|
On September 19 2015 03:05 DinoMight wrote:
So MULE and inject are left as is, but chrono is same to nerfed depending on the situation.
New chrono is more forgiving for noobs but also worse for pros. If you Chrono one thing the whole time that it's building at best you're 22.5% more efficient vs 50% before. Also, now when you chrono something you have to worry about accidentally UN-chronoing something else depending on what Nexus is nearest to that thing... that makes it almost harder tro use...
Injects and Mules are the same as before, but injects now stack in case you're bad and forget to inject. So it's a buff to low level players without hurting high level players.
Yeah I was wondering that too. They took out some of the major applications of chronoboost but went back to original mules and even buffed injects.
Edit: I see the point, they think the new CR is superior enough designwise to go for it, but just numberwise it doesn't sound fair. 22.5% is close to what you would get if you queued one HotS-chrono after the other everytime you had 25energy on a nexus. + Show Spoiler +Explanation: So you get 20seconds of 50% boost and then something like 22seconds of the nexus regenerating energy and no boost at all. Then 50% boost again for 20seconds. And so on...
But you cannot use two nexi to boost the same thing continuously to get close to 50% boost. Or store energy to get up to 50% boost on a thing later on. That is a considerable nerf to many Protoss builds that used to rush out warpgate or storm or blink or charge or an oracle or a certain upgrade (like +1 against zerg).
|
United Kingdom20275 Posts
On September 19 2015 07:00 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 06:47 Raionus wrote:On September 19 2015 03:02 deacon.frost wrote:On September 19 2015 01:35 fickazzz wrote:It shows clearly that most people liked the removal of the macro mechanics and i assume the % of people who don't vote in these polls would be even higher on those, So why would they add them again  Most people here! Even if there is 1000 votes like in the last one, how many people play SC2 daily? TL.net is a minority! And of pretty elitist HC players. If you can gather 20 000 votes, that would be nice and said actually something about it. Not sure how many players play just LotV, but there is over more than 200 000 players in HotS...I guess these players are interested in playing in LotV after the release, so.. :-) Edit: Took numbers from nios(just hundreds of thousands), 1v1 :-) Not entirely true. The 1400 votes it has is pretty huge for a poll: statistically you don't need nearly as many votes to accurately predict a population as you'd think. Your issue with this being on TL is true but also somewhat alleviated by the fact that the poll in question has been posted on the bnet forums many many times. Most players don't go to TL or b.net.
The players who don't go to TL, battle.net, reddit or any other sites can have a voice if they want to. Not giving feedback is up to them - you shouldn't just ignore feedback because it's not perfectly representative of a population that's not voting.
|
On September 19 2015 17:47 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 07:00 TheWinks wrote:On September 19 2015 06:47 Raionus wrote:On September 19 2015 03:02 deacon.frost wrote:On September 19 2015 01:35 fickazzz wrote:It shows clearly that most people liked the removal of the macro mechanics and i assume the % of people who don't vote in these polls would be even higher on those, So why would they add them again Most people here! Even if there is 1000 votes like in the last one, how many people play SC2 daily? TL.net is a minority! And of pretty elitist HC players. If you can gather 20 000 votes, that would be nice and said actually something about it. Not sure how many players play just LotV, but there is over more than 200 000 players in HotS...I guess these players are interested in playing in LotV after the release, so.. :-) Edit: Took numbers from nios(just hundreds of thousands), 1v1 :-) Not entirely true. The 1400 votes it has is pretty huge for a poll: statistically you don't need nearly as many votes to accurately predict a population as you'd think. Your issue with this being on TL is true but also somewhat alleviated by the fact that the poll in question has been posted on the bnet forums many many times. Most players don't go to TL or b.net. The players who don't go to TL, battle.net, reddit or any other sites can have a voice if they want to. Not giving feedback is up to them - you shouldn't just ignore feedback because it's not perfectly representative of a population that's not voting.
This kind of feedback is just not going to be fairly represented the entire community.
An obvious example is how the community feedback Blizzard get is mostly from players/viewers that can speak English. Posts written in Chinese on NeoTV or Baidu Tieba are never going to have the same impact as the posts here on TL or reddit. The same probably goes to Korean community as well.
|
Why you are mostly WRONG.
Auto-Mule
Less clicks and moaar marines ! Moar Explosions ?
No Auto-Mule was horrible. With Cooldown Mule you had to nerf Scan, which felt awkward especially for TvT. Terrans do FEEL if they have a scan, and they do some stuff, expecting to have a scan, especially when you ar at 3+ Bases. You don't mule so much anyway. But then even at 6 bases you have 80 energy on every CC, but not a single scan, instead of 6. With Dropping Siegetanks....this is crap. But well you could have gotten adjusted to it...after 5 Years playing as it is. It's like running on Stilts.
Oh and when the game is not over after 10 Min you actually have to manually mule ANYWAY because your CC is sitting a a low patch.
Oh aaand when the opponent is camping your central production at basetrade you now have 0% chance to comeback, instead of like ...10%.
Edit:
WHOOPS
Not Yet finished.
Auto-Ineject
It sucks for the reason DK stated. It takes No-Skill, no Advantage for a skill long trained. It s making zerg TOO EZ.
The Shift-Click solution is the elegant way to punish zerg for not being good, but at the same time helping NOOBZ once they fucked up. Very good !
Chrono
Yeah chrono felt like the "get me 3-3-3 while i turtle tool, or well 5 oracles at 7 min" shit that was just going one direction, spreading the chrono more equaly does HELP the Protoss being a more rounded race, less "all in", despite the fact that protoss has 2-3 Allins per game.
|
On September 19 2015 06:47 Raionus wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 03:02 deacon.frost wrote:On September 19 2015 01:35 fickazzz wrote:It shows clearly that most people liked the removal of the macro mechanics and i assume the % of people who don't vote in these polls would be even higher on those, So why would they add them again Most people here! Even if there is 1000 votes like in the last one, how many people play SC2 daily? TL.net is a minority! And of pretty elitist HC players. If you can gather 20 000 votes, that would be nice and said actually something about it. Not sure how many players play just LotV, but there is over more than 200 000 players in HotS...I guess these players are interested in playing in LotV after the release, so.. :-) Edit: Took numbers from nios(just hundreds of thousands), 1v1 :-) Not entirely true. The 1400 votes it has is pretty huge for a poll: statistically you don't need nearly as many votes to accurately predict a population as you'd think. Your issue with this being on TL is true but also somewhat alleviated by the fact that the poll in question has been posted on the bnet forums many many times. Let's just say that this poll does only represent TL though. Even if that's the case, the poll has shown the TL overwhelmingly supports no macro mechanics. And look at the Bnet forums. There has been post after post receiving massive amounts of upvotes (40, 50+) asking for the removal of macro mechanics. Even during the SH witch hunt, which mostly everyone agreed should be redesigned, no single thread ever got that many upvotes, let alone most of them. There's clearly overwhelming support in both major communities that something needs to be done. Whether it's semi-auto MM or no MM, or something else entirely, something has to change.
Man I hate those polls.
But the false claims based on polls are worse.
Let's put it straight:
If you don't controll the way your sample [people answering a poll] is drawn out of the general population [starcraft players], you can't say ANYTHING based on your sample about the general population.
Here is why: taking the time to answer a question, or most likely having an already made answer to the question asked by the poll, is a defining characteristic of some people, which is every single time correlated to the given answer.
So you have two choices:
1) you put up a compulsory study (like state census)
2) you conduct an additional qualitative study to understand who are the people in your sample compaired to the general population, and then you work (cautiously) with it.
A general rule of thumb: (sociology ABC)
People tend to express their opinion when they have "strong feelings" about it.
On the internet, it boils done to "angry people talk more and louder".
On the specific case of LOTV beta: "people displeased by the latest gameplay change are franticly creating and answering polls on TL.net"
So we know nothing about what "starcraft 2 players" prefer, and Blizzard neither. Therefore, could we stick to actual arguments and reasonning?
edit:The 1400 votes it has is pretty huge for a poll: statistically you don't need nearly as many votes to accurately predict a population as you'd think
I don't want to be mean, but it's pure bullshit. You don't need a huge sample to accurately predict something if your sample is randomly selected. Otherwise, you can have an enormous sample (let's say 1/4 of the total population), you still know jack shit about the rest.
|
United Kingdom20275 Posts
On the specific case of LOTV beta: "people displeased by the latest gameplay change are franticly creating and answering polls on TL.net"
But the polls say no macro mechanics
meanwhile blizzard is re-adding macro mechanics because of outrage directed at 0 mechanics (the exact opposite opinion)
realistically, few people want the semi-auto mechanics and almost everyone is speaking out against it. Most are divided into either no mechanics or full mechanics
Otherwise, you can have an enormous sample (let's say 1/4 of the total population), you still know jack shit about the rest.
Like 90% of sc2 players don't even play the beta and that's before you even get into which language they speak. How can you take ANYTHING from that with your logic?
|
On September 19 2015 18:56 Karel wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 06:47 Raionus wrote:On September 19 2015 03:02 deacon.frost wrote:On September 19 2015 01:35 fickazzz wrote:It shows clearly that most people liked the removal of the macro mechanics and i assume the % of people who don't vote in these polls would be even higher on those, So why would they add them again Most people here! Even if there is 1000 votes like in the last one, how many people play SC2 daily? TL.net is a minority! And of pretty elitist HC players. If you can gather 20 000 votes, that would be nice and said actually something about it. Not sure how many players play just LotV, but there is over more than 200 000 players in HotS...I guess these players are interested in playing in LotV after the release, so.. :-) Edit: Took numbers from nios(just hundreds of thousands), 1v1 :-) Not entirely true. The 1400 votes it has is pretty huge for a poll: statistically you don't need nearly as many votes to accurately predict a population as you'd think. Your issue with this being on TL is true but also somewhat alleviated by the fact that the poll in question has been posted on the bnet forums many many times. Let's just say that this poll does only represent TL though. Even if that's the case, the poll has shown the TL overwhelmingly supports no macro mechanics. And look at the Bnet forums. There has been post after post receiving massive amounts of upvotes (40, 50+) asking for the removal of macro mechanics. Even during the SH witch hunt, which mostly everyone agreed should be redesigned, no single thread ever got that many upvotes, let alone most of them. There's clearly overwhelming support in both major communities that something needs to be done. Whether it's semi-auto MM or no MM, or something else entirely, something has to change. Man I hate those polls. But the false claims based on polls are worse. Let's put it straight: If you don't controll the way your sample [people answering a poll] is drawn out of the general population [starcraft players], you can't say ANYTHING based on your sample about the general population. Here is why: taking the time to answer a question, or most likely having an already made answer to the question asked by the poll, is a defining characteristic of some people, which is every single time correlated to the given answer. So you have two choices: 1) you put up a compulsory study (like state census) 2) you conduct an additional qualitative study to understand who are the people in your sample compaired to the general population, and then you work (cautiously) with it. A general rule of thumb: (sociology ABC) People tend to express their opinion when they have "strong feelings" about it. On the internet, it boils done to "angry people talk more and louder". On the specific case of LOTV beta: "people displeased by the latest gameplay change are franticly creating and answering polls on TL.net" So we know nothing about what "starcraft 2 players" prefer, and Blizzard neither. Therefore, could we stick to actual arguments and reasonning? edit: Show nested quote +The 1400 votes it has is pretty huge for a poll: statistically you don't need nearly as many votes to accurately predict a population as you'd think I don't want to be mean, but it's pure bullshit. You don't need a huge sample to accurately predict something if your sample is randomly selected. Otherwise, you can have an enormous sample (let's say 1/4 of the total population), you still know jack shit about the rest.
I'm sorry, but your statement is way too extreme. Sample consistency is important. It is not that important that you can say you know jack-shit about the total population when you got this sort of result (60-25-15, 1600votes). Unless of course some very intentional manipulation has taken place.
|
On September 19 2015 19:07 Cyro wrote:
Like 90% of sc2 players don't even play the beta and that's before you even get into which language they speak. How can you take ANYTHING from that with your logic?
I don't understand what seems to be your objection.
It's clear to me that for a lot of reasons (including spoken language as you said) it's impossible to ever say something meaningfull about "what the majority of LOTV beta players wants". That's why we should try to keep the discussion "qualititative", discussing individual feelings or the evolution of the RTS market or whatever... but not playing soothsayers about the opinions of the silent majority.
Sample consistency is important. It is not that important that you can say you know jack-shit about the total population when you got this sort of result (60-25-15, 1600votes). Unless of course some very intentional manipulation has taken place.
No it is that important, especially because answering and internet poll is a low-comitment / low-reward type of interaction.
I do stats for a living (I'm a sociologist) and I could tell you countless stories where some minor inconstistancy (on a first look) leads to absurdly skewed stats.
As an example, take election polls. Polling compagnies need to tweak the raw number as much as doubling or halving some figures, based on the last election results compaired to the polls made at that time.
No intentional manipulation needed, just the fact that some part of the population could be ten time more willing to answer than the rest.
|
United Kingdom20275 Posts
I don't understand what seems to be your objection.
My objection is that english speaking players who have played 100 games on both patches is like 1% of the population
if you disregard all opinions because they come from a fairly small sample size, you will literally have zero feedback
|
On September 19 2015 19:24 Cyro wrote:My objection is that english speaking players who have played 100 games on both patches is like 1% of the population if you disregard all opinions because they come from a fairly small sample size, you will literally have zero feedback
I didn't disregard any feedback. Only difference with you is that I value the feedback because it's food for taught, not because I guess or whish that it represents the majority.
|
United Kingdom20275 Posts
It represents the majority of people voting (in a situation that clearly has both sides feeling strongly enough to go to tl/reddit and vote on a poll) which matters on some level
|
Mule change means it's back to people landing a fourth and smashing that base with mules.. Can't they limit the amount of mules you can have on the map at one time or something? Chrono and injects didn't even need to be looked at all. Instead of all this messing around and trying to pander to casuals Blizz could have actually made Protoss a proper Starcraft race for LotV and maybe even got that arcade section sorted out and worth playing. That way most people who can't handle the game can play fmp customs or whatever and not spend their spare time making whine threads on Bnet and tl like "why shouldn't I be able to macro like soO after 100 games"
|
On September 19 2015 15:36 WrathSCII wrote:
It is funny and sad that in less than 24 hours of creating this thread to summarize and gather everyone to discuss about MM here Blizzard drops the hammer with "screw you all, MM are in the game and not going anywhere.."
I just gave up, I don't care about anything they do at this point, even unit balancing doesn't matter at this point. I already pre-ordered for the sake of the campaign. It is their game, let them do whatever they wanna do and release it on 10th of November with Fallout... Whatever...
Totally understand your frustration. I am in the same boat. I was even considering contacting blizzard support to get the refund for the pre-purchase. However I also want to play the single player to see how the story goes...
And therein lies the problem. Blizzard knows that Starcraft diehards like us will buy the game no matter what. I am not sure what the purpose of all this charade was. They showed a glimpse of how good the game could be and then immediately backpedalled... Just seems like they did this all as a giant middle finger to the community.
|
On September 19 2015 19:07 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On the specific case of LOTV beta: "people displeased by the latest gameplay change are franticly creating and answering polls on TL.net" But the polls say no macro mechanics meanwhile blizzard is re-adding macro mechanics because of outrage directed at 0 mechanics (the exact opposite opinion) realistically, few people want the semi-auto mechanics and almost everyone is speaking out against it. Most are divided into either no mechanics or full mechanics Show nested quote +Otherwise, you can have an enormous sample (let's say 1/4 of the total population), you still know jack shit about the rest. Like 90% of sc2 players don't even play the beta and that's before you even get into which language they speak. How can you take ANYTHING from that with your logic?
Blizzard is re-adding macro boosters because of the short sighted terran players who only cared about their race and didn't care about the game in general...
In addition to this I also think Blizzard intentionally sabotaged the no macro boosters change. That is because while terran and protoss had no boosters , zerg were still left with the inject. If they were serious about the changes they would have removed injects also. But they intentionally created this divide amongst the races to create the backlash that you saw. Now they can say - "see we tried it but it didn't work".It was their intention all along from the beta that all the complaints the community had about things like unit clustering, macro mechanics and all were wrong and that they were right.
|
terrans awful to play as without mules, especially tvt pfs and siege tank dropping, Just no.
|
"Only to zerg" appear as an option twice.
This is better than last patch at least. The automated nonsense was the worst iteration yet.
|
On September 20 2015 01:11 LlamaSc2 wrote:
terrans awful to play as without mules, especially tvt pfs and siege tank dropping, Just no.
meh
|
The patch is glorious, accept that plebs.
Hots Mule, Nerfed Chrono, somewhat noobfriendly inject. Boom they did it, they saved starcraft !
|
I've said this in other threads, all for making the game mechanically challenging but there should be a way to do that in a fun and interesting way.
I've found spreading creep to be a fun aspect to the game. It's is easy to see if doing well. If you forget to do it for a minute you don't auto lose, and you have a layer of the game where your opponent is trying to prevent the spread. It works well on all levels because a casual that doesn't spread creep as well playing against a casual that doesn't micro as well to push creep out works. Just like a pro spreads creep really well but their opponent might be better at pushing it back.
That is a real interesting part of the game. Are queen injects interesting? Does anyone really like injecting?
At the very least, when you hit "inject" with your queen they could make it so your queen walks to the nearest hatch that isn't currently spawning larva and injects. You'd still have to remember to do it but not vision back to each base and eliminate and extra click.
As a random player Zerg was just so much more enjoyable without this tedious repetitive task that takes your focus all game. Just not fun.
|
On September 19 2015 04:18 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 03:57 Asamu1 wrote:On September 19 2015 01:31 AgamemnonSC2 wrote:
I dislike the automated Chrono which you can move to different buildings, as in the Sept. 17 patch. I really liked when it was removed, but I would rather have full control of Chrono, than having it automated.
It feels awful. The automated Chrono isn't much different overall; it just doesn't require you to go back and use it every 20 seconds; you still choose what to use it for, so IMO, the change is a + from the HoTS version. On September 19 2015 03:02 deacon.frost wrote:On September 19 2015 01:35 fickazzz wrote:It shows clearly that most people liked the removal of the macro mechanics and i assume the % of people who don't vote in these polls would be even higher on those, So why would they add them again Most people here! Even if there is 1000 votes like in the last one, how many people play SC2 daily? TL.net is a minority! And of pretty elitist HC players. If you can gather 20 000 votes, that would be nice and said actually something about it. Saying that the TL community is elitist would point to them being more likely to want to keep the macro mechanics, not remove them entirely... The fact that a poll among a supposedly elitist community is so one-sided in the other direction actually says a lot... DO you realize, that without MM the game is actually harder and more punishing? Now you cannot just sacrifice few probes to some mine/oracle/phoenixes, because you cannot CR them out! Now you cannot just camp larvae, you have to produce unit constantly. Now you cannot land at a base, MULE it and then leave if anything bad happen. Also you cannot lose SCVs here and there when defending blink-allin, when mutalisks are on the stage etc. Not sure if you understand what removing MM means. Yes, the pace slows down, but the game is not that forgiving anymore. Another example - now if you do not scout properly the roach-bane all in you cannot get back into the game with 3 SCVs  TL;DR Removing MM makes the game harder, IMO. Since you have lower income - every units counts more. Since you have lower worker production rate - every worker counts more. Edit: And even if Tl.net is not full of elitists, who cares. Tl.net is still a minority, maybe even smaller than the margin of error!!! Edit2: And do not get me wrong, I am not trying to bash on this community. I just want you guys to realize how small sample TL.net is. You cannot go out and say - hey, on TL.net this Poll shows the majority of players wants the MM removed from the game. It is not true at all.
This is pretty much the case. Removal of MM leaves harassment too strong. However, after a long time of people playing; something that has happened in hots will happen in legacy. Widow mines and oracles were insanely strong in early hots, but then people learned to deal with them better. The same thing would have happened in Legacy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
