LotV Community Feedback Update - June 19 - Page 8

On June 22 2015 18:35 Charoisaur wrote:


-killing workers isn't as punishing as in HotS/LotV because only the first 8 workers mine at full efficiency
-nerf to aggressive builds because player who expand earlier have immediately an income advantage (player A expands to 2 bases with 16 workers and has immediately a higher income than player B on 1 base with 16 workers without the need of building additional workers)
-buff to cheeses where you cut workers early because the first 8 workers are more efficient than the last 8.
-turtling will still be viable
-the risk of becoming more vulnerable to counterattacks/harass isn't worth the slight income boost in most situation. (the only exception is if the other player is turtling)
-to complicated for casuals

On June 20 2015 03:08 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
We’d like to also make it as clear as possible that game design is not about implementing every idea that the majority thinks is correct, it’s about finding the key ideas that will be best for the game. So we’ll do our best to keep an open mind on topics and even if we’re currently thinking that we won’t try something out, we’ll keep it as part of our regular discussions if those issues keep being brought up by the community. Please also try your best to do this as well, and remember it’s not about how many people say something, and it’s not about bandwagoning onto the loudest idea. It’s about trying to look at issues from every angle possible to make sure it is in fact what’s best for our game. Just as an example, internally in design meetings we try our best to detach ourselves from every idea. Even if I’ve suggested something, I try my best to analyze how it might be bad. This way, I can focus on the specific idea and if it’s the correct move for the game, rather than pushing for the idea just because I thought of something I think is awesome.

On June 20 2015 03:08 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Flying unit separation radius

• We agree that when you are controlling larger numbers of air units, it’s difficult to do the moving shot micro.
  
• This requires a code fix, and we’re currently exploring and testing something that we can add to the beta soon.

On June 20 2015 03:08 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Making all damage points to zero for air units

• One of the reasons we don’t have a default damage point of zero is so that the timing of micro has to be mastered by players. Just making it zero will mean microing is just much easier, which is probably not the direction we want to go.
  
• We generally don’t make extreme changes that alter so many things at once, due to the side effects these changes can cause. Changing every single air unit’s damage point is not something we’d like to explore, but we’d be open to specific air unit damage point changes if the change makes sense.
  
• With a damage point of zero, a unit that is facing its target can immediately move away after being issued the attack order. With the default damage point, the player must instead time their movement to happen after the attack is performed. An example of where this is pushed even further is the Hellion, which has a higher than normal damage point. The unique timing required for this unit requires additional mastery, which makes it more impressive when pros are able to be so effective with them. Since the suggested goal of the change is to have more interesting micro, in this specific case, we wonder if what we currently have is more interesting micro than the proposed changes.

On June 20 2015 03:08 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Siege Tank /Immortal turret tracking

• This sounds like a very minor change that probably won’t have a huge impact. However, because many players believe this will be of great help, so we’ll test it fairly quickly internally, then put the change in also in the beta. So you can expect this change to go into the beta soon.

On June 20 2015 03:08 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Ranked play in the beta

• We hear your feedback and agree that it’ll be good to enable ranked play.
  
• We may not be able to do this right away as we’ll need to introduce this with a client patch and can’t use the same method we use for the balance update which is done through publishing.
  
• Due to the feedback we’ve seen on this topic, we’ve currently scheduled to enable ranked play in the beta with the next client patch.

On June 20 2015 03:08 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Disruptor being too all-or-nothing

• We agree with you guys here. The optimal case looks too strong, and when you miss with a hit it seems like the Disruptor is killed too easily at such a high cost investment.
  
  • We’ve been trying various things in this area for a while now, but this is where we’re at right now:
    
  • Much lower radius (this is the biggest change + Disruptors look too underpowered right now in our testing)
    
  • Lower cost
    
  • Faster speed when activated
    
  • Less delay before firing
  
  
  
• Overall, it looks like we have a decent solve for the case of a single hit ending games often.
  
• We believe the next step in this area is to test out changes that would allow players to more easily save and reuse the Disruptors. This way, we can solve the issue where a miss creates a high chance of the game being over.

On June 20 2015 03:08 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
We’d also like to comment on some topics that we found interesting this week. Again, please keep in mind just because we don’t mention something here, it doesn’t mean we haven’t read it. While it’s impossible to read every single post that comes up every day, we do try our best and can tell you that we read a big majority of the things you guys bring up.

• Adept micro tips video was very cool.
  
• It was a very good example of relaying more info on something new, so that players in the beta can better test new units.
  
• It would definitely be more cool to see more tips on new units videos, because we believe faster we have the majority of beta testers ramped up with new units, the more high quality beta testing we will have going forward.

On June 20 2015 03:08 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
There was a post asking if players want battles to last much longer. Our thoughts are that the current pace feels really good, and we were happy to see that most players didn’t want battles to last longer in StarCraft II. "

On June 20 2015 03:08 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Flying unit separation radius

We agree that when you are controlling larger numbers of air units, it’s difficult to do the moving shot micro.
This requires a code fix, and we’re currently exploring and testing something that we can add to the beta soon.



We decided to do that and we put it in the context of "community" even though community never even asked.

On June 22 2015 19:49 Penev wrote:

Yes "we" have, never saw "depth of micro"?

On June 22 2015 20:10 sh1RoKen wrote:

Year 2013? Really "hot" topic.

On June 22 2015 20:19 jinjin5000 wrote:
Currently, blizzard made a new change on ventral sacs- now it comes with an upgrade to overlord with at hatchery tech that allows zerg to have early access to drop tech at cost of 25/25 (125/25)-something that zerg wanted for while-an accessible drop tech.

However the current problem is- these ventral sacs come at way too early in the tech tree- at hatch tech- it opens up a lot of room for zerg- but in my opinion, it is accessed way to early.

Ventrac sacs in Hots require lair and 130 second research time- I
n Lotv, its is available right away at hatchery tech.


The problem with these ventral sacs are how powerful it is with combined with early zerg all ins- Zerg units as whole are balanced around open space for engagement. They excel in open space but upon coming in closed space such as at opponent's wall, where they are denied room, their low range serves as a disadvantage.

Now, with hatchery tech ventral sacs coming at low cost of 25/25 on overlord that would be needed to serve as supply anyway, zerg has access to bypass protoss/terran walls at near to no cost. This opens up tons of room for zerg all ins-common ones such as speedling all in and 1/1 roach push dropped at early stages of game are devastating- especially since zergs excel in places with much surface area. It is because most of terran/protoss advantages against these are kept with walls acting as a delay until they are either able to get more units out or do enough damage to stop. Bypassing this and dropping on top of production or into base would prove devastating. Zerg would be able to fight on equal grounds within the base of the Terran/Protoss race itself in open space while being able to wreak havoc on opponent production structures- a double wammy.

Also, the option of AA at the stage of game where such all ins would hit with ventral sacs are limited. empty overlords could be mixed in with regular overlords to protect the drops and each overlord,while slow is at tanky 200hp. Adding to general lack of stronger AA at beginning of game, it would make these drops incredibly powerful

Anyways another problem, as protoss currently stands, they were already having trouble defending these all ins-hence the addition of mothership core as what a lot of people derided as "band-aid" fix and limiting to buffs on other part of race. These drops would allow zergs to bypass it along with zealots general need to have small space to limit the surface area. Which again would be eliminated with these drops.

All this would do is exacerbate the problem.

To people who are going to say that opposition should prepare equally to oppositions all in: how many have seen holds to speedling all in without a wall or defensive structure? Why was photon overcharge added in first place? Ventral sac upgrade itself isnt an issue. its just that zergs ability to bypass wall so early on is. Just delay it to spire or lair tech as other races unlock their respective drop tech by then.

On June 22 2015 21:46 inken wrote:


right. it is scandalous, zerg has a dangerous early game tool! terran and protoss have a right to feel totally safe behind their wall while building their perfect unit comp and sending out oracles, dts, reapers, adepts, hellbats, banshees and FLYING TANKS.

btw either the lings or the overlords will be freakin slow before zerg has researched both speed upgrades. and roach speed is lair tech. and where are all those people who said "let's wait and see how zergs will adapt..." when terran got buffed the **** out of or when swarmhosts got "redesigned" or when even the ravager got nerfed (because there were some strong rushes) and the adept got steroids (so now there are some veeery strong rushes).

seems like everyone got used to terran and protoss having zerg by the balls...

On June 22 2015 19:23 sh1RoKen wrote:
Welcome to a new TeamLiquid feature - Blizzard-to-English translator:



We will never implement anything suggested by the community. We are to afraid to admit that sometimes we are incompetent and some of you bring better ideas that we do.



We decided to do that and we put it in the context of "community" even though community never even asked.



We decided not to do that and we put it in the context of "community" even though community never even asked.



We will do something very tiny that if anyone will summarize all we say and understand that we don't care about the community we could prove him wrong.



No DH because we are too afraid to admit that sometimes we are incompetent and some of you bring better ideas that we do.



We will implement it as previously planned. But it will look like we are changing something for the community.



Our designers fucked up so bad that we can not leave things as they are. We will try to change something.



Sometimes I read TeamLiquid.



We tried and failed. Let's pretend that the current pace feels really good.

On June 22 2015 18:35 Charoisaur wrote:


-killing workers isn't as punishing as in HotS/LotV because only the first 8 workers mine at full efficiency
-nerf to aggressive builds because player who expand earlier have immediately an income advantage (player A expands to 2 bases with 16 workers and has immediately a higher income than player B on 1 base with 16 workers without the need of building additional workers)
-buff to cheeses where you cut workers early because the first 8 workers are more efficient than the last 8.
-turtling will still be viable
-the risk of becoming more vulnerable to counterattacks/harass isn't worth the slight income boost in most situation. (the only exception is if the other player is turtling)
-to complicated for casuals

On June 23 2015 00:09 Survivor61316 wrote:

Dude I play Zerg, but you need to get a clue. It doesn't matter that the overlords will be slow, you just need to rally them across the map somewhere near the opponents base while you're waiting for speed to finish anyways. Even just two overlords dropping 16 slings into a Terran base early on could cause tremendous damage and a lot of lost mining time. The only reason Terran and Protoss can survive sling rushes is because they have walls to defend behind. Zerg is unmatched in terms of being able to quickly macro an army early on, which is why the other races cannot fight them until they have had a chance to get infrastructure and tech up and running.

On June 22 2015 18:35 Charoisaur wrote:


-killing workers isn't as punishing as in HotS/LotV because only the first 8 workers mine at full efficiency
-nerf to aggressive builds because player who expand earlier have immediately an income advantage (player A expands to 2 bases with 16 workers and has immediately a higher income than player B on 1 base with 16 workers without the need of building additional workers)
-buff to cheeses where you cut workers early because the first 8 workers are more efficient than the last 8.
-turtling will still be viable
-the risk of becoming more vulnerable to counterattacks/harass isn't worth the slight income boost in most situation. (the only exception is if the other player is turtling)
-to complicated for casuals

On June 22 2015 17:22 ShambhalaWar wrote:
I'm still waiting to hear a legitimate criticism of the DH model?
Some people bash it, but apparently for no good reason?

On June 22 2015 21:40 Jenia6109 wrote:
These new Vental Sacs just need to require Lair.

On June 23 2015 00:36 ohmylanta1003 wrote:


Go cry somewhere else. If you don't like Blizzard or the way they're handling the game, don't play it.