|
On October 24 2010 22:11 Boundless wrote:
What makes me angry is that he says "There were a lot of strategies that Terrans could go before the patch. The reaper became problematic in team games, so we adjusted the balance with a focus on reapers.
Good news: you don't have to be angry because he didn't say that. He said:
"A. There were a lot of strategies terrans could use before scouting their opponent. We were planning to decrease the number of possible strategies because we felt they were having a negative effect, and the reaper happened to be problematic in team games so we adjusted the balance with a focus on reapers"
|
On October 25 2010 07:05 Kraz.Del wrote:
Giving Psi storm the tank treatment and making them do more damaged to armor and less to light would work well. Colossus could even get 8.5 range.
do you think how bad it will affect PvZ ? no way they can do that
|
if they nerf strom lots of toss player will swtich.
|
Majority of what he says in this interview are a rehash of the Blizzcon Panel, but there are a few new little things. Thanks for the translation
|
what david kim said is fine. what bugged me was the guy sit at the left end side (dustin's right), he insisted that stim marauder is a 'botterline' necessary for countering roaches.
|
On October 25 2010 05:53 Sentenal wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2010 05:49 JoelB wrote:On October 25 2010 05:44 Sentenal wrote:
I'm confused. He says at high levels, Terran has a 6% advantage over Protoss, which makes it an "issue". He then goes on to say that they are thinking about nerfing High Templar. And since Terran has been "nerfed so much", they want to be very careful in nerfing them in the future. Does that apply to Protoss as well, seeing as how Protoss has been nerfed in every single patch since Beta started? read again ... he DID not say that "In PvT however, top-tier terrans have a 6% win rate advantage over protoss. We generally don't see a difference within 5% as a balance issue, but 6% is a little bit outside that range." "Q. Are there any plans to buff terran in the next patch? A. We are looking at PvT and High Templar's Psionic Storm. It's only been a week after patch, so we are still analyzing how it is affecting gameplay." "However, we've nerfed terran so much that if we do end up nerfing terran, we will do so very carefully. We are trying to avoid nerfing terran if we can." So which part did he actually not say? Seems to me like I'm not the one who needs to read it again.
omfg ... could you pls think before posting?
As i said ... read again and stop reading what you want to read ...
Quote from Kim:
"In the early game, Terran has an advantage with stimpack, micro, and medivac drops, but the late game protoss has a lot of powerful units such as high templars with upgrades casting storm immediately after warping in. The Phoenix+Collossus combo of NEXGenius has also been giving Terrans a hard time.
What we want isn't a game where one side has an advantage in the earlygame and the other in the lategame, but rather a game where both sides have opportunities in both the early and late game. We will continue to balance out these issues as we find them."
The early game advantage of terran in PvT is obvious as like the late game advantage of toss ... the aim is to make both phases of game play balanced and therefore changes have to be made to BOTH races ... just because Kim said they "watch" storm, doesnt mean they will just nerf it to the ground like many here think ... they just look how they can fix this problem, which is their task so pls calm down with your crying (all of you)
|
David Kim is well spoken. From his interview it gives the impression that they are on top of things. Only question i missed: There are opinions that Zerg is the hardest race to play.
|
On October 25 2010 08:34 JoelB wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2010 05:53 Sentenal wrote:On October 25 2010 05:49 JoelB wrote:On October 25 2010 05:44 Sentenal wrote:
I'm confused. He says at high levels, Terran has a 6% advantage over Protoss, which makes it an "issue". He then goes on to say that they are thinking about nerfing High Templar. And since Terran has been "nerfed so much", they want to be very careful in nerfing them in the future. Does that apply to Protoss as well, seeing as how Protoss has been nerfed in every single patch since Beta started? read again ... he DID not say that "In PvT however, top-tier terrans have a 6% win rate advantage over protoss. We generally don't see a difference within 5% as a balance issue, but 6% is a little bit outside that range." "Q. Are there any plans to buff terran in the next patch? A. We are looking at PvT and High Templar's Psionic Storm. It's only been a week after patch, so we are still analyzing how it is affecting gameplay." "However, we've nerfed terran so much that if we do end up nerfing terran, we will do so very carefully. We are trying to avoid nerfing terran if we can." So which part did he actually not say? Seems to me like I'm not the one who needs to read it again. omfg ... could you pls think before posting? As i said ... read again and stop reading what you want to read ... Quote from Kim: "In the early game, Terran has an advantage with stimpack, micro, and medivac drops, but the late game protoss has a lot of powerful units such as high templars with upgrades casting storm immediately after warping in. The Phoenix+Collossus combo of NEXGenius has also been giving Terrans a hard time. What we want isn't a game where one side has an advantage in the earlygame and the other in the lategame, but rather a game where both sides have opportunities in both the early and late game. We will continue to balance out these issues as we find them." The early game advantage of terran in PvT is obvious as like the late game advantage of toss ... the aim is to make both phases of game play balanced and therefore changes have to be made to BOTH races ... just because Kim said they "watch" storm, doesnt mean they will just nerf it to the ground like many here think ... they just look how they can fix this problem, which is their task so pls calm down with your crying (all of you)
Calm people down? First off, I think you should calm down. You implied that David Kim never said the things that I said he did... And then I proved that wrong with actual quotes.
It is a fact that he said that TvP is something like 56/44 at high levels. You said he didn't say that (he did).
Its a fact that when they asked about Terran buffs, they said they were taking a look at High Templar (strongly impling a nerf). You said he didn't say that, when he did.
Its also a fact that he said they want to be "very careful" about nerfing Terran, since they have already been "nerfed so much" (aka once in recent history).
You keep saying "you should think before posting!" and you get all mad, but if you calm down and think about it, it isn't me that needs to "think before posting". I'm not sitting here making things up that David Kim did and didn't say.
|
On October 25 2010 08:34 JoelB wrote:
just because Kim said they "watch" storm, doesnt mean they will just nerf it to the ground like many here think ... they just look how they can fix this problem, which is their task so pls calm down with your crying (all of you)
the problem that people have with that interview is the fact that Mr. Kim said that they are looking at Storms, implying a nerf, when Colossus allready outclass Templars in the actualy game in most areas.
then going on and saying that Terrans where nerfed often and that they do not wish to nerf them further..
the interview is problematic because, yet an other, toss nerf is the only nerf that is directly talked about.. yet.. toss show very very poor performance across all tournaments.
|
About the reaper change, I don't think the explanation in this article does the actual reasoning justice. I'm not sure if it is the translation or the original post on PlayXP but I don't think that is exactly what he said.
From what I read previous to this thread, the reaper change was made specifically for the pro level but while keeping other levels and match types (team games) in mind. The way I understood it was that they wanted to cut down the number of possible strategies Terrans could use in the early game, and they found reaper openings to be the most destructive to 1v1 balance. Also, reaper/ling openings in 2v2 games were obviously imbalanced and needed to be nerfed because they were actually ruining team games.
Basically the decision was made in order to fix multiple different problems with only one change, which I think is a good idea. However, now that reapers have become pretty much obsolete early game I think some sort of buff or design change is required to make them a viable unit in 1v1. It is possible that they may have some unexplored uses (such as mid-late game building sniping) so if changes do come they will probably be in a while, but at least now they aren't being destructive to games.
|
On October 25 2010 07:09 oZii wrote:
Isn't that how the races are meant to be played though? Zerg units are weak there for they are suppose to be macro-based as said in the open panel at blizzcon. Protoss has more expensive units and unit composition is key to protoss early game 1 or 2 more zealots or stalker depending on situation can sometimes spell doom for Protoss. Protoss also usually when committing to a given tech path usually has to expo early-mid just to switch to another tech path. Terran is suppose to be the adaptable race. So with protoss having such expensive units they should have powerful late game units. I think terrans refuse to go anything other than MMM because thats what they see most of the time in tournaments and such. Even with storm they toss army is immoble compared to Terrans and you arent getting Storm on 1 base. You have to expand which can sometimes be hard to do as you start spreading your army thin thats when drops come into play.
As Gretorp said on SoTG many of the Terran openings he doesn't like because they are gimmicky and he prefers a more Macro based style. So he has been going 2 rax FE. While he didn't agree with the way they nerfed terran he is excited about the possiblilties for more solid builds that are more macro based. Thats what I think terrans need to see MMM is like toss 4 gate its the bread and butter build that they can always fall back on in most cases. Zerg has mutaling as there bread and butter. These builds will never die out never go anywhere unless blizzard makes a drastic change to all races. Terrans need someone to come with a very nice innovative build just as zerg had Fruitdealer and idrA. Toss needs the samething more innovative build biggest innovator right now I would say is kiwikaki. For terran I dont who is really innovative outside of TLO who is now zerg.
I think that when the game first came out and everyone was upset at the strength of MMM most people focused on beating it people still hate facing MMM most races have figured how to deal with it. I mean zergs mutaling baneling isn't even Tier 3 and really handles MMM well.
I don't see why Terrans can't go mech+ghosts or anything +ghosts its just 1 extra building and a tech lab which is pretty standard anyway.
Let me tell you why people don't go mech. It is because there are things called immortals, chargelots and blinks. Mech's strength lies with the siege tanks with the nerf on light units damage and the new abilities Protoss has in SC2, going mech in Protoss is not a wise choice. As for complaining about the lack of innovative: how about think a little before you post? Yea people try to be creative but this is not art where a brush and a sheet of canvas gave you limitless possibilities. Terrans are bound by the designs of the game. If mech is not effective then it is not effective. No player can do anything to change that.
|
thx for translation. very interesting information.
|
i really hope they handle psi storm correctly. there should be a very nice micro dynamic between ghosts and templar imo. that is really where i want to see that match up go:
viking vs collosus
ghost vs templar
really a good nerf might be to decrease feedback range so ghosts have a better shot at emping. similarly a decrease in psi storm range but an increase in splash might be good.
|
My thoughts, I end up in quite a few late games TvP as T at the 1300 level.
I have succeeded in getting an equal number of cloaked ghosts into tosses army. I then proceed to EMP each and every one of the HT's (standing on their own behind the army, toss is no dummy), then immediately attack. As I hit the EMP's, he started warping in more HT's, who were ready as my army hit to storm. Nothing I could do but cry.
I have started incorporating heavy banshee play. I find they work well, even against HT's- the trick is to not clump them, and to cloak even when it's not needed, to keep the energy as low as possible to stop feedback.
I'm going to agree with four of the things mentioned- Banshees are powerful, but not IMBA, SCV's repairing needs to be looked at (Which should fix all the PF QQing), Terran stim is very powerful earlygame, but T needs more late game options. I'd love to see siege tanks come back.
|
Great. IT sounds like they're going to nerf Toss again. That's going to make it balanced. So storm will be worthless in both matchups. Lovely.
Toss is going to win jack after that next set of nerfs. Can't understand the lategame whining about Toss. Charge lots actually make zealots do somethign rather than be simple damage spunges. Blink allows you to maneuver away from Concussion Marauders. Colli/Templar are necessary or marine medivac troops will melt any number of Gateway units. Mass viking and a few ghosts can completely shutdown any mass damage dealers, not to mention 13 range tanks (remember flash manually sniping templar with tanks? gosu yes?). We're not even talking about a flying dark swarm either.
Would like to see tank damage raised up again though. I can understand terran complaints that mech is completely worthless V toss atleast.
Bleh. Was hoping we'd see DTs get merged with the archives too. Gonna watch Sangho and genius closely this season.
Thanks for the translation ^___^
|
On October 24 2010 22:27 Boundless wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2010 22:13 AcrossFiveJulys wrote:On October 24 2010 22:11 Boundless wrote:
What makes me angry is that he says "There were a lot of strategies that Terrans could go before the patch. The reaper became problematic in team games, so we adjusted the balance with a focus on reapers. In the case of barracks before depot, there were a lot of games that ended before it was even scouted. It didn't happen very often on the pro level, but it was becoming a problem in lower tier play. The main focus is the pro level, but our ultimate goal is for players of all levels to be able to play a fair and balanced game. Barracks first builds were too strong in that regard and created a lot of problems in low level play, which is why we made the adjustments."
If your main focus is the PRO level, and you make adjustments based on LOW level data, then they will create new imbalances when they propagate up to the PRO level. Does anyone else see this huge glaring problem with their balance philosophy, or is it just me?
Honestly, if your input on the supply depot before barracks issue comes from random bronze league noobs playing 4v4's and saying "OMG LETS BUILD MASS VOIDRAYS LOLOLOL KTHXBAI", you're clearly going to get bad balance when professionals play your changes. I have a feeling an order came from the top to do this, and even though David Kim did not like it, he was forced to go along with it. That's very possible. I just think it's fundamentally wrong to implement balance changes based on the games of DERP HERP BANELING players when there are professionals playing your game for prizes of 100 000 000 KRW, which is about 87 000 USD.
95-97% of SC2 sales comes from DERP HERP Baneling players. Without them, there would be no sponsors, no GSL, no $ 87,000. Blizzard cant ignore these guys man, they keep SC2 afloat, the are they target audience for the sponsors. /shrugs.
Eventually and with time the community will get more solid and experienced. Games been out a couple months.
|
Q. Are there any plans to buff terran in the next patch?
A. We are looking at PvT and High Templar's Psionic Storm. It's only been a week after patch, so we are still analyzing how it is affecting gameplay.
Best thing i read all week tbh. storm has been raping by *** in any Tvp games that go past 15 min. Although im not sure what they can do to nerf storm but not rape P..
|
On October 25 2010 10:00 positron. wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2010 07:09 oZii wrote:
Isn't that how the races are meant to be played though? Zerg units are weak there for they are suppose to be macro-based as said in the open panel at blizzcon. Protoss has more expensive units and unit composition is key to protoss early game 1 or 2 more zealots or stalker depending on situation can sometimes spell doom for Protoss. Protoss also usually when committing to a given tech path usually has to expo early-mid just to switch to another tech path. Terran is suppose to be the adaptable race. So with protoss having such expensive units they should have powerful late game units. I think terrans refuse to go anything other than MMM because thats what they see most of the time in tournaments and such. Even with storm they toss army is immoble compared to Terrans and you arent getting Storm on 1 base. You have to expand which can sometimes be hard to do as you start spreading your army thin thats when drops come into play.
As Gretorp said on SoTG many of the Terran openings he doesn't like because they are gimmicky and he prefers a more Macro based style. So he has been going 2 rax FE. While he didn't agree with the way they nerfed terran he is excited about the possiblilties for more solid builds that are more macro based. Thats what I think terrans need to see MMM is like toss 4 gate its the bread and butter build that they can always fall back on in most cases. Zerg has mutaling as there bread and butter. These builds will never die out never go anywhere unless blizzard makes a drastic change to all races. Terrans need someone to come with a very nice innovative build just as zerg had Fruitdealer and idrA. Toss needs the samething more innovative build biggest innovator right now I would say is kiwikaki. For terran I dont who is really innovative outside of TLO who is now zerg.
I think that when the game first came out and everyone was upset at the strength of MMM most people focused on beating it people still hate facing MMM most races have figured how to deal with it. I mean zergs mutaling baneling isn't even Tier 3 and really handles MMM well.
I don't see why Terrans can't go mech+ghosts or anything +ghosts its just 1 extra building and a tech lab which is pretty standard anyway. Let me tell you why people don't go mech. It is because there are things called immortals, chargelots and blinks. Mech's strength lies with the siege tanks with the nerf on light units damage and the new abilities Protoss has in SC2, going mech in Protoss is not a wise choice. As for complaining about the lack of innovative: how about think a little before you post? Yea people try to be creative but this is not art where a brush and a sheet of canvas gave you limitless possibilities. Terrans are bound by the designs of the game. If mech is not effective then it is not effective. No player can do anything to change that.
Ok for the first part I bolded from your quote Yes there is this thing called immortals which are slow there is also this thing called a SENSOR TOWER(Another tool not utilized by terran) so when the slow protoss army is moving out to engage terran can rely on this power of Seige tanks and be prepared.
Senario Terran Scans(no need to bring up mules) cause terrans always have atleast 1 scan. Sees robo still can go mech + ghosts make tanks think of unit comp like a toss player has to and not be so maurder heavy. Sensor tower then seige prepare ghosts for push by cloaking emp (theorycrafting yes but best way I can explain).
Hell you could make a thor and have some autorepair scv's and beat a immortal. Implying that 1 unit shuts down a entire tech tree is the same way as thinking storm automatically shuts down bio but terrans still go bio anyway but stills seem to win do better in tournaments and from the stats posted at Blizzcon have a better W/L ratio against Toss based on Diamond in Korea almost I believe the ratio was something like 52/46, your thinking 1 for 1 instead of unit composition. If storm is raping the bio that hard then maybe you have to mix it up a little which is easier for terran than it is for toss.
Early Colossus play relied on mostly stalkers and colossus / terran starts going vikings to counter
many tosses adjusted by using the colossus advantage to expand and added in a few phoenix to protect/tank for colossus. So there you have a unit that has always been there but no one really thought they could use it in that manner. Its the same concept.
The design part
Sensor tower for example was designed with a purpose and its just maybe possible it wasnt so that terrans can stim their bio but instead siege there tanks. Your also implying that the race is completely figured out and how to play it which just isn't the case this early in the games life.
|
I really like the way they are handling balancing. I'm hoping to see some better PvT for sure. From my experiences, storm is strong, but at the same time, it's the only option Protoss has. This creates a very narrow matchup. Whatever Terran goes, I just go storm. I hope to see different protoss strategies becoming more viable, and giving terrans a better way to deal with storms. That way we have both sides being able to diversify their play.
|
On October 24 2010 22:11 Boundless wrote:
What makes me angry is that he says "There were a lot of strategies that Terrans could go before the patch. The reaper became problematic in team games, so we adjusted the balance with a focus on reapers. In the case of barracks before depot, there were a lot of games that ended before it was even scouted. It didn't happen very often on the pro level, but it was becoming a problem in lower tier play. The main focus is the pro level, but our ultimate goal is for players of all levels to be able to play a fair and balanced game. Barracks first builds were too strong in that regard and created a lot of problems in low level play, which is why we made the adjustments."
If your main focus is the PRO level, and you make adjustments based on LOW level data, then they will create new imbalances when they propagate up to the PRO level. Does anyone else see this huge glaring problem with their balance philosophy, or is it just me?
Honestly, if your input on the supply depot before barracks issue comes from random bronze league noobs playing 4v4's and saying "OMG LETS BUILD MASS VOIDRAYS LOLOLOL KTHXBAI", you're clearly going to get bad balance when professionals play your changes.
It's just you. His answer makes complete sense, unless you're a Terran player...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
