|
I was asked to translate this by someone.
That sounds as though i was doing them a favor but i know i did it cuz i wanted to. So do you, now. Here's hoping nobody beat me to it.
The original PlayXP post can be found here: http://www.playxp.com/sc2/news/view.php?article_id=2229931
It contains some good information, but it's not the best of writing because neither was the original post in Korean. The grammar nazi inside me was squirming. good thing i have him locked up in chains. I kept it close to the original as was conveniently possible, and made edits where necessary. enjoy 
Translation:
First, I'll explain how we balance the game. We use a lot of resources.
1. Community Feedback
Pros: All players may participate.
Cons: Issues can become exaggerated (opinion swings).
2. Progamer Feedback
Because of the skill level of Korean pros, we try to pay a lot of attention to this. We observe focusing our attention on a specific player. Also, we look at a lot of tournament replays. But the fact that progamers play only one race can be a drawback.
3. Tournaments
Many people tend to focus on the results, but we try to focus on the process (of the game) instead. The fact that FruidDealer won does not necessarily mean Zerg is strong, as the fact there was a high ratio of Protoss doesn't necessarily mean Protoss is strong. We focus on the content of the games. But since there is a range in skill depending on brackets and placement, it's difficult to get accurate [information].
4. Excel Statistics
We record the timings of a specific race and look at the statistics. However, it's hard to see certain game elements such as unit size and micro.
5. Battle Tester
We have a tool that lets us create unit mixes that lets us pit armies of corresponding cost against each other. For example, we can test how a mix of Roaches, Hydras, and Ultras fares against certain Protoss unit combinations. But we cannot know the timings. A Roach/Hydra combo with 5 Roachs or 10 Roaches will have different timings in-game, but we cannot know this with this tool.
6. Statistics by Race/Win:Lose Ratios in Matchups
In North America, we feel that ZvT/ZvP are balanced. Protoss seems to be favored in PvT with a 60% win percentage.
The reason why Korea is so important is the fact that there are a lot of gosu gamers in Korea. Also, strategies tend to be developed first in Korea. Even in beta, Korean zergs were sweeping the floor in ZvP with a 70% win rate, while in NA/Europe, the opposite was true (70% win rate for toss).
When we analyzed the games, we learned that Korean Zergs' strategy was different. They were easily defeating protoss with a spine crawler+mutalisk combo, and this strategy was never used in NA. After 1~2 weeks, NA players started copying the strategy. By the end of the second week, the Win rates became the same as in Korea, and we were able to make our decisions regarding ZvP balance.
ZvP balance is still good. 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. As in the past, Terran may become more powerful once Korean strategies make their way to other regions. We are keeping an eye on it at the moment.
Also, if we look at the case of PvT, we've never before had pros send us such varying feedback. When we asked 5 pros for feedback, MakaPrime said PvT was balanced, whereas 2 others said Protoss could never win, and the remaining 2 thought Terran could never win. Normally, 70-80% of pro gamers give us the same opinion when asked for feedback. This time, the opinions are so varied that we are wondering if it's an inherent issue with TvP.
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.
Lately we've been working to accuarately analyze balance in TvP. We don't think there is an issue with stimpack, but we are looking into it closely in order to accurately understand the issues at hand.
Q. There are opinions that Carriers and Mothership are not being used often
A. Foreign gosus are making good use of them in PvT. We do not think they are useless. We don't think all units need to be seen at frequently in top-tier play. Even if we see battle cruisers in only 1 match out of 100, we don't think this in itself is the problem. A lot of the focus with StarCraft II is about eSports, but we are making a game for all gamers. But if gosu players come up with new strategies utilizing these units, we expect it would be very fun to watch.
Q. Some people are disappointed at how short the matches are
A. We think this is a problem with the maps. StarCraft 1 (probably typo, means SC2) was developed with to balance the game through the maps. We had match duration for broadcasting in mind, but we made the maps diverse for Ladder play so that a player would, in, say, 10 games, get to play a vareity of games, such as getting rushed early, playing 10 minute games and 40 minute games and so on. I think it would be a good idea for the hosts of the tournaments to make maps of their own. When you're on the ladder, however, you should inevitably get a variety of matches.
Q. Is balance the reason why there are no island maps in SC2?
A. You don't get fun games on island maps. That, and we intentionally included no island maps because it's so early after launch. If there are new units in the expansions that allow island maps to be fun (**to watch, probably) we will release island maps later.
Q. There are a lot of opinions regarding the slow movement speeds of Hydralisks.
A. This was a design choice. If there was a unit that was strong against both air and ground, the other units would inevitably be used less. That is why there was a strong tendency for players to mass hydras in StarCraft 1. We want units with strengths to also have weaknesses. Without being damaged by splash, hydras reign supreme on creep, but their slow speed becomes their weakness off creep.
Q. Do you only pay attention to feedback from within [South Korea]?
A. We take feedback from gosu players everyewhere.
Q. There are opinions that the balance patches (**maybe he means changes) happened too abruptly
A. In this patch, it was just the Roach range getting increased by 1, but we feel that balance has improved. We will be making balance changes with smaller changes in the future.
Q. Do you take progamer feedback on a regular basis?
A. We ask pros for feedback when a few weeks have passed since a patch, we feel the strategies have stabilized, or special situations arise. A while ago, protoss could do a timing push against terran with zealots, sentries, and void rays. We ask pros for feedback when there are issues like this.
Q. Is there a difference between Korean and foreign progamer feedback?
A. Korean players come up with strong, new strategies. There are times when foreign players fall behind, but there is no big difference in opinion worldwide. Also, the feedback from the average player is pretty similar worldwide. Korean players give a lot of feedback regarding Marauders, and so do the foreign players. Same goes for void rays. There is no huge gap at the community level.
Q. There are opinions that the variety in choice of strategies for Terran have decreased due to the recent nerf
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. 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.
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.
Q. Did you schedule the patch to go with GSL?
A. We try to release patches in time for tournaments. Because GSL is the largest, we try to release them in time for GSL. We have plans to create a tournament server unaffected by balance or bugs, but I don't know when it will actually be happening.
Q. Some people say repair is imba
A. We are looking into it, but we haven't made any decisions. We are looking into ways of decreasing the size of Thors further, since repairing them is so effective, or making the AI target repairing scvs with priority in order to kill them more easily. There are no decisions yet, we are keeping on eye on it.
Q. I would like to ask you for your opinions regarding the banshees
A. We're getting a lot of feedback regarding banshees. We don't think it's overpowered at this point in time, and we will make decisions in 1~2 weeks after discussion. 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.
Q. We are seeing a decrease in cheesy play?
A. We aren't looking to remove cheese. There are cannon rushes and gateway rushes, but we are trying to patch cheeses that are too strong. But again, we are not trying to remove them altogether.
|
Looks damn good, he answers quite a few things people keep whining about.
|
excellent interview and translation! thanks a lot.
and actually blizzard is very on the ball with a lot of things i feel. at least they are aware of the various concerns on all levels.
must be hard to balance the game when a lot of pros have so many differing opinions.
|
This is pretty good thanks.
There is no problem with Psionic Storm terran has the counter which is ghosts but for some reason they dont use that often.
|
Awesome.
I don't know why anyone is opposed to 'cheese'. I don't even know why it's called cheese, everything within a game is a valid strat.
Why must matches be 'GL 20 MINS NO RUSH K?'?
|
gonna be so sad if/when psionic storm is nerfed again.... just recently switching over to it instead of colossus ^^
|
Good interview. Thanks for translating.
|
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.
|
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.
Lately we've been working to accuarately analyze balance in TvP. We don't think there is an issue with stimpack, but we are looking into it closely in order to accurately understand the issues at hand.
Spot on, David Kim. Very pleased to find out he exactly understands the current TvP issue. Although a similar issue exists in TvZ, it's much worse in TvP,
|
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.
|
I like how they focus on both the pros and the average gamer. Also on team games. Since the reaper nerf 2v2 has become a lot more fun
|
Q. Some people are disappointed at how short the matches are
A. We think this is a problem with the maps. StarCraft 1 (probably typo, means SC2) was developed with to balance the game through the maps. We had match duration for broadcasting in mind, but we made the maps diverse for Ladder play so that a player would, in, say, 10 games, get to play a vareity of games, such as getting rushed early, playing 10 minute games and 40 minute games and so on. I think it would be a good idea for the hosts of the tournaments to make maps of their own. When you're on the ladder, however, you should inevitably get a variety of matches.
Hear that tourney organizers?
|
This gives me the idea that Blizzard has no idea what to do. :|
|
I am glad they are fixing that auto-repair crap. Because last night I had a timed push marine-marauder- 6 hellions with +-10 scvs swarming around the hellions. I failed a bit with my baneling timing as they came 6 secs too late. But it is pretty gay that scv's prevent surround.
|
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.
That's a funny Q and A. He asks about buffing terran and he replies about nerfing protoss :O
|
On October 24 2010 22:14 susySquark wrote:Show nested quote +Q. Some people are disappointed at how short the matches are
A. We think this is a problem with the maps. StarCraft 1 (probably typo, means SC2) was developed with to balance the game through the maps. We had match duration for broadcasting in mind, but we made the maps diverse for Ladder play so that a player would, in, say, 10 games, get to play a vareity of games, such as getting rushed early, playing 10 minute games and 40 minute games and so on. I think it would be a good idea for the hosts of the tournaments to make maps of their own. When you're on the ladder, however, you should inevitably get a variety of matches. Hear that tourney organizers?
My god, time for GomTV to hire some damn map designers.
|
Q. We are seeing a decrease in cheesy play?
A. We aren't looking to remove cheese. There are cannon rushes and gateway rushes, but we are trying to patch cheeses that are too strong. But again, we are not trying to remove them altogether.
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.
Are you serious? That is just a retarded change. Lower levels need to nerd up like they had to in BW.
|
best random player in the world for sure. he understands alot and im glad hes on the balancing team.
|
On October 24 2010 22:08 ArghUScaredMe wrote:
Awesome.
I don't know why anyone is opposed to 'cheese'. I don't even know why it's called cheese, everything within a game is a valid strat.
Why must matches be 'GL 20 MINS NO RUSH K?'?
Read the post. No one is opposed to cheese. Kim only said that "we are trying to patch cheeses that are too strong"
too strong
understand?
|
good interview, i disagree with some point and agree with others.
but it is going to be fun to see if the "game is fine, l2p"-idiots finaly stop it and realize that the game is not fine.
|
On October 24 2010 22:20 frucisky wrote:
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.
That's a funny Q and A. He asks about buffing terran and he replies about nerfing protoss :O
yeah... i have a feeling some of it was put out of context, because of how non sequitur some responses are..
|
On October 24 2010 22:06 oZii wrote:
This is pretty good thanks.
There is no problem with Psionic Storm terran has the counter which is ghosts but for some reason they dont use that often.
I like when people think they know how to balance game better than Blizzard. Example:
Immortals beat roaches, therefore it's imba
Stalkers can blink, therefore it's imba
Marauders are too good, therefore it's imba
Ghosts can EMP HTS, therefore t's imba
That's not how it works
|
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.
"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."
read the OP carefully.
|
On October 24 2010 22:13 AcrossFiveJulys wrote:Show nested quote +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.
To me, balance changes for bad players should be in a separate system. For example, if you are playing in the Bronze - Gold Leagues, maybe units have different statistics. Sure, you can argue consistency and implementation all you want, but at some point they're going to have to do this to balance the game at all levels of play. Some people are better, and thus require different balance.
|
David Kim is the guy who made this game into a fairly balanced and interesting one. Good job man..
|
Nice answers but I dont like the one were he said that they made it supply barracks just because noobs couldnt handle it in the lower levels. Thats just not the right way to do it. Kinda gives a huge advantage to those that are good at defending early barracks(They dont have to worry about it at all, while terran still has to worry about proxy gateways etc)
|
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.
They have already said they balance the game first and foremost from top tier players. But if there is an issue in low level play, they need to look into it and possibly fix it because yes, low level tiers have still BOUGHT the game and Blizzard needs to satisfy ALL customers. The important thing is that they will not do anything that will directly imbalance the game for top tier players. They took out Barracks first builds to stop imbalances in the low level play, but at the same time, it doesn't severely affect top level play. In some ways, it helps balance as the mentioned, due to limiting the insane amount of Terran openings there are before the other races can scout them.
I don't think they should nerf High Templar anymore. It's already pretty nerfed. If they nerf it more, the whole mechanic of it will be lost. Even Dustin Browder said in a panel that all the races should have "overpowered" mechanics, that balance each other out. They should try to find some other way.
|
Interesting, do they think psyonic storm is too strong or too weak..?
|
Were tournament maps used as ladder maps in SC1? It seems a little awkward in practice to separate the two because a lot of pros still ladder a ton right now, and if there were separate tourny maps from laddder maps, then they would all be forced into custom games for any meaningful practice.
|
On October 24 2010 22:25 AyJay wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2010 22:06 oZii wrote:
This is pretty good thanks.
There is no problem with Psionic Storm terran has the counter which is ghosts but for some reason they dont use that often. I like when people think they know how to balance game better than Blizzard. Example: Immortals beat roaches, therefore it's imba Stalkers can blink, therefore it's imba Marauders are too good, therefore it's imba Ghosts can EMP HTS, therefore t's imba That's not how it works
I wasn't saying it was This beats that exactly. Im saying its a option and a underused one which many of the problems have come in the first place. Phoenix sux, Liquid Tyler lifts mineral lines oh phoenix are pretty good. I didn't say Ghosts beat HTS either because they can get fried by storm just like marines. Its a option and that has to be looked at also what options does the race have to stop this before going in and tinkering I know its not as simple as this beats that. Ignoring the fact that Ghosts with emp which has no costs to upgrade to get is kind of a bad way to look at it. Funny how you point out my post even though many ppl don't agree with them balancing for lower leagues or 2v2 and I said nothing about that at all. I also didnt say Ghosts are IMBA just that they have a counter to HTS. We aren't talking about units that go head to head because 1 ghosts beats 200 HT's in a straight up fight. Now thats IMBA lol
|
Sounds about right. Especially about PvT issues.
Don't really understand how he downplayed the roach buff as if it was a minor thing. It was a huge (over the top IMO) buff.
|
On October 24 2010 22:36 Tachion wrote:
Were tournament maps used as ladder maps in SC1? It seems a little awkward in practice to separate the two because a lot of pros still ladder a ton right now, and if there were separate tourny maps from laddder maps, then they would all be forced into custom games for any meaningful practice.
None of Blizzard SC1 maps were used in tournaments except for The Lost Temple, I'm pretty sure. If others ever were, it was before sc1 got big or weren't used very much. The tourneys happen on the ladder maps in SC2 because this time, they're actually good lolol. I agree with what you are saying though, and what with the announcements for the leagues above diamond, I'm fairly certain Blizzard will try and keep the pros on the ladder, which they'll probably do by continuing to release new and interesting ladder maps.
That's my take on it
|
On October 24 2010 22:31 jamvng wrote:Show nested quote +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. They have already said they balance the game first and foremost from top tier players. But if there is an issue in low level play, they need to look into it and possibly fix it because yes, low level tiers have still BOUGHT the game and Blizzard needs to satisfy ALL customers. The important thing is that they will not do anything that will directly imbalance the game for top tier players. They took out Barracks first builds to stop imbalances in the low level play, but at the same time, it doesn't severely affect top level play. In some ways, it helps balance as the mentioned, due to limiting the insane amount of Terran openings there are before the other races can scout them. I don't think they should nerf High Templar anymore. It's already pretty nerfed. If they nerf it more, the whole mechanic of it will be lost. Even Dustin Browder said in a panel that all the races should have "overpowered" mechanics, that balance each other out. They should try to find some other way.
This is exactly the problem. Blizzard is making balance changes based on low level data and imposing the same restrictions on professionals. I have no problem with trying to make the game balanced at all levels, but if you are going to hit something with the nerf bat because bronze league noobs can't handle it, at least attempt to realize the effects this will have at the professional level. Imagine changing the offside rule in football to make amateur leagues more fun and exciting, but also making the Premiership play under the same rules. There would be riots in England.
I honestly believe that if you give it a year or so, there will be separate balance conditions for Korean pros. These separate leagues or ladders didn't exist in BW, because there wasn't an amateur market to make the development of such infrastructure profitable. However, SC2 is growing so rapidly and the professional scene is becoming so huge that I think having separate conditions would be very lucrative.
Now you can nerf Reapers all you want in the Bronze 2v2 ladder, without having to impose contrived and silly restrictions like Supply Depot before Barracks onto professional players.
|
I don't get the Roach hate currently. To me they feel like marauders or stalkers now and not just a unit you get if you can be bothered. They increased the range. They have similar HP to stalkers and mauraders, smaller range, do a little more damage. Seems like a good balance between the 3 units.. mauraders can still kite them with concuss or stim.. and mauraders do + to armoured.
|
Lol - another P nerf, really??? Screwing up the SC2 templars further is just so wrong...
|
On October 24 2010 22:52 citi.zen wrote:
Lol - another P nerf, really??? Screwing up the SC2 templars further is just so wrong...
Oh come on, don't post like this is you aren't going to at least voice out WHY you think Protoss should have instant storms. Right now P can pretty much dial a storm and they're already so cost effective against bioball, a nerf is going to help terran a little in the lategame.
|
I don't get the whining about lower level balance. You know, some people actually play the game, instead of just watching GSL. A strategy being removed is unfortunate and not desirable, but when team games are broken and borderline one-dimensional it might be a small price to pay.
|
5th question from bottom that would be so lame on blizzards part terran have a awsome counter which is ghost's emp, emp has range 9+2 splash which outranges feedback/storm and has an added benefit of of instagibbing most toss units as it takes away 100 shield as well.
Ghost is a tier 1.5 unit while HT is tier 3 so wtf blizzard if u nerf storm u ought to nerf ghost/emp big time to. + to this ghosts to can insta emp with +ene upgrade researched but it seems that people seem to forget HTs need both storm+amulet researched and cant insta storm without amulet.
edit in addition to this the no of things that could be feedbacked was reduced in last patch by 2 so HTs have already recieved a nerf.
|
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.
Speedlings/Speedreapers in 2v2 was broken to the point that any other race/unit combo was just not an option, it was horrible.
Regardless of what your design philosophy is - you can't just completely ignore the broken aspects of the game that doesn't align with your ultimate goal.
I'm sure they had many ways of nerfing the speedlings/reaper combo and this was the one the impacted the pro game the least.
|
No mention of ZvT where Zerg plays too defensively and Terran cannot keep with Zerg macro ? Ugh .. alright.
|
So glad to see him saying that tournament organizers in Korea should use their own maps!
|
On October 24 2010 23:08 Televiros wrote:
5th question from bottom that would be so lame on blizzards part terran have a awsome counter which is ghost's emp, emp has range 9+2 splash which outranges feedback/storm and has an added benefit of of instagibbing most toss units as it takes away 100 shield as well.
Ghost is a tier 1.5 unit while HT is tier 3 so wtf blizzard if u nerf storm u ought to nerf ghost/emp big time to. + to this ghosts to can insta emp with +ene upgrade researched but it seems that people seem to forget HTs need both storm+amulet researched and cant insta storm without amulet.
edit in addition to this the no of things that could be feedbacked was reduced in last patch by 2 so HTs have already recieved a nerf.
Its not as black and white as you make it. You're looking at it from a emp vs ht, But you gotta consider others units such as colossus which are in the mix. Or the fact hts can be warped it at will while ghosts take agges to build.
|
On October 24 2010 23:08 Televiros wrote:
5th question from bottom that would be so lame on blizzards part terran have a awsome counter which is ghost's emp, emp has range 9+2 splash which outranges feedback/storm and has an added benefit of of instagibbing most toss units as it takes away 100 shield as well.
Ghost is a tier 1.5 unit while HT is tier 3 so wtf blizzard if u nerf storm u ought to nerf ghost/emp big time to. + to this ghosts to can insta emp with +ene upgrade researched but it seems that people seem to forget HTs need both storm+amulet researched and cant insta storm without amulet.
edit in addition to this the no of things that could be feedbacked was reduced in last patch by 2 so HTs have already recieved a nerf.
The issue is that terrran is basically forced to go MMM + vikings the entire game because tanks and bcs are not worth it anymore since their nerfs. Protoss HT, however, just absolutely demolish that combination. Even with a lot of ghosts mixed in, you can't possibly hope to EMP more than half of the templar (if you put ghosts in front of your army, they get fried by colossus). 5 storms on your army = badly lost battle. It gets especially bad because protoss can warp in templar and cast a storm immediately. Are you saying terran should be able to react instantly and have enough energy to constantly EMP almost every templar that gets warped in? EMP is not a counter to templar; it merely works as a mitigation.
I personally hate this problem so much that I refuse to go MMM in TvP and instead incorporate a banshee heavy army. But I always feel like toss has the upper hand past the early/midgame in this matchup.
|
I don't mind a nerf to HT if they atleast make them easier to get. Right now they hardly get any play because tech through Twilight Council -> Templar Archives -> Psy Storm -> Amulet takes so frikkin' long just to have a unit that can do something.
|
On October 24 2010 22:55 GenericTerranPlayer wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2010 22:52 citi.zen wrote:
Lol - another P nerf, really??? Screwing up the SC2 templars further is just so wrong... Oh come on, don't post like this is you aren't going to at least voice out WHY you think Protoss should have instant storms. Right now P can pretty much dial a storm and they're already so cost effective against bioball, a nerf is going to help terran a little in the lategame.
I guess I'm not sure T needs the help. One issue late game is that stalkers are very weak thanks to only getting +1 per weapon upgrade (as opposed to marauders/roaches/etc.). This makes it hard for the P to have a versatile late game army - a niche tempalrs must continue to help fill. T has the tools to handle storm just fine: tanks out-range templars, ghosts make them useless in a cost effective manner, and scans + sentry towers let you keep tabs on them. Heck, even stim-moving your units out of the way works OK. A nerf would be pretty bad in PvZ as well.
|
On October 24 2010 23:28 Logros wrote:
I don't mind a nerf to HT if they atleast make them easier to get. Right now they hardly get any play because tech through Twilight Council -> Templar Archives -> Psy Storm -> Amulet takes so frikkin' long just to have a unit that can do something.
well... high templars, as a unit, are kind of at the top tier. even in brood war, it was Citadel -> Archives -> Storm, and i'm pretty certain the amulet upgrade did nothing but to boost their max energy. kind of like going carriers, you need a build with high templars in the plan.
|
On October 24 2010 22:55 GenericTerranPlayer wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2010 22:52 citi.zen wrote:
Lol - another P nerf, really??? Screwing up the SC2 templars further is just so wrong... Oh come on, don't post like this is you aren't going to at least voice out WHY you think Protoss should have instant storms. Right now P can pretty much dial a storm and they're already so cost effective against bioball, a nerf is going to help terran a little in the lategame.
wow you really ARE a genericterranplayer :D
Seriously though lategame storm is ridiculous vs T
|
On October 24 2010 23:40 TheAntZ wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2010 22:55 GenericTerranPlayer wrote:On October 24 2010 22:52 citi.zen wrote:
Lol - another P nerf, really??? Screwing up the SC2 templars further is just so wrong... Oh come on, don't post like this is you aren't going to at least voice out WHY you think Protoss should have instant storms. Right now P can pretty much dial a storm and they're already so cost effective against bioball, a nerf is going to help terran a little in the lategame. wow you really ARE a genericterranplayer :D Seriously though lategame storm is ridiculous vs T
In Brood War storms made bio unviable against protoss in late-game. The fact terran still goes MMM in late-game against protoss, even despite storms, maybe says more about their other options.
|
Looks like david Kim wants to nerf storm next patch.
|
Im glad to see that david kim understands the issues in matchups and is patching things as they become obviously OP, but but at the same time is treading lightly with borderline OP things and making sure that matchups go smoothly.
|
Man now this was a great interview.
I agree with him about almost everything.
Dont you dare nerfing storm without nerfing marauders though
Nerfing storm could also make it really shitty in PvZ
|
Are you kidding me? They say terran has a slight adventage and then they want to nerf protoss?? WTF?
And anyone who says HT´s are overpowered just never played protoss - you cant go templar before colossus, if terran attacks you before you have the HT´s or before they have enough energy you´re just DEAD and if you don´t have 10 templar´s and you can´t have them without having 3 bases, the terran can just EMP all your HT´s and then your also dead...and all the terran´s i´m playing again aren´t using any ghosts in the very late game and if terran is too bad to just make ghosts... it´s not a balance problem...and what´s with warping in templars and doing storms immeditly...if you don´t have enough gateway units these templars dont help you in just any way
and yes as they say terran 6% win adventage
and just ask all the protoss in the middle of diamond league like 1500-1800 points...they are all just losing so bad against terran, because terran is just so much easier to play and you can do way more mistakes than the protoss...
just play PvT as protoss and then look what you say over this matchup
and sorry i know my english isn´t the best
|
Do i understand this right they have plans (not concrets but they looking) to nerf storm from high templars ?
after feedback is so less useless then before the last patch that would be a huge nerf for HT i think
i think perhaps the solution is that terran just go more metal in the end of a game like in sc1 they could also not go bio because of the storms.
but with such a strong spell like emp i think its fine as it is
|
David Kim is like the only good guy I know of at Blizzard. Hopefully S2 or something can recruit him. He must have a hard job defending his position vs everyone else on the dev team.
But I am still wondering why Pillars left. Especially now we know how SC2 turned out.
Nerfing storm is not a very elegant solution. Yeah, T is stronger early game, P is stronger late game and Mech is too weak vs P. But if they nerf storm then bio becomes even more dominant vs P.
The thing I don't like about SC2 is that armies clump up so much. It is like WC3 without heroes. Last game Loner vs Genuis at Blizzcon was exactly like watching WC3. Both didn't dare to expand and both were moving back and forth, casting some spells engaging for a second and then backing off.
They need units to act like they do in SC BW but with better pathfinding (SC2 pathfinding isn't actually good either). Right now units have almost no space they take up, making them hard to recognize too. Units shove other units out of the way, which is a bitch to micro. Also, units move towards the enemy even if they aren't attacked. I am not used to setting units on hold position because it wasn't needed in SC BW. Now they suddenly attack the enemy without order when they get close enough. I don't mind adjusting, but these units just have a mind of their own.
Imagine SC2 with armies that spread out naturally and bigger maps, which benefit the game anyway. That will improve the game soo much,
It seems David Kim knows all this, but he is just fighting a losing battle against the others on the dev team. That's exactly how Cowgomoo said things were back long before beta. David Kim, him and a few others would explain the maps are wrong but dev team didn't listen.
|
I'm trying to remember a pro game where I saw Psi-Storm used to such great effect that it seemed overpowered.
All I ever see these days are Colossi and Robotics play... yet they're thinking of nerfing Storm?
|
"We are trying to avoid nerfing terran if we can." -David Kim
Rofl. What? It seems like you should nerf any race according the how their balance is. If Terran is slightly overpowered, you are not going to nerf them because you nerfed them already?
|
Jangbi vs Nada?
Psi storm is overpowered against bio in PvT in SC BW. Also, in PvZ it was very very powerful. And in PvP psi storms on probes were so huge too. SC BW was balanced though maps, not through unit stats. Imagine TvZ without defilers. Blizzard right now doesn't want bio vs P to be like it was in SC BW, obviously. And storm is so easy to spam with autocast and choked maps and unit clumping.
|
On October 25 2010 00:43 Mjolnir wrote:
I'm trying to remember a pro game where I saw Psi-Storm used to such great effect that it seemed overpowered.
All I ever see these days are Colossi and Robotics play... yet they're thinking of nerfing Storm?
blizzcon final ?
|
I think the problem with psy storm is this: If a terran player EMP's all the HT's before a single storm gets off, and he warps them into archons, the archons will likely warp in before the terran player kills all the zealots by stop-shoot micro. The battle is winnable by either race.
However, if the terran player does not EMP all the high templars before a storm gets off, the battle will be tipped in protoss's favor big time.
Are you kidding me? They say terran has a slight adventage and then they want to nerf protoss?? WTF?
I'm a Terran player and I agree with Blizzard. When I play against protoss, I feel like I have to go bio because of the prominence of 3 gate robo. When I go bio, if I don't end the game early, I feel like I am fucked.
My problem is collossus though. I know that I have to attack when there is 1 collossus, because then it will easily be sniped and the protoss army will be weaker. If I do nail that timing, I will likely suffer heavy losses, but also win the battle. I will have an advantage that i can turn into a win by constantly attacking with squads of 8 marauders. However, if I dont attack when there is 2+ collossus. I will likely lose the battle if the protoss is able to keep his collossus on the correct side of his zealots. I often lose against protoss when I feel like I don't deserve to lose.
If blizzard hadnt said anything about TvP I wouldn't have either, because I feel like with practise I can overcome nearly any problems.
Heck, even stim-moving your units out of the way works OK
No man, it doesnt.
|
Psi Storm is allready worse then Colossus.. why nerf it?
Colossus force Vikings -> less units that can shoot ground and buildtime that could have otherwise gone to Medivacs.
Colossus are more mobile
Colossus require less Micro
Colossus vaporize a bioball far faster once you reach critical mass (wich is easy to reach at the point where psi-storm would come in to play)
Colossus are half decent against Mech and double robo allows for faster techswitch in case of heavy mech play
Colossus with Vikings on the field are still easyer to keep alive/usefull then Templars with ghosts on the field
Colossus never run out of energy and allow for a constand push.
but sure.. go and nerf storm.. the OP abillity of protoss that is used in everygame because it is oh so powerfull.
|
On October 24 2010 22:13 AcrossFiveJulys wrote:Show nested quote +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.
He could leave like it happened in the past with other devs. The devs that originally worked at warcraft and starcraft are no longer working at Blizzard for some reason. This was just a stupid thing to do, depot before rax because low level players complain, make a post on all blizzard forums and mainsite explaining how to scout cheese instead of screwing the game up for everyone. Disappointed they didn't talk at all about TvZ.
|
He is very well spoken. Excellent interview.
|
Nice, very glad David Kim is a part of the balancing squad.
|
- Blizzard plans to use the Master/Grand Master League for Blizzard tournaments. They will, obviously, use ladder maps.
- David Kim mentions that tournaments should start creating their own maps. These maps would not be intended for ladder play, which he says should promote a "variety" of playstyles.
Ladder could become a poor way to practice for third-party tournaments, but the only way to do well in the M/GM leagues. Top players would have to make decisions on where to spend their attention, as it is too time-consuming and inefficient to practice a large pool of maps at once. The highest leagues of the ladder could suffer if some top players don't participate. New players will have to grind their way up to the highest online leagues using a different set of maps than those they would practice for most major events, which would only be available through custom games.
Blizzard, please do not fracture the esports community through a mappool that is not unified in ladder and outside tournaments.
|
Overall a excellent interview.
I trust David Kim with my free time.
|
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.
What.
What.
Ghosts are just not a big enough counter? Emp / Snipe range extends further than feedback/storm range.
I'm sorry, as it stands there is more a good protoss has to do in order to win against a hardcore bio ball, they need to control the map, flank it, draw it away from the tanks, worry about stim timing, do FF splits, micro colossus away so they dont get insta popped by four wayward marauders.
Much less worrying about 1-2 ghosts that can and often handle the problem of HT's before they even become an issue.
Anyone Crying over the research time of Storm/Khaydarin probably has poor macro and forgets to use Chrono, because when I get Storm/Amulet it goes by pretty fast. Also get templar the moment the temple finishes the warp so you have storms ready by the time the research finishes. A lot of the time in replays you see people warping them in when storm is finished researching.
Also: lol @ the people in this thread complaining about HT's being OverPowered when we haven't seen a single american pro use them. SUDDENLY NOW they are overpowered =/.
|
As a T player, I would be saddened to see Psi Storm nerfed. I always found it honorable to die under a blanket of storms rather than kiting colossus. I almost always incorporate Ghosts anyway.
If the problem is instant storm, then maybe the "spawn with 75 energy for HTs" could be reworked into "Psi Storm costs only 65 energy". You could not instant Storm. Yet the amount of time you have to wait for two storms after you spawn is rather similar (wait for another 75 as it is, wait for 80 under my proposition). It would also give incentive to spawn your HTs early and preemptively, especially because at 65 energy per storm you could fit 3 from a full 200 energy HT.
There is no rule saying that every spell in the game has to be a multiple of 25. I wish Blizzard could wake up and realize this. I'm not saying that have to follow my exact suggestion, but a little creativity can go a long way.
|
As bratOk said on his stream - Problem about ghosts they are too slow - if blizzards add movingspeed to ghosts a bit they'll be fine.
|
Overall, I can agree with most parts of the interview as they make alot of sense, although I wish they would make rare units like Carriers more useful because they're fun to watch.
Stim isn't the problem in the TvP early game, Marauders with Concussive Shells are. However, it looks like they're still not getting it. Taken from the David Kim interview in the other thread:
Q. Anything about patching Marauders?
A. Marauder is one of the units that we are looking at through various data, and we think that we nerfed them indirectly in the recent patch through nerfing Medivacs. We don't think Marauders are, either unit stat wise or statistics-wise, strong, but we are continuing to check the feedback. So, if we find any special overpoweredness, we are willing to provide a solution. For now, we are watching.
Also lol'ed at that part:
Q: Are you going to buff Terran?
A: Let's nerf Protoss!
|
Decrease the size of the thor again?  It will look a lot less epic, I remember how it looked like a baby thor after the size change in beta. It will start to look like a slightly bigger scv
|
On October 25 2010 01:24 Techno wrote:I think the problem with psy storm is this: If a terran player EMP's all the HT's before a single storm gets off, and he warps them into archons, the archons will likely warp in before the terran player kills all the zealots by stop-shoot micro. The battle is winnable by either race. However, if the terran player does not EMP all the high templars before a storm gets off, the battle will be tipped in protoss's favor big time. Show nested quote +Are you kidding me? They say terran has a slight adventage and then they want to nerf protoss?? WTF? I'm a Terran player and I agree with Blizzard. When I play against protoss, I feel like I have to go bio because of the prominence of 3 gate robo. When I go bio, if I don't end the game early, I feel like I am fucked. My problem is collossus though. I know that I have to attack when there is 1 collossus, because then it will easily be sniped and the protoss army will be weaker. If I do nail that timing, I will likely suffer heavy losses, but also win the battle. I will have an advantage that i can turn into a win by constantly attacking with squads of 8 marauders. However, if I dont attack when there is 2+ collossus. I will likely lose the battle if the protoss is able to keep his collossus on the correct side of his zealots. I often lose against protoss when I feel like I don't deserve to lose. If blizzard hadnt said anything about TvP I wouldn't have either, because I feel like with practise I can overcome nearly any problems. /QUOTE] No man, it doesnt.
The fact that you want to kill protoss player early instead of feeling it comfortable through out the game is the reason why the game itself is not balance. David Kim said so himself, it is not a good thing when one race have advantage early and the other at late game. What you see common is terran player wanting to end the game fast, and the protoss players dragging it out for those HT and colossus counts. I generally agree with david kim analysis of PVT. But if he plan to nerf storm, dont be surprise that he also consider nerfing terran early game as well to make PVT more balanced from early to late game.
|
I wonder if make stim research require a factory can fix the problem with early PvT issue. But for solving the problem with the PvT end game i have no idea...
|
I'm just shocked there was a question about banshees. People thought they were OP?
|
On October 24 2010 22:06 oZii wrote:
There is no problem with Psionic Storm terran has the counter which is ghosts but for some reason they dont use that often.
Because you need to emp every single high templar to be EVEN with the Protoss. If you miss some, you lose.
Just in case:
I know early game marine/marauder and also early midgame with medivacs is very strong, but thats not the point. Ghosts are no real solution to lategame protoss armies with upgraded high templars.
Thats why some pros that dont use them at all.
On the other hand, i really think buffing the ghost would be plain bad. Because earlygame mass stim marine+some ghosts is already way to strong. Balancing TvP is no easy task. Maybe they should nerf the marauders a little bit and make battlecruisers more viable lategame (no energy, speed upgrade, i dont know).
But TvZ and PvZ has also be taken into account, what makes balancing this "earlygame T>P, lategame P>T"-problem even harder.
|
On October 25 2010 01:24 Techno wrote:I think the problem with psy storm is this: If a terran player EMP's all the HT's before a single storm gets off, and he warps them into archons, the archons will likely warp in before the terran player kills all the zealots by stop-shoot micro. The battle is winnable by either race. However, if the terran player does not EMP all the high templars before a storm gets off, the battle will be tipped in protoss's favor big time. Show nested quote +Are you kidding me? They say terran has a slight adventage and then they want to nerf protoss?? WTF? I'm a Terran player and I agree with Blizzard. When I play against protoss, I feel like I have to go bio because of the prominence of 3 gate robo. When I go bio, if I don't end the game early, I feel like I am fucked. My problem is collossus though. I know that I have to attack when there is 1 collossus, because then it will easily be sniped and the protoss army will be weaker. If I do nail that timing, I will likely suffer heavy losses, but also win the battle. I will have an advantage that i can turn into a win by constantly attacking with squads of 8 marauders. However, if I dont attack when there is 2+ collossus. I will likely lose the battle if the protoss is able to keep his collossus on the correct side of his zealots. I often lose against protoss when I feel like I don't deserve to lose. If blizzard hadnt said anything about TvP I wouldn't have either, because I feel like with practise I can overcome nearly any problems. No man, it doesnt.
Vikings hard counter colosi, so colosi are more of a transitional unit. Vikings are also not bad at expo harass. The stalker is the only P AA unit, and as I mentioned before (and was explained by kcdc in a dedicated thread) stalkers don't exactly scale well so you won't want to make many of them, making those vikings even stronger. And yes, moving units out of the storm's way works fine - in BW bio was dead if you stormed it.
|
A good read. Thanks for the translation.
|
Ugh ZvT is not even now.... Terran is completely at a disadvantage, we need some korean to show us how to TvZ now or something because i cant win any of my ZvT's T_T
|
Wonder what they're thinking for with the banshee. Maybe a rate of fire increase?
|
Blizzard knows what they are doing. Whiners really need to just chill out. lol
|
Q. Is balance the reason why there are no island maps in SC2?
A. You don't get fun games on island maps. That, and we intentionally included no island maps because it's so early after launch. If there are new units in the expansions that allow island maps to be fun (**to watch, probably) we will release island maps later.
Did they take back the comment that there would be no new units in the expansions? I could have sworn that the expansions would have no new multiplayer content.
|
Thanks for the translation.
It's a good read. I'm happy to know his thoughts about balancing the game, actually I can't say I disagree with anything he said about their methods.
Hopefully all the races would be equally represented in tournaments.
|
I can't believe they're thinking about nerfing psi storm again ugh...but at least they're looking at autorepair. If the AI could prioritize targeting repairing scvs I would be very happy.
|
On October 25 2010 02:43 KiriKitsune wrote:
Ugh ZvT is not even now.... Terran is completely at a disadvantage, we need some korean to show us how to TvZ now or something because i cant win any of my ZvT's T_T
bratok vs ret craftcup finals yesterday are made for you - watch them
|
I think its great that they care.
|
At least blizz understands the balance issue with PvT. I do think that terran hasn't explored all possibilities when it comes to late game and think that they can be utilized so there isn't as big of a gap as there is for early game tvp.
|
On October 25 2010 04:24 Endalay wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2010 02:43 KiriKitsune wrote:
Ugh ZvT is not even now.... Terran is completely at a disadvantage, we need some korean to show us how to TvZ now or something because i cant win any of my ZvT's T_T bratok vs ret craftcup finals yesterday are made for you - watch them
found it!, http://www.bitsperbeat.com/sc2/?site=match-details&ID=26393
|
so funny how everyone suddenly screams about storm ... make them easier to get in early game to equal out protoss heavy disadvantage ... then a nerf to the overall psy storm dmg f.e. would be fine ... but in it's current state just nerfing HTs will make them completly useless (now they are just hard to get but then usefull ...) people really need to realize that david kim did NOT say "we nerf psy storm, period" ... he clearly said that there is a disadvantage for protoss in early and an advantage in late game ... so a storm nerf would certainly mean a terran nerf for early game (or a protoss buff for early) ... thx for reading the OP
|
spore crawler should be able to detect while unburrowed.
|
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?
|
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
|
On October 25 2010 05:49 JoelB wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
OH Dear Lord in Heaven, please make this happen!!
"or making the AI target repairing scvs with priority in order to kill them more easily"
diminishing the Thor's size is just a buff to its mobility/controlability, for the cost of maybe 2 scvs less to repair it with auto-repair.
|
Dominican Republic97 Posts
On October 24 2010 22:06 oZii wrote:
This is pretty good thanks.
There is no problem with Psionic Storm terran has the counter which is ghosts but for some reason they dont use that often.
So hard to cast EMP when the HT are behind ur forces or good speread of units (1500+ D T here) oh yeah cloack you say? P always have obs flying over the map.. so tough. but not imposibble.
|
On October 25 2010 06:15 g4mbit wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2010 22:06 oZii wrote:
This is pretty good thanks.
There is no problem with Psionic Storm terran has the counter which is ghosts but for some reason they dont use that often. So hard to cast EMP when the HT are behind ur forces or good speread of units (1500+ D T here) oh yeah cloack you say? P always have obs flying over the map.. so tough. but not imposibble.
1. scan
2.snipe the obs
3.emp
4.A-move
5.enjoy
I'm afraid how big the nerf will be on the storm because it will have so big f an impact im PvZ
|
Great thread and translations. It reassured me on a lot of points (as a Terran) and I do agree that repairing a thor can be a little bit imbalanced. I can see where he is coming from about the early barracks being too strong in low tier, but it makes the early game "cheese" options for a terran a bit limited. While it isn't something to be employed every game, it's still fun to use once in a while and I miss being able to do barracks before depot. Also, I like that he's studying High Templar storm or Collosus imbalance because it feels as though Terran is at a disadvantage against both Zerg and Protoss in production capabilities late game. These are just my thoughts though, thanks for the translations though!
|
Thank god they are looking at psyonic storm. Psyonic storm is fluffing ridiculous.
|
Ugh. I get so fucking TIRED of these Nerf that, Nerf this, Imba imba imba imba claims.
"Why does protoss get instant storm when its already so cost effective"? Because fucking christ man, EVERY other unit in PvT is cost INNEFECTIVE. (plz don't say well he had 14 colo's, or 10 carriers) to rebuttle. thats just stupid. you also have a counter in the ghost. Learn to use it.
"ghosts are op" No. They are not. They are a damn good unit, by you do have to pay a heft price for them. And the A-move kiting is mandatorty mid/late game. Ghosts don't A-move kite with the rest of the army. Yes. That is an indeed very big thing. Toss players can sac in a solo HT and feedback a couple of ghosts just as easily T can send ghosts can cloak and emp. without energy Ghosts have an auto attack and nice range, Ht's go archon. 2 different units. Deal with it.
"but toss can warp" Yes, and Terrans get mules. Its the fucking mechanics of the race. Imagine if toss had to produce like terrans did? It would be absolute face rape all over the place.
And the fact that Blizzard is looking into nerfing storm....Saddins me. PvT Will become Marauder+vike/ Stalker/colo. And we all know how lame ass that matchup will be. If the nerf hammer does come down on storm, early bio will have to be nerfed in some way, Otherwise toss will never be able to catch up. My 2 cents from a T and P player. (in with both cases, Z will be extreamly op....)
|
SC2 is a game with alot variables. And when different players have opposite opinions on a same subject its hard to judge wich (if any) is right. Give Blizzard some room. They will eventualy find the balance.
|
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.
|
On October 25 2010 06:46 Epoch wrote:
Thank god they are looking at psyonic storm. Psyonic storm is fluffing ridiculous.
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.
|
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...
|
If they nerf storm it's going to completely change late game PvT. As in more colossus phoenix and less chargelot templar.
|
Protoss is already the worst race at the pro levels and they want to nerf storms (which is like the only useful T3 unit they have)? Collosus is already so easily countered by vikings/corruptors - I really don't like the direction of how this is going. Sure they might find someway to reduce terran early game dominance to compensate, but that in turn will affect the TvZ matchup. With these constant nerfs SC2 will end up being a game with overly similar units and very little differentiation (of course not as extreme, but Warcraft 2 comes to mind).
|
Definitely get the vibe that more Protoss nerfs may be coming. The insanity needs to stop. Protoss have been constantly nerfed in almost every patch since the beta.
|
Well based on what they said at the blizzcon panel, it sounds more like Terran nerf is coming for early game in PvT while Protoss nerf will be applied for late game.
|
On October 25 2010 13:43 Somi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2010 22:27 Boundless wrote: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.
Exactly.
The thing is, lower level players are not inherently creative in their play. Their actions and strategies are based almost solely on what they've seen or experianced in the games that they've played (or watched). Most of this class of player does not care enough about the game to watch GSL, or youtube videos, or read TL. However, the important part to remember is that this demographic of player is the majority of Blizzards sales, and they load up the game -to have fun-. It's in everyones best interest that the game is fun for the casual player, because it allows the game to be successful enough to have things like the GSL.
If your corporate policy is "We only cater to the 5% of our customers that are hardcore, and the other 95% can go screw themselves if they don't like our product".. Well, you're not going to be in business long.
Its just so funny how people can throw feces all over Blizzard year after year, and yet still continue to buy their product and support their company.
In all honesty, pro gamers are professional because they're very good at adjusting quickly. If something gets nerfed, they find new ways to win. This is not the case for low level players though, if someone who buys SC2, signs up, plays a few matches, and just gets reaper rushed every single game, theyre going to hate it. They're not going to spend the time to learn how to adjust to it, they're just going to throw the game away and find something else, and never be interested in another Starcraft title again.
The number of people that cares about competitive gaming, compaired to the number of casual gamers is... probably not as great as a lot of people want to think it is. Go look on the GOM site, and look at fruitdealers RO64 match, check the amount of views it has. SC2 sold 1.5 million non-korean copies in the first 48 hours of release, yet that game has only been viewed 118k times (likely not even unique views, ive watched it twice myself)... Youre probably looking at about 5% of people giving a shit about SC2 that devote more time to the game than simply playing it for fun.
I think people forget that catering to 5 million or more people, from various locations and cultures throughout the world, isn't exactly an easy task.
|
Oh nerfing Protoss. At least they are being original.
Terran not being able to use their MMM ball late game because of storm is so imba. Terran shouldnt have to go to t3 counter toss t3 that would be dumb.
|
On October 25 2010 22:31 Philip2110 wrote:
Oh nerfing Protoss. At least they are being original.
Terran not being able to use their MMM ball late game because of storm is so imba. Terran shouldnt have to go to t3 counter toss t3 that would be dumb.
Tell me the t3 counter to high templars. I think everyone wants to know, especially blizzard and david kim, that noobie random player.
And please dont say "ghosts" now, your post already made you look like a fool...
|
On October 25 2010 23:46 Grummler wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2010 22:31 Philip2110 wrote:
Oh nerfing Protoss. At least they are being original.
Terran not being able to use their MMM ball late game because of storm is so imba. Terran shouldnt have to go to t3 counter toss t3 that would be dumb. Tell me the t3 counter to high templars. I think everyone wants to know, especially blizzard and david kim, that noobie random player. And please dont say "ghosts" now, your post already made you look like a fool...
Thor
(edit: also hellions)
Also:
+ Show Spoiler +What counters zealots? marauders
What counters stalkers? marauders
What counters sentries? medivacs
What counters immortals? marines
What counters collossi? 1-2, marauders. 3+ vikigns
What counters pheonix? marines
What counters void ray? marines
What counters DT? scouting
What counters HT.... Hey it's not marines marauders or medivacs?!?!
|
well it seems that their balancing philosophy is unhealthy for sc2 in the very core.
a) they try to balance team games. If they really want to put some effort into balancing team games then I suggest they make better teammaps where certain imbalanced strategies can be held of easyer. balancing team games over units is really, really disappoining!
b) they try to balance sc2 for everyone. NO. it doesnt work. you cant balance a game around players that are terrible. keep it on the top level. balance doesnt even affect low level play on the slightest. there only one thing affects gameplay: what is the easyest powerfull strategy wins.
|
I really hope that was not an implied toss nerf. Other than that everything seemed pretty decent, it'd be nice if they fixed damn auto repair
|
I play zerg, and I miss the reaper. They should have just nerfed a reaper dmg, but made it a lot better with weapons upgrade 1..this would have made them more balanced.
The whole thing with supply before barracks bothers me. As a zerg i feel 14 hatching safely shoud not be possible on shorter maps. They clearly underestimated roach range.
Protosses whine a lot, but they have a lot of options against all races that are good..they need more well thought out builds and timings to make the buildings they need for diversity, and that's something players need to figure out.
The tank nerf, and Nexus/Zerg buildings buff was needed, but the rest was ok as it was. People will figure out new cool stuff, but I miss reapers as zerg. Tell noobs to practice, or force them to play fast speed or something. All this over-nerfing is a result of whining exesstively..GG whiners.
btw: people whine to much about counters, and what they can't make because of something.. you have to be one step ahead, and play reactive mid-to late, if you face a difficult all-round strat. Change stuff up..Terran can litterally tech switch in 5 seconds if needed.
|
|
|
On October 24 2010 22:08 ArghUScaredMe wrote:
Awesome.
I don't know why anyone is opposed to 'cheese'. I don't even know why it's called cheese, everything within a game is a valid strat.
Why must matches be 'GL 20 MINS NO RUSH K?'?
it's annoying because:
A: the horrible feeling when you see zerglings running up your ramp after 2 minutes.
B: it's a dicy way for a n00b to win over a pro. Basically a bronze player can kill fruitdealer with unscouted cheese in a 4 player map or something.
C: the game becomes much less interesting.. you get 2 minutes of intense micro, instead of a drawn out game where mechanics, intellect and skill is the dominant factor.
On October 26 2010 02:19 luke1304 wrote:
what does "gosu" mean?
google is your friend.
|
Also, They shouldn't bother with balance changes for team games. Team games clearly are not the focus of competitive play.
IMO, either have the units work differently in 1v1 / team games OR don't worry about team balance. They had to make that choice in WoW - They realized that they could not balance both 2v2 and 3v3 arena, so they chose 3v3.
|
Hopefully instead of just nerfing Storm, they make it not quite as powerful, but easier to tech to. I think that would fix a lot of things.
|
What counters storm? Stim and run. Do you know why collosus are used so much, because storm is so easily dodged that it isn't useful if the terran is paying attention. All you have to do it run out of the storm or don't even get in range for storming.
1 storm does fuck all versus anything besides marines. 1 emp rapes every unit in the protoss army except zealots. Terrans get an instantaneous damage spell that also removes energy versus protoss with large range and a large radius.
|
On October 24 2010 22:08 ArghUScaredMe wrote:
I don't know why anyone is opposed to 'cheese'. I don't even know why it's called cheese, everything within a game is a valid strat.
Probably because it's not enjoyable to play against or watch in many cases, since it tends to win outright if not scouted in time or lose outright if it is.
|
On October 26 2010 02:19 luke1304 wrote:
what does "gosu" mean?
Gosu basically means you're really, really good at something (SC2). You have a high degree of skill at whatever is being referred to.
You might also hear the term "chobo" thrown around, which roughly means you're a newbie. A chobo is considered new to whatever game/task and thus, not very good.
|
What we want isn't a game where one side has an advantage in the earlygame and the other in the lategame...
This is what stood out to me in this interview as well as at the Blizzcon panel. This seems to describe the ZvT matchup at the pro level. The complaint before the patches was that Terran had too easy a time harassing Zergs early and holding back their expansion. That got nerfed and now the usual sight is Zergs overwhelming Terrans in mid to late-game with their economy, speed and map control.
Over the weekend I watched 3 matches where HD, Day9 & Artosis, had each commented on an early Terran advantage and then seemed a little surprised when the Zerg player bounced right back and took control of the game.
I hope Blizzard works it out the way Kim wants.
|
On October 25 2010 23:46 Grummler wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2010 22:31 Philip2110 wrote:
Oh nerfing Protoss. At least they are being original.
Terran not being able to use their MMM ball late game because of storm is so imba. Terran shouldnt have to go to t3 counter toss t3 that would be dumb. Tell me the t3 counter to high templars. I think everyone wants to know, especially blizzard and david kim, that noobie random player. And please dont say "ghosts" now, your post already made you look like a fool...
Thor. Im not going to say ghost because they are not t3. Anything else?
Lol
On October 26 2010 00:54 sikyon wrote:
What counters zealots? marauders
What counters stalkers? marauders
What counters sentries? medivacs
What counters immortals? marines
What counters collossi? 1-2, marauders. 3+ vikigns
What counters pheonix? marines
What counters void ray? marines
What counters DT? scouting
What counters HT.... Hey it's not marines marauders or medivacs?!?!
|
|
|
I really like the PvT section of the Q&A. DKim knows what's up.
I don't think they should nerf HTs. I think the problem is much more in the Terran army composition.
As a Terran, you're pretty much forced to start bio because you get an early advantage, and toss needs good forcefield micro to hold off your attacks until they can get the tech to stop your aggression.
However, when the army sizes get bigger (and Toss gets a decent number of HT/colossi), bio doesn't cut it. Players are now trying to support their bio compositions with tanks, thors, or banshees. But I don't really think it's working out. The other option is drop play, which seems to work better because the toss damage dealers are all so slow (immo's, colossi, HTs).
Bio units are the only thing for cost that can soak up the DPS of a huge toss army, while still doing damage. I've seen tanks and thors get absolutely rolled by toss armies time and time again. Robo and HT play just destroys higher tier Terran units (immo's RUIN thors/tanks, HTs wreck banshees, dropships, and bcs). Combine this with forcefields, and the terran army really doesn't stand much of a chance imho. If mech play were more viable, terran might have a brighter mid/late game.
I hope they buff factory units somehow without damaging ZvT. Making the Thor's cannon spell useful would be a great start. (I dunno, maybe have it start doing damage sooner than 2 or 3 seconds after you start casting?)
|
Great interview. I'm glad to know why some of these changes that frustrate me so much were made.
Too be honest, I like the imbas in SC2. Not that they shouldn't work towards creating a balanced game and eventually perfect it, but the process of reaching that perfection is very fun for me.
For one thing, it causes people to constantly change their strategies. It means that every few months, these patterns that people settle into have to change.
I especially like how this effects progames. Watching Boxer before and after the tank nerf is very different.
I know that as a professional sport, imbas need to be fixed, but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy the whole process. Some people just get so upset at these things, but the fact is, no race is so OP that it ruins the game. Obviously this is the case or else there would be no market for professional play at all.
|
Psionic storm does too much damage in my opinion.. and if people say ghosts counter it that isnt entirely correct, a good spread/observers deny ghosts to rush in and emp first , and once the battle starts its impossible to emp all the templars unless they are clumped. hoping for a nerf considering that and collosus both are extremely powerful vs any terran ground army, which has to be bio
|
On October 26 2010 07:56 scojac wrote:
I really like the PvT section of the Q&A. DKim knows what's up.
I don't think they should nerf HTs. I think the problem is much more in the Terran army composition.
As a Terran, you're pretty much forced to start bio because you get an early advantage, and toss needs good forcefield micro to hold off your attacks until they can get the tech to stop your aggression.
However, when the army sizes get bigger (and Toss gets a decent number of HT/colossi), bio doesn't cut it. Players are now trying to support their bio compositions with tanks, thors, or banshees. But I don't really think it's working out. The other option is drop play, which seems to work better because the toss damage dealers are all so slow (immo's, colossi, HTs).
Bio units are the only thing for cost that can soak up the DPS of a huge toss army, while still doing damage. I've seen tanks and thors get absolutely rolled by toss armies time and time again. Robo and HT play just destroys higher tier Terran units (immo's RUIN thors/tanks, HTs wreck banshees, dropships, and bcs). Combine this with forcefields, and the terran army really doesn't stand much of a chance imho. If mech play were more viable, terran might have a brighter mid/late game.
I hope they buff factory units somehow without damaging ZvT. Making the Thor's cannon spell useful would be a great start. (I dunno, maybe have it start doing damage sooner than 2 or 3 seconds after you start casting?)
dropship acc and speed reduced.so dropship plays are not an whole options.but you are forgotting about the options that terran has p. fortress.so they can mass expand and mules.even if you harass svc line it will not be a problem.and terran has always eco avantage over toss.2 units kill mmm.collo and templar.collo is expansive and terran has hardcounter for it (viki).temp tech is late game t3 tech and has semi counter called ghosts.i think after patch 1.2 pvt is pretty balance.and you know terran has lots of strategy options to go.which toss has not.
|
On October 26 2010 09:11 ssregitoss wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2010 07:56 scojac wrote:
I really like the PvT section of the Q&A. DKim knows what's up.
I don't think they should nerf HTs. I think the problem is much more in the Terran army composition.
As a Terran, you're pretty much forced to start bio because you get an early advantage, and toss needs good forcefield micro to hold off your attacks until they can get the tech to stop your aggression.
However, when the army sizes get bigger (and Toss gets a decent number of HT/colossi), bio doesn't cut it. Players are now trying to support their bio compositions with tanks, thors, or banshees. But I don't really think it's working out. The other option is drop play, which seems to work better because the toss damage dealers are all so slow (immo's, colossi, HTs).
Bio units are the only thing for cost that can soak up the DPS of a huge toss army, while still doing damage. I've seen tanks and thors get absolutely rolled by toss armies time and time again. Robo and HT play just destroys higher tier Terran units (immo's RUIN thors/tanks, HTs wreck banshees, dropships, and bcs). Combine this with forcefields, and the terran army really doesn't stand much of a chance imho. If mech play were more viable, terran might have a brighter mid/late game.
I hope they buff factory units somehow without damaging ZvT. Making the Thor's cannon spell useful would be a great start. (I dunno, maybe have it start doing damage sooner than 2 or 3 seconds after you start casting?) dropship acc and speed reduced.so dropship plays are not an whole options.but you are forgotting about the options that terran has p. fortress.so they can mass expand and mules.even if you harass svc line it will not be a problem.and terran has always eco avantage over toss.2 units kill mmm.collo and templar.collo is expansive and terran has hardcounter for it (viki).temp tech is late game t3 tech and has semi counter called ghosts.i think after patch 1.2 pvt is pretty balance.and you know terran has lots of strategy options to go.which toss has not.
Just because dropships are slower doesn't mean they're useless. This is still a great way to catch toss out of position if he has a lot of powerful, slow units. And if you force toss to spend more money on stalkers/blink, that's more time before his HTs and big robo units can come out. You haven't really addressed any of my mech concerns, and you just say that "it's balanced." Thinking solely about which units counter each other is a stupid way to talk about the game, and I'm not going to argue with you about the matchup like that.
|
Nerfing psi storm damage would be one of the most retarded things to do imo - it already does such minimal damage to everything except for a few units (marines, hydras etc.) for a tier THREE unit. It already takes literally forever to storm a well controlled stimmed marauder pack to death. Seriously, they are balancing based on a T1.5 army (terran bio ball) versus a mixed composition army with T3 units? Whats the point of ever teching if every single high tech unit can easily get countered/raped by lower tier units? With feedback already less useful than before, templars would never be used again and protoss will have yet another unit which is trash/not feasible to use.
|
On October 26 2010 10:16 Zealot Lord wrote:
Whats the point of ever teching if every single high tech unit can easily get countered/raped by lower tier units?
Welcome to Broodwar TvZ. When Terran tier 1.5 rapes everything.
I agree with you, but there is precedent to Bio being invincible. I think the Marauder is Blizzard's angry response to no Bio is TvT and TvP in Broodwar.
|
On October 26 2010 00:54 sikyon wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2010 23:46 Grummler wrote:On October 25 2010 22:31 Philip2110 wrote:
Oh nerfing Protoss. At least they are being original.
Terran not being able to use their MMM ball late game because of storm is so imba. Terran shouldnt have to go to t3 counter toss t3 that would be dumb. Tell me the t3 counter to high templars. I think everyone wants to know, especially blizzard and david kim, that noobie random player. And please dont say "ghosts" now, your post already made you look like a fool... Thor (edit: also hellions) Also: + Show Spoiler +What counters zealots? marauders
What counters stalkers? marauders
What counters sentries? medivacs
What counters immortals? marines
What counters collossi? 1-2, marauders. 3+ vikigns
What counters pheonix? marines
What counters void ray? marines
What counters DT? scouting
What counters HT.... Hey it's not marines marauders or medivacs?!?!
Haha, so true, when they face that one thing they can't beat, in this case storm ( which is pretty crap since it takes like 850 850 to get and can get countered by spreading, ghosts) they start throwing nerfbat ideas.
|
On October 26 2010 10:56 Rawenkeke wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2010 00:54 sikyon wrote:On October 25 2010 23:46 Grummler wrote:On October 25 2010 22:31 Philip2110 wrote:
Oh nerfing Protoss. At least they are being original.
Terran not being able to use their MMM ball late game because of storm is so imba. Terran shouldnt have to go to t3 counter toss t3 that would be dumb. Tell me the t3 counter to high templars. I think everyone wants to know, especially blizzard and david kim, that noobie random player. And please dont say "ghosts" now, your post already made you look like a fool... Thor (edit: also hellions) Also: + Show Spoiler +What counters zealots? marauders
What counters stalkers? marauders
What counters sentries? medivacs
What counters immortals? marines
What counters collossi? 1-2, marauders. 3+ vikigns
What counters pheonix? marines
What counters void ray? marines
What counters DT? scouting
What counters HT.... Hey it's not marines marauders or medivacs?!?! Haha, so true, when they face that one thing they can't beat, in this case storm ( which is pretty crap since it takes like 850 850 to get and can get countered by spreading, ghosts) they start throwing nerfbat ideas.
Spreading out ?
You mean Terran in PvT needs to split his bio ball ?
This may require Zerg-like APM !
On a more serious note great interview. I like that he points out some very good points about PvT and Banshees and they seem to have the issues relatively well defined and are working on the issues. As for TvZ it changed too much lately to know where it is at exactly so they are (quite reasonably in my opinion) waiting to see how it goes.
|
On October 26 2010 11:59 Sixes wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2010 10:56 Rawenkeke wrote:On October 26 2010 00:54 sikyon wrote:On October 25 2010 23:46 Grummler wrote:On October 25 2010 22:31 Philip2110 wrote:
Oh nerfing Protoss. At least they are being original.
Terran not being able to use their MMM ball late game because of storm is so imba. Terran shouldnt have to go to t3 counter toss t3 that would be dumb. Tell me the t3 counter to high templars. I think everyone wants to know, especially blizzard and david kim, that noobie random player. And please dont say "ghosts" now, your post already made you look like a fool... Thor (edit: also hellions) Also: + Show Spoiler +What counters zealots? marauders
What counters stalkers? marauders
What counters sentries? medivacs
What counters immortals? marines
What counters collossi? 1-2, marauders. 3+ vikigns
What counters pheonix? marines
What counters void ray? marines
What counters DT? scouting
What counters HT.... Hey it's not marines marauders or medivacs?!?! Haha, so true, when they face that one thing they can't beat, in this case storm ( which is pretty crap since it takes like 850 850 to get and can get countered by spreading, ghosts) they start throwing nerfbat ideas. Spreading out ? You mean Terran in PvT needs to split his bio ball ? This may require Zerg-like APM ! On a more serious note great interview. I like that he points out some very good points about PvT and Banshees and they seem to have the issues relatively well defined and are working on the issues. As for TvZ it changed too much lately to know where it is at exactly so they are (quite reasonably in my opinion) waiting to see how it goes.
If I get cheaper HT`s and then nerfed banshees i will be happy in PvT.
|
Something that people should note: at blizzcon I believe Dustin (but could've been someone else) said that the 3 main balance designers at Blizz are David Kim, Dustin B and Chris S (I think?) They are top diamond tier, low diamond tier and gold level/below, respectively.
So a few people here are getting mad at David Kim for his 'philosophy' on balancing the game with lower level players in mind, but those decisions probably came from Chris S, but David Kim is too classy to put any flak in the other two devs' direction.
Honestly it's clear to me from this interview that David Kim cares about SC2 as a competitive game.
|
lol, we haven't seen any buff for P, now they wanna nerf the HTs, when HT require so many build and research + expensive gas price?
|
On October 26 2010 13:47 hitman133 wrote:
lol, we haven't seen any buff for P, now they wanna nerf the HTs, when HT require so many build and research + expensive gas price?
Don't worry, i'm pretty sure we'll soon see that protoss will be nerfed so hard that all we can build are zealots with 40 hp.
:/
Interesting thread, yet all we can really do is sit back and wait and see how things are going to shape out.
|
Storm is getting hit with the nerf bat, you heard it here first.
They are also going to weaken Terran earlygame again by the sounds of it, making it easier for Zerg players to take more extras bases on the map problem free.
|
Great interview overall but what really disturbs me is when they asked him about buffing Terran in the next patch and then he goes on and talks about the Psionic Storm. He hits everything right where the Terran player has an advantage early game and Protoss has an advantage in the late game but nerfing the Psionic Storm will not do it justice. There's a counter unit for every unit for each race and the ultimate counter unit for HTs and the entire Protoss unit is Ghost. Yes if you might miss just ONE HT with the EMP but think about the other units you emp'd and lowered their shield. Ghost to me is a bit too strong just because of how it not only takes away your energy but the shield as well. Also you need to be aware of how much resources and time is needed to be invested for HTs for the Protoss player compared to Terran. Protoss has to at least get 2 bases in order to support HTs but majority of the time, Protoss tech to HTs once they get at least 3 bases. If Terran just mixes his/her army with 2-3 Ghosts, the Terran's bio ball would be 100x better and it doesn't take that much time and investment to get Ghosts out. Now referring to warping in HTs, Terran you get MULES and PF. PFs are hard to kill off with those stupid SCVs and autorepair that Protoss has to sacrifice units to kill a base. To me Protoss lacks big time in the early/mid game stage than the other races. Let's use the GSL for an example. There are how many Protoss players remaining in the tournament; 5 which will probably go down to 4 since SlayerSBoxeR is destined to win his game  . Compare that to the 9 Zergs and the 10 Terrans. Now they should also analyze the game and not just that stats and they will see that most of the Protoss players fall in the early/mid game section of the game. Something needs to be done about that. And about Colossus being OP for Terran. Colossus are so weak, you can kill them with proper micro with Vikings for Terrans. And I also like how he says how he gets feedback on Marauders and Void Rays from both servers but only patches the VRs. Of course this is coming from a Protoss player so I'm a bit bias towards the Protoss side
|
How do they expect people to take this game seriously as an E-Sport if they admit to making balance decisions based on lower league play?
It's obviously a sound business decision, but it doesn't really bode well for this games longevity as an E-Sport.
|
I think I remember GOSU as standing for "Genious of the stretegic universe" in a lot of peoples minds ten years ago..but it's just korean for "exceptional" or "superior". In chinese it meas "high hand".
|
Random player, but I'll be really sad if they nerf storm.
Find other ideas to make other terran units viable, not just infantry. The thor buff was definitely a step in the right direction.
I didn't agree with the tank nerf, and I still don't. What the matchup lacks, more than balance, is diversity.
At least Templar vs Ghost is fun. If it evolves into MMM vs Colossus, that would be a huge mistake for Blizzard.
|
On October 24 2010 21:52 unbal3 wrote:
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.
Hello, its not the HTs that are causing problems, they are already underused compared to colossi. Nerf those maybe PvP will be playeble again.
|
Honestly, I really feel if they can make PvT balanced, fix auto-repair, and do something about medivac priority blocking marines this game will be extremely well balanced considering were only a few months into release.
|
Q. We are seeing a decrease in cheesy play?
A. We aren't looking to remove cheese. There are cannon rushes and gateway rushes, but we are trying to patch cheeses that are too strong. But again, we are not trying to remove them altogether.
i love the way both his examples are toss 
|
I somehow sense gateway units becoming stronger and high templar way weaker ....
and they seem kinda serios about not nerfing terran anymore too...
|
Overall good interview. But some questions were avoided with dodgy answers:
Too bad no question was asked about the broodlord. I understand that the Battlecruiser and Carrier are capital ships. The broodlord isn't the Zerg equivalent of that though and should IMO see the battlefield more often. As a matter of fact I don't really agree with their stance that some units should see the battlefield less than others. What's wrong with having more options as a player if it's in a balanced fashion?
Their stance on the hydra seems like an attempt to avoid the discussion. If it shoots air and ground it should have a BIG weakness? Then why didn't he mention the marine and stalker? I can't recall those units having a weakness as big as the hydra..
|
Look guys it is possible to balance the game around various skill levels without breaking the balance in multiple levels of skill. Or at the very least come closer to it. Fixing something for silver and bronze league might in the end have no real impact on platinum and diamond. The supply depot change I am starting to see as not really a big deal at all. You can still pull of very early rushes by doing things like going double rax after supply depot.
As for the HT it is possible to nerf an aspect of a unit while still keeping it balanced or making it stronger in another aspect. For example HT warping in ready to storm is probably a bit OP. You could change this by say making them warp in with 25 energy or 50 energy with the upgrade and giving them higher regeneration rate. This slows down their viability some more and directly nerfs warp in HT. However it makes them stronger when they are fully charged as it lets them use storms more frequently and are more easily able to recover from EMP.
|
WoW I'm glad they are looking at storm It is really strong. the other day i was playing a free for all, and I defended my base with 11 templar killing a near max army of hydras. Also it smashes terran bio particularily when coupled with Colossus. That said im glad they are going about it cautiously.
|
Bisutopia19230 Posts
I wish DK could play prof.
|
Interviewer is biased against T? He makes it sound like the only complaining comes from marauders, banshees and repair being too good. Give T a break ffs.
|
On October 27 2010 11:48 Antipod wrote:
Interviewer is biased against T? He makes it sound like the only complaining comes from marauders, banshees and repair being too good. Give T a break ffs.
Um, no? If anything the mood favours an incoming Protoss nerf.
|
On October 27 2010 14:23 Maynarde wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2010 11:48 Antipod wrote:
Interviewer is biased against T? He makes it sound like the only complaining comes from marauders, banshees and repair being too good. Give T a break ffs. Um, no? If anything the mood favours an incoming Protoss nerf.
I did say the interviewer didn't I? Not David Kim.
|
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Please dont nerf my psi storm. Ty for interview.
|
On October 27 2010 11:05 Darpa wrote:
WoW I'm glad they are looking at storm It is really strong. the other day i was playing a free for all, and I defended my base with 11 templar killing a near max army of hydras. Also it smashes terran bio particularily when coupled with Colossus. That said im glad they are going about it cautiously.
i really hope they would nerf carriers too. the other day i played a ffa and my opponent had 17 bases and got 53 carriers and a mothership and i couldnt stop them
oh and banshees are too good too once you get more than 40 they really rape
also i wish blizzard would make marines have less hp. they are really too good in that ums called nexus wars
|
it's funny. It seems people want blizzard to nerf all terran units.
Ask for a nerf : marauders, marines, medivacs, banshee, ghost emp, repairing scv
nerfed: BC, Reapers, tanks.
What's remaining ? Vikings range ? Hellion flame drop too strong vs workers ? and ? erf, no more units to nerf...
PvT is the only balanced MU, why do people want changes ? -_- Early game in PvT is not that one sided, protoss just need to learn HOW TO (i saw some protoss replay owning terran bio build so fast with many sentries or colossus+phoenix build), as terran with patch have to learn how to play against Zerg with no harass in early game.
|
On October 27 2010 11:03 AzureD wrote:
Look guys it is possible to balance the game around various skill levels without breaking the balance in multiple levels of skill. Or at the very least come closer to it. Fixing something for silver and bronze league might in the end have no real impact on platinum and diamond. The supply depot change I am starting to see as not really a big deal at all. You can still pull of very early rushes by doing things like going double rax after supply depot.
As for the HT it is possible to nerf an aspect of a unit while still keeping it balanced or making it stronger in another aspect. For example HT warping in ready to storm is probably a bit OP. You could change this by say making them warp in with 25 energy or 50 energy with the upgrade and giving them higher regeneration rate. This slows down their viability some more and directly nerfs warp in HT. However it makes them stronger when they are fully charged as it lets them use storms more frequently and are more easily able to recover from EMP.
I think you are right, the main think that make ht too powerfull in end game battle is the warp into storm. Because of that you can defend quite easily all your basis. Maybe put a 10+ seconds cd on storm ability after a warp or something like that.
|
Q. I would like to ask you for your opinions regarding the banshees
A. We're getting a lot of feedback regarding banshees. We don't think it's overpowered at this point in time, and we will make decisions in 1~2 weeks after discussion. 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.
[/b]
dont touch my banshees man... XD
|
What difference will a nerf to storm make when every protoss and their mothers are going collosi anyways. Sure, storm is hella strong, but if we reach lategame it won't matter to me whether he has 6 collosi and a gatewayball or a ton of templar - I'll get roasted no matter which one.
If there's anything terran has a real problem with it's fighting zerg lategame, not protoss.
|
o wtf, saying that terran rax-first cheese is getting too strong is like saying pool before ovie should be banned cause 6 pool is the deadliest all-in.
|
Q. There are opinions that the variety in choice of strategies for Terran have decreased due to the recent nerf
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. 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.
I totally called this, months and months ago. I knew they were going for casual balance.
You can read about this theory here:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=127450
|
banshees are getting a nerf, they have been the most abused unit this past gsl...
|
On October 24 2010 22:36 Tachion wrote:
Were tournament maps used as ladder maps in SC1? It seems a little awkward in practice to separate the two because a lot of pros still ladder a ton right now, and if there were separate tourny maps from laddder maps, then they would all be forced into custom games for any meaningful practice.
People that are practicing for tournaments usually have a practice partner where both people involved have this other map that will be used in the tournament.
|
awesome interview, after this much rage on blizzard, Its cool to see they keep up and care for their game and for the community.
I think the maps blizzard made were really cool for ladder (like rllycool) but now people should start make tourney maps imho.
|
If they are gonna do something to storm (not saying they will or something should be done)
What makes storm hard to cope with is it is very easy for 12 templar to carpet storm an entire area (arguably easier than you could even with magic box storming in BW) and once the enemy has moved out of the first carpet your cooldown is over and you can storm again. If they change storm maybe increase the damage that units take while under the strom while decreasing the diamater of strom itself this would greatly lower the surface area of the carpet. Assuming the opponent is good at storm dodging theoretically he would still take the same damage but it would punish who can't get out of it and would also punish toss players that couldn't storm accurately enough.
If blizzard changes storm IMO that's what they should do if anything on the other hand no change would be even better.
|
On October 25 2010 02:02 Endalay wrote:
As bratOk said on his stream - Problem about ghosts they are too slow - if blizzards add movingspeed to ghosts a bit they'll be fine.
defilers were slower than speedlings but people still used them last i checked.
terran players just want everything done for them nowdays , like auto repair and making all their units speeds the same.
|
On October 26 2010 10:54 Crisium wrote:
Welcome to Broodwar TvZ. When Terran tier 1.5 rapes everything.
I remember most pros grabbing vessels before they moved out.
Mech play was also possible.
|
i think he has a thing against toss player, he is trying avoid nerfing terran but completely ignores the fact that he nerfed the toss 3 times in a row while buffing the zerg. We are already forced to go robo against terran just to survive, after the ht nerf it will be even more one dimensional than it is..
|
On October 24 2010 21:52 unbal3 wrote:
Q. Some people are disappointed at how short the matches are
A. We think this is a problem with the maps. StarCraft 1 (probably typo, means SC2) was developed with to balance the game through the maps. We had match duration for broadcasting in mind, but we made the maps diverse for Ladder play so that a player would, in, say, 10 games, get to play a vareity of games, such as getting rushed early, playing 10 minute games and 40 minute games and so on. I think it would be a good idea for the hosts of the tournaments to make maps of their own. When you're on the ladder, however, you should inevitably get a variety of matches.
Q. Is balance the reason why there are no island maps in SC2?
A. You don't get fun games on island maps. That, and we intentionally included no island maps because it's so early after launch. If there are new units in the expansions that allow island maps to be fun (**to watch, probably) we will release island maps later.
>>>>No island Maps because they aren't fun (I assume this is due to the early game build up period)
>>>>Complaints about how matches are too short because of the map pool.
>>>>Want a large variety of maps in the ladder, from longer turtling games to shorter rush orientated games
>>>>No island maps
>>>>Want a large variety of maps in the ladder
>>>>No island maps
Does. Not. Compute.
|
PvT win rate is 60%?
How about you remove all the cannon rush wins and THEN we will see the percentage lol.
|
|
|
lol. reading all these psychic posters
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
