|
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CM809rKWoAAiV0C.jpg)
Source
Hey everyone, we’re back with a community feedback update. There are a few topics we wanted to discuss in detail this week, so let’s begin!
First, we wanted to let you know that until the release of the game, if big issues such as the Adept early/mid game issues arise, we’ll be doing some quick balance updates even if they are smaller than before. Up until this point, we’ve had a slower balance update schedule per our community’s request of having lots of changes per update. This method went well when we were making big changes to the game, but now that we’re trying to fine tune the game as much as we can before release, we’d like quicker turn-arounds on balance updates even if we don’t have so many changes lined up. With that in mind, we’re currently aiming for the next balance update to release tomorrow.
Macro mechanics
We agree with your feedback in that reducing their effectiveness might be a cool idea, so we’ll try it out in the next balance update. We’re currently thinking something like reducing larva per inject to 3, chrono boost speed buff decreased to 15% or so, and increasing the time mules need to spend while mining minerals so that it takes longer to return each trip.
At this point, we also want to let you know that it’s not of much help to give us feedback on why macro mechanics have to be removed at this point. We clearly know that there are pros and cons (that we’ve explored in great detail) to both methods. We feel that after exploring many different angles, the best is what we have now: easier for non-pros, but just as difficult for pros. We will not be exploring a macro mechanics removal for the remainder of the beta. This doesn’t mean however that we will never go back to exploring this topic again. We’re currently discussing plans about when and how to explore big changes (such as this one) after Legacy of the Void ships. We’ll try to settle on some discussion points before Blizzcon so that we can talk to you all about this at panels, interviews, or discussions. For now however, we’d like to focus on balancing the game.
Concerning macro mechanics, please focus your discussions around keeping the current ones in the beta vs. reverting back to Heart of the Swarm. This is the last thing we’re trying to decide for macro mechanics. Also, keep in mind that we can continue tuning the numbers for macro mechanics until we arrive in a good place.
Swarm Host
We hear your feedback in that Swarm Hosts aren't used as much as other units. In Void, they are much stronger compared to the HotS version, so we'd like to take our time to make sure that the unit truly needs to be buffed before making a call. Keep in mind, these types of number tweaks can be done fairly easily, so if you guys could help us test their exact state right now, it'll be extremely helpful.
Adept
Concerning Adepts, we’d like to first try reducing their health to see how that changes the early game use of Adepts. For their later game upgrade, we’ve been exploring various stat upgrades and where we landed on for now is an attack period reduction.
This is what we’re seeing with the new upgrade in comparison with the Zealot:
Adepts are much better at worker line harassment vs. Zealots are much better at structure harassment.
Defensive cases are more interesting with Zealots warping in right on top of enemy units vs. Adepts needing to warp in with positioning in mind vs. melee units.
In larger combat, Adepts will serve mostly as a source of damage vs. Zealots serving as meat-shields (as they already do).
We would see a great reduction in Adepts just teleporting on top of enemy armies, and so good positioning of the Shade ability will be more critical in engagements.
We don’t think we will get the new numbers perfect with the first pass, but we’ll keep a close eye on the new numbers for the Adept and tune accordingly as we go forward.
Ghost Steady Targetting
We want to first explore reducing the delay before the shot fires. If more buffs are needed after this, we’d like to explore increasing the damage output per Snipe, so that they can counter bigger units more easily.
We are aiming for these things, as well as the changes mentioned in last week’s community update, to be implemented in tomorrow’s balance update. Thank you.
|
No raven change? or any talks about liberators?
:c
|
What about Liberators? Phoenix based pvp,etc? Game is a month and a week from official release and all they can write is this super short post?
|
Neat, sounds like a solid update to me. Lexender, what change are you wanting for ravens?
|
At least the adept is finally being finally nerfed. Sadly the macro mechanics are here to stay, but I'm very happy their at least discussing the idea of nerfing it's effectiveness which is actually a great thing.
|
can anyone explain the logic behind the sh statement? they are not used in the beta even though they are stronger than in hots
|
On October 02 2015 02:06 Tsubbi wrote:
can anyone explain the logic behind the sh statement? they are not used in the beta even though they are stronger than in hots
They are saying that they are underused *despite* them being stronger than their HotS version.
Anyway, this update is looking way too small for a release that close..
|
Every time I see those horrible updates. The more I go play BW to forget I saw them...
|
Adept need a Hp nerf AND a dps nerf seriously... PvT is just unplayable in this beta it's not with a tiny nerf like this that will change something
Also when the Op Parasitic bomb and the 8 ultra armor will be nerf ?
|
This is looking to be a solid update. I don't think LotV will be quite as good as the community was hoping, but the post-release changes somewhere far down the road have sounded quite promising, ever since Incontrol started blabbing about them on his stream after coming back from the secret meeting at Blizzard HQ.
|
On October 02 2015 02:11 Pontius Pirate wrote:
This is looking to be a solid update. I don't think LotV will be quite as good as the community was hoping, but the post-release changes somewhere far down the road have sounded quite promising, ever since Incontrol started blabbing about them on his stream after coming back from the secret meeting at Blizzard HQ.
I don't believe any BS the "community figures" came back with from the "Summit". Time will prove just like how this beta did.
|
Interesting...umm...Nerf adept, Nerf Liberator, Nerf Lurker, Nerf warp prism pick up range please...
Other than that, the macro mechanics reduction sounds great!
|
On October 02 2015 02:06 Tsubbi wrote:
can anyone explain the logic behind the sh statement? they are not used in the beta even though they are stronger than in hots
They might be stronger than in hots, but I feel they are weaker in lotv versus the new units. They are so easily destroyed or avoided, especially with the current cooldown.
|
didn't mention warp prism or photon overcharge, and the myriad of other broken stuff. nice.
|
Although none of what they talk about are bad ideas, I'm still not impressed with LotV's direction. There's so much that could be improved in the game that isn't getting changed at all.
|
"We will not be exploring a macro mechanics removal for the remainder of the beta. This doesn’t mean however that we will never go back to exploring this topic again. We’re currently discussing plans about when and how to explore big changes (such as this one) after Legacy of the Void ships. We’ll try to settle on some discussion points before Blizzcon so that we can talk to you all about this at panels, interviews, or discussions"
A glimpse of hope (for any design change)?
|
I even think PO is more broken than adepts right now :D
|
Katowice25012 Posts
On October 02 2015 01:54 WrathSCII wrote:
First, we wanted to let you know that until the release of the game, if big issues such as the Adept early/mid game issues arise, we’ll be doing some quick balance updates even if they are smaller than before. Up until this point, we’ve had a slower balance update schedule per our community’s request of having lots of changes per update. This method went well when we were making big changes to the game, but now that we’re trying to fine tune the game as much as we can before release, we’d like quicker turn-arounds on balance updates even if we don’t have so many changes lined up. With that in mind, we’re currently aiming for the next balance update to release tomorrow.
I feel like I've seen a lot of people mention they like seeing they're willing to try a lot of changes but has anyone said we need big updates? I don't remember seeing much of that, if any...
|
Until this day I don't know why the company that let me hag for 12 years to have another Stracraft game is rushing to publish an expansion, this make me think this is going ONLY for the moneys...
|
i would love to see a complete redesign of the SH, i just hate that unit
|
I feel like I've seen a lot of people mention they like seeing they're willing to try a lot of changes but has anyone said we need big updates? I don't remember seeing much of that, if any...
At the beginning of the Beta, a lot of people were asking for lots of big changes to LotV. This is where things like the econ change adjustments, Siege Tank Drops, Photon Overcharge change, Adept upgrade change, etc came out of, and why they were less frequent: because they were pretty big in comparison to things like stat changes. So it makes sense now that they're in the balancing stage to do a lot more frequent, smaller changes to balance out the game.
|
On October 02 2015 02:30 TorkkSC wrote:Show nested quote +I feel like I've seen a lot of people mention they like seeing they're willing to try a lot of changes but has anyone said we need big updates? I don't remember seeing much of that, if any... At the beginning of the Beta, a lot of people were asking for lots of big changes to LotV. This is where things like the econ change adjustments, Siege Tank Drops, Photon Overcharge change, Adept upgrade change, etc came out of, and why they were less frequent: because they were pretty big in comparison to things like stat changes. So it makes sense now that they're in the balancing stage to do a lot more frequent, smaller changes to balance out the game.
Except actually the first 3 months of the beta they went full herp derp mode and really did not a thing except after the community started to flame the hell out of them.
|
Let's not forget this part though
We’re currently discussing plans about when and how to explore big changes (such as this one) after Legacy of the Void ships. We’ll try to settle on some discussion points before Blizzcon so that we can talk to you all about this at panels, interviews, or discussions. For now however, we’d like to focus on balancing the game.
Not all hope is lost on big changes.
|
On October 02 2015 02:33 KeksX wrote:Let's not forget this part though Show nested quote +We’re currently discussing plans about when and how to explore big changes (such as this one) after Legacy of the Void ships. We’ll try to settle on some discussion points before Blizzcon so that we can talk to you all about this at panels, interviews, or discussions. For now however, we’d like to focus on balancing the game.
Not all hope is lost on big changes.
looks like PR... can you really make big changes in the middle of WCS/GSL , etc?
|
On October 02 2015 02:33 KeksX wrote:Let's not forget this part though Show nested quote +We’re currently discussing plans about when and how to explore big changes (such as this one) after Legacy of the Void ships. We’ll try to settle on some discussion points before Blizzcon so that we can talk to you all about this at panels, interviews, or discussions. For now however, we’d like to focus on balancing the game.
Not all hope is lost on big changes.
More waiting for those who still have faith in SC2. There is only so much you can put off to later. It is sad that LotV has to be a business decision for this year, rather than actually being ready for release.
It feels like SC2 in its entirety has been a waiting game.
|
On October 02 2015 02:33 KeksX wrote:Let's not forget this part though Show nested quote +We’re currently discussing plans about when and how to explore big changes (such as this one) after Legacy of the Void ships. We’ll try to settle on some discussion points before Blizzcon so that we can talk to you all about this at panels, interviews, or discussions. For now however, we’d like to focus on balancing the game.
Not all hope is lost on big changes.
I'd be really really shocked if they did big changes after LotV ships. If they do it'll only be to fix something that's completely fucked like how they changed swarm hosts in HotS after that 4 hour WCS game.
|
I'm cool with macro mechanics being in the new state but nerfed. I'm very cool with them definitely staying in.
I'm not so cool with this being looked at again after go-live. Mostly because I like macro mechanics, but also because making the game unstable after shipping and once proper tournaments are being played for money is not a very good idea in my book.
|
Except actually the first 3 months of the beta they went full herp derp mode and really did not a thing except after the community started to flame the hell out of them.
Except if you actually go back and read those feedbacks that is not true. You're just flaming for the sake of flaming here. People were upset with some of the actual changes themselves, not with the fact that they weren't doing changes. In fact, there are plenty of comments back then of people praising that they're at least pushing out big changes.
|
wow slowing the pace is a thing?! feels so surreal!
I thought that is impossible in Blizzard's mind. This is gonna be the 2nd best patch after "MM removal" patch.
|
I mean I'm pretty okay with the comment on macro boosters, reducing their effectiveness should be a really happy medium to keep things mechanical.
My issue however is that David keeps up bringing small changes and balance tuning but almost half of the units that need it are just being ever so casually tossed to the wayside?
No Infestor change? The unit is borderline not viable, I would almost always rather have Vipers.
No Ultralisk nerf? The unit is still OP vs. bio and a move nonsense I hate it even in my mirror (zvz)
No Sentry rework? With Ravagers FF is going to suck, they need a different ability.
No Nydus change? It can't stay invincible forever.
I know all of these things can be altered as times goes on, but why not now? How long does the Infestor have to suck?
|
For the love of God, please return Chrono Boost to the way that it used to be.
The current scenario is a significant nerf to high level users who have the APM and awareness to bank it ON PURPOSE.
Having it going all the time is not necessarily helpful. In certain scenarios when I want to rush out a Disruptor or a Colossus, I want to actively save chrono so I can spend it all on my robo. In that case, the current system is an over 50% nerf to HotS while Larva is buffed and MULES are unchanged.
|
Pretty underwhelming. It would be much better if blizzard were to just go haam with changes to try things out, since the release date is so close.
|
On October 02 2015 02:29 Topin wrote:
i would love to see a complete redesign of the SH, i just hate that unit
With the Lurker I'd rather the unit just be flat out removed.
|
I am kind of disappointed with how few changes they are trying and most of them are so minimal
|
Just buff the Raven's speed already, guys, lol!
Short but to the point patch preview: please test these things, we're going to tweak this and that.
And @Dino, it does feel like Protoss is getting hit the hardest with the Chronoboost thing, but they asked about this specifically: tweak what we have, or revert to HotS.
|
This game is broken to its core.
|
Let's remind everyone what were all the big changes added on this expansion: -Starting worker number increased.
-go fuck yourself
|
not many changes, but nerf on macro mechanics is a big one!
|
|
|
No mention of the infestor? Its even more useless than sh lol
|
This one says nothing about details and patch will be released tomorrow, players don't really have any option...whatever
|
On October 02 2015 01:54 WrathSCII wrote:
Swarm Host
We hear your feedback in that Swarm Hosts aren't used as much as other units. In Void, they are much stronger compared to the HotS version, so we'd like to take our time to make sure that the unit truly needs to be buffed before making a call. Keep in mind, these types of number tweaks can be done fairly easily, so if you guys could help us test their exact state right now, it'll be extremely helpful.
The exact stats aren't hard to figure, just remove the unit completely.
|
BTW, i think the movement speed and health should both be nerfed for adept. when terran is running back and forth to defend rush in frontline, 3-4 adepts slipping into mineral line with invincible and noclip shade will be the end of terran economy.
|
Reduction of macro boosting so economic progression is slower and the possibility of bigger changes post-release is good enough news.
I'd prefer Chrono with the old system I think.
|
Ok Blizzard. You want me to buy your game, but I just dont see why if not for the story mode.
What is different from HotS that is worth 40€? 12 workers start? TvP is still early guessing game. The macro mechanichs were OK to help us casuals and now they are almost gone...
I play T. I play mech in all MUs. In TvT you never see Liberator. This unit is totally useless in TvP as well. Now I use it in TvZ to kill mutas, so I dont need Thors anymore... I almost never see Disruptors.. Lurkers are very rare in TvZ and there is full of Ravager rush almost every TvZ...
40€ for this?? REALLY??? The game is so stressing, forcing you to expand as crazy... I will wait a lot to buy LotV. Maybe when it is 20€ or less and after Blizz see people are not buying it, this will be in January or even Christmas..
This expansión is even worse than HotS...
|
Potentially reducing macro mechanic effectiveness and slowing down the game pace is a GREAT idea to try out. Really happy with that suggestion
|
|
|
I couldn't get past him using at this point twice in the same sentence. That probably bothered me as much as the direction the game is going.
But I think it is a shame that we did get to see some more extreme testing of ideas. I feel like we were going that way, and then the powers that be said, "get this thing ready for release and we'll fix it later."
It is a shame, because I've grown accustomed to the Blizzard model of shipping the initial version of the game in an unfinished state, but then they typically knock it out of the park with the expansions and get it right. Neither D3 or SC2 have come through in that way. Unfortunately what that means is this update just like HotS will be a small bump for a short time and then settle back to the place it is now since there is nothing really going on here that significantly changes anything substantial.
|
Adepts are extremely mobile, specially for an early game unit. That coupled with the fact that they can two shot workers (a zealot can't even two shot workers and it's a meele unit) is just too much to deal with for early game zerg in my opinion. I think a damage reduction would help balance the unit more than hp at this point.
|
well, at least they made up their mind.
not the worst, but still not good.
|
If Adept's had -1 damage then a fast forge timing attack would be a possibility, but gimmic warp prism plays off 1 base wouldn't be nearly as strong. Reducing their health doesn't add any strategic depth beyond making them weaker, and fails to limit the warp prism BS plays.
|
On October 02 2015 02:06 Tsubbi wrote:
can anyone explain the logic behind the sh statement? they are not used in the beta even though they are stronger than in hots
My guess is the flying ability technically makes their attack way more potent. They are more mobile now, too. But they are funky to use and don't just straight up win games unless you are way ahead, so when I play Zerg I normally don't bother with them either yet. If I had 12 hours a day to play, I'd try them out much more and find builds where they would maybe do great things.
|
On October 02 2015 02:06 Tsubbi wrote:
can anyone explain the logic behind the sh statement? they are not used in the beta even though they are stronger than in hots
The Swarmhost are better, but worst at the same time. The cool down makes them to hard to use. they're a huge investment so if you don't do massive damage with the first few waves, it's gg. Also the air upgrade is terrible vs terran. it's a nerf to go for the air upgrade. Blizzard should consider giving the player the ability to turn on flyer mode vs ground because as it stands right now, if you get the air upgrade, the terran player goes liberator and your sh are useless.
|
Glad for the macro mechanics reduction.
Definitely like the newer Chrono the best... I think a few months down the road we can get a UI update to make them easier to keep track of.
|
If the update process during beta is already that slow, how slowly will the game get fixed after release.
|
On October 02 2015 02:54 DinoMight wrote:
For the love of God, please return Chrono Boost to the way that it used to be.
The current scenario is a significant nerf to high level users who have the APM and awareness to bank it ON PURPOSE.
Having it going all the time is not necessarily helpful. In certain scenarios when I want to rush out a Disruptor or a Colossus, I want to actively save chrono so I can spend it all on my robo. In that case, the current system is an over 50% nerf to HotS while Larva is buffed and MULES are unchanged.
Protoss is less unstable with the new chrono... easier to balance. If we keep old chrono, they are going to nerf gateway units again or who knows what. I'd much rather the current chrono, allowing Z and T to defend all-ins slightly easier than not. If there are timings Protoss cannot hold something because they need a faster colossus, they will reduce the time for that colossus/unit being built. All-ins are still possible and strong for Protoss, but more manageable.
|
This is my 2 cents playing terran is a joke right now! Im getting rekt by bullshit zergs and tosses. please do something for bio or it will litterally disappear from tvz and I'm tired of opening up defensive 1 base ghost just to not die in the early game vs toss, and if they just macro or dont throw away there prism they are just ahead. I love the eco changes enjoy the super fast pace of the game but terran is obviously under powered right now. I never thought I would say this because this is a game I have been playing for more than a decade but if somethign doesn't change I will probably not buy LOTV. I cant even make master in LOTV because there are no terrans for me to play. I die to adept prism rush almost every tvp and even if i defend it im behind. There is a reason there are only 2 gm terrans in the top 16 and they are both koreans. morrow switched to toss because he is tired of opening the same way vs toss everygame. shnitzel terran raged quit the other day because of gg a-move ultras and even Polt is complaining about adepts and he is a multiple WCS champion. Please do something for the maurader vs ultras. "WHAT WAS THAT USE GHOST SURE JUST HAVE A SIEZER ZERG AND MAYBE IT WILL LAND GOOD DESIGN ON THAT SKILL 3 SECONDS IS AN ETERNITY IN SC2.
|
Protoss build/research times need to DRASTICALLY be reduced.
Everything was balanced around having max of the old chrono put into it.
Now that we're capped at 15% improvement for anything (down from 50%) all build times across the board need to come down. The race is unplayable as it is without the Adept being OP (this will get nerfed).
|
On October 02 2015 04:09 Lsvtecjordan wrote:
This is my 2 cents playing terran is a joke right now! Im getting rekt by bullshit zergs and tosses. please do something for bio or it will litterally disappear from tvz and I'm tired of opening up defensive 1 base ghost just to not die in the early game vs toss, and if they just macro or dont throw away there prism they are just ahead. I love the eco changes enjoy the super fast pace of the game but terran is obviously under powered right now. I never thought I would say this because this is a game I have been playing for more than a decade but if somethign doesn't change I will probably not buy LOTV. I cant even make master in LOTV because there are no terrans for me to play. I die to adept prism rush almost every tvp and even if i defend it im behind. There is a reason there are only 2 gm terrans in the top 16 and they are both koreans. morrow switched to toss because he is tired of opening the same way vs toss everygame. shnitzel terran raged quit the other day because of gg a-move ultras and even Polt is complaining about adepts and he is a multiple WCS champion. Please do something for the maurader vs ultras. "WHAT WAS THAT USE GHOST SURE JUST HAVE A SIEZER ZERG AND MAYBE IT WILL LAND GOOD DESIGN ON THAT SKILL 3 SECONDS IS AN ETERNITY IN SC2.
thx for that. the days you could mmm, 1a + t, gg are over.
|
ya now you just make adept dont have to mule dont have to crono and just amove! thanks for that 
|
On October 02 2015 04:17 DinoMight wrote:
Protoss build/research times need to DRASTICALLY be reduced.
Everything was balanced around having max of the old chrono put into it.
Now that we're capped at 15% improvement for anything (down from 50%) all build times across the board need to come down. The race is unplayable as it is without the Adept being OP (this will get nerfed).
I hear you. Some things will probably have to get buffed. Short term there will be problems for Protoss, but long term this is a more stable solution I feel. I'm very curious to see this adept changes... they need to keep it solid and keep the micro action good. Confident it will happen.
|
well at this point i just want to see everything changed and have the game show no resemblance to anything before it. starcraft is cool and i want to open up a new toy on the 10th and have it feel like a new game . . .fucks sake guys this isnt fifa
|
this update sounds good, im happy that they will consider big changes even after the launch of LOTV, and also that they are considering a SH revamp.
keep up the good work blizz
|
We used to have Soon™
Now we have november 10th 2015
:/
|
Shortest community update ever. Waiting for the one that just says 'Done.'
The game is not in a bad way to be honest. Nerf the Adept, tweak boosters and I can live with it (even PB and PO).
|
please DK don't mess around with macro mechanics anymore. We had them for 5 years and nobody ever complained about them. Just revert back to hots and focus on unit balance.
|
On October 02 2015 04:33 Penev wrote:
We used to have Soon™
Now we have november 10th 2015
:/
It is very strange, isn't it? 
|
On October 02 2015 04:40 Charoisaur wrote:
please DK don't mess around with macro mechanics anymore. We had them for 5 years and nobody ever complained about them. Just revert back to hots and focus on unit balance.
Don't even bro. Nerfing macro mechanics is probably the single best thing they can do short of a complete rebalance and removal. This is great. Agreed on reverting chrono back to Hots form
|
On October 02 2015 01:54 WrathSCII wrote:
Swarm Host
We hear your feedback in that Swarm Hosts aren't used as much as other units. In Void, they are much stronger compared to the HotS version, so we'd like to take our time to make sure that the unit truly needs to be buffed before making a call. Keep in mind, these types of number tweaks can be done fairly easily, so if you guys could help us test their exact state right now, it'll be extremely helpful.
Would love to know who are the idiots who keep reminding Blizzard that units like the swarm host and colossus exist. The only hope I have left is that Blizzard totally forgot these terrible, boring units exist and forgot to make them viable before the game releases. For God's sake, stop reminding David Kim about these units.
|
On October 02 2015 04:40 Charoisaur wrote:
please DK don't mess around with macro mechanics anymore. We had them for 5 years and nobody ever complained about them. Just revert back to hots and focus on unit balance.
The game needs macro mechanic nerfs. Way too easy to get to 200 supply. 200 supply army comp trades are the worst thing that can happen to SC2 esports, as has been stated by Korean pros and commentators for some time. 200 supply fights might as well be settled in the unit tester. Macro mechanic nerfs will keep the game under that cap, and prevent the poor gameplay that comes with unit comp contests.
|
When you look at the core/design issues that are being addressed in LOTV, I am confident that it will be a better multiplayer game than HOTS after the balance and fine tuning. Many are simply omitting to consider alot of the very beneficial features coming in LOTV.
|
Dk seems to have no idea what to do with the game. Constantly going back and forth with macro mechanics. If he had a clear vision where he wants to take the game this wouldn't be so difficult.
|
On October 02 2015 04:33 Penev wrote:
We used to have Soon™
Now we have november 10th 2015
:/
Yep,
Soon has turned into Too Soon
|
I hope he leaves the macro mechanics as they are so the game can die for good and Charoisaur can be alone on bnet injecting vs AI
|
The ghost change is that snipe has less of a delay and goes off faster? I don't think that's the needed ghost buff, takes a lot of APM that you will need to spend splitting marines and stuff. I'd rather like to see the dmg buffed or maybe an armor debuff to the target or something
|
On October 02 2015 04:40 Charoisaur wrote:
please DK don't mess around with macro mechanics anymore. We had them for 5 years and nobody ever complained about them. Just revert back to hots and focus on unit balance.
Wait what? Mass mule lategame sillyness, mass larva remaxes, instant worker reproduction from zerg, terran living on after losing most of their workers early game, every protoss timing attack and cheese ever fueled by chronoboost. You must have lived under a rock if you never heard complaints about mass larva, mules or chrono. Not to mention lots of complaints about the general development in the game being too high, which is much easier to adress via macrobooster nerfs than trying to tinker with mining rates or similar fundamental interferences.
|
On October 02 2015 05:06 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 04:40 Charoisaur wrote:
please DK don't mess around with macro mechanics anymore. We had them for 5 years and nobody ever complained about them. Just revert back to hots and focus on unit balance. Wait what? Mass mule lategame sillyness, mass larva remaxes, instant worker reproduction from zerg, terran living on after losing most of their workers early game, every protoss timing attack and cheese ever fueled by chronoboost. You must have lived under a rock if you never heard complaints about mass larva, mules or chrono. Not to mention lots of complaints about the general development in the game being too high, which is much easier to adress via macrobooster nerfs than trying to tinker with mining rates or similar fundamental interferences.
okay people complained about them but some people complained about everything. If every unit that gets complained about would be removed there wouldn't be any units left anymore.
David Kim should do what is best for the game instead of trying to please some gold players who think they would be platinum without macro mechanics and then leave the game once they realize they still don't get out of gold.
|
On October 02 2015 05:15 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 05:06 Big J wrote:On October 02 2015 04:40 Charoisaur wrote:
please DK don't mess around with macro mechanics anymore. We had them for 5 years and nobody ever complained about them. Just revert back to hots and focus on unit balance. Wait what? Mass mule lategame sillyness, mass larva remaxes, instant worker reproduction from zerg, terran living on after losing most of their workers early game, every protoss timing attack and cheese ever fueled by chronoboost. You must have lived under a rock if you never heard complaints about mass larva, mules or chrono. Not to mention lots of complaints about the general development in the game being too high, which is much easier to adress via macrobooster nerfs than trying to tinker with mining rates or similar fundamental interferences. okay people complained about them but some people complained about everything. If every unit that gets complained about would be removed there wouldn't be any units left anymore. David Kim should do what is best for the game instead of trying to please some gold players who think they would be platinum without macro mechanics and then leave the game once they realize they still don't get out of gold.
Lots of people, even or especially amongst those that are against the removal of macro boosters have argued for them being tweaked. The amounts of larva, especially provided by inject at once, has been one of my highest priority complaints about zerg since it leads to too big discreptancies between macro and all out allin play, often impossible to really scout. I cant see how nerfing zerg larva would lead to worse gameplay.
|
Why didn't they address random strategy/random unit #341 that's giving me trouble on the ladder for LotV? Very disappointed by this update.
|
Hopefully nerfing macro mechanics should slow down the frantic pace in LotV to more manageable levels. HotS macro mechanics on top of 12 worker start and reduced mineral counts just sped up the expansion pressure too much.
|
On October 02 2015 05:42 HighPassage wrote:
Why didn't they address random strategy/random unit #341 that's giving me trouble on the ladder for LotV? Very disappointed by this update.
you forgot "I'm not buying this game unless they fix it"
|
I feel like nerfing the macro mechanics is just the way to go, make it more small reward/low punishment so it doesn't pound the noobs but keeps the pros in their own league.
At this point unit balance and interaction should be the primary goal
1. Infestor fix (could even be as simple as reverting IT upgrades and making fungal growth do better damage)
2. Remove Siege Tank pick up thing (idiotic) and buff the siege tank so it holds ground better then Liberators (flat damage please)
3. Make Nydus viable but not gimmicky
4. Make Adepts scale less hard early game and tune them more towards mid game
5. Tune Disruptor as needed
6. Simplify Warp Gate/Warp in timings (offensive warp ins completely useless but Warp Prism seems overwhelming a middle ground might be better here)
|
Talk about macro mechanics seems good and promising. Other changes are not that big of a deal, people here tend to blow everything out of proportion and be way too biased towards something.
|
Why all this attention on macro mechanics?
How about we nerf the Adept so everyone can realize how bad Protoss actually is in LotV?
All tech is significantly delayed relative to econ, favoring Terrana and Zerg. Immortal and Colossus nerfs. Disruptor is a piece of trash, and the Warp Prism pickup buff seems great at first but then you realize that unless you're using it to constantly save your units they can't fight on their own.
The sooner we're rid of Adepts 2-shotting workers and Marines, the sooner Blizzard will realize that Protoss is a trash race, with weak overpriced units that are too hard to use and have too many bad abilities.
|
On October 02 2015 06:18 DinoMight wrote:
Why all this attention on macro mechanics?
How about we nerf the Adept so everyone can realize how bad Protoss actually is in LotV?
I don't really know how you back this up? Protoss doesn't seem OP in it's entirety right now but they definitely feel strong Adept aside, with Warp Prism tunneling into your base instantly to faster Carriers to the Adept/Templar Protoss literally doesn't seem weak/without options at any point in the game.
I do kind of wish Corrosive Bile didn't affect buildings really so FFE could be a viable macro opening but that's besides the point.
|
On October 02 2015 06:18 DinoMight wrote:
Why all this attention on macro mechanics?
How about we nerf the Adept so everyone can realize how bad Protoss actually is in LotV?
Lol, yeah I don't know about that argument:
"How about we nerf the queen so that everyone can realize how bad zerg really is in SC2."
"How about we nerf the medivac so that everyone can realize how bad terran really is in SC2."
Races are good because their shit is good.
|
On October 02 2015 06:20 jpg06051992 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 06:18 DinoMight wrote:
Why all this attention on macro mechanics?
How about we nerf the Adept so everyone can realize how bad Protoss actually is in LotV? I don't really know how you back this up? Protoss doesn't seem OP in it's entirety right now but they definitely feel strong Adept aside, with Warp Prism tunneling into your base instantly to faster Carriers to the Adept/Templar Protoss literally doesn't seem weak/without options at any point in the game. I do kind of wish Corrosive Bile didn't affect buildings really so FFE could be a viable macro opening but that's besides the point.
No i mean, Protoss is very weak, and all the units are gimmicky and require too much micro. Adepts doing insane econ damage ALLOWS Protoss to transition to the late game and build sky armies. But without the early game God mode unit, it all falls apart.
Separately, blizzard is forcing all Protoss players to play one style... micro style. You can extract so much MORE utility out of the units by microing them that it's ALWAYS a better use of APM to micro your units rather than build more or expand etc.
Like I said in my blog there will be no LotV Protoss Bombers. Only Protoss Marine Kings.
|
On October 02 2015 06:22 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 06:18 DinoMight wrote:
Why all this attention on macro mechanics?
How about we nerf the Adept so everyone can realize how bad Protoss actually is in LotV? Lol, yeah I don't know about that argument: "How about we nerf the queen so that everyone can realize how bad zerg really is in SC2." "How about we nerf the medivac so that everyone can realize how bad terran really is in SC2." Races are good because their shit is good.
The thing is the Adept is not even good in the mid-late game. The Adept is only good at doing economic damage in the early game. So as a Protoss you're in a position where unles you do heavy economic damage with Adepts in the early game you're fighting an uphill battle.
Winning PvT without opening some sort of Adept harass seems impossible at the moment. That's what I mean.
|
On October 02 2015 05:44 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 05:42 HighPassage wrote:
Why didn't they address random strategy/random unit #341 that's giving me trouble on the ladder for LotV? Very disappointed by this update. you forgot "I'm not buying this game unless they fix it"
These feedbacks threads are a shit show really. You should not bother.
|
Nice adept changes, can't wait for the patch!
|
On October 02 2015 06:30 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 06:22 Big J wrote:On October 02 2015 06:18 DinoMight wrote:
Why all this attention on macro mechanics?
How about we nerf the Adept so everyone can realize how bad Protoss actually is in LotV? Lol, yeah I don't know about that argument: "How about we nerf the queen so that everyone can realize how bad zerg really is in SC2." "How about we nerf the medivac so that everyone can realize how bad terran really is in SC2." Races are good because their shit is good. The thing is the Adept is not even good in the mid-late game. The Adept is only good at doing economic damage in the early game. So as a Protoss you're in a position where unles you do heavy economic damage with Adepts in the early game you're fighting an uphill battle. Winning PvT without opening some sort of Adept harass seems impossible at the moment. That's what I mean.
And they have said on multiple occasions that they want the adept to be a strong unit (just not lead to imbalanced strategies). Just by plain design, a low range, slow movement speed, ground only unit has to be strong. There is no way around the adept being somewhat strong in combat, unless they change it's functionality (or make it useless of course).
So I think your reaction goes way overboard if you think that they are going to make it unviable. It's probably still going to get some damage done if you dedicate to it, and it's probably still going to be severely limiting to terran openings since it still 2shots marines and SCVs and counters hellions and reapers as well.
Also they give the adept a cooldown reduction upgrade, and wasn't that something you (maybe it was some other protoss player) said they should do to make it stronger in the lategame in the last CU thread?
|
On October 02 2015 06:31 Musicus wrote:
Nice adept changes, can't wait for the patch!
That's a weird way to complain. Are you sure you're in the right thread?
|
if we're stuck with macro mechanics I'd prefer reduced ones.
|
On October 02 2015 06:18 DinoMight wrote:
Why all this attention on macro mechanics?
How about we nerf the Adept so everyone can realize how bad Protoss actually is in LotV?
All tech is significantly delayed relative to econ, favoring Terrana and Zerg. Immortal and Colossus nerfs. Disruptor is a piece of trash, and the Warp Prism pickup buff seems great at first but then you realize that unless you're using it to constantly save your units they can't fight on their own.
The sooner we're rid of Adepts 2-shotting workers and Marines, the sooner Blizzard will realize that Protoss is a trash race, with weak overpriced units that are too hard to use and have too many bad abilities.
probably because macro mechanics are extremely important to both the pace, overall balance, and fun factor to the entire game.
your biased complaints can wait another week imo
|
8748 Posts
I like it. I think LotV right now is fun and has the potential to stay interesting for quite a while. They're out of time so we're stuck with what we're stuck with anyway, but I think a lot of things have come together pretty well so far. It'd be wasteful to throw out this iteration. And the way they're talking about planning another round of big changes post-launch could potentially be the equivalent of a new expansion for multiplayer players. They won't add new units I'm sure, but they could redesign unused ones and they could make econ/macro/micro changes that reset all build orders again and change the dynamics of the game again. Right now I think the people who are unsatisfied are either pessimists who'd be unsatisfied with anything or they're in a minority that didn't see their preferences met, which is pretty much unavoidable (can't please everyone).
|
I'm happy with reduced macro mechanics, I've always lobbied to keep the existence of the macro mechanics but just nerf them so they're less important. I'd also hope that after this nerf, we don't have to discuss macro mechanics ever again, because the topic has taken such a huge emphasise when there are so many other things we could be focused on, and honestly I'm just sick of all the low league players whining about how hard it is to inject.
It's very difficult to judge the state of Protoss atm because of the adept, so hopefully once the nerf happens we can really focus in and see some pretty glaring weaknesses.
A couple of personal opinions of mine after playing over 200 games in the last 2 weeks:
Chrono: I prefer the old system, even if they decide to nerf it so it's not as strong. The auto one is just a bit clunky. I've actually gotten use to it after playing so many games, and it's not that terrible, if it's released in the eventual game i won't complain. But i do think the old one is just more intuitive.
Colossi: I could be in the minority but I really miss the colossi. I know a lot of people hated it, but it was reliable AoE and all races did have some sort of counter play against it in all honesty. The protoss army atm is just ridiculous, there's a lot of compositions that I can't go for, purely because there's just too many spell casters that makes it physically impossible. It's basically not possible to micro phoenixes while using disruptors, in fact, it's pretty hard to micro anything when you're using disruptors. Their attack requires so much attention that you have to babysit them, otherwise you risk doing a lot of damage to yourself. The result is that your micro with other units becomes pretty superficial, the most I'd ever do is blink away from my opponent's disruptor shots and try focus their ones down, all other unit abilities get thrown down the drain (and there are many). Disruptor shots are cool and fun to watch, but that's all you're really going to see because they take importance over everything else. I don't mind the increased skill cap with controlling the protoss army, but I would've rathered Blizzard's approach to not be so focused on abilities, something similar to marine splitting or zerg dodging widow mines and baneling shots would've been preferred (I have no idea how they could apply that to protoss, this is wishful thinking).
|
On October 02 2015 07:08 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 06:31 Musicus wrote:
Nice adept changes, can't wait for the patch! That's a weird way to complain. Are you sure you're in the right thread?
Oh sorry, I forgot to add how much I like that they are slowing down the game a bit with nerfed macro mechanics!
|
Am I the only one here who, regardless of the balance tweaks it probably needs, is excruciated by the Liberator's looks? I don't think they've ever created a unit so ugly and underwhelming in the way it attacks (air to air, air to ground is actually ok). It pisses me off, a lot.
|
mm patch sounds good but pls nerf warp prism, is just the strongest unit in the game and costs just 200 minerals... and pls be care about balance before release, check GM ladder (only 2 z in top20 right now) and what about tournaments? Only P and T winners... Z didnt won any tournament in last months, this means something or am I wrong?
|
On October 02 2015 03:03 insitelol wrote:
This game is broken to its core.
Fine. Play something else. There's plenty of games to choose.
|
On October 02 2015 08:21 CptMarvel wrote:
Am I the only one here who, regardless of the balance tweaks it probably needs, is excruciated by the Liberator's looks? I don't think they've ever created a unit so ugly and underwhelming in the way it attacks (air to air, air to ground is actually ok). It pisses me off, a lot.
The sideways missile launches are supposed to evoke the Valkyrie, but just look goofy and implausible in SC2 engine. Should just shoot straight forwards or something. The sideways launch followed by the spin makes no sense.
|
On October 02 2015 08:21 CptMarvel wrote:
Am I the only one here who, regardless of the balance tweaks it probably needs, is excruciated by the Liberator's looks? I don't think they've ever created a unit so ugly and underwhelming in the way it attacks (air to air, air to ground is actually ok). It pisses me off, a lot.
Na, you are not the only one. I also think the model size doesn't represent the unit very well. It looks too big for its hitpoints in particular.
|
Nerfing macro mechanics sounds great. I'm pretty happy with how this has been turning out.
|
I think they have to review some units costs... for example, an adept costs same as maruader but is like 3x stronger... liberator costs less than a voidray but it's better maybe... and what about ht that costs 1/3 mineral than infestor but being 10x worth?
|
On October 02 2015 06:28 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 06:20 jpg06051992 wrote:On October 02 2015 06:18 DinoMight wrote:
Why all this attention on macro mechanics?
How about we nerf the Adept so everyone can realize how bad Protoss actually is in LotV? I don't really know how you back this up? Protoss doesn't seem OP in it's entirety right now but they definitely feel strong Adept aside, with Warp Prism tunneling into your base instantly to faster Carriers to the Adept/Templar Protoss literally doesn't seem weak/without options at any point in the game. I do kind of wish Corrosive Bile didn't affect buildings really so FFE could be a viable macro opening but that's besides the point. No i mean, Protoss is very weak, and all the units are gimmicky and require too much micro. Adepts doing insane econ damage ALLOWS Protoss to transition to the late game and build sky armies. But without the early game God mode unit, it all falls apart. Separately, blizzard is forcing all Protoss players to play one style... micro style. You can extract so much MORE utility out of the units by microing them that it's ALWAYS a better use of APM to micro your units rather than build more or expand etc. Like I said in my blog there will be no LotV Protoss Bombers. Only Protoss Marine Kings.
I hope u are kidding... what about carriers, disruptor, warp prism? And ofc old hots op units like hts, blink stalker, immortals etc... I really cant see this HIGH COST units rotfl, they all are so cheap
|
On October 02 2015 08:21 CptMarvel wrote:
Am I the only one here who, regardless of the balance tweaks it probably needs, is excruciated by the Liberator's looks? I don't think they've ever created a unit so ugly and underwhelming in the way it attacks (air to air, air to ground is actually ok). It pisses me off, a lot.
The name is lame too. But to be fair, the Warhound looked even more out of place.
What pisses me of the most though is that it's an air unit. The starport has the most units now, 6 vs 4 for the barracks and 5 for the factory.
|
On October 02 2015 02:10 SC2Angora wrote:
Also when the Op Parasitic bomb and the 8 ultra armor will be nerf ?
I doubt they will change the parasitic bomb since zerg has no good response for air, and it is a bandaid in the first place for the real issue.
|
good to see they're nerfing the macro mechanic effectiveness, that is probably the best possible decision they can make at this point. it keeps the "high apm/skill" requirements but reduces the damage done by not keeping up with them. plus it slows down the game, which is always a good change.
also i'm glad that they're thinking of the adept as more of a damage focused unit, replacing the zealot as a tank was a a retarded idea.
|
I prefer the current strength of the mechanics. The change is going to nerf all of my pool before hatch builds. I'll end up hatch 1st every game now, which is boring. I don't see the big need to nerf them. It's needlessly changing the game. It makes the opening more boring. I don't see a huge improvement or problem to begin with. Just keep the current mechanics at this point.
|
On October 02 2015 09:02 K)Vincent wrote:
I think they have to review some units costs... for example, an adept costs same as maruader but is like 3x stronger... liberator costs less than a voidray but it's better maybe... and what about ht that costs 1/3 mineral than infestor but being 10x worth?
The races are asymmetrical.
|
people whining and moaning that the game will suck balls when it is released should remember the state of Day 1 multiplayer when SC1, Brood War, Reign of Chaos, and Frozen Throne were released. if it takes 18 months to fully flesh out LotV after release it'll be on par with all their other RTS releases.
Furthermore, what was CoH1, RA2, and Kane's Wrath multiplayer like on release day? Every multiplayer RTS ever made always needed a long trail of balance patches.
nice consistency between Sigaty's interview at Blizzcon and David Kim's community feedback update
Specifically, this is nice to see:
"We will not be exploring a macro mechanics removal for the remainder of the beta. This doesn’t mean however that we will never go back to exploring this topic again. We’re currently discussing plans about when and how to explore big changes (such as this one) after Legacy of the Void ships. We’ll try to settle on some discussion points before Blizzcon so that we can talk to you all about this at panels, interviews, or discussions. For now however, we’d like to focus on balancing the game. "
Go DK Go!
Great work Mr. Kim.
|
I'm kind of on the fence about whether macro mechanics need to be toned down or not. On one hand yes, it might make the pace of the game less breakneck, but it also provides potential for recovery when you lose workers to harass, which is another issue the community is vocal about (harass being too strong). On the other hand, if you lose a bunch of workers, you've probably lost the game already. There's likely a nice balance between the two, but it would take more testing in beta to find it, and they're short on time. Drastic changes like removing macro mechanics while not addressing unit balance would take a lot of time to fix, since it affects so many parts of the game (effectiveness of harassment for example, but that's really the least of it). I wish they made more time for it, if that's the direction they want to go.
|
On October 02 2015 07:37 NonY wrote:
I like it. I think LotV right now is fun and has the potential to stay interesting for quite a while. They're out of time so we're stuck with what we're stuck with anyway, but I think a lot of things have come together pretty well so far. It'd be wasteful to throw out this iteration. And the way they're talking about planning another round of big changes post-launch could potentially be the equivalent of a new expansion for multiplayer players. They won't add new units I'm sure, but they could redesign unused ones and they could make econ/macro/micro changes that reset all build orders again and change the dynamics of the game again. Right now I think the people who are unsatisfied are either pessimists who'd be unsatisfied with anything or they're in a minority that didn't see their preferences met, which is pretty much unavoidable (can't please everyone).
Definitely agree, LoTV has created really fun interactions and overall is actually amazing, especially the micro potential of progames, we haven't even seen the tip of the iceberg yet!
PvZ Roach/Ravager/Lurker vs Robo is one of the funnest things added to the game. PvP Robo wars is also insanely fun. PvT, as soon as the adept change goes through will probably not as bad as made out to be, maybe even T favored.
|
Will need to do something about Bio being so mineral costly and Protoss unit production being adjusted to HotS Chrono. Maybe Barracks get a mineral discount and certain Protoss units get build time reductions depending on how thing unfold.
|
On October 02 2015 09:02 K)Vincent wrote:
I think they have to review some units costs... for example, an adept costs same as maruader but is like 3x stronger... liberator costs less than a voidray but it's better maybe... and what about ht that costs 1/3 mineral than infestor but being 10x worth?
1 adept kills 3 marauders? O_O
|
On October 02 2015 10:17 ROOTFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 09:02 K)Vincent wrote:
I think they have to review some units costs... for example, an adept costs same as maruader but is like 3x stronger... liberator costs less than a voidray but it's better maybe... and what about ht that costs 1/3 mineral than infestor but being 10x worth?
1 adept kills 3 marauders? O_O
I think he means kills "workers" or light units 3 times faster. Although the same could be said about the marauder vs armored units when compared to adept vs armored units.
|
Ok, well there is nothing wrong with the changes they are making really..
* Adepts need to be nerfed somehow, TvA (read "Terran vs Adepts") is really stupid
* Swarm Hosts could just be removed, I don't see a point for them now that the Lurker exists (Swarm Host was originally the "seige" unit, but the Lurker and Ravager have basically filled those roles
* Ghost Snipe - Nobody uses this b/c who has time to individually target snipe every ghost in a way that it won't get interrupted during a giant battle when you're trying to micro all your other units?
* Don't really care about macro mechanics I'd prefer they just leave them as they are in HOTS an focus on balancing the units properly, but I accept that if they would have removed them, it would have put the game back ever further in terms of balance... So many things would have had to been re-tweaked it never would have worked in the time period they have (duh).. I'm really tired of reading about macro mechanics anyways, so I'm glad they are putting it to rest
|
[B]On October 02 2015 01:54 WrathSCII wrote:
At this point, we also want to let you know that it’s not of much help to give us feedback on why macro mechanics have to be removed at this point. We clearly know that there are pros and cons (that we’ve explored in great detail) to both methods. We feel that after exploring many different angles, the best is what we have now: easier for non-pros, but just as difficult for pros. We will not be exploring a macro mechanics removal for the remainder of the beta. This doesn’t mean however that we will never go back to exploring this topic again. We’re currently discussing plans about when and how to explore big changes (such as this one) after Legacy of the Void ships. We’ll try to settle on some discussion points before Blizzcon so that we can talk to you all about this at panels, interviews, or discussions. For now however, we’d like to focus on balancing the game.
Does this mean there is hope?
|
Post-release changes sound good.
Also glad to hear they are going to try to nerf MM.
Adept I'm not quite sure but we'll see after the patch come out.
Edit: Also I don't like Liberator's attack animation as well 
It would looks better if she does not only launch 2 missiles... But changing this means we need to tweak its damage.
Maybe reduce its model size would be good too.
|
Can't belive blizzard really thinks that ZvT and carriers are fine right now...
|
This is what we’re seeing with the new upgrade in comparison with the Zealot:
Adepts are much better at worker line harassment vs. Zealots are much better at structure harassment.
Defensive cases are more interesting with Zealots warping in right on top of enemy units vs. Adepts needing to warp in with positioning in mind vs. melee units.
In larger combat, Adepts will serve mostly as a source of damage vs. Zealots serving as meat-shields (as they already do).
We would see a great reduction in Adepts just teleporting on top of enemy armies, and so good positioning of the Shade ability will be more critical in engagements
Because I always wanted to have supply depot harassment units...And why would I warp in zealots on top of units when I am Pretty sure adepts have more health than zealots (correct me if im wrong). I can not see any reasoning to use zealots instead of adepts in this current state
|
On October 02 2015 11:44 WhaleOFaTale wrote:
This is what we’re seeing with the new upgrade in comparison with the Zealot:
Adepts are much better at worker line harassment vs. Zealots are much better at structure harassment.
Defensive cases are more interesting with Zealots warping in right on top of enemy units vs. Adepts needing to warp in with positioning in mind vs. melee units.
In larger combat, Adepts will serve mostly as a source of damage vs. Zealots serving as meat-shields (as they already do).
We would see a great reduction in Adepts just teleporting on top of enemy armies, and so good positioning of the Shade ability will be more critical in engagements
Because I always wanted to have supply depot harassment units...And why would I warp in zealots on top of units when I am Pretty sure adepts have more health than zealots (correct me if im wrong). I can not see any reasoning to use zealots instead of adepts in this current state
Er... Because they are going to nerf adept's health?
Also zealots are used all the time to snipe building in PvZ...
|
On October 02 2015 11:55 Yiome wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 11:44 WhaleOFaTale wrote:
This is what we’re seeing with the new upgrade in comparison with the Zealot:
Adepts are much better at worker line harassment vs. Zealots are much better at structure harassment.
Defensive cases are more interesting with Zealots warping in right on top of enemy units vs. Adepts needing to warp in with positioning in mind vs. melee units.
In larger combat, Adepts will serve mostly as a source of damage vs. Zealots serving as meat-shields (as they already do).
We would see a great reduction in Adepts just teleporting on top of enemy armies, and so good positioning of the Shade ability will be more critical in engagements
Because I always wanted to have supply depot harassment units...And why would I warp in zealots on top of units when I am Pretty sure adepts have more health than zealots (correct me if im wrong). I can not see any reasoning to use zealots instead of adepts in this current state Er... Because they are going to nerf adept's health? Also zealots are used all the time to snipe building in PvZ...
They would have to nerf its heath substantially to make it less than a zealots, correct? You think they would do that
|
On October 02 2015 11:44 WhaleOFaTale wrote:
This is what we’re seeing with the new upgrade in comparison with the Zealot:
Adepts are much better at worker line harassment vs. Zealots are much better at structure harassment.
Defensive cases are more interesting with Zealots warping in right on top of enemy units vs. Adepts needing to warp in with positioning in mind vs. melee units.
In larger combat, Adepts will serve mostly as a source of damage vs. Zealots serving as meat-shields (as they already do).
We would see a great reduction in Adepts just teleporting on top of enemy armies, and so good positioning of the Shade ability will be more critical in engagements
Because I always wanted to have supply depot harassment units...And why would I warp in zealots on top of units when I am Pretty sure adepts have more health than zealots (correct me if im wrong). I can not see any reasoning to use zealots instead of adepts in this current state
Because Zealots have more DPS against anything that isn't a worker? Or a marine?
|
I still am mind boggled why they don't just marginally reduce the mineral income that a mule generates. It's not an "all or nothing" thing, you can tweak the numbers, geez!
And a huge nerf to the mule hammer lategame would be to add a cooldown for an OC of like 25s or so. Wouldn't prevent it, of course, but would help alleviate. I also really liked the suggestion in another thread, that instead of calling down a mule, it called down something that attached to an SCV and permitted the SCV to mine at the current rate of a mule + 1 scv. This means mineral income would not change in any normal or midgame situation, but would drastically affect it lategame, while simultaneously preventing hidden mule calldowns where you don't have SCVs already at the base.
Dislike that they are still looking at an HP reduction for the adept, a simple -1 dmg to light so they don't 2-hit workers and marines would do amazing, as well as nerfing them later in the game vs T (combat shield marine + stim would die in 3 hits instead of 2). Such an easy fix, but they seem determined to have them 2 shot marines and workers. The question is WHY?? It's the same thing with oracles, they could make them so much better midgame vs units if they simply weakened how insanely they are in rushes.
|
A bit over one month to the release and I still haven't changed my mind: at this stage of LotV I am not interested with SC2 anymore. Unfortunately after the release HotS ladder will soon die.
Macro mechanics changes are interesting. What I mostly don't like is new economy. 12 workers is fine, but less minerals in bases which leads to forced expanding is bad idea IMO.
Second problem that I have with LotV is some BS ideas/units - Adepts, PO on Pylon, Marauder nerf, Ultralisk buff.
And honestly, I liked WoL the most. Why? Because in HotS they gave us MSC with PO, SH, Mines and Oracles. I hate all these units. But I guess, it's just me.
I will wait with buying LotV until it is either massively changed or the price will go down by a lot. I have 3 WoL/HotS accounts, but I don't feel like spending a dime on LotV.
|
On October 02 2015 14:13 FabledIntegral wrote:
I still am mind boggled why they don't just marginally reduce the mineral income that a mule generates. It's not an "all or nothing" thing, you can tweak the numbers, geez!
And a huge nerf to the mule hammer lategame would be to add a cooldown for an OC of like 25s or so. Wouldn't prevent it, of course, but would help alleviate. I also really liked the suggestion in another thread, that instead of calling down a mule, it called down something that attached to an SCV and permitted the SCV to mine at the current rate of a mule + 1 scv. This means mineral income would not change in any normal or midgame situation, but would drastically affect it lategame, while simultaneously preventing hidden mule calldowns where you don't have SCVs already at the base.
Dislike that they are still looking at an HP reduction for the adept, a simple -1 dmg to light so they don't 2-hit workers and marines would do amazing, as well as nerfing them later in the game vs T (combat shield marine + stim would die in 3 hits instead of 2). Such an easy fix, but they seem determined to have them 2 shot marines and workers. The question is WHY?? It's the same thing with oracles, they could make them so much better midgame vs units if they simply weakened how insanely they are in rushes.
They are increasing the mining time of the mule. This makes it harvest less overall, the first money after dropping a mule comes later and there's more opportunity to snipe a mule while mining to deny harvesting. Sure, this doesn't totally fix the mule hammer (terran is the only race that can make up the delay taking new bases both because of the mule hammer and being able to fly buildings).
|
On October 02 2015 14:13 FabledIntegral wrote:
I still am mind boggled why they don't just marginally reduce the mineral income that a mule generates. It's not an "all or nothing" thing, you can tweak the numbers, geez!
And a huge nerf to the mule hammer lategame would be to add a cooldown for an OC of like 25s or so. Wouldn't prevent it, of course, but would help alleviate.
On October 02 2015 14:42 y0su wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 14:13 FabledIntegral wrote:
I still am mind boggled why they don't just marginally reduce the mineral income that a mule generates. It's not an "all or nothing" thing, you can tweak the numbers, geez!
And a huge nerf to the mule hammer lategame would be to add a cooldown for an OC of like 25s or so. Wouldn't prevent it, of course, but would help alleviate. I also really liked the suggestion in another thread, that instead of calling down a mule, it called down something that attached to an SCV and permitted the SCV to mine at the current rate of a mule + 1 scv. This means mineral income would not change in any normal or midgame situation, but would drastically affect it lategame, while simultaneously preventing hidden mule calldowns where you don't have SCVs already at the base.
Dislike that they are still looking at an HP reduction for the adept, a simple -1 dmg to light so they don't 2-hit workers and marines would do amazing, as well as nerfing them later in the game vs T (combat shield marine + stim would die in 3 hits instead of 2). Such an easy fix, but they seem determined to have them 2 shot marines and workers. The question is WHY?? It's the same thing with oracles, they could make them so much better midgame vs units if they simply weakened how insanely they are in rushes. They are increasing the mining time of the mule. This makes it harvest less overall, the first money after dropping a mule comes later and there's more opportunity to snipe a mule while mining to deny harvesting. Sure, this doesn't totally fix the mule hammer (terran is the only race that can make up the delay taking new bases both because of the mule hammer and being able to fly buildings).
And Zerg is the only race that can make an opponent's composition completely irrelevant by tech switching their entire production.
Why is one OK but the other is not? Are Terrans winning everything left and right or what?
|
United Kingdom20303 Posts
On October 02 2015 12:21 WhaleOFaTale wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 11:55 Yiome wrote:On October 02 2015 11:44 WhaleOFaTale wrote:
This is what we’re seeing with the new upgrade in comparison with the Zealot:
Adepts are much better at worker line harassment vs. Zealots are much better at structure harassment.
Defensive cases are more interesting with Zealots warping in right on top of enemy units vs. Adepts needing to warp in with positioning in mind vs. melee units.
In larger combat, Adepts will serve mostly as a source of damage vs. Zealots serving as meat-shields (as they already do).
We would see a great reduction in Adepts just teleporting on top of enemy armies, and so good positioning of the Shade ability will be more critical in engagements
Because I always wanted to have supply depot harassment units...And why would I warp in zealots on top of units when I am Pretty sure adepts have more health than zealots (correct me if im wrong). I can not see any reasoning to use zealots instead of adepts in this current state Er... Because they are going to nerf adept's health? Also zealots are used all the time to snipe building in PvZ... They would have to nerf its heath substantially to make it less than a zealots, correct? You think they would do that
Adept is 140/90 at the moment.. They're talking about removing the 50 shield upgrade (90/90) and then adding a further nerf to health.
Because I always wanted to have supply depot harassment units
You can't do any kind of building denial with Adepts - when's the last time you tried to kill a nexus using Reapers? Unpowered a stargate, perhaps?
|
Decent update, even if a bit small.
The analysis on zealot + adept is spot on. Reducing MM effect (specially larvae) might do the trick I guess.
Still need more units looked at, like others have pointed out (vipers, ultra armor, carrier, liberator, lurker?).
|
"We will not be exploring a macro mechanics removal for the remainder of the beta. This doesn’t mean however that we will never go back to exploring this topic again. We’re currently discussing plans about when and how to explore big changes (such as this one) after Legacy of the Void ships"
You realize that's basically saying 'We are releasing LotV with unfinished multiplayer, we will finish it after launch'
|
On October 02 2015 01:54 WrathSCII wrote:
At this point, we also want to let you know that it’s not of much help to give us feedback on why macro mechanics have to be removed at this point. We clearly know that there are pros and cons (that we’ve explored in great detail) to both methods. We feel that after exploring many different angles, the best is what we have now: easier for non-pros, but just as difficult for pros. We will not be exploring a macro mechanics removal for the remainder of the beta. This doesn’t mean however that we will never go back to exploring this topic again. We’re currently discussing plans about when and how to explore big changes (such as this one) after Legacy of the Void ships. We’ll try to settle on some discussion points before Blizzcon so that we can talk to you all about this at panels, interviews, or discussions. For now however, we’d like to focus on balancing the game.
I bet this part was written by his PR expert due to so many people already giving up on LotV. I don't trust them at all to do anything after release if we are to look at their history. Even smaller changes they were unwilling to do without expansions and once time they did (swarm host change) they fucked up.
|
I'm not sure but I think terran is possibly the worst race in late game, has a very decent early game (less vs adepts), but after mid game its completely random.
Also, I don't know if cyclone can be useful in the future, it's a very punctual unit.
|
Structure harassment? Is that an actual thing? With Zealots?
I mean, I'd see structure harassment as a bunch of WoL Reapers sniping a Pylon or maybe a Dark Shrine.
If Protoss warps Zealots into my base, they're going for the SCVs. They might autopilot to depots afterwards but the damage is already done.
Slowing down the attack speed of the Adept doesn't do that much because with a Warp Prism the Adepts can still just cycle in and out whilst their attack comes off cooldown. That'll now be easier even if it is slower. Marines/SCVs will still get two shot, preventing Marines from returning fire. Just reduce their +Light damage, up their normal damage a little and tweak their health.
They won't two shot SCVs/Marines anymore but remain viable and more viable vs everything non-Light.
|
On October 02 2015 17:42 Thezzy wrote:
Structure harassment? Is that an actual thing? With Zealots?
I mean, I'd see structure harassment as a bunch of WoL Reapers sniping a Pylon or maybe a Dark Shrine.
If Protoss warps Zealots into my base, they're going for the SCVs. They might autopilot to depots afterwards but the damage is already done.
Slowing down the attack speed of the Adept doesn't do that much because with a Warp Prism the Adepts can still just cycle in and out whilst their attack comes off cooldown. That'll now be easier even if it is slower. Marines/SCVs will still get two shot, preventing Marines from returning fire. Just reduce their +Light damage, up their normal damage a little and tweak their health.
They won't two shot SCVs/Marines anymore but remain viable and more viable vs everything non-Light.
Hatcheries, spire, lair/hive are very frequent targets of harassment. Given its cost the lurker den will probably be a such as well. Infestation pit was one when it used to be useful for unit production. And killing static D can be considered as that as well, which is sometimes necessary to make harassment work and which the adept really sucks at.
|
On October 02 2015 17:42 Thezzy wrote:
Structure harassment? Is that an actual thing? With Zealots?
vs. zerg it's extremely common to suicide zealots onto tech buildings or hatcheries...
|
On October 02 2015 14:42 y0su wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 14:13 FabledIntegral wrote:
I still am mind boggled why they don't just marginally reduce the mineral income that a mule generates. It's not an "all or nothing" thing, you can tweak the numbers, geez!
And a huge nerf to the mule hammer lategame would be to add a cooldown for an OC of like 25s or so. Wouldn't prevent it, of course, but would help alleviate. I also really liked the suggestion in another thread, that instead of calling down a mule, it called down something that attached to an SCV and permitted the SCV to mine at the current rate of a mule + 1 scv. This means mineral income would not change in any normal or midgame situation, but would drastically affect it lategame, while simultaneously preventing hidden mule calldowns where you don't have SCVs already at the base.
Dislike that they are still looking at an HP reduction for the adept, a simple -1 dmg to light so they don't 2-hit workers and marines would do amazing, as well as nerfing them later in the game vs T (combat shield marine + stim would die in 3 hits instead of 2). Such an easy fix, but they seem determined to have them 2 shot marines and workers. The question is WHY?? It's the same thing with oracles, they could make them so much better midgame vs units if they simply weakened how insanely they are in rushes. They are increasing the mining time of the mule. This makes it harvest less overall, the first money after dropping a mule comes later and there's more opportunity to snipe a mule while mining to deny harvesting. Sure, this doesn't totally fix the mule hammer (terran is the only race that can make up the delay taking new bases both because of the mule hammer and being able to fly buildings).
I agree, it just seems like they are trying a lot of tweaks to the mule because they aren't satisfied with it, but it seems like there's such an easy fix to me as opposed to what they are trying to accomplish. Their current change, assuming the mule doesn't get sniped at any point, has a very minimal impact, as it just goes to smooth over the income as opposed to it being slightly more spiked. Overall, unless it's a dramatic increase in mining time, the impact would be very minimal.
On October 02 2015 15:03 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 14:13 FabledIntegral wrote:
I still am mind boggled why they don't just marginally reduce the mineral income that a mule generates. It's not an "all or nothing" thing, you can tweak the numbers, geez!
And a huge nerf to the mule hammer lategame would be to add a cooldown for an OC of like 25s or so. Wouldn't prevent it, of course, but would help alleviate. Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 14:42 y0su wrote:On October 02 2015 14:13 FabledIntegral wrote:
I still am mind boggled why they don't just marginally reduce the mineral income that a mule generates. It's not an "all or nothing" thing, you can tweak the numbers, geez!
And a huge nerf to the mule hammer lategame would be to add a cooldown for an OC of like 25s or so. Wouldn't prevent it, of course, but would help alleviate. I also really liked the suggestion in another thread, that instead of calling down a mule, it called down something that attached to an SCV and permitted the SCV to mine at the current rate of a mule + 1 scv. This means mineral income would not change in any normal or midgame situation, but would drastically affect it lategame, while simultaneously preventing hidden mule calldowns where you don't have SCVs already at the base.
Dislike that they are still looking at an HP reduction for the adept, a simple -1 dmg to light so they don't 2-hit workers and marines would do amazing, as well as nerfing them later in the game vs T (combat shield marine + stim would die in 3 hits instead of 2). Such an easy fix, but they seem determined to have them 2 shot marines and workers. The question is WHY?? It's the same thing with oracles, they could make them so much better midgame vs units if they simply weakened how insanely they are in rushes. They are increasing the mining time of the mule. This makes it harvest less overall, the first money after dropping a mule comes later and there's more opportunity to snipe a mule while mining to deny harvesting. Sure, this doesn't totally fix the mule hammer (terran is the only race that can make up the delay taking new bases both because of the mule hammer and being able to fly buildings). And Zerg is the only race that can make an opponent's composition completely irrelevant by tech switching their entire production. Why is one OK but the other is not? Are Terrans winning everything left and right or what?
Blizzard stated they didn't like the mule hammer. Also, the playstyle is pretty boring to play against as well as watch. Can't comment on how it is to play.
On October 02 2015 17:34 carcelink wrote:
I'm not sure but I think terran is possibly the worst race in late game, has a very decent early game (less vs adepts), but after mid game its completely random.
Also, I don't know if cyclone can be useful in the future, it's a very punctual unit.
I don't know how it is yet in TvZ lategame (haven't seen one side dominate the other enough, and my own experience is super volatile), but TvP favors T lategame right now due to liberators. T struggles early and midgame vs adepts.
|
On October 02 2015 18:00 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2015 17:42 Thezzy wrote:
Structure harassment? Is that an actual thing? With Zealots?
I mean, I'd see structure harassment as a bunch of WoL Reapers sniping a Pylon or maybe a Dark Shrine.
If Protoss warps Zealots into my base, they're going for the SCVs. They might autopilot to depots afterwards but the damage is already done.
Slowing down the attack speed of the Adept doesn't do that much because with a Warp Prism the Adepts can still just cycle in and out whilst their attack comes off cooldown. That'll now be easier even if it is slower. Marines/SCVs will still get two shot, preventing Marines from returning fire. Just reduce their +Light damage, up their normal damage a little and tweak their health.
They won't two shot SCVs/Marines anymore but remain viable and more viable vs everything non-Light. Hatcheries, spire, lair/hive are very frequent targets of harassment. Given its cost the lurker den will probably be a such as well. Infestation pit was one when it used to be useful for unit production. And killing static D can be considered as that as well, which is sometimes necessary to make harassment work and which the adept really sucks at.
Yeah vs Zerg it is a thing given that their building health is lower and can't lift off.
The Zealots are however garantueed to die afterwards unlike say a Marauder drop sniping a Forge and getting out.
The term structure harassment just felt a bit weird when talking about Zealots vs Adepts but I guess that's just from my Terran standpoint.
|
still no nerf on liberators or Lurkers? lol and now their going to buff the swarm hosts? sounds a bit more like Legacy of the Swarm at this point GG Blizzard.... (david kim)
|
On October 02 2015 18:44 Dratini25 wrote:
still no nerf on liberators or Lurkers? lol and now their going to buff the swarm hosts? sounds a bit more like Legacy of the Swarm at this point GG Blizzard.... (david kim)
I think if they want to test balance they need to do the balancing in the same order game goes
Early game(adept, ravager)->see results and twerk-> midgame (Lurker, Liberator, Disruptor)->see results and twerk-> late game (carriers maybe)
|
Protoss did very well in this patch. Zerg fared badly, they need 4 larvae to keep up. Terran are just sort of fine and it doesn't matter that much for them.
Protoss did not need a buff and this change just imbalances the game. The mechanics we have now are fine and we just need to stick with them. Any issues this change is aimed at fixing are small issues and can be overcome by players.
|
Where is the patch, shouldn't it be up today? :/
|
On October 02 2015 17:06 IcemanAsi wrote:
"We will not be exploring a macro mechanics removal for the remainder of the beta. This doesn’t mean however that we will never go back to exploring this topic again. We’re currently discussing plans about when and how to explore big changes (such as this one) after Legacy of the Void ships"
You realize that's basically saying 'We are releasing LotV with unfinished multiplayer, we will finish it after launch'
Yeah, just like D3 is releasing with unfinished PvP Arena system w/ matchmaking, they will finish that after launch...
|
On October 02 2015 02:54 DinoMight wrote:
For the love of God, please return Chrono Boost to the way that it used to be.
The current scenario is a significant nerf to high level users who have the APM and awareness to bank it ON PURPOSE.
Having it going all the time is not necessarily helpful. In certain scenarios when I want to rush out a Disruptor or a Colossus, I want to actively save chrono so I can spend it all on my robo. In that case, the current system is an over 50% nerf to HotS while Larva is buffed and MULES are unchanged.
For newbies (bronce/silver) it is clearly a buff, because they probably were not using CB at all. For the rest it is a nerf, that also removes strategic depth. My opinion is:
- %50-%50 CB ... not sure
- Maintain MULE as in LoTV. Mass-mule at late game is cool, I do not see it as a issue. It is just a race characteristic that gives an advantage in that state of the game, similar to being able to fly buildings and have an advantage in base-races.
- Maintain inject as in LoTV.
OK to tune all of them down, its is the best balance between machanical demand and strategic depth vs game is too fast in LoTV.
|
Russian Federation66 Posts
Mule now is 120 minerals in 45 seconds (50% of 9 walks is 4.5... it'll die when go to cc). Time to regen 50 mana is ~89-90 seconds => 120 minerals in 90 seconds = ~80 minerals/min for all mana spending.
Extra supply is 100 minerals. Same cost at mana, close to same profit.
Orbital build in 35 seconds and cost 150 mineras - time of 2x scv production (17x2=34 sec) and 100 mineral cost. ~90-95 mineral income from 2 scvs.
>>> So now, no need orbital before u get an expo and 16+ mineral workers?
So... for terrans it's like in patch w/o mules. Yeah, but mass orbitals still ingame. LOL. One another briliant design decision made by blizz'.
Mb just remove them? All macro boosters? And tweak the game accordingly?
(sorry, info from neighbor topic http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/495804-wishful-fake-patch)
anyway i'm confused with what they are doing
|
On October 03 2015 02:34 i_am_Nite wrote:
Mule now is 120 minerals in 45 seconds (50% of 9 walks is 4.5... it'll die when go to cc). Time to regen 50 mana is ~89-90 seconds => 120 minerals in 90 seconds = ~80 minerals/min for all mana spending.
Extra supply is 100 minerals. Same cost at mana, close to same profit.
Orbital build in 35 seconds and cost 150 mineras - time of 2x scv production (17x2=34 sec) and 100 mineral cost. ~90-95 mineral income from 2 scvs.
>>> So now, no need orbital before u get an expo and 16+ mineral workers?
So... for terrans it's like in patch w/o mules. Yeah, but mass orbitals still ingame. LOL. One another briliant design decision made by blizz'.
Mb just remove them? All macro boosters? And tweak the game accordingly?
where do you have the values from? The OP only says they want to decrease it somewhat, but didn't give a number.
|
Russian Federation66 Posts
sorry, i just used numbers i remember from neighbor topic i read recently. I realise it just after i write a post.
|
I feel the swarmhost should be an anti air unit that's burrowed in the ground, it seems like it would be a good idea... It doesn't seem to be working out with ground because it overlaps with the lurker,
and zerg is excuse my french.. "Lacking with anti air" as well and imo i would rather have that than decide if i need to pull or paracidic bomb with the viper, and that zerg can fall back on being chased by air units..
Have them shoot up two locus (with a cooldown of 5-10 seconds) at near by air units... people wont overcommit them because they would only shoot air, which makes them vulnerable to ground that would need protection.
|
On October 02 2015 08:21 CptMarvel wrote:
Am I the only one here who, regardless of the balance tweaks it probably needs, is excruciated by the Liberator's looks? I don't think they've ever created a unit so ugly and underwhelming in the way it attacks (air to air, air to ground is actually ok). It pisses me off, a lot.
Biggest problem I have with it is how it is so hugely bulky and blocks vision. That is a major problem when playing against tiny marines under them... how many marines there are matters quite a bit.
|
On October 03 2015 03:11 BLAiNER wrote:
I feel the swarmhost should be an anti air unit that's burrowed in the ground, it seems like it would be a good idea... It doesn't seem to be working out with ground because it overlaps with the lurker,
and zerg is excuse my french.. "Lacking with anti air" as well and imo i would rather have that than decide if i need to pull or paracidic bomb with the viper, and that zerg can fall back on being chased by air units..
Have them shoot up two locus (with a cooldown of 5-10 seconds) at near by air units... people wont overcommit them because they would only shoot air, which makes them vulnerable to ground that would need protection.
I'd get behind making the swarmhost an anti air unit. It resolves the redundancy around the lurker like you mentioned, and making them vulnerable to ground means they must be supported by other units (and prevents them from being massed). It provides some options from ground to air that isn't a hydra/queen/ravager, help against all kinds of air attacks and also assist against medivacs and warp prisms on lair tech. It might make for an interesting dynamic between liberators as they have to decide between killing the locusts vs killing the swarmhost/other ground targets. If having "unimited" units is an issue, just make the locust duration more like broodlord broodlings so it feels more like an attack with targetable bullets or something similar (I'm sure they can work it out). If it's more like an attack, remove the manual spawning part of it, now you have one less active ability to worry about too. In any case, if this was how the swarmhost worked I'd rather have it than the ravager.
My dream unit would be if it shot scourge into the sky lol, but for balance reasons I'd just tone the damage way down. Would still be a cool unit.
|
What a defensive update. The part where they tell us what to discuss and what not to discuss is rather humorous.
|
On October 03 2015 01:22 Lexender wrote:
Where is the patch, shouldn't it be up today? :/
It's up. Adepts have 60 health and the upgrade gives 45% attack speed instead of 50 shields.
|
I believe the only way LOTV will reach a good point will be if Blizzard adopt a more aggressive updates schedule when the game is released. MOBAS get balanced so frequently and whilst I know they are different games, a constantly evolving meta due to quick tweaks and changes becomes a skill the player ultimately has to keep up with, until the game is as good as it can be. Right?
|
On October 03 2015 04:45 haiyeah wrote:
I believe the only way LOTV will reach a good point will be if Blizzard adopt a more aggressive updates schedule when the game is released. MOBAS get balanced so frequently and whilst I know they are different games, a constantly evolving meta due to quick tweaks and changes becomes a skill the player ultimately has to keep up with, until the game is as good as it can be. Right?
In 2011 there were major patches every few months but people complained and said the game was unstable and that BW never got balance patched after 2001.
|
Reasonable thoughts overall, though I'm very doubtful a simple adept nerf will be enough to balance 2 sec warp prism shenanigans.+ Show Spoiler +SPLIT ENERGY AND WARP-IN POWER
|
On October 03 2015 04:39 jalstar wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2015 01:22 Lexender wrote:
Where is the patch, shouldn't it be up today? :/ It's up. Adepts have 60 health and the upgrade gives 45% attack speed instead of 50 shields.
now that's interesting
|
On October 03 2015 04:47 jalstar wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2015 04:45 haiyeah wrote:
I believe the only way LOTV will reach a good point will be if Blizzard adopt a more aggressive updates schedule when the game is released. MOBAS get balanced so frequently and whilst I know they are different games, a constantly evolving meta due to quick tweaks and changes becomes a skill the player ultimately has to keep up with, until the game is as good as it can be. Right? In 2011 there were major patches every few months but people complained and said the game was unstable and that BW never got balance patched after 2001.
yeah and those people were obviously wrong. Many issues didn't "just get figured out" and would have stuck around and when blizzard finally gave into their "let's wait and see" attitude we were stuck on broodlord infestor for way longer than we had to. Even blizzard appologized for that.
|
I am very interested in seeing where they take the Ghost, because it seems like the Ghost has a lot potential to be a much more fun and exciting unit to use.
|
On October 03 2015 04:39 jalstar wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2015 01:22 Lexender wrote:
Where is the patch, shouldn't it be up today? :/ It's up. Adepts have 60 health and the upgrade gives 45% attack speed instead of 50 shields.
isnt that totally ridiculous... now 2base adept allins are even worse than before
|
On October 03 2015 04:39 jalstar wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2015 01:22 Lexender wrote:
Where is the patch, shouldn't it be up today? :/ It's up. Adepts have 60 health and the upgrade gives 45% attack speed instead of 50 shields.
1 base ghost Every Game til Masters. Don't see reason not to open straight to ghost now. That snipe is going to be the only thing holding that crap.
|
isnt that totally ridiculous... now 2base adept allins are even worse than before
Seeing the new stat it seems that they are weaker than before mid/late game. At least as a core unit in a direct engagment.
Don't forget they lost 80 shield which means a 40% nerf
|
I don't understand why the Adept upgrade is better than adrenal glands, costs only half and is available way earlier :/.
Still like the direction though.
Also where are the patch notes?
|
there are so many things wrong about the cost of units/upgrades... like infestor that costs more than ht but they are pure shit while ht is superstrong, liberator costs less than a voidray but is way better and vailable etc.
|
|
|
On October 03 2015 07:08 K)Vincent wrote:
there are so many things wrong about the cost of units/upgrades... like infestor that costs more than ht but they are pure shit while ht is superstrong, liberator costs less than a voidray but is way better and vailable etc.
Depends how you look at the race overall, some races have sweet spot units. Not everything should be equivalent. Only thing that matters is that it's balanced and fun.
|
We're getting lost in these subtle macro tweaks and the actual balance of the game is overlooked. Zerg now cannot go early pools and the race is bland.
|
On October 02 2015 01:54 WrathSCII wrote:
Macro mechanics
We agree with your feedback in that reducing their effectiveness might be a cool idea, so we’ll try it out in the next balance update. We’re currently thinking something like reducing larva per inject to 3, chrono boost speed buff decreased to 15% or so, and increasing the time mules need to spend while mining minerals so that it takes longer to return each trip.
At this point, we also want to let you know that it’s not of much help to give us feedback on why macro mechanics have to be removed at this point. We clearly know that there are pros and cons (that we’ve explored in great detail) to both methods. We feel that after exploring many different angles, the best is what we have now: easier for non-pros, but just as difficult for pros. We will not be exploring a macro mechanics removal for the remainder of the beta. This doesn’t mean however that we will never go back to exploring this topic again. We’re currently discussing plans about when and how to explore big changes (such as this one) after Legacy of the Void ships. We’ll try to settle on some discussion points before Blizzcon so that we can talk to you all about this at panels, interviews, or discussions. For now however, we’d like to focus on balancing the game.
Concerning macro mechanics, please focus your discussions around keeping the current ones in the beta vs. reverting back to Heart of the Swarm. This is the last thing we’re trying to decide for macro mechanics. Also, keep in mind that we can continue tuning the numbers for macro mechanics until we arrive in a good place.
Translation: "We feel 'negative perceptions' outweighs facts and good game design".
John Maynard Keynes famously said "When the facts change, I change my mind". In the case of flip-flopper David Kim, when the facts haven't changed, but bogus perceptions have, he changes his mind.
Backpeddle harder.
|
On October 03 2015 11:05 crazedrat wrote:
We're getting lost in these subtle macro tweaks and the actual balance of the game is overlooked. Zerg now cannot go early pools and the race is bland.
You act as if pool first was an entirely different tech tree opening. It's a marginal change that barely impacts anything.
|
On October 03 2015 13:48 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2015 11:05 crazedrat wrote:
We're getting lost in these subtle macro tweaks and the actual balance of the game is overlooked. Zerg now cannot go early pools and the race is bland. You act as if pool first was an entirely different tech tree opening. It's a marginal change that barely impacts anything.
It changes the PvZ metagame alot actually.
|
Revert the macro mechanics back to HotS, but with toned down efficiency.
|
United Kingdom20303 Posts
It's an 82% increase to the attack speed, however blizzard doesn't know how to math. They said a 45% reduction in period, what they actually implemented and wrote into the game was a 31% reduction in period (or 45% increase in rate).
I like it, have not played with it yet. To be fair, +40% on Adrenal glands is a crazy damage increase - zerglings are extremely good with it, only not massed because strong counters (air armies or large amounts of AOE) are available in the later stages of the game. That's a design thing, not particularly a balance issue with the zergling numbers which are quite good and strong. If adrenal came in earlier or some stephano-esque zerg started rushing hive, i would be very worried about them :D
Revert the macro mechanics back to HotS, but with toned down efficiency.
I agree with this, for chrono. I think queueing injects is fine.
New chrono is roughly the same as the old one in actual production per minute (well, it was a bit better.. and now it's nerfed, so a bit worse), but it cannot be banked or focused effectively. You're desperately trying to get that first colossus or disruptor out in order to hold a push or hit a timing, you could bank chrono for the last 2 minutes while the robo and robo support built.. but what? You can only accelerate it by +15% instead of +50%. The old WOL+HOTS chronoboost was over 3x as effective in this situation.
It's the difference between cutting an 80 second build time down to 70 seconds, vs cutting an 80 second build time down to 53 seconds. Old chrono was strong, felt and good in the hands of good players. There could even be a system implemented like what inject has now, so a weaker player (or a strong one who knows what he wants a whole minute in advance) can drop 3 chrono boosts on the same building and they'll run back-to-back without downtime with no further input.
|
On October 03 2015 19:25 [PkF] Wire wrote:
Revert the macro mechanics back to HotS, but with toned down efficiency.
I personally think that stacking injects is a really great solution for newer players. I also think that mules having a range is a great thing too and should definitely be in the game, and I think Chronoboost can stay in there too if it's balanced.
The problem I see is that Blizzard is still treating macro mechanics as if they are the same. Mules don't do the same thing as injects, and neither does chronoboost. They all have different effects on the game and I think nerfing them to the same degree is not going to help. 4->3 Larva/inject is not the same as less minerals per mule. It has completely different implications and consequences. Why the hell are they treating them like the same thing?
Mules without limitations can still create income out of 0 workers, which is impossible for both Protoss and Zerg. What the hell is Zerg going to do with extra larvae if they don't have any income. And what the hell is Protoss chronoboosting?
They should take an independent look on the macro mechanics, see what their problems are, and then nerf them accordingly.
Don't look at symmetric patching if it's asymmetrical design.
|
United Kingdom20303 Posts
On October 03 2015 06:04 rauk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2015 04:39 jalstar wrote:On October 03 2015 01:22 Lexender wrote:
Where is the patch, shouldn't it be up today? :/ It's up. Adepts have 60 health and the upgrade gives 45% attack speed instead of 50 shields. isnt that totally ridiculous... now 2base adept allins are even worse than before
The 2 base adept all-in that everybody complained about happened early in the game, basically producing four adepts as warpgate research was ticking away and a warp prism got out and then warping your first units produced from the extra gateways into his base behind his wall. It was the LOTV equivelant of a WOL 4gate and is ruined by the introduction of a twilight council.
The problem I see is that Blizzard is still treating macro mechanics as if they are the same. Mules don't do the same thing as injects, and neither does chronoboost. They all have different effects on the game and I think nerfing them to the same degree is not going to help. 4->3 Larva/inject is not the same as less minerals per mule. It has completely different implications and consequences. Why the hell are they treating them like the same thing?
+1
|
The thing with treating macro boosters all the same is that they want to find solutions to certain problems with each one of them. Therefore changing all of them together and trying to make them balance out somehow is probably the easiest approach and easiest to revert if things don't turn out well.
|
On October 03 2015 20:26 KeksX wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2015 19:25 [PkF] Wire wrote:
Revert the macro mechanics back to HotS, but with toned down efficiency. I personally think that stacking injects is a really great solution for newer players. I also think that mules having a range is a great thing too and should definitely be in the game, and I think Chronoboost can stay in there too if it's balanced. The problem I see is that Blizzard is still treating macro mechanics as if they are the same. Mules don't do the same thing as injects, and neither does chronoboost. They all have different effects on the game and I think nerfing them to the same degree is not going to help. 4->3 Larva/inject is not the same as less minerals per mule. It has completely different implications and consequences. Why the hell are they treating them like the same thing? Mules without limitations can still create income out of 0 workers, which is impossible for both Protoss and Zerg. What the hell is Zerg going to do with extra larvae if they don't have any income. And what the hell is Protoss chronoboosting? They should take an independent look on the macro mechanics, see what their problems are, and then nerf them accordingly. Don't look at symmetric patching if it's asymmetrical design.
They are toning them down, and the absolute best way to test them would be to tone down symmetrically, as you refer to it. If you have some semblance of balance now, then you'd need to reduce all 3 macro mechanics in some way to keep it balanced. This is the easiest and most sensical way to test it.
Don't know why we're trying to create problems where there aren't any.
|
Feels like mule nerf is lot bigger than origially anticipated.
I find productions lot slower and lagging behind units in terms of supply by huge comparison v.s. pre-nerf mules.
|
whats going on with the cyclone?? i honestly dont know when i should ever make them, whenever i try and make them or make a build around them they never seem to do well and always underpreform. lock on takes too much time and it only seems good on high hp units. units like ultra/brood/carrier/bc but all those units have as good or better counters already, except maybe the bc/carrier.
|
On October 05 2015 22:45 EleanorRIgby wrote:
whats going on with the cyclone?? i honestly dont know when i should ever make them, whenever i try and make them or make a build around them they never seem to do well and always underpreform. lock on takes too much time and it only seems good on high hp units. units like ultra/brood/carrier/bc but all those units have as good or better counters already, except maybe the bc/carrier.
The cyclone imo is an anti ranged unit for instance... sniping tanks, lurkers, disruptors/colo works very well, also works against massive units as well.
|
i guess this is the thread for this bit of humour..
new secret game from Blizz
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/uwd45zZ.jpg)
|
Damn JimmyJRaynor, I'd really like to play that game.
|
Just a short note: Is the Adept considered fine now? I couldn't play Beta before they got "nerfed", but they still feel incredibly strong when you are Terran. Also I'm more or less clueless which unit is supposed to work well against them, since neither marines nor marauders (with CS/Stim) seem to do too well. I tried mines and they may help a little, but still without triple bunker wall-in they will just go to my mineral line and lay waste to it. Any ideas? Thx!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
