|
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CM809rKWoAAiV0C.jpg)
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/18704214130
Hey everyone - here is an update on a lot of what's been being discussed over the last week:
Macro mechanics stuff
Overall, the coolest thing we’re seeing is the freed up clicks needed on this side going to more interesting parts of the game, and our worry of some of the races becoming too easy to play doesn’t seem to be the case. We agree with the Korean pros/community on this side point - that because Starcraft 2 is already one of the most difficult games to master by far out there, and LotV added much more skill needed to play, helping out on this end looks to be the correct move. With that said, there are definitely issues we’d like to improve.:
Terran’s minerals income rate in the early/mid game slowing down especially in the early/mid game took a big hit.
How frequent Scan has become so frequent that it doesn’t look to be as interesting for the game since Terran can play while seeing so much more than before.
Protoss lost a potentially cool choice in terms of what specific thing to Chronoboost per situation.
Zerg choice between Queen and additional hatcheries became a bit more muddy, because Queens cost less for less larva per time now.
Zerg Queen positioning is still important, and it looks as if we haven’t completely removed clicks needed here. Eg. when queens move out of range to defend, players still need to reposition each Queen correctly each time this happens which can be quite frequent in LotV games.
However, these are the things that we’d like to try to keep going forward:
Reduced clicks per race surrounding macro mechanicsin this area
Potentially increasing the both players’ interaction with creep spread more (now that Zerg players can more easily dedicate more effort in this area)
Bring back some of the necessary components of each race, but not go all the way back in strength per mechanic.
We like the fact that there can’t be 10~20 mules in the late game quickly mining out future bases, and would like to keep this component.
After trying various solutions that hit the points above on both what we’d like to keep and what we’d like to address, here’s what we’re currently looking at internally:
Protoss
Chrono boost is back, reduced in effectiveness per time, no longer costs energy to cast, and starts defaulted to being cast on the Nexus.
Protoss players will be able to switch the Chrono Boost on a Nexus to any building of his or her choice, and until it’s switched out again, it’ll remain on that building forever.
This way, we bring back the interesting choice part of Chrono Boost in a slightly nerfed state, while having minimal number of clicks. And for non pronewer level players who never even click onesonce, they would still benefit the whole game from units being built from eacheach of their Nexus always being Chrono Boosted.
Terran
Mule is back, reduced in harvesting racerate, no longer costs energy to cast, has a cooldown equal to the time it takes to generate 50 energy, and is autocast on by default.
Mule will have a casting range, and will only be usable within that radius, so that in the late game, the Orbitals themselves have to move closer to the mining bases in order to drop multiple mules there.
Scan and supply drop energy costs will be increased to compensate for the free mule cost.
With this version we can solve the issue of Terran early game income rates, solve the end game Terran mule case, and also have no increase in the number of clicks needed to mule effectively in games.
Zerg
Keep Spawn Larva as autocast, but increase the larva count per use to 3.
Increase the creep spread rate, and increase the creep going away rate.decay rate.
The first change is to make the benefit of having the Queen very clear, and now that players have more effort spent on creep spread, we wonder if the creep interaction between players in Zerg games will be more interesting in terms of spreading creep tumors vs. clearing them out on a more regular basis within game.
Adept
We’ve reverted the Adept cost nerf. With both this cost nerf as well as the nerf to offensive Pylon Warp ins, the unit lost too much strength in the early game. We were looking for a minor nerf to help out other races defending against early Adept pushes, and were hoping to keep them still remain strong in the early game, and the offensive warp in nerf looks to be a good start already in this direction. We don’t want to overreact and nerf the unit too much.
However, another thing we’ve been exploring in this area is to have a more interesting upgrade for the Adept other than the health buff. Per your suggestion we’re trying to see if a damage upgrade is more relevant for this unit. We are also discussing other possibilities for this upgrade slot, and we will keep you guys updated going forward.
Oracle Revelation
We’ve been getting feedback around this ability for a long time from our community, and one of our favorite casters from South Holland. Overall, it doesn’t compete well with observer detection, and although it is more effective in certain, specific situations such as countering Lurkers or speed upgraded Banshees, it is also a big nerf against certain specific situations such as clearing out Creep Tumors. But because this new way for Oracles to detect fits the unit much better, is a cool difference from how the Observer works, and clearly has some advantages, we’d like to push this version and see if this will ultimately be a good change in how the Oracle detects.
We’re currently trying a version where the Revelation cast range is increased to 12, so that against majority of the threats out there, it’ll be possible to keep the Oracle alive much easier when trying to detect enemy units. For example, when trying to hit Lurkers with Revelation, it’ll be much more difficult for the Vipers to pull the oracle in to kill them, and Vikings will also have a much more difficult time taking Oracles out when they try to come in to detect Terran units. This way, although the strengths and weaknesses of Revelation hasn’t changed, it’ll be possible for Protoss to more reliably use Oracles as detectors more often.
Tempest
It’s pretty clear that Tempests’ role is needed more than ever in LotV due to the units they counter being much stronger such as Brood Lords, Carriers, BCs, and even new additions such as Liberators that Protoss going only ground struggle heavily against.
However, the redesigned Tempest isn’t working out as well as we had hoped. The main reason is that we’ve added an activated ability to replace what the Tempest normally does in HotS, but the ability added isn’t very interesting. There’s no real counter to the ability being cast due to it being a instant 1 click thing where the opponent really doesn’t have many responses to other than “use this unit before it dies.” Therefore, we believe the HotS version is just better for this unit, and a role change to this unit is not a good idea due to the Tempests’ role being more needed than ever in LotV. We’ve decided to revert this unit back for now.to its HotS version.
Zealot damage on Charge
We fully agree with majority of your feedback in that 30 damage is too much. We made a mistake here because there was a bug internally where Zealots were not always dealing damage on charge, which we weren’t aware of until very close to the release of the patch. We fixed the bug right before the patch went out, but forgot to double check to see what that actually means in actual games. Fortunately, we’re still in the beta so there was no huge issue of players losing tournament money due to this mistake, but even so, we will try our best to make sure things like don’t happen even in the beta going forward.
We’ve been exploring with much lower damage on charge internally, and what we’re finding is something we’ve known and been talking about for long time. It’s very difficult to do a minor buff to such massable tier 1 units, because the impact of a minor buff adds up due to the ability to effectively mass these units so easily in the later stages of the game. We’re not yet sure what the best course of action on this area is, but we’ll continue exploring. For the next balance patch, we’ll greatly reduce this number, but we’re not sure yet if the added damage for this upgrade is correct in the long run.
Balance changes
We’re also exploring some balance changes this week especially on the specific things you bring up often. These include things like:
0.75 sec delay before the Siege Tanks in siege mode fires can fire when being dropped by Medivacs
Moving overlord drop upgrade to Llair tech
Colossi upgraded range up from 8 to 9
Continuing to test the new Ravager Corrosive Bile range upgrade.
Continuing to test different numbers on Mothership Core Overcharge being on Pylons.
We’re not saying all these things will make it into the beta for certain, but these are some examples of things we’re currently testing right now. We’ll provide an additional update next week that clearly outlines the changes coming to the beta, but we wanted to give you this information as early as possible. Thanks for your continued testing and feedback in helping us develop the best Legacy of the Void possible.
|
I just want to say that im really dissapointed with 1 thing.
They completely forgot about Infestors 
|
I can't stop laughing...
Auto MULE
Auto Chrono
Auto Larva+1
And didn't realize the obvious math mistake on Zealot damage numbers lol
Oh God, thankfully there is StarBow or I would be playing any other RTS instead SC2 right now, or even going back to WoL (but it was sad to see Protoss struggling so much early game there)
|
Is that a Rotti shoutout?
Not a fan of the autocasted macro boosters. I'd rather they just take them all out and balance the game around regular old macro.
|
Oh look more auto-casting for marco. :p
So before, many of the marco boosters were just the clear-cut better options compare to the alternative options. So the new answer is to just automatically do them all. Obviously they have been nerf, but the question is, if there's just always there without even a single input for the player, how is this more engaging/fun to have for the game.
Here's a suggestion for the Zealot. Why not look for ways to improve the timing which they become powerful over just simply buffing them in extra damage if late game situations causes too much issue. Maybe move Charge to a earlier stage of the game, like moving to Cybernetic Core. Note: this does not mean Zealots SHOULD or CAN'T still receive some late game buff.
As for the other mentioned stuff:
- Adepts: Can't say I'm super happy about this, but I'm glad at least they looking to go away from just being a ubertank. Though, it's not enough in my view.
- Oracle change is something I like.
- Tempest reverting back to its HoTS counter part was not surpising at the slightlest. I figured Blizzard was going to do something like this when they just left the Tempest to sit around filling zero useful roles. Though, saying that, I don't like the Tempest in either position as its HoTs role wasn't something I even liked that much.
- Mass Zergling running underneath Siege Tank/Medivac can stop it now, i guess.
- As much as I thought Overlord drops were strong in the early game, I would have perferred if they would have kept it hatchery level and made it easier for the Terran/Protoss (though mainly protoss) the ability to defend against it easier. I like a more varity of openings.
- Colossi is meh. With the Disruptor the way they are, I find the Colossi a reduntant role that doesn't really provide the Protoss player enough varience in what can do.
- Maybe unpopluar opinion but I think they could do so much more with the Roach/Ravager dyamic, but in the state the Ravager are, I guess I just have to accept them as just for the ability.
- I find the Photon Overcharge on Pylon stupid. Free defense is stupid in my opinion. I want incentizes to have to have my units placed in the proper positions. Not just, overcharge these Pylon.
|
Autocast on everything now? You gotta be kidding me. Also the overlord drop had no reason to move to lair.
I really hate this update. The only thing I didn't like about removing the macro mechanics was the queen autocast and now every race will have it too.
If they wanted to ditch the macro mechanics they should have nerfed them or removed them completely. This autocast shit is just blizzard not wanting to rebalance around the new macro and band aiding the shit out of old macro mechanics.
|
Lemme just say that when people figure out how to properly abuse Liberators, Terrans will be invulnerable.
Last night i watched NightEnd stream and a guy just made 3 liberators and sieged his probes.The liberators were clearly out in the space and not reachable with any ground unit.
Anyway i don't like macro mechanics back, i wanna see Lurkers being seen because really now, they are incredibly strong midgame, giving the zerg so much easier agression.
|
Just because macro mechanics were Autocast doesn't reduce any if the "hardness" lower leagues face other than for zerg.
As a person who was lower leaguer very recently and went through grinding of mechanic improvement drill very recently (9-10 months ago at silver/gold), and top bronze in wol, the biggest obstacle by far was keeping up with production cycle and supply, not the macro mechanic as terran.
In addition to this, the biggest barrier by far at least when I was lower league is the ridiculously fast punishment of your army if it is caught out that melts your army to point you lose your game instant you don't babysit your army while doing general production building. This is primarily reason why I quit back in wol anyway. Not because production struggles or macro mechanics, because how fast your hard earned army melts in instant you look away, hence reputation of game as twitchy fingers.
Seems like blizzard have different idea of lower league struggles for protoss and terran.
Since zerg inject is equivalent of the production cycle along with drone timing, it does ease zerg players lower league tremendously
Also, this isn't gonna do anything to terran 3rd/4th base production parade pushes. Those depended on ability to inflate base count with mules to keep up with mineral income and boost bio production. With limited cast range, it isn't gonna solve the midgame problem especially with lotv mineral patches. But this will "fix" early game
|
The MULE change is actually quite elegant. I feel people are glossing over that OCs now have a cast range so you can't just MULE hammer a base when an OC lands on it.
|
Dang it, my streak of posting this is broken 
Thanks though OP
|
Lol. Team Liquid for the win. Are the members of this forum ever happy with any of these changes?
|
To be honest, I don't like auto chrono, but I still have the choice of what is getting crono'd so, im pretty fine with it  This is a good version of legacy going forward.
|
On August 29 2015 03:25 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
Lol. Team Liquid for the win. Are the members of this forum ever happy with any of these changes?
I loved the original removal. I'm sad that they pussyfooted around and brought back the boosters.
|
I like the cast range on mule, that's a great change. However, with no energy cost on mules, even if they increase the energy cost for supply drops or scans to 75 energy, that's still more resources than terrans had before these changes. I dunno if that will affect anything but it seems like something to consider.
|
On August 29 2015 03:25 AkashSky wrote:To be honest, I don't like auto chrono, but I still have the choice of what is getting crono'd so, im pretty fine with it This is a good version of legacy going forward.
I also like it for scouting purposes. CB has always been a cornerstone in scouting Protoss. Now it is back for you to determine where the player is putting emphasis.
|
So um....what in the actual **** is Blizzard thinking?
|
On August 29 2015 03:26 TheDougler wrote:
I like the cast range on mule, that's a great change. However, with no energy cost on mules, even if they increase the energy cost for supply drops or scans to 75 energy, that's still more resources than terrans had before these changes. I dunno if that will affect anything but it seems like something to consider.
MULE gives less now though. So if a single MULE only returns 150 minerals over it's time frame that won't be better than MULE + free depot than pre-nerf MULE.
|
On August 29 2015 03:27 Tenks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 03:25 AkashSky wrote:To be honest, I don't like auto chrono, but I still have the choice of what is getting crono'd so, im pretty fine with it This is a good version of legacy going forward. I also like it for scouting purposes. CB has always been a cornerstone in scouting Protoss. Now it is back for you to determine where the player is putting emphasis.
In addition, it adds the extra mechanic of being able to "mind game" your opponent by switching your cronoboost to a building you are not focusing on while they scout if you see them get past you to scout with say a reaper or overlord.
|
This is it. This is the last nail in the coffin. Not even starbow can redeem this. Time to go to ICCUP...
|
I wish they'd add chrono boost range as well to help with those pesky proxy oracles
-edit-
Actually thinking about it this someone does help. Now that CB is always active it will be easy to see they don't have the CB in their base instead of implying based upon an absence of CB on the nexus and adding up the nexus energy.
|
I just dont like where this game is going at all...
|
I don't even know what to say about those macro changes. Just wow.
As for zealots instead of buffing them, I think they can be fixed by nerfing their worst enemy: the widow mine. That +shields damage is just gratuitous. Widow mines are a low effort "wonder" unit that counters almost everything in the TvP matchup. Seriously, they even counter carriers (???). The only safe and easy way to remove them is with colossus, another unit I wish never existed. Honestly they're like half the reason I don't play Starcraft anymore.
|
Please up inject to 3 and make it non-autocast. Please, please please. Just do this. Don't keep it as autocast. I would play in a heartbeat if that were the case. Autocast is so ugly. 3 larva and non-autocast is just the right amount. Good Zerg will be able to get a lot of larva with strong injects, and Zerg without as much multitask will fall behind (just as in previous renditions of SC2). This would be perfect.
I was tunneling on inject. Now Blizzard is making chrono and mule autocast as well? Please do not make macro mechanics autocast! Oh my that's painful.
|
Bandaid after bandaid. This is what happens when the core game does not have a good foundation.
|
On August 29 2015 03:26 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 03:25 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
Lol. Team Liquid for the win. Are the members of this forum ever happy with any of these changes? I loved the original removal. I'm sad that they pussyfooted around and brought back the boosters.
Same here. I'm kinda disappointed with this. They should have tested with zerg hatcheries spawning more larva with injects removed. It just seems such a cop out. Macro boosters were bad by themselves but auto cast macro boosters are even worse even if their efficiency is reduced. The change to remove them was inspired but this is not...
|
You get auto cast, you get an auto cast. AND ALL OF YOU GET AUTO CAST.
Tempest back to "No massive air vs toss".
Seriously you said this is the last month. How lazy can you be?
|
How would you guys feel if they just had cooldowns on MULE and Chrono, but got rid of the auto-cast?
|
This is actually complete garbage. I was hoping they'd remove queen auto inject and do something else, the concept of auto help has almost no place at all in Starcraft. MULE and chrono back on auto cast? You kidding me right?
This entire update has me feeling like a sad panda, and I've been one of the most optimistic ones this whole beta. Losing hope for sc to be back to its glory days every week.
Also can't believe they haven't dropped the idea of photon overcharge on pylons,overlord drop to lair and13 range corrosive bile
|
I am a bit surprised they're calling out scan. In my games I had maybe 2-3 OCs. I was making PFs elsewhere because there wasn't a huge incentive anymore to make a bunch of OC. So while I generally had free access to a scan whenever I needed it the game wasn't quite playing out like I was on maphacks.
|
Wow very bad response from the community on this one.
I like the macro changes, but keep the damn skill involved, now that they are nerfed it should be all about the better player mechanically get's the slight edge over time.
The creep change is cool though and I'm glad they are bringing a nerfed Mule back.
By the way autocast on inject is just horrible, when I need the Queens to do something they will sometimes wander off to make an inject pit stop, yea I know you can disable it but if you can disable it, why even bother keeping it at all? Starcraft is all about the best players with the best mechanics wrestling with the multitasking and macro requirements.
I don't know, I just don't really get it I guess.
Also no Infestor update is a joke.
|
I like the unit changes, but I'm a bit divided on the macro mechanics changes. I'm pretty intrigued, though skeptical with chronoboost and with bumping inject up to 3 larva. At the very least, I think that Queen starting energy should be lowered more in conjunction with this buff, in order to prevent Zerg economy from skyrocketing too quickly. Even with 2-larvae auto-injects, I feel like the economy is pretty easy to slam into overdrive. The only real issue I had was having enough larvae to both build units to defend harass and hatching waves of Drones at the same time.
I dislike the loss of energy tension by putting Mules on a cooldown system. As much as prefer autocast on Queens, Mules are a pretty easy macro mechanic to use, and the limitation on casting range doesn't really make it any easier. If anything, it makes it marginally harder to manage them. I would've much rather seen the economy ramp up slowed down by having Calldown Mule also cost some resources. Maybe 50 minerals and 25 gas, so that it still provides a net gain of 220-250 minerals, just at a cost of 25 gas. And obviously this would be a terrible decision to use en masse in the very late game on one base, when the map is starting to run out of resources.
|
On August 29 2015 03:37 IntoTheheart wrote:
How would you guys feel if they just had cooldowns on MULE and Chrono, but got rid of the auto-cast?
Autocasting is not the problem. The MULE itself is the problem.
|
On August 29 2015 03:37 IntoTheheart wrote:
How would you guys feel if they just had cooldowns on MULE and Chrono, but got rid of the auto-cast?
How would that solve the necessity to learn macro mechanic timings as a barrier of entry to SC2, though?
|
On August 29 2015 03:37 IntoTheheart wrote:
How would you guys feel if they just had cooldowns on MULE and Chrono, but got rid of the auto-cast?
That would be great. To me, the two best options were always nerfing the macro mechanics but keeping them in, or removing them completely and balancing around that.
This autocast shit is terrible and for the first time in beta I really don't feel inspired to play anymore. Really bad update.
|
What's the point of having autocast macro mechanics? Wasn't the whole goal of them to make the player's cam come back to his/her base regularly?
|
On August 29 2015 03:39 Tenks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 03:37 IntoTheheart wrote:
How would you guys feel if they just had cooldowns on MULE and Chrono, but got rid of the auto-cast? How would that solve the necessity to learn macro mechanic timings as a barrier of entry to SC2, though?
What exactly is the problem here? You have to get better at using macro-mechanics, among many other different skills, to improve at the game?
Why exactly is that a barrier? And why is it a bad thing? MULE and Chrono don't exactly take up much of a player's time, compared to inject. And I WANT inject to be manual. Good players pull further and further ahead with strong injects. Mediocre players can get by with decent injects and strong focus in other skills. It balances itself out. But for the people who want inject to not be manual, why not oblige them rather than homogenizing an entire facet of Zerg play so that there is no skill differential at all?
|
I'm surprised people are being so negative about these changes, I actually some of these.
|
On August 29 2015 03:44 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
I'm surprised people are being so negative about these changes, I actually some of these.
The macro changes are ok, the only problem is auto-cast nature of them. I would either prefer manual toned down macro or no macro boosters at all.
|
So if Terran build a lot of orbital commands in late game, he/she has to lift and move each of them to next base. I do not know the radius that one orbital command can call down a mule, but the space in each mining area is not unlimited. So he must manually land an orbital, call down the mule (though it is auto-cast), then lift it for the next orbital to land. It may be interesting because if a pro wants to take the advantage of extra mules, he must add a lot of more click. Move several orbital commands to a new base is risky too.
Another question: how do we know if a lifted orbital command in cooldown?
|
On August 29 2015 03:43 Qwyn wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 03:39 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:37 IntoTheheart wrote:
How would you guys feel if they just had cooldowns on MULE and Chrono, but got rid of the auto-cast? How would that solve the necessity to learn macro mechanic timings as a barrier of entry to SC2, though? What exactly is the problem here? You have to get better at using macro-mechanics, among many other different skills, to improve at the game? Why exactly is that a barrier? And why is it a bad thing? MULE and Chrono don't exactly take up much of a player's time, compared to inject. And I WANT inject to be manual. Good players pull further and further ahead with strong injects. Mediocre players can get by with decent injects and strong focus in other skills. It balances itself out. But for the people who want inject to not be manual, why not oblige them rather than homogenizing an entire facet of Zerg play so that there is no skill differential at all?
Because no one has fun dropping MULE, CB'ing a forge or injecting larvae. It is an artificial and unnecessary chore.
|
On August 29 2015 03:45 Tenks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 03:43 Qwyn wrote:On August 29 2015 03:39 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:37 IntoTheheart wrote:
How would you guys feel if they just had cooldowns on MULE and Chrono, but got rid of the auto-cast? How would that solve the necessity to learn macro mechanic timings as a barrier of entry to SC2, though? What exactly is the problem here? You have to get better at using macro-mechanics, among many other different skills, to improve at the game? Why exactly is that a barrier? And why is it a bad thing? MULE and Chrono don't exactly take up much of a player's time, compared to inject. And I WANT inject to be manual. Good players pull further and further ahead with strong injects. Mediocre players can get by with decent injects and strong focus in other skills. It balances itself out. But for the people who want inject to not be manual, why not oblige them rather than homogenizing an entire facet of Zerg play so that there is no skill differential at all? Because no one has fun dropping MULE, CB'ing a forge or injecting larvae. It is an artificial and unnecessary chore.
Wow. I have fun doing these things. They simulate more difficult macro and give me a reason to go back to my base. It's not artificial at all, considering how big of an impact it has on the game for every race (Blizzard brought em' back in autocast form now, lol). You want to reduce everything down to an unnecessary chore? That's easily done...
|
Macro booster mechanics have nothing to do with learning production cycles and multitasking with army, which lower leagues struggle the most. I am surprised people don't see that. It is hugely difficult for beginning player to keep making production structures regardless of macro boosters. Thats where hardness of game as core comes from
Combine that with battles that last seconds while you look away to build buildings and that makes extremely punishing game.
Thats the core problem and barrier of sc2, not macro boosters (other than for zerg which inject is the production cycle)
I experienced this difficulty in wol myself as well as when I played game against last year. This was by far biggest obstacle that made me quit for 4 years in first place.
|
On August 29 2015 03:44 pzlama333 wrote:
So if Terran build a lot of orbital commands in late game, he/she has to lift and move each of them to next base. I do not know the radius that one orbital command can call down a mule, but the space in each mining area is not unlimited. So he must manually land an orbital, call down the mule (though it is auto-cast), then lift it for the next orbital to land. It may be interesting because if a pro wants to take the advantage of extra mules, he must add a lot of more click. Move several orbital commands to a new base is risky too.
Another question: how do we know if a lifted orbital command in cooldown?
With the cast radius on MULE drops it is simply not viable anymore to mass Orbitals in the late game for MULE purposes, which is what Blizzard wanted. And honestly I'm with them on that. A couple of additional Orbitals for Scan only can still be useful in the ultra late game, though. Overall these changes seem pretty good to me, good enough to beta test anyway.
|
On August 29 2015 03:47 Qwyn wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 03:45 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:43 Qwyn wrote:On August 29 2015 03:39 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:37 IntoTheheart wrote:
How would you guys feel if they just had cooldowns on MULE and Chrono, but got rid of the auto-cast? How would that solve the necessity to learn macro mechanic timings as a barrier of entry to SC2, though? What exactly is the problem here? You have to get better at using macro-mechanics, among many other different skills, to improve at the game? Why exactly is that a barrier? And why is it a bad thing? MULE and Chrono don't exactly take up much of a player's time, compared to inject. And I WANT inject to be manual. Good players pull further and further ahead with strong injects. Mediocre players can get by with decent injects and strong focus in other skills. It balances itself out. But for the people who want inject to not be manual, why not oblige them rather than homogenizing an entire facet of Zerg play so that there is no skill differential at all? Because no one has fun dropping MULE, CB'ing a forge or injecting larvae. It is an artificial and unnecessary chore. You want to reduce everything down to an unnecessary chore?
Oh look this argument is back from when they first said they're removing the mechanics. While we're at it lets also get rid of MBS and infinite select. Oh yeah and smart cast. Rally points on workers seem pretty silly because I want to go back to my base everytime a unit is created to move it as well. Oh yeah these are all things the community was up in arms about in SC2 WoL beta as well because it was dumbing down the game as well.
|
Make MULE have a cooldown of like 15 seconds or some shit and last 15 seconds. The autocast however is delayed by 5 extra seconds so auto cast has a total of 20 seconds for a cooldown. Low level players still get their auto mules but higher level players will want to manually call down.
The difference after 60 seconds is only 1 mules for someone who is completely auto casting vs someone who is perfectly calling down. It's more difficult than before for pros because they have to check back at their base every 15 seconds to be perfectly efficient but low level players don't have to look back at all.
|
This is just making me despair more about this game.
I wouldn't be surprised if they're saying to the Korean community that we're the ones saying that the game needs to be easier, I've spoken to a couple of Koreans and they say that the higher levels of the Korean community disagree with the macro changes and have similar opinion to us. (but don't take this for gospel cause it's second hand information)
I'm fine with them scaling the macro mechanics back slightly since they do accelerate the game hard but there needs to be a clear advantage to using them consistently/effectively. Just revert the changes and scale back the effect by a tiny amount.
|
I dislike all those autocast mechanics
|
On August 29 2015 03:45 Tenks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 03:43 Qwyn wrote:On August 29 2015 03:39 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:37 IntoTheheart wrote:
How would you guys feel if they just had cooldowns on MULE and Chrono, but got rid of the auto-cast? How would that solve the necessity to learn macro mechanic timings as a barrier of entry to SC2, though? What exactly is the problem here? You have to get better at using macro-mechanics, among many other different skills, to improve at the game? Why exactly is that a barrier? And why is it a bad thing? MULE and Chrono don't exactly take up much of a player's time, compared to inject. And I WANT inject to be manual. Good players pull further and further ahead with strong injects. Mediocre players can get by with decent injects and strong focus in other skills. It balances itself out. But for the people who want inject to not be manual, why not oblige them rather than homogenizing an entire facet of Zerg play so that there is no skill differential at all? Because no one has fun dropping MULE, CB'ing a forge or injecting larvae. It is an artificial and unnecessary chore.
Then get rid of them if they're so artificial. Put extra larva from the hatch or a hatchery add on like a reactor and balance marines zerglings and protoss timings around having no macro mechanics.
Stop half assing and go with one way or the other. Autocast is convoluted and shitty.
|
I appreciate that they confessed on the zealot charge bug eventually.
More communication is always a step forward. Not sure what to think on changes, wanna try them first. Looking forward to
|
On August 29 2015 03:56 Little-Chimp wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 03:45 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:43 Qwyn wrote:On August 29 2015 03:39 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:37 IntoTheheart wrote:
How would you guys feel if they just had cooldowns on MULE and Chrono, but got rid of the auto-cast? How would that solve the necessity to learn macro mechanic timings as a barrier of entry to SC2, though? What exactly is the problem here? You have to get better at using macro-mechanics, among many other different skills, to improve at the game? Why exactly is that a barrier? And why is it a bad thing? MULE and Chrono don't exactly take up much of a player's time, compared to inject. And I WANT inject to be manual. Good players pull further and further ahead with strong injects. Mediocre players can get by with decent injects and strong focus in other skills. It balances itself out. But for the people who want inject to not be manual, why not oblige them rather than homogenizing an entire facet of Zerg play so that there is no skill differential at all? Because no one has fun dropping MULE, CB'ing a forge or injecting larvae. It is an artificial and unnecessary chore. Then get rid of them if they're so artificial. Put extra larva from the hatch or a hatchery add on like a reactor and balance marines zerglings and protoss timings around having no macro mechanics. Stop half assing and go with one way or the other. Autocast is convoluted and shitty.
I don't disagree. I liked it better when they just didn't exist. I don't fully understand them having a toe in the pool with macro mechanics. But I guess now Protoss have to reveal their hand a bit with CB and they are able to explore faster tech switches with it so that strategic option is back. Terran have to decide if they want a base to spawn a MULE or if they want a PF. It is even stronger a decision now because even if this is your 4th base you can't just make it a PF and MULE with OC's 1-3. It sounds like it just won't be able to get a MULE.
The auto cast queen always felt strange to me. I wish they would make it so the queen was a strategic decision to obtain instead of a "Well here is a hatch guess I need a queen here too."
|
OK, so first about the macro stuff:
I agree with the direction. But I don't like the proposed changes. They feel like they are plainly being done to balance the game due to lack of time to actually rebalance accordingly to the current situation. And really don't want to see inject buffed, ZvZ early game has felt somewhat stable for the first time ever with the 2larva change.
Oh and bringing back mules while terran can additionally use the energy on supply drops (even if energy cost are increased) is essentially a buff to terran early macro, while chrono and inject are still nerfed in the early game. Don't know how they think this will turn out balanced early. (though lategame terran take a big hit of course)
Creep change sounds nice. Not having to wait forever to build walls, in particular in ZvZ and sometimes ZvT is good. Creep being cleaned up faster has been a small wish of mine for a long time.
There’s no real counter to the ability being cast due to it being a instant 1 click thing where the opponent really doesn’t have many responses to other than “use this unit before it dies.”
It’s very difficult to do a minor buff to such massable tier 1 units, because the impact of a minor buff adds up due to the ability to effectively mass these units so easily in the later stages of the game.
Really happy about them understanding those two things. You cannot plainly buff units like zealots aside from insignificant tweaks. And I hope they find a solution to make the Tempest more interesting than HotS, but not less (as has been the case so far in LotV).
0.75 sec delay before the Siege Tanks in siege mode fires can fire when being dropped by Medivacs
Don't like this one. The unit already sometimes has a turret-turning animation before it fires. There is no problem with tank drops balancewise. It's just a bad idea because it gives terran the ability to overrun ground positions easily, especially against other siege tanks and lurkers and similar units that you should be forced to take on slowly. Also in combination with the zerg-drop nerf (which I like), the tank drops could proof problematic on highground spots once again.
Moving overlord drop upgrade to Llair tech
Good change. Noone wants to have units bypassing your defenses at 3mins in the game. Now do something about adepts shadow walk ability as well please. It's the exact same issue.
What I'm missing in this update:
- Viper/Broodlord armies against Terran
- Carriers (too strong?)
- early adepts in all matchups
- early liberators in unreachable spots over mineral lines in TvZ
|
The new chrono boost seems like a good compromise, we get to pick what to chrono boost still even if it's less impactful. I'm like the rest really against automatic macro mechanics though, auto mules and auto injects have got to go..
|
Actually thinking about the MULE change I have some issues with it. It pretty much puts Terran on a bit of a clock. In LotV you need to spread out pretty rapidly. The PF really helps with that for Terran. But now if you make a base with a PF you can't spawn a MULE. So after bases 1-3 are mined out for Terran they will actually start to see a reduction in their mineral intake once their primary bases for mining gravitate towards being PFs instead of OCs in the late game.
|
Can't wait to test micro colosus agnist lurker's ! <3
|
On August 29 2015 03:51 Tenks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 03:47 Qwyn wrote:On August 29 2015 03:45 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:43 Qwyn wrote:On August 29 2015 03:39 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:37 IntoTheheart wrote:
How would you guys feel if they just had cooldowns on MULE and Chrono, but got rid of the auto-cast? How would that solve the necessity to learn macro mechanic timings as a barrier of entry to SC2, though? What exactly is the problem here? You have to get better at using macro-mechanics, among many other different skills, to improve at the game? Why exactly is that a barrier? And why is it a bad thing? MULE and Chrono don't exactly take up much of a player's time, compared to inject. And I WANT inject to be manual. Good players pull further and further ahead with strong injects. Mediocre players can get by with decent injects and strong focus in other skills. It balances itself out. But for the people who want inject to not be manual, why not oblige them rather than homogenizing an entire facet of Zerg play so that there is no skill differential at all? Because no one has fun dropping MULE, CB'ing a forge or injecting larvae. It is an artificial and unnecessary chore. You want to reduce everything down to an unnecessary chore? Oh look this argument is back from when they first said they're removing the mechanics. While we're at it lets also get rid of MBS and infinite select. Oh yeah and smart cast. Rally points on workers seem pretty silly because I want to go back to my base everytime a unit is created to move it as well. Oh yeah these are all things the community was up in arms about in SC2 WoL beta as well because it was dumbing down the game as well.
And I would still be up in arms about it, if it weren't set in stone. This isn't. It's a spectrum, and you need to be aware of how far in this direction the game is heading before it becomes too much.
If an ability is autocast, there 's no skill gradient at all. There's no skill. What is the point of a mechanic if you don't have varying degrees of execution? I'd argue none at all. Choosing where to chrono or having auto mule/inject and then forgetting about it is not interesting. You go from having a high degree of interaction to having none at all.
An analogy would be...what if your units built themselves? What if your army moved itself? You might argue that those things are different but I see them as one and the same. It comes down to player execution - player input. Either make these things manual or remove them altogether. So much stress on strategy but none on the real time component.
|
United States97276 Posts
|
what is blizzard doing
also no manner mules either
it was my favourite part about this game
edit: wow shellshock was 20 seconds faster
|
On August 29 2015 03:59 Tenks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 03:56 Little-Chimp wrote:On August 29 2015 03:45 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:43 Qwyn wrote:On August 29 2015 03:39 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:37 IntoTheheart wrote:
How would you guys feel if they just had cooldowns on MULE and Chrono, but got rid of the auto-cast? How would that solve the necessity to learn macro mechanic timings as a barrier of entry to SC2, though? What exactly is the problem here? You have to get better at using macro-mechanics, among many other different skills, to improve at the game? Why exactly is that a barrier? And why is it a bad thing? MULE and Chrono don't exactly take up much of a player's time, compared to inject. And I WANT inject to be manual. Good players pull further and further ahead with strong injects. Mediocre players can get by with decent injects and strong focus in other skills. It balances itself out. But for the people who want inject to not be manual, why not oblige them rather than homogenizing an entire facet of Zerg play so that there is no skill differential at all? Because no one has fun dropping MULE, CB'ing a forge or injecting larvae. It is an artificial and unnecessary chore. Then get rid of them if they're so artificial. Put extra larva from the hatch or a hatchery add on like a reactor and balance marines zerglings and protoss timings around having no macro mechanics. Stop half assing and go with one way or the other. Autocast is convoluted and shitty. I don't disagree. I liked it better when they just didn't exist. I don't fully understand them having a toe in the pool with macro mechanics. But I guess now Protoss have to reveal their hand a bit with CB and they are able to explore faster tech switches with it so that strategic option is back. Terran have to decide if they want a base to spawn a MULE or if they want a PF. It is even stronger a decision now because even if this is your 4th base you can't just make it a PF and MULE with OC's 1-3. It sounds like it just won't be able to get a MULE. The auto cast queen always felt strange to me. I wish they would make it so the queen was a strategic decision to obtain instead of a "Well here is a hatch guess I need a queen here too."
Why don't we just add a Xelnaga bank where you can invest minerals or gas for a certain % return depending on the time that money has been invested? I'm sure that's an interesting mechanic that is very strategic.
The strategy aspect comes from rationing your actions unfortunately this is incredibly subtle. Do you focus on the harass for the potential of a few workers killed at the detriment of your own macro? Do you ignore the harass and focus purely on the macro or do you try to balance both? The key to a fun macro/micro experience is that all three of those options are balanced.
|
i dont like any of these changes except the obvious charge nerf
|
Is this wc3 so much autocast, just keep the nerf and make it non autocast
|
On August 29 2015 03:25 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
Lol. Team Liquid for the win. Are the members of this forum ever happy with any of these changes?
I am very happy with these changes. I'm very happy with Legacy of the Void in general. It feels like an entirely new game, and I love how early aggression is much more viable compared to the long, boring macro games that were the hallmark of WoL and HotS.
|
On August 29 2015 04:06 Linear wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 03:59 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:56 Little-Chimp wrote:On August 29 2015 03:45 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:43 Qwyn wrote:On August 29 2015 03:39 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:37 IntoTheheart wrote:
How would you guys feel if they just had cooldowns on MULE and Chrono, but got rid of the auto-cast? How would that solve the necessity to learn macro mechanic timings as a barrier of entry to SC2, though? What exactly is the problem here? You have to get better at using macro-mechanics, among many other different skills, to improve at the game? Why exactly is that a barrier? And why is it a bad thing? MULE and Chrono don't exactly take up much of a player's time, compared to inject. And I WANT inject to be manual. Good players pull further and further ahead with strong injects. Mediocre players can get by with decent injects and strong focus in other skills. It balances itself out. But for the people who want inject to not be manual, why not oblige them rather than homogenizing an entire facet of Zerg play so that there is no skill differential at all? Because no one has fun dropping MULE, CB'ing a forge or injecting larvae. It is an artificial and unnecessary chore. Then get rid of them if they're so artificial. Put extra larva from the hatch or a hatchery add on like a reactor and balance marines zerglings and protoss timings around having no macro mechanics. Stop half assing and go with one way or the other. Autocast is convoluted and shitty. I don't disagree. I liked it better when they just didn't exist. I don't fully understand them having a toe in the pool with macro mechanics. But I guess now Protoss have to reveal their hand a bit with CB and they are able to explore faster tech switches with it so that strategic option is back. Terran have to decide if they want a base to spawn a MULE or if they want a PF. It is even stronger a decision now because even if this is your 4th base you can't just make it a PF and MULE with OC's 1-3. It sounds like it just won't be able to get a MULE. The auto cast queen always felt strange to me. I wish they would make it so the queen was a strategic decision to obtain instead of a "Well here is a hatch guess I need a queen here too." The key to a fun macro/micro experience is that all three of those options are balanced.
I don't want to put an opinion in your mouth but I completely agree with this statement. The problem is SC2 HotS is not a balanced experience. You macro or you die. Simple as that. I could be playing against someone with the best control in the world but if they can't hit their macro mechanics they will die. Plain and simple. I could be the absolute most shit tier controller on the planet. If the best macroer in the world played against the best controller in the world the macro player will always win. That is what Blizzard is trying to address.
|
On August 29 2015 03:17 Little-Chimp wrote:
Autocast on everything now? This autocast shit is just blizzard not wanting to rebalance around the new macro and band aiding the shit out of old macro mechanics.
This! Blizzard what are you doing to our beloved game?
So many weird changes, you say you will remove them. Ok I didn't like it but I accepted it after a while.
Now you bring them in again with strange changes and make them on autocast?
There is no red line in the balance. Time is running out, not much is left until release.
|
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed
|
I applaud DK and his team for making very goal directed changes. Even if we disagree on the methods, we have precise points and arguments to discuss rather than nebulous naysaying or distracting lamentation. He has offered solutions with as little encroachment as possible on either side of the micro and macro debate, even if auto-cast carries bad connotations to a very APM driven community. The solutions are not exactly how I envisioned things, but I acknowledge that they are potentially effective solutions regarding the themes of our discussion for the past couple weeks, harassability, pacing, mechanical difficulty, and economy. The discussion is very high concept and this uncharted territory will undoubtedly lead to trepidation, but the reward will be much more satisfying. There is still time to tinker with these broad strokes.
I do not know what plans they have in store for the Liberator, but like the Adept, they are in a tenuous state of overpowered vs useless. They both act as linchpins to generalizing composition and enabling open ended build order diversity in it of themselves. The gas increase of the Adept failed because gas is Protoss' BO variety. Had Protoss more mineral heavy dumps, it would've worked, but that is not the environment we have. Species do not survive if they don't thrive in their environment.
AtG has been discussed very thoroughly by various threads so I see it as the main point of contention because it reflects the nature of air which Depth of Micro heavily focused on. Liberators range and harass potential as a result of the AtG has led to a lot of frustration, so we must decide where to focus the Liberator's strength and how it will compare to Banshee. Perhaps Banshee's stealth nature could be reevaluated too.
I also like this post because DK acknowledges how extra actives can sometimes not be productive to the game, e.g. the Tempest. Micro can be achieved through movement quirks (size/shape, accel/decel) and damage quirks (damage point, nature of DPS, range, armor type). I think the same can be said for the Immortal and Void Ray. Passives can make for very interesting dynamics, so I look forward to how the community draws upon precedented unit design in other games. And I look forward to what sort of damage natures can be added with Adept upgrade to further refine the role of the Adept. It would be best to focus on what gaps are left for Protoss as the game progresses.
Speaking of which, the Zealot thing is more a concern of balance, even though I had wished the high mobility Bisu Zealot of old had panned out. Mostly because the only special micro interaction in SC2 the Zealot could achieve was stutter step against speedless Zerglings. Was it because of Concussive and Creep and Adept dominance? It's mostly just speculation on my end because Marauders have definitely dropped in prevalence from their nerf.
A more mobile PO has potential but it's difficult for me to make any projections without seeing the games. There's been good arguments against its viability since it hinges on a very vulnerable building, how can you balance engagements around a Pylon? Unless some sort of shield mechanic comes into play. The shield battery is not dead yet!
|
On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed
I'm so sad that you are not the lead designer. We sure would have a better game.
|
On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed
It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players.
I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player.
|
Even if you don't agree with all the autocast, I think we can all agree that this is a much better way to have MULES. Late game MULE bombs were the dumbest shit. Sure, it takes no "skill" but there wasn't really any skill in dropping MULES in the first place.
|
On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player.
The arrogance of this community it honestly astounding at times
|
The cyclone is unable to use its basic attack ground to air. This does not make sense as its primary need was tier two anti air. TvP is frustrating for terran mech bc there is no way to apply pressure early on without making marines or making a star port. If the cyclone had its basic attack ground to air.... which ... it... still confuses me why this was removed.... the mech player could pressure with two factories and expand .... this would offer an exciting variation from the barracks reactor factory starport opener mech players have now.
Currently if the Protoss player gets aggressive on one base -> Mech Terran expands defensively but requires marines and starport to defend everything if Mech terran made two factories he will be unable to hold certain proxies (proxy void ray stalker is unrealistic to hold without marines and bunkers.... it would be interesting if cyclones could kill voidrays as their main roll is AA or atleast be able to go kill the proxy starport)
Currently if the Protoss player fast expands to two base -> 2 factory Mech Terran dies to starport tech so he expands defensively
In conclusion, the overall changes are good but please consider giving cyclone its basic attack back ground to air and removing auto cast from the game.
|
On August 29 2015 04:22 Tenks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player. The arrogance of this community it honestly astounding at times
You gold league? It's not arrogant to view someone who has more knowledge in the game as a better voice/opinion.
You think that a guy with 200 games knows more about how to send this game in a good direction that a player with 5k games?
|
On August 29 2015 04:21 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Even if you don't agree with all the autocast, I think we can all agree that this is a much better way to have MULES. Late game MULE bombs were the dumbest shit. Sure, it takes no "skill" but there wasn't really any skill in dropping MULES in the first place.
Yes it is a much better way to have mules. Zealot charge is going to be fixed too, great.
Now can we get this autocast trash out of sc2 please. It boggles my mind how people are talking about the infestor and cyclones when the core of the game keeps getting mangled week to week. None of the little details matter right now.
|
Either take them out or keep them in properly. Why the hell do we have these macro boosters if they don't add interesting gameplay
|
On August 29 2015 04:25 Linear wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:22 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player. The arrogance of this community it honestly astounding at times You gold league? It's not arrogant to view someone who has more knowledge in the game as a better voice/opinion. You think that a guy with 200 games knows more about how to send this game in a good direction that a player with 5k games?
Um, that kinda is the definition of arrogant Good ideas can come from anywhere.
|
This auto-cast is i don't know, I'm skeptical it feels like a band-aid but maybe its not, maybe it works to make the game better. The more I think about it the more i see possiblities, and honestly for beta testing its all about testing possiblities.
|
The auto mule is dumb, but it's just a lazy way to buff Bio I guess. Over all, underwhelming update.
|
On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player.
The vast majority of players ARE gold leaguers and intermittent players. You cannot build a game for the elite 1% alone. You cannot have a successful game that only casters to Masters and Grandmasters while leaving everyone below the best of the best frustrated and unsatisfied. I think you're forgetting that TL.net is made up of better-than-average players as well as actual progamers, outliers who are alright with the status quo. TL.net posters are the minority. A well-informed, highly-skilled minority, but a minority nevertheless.
Making the game easier will not suddenly make gold scrubs like Eternal Dalek win games against players like you. You will still kick my ass 99% of the time, but the game will be much less frustrating for lesser-skilled players like me. Basically, you'll have much more people to play with if the game is much more accessible.
Also, what they're really lowering is the skill floor, not the skill ceiling. The skill ceiling remains impossibly high. The skill floor is now much lower. This means that more people can play and enjoy the game, but the best of the best remains in their unassailable fortress of skill. I know a lot of people here confuse the skill floor with the skill ceiling; most of the time, when people say that Blizzard/Valve/Riot/whatever is dumbing down Starcraft/DotA/LoL and lowering the skill ceiling, what they really mean is that the skill floor is being lowered and the game is more accessible.
|
Maybe one thing I want to add is that I 100% agree with keeping queens a necessity for injecting. It makes it much more interesting to have queens sitting around hatcheries, being snipeable, being a serious early game investment that you sometimes may want to cut/delay and being pullable in dicey situations.
I really hope they consider keeping inject at 2larva/queen though. The game is much more interesting without the early ling-floods in ZvZ.
|
On August 29 2015 04:25 Linear wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:22 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player. The arrogance of this community it honestly astounding at times You gold league? It's not arrogant to view someone who has more knowledge in the game as a better voice/opinion. You think that a guy with 200 games knows more about how to send this game in a good direction that a player with 5k games?
Obviously David Kim should know best then, he has worked on SC2 since the launch and developed the game. He obviously knows every single thing about how to send the game in a good direction so all the rest of us should just shut up and see his magic at work. (as the past has told us your reasoning isn't worth shit)
|
Yes, make the game more accessible for players who have never played a StarCraft game and alienate us veterans.
|
If they move the overlord drop at Lair without giving it any speed buff, they will complety kill overlord drops again.
They where really fun at least in early game. now they will be useless.
I mean the slowest drop and cheapest in the game is at Lair ? Where you have Mutas and Nydus ? Cmon.
|
Legacy of the Automation
sorry this just a joke. Everything gets automated. Soon Marinesplits, Banelingsplits and everything else, all automated...
Every community update makes me more sick and hoping for Heart of the Swarm will stick forever as main SC II game.
|
On August 29 2015 04:35 NeThZOR wrote:
Yes, make the game more accessible for players who have never played a StarCraft game and alienate us veterans.
People said they were alienating veterans when they made workers automine at rally. You'll get used to it.
|
this is a stupid change, but as always the community overstates the impact it actually has on playability and fun because it makes people feel like hot shit to make absurd statements like "this is it, the game is completely ruined" or "devs are incompetent/trolling"
the game plays great, the new pace is good, the matchups are mostly pretty good (from a z standpoint). how the fucking macro mechanics specifically work is really really really not that huge of a deal
again, i agree the mass autocast idea is pretty silly, but the "oh well, back to brood war, thanks David Kim" posters are infinitely more stupid and i hope they delete their accounts and leave forever
|
On August 29 2015 04:30 starimk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:25 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:22 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player. The arrogance of this community it honestly astounding at times You gold league? It's not arrogant to view someone who has more knowledge in the game as a better voice/opinion. You think that a guy with 200 games knows more about how to send this game in a good direction that a player with 5k games? Um, that kinda is the definition of arrogant Good ideas can come from anywhere.
I've said nothing about ideas, it's about a review of the implementation of ideas. The more knowledgeable person is in a much better position to comment because they just have more knowledge of how it's effecting the game. Pretty simple concept.
|
On August 29 2015 04:35 Clonester wrote:
Legacy of the Automation
sorry this just a joke. Everything gets automated. Soon Marinesplits, Banelingsplits and everything else, all automated...
Every community update makes me more sick and hoping for Heart of the Swarm will stick forever as main SC II game.
They want to encourage micro. They're not gonna make splits auto or make a split button like this is Red Alert 2. People are overreacting. I can't believe I'm defending Blizzard, but really this is silly.
|
On August 29 2015 04:35 Clonester wrote:
Sorry this just a joke. Everything gets automated. Soon Marinesplits, Banelingsplits and everything else, all automated.
lol. this will never happen and you know it will never happen. you sound like a spoiled child in a candy shop
|
What a bunch of babies we have around here. Nothing but complaints and more complaints. Blizzard has a reasonable thought process and is moving forward in ways that may improve the game overall. They are doing a WAY better job of communicating their thought process and reasons for certain changes. And yet, all most of you do is stomp your little baby feet and cross your little baby arms and furrow your little baby eyebrows and say, "Fine, if you won't make the game exactly the way I want it, then I just won't play it any more."
You are hypocrites. You claim Blizzard doesn't care enough about this game and you talk about your amazing passion. Then, as soon as something happens that you don't happen to approve of, you run away like a child. Where is the passion? How about offering a constructive thought or two? How about testing the proposed changes for a while before you decide to quit the game? Good grief. So hypocritical. You complainers go ahead and walk away. It will make the game more enjoyable for the rest of us.
|
All macroboosters on autocast? What the fuck?!?! I get a really bad feeling in my stomach area when reading through the last community updates.
|
On August 29 2015 04:34 Eternal Dalek wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player. The vast majority of players ARE gold leaguers and intermittent players. You cannot build a game for the elite 1% alone. You cannot have a successful game that only casters to Masters and Grandmasters while leaving everyone below the best of the best frustrated and unsatisfied. I think you're forgetting that TL.net is made up of better-than-average players as well as actual progamers, outliers who are alright with the status quo. TL.net posters are the minority. A well-informed, highly-skilled minority, but a minority nevertheless. Making the game easier will not suddenly make gold scrubs like Eternal Dalek win games against players like you. You will still kick my ass 99% of the time, but the game will be much less frustrating for lesser-skilled players like me. Basically, you'll have much more people to play with if the game is much more accessible. Also, what they're really lowering is the skill floor, not the skill ceiling. The skill ceiling remains impossibly high. The skill floor is now much lower. This means that more people can play and enjoy the game, but the best of the best remains in their unassailable fortress of skill. I know a lot of people here confuse the skill floor with the skill ceiling; most of the time, when people say that Blizzard/Valve/Riot/whatever is dumbing down Starcraft/DotA/LoL and lowering the skill ceiling, what they really mean is that the skill floor is being lowered and the game is more accessible.
I will never understand what this "more accessable for casuals" means.
As a low level player you always face players at similar skill with equally bad macro/micro.
Making mechanics easier does nothing to decrease their frustration because they will lose 50% of the time regardless.
The only difference will be that they lost because they fucked up their micro or got caught offguard instead of losing because they missed their injects.
Is that less frustrating? I don't think so.
|
On August 29 2015 04:41 spydog wrote:
What a bunch of babies we have around here. Nothing but complaints and more complaints. Blizzard has a reasonable thought process and is moving forward in ways that may improve the game overall. They are doing a WAY better job of communicating their thought process and reasons for certain changes. And yet, all most of you do is stomp your little baby feet and cross your little baby arms and furrow your little baby eyebrows and say, "Fine, if you won't make the game exactly the way I want it, then I just won't play it any more."
You are hypocrites. You claim Blizzard doesn't care enough about this game and you talk about your amazing passion. Then, as soon as something happens that you don't happen to approve of, you run away like a child. Where is the passion? How about offering a constructive thought or two? How about testing the proposed changes for a while before you decide to quit the game? Good grief. So hypocritical. You complainers go ahead and walk away. It will make the game more enjoyable for the rest of us.
Look at the Reddit thread. A lot more positivity and thoughtful discussion. Is not surprising that David Kim is posting there and not here.
At this point TL is only better than Battle.net foruns.
|
I agree that auto-CB/mule isn't that big of a deal. Anyone who's actually been playing the latest patch of the beta knows that the majority of macro clicks are building things, depots/production buildings etc., than dropping a mule or chronoing something. As for zerg though, auto inject larva is pretty nuts and I'd like to see the ability re-worked... I've said it before (and others have too) that the idea of inject larva making hatcheries spawn an extra 3-4 larva over X seconds (1 larva per Y seconds) is more interesting... So it's less punishing if I haven't injected in a while since I will get an extra larva quickly. But still forces zergs to go back to their base more often...
Anyone play all 3 races? Zerg really doesn't feel like you need to go back to your base as much anymore. I guess creep spread does help though.
|
On August 29 2015 04:41 spydog wrote:
What a bunch of babies we have around here. Nothing but complaints and more complaints. Blizzard has a reasonable thought process and is moving forward in ways that may improve the game overall. They are doing a WAY better job of communicating their thought process and reasons for certain changes. And yet, all most of you do is stomp your little baby feet and cross your little baby arms and furrow your little baby eyebrows and say, "Fine, if you won't make the game exactly the way I want it, then I just won't play it any more."
You are hypocrites. You claim Blizzard doesn't care enough about this game and you talk about your amazing passion. Then, as soon as something happens that you don't happen to approve of, you run away like a child. Where is the passion? How about offering a constructive thought or two? How about testing the proposed changes for a while before you decide to quit the game? Good grief. So hypocritical. You complainers go ahead and walk away. It will make the game more enjoyable for the rest of us.
People get angry when you dedicate 5 years to a game and then it starts getting ruined by pandering to muh micro LOL players and not even doing it properly and in an intuitive way.
Honestly this auto everything stuff just sounds like a response to the terran whining over the last week, and instead of buffing terran units or changing build times or ANYTHING they just decided to put auto mule to band aid it up. Of course if auto mule and auto inject are in, gotta have auto chrono!
|
On August 29 2015 04:30 starimk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:25 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:22 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player. The arrogance of this community it honestly astounding at times You gold league? It's not arrogant to view someone who has more knowledge in the game as a better voice/opinion. You think that a guy with 200 games knows more about how to send this game in a good direction that a player with 5k games? Um, that kinda is the definition of arrogant Good ideas can come from anywhere.
I love how he pretty much proved the quoted poster's point. :D
I can't find the articles right now, but over the years, many players have asked Wizards of the Coast why they print bad/gimmicky/silly cards in Magic: The Gathering. None of the pros, who spend thousands of dollars on a single deck every few months or so, will ever pay for any of these cards. Also, some have asked why some useless cards like Browbeat have a higher-than-normal secondary market value.
The answer to this is that while the pros spend a considerable amount of money on the game individually, collectively, the rest of us MTG scrubs outspend them by a lot. Basically, WotC makes most of its Magic revenue not from the Magic progamers, but from casual scrubs like Eternal Dalek who can't even get past Gold in Starcraft 2. The pro scene does drive card sales, especially individual card sales, a.k.a. "singles," but it's still only a small fraction of the total Magic sales.
The same applies to Starcraft 2 and Blizzard. How many players are there in GM? A thousand, right? How many current players are there in HotS? According to this site:
http://nios.kr/sc2/global/1v1/hots/
There are 799 Grandmasters out of 224,600 accounts. That's 0.36% of the active player base. If we add Masters to that (10,972 or 4.89%), we go up to 5.25% of the active player base (those who bothered to play ranked and haven't quit by now). Are you going to ignore 94.75% of the player base just to cater to the top 5.25%? Remember that they all had to pay to play like the rest of us. Are you going to cater to the five people that gave you $1 each, or the 95 people who gave you $1 each? The answer is no, you shouldn't ignore the majority. You should listen to the highly-skilled minority more, but you shouldn't completely ignore everyone else.
Remember, the 94.75% of Diamond and below players only represents the active player base. It doesn't count people like me who gave up on the game years ago. We still count. We represent the bulk of revenue Blizzard earned from Starcraft 2. We should not, and cannot be ignored.
|
On August 29 2015 04:39 brickrd wrote:
this is a stupid change, but as always the community overstates the impact it actually has on playability and fun because it makes people feel like hot shit to make absurd statements like "this is it, the game is completely ruined" or "devs are incompetent/trolling"
the game plays great, the new pace is good, the matchups are mostly pretty good (from a z standpoint). how the fucking macro mechanics specifically work is really really really not that huge of a deal
again, i agree the mass autocast idea is pretty silly, but the "oh well, back to brood war, thanks David Kim" posters are infinitely more stupid and i hope they delete their accounts and leave forever
ahaha. that doesn't surprise me lol.
|
On August 29 2015 04:25 Linear wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:22 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player. The arrogance of this community it honestly astounding at times You gold league? It's not arrogant to view someone who has more knowledge in the game as a better voice/opinion. You think that a guy with 200 games knows more about how to send this game in a good direction that a player with 5k games?
I find it ironic that the master Korean race is the one complaining that the game is too hard while shitty foreigners are raging about the casualization of the game.
|
A lot of people are overreacting here I think. Blizzard stated that removing the macro mechanics yielded the results they wanted to see, and that the complaints that led to it came from Korean pros, who thought that Legacy was actually too fast. But removing the mechanics created a few problems, and these changes seem to address them in an elegant way.
They listened to community feedback, investigated it, developed and tested a solution for it, and saw good results. I can't complain about that.
Besides, nothing is final yet so it's always possible that more will get changed/reverted.
Very satisfied with today's update.
|
On August 29 2015 04:39 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:35 Clonester wrote:
Legacy of the Automation
sorry this just a joke. Everything gets automated. Soon Marinesplits, Banelingsplits and everything else, all automated...
Every community update makes me more sick and hoping for Heart of the Swarm will stick forever as main SC II game. They want to encourage micro. They're not gonna make splits auto or make a split button like this is Red Alert 2. People are overreacting. I can't believe I'm defending Blizzard, but really this is silly.
OR people are just really confused about the direction Blizz is going with LotV, myself included. Using autocast macroboosters to encourage more micro is a complete joke tbh. I for my part don't want the game to be like this, I've never asked for these kind of changes.
They changed the starting workers to 12 and never tried out other options, but some people don't really like having 12 starting workers, myself included. Why don't they test those kind of things, but do shitty stuff like this?!
|
Well, what is exactly the point of energy-free auto MULEs? Build OC -> get money? You now don't even have to choose whether to scan or supply drop or MULE? This is a very bad idea in my opinion.
The rest is good, though. Auto CB seems weird but isn't bad conceptually. Tempests reverted is nice and makes sense, too.
Adepts should still be nerfed, though, especially seeing today's first RedBull PvT (hint: Adepts shrekt everything).
Also, move Droplords to Lair and kill the DropTank, please.
|
On August 29 2015 04:47 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:34 Eternal Dalek wrote:On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player. The vast majority of players ARE gold leaguers and intermittent players. You cannot build a game for the elite 1% alone. You cannot have a successful game that only casters to Masters and Grandmasters while leaving everyone below the best of the best frustrated and unsatisfied. I think you're forgetting that TL.net is made up of better-than-average players as well as actual progamers, outliers who are alright with the status quo. TL.net posters are the minority. A well-informed, highly-skilled minority, but a minority nevertheless. Making the game easier will not suddenly make gold scrubs like Eternal Dalek win games against players like you. You will still kick my ass 99% of the time, but the game will be much less frustrating for lesser-skilled players like me. Basically, you'll have much more people to play with if the game is much more accessible. Also, what they're really lowering is the skill floor, not the skill ceiling. The skill ceiling remains impossibly high. The skill floor is now much lower. This means that more people can play and enjoy the game, but the best of the best remains in their unassailable fortress of skill. I know a lot of people here confuse the skill floor with the skill ceiling; most of the time, when people say that Blizzard/Valve/Riot/whatever is dumbing down Starcraft/DotA/LoL and lowering the skill ceiling, what they really mean is that the skill floor is being lowered and the game is more accessible. I will never understand what this "more accessable for casuals" means. As a low level player you always face players at similar skill with equally bad macro/micro. Making mechanics easier does nothing to decrease their frustration because they will lose 50% of the time regardless. The only difference will be that they lost because they fucked up their micro or got caught offguard instead of losing because they missed their injects. Is that less frustrating? I don't think so.
Do you mean that you're unable to empathize with lesser-skilled players? Are you simply unable to see it from our perspective?
A wise man once said that players are generally right about what's wrong with the game, but are generally wrong with how to fix it. The vast majority of Starcraft 2 players, not just the active player base of around 200k, but everyone who bought SC1 and/or SC2, generally agree that the game is too hard and too frustrating to play. Most people are wrong about how to fix it without destroying the core gameplay.
I have more faith in someone whose livelihood is based on the success or failure of Starcraft 2 (David Kim, Dustin Browder, etc.) than someone who cannot or will not try to understand how other players feel. David Kim and Dustin Browder acknowledge the actual problems instead of just dismissing them as the signs of unskilled play.
|
God. Everyone here is so fucking entitled. It's ridiculous.
|
We hade the exact same public outcry when blizzard introduced multiple building selection.
Same thing with auto rally.
Same thing with auto-split workers.
Take a chill pill, wait for the changes to hit the beta servers, test it out and then voice your concerns.
I've been playing SC2 since WoL Beta, and I find these changes interesting, especially the Chronoboost change seems elegant and simple, and fits perfectly with Blizzards new direction stated in the bluepost.
|
On August 29 2015 04:54 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:25 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:22 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player. The arrogance of this community it honestly astounding at times You gold league? It's not arrogant to view someone who has more knowledge in the game as a better voice/opinion. You think that a guy with 200 games knows more about how to send this game in a good direction that a player with 5k games? I find it ironic that the master Korean race is the one complaining that the game is too hard while shitty foreigners are raging about the casualization of the game.
I gained a lot of respect for the Korean pros for this. I mean, I already put them on a pedestal like the rest of us have, but it's quite commendable that they actually acknowledge the problems in this game, when they could've just continued their dominance if the status quo remained.
|
That's very inelegant ... and disappointing.
|
On August 29 2015 04:55 Creager wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:39 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:On August 29 2015 04:35 Clonester wrote:
Legacy of the Automation
sorry this just a joke. Everything gets automated. Soon Marinesplits, Banelingsplits and everything else, all automated...
Every community update makes me more sick and hoping for Heart of the Swarm will stick forever as main SC II game. They want to encourage micro. They're not gonna make splits auto or make a split button like this is Red Alert 2. People are overreacting. I can't believe I'm defending Blizzard, but really this is silly. OR people are just really confused about the direction Blizz is going with LotV, myself included. Using autocast macroboosters to encourage more micro is a complete joke tbh. I for my part don't want the game to be like this, I've never asked for these kind of changes. They changed the starting workers to 12 and never tried out other options, but some people don't really like having 12 starting workers, myself included. Why don't they test those kind of things, but do shitty stuff like this?!
I totally agree that the fact they never tried any other economy models is completely fucking stupid and I'm very disappointed in them for that. I would have at least like to try DH model.
But really, what does making these autocast change? Dropping MULEs isn't a skill, and MULEs caused problems in the late game and that is now solved. Chronoboosting is similar enough that it's not that big of a deal, and larva inject was way too important for zerg and was very very frustrating for lower level players.
|
do you know what's FUN? ... manner mules! Now I'm going to have to fly and land an orbital near my opponent to do so!!
Honestly, it's not that I dislike this change (or the previous "removal")... it's that they didn't anticipate any of the problems nor did they try anything to fix them (I don't count this partial revert as a fix).
|
On August 29 2015 04:56 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
God. Everyone here is so fucking entitled. It's ridiculous.
Can we stop with these comments? Lol this is the beta, we are supposed to give feedback, and tons of it. When things are going the wrong way, you better damn voice your opinion, otherwise what's the point of even participating in beta testing??
|
I don't understand the hate for the automatization in itself as a mechanic. Something automated is something you don't have to control in the game, it is literally the same thing as not having it to begin with controlwise.
I understand the argument about making macro hard (even though I don't support it), but I can't understand the stance that abilities must not be automated ever. That just doesn't make sense.
|
so when are they adding production hacks in?
|
On August 29 2015 04:56 Eternal Dalek wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:47 Charoisaur wrote:On August 29 2015 04:34 Eternal Dalek wrote:On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player. The vast majority of players ARE gold leaguers and intermittent players. You cannot build a game for the elite 1% alone. You cannot have a successful game that only casters to Masters and Grandmasters while leaving everyone below the best of the best frustrated and unsatisfied. I think you're forgetting that TL.net is made up of better-than-average players as well as actual progamers, outliers who are alright with the status quo. TL.net posters are the minority. A well-informed, highly-skilled minority, but a minority nevertheless. Making the game easier will not suddenly make gold scrubs like Eternal Dalek win games against players like you. You will still kick my ass 99% of the time, but the game will be much less frustrating for lesser-skilled players like me. Basically, you'll have much more people to play with if the game is much more accessible. Also, what they're really lowering is the skill floor, not the skill ceiling. The skill ceiling remains impossibly high. The skill floor is now much lower. This means that more people can play and enjoy the game, but the best of the best remains in their unassailable fortress of skill. I know a lot of people here confuse the skill floor with the skill ceiling; most of the time, when people say that Blizzard/Valve/Riot/whatever is dumbing down Starcraft/DotA/LoL and lowering the skill ceiling, what they really mean is that the skill floor is being lowered and the game is more accessible. I will never understand what this "more accessable for casuals" means. As a low level player you always face players at similar skill with equally bad macro/micro. Making mechanics easier does nothing to decrease their frustration because they will lose 50% of the time regardless. The only difference will be that they lost because they fucked up their micro or got caught offguard instead of losing because they missed their injects. Is that less frustrating? I don't think so. Do you mean that you're unable to empathize with lesser-skilled players? Are you simply unable to see it from our perspective? A wise man once said that players are generally right about what's wrong with the game, but are generally wrong with how to fix it. The vast majority of Starcraft 2 players, not just the active player base of around 200k, but everyone who bought SC1 and/or SC2, generally agree that the game is too hard and too frustrating to play. Most people are wrong about how to fix it without destroying the core gameplay. I have more faith in someone whose livelihood is based on the success or failure of Starcraft 2 (David Kim, Dustin Browder, etc.) than someone who cannot or will not try to understand how other players feel. David Kim and Dustin Browder acknowledge the actual problems instead of just dismissing them as the signs of unskilled play.
you didn't answer my question at all.
My point is, in every multiplayer game the difficulty is determined by your opponent not by the game.
Making macro mechanics easier doesn't make the game easier it only shifts the things you have to be good at from macro to micro. If you think casual players generally like micro more than macro then you may have a point but as long as you always lose 50% of your games the game will stay as frustrating as it is.
|
Sadly I guess DK only looks to Koreans for feedback. RIP zerg macro, RIP soo. SC2: The Frozen Throne is here.
|
On August 29 2015 04:57 Eternal Dalek wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:54 andrewlt wrote:On August 29 2015 04:25 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:22 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player. The arrogance of this community it honestly astounding at times You gold league? It's not arrogant to view someone who has more knowledge in the game as a better voice/opinion. You think that a guy with 200 games knows more about how to send this game in a good direction that a player with 5k games? I find it ironic that the master Korean race is the one complaining that the game is too hard while shitty foreigners are raging about the casualization of the game. I gained a lot of respect for the Korean pros for this. I mean, I already put them on a pedestal like the rest of us have, but it's quite commendable that they actually acknowledge the problems in this game, when they could've just continued their dominance if the status quo remained.
Well, I do agree that the reasoning behind the changes is good for the game. However, I feel like the autocast solution is an effort to get the game out by December. Removing the unnecessary macro mechanics and rebalancing around that would take too long. So I agree with the disappointment of the older fans as well since the old Blizzard would do what is necessary and just delay the game's release if they need to.
|
Im so god damn upset and cringy cuz nothing is said about Infestor and SwarmHost. God dammit.
|
On August 29 2015 04:56 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
God. Everyone here is so fucking entitled. It's ridiculous.
Actually, Blizzard is not entitled to my money and they've made it clear through these community updates that they appreciate the feedback. It's free information and market data and the only reason we give it is because we love Starcraft. Starcraft's saving grace right now is its devoted community so how about you stop shitting on it?
|
definitely not going in a direction I like, so that sucks a lot.. Guess games might still look cool enough but i dont think i'll be playing anymore
|
On August 29 2015 04:50 Eternal Dalek wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:30 starimk wrote:On August 29 2015 04:25 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:22 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player. The arrogance of this community it honestly astounding at times You gold league? It's not arrogant to view someone who has more knowledge in the game as a better voice/opinion. You think that a guy with 200 games knows more about how to send this game in a good direction that a player with 5k games? Um, that kinda is the definition of arrogant Good ideas can come from anywhere. I love how he pretty much proved the quoted poster's point. :D I can't find the articles right now, but over the years, many players have asked Wizards of the Coast why they print bad/gimmicky/silly cards in Magic: The Gathering. None of the pros, who spend thousands of dollars on a single deck every few months or so, will ever pay for any of these cards. Also, some have asked why some useless cards like Browbeat have a higher-than-normal secondary market value. The answer to this is that while the pros spend a considerable amount of money on the game individually, collectively, the rest of us MTG scrubs outspend them by a lot. Basically, WotC makes most of its Magic revenue not from the Magic progamers, but from casual scrubs like Eternal Dalek who can't even get past Gold in Starcraft 2. The pro scene does drive card sales, especially individual card sales, a.k.a. "singles," but it's still only a small fraction of the total Magic sales. The same applies to Starcraft 2 and Blizzard. How many players are there in GM? A thousand, right? How many current players are there in HotS? According to this site: http://nios.kr/sc2/global/1v1/hots/There are 799 Grandmasters out of 224,600 accounts. That's 0.36% of the active player base. If we add Masters to that (10,972 or 4.89%), we go up to 5.25% of the active player base (those who bothered to play ranked and haven't quit by now). Are you going to ignore 94.75% of the player base just to cater to the top 5.25%? Remember that they all had to pay to play like the rest of us. Are you going to cater to the five people that gave you $1 each, or the 95 people who gave you $1 each? The answer is no, you shouldn't ignore the majority. You should listen to the highly-skilled minority more, but you shouldn't completely ignore everyone else. Remember, the 94.75% of Diamond and below players only represents the active player base. It doesn't count people like me who gave up on the game years ago. We still count. We represent the bulk of revenue Blizzard earned from Starcraft 2. We should not, and cannot be ignored.
First off the definition of arrogance is not even close to what I said, valuing a more experienced person opinion isn't an exaggerated position of self worth.
Secondly don't people play this game currently at these low leagues, the audience they feel they will attract or gain with these changes is an audience that is yet to have shown itself and they do this at the detriment of the core players they already have seems like a bad idea?
You are a perfect case in point, you don't even play this game anymore and you never attained a good knowledge of this game yet you want to discuss key design points that affect the very state of the game?
Lower league players are fine for discussing the things that they want achieved (ie lower skill floor, more noticeable/rewarding micro) but when it comes to discussing the implementation I find their input lacking.
|
On August 29 2015 04:59 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:55 Creager wrote:On August 29 2015 04:39 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:On August 29 2015 04:35 Clonester wrote:
Legacy of the Automation
sorry this just a joke. Everything gets automated. Soon Marinesplits, Banelingsplits and everything else, all automated...
Every community update makes me more sick and hoping for Heart of the Swarm will stick forever as main SC II game. They want to encourage micro. They're not gonna make splits auto or make a split button like this is Red Alert 2. People are overreacting. I can't believe I'm defending Blizzard, but really this is silly. OR people are just really confused about the direction Blizz is going with LotV, myself included. Using autocast macroboosters to encourage more micro is a complete joke tbh. I for my part don't want the game to be like this, I've never asked for these kind of changes. They changed the starting workers to 12 and never tried out other options, but some people don't really like having 12 starting workers, myself included. Why don't they test those kind of things, but do shitty stuff like this?! I totally agree that the fact they never tried any other economy models is completely fucking stupid and I'm very disappointed in them for that. I would have at least like to try DH model. But really, what does making these autocast change? Dropping MULEs isn't a skill, and MULEs caused problems in the late game and that is now solved. Chronoboosting is similar enough that it's not that big of a deal, and larva inject was way too important for zerg and was very very frustrating for lower level players.
I agree that MULES in HotS are indeed kinda problematic, however there is actually skill (well, thought, at least) involved when deciding to scan OR mule if you're low on energy and can't have both. I just don't like that more and more stuff is taken care of automatically (fuck auto worker rally, scan radius etc).
Experience is a major factor when playing this game, it can be brutal and devastatingly frustrating to play Starcraft, I think we all know and kinda love that. This will still be an obstacle to overcome for new players and having autocast macro abilities is just less stuff people have to show-off their skill. Leveling the playing field that way is the wrong approach imho.
|
On August 29 2015 05:02 ffadicted wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:56 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
God. Everyone here is so fucking entitled. It's ridiculous. Can we stop with these comments? Lol this is the beta, we are supposed to give feedback, and tons of it. When things are going the wrong way, you better damn voice your opinion, otherwise what's the point of even participating in beta testing??
Lol. Cause the feedback people are giving back in this thread is so constructive, right? Give me a break.
|
How's this for an idea: If mule is autocast with no energy (only cooldown), then why not also give it to the planetary fortress?
I know that sounds like a pretty huge buff to planetary, but as it stands now, the choice will be between getting mules, and your choice of scans or supply drops, and also the ability to lift versus a large, expensive cannon.
If PF has mule, there's still plenty of choice there, especially since you're going to want to have a few orbitals in order to lift them in the late game and move them towards resources. Plus, orbitals don't require gas.
|
On August 29 2015 05:19 ohmylanta1003 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 05:02 ffadicted wrote:On August 29 2015 04:56 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
God. Everyone here is so fucking entitled. It's ridiculous. Can we stop with these comments? Lol this is the beta, we are supposed to give feedback, and tons of it. When things are going the wrong way, you better damn voice your opinion, otherwise what's the point of even participating in beta testing?? Lol. Cause the feedback people are giving back in this thread is so constructive, right? Give me a break.
The feedback in this thread is overwhelmingly "we want macro back". If enough people say it, maybe they'll listen?
|
On August 29 2015 05:19 ohmylanta1003 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 05:02 ffadicted wrote:On August 29 2015 04:56 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
God. Everyone here is so fucking entitled. It's ridiculous. Can we stop with these comments? Lol this is the beta, we are supposed to give feedback, and tons of it. When things are going the wrong way, you better damn voice your opinion, otherwise what's the point of even participating in beta testing?? Lol. Cause the feedback people are giving back in this thread is so constructive, right? Give me a break.
Let people advertise for the game they want dude
|
On August 29 2015 05:19 TheDougler wrote:
How's this for an idea: If mule is autocast with no energy (only cooldown), then why not also give it to the planetary fortress?
I know that sounds like a pretty huge buff to planetary, but as it stands now, the choice will be between getting mules, and your choice of scans or supply drops, and also the ability to lift versus a large, expensive cannon.
If PF has mule, there's still plenty of choice there, especially since you're going to want to have a few orbitals in order to lift them in the late game and move them towards resources. Plus, orbitals don't require gas.
Wow that sounds absolutely terrible to play against.
|
On August 29 2015 04:57 Eternal Dalek wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:54 andrewlt wrote:On August 29 2015 04:25 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:22 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player. The arrogance of this community it honestly astounding at times You gold league? It's not arrogant to view someone who has more knowledge in the game as a better voice/opinion. You think that a guy with 200 games knows more about how to send this game in a good direction that a player with 5k games? I find it ironic that the master Korean race is the one complaining that the game is too hard while shitty foreigners are raging about the casualization of the game. I gained a lot of respect for the Korean pros for this. I mean, I already put them on a pedestal like the rest of us have, but it's quite commendable that they actually acknowledge the problems in this game, when they could've just continued their dominance if the status quo remained.
I don't think they have, they've fobbed us off with a statement from the general korean community from when they first started the beta rather than something they've said about this change, as I said earlier I've spoken to some Koreans and they have said to me the higher levels of their community disagree with these macro changes and that the lower leagues are in agreement which is similar to the situation we have here. (Don't take that for a certain since It's second hand information though)
|
I have to say I've been one of the people that have defended blizzard through a lot I can't defend their actions with this current change to auto cast abilities.... I have been watching BW games for old times sake and I think I might be going back because of how disappointing this has truly been. I kinda want my $ back for LotV before all of this macro crap started happening....
Edit: In the end I know it was my fault for purchasing it and trusting DK would pull through but... disappointed... truly disappointed.....
|
I was really enjoying the removal of Macro Boosters, and felt that the game was going to need balancing, but that it would be easier since things were more predictable. I will try to keep an open mind, but my initial reaction to the Auto-cast Macro Boosters was: "Oh crap. Please don't do this!"
I would have REALLY preferred that the next patch be an initial attempt at balancing the game (for Terran mostly), around the Removal of Macro Boosters. I mean, we didn't even get to see what the game COULD be like.
I feel this switch to Auto Boosters is rushed, and that we did not get to flush out gameplay with the Removal option.
I hope this Auto stuff doesn't happen.
|
On August 29 2015 05:21 Aocowns wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 05:19 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 29 2015 05:02 ffadicted wrote:On August 29 2015 04:56 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
God. Everyone here is so fucking entitled. It's ridiculous. Can we stop with these comments? Lol this is the beta, we are supposed to give feedback, and tons of it. When things are going the wrong way, you better damn voice your opinion, otherwise what's the point of even participating in beta testing?? Lol. Cause the feedback people are giving back in this thread is so constructive, right? Give me a break. Let people advertise for the game they want dude
It's impossible for Blizzard to please everyone. You know this, I know this, we all know it. People in this thread aren't advertising for the game they want. They're bitching about what has been given to them. That's all they ever do.
|
Chrono change might actually be pretty damn good and I think the same needs to be done to the Queen. You pick the Queen and select af Hatch and the Queen simply speeds up the Larvae production of the Hatchery by a percent (channel ability.)
Mule should just be energy, why remove the decision element in choosing between Mule/SupplyDrop/Scan and instead make Mule a no decision mechanic...
So nerf Mule so that it's on equal terms with Scan&Supply Drop, Chrono becomes this and Queen Inject becomes like the new Chrono, but for Larvae.
They do so many small scale micro changes that they sometimes forget the big picture and it can make the game ugly.
|
On August 29 2015 05:30 ohmylanta1003 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 05:21 Aocowns wrote:On August 29 2015 05:19 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 29 2015 05:02 ffadicted wrote:On August 29 2015 04:56 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
God. Everyone here is so fucking entitled. It's ridiculous. Can we stop with these comments? Lol this is the beta, we are supposed to give feedback, and tons of it. When things are going the wrong way, you better damn voice your opinion, otherwise what's the point of even participating in beta testing?? Lol. Cause the feedback people are giving back in this thread is so constructive, right? Give me a break. Let people advertise for the game they want dude It's impossible for Blizzard to please everyone. You know this, I know this, we all know it. People in this thread aren't advertising for the game they want. They're bitching about what has been given to them. That's all they ever do.
oh shit it's almost as if they're giving feedback about what they want instead of all supporting one thing
|
GET RID OF THE COLOSSUS
Also most of the macro changes suck.
|
We’re not saying all these things will make it into the beta for certain, but these are some examples of things we’re currently testing right now. We’ll provide an additional update next week that clearly outlines the changes coming to the beta, but we wanted to give you this information as early as possible. Thanks for your continued testing and feedback in helping us develop the best Legacy of the Void possible.
So this update is basically a fine-tuning and adjustment after the first results of the macro change; next week they do another update on the macro subject, and this is basically the game, in this state. It doesn't seem like they are willing to experiment with new units anymore. I was kinda hoping that they would spice the game up with some other interesting new units but it seems that's it.
Oh well, the game seems alright. It's not as groundbreaking as i hoped, but it's decent I guess.
|
On August 29 2015 05:04 Big J wrote:
I don't understand the hate for the automatization in itself as a mechanic. Something automated is something you don't have to control in the game, it is literally the same thing as not having it to begin with controlwise.
I understand the argument about making macro hard (even though I don't support it), but I can't understand the stance that abilities must not be automated ever. That just doesn't make sense.
Yeah it seems like people just find it "icky" for some reason. Really their solution seems to hit all the points they want it to. I understand if you disagree with those points, but if you agree with the goals this seems like a fine way to achieve them.
I guess it's a little bit of the lazy solution as some of the reason for it is fixing the balance concerns with completely removing the boosters. I just thought they'd re-balance the game. Autocast doesn't change things up too much so everything should be closer to how it was.
If you're someone who was excited about slowing down macro in general or getting rid of cheesier chrono builds or more common PFs or some other side-effect this might not have the advantages of cutting the boosters, in any case.
I think people care way too much about "elegance" in game design when it doesn't even effect the way the game plays. It's only a bit of a burden for new players to learn what mules and chrono are. Other than the "complication" of their very existence, they don't really make the game clunkier or anything. Cutting them altogether would make the end product simpler but the process to balance the game around that would be much more work.
An argument could also be made that a race's abilities are features in a game and it's kinda lame to cut features in an expansion. That's more from a traditional average consumer's point of view, and obviously more abilities doesn't mean more quality gameplay or anything, but it's still the what I would have expected from an expansion before I really tried much competitive play in RTS games.
|
Russian Federation1612 Posts
Love the direction they are going!
|
So basically we will continue with an exponential economy, but more automatic than before so we can focus on KILL WORKERS instead making them or use the Macro Mechanics to do so.
There is no way I could regret spending time on playing SB instead SC2 at this point
|
On August 29 2015 05:39 Gfire wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 05:04 Big J wrote:
I don't understand the hate for the automatization in itself as a mechanic. Something automated is something you don't have to control in the game, it is literally the same thing as not having it to begin with controlwise.
I understand the argument about making macro hard (even though I don't support it), but I can't understand the stance that abilities must not be automated ever. That just doesn't make sense. Yeah it seems like people just find it "icky" for some reason. Really their solution seems to hit all the points they want it to. I understand if you disagree with those points, but if you agree with the goals this seems like a fine way to achieve them. I guess it's a little bit of the lazy solution as some of the reason for it is fixing the balance concerns with completely removing the boosters. I just thought they'd re-balance the game. Autocast doesn't change things up too much so everything should be closer to how it was. If you're someone who was excited about slowing down macro in general or getting rid of cheesier chrono builds or more common PFs or some other side-effect this might not have the advantages of cutting the boosters, in any case. I think people care way too much about "elegance" in game design when it doesn't even effect the way the game plays. It's only a bit of a burden for new players to learn what mules and chrono are. Other than the "complication" of their very existence, they don't really make the game clunkier or anything. Cutting them altogether would make the end product simpler but the process to balance the game around that would be much more work. An argument could also be made that a race's abilities are features in a game and it's kinda lame to cut features in an expansion. That's more from a traditional average consumer's point of view, and obviously more abilities doesn't mean more quality gameplay or anything, but it's still the what I would have expected from an expansion before I really tried much competitive play in RTS games.
It's pretty much a giant dirty nasty band aid of all band aids instead of balancing the game around no macro mechanics.
Some people enjoyed the macro mechanics, some people hated them. I'm pretty sure no one wanted them to just exist in the background except for some terrans last week who got nailed hard by the last patch. That issue could have been fixed a million other ways than automating old mechanics.
It's a bit like the HOTS spore crawlers doing a million damage to mutas only but for macro.
|
While I really appreciate that they're trying out so much stuff, it also feels like they're completely crippling themselves by not going into the fundamentals more.
Many people in this thread are pretty stupid about how to say it and just flame ahead as if this was a reddit thread, but they have a point: Instead of fixing the core problems of the game, Kim has to come up with bandaid fixes to make the game more appealing to casual players as well as more fun and an overall better experience for higher level players(i.e. everyone not playing once a month).
Things like "engine flaws/technical flaws" that Blizzard doesn't see as flaws(overkill protection screwing with Terran mech/tanks comes to mind, or damage point and other things, referring to Lalush's posts mainly about unit control) exist next to a not-optimized and outdated economic growth model that always leads to the same number of optimal bases/workers and some archaic unit concepts such as the colossus, roach or marauder and many others that are either boring or completely hard-countering certain playstyles.
I don't know if it's Blizzard telling Kim to not do it, or Kim not being confident enough. But these changes are so well thought out that I firmly believe that given the proper amount of time, Kim and his team can do a proper redesign of some core-aspects of the game so that they can stop the bandaid fixing and concentrate on whats important: Making all elements of the game more fun - instead of increasing the already existing fun elements while completely having to ignore the frustrating, non-fun elements of the game.
It seems like it's too late for that now and we're past a point where this is the biggest change we will see in Beta.
|
On August 29 2015 05:34 Aocowns wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 05:30 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 29 2015 05:21 Aocowns wrote:On August 29 2015 05:19 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 29 2015 05:02 ffadicted wrote:On August 29 2015 04:56 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
God. Everyone here is so fucking entitled. It's ridiculous. Can we stop with these comments? Lol this is the beta, we are supposed to give feedback, and tons of it. When things are going the wrong way, you better damn voice your opinion, otherwise what's the point of even participating in beta testing?? Lol. Cause the feedback people are giving back in this thread is so constructive, right? Give me a break. Let people advertise for the game they want dude It's impossible for Blizzard to please everyone. You know this, I know this, we all know it. People in this thread aren't advertising for the game they want. They're bitching about what has been given to them. That's all they ever do. oh shit it's almost as if they're giving feedback about what they want instead of all supporting one thing
You should be a little more sarcastic. It might help Blizzard make this game the best it can be. I'm not saying everyone should support one thing. But this community is so divided on EVERY FUCKING ISSUE that it's impossible for Blizzard to make this game without a chunk of people saying "guess I won't be purchasing LOTV". Great comment. 10/10. Just shut your fucking mouth, honestly, if that's all you have to say.
|
BTW The Macro Mechanics were something like "I want to do them better, I want to use my skill at macroing to get advantage over the other players", not a "I want them because they look "cool" but put them in Auto-Mode plox
|
On August 29 2015 05:46 KeksX wrote:
While I really appreciate that they're trying out so much stuff, it also feels like they're completely crippling themselves by not going into the fundamentals more.
Many people in this thread are pretty stupid about how to say it and just flame ahead as if this was a reddit thread, but they have a point: Instead of fixing the core problems of the game, Kim has to come up with bandaid fixes to make the game more appealing to casual players as well as more fun and an overall better experience for higher level players(i.e. everyone not playing once a month).
Things like "engine flaws/technical flaws" that Blizzard doesn't see as flaws(overkill protection comes to mind, or damage point and other things, referring to Lalush's posts) exist next to a not-optimized and outdated economic growth model and archaic unit concepts such as the colossus, roach or marauder.
I don't know if it's Blizzard telling Kim to not do it, or Kim not being confident enough. But these changes are so well thought out that I firmly believe that given the proper amount of time, Kim and his team can do a proper redesign of some core-aspects of the game so that they can stop the bandaid fixing and concentrate on whats important: Making all elements of the game more fun - instead of increasing the already existing fun elements while completely having to ignore the frustrating, non-fun elements of the game.
It seems like it's too late for that now and we're past a point where this is the biggest change we will see in Beta.
The funniest part is that the Reddit thread is more constructive and less hostile than this Team Liquid one. And David Kim even is responding in the Reddit thread. I wouldn't come to this forum if I was him either.
|
On August 29 2015 05:08 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:56 Eternal Dalek wrote:On August 29 2015 04:47 Charoisaur wrote:On August 29 2015 04:34 Eternal Dalek wrote:On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player. The vast majority of players ARE gold leaguers and intermittent players. You cannot build a game for the elite 1% alone. You cannot have a successful game that only casters to Masters and Grandmasters while leaving everyone below the best of the best frustrated and unsatisfied. I think you're forgetting that TL.net is made up of better-than-average players as well as actual progamers, outliers who are alright with the status quo. TL.net posters are the minority. A well-informed, highly-skilled minority, but a minority nevertheless. Making the game easier will not suddenly make gold scrubs like Eternal Dalek win games against players like you. You will still kick my ass 99% of the time, but the game will be much less frustrating for lesser-skilled players like me. Basically, you'll have much more people to play with if the game is much more accessible. Also, what they're really lowering is the skill floor, not the skill ceiling. The skill ceiling remains impossibly high. The skill floor is now much lower. This means that more people can play and enjoy the game, but the best of the best remains in their unassailable fortress of skill. I know a lot of people here confuse the skill floor with the skill ceiling; most of the time, when people say that Blizzard/Valve/Riot/whatever is dumbing down Starcraft/DotA/LoL and lowering the skill ceiling, what they really mean is that the skill floor is being lowered and the game is more accessible. I will never understand what this "more accessable for casuals" means. As a low level player you always face players at similar skill with equally bad macro/micro. Making mechanics easier does nothing to decrease their frustration because they will lose 50% of the time regardless. The only difference will be that they lost because they fucked up their micro or got caught offguard instead of losing because they missed their injects. Is that less frustrating? I don't think so. Do you mean that you're unable to empathize with lesser-skilled players? Are you simply unable to see it from our perspective? A wise man once said that players are generally right about what's wrong with the game, but are generally wrong with how to fix it. The vast majority of Starcraft 2 players, not just the active player base of around 200k, but everyone who bought SC1 and/or SC2, generally agree that the game is too hard and too frustrating to play. Most people are wrong about how to fix it without destroying the core gameplay. I have more faith in someone whose livelihood is based on the success or failure of Starcraft 2 (David Kim, Dustin Browder, etc.) than someone who cannot or will not try to understand how other players feel. David Kim and Dustin Browder acknowledge the actual problems instead of just dismissing them as the signs of unskilled play. you didn't answer my question at all. My point is, in every multiplayer game the difficulty is determined by your opponent not by the game. Making macro mechanics easier doesn't make the game easier it only shifts the things you have to be good at from macro to micro. If you think casual players generally like micro more than macro then you may have a point but as long as you always lose 50% of your games the game will stay as frustrating as it is.
I won't speak for most of us peasants, but yes, I prefer micro over macro. I much prefer micro over macro, though not to the extent of removing macro altogether. However, the type of micro I like is army micro, not those fancy stutter-stepping, muta-stacking micro tricks. I like having army #1 in the middle, with army #2 and army #3 in other positions on the map. If the enemy moves forward, I can either surround them with my split forces, or even send one of my forces to backstab the enemy base. This wasn't really possible in Heart of the Swarm or even Wings of Liberty because at my level, macro wins games by itself. It doesn't matter how much fancy micro I can bring to bear if I can simply spam clicks and keypresses to rebuild faster than my enemy can damage me.
The thing about micro is that it's in your face and it's obvious when you screw up, whereas with macro, it's not at all clear if you're outmacroing your opponent or if he has perfect macro and will crush you with a bigger deathball. The key here is that you don't get immediate feedback if you're doing something wrong. When you're harassing and counter-harassing an enemy, you can tell for certain if you screwed up or not, whereas with macro, you have to hope that he's really bad at keeping up constant production as well as managing macro boosters; there's no real way to tell right now in HotS until you get smashed by a much larger army.
My main RTS right now is DotA 2. In the beginning, I didn't like the complete lack of base building and resource gathering and other forms of macro, as well as the almost complete lack of army micro. However, DotA 2 is a much more accessible game. It's F2P, and it offers a wide range of heroes to choose from. Some heroes, like Huskar or Ursa, dominate in pubs but are all but unseen in high-level games (they're hard countered by actual teamwork). Other heroes like Chen or Io are scarce in pubs but are mainstays in high-level games due to their complicated mechanics.Most importantly, I can play DotA 2 with my friends. This is the #1 reason why I quit SC2. None of my friends and family play it, making laddering a very lonely experience, and the sheer power of macro means that none of my fancy micro from my C&C days matters.
My most played hero is Chen, a hero whose shtick is that he is a micro hero who has some aspect of macro. Micro comes in the form of controlling Chen and his four dominated creeps, as well as keeping tabs on your allies' HP so you can send them home or heal them from across the map (Chen's ultimate is a global heal that's very useful for saving allies). He also has the duty of warding, dewarding, and stacking, the equivalent of macro busywork in Starcraft 2. There's also the fact that when he loses his creeps, he has to go around the map recruiting replacements, which is analogous to rebuilding your army in traditional RTS games.
The global win rate for Chen is 42.51%. My win rate with him is 55.88%. How can a mere 2.5k mmr scrub have such a high solo win rate with one of the hardest heroes in the game? Simple. I come from a micro background, i.e. C&C and the early days of SC. Is it as fulfilling as playing a real RTS like Starcraft? If you asked me this question a few years ago, I'd say no, it's not even close. Today, I enjoy it much more because I can talk to my friends about DotA 2 and they can actually appreciate my 1337 micro and macro skills with this hero.
The social aspect of video games matters. I would much prefer to play and get better at "real" RTS games like Starcraft, but the fact that I find its current (HotS) gameplay a bit unsatisfying, combined with my friends' complete lack of interest in it, killed all of my desire to play the game until very, very recently.
|
On August 29 2015 05:23 Little-Chimp wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 05:19 TheDougler wrote:
How's this for an idea: If mule is autocast with no energy (only cooldown), then why not also give it to the planetary fortress?
I know that sounds like a pretty huge buff to planetary, but as it stands now, the choice will be between getting mules, and your choice of scans or supply drops, and also the ability to lift versus a large, expensive cannon.
If PF has mule, there's still plenty of choice there, especially since you're going to want to have a few orbitals in order to lift them in the late game and move them towards resources. Plus, orbitals don't require gas. Wow that sounds absolutely terrible to play against.
How so? Wouldn't cause any more planetaries than we see currently (since the mules were removed that is), and I don't see most people complaining about planetaries being a problem. Unless I'm missing something? I've been mostly playing zerg the last few weeks.
|
On August 29 2015 05:48 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
The funniest part is that the Reddit thread is more constructive and less hostile than this Team Liquid one. And David Kim even is responding in the Reddit thread. I wouldn't come to this forum if I was him either.
Pretty sad to say, but for some people thats actually true. I don't know how people can be so entitled sometimes. I am disappointed as well but I'd never not appreciate the work Kim is doing.
But alas, I edited my post a bit and am copying it into here again:
+ Show Spoiler +
While I really appreciate that they're trying out so much stuff, it also feels like they're completely crippling themselves by not going into the fundamentals more.
Many people in this thread are pretty stupid about how to say it and just flame ahead as if this was a reddit thread, but they have a point: Instead of fixing the core problems of the game, Kim has to come up with bandaid fixes to make the game more appealing to casual players as well as more fun and an overall better experience for higher level players(i.e. everyone not playing once a month).
Things like "engine flaws/technical flaws" that Blizzard doesn't see as flaws(overkill protection screwing with Terran mech/tanks comes to mind, or damage point and other things, referring to Lalush's posts mainly about unit control) exist next to a not-optimized and outdated economic growth model that always leads to the same number of optimal bases/workers and some archaic unit concepts such as the colossus, roach or marauder and many others that are either boring or completely hard-countering certain playstyles.
I don't know if it's Blizzard telling Kim to not do it, or Kim not being confident enough. But these changes are so well thought out that I firmly believe that given the proper amount of time, Kim and his team can do a proper redesign of some core-aspects of the game so that they can stop the bandaid fixing and concentrate on whats important: Making all elements of the game more fun - instead of increasing the already existing fun elements while completely having to ignore the frustrating, non-fun elements of the game.
It seems like it's too late for that now and we're past a point where this is the biggest change we will see in Beta.
|
I was going to make a new thread but fuck it. I'll just post it here.
Automation and Efficiency: Easy Next Step
This change was expected in some form or another and I’ve already thought about what I felt should be the next step.
Their purpose was always to make the game easier for newer players and less punishing for slip ups in macro mechanics. Automation was pretty clearly a good answer to both of these issues and allows us to move past those particular issues in discussing macro mechanics.
I believe that macro mechanics should be altered as follows:
Macro mechanics should be more difficult but less punishing.
Automation takes care of the second part and now I’d like to deal with the first.
Inefficient Automation:
While automation seems at first to be dumbing the game down, it allows for the introduction of inefficiency within the system without being overly punishing for newer players.
Inefficiency already exists in many areas of Starcraft so it’s not unprecedented to introduce them here. Take 2 options for building marines:
Option A is easier but has less benefits. (Queue 5 marines in a barracks)
Option B is harder but more benefits. (build 1 marine at a time and use the freed up money to do other things)
As long as option A exists for new players, option B can also exist for higher skill players. HOTS had only 1 option (inject or die) and thus tampering with it was very problematic as it effects pros and noobs alike.
Proposed System:
All races have a 2 macro mechanics system; manual and automatic.
An orbital will have a spell that is called MULE and another called auto-MULE. Same for inject and chrono.
Increase the frequency these spells need to be cast greatly. MULEs in HOTS were cast every 90 seconds. Decrease that to 15 or 30 seconds.
The manual cast cooldown will always be shorter than the automatic cast.
For example MULE cooldown is 15 seconds and the auto-MULE is 20 seconds.
The cooldowns BOTH reset when either of the spells are used.
The numbers are very easily tweaked depending on how harsh or lenient Blizzard wants to be. A harsh punishment would be for example a manual MULE having a 10 second cooldown while the auto-MULE having a 30 second cooldown.
In the example of MULE=15 second cooldown and auto-MULE= 20 second cooldown; at best you can have 4 MULEs every minute. At worst you can have 3 MULEs every minute.
Similarly, queen inject now spawn only 1 larva but you manually inject every 10 seconds and auto-Inject occurs every 15 seconds. Over 1 minute you have between 4-6 larva per hatch depending on your execution. Again, numbers are easily tweaked as the inefficiency is the main point here.
Difficulty scales into later game scenarios. A terran with 1 orbital is losing 1 mule every minute if they auto-MULE every single cycle. When you move up to 3 orbitals, this can be up to 3 MULEs lost per minute. Perfect muling from 3 orbitals every 15 seconds would be quite difficult but perhaps a task worth pursuing if you are looking to compete in GSL.
Smoother learning curve and Multiple Chances to improve:
The system is much smoother and easy to understand compared to the HOTS model. A newer zerg can manually inject for the first 5 minutes of a game and then, because the game is hard, let auto-Inject take over for the rest of the game. The player can manually inject periodically over the course of the game but it will only yield a few extra larva. Only through consistent concerted effort to manually inject can the Zerg yield any major benefits over their auto-Injecting counterparts.
Maybe next game the same players try to manually inject for the next 5:30 minutes and so on and so forth. This is a clear and simple improvement process that allows the player to make mistakes and have a safety net so they can try again.
In a gold vs gold league match, the difference between manual inject and auto-Inject over the course of a minute would only be 2-4 roaches but doing so over the course of 5 minutes could lead to game winning macro (10-20 excess roaches). It’s not so loaded on that single inject that led to 8 less roaches in your battle. Automation means slip ups are not so punishing but stronger players can clearly distance themselves from their weaker opponents.
Conclusion:
The introduction of automation actually provides benefits for competitive players as long as inefficiency comes along with it. Automation means new players do not even have to be part of the equation when discussing the difficulty and punishment of macro mechanics as the automation efficiency can be tweaked accordingly.
|
Mules not being a choice anymore in the early game is.... Strange. It removes strategic depth from the race.
Even as a lower league player i think they're removing 'clicks' from the wrong place.... Just provide more diverse units which don't need spells or micro.
I get the feeling with LotV Blizzard doesn't want to change the game for the better, they just want to change it with no idea where to take it.
|
On August 29 2015 05:47 ohmylanta1003 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 05:34 Aocowns wrote:On August 29 2015 05:30 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 29 2015 05:21 Aocowns wrote:On August 29 2015 05:19 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 29 2015 05:02 ffadicted wrote:On August 29 2015 04:56 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
God. Everyone here is so fucking entitled. It's ridiculous. Can we stop with these comments? Lol this is the beta, we are supposed to give feedback, and tons of it. When things are going the wrong way, you better damn voice your opinion, otherwise what's the point of even participating in beta testing?? Lol. Cause the feedback people are giving back in this thread is so constructive, right? Give me a break. Let people advertise for the game they want dude It's impossible for Blizzard to please everyone. You know this, I know this, we all know it. People in this thread aren't advertising for the game they want. They're bitching about what has been given to them. That's all they ever do. oh shit it's almost as if they're giving feedback about what they want instead of all supporting one thing You should be a little more sarcastic. It might help Blizzard make this game the best it can be. I'm not saying everyone should support one thing. But this community is so divided on EVERY FUCKING ISSUE that it's impossible for Blizzard to make this game without a chunk of people saying "guess I won't be purchasing LOTV". Great comment. 10/10. Just shut your fucking mouth, honestly, if that's all you have to say.
Jesus fuck man, im just saying it's retarded to say people should stop voicing their opinions just because blizz cant please everyone
|
On August 29 2015 05:13 BaronVonOwn wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:56 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
God. Everyone here is so fucking entitled. It's ridiculous. Actually, Blizzard is not entitled to my money and they've made it clear through these community updates that they appreciate the feedback. It's free information and market data and the only reason we give it is because we love Starcraft. Starcraft's saving grace right now is its devoted community so how about you stop shitting on it?
There are many different ways to provide feedback. Moaning and crying on the TL.net forums is not one that does anything useful, helpful or constructive. If people really love the game, they should give feedback that is more thoughtful than, "No more macro mechanics??? That's it, I'm never playing SC2 again!" So, ya, the stupid, entitled comments are getting really old. For those that truly care about the game try this...test out the new changes and offer something constructive.
|
Seems decent, however, still waiting for a change to warp prism warp in duration. Balance aside, I don't think it creates a healthy dynamic if protoss in the early midgame can warp in half an army inside the enemy base within 2 seconds.
|
On August 29 2015 05:57 Aocowns wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 05:47 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 29 2015 05:34 Aocowns wrote:On August 29 2015 05:30 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 29 2015 05:21 Aocowns wrote:On August 29 2015 05:19 ohmylanta1003 wrote:On August 29 2015 05:02 ffadicted wrote:On August 29 2015 04:56 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
God. Everyone here is so fucking entitled. It's ridiculous. Can we stop with these comments? Lol this is the beta, we are supposed to give feedback, and tons of it. When things are going the wrong way, you better damn voice your opinion, otherwise what's the point of even participating in beta testing?? Lol. Cause the feedback people are giving back in this thread is so constructive, right? Give me a break. Let people advertise for the game they want dude It's impossible for Blizzard to please everyone. You know this, I know this, we all know it. People in this thread aren't advertising for the game they want. They're bitching about what has been given to them. That's all they ever do. oh shit it's almost as if they're giving feedback about what they want instead of all supporting one thing You should be a little more sarcastic. It might help Blizzard make this game the best it can be. I'm not saying everyone should support one thing. But this community is so divided on EVERY FUCKING ISSUE that it's impossible for Blizzard to make this game without a chunk of people saying "guess I won't be purchasing LOTV". Great comment. 10/10. Just shut your fucking mouth, honestly, if that's all you have to say. Jesus fuck man, im just saying it's retarded to say people should stop voicing their opinions just because blizz cant please everyone
And I'm just trying to say that no one is even voicing anything useful!
|
On August 29 2015 03:26 TheDougler wrote:
I like the cast range on mule, that's a great change. However, with no energy cost on mules, even if they increase the energy cost for supply drops or scans to 75 energy, that's still more resources than terrans had before these changes. I dunno if that will affect anything but it seems like something to consider.
Yeah, I wonder how they are going to handle that. Maybe they consider the queen creep change (buff?) and mothershipcore change (nerf?) to balance it out somehow? I can understand why they did that with mules, they wanted nothing autocast to permanently block scan usage since you won't have extra orbitals like you'd have extra queens for creep. But... I dunno.
|
On August 29 2015 06:01 spydog wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 05:13 BaronVonOwn wrote:On August 29 2015 04:56 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
God. Everyone here is so fucking entitled. It's ridiculous. Actually, Blizzard is not entitled to my money and they've made it clear through these community updates that they appreciate the feedback. It's free information and market data and the only reason we give it is because we love Starcraft. Starcraft's saving grace right now is its devoted community so how about you stop shitting on it? There are many different ways to provide feedback. Moaning and crying on the TL.net forums is not one that does anything useful, helpful or constructive. If people really love the game, they should give feedback that is more thoughtful than, "No more macro mechanics??? That's it, I'm never playing SC2 again!" So, ya, the stupid, entitled comments are getting really old. For those that truly care about the came try this...test out the new changes and offer something constructive.
Seriously would it matter anymore? Half of the "Last Month" already passed. People already gave a lot of constructive feedback in the non-QQ methods, what was it from Blizzard? Complete ignore and doing their own shit. People already gave up on giving constructive feedback thanks to the way they handle it.
|
On August 29 2015 05:45 Little-Chimp wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 05:39 Gfire wrote:On August 29 2015 05:04 Big J wrote:
I don't understand the hate for the automatization in itself as a mechanic. Something automated is something you don't have to control in the game, it is literally the same thing as not having it to begin with controlwise.
I understand the argument about making macro hard (even though I don't support it), but I can't understand the stance that abilities must not be automated ever. That just doesn't make sense. Yeah it seems like people just find it "icky" for some reason. Really their solution seems to hit all the points they want it to. I understand if you disagree with those points, but if you agree with the goals this seems like a fine way to achieve them. I guess it's a little bit of the lazy solution as some of the reason for it is fixing the balance concerns with completely removing the boosters. I just thought they'd re-balance the game. Autocast doesn't change things up too much so everything should be closer to how it was. If you're someone who was excited about slowing down macro in general or getting rid of cheesier chrono builds or more common PFs or some other side-effect this might not have the advantages of cutting the boosters, in any case. I think people care way too much about "elegance" in game design when it doesn't even effect the way the game plays. It's only a bit of a burden for new players to learn what mules and chrono are. Other than the "complication" of their very existence, they don't really make the game clunkier or anything. Cutting them altogether would make the end product simpler but the process to balance the game around that would be much more work. An argument could also be made that a race's abilities are features in a game and it's kinda lame to cut features in an expansion. That's more from a traditional average consumer's point of view, and obviously more abilities doesn't mean more quality gameplay or anything, but it's still the what I would have expected from an expansion before I really tried much competitive play in RTS games. It's pretty much a giant dirty nasty band aid of all band aids instead of balancing the game around no macro mechanics. Some people enjoyed the macro mechanics, some people hated them. I'm pretty sure no one wanted them to just exist in the background except for some terrans last week who got nailed hard by the last patch. That issue could have been fixed a million other ways than automating old mechanics. It's a bit like the HOTS spore crawlers doing a million damage to mutas only but for macro.
Yeah, it certainly is a band-aid for not rebalancing for the original change. But you could say the whole concept of macro boosters was a band-aid to begin with. The next version will still be less of a band-aid than the original macro boosters, it's a bit of a 2step forward, 1step back patch in that direction and I don't like it in comparison to the status quo of LotV. But the most important parts for me are kept, which is the whole concept of not having to care about those things as much.
|
You know, this reminds me of the time when IceFrog posted pictures of his cat on the then official DotA website (PlayDota.com). He got flamed relentlessly, with people telling him to get back to work on DotA instead of posting cat pics, and some even sent him death threats. He stopped participating in Western communities and focused on the Chinese community, which was much more respectful and positive towards him and his cat.
To this day, IceFrog has an active Weibo account but doesn't directly communicate with the Western fanbase. He does still communicate with prominent community members as well as progamers, but never directly with the fans. I think those death threats made him keep his identity hidden to this day.
He did make one relatively recent post in the DotA 2 developer forums:
http://dev.dota2.com/showthread.php?t=107817&page=16982&p=1218412#post1218412
But this has been his only communication to Western fans for a very long time.
|
On August 29 2015 06:07 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 05:45 Little-Chimp wrote:On August 29 2015 05:39 Gfire wrote:On August 29 2015 05:04 Big J wrote:
I don't understand the hate for the automatization in itself as a mechanic. Something automated is something you don't have to control in the game, it is literally the same thing as not having it to begin with controlwise.
I understand the argument about making macro hard (even though I don't support it), but I can't understand the stance that abilities must not be automated ever. That just doesn't make sense. Yeah it seems like people just find it "icky" for some reason. Really their solution seems to hit all the points they want it to. I understand if you disagree with those points, but if you agree with the goals this seems like a fine way to achieve them. I guess it's a little bit of the lazy solution as some of the reason for it is fixing the balance concerns with completely removing the boosters. I just thought they'd re-balance the game. Autocast doesn't change things up too much so everything should be closer to how it was. If you're someone who was excited about slowing down macro in general or getting rid of cheesier chrono builds or more common PFs or some other side-effect this might not have the advantages of cutting the boosters, in any case. I think people care way too much about "elegance" in game design when it doesn't even effect the way the game plays. It's only a bit of a burden for new players to learn what mules and chrono are. Other than the "complication" of their very existence, they don't really make the game clunkier or anything. Cutting them altogether would make the end product simpler but the process to balance the game around that would be much more work. An argument could also be made that a race's abilities are features in a game and it's kinda lame to cut features in an expansion. That's more from a traditional average consumer's point of view, and obviously more abilities doesn't mean more quality gameplay or anything, but it's still the what I would have expected from an expansion before I really tried much competitive play in RTS games. It's pretty much a giant dirty nasty band aid of all band aids instead of balancing the game around no macro mechanics. Some people enjoyed the macro mechanics, some people hated them. I'm pretty sure no one wanted them to just exist in the background except for some terrans last week who got nailed hard by the last patch. That issue could have been fixed a million other ways than automating old mechanics. It's a bit like the HOTS spore crawlers doing a million damage to mutas only but for macro. Yeah, it certainly is a band-aid for not rebalancing for the original change. But you could say the whole concept of macro boosters was a band-aid to begin with. The next version will still be less of a band-aid than the original macro boosters, it's a bit of a 2step forward, 1step back patch in that direction and I don't like it in comparison to the status quo of LotV. But the most important parts for me are kept, which is the whole concept of not having to care about those things as much.
What really makes me mad is that they have no goal in each change. They removed macro mechanics and wanted to test the result. Even by a simple theorycrafting, you will see that Terran will be the most effected and that with how worker harassment balanced around macro mechanics will be broken after they removed them. Now they restored the macro mechanics in a nerfed version. So what did we exactly achieve in the last week? What was the point of testing when you say "Well, we will just change things again, though mostly we did not get that much of data to work on anyway".
This is how we wasted 5 months of the beta without addressing:
1- Economy.
2- Pathing.
3- Macro Mechanics (Being addressed in a very very strange way).
4- Worker Harassment.
5- Protoss Gimmickness.
6-... etc.
|
Indigested mashup. The WORST choice ever.
|
On August 29 2015 06:17 WrathSCII wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 06:07 Big J wrote:On August 29 2015 05:45 Little-Chimp wrote:On August 29 2015 05:39 Gfire wrote:On August 29 2015 05:04 Big J wrote:
I don't understand the hate for the automatization in itself as a mechanic. Something automated is something you don't have to control in the game, it is literally the same thing as not having it to begin with controlwise.
I understand the argument about making macro hard (even though I don't support it), but I can't understand the stance that abilities must not be automated ever. That just doesn't make sense. Yeah it seems like people just find it "icky" for some reason. Really their solution seems to hit all the points they want it to. I understand if you disagree with those points, but if you agree with the goals this seems like a fine way to achieve them. I guess it's a little bit of the lazy solution as some of the reason for it is fixing the balance concerns with completely removing the boosters. I just thought they'd re-balance the game. Autocast doesn't change things up too much so everything should be closer to how it was. If you're someone who was excited about slowing down macro in general or getting rid of cheesier chrono builds or more common PFs or some other side-effect this might not have the advantages of cutting the boosters, in any case. I think people care way too much about "elegance" in game design when it doesn't even effect the way the game plays. It's only a bit of a burden for new players to learn what mules and chrono are. Other than the "complication" of their very existence, they don't really make the game clunkier or anything. Cutting them altogether would make the end product simpler but the process to balance the game around that would be much more work. An argument could also be made that a race's abilities are features in a game and it's kinda lame to cut features in an expansion. That's more from a traditional average consumer's point of view, and obviously more abilities doesn't mean more quality gameplay or anything, but it's still the what I would have expected from an expansion before I really tried much competitive play in RTS games. It's pretty much a giant dirty nasty band aid of all band aids instead of balancing the game around no macro mechanics. Some people enjoyed the macro mechanics, some people hated them. I'm pretty sure no one wanted them to just exist in the background except for some terrans last week who got nailed hard by the last patch. That issue could have been fixed a million other ways than automating old mechanics. It's a bit like the HOTS spore crawlers doing a million damage to mutas only but for macro. Yeah, it certainly is a band-aid for not rebalancing for the original change. But you could say the whole concept of macro boosters was a band-aid to begin with. The next version will still be less of a band-aid than the original macro boosters, it's a bit of a 2step forward, 1step back patch in that direction and I don't like it in comparison to the status quo of LotV. But the most important parts for me are kept, which is the whole concept of not having to care about those things as much. What really makes me mad is that they have no goal in each change. They removed macro mechanics and wanted to test the result. Even by a simple theorycrafting, you will see that Terran will be the most effected and that with how worker harassment balanced around macro mechanics will be broken after they removed them. Now they restored the macro mechanics in a nerfed version. So what did we exactly achieve in the last week? What was the point of testing when you say "Well, we will just change things again, though mostly we did not get that much of data to work on anyway". This is how we wasted 5 months of the beta without addressing: 1- Economy. 2- Pathing. 3- Macro Mechanics (Being addressed in a very very strange way). 4- Worker Harassment. 5- Protoss Gimmickness. 6-... etc.
I disagree. They have goals with their changes. It is plainly you not agreeing with their goals. I also don't agree with them, but the list you gave is relatively easy to work through:
1 - has been adressed a ton of times. You may not like it, but they like the half-base/12worker start/slower pace through macro boosters economy.
2 - this has not been adressed in LotV, I give you that. They have said previously that they like the pathing and don't want to alter it. And I agree with them to a large degree. The only thing I would alter is remove air stacking, but otherwise I'm very much fine with the SC2 pathing, as the whole game has been designed well for it.
3 - You already said it. You think it's a weird way to adress them, but as I said, that's just you not agreeing with them. Not them not adressing it.
4 - they have been adressing it. They want more harassment and thus have included a lot of new ways to harass, from early drops and tank drops to adepts and I guess the one or other change I'm missing that goes into that spirit.
5 - They try to adress it with the warpgate changes and MsC changes they are talking about. Again, something you (and I) may not agree with but they are adressing it.
6 - they are adressing other stuff too
For the macro changes in particular they have given a very clear direction: People should not be forced to repetitively click them. That's exactly what their changes do. They have given a goal and hitting it. There may be other (better?!) ways to do it, but they are doing what they gave out as their design goal (in a way that is supposed to alter the game as little as possible beyond that I believe).
|
Really happy with the 3 larva. Playing with 2 was just really awkward for me.
Implementing mule radius is a pretty genius idea, I like it.
Scan thing was 100% predictable but oh well.
Chronoboost better still have a duration and cooldown because otherwise it'll be impossible to guess what build protoss is doing if they can just switch it to a decoy building at will
Moving drop to lair is really meh, i'd rather have normal ventral sacks back then. Don't really see the use of the change now.
Also David Kim mentioned south holland 
|
Things I'd like to see addressed/added to LotV before it's out of beta
1. DH Econ Model
2. Ground Unit Clumping
3. Removal of Siege tank drops
4. Other "depth of micro" changes since we're focusing on micro more anyway
Sadly, Blizzard has written off DH Economy without trying it and not understanding it. Ground unit clumping seems to have been ignored. They're nerfing tank drops and have mentioned removing it as a last option if it continues to be OP and they'll never take a serious look at Lalush's comments. LotV could be so much more than it currently is but it's rapidly becoming too late
|
On August 29 2015 06:33 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Things I'd like to see addressed/added to LotV before it's out of beta
1. DH Econ Model
2. Ground Unit Clumping
3. Removal of Siege tank drops
4. Other "depth of micro" changes since we're focusing on micro more anyway
Sadly, Blizzard has written off DH Economy without trying it and not understanding it. Ground unit clumping seems to have been ignored. They're nerfing tank drops and have mentioned removing it as a last option if it continues to be OP and they'll never take a serious look at Lalush's comments. LotV could be so much more than it currently is but it's rapidly becoming too late
Damage point. Just damage point to 0 as standard value please and then have certain units have a higher one. At least make it so that the damage point is a percentage of the attack speed, instead of making fast shooting units like hydras even less micro-able with a higher-than-usual damage point when they should have a lower-than-usual one, since it happens more often that they shoot.
|
On August 29 2015 06:33 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Things I'd like to see addressed/added to LotV before it's out of beta
1. DH Econ Model
2. Ground Unit Clumping
3. Removal of Siege tank drops
4. Other "depth of micro" changes since we're focusing on micro more anyway
Sadly, Blizzard has written off DH Economy without trying it and not understanding it. Ground unit clumping seems to have been ignored. They're nerfing tank drops and have mentioned removing it as a last option if it continues to be OP and they'll never take a serious look at Lalush's comments. LotV could be so much more than it currently is but it's rapidly becoming too late
Some of Lalush and the economy were adressed here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/488139-lotv-community-feedback-update-june-19
and I'm pretty sure they said they tested bigger unit seperation but did not like it.
|
On August 29 2015 06:27 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 06:17 WrathSCII wrote:On August 29 2015 06:07 Big J wrote:On August 29 2015 05:45 Little-Chimp wrote:On August 29 2015 05:39 Gfire wrote:On August 29 2015 05:04 Big J wrote:
I don't understand the hate for the automatization in itself as a mechanic. Something automated is something you don't have to control in the game, it is literally the same thing as not having it to begin with controlwise.
I understand the argument about making macro hard (even though I don't support it), but I can't understand the stance that abilities must not be automated ever. That just doesn't make sense. Yeah it seems like people just find it "icky" for some reason. Really their solution seems to hit all the points they want it to. I understand if you disagree with those points, but if you agree with the goals this seems like a fine way to achieve them. I guess it's a little bit of the lazy solution as some of the reason for it is fixing the balance concerns with completely removing the boosters. I just thought they'd re-balance the game. Autocast doesn't change things up too much so everything should be closer to how it was. If you're someone who was excited about slowing down macro in general or getting rid of cheesier chrono builds or more common PFs or some other side-effect this might not have the advantages of cutting the boosters, in any case. I think people care way too much about "elegance" in game design when it doesn't even effect the way the game plays. It's only a bit of a burden for new players to learn what mules and chrono are. Other than the "complication" of their very existence, they don't really make the game clunkier or anything. Cutting them altogether would make the end product simpler but the process to balance the game around that would be much more work. An argument could also be made that a race's abilities are features in a game and it's kinda lame to cut features in an expansion. That's more from a traditional average consumer's point of view, and obviously more abilities doesn't mean more quality gameplay or anything, but it's still the what I would have expected from an expansion before I really tried much competitive play in RTS games. It's pretty much a giant dirty nasty band aid of all band aids instead of balancing the game around no macro mechanics. Some people enjoyed the macro mechanics, some people hated them. I'm pretty sure no one wanted them to just exist in the background except for some terrans last week who got nailed hard by the last patch. That issue could have been fixed a million other ways than automating old mechanics. It's a bit like the HOTS spore crawlers doing a million damage to mutas only but for macro. Yeah, it certainly is a band-aid for not rebalancing for the original change. But you could say the whole concept of macro boosters was a band-aid to begin with. The next version will still be less of a band-aid than the original macro boosters, it's a bit of a 2step forward, 1step back patch in that direction and I don't like it in comparison to the status quo of LotV. But the most important parts for me are kept, which is the whole concept of not having to care about those things as much. What really makes me mad is that they have no goal in each change. They removed macro mechanics and wanted to test the result. Even by a simple theorycrafting, you will see that Terran will be the most effected and that with how worker harassment balanced around macro mechanics will be broken after they removed them. Now they restored the macro mechanics in a nerfed version. So what did we exactly achieve in the last week? What was the point of testing when you say "Well, we will just change things again, though mostly we did not get that much of data to work on anyway". This is how we wasted 5 months of the beta without addressing: 1- Economy. 2- Pathing. 3- Macro Mechanics (Being addressed in a very very strange way). 4- Worker Harassment. 5- Protoss Gimmickness. 6-... etc. 2 - this has not been adressed in LotV, I give you that. They have said previously that they like the pathing and don't want to alter it. And I agree with them to a large degree. The only thing I would alter is remove air stacking, but otherwise I'm very much fine with the SC2 pathing, as the whole game has been designed well for it.
You really like the current pathing? It creates so many problems though :/
A pathing change alone could make the game A LOT better imo.
Visually alone this would make bigger engagements look way better, this is still a huge factor why people don't like protoss if you ask me.
|
Also, general observation, I'm OK with most of these changes if it doesn't turn the game into turtle mass army vs. mass army again. The new MULE and Chrono should be nerfed a decent amount I bet.
Macro mechanics: It sounds easier to balance out and still takes a step away from too much base babysitting which is their goal. Zerg still is getting the most benefit out of this it would seem, so I wonder what else is on the horizon.
Mule tweak: the range is a good idea. No, it's a great idea. This has surely been tossed around for years. This potentially fixes so many things that caused mules to be broken like gold minerals, SCV sacrifice, sucking a risky expansion dry and letting your other bases mine slowly. I could go on.
Adept: I'm glad Protoss can move out on the map early. With slow units and armies, you don't want to encourage P to sit around and defend from the get go, etc.
MSC spell on pylon: I feel weird on this one. I want to see how it plays out. With the adept being helpful, maybe it's fine. PvP seems like it will be too weak though on defense. It also makes late game P expansions even that much harder to keep I guess.
Creep change: It sounds good to me. Faster is better. I hated waiting for it to grow as Zerg or waiting for it to dissipate playing against Zerg.
More larva: nothing to say, it must be needed if you give chrono and mule back.
Chrono on auto: sounds reasonable to me if it is nerfed. Part of me still would rather just not ever have it, but I bet it'll be fine. You can't save up energy and use it to speed up mass gateways anymore. After probes, you'll mostly just used for upgrades and slow production units on robo and stargate. OK. Or wait... maybe you can set it to say three warpgates and build your slow units out of there and your other 5 warpgates will be fast building units, so you can sync things better. Well what is the rule for what warpgate is used first when they are all done with cooldown... as in how do you know which warpgate to cast it on... I don't recall, is it range dependent with respect to your screen like chrono is? Probably won't matter often though.
|
On August 29 2015 06:39 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 06:33 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Things I'd like to see addressed/added to LotV before it's out of beta
1. DH Econ Model
2. Ground Unit Clumping
3. Removal of Siege tank drops
4. Other "depth of micro" changes since we're focusing on micro more anyway
Sadly, Blizzard has written off DH Economy without trying it and not understanding it. Ground unit clumping seems to have been ignored. They're nerfing tank drops and have mentioned removing it as a last option if it continues to be OP and they'll never take a serious look at Lalush's comments. LotV could be so much more than it currently is but it's rapidly becoming too late Some of Lalush and the economy were adressed here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/488139-lotv-community-feedback-update-june-19and I'm pretty sure they said they tested bigger unit seperation but did not like it.
I would love it if unit movement/clumping was like BW. I'd also like all the smartcasting to be taken off, but then AOE and splash made better. But this is rewriting the game, so I just don't think they can do all of it without breaking the game for another year.
|
On August 29 2015 06:33 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Things I'd like to see addressed/added to LotV before it's out of beta
1. DH Econ Model
2. Ground Unit Clumping
3. Removal of Siege tank drops
4. Other "depth of micro" changes since we're focusing on micro more anyway
Sadly, Blizzard has written off DH Economy without trying it and not understanding it. Ground unit clumping seems to have been ignored. They're nerfing tank drops and have mentioned removing it as a last option if it continues to be OP and they'll never take a serious look at Lalush's comments. LotV could be so much more than it currently is but it's rapidly becoming too late
I agree, they've just wrote off other economic approaches instead of giving them a shot. Ground unit clumping, though, seems to be more like a feature from their point of view, so in that regard I didn't have much hopes to begin with. Siege tank drops are a fundamental design flaw (completely nullifying the downside of a unit and thus disabling potential counterplay) and absolutely need to go.
I feel like their schedule to release the game by the end of the year surely doesn't help the cause.
|
On August 29 2015 06:43 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 06:27 Big J wrote:On August 29 2015 06:17 WrathSCII wrote:On August 29 2015 06:07 Big J wrote:On August 29 2015 05:45 Little-Chimp wrote:On August 29 2015 05:39 Gfire wrote:On August 29 2015 05:04 Big J wrote:
I don't understand the hate for the automatization in itself as a mechanic. Something automated is something you don't have to control in the game, it is literally the same thing as not having it to begin with controlwise.
I understand the argument about making macro hard (even though I don't support it), but I can't understand the stance that abilities must not be automated ever. That just doesn't make sense. Yeah it seems like people just find it "icky" for some reason. Really their solution seems to hit all the points they want it to. I understand if you disagree with those points, but if you agree with the goals this seems like a fine way to achieve them. I guess it's a little bit of the lazy solution as some of the reason for it is fixing the balance concerns with completely removing the boosters. I just thought they'd re-balance the game. Autocast doesn't change things up too much so everything should be closer to how it was. If you're someone who was excited about slowing down macro in general or getting rid of cheesier chrono builds or more common PFs or some other side-effect this might not have the advantages of cutting the boosters, in any case. I think people care way too much about "elegance" in game design when it doesn't even effect the way the game plays. It's only a bit of a burden for new players to learn what mules and chrono are. Other than the "complication" of their very existence, they don't really make the game clunkier or anything. Cutting them altogether would make the end product simpler but the process to balance the game around that would be much more work. An argument could also be made that a race's abilities are features in a game and it's kinda lame to cut features in an expansion. That's more from a traditional average consumer's point of view, and obviously more abilities doesn't mean more quality gameplay or anything, but it's still the what I would have expected from an expansion before I really tried much competitive play in RTS games. It's pretty much a giant dirty nasty band aid of all band aids instead of balancing the game around no macro mechanics. Some people enjoyed the macro mechanics, some people hated them. I'm pretty sure no one wanted them to just exist in the background except for some terrans last week who got nailed hard by the last patch. That issue could have been fixed a million other ways than automating old mechanics. It's a bit like the HOTS spore crawlers doing a million damage to mutas only but for macro. Yeah, it certainly is a band-aid for not rebalancing for the original change. But you could say the whole concept of macro boosters was a band-aid to begin with. The next version will still be less of a band-aid than the original macro boosters, it's a bit of a 2step forward, 1step back patch in that direction and I don't like it in comparison to the status quo of LotV. But the most important parts for me are kept, which is the whole concept of not having to care about those things as much. What really makes me mad is that they have no goal in each change. They removed macro mechanics and wanted to test the result. Even by a simple theorycrafting, you will see that Terran will be the most effected and that with how worker harassment balanced around macro mechanics will be broken after they removed them. Now they restored the macro mechanics in a nerfed version. So what did we exactly achieve in the last week? What was the point of testing when you say "Well, we will just change things again, though mostly we did not get that much of data to work on anyway". This is how we wasted 5 months of the beta without addressing: 1- Economy. 2- Pathing. 3- Macro Mechanics (Being addressed in a very very strange way). 4- Worker Harassment. 5- Protoss Gimmickness. 6-... etc. 2 - this has not been adressed in LotV, I give you that. They have said previously that they like the pathing and don't want to alter it. And I agree with them to a large degree. The only thing I would alter is remove air stacking, but otherwise I'm very much fine with the SC2 pathing, as the whole game has been designed well for it. You really like the current pathing? It creates so many problems though :/ A pathing change alone could make the game A LOT better imo. Visually alone this would make bigger engagements look way better, this is still a huge factor why people don't like protoss if you ask me.
I think the pathing could be much better, but I don't know how intelligent it should/should not be. The current pathing is relatively simple to understand for the player: units go to the closest point you order them, which will naturally clump them in higher numbers.
I think a pathing that kind of "holds formations" would be nicer, but I'm not sure to which degree this is actually implementable without the PC starting to maneuver the units in all sorts of artificial ways around corners and through chokes.
A more scattering pathing has it's beauty as well gameplaywise, but I think it also punishes you for maneuvering a lot and rewards you for micromanaging that units actually do what you want them to do, which is kind of the opposite I want.
|
On August 29 2015 06:39 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 06:33 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Things I'd like to see addressed/added to LotV before it's out of beta
1. DH Econ Model
2. Ground Unit Clumping
3. Removal of Siege tank drops
4. Other "depth of micro" changes since we're focusing on micro more anyway
Sadly, Blizzard has written off DH Economy without trying it and not understanding it. Ground unit clumping seems to have been ignored. They're nerfing tank drops and have mentioned removing it as a last option if it continues to be OP and they'll never take a serious look at Lalush's comments. LotV could be so much more than it currently is but it's rapidly becoming too late Some of Lalush and the economy were adressed here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/488139-lotv-community-feedback-update-june-19and I'm pretty sure they said they tested bigger unit seperation but did not like it.
yeah i think this is accurate. Still would've liked to play with and see some of those changes for myself, maybe we'd like it
|
I enjoyed the last patch without macro mechanics.
Kind of sad about all this autocast, feels so clunky and not creative.
|
It would have taken a TON of balancing to make things even after the macro booster removal in the last patch, and it seems like they didn't want to venture down that route during the final installment of the game, which is understandable.
My first reaction to this "middle ground" of automating chrono and mules was disgust. But the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. The automatic injects so far have been exciting to me, since it means even lower level zergs can enjoy PLAYING the game the same way terran and protoss already can. The new range limit on the mule is definitely a good choice as well, and maybe that coupled with it's reduced efficacy, will allow harass to continue to be important against terran mineral lines in LOTV. The change to chrono is actually very elegant. It gets rid of all the extra clicks, and allows protoss players to once again bring individuality to their builds, while also rewarding skilled players more, as they can move it around where it's needed.
|
Blizzard plz just cut the mechanics and balance from there it just makes more sense and I really like the smaller supplys eariler on
|
On August 29 2015 06:49 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 06:43 The_Red_Viper wrote:On August 29 2015 06:27 Big J wrote:On August 29 2015 06:17 WrathSCII wrote:On August 29 2015 06:07 Big J wrote:On August 29 2015 05:45 Little-Chimp wrote:On August 29 2015 05:39 Gfire wrote:On August 29 2015 05:04 Big J wrote:
I don't understand the hate for the automatization in itself as a mechanic. Something automated is something you don't have to control in the game, it is literally the same thing as not having it to begin with controlwise.
I understand the argument about making macro hard (even though I don't support it), but I can't understand the stance that abilities must not be automated ever. That just doesn't make sense. Yeah it seems like people just find it "icky" for some reason. Really their solution seems to hit all the points they want it to. I understand if you disagree with those points, but if you agree with the goals this seems like a fine way to achieve them. I guess it's a little bit of the lazy solution as some of the reason for it is fixing the balance concerns with completely removing the boosters. I just thought they'd re-balance the game. Autocast doesn't change things up too much so everything should be closer to how it was. If you're someone who was excited about slowing down macro in general or getting rid of cheesier chrono builds or more common PFs or some other side-effect this might not have the advantages of cutting the boosters, in any case. I think people care way too much about "elegance" in game design when it doesn't even effect the way the game plays. It's only a bit of a burden for new players to learn what mules and chrono are. Other than the "complication" of their very existence, they don't really make the game clunkier or anything. Cutting them altogether would make the end product simpler but the process to balance the game around that would be much more work. An argument could also be made that a race's abilities are features in a game and it's kinda lame to cut features in an expansion. That's more from a traditional average consumer's point of view, and obviously more abilities doesn't mean more quality gameplay or anything, but it's still the what I would have expected from an expansion before I really tried much competitive play in RTS games. It's pretty much a giant dirty nasty band aid of all band aids instead of balancing the game around no macro mechanics. Some people enjoyed the macro mechanics, some people hated them. I'm pretty sure no one wanted them to just exist in the background except for some terrans last week who got nailed hard by the last patch. That issue could have been fixed a million other ways than automating old mechanics. It's a bit like the HOTS spore crawlers doing a million damage to mutas only but for macro. Yeah, it certainly is a band-aid for not rebalancing for the original change. But you could say the whole concept of macro boosters was a band-aid to begin with. The next version will still be less of a band-aid than the original macro boosters, it's a bit of a 2step forward, 1step back patch in that direction and I don't like it in comparison to the status quo of LotV. But the most important parts for me are kept, which is the whole concept of not having to care about those things as much. What really makes me mad is that they have no goal in each change. They removed macro mechanics and wanted to test the result. Even by a simple theorycrafting, you will see that Terran will be the most effected and that with how worker harassment balanced around macro mechanics will be broken after they removed them. Now they restored the macro mechanics in a nerfed version. So what did we exactly achieve in the last week? What was the point of testing when you say "Well, we will just change things again, though mostly we did not get that much of data to work on anyway". This is how we wasted 5 months of the beta without addressing: 1- Economy. 2- Pathing. 3- Macro Mechanics (Being addressed in a very very strange way). 4- Worker Harassment. 5- Protoss Gimmickness. 6-... etc. 2 - this has not been adressed in LotV, I give you that. They have said previously that they like the pathing and don't want to alter it. And I agree with them to a large degree. The only thing I would alter is remove air stacking, but otherwise I'm very much fine with the SC2 pathing, as the whole game has been designed well for it. You really like the current pathing? It creates so many problems though :/ A pathing change alone could make the game A LOT better imo. Visually alone this would make bigger engagements look way better, this is still a huge factor why people don't like protoss if you ask me. I think the pathing could be much better, but I don't know how intelligent it should/should not be. The current pathing is relatively simple to understand for the player: units go to the closest point you order them, which will naturally clump them in higher numbers. I think a pathing that kind of "holds formations" would be nicer, but I'm not sure to which degree this is actually implementable without the PC starting to maneuver the units in all sorts of artificial ways around corners and through chokes. A more scattering pathing has it's beauty as well gameplaywise, but I think it also punishes you for maneuvering a lot and rewards you for micromanaging that units actually do what you want them to do, which is kind of the opposite I want.
My biggest wish would be that armies which move spread out more. This would be a big buff to defending armies and in general deathballs would be nerfed.
It also looks way nicer.
I think it would be ok to do that (if we wanna call it dumber pathing) considering that the multitasking for macro gets lowered so you have more opportunitiy to micro your army. A little bit of babysitting shouldn't be that bad
|
In the next patch will they add a feature where someone just automatically plays for you?
|
On August 29 2015 07:08 FLuE wrote:
In the next patch will they add a feature where someone just automatically plays for you?
Great fucking feedback. Does everyone see what I'm talking about?
|
I think people are missing the main points addressed here. Sure it sucks a little that the way we play the game has been significantly changed due to the removal of Macro Mechanics. But this was just as true last week as it is today. One of the main complaints was how slow the economy had become. Another old complaint was that the economy is too fast, which warranted the removal of Macro Mechanics in some sense; to give the player less to do.
So implementing automated Macro Mechanics is an obvious way to slightly accelerate the speed of the early and mid game. The same logic follows 2 larva to 3. If you think about it from a pacing standpoint it makes a lot more sense. I really don't know why people are so worried about losing mule and chrono (perhaps inject but different story). Sure it lowers the skill ceiling, but the skill ceiling will be harder to reach once the economy speeds up a bit more. And then there will be plenty of things for players to do without Mule, chrono, or inject.
Maybe I am being naive, but once things are tuned and Zerg have a few more things to do regarding creep spread. I really think there is something nice starting to take shape. Keep in mind LotV is going to be constantly updated even out of beta. This is very early days, and a very fresh new start.
|
Economy is the biggest issue with this game and it WILL KILL LOTV if it keeps like this, a lot of people dont like it and its for multiple reasons, yet blizzard acts like they are deaf and they dont try to fix the problem the current econ system presents. Its too fast, bases mine out at incredible rates, you are forced to expand, the comeback potential is very slim and games are way way too volatile. Its like DK just focused on making an arcade game instead of a strategy one. And what I hate most is how they are "pretending" they are doing stuff we want there to be, what about the changes proposed by the community writers? where are they? AM I the only one that thinks that they are being really false? Acting like they give a damn when they actually dont and keep doing what their "internal testing" says?
|
it looks like Mr. Kim really wants to remove the clicks used to MULE, Chrono, and Inject... and he is replacing that busy work with more fun things to do...
somewhere Bret Sperry is saying "i told you so"
|
On August 29 2015 06:56 Fig wrote:
It would have taken a TON of balancing to make things even after the macro booster removal in the last patch, and it seems like they didn't want to venture down that route during the final installment of the game, which is understandable.
My first reaction to this "middle ground" of automating chrono and mules was disgust. But the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. The automatic injects so far have been exciting to me, since it means even lower level zergs can enjoy PLAYING the game the same way terran and protoss already can. The new range limit on the mule is definitely a good choice as well, and maybe that coupled with it's reduced efficacy, will allow harass to continue to be important against terran mineral lines in LOTV. The change to chrono is actually very elegant. It gets rid of all the extra clicks, and allows protoss players to once again bring individuality to their builds, while also rewarding skilled players more, as they can move it around where it's needed.
thats exactly what I think and additionally terran cannot outmule anybody anymore with dozens of OC
Just want to add that blizzard is finally trying some risky ballance changes and trying to redesign stuff as desired for years and ppl still crying.
|
On August 29 2015 07:22 ohmylanta1003 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 07:08 FLuE wrote:
In the next patch will they add a feature where someone just automatically plays for you? Great fucking feedback. Does everyone see what I'm talking about?
They removed macro mechanics, people complained, they listened to the people.
As always, the people have no idea what they're doing.
|
On August 29 2015 07:49 Steelghost wrote:
Economy is the biggest issue with this game and it WILL KILL LOTV if it keeps like this, a lot of people dont like it and its for multiple reasons, yet blizzard acts like they are deaf and they dont try to fix the problem the current econ system presents. Its too fast, bases mine out at incredible rates, you are forced to expand, the comeback potential is very slim and games are way way too volatile. Its like DK just focused on making an arcade game instead of a strategy one. And what I hate most is how they are "pretending" they are doing stuff we want there to be, what about the changes proposed by the community writers? where are they? AM I the only one that thinks that they are being really false? Acting like they give a damn when they actually dont and keep doing what their "internal testing" says?
I have been thinking for a while now that while not ideal, the new economy is actually decent and it's not that big a problem that the community ideas have been dismissed (with ridiculous reasons, though). However, my doubts are rising and sadly I have to agree that it may be the very downfall of LotV.
The worst thing is you have less mining overall, and that, paired with the lack of macro boosters and increased harass potential, especially worker harass, results in game-ending damage being done very easily, with little comeback potential, as you say.
I'm not actually sure if Blizzard realizes that all three of the main points of their LotV "campaign" (more harass, new economy, reduced macro boosters) point toward irrecoverable, terrible, terrible damage, even if the goal is actually the opposite.
I'm not saying the game will turn out to be unplayable. Pros will always find a way to make it work, but it may become less enjoyable, more unstable and annoying, which does not help a game with a relatively small player and fanbase to begin with. At this point I'm almost sure that if the direction of the development remains the same, LotV will be a worse game overall than HotS, because they are focusing on creating a very different game flow, and to be honest, HotS, to me at least, seemed really balanced and interesting; something that is hard to topple. I hope, though, that time will prove me wrong and LotV will indeed become a great game.
|
China6327 Posts
Am I the only one who actually like the macro mechanics change?
|
On August 29 2015 03:32 Tenks wrote:
I wish they'd add chrono boost range as well to help with those pesky proxy oracles
-edit-
Actually thinking about it this someone does help. Now that CB is always active it will be easy to see they don't have the CB in their base instead of implying based upon an absence of CB on the nexus and adding up the nexus energy.
This is fun. Now we'll have mind games where the toss player moves CB back to their base while a scout is around, and then back to the proxy after they chase it away!
I look forward to watching all these changes. I was hoping mule and CB would come back in a nerfed form. Glad they are meeting the pro Korean goal of fewer clicks on the macro end while bringing back some of the choices involved (which building to crono, where to drop mules). I wonder how big the mule range will be.
On August 29 2015 08:18 digmouse wrote:
Am I the only one who actually like the macro mechanics change?
I like it too!
|
On August 29 2015 08:18 digmouse wrote:
Am I the only one who actually like the macro mechanics change?
Its decent.
They fixed the MULE
Stopped some BS from Protoss
Made Zerg easier and more forgiving, while giving them the creep play, like Morrow said, a Zerg will abuse the 5 sec creep bulding time that takes to be made, and spread creep even more during that time.
Pros will have 2x times better creep then any other Zerg out there now.
And when you have time to spread creep you will see creep hiting the enemy bases in mid game if they dont remove it and stay on removing it.
Finally, creep will matter to the enemy player a bit more.
What i dont like is that they are forgeting to buff units like Ghost, Infestor, Tempest, Swarm Host
This 3 units suck alot...
Also Overlord drop at lair will kill all the cool drops cuz its to slow at that point to drop and Nydus or Muta is way better cuz its a safe bet that does damage unlike losing and overlord drop.
|
On August 29 2015 08:18 digmouse wrote:
Am I the only one who actually like the macro mechanics change?
I like it more than just removing them.
But I do not think that they have addressed a very significant worry of the community - namely that worker harass is game ending now because recovery is not possible. This affects Terran more than Protoss, and Protoss more than Zerg.
|
People should realize that they aren't balancing between the races, they are balancing between micro and macro.
(Add to this entire article: 'in Blizzard's opinion'.)
It was the case that macro was too important relative to micro. After the removing, it seemed that macro was less important (less to do). So they tried to find a middle ground: with (nerfed) macro boosters, that don't require too much clicks, but still some choice.
Sure; the 'auto' seems a bit silly, but really: it's not that different than 'auto' building workers relative to 'having to click the barracks for the entire process of building a marine'.
We will all get used to the 'auto' mule/chrone/inject and spend our APM on other things; things that _still_ require 'macro' (new hatch? should I expand? should I build new building?) but are, on the margin, more actual 'fighting the army of the opponent': scouting, positioning, the many spells and all.
Importantly - for the vast majority of blizzard's income, aka, the casuals - this will make sure that 'casuals' their game will resemble more closely to what pro's play, which will increase the likelihood of people wanting to play it. If you watch a bronze and gm play, it's two completely different things, because of the importance of macro boosters. However, if you take that away, on the margin, it iwll be similar (so lowering the skillfloor) but on the other side; the skill ceiling is still so high that we will still see a big difference. Just; a difference in skill that will still produce 'similar' games, rather than vastly different games. This is a good thing, for the marketability of blizzard.
Blizzard is, I think, taking the right step for the long term survival of starcraft. Making a game that pro-players cna play, that newbies can easily grasp and that has a long, but fun, learnign curve.
|
On August 29 2015 06:48 Creager wrote:
Siege tank drops are a fundamental design flaw (completely nullifying the downside of a unit and thus disabling potential counterplay) and absolutely need to go.
Hmm, what about this?
Reaver drops are a fundamental design flaw (completely nullifying the downside of a unit and thus disabling potential counterplay) and absolutely need to go.
Reaver drops nullified the downside of the Reaver (low mobility) yet introduced different counterplay.
Reaver drops were initially OP, but they got nerfed to a point of balance. And I believe they were nerfed using the exact mechanism that Blizzard is pursuing with tank drops (a delay between drop and fire). Looks like a repeat of successful design, no?
If tank drops are coming too soon for their counters, maybe tank drops just need a 200/200 upgrade requirement? Factory tech lab lights would be a good scoutable tell.
|
Re-introduce siege tank research, haha.
|
On August 29 2015 08:27 DeadByDawn wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 08:18 digmouse wrote:
Am I the only one who actually like the macro mechanics change? I like it more than just removing them. But I do not think that they have addressed a very significant worry of the community - namely that worker harass is game ending now because recovery is not possible. This affects Terran more than Protoss, and Protoss more than Zerg.
How are they not addressing that, when the proposed change gives Terran and Protoss some of their recovery ability back? (Not as strong as HotS, but still recovery will be buffed compared to the non-macro mechanics LotV.)
|
Sigh how sad they didn't even try balancing for it just doing the nerfed mechanics. Very disappointed, expected of course but disappointed.
|
On August 29 2015 08:43 blade55555 wrote:
Sigh how sad they didn't even try balancing for it just doing the nerfed mechanics. Very disappointed, expected of course but disappointed.
Auto inject never bothered you? Now we've got auto mule and auto chrono too .
|
I guess it was all too good to be true. Blizzard actually having the balls to completely remove some longstanding features... of course that wasn't going to happen.
I'm sad. I was actually looking forward to where they were going with this. Removing the macro mechanics was such a great change, and such a drastic one at that. Instead of going through with it and reworking the balance from there, they just put back in the same thing but nerfed.
I thought they had a plan. But it falls back down to what I've been thinking since a year or two ago. Blizzard just simply does not know what to do. They do not know how to make starcraft into a good and exciting game. They're just mucking about, becoming ever desperate, hoping to strike gold with every patch. They did with the last patch in my opinion. But they realize they have no idea how to adapt the game to work without those macro mechanics, so they back out. It's a sad state of affairs really.
|
Looks like HOTS will be my last SC2 purchase
|
On August 29 2015 08:43 TiberiusAk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 08:27 DeadByDawn wrote:On August 29 2015 08:18 digmouse wrote:
Am I the only one who actually like the macro mechanics change? I like it more than just removing them. But I do not think that they have addressed a very significant worry of the community - namely that worker harass is game ending now because recovery is not possible. This affects Terran more than Protoss, and Protoss more than Zerg. How are they not addressing that, when the proposed change gives Terran and Protoss some of their recovery ability back? (Not as strong as HotS, but still recovery will be buffed compared to the non-macro mechanics LotV.)
Because (for TvP) the amount of damage that can be done to worker lines by an Oracle, or by Adepts is huge, and the recovery potential is being reduced from before. It just sufficed before, and now will not be enough.
This is the only complaint I have. I believe that they are attempting to balance the game but I am not sure that they are understanding the need for recovery potential.
|
My idea is to make:
-queen costs 125 minerals,
-queen can spawn 5 eggs
-creep spread range 8
|
I would like to hear what actual Korean progamers think of these changes, would be worth alot more than people endlessly speculating.
|
On August 29 2015 08:51 DeadByDawn wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 08:43 TiberiusAk wrote:On August 29 2015 08:27 DeadByDawn wrote:On August 29 2015 08:18 digmouse wrote:
Am I the only one who actually like the macro mechanics change? I like it more than just removing them. But I do not think that they have addressed a very significant worry of the community - namely that worker harass is game ending now because recovery is not possible. This affects Terran more than Protoss, and Protoss more than Zerg. How are they not addressing that, when the proposed change gives Terran and Protoss some of their recovery ability back? (Not as strong as HotS, but still recovery will be buffed compared to the non-macro mechanics LotV.) Because (for TvP) the amount of damage that can be done to worker lines by an Oracle, or by Adepts is huge, and the recovery potential is being reduced from before. It just sufficed before, and now will not be enough. This is the only complaint I have. I believe that they are attempting to balance the game but I am not sure that they are understanding the need for recovery potential.
Those issues, I believe, will be addressed, *after* they have settled on what they think are core mechanics. Just like they addressed the 4-gate issue in PvP (where the best response to 4-gate was to more 4-gate).
I hope they'll address swarmhost/infestor (I am a zerg), but those issues just aren't on the table yet, as explained when they said a week or two ago that for the next month (so two or three more weeks) they first want to settle on design, then balance.
|
On August 29 2015 08:54 Caihead wrote:
I would like to hear what actual Korean progamers think of these changes, would be worth alot more than people endlessly speculating.
To be honest, I don't think actual Korean progamers' opinions would be much more than speculations, either, since most of them don't play LotV close to competitively. Yes, they may have more insight, but I'm not sure if they could correctly guess the directions the game is going to take after each change.
Sadly, though, we will have to wait for this until LotV is released and Korean pros start playing it, I think.
|
I actually thought the overlord drop at hatchery was a good step, finally allowing me to play aggressive. I stopped playing after WOL because I hated being forced to turtle every single game as a zerg. That and because mules made terrans too resilient to fight against. It was possible, but just not very fun. Same with the inject. It was really annoying, although I could do it (I was diamond back at release). I haven't played it in 5 years though, and all my friends quit too. However, I do like the overall direction Blizzard is taking this.
|
On August 29 2015 08:50 WhaleOFaTale wrote:
Looks like HOTS will be my last SC2 purchase
That's great!!! Thanks a lot for telling us.
|
I could go either way keeping or removing macro mechanics, but I am really enjoying playing with auto-injects (much more than with manual injects) and quite frankly would not like to see them go back to manual-only injects.
In fact I would lean towards removing macro mechanics (inject included) completely and rebalance from there (the game without macromechanics is a more streamlined and elegant form of starcraft in my opinion, and the game loses practically no strategical skill as a cost), but I can live with having them exist on auto-cast. I'm not upset about it.
|
Why not, instead of giving terran and protoss these tools, reduce the queen inject to 1 larva, 50 energy and remove autocast so you can opt to just make a hatchery instead (3 hatch 1 queen for creep into roach/hydra lets go).
|
On August 29 2015 09:22 a_flayer wrote:
Why not, instead of giving terran and protoss these tools, reduce the queen inject to 1 larva, 50 energy and remove autocast so you can opt to just make a hatchery instead (3 hatch 1 queen for creep into roach/hydra lets go).
what would be the purpose of such a change?
getting a hatchery wouldn't be "opting", getting queens for larvae wouldn't be viable at all.
this change would make queens be made exclusively for creep and anti-air defense while larvae production would be gotten via hatcheries, queen injecting would only happen if the zerg is happy with the amount of creep it has.
while I kind of like this general idea, I think it would be better to just remove inject completely. that would give practically identical results while keeping the design more streamlined.
|
Mexico2170 Posts
I think the one mistake Blizzard is making is releasing this stuff before a patch. They should just release these thoughts alongside a new patch and say "ok here we did this bexause X, now try it out". Because releasing stuff this way just causes a lot of speculation, pretty pointless disscussion and angry people complaining about changes they haven't even tried.
|
This is really bad.
but at least it's beta, so it's time to test this stuff
|
I'm taking credit for the OC range idea : D
jkjk
|
This is it. This is the last nail in the coffin. Not even starbow can redeem this. Time to go to ICCUP...
This is the Legacy!
|
I'm failing to understand how the new chronoboost will be easier to use. Good protoss players will be switching the building being chronoboosted so much as they do now after a few minutes into the game.
|
autocast is hilarious, heheheheheh
|
On August 29 2015 11:19 Tiaraju9 wrote:
I'm failing to understand how the new chronoboost will be easier to use. Good protoss players will be switching the building being chronoboosted so much as they do now after a few minutes into the game.
Okay...but then think about the bad players.
|
The "Terran economy took a big hit from lack of MULE" feedback in this update is a little bit completely shocking.
Like... did they think... losing MULE... would not be... a big hit? ...What?
It was always going to be a big hit. The question was always "how will you change the rest of the race to make up for that" once the dust settles?
This makes it sound like they thought they wouldn't need to really make any big changes, the game would somehow balance itself out... while Protoss and Zerg got a slew of buffs... and Terran lost MULE.
I mean I'm just not sure how to even respond to this. I don't like being incessantly negative and cynical, but I don't know how to read this other than "a gross and total misunderstanding of what role the different macro mechanics actually play in this game."
I actually prefer autocast macro to no macro, it strikes a neat balance for pros vs new players, I'm just so flabbergasted by the first thing that I can't even focus on the other stuff.
|
Bisutopia19214 Posts
Macro ability removal was fine. This autocast patch is kinda dumb. Oh well. I won't play enough to hold an opinion on this one.
|
yea it was pretty obvious the macro mechanics weren't balanced at all, terran's mules were way better than chrono boost but they had to balance all the races around their respective macro mechanics, so obv terran would become shitty once they remove it lol
|
On August 29 2015 11:19 Tiaraju9 wrote:
I'm failing to understand how the new chronoboost will be easier to use. Good protoss players will be switching the building being chronoboosted so much as they do now after a few minutes into the game.
It doesn't make it easier in the early game, but CB was never really hard to begin with. I've never seen a noob cry about CB's mechanical difficulty, because normally you can just place the CB in the middle of something with little risk of overlap. In the late game it will be easier to just fire and forget on the critical tech buildings like Stargate and Robo. It will be interesting to see if this perma-CB helps alleviate the Robo squeeze Protoss tend to feel all the time and I wonder how PvP will fare now that you can't stack CBs for explosive timings.
|
Ultimately, here is my issue with it.
The reason they removed the mechanics, is not the same reason they are adding them back in and that is what is annoying.
The mechanics were not only unbalanced, they were not fun to use, and not fun to play against, and not fun to watch. Creep spreading was/is interesting, and needed to remain. It is a good dynamic, spreading it, vs. clearing it, vs. fighting on it.
However inject was tedious and if that is what separates the good zergs from the bad, I certainly have to ask there must be a better way. It was hard for new players, and really just not fun on any level and even in late games even though it got more forgiving as a game went on was still important. Chrono is just a bit silly, and meant that anytime they wanted to balance protoss they always had to account for the timings that COULD exist if someone put all their effort into chrono one thing. So we ended up with really long research times for the most common things in the game, and really that makes no sense. Why put something in the game, that speeds something up, only to always make whatever is being most sped up take longer? At that point just remove it. In regards to mules, they were the most forgiving mechanic that led to just constant nerfs for mineral based Terran compositions. It has made the game for Terran so bio heavy and again hard to balance because you always had to account for mass mules, throwing away scvs late game for more mules, and to top it off the mechanic wasn't even impressive to watch or use because if you forgot to use it you could always just dump all your energy into mules and "catch" back up.
With these issues, how could Blizzard had helped the problem?
Well I saw two real solutions, if you were keeping the current mechanics(pre this patch) just go auto inject for the zerg and have it be 1 less larva. If that hurt pros a bit that didn't miss injects in early game, it would end up helping late game to balance it out because everyone misses injects even the best. Then they could have just left everything else as it is, or even just removed chrono only, balanced build times, and maybe given Toss something else interesting.
The other option could have been to just remove all of them, make the queens a defensive/creep spreading unit only and maybe add another ability(I saw a speed boost idea that I thought would be neat, for off creep). Make hatches spawn up to 5 larva and no more inject. From there just take the time to actually get Terran in line, showing some love to bio(cheaper upgrades, maybe some cheaper buildings) and make CC/PF cheaper and allow scvs to be built while upgrading. That would have worked too.
But now instead of removing them, or fixing them in the current form and dealing with the main issue which were the annoying injects, they now have them back in the game, in a half assed way, that is automatic? What the hell is that? So now all 3 races have 3 bad mechanics that will happen automatically? Is that really the only way they can balance things? And even at that it isn't going to be balanced anyway and going to take time to tweak. It was like Blizzard couldn't grow a pair and either put the mechanics in or make people unhappy by taking them out and are trying this middle of the road approach that is totally lame.
"Well you can sorta get mules but they will be automatic but they won't return as many minerals but you can only have one mule but your mule will drop for you so now you don't have to drop the mule yourself but you can get your minerals!" Lame.
"No chrono will just speed up one building all the time whenever you want you just have to set it and forget it!" Lame.
So yeah, they set out to make the game simpler, easier to understand for new players, and allow higher level players more time to micro, but instead we got this solution which seems worse than what was there before and what is there now. I hope that they come to their senses and see that adding 3 automatic mechanics doesn't make the game harder, nor more interesting, and if it doesn't do either of those why have it?
|
Dear God is this community afraid of trying things out?
I think this is a rather elegant (all things considered) solution to the issues brought on by the removal of the original macro mechanics.
First, they don't have to balance Terran's loss of minerals any more (at least as drastically).
Second, MULES cast range stops the late game, counter-intutive worker sac (at least some what).
Third, it speeds the game back up (a common complaint).
Fourth, Toss's chrono is fucking beautiful now. It really rewards some good foresight while losing a lot of it's "comeback mechanic" edge. I promise, as is, you'll see some great builds come out of this for good players, and it will remain quietly relevant all game for those that want to min/max it.
I say the complaints need to stop for a while, and the testing needs to happen.
|
The chrono boost change is bad.
It will absolutely hellish to use this new version optimally, and in the late game it will arguably require even more attention than the old version so that it's always on something that's producing.
With this change protoss will have the hardest macro by far.
|
I am probably the biggest proponent of removing macro-mechanics, that being said auto-casting / heavily nerfing them is not the same thing. Just get rid of them and fix the cost of production for terran.
The primary goal of LOTV should be making sure that base capturing / defense / trading units is a more effective long term strategy than timing attacks. It's essentially a capture the flag game.
Mules, chrono and inject destabilize the economy / unit production. Resource and production rates heavily favor different races at specific timings, it makes trading a dangerous gamble. One player cuts a few svc's/probes/drones to be aggressive and then there's a very short window of opportunity before the person expanding economy / unit production explodes massively beyond the aggressors. They will quickly be overwhelmed by numbers if they don't win or reset the game in that window.
The choice becomes gambling on a 2-minute window for aggression or waiting for the late game where the economy / unit production is more predictable and stable. Games become heavily in favor of late game macro 200 supply armies and timing attacks exploiting race-specific deficiencies against rapid macro-advantages, like 200 supply roaches in 12 minutes.
|
I'm so glad they brought back mules and chronoboost - The game needs those two things to keep up with zerg, or else you end up with a crappy zerg dominant patch like we just had. Chronoboost is so important to protoss tech switching because without it, you can't adjust to zergs crazy macro. If you are in robo tech and you see a mass muta switch, good luck building a twilight + blink in a reasonable time to be able to defend it without chronoboost. It forces you to pre-emptively climb both tech trees before your 3rd expo is stabilized and vs any good zerg, (GM) you cant get away with that without being run over.
Finally, the game might be going in the right direction again. I was actually considering quitting 100% or switching to zerg if these removal of macro changes were final. It's just frustrating that since other races are the main whiners, protoss keeps getting the short end of the stick in every patch.
This game shouldnt be broodwar, it should be SC2. And without macro mechanics, even if they are autocast (lame but whatever I get their point) - it just becomes a cheap broodwar imitation where zerg units are actually strong instead of weak, with 6 larva per hatch.
|
On August 29 2015 13:43 SnowfaLL wrote:
I'm so glad they brought back mules and chronoboost - The game needs those two things to keep up with zerg, or else you end up with a crappy zerg dominant patch like we just had. Chronoboost is so important to protoss tech switching because without it, you can't adjust to zergs crazy macro. If you are in robo tech and you see a mass muta switch, good luck building a twilight + blink in a reasonable time to be able to defend it without chronoboost. It forces you to pre-emptively climb both tech trees before your 3rd expo is stabilized and vs any good zerg, (GM) you cant get away with that without being run over.
Finally, the game might be going in the right direction again. I was actually considering quitting 100% or switching to zerg if these removal of macro changes were final. It's just frustrating that since other races are the main whiners, protoss keeps getting the short end of the stick in every patch.
This game shouldnt be broodwar, it should be SC2. And without macro mechanics, even if they are autocast (lame but whatever I get their point) - it just becomes a cheap broodwar imitation where zerg units are actually strong instead of weak, with 6 larva per hatch.
it would have been totally fine if they removed inject completely and put a larva cap on hatcheries, would be on par with other races
|
On August 29 2015 04:34 Eternal Dalek wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 04:20 Linear wrote:On August 29 2015 04:12 Charoisaur wrote:
It's hard to give constructive feedback when the balance updates look like some trolls who never played sc2 rolled a dice and put some random changes in the game they thought would be "cool".
I always hope blizzard gets their shit together and makes LotV an awesome game but with every community update I'm getting more and more dissapointed It's in part due to the fact that some of the most vocal people are gold leaguers or intermittent players. Another problem blizzard forget is that you only stay new for so long this is the final expansion the goal should be longevity of player enjoyment rather than a perceived short term gain because the game is now easier for newer players. I wish there was a weighted voting system which is based off the percentage of people in a league so a GM or Masters vote is valued more than a gold league player. The vast majority of players ARE gold leaguers and intermittent players. You cannot build a game for the elite 1% alone. You cannot have a successful game that only casters to Masters and Grandmasters while leaving everyone below the best of the best frustrated and unsatisfied. I think you're forgetting that TL.net is made up of better-than-average players as well as actual progamers, outliers who are alright with the status quo. TL.net posters are the minority. A well-informed, highly-skilled minority, but a minority nevertheless. Making the game easier will not suddenly make gold scrubs like Eternal Dalek win games against players like you. You will still kick my ass 99% of the time, but the game will be much less frustrating for lesser-skilled players like me. Basically, you'll have much more people to play with if the game is much more accessible. Also, what they're really lowering is the skill floor, not the skill ceiling. The skill ceiling remains impossibly high. The skill floor is now much lower. This means that more people can play and enjoy the game, but the best of the best remains in their unassailable fortress of skill. I know a lot of people here confuse the skill floor with the skill ceiling; most of the time, when people say that Blizzard/Valve/Riot/whatever is dumbing down Starcraft/DotA/LoL and lowering the skill ceiling, what they really mean is that the skill floor is being lowered and the game is more accessible.
Very well said
|
would like to see something about abusive planetary fortresses at every base.
|
The macro solution is not elegant, and maybe elegance is overrated, but I liked the simplicity of no macro mechanics and wish they would try balancing the game without the mechanics...
I have a substantive question/comment: suppose MULE is set to autocast by default and they increase the energy cost of scan (and supply drop but if MULES are back, who cares amirite). Does that then mean my OC will never bank enough energy to scan unless I turn off autocast (because the game will automatically spend the energy calling down a MULE). If so, wouldn't that defeat the purpose of automation? I still would have to babysit 1-2 orbitals to even access scan... And it's not like I'm always going to scan when I could, so the rest of the time I'm manually dropping MULES?
I suppose I can have the OCs set to manual at critical scout times (early game?) when it's not too difficult to MULE consistently (been doin it for years) and set it to autocast once we get into the mid game?
We can also set aside one OC to bank scan energy and drop MULES if we feel safe. I guess that works ok too.
Balance concerns aside, I just really hope this middle ground doesn't speed up the game too much, because I was enjoying the scrappy low Econ games. It felt like I was able to do more with my units and not be so worried I was behind economically.
|
I think you missed the part where MULE cost no energy
, gh0st
So yeah, no more banking energy for MULE/CB
|
Ohh I see. Thats nice. Free money here we go! Shame though that OCs are basically the only good option again... much less interesting than chrono or creep spread. On par with auto inject in its boringness
|
The people at Blizzard aren't getting paid for all this right?
|
i really hope they do some macro changes to make the pacing of the game slower again after reincluding macro mechanics
without these changes it felt almost perfect, maybe still a little too fast to mass units
now it will be too fast im afraid, but lets see it in practice...
|
I never had as much fun playing SC2 as after the last lotv patch. Of course, the individual units need balancing but I liked the overall pace of the game.
Some argue that it's harder to come back from losing workers now but I'd rather have that than the frustrating gameplay created by the old macro-mechanic- Injects, mule, chrono make the game more extreme, more all-or-nothing and complicate the task of finally having a set of interesting and balanced units.
Maybe it makes sense to keep some weaker less time consuming makro boosters to better compensate worker losses and give players a bit more choice in how hard they go for economy. That being said, who looks at this autocast, no energy, limited radius mule and thinks ‘’wow what an elegant concept’’?
To be more constructive here are my ideas. Not completely happy with most of them but maybe they will inspire someone:
ZERG:
-Queens
Don’t increase injects to 3, let us build more Hatches! If inject would be removed altogether and hatcheries produced larvea quicker Zergs would get quite a production boost right from the beginning which would call for boosting T and P makro further..
Possible solution: Hatches need to be injected just once and then periodically pop 2 extra larvae for the rest of their life. This keeps the amount of larvea in the early game as it is now and demands at least a little bit of attention (have queen with energy at every new Hatch) and will delay creep spread for a while if you decide to get just one queen.
-Viper
Reduce DPS of Parasitic Bomb (half or something) and reduce the mana cost proportionatly. More time to react, clumped flyers dont explode in 2 seconds. Zerg player needs more time and clicks to defeat air army.
PROTOSS:
-Mothership Core/Nexus
MC can cast some kind of chrono boost on Nexus for replenishing probes
Not a hero unit anymore. 1 supply, smaller size, very slow, tough, no attack, less or no gas.
If over Pylon Power you can recall a few units within a small circle from anywhere on the map right underneath it. If you want to recall whole armies you will need many Mothership Cores and many clicks. -> Drop defense + lategame mobility
Speaking of drop defense: Photon Overcharge, remove it. Nexus energy is used to shoot shield replenishing projectiles at your own units. Each projectile must be fired individually and has some splash. Don't know how much energy each shot should cost and how many Shields it heals. Shoot it on the spot of your wall that is about to break. Shoot it at your Photon Cannon, at your probes which are fighting Lings or at your units you just recalled with your Mothership Core.
The other use for Nexus energy is as part of the cost of the Mothership Core. You have to decide if it is save to build the Core for more mobility and Probes or if you might need the energy for defense soon.
-Zealot
Make charge expensive. Zealots move much quicker AND get the charge-attack it has now. After charging into something the Zealot is slowed for a few seconds. If you a-move it will charge the first target in range, if you right click on something it runs to it until in range and charges. So players will for example want to maneuver the chargelots behind or through the enemy lines and then charge. As it is slow afterwards there will always be micro possibilities for both sites.
TERRAN:
-CC/Orbital/PF
Don't make Scan more expensive, make the radius smaller maybe.
Not sure what to do with the damn mule. Maybe it doesn’t have a timed life and is like a free scv here and there/
|
On August 29 2015 17:13 FIENCHEN wrote:
-Zealot
Make charge expensive. Zealots move much quicker AND get the charge-attack it has now. After charging into something the Zealot is slowed for a few seconds. If you a-move it will charge the first target in range, if you right click on something it runs to it until in range and charges. So players will for example want to maneuver the chargelots behind or through the enemy lines and then charge. As it is slow afterwards there will always be micro possibilities for both sites.
your suggestions tend to be on the overcomplicated side, but i like this charge mechanic
|
Russian Federation4 Posts
instead make a drop tank to grade fast siege mode
|
Make call down SCV instead of MULE and you fix Terran.
Auto cast is a very lazy, messy and unimaginative solution; it's something you'd expect from a MOD not an expansion. Please get to work and come up with more elegant solutions.
|
On August 29 2015 15:50 Ozmodeus wrote:
would like to see something about abusive planetary fortresses at every base.
Well if Blizzard would finally do something about mobile Defense (Tanks, Mines) then we wouldn´t have to do this. The weaknesses Terran had with Static Defense (needing Units to have defense e.g.) were always balanced by Units that are good in defense. Im sure there is a way to make Tanks stronger without having a super turtle style or make Mines a reliable tool against flanking if they would just try things out.
All in all it´s too early to say what the upcoming changes will do for the game, we have to see them in action. Im just disappointed that there is no words about the Thor or other ideas for Mech in general or bio so that its good but not the dominating composition/strategy it mostly was for 5 years. Instead they focus on Units that don´t need additional help like Medivacs. For example they could make the Raven a good support Unit for both compostions like Science Vessels were in BW.
I also dislike that there is so much abilities for almost every Unit for all races. Why not bring some simple Units that still can be microed without having 5000 abilities that need activation or targeting or something else? Micro can also be fun to watch if its just Units being pulled away when they are at low Health to save them.
So far the only thing I really like is the real time adjustment. They should implement this to HotS aswell.
|
This will b a buf to T and P in the areas they need it. A slight nerf to Z overall, sine Zerg could already go 3 hatch and be eual in production; but now the races catch up to zerg to macro.
|
I'm really starting to think people would literally whine about every change.
|
On August 29 2015 03:25 ohmylanta1003 wrote:
Lol. Team Liquid for the win. Are the members of this forum ever happy with any of these changes?
-_-
|
On August 29 2015 19:38 Karpfen wrote:
I'm really starting to think people would literally whine about every change.
It's clear though, that they're nothing bur lil' dumb kids (see posts 1 to 5, etc). The developers aren't going to take any of that seriously.
|
On August 29 2015 19:38 Karpfen wrote:
I'm really starting to think people would literally whine about every change.
They have the right to do so. It's all about your opinion. These changes are not objectively good or bad. If you don't like them you should say so. Naturally giving your reasons and maybe other options is a better way than just saying you don't like something. Some people here are confusing opinion and fact and are acting like their opinion is a fact and that everyone thinks as they do.
|
On August 29 2015 19:41 DJZest wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 19:38 Karpfen wrote:
I'm really starting to think people would literally whine about every change. It's clear though, that they're nothing bur lil' dumb kids (see posts 1 to 5, etc). The developers aren't going to take any of that seriously.
Thanks for your contribution.
|
So no more manner mule and no more reparation with mule from the sky ?
|
Whyyyyy are they bringing autocast into the equation even more now?
|
I don't like them making everything autocast as a way to fix a problem that they created themselves. I never thought that the macro mechanics were ever a problem of the game.
|
Moving ovelord drop to lair will backfire with 1 base lair and drop as a gimmick.
It wont solve anything.
If you move to lair you must buff the overlord speed somehow.
The ovi speed upgrade could give more speed to overlords and overssers or the same speed to both.
Otherwise i feel the cool drops will turn into gimmick all ins
|
This honestly makes me not want to play the game at all. This is the WORST of both worlds. The best being the removal of macro mechanics entirely (fixing queen auto cast to extra larvae at the hatch or something similar). The next best being the normal macro mechanics, and the worst being this autocast option. Its like playing archon mode with the computer.
Chrono is not an interesting option, I dont know why anyone thinks it is. It is used for cheese and then after that constantly robo and upgrades.
I dont care about the balance tweaks for now. The game was going in the right direction for slowing down the pumping out of armies and having more expansions and small battles. It will be back to HOTS after this. Sigh. (although moving drop back to lair is stupid there was no problem there)
|
AUTO EVERYTHING.
- auto macro mechanics
- when you're supply blocked, one peon builds a pylon/supply on its own, and an overlord is created
- when protoss reaches 200/200, auto F2 => Amove
- when mutalisks are stationed near an ennemy base, they auto attack this base every 30 seconds and back if they take damage
- when a terran has a medivac and 8 marines on the same rally point, the medivac auto loads and drops the enemy main
- when you built a dark shrine on the map, with a pylon next to it, as soon as the dark shrine is finished, all available warpgates will warp DTs on the pylon, with the DTs being rallied on the enemy main
PLEASE. Macro mecanics aren't at all a part of the SC2 skillcap, except for injects.
=> keep the mule the way it was in HOTS, while giving it casting range, with minor terran tweaks to balance it
=> get the stupid auto inject outta the game, just tweak it to be 2 larvae while buffing hatcheries larvae generation
=> keep the old chronoboost and give the nexus the photon canon for 150 energy.
BLIZZARD. PLEASE.
|
Why in God's name did they reintroduce those crutches called macro mechanics... They finally did something right last patch, but I guess 1 step forward 2 steps back is their policy after all
|
Well, there goes the good feeling of having 10 hatcheries again.
I wish they'd just cut the macro mechanics.
|
STOP WITH THOSE SHITTY AUTOCASTS DAMN
The chronoboost thing sets my teeth on edge ! No ! No !!!! It doesn't even help newer players because there are situations where chronoboosting probes will be detrimental... This is downright stupid, but I guess we shouldn't expect less retardedness from DK.
Stop trying to be clever with the macro mechanics because you've already proved so many times you aren't. Keep them as they were but nerfed. Stop trying to bring your unique snowflake flavor to this game because you are ten times more incompetent than Dustin Browder and that is saying something.
|
I found this in other thread and represent a lot about the feeling of people who actually understand RTS as not only "microing an army"
On August 28 2015 00:34 travis wrote:
This reminds me of the difference between, say, mtg and hearthstone.
It looks like blizzard is taking this approach again.
Sc2 is the hearthstone to starcraft 1.
Why even mine resources? Why not just be given 1000 minerals and 300 gas per minute per macro building? Then you can *really* focus on just strategy.
btw, side note: I've played games that work like what I just suggested. That mechanic was always terrible.
|
On August 29 2015 22:06 rockslave wrote:Well, there goes the good feeling of having 10 hatcheries again. I wish they'd just cut the macro mechanics.
I agree, since automated Inject/Mule add nothing to the game other than not needed complexity, working as an entry barrier for new players.
If you want to keep macro mechanics there are two ways to make it easier.
1) Make Inject/Chrono stackable, if a building is already Injected/Chronoed it queues up the next one, for when the other is done. Queen does Inject animation immediately, but actual timer only starts when the other timer finishes.
2) Chrono Boost approach, do the same for Inject, Queen sits and channels Inject indefinitely, increasing the spawn rate of the Hatchery, you can stop the Queen at any time.
As for the Mule, I don't think that this spell is actually made easier from this new patch. You have to be adamant about floating your CC's into range of the new Mineral Field in order for the Mule to be possible. Also no one would want to keep Muling the same Mineral Patch as it would just run out, so I think this is just a bad implemented Mule. You also removed the energy, which WAS the decision part of the Mule, in favour of just making it useless added complexity that don't add much to the game. It's pretty much as bandaid as your gonna get, simply because you don't wanna balance the game around not having the Mule, or having a nerfed Mule.
|
On August 29 2015 03:36 purakushi wrote:
Bandaid after bandaid. This is what happens when the core game does not have a good foundation.
Precisely. This is getting silly.
Please please Blizzard : if it turns out at the end of the month that the version without macro mechanics or with those imbecile autocasts is not more solid than what we had a week ago, revert those changes. Just guarantee that because if you just stubbornly build upon mistakes and unsufferable design, you'll just kill the game.
Every community update makes me more sick and hoping for Heart of the Swarm will stick forever as main SC II game.
I was very hopeful and genuinely interested in the game at the beginning. Since a month or so, I definitely feel exactly the same as you.
|
On August 29 2015 22:32 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 03:36 purakushi wrote:
Bandaid after bandaid. This is what happens when the core game does not have a good foundation. Precisely. This is getting silly. Please please Blizzard : if it turns out at the end of the month that the version without macro mechanics or with those imbecile autocasts is not more solid than what we had a week ago, revert those changes. Just guarantee that because if you just stubbornly build upon mistakes and unsufferable design, you'll just kill the game. Show nested quote +
Every community update makes me more sick and hoping for Heart of the Swarm will stick forever as main SC II game.
I was very hopeful and genuinely interested in the game at the beginning. Since a month or so, I definitely feel exactly the same as you.
many people thought macro mechanics like mules etc were the problematic design....
people need to chill and actually see how it goes.
|
On August 29 2015 22:44 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 22:32 [PkF] Wire wrote:On August 29 2015 03:36 purakushi wrote:
Bandaid after bandaid. This is what happens when the core game does not have a good foundation. Precisely. This is getting silly. Please please Blizzard : if it turns out at the end of the month that the version without macro mechanics or with those imbecile autocasts is not more solid than what we had a week ago, revert those changes. Just guarantee that because if you just stubbornly build upon mistakes and unsufferable design, you'll just kill the game.
Every community update makes me more sick and hoping for Heart of the Swarm will stick forever as main SC II game.
I was very hopeful and genuinely interested in the game at the beginning. Since a month or so, I definitely feel exactly the same as you. many people thought macro mechanics like mules etc were the problematic design.... people need to chill and actually see how it goes.
I'm sure macro mechanics are indeed a problem with the way LotV eco develops. But they get a lot of bash for the automation of injects and what do they do ? Autocast on everything ! Seriously this is just downright stupid, something I don't even want to see tested.
It's not even like it's useful. For instance, sometimes it's good as P to have many chronos stacked so as to boost one full gateway cycle. With the current build Nexi will always be at 0 energy so it won't be possible unless you have as many Nexi as warpgates, which is unlikely. I don't even understand how they can come up with such ideas.
I have to say most of the other changes make sense, but they're ruining the core of the game.
But yeah, let's chill and relish the bright outlook, because clearly negativity is affecting Blizzard's work in a bad way. You're doing good Blizzard, you're so bold and so smart keep it on. Fuck it I'm done.
|
Not even going to concider buying lotv before the macro mechanics is not auto-cast anymore...
|
What if we think outside the box and bring in MORE macro mechanics, and other ways to boost macro? Preferably with less clicks too, but I don't mind.
|
|
|
I must be one of a kind, but I actually am a big fan of players that won because "they just had a bit more of everything". When Bomber was great he actually maxed out before anyone on the planet while harassing and keeping on upgrades and could just a-move his way through his opponents. Watching soO's queen energy during some of his GSL runs was fascinating.
It seems most people see little to no merit in that kind of feats because they're not spectacular, while everyone is in awe when PartinG keeps picking up an immortal in a warp prism to rack up 80 kills. I've never been impressed the slightest by such "feats". If he does that in a two base all-in, he doesn't have any eco to manage, since he has walled his natural ramp he doesn't have to worry about a counter-attack... So he only has one task to execute, and of course he does it flawlessly, but as much as I can understand people loving it and finding it spectacular, I always thought that was one-dimensional and not very interesting. Multitask is interesting, micro is just one task and I've always thought the warp prism would have far too much micro potential in LotV to not create unstoppable 2 bases all-ins.
So yeah, I'd call myself a player who favors macro over micro. But is it shocking ? I think Starcraft games are more about macro, and Warcraft games more about micro. So shouldn't it be this way ?
This is why when I read that automated macro mechanics will be good for newer players because they make the game more accessible, I'm as shocked as you would be if I said I think automated marine splits would be good because it would allow players to focus on their macro, make the game more accessible and help bio that struggles in LotV. People who are really good at splitting and want to focus on that can still deactivate autosplit, huh ?
Don't get me wrong, I agree macro mechanics are a problem. But I'd favor a nerf of them to make them less important so less punishing to miss for newer players, over that really inelegant automation. So I'll be vocal against these changes because I think they're really bad and hurt the game at its core for many reasons.
|
having the macro mechanics on autocast is in my opinion equivalent to not having them at all (since both cases require practically no player attention), except for the fact that there is a mandatory investment required for terran and zerg. I can't see the mandatory investment as a good thing, but I can see this version of the macro-mechanics as a harmless thing.
I consider this version of macro-mechanics to be largely equivalent to to the no-mule, no-chrono, 2-larvae-auto-inject version, with the one major diference that the balance will be a little closer to pre-macro-mechanics-removal version.
|
On August 29 2015 22:58 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 22:44 ETisME wrote:On August 29 2015 22:32 [PkF] Wire wrote:On August 29 2015 03:36 purakushi wrote:
Bandaid after bandaid. This is what happens when the core game does not have a good foundation. Precisely. This is getting silly. Please please Blizzard : if it turns out at the end of the month that the version without macro mechanics or with those imbecile autocasts is not more solid than what we had a week ago, revert those changes. Just guarantee that because if you just stubbornly build upon mistakes and unsufferable design, you'll just kill the game.
Every community update makes me more sick and hoping for Heart of the Swarm will stick forever as main SC II game.
I was very hopeful and genuinely interested in the game at the beginning. Since a month or so, I definitely feel exactly the same as you. many people thought macro mechanics like mules etc were the problematic design.... people need to chill and actually see how it goes. I'm sure macro mechanics are indeed a problem with the way LotV eco develops. But they get a lot of bash for the automation of injects and what do they do ? Autocast on everything ! Seriously this is just downright stupid, something I don't even want to see tested. It's not even like it's useful. For instance, sometimes it's good as P to have many chronos stacked so as to boost one full gateway cycle. With the current build Nexi will always be at 0 energy so it won't be possible unless you have as many Nexi as warpgates, which is unlikely. I don't even understand how they can come up with such ideas. I have to say most of the other changes make sense, but they're ruining the core of the game. But yeah, let's chill and relish the bright outlook, because clearly negativity is affecting Blizzard's work in a bad way. You're doing good Blizzard, you're so bold and so smart keep it on. Fuck it I'm done.
negativity does as little as positivity without even trying it out.
The auto cast is most likely to get rid of stack energy and boost everything which mid to late game tend to have.
it's not like auto cast = bad. Someone suggested in reddit that you can have queen tethered to hatchery for auto inject and that's an interesting auto macro mechanics
I mean look at sc2 history, only bomber can seperate themselves for having more stuff (and fruitdfealer i guess). it's not like the original were having players identifying themselves as great macro player.
|
i dont like this update, imo they are rushing with decisions because they have until "Fall 2015" to realease the game and because of that the most notable changes arent being tested enough. I dont like the auto cast things, for me is all or nothing in this case, or we have HotS macro mecanics or we dont, this middle point or the way its being implemented doesnt sound good, i could be wrong but thats my opinion regarding the developers post.
On August 29 2015 09:49 [Phantom] wrote:
I think the one mistake Blizzard is making is releasing this stuff before a patch. They should just release these thoughts alongside a new patch and say "ok here we did this bexause X, now try it out". Because releasing stuff this way just causes a lot of speculation, pretty pointless disscussion and angry people complaining about changes they haven't even tried.
i was on the hype train with the no macro mechanics patch and playing LotV whenever i could, now with this patch idk if i would be playing until next week :/
|
This is a step in the right direction. Autocast, as people have pointed out, is an odd and perhaps inelegant mechanic to have here (does anyone else feel that this new chrono boost might be more frustrating to use than the old one?), but it's possible that it could work out to some degree. In any event, it's probably worth testing. I would still tend, on the balance, to favor simply weakening macro mechanics but keeping them more as they were. We shall see.
Personally, I enjoy the macro side of the game generally more than the micro side. I enjoy chrono-boosting different things. I'm glad that chrono boost isn't gone completely. But the devs are obviously trying to find a different balance regarding mechanics, macro, and micro than HotS, and that's probably a good idea. Macro, however, is a core part of SC2, and it needs to stay there.
My two cents, anyway.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
so, to be clear..they mean that they are going to go through with the adept cost at 75/50?
|
Lowering the skillcap even more only serves the fact that no player is really 'the best player'. With a lower skillcap we're going to keep seeing different winners at every tournament. No player will be able to take the spot as the best sc2 player, which is a really bad thing to me. Oh well.
|
On August 29 2015 23:54 BluemoonSC wrote:
so, to be clear..they mean that they are going to go through with the adept cost at 75/50?
No they are not. They never implemented it publicly, but I guess they tested the adept nerf internally and didn't like it. Which is absurd because it plainly needs some nerf, otherwise PvT will be utterly broken. They must address adepts or prisms. Bringing back a nerfed mule won't fix it.
|
do what you want with terran and protoss but don't let spawn larva autocast- you force good players and bad players to have the SAME macro and there is NOTHING you can do about it. Players cannot show the skill anymore in this area of the game
|
On August 29 2015 23:28 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I must be one of a kind, but I actually am a big fan of players that won because "they just had a bit more of everything". When Bomber was great he actually maxed out before anyone on the planet while harassing and keeping on upgrades and could just a-move his way through his opponents. Watching soO's queen energy during some of his GSL runs was fascinating.
It seems most people see little to no merit in that kind of feats because they're not spectacular, while everyone is in awe when PartinG keeps picking up an immortal in a warp prism to rack up 80 kills. I've never been impressed the slightest by such "feats". If he does that in a two base all-in, he doesn't have any eco to manage, since he has walled his natural ramp he doesn't have to worry about a counter-attack... So he only has one task to execute, and of course he does it flawlessly, but as much as I can understand people loving it and finding it spectacular, I always thought that was one-dimensional and not very interesting. Multitask is interesting, micro is just one task and I've always thought the warp prism would have far too much micro potential in LotV to not create unstoppable 2 bases all-ins.
So yeah, I'd call myself a player who favors macro over micro. But is it shocking ? I think Starcraft games are more about macro, and Warcraft games more about micro. So shouldn't it be this way ?
This is why when I read that automated macro mechanics will be good for newer players because they make the game more accessible, I'm as shocked as you would be if I said I think automated marine splits would be good because it would allow players to focus on their macro, make the game more accessible and help bio that struggles in LotV. People who are really good at splitting and want to focus on that can still deactivate autosplit, huh ?
Don't get me wrong, I agree macro mechanics are a problem. But I'd favor a nerf of them to make them less important so less punishing to miss for newer players, over that really inelegant automation. So I'll be vocal against these changes because I think they're really bad and hurt the game at its core for many reasons.
I agree with you. Taking out much of the depth of SC2 is not something i want. Nerfing the macro boosters is better way to go. I wan´t SoO to have more stuff than random GM.
|
Canada13387 Posts
No auto cast but nerfed mechanics.
I don't see why we can't try that? If they are all nerfed - then they have less impact if you miss them. If they are forced to be clicked, then players can make use of it.
I really want to hear this korean feedback. I wonder if they dislike the macro clicks or dislike the amount of micro clicks instead,
|
On August 30 2015 00:11 ZeromuS wrote:
No auto cast but nerfed mechanics.
I don't see why we can't try that?
Because that would make too much sense ? Because everyone suggested that so they need to show there's a captain on the boat ?
I hope this gets tested quick.
|
On August 29 2015 22:26 [PkF] Wire wrote:
STOP WITH THOSE SHITTY AUTOCASTS DAMN
The chronoboost thing sets my teeth on edge ! No ! No !!!! It doesn't even help newer players because there are situations where chronoboosting probes will be detrimental... This is downright stupid, but I guess we shouldn't expect less retardedness from DK.
Stop trying to be clever with the macro mechanics because you've already proved so many times you aren't. Keep them as they were but nerfed. Stop trying to bring your unique snowflake flavor to this game because you are ten times more incompetent than Dustin Browder and that is saying something.
wasnt dustin "terrible terrible damage im a fat redneck idiot" browder the guy who came up with warhounds?
nothing, really nothing ever ever can be more retarded than warhounds.
i wish this game's futures wasnt in the hands of idiots.
User was warned for this post
|
What does it take to make DKim understand that noone fucking likes autocast? The amount of inelegance this game is going to convey on release is absolutely unbelievable. They're screwing up bigtime. Bigtime.
|
On August 30 2015 00:32 summerloud wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 22:26 [PkF] Wire wrote:
STOP WITH THOSE SHITTY AUTOCASTS DAMN
The chronoboost thing sets my teeth on edge ! No ! No !!!! It doesn't even help newer players because there are situations where chronoboosting probes will be detrimental... This is downright stupid, but I guess we shouldn't expect less retardedness from DK.
Stop trying to be clever with the macro mechanics because you've already proved so many times you aren't. Keep them as they were but nerfed. Stop trying to bring your unique snowflake flavor to this game because you are ten times more incompetent than Dustin Browder and that is saying something. wasnt dustin "terrible terrible damage im a fat redneck idiot" browder the guy who came up with warhounds? nothing, really nothing ever ever can be more retarded than warhounds. i wish this game's futures wasnt in the hands of idiots. User was warned for this post
Warhounds got scrapped. I'll be happy if autocasts end up in the same bin.
|
On August 30 2015 00:25 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2015 00:11 ZeromuS wrote:
No auto cast but nerfed mechanics.
I don't see why we can't try that? Because that would make too much sense ? Because everyone suggested that so they need to show there's a captain on the boat ? I hope this gets tested quick.
It's almost like SC2 devs don't want to copy things directly from the community's suggestions, so they always try to "spice" it up just a little bit, and end up missing the point. Ex- LotV economy, buffing tanks, replacing the colossus with the reaver [read disruptor], and now macro mechanics
|
People are really failing to understand what is trying to be achieved here. Allow me to try to explain.
This is about economy pacing. Making the bold choice to go with a completely new economy model is obviously going to change the pace of the game. This is one of the more important factors there is in game design.
Now let us consider the fact that community opinion is in stark contradiction through time. People like to complain, and there is always a majority issue being heard. Earlier in LotV one of them was the economy moving too quickly to keep up with. As soon as they took out macro mechanics suddenly everyone was moaning that the game had become too slow, that Terran could not keep up now, etc.
Literally a week or so after this huge change Blizzard are ready to take steps to begin balancing around these new ideas. And the changes they bring are to fine tune the economy pacing. They are not trying to appease all the players who want back Macro Mechanics (maybe it is a nice compromise for some). They are trying to give a slight boost to mineral income in the economy. I imagine Protoss will keep chrono on nexus until saturation and start using it for tech later, and we will see Terran much more easily take a third base now (I have to say the range on mule is pretty smart).
I played high master T in HotS (year retired) and I have a good feel for the macro of the game (Expand builds only and never practiced strictly 1 - 3 builds, always like 10 - 15, bad I know). I have played every significant patch in the beta, and I can safely say that after getting a feel for when it was "too fast" and now when it is "too slow" these changes should at least reach a middle ground where the pacing of the game actually means players will have other things to do to make up for the loss of MMs.
Everyone is way too scared that the game is being ruined. Cries of the game being made terrible due to the importance of worker harass. Then Blizzard go propose a change that does make workers slightly easier to come by, and all anyone can talk about is the fact they removed Macro Mechanics. News flash guys, they were removed in the last patch, and they are still gone. This just improves the economy without foundational changes to it. Fine tuning, so to speak.
|
On August 30 2015 00:55 aRyuujin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2015 00:25 [PkF] Wire wrote:On August 30 2015 00:11 ZeromuS wrote:
No auto cast but nerfed mechanics.
I don't see why we can't try that? Because that would make too much sense ? Because everyone suggested that so they need to show there's a captain on the boat ? I hope this gets tested quick. It's almost like SC2 devs don't want to copy things directly from the community's suggestions, so they always try to "spice" it up just a little bit, and end up missing the point.
Couldn't have said it better. They don't need to twist things all the time to have us convinced they're the one leading the development.
|
Auto cast is not the way to go. Blizzard messed this one up a lot.
I'd rather they experiment with different mining speed for different workers instead of adding another auto-cast feature.
|
I wholeheartedly prefer the macro mechanics to be removed entirely. The slightly slower pace of the game makes for the decision making on the larger number of units now in the game to be made more thoroughly. Better decisions, better games for players and spectators.
|
Don't mind the autocast but as a design it's ugly. It feels like they need to fix economy pace, aren't given enough time before LoTV release so they solve it by having the autocast option.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 30 2015 00:05 gh0st wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 23:54 BluemoonSC wrote:
so, to be clear..they mean that they are going to go through with the adept cost at 75/50? No they are not. They never implemented it publicly, but I guess they tested the adept nerf internally and didn't like it. Which is absurd because it plainly needs some nerf, otherwise PvT will be utterly broken. They must address adepts or prisms. Bringing back a nerfed mule won't fix it.
I think it will alleviate it at the very least. More minerals, more production.
On August 30 2015 00:11 ZeromuS wrote:
No auto cast but nerfed mechanics.
I don't see why we can't try that? If they are all nerfed - then they have less impact if you miss them. If they are forced to be clicked, then players can make use of it.
I really want to hear this korean feedback. I wonder if they dislike the macro clicks or dislike the amount of micro clicks instead,
That might be the next iteration of the changes.
From what I understand from all of the stuff blizzard and people invited to the summit are saying that Koreans felt there were a ton of micro clicks, and not enough apm to devote to macro without dumping apm via multiple mules and banking chrono. Zergs definitely had a tough time injecting bc of all of the harassment options the other races have with the increased pace of the game.
|
Well, we had Archon Mode. Now there's single player Archon Mode!
|
Dunno, tbh I find the chrono autocast quite elegant. It makes scouting easier for other races, I can still shift from economic mode to production mode and I dont need to spam chrono all 20 seconds on my stargate or whatever. It's less extreme now (can't just bunker energy and push all 4 gates at the same time) and I'm not sure if I like that, but that is an indirect nerf to Protoss warp-in aggression (not the one i wanted but whatever).
I like the mule radius change as well, mb they should buff orbital flight speed to make it viable. Flying industrial sector sounds somewhat cool and back to the time where terrans had some steampunk elements.
I agree that queen auto-inject is redundant though. That would have needed a bigger rebalancing, something along the lines of making queens a lot cheaper, take inject away and let hatches spawn larvae faster.
Tbh I never was a big fan of the macro mechanics, they dont add decisions but only apm-checks. It's boring for viewers and boring for players as well.
|
To me it feels like they just roll the dice on what to change without thinking about it at all and then revert most of the stuff when the community is angry(for a reason).
For example that Zealot charge thing. Do you seriously need to internally test it in actual fights to determine it's too strong? You just need to use your eyes and look at the 3 and the 0 to figure out it's overpowered, no testing needed.
Disappointed with the macro mechanic changes. I hate autocast.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
Yeah I think that they almost need to have queens with inject in some form bc otherwise the zerg design would need a complete overhaul. Every timing would need to be adjusted to account for the extra minerals they aren't required to spend, creep spread would be insane, and zergs would have queens as dedicated anti air since they wouldn't need to be next to a hatch if larva spawned more/faster from hatches.
On August 30 2015 01:52 Shikyo wrote:
To me it feels like they just roll the dice on what to change without thinking about it at all and then revert most of the stuff when the community is angry(for a reason).
For example that Zealot charge thing. Do you seriously need to internally test it in actual fights to determine it's too strong? You just need to use your eyes and look at the 3 and the 0 to figure out it's overpowered, no testing needed.
Disappointed with the macro mechanic changes. I hate autocast.
If you read the post, there was a bug that caused the dmg to not be applied in testing. They fixed the bug before the patch but didn't test the change to see if it was still an appropriate number. They owned up to their mistake, so I'm not sure whats up with the outrage.
|
On August 30 2015 01:46 Hier wrote:
Well, we had Archon Mode. Now there's single player Archon Mode!
a ladder of lone individual players versus 2-player archons would be a blast.
i play 2v1s with my friends who usually only play the campaign or skirmish and its great fun.
|
The thing with this community is that most of the people just dont like change and then gives it no chance at all and regardless of the outcome they overlook the bads and just says negative things about it..
|
The problem with making injects autocast is that it makes zerg production far easier than that of the other races. Protoss and terran have to constantly produce units from their production facilities while zerg could stack larvae and then make a lot of units at once.
So zerg other than the other races doesn't have to make units constantly but to balance that out they had to constantly hit injects.
Making inject autocast removes that burden from zerg players which completely automates their production.
They don't have to worry about hitting production/inject cycles and can just make all units as once.
What that means is the only thing zerg has to worry about is making workers constantly the rest is automatic.
In other words: a gold/ platin zerg can max out at the same time as soO.
|
On August 30 2015 02:13 SiorasSC wrote:
The thing with this community is that most of the people just dont like change and then gives it no chance at all and regardless of the outcome they overlook the bads and just says negative things about it..
it'd help if more people played a different style of RTS like say C&C or CoH.
|
Protoss benefits the most from these mechanics. Zerg already had enough larvae - queens nerfed or not it was irrelevant. Considering the boost the other races get, this is a nerf to the dominance of zerg. It does bring back early pools a little but - but not really much. The patch will be more of an appeasement to Terrans, it doesn't give them much edge over the opponents, just gives them reminiscence for the MULE.
Protoss can boost out specific units and control the direction of the game, so it's very good.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 30 2015 02:15 Charoisaur wrote:
The problem with making injects autocast is that it makes zerg production far easier than that of the other races. Protoss and terran have to constantly produce units from their production facilities while zerg could stack larvae and then make a lot of units at once.
So zerg other than the other races doesn't have to make units constantly but to balance that out they had to constantly hit injects.
Making inject autocast removes that burden from zerg players which completely automates their production.
They don't have to worry about hitting production/inject cycles and can just make all units as once.
What that means is the only thing zerg has to worry about is making workers constantly the rest is automatic.
In other words: a gold/ platin zerg can max out at the same time as soO.
this isn't exactly true. zerg have to produce units constantly as well, due to the fact that if you don't spend all of your larva, especially early, you don't get the 3 naturally produced larva from the hatchery. banking larva only benefits zergs later on in the game when they're already maxed.
zerg production is by no means automated, you still have to do as much as a terran and protoss player, except now, you have to worry much less about hitting injects when you're dealing with multi pronged aggression and then in addition, spread creep, constantly scout, spread your overlords, etc. to say that a gold or platinum player will have a similar max out time as soO is blatantly exaggerating because there is much more to zerg macro than injecting hatcheries. that would be comparing the fact that chronoboost can be cast on your twilight council constantly to saying that protoss players can now hit the same timings as a player like naniwa who would always manually cast chrono the moment it wore off on the TC. there's so much more to macro than pressing buttons and THAT is what blizzard is trying to highlight with these changes.
knowing when to drone or when to produce units is something that a gold, plat, diamond, or even masters player could never compare to when you look at players like soO. anyone that has spent significant time playing zerg knows what it's like to drone up a new expansion only to have the other player's army move out exactly as you spend all of your larva. unlike terran, we can't get those units back. unlike protoss, we can't chrono our gateways or our robos to make extra units come out faster or cast a spell that makes pushing into an under-sized army more risky.
|
I liked original changes, why this stupid autocast for everyone. I guess I will not be buying Lotv afterall but switching to Act of Aggression. That game not have MBS
|
On August 29 2015 23:28 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I must be one of a kind, but I actually am a big fan of players that won because "they just had a bit more of everything". When Bomber was great he actually maxed out before anyone on the planet while harassing and keeping on upgrades and could just a-move his way through his opponents. Watching soO's queen energy during some of his GSL runs was fascinating.
It seems most people see little to no merit in that kind of feats because they're not spectacular, while everyone is in awe when PartinG keeps picking up an immortal in a warp prism to rack up 80 kills. I've never been impressed the slightest by such "feats". If he does that in a two base all-in, he doesn't have any eco to manage, since he has walled his natural ramp he doesn't have to worry about a counter-attack... So he only has one task to execute, and of course he does it flawlessly, but as much as I can understand people loving it and finding it spectacular, I always thought that was one-dimensional and not very interesting. Multitask is interesting, micro is just one task and I've always thought the warp prism would have far too much micro potential in LotV to not create unstoppable 2 bases all-ins.
So yeah, I'd call myself a player who favors macro over micro. But is it shocking ? I think Starcraft games are more about macro, and Warcraft games more about micro. So shouldn't it be this way ?
This is why when I read that automated macro mechanics will be good for newer players because they make the game more accessible, I'm as shocked as you would be if I said I think automated marine splits would be good because it would allow players to focus on their macro, make the game more accessible and help bio that struggles in LotV. People who are really good at splitting and want to focus on that can still deactivate autosplit, huh ?
Don't get me wrong, I agree macro mechanics are a problem. But I'd favor a nerf of them to make them less important so less punishing to miss for newer players, over that really inelegant automation. So I'll be vocal against these changes because I think they're really bad and hurt the game at its core for many reasons.
Don't worry, you are not. I always like, as Zerg, when you had to balance between micro and injections, knowing when is the right time to do it, watching different play style as a function of how the professional zerg balance between the two. Like a Life/Leenock or even Stephano at its prime which puts much more emphasis on the control of the army, setting up a lots of banelings traps that require your constant attention, than DRG/Soo which had incredible injects/creep spread.
I hate every-autocast stuff and I don't want to play this kind of game at all.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
Server is lagging some
kiwikaki + drewbie spamming chat 10 messages per second to try to make people drop (both on stream and to my team when we matched against them)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/AEEsz4t.png)
|
The APM mechanics are unchanged from the current patch.
|
On August 30 2015 04:27 crazedrat wrote:
The APM mechanics are unchanged from the current patch.
Its just a community update for now.
|
Great to see you guys are working on it. Difficult to be patient but I will attempt. I guess we will just have to move on and accept the other races as autocast
|
For the record, I'm not a fan of the auto cast all around.
I think some of the arguments for it make sense.
What I am a fan of is making the strategic choice to do one thing or another. For example, spread creep early game or inject is an impactful choice on strategy.
Autocast mules don't offer any strategic choice, so I'm not a fan (I get the argument is for an early eco boost, but is it really that bad for terran right now? It doesn't seem so to me, but I could be wrong).
Adding auto cast to protoss gives them very legitimate strategic choices, so it is a very cool option for them, but imo its really just for them and I'm not a fan of that either.
Overall I'm not a fan of this patch. Seems like, "Lets take this thing away... a couple weeks later, let's now put it back."
Idk, I wasn't a fan of removing macro mechanics and I haven't really played with it enough to have a good opinion on the subject, but I would like to see people have more time with it before we half-revert.
|
I feel like making these things automated is taking the worst thing of both worlds.
I like how removing the mechanics affected the overall feel of the game (harass was to strong but that was what they should have tweeked) and I liked the "skill check" the mechanics gave.
But now we don't have the skill check and they will still be there affecting game.
I starting to find it pretty hilarious how different my and blizzards views are :p
|
Zerg actually needed the autocast. Terran could have an ability to turn on and off autocast, and have MULES use energy. So c hoose whether to have it auto calldown or manually save up for scan energy and so on.
|
On August 30 2015 05:48 Gullis wrote:
I feel like making these things automated is taking the worst thing of both worlds.
Kinda. Lower players will still feel frustrated because they won't be able to cope with the "mindless clicks" needed to spread creep or to switch the chronoboosts, while hardcore players will probably don't like the change because it takes away strategic depth and skill differentiation possibilities.
I'll say it again, I was fine with the idea of balancing around a total removal, a lot more than I am with the current build. And yeah, I hate the warpgate change.
|
Now there is so little to do in the base for zerg making it the easiest race to play by far.
I think overlords should be made from drones instead. That way zerg have to go back to the base and plop down an overlord egg (same size as pylon/supplydepot) like terran/protoss does.
|
|
|
I did not enjoy doing injects, but I understood why it was in the game. While I found both mules and chrono good/fun.
I think they should just keep the old mule/inject/chrono and keep this auto cast nonsense out of the game.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
man, i really wish zvz didn't suck so much ass right now
|
just revert to before hte macro changes.... plzzz
|
I think the colossus needs the same turret change as tanks and immortals. It's always been so bad at fighting while moving away which makes it need units in front of it at all times. I think it would be a step towards making it less of a blob-army unit.
|
I don't know, I think I have been following different changes than everybody.
All I hear is casuals this and pros that, back when DKim was in gamescom I really liked his idea (I still do btw) back then he said since LotV is a much harder and faster game than HotS (still is) he wanted to make changes to switch the focus from macro to micro and control, since LotV already had more difficulties since you had to expand earlier, defend more bases sooner and deal with more harras at all time he wanted to make things easier in some aspect and other to be harder so the same level of skill is needed in HotS but with a different focus.
So I don't understand if the people that talk about casual and how pros would hate these changes either don't read/listen what DK says or if I'm the only odd one that got the message backwards.
|
This thread is full of hatred for autocast. Why? No one says. Probably because it gives the impression of dumbing down the game (except for auto-cast medivac heals and zealoat charge, of course!), even though it doesn't, it forces your clicks to be spent on more productive things and if you don't, you'll probably lose.
So here's a suggestion.
Make it like widow mine: it's auto-cast in practice, but the icon isn't auto-cast, it's a passive. Happy?
Or make the Orbital give a passive buff on SCVs in it's radius to mine faster. As for chrono, that needs to be removed and changed again, the new version is harder to use optimally than the old.
|
On August 30 2015 12:02 paralleluniverse wrote:
This thread is full of hatred for autocast. Why? No one says. Probably because it gives the impression of dumbing down the game (except for auto-cast medivac heals and zealoat charge, of course!), even though it doesn't, it forces your clicks to be spent on more productive things and if you don't, you'll probably lose.
So here's a suggestion.
Make it like widow mine: it's auto-cast in practice, but the icon isn't auto-cast, it's a passive. Happy?
Please if you wanna play a MOBA go play a MOBA. It's a genre in its own. We're talking about a RTS here, which involves actual "looking back at your base" and mechanical skills.
|
On August 30 2015 12:07 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2015 12:02 paralleluniverse wrote:
This thread is full of hatred for autocast. Why? No one says. Probably because it gives the impression of dumbing down the game (except for auto-cast medivac heals and zealoat charge, of course!), even though it doesn't, it forces your clicks to be spent on more productive things and if you don't, you'll probably lose.
So here's a suggestion.
Make it like widow mine: it's auto-cast in practice, but the icon isn't auto-cast, it's a passive. Happy? Please if you wanna play a MOBA go play a MOBA. It's a genre in its own. We're talking about a RTS here, which involves actual "looking back at your base" and mechanical skills.
False dilemma. LotV require as much mechanical skills as HotS. Just not mindless clicking on injects.
Why that logic, please remove production queues, I want to macro, not play a MOBA.
|
On August 29 2015 03:51 Tenks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 03:47 Qwyn wrote:On August 29 2015 03:45 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:43 Qwyn wrote:On August 29 2015 03:39 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:37 IntoTheheart wrote:
How would you guys feel if they just had cooldowns on MULE and Chrono, but got rid of the auto-cast? How would that solve the necessity to learn macro mechanic timings as a barrier of entry to SC2, though? What exactly is the problem here? You have to get better at using macro-mechanics, among many other different skills, to improve at the game? Why exactly is that a barrier? And why is it a bad thing? MULE and Chrono don't exactly take up much of a player's time, compared to inject. And I WANT inject to be manual. Good players pull further and further ahead with strong injects. Mediocre players can get by with decent injects and strong focus in other skills. It balances itself out. But for the people who want inject to not be manual, why not oblige them rather than homogenizing an entire facet of Zerg play so that there is no skill differential at all? Because no one has fun dropping MULE, CB'ing a forge or injecting larvae. It is an artificial and unnecessary chore. You want to reduce everything down to an unnecessary chore? Oh look this argument is back from when they first said they're removing the mechanics. While we're at it lets also get rid of MBS and infinite select. Oh yeah and smart cast. Rally points on workers seem pretty silly because I want to go back to my base everytime a unit is created to move it as well. Oh yeah these are all things the community was up in arms about in SC2 WoL beta as well because it was dumbing down the game as well.
both smartcast and unlimited selection are really hurting the game since its inception. Especially smartcast.
|
Thank God they realized how the charge damage is too strong, plz do something about it, blizzard
|
I guess I'm just shocked that they gave up so quickly on removing the macro mechanics. I was expecting they'd rebalance the game around the change, but it's like they said nah that's too hard, nevermind. I'm a little disappointed because I felt like removing the macro mechanics was a good direction.
|
On August 30 2015 12:40 BaronVonOwn wrote:
I guess I'm just shocked that they gave up so quickly on removing the macro mechanics. I was expecting they'd rebalance the game around the change, but it's like they said nah that's too hard, nevermind. I'm a little disappointed because I felt like removing the macro mechanics was a good direction.
You're on your own in that train of thought. Removing the macro mechanics is not good for the game in any sense. It just lowers the skill ceiling.
Without macro mechanics it'd be way harder to discern the difference between Jaedong and your average top 8 masters hero.
|
On August 30 2015 12:58 kenzy_5g wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2015 12:40 BaronVonOwn wrote:
I guess I'm just shocked that they gave up so quickly on removing the macro mechanics. I was expecting they'd rebalance the game around the change, but it's like they said nah that's too hard, nevermind. I'm a little disappointed because I felt like removing the macro mechanics was a good direction. You're on your own in that train of thought. Removing the macro mechanics is not good for the game in any sense. It just lowers the skill ceiling. Without macro mechanics it'd be way harder to discern the difference between Jaedong and your average top 8 masters hero.
I have the feeling the people who say this has not watch a single LotV game, RBBG is on right!! go look at it!! you'll see that even without macro boosters theres so much stuff to do its hard even for 2 persons to do it all.
|
On August 30 2015 13:22 Lexender wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2015 12:58 kenzy_5g wrote:On August 30 2015 12:40 BaronVonOwn wrote:
I guess I'm just shocked that they gave up so quickly on removing the macro mechanics. I was expecting they'd rebalance the game around the change, but it's like they said nah that's too hard, nevermind. I'm a little disappointed because I felt like removing the macro mechanics was a good direction. You're on your own in that train of thought. Removing the macro mechanics is not good for the game in any sense. It just lowers the skill ceiling. Without macro mechanics it'd be way harder to discern the difference between Jaedong and your average top 8 masters hero. I have the feeling the people who say this has not watch a single LotV game, RBBG is on right!! go look at it!! you'll see that even without macro boosters theres so much stuff to do its hard even for 2 persons to do it all.
That's because Blizzard has turned the game into CuntCraft. Every unit has an ability and for some reason they're really insistent on making the game micro-oriented and based around flashy spells.
Fun to watch? Maybe. Fun to play (against)? Hell no. And i'm right; find me one person who says playing vs Adepts is fun.
|
On August 30 2015 12:11 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2015 12:07 JackONeill wrote:On August 30 2015 12:02 paralleluniverse wrote:
This thread is full of hatred for autocast. Why? No one says. Probably because it gives the impression of dumbing down the game (except for auto-cast medivac heals and zealoat charge, of course!), even though it doesn't, it forces your clicks to be spent on more productive things and if you don't, you'll probably lose.
So here's a suggestion.
Make it like widow mine: it's auto-cast in practice, but the icon isn't auto-cast, it's a passive. Happy? Please if you wanna play a MOBA go play a MOBA. It's a genre in its own. We're talking about a RTS here, which involves actual "looking back at your base" and mechanical skills. False dilemma. LotV require as much mechanical skills as HotS. Just not mindless clicking on injects. Why that logic, please remove production queues, I want to macro, not play a MOBA.
You call it "mindless clicking" but that is exactly what defines an RTS. There are certain repetitive tasks you just have to do and how well someone does it separates the good players from the worse players.
it's the same with constantly building workers and supply depots. Is that "mindless" and should be removed too?
If you want a game without "mindless clicking" play a MOBA.
|
On August 30 2015 13:32 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2015 12:11 paralleluniverse wrote:On August 30 2015 12:07 JackONeill wrote:On August 30 2015 12:02 paralleluniverse wrote:
This thread is full of hatred for autocast. Why? No one says. Probably because it gives the impression of dumbing down the game (except for auto-cast medivac heals and zealoat charge, of course!), even though it doesn't, it forces your clicks to be spent on more productive things and if you don't, you'll probably lose.
So here's a suggestion.
Make it like widow mine: it's auto-cast in practice, but the icon isn't auto-cast, it's a passive. Happy? Please if you wanna play a MOBA go play a MOBA. It's a genre in its own. We're talking about a RTS here, which involves actual "looking back at your base" and mechanical skills. False dilemma. LotV require as much mechanical skills as HotS. Just not mindless clicking on injects. Why that logic, please remove production queues, I want to macro, not play a MOBA. You call it "mindless clicking" but that is exactly what defines an RTS. There are certain repetitive tasks you just have to do and how well someone does it separates the good players from the worse players. it's the same with constantly building workers and supply depots. Is that "mindless" and should be removed too? If you want a game without "mindless clicking" play a MOBA.
I concur. That guys a moron and insulted Brood War considering BW was 90% "mindless" clicks according to his definition of what constitutes as mindless.
|
lol about mindless clicks. My god... every is a mindless click at some extent, the game should read my mind and execute everything I want without me actually playing the game.
It is like "I will put the AI to play Macro for me" then you watch the game as a replay while eating cookies.
I can't believe people think macro is producing units (and they also wanted to try auto-build- units) and microing like a MOBA.
At this moment a MOBA feel more like a RTS than LotV will look if the Dev Team continue to push their goal to destroy it
|
On August 30 2015 12:58 kenzy_5g wrote:
You're on your own in that train of thought. Removing the macro mechanics is not good for the game in any sense. It just lowers the skill ceiling.
Without macro mechanics it'd be way harder to discern the difference between Jaedong and your average top 8 masters hero.
hahahaha, Jaedong does not need SC2 macro mechanics to distinguish himself from other players. See: his entire Brood War career. Also worrying about how a change will affect the pro/esports scene is basically the worst motivation ever.
|
The "new" Protoss macro (endless CB) will be much more complicated to handle than the old one. Maybe to complicate to balance too.
|
Oh my God. A community update I universally approve of and agree with!
So I really hope they do something with the Tempest so it doesn't just do what it did in HOTS: ie negate air massive units all together. Combining it with the new Carriers is still hard to fight against and I'd really love it if we had a game where massive units actually mattered outside of being too powerful to fight, or massively easy to kill. I still feel like we might as well get rid of them and replace them with units that will actually work.
|
Auto-mechanics don't sound so bad, their ideas are quite elegant. But I still have a hard time to see why Zerg isn't considered wayyyyyy easier to play than before...
|
On August 30 2015 15:53 ZenithM wrote:
Auto-mechanics don't sound so bad, their ideas are quite elegant. But I still have a hard time to see why Zerg isn't considered wayyyyyy easier to play than before...
I would assume that this is like the only thing everyone agrees on?
Mid master Z in hots who is bored out of his mind when playing ZvZ in lotv. It's better in mus where its more important to spread creep, but not gonna lie.. The macro for Z has gone from 'quite hard \ possibly hardest' to 'easiest' by a landslide.
The redeeming factor would be that getting units or drones is a consideration that can be hard to master and get right while others generally pump out units relatively consistently.
|
The problem is, Blizz compromises everything; they want to satisfy all the people here, which makes the game extremely shoddy.
And I think this is the moment when Blizz should make a decisive choice, even though we`re on beta. Now we have 2 months at best cause detail adjustment will take a month or two at least. I mean, overall picture of the game(things like economy and fundamental macro) should be drawn by now, and it seems Blizz is evading the issue.
Please, do or do not. you can`t try forever.
|
On August 30 2015 15:53 ZenithM wrote:
Auto-mechanics don't sound so bad, their ideas are quite elegant. But I still have a hard time to see why Zerg isn't considered wayyyyyy easier to play than before...
Because there is nothing they can do about it, so they pretend the problem doesn't exist.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
This thread is full of hatred for autocast. Why? No one says.
I strongly prefer units being complex in other ways than every unit having a spell that's set to autocast that you can take further control of; there's a focus on adding more and more abilities to make micro a thing rather than improving the base engine to let it naturally happen
|
I don't get why they just remove mule and Chrono while keeping the queen and inject. It's far more than just a macro chore. if you want to dumb down the race-uniquenss and macro game....why not Auto-Spawn units? And every race gets ~3 diffrent units only.
From a Terran view:
- can calldown Mule for Extra income, emergency repair for burning buildings and units (anywhere), Trigger banelings, divert Tanks, Mines or even colossi shots.
- has to balance Scan/mules
- worker production at best as fast as protoss, but workers neeed to spend time to build stuff instead of just warp in, if you make a OC from CC, you loose time to build workers while Protoss happily keeps making probes. In A base Trade situation a probe can rebuild a whole base in under one minute. Terran has to have scvs, and only can build one building at a time.
- Terran has to build production buildings. The production must resemble and balance the income in gas/minerals and the compostion you want to go for. The longer the game goes, terran has to add production buildings. For the effect of chrono boost, terran can use Reactors and switch add ons.
Inject/Queen
- zerg just makes hatcherys and queens to produce anything
- injecting equals adding production, since what you actually do is making larvae
- yes its pretty mindless. The More Larvae the better, and since queens are pretty good at defending now, equal to the mothership it's not like you dont have enough of them to creep and inject. There is no decisionmaking in injecting. The only skill is not to forget it.
Blizzard wants to make "good play" visible. That means that most things have to be an active decision, not at all autocast.
Protoss/Chronoboost
- Perfect chronoboost execution can make a difference
- Chronoboost emergency units, chronoboost upgrades, chronoboost gateways to ALL-In, constant boost of Big-Ass units...
- It's a decision, not as hard as mule/scan but still a decision, to boost either economy/upgrades.
- It's a tell for the opponent for the reasons above
TL;DR
Mules != Chrono != Inject.
By removing them you take a big part out of every race uniqueness without replacing it. If the goal is to make the pace of the game slower.....well dont start with 12 workers. If its to promote "good plays" by making them visible...make injecting a HARD decision instead of a "the more the better" chore,
e.g. Make the Queen be either able to attack or to use spells by giving them a time consuming transformation.
|
Make the queen autocast larva at 50 energy but let the good zerg inject directly at 25; so we have a skill part for the zerg who actually inject well and a automated cast for help the zerg who struggle with that.
Good player and low player can enjoy that, i dont see why a diamond player can have the same macro than soo.
|
Oh wow, the starcraft 2 subreddit seems way more reasonable then here. It's embarrasing reading all these reactions. Geez.
From a gameplay design point of view I find the chronoboost and mule changes very interesting. I like the chronoboost one in particular as it seems quite elegant. It also remains important throughout the game where it's important that you don't forget switching the chronoboost off a forge or another building when you're done chronoboosting the upgrade/unit.
I wonder if in the super late game we'll see like a ton of Nexusses and have everything under chronoboost all the time. Probably too costly.
Mule change is good and prevents the dumb insta-comback factor that were mass mules.
I'm not sold in the Zerg changes yet, and hope they come up with something more creative that fits the Zerg race more.
|
Auto-chronoboost is the best designed "auto-macro-mechanics" they proposed imo. It's way less intensive APM-wise, but still requires kind of the same decision making as before (with a bit less granularity for builds but that's fine). It's really a neat idea if they want to stick with removing macro mechanics.
I'm a bit more skeptical about auto-mule. I think they should find something else, I don't find it elegant that an economy booster falls down from the sky automatically with no choice involved (now that it's separated from scan/supply drop energy). If Terran really needs the boost, might as well reduce cost or timings here and there instead of re-adding mules.
Auto-inject I'm really against altogether. It's like they don't realize that Zerg macro effort is like 95% injects, 5% unit production. Remove injects and Zerg becomes too APM friendly. If they really decide to do that, they should make manual injecting marginally more efficient so that at least high level players can move their fingers to try to macro optimally.
Overall, I think Blizzard had other things to focus on than removing macro mechanics, I don't even feel like the community was bringing that up very often...
|
I would love to have more base mechanics, if it weren't for all the insane abilites so many untis have. Take a look at your base in the wrong second, BOOM, you lost 20-30% of your army, and you're limping from here on out.
In its current state of units, I welcome stripping down the stuff to do at base, making it auto so I can be more with my army. Yes its not RTS, maybe a mix with MOBA.
|
On August 30 2015 18:23 Seiniyta wrote:
Oh wow, the starcraft 2 subreddit seems way more reasonable then here. It's embarrasing reading all these reactions. Geez.
From a gameplay design point of view I find the chronoboost and mule changes very interesting. I like the chronoboost one in particular as it seems quite elegant. It also remains important throughout the game where it's important that you don't forget switching the chronoboost off a forge or another building when you're done chronoboosting the upgrade/unit.
I wonder if in the super late game we'll see like a ton of Nexusses and have everything under chronoboost all the time. Probably too costly.
Mule change is good and prevents the dumb insta-comback factor that were mass mules.
I'm not sold in the Zerg changes yet, and hope they come up with something more creative that fits the Zerg race more.
Every 5 posts someone says: "wow the reactions here are soooooooo bad" or "people here are just raging, whatever blizzard does nobody is ever satisfied".
First of all, with all the complaining about shitposts in this thread, where are the shitposts? Yeah, there might be 4 or 5 people who write one dismissive sentence and leave it at that. Granted, these people dont contribute to discussion. All the other posts however are simply people stating their opinion and arguments to support it. The only actual shitposting Ive seen is someone complaining about the other posts being so bad.
The overall feeling in this thread is, dare I say, negative. The idea of this thread being full of bad posts, simply because they are negative (yet reasonable and well mostly structured) is absolutely ludicrous.
Secondly, to the several people saying that people always complain no matter what blizz does, here comes a knowledge bomb: There is actually more than one person on the internet. The person giving negative feedback after one patch is not necessarily one of the people giving negative feedback after another patch. After the last patch I would actually say the majority of reactions were positive, and many people weary of blizzards idiocy - me included - actually turned around and said: "wow, finally blizzard makes a really big change, and it could actually lead somewhere". So the idea of teamliquid being full of people who will just be negative no matter what, is again, ludicrous.
When starcraft 2 came out I was absolutely in love with it. I couldnt stop playing it, I couldnt stop thinking about it. Just fantasizing about the great things sc2 could achieve, it had real potential. Eventually though, it became clear blizzard actually had no fucking idea what to do with it. The complete incompetence which has been the driving factor behind almost every major design decision after sc2 came out is mind baffling. Blizzard wants to do their own thing.They want sc2 to be a succesful eSport, and they dont want it to be like broodwar. Yet they have no idea how. Everything weve seen upsofar, is blizzard trying some 'unique' new design, which is usually something copied out of bw, but changed for the worse. The new thing fails, they concede to the complaints, and implement the same thing, but a little more like bw. And in the end, it just doesnt work. Their seemingly complete denial of all the fundamental flaws in the engine is a whole other question entirely.
Now, the last patch rolled along and it finally, finally shows a glimpse of sanity. They scrap the shitty race specific macro mechanics which have plagued this game for so long. And its such a drastic change. Who could have even predicted they would actually dare to almost completely remove such longstanding mechanics. It could have been something amazing. But of course, it was too good to be true. They realize they have no idea how to adapt the game to these big changes, so they pussy out. They just add the shite back in, but this time with autocast. Jolly times! Sc2's development process is a travesty.
|
Its easy because they have no time to balance the game withouth macro mechanics... release this year? its about the time and the money... hate it ;/
|
On August 30 2015 19:47 Schakal111 wrote:
Its easy because they have no time to balance the game withouth macro mechanics... release this year? its about the time and the money... hate it ;/
This, and also the fact that they seem to shy out of all the big changes until the last moment, at which time they give the "oops we have no time to fix this properly", and they never seem to actually roll them out when they would have the time. It's like them saying "look guys we're trying to fix things and would totally do it if we had enough time" but funny enough, all the revolutionary changes are too late and need to be reverted.
If they had made this change a year ago there would have been more than enough time to adapt.
|
On August 30 2015 12:11 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2015 12:07 JackONeill wrote:On August 30 2015 12:02 paralleluniverse wrote:
This thread is full of hatred for autocast. Why? No one says. Probably because it gives the impression of dumbing down the game (except for auto-cast medivac heals and zealoat charge, of course!), even though it doesn't, it forces your clicks to be spent on more productive things and if you don't, you'll probably lose.
So here's a suggestion.
Make it like widow mine: it's auto-cast in practice, but the icon isn't auto-cast, it's a passive. Happy? Please if you wanna play a MOBA go play a MOBA. It's a genre in its own. We're talking about a RTS here, which involves actual "looking back at your base" and mechanical skills. False dilemma. LotV require as much mechanical skills as HotS. Just not mindless clicking on injects. Why that logic, please remove production queues, I want to macro, not play a MOBA.
That's just taking what I'm saying to the absurd. LOTV doesn't require as much mechanical skill as HOTS, and the mecanical requirements in HOTS are already very low.
RTS skill is about doing a lot of things in a restricted period of time. So yeah, if you make everything automatic, it becomes a MOBA. If you make almost everything manual, it's BW.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
That's just taking what I'm saying to the absurd. LOTV doesn't require as much mechanical skill as HOTS, and the mecanical requirements in HOTS are already very low.
Are you actually playing LOTV? Having to expand immediately (every race has suddenly become zerg now unless doing a crazy all in) and then keep expanding is actually a huge tax on you. Harass is more important than ever, so harassing and defending harass at the same time is taxing as well. Being on either side of zerg creep spread is very demanding and they're talking about tuning it up so it spreads even faster but recedes faster after you kill tumors
|
Such kind of macro mechanics are very specific to sc2.
People seem to forget that there are many more macro mechanics such as bulding units and buildings.
I really like that they focus more on the important parts of the game, which are more RTS like than those removed or changed macro mechanics.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
There are way too many people in this thread that either don't play zerg or watch too much Avilo on his smurf.
|
People forget to that Zerg macro is suppose to be Apm friendly. That is the point of the race, the design in and of itself is the most simple one building produces everything. There is nothing wrong with Zerg macro bring easy the units should flood out and swarm. They can balance around that, but people that keep saying Zerg macro is easy without injects, that's the point! Let things like creep spread, harass defense, flanking, define good and bad zergs. Not clicking a queen every 20 seconds.
In response you can always strengthen features of the other races if Zerg is flooding to many units out. If you are telling me you want the game designed around the idea that people will miss injects therefore Zerg units and defense gets a buff then I think that is a dumb approach. It creates an inconsistent race because your success is purely dependent on injects and playing against that isn't fun either because you either get steamrolled by someone that doesn't miss injects or crush someone that misses them. It has made Zerg either way too strong or way too weak depending on the current patch we are on. These mechanics have made it harder to get more consistent gameplay.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
yep anyone that has actually played zerg knows that autoinject hurts them more now than it would hurt them if they missed their manual inject by 10 seconds. there is simply so much less larva to use these days, and that's the reason i lose most of my games lol.
|
On August 30 2015 22:11 FLuE wrote:
People forget to that Zerg macro is suppose to be Apm friendly. That is the point of the race, the design in and of itself is the most simple one building produces everything. There is nothing wrong with Zerg macro bring easy the units should flood out and swarm. They can balance around that, but people that keep saying Zerg macro is easy without injects, that's the point! Let things like creep spread, harass defense, flanking, define good and bad zergs. Not clicking a queen every 20 seconds.
In response you can always strengthen features of the other races if Zerg is flooding to many units out. If you are telling me you want the game designed around the idea that people will miss injects therefore Zerg units and defense gets a buff then I think that is a dumb approach. It creates an inconsistent race because your success is purely dependent on injects and playing against that isn't fun either because you either get steamrolled by someone that doesn't miss injects or crush someone that misses them. It has made Zerg either way too strong or way too weak depending on the current patch we are on. These mechanics have made it harder to get more consistent gameplay.
You are missing the point. The easy production mechanics of Zerg was balanced by the difficulty of keeping good inject through all the game. This difficulty forces Zerg to find the right equilibrium between setting up flanks and micro during the battle and keeping good injects. With automatic injects Zerg race is waaay too much macro friendly and thus you're losing this interesting part of the race, I can guarantee you that with automatics inject in HoTS and keeping everything else the same you would never see bio vs Zerg, as every terran would get demolished by even by much inferior zerg.
To me this autocast inject is 100% equivalent to building automatically units, and thus as stupid.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
how is producing units as a zerg player easier than producing units as a terran player?
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
yep anyone that has actually played zerg knows that autoinject hurts them more now than it would hurt them if they missed their manual inject by 10 seconds. there is simply so much less larva to use these days, and that's the reason i lose most of my games lol.
With 2 larvae, this is correct ESPECIALLY in the early stages of the game but with 3 returned from queen and autoinject, i think people (aside from the very very top) benefit a lot in the mid and lategame if the early game is balanced with the slightly lower larvae counts.
i really think this increase is a mistake and they should instead give the extra larvae from the hatchery itself rather than inject - they're just making queens very important for larvae again, to the point where half of your larvae comes from the queen - and we were finally stepping away from that.
how is producing units as a zerg player easier than producing units as a terran player?
A terran player has different buildings and addons that need to be balanced to make a composition and spend minerals/gas properly, everything also has different production times which means you have to add new ones to production queue at different times to product well.
Zerg does not have that as they don't produce from buildings, they unlock tech with them. Their larvae spawns at the same rate no matter what you're making, so production cycles for everything is the same. A lot of the difficulty from zerg macro (as opposed to terran and protoss) came from having to hit injects decently to play and balancing drones+units
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 30 2015 22:53 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +yep anyone that has actually played zerg knows that autoinject hurts them more now than it would hurt them if they missed their manual inject by 10 seconds. there is simply so much less larva to use these days, and that's the reason i lose most of my games lol. With 2 larvae, this is correct ESPECIALLY in the early stages of the game and at the very highest level of play (top 0.1% moreso than top 2-5%) but with 3 returned from queen and autoinject, i think people (aside from the very top) benefit a lot in the mid and lategame if the early game is balanced with the slightly lower larvae counts i really think this increase is a mistake and they should instead give the extra larvae from the hatchery itself rather than inject - they're just making queens very important for larvae again, to the point where half of your larvae comes from the queen - and we were finally stepping away from that.
its definitely clear that DK wants less larva in the game, but i think that even 4 natural larva from a hatchery (with maybe +2 from autoinject) is worse for the early game bc of the fact that you have to spend down your larva before queens come out or you're not gonna get anymore. being able to bank 3 larva knowing that you're still making a 4th larva is super shitty for something like zvz where your builds have to be on point so you can have the proper number of drones and still be able to produce your 6 lings for a rush build. or if you went pool first, having 8 lings attacking a protoss who went gate nexus could be game ending.
|
I like the shift in the game play, from the macro to micro, because micro is where the interesting part of SC2. SC2 is currently a game where results are hugely based on macro and such players spend alot of time grinding. With this shift, more focus can be placed on army movements and spell casting, real time strategic decision making.
Also the effort by blizzard to reduce the time taken for each game allows for more games.
Of course there are balance issues here and there, but I hope blizzard continues to move in this direction.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
being able to bank 3 larva knowing that you're still making a 4th larva is super shitty
I've always said since LOTV that i want more larvae per minute from the hatchery itself if they're talking about easier macro mechanics (and less from the queen) with the ability to store ~4-6 larvae and still generate them because 3 is a low limit especially if hatchery makes more
or if you went pool first, having 8 lings attacking a protoss who went gate nexus could be game ending.
It's actually not, in my experience. You can nexus super early, and though i've only been 12pooled once in 50 games it seems holdable with gate-gate-nexus-core or gate-gate-core-nexus adept. Not only holdable but protoss coming out well ahead, i think.
Depends on the rush distance on the map, but the trend is long enough distances. Buffing inject to 3 larvae and re-adding chrono boost in some form will help protoss more than zerg with such an opening, at least for the initial defense
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 30 2015 23:03 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +being able to bank 3 larva knowing that you're still making a 4th larva is super shitty I've always said since LOTV that i want more larvae per minute from the hatchery itself if they're talking about easier macro mechanics (and less from the queen) with the ability to store ~4-6 larvae and still generate them because 3 is a low limit especially if hatchery makes more
dunno, i think that the extra larva from the hatch would create some early game-breaking situations like the lings vs a gate-nexus i mentioned earlier.
it would definitely make queens more optional early on and i would always love more larva naturally spawning from the hatchery, but i don't think the trade off is good for the early game.
Show nested quote +or if you went pool first, having 8 lings attacking a protoss who went gate nexus could be game ending. It's actually not, in my experience. You can nexus super early, and though i've only been 12pooled once in 50 games it seems holdable with gate-gate-nexus-core or gate-gate-core-nexus adept. Not only holdable but protoss coming out well ahead, i think. Depends on the rush distance on the map, but the trend is long enough distances
ah, see im talking about the 1 gate expands, not the 2 gate + core vs a standard pool first.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
dunno, i think that the extra larva from the hatch would create some early game-breaking situations like the lings vs a gate-nexus i mentioned earlier.
vs 1 gate perhaps but 2 gate is very affordable, doesn't delay the nexus much and is way safer and can actually directly apply pressure to justify it no matter what zerg does. In the game i saw it, lings coming in forced a nexus cancel but it seemed defendable with 20 probes vs ~13 drones left over (and ~4 adepts rushing at the zerg at that point in the game)
|
SoCal8908 Posts
yep, see my edit. we were talking about 2 different protoss builds :D
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
gate-nex-core and gate-gate-nex-core are very similar
i'm not very sure how it plays out because nobody really does it on zerg side to us
|
On August 30 2015 22:53 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +how is producing units as a zerg player easier than producing units as a terran player? A terran player has different buildings and addons that need to be balanced to make a composition and spend minerals/gas properly, everything also has different production times which means you have to add new ones to production queue at different times to product well. Zerg does not have that as they don't produce from buildings, they unlock tech with them. Their larvae spawns at the same rate no matter what you're making, so production cycles for everything is the same. A lot of the difficulty from zerg macro (as opposed to terran and protoss) came from having to hit injects decently to play and balancing drones+units
I don't know man. The races are so different in production anyways. I don't know how one can say with a straight face that zerg is now obviously the easiest race to produce with, meanwhile Protoss probes can singlehandedly queue whole bases with nearly any pre or postplanning needed. It is what it is. Terran may have to switch back and add barracks and depots, but Zerg has to spread creep and overlords as well. The tech buildings aren't self-building and neither are the upgrades. Queens have to be sent to the right hatches, or produced at the right hatches, meanwhile OCs and addons can be upgraded without looking back, same goes for warpgate transformations. There is lots of macro work to do for all races. The game mechanics aren't equal and where one race might get an advantage, it loses it somewhere else if the game is balanced and that just means it is OK as it is.
The whole "issue" what you exactly have to do and how to perform it is so deeply rooted in the asymetric design aspect of the races that in my opinion it is moot to discuss this isolated from the overall game balance.
We might be able to see that Zerg becomes too strong with the changes, but saying that is because zerg has become too easy when the whole game is balanced around mechanical limits is not really a way to describe such an issue.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
i can tell you from experience you don't want to go gate-nexus-core vs a zerg that wants to lift lings in your base. though that will be a thing of the past soon. not gonna lie, im gonna miss actually being able to cause dmg to a greedy player with a wall off
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
i can tell you from experience you don't want to go gate-nexus-core vs a zerg that wants to lift lings in your base
Ah nobody has done that to us either
hatch lifting is silly IMO.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 30 2015 23:28 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +i can tell you from experience you don't want to go gate-nexus-core vs a zerg that wants to lift lings in your base Ah nobody has done that to us either hatch lifting is silly IMO.
yeah it can be brutal if you're playing greedy, but idk. it was nice to have a way to get some dmg done to a greedy player instead of banging your head against his front door after he's had time to take advantage of the greed.
i suppose when mules and chrono were a thing it was fine, but now, losing those probes/scvs could be a disaster. maybe its not as fair as i thought with the current state of the beta
|
On August 30 2015 23:26 BluemoonSC wrote:i can tell you from experience you don't want to go gate-nexus-core vs a zerg that wants to lift lings in your base. though that will be a thing of the past soon. not gonna lie, im gonna miss actually being able to cause dmg to a greedy player with a wall off
Haha. Yeah, as much as I agree with the drops being a goner, I will be a very sad player when I have to play against bullshit forge openings again which is the exact same thing as a gateway opening, just with an easy win condition and more "sit-and-wait" type of gameplay.
I honestly feel a bit pissed at blizzard that they keep on nerfing all early aggressive tools for zerg again, meanwhile no word about adepts, no word about liberators, oracles and reapers even got buffs.
I mean it's bullshit, either they go with the "we don't want to limit people to opening/defending in X way" (which they seem to apply to every zerg strategy they have introduced and nerfed again), or they go with "we are so excited that players have started to adapt and seem to be getting better results against this new strategy" (what they seem to apply to every strategy zerg is struggling with for a while). I'm very much in favor of the first, but please be consistent in both ways.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
It's impossible not to play "greedy" in LOTV, you have the money for nexus before your gateway is even done
I honestly feel a bit pissed at blizzard that they keep on nerfing all early aggressive tools for zerg again, meanwhile no word about adepts
They actually said that they were being cautious not to overnerf adepts after the huge warpgate nerf made them less useful for killing your opponent.
The prism is obviously messed up with the ability to warp twice as fast as in HOTS and 6 range pickup and i think that's more of the problem than the adept itself.
Also protoss has no way to deal with adepts in the early game (aside from adept vs adept), but that's because zealots and sentries can't stand up to them in any capacity and stalkers are completely terrible against light units (coming out later, costing more than 3 marines yet having similar DPS to one)
Immortals are also REALLY BAD at the moment, most scenarios where i would have previously built immortals are now defaulting to void rays; even defending a blink stalker all in. You'll have a base with 3 gates, a robo and a stargate and actually choose to make adept/voidray instead of immortals.
I don't see drop being put to lair tech as removing that much early agression for zerg - it was kinda silly existing in any form at the 1 minute mark in a game. It's very cheap.
|
On August 30 2015 20:53 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +That's just taking what I'm saying to the absurd. LOTV doesn't require as much mechanical skill as HOTS, and the mecanical requirements in HOTS are already very low. Are you actually playing LOTV? Having to expand immediately (every race has suddenly become zerg now unless doing a crazy all in) and then keep expanding is actually a huge tax on you. Harass is more important than ever, so harassing and defending harass at the same time is taxing as well. Being on either side of zerg creep spread is very demanding and they're talking about tuning it up so it spreads even faster but recedes faster after you kill tumors
What? How the heck is expanding faster mechanically more difficult?
And yeah harass is more intense in LOTV. But that means that to harass effectively you need go mechanics, and the defender must have good mechanics. If you harass while forgetting to chrono/inject/land addons, you end up behind the enemy if he decently countered the harass. That's what SC2 is : easy to learn, difficult to master, and until masters level, mechanics will differentiate the players.
Dumbing down the game won't bring in new players. When you play starcraft, you start with the campaign, then watch streams of professional players that inspire you with the quality and complexity of their play. If I can inject as well as Life right off the bat, what's the point of trying to improve my skills? What's the point of actually train on the ladder?
We'll just end up with a simplified game that people watch on streams, but don't play in the hope to get better.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
the problem for me is that zergs have to put up with a greedy opening without taking a huge hit to mid-late game economy, but the other races have tools to punish a greedy opening without a huge hit to mid-late game economy.
like i don't want to have to use a ravager roach push off 2 base in order to deal some form of dmg to the other player. dunno.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
What? How the heck is expanding faster mechanically more difficult?
You need a 4'th-5'th base at the time where you'd play with three in WOL/HOTS because your main and nat which you drop like 90 seconds into the game are both half mined out. More buildings are more mechanically demanding
|
On August 30 2015 23:36 Cyro wrote:It's impossible not to play "greedy" in LOTV, you have the money for nexus before your gateway is even done Show nested quote +I honestly feel a bit pissed at blizzard that they keep on nerfing all early aggressive tools for zerg again, meanwhile no word about adepts They actually said that they were being cautious not to overnerf adepts after the huge warpgate nerf made them less useful for killing your opponent. The prism is obviously messed up with the ability to warp twice as fast as in HOTS and 6 range pickup and i think that's more of the problem than the adept itself. Also protoss has no way to deal with adepts in the early game (aside from adept vs adept), but that's because zealots and sentries can't stand up to them in any capacity and stalkers are completely terrible against light units (coming out later, costing more than 3 marines yet having similar DPS to one) Immortals are also REALLY BAD at the moment, most scenarios where i would have previously built immortals are now defaulting to void rays; even defending a blink stalker all in. You'll have a base with 3 gates, a robo and a stargate and actually choose to make adept/voidray instead of immortals. I don't see drop being put to lair tech as removing that much early agression for zerg - it was kinda silly existing in any form at the 1 minute mark in a game. It's very cheap.
Well, I think adepts being able to tunnel through blocks is just as silly. You put two queens on your ramp and evacuate your drones from your natural for some time? Doesn't matter, Protoss still gets into your base. It's just as silly and cheap. A block should be a block and tools to bypass them shouldn't come at the 1,2 or 3min mark or be built into early units from the get-go.
|
Who the fuck cried about overlord drop other than avilo honestly? ?
You can stop it by scouting the one spot you can lift to and leaving a unit there. What a joke putting drops on the same tier as nydus.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
Well, I think adepts being able to tunnel through blocks is just as silly.
I wasn't even aware of that being a thing really (aside from in pvp) - as they can't go through buildings. They need to be able to go through units at some stage i think; maybe put it on the twilight council upgrade? If he ghosts through your queens, you can probably kill the adepts - i keep losing adepts vs zergs constantly early game when they have some lings and queens if i ghost in. It's like blinking agressively, it's a stupid thing to do
Who the fuck cried about overlord drop other than avilo honestly? ?
Pretty much everyone who isn't zerg thinks that it's a stupid mechanic. It's on lair because it's basically FREE, unlike nydus
|
On August 31 2015 00:48 Cyro wrote:I wasn't even aware of that being a thing really (aside from in pvp) - as they can't go through buildings. They need to be able to go through units at some stage i think; maybe put it on the twilight council upgrade? If he ghosts through your queens, you can probably kill the adepts - i keep losing adepts vs zergs constantly early game when they have some lings and queens if i ghost in. It's like blinking agressively, it's a stupid thing to do Pretty much everyone who isn't zerg thinks that it's a stupid mechanic. It's on lair because it's basically FREE, unlike nydus
Stupid how? It's unique and interesting and not OP in any way shape or form.
I'll translate for you: stupid = you didn't want to deal with it
|
On August 31 2015 00:48 Cyro wrote:I wasn't even aware of that being a thing really (aside from in pvp) - as they can't go through buildings. They need to be able to go through units at some stage i think; maybe put it on the twilight council upgrade? If he ghosts through your queens, you can probably kill the adepts - i keep losing adepts vs zergs constantly early game when they have some lings and queens if i ghost in. It's like blinking agressively, it's a stupid thing to do Pretty much everyone who isn't zerg thinks that it's a stupid mechanic. It's on lair because it's basically FREE, unlike nydus
It's pretty cheap when there are very little units (at hatch tech), because you can basically get in the base with 25/25.
But at lair tech - more units so you need more overlords - it becomes more expensive. At this point, nydus gets really attractive again. You could still use it for banedrops or something, but for an attack it's not as useful anymore.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
I'll translate for you: stupid = people don't want to deal with it
no, stupid = makes a ton of stuff inviable for no real reason while not being fun to rely on in a tournament game.
At least ravager adds enough to the game to make FFE inviable.
|
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
I agree TBH, from protoss POV.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
They need to re-balance harassment, but otherwise I like this semi-removal idea.
|
On August 31 2015 01:30 Captain Peabody wrote:
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me.
yeah, Protoss has lost a lot of their comback potential without chrono I guess. Zerg still has their economical comeback mechanic (i.e. only make drones), just nerfed down accordingly.
|
On August 30 2015 23:43 BluemoonSC wrote:
the problem for me is that zergs have to put up with a greedy opening without taking a huge hit to mid-late game economy, but the other races have tools to punish a greedy opening without a huge hit to mid-late game economy.
like i don't want to have to use a ravager roach push off 2 base in order to deal some form of dmg to the other player. dunno.
lol you can't be serious, there's almost no way to punish a quick 3 base zerg at least as protoss, and you can't even open gate nexus on some maps now because of the threat of the quick drop speed lings, so realistically I think protoss is at quite a disadvantage against zerg, remove or nerf the adept and Protoss would probably lose 90% of their pvz or something stupid like that, Terran is pretty much in the same spot except replace adept with liberators
|
On August 31 2015 03:15 ROOTFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2015 23:43 BluemoonSC wrote:
the problem for me is that zergs have to put up with a greedy opening without taking a huge hit to mid-late game economy, but the other races have tools to punish a greedy opening without a huge hit to mid-late game economy.
like i don't want to have to use a ravager roach push off 2 base in order to deal some form of dmg to the other player. dunno. lol you can't be serious, there's almost no way to punish a quick 3 base zerg at least as protoss, and you can't even open gate nexus on some maps now because of the threat of the quick drop speed lings, so realistically I think protoss is at quite a disadvantage against zerg, remove or nerf the adept and Protoss would probably lose 90% of their pvz or something stupid like that, Terran is pretty much in the same spot except replace adept with liberators
I feel like you should always open gate/gate/core 2adept expand against zerg at the moment. It punishes 3rd bases heavily and is only slightly less economical than core/gate/nexus. Especially because the 2nd nexus has less value without chronoboost (i.e. delaying it isn't as bad by comparison than previously) while keeping zerg on two bases even just for a little while is quite better than previously due to nerfed injects.
At least that has been what I have been struggling the most with. And then of course chargelots wreck everything on the ground with the current bug, including small amounts of lurkers. Only with mass lurker or ultras it feels like you can combat the mass zealot. (maybe banelings, haven't tried yet)
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
I feel like you should always open gate/core/gate 2adept expand against zerg at the moment.
Nobody's opening gate-core-gate because the gateway build time is longer than core. 2gate opening is gate-gate-core
It punishes 3rd bases heavily
I disagree, depending on the map it can be hard to do damage. It sucks to lose 4 adepts to 8-14 lings and 1-2 queens without really killing anything
|
On August 31 2015 04:02 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +I feel like you should always open gate/core/gate 2adept expand against zerg at the moment. Nobody's opening gate-core-gate because the gateway build time is longer than core. 2gate opening is gate-gate-core
Ah ok. I only scout them buidling at roughly the same time
|
On August 31 2015 02:59 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 01:30 Captain Peabody wrote:
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me. yeah, Protoss has lost a lot of their comback potential without chrono I guess. Zerg still has their economical comeback mechanic (i.e. only make drones), just nerfed down accordingly.
This point is one of the things that worries me the most. It was actually great sometimes to have a lot of chronos banked up to catch up on eco, to launch a hard counter-attack or for many other things... Now all your CBs are being spent every time, it's just dumb.
|
On August 31 2015 03:30 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 03:15 ROOTFayth wrote:On August 30 2015 23:43 BluemoonSC wrote:
the problem for me is that zergs have to put up with a greedy opening without taking a huge hit to mid-late game economy, but the other races have tools to punish a greedy opening without a huge hit to mid-late game economy.
like i don't want to have to use a ravager roach push off 2 base in order to deal some form of dmg to the other player. dunno. lol you can't be serious, there's almost no way to punish a quick 3 base zerg at least as protoss, and you can't even open gate nexus on some maps now because of the threat of the quick drop speed lings, so realistically I think protoss is at quite a disadvantage against zerg, remove or nerf the adept and Protoss would probably lose 90% of their pvz or something stupid like that, Terran is pretty much in the same spot except replace adept with liberators I feel like you should always open gate/gate/core 2adept expand against zerg at the moment. It punishes 3rd bases heavily and is only slightly less economical than core/gate/nexus. Especially because the 2nd nexus has less value without chronoboost (i.e. delaying it isn't as bad by comparison than previously) while keeping zerg on two bases even just for a little while is quite better than previously due to nerfed injects. At least that has been what I have been struggling the most with. And then of course chargelots wreck everything on the ground with the current bug, including small amounts of lurkers. Only with mass lurker or ultras it feels like you can combat the mass zealot. (maybe banelings, haven't tried yet)
This does not keep zerg on 2 base. The 2 gate openers are probably the weakest ones toss are using. They delay not only the nexus but the build overall, and don't do much damage if responded to correctly. Also they make toss very predictable which is half the problem as a Zerg. Maybe on terraform
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 31 2015 01:30 Captain Peabody wrote:
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me.
the thing about that perception is that as a new player playing zerg, unlike chrono which can be banked, you cannot get larva back much like you can drop multiple mules at a time or chrono several buildings with banked energy. the system was always inequitable to an extent but more pronounced in lotv because of the numerous harassment and micro options against and for zerg players.
On August 31 2015 03:15 ROOTFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2015 23:43 BluemoonSC wrote:
the problem for me is that zergs have to put up with a greedy opening without taking a huge hit to mid-late game economy, but the other races have tools to punish a greedy opening without a huge hit to mid-late game economy.
like i don't want to have to use a ravager roach push off 2 base in order to deal some form of dmg to the other player. dunno. lol you can't be serious, there's almost no way to punish a quick 3 base zerg at least as protoss, and you can't even open gate nexus on some maps now because of the threat of the quick drop speed lings, so realistically I think protoss is at quite a disadvantage against zerg, remove or nerf the adept and Protoss would probably lose 90% of their pvz or something stupid like that, Terran is pretty much in the same spot except replace adept with liberators
gate nexus is a greedy opening. to drop 8 speedlings in a timely manner, it costs like 8+ drones worth of resources (not to mention the time that it takes to research speed), you can't say that the zerg player isn't making a sacrifice to do the ling drop to try to punish a greedy opening. i honestly don't feel too bad that you couldn't sit behind a wall with nothing to defend because you know the zerg is unable to do anything to harm you until later.
dunno, warp prisms are pretty good vs a greedy zerg. i think one of the most important things with legacy of the void is keeping your openings flexible so that you can potentially punish another player's opening or match greed with greed. /shrug
|
On August 31 2015 07:27 BluemoonSC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 01:30 Captain Peabody wrote:
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me. the thing about that perception is that as a new player playing zerg, unlike chrono which can be banked, you cannot get larva back much like you can drop multiple mules at a time or chrono several buildings with banked energy. the system was always inequitable to an extent but more pronounced in lotv because of the numerous harassment and micro options against and for zerg players. Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 03:15 ROOTFayth wrote:On August 30 2015 23:43 BluemoonSC wrote:
the problem for me is that zergs have to put up with a greedy opening without taking a huge hit to mid-late game economy, but the other races have tools to punish a greedy opening without a huge hit to mid-late game economy.
like i don't want to have to use a ravager roach push off 2 base in order to deal some form of dmg to the other player. dunno. lol you can't be serious, there's almost no way to punish a quick 3 base zerg at least as protoss, and you can't even open gate nexus on some maps now because of the threat of the quick drop speed lings, so realistically I think protoss is at quite a disadvantage against zerg, remove or nerf the adept and Protoss would probably lose 90% of their pvz or something stupid like that, Terran is pretty much in the same spot except replace adept with liberators gate nexus is a greedy opening. to drop 8 speedlings in a timely manner, it costs like 8+ drones worth of resources (not to mention the time that it takes to research speed), you can't say that the zerg player isn't making a sacrifice to do the ling drop to try to punish a greedy opening. i honestly don't feel too bad that you couldn't sit behind a wall with nothing to defend because you know the zerg is unable to do anything to harm you until later. dunno, warp prisms are pretty good vs a greedy zerg. i think one of the most important things with legacy of the void is keeping your openings flexible so that you can potentially punish another player's opening or match greed with greed. /shrug
You keep talking about walls and being greedy for toss and terran, having walls is not being greedy, they cost you resources (quite a lot in some cases) and are a necesity, dou you remember daedalus point? that was a good example of what happened when you couldn't wall of, so stop talking about "being greedy behind a wall" like we terran protoss actually chose to make walls, or try to play games as terran or protoss without walling off an see how it goes.
I'm not talking about overlord drops being OP or not, I'm just saying that if you are going to argue at least make arguments that make sense and stop saying that having walls is being greedy (also gate/rax expand are not greedy builds, they are not as safe as gas first or gate/core builds but they are definitively safe builds)
|
Just watching Red Bull Archon mode. God this patch is the best thing to happen to Starcraft in the last 4years. Please just give it a major balance patch before going 1step back. So fucking awesome seeing all the new meta-details. Just buff Terran, do whatever you want with drops and these balance/design changes, but leave it at 2larva and no chrono/mules for a bit longer.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 31 2015 07:50 Lexender wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 07:27 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 01:30 Captain Peabody wrote:
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me. the thing about that perception is that as a new player playing zerg, unlike chrono which can be banked, you cannot get larva back much like you can drop multiple mules at a time or chrono several buildings with banked energy. the system was always inequitable to an extent but more pronounced in lotv because of the numerous harassment and micro options against and for zerg players. On August 31 2015 03:15 ROOTFayth wrote:On August 30 2015 23:43 BluemoonSC wrote:
the problem for me is that zergs have to put up with a greedy opening without taking a huge hit to mid-late game economy, but the other races have tools to punish a greedy opening without a huge hit to mid-late game economy.
like i don't want to have to use a ravager roach push off 2 base in order to deal some form of dmg to the other player. dunno. lol you can't be serious, there's almost no way to punish a quick 3 base zerg at least as protoss, and you can't even open gate nexus on some maps now because of the threat of the quick drop speed lings, so realistically I think protoss is at quite a disadvantage against zerg, remove or nerf the adept and Protoss would probably lose 90% of their pvz or something stupid like that, Terran is pretty much in the same spot except replace adept with liberators gate nexus is a greedy opening. to drop 8 speedlings in a timely manner, it costs like 8+ drones worth of resources (not to mention the time that it takes to research speed), you can't say that the zerg player isn't making a sacrifice to do the ling drop to try to punish a greedy opening. i honestly don't feel too bad that you couldn't sit behind a wall with nothing to defend because you know the zerg is unable to do anything to harm you until later. dunno, warp prisms are pretty good vs a greedy zerg. i think one of the most important things with legacy of the void is keeping your openings flexible so that you can potentially punish another player's opening or match greed with greed. /shrug You keep talking about walls and being greedy for toss and terran, having walls is not being greedy, they cost you resources (quite a lot in some cases) and are a necesity, dou you remember daedalus point? that was a good example of what happened when you couldn't wall of, so stop talking about "being greedy behind a wall" like we terran protoss actually chose to make walls, or try to play games as terran or protoss without walling off an see how it goes. I'm not talking about overlord drops being OP or not, I'm just saying that if you are going to argue at least make arguments that make sense and stop saying that having walls is being greedy (also gate/rax expand are not greedy builds, they are not as safe as gas first or gate/core builds but they are definitively safe builds)
the wall itself is not greedy, its what you do behind the wall because it acts as a safety net from early zerg aggression.
if you're going gate nexus vs a zerg that has gas, you're probably playing greedy.
On August 31 2015 07:54 Big J wrote:
Just watching Red Bull Archon mode. God this patch is the best thing to happen to Starcraft in the last 4years. Please just give it a major balance patch before going 1step back. So fucking awesome seeing all the new meta-details. Just buff Terran, do whatever you want with drops and these balance/design changes, but leave it at 2larva and no chrono/mules for a bit longer.
its a lot of fun, but i do think that its more difficult for protoss and terran to come back in any matchup right now
|
I think it is a good patch idea all around for new players, for fixing harassment extreme, and so on.
|
On August 31 2015 07:55 BluemoonSC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 07:50 Lexender wrote:On August 31 2015 07:27 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 01:30 Captain Peabody wrote:
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me. the thing about that perception is that as a new player playing zerg, unlike chrono which can be banked, you cannot get larva back much like you can drop multiple mules at a time or chrono several buildings with banked energy. the system was always inequitable to an extent but more pronounced in lotv because of the numerous harassment and micro options against and for zerg players. On August 31 2015 03:15 ROOTFayth wrote:On August 30 2015 23:43 BluemoonSC wrote:
the problem for me is that zergs have to put up with a greedy opening without taking a huge hit to mid-late game economy, but the other races have tools to punish a greedy opening without a huge hit to mid-late game economy.
like i don't want to have to use a ravager roach push off 2 base in order to deal some form of dmg to the other player. dunno. lol you can't be serious, there's almost no way to punish a quick 3 base zerg at least as protoss, and you can't even open gate nexus on some maps now because of the threat of the quick drop speed lings, so realistically I think protoss is at quite a disadvantage against zerg, remove or nerf the adept and Protoss would probably lose 90% of their pvz or something stupid like that, Terran is pretty much in the same spot except replace adept with liberators gate nexus is a greedy opening. to drop 8 speedlings in a timely manner, it costs like 8+ drones worth of resources (not to mention the time that it takes to research speed), you can't say that the zerg player isn't making a sacrifice to do the ling drop to try to punish a greedy opening. i honestly don't feel too bad that you couldn't sit behind a wall with nothing to defend because you know the zerg is unable to do anything to harm you until later. dunno, warp prisms are pretty good vs a greedy zerg. i think one of the most important things with legacy of the void is keeping your openings flexible so that you can potentially punish another player's opening or match greed with greed. /shrug You keep talking about walls and being greedy for toss and terran, having walls is not being greedy, they cost you resources (quite a lot in some cases) and are a necesity, dou you remember daedalus point? that was a good example of what happened when you couldn't wall of, so stop talking about "being greedy behind a wall" like we terran protoss actually chose to make walls, or try to play games as terran or protoss without walling off an see how it goes. I'm not talking about overlord drops being OP or not, I'm just saying that if you are going to argue at least make arguments that make sense and stop saying that having walls is being greedy (also gate/rax expand are not greedy builds, they are not as safe as gas first or gate/core builds but they are definitively safe builds) the wall itself is not greedy, its what you do behind the wall because it acts as a safety net from early zerg aggression. if you're going gate nexus vs a zerg that has gas, you're probably playing greedy. Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 07:54 Big J wrote:
Just watching Red Bull Archon mode. God this patch is the best thing to happen to Starcraft in the last 4years. Please just give it a major balance patch before going 1step back. So fucking awesome seeing all the new meta-details. Just buff Terran, do whatever you want with drops and these balance/design changes, but leave it at 2larva and no chrono/mules for a bit longer. its a lot of fun, but i do think that its more difficult for protoss and terran to come back in any matchup right now
Terran is just behind in all their non-mirrors right from the start. They just don't get off the ground and then any worker damage in an already imbalanced situation is gameending. I'm pretty sure Terran could function without mules if they just tweaked the costs/build times of things, in particular the infrastructure of Terran is really expensive and hard to get going if you don't have that extra mining.
For Protoss, yeah they lost a bit of a comeback mechanic. And an interesting mechanic on top of that. I would still rather stay with 2larva inject and no mules at all for the cost of chronoboost at the moment. Watching those highlevel games just shows how much new stuff can evolve if we don't just return to the old build orders in which everyone gets a OC after barracks and a ling flood in ZvZ and everything is instantly built-up and saturated. The pace of the game is just much, much better with the currently nerfed/removed macro mechanics. Units have much more time to shine instead of going over to the opponent, shooting once and getting deflected by 99999 freshly produced units.
|
On August 31 2015 04:07 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 02:59 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 01:30 Captain Peabody wrote:
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me. yeah, Protoss has lost a lot of their comback potential without chrono I guess. Zerg still has their economical comeback mechanic (i.e. only make drones), just nerfed down accordingly. This point is one of the things that worries me the most. It was actually great sometimes to have a lot of chronos banked up to catch up on eco, to launch a hard counter-attack or for many other things... Now all your CBs are being spent every time, it's just dumb.
Try it this way: Now all your CBs are being spent perfectly every time, and I can change the assignment to Nexus for an economy comeback, or on my production buildings, for big counter attack, or in any combination I can think of.
|
On August 31 2015 08:18 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 07:55 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 07:50 Lexender wrote:On August 31 2015 07:27 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 01:30 Captain Peabody wrote:
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me. the thing about that perception is that as a new player playing zerg, unlike chrono which can be banked, you cannot get larva back much like you can drop multiple mules at a time or chrono several buildings with banked energy. the system was always inequitable to an extent but more pronounced in lotv because of the numerous harassment and micro options against and for zerg players. On August 31 2015 03:15 ROOTFayth wrote:On August 30 2015 23:43 BluemoonSC wrote:
the problem for me is that zergs have to put up with a greedy opening without taking a huge hit to mid-late game economy, but the other races have tools to punish a greedy opening without a huge hit to mid-late game economy.
like i don't want to have to use a ravager roach push off 2 base in order to deal some form of dmg to the other player. dunno. lol you can't be serious, there's almost no way to punish a quick 3 base zerg at least as protoss, and you can't even open gate nexus on some maps now because of the threat of the quick drop speed lings, so realistically I think protoss is at quite a disadvantage against zerg, remove or nerf the adept and Protoss would probably lose 90% of their pvz or something stupid like that, Terran is pretty much in the same spot except replace adept with liberators gate nexus is a greedy opening. to drop 8 speedlings in a timely manner, it costs like 8+ drones worth of resources (not to mention the time that it takes to research speed), you can't say that the zerg player isn't making a sacrifice to do the ling drop to try to punish a greedy opening. i honestly don't feel too bad that you couldn't sit behind a wall with nothing to defend because you know the zerg is unable to do anything to harm you until later. dunno, warp prisms are pretty good vs a greedy zerg. i think one of the most important things with legacy of the void is keeping your openings flexible so that you can potentially punish another player's opening or match greed with greed. /shrug You keep talking about walls and being greedy for toss and terran, having walls is not being greedy, they cost you resources (quite a lot in some cases) and are a necesity, dou you remember daedalus point? that was a good example of what happened when you couldn't wall of, so stop talking about "being greedy behind a wall" like we terran protoss actually chose to make walls, or try to play games as terran or protoss without walling off an see how it goes. I'm not talking about overlord drops being OP or not, I'm just saying that if you are going to argue at least make arguments that make sense and stop saying that having walls is being greedy (also gate/rax expand are not greedy builds, they are not as safe as gas first or gate/core builds but they are definitively safe builds) the wall itself is not greedy, its what you do behind the wall because it acts as a safety net from early zerg aggression. if you're going gate nexus vs a zerg that has gas, you're probably playing greedy. On August 31 2015 07:54 Big J wrote:
Just watching Red Bull Archon mode. God this patch is the best thing to happen to Starcraft in the last 4years. Please just give it a major balance patch before going 1step back. So fucking awesome seeing all the new meta-details. Just buff Terran, do whatever you want with drops and these balance/design changes, but leave it at 2larva and no chrono/mules for a bit longer. its a lot of fun, but i do think that its more difficult for protoss and terran to come back in any matchup right now Terran is just behind in all their non-mirrors right from the start. They just don't get off the ground and then any worker damage in an already imbalanced situation is gameending. I'm pretty sure Terran could function without mules if they just tweaked the costs/build times of things, in particular the infrastructure of Terran is really expensive and hard to get going if you don't have that extra mining. For Protoss, yeah they lost a bit of a comeback mechanic. And an interesting mechanic on top of that. I would still rather stay with 2larva inject and no mules at all for the cost of chronoboost at the moment. Watching those highlevel games just shows how much new stuff can evolve if we don't just return to the old build orders in which everyone gets a OC after barracks and a ling flood in ZvZ and everything is instantly built-up and saturated. The pace of the game is just much, much better with the currently nerfed/removed macro mechanics. Units have much more time to shine instead of going over to the opponent, shooting once and getting deflected by 99999 freshly produced units.
Right. This new patch will be hugely good. Terran gets a little bit of their economy back, Protoss get an awesome new way to use CB, but frankly, I'm concerned about 3 larva. Hopefully the improved economy for T and P helps--a lot--but, I mean ... we're all watching Red Bull right now, right? Zerg is a total lol-fest and everyone knows it.
Their mics were hot after that match versus QXC, and I think I heard something like, "it's so easy." Did anyone else hear that?
|
SoCal8908 Posts
they made a lot of mistakes including building cyclones vs mass roach so im not really sure we can take a lot away from that.
|
On August 31 2015 08:27 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 08:18 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 07:55 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 07:50 Lexender wrote:On August 31 2015 07:27 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 01:30 Captain Peabody wrote:
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me. the thing about that perception is that as a new player playing zerg, unlike chrono which can be banked, you cannot get larva back much like you can drop multiple mules at a time or chrono several buildings with banked energy. the system was always inequitable to an extent but more pronounced in lotv because of the numerous harassment and micro options against and for zerg players. On August 31 2015 03:15 ROOTFayth wrote:On August 30 2015 23:43 BluemoonSC wrote:
the problem for me is that zergs have to put up with a greedy opening without taking a huge hit to mid-late game economy, but the other races have tools to punish a greedy opening without a huge hit to mid-late game economy.
like i don't want to have to use a ravager roach push off 2 base in order to deal some form of dmg to the other player. dunno. lol you can't be serious, there's almost no way to punish a quick 3 base zerg at least as protoss, and you can't even open gate nexus on some maps now because of the threat of the quick drop speed lings, so realistically I think protoss is at quite a disadvantage against zerg, remove or nerf the adept and Protoss would probably lose 90% of their pvz or something stupid like that, Terran is pretty much in the same spot except replace adept with liberators gate nexus is a greedy opening. to drop 8 speedlings in a timely manner, it costs like 8+ drones worth of resources (not to mention the time that it takes to research speed), you can't say that the zerg player isn't making a sacrifice to do the ling drop to try to punish a greedy opening. i honestly don't feel too bad that you couldn't sit behind a wall with nothing to defend because you know the zerg is unable to do anything to harm you until later. dunno, warp prisms are pretty good vs a greedy zerg. i think one of the most important things with legacy of the void is keeping your openings flexible so that you can potentially punish another player's opening or match greed with greed. /shrug You keep talking about walls and being greedy for toss and terran, having walls is not being greedy, they cost you resources (quite a lot in some cases) and are a necesity, dou you remember daedalus point? that was a good example of what happened when you couldn't wall of, so stop talking about "being greedy behind a wall" like we terran protoss actually chose to make walls, or try to play games as terran or protoss without walling off an see how it goes. I'm not talking about overlord drops being OP or not, I'm just saying that if you are going to argue at least make arguments that make sense and stop saying that having walls is being greedy (also gate/rax expand are not greedy builds, they are not as safe as gas first or gate/core builds but they are definitively safe builds) the wall itself is not greedy, its what you do behind the wall because it acts as a safety net from early zerg aggression. if you're going gate nexus vs a zerg that has gas, you're probably playing greedy. On August 31 2015 07:54 Big J wrote:
Just watching Red Bull Archon mode. God this patch is the best thing to happen to Starcraft in the last 4years. Please just give it a major balance patch before going 1step back. So fucking awesome seeing all the new meta-details. Just buff Terran, do whatever you want with drops and these balance/design changes, but leave it at 2larva and no chrono/mules for a bit longer. its a lot of fun, but i do think that its more difficult for protoss and terran to come back in any matchup right now Terran is just behind in all their non-mirrors right from the start. They just don't get off the ground and then any worker damage in an already imbalanced situation is gameending. I'm pretty sure Terran could function without mules if they just tweaked the costs/build times of things, in particular the infrastructure of Terran is really expensive and hard to get going if you don't have that extra mining. For Protoss, yeah they lost a bit of a comeback mechanic. And an interesting mechanic on top of that. I would still rather stay with 2larva inject and no mules at all for the cost of chronoboost at the moment. Watching those highlevel games just shows how much new stuff can evolve if we don't just return to the old build orders in which everyone gets a OC after barracks and a ling flood in ZvZ and everything is instantly built-up and saturated. The pace of the game is just much, much better with the currently nerfed/removed macro mechanics. Units have much more time to shine instead of going over to the opponent, shooting once and getting deflected by 99999 freshly produced units. Right. This new patch will be hugely good. Terran gets a little bit of their economy back, Protoss get an awesome new way to use CB, but frankly, I'm concerned about 3 larva. Hopefully the improved economy for T and P helps--a lot--but, I mean ... we're all watching Red Bull right now, right? Zerg is a total lol-fest and everyone knows it. Their mics were hot after that match versus QXC, and I think I heard something like, "it's so easy." Did anyone else hear that?
My god bro you're literally the ZerglingShepard of Terran.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
some zergs (@redbull) using 6 queens and some lings by 4:30 to defend against warp prism/adept, it's probably extremely difficult if at all possible to do any direct damage against that
|
Protoss looks broken...
Adpets with to much health and so cheap
Charge Zealots with 30 dmg that made into the game because Blizz had a mistake with a bug
Warp Prism with 2 sec is to much
I know their afraid of Protoss being weak like they where but now their broken as hell man
|
On August 31 2015 08:47 Little-Chimp wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 08:27 TimeSpiral wrote:On August 31 2015 08:18 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 07:55 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 07:50 Lexender wrote:On August 31 2015 07:27 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 01:30 Captain Peabody wrote:
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me. the thing about that perception is that as a new player playing zerg, unlike chrono which can be banked, you cannot get larva back much like you can drop multiple mules at a time or chrono several buildings with banked energy. the system was always inequitable to an extent but more pronounced in lotv because of the numerous harassment and micro options against and for zerg players. On August 31 2015 03:15 ROOTFayth wrote:On August 30 2015 23:43 BluemoonSC wrote:
the problem for me is that zergs have to put up with a greedy opening without taking a huge hit to mid-late game economy, but the other races have tools to punish a greedy opening without a huge hit to mid-late game economy.
like i don't want to have to use a ravager roach push off 2 base in order to deal some form of dmg to the other player. dunno. lol you can't be serious, there's almost no way to punish a quick 3 base zerg at least as protoss, and you can't even open gate nexus on some maps now because of the threat of the quick drop speed lings, so realistically I think protoss is at quite a disadvantage against zerg, remove or nerf the adept and Protoss would probably lose 90% of their pvz or something stupid like that, Terran is pretty much in the same spot except replace adept with liberators gate nexus is a greedy opening. to drop 8 speedlings in a timely manner, it costs like 8+ drones worth of resources (not to mention the time that it takes to research speed), you can't say that the zerg player isn't making a sacrifice to do the ling drop to try to punish a greedy opening. i honestly don't feel too bad that you couldn't sit behind a wall with nothing to defend because you know the zerg is unable to do anything to harm you until later. dunno, warp prisms are pretty good vs a greedy zerg. i think one of the most important things with legacy of the void is keeping your openings flexible so that you can potentially punish another player's opening or match greed with greed. /shrug You keep talking about walls and being greedy for toss and terran, having walls is not being greedy, they cost you resources (quite a lot in some cases) and are a necesity, dou you remember daedalus point? that was a good example of what happened when you couldn't wall of, so stop talking about "being greedy behind a wall" like we terran protoss actually chose to make walls, or try to play games as terran or protoss without walling off an see how it goes. I'm not talking about overlord drops being OP or not, I'm just saying that if you are going to argue at least make arguments that make sense and stop saying that having walls is being greedy (also gate/rax expand are not greedy builds, they are not as safe as gas first or gate/core builds but they are definitively safe builds) the wall itself is not greedy, its what you do behind the wall because it acts as a safety net from early zerg aggression. if you're going gate nexus vs a zerg that has gas, you're probably playing greedy. On August 31 2015 07:54 Big J wrote:
Just watching Red Bull Archon mode. God this patch is the best thing to happen to Starcraft in the last 4years. Please just give it a major balance patch before going 1step back. So fucking awesome seeing all the new meta-details. Just buff Terran, do whatever you want with drops and these balance/design changes, but leave it at 2larva and no chrono/mules for a bit longer. its a lot of fun, but i do think that its more difficult for protoss and terran to come back in any matchup right now Terran is just behind in all their non-mirrors right from the start. They just don't get off the ground and then any worker damage in an already imbalanced situation is gameending. I'm pretty sure Terran could function without mules if they just tweaked the costs/build times of things, in particular the infrastructure of Terran is really expensive and hard to get going if you don't have that extra mining. For Protoss, yeah they lost a bit of a comeback mechanic. And an interesting mechanic on top of that. I would still rather stay with 2larva inject and no mules at all for the cost of chronoboost at the moment. Watching those highlevel games just shows how much new stuff can evolve if we don't just return to the old build orders in which everyone gets a OC after barracks and a ling flood in ZvZ and everything is instantly built-up and saturated. The pace of the game is just much, much better with the currently nerfed/removed macro mechanics. Units have much more time to shine instead of going over to the opponent, shooting once and getting deflected by 99999 freshly produced units. Right. This new patch will be hugely good. Terran gets a little bit of their economy back, Protoss get an awesome new way to use CB, but frankly, I'm concerned about 3 larva. Hopefully the improved economy for T and P helps--a lot--but, I mean ... we're all watching Red Bull right now, right? Zerg is a total lol-fest and everyone knows it. Their mics were hot after that match versus QXC, and I think I heard something like, "it's so easy." Did anyone else hear that? My god bro you're literally the ZerglingShepard of Terran.
You summoned him!
|
Stupid.
Lets re-add chrono because we may have lost something "cool". Is that serious? I didn't realize how cool pressing C and clicking my forge was. How can you expect to balance a whole game when your worried about whether or not shit is cool enough. Starcraft itself is cool... just make a BALANCED game ( That would be really cool!!!). /rant
-- Just because 1 race is struggling does not mean that we need to re-introduce the macro bosoters. Inject and chrono are literally being re-added all because of terran. If multiple races were struggling than I would agree that this is a design problem, but when it's just a single race having problems with the new design. That race should be balanced to fit it, not revert the design completely because of 1 problem.
|
On August 30 2015 12:21 sAsImre wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 03:51 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:47 Qwyn wrote:On August 29 2015 03:45 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:43 Qwyn wrote:On August 29 2015 03:39 Tenks wrote:On August 29 2015 03:37 IntoTheheart wrote:
How would you guys feel if they just had cooldowns on MULE and Chrono, but got rid of the auto-cast? How would that solve the necessity to learn macro mechanic timings as a barrier of entry to SC2, though? What exactly is the problem here? You have to get better at using macro-mechanics, among many other different skills, to improve at the game? Why exactly is that a barrier? And why is it a bad thing? MULE and Chrono don't exactly take up much of a player's time, compared to inject. And I WANT inject to be manual. Good players pull further and further ahead with strong injects. Mediocre players can get by with decent injects and strong focus in other skills. It balances itself out. But for the people who want inject to not be manual, why not oblige them rather than homogenizing an entire facet of Zerg play so that there is no skill differential at all? Because no one has fun dropping MULE, CB'ing a forge or injecting larvae. It is an artificial and unnecessary chore. You want to reduce everything down to an unnecessary chore? Oh look this argument is back from when they first said they're removing the mechanics. While we're at it lets also get rid of MBS and infinite select. Oh yeah and smart cast. Rally points on workers seem pretty silly because I want to go back to my base everytime a unit is created to move it as well. Oh yeah these are all things the community was up in arms about in SC2 WoL beta as well because it was dumbing down the game as well. both smartcast and unlimited selection are really hurting the game since its inception. Especially smartcast.
I agree entirely but it's so hard to defend this point. Very few 'new' players understand how dumbing down such interactions would actually make the game deeper.
|
On August 31 2015 09:21 Ouija wrote:
Stupid.
Lets re-add chrono because we may have lost something "cool". Is that serious? I didn't realize how cool pressing C and clicking my forge was. How can you expect to balance a whole game when your worried about whether or not shit is cool enough. Starcraft itself is cool... just make a BALANCED game ( That would be really cool!!!). /rant
-- Just because 1 race is struggling does not mean that we need to re-introduce the macro bosoters. Inject and chrono are literally being re-added all because of terran. If multiple races were struggling than I would agree that this is a design problem, but when it's just a single race having problems with the new design. That race should be balanced to fit it, not revert the design completely because of 1 problem.
Yeah, pretty much this. I think balancing Terran that way is a bit of a missed chance to actually get the good change out and also to attack certain problems that Terran has been struggling with all along, e.g. using gas in their bio-builds and/or transitioning into higher tech units eventually with such styles. Hider brought up an interesting suggestion, which was a 75/50 marauder (probably with some balance tweaks/buffs). Also I feel like a lot could be achieved by tweaking addons, like techlabs to 25/25, OCs to 100minerals (so similar to the mule you get a direct pay-off from the first supply drop) maybe the one or other build time tweak (barracks to 60seconds, stimpack to 140seconds?). Those timings and costs don't fullfill their original/balanced purpose anymore anyways with the changed macro/timings that the changed/removed macro boosters and the 12worker start produce to begin with.
I think with a bunch of such changes Terran could actually be quite on even footing. (besides imbalances that may have existed before the patch anyways)
Also with 3 larva autocast we get into the regions in which this becomes essentially a buff in the lategame compared to manual 4larva that may have to be compensated otherwise. Because for the other races - especially Terran - the proposed adjustment is (probably) still a nerf in comparison to the mulehammer lategame income.
|
my gut feeling is that Blizz know that have balanced all protoss timings around chrono and to remove chrono is either a massive nerf to protoss since everything takes longer, or they need to reduce the time cost for every unit and upgrade, which is a massive buff.
this way they can pretty much leave everything alone. Protoss can get a few things quickly and everything else slowly.
It's the easy way out.
|
On August 30 2015 23:25 Big J wrote:
We might be able to see that Zerg becomes too strong with the changes, but saying that is because zerg has become too easy when the whole game is balanced around mechanical limits is not really a way to describe such an issue.
Do you believe mechanical and multitasking difficulty to be fundamentally unquantifiable given the asymmetry of the races?
Because - assuming that your answer is yes - that seems very obviously wrong. Even without access to pro replays, we can analyze how many things any given player has to keep active track of throughout certain parts of the game to measure multitasking skill floor, and we can analyze approximately how many meaningful clicks they have to perform to measure mechanical skill floor.
This is all extremely doable, and extraordinarily valuable, because a difference in skill floors and ceilings among races, whether we're able to perceive it or not, if it exists, completely undermines the foundation of fair and meaningful competition.
I know I'm in a very small minority to give a shit about that. People will watch any competition, no matter what the skill floor or ceiling is, no matter how imbalanced it is, and MOBAs are the perfect proof of that even if SC1/SC2 aren't enough... which they ought to be.
edit: that last bit is just me letting off some very hot steam, it's not aimed in your specific direction. 
|
P will always be a "broken" and "grimmicky" race until Mothership Core/Mothership is REMOVED. Hero unit doesn't belong to this game.
|
On August 31 2015 08:47 Little-Chimp wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 08:27 TimeSpiral wrote:On August 31 2015 08:18 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 07:55 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 07:50 Lexender wrote:On August 31 2015 07:27 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 01:30 Captain Peabody wrote:
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me. the thing about that perception is that as a new player playing zerg, unlike chrono which can be banked, you cannot get larva back much like you can drop multiple mules at a time or chrono several buildings with banked energy. the system was always inequitable to an extent but more pronounced in lotv because of the numerous harassment and micro options against and for zerg players. On August 31 2015 03:15 ROOTFayth wrote:On August 30 2015 23:43 BluemoonSC wrote:
the problem for me is that zergs have to put up with a greedy opening without taking a huge hit to mid-late game economy, but the other races have tools to punish a greedy opening without a huge hit to mid-late game economy.
like i don't want to have to use a ravager roach push off 2 base in order to deal some form of dmg to the other player. dunno. lol you can't be serious, there's almost no way to punish a quick 3 base zerg at least as protoss, and you can't even open gate nexus on some maps now because of the threat of the quick drop speed lings, so realistically I think protoss is at quite a disadvantage against zerg, remove or nerf the adept and Protoss would probably lose 90% of their pvz or something stupid like that, Terran is pretty much in the same spot except replace adept with liberators gate nexus is a greedy opening. to drop 8 speedlings in a timely manner, it costs like 8+ drones worth of resources (not to mention the time that it takes to research speed), you can't say that the zerg player isn't making a sacrifice to do the ling drop to try to punish a greedy opening. i honestly don't feel too bad that you couldn't sit behind a wall with nothing to defend because you know the zerg is unable to do anything to harm you until later. dunno, warp prisms are pretty good vs a greedy zerg. i think one of the most important things with legacy of the void is keeping your openings flexible so that you can potentially punish another player's opening or match greed with greed. /shrug You keep talking about walls and being greedy for toss and terran, having walls is not being greedy, they cost you resources (quite a lot in some cases) and are a necesity, dou you remember daedalus point? that was a good example of what happened when you couldn't wall of, so stop talking about "being greedy behind a wall" like we terran protoss actually chose to make walls, or try to play games as terran or protoss without walling off an see how it goes. I'm not talking about overlord drops being OP or not, I'm just saying that if you are going to argue at least make arguments that make sense and stop saying that having walls is being greedy (also gate/rax expand are not greedy builds, they are not as safe as gas first or gate/core builds but they are definitively safe builds) the wall itself is not greedy, its what you do behind the wall because it acts as a safety net from early zerg aggression. if you're going gate nexus vs a zerg that has gas, you're probably playing greedy. On August 31 2015 07:54 Big J wrote:
Just watching Red Bull Archon mode. God this patch is the best thing to happen to Starcraft in the last 4years. Please just give it a major balance patch before going 1step back. So fucking awesome seeing all the new meta-details. Just buff Terran, do whatever you want with drops and these balance/design changes, but leave it at 2larva and no chrono/mules for a bit longer. its a lot of fun, but i do think that its more difficult for protoss and terran to come back in any matchup right now Terran is just behind in all their non-mirrors right from the start. They just don't get off the ground and then any worker damage in an already imbalanced situation is gameending. I'm pretty sure Terran could function without mules if they just tweaked the costs/build times of things, in particular the infrastructure of Terran is really expensive and hard to get going if you don't have that extra mining. For Protoss, yeah they lost a bit of a comeback mechanic. And an interesting mechanic on top of that. I would still rather stay with 2larva inject and no mules at all for the cost of chronoboost at the moment. Watching those highlevel games just shows how much new stuff can evolve if we don't just return to the old build orders in which everyone gets a OC after barracks and a ling flood in ZvZ and everything is instantly built-up and saturated. The pace of the game is just much, much better with the currently nerfed/removed macro mechanics. Units have much more time to shine instead of going over to the opponent, shooting once and getting deflected by 99999 freshly produced units. Right. This new patch will be hugely good. Terran gets a little bit of their economy back, Protoss get an awesome new way to use CB, but frankly, I'm concerned about 3 larva. Hopefully the improved economy for T and P helps--a lot--but, I mean ... we're all watching Red Bull right now, right? Zerg is a total lol-fest and everyone knows it. Their mics were hot after that match versus QXC, and I think I heard something like, "it's so easy." Did anyone else hear that? My god bro you're literally the ZerglingShepard of Terran.
except he's a lot more passive aggressive and accuses anyone of derailing conversation / trolling if they don't agree with him
|
all this whining pro or against autocast based on mechanical ability really distracts from the point that the game's pace was better than it ever was ever since WoL beta with the removal of macro mechanics, and now they are ruining that again without giving it a chance.
i never had as much fun playing sc2 as in the current patch, even with all the broken shit like chargelots. and now its being taken away again without even giving it a real chance? extremely frustrating and disappointing
|
I don't like the auto-casted macro boosters on Terran and Protoss tbh. It just looks like pressing a feature into the game that doesn't actually belong there.
On the Zerg the spawn larvae could be an auto-cast on Hatcheries themselves that is available as soon as a Spawning Pool is finished (to compensate for it usually being available, when the 1st Queen pops, which also needs a Pool before). Zergs will still need Queens for creep spread and early defense, but now can choose to delay them.
|
I feel people are viewing the Auto-casting the wrong way. Instead of thinking "since it's happening automatically, it could easily not happen anyway" try to think like this:
Terran:
Mules still exist, they are now effectively "Free" workers that balance out the design of Terran (who need less workers than the other races). It would probably be too difficult to balance out terran mining (imagine the complexity with build times of buildings (mining time lost), etc.
However, the crucial thing is that Mules are still there, which means you can still kill them, which will still hurt the Terrans economy (in essence this means Terrans always have one prime target for harassing players, but they are a little beefier so an oracle may go for SCV's instead, which is a nice decision to include).
It also adds the dynamic of moving a bunch of CC's around a lot late-game (exposing them to be killed easier as well).
Protoss
The change honestly will largely work the same. Swapping which building has the chrono is a little easier than babysitting your nexus' energy, but not that much. It feels like a very reasonable middle-way change to me.
Zerg
If you just look at queens as an upgrade to hatcheries, it makes more sense with the autocast. Hatcheries themselves already "autospawn" larvae. This is the same way they worked in BW, it's just that you can view a Queen as an upgrade to each Hatchery. There's also the dynamic of Queens being needed for creep and early game defence. But at the same time they take up supply. So in a way it may be an interesting choice whether to make a queen or just another Hatchery. I hope Blizzard tweaks the spawn rate of Larvae so that this choice becomes relevant (right now it feels like the obvious choice is always to build a queen, because ot their low supply and 3 larvae, like maybe they should alternate between 2 and 3 or something).
I guess what I'm trying to say is that while these things happen automatically - they still add dynamic to the game. Killing Mules & Queens still hurt Terrans and Zergs. Chronoboosting still reveals the Protosses intentions to the opponent.
That's why it's better to have these things as autocast than to not have them at all (so long as it's all balanced). At least that's what I think.
|
I wonder why can't BLZ just simply make hatcheries spawn larvas faster?
|
On August 31 2015 10:51 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2015 23:25 Big J wrote:
We might be able to see that Zerg becomes too strong with the changes, but saying that is because zerg has become too easy when the whole game is balanced around mechanical limits is not really a way to describe such an issue. Do you believe mechanical and multitasking difficulty to be fundamentally unquantifiable given the asymmetry of the races? Because - assuming that your answer is yes - that seems very obviously wrong. Even without access to pro replays, we can analyze how many things any given player has to keep active track of throughout certain parts of the game to measure multitasking skill floor, and we can analyze approximately how many meaningful clicks they have to perform to measure mechanical skill floor. This is all extremely doable, and extraordinarily valuable, because a difference in skill floors and ceilings among races, whether we're able to perceive it or not, if it exists, completely undermines the foundation of fair and meaningful competition. I know I'm in a very small minority to give a shit about that. People will watch any competition, no matter what the skill floor or ceiling is, no matter how imbalanced it is, and MOBAs are the perfect proof of that even if SC1/SC2 aren't enough... which they ought to be. edit: that last bit is just me letting off some very hot steam, it's not aimed in your specific direction.
No, it's not unquantifable. Make a table in which you list every action and weight it based on difficulty, importance and frequency and tweak it until a large portion of people roughly agree with your assesment. (That's probably only going to be possibpe for a certain level of play and matchup to begin with and not the races themselve). Then we can talk about that.
Before someone does that this topic is always going to be mostly vodoo if looked at isolated.
|
On August 31 2015 17:32 Mazuuurk wrote:
I feel people are viewing the Auto-casting the wrong way. Instead of thinking "since it's happening automatically, it could easily not happen anyway" try to think like this:
Terran:
Mules still exist, they are now effectively "Free" workers that balance out the design of Terran (who need less workers than the other races). It would probably be too difficult to balance out terran mining (imagine the complexity with build times of buildings (mining time lost), etc.
However, the crucial thing is that Mules are still there, which means you can still kill them, which will still hurt the Terrans economy (in essence this means Terrans always have one prime target for harassing players, but they are a little beefier so an oracle may go for SCV's instead, which is a nice decision to include).
It also adds the dynamic of moving a bunch of CC's around a lot late-game (exposing them to be killed easier as well).
Protoss
The change honestly will largely work the same. Swapping which building has the chrono is a little easier than babysitting your nexus' energy, but not that much. It feels like a very reasonable middle-way change to me.
Zerg
If you just look at queens as an upgrade to hatcheries, it makes more sense with the autocast. Hatcheries themselves already "autospawn" larvae. This is the same way they worked in BW, it's just that you can view a Queen as an upgrade to each Hatchery. There's also the dynamic of Queens being needed for creep and early game defence. But at the same time they take up supply. So in a way it may be an interesting choice whether to make a queen or just another Hatchery. I hope Blizzard tweaks the spawn rate of Larvae so that this choice becomes relevant (right now it feels like the obvious choice is always to build a queen, because ot their low supply and 3 larvae, like maybe they should alternate between 2 and 3 or something).
I guess what I'm trying to say is that while these things happen automatically - they still add dynamic to the game. Killing Mules & Queens still hurt Terrans and Zergs. Chronoboosting still reveals the Protosses intentions to the opponent.
That's why it's better to have these things as autocast than to not have them at all (so long as it's all balanced). At least that's what I think.
It's not a mindset issue. Nobody cares if things autocast or not from a semantics point of view. The point is if all 3 races have something automatically being done you should question if all 3 are needed at all?
My issue is that Blizzard stated they felt these mechanics were hard to master and hard to watch pros use in a way that was exciting, essentially they were boring and didn't add to the game. Now they are trying to rebalance those boring mechanics in an automatic format? People either want the mechanics and try to make them more interesting or get rid of them. The mule doesn't need to be autocast that was never an issue. Chronoboost, so dumb and boring and one dimensional, was never something people said "please make autocast!"
They are creating a whole new problem from one that had two acceptable solutions and going this lame third direction that nobody wants. This has happened in the past where they try to placate both sides with a middle solution and it doesn't work. Not to mention if you are going to try a major change like this at least try and do one balance update. This patch has been worthless to test because the game wasn't also rebalanced around the removal of the mechanics.
|
Which freaking "feedback" are they listening to? 10yo kids on their forums coming mostly from the WOW parts?
Give me a break, auto cast macro mechanics, making colossi even more absurd with 9 range, adding 3 larva to the queen, do they actually read real feedback on teamliquid, SC subreddit and others?
DON'T LISTEN TO FEEDWHINE ON YOUR OWN FORUMS BLIZZARD, MOST OF IT IS FROM 10YO KIDS COMING FROM THE WOW FORUMS!
User was warned for this post
|
On August 31 2015 17:32 Mazuuurk wrote:
I guess what I'm trying to say is that while these things happen automatically - they still add dynamic to the game. Killing Mules & Queens still hurt Terrans and Zergs. Chronoboosting still reveals the Protosses intentions to the opponent.
They didn't say whether there would be a cooldown on chronoboost retargeting. Because if there is not, the protoss can hide his intentions way too easily by swapping it when you scoot, even if you see where to and/or where from: is it on purpose, is it a trick, was it too late or too soon...?
So as you said, it feels too much that Z and T has a good but potentially costly tool, but P has a free but meh one.
|
On August 31 2015 16:21 summerloud wrote:all this whining pro or against autocast based on mechanical ability really distracts from the point that the game's pace was better than it ever was ever since WoL beta with the removal of macro mechanics, and now they are ruining that again without giving it a chance. i never had as much fun playing sc2 as in the current patch, even with all the broken shit like chargelots. and now its being taken away again without even giving it a real chance? extremely frustrating and disappointing
I agree I love how LotV currently throws you into the game and the midgame is not midgame any more it's divided into several tiers where you try to edge out small wins for a stronger late game which is truly a late game compared to HotS.
As for the powerlevel of Terran I think a lot of their strength has come from Reactors, with less minerals coming from the Mule, Reactors fast ramp production has taken a huge hit.
|
On another topic, I came up with this original idea for an adept upgrade:
- enemy units that you move through with the shade become frightened and take 10damage over 7seconds (can't stack)
Would be a bit more interesting and microdependent than a plain damage upgrade imo.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 31 2015 23:02 Big J wrote:On another topic, I came up with this original idea for an adept upgrade: - enemy units that you move through with the shade become frightened and take 10damage over 7seconds (can't stack) Would be a bit more interesting and microdependent than a plain damage upgrade imo.
i think one of the complaints about the adept is that with the shade its incredibly mobile. having 10 adepts use their shade and stand on top of an army would be outrageous.
|
On August 31 2015 09:08 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 08:47 Little-Chimp wrote:On August 31 2015 08:27 TimeSpiral wrote:On August 31 2015 08:18 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 07:55 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 07:50 Lexender wrote:On August 31 2015 07:27 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 01:30 Captain Peabody wrote:
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me. the thing about that perception is that as a new player playing zerg, unlike chrono which can be banked, you cannot get larva back much like you can drop multiple mules at a time or chrono several buildings with banked energy. the system was always inequitable to an extent but more pronounced in lotv because of the numerous harassment and micro options against and for zerg players. On August 31 2015 03:15 ROOTFayth wrote:On August 30 2015 23:43 BluemoonSC wrote:
the problem for me is that zergs have to put up with a greedy opening without taking a huge hit to mid-late game economy, but the other races have tools to punish a greedy opening without a huge hit to mid-late game economy.
like i don't want to have to use a ravager roach push off 2 base in order to deal some form of dmg to the other player. dunno. lol you can't be serious, there's almost no way to punish a quick 3 base zerg at least as protoss, and you can't even open gate nexus on some maps now because of the threat of the quick drop speed lings, so realistically I think protoss is at quite a disadvantage against zerg, remove or nerf the adept and Protoss would probably lose 90% of their pvz or something stupid like that, Terran is pretty much in the same spot except replace adept with liberators gate nexus is a greedy opening. to drop 8 speedlings in a timely manner, it costs like 8+ drones worth of resources (not to mention the time that it takes to research speed), you can't say that the zerg player isn't making a sacrifice to do the ling drop to try to punish a greedy opening. i honestly don't feel too bad that you couldn't sit behind a wall with nothing to defend because you know the zerg is unable to do anything to harm you until later. dunno, warp prisms are pretty good vs a greedy zerg. i think one of the most important things with legacy of the void is keeping your openings flexible so that you can potentially punish another player's opening or match greed with greed. /shrug You keep talking about walls and being greedy for toss and terran, having walls is not being greedy, they cost you resources (quite a lot in some cases) and are a necesity, dou you remember daedalus point? that was a good example of what happened when you couldn't wall of, so stop talking about "being greedy behind a wall" like we terran protoss actually chose to make walls, or try to play games as terran or protoss without walling off an see how it goes. I'm not talking about overlord drops being OP or not, I'm just saying that if you are going to argue at least make arguments that make sense and stop saying that having walls is being greedy (also gate/rax expand are not greedy builds, they are not as safe as gas first or gate/core builds but they are definitively safe builds) the wall itself is not greedy, its what you do behind the wall because it acts as a safety net from early zerg aggression. if you're going gate nexus vs a zerg that has gas, you're probably playing greedy. On August 31 2015 07:54 Big J wrote:
Just watching Red Bull Archon mode. God this patch is the best thing to happen to Starcraft in the last 4years. Please just give it a major balance patch before going 1step back. So fucking awesome seeing all the new meta-details. Just buff Terran, do whatever you want with drops and these balance/design changes, but leave it at 2larva and no chrono/mules for a bit longer. its a lot of fun, but i do think that its more difficult for protoss and terran to come back in any matchup right now Terran is just behind in all their non-mirrors right from the start. They just don't get off the ground and then any worker damage in an already imbalanced situation is gameending. I'm pretty sure Terran could function without mules if they just tweaked the costs/build times of things, in particular the infrastructure of Terran is really expensive and hard to get going if you don't have that extra mining. For Protoss, yeah they lost a bit of a comeback mechanic. And an interesting mechanic on top of that. I would still rather stay with 2larva inject and no mules at all for the cost of chronoboost at the moment. Watching those highlevel games just shows how much new stuff can evolve if we don't just return to the old build orders in which everyone gets a OC after barracks and a ling flood in ZvZ and everything is instantly built-up and saturated. The pace of the game is just much, much better with the currently nerfed/removed macro mechanics. Units have much more time to shine instead of going over to the opponent, shooting once and getting deflected by 99999 freshly produced units. Right. This new patch will be hugely good. Terran gets a little bit of their economy back, Protoss get an awesome new way to use CB, but frankly, I'm concerned about 3 larva. Hopefully the improved economy for T and P helps--a lot--but, I mean ... we're all watching Red Bull right now, right? Zerg is a total lol-fest and everyone knows it. Their mics were hot after that match versus QXC, and I think I heard something like, "it's so easy." Did anyone else hear that? My god bro you're literally the ZerglingShepard of Terran. You summoned him!
Really, guys? So much hate ...
|
On August 31 2015 23:15 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 09:08 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 08:47 Little-Chimp wrote:On August 31 2015 08:27 TimeSpiral wrote:On August 31 2015 08:18 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 07:55 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 07:50 Lexender wrote:On August 31 2015 07:27 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 01:30 Captain Peabody wrote:
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me. the thing about that perception is that as a new player playing zerg, unlike chrono which can be banked, you cannot get larva back much like you can drop multiple mules at a time or chrono several buildings with banked energy. the system was always inequitable to an extent but more pronounced in lotv because of the numerous harassment and micro options against and for zerg players. On August 31 2015 03:15 ROOTFayth wrote:On August 30 2015 23:43 BluemoonSC wrote:
the problem for me is that zergs have to put up with a greedy opening without taking a huge hit to mid-late game economy, but the other races have tools to punish a greedy opening without a huge hit to mid-late game economy.
like i don't want to have to use a ravager roach push off 2 base in order to deal some form of dmg to the other player. dunno. lol you can't be serious, there's almost no way to punish a quick 3 base zerg at least as protoss, and you can't even open gate nexus on some maps now because of the threat of the quick drop speed lings, so realistically I think protoss is at quite a disadvantage against zerg, remove or nerf the adept and Protoss would probably lose 90% of their pvz or something stupid like that, Terran is pretty much in the same spot except replace adept with liberators gate nexus is a greedy opening. to drop 8 speedlings in a timely manner, it costs like 8+ drones worth of resources (not to mention the time that it takes to research speed), you can't say that the zerg player isn't making a sacrifice to do the ling drop to try to punish a greedy opening. i honestly don't feel too bad that you couldn't sit behind a wall with nothing to defend because you know the zerg is unable to do anything to harm you until later. dunno, warp prisms are pretty good vs a greedy zerg. i think one of the most important things with legacy of the void is keeping your openings flexible so that you can potentially punish another player's opening or match greed with greed. /shrug You keep talking about walls and being greedy for toss and terran, having walls is not being greedy, they cost you resources (quite a lot in some cases) and are a necesity, dou you remember daedalus point? that was a good example of what happened when you couldn't wall of, so stop talking about "being greedy behind a wall" like we terran protoss actually chose to make walls, or try to play games as terran or protoss without walling off an see how it goes. I'm not talking about overlord drops being OP or not, I'm just saying that if you are going to argue at least make arguments that make sense and stop saying that having walls is being greedy (also gate/rax expand are not greedy builds, they are not as safe as gas first or gate/core builds but they are definitively safe builds) the wall itself is not greedy, its what you do behind the wall because it acts as a safety net from early zerg aggression. if you're going gate nexus vs a zerg that has gas, you're probably playing greedy. On August 31 2015 07:54 Big J wrote:
Just watching Red Bull Archon mode. God this patch is the best thing to happen to Starcraft in the last 4years. Please just give it a major balance patch before going 1step back. So fucking awesome seeing all the new meta-details. Just buff Terran, do whatever you want with drops and these balance/design changes, but leave it at 2larva and no chrono/mules for a bit longer. its a lot of fun, but i do think that its more difficult for protoss and terran to come back in any matchup right now Terran is just behind in all their non-mirrors right from the start. They just don't get off the ground and then any worker damage in an already imbalanced situation is gameending. I'm pretty sure Terran could function without mules if they just tweaked the costs/build times of things, in particular the infrastructure of Terran is really expensive and hard to get going if you don't have that extra mining. For Protoss, yeah they lost a bit of a comeback mechanic. And an interesting mechanic on top of that. I would still rather stay with 2larva inject and no mules at all for the cost of chronoboost at the moment. Watching those highlevel games just shows how much new stuff can evolve if we don't just return to the old build orders in which everyone gets a OC after barracks and a ling flood in ZvZ and everything is instantly built-up and saturated. The pace of the game is just much, much better with the currently nerfed/removed macro mechanics. Units have much more time to shine instead of going over to the opponent, shooting once and getting deflected by 99999 freshly produced units. Right. This new patch will be hugely good. Terran gets a little bit of their economy back, Protoss get an awesome new way to use CB, but frankly, I'm concerned about 3 larva. Hopefully the improved economy for T and P helps--a lot--but, I mean ... we're all watching Red Bull right now, right? Zerg is a total lol-fest and everyone knows it. Their mics were hot after that match versus QXC, and I think I heard something like, "it's so easy." Did anyone else hear that? My god bro you're literally the ZerglingShepard of Terran. You summoned him! Really, guys? So much hate ...
I was talking about DeepBurrow (=ZerglingShepard1's alter ego) who commented right after Little-Chimp posted the thing I responded to.
But quite honestly, I do believe too your comment was quite over the top. The PvZ's before your comment were very close (2-1 in favor for the zergs) and the PvZs afterwards were two stomps from the Protoss' over the Zergs. It's really not that "Zerg is a total lol-fest and everyone knows it." but Terran being too weak in both matchups as I said. PvZ seems to be quite winable for both sides at that moment in time.
Even in Archon mode it looks like both zerg's are heavily busy managing all their shit and still making big mistakes so I find those comments about "easy race" quite laughable. Just balance the TvX matchups and you will see how zerg will have to play very well against equally skilled opponents on all levels if they want to win.
|
On August 31 2015 23:27 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 23:15 TimeSpiral wrote:On August 31 2015 09:08 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 08:47 Little-Chimp wrote:On August 31 2015 08:27 TimeSpiral wrote:On August 31 2015 08:18 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 07:55 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 07:50 Lexender wrote:On August 31 2015 07:27 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 01:30 Captain Peabody wrote:
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me. the thing about that perception is that as a new player playing zerg, unlike chrono which can be banked, you cannot get larva back much like you can drop multiple mules at a time or chrono several buildings with banked energy. the system was always inequitable to an extent but more pronounced in lotv because of the numerous harassment and micro options against and for zerg players. On August 31 2015 03:15 ROOTFayth wrote:
[quote]
lol you can't be serious, there's almost no way to punish a quick 3 base zerg at least as protoss, and you can't even open gate nexus on some maps now because of the threat of the quick drop speed lings, so realistically I think protoss is at quite a disadvantage against zerg, remove or nerf the adept and Protoss would probably lose 90% of their pvz or something stupid like that, Terran is pretty much in the same spot except replace adept with liberators gate nexus is a greedy opening. to drop 8 speedlings in a timely manner, it costs like 8+ drones worth of resources (not to mention the time that it takes to research speed), you can't say that the zerg player isn't making a sacrifice to do the ling drop to try to punish a greedy opening. i honestly don't feel too bad that you couldn't sit behind a wall with nothing to defend because you know the zerg is unable to do anything to harm you until later. dunno, warp prisms are pretty good vs a greedy zerg. i think one of the most important things with legacy of the void is keeping your openings flexible so that you can potentially punish another player's opening or match greed with greed. /shrug You keep talking about walls and being greedy for toss and terran, having walls is not being greedy, they cost you resources (quite a lot in some cases) and are a necesity, dou you remember daedalus point? that was a good example of what happened when you couldn't wall of, so stop talking about "being greedy behind a wall" like we terran protoss actually chose to make walls, or try to play games as terran or protoss without walling off an see how it goes. I'm not talking about overlord drops being OP or not, I'm just saying that if you are going to argue at least make arguments that make sense and stop saying that having walls is being greedy (also gate/rax expand are not greedy builds, they are not as safe as gas first or gate/core builds but they are definitively safe builds) the wall itself is not greedy, its what you do behind the wall because it acts as a safety net from early zerg aggression. if you're going gate nexus vs a zerg that has gas, you're probably playing greedy. On August 31 2015 07:54 Big J wrote:
Just watching Red Bull Archon mode. God this patch is the best thing to happen to Starcraft in the last 4years. Please just give it a major balance patch before going 1step back. So fucking awesome seeing all the new meta-details. Just buff Terran, do whatever you want with drops and these balance/design changes, but leave it at 2larva and no chrono/mules for a bit longer. its a lot of fun, but i do think that its more difficult for protoss and terran to come back in any matchup right now Terran is just behind in all their non-mirrors right from the start. They just don't get off the ground and then any worker damage in an already imbalanced situation is gameending. I'm pretty sure Terran could function without mules if they just tweaked the costs/build times of things, in particular the infrastructure of Terran is really expensive and hard to get going if you don't have that extra mining. For Protoss, yeah they lost a bit of a comeback mechanic. And an interesting mechanic on top of that. I would still rather stay with 2larva inject and no mules at all for the cost of chronoboost at the moment. Watching those highlevel games just shows how much new stuff can evolve if we don't just return to the old build orders in which everyone gets a OC after barracks and a ling flood in ZvZ and everything is instantly built-up and saturated. The pace of the game is just much, much better with the currently nerfed/removed macro mechanics. Units have much more time to shine instead of going over to the opponent, shooting once and getting deflected by 99999 freshly produced units. Right. This new patch will be hugely good. Terran gets a little bit of their economy back, Protoss get an awesome new way to use CB, but frankly, I'm concerned about 3 larva. Hopefully the improved economy for T and P helps--a lot--but, I mean ... we're all watching Red Bull right now, right? Zerg is a total lol-fest and everyone knows it. Their mics were hot after that match versus QXC, and I think I heard something like, "it's so easy." Did anyone else hear that? My god bro you're literally the ZerglingShepard of Terran. You summoned him! Really, guys? So much hate ... I was talking about DeepBurrow (=ZerglingShepard1's alter ego) who commented right after Little-Chimp posted the thing I responded to. But quite honestly, I do believe too your comment was quite over the top. The PvZ's before your comment were very close (2-1 in favor for the zergs) and the PvZs afterwards were two stomps from the Protoss' over the Zergs. It's really not that "Zerg is a total lol-fest and everyone knows it." but Terran being too weak in both matchups as I said. PvZ seems to be quite winable for both sides at that moment in time. Even in Archon mode it looks like both zerg's are heavily busy managing all their shit and still making big mistakes so I find those comments about "easy race" quite laughable. Just balance the TvX matchups and you will see how zerg will have to play very well against equally skilled opponents on all levels if they want to win.
Ahh, gotcha.
And I pretty much agree with all of this.
|
On August 31 2015 23:27 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 23:15 TimeSpiral wrote:On August 31 2015 09:08 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 08:47 Little-Chimp wrote:On August 31 2015 08:27 TimeSpiral wrote:On August 31 2015 08:18 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 07:55 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 07:50 Lexender wrote:On August 31 2015 07:27 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 01:30 Captain Peabody wrote:
After playing this patch as a bad player, I have to say that the idea that this makes the game easier and less frustrating for casuals is total crap. For me, it's been the exact opposite. Chrono boost made the game way more forgiving for me--if I lost probes, I could chrono them out, if I didn't have enough gateways, I could chrono gateways, if I was behind on upgrades, I could chrono upgrades. Now, I feel like every tiny loss and every mistake is game-ending...even more than before. If I lose probes to harass, I'm put drastically behind, with little or no way to catch up. If I don't have enough gateways during an attack, I'm screwed. If I haven't been getting upgrades, I'm screwed.
This is just my perspective, but so far, I'm really not seeing in what possible world this change makes the game easier for bad players like me. the thing about that perception is that as a new player playing zerg, unlike chrono which can be banked, you cannot get larva back much like you can drop multiple mules at a time or chrono several buildings with banked energy. the system was always inequitable to an extent but more pronounced in lotv because of the numerous harassment and micro options against and for zerg players. On August 31 2015 03:15 ROOTFayth wrote:
[quote]
lol you can't be serious, there's almost no way to punish a quick 3 base zerg at least as protoss, and you can't even open gate nexus on some maps now because of the threat of the quick drop speed lings, so realistically I think protoss is at quite a disadvantage against zerg, remove or nerf the adept and Protoss would probably lose 90% of their pvz or something stupid like that, Terran is pretty much in the same spot except replace adept with liberators gate nexus is a greedy opening. to drop 8 speedlings in a timely manner, it costs like 8+ drones worth of resources (not to mention the time that it takes to research speed), you can't say that the zerg player isn't making a sacrifice to do the ling drop to try to punish a greedy opening. i honestly don't feel too bad that you couldn't sit behind a wall with nothing to defend because you know the zerg is unable to do anything to harm you until later. dunno, warp prisms are pretty good vs a greedy zerg. i think one of the most important things with legacy of the void is keeping your openings flexible so that you can potentially punish another player's opening or match greed with greed. /shrug You keep talking about walls and being greedy for toss and terran, having walls is not being greedy, they cost you resources (quite a lot in some cases) and are a necesity, dou you remember daedalus point? that was a good example of what happened when you couldn't wall of, so stop talking about "being greedy behind a wall" like we terran protoss actually chose to make walls, or try to play games as terran or protoss without walling off an see how it goes. I'm not talking about overlord drops being OP or not, I'm just saying that if you are going to argue at least make arguments that make sense and stop saying that having walls is being greedy (also gate/rax expand are not greedy builds, they are not as safe as gas first or gate/core builds but they are definitively safe builds) the wall itself is not greedy, its what you do behind the wall because it acts as a safety net from early zerg aggression. if you're going gate nexus vs a zerg that has gas, you're probably playing greedy. On August 31 2015 07:54 Big J wrote:
Just watching Red Bull Archon mode. God this patch is the best thing to happen to Starcraft in the last 4years. Please just give it a major balance patch before going 1step back. So fucking awesome seeing all the new meta-details. Just buff Terran, do whatever you want with drops and these balance/design changes, but leave it at 2larva and no chrono/mules for a bit longer. its a lot of fun, but i do think that its more difficult for protoss and terran to come back in any matchup right now Terran is just behind in all their non-mirrors right from the start. They just don't get off the ground and then any worker damage in an already imbalanced situation is gameending. I'm pretty sure Terran could function without mules if they just tweaked the costs/build times of things, in particular the infrastructure of Terran is really expensive and hard to get going if you don't have that extra mining. For Protoss, yeah they lost a bit of a comeback mechanic. And an interesting mechanic on top of that. I would still rather stay with 2larva inject and no mules at all for the cost of chronoboost at the moment. Watching those highlevel games just shows how much new stuff can evolve if we don't just return to the old build orders in which everyone gets a OC after barracks and a ling flood in ZvZ and everything is instantly built-up and saturated. The pace of the game is just much, much better with the currently nerfed/removed macro mechanics. Units have much more time to shine instead of going over to the opponent, shooting once and getting deflected by 99999 freshly produced units. Right. This new patch will be hugely good. Terran gets a little bit of their economy back, Protoss get an awesome new way to use CB, but frankly, I'm concerned about 3 larva. Hopefully the improved economy for T and P helps--a lot--but, I mean ... we're all watching Red Bull right now, right? Zerg is a total lol-fest and everyone knows it. Their mics were hot after that match versus QXC, and I think I heard something like, "it's so easy." Did anyone else hear that? My god bro you're literally the ZerglingShepard of Terran. You summoned him! Really, guys? So much hate ... I was talking about DeepBurrow (=ZerglingShepard1's alter ego) who commented right after Little-Chimp posted the thing I responded to. But quite honestly, I do believe too your comment was quite over the top. The PvZ's before your comment were very close (2-1 in favor for the zergs) and the PvZs afterwards were two stomps from the Protoss' over the Zergs. It's really not that "Zerg is a total lol-fest and everyone knows it." but Terran being too weak in both matchups as I said. PvZ seems to be quite winable for both sides at that moment in time. Even in Archon mode it looks like both zerg's are heavily busy managing all their shit and still making big mistakes so I find those comments about "easy race" quite laughable. Just balance the TvX matchups and you will see how zerg will have to play very well against equally skilled opponents on all levels if they want to win.
I find your statement quite delusional, the game will be balanced in the end so winrate at the moment does not matter at all, but I find unbelievable that you deny how much easier Zerg has been made comparatively to the two other races. Injects was the only difficult part about macroing as Zerg (with creep spread), except when you want to produce building (and that is much less frequent than the other races) you never have to go manage your base, all the productions of units, supply is achievable in three clic, then you can automatically define a rally point and you can directly add them to your control group.
The difficulty of injects was the only point that makes Zerg macro equally difficult to terrans and protoss, and since injecting was much more difficult than managing your Mules/chronoboost which also have been "auto-casted", it is quite logical that Zerg is now the easiest race when it comes to macro management.
|
On September 01 2015 01:07 Vanadiel wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 23:27 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 23:15 TimeSpiral wrote:On August 31 2015 09:08 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 08:47 Little-Chimp wrote:On August 31 2015 08:27 TimeSpiral wrote:On August 31 2015 08:18 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 07:55 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 07:50 Lexender wrote:On August 31 2015 07:27 BluemoonSC wrote:
[quote]
the thing about that perception is that as a new player playing zerg, unlike chrono which can be banked, you cannot get larva back much like you can drop multiple mules at a time or chrono several buildings with banked energy. the system was always inequitable to an extent but more pronounced in lotv because of the numerous harassment and micro options against and for zerg players.
[quote]
gate nexus is a greedy opening. to drop 8 speedlings in a timely manner, it costs like 8+ drones worth of resources (not to mention the time that it takes to research speed), you can't say that the zerg player isn't making a sacrifice to do the ling drop to try to punish a greedy opening. i honestly don't feel too bad that you couldn't sit behind a wall with nothing to defend because you know the zerg is unable to do anything to harm you until later.
dunno, warp prisms are pretty good vs a greedy zerg. i think one of the most important things with legacy of the void is keeping your openings flexible so that you can potentially punish another player's opening or match greed with greed. /shrug You keep talking about walls and being greedy for toss and terran, having walls is not being greedy, they cost you resources (quite a lot in some cases) and are a necesity, dou you remember daedalus point? that was a good example of what happened when you couldn't wall of, so stop talking about "being greedy behind a wall" like we terran protoss actually chose to make walls, or try to play games as terran or protoss without walling off an see how it goes. I'm not talking about overlord drops being OP or not, I'm just saying that if you are going to argue at least make arguments that make sense and stop saying that having walls is being greedy (also gate/rax expand are not greedy builds, they are not as safe as gas first or gate/core builds but they are definitively safe builds) the wall itself is not greedy, its what you do behind the wall because it acts as a safety net from early zerg aggression. if you're going gate nexus vs a zerg that has gas, you're probably playing greedy. On August 31 2015 07:54 Big J wrote:
Just watching Red Bull Archon mode. God this patch is the best thing to happen to Starcraft in the last 4years. Please just give it a major balance patch before going 1step back. So fucking awesome seeing all the new meta-details. Just buff Terran, do whatever you want with drops and these balance/design changes, but leave it at 2larva and no chrono/mules for a bit longer. its a lot of fun, but i do think that its more difficult for protoss and terran to come back in any matchup right now Terran is just behind in all their non-mirrors right from the start. They just don't get off the ground and then any worker damage in an already imbalanced situation is gameending. I'm pretty sure Terran could function without mules if they just tweaked the costs/build times of things, in particular the infrastructure of Terran is really expensive and hard to get going if you don't have that extra mining. For Protoss, yeah they lost a bit of a comeback mechanic. And an interesting mechanic on top of that. I would still rather stay with 2larva inject and no mules at all for the cost of chronoboost at the moment. Watching those highlevel games just shows how much new stuff can evolve if we don't just return to the old build orders in which everyone gets a OC after barracks and a ling flood in ZvZ and everything is instantly built-up and saturated. The pace of the game is just much, much better with the currently nerfed/removed macro mechanics. Units have much more time to shine instead of going over to the opponent, shooting once and getting deflected by 99999 freshly produced units. Right. This new patch will be hugely good. Terran gets a little bit of their economy back, Protoss get an awesome new way to use CB, but frankly, I'm concerned about 3 larva. Hopefully the improved economy for T and P helps--a lot--but, I mean ... we're all watching Red Bull right now, right? Zerg is a total lol-fest and everyone knows it. Their mics were hot after that match versus QXC, and I think I heard something like, "it's so easy." Did anyone else hear that? My god bro you're literally the ZerglingShepard of Terran. You summoned him! Really, guys? So much hate ... I was talking about DeepBurrow (=ZerglingShepard1's alter ego) who commented right after Little-Chimp posted the thing I responded to. But quite honestly, I do believe too your comment was quite over the top. The PvZ's before your comment were very close (2-1 in favor for the zergs) and the PvZs afterwards were two stomps from the Protoss' over the Zergs. It's really not that "Zerg is a total lol-fest and everyone knows it." but Terran being too weak in both matchups as I said. PvZ seems to be quite winable for both sides at that moment in time. Even in Archon mode it looks like both zerg's are heavily busy managing all their shit and still making big mistakes so I find those comments about "easy race" quite laughable. Just balance the TvX matchups and you will see how zerg will have to play very well against equally skilled opponents on all levels if they want to win. I find your statement quite delusional, the game will be balanced in the end so winrate at the moment does not matter at all, but I find unbelievable that you deny how much easier Zerg has been made comparatively to the two other races. Injects was the only difficult part about macroing as Zerg (with creep spread), except when you want to produce building (and that is much less frequent than the other races) you never have to go manage your base, all the productions of units, supply is achievable in three clic, then you can automatically define a rally point and you can directly add them to your control group. The difficulty of injects was the only point that makes Zerg macro equally difficult to terrans and protoss, and since injecting was much more difficult than managing your Mules/chronoboost which also have been "auto-casted", it is quite logical that Zerg is now the easiest race when it comes to macro management.
While building units was easier for zerg adding directly to group took additional clicking and pressing buttons, also needing to balance drones and military from same supply of larva was not easy and creep spread is still part of zerg macro.
Then you forget some zerg units have two steps of being built (Banelings, Guardians, Lurkers, new roach morph unit) which other races don't have.
And of course you cannot waypoint multiple buildings with zergs but use one drone for one building.
With inject zerg macro was hardest, on average zerg players had more APM. Now the whole business is back to about equal.
|
On September 01 2015 01:37 -Archangel- wrote:
*snip*
With inject zerg macro was hardest, on average zerg players had more APM. Now the whole business is back to about equal.
If you compare Spawn Larva to dropping MULE or assigning Chronoboost, then it's incredibly obvious that Spawn Larva was the "hardest" of the three, but that's a silly comparison. Spawn Larva--imho--is more accurately compared to the scaling of production capabilities for Terran and Protoss. In this context, Zerg is the simplest to understand: if you want more units--doesn't matter which ones, you can choose that later--continuously Spawn Larva with Queens on Hatches. Terran and Protoss is, of course, different. Investments must be made in production infrastructures, and this constitutes a tangible premeditated commitment. Certainly builds or comps require scaling your production with your economy properly, and this is much less straight forward than "don't miss Spawn Larvas if you want to build lots of units."
All three races are difficult to play well. Starcraft 2 is a hard game. They each have their focuses, and will appeal to players of different dispositions.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On September 01 2015 02:13 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2015 01:37 -Archangel- wrote:
*snip*
With inject zerg macro was hardest, on average zerg players had more APM. Now the whole business is back to about equal. If you compare Spawn Larva to dropping MULE or assigning Chronoboost, then it's incredibly obvious that Spawn Larva was the "hardest" of the three, but that's a silly comparison. Spawn Larva--imho--is more accurately compared to the scaling of production capabilities for Terran and Protoss. In this context, Zerg is the simplest to understand: if you want more units--doesn't matter which ones, you can choose that later--continuously Spawn Larva with Queens on Hatches. Terran and Protoss is, of course, different. Investments must be made in production infrastructures, and this constitutes a tangible premeditated commitment. Certainly builds or comps require scaling your production with your economy properly, and this is much less straight forward than "don't miss Spawn Larvas if you want to build lots of units." All three races are difficult to play well. Starcraft 2 is a hard game. They each have their focuses, and will appeal to players of different dispositions.
the thing about that comparison is that terran and protoss players don't have to make the decision to create workers at certain times in the game, so in that regard, its not as simple as "spawn larva, make more units."
it's "ok, if i get one more wave of drones out, i can spit and make a round of units before my opponent moves out."
the decision of what units to make, how many, and when (especially when you're waiting for an important tech building to finish) is all a part of zerg macro where as a terran or protoss player, its much more straight forward with what you can build and when. to say that zerg macro can be summed up by not missing injects is a fallacy that non-zerg players live in.
|
On August 29 2015 03:17 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:
Is that a Rotti shoutout?
Not a fan of the autocasted macro boosters. I'd rather they just take them all out and balance the game around regular old macro.
Came here to basically say this. It seems like a slightly clunky way to maintain the current balance in an effort to avoid rebalancing everything (which is an incredible amount of work). I think the effort would be worth it though.
Also is the new chrono actually less clicking? Does it have a cooldown or can you freely switch it around?
Mule change isn't too bad I guess. You can still kill mules so there's that harass option.
Larva inject should just be removed and maybe just increase larva count and spawn speed at the hatchery. Or lair/hive could provide some bonus. More macro hatches seems cooler to me.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On September 01 2015 03:10 Footler wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2015 03:17 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:
Is that a Rotti shoutout?
Not a fan of the autocasted macro boosters. I'd rather they just take them all out and balance the game around regular old macro. Came here to basically say this. It seems like a slightly clunky way to maintain the current balance in an effort to avoid rebalancing everything (which is an incredible amount of work). I think the effort would be worth it though. Also is the new chrono actually less clicking? Does it have a cooldown or can you freely switch it around? Mule change isn't too bad I guess. You can still kill mules so there's that harass option. Larva inject should just be removed and maybe just increase larva count and spawn speed at the hatchery. Or lair/hive could provide some bonus. More macro hatches seems cooler to me.
i would imagine the ability is cast on a building, and during the duration of chronoboost, you can switch the building you want it cast on, and when it is done on the original structure, it will be then be cast on the new structure.
as for larva inject being removed and more larva coming from queens, i said this in another thread or maybe earlier in this one but there are a couple problems that will arise
1) queens can be more dedicated to defense and attacks. losing a queen is no longer a big deal and can be used aggressively. on the other hand, early attacks won't find the queens split up at different bases, waddling to get to the attack.
2) a side effect of problem 1 is the speed at which creep will take over the map.
3) more larva early on can create volatile situations where you see a zerg player banking like 5-6 larva to instantly spawn 10-12 zerglings on one base while getting speed because, again, queens aren't necessary. zvz would become a nightmare and P/T players would never be able to quickly expand because of the threat of a huge ling flood early.
|
On September 01 2015 01:07 Vanadiel wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2015 23:27 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 23:15 TimeSpiral wrote:On August 31 2015 09:08 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 08:47 Little-Chimp wrote:On August 31 2015 08:27 TimeSpiral wrote:On August 31 2015 08:18 Big J wrote:On August 31 2015 07:55 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 31 2015 07:50 Lexender wrote:On August 31 2015 07:27 BluemoonSC wrote:
[quote]
the thing about that perception is that as a new player playing zerg, unlike chrono which can be banked, you cannot get larva back much like you can drop multiple mules at a time or chrono several buildings with banked energy. the system was always inequitable to an extent but more pronounced in lotv because of the numerous harassment and micro options against and for zerg players.
[quote]
gate nexus is a greedy opening. to drop 8 speedlings in a timely manner, it costs like 8+ drones worth of resources (not to mention the time that it takes to research speed), you can't say that the zerg player isn't making a sacrifice to do the ling drop to try to punish a greedy opening. i honestly don't feel too bad that you couldn't sit behind a wall with nothing to defend because you know the zerg is unable to do anything to harm you until later.
dunno, warp prisms are pretty good vs a greedy zerg. i think one of the most important things with legacy of the void is keeping your openings flexible so that you can potentially punish another player's opening or match greed with greed. /shrug You keep talking about walls and being greedy for toss and terran, having walls is not being greedy, they cost you resources (quite a lot in some cases) and are a necesity, dou you remember daedalus point? that was a good example of what happened when you couldn't wall of, so stop talking about "being greedy behind a wall" like we terran protoss actually chose to make walls, or try to play games as terran or protoss without walling off an see how it goes. I'm not talking about overlord drops being OP or not, I'm just saying that if you are going to argue at least make arguments that make sense and stop saying that having walls is being greedy (also gate/rax expand are not greedy builds, they are not as safe as gas first or gate/core builds but they are definitively safe builds) the wall itself is not greedy, its what you do behind the wall because it acts as a safety net from early zerg aggression. if you're going gate nexus vs a zerg that has gas, you're probably playing greedy. On August 31 2015 07:54 Big J wrote:
Just watching Red Bull Archon mode. God this patch is the best thing to happen to Starcraft in the last 4years. Please just give it a major balance patch before going 1step back. So fucking awesome seeing all the new meta-details. Just buff Terran, do whatever you want with drops and these balance/design changes, but leave it at 2larva and no chrono/mules for a bit longer. its a lot of fun, but i do think that its more difficult for protoss and terran to come back in any matchup right now Terran is just behind in all their non-mirrors right from the start. They just don't get off the ground and then any worker damage in an already imbalanced situation is gameending. I'm pretty sure Terran could function without mules if they just tweaked the costs/build times of things, in particular the infrastructure of Terran is really expensive and hard to get going if you don't have that extra mining. For Protoss, yeah they lost a bit of a comeback mechanic. And an interesting mechanic on top of that. I would still rather stay with 2larva inject and no mules at all for the cost of chronoboost at the moment. Watching those highlevel games just shows how much new stuff can evolve if we don't just return to the old build orders in which everyone gets a OC after barracks and a ling flood in ZvZ and everything is instantly built-up and saturated. The pace of the game is just much, much better with the currently nerfed/removed macro mechanics. Units have much more time to shine instead of going over to the opponent, shooting once and getting deflected by 99999 freshly produced units. Right. This new patch will be hugely good. Terran gets a little bit of their economy back, Protoss get an awesome new way to use CB, but frankly, I'm concerned about 3 larva. Hopefully the improved economy for T and P helps--a lot--but, I mean ... we're all watching Red Bull right now, right? Zerg is a total lol-fest and everyone knows it. Their mics were hot after that match versus QXC, and I think I heard something like, "it's so easy." Did anyone else hear that? My god bro you're literally the ZerglingShepard of Terran. You summoned him! Really, guys? So much hate ... I was talking about DeepBurrow (=ZerglingShepard1's alter ego) who commented right after Little-Chimp posted the thing I responded to. But quite honestly, I do believe too your comment was quite over the top. The PvZ's before your comment were very close (2-1 in favor for the zergs) and the PvZs afterwards were two stomps from the Protoss' over the Zergs. It's really not that "Zerg is a total lol-fest and everyone knows it." but Terran being too weak in both matchups as I said. PvZ seems to be quite winable for both sides at that moment in time. Even in Archon mode it looks like both zerg's are heavily busy managing all their shit and still making big mistakes so I find those comments about "easy race" quite laughable. Just balance the TvX matchups and you will see how zerg will have to play very well against equally skilled opponents on all levels if they want to win. I find your statement quite delusional, the game will be balanced in the end so winrate at the moment does not matter at all, but I find unbelievable that you deny how much easier Zerg has been made comparatively to the two other races. Injects was the only difficult part about macroing as Zerg (with creep spread), except when you want to produce building (and that is much less frequent than the other races) you never have to go manage your base, all the productions of units, supply is achievable in three clic, then you can automatically define a rally point and you can directly add them to your control group. The difficulty of injects was the only point that makes Zerg macro equally difficult to terrans and protoss, and since injecting was much more difficult than managing your Mules/chronoboost which also have been "auto-casted", it is quite logical that Zerg is now the easiest race when it comes to macro management.
Sorry, but I find this sort of argument completely blue eyed.
There are a thousand and one assymetries in the game. Macro is not "equally hard" at the moment, it's probably heavily skewed and also completely different every game and matchup you play. You know why? Because blizzard never gave a fuck about making it equally hard. They made it hard, whether that means that after 5years of evolving metagame it turned out 50% harder for Zerg or 50% harder for Terran doesn't matter. What matters is that while the one side has to do "necessary" macro, the other race has to take other "necessary" actions.
And that's going to be the case in a hard enough, balanced game. "Making macro easier" for zerg will just mean that the game gets balanced around different "necessary" actions.
Also it doesn't imply that zerg "has become easiest in macro" to begin with, which is a very subjective perception anyways.
|
On September 01 2015 02:54 BluemoonSC wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2015 02:13 TimeSpiral wrote:On September 01 2015 01:37 -Archangel- wrote:
*snip*
With inject zerg macro was hardest, on average zerg players had more APM. Now the whole business is back to about equal. If you compare Spawn Larva to dropping MULE or assigning Chronoboost, then it's incredibly obvious that Spawn Larva was the "hardest" of the three, but that's a silly comparison. Spawn Larva--imho--is more accurately compared to the scaling of production capabilities for Terran and Protoss. In this context, Zerg is the simplest to understand: if you want more units--doesn't matter which ones, you can choose that later--continuously Spawn Larva with Queens on Hatches. Terran and Protoss is, of course, different. Investments must be made in production infrastructures, and this constitutes a tangible premeditated commitment. Certainly builds or comps require scaling your production with your economy properly, and this is much less straight forward than "don't miss Spawn Larvas if you want to build lots of units." All three races are difficult to play well. Starcraft 2 is a hard game. They each have their focuses, and will appeal to players of different dispositions. the thing about that comparison is that terran and protoss players don't have to make the decision to create workers at certain times in the game, so in that regard, its not as simple as "spawn larva, make more units." it's "ok, if i get one more wave of drones out, i can spit and make a round of units before my opponent moves out." the decision of what units to make, how many, and when (especially when you're waiting for an important tech building to finish) is all a part of zerg macro where as a terran or protoss player, its much more straight forward with what you can build and when. to say that zerg macro can be summed up by not missing injects is a fallacy that non-zerg players live in.
You're right, Terran and Protoss think about those choices differently. But that is not the point I was making. Look again.
On September 01 2015 02:13 TimeSpiral wrote:
[...] Zerg is the simplest to understand: if you want more units--doesn't matter which ones, you can choose that later--continuously Spawn Larva with Queens on Hatches.
The choice of "when to drone" or "when to build units" is completely separate from, "if you want to build more units, continuously Spawn Larva on Hatcheries".
Sorry if I was being unclear. I can tend toward the verbose side of things.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On September 01 2015 03:47 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2015 02:54 BluemoonSC wrote:On September 01 2015 02:13 TimeSpiral wrote:On September 01 2015 01:37 -Archangel- wrote:
*snip*
With inject zerg macro was hardest, on average zerg players had more APM. Now the whole business is back to about equal. If you compare Spawn Larva to dropping MULE or assigning Chronoboost, then it's incredibly obvious that Spawn Larva was the "hardest" of the three, but that's a silly comparison. Spawn Larva--imho--is more accurately compared to the scaling of production capabilities for Terran and Protoss. In this context, Zerg is the simplest to understand: if you want more units--doesn't matter which ones, you can choose that later--continuously Spawn Larva with Queens on Hatches. Terran and Protoss is, of course, different. Investments must be made in production infrastructures, and this constitutes a tangible premeditated commitment. Certainly builds or comps require scaling your production with your economy properly, and this is much less straight forward than "don't miss Spawn Larvas if you want to build lots of units." All three races are difficult to play well. Starcraft 2 is a hard game. They each have their focuses, and will appeal to players of different dispositions. the thing about that comparison is that terran and protoss players don't have to make the decision to create workers at certain times in the game, so in that regard, its not as simple as "spawn larva, make more units." it's "ok, if i get one more wave of drones out, i can spit and make a round of units before my opponent moves out." the decision of what units to make, how many, and when (especially when you're waiting for an important tech building to finish) is all a part of zerg macro where as a terran or protoss player, its much more straight forward with what you can build and when. to say that zerg macro can be summed up by not missing injects is a fallacy that non-zerg players live in. You're right, Terran and Protoss think about those choices differently. But that is not the point I was making. Look again. Show nested quote +On September 01 2015 02:13 TimeSpiral wrote:
[...] Zerg is the simplest to understand: if you want more units--doesn't matter which ones, you can choose that later--continuously Spawn Larva with Queens on Hatches. The choice of "when to drone" or "when to build units" is completely separate from, "if you want to build more units, continuously Spawn Larva on Hatcheries". Sorry if I was being unclear. I can tend toward the verbose side of things.
i understand what you're trying to say. let me rephrase what i meant. unlike the other two races, zerg have 3 resources: minerals, gas, and larva. terran and protoss macro is based purely off of how much money they have at a given point in a game. if you have too much money floating, you can make structures that spend that money. if you are creating workers without overlap, this money can be easily defined and spent accordingly. you have money, you have production structures, you make the stuff you want out of them. it's is much more straight forward than zerg macro.
zerg, on the other hand, have to take into account their income just like protoss and terran, but the undefined is how they spend their 3rd resource, the larva. yes, in the beginning of the game you have a set plan..get your hatch at this time, drop your spawning pool at this time. but after about 30 supply when your first inject happens, a lot of that is out the window due to the nature of the game and the adjustments required for success.. "did a bunch of adepts move out on the map? i need to make speedlings. ok, i made a couple too many and my economy is hurting, so i need to spend the rest of my larva on drones. alright, i'm floating too many minerals and I don't have enough larva, better get a macro hatch." etc. the process that is zerg macro has many deviations and shortcuts.
tl;dr zerg macro doesn't happen linearly like protoss or terran and to say "just spit if you want to make units" is oversimplifying that
|
On September 01 2015 03:32 BluemoonSC wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2015 03:10 Footler wrote:On August 29 2015 03:17 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:
Is that a Rotti shoutout?
Not a fan of the autocasted macro boosters. I'd rather they just take them all out and balance the game around regular old macro. Came here to basically say this. It seems like a slightly clunky way to maintain the current balance in an effort to avoid rebalancing everything (which is an incredible amount of work). I think the effort would be worth it though. Also is the new chrono actually less clicking? Does it have a cooldown or can you freely switch it around? Mule change isn't too bad I guess. You can still kill mules so there's that harass option. Larva inject should just be removed and maybe just increase larva count and spawn speed at the hatchery. Or lair/hive could provide some bonus. More macro hatches seems cooler to me. i would imagine the ability is cast on a building, and during the duration of chronoboost, you can switch the building you want it cast on, and when it is done on the original structure, it will be then be cast on the new structure. as for larva inject being removed and more larva coming from queens, i said this in another thread or maybe earlier in this one but there are a couple problems that will arise 1) queens can be more dedicated to defense and attacks. losing a queen is no longer a big deal and can be used aggressively. on the other hand, early attacks won't find the queens split up at different bases, waddling to get to the attack. 2) a side effect of problem 1 is the speed at which creep will take over the map. 3) more larva early on can create volatile situations where you see a zerg player banking like 5-6 larva to instantly spawn 10-12 zerglings on one base while getting speed because, again, queens aren't necessary. zvz would become a nightmare and P/T players would never be able to quickly expand because of the threat of a huge ling flood early.
It kind of seems like the new chronoboost doesn't really accomplish the less clicking thing (at least not to a significant amount) but just makes it more friendly to lower level players. I would imagine better players would want to frequently change the chronoboosted building. But I guess I don't know exactly how it works yet so I can't really comment further.
No larva inject and more larva on hatcheries could still work. It would just require some rebalancing which all of these macro changes are going to require anyways. It could be hatchery/lair/hive equals 4/5/6 larva or something similar.
|
On September 01 2015 04:05 BluemoonSC wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2015 03:47 TimeSpiral wrote:On September 01 2015 02:54 BluemoonSC wrote:On September 01 2015 02:13 TimeSpiral wrote:On September 01 2015 01:37 -Archangel- wrote:
*snip*
With inject zerg macro was hardest, on average zerg players had more APM. Now the whole business is back to about equal. If you compare Spawn Larva to dropping MULE or assigning Chronoboost, then it's incredibly obvious that Spawn Larva was the "hardest" of the three, but that's a silly comparison. Spawn Larva--imho--is more accurately compared to the scaling of production capabilities for Terran and Protoss. In this context, Zerg is the simplest to understand: if you want more units--doesn't matter which ones, you can choose that later--continuously Spawn Larva with Queens on Hatches. Terran and Protoss is, of course, different. Investments must be made in production infrastructures, and this constitutes a tangible premeditated commitment. Certainly builds or comps require scaling your production with your economy properly, and this is much less straight forward than "don't miss Spawn Larvas if you want to build lots of units." All three races are difficult to play well. Starcraft 2 is a hard game. They each have their focuses, and will appeal to players of different dispositions. the thing about that comparison is that terran and protoss players don't have to make the decision to create workers at certain times in the game, so in that regard, its not as simple as "spawn larva, make more units." it's "ok, if i get one more wave of drones out, i can spit and make a round of units before my opponent moves out." the decision of what units to make, how many, and when (especially when you're waiting for an important tech building to finish) is all a part of zerg macro where as a terran or protoss player, its much more straight forward with what you can build and when. to say that zerg macro can be summed up by not missing injects is a fallacy that non-zerg players live in. You're right, Terran and Protoss think about those choices differently. But that is not the point I was making. Look again. On September 01 2015 02:13 TimeSpiral wrote:
[...] Zerg is the simplest to understand: if you want more units--doesn't matter which ones, you can choose that later--continuously Spawn Larva with Queens on Hatches. The choice of "when to drone" or "when to build units" is completely separate from, "if you want to build more units, continuously Spawn Larva on Hatcheries". Sorry if I was being unclear. I can tend toward the verbose side of things. i understand what you're trying to say. let me rephrase what i meant. unlike the other two races, zerg have 3 resources: minerals, gas, and larva. terran and protoss macro is based purely off of how much money they have at a given point in a game. if you have too much money floating, you can make structures that spend that money. if you are creating workers without overlap, this money can be easily defined and spent accordingly. you have money, you have production structures, you make the stuff you want out of them. it's is much more straight forward than zerg macro. zerg, on the other hand, have to take into account their income just like protoss and terran, but the undefined is how they spend their 3rd resource, the larva. yes, in the beginning of the game you have a set plan..get your hatch at this time, drop your spawning pool at this time. but after about 30 supply when your first inject happens, a lot of that is out the window due to the nature of the game and the adjustments required for success.. "did a bunch of adepts move out on the map? i need to make speedlings. ok, i made a couple too many and my economy is hurting, so i need to spend the rest of my larva on drones. alright, i'm floating too many minerals and I don't have enough larva, better get a macro hatch." etc. the process that is zerg macro has many deviations and shortcuts. tl;dr zerg macro doesn't happen linearly like protoss or terran and to say "just spit if you want to make units" is oversimplifying that
Sure, I've heard that before. That larva is a resource. I guess if we're going to give that, we have to also say that production facilities are the equivalent resource for Terran and Protoss. To simplify, I will speak as a Terran (so I don't have to say T and P every time).
But when you say, "terran and protoss macro is based purely off of how much money they have at a given point in a game. if you have too much money floating, you can make structures that spend that money." I would say, "but production facilities can't shoot stuff." See, the problem is the same. If Zerg needs units, and they just built drones, or missed a bunch of Spawn Larvas, they're fucked. If Terran needs units, and sees they are still on they only have three production facilities, they're fucked. It's the same, just different (if that makes sense).
I contend that Spawn Larva is a simpler mechanic to understand because it really is as simple as "Spawn Larva on your hatches and you should have enough larva when you need it." --Please, before everyone freaks. I'm not saying it's easy to play SC2 as Zerg. It's not.-- Of course you have other infrastructure, like tech buildings, but you never have to iterate those buildings. If you want to go mass roach on three base, you take three bases, spawn larva, have a roach warren, and build a bunch of roaches. If you want to plan for a tech switch you build the new tech building, maybe get some upgrades, but iterating production is literally the same exact process for every unit composition: Spawn Larva on Hatches.
Terran's mechanic is also simple to understand: certain production facilities can produce certain units at set intervals. Some production facilities require add-on structures to unlock the ability to train certain units and upgrades. It is less simple to know how many barracks one needs on a saturated two-base economy, what add-on configuration is best, and at what times in your economic scaling to build those facilities. Similarly, if Terran is planning a tech switch, they have to know how to use the other production facilities, and how they scale with economy, and what add-ons are best, and each composition is slightly different given your economy as it grows. Sure, once you have memorized all of these configurations, then you have it, and it comes down to execution. But this can be said for all three.
I can't imagine this response not getting brutally attacked by the butt-hurt police, but I think you will get what I'm saying. I'm not being pejorative. I want to be very clear: I don't think any race is easy to play, or easier than the other (in the grand scheme of things) but the unit production mechanic for Zerg is the simplest of the three.
|
Why do I have the impression that the dudes "at blizzard, can't even call them devs or balance team" modus operandi is to randomly change stuff and hope it sticks. I've been following/playing this game since 2011 and that's my honest opinion in retrospective. As it is , the current SC2 (LotV and even HotS) stopped being the SC2 that we knew and loved.
I still have some hope , maybe, maybe, they will get it right, tho, that might be wishful thinking ...
|
On September 01 2015 04:53 HomeWorld wrote:
Why do I have the impression that the dudes "at blizzard, can't even call them devs or balance team" modus operandi is to randomly change stuff and hope it sticks. I've been following/playing this game since 2011 and that's my honest opinion in retrospective. As it is , the current SC2 (LotV and even HotS) stopped being the SC2 that we knew and loved.
I still have some hope , maybe, maybe, they will get it right, tho, that might be wishful thinking ...
Blizzard's approach to LotV might come off a bit reckless in the sense that it is upsetting the balance but the bigger picture that they have in mind and will hopefully achieve could be huge for the game on all fronts. I would be lying if I said I wasn't nervous though.
|
I'm not sure why creep spread gets ignored so much in these "jerg ez" discussions about looking at their base lol. Spreading creep well takes up way more actions than popping supply depots, but I guess it doesn't count because it's not in the base and it's not as "mandatory".
Like I suppose you wouldnt creep spread in an important battle, but honestly no terran is going to be building supply depots while splitting marines vs banelings. It's pretty much equal footing.
That being said, lol at autoinject with 3 larva. gg everyone else
|
On September 01 2015 05:53 Little-Chimp wrote:
I'm not sure why creep spread gets ignored so much in these "jerg ez" discussions about looking at their base lol. Spreading creep well takes up way more actions than popping supply depots, but I guess it doesn't count because it's not in the base and it's not as "mandatory".
Like I suppose you wouldnt creep spread in an important battle, but honestly no terran is going to be building supply depots while splitting marines vs banelings. It's pretty much equal footing.
That being said, lol at autoinject with 3 larva. gg everyone else
Well, creepspread isn't even really important in a lot of ZvZs (I guess that doesn't matter) and PvZs. Just read through the crap and have a nice laugh. People trying to sell making 7barracks a factory and a starport as the pinnacle of macro and then only have to look back every 5mins to queue 5more depots are just hilarious. I could also say: "At that point in the game I haven't even placed my spire, started my baneling speed, made an infestation pit, a hive an ultralisk cavern or a greater spire", but whatever. Some people just won't understand it ever, it's assymetric and NOT THE SAME. They just see what they want to see.
3larva will be crazy in the mid and lategame though, especially if the mule and chrono return in nerfed versions. 75% inject rate is probably more than a lot of professional players get in a 20min game right now...
|
fuck, quote instead of edit...
|
On September 01 2015 02:13 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2015 01:37 -Archangel- wrote:
*snip*
With inject zerg macro was hardest, on average zerg players had more APM. Now the whole business is back to about equal. If you compare Spawn Larva to dropping MULE or assigning Chronoboost, then it's incredibly obvious that Spawn Larva was the "hardest" of the three, but that's a silly comparison. Spawn Larva--imho--is more accurately compared to the scaling of production capabilities for Terran and Protoss. In this context, Zerg is the simplest to understand: if you want more units--doesn't matter which ones, you can choose that later--continuously Spawn Larva with Queens on Hatches. Terran and Protoss is, of course, different. Investments must be made in production infrastructures, and this constitutes a tangible premeditated commitment. Certainly builds or comps require scaling your production with your economy properly, and this is much less straight forward than "don't miss Spawn Larvas if you want to build lots of units." All three races are difficult to play well. Starcraft 2 is a hard game. They each have their focuses, and will appeal to players of different dispositions.
I was comparing whole macro of 3 races. I didn't mention upgrades part of macro because all 3 factions have it same difficulty here (click on building and put some upgrade to work).
I agree that automating inject has more effect on Zerg that automating chrono or mules, but that is OK because total Zerg macro was hardest of the 3 factions so now it will be more equal.
|
There is no bigger pointless discussion than X is an easy race.
|
On September 01 2015 06:05 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2015 05:53 Little-Chimp wrote:
I'm not sure why creep spread gets ignored so much in these "jerg ez" discussions about looking at their base lol. Spreading creep well takes up way more actions than popping supply depots, but I guess it doesn't count because it's not in the base and it's not as "mandatory".
Like I suppose you wouldnt creep spread in an important battle, but honestly no terran is going to be building supply depots while splitting marines vs banelings. It's pretty much equal footing.
That being said, lol at autoinject with 3 larva. gg everyone else Well, creepspread isn't even really important in a lot of ZvZs (I guess that doesn't matter) and PvZs. Just read through the crap and have a nice laugh. People trying to sell making 7barracks a factory and a starport as the pinnacle of macro and then only have to look back every 5mins to queue 5more depots are just hilarious. I could also say: "At that point in the game I haven't even placed my spire, started my baneling speed, made an infestation pit, a hive an ultralisk cavern or a greater spire", but whatever. Some people just won't understand it ever, it's assymetric and NOT THE SAME. They just see what they want to see. 3larva will be crazy in the mid and lategame though, especially if the mule and chrono return in nerfed versions. 75% inject rate is probably more than a lot of professional players get in a 20min game right now...
I just recently compared Spawn Larva to iterating production facilities. Could that be directed at me?
On September 01 2015 05:53 Little-Chimp wrote:
I'm not sure why creep spread gets ignored so much in these "jerg ez" discussions about looking at their base lol. Spreading creep well takes up way more actions than popping supply depots, but I guess it doesn't count because it's not in the base and it's not as "mandatory".
Like I suppose you wouldnt creep spread in an important battle, but honestly no terran is going to be building supply depots while splitting marines vs banelings. It's pretty much equal footing.
That being said, lol at autoinject with 3 larva. gg everyone else
I've always put spreading creep in the Army Movement category, but it's a unique element of the game. In a way it's a form of energy scouting, but it also grants a passive buff to all friendly units.
|
You're never going to quantify "easiness" in any rigorous fashion. Design the game around fun unit interactions and mechanics rather trying to make sure things are equally difficult for everyone.
If one race truly is easier to play, it'll show up, either in winrates or representation, and you can address that then.
|
On September 01 2015 07:17 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2015 06:05 Big J wrote:On September 01 2015 05:53 Little-Chimp wrote:
I'm not sure why creep spread gets ignored so much in these "jerg ez" discussions about looking at their base lol. Spreading creep well takes up way more actions than popping supply depots, but I guess it doesn't count because it's not in the base and it's not as "mandatory".
Like I suppose you wouldnt creep spread in an important battle, but honestly no terran is going to be building supply depots while splitting marines vs banelings. It's pretty much equal footing.
That being said, lol at autoinject with 3 larva. gg everyone else Well, creepspread isn't even really important in a lot of ZvZs (I guess that doesn't matter) and PvZs. Just read through the crap and have a nice laugh. People trying to sell making 7barracks a factory and a starport as the pinnacle of macro and then only have to look back every 5mins to queue 5more depots are just hilarious. I could also say: "At that point in the game I haven't even placed my spire, started my baneling speed, made an infestation pit, a hive an ultralisk cavern or a greater spire", but whatever. Some people just won't understand it ever, it's assymetric and NOT THE SAME. They just see what they want to see. 3larva will be crazy in the mid and lategame though, especially if the mule and chrono return in nerfed versions. 75% inject rate is probably more than a lot of professional players get in a 20min game right now... I just recently compared Spawn Larva to iterating production facilities. Could that be directed at me? Show nested quote +On September 01 2015 05:53 Little-Chimp wrote:
I'm not sure why creep spread gets ignored so much in these "jerg ez" discussions about looking at their base lol. Spreading creep well takes up way more actions than popping supply depots, but I guess it doesn't count because it's not in the base and it's not as "mandatory".
Like I suppose you wouldnt creep spread in an important battle, but honestly no terran is going to be building supply depots while splitting marines vs banelings. It's pretty much equal footing.
That being said, lol at autoinject with 3 larva. gg everyone else I've always put spreading creep in the Army Movement category, but it's a unique element of the game. In a way it's a form of energy scouting, but it also grants a passive buff to all friendly units.
Well you're grabbing an object, hitting a hotkey, and placing a structure somewhere else. It's the exact same action as placing a pylon or supply depot. Sure you waypoint the scv or probe back to minerals or something else, but you also place several creep tumors at a time to make up for it.
|
On September 01 2015 07:17 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2015 06:05 Big J wrote:On September 01 2015 05:53 Little-Chimp wrote:
I'm not sure why creep spread gets ignored so much in these "jerg ez" discussions about looking at their base lol. Spreading creep well takes up way more actions than popping supply depots, but I guess it doesn't count because it's not in the base and it's not as "mandatory".
Like I suppose you wouldnt creep spread in an important battle, but honestly no terran is going to be building supply depots while splitting marines vs banelings. It's pretty much equal footing.
That being said, lol at autoinject with 3 larva. gg everyone else Well, creepspread isn't even really important in a lot of ZvZs (I guess that doesn't matter) and PvZs. Just read through the crap and have a nice laugh. People trying to sell making 7barracks a factory and a starport as the pinnacle of macro and then only have to look back every 5mins to queue 5more depots are just hilarious. I could also say: "At that point in the game I haven't even placed my spire, started my baneling speed, made an infestation pit, a hive an ultralisk cavern or a greater spire", but whatever. Some people just won't understand it ever, it's assymetric and NOT THE SAME. They just see what they want to see. 3larva will be crazy in the mid and lategame though, especially if the mule and chrono return in nerfed versions. 75% inject rate is probably more than a lot of professional players get in a 20min game right now... I just recently compared Spawn Larva to iterating production facilities. Could that be directed at me?
Not exclusively but yes.
|
On September 01 2015 07:34 Little-Chimp wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2015 07:17 TimeSpiral wrote:On September 01 2015 06:05 Big J wrote:On September 01 2015 05:53 Little-Chimp wrote:
I'm not sure why creep spread gets ignored so much in these "jerg ez" discussions about looking at their base lol. Spreading creep well takes up way more actions than popping supply depots, but I guess it doesn't count because it's not in the base and it's not as "mandatory".
Like I suppose you wouldnt creep spread in an important battle, but honestly no terran is going to be building supply depots while splitting marines vs banelings. It's pretty much equal footing.
That being said, lol at autoinject with 3 larva. gg everyone else Well, creepspread isn't even really important in a lot of ZvZs (I guess that doesn't matter) and PvZs. Just read through the crap and have a nice laugh. People trying to sell making 7barracks a factory and a starport as the pinnacle of macro and then only have to look back every 5mins to queue 5more depots are just hilarious. I could also say: "At that point in the game I haven't even placed my spire, started my baneling speed, made an infestation pit, a hive an ultralisk cavern or a greater spire", but whatever. Some people just won't understand it ever, it's assymetric and NOT THE SAME. They just see what they want to see. 3larva will be crazy in the mid and lategame though, especially if the mule and chrono return in nerfed versions. 75% inject rate is probably more than a lot of professional players get in a 20min game right now... I just recently compared Spawn Larva to iterating production facilities. Could that be directed at me? On September 01 2015 05:53 Little-Chimp wrote:
I'm not sure why creep spread gets ignored so much in these "jerg ez" discussions about looking at their base lol. Spreading creep well takes up way more actions than popping supply depots, but I guess it doesn't count because it's not in the base and it's not as "mandatory".
Like I suppose you wouldnt creep spread in an important battle, but honestly no terran is going to be building supply depots while splitting marines vs banelings. It's pretty much equal footing.
That being said, lol at autoinject with 3 larva. gg everyone else I've always put spreading creep in the Army Movement category, but it's a unique element of the game. In a way it's a form of energy scouting, but it also grants a passive buff to all friendly units. Well you're grabbing an object, hitting a hotkey, and placing a structure somewhere else. It's the exact same action as placing a pylon or supply depot. Sure you waypoint the scv or probe back to minerals or something else, but you also place several creep tumors at a time to make up for it.
Yeah. I hear ya. It grants vision, and friendly-unit buffs. It's an important element for army engagements. It directly impedes your opponent's army movements and effectiveness. It's clearly unique. It's a similar action to building supply--in that you're selecting stuff and clicking--but with the obvious differences that it doesn't provide (or cost) supply, nor does it provide (or cost) money. If you're going to split up categories of play, I'd still put creep in army movement, tactics, positioning and formations.
On September 01 2015 07:39 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2015 07:17 TimeSpiral wrote:On September 01 2015 06:05 Big J wrote:On September 01 2015 05:53 Little-Chimp wrote:
I'm not sure why creep spread gets ignored so much in these "jerg ez" discussions about looking at their base lol. Spreading creep well takes up way more actions than popping supply depots, but I guess it doesn't count because it's not in the base and it's not as "mandatory".
Like I suppose you wouldnt creep spread in an important battle, but honestly no terran is going to be building supply depots while splitting marines vs banelings. It's pretty much equal footing.
That being said, lol at autoinject with 3 larva. gg everyone else Well, creepspread isn't even really important in a lot of ZvZs (I guess that doesn't matter) and PvZs. Just read through the crap and have a nice laugh. People trying to sell making 7barracks a factory and a starport as the pinnacle of macro and then only have to look back every 5mins to queue 5more depots are just hilarious. I could also say: "At that point in the game I haven't even placed my spire, started my baneling speed, made an infestation pit, a hive an ultralisk cavern or a greater spire", but whatever. Some people just won't understand it ever, it's assymetric and NOT THE SAME. They just see what they want to see. 3larva will be crazy in the mid and lategame though, especially if the mule and chrono return in nerfed versions. 75% inject rate is probably more than a lot of professional players get in a 20min game right now... I just recently compared Spawn Larva to iterating production facilities. Could that be directed at me? Not exclusively but yes.
I'm not trying to sell anything, man. Lol. I'm a little surprised that this is even causing little waves. Are you really going to argue that spawning larva on hatches is a more complicated unit production capability mechanic than iterating and scaling production facilities? It's just simpler. And it's probably simpler because there are other elements that are more difficult for Zerg, like hatch upgrade timings, defending faster expansion timings, tier3 timings, spreading and then engaging on creep effectively, army position and tactics (because there are fewer activated unit abilities).
I'm definitely not saying that the catalogue of production schemes Terran and Toss have to learn and execute is "the pinnacle of macro". Come on--even though I am prone to hyperbole at times, I certainly never implied that. It's just more complicated than spawning larva. *shrugs*
|
On September 01 2015 23:31 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2015 07:39 Big J wrote:On September 01 2015 07:17 TimeSpiral wrote:On September 01 2015 06:05 Big J wrote:On September 01 2015 05:53 Little-Chimp wrote:
I'm not sure why creep spread gets ignored so much in these "jerg ez" discussions about looking at their base lol. Spreading creep well takes up way more actions than popping supply depots, but I guess it doesn't count because it's not in the base and it's not as "mandatory".
Like I suppose you wouldnt creep spread in an important battle, but honestly no terran is going to be building supply depots while splitting marines vs banelings. It's pretty much equal footing.
That being said, lol at autoinject with 3 larva. gg everyone else Well, creepspread isn't even really important in a lot of ZvZs (I guess that doesn't matter) and PvZs. Just read through the crap and have a nice laugh. People trying to sell making 7barracks a factory and a starport as the pinnacle of macro and then only have to look back every 5mins to queue 5more depots are just hilarious. I could also say: "At that point in the game I haven't even placed my spire, started my baneling speed, made an infestation pit, a hive an ultralisk cavern or a greater spire", but whatever. Some people just won't understand it ever, it's assymetric and NOT THE SAME. They just see what they want to see. 3larva will be crazy in the mid and lategame though, especially if the mule and chrono return in nerfed versions. 75% inject rate is probably more than a lot of professional players get in a 20min game right now... I just recently compared Spawn Larva to iterating production facilities. Could that be directed at me? Not exclusively but yes. I'm not trying to sell anything, man. Lol. I'm a little surprised that this is even causing little waves. Are you really going to argue that spawning larva on hatches is a more complicated unit production capability mechanic than iterating and scaling production facilities? It's just simpler. And it's probably simpler because there are other elements that are more difficult for Zerg, like hatch upgrade timings, defending faster expansion timings, tier3 timings, spreading and then engaging on creep effectively, army position and tactics (because there are fewer activated unit abilities). I'm definitely not saying that the catalogue of production schemes Terran and Toss have to learn and execute is "the pinnacle of macro". Come on--even though I am prone to hyperbole at times, I certainly never implied that. It's just more complicated than spawning larva. *shrugs*
No I'm not making any point about the details of those things. I think my point has been very clear:
Sorry, but I find this sort of argument completely blue eyed.
There are a thousand and one assymetries in the game. Macro is not "equally hard" at the moment, it's probably heavily skewed and also completely different every game and matchup you play. You know why? Because blizzard never gave a fuck about making it equally hard. They made it hard, whether that means that after 5years of evolving metagame it turned out 50% harder for Zerg or 50% harder for Terran doesn't matter. What matters is that while the one side has to do "necessary" macro, the other race has to take other "necessary" actions.
And that's going to be the case in a hard enough, balanced game. "Making macro easier" for zerg will just mean that the game gets balanced around different "necessary" actions.
Also it doesn't imply that zerg "has become easiest in macro" to begin with, which is a very subjective perception anyways.
|
On September 02 2015 03:36 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2015 23:31 TimeSpiral wrote:On September 01 2015 07:39 Big J wrote:On September 01 2015 07:17 TimeSpiral wrote:On September 01 2015 06:05 Big J wrote:On September 01 2015 05:53 Little-Chimp wrote:
I'm not sure why creep spread gets ignored so much in these "jerg ez" discussions about looking at their base lol. Spreading creep well takes up way more actions than popping supply depots, but I guess it doesn't count because it's not in the base and it's not as "mandatory".
Like I suppose you wouldnt creep spread in an important battle, but honestly no terran is going to be building supply depots while splitting marines vs banelings. It's pretty much equal footing.
That being said, lol at autoinject with 3 larva. gg everyone else Well, creepspread isn't even really important in a lot of ZvZs (I guess that doesn't matter) and PvZs. Just read through the crap and have a nice laugh. People trying to sell making 7barracks a factory and a starport as the pinnacle of macro and then only have to look back every 5mins to queue 5more depots are just hilarious. I could also say: "At that point in the game I haven't even placed my spire, started my baneling speed, made an infestation pit, a hive an ultralisk cavern or a greater spire", but whatever. Some people just won't understand it ever, it's assymetric and NOT THE SAME. They just see what they want to see. 3larva will be crazy in the mid and lategame though, especially if the mule and chrono return in nerfed versions. 75% inject rate is probably more than a lot of professional players get in a 20min game right now... I just recently compared Spawn Larva to iterating production facilities. Could that be directed at me? Not exclusively but yes. I'm not trying to sell anything, man. Lol. I'm a little surprised that this is even causing little waves. Are you really going to argue that spawning larva on hatches is a more complicated unit production capability mechanic than iterating and scaling production facilities? It's just simpler. And it's probably simpler because there are other elements that are more difficult for Zerg, like hatch upgrade timings, defending faster expansion timings, tier3 timings, spreading and then engaging on creep effectively, army position and tactics (because there are fewer activated unit abilities). I'm definitely not saying that the catalogue of production schemes Terran and Toss have to learn and execute is "the pinnacle of macro". Come on--even though I am prone to hyperbole at times, I certainly never implied that. It's just more complicated than spawning larva. *shrugs* No I'm not making any point about the details of those things. I think my point has been very clear: Show nested quote +Sorry, but I find this sort of argument completely blue eyed.
There are a thousand and one assymetries in the game. Macro is not "equally hard" at the moment, it's probably heavily skewed and also completely different every game and matchup you play. You know why? Because blizzard never gave a fuck about making it equally hard. They made it hard, whether that means that after 5years of evolving metagame it turned out 50% harder for Zerg or 50% harder for Terran doesn't matter. What matters is that while the one side has to do "necessary" macro, the other race has to take other "necessary" actions.
And that's going to be the case in a hard enough, balanced game. "Making macro easier" for zerg will just mean that the game gets balanced around different "necessary" actions.
Also it doesn't imply that zerg "has become easiest in macro" to begin with, which is a very subjective perception anyways.
Don't bother trying to debate with TimeSpiral..he's like the Zerglingshepherd of Terrans. He's always going back and forth about how T needs this buffs and that while downplaying the problems of other races. Are you even surprised he's claiming Zerg inject is easier to do?
|
I only played 10 or so games on the last patch. So not nearly enough to have a qualified opinion on anything.
Though it honestly did teach me one thing about my play. The only skill that I've apparently been decent at in Sc2 was in fact injecting.
I suck at decision making, scouting, my micro is horrid. Even the finer points of my macro weren't nearly as polished as i would have liked to have believed, overlord timings, distribution of workers 16 per mineral line, expansion timings and macro hatch timings to keep up with needed production.
Honestly I apparently haven't been winning Imo for the right reasons.
I don't know what is best for the game. Though i don't mind the reintroduction of autocast macro mechanics because it speeds up the game without the clicks. That said i'm still hoping these extra clicks are spent on meaningful actions by pros, to make more interesting games to watch. (would love a show match to see if this really would be the case)
What i don't understand is all the community outrage about the autocast mechanics.
|
On September 02 2015 06:13 parkufarku wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2015 03:36 Big J wrote:On September 01 2015 23:31 TimeSpiral wrote:On September 01 2015 07:39 Big J wrote:On September 01 2015 07:17 TimeSpiral wrote:On September 01 2015 06:05 Big J wrote:On September 01 2015 05:53 Little-Chimp wrote:
I'm not sure why creep spread gets ignored so much in these "jerg ez" discussions about looking at their base lol. Spreading creep well takes up way more actions than popping supply depots, but I guess it doesn't count because it's not in the base and it's not as "mandatory".
Like I suppose you wouldnt creep spread in an important battle, but honestly no terran is going to be building supply depots while splitting marines vs banelings. It's pretty much equal footing.
That being said, lol at autoinject with 3 larva. gg everyone else Well, creepspread isn't even really important in a lot of ZvZs (I guess that doesn't matter) and PvZs. Just read through the crap and have a nice laugh. People trying to sell making 7barracks a factory and a starport as the pinnacle of macro and then only have to look back every 5mins to queue 5more depots are just hilarious. I could also say: "At that point in the game I haven't even placed my spire, started my baneling speed, made an infestation pit, a hive an ultralisk cavern or a greater spire", but whatever. Some people just won't understand it ever, it's assymetric and NOT THE SAME. They just see what they want to see. 3larva will be crazy in the mid and lategame though, especially if the mule and chrono return in nerfed versions. 75% inject rate is probably more than a lot of professional players get in a 20min game right now... I just recently compared Spawn Larva to iterating production facilities. Could that be directed at me? Not exclusively but yes. I'm not trying to sell anything, man. Lol. I'm a little surprised that this is even causing little waves. Are you really going to argue that spawning larva on hatches is a more complicated unit production capability mechanic than iterating and scaling production facilities? It's just simpler. And it's probably simpler because there are other elements that are more difficult for Zerg, like hatch upgrade timings, defending faster expansion timings, tier3 timings, spreading and then engaging on creep effectively, army position and tactics (because there are fewer activated unit abilities). I'm definitely not saying that the catalogue of production schemes Terran and Toss have to learn and execute is "the pinnacle of macro". Come on--even though I am prone to hyperbole at times, I certainly never implied that. It's just more complicated than spawning larva. *shrugs* No I'm not making any point about the details of those things. I think my point has been very clear: Sorry, but I find this sort of argument completely blue eyed.
There are a thousand and one assymetries in the game. Macro is not "equally hard" at the moment, it's probably heavily skewed and also completely different every game and matchup you play. You know why? Because blizzard never gave a fuck about making it equally hard. They made it hard, whether that means that after 5years of evolving metagame it turned out 50% harder for Zerg or 50% harder for Terran doesn't matter. What matters is that while the one side has to do "necessary" macro, the other race has to take other "necessary" actions.
And that's going to be the case in a hard enough, balanced game. "Making macro easier" for zerg will just mean that the game gets balanced around different "necessary" actions.
Also it doesn't imply that zerg "has become easiest in macro" to begin with, which is a very subjective perception anyways. Don't bother trying to debate with TimeSpiral..he's like the Zerglingshepherd of Terrans. He's always going back and forth about how T needs this buffs and that while downplaying the problems of other races. Are you even surprised he's claiming Zerg inject is easier to do?
Zing!
|
On September 02 2015 07:14 Cyanocyst wrote:
I only played 10 or so games on the last patch. So not nearly enough to have a qualified opinion on anything.
Though it honestly did teach me one thing about my play. The only skill that I've apparently been decent at in Sc2 was in fact injecting.
Lol same here. I play both Terran and Zerg (Never could get used to WG mechanic). I bound Base cycle from backspace to Space and flew in the ranks because I had really good Zerg Macro. I simply always had more stuff then my opponent. W/o inject now everyone is as good as I am .
I guess its okay though. I just hate this auto cast crap . Either we have it or don't. None of this band-aid middle ground.
|
I feel that TLO sum up pretty well how I feel about the macro booster change, specifically for Zerg:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/H8WhPLl.png)
I hope more pro will be more vocal on this.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
i don't think they will bc it's truthfully a matter of preference. you still need to do things in base and spread creep, so you're not ALWAYS looking at your army. but i think there are people on both sides of the argument, people that like the micro and people that don't.
|
Again: the whole deal was to make micro, on the margin, more important and macro, on the margin, less important.
It might be that they went overboard - that they balanced it towards micro too much - but I am glad they tried, because (at least for me) in the old standard; there was (in my experience) too littlemicro.
But it could be that they went overboard on it. A little bit more macro might still be a good thing.
|
On September 02 2015 19:49 AdrianHealeyy wrote:
Again: the whole deal was to make micro, on the margin, more important and macro, on the margin, less important.
It might be that they went overboard - that they balanced it towards micro too much - but I am glad they tried, because (at least for me) in the old standard; there was (in my experience) too littlemicro.
But it could be that they went overboard on it. A little bit more macro might still be a good thing.
But this change is asymmetric with the different races, the inject being autocast simplify Zerg's macro way more than the autocast chrono/Mules, to a point that, you actually never need to manage your base unless to construct some building, and for my experience this has made Zerg very boring to play. I liked the balance between macro/micro in HoTS, and I wished that it was maintained in LoTV, if I wanted to play a mainly micro-focused game I would play warcraft or even some Moba.
|
It could be my low level, but I wasn't bored to play.
Positining overlords, macro hatcheries, spawn larva, zerglings over the map, drops, ...
I think 'we' need to learn to use our new found apm to do more stuf. :p
|
kind of nice they're bringing back some of the stuff they took out. I knew it wasnt going to last though . Terran without mules was a bit much...
Mules on cooldown and autocast is what i've been saying all the time!
|
On September 02 2015 19:30 Vanadiel wrote:I feel that TLO sum up pretty well how I feel about the macro booster change, specifically for Zerg: I hope more pro will be more vocal on this.
Because he was competing so much with Koreans... Seriously Zerg issue right now is the auto inject. Just remove the auto inject and then let us do a REAL testing of the MM removal. The current situation is just pseudo removal with having injects in the game.
|
Disagree with the direction of the macro mechanic changes, seems to be aiming at a middle ground which doesn't really make either side particularly happy.
Regarding warp-ins, how about making warp-ins with the warp prism take up space inside the warp prism (as well as a nerf to warp-in times, maybe 4-6 seconds)?
This would help against late game mass instant warp-ins and encourage players to fill their warp prisms before sending them to enemy bases. Although it wouldn't really help with warp prism all-ins that much, which aren't off of more than 8 warpgates normally.
|
On September 01 2015 07:19 Athenau wrote:
You're never going to quantify "easiness" in any rigorous fashion. Design the game around fun unit interactions and mechanics rather trying to make sure things are equally difficult for everyone.
If one race truly is easier to play, it'll show up, either in winrates or representation, and you can address that then.
You will never be able to quantify the fun factor as well.
|
On September 02 2015 19:30 Vanadiel wrote:I feel that TLO sum up pretty well how I feel about the macro booster change, specifically for Zerg: I hope more pro will be more vocal on this.
it's only true for zerg though
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
it's only true for zerg though
removing chrono boost feels kinda that way for protoss too - less to do and less control over what you're doing
|
Speaking specifically as a Zerg player...with autocast inject I now have zero incentive to go back to my base at all. I went from a complex cycle of camera key management to never going back to my base. I do just spazz my army back and forth in the late game when the circumstances of the game do not permit me to be aggressive. I can sympathize with TLO; he's getting at exactly what my problem is. The other races didn't lose much of their incentive to go back and manage their base, but Zerg went from a high level of management to none at all. It is boring to macro as Zerg now. And with drone egg rallying, it's not exactly difficult...
The other two races by their very nature maintain incentive to periodically return to their bases and macro. But the only anchor that made Zerg feel taxing to macro has just been automated.
|
I have to say, removing macro boosters goes against the overall-design-direction that SC2 has.
Why ? Well, SC2 is all about scouting (trying to figure out what your opponent is doing). It is almost impossible to have perfect scouting every game, therefore, there will times when a player reacts late - this is where macro boosters play an important role. They allow players to react in time, if they are not there, then a player will just lose as they wont be able to speed up their reaction.
SC2 relies on macro boosters by design. So if you want to get rid of them, then the only logical thing is to make scouting easier to compensate. And in this scenario , I think the game will be not as exciting.
|
On September 03 2015 18:41 Parcelleus wrote:
I have to say, removing macro boosters goes against the overall-design-direction that SC2 has.
Why ? Well, SC2 is all about scouting (trying to figure out what your opponent is doing). It is almost impossible to have perfect scouting every game, therefore, there will times when a player reacts late - this is where macro boosters play an important role. They allow players to react in time, if they are not there, then a player will just lose as they wont be able to speed up their reaction.
SC2 relies on macro boosters by design. So if you want to get rid of them, then the only logical thing is to make scouting easier to compensate. And in this scenario , I think the game will be not as exciting.
If you react too late and scout something when it's already on the way to you no amount of mules, chronoboost or inject will help you.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
Banked chrono and/or gateways will and protoss abuses that a fair amount - they're the only race to often build more production than they can support to keep building units from due to the ability to instantly create army to defend a push or drops etc whenever neccesary if they do so.
That way you can power ahead in workers/tech and respond to a push by making 3 rounds of units over about 40 seconds or when that drop hits you, you'll have 5/10 of your warpgates ready to warp instantly instead of 6/6 of them on cooldown because of having to keep up on army value.
Day9 talked about that a fair bit around WOL+HOTS too - though it's not something that a lot of observers (especially zerg/terran and those who don't play the game) pick up on a lot.
Inject and mules are two things that you're kinda supposed to keep up 24/7 (inject definitely, mules less-so but they still take a long time to translate into actual power for you) so that dynamic does not really apply.
There's no real penalty for banking chronoboost that you was going to use on warpgates as long as you have at least as many warpgates as you have chrono's and none of your nexii hit max energy
|
SoCal8908 Posts
back in WOL during the era of blink stalker all ins, all the zergs knew about it
it was like..how the fuck did he get that many units after having next to none 30 seconds ago
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
