LotV Beta Balance Update -- October 2

On October 03 2015 07:07 CannonsNCarriers wrote:
What is the point of this Raven buff? So it runs ahead of your air units and gets killed long before the fight starts? Delete its abilities and give it auto-repair ray plz.

On October 03 2015 07:05 owlman wrote:
The nerf of MM is strange really :o
Mule and spam larva got nerfed by 25 % but chronoboost got nerfed by 33%.
The first change to chrono boost was a nerf from HOTS to begin with cause it was less versatile about the use .

Any thoughts on that strange change ?

Mule seems to have nearly 50% nerf? 2.05-3.85

On October 03 2015 07:20 Jer99 wrote:


stim!

On October 03 2015 07:21 owlman wrote:
Just a little comparison between protoss gate units cos most ppl are concerned by adepts :

- zealot 150 life / 13.3 dps (+8 dmg from charge)
- stalker 160 life / 6.9 dps ( 9.7 dps vs armored)
- adept 150 life / 6.4 dps ( 14.8 dps vs light)

Most units in the game are armored so adept still has a niche role and zealot is almost as good as adept vs light.

but factor in the new adept research? +45% attack speed?

On October 03 2015 07:20 Jer99 wrote:


stim!

On October 03 2015 07:22 Big J wrote:

also adrenalin glands is at 40% or 50% in LotV as well!

On October 03 2015 07:26 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:

but but but limited time and self harm


:o really? I really hope there's gonna be a hots>lotv total change list when it launches, pretty hard to keep up.

On October 03 2015 07:34 Jer99 wrote:


how do you feel about siege tanks in TvP? I've had a lot of success with them, but i haven't faced any adept with warp prism builds yet

I wonder when will Blizzard realize "macro mechanics" for Zerg, Terran and Protoss are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT and you can't buff and nerf all 3 of them at same time because they are completely different things...sigh.

On October 03 2015 07:54 Beastyqt wrote:
Terran again gets fucked over for economy, while Zerg loses a bit of unit production that can be supplemented in the late game by making more hatcheries and that doesn't affect early game as much as this patch affects Terran ;;

I wonder when will Blizzard realize "macro mechanics" for Zerg, Terran and Protoss are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT and you can't buff and nerf all 3 of them at same time because they are completely different things...sigh.

On October 03 2015 07:58 pure.Wasted wrote:
I'm confused about Blizzard's intentions with the Ghost ability.

The snipe "delay" obviously exists to create some form of counterplay. But what sort of counterplay is a Zerg supposed to pull off in the allotted 1.5 seconds? What are the chances you'll have a spotter AND a Zergling available within 1.5 seconds of movement + attack of that Ghost, never mind actually pulling off the micro.

Do they still intend for counterplay to exist? If yes, is that actually reasonable? If no, why keep the ability as is at all?

On October 03 2015 08:02 GGzerG wrote:
They really need to remove all macro mechanics and balance the game around that, best state of the game we ever had was when there were no macro mechanics!

On October 03 2015 07:07 CannonsNCarriers wrote:
They still haven't solved stinker units like Thor, Cyclone, Infestor, Swarm Host, and arguably Void Ray. There are going to be some legacy junk units still in the queues but left unbuilt come release.

On October 03 2015 08:14 ZAiNs wrote:
MULEs used to mine 270 minerals, now how much do they mine?

On October 03 2015 08:33 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Adept upgrade which reduces attack period by 45%
Just to make it make more sense, the Adept dps has increased by +81%
Workers are going to die a lot lot faster now.

A quick purely mathematical comparison devoid of context.
HP reduced to 0.65 of former level.
DPS increased to 1.81 of previous level.
Multiply and square root = 1.09
Adept is 9% buffed in a "straight" combat.

On October 03 2015 08:02 GGzerG wrote:
They really need to remove all macro mechanics and balance the game around that, best state of the game we ever had was when there were no macro mechanics!

On October 03 2015 08:20 pure.Wasted wrote:


Holy shit. Terrans are already on the back foot economically in TvP because of the power of Adepts.

In what universe is directly hurting Terran economy the sensible next step?

On October 03 2015 08:33 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Adept upgrade which reduces attack period by 45%
Just to make it make more sense, the Adept dps has increased by +81%
Workers are going to die a lot lot faster now.

On October 03 2015 08:10 rauk wrote:


i really dont see a problem with that as long as the the units that are viable are balanced and fun to use, having a bunch of 100% junk tech trees or units in bw didn't hurt it at all

On October 03 2015 07:52 pure.Wasted wrote:
DinoMight wrote an excellent blog post about the nefarious consequences of having the Adept in the game in this state.

Blizzard quite obviously shot themselves in the foot by keeping the unit unnerfed this long into the beta, because as DinoMight points out, the Adept being as strong as it is has created the illusion that TvP is more or less balanced. It'll only take until the first Code S of the next season to see that nothing could be further from the truth.

And then what?

How is Blizzard supposed to nerf this unit into something remotely approaching reasonable, without completely trashing Protoss's ability to have map presence in the early game?

Protoss needs buffs but there's nothing fundamental to buff. Zealots are as strong as an A+move unit has any right to be. Stalkers can't be buffed or it's 2014 all over again. MSC can't be buffed because it's loathsome and abhorrent and in fact needs nerfing. That leaves... Sentries? I mean, there's literally nothing else, unless they wise up and start CHANGING instead of buffing and nerfing.

On October 03 2015 08:46 pure.Wasted wrote:


If Terran economy in early and midgame is overpowered vZ and v(hypothetically balanced)P, you're right, but if that's Blizzard's thought process then I'd love to hear what made them think Terran economy is indeed too strong. That's the sort of conclusion you can only come to after closely analyzing some statistics.

There's no stats mentioned anywhere in yesterday's or today's posts, though. It sounds a lot more like their reasoning was "we hate macro mechanics whee!"

On October 03 2015 08:37 Big J wrote:


No, it's buffed by 45.045045045045...%, the exact amount they buffed the attack cooldown. How do you even get to 81%?

On October 03 2015 09:01 Dangermousecatdog wrote:

Eh, Blizzard can't even describe their own changes properly. The attack period wasn't reduced by 45% as was written.
"Adept upgrade which reduces attack period by 45%" is not the same thing as "45% increase in attack speed". Two completely different things Silly silly Blizzard. Makes you wonder how incompetent whoever it is that wrote the update is.

Anyhow Adept is nerfed by 3% in a straight fight, devoid of context. Amazing Nerf.

It's pretty much a buff if you consider how much point damage the adept does.

On October 03 2015 09:01 Dangermousecatdog wrote:

Eh, Blizzard can't even describe their own changes properly. The attack period wasn't reduced by 45% as was written.
"Adept upgrade which reduces attack period by 45%" is not the same thing as "45% increase in attack speed". Two completely different things Silly silly Blizzard. Makes you wonder how incompetent whoever it is that wrote the update is.

Anyhow Adept is nerfed by 3% in a straight fight, devoid of context. Amazing Nerf.

It's pretty much a buff if you consider how much point damage the adept does.

On October 03 2015 09:17 Athenau wrote:
^^Attack period reduced by 45% => the new attack period is 1-.45 = .55 of the old one, or 1/.55 = 1.818 times the attack speed. Which isn't the case, the attack speed was increased by 45%.

It's just sloppy wording on Blizzard's part.

Anyhow Adept is nerfed by 3% in a straight fight, devoid of context. Amazing Nerf.

On October 03 2015 09:20 Lumi wrote:
does anybody know where this larva/zerg nerf came from..? i've never once in the games history heard anyone even conceive of tweaking the number of larva from injects or there being too much xD i'm wtf

looks like they are trying to slow down the econ potential for all races but in the case of protoss and zerg the nerf hits the whole race..? where as for T it's just the mule/econ itself..

On October 03 2015 10:28 deth wrote:
I think people have warped ideas about the macro mechanics and devalue their contributions to the overall rate of the races' progression throughout a game.

CB is significant early game with a 22.5% increase in the production of workers, alongside the fact that protoss doesn't need to sacrifice much mining time to produce structures. It remains vital throughout tech transitions, upgrades and late game production of capital ships etc. CB is nerfed by 33%.

Mule is the lifeblood of terran to help them keep up or get ahead in economy considering a linear production rate of workers and having to sacrifice mining time to produce structures, as well as having very expensive mineral-heavy bio forces. Mule is nerfed by 33%.

Spawn larvae is the cornerstone of zerg production, allowing them to switch army composition and replenish workers quickly. SL is nerfed by 25%.

One of these things is not like the others. Zerg got hit the least overall with these changes. Zerg may need a few more tweaks with macro mechanics or the rate of spawning larvae, and I'm sure any issues will begin to be highlighted over the next week.

On October 03 2015 10:32 crazedrat wrote:

A 7 percent decrease in the speed of worker production through the early game is virtually nothing compared to the changes in the macro mechanics for Terran and Zerg. It amounts to about 2 slower workers at the point you're at 40 workers.

On October 03 2015 10:32 crazedrat wrote:

A 7 percent decrease in the speed of worker production through the early game is virtually nothing compared to the changes in the macro mechanics for Terran and Zerg. It amounts to about 2 slower workers at the point you're at 40 workers.

On October 03 2015 10:37 deth wrote:


The races have very different identities. Protoss units are much more powerful and cost-effective as the other races. CB also serves to allow Protoss to get away with building less infrastructure and production facilities, as well as hit timings to exploit weakness.

If we look at the spell as a purely macro-focused mechanic, then you're absolutely right. It's far more complex than that and I think people would do well to remember that.

On October 03 2015 10:53 crazedrat wrote:


All protoss timings remain in tact and their economy hardly suffers at all.

On October 03 2015 10:28 FabledIntegral wrote:


This is the third time it's been suggested in the beta. And many have suggested it because the current iteration gives increased volatility. I think it's an amazing change to reduce that. Four is way too much at once.

On October 03 2015 11:13 crazedrat wrote:
Just look at the math.


And now I can't go early pool. I have a boring race which I am not that interested in playing. I'm not being dramatic either. What is so bad about volatility? The only place you feel it is in ZvZ or lower leagues. I can't play the way I want to now. I have to go hatch 1st, it's the same streamlined game. Boring. B-o-r-i-n.g.

On October 03 2015 11:42 FabledIntegral wrote:


You feel it all the way to the very top. You can scout the opponent has zero units, and after you're done scouting their 3 hatch can produce around 30 zerglings at once. Or another 15 drones. That's volatile and should be toned down. The lack of ability to cancel larvae compounds the issue that a Zerg's decision is also all made at once, unless they opt to pool larvae, which isn't optimal.

Would be better if inject simply popped out larvae one by one throughout the inject if you ask me (only requires one inject).

On October 03 2015 11:46 crazedrat wrote:

If you play greedily you can be punished for it. Don't play greedy and you'll be fine.

On October 03 2015 12:47 GGzerG wrote:

Actually you are completely wrong. You can still open pool first if you are good enough, and all timings for Protoss, Terran and Zerg have changed.

Please stop talking as if you are omniscient, because you are 100% wrong here.

On October 03 2015 13:30 crazedrat wrote:

Pool now depends on hoping that it works rather than executing it with skill and precision. Zergs and Terran economies are hit much harder than Protoss with this patch. I won't join your little clan and now you pin your favorite memes onto me. Fuck off.

[B]
[*]Adept

• Shield reduced from 90/90 to 60/90

source

On October 03 2015 13:46 FabledIntegral wrote:


Its not exactly a massive difference. Yes, it's a nerf, but to insinuate pool first is suddenly unviable is ridiculous. It originally put you at a slight disadvantage. Now it puts you at a slightly more disadvantage. To state it kills it on day1 of the patch is the type of things that shit up forums.

On October 03 2015 13:56 crazedrat wrote:

A reduction from 4 to 3 larvae is a big hit to pool 1st openings.

On October 03 2015 14:05 FabledIntegral wrote:
I didn't say it wasn't a nerf. Assuming you use 100% of the early queens for injects, which we already see many pros do NOT,

On October 03 2015 14:05 FabledIntegral wrote:
This is coming from a low GM zerg in hots that opened 13 pool almost every single time vs. P as well as opening 15 pool almost every game vs T.

On October 03 2015 14:05 FabledIntegral wrote:you're down around 3 larvae max. This doesn't account for the fact there is already a brief moment you can't use all the larvae anyways.

On October 03 2015 14:14 crazedrat wrote:
Pool now relies more and luck than skill for an advantage. The opening has been very much changed by this patch.
Alot of what you say is superfluous, like this:

The queen might be slightly underused regardless.
This:

Does not matter.
This:

You're down about 3 larvae, to state it plainly.

On October 03 2015 14:31 FabledIntegral wrote:


Not sure how that's all you got. The impact is mild, the most you'd be down is 3 larvae, although since most pros use one of the first 3 injects for a tumor when going pool first, you're down 2 in most cases. Since you may not have been able to spend the larvae regardless, this further minimizes the impact.

Once again, without actually taking a deeper look, you're doing nothing more than cry end of a build order on day 1, which is quite stupid.

On October 03 2015 14:36 crazedrat wrote:

It's a major change to pool, not mild. We just don't agree, I think it's a stylistic thing. You already open pool every game regardless (?). It's a hit to pool to a point I am not opening with it anymore. It was already shaky in alot of scenarios, making it weaker just means hatch 1st is the better opening overall. You can use it for a lucky win or a series win, but using it on ladder as a standard skill based build order I don't see why you'd choose to be more disadvantaged. Zerg is now already larvae pressed and you need the earlier hatch.
You should also recognize that pool 1st in LOTV is a different build order. The timing of everything - the queen, the hatch, the lings... etc. the metagame, is different. Also it depends on how you use the pool. If you're going gas with it, that's a big impact. Bigger than just 3 larvae. You're going to be using multiple injects because you're building lings. So the speed opening, the fast baneling nest opening are both more strongly nerfed. I use those builds frequently now. You are speaking specifically about a few lings into hatch and droning which is not all pool builds, and you're speaking about HOTS builds and metagame which isn't the same.

On October 03 2015 15:05 FabledIntegral wrote:


The hots reference was only to display I am familiar with pool first. I've played LotV since the beta first started. Speed openings are already heavily luck dependent as is, and your argument was revolving around "skill," so I was assuming gasless. Sure baneling busts have been nerfed, but this hardly affects zerg in general non ZvZ.

Every change in the beta has created significant changes to how you can open as every race really.

Adept

Replace shield upgrade with an upgrade which reduces attack period by 45%
Shield reduced from 90/90 to 60/90

isnt the inject nerf which affects all of zerg production comparatively bigger than the chrono and mule nerf?

I believe for Terran vs Protoss Adept Allins might be even stronger. Why? 30 less shields dont mean a lot in the current state

On October 03 2015 15:09 crazedrat wrote:

Yes and I like Zerg being able to standard open 13 pool on certain maps and rely on skill and execution to almost equalize. Now I have to rely on luck and that is irritating. It's really not a minor change, it changes the metagame. On Terraform how am I going to prevent Protoss from Nexus 1st now? And they can pylon block me. I have to go pool anyway. Well I pretty much have to go pool 1st, now when they open gateway gas I am faililng to equalize. I am forced into a coinflip by the metagame. So you say what?.Well you probably won't say much because you just open pool 1st in every matchup on every map regardless.
And if we're talking about ZvZ, it's my favorite matchup right now and the metagame is extremely interesting because of how dynamic it is.

On October 03 2015 15:39 deth wrote:


Every race has similar frustrations. I'm sure some terrans would love to open 1/1/1 into a later expand and be highly aggressive against zerg, but some maps and scenarios make it completely unviable - so they have to expand first.

Adept

Replace shield upgrade with an upgrade which reduces attack period by 45%

not even to start on undocumented changes

I think it should be health nerf instead of shield nerf.

What is so bad about volatility? The only place you feel it is in ZvZ or lower leagues

On October 03 2015 17:36 Tuczniak wrote:
It's nice to see they are removing tools so people can't deal with liberators. Now they are even more broken.

On October 03 2015 16:47 Cyro wrote:


That's not really true, zergs with 2-3 hatches are building about 20-30 drones and then suddenly having 30-40 zerglings or 0 zerglings in a lot of my games (protoss), particularly since they rebuffed inject. It's worse since 2 or 3 hatcheries before a pool has become very common

On October 03 2015 17:55 pure.Wasted wrote:
In what sort of contexts are Liberators overpowered? I'm seeing Polt and ForGG use them in macro games and they seem pretty well balanced. It takes lots of attention to get results out of them.

On October 03 2015 16:42 Cyro wrote:
Blizzard posted the WRONG PATCH NOTE when talking about the adept attack speed upgrade (looking back some pages, i see other people talking about this)



The attack period right now is every 1.61 seconds. Reducing it by 45% would make it 0.885 seconds, a 1.82x DPS upgrade.

They actually increased the attack rate by 45%, making the period 1.11 seconds - that's 31% lower. 31 vs 45 doesn't seem like a big deal, but it's a huge deal when talking about exponential increases.

We got a 45% DPS increase when they wrote an 82% DPS increase in the note.

The correct value is written ingame.

I really don't get how you can mess that up, it's math that will fail you before high school - almost doubling the attack speed would have been ridiculous (a 50% reduction in attack period) but that's what it said, a 45% reduction



Which ones did i miss?

On October 03 2015 18:30 ChristianS wrote:

Not that the difference between 31% and 45% isn't significant, but what's exponential about this?

On October 03 2015 18:33 Cyro wrote:


A 31% reduction in attack speed period is a 45% DPS gain.

A 45% reduction in attack speed period is an 82% DPS gain.

A 75% reduction in attack speed period is a 300% DPS gain.

They used the wrong math. They didn't reduce the period by 45%, they increased the rate by 45% - those are two very different things

On October 03 2015 18:53 Aenur wrote:
I want manual cronoboost back, you can nerf it by it's effectiveness or by it's energy cost (which I prefer). Feel very bad if Protoss is the only race which doesn't get rid of the auto mechanics.

On October 03 2015 18:38 ChristianS wrote:

Huh. Strictly speaking, DPS goes as 1/(100-x) if x is the percent reduction, right? So not technically exponential? Not that it particularly matters for these purposes, it's still a clumsy mistake for the patch notes to get it wrong.

I don't even want to imagine 8 chronoboosted gateways with the prism adept allin ^_-

On October 03 2015 22:10 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Yeah it is kinda sad that whoever wrote the patchnotes would had failed basic high school maths.

On October 03 2015 07:02 jpg06051992 wrote:
No Infestor changes?

No Ultralisk nerf?

No Liberator nerf/Siege tank buff?

No removing structure damage on CB so forge expands can be viable again?

No Lurker hp/movement nerfs?

This patch is decent but it seems soooo small and minor for the amount of things that still need to be tested, the Infestor still being garbage is ridiculous.

No removing structure damage on CB so forge expands can be viable again?

On October 04 2015 02:52 Dumbledore wrote:
Super nerf on chrono boost and super buff on MULE? wtf

On October 04 2015 03:57 ohmylanta1003 wrote:


In what world is this a super anything?

On October 03 2015 18:53 Aenur wrote:
I want manual cronoboost back, you can nerf it by it's effectiveness or by it's energy cost (which I prefer). Feel very bad if Protoss is the only race which doesn't get rid of the auto mechanics.

On October 04 2015 11:26 paralleluniverse wrote:
If chrono boost isn't being removed, it needs to be reverted to the HotS version. The LotV version is far harder to use than the latter.

On October 04 2015 11:26 paralleluniverse wrote:
If chrono boost isn't being removed, it needs to be reverted to the HotS version. The LotV version is far harder to use than the latter.

On October 04 2015 15:16 Beliskner wrote:


Honestly, after the 4 second cooldown change, it's really not that bad, you just change your mindset from 'Chrono this' to 'set my chrono'. It takes longer to set it but you change it a lot less.

On October 04 2015 15:16 Beliskner wrote:


Honestly, after the 4 second cooldown change, it's really not that bad, you just change your mindset from 'Chrono this' to 'set my chrono'. It takes longer to set it but you change it a lot less.

On October 05 2015 02:32 TronJovolta wrote:
Seriously, invincible nydus has never been brought up? If Z has a bunch of queens it's like literally impossible to beat...