|
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CMY4GarWgAEbLWx.jpg)
Potential Balance Test Map for HotS
Before we get to the Void topics, we’d like to discuss a potential balance test map for Heart of the Swarm. We’re currently wondering if a minor change is needed to help Zerg against Terran mech and Protoss. We don’t quite know for certain that a balance update is needed, however we are wondering if we should start up a balance test map to explore the idea.
For this, we’re considering testing the Swarm Host balance changes that have been ongoing in the Void beta. The automatic Flying Locusts, cheaper cost, and decreased supply of Void Swarm Hosts have shown decent potential versus Protoss and mech, and for ZvT, we are looking for a change that will only really help versus mech, since Zerg vs Bio appears to be in a good state. Buffing Swarm Host harass could target this well, considering the relatively low mobility of Terran mech. Please let us know your thoughts in this area so that we can make the best possible decision. Thank you.
Design/balance Schedule in the Beta
As some of you may already know, our team is hard at work trying to release Legacy of the Void sometime this year. With this in mind, we wanted to discuss what this means for the Legacy of the Void beta. So far, we’ve been in the beta for about 4 months – approximately the length of the entire HotS beta.
With the ways things currently are, we don’t quite feel that we’re ready to move into the balance “fine-tuning” stages yet, since major changes (such as macro mechanics or Disruptor redesign) are still on the table. Our current plan is to continue exploring various large-scale changes for roughly one additional month, and then (assuming things are sufficiently finalized) we can shift our focus towards balance changes for the remainder of the beta. Design changes will still be considered after this period, but we will be trying to reduce them to things that are absolutely needed so that we can focus on balance tuning before the release of the game.
Protoss Warp-in changes
We found that the defensive case is too big of a nerf in expansion locations. After reading many of your suggestions, we’ve decided to test this mechanic with both Warpgates and Nexus providing faster warp-ins. Below is a list of all the warpgate changes going into the next update:
- Warping-in at a Pylon takes 16 seconds.
- If a Pylon’s power radius is touching a Warp Gate or a Nexus, the color of the power radius changes, and warp-ins take 2 seconds.
- Multiple Pylons can be affected by the same Nexus or Warp Gate.
- The Warp Prism’s power radius will be the stronger version, and units will only take 2 seconds to warp-in.
With these changes, we’re clearly seeing the heavy nerfs to the offensive warp-ins. The huge buff to defensive warp-ins is also feeling good internally, because one of the main reasons why Protoss is struggling in the beta right now is due to their difficulty in securing late-game expansions.
Macro mechanics
We’ve recently seen significant amounts of passionate and well-articulated discussions on the topic of macro mechanics. There are numerous people on both sides of our proposed changes, and we’ve read through and listened to many of the arguments as to why people feel the way they do. Having considered our testing internally along with your opinions in the community, we are currently planning to begin testing these changes in the next balance update. This does not mean the changes are permanent, but that we would like to explore their effects on a larger scale. To help prepare for this, we also wanted to briefly discuss some additional gameplay observations that we’ve discovered while testing.
Terran Mules being Removed
- Scanner Sweep use is much more common, but because there are so many possible scans available, Calldown: Extra Supplies now has tactical justification. The decision to cast one ability or the other has become rather dynamic, and the constant decisions between these two abilities seem interesting.
- The balance on these abilities might not be there yet, and if Mules do in fact get removed, we may need to tune these abilities’ details.
Protoss Chronoboost being Removed
- The removal itself seems good, but we’re definitely realizing that there may need to be some timing changes to help Protoss.
- We will be decreasing Warp Gate research time, and also speeding up the Disruptor build time, but we believe there’s more to come if this change goes through. Our current thought is that if Chronoboost is removed, we will need to strategically locate the specific units, buildings, upgrade times that would need to be reduced .
Zerg Inject Larva Being Auto-Cast and Reduced to 2 per Inject
- We were initially worried that this particular change would take away too much from Zerg macro, but surprisingly, it is feeling like there’s still so much macro to tackle.
- With this change, we’re also seeing better creep spread. This is something that we may need to tune eventually. Nevertheless, having a more visible result from players’ macro looks to be a much cooler direction rather than just having the forced/needed clicks found in things like Inject Larva.
Overall, we expect there will need to be a lot of balance tuning required if the macro mechanics changes stick. We are definitely looking forward to hearing your feedback and observing how the changes play out in the beta. Also, please remember to keep an open mind when testing out these changes - it will take time to iron out the balance as we continue testing this area.
Thanks for all of the passionate feedback and discussions these last few weeks. We hope that you will continue to have such rich discussions while we test these rather unique changes as we are certainly eager to hear your thoughts after playing with them.
Thanks so much!
Source
|
Well that was... disappointing I guess. I was kind of hoping for some more changes considering macro mechanics are being removed. I'd be lying if I wasn't at least half-expecting supply costs to be revisited, especially for zerg since they're going to have an even tougher time remaxing after a fight without as much of a larva bank. May as well let zerg have a larger max army to help with trades.
|
As a HotS only Terran player, I have problems vs Mech as well. I know recently buffing units is the way to go, but considering that Mech is trouble in TvZ, TvT and TvP, nerfing something hard in the Mech composition would be a better idea. Just as a reminder, Mech was buffed 4-5 times throughout the last 2 years. Hellbats were introduced, air and ground weapon and armor upgrades were mixed. Siege tank fire rate was buffed aswell, which is a buff to the Mech composition as it uses more tanks than the Bio composition.
Please read this <3.
Cheers
|
I've never been so disappointed in a community update.
"Hey we're going to help ZvMech, here's the swarm host"
How about you give vipers PB and/or split mech attack upgrades like in lotv, which ACTUALLY balance the match up instead of fucking around with the useless swarmhost. Either give back the old swarmhost or do the changes that are done in the beta that actually solve the problem.
I still find the removal of the macro elements to be the worst decision for the beta yet, but I haven't really thought many of the decisions have been good. I really don't see how this gives any positives while it seemingly just harms match ups. I'm glad that they're at least acknowledging that protoss needs upgrades/build times decreased in some areas to balance it out so at least that's a start.
|
I don't like the Inject Larva auto-cast and two larva way of adjusting Zerg macro - but it's worth a shot I guess.
Everything else seems fine.
|
On August 15 2015 03:37 chipmonklord17 wrote:
I've never been so disappointed in a community update.
"Hey we're going to help ZvMech, here's the swarm host"
How about you give vipers PB and/or split mech attack upgrades like in lotv, which ACTUALLY balance the match up instead of fucking around with the useless swarmhost. Either give back the old swarmhost or do the changes that are done in the beta that actually solve the problem.
I still find the removal of the macro elements to be the worst decision for the beta yet, but I haven't really thought many of the decisions have been good. I really don't see how this gives any positives while it seemingly just harms match ups. I'm glad that they're at least acknowledging that protoss needs upgrades/build times decreased in some areas to balance it out so at least that's a start.
Swarmhost is on the border between being incredibly difficult to deal with, and incredibly useless. Right now I'd argue its the latter. Even in Lotv they feel so underwhelming.
Nerfing mech I dont think is the answer, but without the old swarmhost, zerg in hots lost their ability to trade efficiently which is what makes mech so strong in zvt, especially in split map scenarios (ie flash v curious earlier today in gsl).
|
Ok I love all of these patch, but when is it comming?
|
On August 15 2015 03:43 Sogetsu wrote:
Ok I love all of these patch, but when is it comming?
I'm thinking the exact same thing man...when!
|
warp prism 8 adepts will be much stronger 
|
On August 15 2015 03:37 Pooof wrote:
Mech is trouble in TvZ, TvT and TvP
Please do show me the last TvP mech you've seen in the pro level, thank you
|
Great patch, now release it and let's test!
|
Disagree 100% with the complete removal of macro mechanics and warp gates. Expected a lot more since there were 2 weeks instead of one to prepare the update this time. Oh well lets try them atleast i guess
|
On August 15 2015 03:41 Energizer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 03:37 chipmonklord17 wrote:
I've never been so disappointed in a community update.
"Hey we're going to help ZvMech, here's the swarm host"
How about you give vipers PB and/or split mech attack upgrades like in lotv, which ACTUALLY balance the match up instead of fucking around with the useless swarmhost. Either give back the old swarmhost or do the changes that are done in the beta that actually solve the problem.
I still find the removal of the macro elements to be the worst decision for the beta yet, but I haven't really thought many of the decisions have been good. I really don't see how this gives any positives while it seemingly just harms match ups. I'm glad that they're at least acknowledging that protoss needs upgrades/build times decreased in some areas to balance it out so at least that's a start. Swarmhost is on the border between being incredibly difficult to deal with, and incredibly useless. Right now I'd argue its the latter. Even in Lotv they feel so underwhelming. Nerfing mech I dont think is the answer, but without the old swarmhost, zerg in hots lost their ability to trade efficiently which is what makes mech so strong in zvt, especially in split map scenarios (ie flash v curious earlier today in gsl).
That's entirely what I said. The real problem with ZvMech in HotS is twofold. First, the fact that terran can transition flawlessly into fully upgraded viking banshee from ground mech due to combined upgrades. Zerg doesn't have something that can match this in versatility as the counterpart to viking/banshee (corruptor/BL) is far more expensive, and far worse especially down on upgrades. This is fixed in LotV.
The perhaps larger problem is the fact that Vipers are completely defenseless versus air. In any "even" engagement (meaning one player isn't out of position and both are ready to take on said engagement) worth a damn in HotS a zerg player generally loses all if not most of their vipers. This is due to the fact that to get in range to blinding cloud vipers have to pass over vikings and thors, who are both well upgraded and have amazing range to kill them. Every engagement goes something like
1)vipers fly in and blinding cloud as much as they can before they die
2)ground army goes in and kills everything they can before blinding cloud runs out
3) rinse repeat
The problem is that the time it takes to "rinse/repeat" is the mech player's greatest asset. The time it takes to remake an army AND to remake the vipers AND give vipers the time to gather energy is arguably enough to offset the slowness that mech takes to build up, as it takes fewer units to fortify a position defensively as mech. This is also fixed in LotV in the form of parasitic bombs. There is now a viper micro element in LotV which allows a zerg to not throw away their vipers every engagement as they can attack the air units that your ground army is likely far out of range for.
|
Horrible and to be frank, quite disappointing given the time they took to make it, community update.
1) Balance map for HotS : I'd like them to let the game evolve. If anything, swarm hosts aren't the answer. Splitting upgrades again would be far more reasonable to avoid those BCs turtle games.
2) Fine tuning : we're clearly not at that point, yeah.
3) Warp-in change : I've said it before, that change is just wrong. It strengthens warp prism adepts all-ins even more, to the point of retardedness, is complicated, inelegant. Splitting warp-in power and energy power achieves the same without any drawback. Warp prisms are going to be the new sentry, even worse... Frustrating to play against, source of all-ins, etc... Stop buffing that unit that is already quite broken with the range.
4) Macro changes : please no autocasts...
Overall I'm very disappointed with the direction they're taking... They're making wrong decisions while leaving cyclones and liberators untouched, not doing anything about adepts strength early game that makes PvP a nightmare worse than WoL 4 gates... I'm more and more worried.
|
Really weird that they have like only a month left while these changes are the biggest ever...what happened to ' when it's done' 
Don't really understand why protoss research times should be reduced because chrono is gone. Without mule and with 50% worse injects Zerg and Protoss stuff is going to be much later as well.
HotS change shows they really don't want to spend any time on HotS
|
Awesome! Looking forward to the live patch!
|
On August 15 2015 03:58 [PkF] Wire wrote:
3) Warp-in change : I've said it before, that change is just wrong. It strengthens warp prism adepts all-ins even more, to the point of retardedness, is complicated, inelegant. Splitting warp-in power and energy power achieves the same without any drawback. Warp prisms are going to be the new sentry, even worse... Frustrating to play against, source of all-ins, etc... Stop buffing that unit that is already quite broken with the range.
First, they will tune down the Adept at some point, so it doesn't matter
Second, Adepts can't shoot air, so with a Viking you can deny or stop the Prism (even Turrets)
The All In warping with Prism could be strong but it is a good thing because right now any sort of warp all in is stupidly strong, even the Adepts early game without any Prism and skipping the Bunkers, etc etc.
I really love the whole patch notes, but I want the patch to try it ASAP. And I hope they put the new changes on the Cyclone they were testing as well the new Disruptor.
|
Quoted myself AGAIN... Will one day get used to that new design
|
Only one month to try "bigger" changes? Please no! Take your time Blizzard! Take all you need!
|
Zerg macro is stupid without inject.
|
On August 15 2015 04:02 Sogetsu wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 03:58 [PkF] Wire wrote:
3) Warp-in change : I've said it before, that change is just wrong. It strengthens warp prism adepts all-ins even more, to the point of retardedness, is complicated, inelegant. Splitting warp-in power and energy power achieves the same without any drawback. Warp prisms are going to be the new sentry, even worse... Frustrating to play against, source of all-ins, etc... Stop buffing that unit that is already quite broken with the range.
First, they will tune down the Adept at some point, so it doesn't matter Second, Adepts can't shoot air, so with a Viking you can deny or stop the Prism (even Turrets) The All In warping with Prism could be strong but it is a good thing because right now any sort of warp all in is stupidly strong, even the Adepts early game without any Prism and skipping the Bunkers, etc etc. I really love the whole patch notes, but I want the patch to try it ASAP. And I hope they put the new changes on the Cyclone they were testing as well the new Disruptor.
I wouldn't be as confident as you about Blizzard nerfing what is currently horribly broken like liberators or adepts. New units are cool, better make them strong, huh ?
But anyway, what is the point of making your life complicated with an even more broken warp prism that takes any gateway buff out of the question ? Splitting warp-in power and energy power (= you can warp normally but only around warpgates and Nexi) achieves exactly the same offensive warp-in nerfs without having to overbuff the warp prism, and given that the warp-in time is unchanged leaves some place to zealots buffs for instance.
|
Love the patch! Hopefully coming soon!
As for people complaining there is not more info in this community feed back, I think this probably exactly tells us that DK and his team are busy with redesign, patch, and internal testing. The marco change is huge and I don't think they will have enough time to test too many versions of it.
Also this is why I am worry about the 1 month time limit... it is probably not going to be enough with so many big changes going on.
So please, release the next patch soon to get the test going.
|
Really disappointing update.
Beta needs more time.
No mention the reaver.
No talk about removing msc or reworking protoss.
He mentions buffing swarmhosts which is awful.
Autocast injects... Jesus.
|
On August 15 2015 04:04 Jj_82 wrote:
Only one month to try "bigger" changes? Please no! Take your time Blizzard! Take all you need!
Its already been slated to be released in 2015 - most likely during christmas. More time isn't an option.
|
automatic flying locusts? this is a huge nerf. if anything you should play with ground locusts against 200/200 mech.
|
On August 15 2015 03:41 Energizer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 03:37 chipmonklord17 wrote:
I've never been so disappointed in a community update.
"Hey we're going to help ZvMech, here's the swarm host"
How about you give vipers PB and/or split mech attack upgrades like in lotv, which ACTUALLY balance the match up instead of fucking around with the useless swarmhost. Either give back the old swarmhost or do the changes that are done in the beta that actually solve the problem.
I still find the removal of the macro elements to be the worst decision for the beta yet, but I haven't really thought many of the decisions have been good. I really don't see how this gives any positives while it seemingly just harms match ups. I'm glad that they're at least acknowledging that protoss needs upgrades/build times decreased in some areas to balance it out so at least that's a start. Swarmhost is on the border between being incredibly difficult to deal with, and incredibly useless. Right now I'd argue its the latter. Even in Lotv they feel so underwhelming. Nerfing mech I dont think is the answer, but without the old swarmhost, zerg in hots lost their ability to trade efficiently which is what makes mech so strong in zvt, especially in split map scenarios (ie flash v curious earlier today in gsl).
Zerg in BW can't trade effectively against mech either. The entire game, against Flash's turtle style, is based upon how many minerals zerg can mine on the terran's half of the map.
SC2's economy just doesn't work with that dynamic. Would need a BW style economy for that meta to work.
|
Norway839 Posts
Zergs asked for two buttons, one to spawn ground locust and one for air locust, but it never happened.
Locust landing AI is clunky and not fun to use.
Locusts are Light, a few turrets and a PF with blue flame hellbats next to them completely demolish them.
60 seconds waiting time is still a lot.
They move awfully slowly in the air.
Feels like a lot of ways to improve the SH without making it utterly broken.
Reducing its supply from 4 to 3 is probably the best way since it only affects the later maxed-out stages of the game. Pretty much every caster out there has stated it a million times including on the WCS streams ... "the army is so small" ...
But even then, turtle mech players are extremely good at taking close to zero damage from them anyway. It's really impressive to play against players like Happy that position their planetaries, hellbats, turrets etc. well. I've had several scenarios where 10 swarm hosts have only been able to kill one turret and 1-2 hellbats. They're just really weak.
Reducing the supply from 4 to 3 is the most important change, but even then this unit has so many issues and a lot of those issues will transfer over to LOTV if they are not fixed, especially not having separate buttons for ground/air and the clunky, un-enjoyable AI with slow air locusts, stutters before landing, premature landing, etc... still there.
Actually they could just remove the swarm host and buff infested terrans on hive tech. make the eggs beefy, make the marines do damage, especially vs buildings (PF...). Same purpose, better design in every possible way.
|
I think people are underestimating how dangerous it is to make "defensive" warp-ins this strong. 2 sec warp-in is pretty much instataneous, so that in the end it even reinforces 1-2 bases all-ins that have a warp prism. Hell, for 2 sec warp-ins, I would even proxy some warpgates while doing a gateway all-in. When you see how long a Protoss pylon can be defended with zealots (imagine what it becomes with adepts), you should probably be able to wall-in and defend a pylon with some warpgates, creating an on steroids warpgate all-in vs Z.
Their first solution, which I'm a big defender of, was to split energy power and warp-in power and have only warpgates, warp prisms and Nexi provide warp-in power. That solution was so much more simple and elegant, I really regret they seem to have given up on that.
|
My worst dreams have come true. Autocast? REALLY? Why? Please no...
Also - incoming proxy pylon + warpgate all-ins to be stronger than anything we've seen before  .
|
On August 15 2015 04:16 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 03:41 Energizer wrote:On August 15 2015 03:37 chipmonklord17 wrote:
I've never been so disappointed in a community update.
"Hey we're going to help ZvMech, here's the swarm host"
How about you give vipers PB and/or split mech attack upgrades like in lotv, which ACTUALLY balance the match up instead of fucking around with the useless swarmhost. Either give back the old swarmhost or do the changes that are done in the beta that actually solve the problem.
I still find the removal of the macro elements to be the worst decision for the beta yet, but I haven't really thought many of the decisions have been good. I really don't see how this gives any positives while it seemingly just harms match ups. I'm glad that they're at least acknowledging that protoss needs upgrades/build times decreased in some areas to balance it out so at least that's a start. Swarmhost is on the border between being incredibly difficult to deal with, and incredibly useless. Right now I'd argue its the latter. Even in Lotv they feel so underwhelming. Nerfing mech I dont think is the answer, but without the old swarmhost, zerg in hots lost their ability to trade efficiently which is what makes mech so strong in zvt, especially in split map scenarios (ie flash v curious earlier today in gsl). Zerg in BW can't trade effectively against mech either. The entire game, against Flash's turtle style, is based upon how many minerals zerg can mine on the terran's half of the map. SC2's economy just doesn't work with that dynamic. Would need a BW style economy for that meta to work.
Eh, while the economy in BW did help zerg deal with mech, I'd argue that it wasn't the only reason zerg was able to beat mech. A lot of it came down to positioning a much larger army and excellent defiler control, though granted, there wasn't any real way to engage into a terran position and come out ahead - but that was to be expected since you were banking on your third attack. Dont get me wrong, I'd love to see a return of BW's old economy back, but I think at this point its clear DK doesn't want it in sc2 nor does he intend to change the eco system.
|
creep spread will be alot easier to do now for every player... looks scary
|
On August 15 2015 04:24 Qwyn wrote:Also - incoming proxy pylon + warpgate all-ins to be stronger than anything we've seen before .
I think they're really overlooking this... And don't forget the even more obvious anything + a warp prism scenario.
|
On August 15 2015 04:26 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 04:24 Qwyn wrote:Also - incoming proxy pylon + warpgate all-ins to be stronger than anything we've seen before . I think they're really overlooking this... And don't forget the even more obvious anything + a warp prism scenario.
no more warp prism harras, more like warp prism kill move
|
|
|
Jesus fucking christ can they please stop ruining the game?
What's the point of having autocast larva injects? That is so fucking stupid. Either make the player do it or remove it completely.
With the piss poor state of the game so far, are MACRO MECHANICS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING?
Any changes to those will obviously require huge rebalancing of the game around them (basically every single protoss build time needs to change).
Can they just work on fixing liberators, cyclones, disruptors, the economy, etc.??
They make the game infinitely harder by insisting on this stupid fucking economy that is change purely for change's sake and then go around dumbing everything down to compensate.
Fuck.
Ugh I'm mad.
|
What is the point of having auto-injects? Why not just make more larva spawn at the hatchery with a soft cap where they start to spawn slower, or have some sort of upgrade to have more than 3 available? And then queens can have 50 energy required to poop a tumor since they won't be injecting anymore.
WP needs to take some middle ground on unit spawning, like 5-8 seconds. Otherwise it would defeat the whole point of nerfing the offensive warp if a prism is allowed to spawn units quickly.
|
LOOOOOOL
Swarmhosts again? This is the result of all the hard counters in the game so blizzard HAVE to go back to these stupid units. PLEASE Blizzard just remove the swarm host and find some other solution (or make locusts cost money).
I have no idea how the warpgates changes is gonna play out in a game.
Regarding removing the macro stuff.
It sucks that they are removing chronoboost imho it is a really good mechanic. But maybe it could be good for the game?(I am however very doubtful with the current unit interactions)
Suggestion
I feel like zerg wont have to look in their base as much as the other races if they remove inject, so maybe make it so that overlords dont spawn from larvae but you build them with your drones. Maybe the drones morphs in to a 2x2 caccon so you cant just put it down in the mineral line?
|
Looking forward to how the new macro mechanics feel, going to be weird for sure 
Yes, the warp prism all ins will be stronger. But at least it will be shut down HARD once the warp prism dies. It will probably be standard to get some ravagers or vikings to counter the warp prism once you scout the all in coming, but so be it. Don't bash it too much before you try to play against it.
Looking forward to the patch.
|
On August 15 2015 04:26 Topin wrote:
creep spread will be alot easier to do now for every player... looks scary
with auto-inject you have basically zero chance to creep spread.
|
On August 15 2015 04:36 MyrionSC wrote:
Yes, the warp prism all ins will be stronger. But at least it will be shut down HARD once the warp prism dies. It will probably be standard to get some ravagers or vikings to counter the warp prism once you scout the all in coming, but so be it. Don't bash it too much before you try to play against it.
I wouldn't bash it if splitting warp-in power and energy power didn't achieve exactly the same things on the offensive warp-in nerf side, but without the downsides...
|
On August 15 2015 04:39 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 04:36 MyrionSC wrote:
Yes, the warp prism all ins will be stronger. But at least it will be shut down HARD once the warp prism dies. It will probably be standard to get some ravagers or vikings to counter the warp prism once you scout the all in coming, but so be it. Don't bash it too much before you try to play against it.
I wouldn't bash it if splitting warp-in power and energy power didn't achieve exactly the same things on the offensive warp-in nerf side, but without the downsides...
I'm not familiar with what you are talking about. How is what you are saying different from what is being implemented?
|
On August 15 2015 04:39 Dingodile wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 04:26 Topin wrote:
creep spread will be alot easier to do now for every player... looks scary with auto-inject you have basically zero chance to creep spread.
I think you'll be able to set queens on auto-inject. If you don't set a queen on auto-inject, it will just live its peaceful creep spreading / transfusing life.
Nevertheless, I hate the autocast "solution" too. Make hatcheries automatically spawn more larvae, it's more elegant and queens are a very useful spellcaster and early game defense anyway.
|
Scanner Sweep use is much more common, but because there are so many possible scans available, Calldown: Extra Supplies now has tactical justification. The decision to cast one ability or the other has become rather dynamic, and the constant decisions between these two abilities seem interesting.
It cannot be understated how gigantic this nerf to bio play is. I think you will have to go for gas intensive units now. Marine/Maurauder is unlikely to be viable.
Also the decision between supply call down and scan isn't interesting at all, but w/e.
|
On August 15 2015 04:42 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 04:39 Dingodile wrote:On August 15 2015 04:26 Topin wrote:
creep spread will be alot easier to do now for every player... looks scary with auto-inject you have basically zero chance to creep spread. I think you'll be able to set queens on auto-inject. If you don't set a queen on auto-inject, it will just live its peaceful creep spreading / transfusing life.
?
If you disable the auto-inject, that queen is doing the same job like the current queen/state?!
|
Warp Gate change is much better now.
I think there's honestly no reason to cut the Mule if they keep call down supply. Instead they could just nerf it to the ground.
Using call down supply, when no scan is needed, will feel terrible as with Orbitals giving 14 Supply there's already not much space to make building walls, with call down supply, it'll hurt this even more and those walls will actually be pretty precious at 16 supply pr. supply depot.
Auto inject should instead be the ability to queue up injects I think. The reason auto inject is kept instead of increasing the hatch larvae spawn rate, is so you can still harass and kill off queens. MB auto inject is nice, but have a hard time thinking of a nice implementation of this.
Chrono Boost is the easiest to just cut, though if they go back on this at some point, you could also make it able to queue up instead.
|
On August 15 2015 04:43 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +Scanner Sweep use is much more common, but because there are so many possible scans available, Calldown: Extra Supplies now has tactical justification. The decision to cast one ability or the other has become rather dynamic, and the constant decisions between these two abilities seem interesting. It cannot be understated how gigantic this nerf to bio play is. I think you will have to go for gas intensive units now. Marine/Maurauder is unlikely to be viable. Also the decision between supply call down and scan isn't interesting at all, but w/e.
Also Terran's implicit harass resistance. Mules make up for dead SCVs. Turtle mech is going to be much better, especially cyclones.
|
On August 15 2015 04:40 MyrionSC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 04:39 [PkF] Wire wrote:On August 15 2015 04:36 MyrionSC wrote:
Yes, the warp prism all ins will be stronger. But at least it will be shut down HARD once the warp prism dies. It will probably be standard to get some ravagers or vikings to counter the warp prism once you scout the all in coming, but so be it. Don't bash it too much before you try to play against it.
I wouldn't bash it if splitting warp-in power and energy power didn't achieve exactly the same things on the offensive warp-in nerf side, but without the downsides... I'm not familiar with what you are talking about. How is what you are saying different from what is being implemented?
The solution they first came with and which I'm a big fan of :
- Pylons provide only energy power, that allows you to build structures (blue circles). They don't provide warp-in power anymore.
- Warpgates, Nexi and warp prisms provide usual warp-in power. Warp-in duration is left unchanged.
That solution just kills early/mid game attacks that rely on proxy pylons.
It also avoids the downsides of the 2/16 sec "solution" : with their solution, the warp prism makes every gateway based all-in basically able to reinforce at an unheard of speed, and I can even see proxy warpgates becoming a thing. I'm pretty adamant it would force a severe adept nerf because of warp prism + adepts all-ins. Besides, that solution is quite confusing... I really see no reason to favor the 2/16 solution instead of the warp-in / energy power split.
|
On August 15 2015 04:46 Dingodile wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 04:42 [PkF] Wire wrote:On August 15 2015 04:39 Dingodile wrote:On August 15 2015 04:26 Topin wrote:
creep spread will be alot easier to do now for every player... looks scary with auto-inject you have basically zero chance to creep spread. I think you'll be able to set queens on auto-inject. If you don't set a queen on auto-inject, it will just live its peaceful creep spreading / transfusing life. ? If you disable the auto-inject, that queen is doing the same job like the current queen/state?!
I think so. I'm pretty sure Proleague will forbid queen autocasting by the way, like they did with automatic drones rally at the start.
|
In order of disappointment...
Removal of Inject>Removal of Chrono-boost>Changes to Warp-ins>Removal of Mule.
Also, now Warp Prisms are essentially required for offensive attacks as Protoss. I don't really see many aggressive builds forgoing it.
Another thing is that they removed a lot of the build strategy in Protoss and Zerg due to the macro reduction changes. Chrono-boost gave Protoss a lot of ways to customize their build, or tweak it slightly for crisp timings in the early game. I thought it was sort of neat. Similar situation with Zerg. Inject timings were a cool part of Zerg openers, at least in ZvZ. But whatever.
|
Argh. I feel like warp-in change will make warp prism the new hero unit and still not sure how i feel about the auto inject :/ I do believe they should nerf ravens r BC´s and NOT just give SH some small buff as that won´t do anything most likely. Let´s see what´s gonna happen but at the moment i´m not feeling very optimistic on Lotv or ZvMech.
|
On August 15 2015 03:34 Energizer wrote:
Well that was... disappointing I guess. I was kind of hoping for some more changes considering macro mechanics are being removed. I'd be lying if I wasn't at least half-expecting supply costs to be revisited, especially for zerg since they're going to have an even tougher time remaxing after a fight without as much of a larva bank. May as well let zerg have a larger max army to help with trades.
Agreed. I can't believe I'm saying this, but I actually think it's time to revisit one supply roaches. (Note: not two armor, however).
|
Blizzard has to remember that the mule was introduced to compensate for the fact that in early game, Terran must pull scvs from mining to construct buildings.
What if the orbital calls down an SCV instead of a mule? That would be a interesting change.
|
On August 15 2015 05:01 Loccstana wrote:
Blizzard has to remember that the mule was introduced to compensate for the fact that in early game, Terran must pull scvs from mining to construct buildings.
What if the orbital calls down an SCV instead of a mule? That would be a interesting change.
That is exactly what it does in starbow
|
Negative people will be negative but I think this is exactly the round of changes that needed to be made with the macro mechanics, without the super boosts that all of them are providing, battles in the early game will be much more micro centric as there will now just be less army supply on the map early to mid game, Zerg is going to have to invest in macro hatcheries for appropriate larvae spending.
The WG changes are beautiful, really an awesome solution, allow WG to be a tool to defend bases especially against super drops, other super prisms and Zerg drops, Protoss needs to be able to quickly and reliably spread out. Now that that is taken care of, a slew of balance problems are going to exist and Protoss is probably going to be a bit underpowered, but after several balance changes and the Koreans coming into the scene and teaching everyone how to play, I think Protoss will have to go through the rough learning phase while they are redesigned into a more unit control skill cap based race.
My only gripes is that there are things that are clear problems in LOTV right now that aren't really an issue of people learning to play. Ultralisks are killing bio play and are stupid and A move, the Ghost and Infestor still are underpowered compared to Templar play, Liberators need to be tuned down, the Reaver change needs to go through for the Disruptor, and the Cyclone still needs to be removed.
All in all, as far as major balance and design changes, I am so pleased to finally see Protoss get some fundamental reworking, especially to WG, it's been so problematic for so many years, nice to see a good, sensible, balance friendly solution.
|
the irony of this "community" update is that they're not actually listening to the vast majority of the community
it's like a slap in the face..
please reconsider auto-cast injects.. i'm no BW purist but this is taking the auto rallied workers and auto mining to the extreme.
|
On August 15 2015 04:16 Liquid`Snute wrote:
Zergs asked for two buttons, one to spawn ground locust and one for air locust, but it never happened.
Locust landing AI is clunky and not fun to use.
Locusts are Light, a few turrets and a PF with blue flame hellbats next to them completely demolish them.
60 seconds waiting time is still a lot.
They move awfully slowly in the air.
Feels like a lot of ways to improve the SH without making it utterly broken.
Reducing its supply from 4 to 3 is probably the best way since it only affects the later maxed-out stages of the game. Pretty much every caster out there has stated it a million times including on the WCS streams ... "the army is so small" ...
But even then, turtle mech players are extremely good at taking close to zero damage from them anyway. It's really impressive to play against players like Happy that position their planetaries, hellbats, turrets etc. well. I've had several scenarios where 10 swarm hosts have only been able to kill one turret and 1-2 hellbats. They're just really weak.
Reducing the supply from 4 to 3 is the most important change, but even then this unit has so many issues and a lot of those issues will transfer over to LOTV if they are not fixed, especially not having separate buttons for ground/air and the clunky, un-enjoyable AI with slow air locusts, stutters before landing, premature landing, etc... still there.
Actually they could just remove the swarm host and buff infested terrans on hive tech. make the eggs beefy, make the marines do damage, especially vs buildings (PF...). Same purpose, better design in every possible way.
I agree 100%
Best way is to give upgrades back to Infested Terrans, make FG do bonus damage vs Armored units, longer range.
Remove PDD
That alone could change the game a bit. It would allow you to do something.
Also NP that was never used... that ability could also be a projectile that gives you control of the enemy unit for 12 - 15 sec.
There are so many ways to help Zerg vs Mech but i feel David Kim or other people on the balance team have no god damn idea how Zergs even work in Sc2
|
I pre-ordered the game today because this patch is so awesome!
|
Autocast injects is so fucking lame. Love the rest of the changes
|
Can't say I like auto-cast at all, could just remove inject and buff larva spawning from the hatch instead if you are going to make it auto-cast imo.
|
On August 15 2015 05:38 Araneae wrote:
Can't say I like auto-cast at all, could just remove inject and buff larva spawning from the hatch instead if you are going to make it auto-cast imo.
the end result is the exact same except you wouldn't need 1 queen for every macro hatchery
|
Macro changes are terrible. They remove strategic depth, reduce the mechanical skill cap and make the races less unique.
Warpin changes are TERRIBLE. way to complicated and buffs warpprism allins.
If those changes go through I will probably stick with HotS.
|
On August 15 2015 05:18 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 04:16 Liquid`Snute wrote:
Zergs asked for two buttons, one to spawn ground locust and one for air locust, but it never happened.
Locust landing AI is clunky and not fun to use.
Locusts are Light, a few turrets and a PF with blue flame hellbats next to them completely demolish them.
60 seconds waiting time is still a lot.
They move awfully slowly in the air.
Feels like a lot of ways to improve the SH without making it utterly broken.
Reducing its supply from 4 to 3 is probably the best way since it only affects the later maxed-out stages of the game. Pretty much every caster out there has stated it a million times including on the WCS streams ... "the army is so small" ...
But even then, turtle mech players are extremely good at taking close to zero damage from them anyway. It's really impressive to play against players like Happy that position their planetaries, hellbats, turrets etc. well. I've had several scenarios where 10 swarm hosts have only been able to kill one turret and 1-2 hellbats. They're just really weak.
Reducing the supply from 4 to 3 is the most important change, but even then this unit has so many issues and a lot of those issues will transfer over to LOTV if they are not fixed, especially not having separate buttons for ground/air and the clunky, un-enjoyable AI with slow air locusts, stutters before landing, premature landing, etc... still there.
Actually they could just remove the swarm host and buff infested terrans on hive tech. make the eggs beefy, make the marines do damage, especially vs buildings (PF...). Same purpose, better design in every possible way. I agree 100% Best way is to give upgrades back to Inefeste Terrans, make FG do bonus damage vs Armored units, longer range. Remove PDD That alone could change the game a bit. It would allow you to do something. Also NP that was never used... that ability could also be a projectile that gives you control of the enmy unit for 12 - 15 sec. There are so many ways to help Zerg vs Mech but i feel David Kim or other people on the balance team have no god damn idea how Zergs even work in Sc2
It's more apperent that its not that they have no idea how Zergs work, but rather their main goal is to reach 50-50 win ratio with the fewest possible changes, at the expense of all other aspects of the game.
|
I think is poitnless discuss now about if the changes are good or bad, i prefer test the map and the changes to make an opinion ^_^, but at first impressions im glad of the direction of the LotV game development, but i hoped other thing in the case of the z v mech, that obviusly is unbalanced, i don´t think a swarmhost harrass is the solution, i would prefer a buff to mutas,or a buff to roach/hydra, or maybe a buff to viper to cost less min/gas/supply or more HP, because practically zerg makes an expensive unit to just being sacrificed after make a couple of blinding clouds, if could make them before die. But thats only thoughts, waiting to test the map.
|
On August 15 2015 05:09 jpg06051992 wrote:
The WG changes are beautiful, really an awesome solution, allow WG to be a tool to defend bases especially against super drops, other super prisms and Zerg drops, Protoss needs to be able to quickly and reliably spread out.
I think the warp-in nerfs (more damage taken, a bit longer) should be deleted to help Protoss (alongside with splitting energy and warp-in power to make offensive warp-ins disappear) ; allowing those on steroids warp-ins is bound to be abused and I find it more worrisome than exciting.
On August 15 2015 05:47 Charoisaur wrote:
Macro changes are terrible. They remove strategic depth, reduce the mechanical skill cap and make the races less unique.
Warpin changes are TERRIBLE. way to complicated and buffs warpprism allins.
If those changes go through I will probably stick with HotS.
While I'm not as harsh as you on macro changes, I feel the same about warp-in changes. I for sure won't stick with HotS, I love competing and there won't be any competition left in HotS most likely, but I'm pretty sure I won't enjoy LotV as much as HotS.
|
The biggest problame is going to be that Zerg will have another 6-8 supply stuck in queens.
But it could be fixed by lowering the supply cost of some units... like roaches and BL and Ultralisk.
I mean Zerg has no god damn 1 supply unit.
|
I would've preferred reductions to macro mechanics rather than outright removal. In particular, I think the Mule removal is going a bit too far. Can't they just test casting calldown Mule cost 50 or 75 minerals before removing it entirely?
|
On August 15 2015 05:48 Clear World wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 05:18 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 15 2015 04:16 Liquid`Snute wrote:
Zergs asked for two buttons, one to spawn ground locust and one for air locust, but it never happened.
Locust landing AI is clunky and not fun to use.
Locusts are Light, a few turrets and a PF with blue flame hellbats next to them completely demolish them.
60 seconds waiting time is still a lot.
They move awfully slowly in the air.
Feels like a lot of ways to improve the SH without making it utterly broken.
Reducing its supply from 4 to 3 is probably the best way since it only affects the later maxed-out stages of the game. Pretty much every caster out there has stated it a million times including on the WCS streams ... "the army is so small" ...
But even then, turtle mech players are extremely good at taking close to zero damage from them anyway. It's really impressive to play against players like Happy that position their planetaries, hellbats, turrets etc. well. I've had several scenarios where 10 swarm hosts have only been able to kill one turret and 1-2 hellbats. They're just really weak.
Reducing the supply from 4 to 3 is the most important change, but even then this unit has so many issues and a lot of those issues will transfer over to LOTV if they are not fixed, especially not having separate buttons for ground/air and the clunky, un-enjoyable AI with slow air locusts, stutters before landing, premature landing, etc... still there.
Actually they could just remove the swarm host and buff infested terrans on hive tech. make the eggs beefy, make the marines do damage, especially vs buildings (PF...). Same purpose, better design in every possible way. I agree 100% Best way is to give upgrades back to Inefeste Terrans, make FG do bonus damage vs Armored units, longer range. Remove PDD That alone could change the game a bit. It would allow you to do something. Also NP that was never used... that ability could also be a projectile that gives you control of the enmy unit for 12 - 15 sec. There are so many ways to help Zerg vs Mech but i feel David Kim or other people on the balance team have no god damn idea how Zergs even work in Sc2 Its more apperently that its not that they have no idea how Zergs work, but rather their main goal is to reach 50-50 win ratio with the fewest possible changes over all other aspects of the game.
True, its all about that win ratio... deosnt matter that it gets that way with cheese, stupid all ins, dont let them get there, deathballs and turtles.
So stupid.
|
On August 15 2015 05:53 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
The biggest problame is going to be that Zerg will have another 6-8 supply stuck in queens.
But it could be fixed by lowering the supply cost of some units... like roaches and BL and Ultralisk.
I mean Zerg has no god damn 1 supply unit.
We do.
The drone.
|
On August 15 2015 05:56 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 05:48 Clear World wrote:On August 15 2015 05:18 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 15 2015 04:16 Liquid`Snute wrote:
Zergs asked for two buttons, one to spawn ground locust and one for air locust, but it never happened.
Locust landing AI is clunky and not fun to use.
Locusts are Light, a few turrets and a PF with blue flame hellbats next to them completely demolish them.
60 seconds waiting time is still a lot.
They move awfully slowly in the air.
Feels like a lot of ways to improve the SH without making it utterly broken.
Reducing its supply from 4 to 3 is probably the best way since it only affects the later maxed-out stages of the game. Pretty much every caster out there has stated it a million times including on the WCS streams ... "the army is so small" ...
But even then, turtle mech players are extremely good at taking close to zero damage from them anyway. It's really impressive to play against players like Happy that position their planetaries, hellbats, turrets etc. well. I've had several scenarios where 10 swarm hosts have only been able to kill one turret and 1-2 hellbats. They're just really weak.
Reducing the supply from 4 to 3 is the most important change, but even then this unit has so many issues and a lot of those issues will transfer over to LOTV if they are not fixed, especially not having separate buttons for ground/air and the clunky, un-enjoyable AI with slow air locusts, stutters before landing, premature landing, etc... still there.
Actually they could just remove the swarm host and buff infested terrans on hive tech. make the eggs beefy, make the marines do damage, especially vs buildings (PF...). Same purpose, better design in every possible way. I agree 100% Best way is to give upgrades back to Inefeste Terrans, make FG do bonus damage vs Armored units, longer range. Remove PDD That alone could change the game a bit. It would allow you to do something. Also NP that was never used... that ability could also be a projectile that gives you control of the enmy unit for 12 - 15 sec. There are so many ways to help Zerg vs Mech but i feel David Kim or other people on the balance team have no god damn idea how Zergs even work in Sc2 Its more apperently that its not that they have no idea how Zergs work, but rather their main goal is to reach 50-50 win ratio with the fewest possible changes over all other aspects of the game. True, its all about that win ratio... deosnt matter that it gets that way with cheese, stupid all ins, dont let them get there, deathballs and turtles. So stupid.
Agree.
|
protoss and terran don't have half a supply unit
|
On August 15 2015 06:06 ROOTFayth wrote:protoss and terran don't have half a supply unit
They aren't the swarm and all.
I think the 'autoinject' is a bit silly, but the direction they are going seems reasonable.
Just 'make' us make more hatches. That's cooler anyway.
|
On August 15 2015 05:01 Loccstana wrote:
Blizzard has to remember that the mule was introduced to compensate for the fact that in early game, Terran must pull scvs from mining to construct buildings.
What if the orbital calls down an SCV instead of a mule? That would be a interesting change.
No. Even BW had the same mechanic of constructing buildings and there was no mules then. The way it was compensated was that SCVs had more HPs than probes/drones so that they would be more resistant to harass during game start.
Mules was introduced since Chrono boost and spawn larva enabled zerg and protoss to produce workers quicker than terran.
Without Chrono boost and spawn larva there is really no need for mules. It also makes Terran more susceptible to harass.
I kinda of like these changes with the exception of autocast spawn larva. I liked an earlier suggestion of hatcheries just spawning larvas faster.
But this does mean that TVZ or TVP balance will be out of whack! The balance has an implicit dependence of mules providing the mineral boost enabling mineral heavy armies. Also in late game terran would often trade scvs for units depending on mules for mining. I don't see how all of this is going to be rebalanced in time for game release!
|
On August 15 2015 06:04 AdrianHealeyy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 05:53 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
The biggest problame is going to be that Zerg will have another 6-8 supply stuck in queens.
But it could be fixed by lowering the supply cost of some units... like roaches and BL and Ultralisk.
I mean Zerg has no god damn 1 supply unit. We do. The drone.
Time for mass drones!
Honestly though. I would appreciate a nerfed 1 supply roach.
From the beginning of SC2, zerg have never really been limited in terms of larva except for mass lings late game just because queen inject was so strong. Maybe with this change, a 1 supply roach might be possible and zerg will finally feel more zergy.
|
sooo... Zergs are going to need pretty much 2/3 Macro Hatcheries per 3 mining bases? Just letting them spawn more larvae all the time would be a way better change imo. Though it would force you to constantly build units/drones instead of a more "in waves" way. Which would probably not even make macro much easier at all. But just the requirement of macro hatches pretty much from 2 Base on seems really odd. Will also require you to build more queens that wont even be able to creep spread with at least every second 25 energy.
The idea of removing macro mechanics could've been nice and everything. But that half ass way without thinking it through (at least it seems like that) is just disappointing and bad. The 900 Mins on half of the patches also still feels wrong.
Speeding up the game with 12 Workers and destroying cheesy proxy builds and early pools? Fine whatever, doesnt change that much in the end. But this ressource change still seems odd.
It's hard to see LotV becoming a great game in like 2.5 months of beta left at most.
|
On August 15 2015 06:16 Obsi wrote:
It's hard to see LotV becoming a great game in like 2.5 months of beta left at most.
I'm VERY doubtful too, because we're basically sent back to WoL, no timing is figured out, nothing is solid, nothing is known. I expect the first months to be very rough, and not necessarily in a good way.
|
On August 15 2015 06:16 Obsi wrote:
sooo... Zergs are going to need pretty much 2/3 Macro Hatcheries per 3 mining bases? Just letting them spawn more larvae all the time would be a way better change imo. Though it would force you to constantly build units/drones instead of a more "in waves" way. Which would probably not even make macro much easier at all. But just the requirement of macro hatches pretty much from 2 Base on seems really odd. Will also require you to build more queens that wont even be able to creep spread with at least every second 25 energy.
The idea of removing macro mechanics could've been nice and everything. But that half ass way without thinking it through (at least it seems like that) is just disappointing and bad. The 900 Mins on half of the patches also still feels wrong.
Speeding up the game with 12 Workers and destroying cheesy proxy builds and early pools? Fine whatever, doesnt change that much in the end. But this ressource change still seems odd.
It's hard to see LotV becoming a great game in like 2.5 months of beta left at most.
The new 12-worker start has created new cheesy builds.
Triple rax from terran, proxy gates from p, 12 pool.
It's all still there.
|
On August 15 2015 06:18 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 06:16 Obsi wrote:
It's hard to see LotV becoming a great game in like 2.5 months of beta left at most. I'm VERY doubtful too, because we're basically sent back to WoL, no timing is figured out, nothing is solid, nothing is known. I expect the first months to be very rough, and not necessarily in a good way.
I feel like blizzard is just changing for change sake. Once the initial spike of players who come on because of an expansion (like always) die out we're going to be left with a much rougher and ultimately less good game. I'd rather see them flesh out these changes and release LotV later, or not go so balls to the wall for seemingly no reason
On August 15 2015 06:21 AdrianHealeyy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 06:16 Obsi wrote:
sooo... Zergs are going to need pretty much 2/3 Macro Hatcheries per 3 mining bases? Just letting them spawn more larvae all the time would be a way better change imo. Though it would force you to constantly build units/drones instead of a more "in waves" way. Which would probably not even make macro much easier at all. But just the requirement of macro hatches pretty much from 2 Base on seems really odd. Will also require you to build more queens that wont even be able to creep spread with at least every second 25 energy.
The idea of removing macro mechanics could've been nice and everything. But that half ass way without thinking it through (at least it seems like that) is just disappointing and bad. The 900 Mins on half of the patches also still feels wrong.
Speeding up the game with 12 Workers and destroying cheesy proxy builds and early pools? Fine whatever, doesnt change that much in the end. But this ressource change still seems odd.
It's hard to see LotV becoming a great game in like 2.5 months of beta left at most. The new 12-worker start has created new cheesy builds. Triple rax from terran, proxy gates from p, 12 pool. It's all still there.
I thought that, at least in the 12 pool case, it no longer punishes like a 6-10 pool used to
|
On August 15 2015 06:22 chipmonklord17 wrote:
I thought that, at least in the 12 pool case, it no longer punishes like a 6-10 pool used to
12 pool beats 17 hatch pretty comfortably. (Or I'd like to think that: otherwise I am just bad.)
I haven't tried 12 pool against FFE, because P don't reliable FFE anymore.
My response is now double extractor trick, 16 hatch, 15 pool, 14 gas, 13 overlord.
From my experience, it's a counter to 12 pool and you aren't far behind from 17 hatch.
|
On August 15 2015 06:24 AdrianHealeyy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 06:22 chipmonklord17 wrote:
I thought that, at least in the 12 pool case, it no longer punishes like a 6-10 pool used to 12 pool beats 17 hatch pretty comfortably. (Or I'd like to think that: otherwise I am just bad.) I haven't tried 12 pool against FFE, because P don't reliable FFE anymore. My response is now double extractor trick, 16 hatch, 15 pool, 14 gas, 13 overlord. From my experience, it's a counter to 12 pool and you aren't far behind from 17 hatch.
I'm talking outside the mirror match up
|
On August 15 2015 06:25 chipmonklord17 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 06:24 AdrianHealeyy wrote:On August 15 2015 06:22 chipmonklord17 wrote:
I thought that, at least in the 12 pool case, it no longer punishes like a 6-10 pool used to 12 pool beats 17 hatch pretty comfortably. (Or I'd like to think that: otherwise I am just bad.) I haven't tried 12 pool against FFE, because P don't reliable FFE anymore. My response is now double extractor trick, 16 hatch, 15 pool, 14 gas, 13 overlord. From my experience, it's a counter to 12 pool and you aren't far behind from 17 hatch. I'm talking outside the mirror match up
Fair enough, but 6/7 pool isn't particularly strong in hots/wol against terran either...
Against P, it's only reasonable when P goes FFE. If they wall of, you nearly almost lost the game.
|
On August 15 2015 06:21 AdrianHealeyy wrote:
The new 12-worker start has created new cheesy builds.
Triple rax from terran, proxy gates from p, 12 pool.
It's all still there.
How do you proxy gate when your probe to build the proxy pylon will be half the way to your opponents natural if not closer to you? Triple Rax from terran has always been "the plat build" which is really really bad and the economy changes won't help that, rightfully so. And I've never seen a 12 Pool in LotV accomplish anything at all. It probably even sucks against Nexus first I could imagine. And if not, it definitely will suck against normal gateway builds since they come so extremely fast.
You both build your buildings faster, but the rush distance doesn't get shorter. Also scouting becomes relatively cheaper aswell.
I'm not even complaining about this, since those cheeses weren't fun to play against to begin with. Sure there are other cheeses now, especially with the new units, but I don't think they are comparable to proxy gates/2 rax/ early pools.
|
On August 15 2015 06:26 AdrianHealeyy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 06:25 chipmonklord17 wrote:On August 15 2015 06:24 AdrianHealeyy wrote:On August 15 2015 06:22 chipmonklord17 wrote:
I thought that, at least in the 12 pool case, it no longer punishes like a 6-10 pool used to 12 pool beats 17 hatch pretty comfortably. (Or I'd like to think that: otherwise I am just bad.) I haven't tried 12 pool against FFE, because P don't reliable FFE anymore. My response is now double extractor trick, 16 hatch, 15 pool, 14 gas, 13 overlord. From my experience, it's a counter to 12 pool and you aren't far behind from 17 hatch. I'm talking outside the mirror match up Fair enough, but 6/7 pool isn't particularly strong in hots/wol against terran either... Against P, it's only reasonable when P goes FFE. If they wall of, you nearly almost lost the game.
While that's true that still adds to the game in a way that the 12 worker start removes for seemingly no good reason. I'd personally really like to see blizzard let the community play with the same economy system but HotS starting workers. Its one thing to say "we tested it, its not that cool" and letting the community see it in action. Maybe I'd actually believe them
|
On August 15 2015 06:04 AdrianHealeyy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 05:53 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
The biggest problame is going to be that Zerg will have another 6-8 supply stuck in queens.
But it could be fixed by lowering the supply cost of some units... like roaches and BL and Ultralisk.
I mean Zerg has no god damn 1 supply unit. We do. The drone.
LOL yeah... i was talking about a real 1 supply unit to battle like hydra was in BW
On August 15 2015 06:06 ROOTFayth wrote:protoss and terran don't have half a supply unit
Right cuz they are the swarm right ?
Man Terran Bio is more swarmy then Zerg, its that bad.
Sometime i miss BW so much... like all games it had some problems but it wasnt this stupid design.
|
On August 15 2015 03:34 Energizer wrote:
...especially for zerg since they're going to have an even tougher time remaxing after a fight without as much of a larva bank. May as well let zerg have a larger max army to help with trades.
BINGO.
Zerg will just be forced to do a lot more hatcheries to compensate for the larvae loss.
How about leaving autocast for 2 larva, but also allow inject, and inject adds 1 more larva for those who feel the need for it?
Right cuz they are the swarm right ?
Man Terran Bio is more swarmy then Zerg, its that bad.
Sometime i miss BW so much... like all games it had some problems but it wasnt this stupid design.
Also, a thousand times THIS!!! Zerg has lost its capability to "swarm" effectively a long time ago somewhere between the tons of nerfs and "balancing patches". Im learning some terran nowadays precisely for the swarming factor. Zerg has been reduced to a struggle to survive in both early game and late game.
|
Yet again, DK disappoints a lot of the community because it feels like he does not care about the "issues" we are really concerned about... Macro Mechanics? We are really getting ahead of ourselves, why not fix things like the overlapping disruptor, viper etc? And please blizzard really give thought to the economic models that have been proposed. A lot of people put work into creating them because they have clearly seen a problem with LOTV current econ system, a problem a lot of people have seen and are beginning to get hopeless because we are starting to believe you dont take this game seriously since you have done nothing on this matter...
|
On August 15 2015 06:27 Obsi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 06:21 AdrianHealeyy wrote:
The new 12-worker start has created new cheesy builds.
Triple rax from terran, proxy gates from p, 12 pool.
It's all still there. How do you proxy gate when your probe to build the proxy pylon will be half the way to your opponents natural if not closer to you? Triple Rax from terran has always been "the plat build" which is really really bad and the economy changes won't help that, rightfully so. And I've never seen a 12 Pool in LotV accomplish anything at all. It probably even sucks against Nexus first I could imagine. And if not, it definitely will suck against normal gateway builds since they come so extremely fast. You both build your buildings faster, but the rush distance doesn't get shorter. Also scouting becomes relatively cheaper aswell. I'm not even complaining about this, since those cheeses weren't fun to play against to begin with. Sure there are other cheeses now, especially with the new units, but I don't think they are comparable to proxy gates/2 rax/ early pools.
Agreed. While it's true cheeses have led to some of the most awesome games in sc2 most of the time it just leads to plain BO losses. I just hate BO losses because they have nothing to do with skill and it comes all down to luck if it works or not.
If I want to watch a game where the winner is decided by luck I watch rock/paper/scissors and not sc2.
Something like PartinG vs Life g7 where PartinG only lost because he lost the rock/paper/scissors game shouldn't happen in sc2.
|
On August 15 2015 06:16 Obsi wrote:
sooo... Zergs are going to need pretty much 2/3 Macro Hatcheries per 3 mining bases? Just letting them spawn more larvae all the time would be a way better change imo. Though it would force you to constantly build units/drones instead of a more "in waves" way. Which would probably not even make macro much easier at all. But just the requirement of macro hatches pretty much from 2 Base on seems really odd. Will also require you to build more queens that wont even be able to creep spread with at least every second 25 energy.
The idea of removing macro mechanics could've been nice and everything. But that half ass way without thinking it through (at least it seems like that) is just disappointing and bad. The 900 Mins on half of the patches also still feels wrong.
Speeding up the game with 12 Workers and destroying cheesy proxy builds and early pools? Fine whatever, doesnt change that much in the end. But this ressource change still seems odd.
It's hard to see LotV becoming a great game in like 2.5 months of beta left at most.
8 hatches with 6 queens, it will be the optimal number, it would mean the production of 5 bases in the current patch.
The pros.
- more creep spread
- more attention on other tasks
- if someone snipes a hatch it wont kill the economy since you already have a mcro hatch right next to it, guess ost people will go for drones now then sniping a base.
The cons.
- even less supply when this was a zerg problem already
- less production in early-mid game
- tech switches might happen only 1 as a suprise but never again will you see more tech switches then that.
|
The cons.
- even less supply when this was a zerg problem already
- less production in early-mid game
Exactly, these two critical points worry me the most out of everything.
I feel like they simply dont calculate the impact of these changes all the way through.
Early game was already tough, with less larva it will be alt-f4 -> uninstall; i would need additional macro hatcheries to compensate, and no opponent with a functional brain would allow the time for that to happen.
|
On August 15 2015 06:38 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 06:27 Obsi wrote:On August 15 2015 06:21 AdrianHealeyy wrote:
The new 12-worker start has created new cheesy builds.
Triple rax from terran, proxy gates from p, 12 pool.
It's all still there. How do you proxy gate when your probe to build the proxy pylon will be half the way to your opponents natural if not closer to you? Triple Rax from terran has always been "the plat build" which is really really bad and the economy changes won't help that, rightfully so. And I've never seen a 12 Pool in LotV accomplish anything at all. It probably even sucks against Nexus first I could imagine. And if not, it definitely will suck against normal gateway builds since they come so extremely fast. You both build your buildings faster, but the rush distance doesn't get shorter. Also scouting becomes relatively cheaper aswell. I'm not even complaining about this, since those cheeses weren't fun to play against to begin with. Sure there are other cheeses now, especially with the new units, but I don't think they are comparable to proxy gates/2 rax/ early pools. Agreed. While it's true cheeses have led to some of the most awesome games in sc2 most of the time it just leads to plain BO losses. I just hate BO losses because they have nothing to do with skill and it comes all down to luck if it works or not. If I want to watch a game where the winner is decided by luck I watch rock/paper/scissors and not sc2. Something like PartinG vs Life g7 where PartinG only lost because he lost the rock/paper/scissors game shouldn't happen in sc2.
But that's just a matter of opinion. Everything in the game has a risk, that's an inherent part of a real time strategy game. There's ALWAYS a cost (assuming a balanced game). Two rax/proxy gate/6-10 pool all come with their own share of risks. Parting by every right should have lost because Life read him, he risked it all knowing Parting wouldn't. Mind games and strategies like that are how champions are made and in mine and many other's opinions, are an integral part of the game.
|
I have to say I'm pretty sure they will give up on removing macro mechanics if it turns out to be a catastrophe, which is possible. The game is working well with them.
|
It's also way too early to talk about the balance implications of it. We know there are going to be massive balance implications all the way up and down the game in every matchup, but it affects so many things in so many ways there's no way to really know what's going to happen for sure without some rigorous testing.
|
Hopefully they patch after Battlegrounds, anyone think this is probable?
|
On August 15 2015 07:02 GGzerG wrote:
Hopefully they patch after Battlegrounds, anyone think this is probable?
They told on page 4 of that thread the patch is comming Thursday 20 (OUCH)
I will be farming gold or playing StarBow until the next weekend then
|
Warping-in at a Pylon takes 16 seconds.
If a Pylon’s power radius is touching a Warp Gate or a Nexus, the color of the power radius changes, and warp-ins take 2 seconds.
Multiple Pylons can be affected by the same Nexus or Warp Gate.
The Warp Prism’s power radius will be the stronger version, and units will only take 2 seconds to warp-in.
Protoss Aggressive warpins nerfed? That is a great step in the right direction. So much of the game is balanced around that mechanic that it could change things hugely. My actually start giving this a go again. Was my biggest balance complaint for the longest time.
Hated that you had to be so safe or perfect scouting to avoid protoss all ins every game. I would guess now they will send some unit buffs protoss way.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
Don't really understand why protoss research times should be reduced because chrono is gone
Because they have added time to the important researches over and over and over again due to anticipating them being chrono boosted ~4-8x in all ins centered around them. Blink, Warpgate etc had to be slow when chrono'd, so they'll be really really really slow without chain chrono on them.
Also, with the game starting at 12 workers, way less of the research time is buried in the "people are just getting up economy and doing nothing significant anyway" time period - the upgrades like warpgate and blink were coming in comparitively too late even with chrono.
With the inject change, i'm guessing that at some stages of the game, people will opt for just dropping hatcheries rather than queens. Queens are good for defense, but no longer hugely efficient for production
|
I'm baffled that Zergs are complaining about this patch. Your lives are going to be so much easier, and you'll have to build slightly more unit producing structures *gasp*. Yours is the only change that is a nerf, not a removal. And it's not even really a nerf. You'll probably end up with about the same larva, or more, for substantially less APM. Yet the tears run like rivers before they've even tried it.
There is no mechanic that makes up for the Mule being removed.
There is no mechanic that makes up for Chronoboost being removed.
Toss will end up getting buffs to research times, and certain units.
Terran will get ... supply call down and scanner sweep. Get ready for a lot more PF's, fellas! Bahahaha.
|
On August 15 2015 07:41 TimeSpiral wrote:
I'm baffled that Zergs are complaining about this patch. Your lives are going to be so much easier, and you'll have to build slightly more unit producing structures *gasp*. Yours is the only change that is a nerf, not a removal. And it's not even really a nerf. You'll probably end up with about the same larva, or more, for substantially less APM. Yet the tears run like rivers before they've even tried it.
There is no mechanic that makes up for the Mule being removed.
There is no mechanic that makes up for Chronoboost being removed.
Toss will end up getting buffs to research times, and certain units.
Terran will get ... supply call down and scanner sweep. Get ready for a lot more PF's, fellas! Bahahaha.
I don't know, I assume you are Terran?
So imagine Chronoboost is being removed and Inject is being removed, Mules however, now are autocast. You still have to invest into an orbital, your race is now balanced around something that happens automatically (since it is as tactical of a decision as returning a mineral patch to the hatchery after it was mined). It's just a mess, It's ugly. Should have removed inject, increased the cost of creep tumors, and slightly rebalance the larva spawntime in future updates, like they will with protoss research times.
|
On August 15 2015 08:06 HaRuHi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 07:41 TimeSpiral wrote:
I'm baffled that Zergs are complaining about this patch. Your lives are going to be so much easier, and you'll have to build slightly more unit producing structures *gasp*. Yours is the only change that is a nerf, not a removal. And it's not even really a nerf. You'll probably end up with about the same larva, or more, for substantially less APM. Yet the tears run like rivers before they've even tried it.
There is no mechanic that makes up for the Mule being removed.
There is no mechanic that makes up for Chronoboost being removed.
Toss will end up getting buffs to research times, and certain units.
Terran will get ... supply call down and scanner sweep. Get ready for a lot more PF's, fellas! Bahahaha. I don't know, I assume you are Terran? So imagine Chronoboost is being removed and Inject is being removed, Mules however, now are autocast. You still have to invest into an orbital, your race is now balanced around something that happens automatically (since it is as tactical of a decision as returning a mineral patch to the hatchery after it was mined). It's just a mess, It's ugly. Should have removed inject, increased the cost of creep tumors, and slightly rebalance the larva spawntime in future updates, like they will with protoss research times.
You assume correctly.
I agree with the last bit, that spawn larva should have been flatly removed, but the rest feels a little flimsy. Often, Zergs will argue that you cannot miss an inject. There is no tactical decision to inject or not, unless you're talking about extreme early game, and you're trying to connect bases with an early tumor. So, essentially, they've taken something that had to be done, every time without fail--with little decision making--and made it automatic. And there are complaints.
Could it have been better for Zerg? Contextually, probably not.
EDITED: Sorry, let me address if Mule was autocast. That would be super terrible, because Terran needs to choose between Mule and scan in meaningful ways.
|
On August 15 2015 08:18 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 08:06 HaRuHi wrote:On August 15 2015 07:41 TimeSpiral wrote:
I'm baffled that Zergs are complaining about this patch. Your lives are going to be so much easier, and you'll have to build slightly more unit producing structures *gasp*. Yours is the only change that is a nerf, not a removal. And it's not even really a nerf. You'll probably end up with about the same larva, or more, for substantially less APM. Yet the tears run like rivers before they've even tried it.
There is no mechanic that makes up for the Mule being removed.
There is no mechanic that makes up for Chronoboost being removed.
Toss will end up getting buffs to research times, and certain units.
Terran will get ... supply call down and scanner sweep. Get ready for a lot more PF's, fellas! Bahahaha. I don't know, I assume you are Terran? So imagine Chronoboost is being removed and Inject is being removed, Mules however, now are autocast. You still have to invest into an orbital, your race is now balanced around something that happens automatically (since it is as tactical of a decision as returning a mineral patch to the hatchery after it was mined). It's just a mess, It's ugly. Should have removed inject, increased the cost of creep tumors, and slightly rebalance the larva spawntime in future updates, like they will with protoss research times. You assume correctly. I agree with the last bit, that spawn larva should have been flatly removed, but the rest feels a little flimsy. Often, Zergs will argue that you cannot miss an inject. There is no tactical decision to inject or not, unless you're talking about extreme early game, and you're trying to connect bases with an early tumor. So, essentially, they've taken something that had to be done, every time without fail--with little decision making--and made it automatic. And there are complaints. Could it have been better for Zerg? Contextually, probably not.
The complaints that I see are angry about poor game design, not poor balance. As a zerg I hate this change for the reasons that guy stated. Inject should be manual or removed entirely. I don't care at all about whether the race is actually becoming stronger or not. That's something to think about later.
|
Wow, more protoss, bullshit, cheesy builds incoming. Protoss players love proxying Stargates, now they will proxy gateways instead, then bang - 2 second warp in. With Adepts supporting the pylon and Stargate they will never lose them and the game will become unplayable for 1/3 of match ups. Try to catch them out of position and PO and defensive 2 second warp in will get them out of jail - mothership core out of position just recall and defend.
How about a change that would make Protoss players have to scout? Or be aware of the map? Or any of the other stuff that real players have to do?
|
One month is too little for big changes. Especially when it takes weeks for each patch .
|
Our current plan is to continue exploring various large-scale changes for roughly one additional month, and then (assuming things are sufficiently finalized) we can shift our focus towards balance changes for the remainder of the beta. Design changes will still be considered after this period, but we will be trying to reduce them to things that are absolutely needed so that we can focus on balance tuning before the release of the game.
This is the most disappointing part for me, that probably means there won't be any changes to economy, high ground, pathing, tier changes (hydra tier one for example), or even some new upgrades which would maybe improve the game (let's be honest, additional upgrades would be sweet)
Oh man, as i said before, Blizzard only doing the absolut minimum (ok a little bit more maybe) :/
Beware people, the LOTV gameplay you see in one week will be pretty much the game we will play till the next big rts, sigh -.-
|
|
|
On August 15 2015 08:42 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +Our current plan is to continue exploring various large-scale changes for roughly one additional month, and then (assuming things are sufficiently finalized) we can shift our focus towards balance changes for the remainder of the beta. Design changes will still be considered after this period, but we will be trying to reduce them to things that are absolutely needed so that we can focus on balance tuning before the release of the game. This is the most disappointing part for me, that probably means there won't be any changes to economy, high ground, pathing, tier changes (hydra tier one for example), or even some new upgrades which would maybe improve the game (let's be honest, additional upgrades would be sweet) Oh man, as i said before, Blizzard only doing the absolut minimum (ok a little bit more maybe) :/ Beware people, the LOTV gameplay you see in one week will be pretty much the game we will play till the next big rts, sigh -.-
i was literally just writing a post on the exact same thing, but now it doesnt make sense since you mentioned it; i completely agree, it feels rushed. When giving such a deadline, ideally many (70% maybe?) of the core design changes would have been tested and approved.
This feels like a management decision from above, they just have to stick to the deadline and there is nothing they can do about it. Realistically in a month at this rate of testing, there is room for a last batch of core changes, after the one on thursday; then only fine tuning and release; the community better help with quality feedback and quick feasible ideas, as time is rapidly running out.
|
I guess protoss is going to become very turtlish. This is going to suck for counter-attack harassment with proxy pylons and could make protoss fairly limited.
|
On August 15 2015 08:56 xtorn wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 08:42 The_Red_Viper wrote:Our current plan is to continue exploring various large-scale changes for roughly one additional month, and then (assuming things are sufficiently finalized) we can shift our focus towards balance changes for the remainder of the beta. Design changes will still be considered after this period, but we will be trying to reduce them to things that are absolutely needed so that we can focus on balance tuning before the release of the game. This is the most disappointing part for me, that probably means there won't be any changes to economy, high ground, pathing, tier changes (hydra tier one for example), or even some new upgrades which would maybe improve the game (let's be honest, additional upgrades would be sweet) Oh man, as i said before, Blizzard only doing the absolut minimum (ok a little bit more maybe) :/ Beware people, the LOTV gameplay you see in one week will be pretty much the game we will play till the next big rts, sigh -.- i was literally just writing a post on the exact same thing, but now it doesnt make sense since you mentioned it; i completely agree, it feels rushed. When giving such a deadline, ideally many (70% maybe?) of the core design changes would have been tested and approved. This feels like a management decision from above, they just have to stick to the deadline and there is nothing they can do about it. Realistically in a month at this rate of testing, there is room for a last batch of core changes, after the one on thursday; then only fine tuning and release; the community better help with quality feedback and quick feasible ideas, as time is rapidly running out.
One month would be okish if they actually would be fast with these core changes and tests.
Let's say we use one week per change, that would probably be doable to see if a change is good or bad for the game design (balance is almost unimportant).
But that obviously won't happen, i don't even see ONE more big thing being changed tbh.
|
|
|
I just don't understand it, why simplifying? I like macroing as Protoss, it gaves me nice feeling when I'm doing it right. To think that less macro brings more micro is just stupid.
Also, Terran can still mule/depo, Zerg has creeps and larva (though auto), and Toss has?.... mcore i guess :/
|
On August 15 2015 06:35 Steelghost wrote:
Macro Mechanics? We are really getting ahead of ourselves, why not fix things like the overlapping disruptor, viper etc?
i think such changes are considered ahead of others because of the "game too hard, make it more approachable for newcomers" argument; this seems to be top priority now, increasing player base (which i agree is necessary, but maybe there are ways to do this other than simply dumbing down the game mechanics)
|
Change CC and Nexus cost to 500 minerals... Mutas Tier 1,5 (hatchery + spire)... simple, simple, simple...
|
On August 15 2015 08:38 DeadByDawn wrote:
Wow, more protoss, bullshit, cheesy builds incoming. Protoss players love proxying Stargates, now they will proxy gateways instead, then bang - 2 second warp in. With Adepts supporting the pylon and Stargate they will never lose them and the game will become unplayable for 1/3 of match ups. Try to catch them out of position and PO and defensive 2 second warp in will get them out of jail - mothership core out of position just recall and defend.
How about a change that would make Protoss players have to scout? Or be aware of the map? Or any of the other stuff that real players have to do?
you mean that are moving from forcefield bullshit to another bullshit?.
|
Super psyched, great job blizz! Big changes.
|
Don't add any more automations
|
Not a fan. It's such a bizarre reasoning:
They make inject automatic, making zerg alot easier by removing the one punishing thing about it (and one of the few reasons to even look at your base). Zerg, which is already the race which had the last two years less players in bronce and silver than protoss and terran, meaning it is easier already in low leagues.
23.6% bronce, 27.6% silver, 32.4% gold and more zerg above: nios.kr
Then you remove chrono for protoss, which is busywork, but also can be forgiving when you forgot upgrades or lost workers.
Worst of all, they remove mules for terran, which are incredibly easy to use and the simplest part of terran macro, you'll automatically see all mules while building SCVs anyway. Instead we'll use supply drops now, which will actually take a miniscule amount of more aiming.
Supply drop will make the early game actually more punishing since people can just go for sniping high supply depots to cause hardcore supply-blocks! And did I mention how inbase expands are nerfed by having them to fly out earlier (with less incentive for orbitals)? How you can't mule on fewer bases? How terrans are going to get less orbitals, weakening their natural tools against cloaked units?
So the general 'easement' of macro will make the most accessible race more accessible and don't ease anything about terran at all, but instead making it slightly harder despite simplifying build-orders. Anyone else seeing the error?
|
On August 15 2015 10:27 Temeter wrote:Not a fan. It's such a bizarre reasoning: They make inject automatic, making zerg alot easier by removing the one punishing thing about it (and one of the few reasons to even look at your base). Zerg, which is already the race which had the last two years less players in bronce and silver than protoss and terran, meaning it is easier already in low leagues. 23.6% bronce, 27.6% silver, 32.4% gold and more zerg above: nios.krThen you remove chrono for protoss, which is busywork, but also can be forgiving when you forgot upgrades or lost workers. Worst of all, they remove mules for terran, which are incredibly easy to use and the simplest part of terran macro, you'll automatically see all mules while building SCVs anyway. Instead we'll use supply drops now, which will actually take a miniscule amount of more aiming. Supply drop will make the early game actually more punishing since people can just go for sniping high supply depots to cause hardcore supply-blocks! And did I mention how inbase expands are nerfed by having them to fly out earlier (with less incentive for orbitals)? How you can't mule on fewer bases? How terrans are going to get less orbitals, weakening their natural tools against cloaked units? So the general 'easement' of macro will make the most accessible race more accessible and don't ease anything about terran at all, but instead making it slightly harder despite simplifying build-orders. Anyone else seeing the error?
You have some good points. I think after testing things will be back to normal.
I think a better nerf (if at all required, it isn't imho) - would be to nerf macro boosters by 25%. This will slow their effect and put more emphasis on micro engagements as you will have less money to throw away.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
i dont understand why people are complaining about the zerg inject auto cast for 2 reasons
1) less economy early. that means that zergs cannot play greedy anymore and really have to think about what units they are producing, especially before they get an additional macro hatch..which also means that they're sinking 300/450 minerals, which could have been something else, into macro hatches/queens to reach similar levels of production
2) zergs can no longer bank as much larva as they used to be able to off of 3/4 base. which means if you kill a drone line, thats twice as devastating for zerg as it was before. it also means that if you wipe out an army, your counter attack will be much stronger as well since they will have less larva.
previously, zergs were punished if they missed injects or lost a queen to save something from harassment..thats production/larva that they can never get back whereas mules and chrono bank and can be spammed out. now terran get to spend energy on more intel via scans, and can more regularly supply drop which saves 100g and keeps a worker mining..thats so huge. protoss will also get naturally faster tech which is pretty neat too, you don't have to choose to spend chrono on either tech or warp-ins (especially with the quicker defensive warp ins).
all in all i think this is positive especially with the new units requiring all races to baby sit and micro more
|
Everybody who is talking balance in a design thread should really rethink what they are saying
|
On August 15 2015 11:02 BluemoonSC wrote:
i dont understand why people are complaining about the zerg inject auto cast for 2 reasons
1) less economy early. that means that zergs cannot play greedy anymore and really have to think about what units they are producing, especially before they get an additional macro hatch..which also means that they're sinking 300/450 minerals, which could have been something else, into macro hatches/queens to reach similar levels of production
2) zergs can no longer bank as much larva as they used to be able to off of 3/4 base. which means if you kill a drone line, thats twice as devastating for zerg as it was before. it also means that if you wipe out an army, your counter attack will be much stronger as well since they will have less larva.
previously, zergs were punished if they missed injects or lost a queen to save something from harassment..thats production/larva that they can never get back whereas mules and chrono bank and can be spammed out. now terran get to spend energy on more intel via scans, and can more regularly supply drop which saves 100g and keeps a worker mining..thats so huge. protoss will also get naturally faster tech which is pretty neat too, you don't have to choose to spend chrono on either tech or warp-ins (especially with the quicker defensive warp ins).
all in all i think this is positive especially with the new units requiring all races to baby sit and micro more
Yeah, the problem with all of that is, we haven't gotten to the balance patches yet. The point of cutting macro mechanics isn't to change the meta, it's to make the game smoother for newbies, therefore I have to assume that Blizzard will do everything in their power to minimize the meta-impact of these changes.
"Less economy early" - so they'll just reduce costs on early Zerg structures/units and there won't be a difference.
"Zergs can no longer bank as much larva" - first of all, Zerg will have more Hatcheries in LOTV so this is already a grey area; second, Blizz might just buff Zerg units to make up for less larva.
All of that is up in the air. What we know for a fact is that the macro of a race that wasn't micro-intensive to begin with just got a hell of a lot easier.
|
"Hey everyone,
We've seen a few questions about the upcoming patch and so we wanted to clarify:
The Disruptor changes will be in the next LotV beta balance patch
The next beta balance patch is currently planned for Thursday, August 20th
Hopefully that helps answer some of your questions!
~Arkitas "
|
Good changes, these will be healthy for the game in the long run.
Mules should have never made it into the game. This will have a nice impact on the TvZ matchup, hopefully they let it play out a bit before making any changes to units. It will hopefully get rid of the ultra turtle style which lotv is trying to get rid of.
The speed at which creed recedes seems like the obvious area to fix. It may add an incentive for players to get overlord speed as a way to regain their creep spread after removal.
The list for build time changes for protoss units and upgrades is going to be huge
|
As an old man, I'm happy with anything that reduces the APM requirements of the game. However, as,a gamer, I'm disappointed with these changes. I think that removing chrono removes a lot of strategy from the game. Same goes for mules. I guess the queen inject change is ok. IDK. I'm interested in testing out these changes.
|
On August 15 2015 11:00 Parcelleus wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 10:27 Temeter wrote:Not a fan. It's such a bizarre reasoning: They make inject automatic, making zerg alot easier by removing the one punishing thing about it (and one of the few reasons to even look at your base). Zerg, which is already the race which had the last two years less players in bronce and silver than protoss and terran, meaning it is easier already in low leagues. 23.6% bronce, 27.6% silver, 32.4% gold and more zerg above: nios.krThen you remove chrono for protoss, which is busywork, but also can be forgiving when you forgot upgrades or lost workers. Worst of all, they remove mules for terran, which are incredibly easy to use and the simplest part of terran macro, you'll automatically see all mules while building SCVs anyway. Instead we'll use supply drops now, which will actually take a miniscule amount of more aiming. Supply drop will make the early game actually more punishing since people can just go for sniping high supply depots to cause hardcore supply-blocks! And did I mention how inbase expands are nerfed by having them to fly out earlier (with less incentive for orbitals)? How you can't mule on fewer bases? How terrans are going to get less orbitals, weakening their natural tools against cloaked units? So the general 'easement' of macro will make the most accessible race more accessible and don't ease anything about terran at all, but instead making it slightly harder despite simplifying build-orders. Anyone else seeing the error? You have some good points. I think after testing things will be back to normal. I think a better nerf (if at all required, it isn't imho) - would be to nerf macro boosters by 25%. This will slow their effect and put more emphasis on micro engagements as you will have less money to throw away.
Thanks! I imagine Blizzard would ofc still balance terran around these new issues, but I just can't really see the point. It's like exchanging one system for another without actually making anything easier.
I see how taking some speed out of the midgame makes sense, slowing down the jump to lategame compared to HOTS and putting more focus on limited engagements than fast deathballing. Just not really convinced this is the way to do it, slowing down boosters and limiting their relevance might be indeed better.
|
Holy hell, what's going on in the beta? Macro mechanics being outright removed? Additional set of warp in rules? Were we seriously asking for all this?
|
On August 15 2015 11:52 Hier wrote:
Holy hell, what's going on in the beta? Macro mechanics being outright removed? Additional set of warp in rules? Were we seriously asking for all this?
Warp in rules should have been in from day one. It defied the entire point of the warp prism tech to be able to warp in anywhere on the map with no penalty. Plus the protoss matchups are balanced around protoss all ins, which now wont be nearly as effective. Which means protoss might get some buffs in the gateway units.
|
I don't care if it takes Blizz till the end of 2018 if it means they will make an amazing game that will last for a decade or more! PLEASE TAKE YOUR TIME
|
On August 15 2015 11:29 iPhoneAppz wrote:
As an old man, I'm happy with anything that reduces the APM requirements of the game. However, as,a gamer, I'm disappointed with these changes. I think that removing chrono removes a lot of strategy from the game. Same goes for mules. I guess the queen inject change is ok. IDK. I'm interested in testing out these changes.
Unless you are like 50 you should be fine! Im 24 and my APM skill is increasing. Just remember Bomber is like 27! It also will help keep you mentally fit! You will live to 100 if you play starcraft!-research still pending
|
Finally something against Mech.
Maybe Blizzard realized that it was a bit strange that after 5 years of bio now 90% of the korean Terrans have switched to full mech
|
Bisutopia19214 Posts
What if they kept mules as repair only ability? That'd be cool at least having drop down repairs. They could also then continue to be used with the scan drop combo.
|
|
|
|
|
On August 15 2015 16:39 Fran_ wrote:
so disappointing
Why? Macro boosters sucked and only barely had a place in the game because of the way the economy worked. Now with the new economy they are more harmful then anything else.
Mules have been OP since the start, Chronoboost has sucked since the start, and Inject has been more of a necessary evil then a true display of "skill" and limited balance options for Zerg because of the remax capability.
|
Removing macro mecanics instead of giving people a choice on how they affect their gameplay is ridiculous. Terran bio only works because of mules, protoss techswitches only work with chronoboost.
Removing the macro mecanics is ridiculous. BW difficulty about macro because you had mecanical limits to the game. SC2 doesn't have these limits, and removing the macro mechanics will lead to a BORING game to play and to watch.
|
"If a Pylon’s power radius is touching a Warp Gate or a Nexus, the color of the power radius changes, and warp-ins take 2 seconds."
So basically, the new way to 4gate is to put a proxy gateway at your opponents natural for fast warpins?
When you guys see it in GSL, you gotta call it the Dumbledore build 
|
but how do I manner mule then?
|
I personnaly see the auto-cast inject as the worst change. Not only it gives outright the optimum production potential to all zergs (whether GM or Bronze), but it is also a hidden buff to creep spread (you have more time to manage your creep). It is basically more creep and more production for every zerg player, no matter their level of skill... Protoss and Terran macro mechanics changes feel like design changes, the Zerg ones feel like balance (imba?) changes.
|
They say they want macro to be more visible, but give queens autoinject... >< Macro will be easy as piss now, and it already was incredibly simple compared to BW. The development team has a MOBA-boil in desperate need of lancing, I'm getting increasingly frustrated by how they're always trying to add more and more "fast-paced action" and abilities to units, while dumbing down the economical aspect and macro.
|
this autoinject will make zerg in lotv can't be able to remax as fast as in hots. Zerg army supply is always smaller than terran and protoss due to higher worker count. They must depend on high larva count to rebuild his army fast and send immidiately to the battlefied to overwhelm the enemy. Especially in Lotv, with Lurker-3 supply unit in the combination, zerg army is even smaller. Unless there are some ways to buff the efficiency of zerg army, or at least increasing the max supply cap of the zerg, then i don't think people will consider to play zerg. The zerg is getting far away from its identity of being a swarmy race!!! Fuck that!
|
The release date is already written down, Lets all haste the beta now; gg
|
Exciting times for Starcraft!
|
As a compromise, what I would like to see is an optional manual inject for Zerg which gives a small advantage to macro over the auto-option, but not so great that it is mandatory (and other activities such as creep spread or harrass could be chosen instead for players who don't like injecting). For example auto injects give 2 larva, but manual injects still produce 4 larva (exact numbers TBD).
That would allow lower level players and those who don't like the inject pattern not to have to worry about it, but those like me who love injecting could choose to do injects over other activities for a small larva bonus, perhaps until the lategame when larva isn't as important as army control.
Also, I'm not a fan of the comment "we’re also seeing better creep spread. This is something that we may need to tune eventually."
To me, this says that the current plan is replace injects + creep with creep which is twice as hard to do. That is simply removing an aspect of the game for no benefit whatsoever.
Remember: injects and the other macro actions were put in to keep a timed-return-to-your-base skill similar to worker building in brood war. Whilst I completely accept SC2 moves towards strategy over mechanics, I really feel it would be a shame to remove this remaining unique facet from the game entirely.
|
On August 15 2015 20:28 mishimaBeef wrote:
Exciting times for Starcraft!
Yeah very exciting to read that they won't do big changes anymore pretty much.
At least they tested a lot of what the community wanted, right?
I really hoped blizzard would care and do a good job with this beta, but in the end they didn't deliver :/
|
warp prisms should get a bit more expensive i think. with the 2 sec warpin a warpprism pretty much contains infinite (as much as gateways) units without the risk of losing them like other dropships have (medivac, overlord)
|
I am very happy with this community update. I think they are going in a great direction with it.
|
I can see what blizzard is aiming for but I am still really worried.
I mean ok it is good to put a bigger focus on micro. Currently I see 2 things that problaby are going to make the game pretty frustrating to play.
1. The cyclone. The first time you see this unit you will go "ok that was some pretty cool micro" the second time "well it is ok I guess" and the third time it will be "wtf is this shit". There is ZERO depth to this auto move and shoot micro and the skill ceiling is incredibly low.
2. The adept. They fill a pretty good role for protoss with how tanky they are but my problem is with the ability and with how strong they are against light units. Imho the shade thing is at the end of the day only fun for the player using it, I cant see much micro for the opposing player other than simply being aware and not being caught of guard by it. So you are basically being punished for not paying attention or you are paying attention and the protoss will just cancel, not loosing anything.
Additionally both of these units will require very specific army comps to deal with which will limit diversity.
(Admittedly to keep things interesting you need some uniques but these 2 along with a few other crosses the line, my humble opinion)
|
Looks like I will be building more hatcheries to have more larvae available.
|
macro was fine, why do they have to destroy everything that is good, its like the game is good enough (not perfect, but what game is...), so they are no longer needed, therefore they have to destroy everything so they have something to fix again...
|
The first time you went live with considering to take away some of the macro mechanics I went totally bananas =P
Posted an aggresive comment too, now that it has sunk in I have to say that I'm curious to see how this goes if you try it. I'm very excited for it actually, to try anyway.
Zerg changes would be welcome seeing as anyone but Rogue is trumped against mech on maps where its good. The other possiblity is making all/most maps very very open so zerg actually can make 280 degrees surrounds which is the only other possible way of winning without outplaying your opponent as Z.
|
On August 15 2015 12:17 Darpa wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 11:52 Hier wrote:
Holy hell, what's going on in the beta? Macro mechanics being outright removed? Additional set of warp in rules? Were we seriously asking for all this? Warp in rules should have been in from day one. It defied the entire point of the warp prism tech to be able to warp in anywhere on the map with no penalty. Plus the protoss matchups are balanced around protoss all ins, which now wont be nearly as effective. Which means protoss might get some buffs in the gateway units.
No. Some Protoss all-ins will indeed effectively disappear, but anything that includes a warp prism will actually be even stronger -don't forget that retarded 6 range pick-up thing on top of the now nearly instantaneous warp-ins.
Don't expect most Protoss players to respectfully use the "defensive" warp-ins to try and painfully survive vs bio + liberators or lurkers. Expect them to try to proxy gateways or use warp prisms to strengthen their adept all-ins. I know for instance that I will only do 1 base proxy robo warp prism adepts all-ins vs T if that change goes through and enjoy my free wins.
The warp prism is already far too cheap for how good it has become, and now you make it even stronger. This is plain retarded. "Defensive" warp-ins shouldn't be that strong. Revert warp-in duration and damage taken to what it was in HotS, and split energy and warp-in power (you can only warp-in around warp gates, Nexi and warp prism). THAT change would allow some work on zealots and stalkers without the fear of creating an unstoppable 8 gates warp prism all-in and without the confusion of the many circles of different colors. I can already feel my eyes suffer.
|
On August 15 2015 21:16 Shuffleblade wrote:Zerg changes would be welcome seeing as anyone but Rogue is trumped against mech on maps where its good. The other possiblity is making all/most maps very very open so zerg actually can make 280 degrees surrounds which is the only other possible way of winning without outplaying your opponent as Z.
Most maps are already zerg-favored and (for this or other reasons) bio-play just doesn't cut it anymore against top zergs. You've been able to see lots of korean terrans just die by using bio, that's why Innovation went mech against zerg in the first place. Proleague has reached 60% ZvT winrate, the individual leagues don't have many terrans at the top. If anything, protoss dominance might be an issue.
Mech is basically the only tool that reliably works against zerg of that level and following many terran players jumped on the mech train. Funny thing is most of them never played much mech, bio-play was far more common.
Looking at proleague, GSL and Starleague only paints a kinda weird picture as to why Blizz suddenly thinks mech is an issue and Bio play just fine, all the while while terran winrates are down and only mech helps to recover atm.
Not that I've got too much sympathy for mech, while it has some nice positional elements, bio all the way. Personally, I'm not so hot about balance change, but that's a weird place to start. Also, I've got little trust in Blizz creating anything out of that abomination of an unit that is the swarmhost.
|
On August 15 2015 16:17 BisuDagger wrote:
What if they kept mules as repair only ability? That'd be cool at least having drop down repairs. They could also then continue to be used with the scan drop combo.
I second this! The economy would run as blizz intends, without mules, but terran would still have three distinct options to use energy in orbitals. Just taking the mule outright out decreases the diversity of plays unnecessarily.
|
On August 15 2015 21:53 Koivusto wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 16:17 BisuDagger wrote:
What if they kept mules as repair only ability? That'd be cool at least having drop down repairs. They could also then continue to be used with the scan drop combo. I second this! The economy would run as blizz intends, without mules, but terran would still have three distinct options to use energy in orbitals. Just taking the mule outright out decreases the diversity of plays unnecessarily.
And the manner mules !
|
On August 15 2015 21:55 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 21:53 Koivusto wrote:On August 15 2015 16:17 BisuDagger wrote:
What if they kept mules as repair only ability? That'd be cool at least having drop down repairs. They could also then continue to be used with the scan drop combo. I second this! The economy would run as blizz intends, without mules, but terran would still have three distinct options to use energy in orbitals. Just taking the mule outright out decreases the diversity of plays unnecessarily. And the manner mules !
I require a new spell on the cc which cast mules with auto dance.
|
On August 15 2015 19:39 Thinh123456 wrote:
this autoinject will make zerg in lotv can't be able to remax as fast as in hots. Zerg army supply is always smaller than terran and protoss due to higher worker count. They must depend on high larva count to rebuild his army fast and send immidiately to the battlefied to overwhelm the enemy. Especially in Lotv, with Lurker-3 supply unit in the combination, zerg army is even smaller. Unless there are some ways to buff the efficiency of zerg army, or at least increasing the max supply cap of the zerg, then i don't think people will consider to play zerg. The zerg is getting far away from its identity of being a swarmy race!!! Fuck that!
They could reduce the supply of all zerg units by 1 across the board with few exceptions.
|
Everything great! Finally the right steps.
|
On August 15 2015 22:10 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 19:39 Thinh123456 wrote:
this autoinject will make zerg in lotv can't be able to remax as fast as in hots. Zerg army supply is always smaller than terran and protoss due to higher worker count. They must depend on high larva count to rebuild his army fast and send immidiately to the battlefied to overwhelm the enemy. Especially in Lotv, with Lurker-3 supply unit in the combination, zerg army is even smaller. Unless there are some ways to buff the efficiency of zerg army, or at least increasing the max supply cap of the zerg, then i don't think people will consider to play zerg. The zerg is getting far away from its identity of being a swarmy race!!! Fuck that! They could reduce the supply of all zerg units by 1 across the board with few exceptions.
In bio TvZ zerg uses banelings, which are incredibly supply efficient. That does more than just balance out the supply difference. Just think about it: 40 marines equate to 80 banelings supply-wise.
And that's also one of the reasons terran needs mines, which do need to kill huge amounts of zerg in a single shot from time to time.
|
Finally, some good changes. It took like 5 years them to realize that.
Worst timing though, there are hardly anybody to appreciate it.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 15 2015 22:10 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 19:39 Thinh123456 wrote:
this autoinject will make zerg in lotv can't be able to remax as fast as in hots. Zerg army supply is always smaller than terran and protoss due to higher worker count. They must depend on high larva count to rebuild his army fast and send immidiately to the battlefied to overwhelm the enemy. Especially in Lotv, with Lurker-3 supply unit in the combination, zerg army is even smaller. Unless there are some ways to buff the efficiency of zerg army, or at least increasing the max supply cap of the zerg, then i don't think people will consider to play zerg. The zerg is getting far away from its identity of being a swarmy race!!! Fuck that! They could reduce the supply of all zerg units by 1 across the board with few exceptions.
That would make a zerg 200/200 supply army way better than it needs to be. I honestly think that with macro hatches zerg will be ok, but if they're not, it's more likely gonna be a buff to the speed at which larva spawn.
|
On August 15 2015 20:34 The_Red_Viper wrote:Yeah very exciting to read that they won't do big changes anymore pretty much. At least they tested a lot of what the community wanted, right? I really hoped blizzard would care and do a good job with this beta, but in the end they didn't deliver :/
They said they are still going to be doing big patches for a month at least. The changes they are testing in this patch are big and worth testing.
I love this patch!!
|
On August 15 2015 22:54 BluemoonSC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 22:10 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 15 2015 19:39 Thinh123456 wrote:
this autoinject will make zerg in lotv can't be able to remax as fast as in hots. Zerg army supply is always smaller than terran and protoss due to higher worker count. They must depend on high larva count to rebuild his army fast and send immidiately to the battlefied to overwhelm the enemy. Especially in Lotv, with Lurker-3 supply unit in the combination, zerg army is even smaller. Unless there are some ways to buff the efficiency of zerg army, or at least increasing the max supply cap of the zerg, then i don't think people will consider to play zerg. The zerg is getting far away from its identity of being a swarmy race!!! Fuck that! They could reduce the supply of all zerg units by 1 across the board with few exceptions. That would make a zerg 200/200 supply army way better than it needs to be. I honestly think that with macro hatches zerg will be ok, but if they're not, it's more likely gonna be a buff to the speed at which larva spawn.
The problem is, zerg still has alot of supply in drones and queens... now they will have even less supply to work with. ( more queens on macro hatches )
Did i mention we still dont have a 1 supply unit ?
I do agree they might buff the larva spawn but Zergs needs a 1 supply unit and/or reduced supply on other units.
Zerg is the swarm for god sake and everytime it has less units then a terran.... its such bad design and a really bad joke.
|
Auto-inject is the laziest solution ever seen... If you don't want players to have to do injects, then remove the ability ffs.
There is no way ever that Blizzard would have created a queen with autocast injects from the start. The only reason it exists is that the game is designed around injects and now they want to remove it, but they can't because it is too important, and they don't know what to replace it with. Try explaining the rational of the suggested queen to someone that never played sc2, how would it add something to the game?
I mean... what if we suggest a unit for protoss that has a spell that casts chronoboost on a warpgate for 10 seconds. costs 50 minerals. 10 second cooldown on the spell. Oh, and it's autocast. Sounds like a great unit? My point is: there is NO WAY the suggested queen would have made it through if suggested as a new unit as it is now. The other devs would have looked at the person suggesting it in a strange way and stop inviting him to after-work beers.
I'm a bit upset at this change... I am personally pretty emotionally against removing manual inject to start with, and then they choose to not even remove it, but rather add more mechanics that cancels it out? Well, cudos for testing, but this is a plain lazy solution.
|
On August 15 2015 23:21 Cascade wrote:
Auto-inject is the laziest solution ever seen... If you don't want players to have to do injects, then remove the ability ffs.
Killing an auto-inject queen remains a tactical option in battles and harrassments but it wont have that high effect anymore. It's the best solution.
Blizzard is perfectly right with its current decisionmaking. They reduce "terrible terrible damage" as well as scaling of advantages and disadvantages. More opportunities for comebacks will be created etc. It is what this game needs.
|
On August 15 2015 23:27 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 23:21 Cascade wrote:
Auto-inject is the laziest solution ever seen... If you don't want players to have to do injects, then remove the ability ffs.
Killing an auto-inject queen remains a tactical option in battles and harrassments but it wont have that high effect anymore. It's the best solution. Blizzard is perfectly right with its current decisionmaking. They reduce "terrible terrible damage" as well as scaling of advantages and disadvantages. More opportunities for comebacks will be created etc. It is what this game needs.
All of these macro mechanics were a reason for comebacks. A fast 3CC could replenish, lots of larva mean lots of drones, and chroonoboost could alleviate tech disadvantages and probe losses.
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
well, not buying LotV
nice job
|
On August 15 2015 23:41 Temeter wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 23:27 LSN wrote:On August 15 2015 23:21 Cascade wrote:
Auto-inject is the laziest solution ever seen... If you don't want players to have to do injects, then remove the ability ffs.
Killing an auto-inject queen remains a tactical option in battles and harrassments but it wont have that high effect anymore. It's the best solution. Blizzard is perfectly right with its current decisionmaking. They reduce "terrible terrible damage" as well as scaling of advantages and disadvantages. More opportunities for comebacks will be created etc. It is what this game needs. All of these macro mechanics were a reason for comebacks. A fast 3CC could replenish, lots of larva mean lots of drones, and chroonoboost could alleviate tech disadvantages and probe losses.
These mechanics were responsible for high advantage vs. disadvantage scaling mostly. Look at 2 hatch vs. 3 hatch ZvZ. Compare at 2 oc vs. 3 oc TvT.
The same applies to mixed matchups: compare 3 OC T vs. 4 hatch Z with 2 OC vs. 4 hatch zerg and with 3 OC vs. 3 hatch zerg. Losing a base or having an additional hatch/oc out only a bit late can auto lose you the game or force you unwillingly on all-in-mode due to the high scaling.
Exactly this is what narrows down sc2's strategical and tactical diversity.
|
On August 15 2015 23:50 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 23:41 Temeter wrote:On August 15 2015 23:27 LSN wrote:On August 15 2015 23:21 Cascade wrote:
Auto-inject is the laziest solution ever seen... If you don't want players to have to do injects, then remove the ability ffs.
Killing an auto-inject queen remains a tactical option in battles and harrassments but it wont have that high effect anymore. It's the best solution. Blizzard is perfectly right with its current decisionmaking. They reduce "terrible terrible damage" as well as scaling of advantages and disadvantages. More opportunities for comebacks will be created etc. It is what this game needs. All of these macro mechanics were a reason for comebacks. A fast 3CC could replenish, lots of larva mean lots of drones, and chroonoboost could alleviate tech disadvantages and probe losses. These mechanics were responsible for high advantage vs. disadvantage scaling mostly. Look at 2 hatch vs. 3 hatch ZvZ. Compare at 2 oc vs. 3 oc TvT. The same applies to mixed matchups: compare 3 OC T vs. 4 hatch Z with 2 OC vs. 4 hatch zerg and with 3 OC vs. 3 hatch zerg. Losing a base or having an additional hatch/oc out only a bit late can auto lose you the game or force you unwillingly on all-in-mode due to the high scaling. Exactly this is what narrows down sc2's strategic and tactical diversity.
What narrows down ZvZs diversity are mostly roaches, which are incredibly efficient earlygame and snowball everything.
TvT always had lots of uncertainities and comebacks, lots of potential for positional play and economical damage.
Removing macro will never add to the games diversity. Suddenly the game gets easier, suddenly the game gets less punishing, suddenly comebacks are more possible, suddenly there is more complexity.
That's a pipe dream.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 15 2015 23:15 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 22:54 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 15 2015 22:10 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 15 2015 19:39 Thinh123456 wrote:
this autoinject will make zerg in lotv can't be able to remax as fast as in hots. Zerg army supply is always smaller than terran and protoss due to higher worker count. They must depend on high larva count to rebuild his army fast and send immidiately to the battlefied to overwhelm the enemy. Especially in Lotv, with Lurker-3 supply unit in the combination, zerg army is even smaller. Unless there are some ways to buff the efficiency of zerg army, or at least increasing the max supply cap of the zerg, then i don't think people will consider to play zerg. The zerg is getting far away from its identity of being a swarmy race!!! Fuck that! They could reduce the supply of all zerg units by 1 across the board with few exceptions. That would make a zerg 200/200 supply army way better than it needs to be. I honestly think that with macro hatches zerg will be ok, but if they're not, it's more likely gonna be a buff to the speed at which larva spawn. The problem is, zerg still has alot of supply in drones and queens... now they will have even less supply to work with. ( more queens on macro hatches ) Did i mention we still dont have a 1 supply unit ? I do agree they might buff the larva spawn but Zergs needs a 1 supply unit and/or reduced supply on other units. Zerg is the swarm for god sake and everytime it has less units then a terran.... its such bad design and a really bad joke.
terran and protoss have just as much supply in probes and scvs, though. yes, you want to be ahead, but with more workers, comes more production, comes more units. you don't necessarily need queens on your macro hatches either. an extra hatch per expansion is what will likely become the norm to make up for the missing larva. minerals are easy for a zerg to come by too, so im not too upset.
On August 15 2015 23:21 Cascade wrote:
Auto-inject is the laziest solution ever seen... If you don't want players to have to do injects, then remove the ability ffs.
There is no way ever that Blizzard would have created a queen with autocast injects from the start. The only reason it exists is that the game is designed around injects and now they want to remove it, but they can't because it is too important, and they don't know what to replace it with. Try explaining the rational of the suggested queen to someone that never played sc2, how would it add something to the game?
I mean... what if we suggest a unit for protoss that has a spell that casts chronoboost on a warpgate for 10 seconds. costs 50 minerals. 10 second cooldown on the spell. Oh, and it's autocast. Sounds like a great unit? My point is: there is NO WAY the suggested queen would have made it through if suggested as a new unit as it is now. The other devs would have looked at the person suggesting it in a strange way and stop inviting him to after-work beers.
I'm a bit upset at this change... I am personally pretty emotionally against removing manual inject to start with, and then they choose to not even remove it, but rather add more mechanics that cancels it out? Well, cudos for testing, but this is a plain lazy solution.
dude we get 2 less larva than we did before..this is actually a nerf. it makes zerg production choices super important and building that extra round of drones instead of units is even more punishing. i understand that the autocast thing is a little lame, but realistically with all of hte micro options for the other races, injecting perfectly is almost impossible. even the koreans thought it was hard.
|
On August 15 2015 23:56 Temeter wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 23:50 LSN wrote:On August 15 2015 23:41 Temeter wrote:On August 15 2015 23:27 LSN wrote:On August 15 2015 23:21 Cascade wrote:
Auto-inject is the laziest solution ever seen... If you don't want players to have to do injects, then remove the ability ffs.
Killing an auto-inject queen remains a tactical option in battles and harrassments but it wont have that high effect anymore. It's the best solution. Blizzard is perfectly right with its current decisionmaking. They reduce "terrible terrible damage" as well as scaling of advantages and disadvantages. More opportunities for comebacks will be created etc. It is what this game needs. All of these macro mechanics were a reason for comebacks. A fast 3CC could replenish, lots of larva mean lots of drones, and chroonoboost could alleviate tech disadvantages and probe losses. These mechanics were responsible for high advantage vs. disadvantage scaling mostly. Look at 2 hatch vs. 3 hatch ZvZ. Compare at 2 oc vs. 3 oc TvT. The same applies to mixed matchups: compare 3 OC T vs. 4 hatch Z with 2 OC vs. 4 hatch zerg and with 3 OC vs. 3 hatch zerg. Losing a base or having an additional hatch/oc out only a bit late can auto lose you the game or force you unwillingly on all-in-mode due to the high scaling. Exactly this is what narrows down sc2's strategic and tactical diversity. What narrows down ZvZs diversity are mostly roaches, which are incredibly efficient earlygame and snowball everything. TvT always had lots of uncertainities and comebacks, lots of potential for positional play and economical damage. Removing macro will never add to the games diversity. Suddenly the game gets easier, suddenly the game gets less punishing, suddenly comebacks are more possible, suddenly there is more complexity. That's a pipe dream.
Sure it will. And you will be one of the guys that hasn't seen it coming but will have to admit it later on when it becomes obvious for everyone.
And you know what becomes obvious about your post? You just dislike that zergs will have an easier life with auto injects. You don't even understand the global context and impact of these changes nor want to know them. I am sorry to say.
Less 3vs2 base (etc.) scaling is exactly what Sc2 needs.
Some other effects:
- Less larvas per inject is what I suggested already like 1-2 years ago in balance discussion (and ppl told me its design). Goes without saying that it was just too much with 4 per inject. It was the only thing that matters and forgetting it in important situations or losing 1-2 major queens at times ends the game.
- The ability of terran to lose almost all its economy but have about 15 free scv replacements from 3 OC had to go, it made every committment on attacking the terran early on without killing him a complete waste and therefore narrowed down the strategical diversity to pure all-in or pure defensive macro against terran (compare introduction of oracles: that was nothing else than giving protoss an effective ability to harrass terran at all early on). Now there will be more shades of grey and committing on different levels of pressure on terran can pay off without the drawback of mules making your efforts invisible. The game will become more skill heavy due to this for everyone included.
- Replacing lategame economy almost completely with supplyless mules is one of the dumbest things Sc2 has seen, it had to go. Rather make terran stronger overall (e.g. scv back to 55-60hp).
|
Ppl still talk about numbers at this stage... Why is that. Must be psychological pressure that they feel when "their" race has been touched. No one wants a balance talk right now...
I don't like that it's only 1 month of design changes. I am really disappointed. I guess the management floor wants the game to be released asap. There goes the quality : (
|
On August 15 2015 23:58 BluemoonSC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 23:15 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 15 2015 22:54 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 15 2015 22:10 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 15 2015 19:39 Thinh123456 wrote:
this autoinject will make zerg in lotv can't be able to remax as fast as in hots. Zerg army supply is always smaller than terran and protoss due to higher worker count. They must depend on high larva count to rebuild his army fast and send immidiately to the battlefied to overwhelm the enemy. Especially in Lotv, with Lurker-3 supply unit in the combination, zerg army is even smaller. Unless there are some ways to buff the efficiency of zerg army, or at least increasing the max supply cap of the zerg, then i don't think people will consider to play zerg. The zerg is getting far away from its identity of being a swarmy race!!! Fuck that! They could reduce the supply of all zerg units by 1 across the board with few exceptions. That would make a zerg 200/200 supply army way better than it needs to be. I honestly think that with macro hatches zerg will be ok, but if they're not, it's more likely gonna be a buff to the speed at which larva spawn. The problem is, zerg still has alot of supply in drones and queens... now they will have even less supply to work with. ( more queens on macro hatches ) Did i mention we still dont have a 1 supply unit ? I do agree they might buff the larva spawn but Zergs needs a 1 supply unit and/or reduced supply on other units. Zerg is the swarm for god sake and everytime it has less units then a terran.... its such bad design and a really bad joke. terran and protoss have just as much supply in probes and scvs, though. yes, you want to be ahead, but with more workers, comes more production, comes more units. you don't necessarily need queens on your macro hatches either. an extra hatch per expansion is what will likely become the norm to make up for the missing larva. minerals are easy for a zerg to come by too, so im not too upset. Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 23:21 Cascade wrote:
Auto-inject is the laziest solution ever seen... If you don't want players to have to do injects, then remove the ability ffs.
There is no way ever that Blizzard would have created a queen with autocast injects from the start. The only reason it exists is that the game is designed around injects and now they want to remove it, but they can't because it is too important, and they don't know what to replace it with. Try explaining the rational of the suggested queen to someone that never played sc2, how would it add something to the game?
I mean... what if we suggest a unit for protoss that has a spell that casts chronoboost on a warpgate for 10 seconds. costs 50 minerals. 10 second cooldown on the spell. Oh, and it's autocast. Sounds like a great unit? My point is: there is NO WAY the suggested queen would have made it through if suggested as a new unit as it is now. The other devs would have looked at the person suggesting it in a strange way and stop inviting him to after-work beers.
I'm a bit upset at this change... I am personally pretty emotionally against removing manual inject to start with, and then they choose to not even remove it, but rather add more mechanics that cancels it out? Well, cudos for testing, but this is a plain lazy solution. dude we get 2 less larva than we did before..this is actually a nerf. it makes zerg production choices super important and building that extra round of drones instead of units is even more punishing. i understand that the autocast thing is a little lame, but realistically with all of hte micro options for the other races, injecting perfectly is almost impossible. even the koreans thought it was hard.
I think you missed the point, you will need 8 hatches and 6 queens to balance out the current 5 hatches with 3-4 queens injecting.
You will lose supply, early timings will be impossible... not to mention holding a hellbat push that comes just a bit latter.
Zerg will need some buffs to early and mid game while Terran will need late game buffs.
Protoss doesnt change much... they can revert some research timings and their good to go.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 16 2015 00:11 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 23:58 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 15 2015 23:15 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 15 2015 22:54 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 15 2015 22:10 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 15 2015 19:39 Thinh123456 wrote:
this autoinject will make zerg in lotv can't be able to remax as fast as in hots. Zerg army supply is always smaller than terran and protoss due to higher worker count. They must depend on high larva count to rebuild his army fast and send immidiately to the battlefied to overwhelm the enemy. Especially in Lotv, with Lurker-3 supply unit in the combination, zerg army is even smaller. Unless there are some ways to buff the efficiency of zerg army, or at least increasing the max supply cap of the zerg, then i don't think people will consider to play zerg. The zerg is getting far away from its identity of being a swarmy race!!! Fuck that! They could reduce the supply of all zerg units by 1 across the board with few exceptions. That would make a zerg 200/200 supply army way better than it needs to be. I honestly think that with macro hatches zerg will be ok, but if they're not, it's more likely gonna be a buff to the speed at which larva spawn. The problem is, zerg still has alot of supply in drones and queens... now they will have even less supply to work with. ( more queens on macro hatches ) Did i mention we still dont have a 1 supply unit ? I do agree they might buff the larva spawn but Zergs needs a 1 supply unit and/or reduced supply on other units. Zerg is the swarm for god sake and everytime it has less units then a terran.... its such bad design and a really bad joke. terran and protoss have just as much supply in probes and scvs, though. yes, you want to be ahead, but with more workers, comes more production, comes more units. you don't necessarily need queens on your macro hatches either. an extra hatch per expansion is what will likely become the norm to make up for the missing larva. minerals are easy for a zerg to come by too, so im not too upset. On August 15 2015 23:21 Cascade wrote:
Auto-inject is the laziest solution ever seen... If you don't want players to have to do injects, then remove the ability ffs.
There is no way ever that Blizzard would have created a queen with autocast injects from the start. The only reason it exists is that the game is designed around injects and now they want to remove it, but they can't because it is too important, and they don't know what to replace it with. Try explaining the rational of the suggested queen to someone that never played sc2, how would it add something to the game?
I mean... what if we suggest a unit for protoss that has a spell that casts chronoboost on a warpgate for 10 seconds. costs 50 minerals. 10 second cooldown on the spell. Oh, and it's autocast. Sounds like a great unit? My point is: there is NO WAY the suggested queen would have made it through if suggested as a new unit as it is now. The other devs would have looked at the person suggesting it in a strange way and stop inviting him to after-work beers.
I'm a bit upset at this change... I am personally pretty emotionally against removing manual inject to start with, and then they choose to not even remove it, but rather add more mechanics that cancels it out? Well, cudos for testing, but this is a plain lazy solution. dude we get 2 less larva than we did before..this is actually a nerf. it makes zerg production choices super important and building that extra round of drones instead of units is even more punishing. i understand that the autocast thing is a little lame, but realistically with all of hte micro options for the other races, injecting perfectly is almost impossible. even the koreans thought it was hard. I think you missed the point, you will need 8 hatches and 6 queens to balance out the current 5 hatches with 3-4 queens injecting. You will lose supply, early timings will be impossible. Zerg will need some buffs to early and mid game while Terran will need late game buffs. Protoss doesnt change much... they can revert some research timings and their good to go.
if you're on 3 bases, you lose 6 larva with this nerf. you only need 2 macro hatcheries to account for the missing larva and for most players, they won't be floating too much because they will obviously be injecting on time and your saturation will come much slower. im interested to see what happens when zergs take a 4th and go into the late-late game though.
|
On August 16 2015 00:14 BluemoonSC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2015 00:11 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 15 2015 23:58 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 15 2015 23:15 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 15 2015 22:54 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 15 2015 22:10 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 15 2015 19:39 Thinh123456 wrote:
this autoinject will make zerg in lotv can't be able to remax as fast as in hots. Zerg army supply is always smaller than terran and protoss due to higher worker count. They must depend on high larva count to rebuild his army fast and send immidiately to the battlefied to overwhelm the enemy. Especially in Lotv, with Lurker-3 supply unit in the combination, zerg army is even smaller. Unless there are some ways to buff the efficiency of zerg army, or at least increasing the max supply cap of the zerg, then i don't think people will consider to play zerg. The zerg is getting far away from its identity of being a swarmy race!!! Fuck that! They could reduce the supply of all zerg units by 1 across the board with few exceptions. That would make a zerg 200/200 supply army way better than it needs to be. I honestly think that with macro hatches zerg will be ok, but if they're not, it's more likely gonna be a buff to the speed at which larva spawn. The problem is, zerg still has alot of supply in drones and queens... now they will have even less supply to work with. ( more queens on macro hatches ) Did i mention we still dont have a 1 supply unit ? I do agree they might buff the larva spawn but Zergs needs a 1 supply unit and/or reduced supply on other units. Zerg is the swarm for god sake and everytime it has less units then a terran.... its such bad design and a really bad joke. terran and protoss have just as much supply in probes and scvs, though. yes, you want to be ahead, but with more workers, comes more production, comes more units. you don't necessarily need queens on your macro hatches either. an extra hatch per expansion is what will likely become the norm to make up for the missing larva. minerals are easy for a zerg to come by too, so im not too upset. On August 15 2015 23:21 Cascade wrote:
Auto-inject is the laziest solution ever seen... If you don't want players to have to do injects, then remove the ability ffs.
There is no way ever that Blizzard would have created a queen with autocast injects from the start. The only reason it exists is that the game is designed around injects and now they want to remove it, but they can't because it is too important, and they don't know what to replace it with. Try explaining the rational of the suggested queen to someone that never played sc2, how would it add something to the game?
I mean... what if we suggest a unit for protoss that has a spell that casts chronoboost on a warpgate for 10 seconds. costs 50 minerals. 10 second cooldown on the spell. Oh, and it's autocast. Sounds like a great unit? My point is: there is NO WAY the suggested queen would have made it through if suggested as a new unit as it is now. The other devs would have looked at the person suggesting it in a strange way and stop inviting him to after-work beers.
I'm a bit upset at this change... I am personally pretty emotionally against removing manual inject to start with, and then they choose to not even remove it, but rather add more mechanics that cancels it out? Well, cudos for testing, but this is a plain lazy solution. dude we get 2 less larva than we did before..this is actually a nerf. it makes zerg production choices super important and building that extra round of drones instead of units is even more punishing. i understand that the autocast thing is a little lame, but realistically with all of hte micro options for the other races, injecting perfectly is almost impossible. even the koreans thought it was hard. I think you missed the point, you will need 8 hatches and 6 queens to balance out the current 5 hatches with 3-4 queens injecting. You will lose supply, early timings will be impossible. Zerg will need some buffs to early and mid game while Terran will need late game buffs. Protoss doesnt change much... they can revert some research timings and their good to go. if you're on 3 bases, you lose 6 larva with this nerf. you only need 2 macro hatcheries to account for the missing larva and for most players, they won't be floating too much because they will obviously be injecting on time and your saturation will come much slower. im interested to see what happens when zergs take a 4th and go into the late-late game though.
Will see how it goes... but i suspect that will need macro hatches at all bases until we take the 5 base.
|
On August 15 2015 23:41 Temeter wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 23:27 LSN wrote:On August 15 2015 23:21 Cascade wrote:
Auto-inject is the laziest solution ever seen... If you don't want players to have to do injects, then remove the ability ffs.
Killing an auto-inject queen remains a tactical option in battles and harrassments but it wont have that high effect anymore. It's the best solution. Blizzard is perfectly right with its current decisionmaking. They reduce "terrible terrible damage" as well as scaling of advantages and disadvantages. More opportunities for comebacks will be created etc. It is what this game needs. All of these macro mechanics were a reason for comebacks. A fast 3CC could replenish, lots of larva mean lots of drones, and chroonoboost could alleviate tech disadvantages and probe losses.
If macro mechanics can be used for comebacks they can be also be used to get ahead. Any boosters for economy, unit production, upgrades can be used by either player and will always favour the one who is ahead. It is at best a bad comeback mechanic imo..
|
On August 15 2015 23:48 KelsierSC wrote:
well, not buying LotV
nice job
I didn't buy HotS but if all these changes go into release I will be buying LotV.
So nice job
|
On August 16 2015 00:34 -Archangel- wrote:I didn't buy HotS but if all these changes go into release I will be buying LotV. So nice job
I'm buying lotv either way.
blizz is making a good product that I will enjoy, they deserve some of my disposable income.
keep doing good blizz
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On August 16 2015 00:34 -Archangel- wrote:I didn't buy HotS but if all these changes go into release I will be buying LotV. So nice job
meh there's plenty of casual games for free, clearly that is the direction Blizzard want to move in.
|
Why does zerg retain the "macro" mechaics and why is it automatically done? Why not just hatcheries 5 larva to produce from?
I hate how they are making the game so easy with the automation of the zerg macro mechanic.
And why is David Kim a game designer? Being good at the game doesn't automatically mean you are a great balancer and even if you were a good balancer, that doesn't mean you are a good designer.
Clearly David Kim lacks any sort of game design skills.
|
On August 15 2015 03:26 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Nevertheless, having a more visible result from players’ macro looks to be a much cooler direction rather than just having the forced/needed clicks found in things like Inject Larva.
NO. FUCKING. SHIT!!!
I swear to god, five freaking years of screaming at blizzard about how fucking boring inject is and what do you fucking know, removing it makes the game better!!!
Aghggaaaa!!!!
|
On August 15 2015 23:27 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 23:21 Cascade wrote:
Auto-inject is the laziest solution ever seen... If you don't want players to have to do injects, then remove the ability ffs.
Killing an auto-inject queen remains a tactical option in battles and harrassments but it wont have that high effect anymore. It's the best solution. Blizzard is perfectly right with its current decisionmaking. They reduce "terrible terrible damage" as well as scaling of advantages and disadvantages. More opportunities for comebacks will be created etc. It is what this game needs.
I think the removal of Macro mechanics actually reduces the opportunity for comeback, especially in the case of Terran. Because those mechanics were the most forgiving part of the Macro. They also buffed harassment to insane degrees, because killing workers had little effect because of Macro mechanics.
Killing drones just depleted the Larva of the Zerg a little. Killing probes just slowed the upgrades of Protoss. Killing SCVs just made Terran Scan less.
Thinking about it, killing a full workerline hurts so much with this change. It might actually help spreading out expansions. Well unless you are Terran, thanks to Neo Steel and no need for Orbitals, you can have your 15 workers hide inside the CC on your expansions now XD.
|
On August 16 2015 01:38 FeyFey wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 23:27 LSN wrote:On August 15 2015 23:21 Cascade wrote:
Auto-inject is the laziest solution ever seen... If you don't want players to have to do injects, then remove the ability ffs.
Killing an auto-inject queen remains a tactical option in battles and harrassments but it wont have that high effect anymore. It's the best solution. Blizzard is perfectly right with its current decisionmaking. They reduce "terrible terrible damage" as well as scaling of advantages and disadvantages. More opportunities for comebacks will be created etc. It is what this game needs. I think the removal of Macro mechanics actually reduces the opportunity for comeback, especially in the case of Terran. Because those mechanics were the most forgiving part of the Macro. They also buffed harassment to insane degrees, because killing workers had little effect because of Macro mechanics. Killing drones just depleted the Larva of the Zerg a little. Killing probes just slowed the upgrades of Protoss. Killing SCVs just made Terran Scan less. Thinking about it, killing a full workerline hurts so much with this change. It might actually help spreading out expansions. Well unless you are Terran, thanks to Neo Steel and no need for Orbitals, you can have your 15 workers hide inside the CC on your expansions now XD.
I understand where you are coming from but again I wanna emphasize the major aspects of these changes for me.
1. These changes reduce scaling. Scaling always helps the player that has the advantage. Therefore the reduction of scaling will help to make comebacks possible more oftenly as the player with the advantage will gain less benefits from his advantage.
2. Terran's ability to come back with mules can't be even considered as that. It was more kind of a metagame factor that everyone knew and had to count in. It lead to the fact that attacking the terran was almost only worth it when you could kill the terran completely. In PvT and ZvT any extra committement on harrassing the terran was negated by the fact that he could make up for major eco losses with only dropping mules, terran basically just had to survive and p/z were behind with their committment even when they did comparetively large amounts of damage. That again lead to the fact that play against terran almost only was either full all-in with the only objective to kill terran or passive/defensive macro play - there was hardly anything inbetween aside of oracles that only for these reasons were introduced to the game.
Now with these changes this is going to change. A Z/P can committ on different levels and only has to deal damage that is corresponding to the level of his committment. Only this is going to take Sc2 to a new level!
|
On August 15 2015 23:48 KelsierSC wrote:
well, not buying LotV
nice job
Well, no one fucking cares.
Great, original post about LOTV. This one will really help Blizzard make the game the best it can be!
Nice job.
User was warned for this post
|
On August 15 2015 23:41 Temeter wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 23:27 LSN wrote:On August 15 2015 23:21 Cascade wrote:
Auto-inject is the laziest solution ever seen... If you don't want players to have to do injects, then remove the ability ffs.
Killing an auto-inject queen remains a tactical option in battles and harrassments but it wont have that high effect anymore. It's the best solution. Blizzard is perfectly right with its current decisionmaking. They reduce "terrible terrible damage" as well as scaling of advantages and disadvantages. More opportunities for comebacks will be created etc. It is what this game needs. All of these macro mechanics were a reason for comebacks. A fast 3CC could replenish, lots of larva mean lots of drones, and chroonoboost could alleviate tech disadvantages and probe losses.
Ludicrously false, these mechanics were the reason for heavy snowballing, why a 3CC had to suffer absolutely catastrophic damage from a Roach all in or the Zerg was economically behind, why Phoenix had to be weirdly buffed to hard counter the Mutalisk because heavy larvae stacking made tech switches OP.
|
Lol, I have never seen the community split so radically, 50 % loves mechanics changes, 50 % HATES them, haha
|
Terran can now build half the supply depots that they usually built. Saves a lot of time, space, scvs, money.
|
On August 16 2015 00:02 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 23:56 Temeter wrote:On August 15 2015 23:50 LSN wrote:On August 15 2015 23:41 Temeter wrote:On August 15 2015 23:27 LSN wrote:On August 15 2015 23:21 Cascade wrote:
Auto-inject is the laziest solution ever seen... If you don't want players to have to do injects, then remove the ability ffs.
Killing an auto-inject queen remains a tactical option in battles and harrassments but it wont have that high effect anymore. It's the best solution. Blizzard is perfectly right with its current decisionmaking. They reduce "terrible terrible damage" as well as scaling of advantages and disadvantages. More opportunities for comebacks will be created etc. It is what this game needs. All of these macro mechanics were a reason for comebacks. A fast 3CC could replenish, lots of larva mean lots of drones, and chroonoboost could alleviate tech disadvantages and probe losses. These mechanics were responsible for high advantage vs. disadvantage scaling mostly. Look at 2 hatch vs. 3 hatch ZvZ. Compare at 2 oc vs. 3 oc TvT. The same applies to mixed matchups: compare 3 OC T vs. 4 hatch Z with 2 OC vs. 4 hatch zerg and with 3 OC vs. 3 hatch zerg. Losing a base or having an additional hatch/oc out only a bit late can auto lose you the game or force you unwillingly on all-in-mode due to the high scaling. Exactly this is what narrows down sc2's strategic and tactical diversity. What narrows down ZvZs diversity are mostly roaches, which are incredibly efficient earlygame and snowball everything. TvT always had lots of uncertainities and comebacks, lots of potential for positional play and economical damage. Removing macro will never add to the games diversity. Suddenly the game gets easier, suddenly the game gets less punishing, suddenly comebacks are more possible, suddenly there is more complexity. That's a pipe dream. Sure it will. And you will be one of the guys that hasn't seen it coming but will have to admit it later on when it becomes obvious for everyone. And you know what becomes obvious about your post? You just dislike that zergs will have an easier life with auto injects. You don't even understand the global context and impact of these changes nor want to know them. I am sorry to say. Less 3vs2 base (etc.) scaling is exactly what Sc2 needs. Some other effects: - Less larvas per inject is what I suggested already like 1-2 years ago in balance discussion (and ppl told me its design). Goes without saying that it was just too much with 4 per inject. It was the only thing that matters and forgetting it in important situations or losing 1-2 major queens at times ends the game. - The ability of terran to lose almost all its economy but have about 15 free scv replacements from 3 OC had to go, it made every committment on attacking the terran early on without killing him a complete waste and therefore narrowed down the strategical diversity to pure all-in or pure defensive macro against terran (compare introduction of oracles: that was nothing else than giving protoss an effective ability to harrass terran at all early on). Now there will be more shades of grey and committing on different levels of pressure on terran can pay off without the drawback of mules making your efforts invisible. The game will become more skill heavy due to this for everyone included. - Replacing lategame economy almost completely with supplyless mules is one of the dumbest things Sc2 has seen, it had to go. Rather make terran stronger overall (e.g. scv back to 55-60hp).
Which is a bunch of assumptions without any proof. Interesting you're trying to complain about my the rigidity of what I wrote.
And really, throwing down accusation about bias and then talking about harass being useless because of '15 free scv replacements'? You know that TvZ is balanced with mules in mind? That's how a matchup works, you can't go and say 'that one point is imba'.
As for terran not being able to be pressured, you might check things like stalker pressure or roach pushes. Two base muta opening were always strong too, even if they fallen out of favor for some time in the highest meta. Still managed to kill maru recently, so that's that. Turned out early damage is still early damage.
Heard that whining about mules around a million times, not even going to bother with that. All races have their quirks which are balanced out against each other, no matter how good or bad they are.
|
On August 16 2015 02:29 jpg06051992 wrote:Ludicrously false, these mechanics were the reason for heavy snowballing, why a 3CC had to suffer absolutely catastrophic damage from a Roach all in or the Zerg was economically behind, why Phoenix had to be weirdly buffed to hard counter the Mutalisk because heavy larvae stacking made tech switches OP.
Right, and that's why Bio v Z, which often relies on fast 3CC, is zerg favored atm. Riiiiiiiiight.
|
On August 16 2015 02:48 Temeter wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2015 02:29 jpg06051992 wrote:Ludicrously false, these mechanics were the reason for heavy snowballing, why a 3CC had to suffer absolutely catastrophic damage from a Roach all in or the Zerg was economically behind, why Phoenix had to be weirdly buffed to hard counter the Mutalisk because heavy larvae stacking made tech switches OP. Right, and that's why Bio v Z, which often relies on fast 3CC, is zerg favored atm. Riiiiiiiiight.
That merely became the meta after multitudes of fine tunings and metagame switches occurred as is natural in Starcraft. 3CC became Standard after maps got huge and Terrans really honed down how to play greedy (by defending the flavor of the month Roach/Bane all ins) vs. Zerg who realized the better response after the Roach allin phase was over was merely to play even more greedy.
I understand that the community is divided on this and everyone is entitled to an opinion but after reading your previous statements man it's clear you don't know what your talking about or the underlying ramifications of the macro boosters.
The whole point of removing these boosters is to SLOW the game down now that the super economy start with lower minerals gives you a big influx of money but forces you to expand aggressively, they simply are not needed, they are antiquated and it's time to rebalance things that honestly should have been done back in WOL.
|
I kinda died a little inside when they said it was great that players were better at creep spreading and that it was visible. Goodbye legendary zerg creep spreaders, your excelling at this is now the standard among master ladder zergs
|
On August 15 2015 06:04 AdrianHealeyy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 05:53 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
The biggest problame is going to be that Zerg will have another 6-8 supply stuck in queens.
But it could be fixed by lowering the supply cost of some units... like roaches and BL and Ultralisk.
I mean Zerg has no god damn 1 supply unit. We do. The drone.
Lol.
|
On August 15 2015 03:26 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:- Warping-in at a Pylon takes 16 seconds.
I haven't even played SC after WoL, yet reading this made me go
HOOOO BOY.
|
The Warp Gate has always been strange to me. It has absolutely no disadvantages to its counterpart. Why not just make the warp-in process longer for all cases, so that players have to choose decide to between Gateway (faster production time at one location) and Warp Gate(slower production at potentially any location)? If Warp Gate is just plain better than the Gateway, then why even have the Gateway in the first place?
|
No lurker and liberator nerf? ZvZ and ZvT are so boring right now, Lurker and Liberator/Hellbat all day...
|
On August 15 2015 07:41 TimeSpiral wrote:
I'm baffled that Zergs are complaining about this patch. Your lives are going to be so much easier, and you'll have to build slightly more unit producing structures *gasp*. Yours is the only change that is a nerf, not a removal. And it's not even really a nerf. You'll probably end up with about the same larva, or more, for substantially less APM. Yet the tears run like rivers before they've even tried it.
I don't want an easy race, because that's exactly what makes me sick of starcraft. People getting build orders/unit composition wins.
If zerg becomes easy, i will feel no reward in playing sc2 anymore.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
Why not just make the warp-in process longer for all cases
The warp-in time doesn't actually affect the amount of units that you can build per 5 minute period at all. The warp cooldown begins when you start the warp, not when you end it. Even if a warp takes 15 seconds, the warpgate will be able to make X amount of units faster than a gateway will
|
Removing macro mechanics isn't an issue. Brood War didn't have any and it was very well designed. We got 'used' to MULEs and the likes because they've been here since the beginning of SC2, truth is they're vastly uninteresting and we don't really need them, I'd actually make an argument for removing the Queen injects altogether and force more hatcheries.
As for warp in changes they were absolutely necessary and it's great to finally see them try something significant regarding Protons design. I'm not sure it'll work though, gate comps still need to be made stronger in some way, through CORE changes, not through the addition of the adept.
|
On August 15 2015 13:04 SuperHofmann wrote:
Finally something against Mech.
Maybe Blizzard realized that it was a bit strange that after 5 years of bio now 90% of the korean Terrans have switched to full mech
Anyway i thought they gona react later, if took them 5 years to notice the forcefield bullshit and finally did something about it. I think the balance team reunions are only statistics, graphics, ratios, percents, but they don´t even play the game and don´t have any idea of whats going on.
|
Lol, I have never seen the community split so radically, 50 % loves mechanics changes, 50 % HATES them, haha
If I were Blizzard, I would not try to piss off 50 percent of the community that is already playing this game. Bring something new to the table sure, but for the love of god dont clash with us as they have done, try making changes we all can agree upon and dont treat us like we were dumb as Mr.Kim does on his posts "We would like to thank the community","These changes couldnt have gone through if not for the community" I´ve yet to see one serious issue that has been raised by all who have complained on TL and Blizzard actually doing something on the matter, and I think its like a lot of us around here feel like that. Otherwise we would not flood the forums with complaints.
|
Russian Federation4 Posts
can make the warp T3 technology
|
I actually have no idea how this is going to turn out. :D
I guess now zerg will have to be more carefull about spending their larva, for exemple it will make all-ins really all-in, like doing some amount of damage wont be enough to come back with a round of drone you'll have to kill or leave him half dead.
I don't understand the removal of mule. Maye be a redisign would have been a better option, same goes for chronoboost. But as i said it's going to be tested and figuered out... I hope.
The warp-in stuff is what makes me wet my pants(joy or fear not sur), like early game all-in will cost 150 more minerals and without chrono the delay between warp will be a bit longer than today. So it's worth testing i guess.
Late game pylone will be fun to watch too, like the one near the army with 3-4 cannons and a warp gate, like protoss doesn't build enough building out of their bases.
The warp prisme is... seems pretty OP especially if you have more than one, lets say one is full of imortals the other of adepts; you can whipe out 1.5 base's economy in matter of seconds, but i guess it will speed up the pace of the game in the late stages of it, even less down time.
Anyway looking forward to try it, not sur i'll like it but i'll give it a try.
Much love from a diamond toss playing mainly for fun and a little to destroy other player
|
Looking forward to mutalisks now, if terran actually "feels" 20 scvs dying, I think they are dead boys, I think they are dead.
|
On August 16 2015 19:03 HaRuHi wrote:
Looking forward to mutalisks now, if terran actually "feels" 20 scvs dying, I think they are dead boys, I think they are dead.
Yeah the best part is that killing SCV's will matter.
Then again Zerg's timings will be more all in then ever,
|
Message of General importance.
Stop with balance comments on design issues.
Stop with balance comments on design issues.
Stop with balance comments on design issues.
Stop with balance comments on design issues.
Stop with balance comments on design issues.
Really, stop it.
+ Show Spoiler +Hopefully, this will help.
|
On August 16 2015 15:54 Steelghost wrote:Show nested quote +Lol, I have never seen the community split so radically, 50 % loves mechanics changes, 50 % HATES them, haha If I were Blizzard, I would not try to piss off 50 percent of the community that is already playing this game. Bring something new to the table sure, but for the love of god dont clash with us as they have done, try making changes we all can agree upon and dont treat us like we were dumb as Mr.Kim does on his posts "We would like to thank the community","These changes couldnt have gone through if not for the community" I´ve yet to see one serious issue that has been raised by all who have complained on TL and Blizzard actually doing something on the matter, and I think its like a lot of us around here feel like that. Otherwise we would not flood the forums with complaints.
The thing is, you can't always please everyone. I don't think they did this to pander to half the community, I think they did this to make a better game. Inevitably, someone will be pissed off whenever the status quo is moved. That is life.
So I guess the real question is, will this make for a better game? I guess we will see down the line.
|
On August 16 2015 20:58 AdrianHealeyy wrote:Message of General importance. Stop with balance comments on design issues. Stop with balance comments on design issues. Stop with balance comments on design issues.Stop with balance comments on design issues. Stop with balance comments on design issues.+ Show Spoiler +Hopefully, this will help.
Massing one overpowered unit gives really good idea about the overall unit's design and it's relations to other units, right?
|
Just realized this will make blink stalker all-ins much weaker. I'm sure terrans will be glad of that atleast wasn't that fun to watch anyway, seemed a little too strong
|
Most people should get what they were hoping for with the test changes, especially regarding the warp in mechanics.
On another note, why not ban all the complaining kids? It really is of no use letting the whiners insert their petty, unreasonable crying into every new Blizzard post.
|
On August 15 2015 11:07 AdrianHealeyy wrote:
Everybody who is talking balance in a design thread should really rethink what they are saying
Word.
|
On August 15 2015 05:01 Loccstana wrote:
Blizzard has to remember that the mule was introduced to compensate for the fact that in early game, Terran must pull scvs from mining to construct buildings.
What if the orbital calls down an SCV instead of a mule? That would be a interesting change.
Great idea! Ans it would be really cute for Terran to be able to get some extra SCVs like that.
|
Zerg ez-mode now with auto-inject. Wonder why queens don't auto-creep spread too
|
On August 16 2015 01:52 LSN wrote:
1. These changes reduce scaling. Scaling always helps the player that has the advantage. Therefore the reduction of scaling will help to make comebacks possible more oftenly as the player with the advantage will gain less benefits from his advantage.
This. Over and over.
|
On August 16 2015 23:43 NKexquisite wrote:
Zerg ez-mode now with auto-inject. Wonder why queens don't auto-creep spread too
Yes. Because pressing a button every some odd seconds made Zerg that much harder.
|
Instead of removing chronoboost and mules, can i suggest we make it auto with a slight nerf, just like injects.
|
On August 17 2015 00:12 Rexeus wrote:
Instead of removing chronoboost and mules, can i suggest we make it auto with a slight nerf, just like injects.
Inject change, in context, will end up being a buff.
|
On August 17 2015 00:17 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 00:12 Rexeus wrote:
Instead of removing chronoboost and mules, can i suggest we make it auto with a slight nerf, just like injects. Inject change, in context, will end up being a buff.
You do not know this and cannot say this.
|
On August 16 2015 23:50 ohmylanta1003 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2015 23:43 NKexquisite wrote:
Zerg ez-mode now with auto-inject. Wonder why queens don't auto-creep spread too Yes. Because pressing a button every some odd seconds made Zerg that much harder.
Zerg is the busy race... even Incontrol who is a protoss know this.
Injecting every 40 sec, while creep spreading, while having a blance of when to drone and make units is much harder then any other race.
Zerg is the macro race.
|
On August 16 2015 22:39 DJZest wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2015 11:07 AdrianHealeyy wrote:
Everybody who is talking balance in a design thread should really rethink what they are saying Word.
Design and balance are heavily tied together. While balance isn't the first thing you should think about, you should definitely ask the question "Can this design work in the current environment to a point where it doesn't disrupt it's balance, but adds to it/improves it?" sooner or later, otherwise you end up with a concept that needs constant bandaid fixing.
|
On August 17 2015 00:18 ohmylanta1003 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 00:17 TimeSpiral wrote:On August 17 2015 00:12 Rexeus wrote:
Instead of removing chronoboost and mules, can i suggest we make it auto with a slight nerf, just like injects. Inject change, in context, will end up being a buff. You do not know this and cannot say this.
He's saying below pro-scene where people don't inject at all and just have max energy queens sitting around.
|
|
|
On August 17 2015 01:17 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2015 23:50 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 16 2015 23:43 NKexquisite wrote:
Zerg ez-mode now with auto-inject. Wonder why queens don't auto-creep spread too Yes. Because pressing a button every some odd seconds made Zerg that much harder. Zerg is the busy race... even Incontrol who is a protoss know this. Injecting every 40 sec, while creep spreading, while having a blance of when to drone and make units is much harder then any other race. Zerg is the macro race.
sure zerg is/was more macro oriented, didn't make it harder though
|
On August 17 2015 01:17 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2015 23:50 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 16 2015 23:43 NKexquisite wrote:
Zerg ez-mode now with auto-inject. Wonder why queens don't auto-creep spread too Yes. Because pressing a button every some odd seconds made Zerg that much harder. Zerg is the busy race... even Incontrol who is a protoss know this. Injecting every 40 sec, while creep spreading, while having a blance of when to drone and make units is much harder then any other race. Zerg is the macro race.
I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying I don't understand how people can say Zerg got SOOOOO much easier because of autoinjects.
|
On August 17 2015 02:00 ROOTFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 01:17 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 16 2015 23:50 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 16 2015 23:43 NKexquisite wrote:
Zerg ez-mode now with auto-inject. Wonder why queens don't auto-creep spread too Yes. Because pressing a button every some odd seconds made Zerg that much harder. Zerg is the busy race... even Incontrol who is a protoss know this. Injecting every 40 sec, while creep spreading, while having a blance of when to drone and make units is much harder then any other race. Zerg is the macro race. sure zerg is/was more macro oriented, didn't make it harder though
Oh boy. I hate talking about "easy race, hard race". Everyone thinks their race is the hardest for reasons X, Y, and Z. It's stupid to even try to get into an argument about it.
|
On August 17 2015 02:06 ohmylanta1003 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 02:00 ROOTFayth wrote:On August 17 2015 01:17 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 16 2015 23:50 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 16 2015 23:43 NKexquisite wrote:
Zerg ez-mode now with auto-inject. Wonder why queens don't auto-creep spread too Yes. Because pressing a button every some odd seconds made Zerg that much harder. Zerg is the busy race... even Incontrol who is a protoss know this. Injecting every 40 sec, while creep spreading, while having a blance of when to drone and make units is much harder then any other race. Zerg is the macro race. sure zerg is/was more macro oriented, didn't make it harder though Oh boy. I hate talking about "easy race, hard race". Everyone thinks their race is the hardest for reasons X, Y, and Z. It's stupid to even try to get into an argument about it.
there's no argument, I didn't say zerg was easy, I said it wasn't harder than other races, every race is different, requires different focus, no race is harder overall really, you're either good at starcraft or you're not
|
On August 17 2015 02:04 ohmylanta1003 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 01:17 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 16 2015 23:50 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 16 2015 23:43 NKexquisite wrote:
Zerg ez-mode now with auto-inject. Wonder why queens don't auto-creep spread too Yes. Because pressing a button every some odd seconds made Zerg that much harder. Zerg is the busy race... even Incontrol who is a protoss know this. Injecting every 40 sec, while creep spreading, while having a blance of when to drone and make units is much harder then any other race. Zerg is the macro race. I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying I don't understand how people can say Zerg got SOOOOO much easier because of autoinjects.
Most people think that auto-inject will allow the zerg to always look at his army, without seeing his base ever during the game.
Its a false statment by far tho.
On August 17 2015 02:00 ROOTFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 01:17 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 16 2015 23:50 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 16 2015 23:43 NKexquisite wrote:
Zerg ez-mode now with auto-inject. Wonder why queens don't auto-creep spread too Yes. Because pressing a button every some odd seconds made Zerg that much harder. Zerg is the busy race... even Incontrol who is a protoss know this. Injecting every 40 sec, while creep spreading, while having a blance of when to drone and make units is much harder then any other race. Zerg is the macro race. sure zerg is/was more macro oriented, didn't make it harder though
You havent played LBM or playing vs Mech....
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
On August 16 2015 21:41 MyrionSC wrote:Just realized this will make blink stalker all-ins much weaker. I'm sure terrans will be glad of that atleast wasn't that fun to watch anyway, seemed a little too strong
It shouldn't, because they nerfed blink and warpgate into balance by anticipating the researches being chrono boosted half a dozen times and increasing the research times. Not by short amounts either*. Without chrono, the research times will be made shorter again so that aggression around research times will still be possible
*Blink went from 110 seconds to 170
|
Just separate mech upgrades and that will alleviate much of the problem.
|
On August 17 2015 02:08 ROOTFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 02:06 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 17 2015 02:00 ROOTFayth wrote:On August 17 2015 01:17 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 16 2015 23:50 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 16 2015 23:43 NKexquisite wrote:
Zerg ez-mode now with auto-inject. Wonder why queens don't auto-creep spread too Yes. Because pressing a button every some odd seconds made Zerg that much harder. Zerg is the busy race... even Incontrol who is a protoss know this. Injecting every 40 sec, while creep spreading, while having a blance of when to drone and make units is much harder then any other race. Zerg is the macro race. sure zerg is/was more macro oriented, didn't make it harder though Oh boy. I hate talking about "easy race, hard race". Everyone thinks their race is the hardest for reasons X, Y, and Z. It's stupid to even try to get into an argument about it. there's no argument, I didn't say zerg was easy, I said it wasn't harder than other races, every race is different, requires different focus, no race is harder overall really, you're either good at starcraft or you're not
So you flat out disagree with Blizzard's claim after the pro summit (presumably reinforced by pro feedback) that Protoss is the easier race to master?
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
So when is this patch going live?
|
What if they kept the mule but just changed its purpose? For instance, make it more like an SCV, have it able to build, no time limit on it, maybe returns as much as a gold patch(7 minerals right?), or maybe something like being able to build a bit faster?
As far as the Disruptor goes, I've been saying since it came out, The design of it makes it an absolute nightmare to balance. Might just need a new unit design, curious what changes there thinkin of though.. Heres my idea of redesigning it, change the look of it a bit but consider it work like this. It hovers like it does then you activate it, it plants itself into the ground and a ball turret rises from the middle. Its like a mobile turret but you could come up with any amount of clever firing options. It could fire a beam at a couple targets simultaneously or maybe have it shoot somethin like a under powered Reaver shot, that would be some cool nostalgia but need to be balanced correctly. It would give the protoss some cool advancing and retreating options, PvP might not end in a single 5 second battle as much. It would also add some fun micro
Ghost snipe ability - I think it would be cool if the shot went through its target and hit anything directly behind it, maybe going through a couple, dealing less damage to each subsequent target. Hell its a huge rifle, call it a armor piercing shot or somethin..Not through massive units though. 3 seconds is still too long, but if theres going to be any delay before it fires, its gotta have more value. Probably would still be fine with no delay
|
It's crazy to me that this game has been out for like 5 years and just now, at the 11th hour just before LotV comes out, they decide to start making these huge gameplay changes? People have been complaining about warp gate since release. Where was the warpgate change when XNC was a map, or when 4gate was the most common PvP build?
I really think changes like these warrant more than a month of testing at the least
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
I agree, we're 4 months into the LOTV beta. Why did they sit for the last 3 months making very few serious changes with little beta activity at all before deciding that they're actually going to do the changes that people have been asking for, but only have ~4 weeks to balance them?
|
As a protoss player, I really don't like these warpgate changes. The 2/16 sec differential seems so gimmicky. Also, stop buffing the warp prism and look at other units. HOTS basically forced all toss players to get a MSC, and now it seems that LOTV is trying to do the same thing with warp prisms.
|
Glad to hear there is some progress...still kind of disappointed they're still wanting to change the macro mechanics. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
|
On August 17 2015 08:12 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 02:08 ROOTFayth wrote:On August 17 2015 02:06 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 17 2015 02:00 ROOTFayth wrote:On August 17 2015 01:17 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:On August 16 2015 23:50 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 16 2015 23:43 NKexquisite wrote:
Zerg ez-mode now with auto-inject. Wonder why queens don't auto-creep spread too Yes. Because pressing a button every some odd seconds made Zerg that much harder. Zerg is the busy race... even Incontrol who is a protoss know this. Injecting every 40 sec, while creep spreading, while having a blance of when to drone and make units is much harder then any other race. Zerg is the macro race. sure zerg is/was more macro oriented, didn't make it harder though Oh boy. I hate talking about "easy race, hard race". Everyone thinks their race is the hardest for reasons X, Y, and Z. It's stupid to even try to get into an argument about it. there's no argument, I didn't say zerg was easy, I said it wasn't harder than other races, every race is different, requires different focus, no race is harder overall really, you're either good at starcraft or you're not So you flat out disagree with Blizzard's claim after the pro summit (presumably reinforced by pro feedback) that Protoss is the easier race to master?
given that nobody has mastered a race yet, how can this be possible
|
On August 17 2015 11:32 TheFish7 wrote:
It's crazy to me that this game has been out for like 5 years and just now, at the 11th hour just before LotV comes out, they decide to start making these huge gameplay changes? People have been complaining about warp gate since release. Where was the warpgate change when XNC was a map, or when 4gate was the most common PvP build?
I really think changes like these warrant more than a month of testing at the least
I'm worried that this is a last minute change to throw a bone to the player base that is asking for changes, only for them to change it back at the last second because they realize proper balance will be harder to tweak.
Which would suck because I think the macro changes are the best for the game in the long run (save for auto-inject, just give hatches more larva and change the role of the queen), and they had 3 months to try this out and tweak it.
|
I really don't get the mule removal. Nerfing it to the point the 3 abilities on the cc are meaningful would be a nice change. What happens now? They just replaced the APM sink with another one, supply drop. Save 100 minerals when you have scans? sure! Of course, the other impact is that terran will scan more, don't think its an improvement the game. The price? rebalance everything terran. There is no fine tuning ahead, changing the mineral/gas ratio changes everything, its a full redesign.
Protoss without chrono and with the slow production will become very hard to fix too, Many HotS and WoL strategies relied on chrono boost on production, others on warp gate, probes or upgrades. Chrono is such an interesting, meaningful, fun macro mechanic that is not hard to use to begin with. Why mix in the same "boring" bag with larva injects? To make it fair? Everything must be reworked anyway!
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
I never found inject boring. I worked really hard to get good at it, hours of practicing nothing but injects and the fact that I could inject like a pro player was an incredible feeling . Selecting my larvae and having hundreds available felt very zerg as I re maxed instantly.
I really hate that they removed it, people who spent time working on being mechanically sound are being punished because some people have said it's boring , perhaps they just aren't very good at it.
At the moment they removed inject but have provided no alternative mechanic that can separate good players.
If I wanted to play a game where all I do with my apm is micro my units I would play wc3 or a moba.
|
On August 17 2015 17:49 KelsierSC wrote:
I never found inject boring. I worked really hard to get good at it, hours of practicing nothing but injects and the fact that I could inject like a pro player was an incredible feeling . Selecting my larvae and having hundreds available felt very zerg as I re maxed instantly.
I really hate that they removed it, people who spent time working on being mechanically sound are being punished because some people have said it's boring , perhaps they just aren't very good at it.
At the moment they removed inject but have provided no alternative mechanic that can separate good players.
If I wanted to play a game where all I do with my apm is micro my units I would play wc3 or a moba.
Creep spread will separate good player from bad players... burrow micro, overlord drops, multitasking. harassing.
Choosing when to make units since you will have limited larva.
When and where to make macro hatches.
If anything... Zerg will be harder on micro side but a bit easier on macro side.
Speaking of macro hatches... if a zerg opens up with 2 hatches and a macro hatch ( closer to the cliffs )... it might stop the canon rushes forever.
|
On August 17 2015 18:00 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
If anything... Zerg will be harder on micro side but a bit easier on macro side.
If it hasn't arrive to you yet, this is the main point people are complaining about. Some want to maintain the hard macro mechanics, rather than moving the hard parts over towards micro and other categories.
|
On August 17 2015 18:40 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2015 18:00 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
If anything... Zerg will be harder on micro side but a bit easier on macro side. If it hasn't arrive to you yet, this is the main point people are complaining about. Some want to maintain the hard macro mechanics, rather than moving the hard parts over towards micro and other categories.
But this isnt minecraft... just my opinion.
|
Really don't like the direction this is going, sounds like they're not even considering to test alternate economical approaches. Also I'd rather see inject removed as well as it being auto-cast.
|
Does anyone have any information about the release date?
|
|
|
Sorry, my bad, I meant for the patch.
|
Actually, Psione replied to my tweet saying Thursday for patch release if all goes as well with the preparations.
|
Awesome! Can't wait to try it out!
|
On August 15 2015 03:34 Energizer wrote:
Well that was... disappointing I guess. I was kind of hoping for some more changes considering macro mechanics are being removed. I'd be lying if I wasn't at least half-expecting supply costs to be revisited, especially for zerg since they're going to have an even tougher time remaxing after a fight without as much of a larva bank. May as well let zerg have a larger max army to help with trades.
I guess this'll mean that mass macro hatches are going to be a thing again
|
Mass macro hatches limit the damage done by a hatch snipe, btw. I usually make my macro hatches in such a way that they can function as 'second hatches' at expansions when the nearest one is sniped; so the income reduction will be less overall.
|
they arent changing anything to the current hatches. IF macro hatches are a thing after this patch, why wouldnt they be without.
|
im really curious how this will play out, since investing in a macro hatch was always (from my lowbie league opinion) a big risk, and after this there will be more than one macro hatch needed relatively early.
i for one see the change as risky, but i trust 110% that the progamers and the rest of the community will give valuable feedback and statistics and everything will eventually balance out. my hope is that since they gave only a month deadline, they wont focus it all on this issue and there will be enough time for yet another major change to test.
|
What I envision is that Zerg will build more hatcheries to make sure there's enough larvae to make units.
|
awful patch.....
I mean what they want to change in 3 races about Macro mechanics...
Remove mules, Auto cast larva inject added and Chronoboost removed....
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
On August 19 2015 09:36 weikor wrote:
they arent changing anything to the current hatches. IF macro hatches are a thing after this patch, why wouldnt they be without.
Because right now if you want to dump minerals into getting more larvae, queens are absolutely the undisputed way to go until you have 1 per hatchery
After the patch, they're halving the larvae benefit of queens without reducing the queen cost.
Mineral for mineral, dropping an extra hatchery will be comparable to building queens for the amount of larvae that you gain (at least way closer than ever before), while having the obvious benefits of an extra hatchery. It doesn't walk around and throw spines at annoying enemy units, though.
|
I think blizzard is going to go back on the auto-inject. There's really something to it which is part of what defines starcraft. I agree with Morrow on his take on that.
Taking away mules is interesting, but considering that it constitutes a massive part of Terran mineral income I am also very interested in how Terran will be compensated economically. Some ideas for this:
-Call-down supply brings double the supply than it does now. Building a depot costs 100 minerals, and an scv is busy for > 30 seconds building it and moving, that's about 25 lost mineral income. Double this, the cost becomes 250, comparable to the income a mule brings in (which is 270). Arguably this is more effective than the mule whenever supply is necessary, because 1) mineral patches are mined out less quickly, and 2) the investment pays off immediately, instead of during the course of 90 seconds.
-Depots can be called down anywhere, or within a radius of Terran CC's. Perhaps available as an additional option as well, this eliminates the need to actually build base depots in order to call down extra supply later in the game.
-Additional buildings can also be called down, such as add-ons for production facilities. This allows for a much more diverse set of build orders for Terran. It also will also marginally compensate Terran economically in the late game when already at -/200 supply.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
I think auto inject shouldn't be a thing. If it really comes down to it, rework the queen a bit and make the hatchery produce more larvae - or just don't have inject be auto. if it's less important (2 larvae, not 4) then it's more of a boost than a necessity to hit with 0 downtime for 10 minutes straight
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
