and actually transtion better into some composition will be great for protoss. Basically protoss is the most predictable race since they cant really change up their game. They always can do some tweaks to some builds... but once they follow a build they cant really try anything else. Im talking about macro game not cheese. Overall your post is a total fail. Nope. You don't free up choice by removing what makes getting that choice 50% faster. You're making a statement that makes absolutely no sense. Please, understand how the race operates at the top level first before you tell people who play the race they don't understand what they're doing or how the race plays.
Not trying to support his argument or anything, but you agree that not adding additional choices is not the same as removing choices, right? I think that one change not giving much distinct benefit to the gameplay of one race is not necessarily a bad idea, provided that it improves the overall game in some way to compensate for the lost mechanic. I do feel a bit iffy that it's going, but on the other hand, I'm willing to be impressed by the resulting games if they can pull it off.
|
I don't know how much of a true choice chrono was. You generally knew what you were going to chrono before the game starts and then if priorities change during gameplay there is usually a pretty 'right' answer.
|
On August 18 2015 13:37 TheWinks wrote:
I don't know how much of a true choice chrono was. You generally knew what you were going to chrono before the game starts and then if priorities change during gameplay there is usually a pretty 'right' answer.
Basically 0 since most of the time you chrono workers.
|
OP zerg suggestion is pretty horrible. Terran and Protoss units are so cost efficient that the only thing that keeps zerg in the fight is their ability to re max quickly.
In my opinion, make macro somewhat like Brood War. Throw away the babying shit like, automine workers, selecting more than 1 building at a time, set limits to how many units you can have selected at a time, do away with the f2 function, easy fog of war *forces people to actually learn maps*.
Give power back to the player who has better mechanics, that was one of the things that made brood war great.
|
On August 18 2015 13:37 TheWinks wrote:
I don't know how much of a true choice chrono was. You generally knew what you were going to chrono before the game starts and then if priorities change during gameplay there is usually a pretty 'right' answer.
With chrono you could open up with builds that looked pretty much the same and chrono different things to drastically change them. And there isn't necessarily always a correct choice. Think of a standard gateway opening in TvP which can have all the same buildings at all the same time except more chrono on the gateway, and then a twilight, and chrono on the twilight, compared to a gateway expand with chrono on probes continuously and a twilight followup. These are 2 builds that are drastically different in HotS but with no chrono become exactly the same, and blink pressure can't pack anywhere near the same punch it did before (they can't speed it up to the research time it would be with constant chrono but it can't be the speed with no chrono at all either; it needs to be somewhere in between, which means that you can't do sharp blink timings anymore.)
|
Terran benefits too much from this change, far more than the other races. Protoss got the worst end of this, Zerg is just okay. Calldown supply needs to be redone.
I really dislike the way this change effects 1 base plays, many of which were becoming very interesting in LOTV for Zerg and for Protoss. Zergs 1 base plays especially have been eliminated. Zerg is now forced to go hatch 1st... early pools are almost impossible to justify. Even an earlier Queen for defensive purposes, such as with a 16 pool > 18 hatch opener (essential in some cases), I have a hard time justifying doing this build now. Zerg, to me, has instantly become incredibly boring in the opening. Protoss has much less threat in the early game. Protoss will also be forced into fast expanding more, which is not favorable for them either; they want to maintain the early game threat. Terran is basically unchanged in the early game: Again, Terran benefited so much from this change. The threats and the choices Terran has the opening, unlike the other two races, are unchanged.
As a Zerg player, I hate how Zerg openers are being eliminated. Their opening is being channeled into something too standard and the game is becoming very bland. ... I am very disappointed.
|
On August 18 2015 15:33 crazedrat wrote:
Terran benefits too much from this change, far more than the other races. Protoss got the worst end of this, Zerg is just okay. Calldown supply needs to be redone.
I really dislike the way this change effects 1 base plays, many of which were becoming very interesting in LOTV for Zerg and for Protoss. Zergs 1 base plays especially have been eliminated. Zerg is now forced to go hatch 1st... early pools are almost impossible to justify. Even an earlier Queen for defensive purposes, such as with a 16 pool > 18 hatch opener (essential in some cases), I have a hard time justifying doing this build now. Zerg, to me, has instantly become incredibly boring in the opening. Protoss has much less threat in the early game. Protoss will also be forced into fast expanding more, which is not favorable for them either; they want to maintain the early game threat. Terran is basically unchanged in the early game: Again, Terran benefited so much from this change. The threats and the choices Terran has the opening, unlike the other two races, is unchanged. Nerf calldown supply immediately, there is no need to wait.
As a Zerg player, I hate how Zerg openers are being eliminated. Their opening is being channeled into something too standard and the game is becoming very bland. ... I am very disappointed.
Overall this is a nerf to all ins and some cheese for all races.
You will never see ling/bling in ZvZ ever again... less zerlings in early game and more roaches.
Dont know if a Terran could still do a hellbat push and if it would make any sense
Early pool wont make any sense but you will see 2 hatch before pool and a quick macro hatch.
Or you could be very greedy and abuse the fact that hatches gives you 6 supply... so you drone scout and avoid making overlords for a long time... you can drone like a mad man.
Some people will love it and other will hate it, i love that we might not die to stupid shit and macro games would be more standard.
|
Vancouver14381 Posts
Not much more to see here other than ZergLingShepherd1 making new accounts to get around his ban.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
