|
On November 14 2017 04:27 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 13 2017 19:51 Charoisaur wrote:On November 13 2017 19:34 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 13 2017 18:29 Charoisaur wrote:On November 13 2017 18:02 deacon.frost wrote:On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:
My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree. You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW) C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all. this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak. You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well. It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it. However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono. I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out. Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle. I realize that the MSC removal is a big nerf but most people seem to think the new chronoboost + shield battery + stalker buff more than make up for it. Which buff did terran get that is significant? No race got changed as much as Protoss, that is true. But the issue isn't that Zerg and Protoss got buffed while Terran got nerfed. Terran did receive some token buffs as well as a raven redesign. The main nerf that Terran received was the mine nerf, and I don't think it's significant enough to drop T winrates or make them by far the worse race. The SB, as I've maintained, is bad because it scales too well in the mid-late game. Because you can spam SBs, you can make base defense way more powerful than it should be. However, I have also maintained that the SB is not sufficient to protect Protoss against early pressure. It doesn't kill the units, which is what Protoss needs, and stalkers are fairly expensive early game units even though they have survivability and damage now. I think the other issue is that we had no really high level Terran at HSC. Some things that seem op may not necessarily be op until the best of the best take a solid crack at it. Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. But perhaps it just requires a couple months of experimentation to deal with the other Protoss changes. For instance, if P is building more stalkers and SBs, perhaps ghosts could be mixed in. You drop the ghost, emp, and then wipe out the defending forces because the SB has a max of 100 energy. Even though it was annoying seeing Protoss with low winrates in January, with minimal tweaking, Protoss still did become about even with Terran, which I think needs to happen here. And ultimately, if things are overpowered, then they can be changed. Typing stuff doesn't make it true. The fact that terrans couldnt qualify and then got 3-0'd every single round should be a red alert that the balance team is failing. HSC last year had more than 15,000 people watching. This was probably the first SC2 tournament I can think of that I literally just turned off and stopped caring about. I don't know who won, doesn't really matter because the patch is clearly developed by someone who can't play terran and doesn't know high level gameplay. we didn't get to see it here, but if this 'balance' patch doesn't get fixed, my friends and I have practiced a 2-3 nexus early forge chronoboost on armor. If you don't die in 1 minute after starting it, you win the game almost no matter what because terran will be on +1 maybe halfway to 2 and protoss will already be on 3. One race should not be completely gutted and butchered just because 2-3 people on the planet are on another level than everyone else.
I agree that some of what I said was theorycrafting, and sometimes, things need to be changed.
Aside from the fact that Terrans didn't get 3-0ed every round, I can point to the fact uThermal beat Neeb I think 3-1 when Neeb has been the best foreigner by far for 2017.
If your counterpoint is that Neeb isn't at the highest skill level and then point to aLive and jjakji getting wrecked, then I will say the same thing. Those are players are simply not on the same level as the players they were playing against.
At HSC, the top 5 Terrans were nowhere to be seen, whereas two of the top 5 Protoss were here, and a top 4 Zerg was present.
And, the thing is, most people are not a top 5 or even top 10 Terran. What might be unholdable at a certain level may be holdable at their level.
|
I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
The Raven redesign was done explicitly to prevent massing them, and yet we have another cancerous Zerg playstyle that involves massing spellcasters (literal Broodlord/Infestor!), and somehow that's ok? Even supposing that Terrans and Protosses find an answer, what's the benefit to keeping this sort of stuff in the game?
Is there any reason to have a super-powerful Zerg air deathball vs a super-powerful Protoss air deathball? What, exactly, is the improvement here?
Or does anyone think the game needs more Protoss cheese?
Even supposing the meta settles into a somewhat balanced equilibrium, what's the point of doing a big redesign that leaves things worse than before?
None of this shit needs to exist. If it's a choice between keeping this crap around to maintain balance or just reverting the changes wholesale, I'd pick the latter any day of the week.
Fortunately, I don't think that that's necessary. Blizzard can probably fix most of this with some minor tweaks. But what they definitely shouldn't do is sit on their ass for eight months waiting for players to solve a problem that they caused ala WoL.
|
On November 13 2017 23:57 Olli wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2017 23:46 Boggyb wrote:On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote:
Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. How do you make that tweak without reverting the chrono change or completely destroying stargate openers? Surely you can have oracles build a bit slower without completely ruining SG openings.
You could do that, but I don't think oracles are the core problem in PvT. Better chrono, better stalkers, shield battery, the widow mine nerf all put together just gives Protoss so many more options in the opening (which from a build diversity perspective is pretty good tbf). And terran just struggles to deal with all the different things Protoss can do.
|
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
|
On November 14 2017 08:50 Boggyb wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest. Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly. Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
You completely missed the point. Balance is not the issue. What is the point of doing a redesign if the gameplay that arises is worse than before?
Do you really think, for example, that T/P players will find a response that makes massing infestors unviable? And if so, do you think that we should wait months waiting for this miracle to materialize?
|
On November 14 2017 08:50 Boggyb wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest. Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly. Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
Not only that, but the "wait and see" attitude was how most people and Blizzard responded to Protoss being weak in December through January. And what happened? Protoss developed the Phoenix/adept style to counter the heavy liberator and mine style.
On November 14 2017 07:53 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2017 23:57 Olli wrote:On November 13 2017 23:46 Boggyb wrote:On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote:
Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. How do you make that tweak without reverting the chrono change or completely destroying stargate openers? Surely you can have oracles build a bit slower without completely ruining SG openings. You could do that, but I don't think oracles are the core problem in PvT. Better chrono, better stalkers, shield battery, the widow mine nerf all put together just gives Protoss so many more options in the opening (which from a build diversity perspective is pretty good tbf). And terran just struggles to deal with all the different things Protoss can do.
For the early game, I think it's oracles + new chrono. For the mid game, I think Terran is hampered by Shield battery + stalkers or adepts making drops so much less useful.
The widow mine nerf really only nerfs the multiple shot potential of mines and keeps their initial strength similarly powerful. Potentially, the buff to stalkers indirectly nerfed the mine because of the range difference.
|
France12915 Posts
On November 14 2017 05:00 FrkFrJss wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 04:27 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 13 2017 19:51 Charoisaur wrote:On November 13 2017 19:34 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 13 2017 18:29 Charoisaur wrote:On November 13 2017 18:02 deacon.frost wrote:On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:
My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree. You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW) C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all. this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak. You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well. It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it. However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono. I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out. Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle. I realize that the MSC removal is a big nerf but most people seem to think the new chronoboost + shield battery + stalker buff more than make up for it. Which buff did terran get that is significant? No race got changed as much as Protoss, that is true. But the issue isn't that Zerg and Protoss got buffed while Terran got nerfed. Terran did receive some token buffs as well as a raven redesign. The main nerf that Terran received was the mine nerf, and I don't think it's significant enough to drop T winrates or make them by far the worse race. The SB, as I've maintained, is bad because it scales too well in the mid-late game. Because you can spam SBs, you can make base defense way more powerful than it should be. However, I have also maintained that the SB is not sufficient to protect Protoss against early pressure. It doesn't kill the units, which is what Protoss needs, and stalkers are fairly expensive early game units even though they have survivability and damage now. I think the other issue is that we had no really high level Terran at HSC. Some things that seem op may not necessarily be op until the best of the best take a solid crack at it. Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. But perhaps it just requires a couple months of experimentation to deal with the other Protoss changes. For instance, if P is building more stalkers and SBs, perhaps ghosts could be mixed in. You drop the ghost, emp, and then wipe out the defending forces because the SB has a max of 100 energy. Even though it was annoying seeing Protoss with low winrates in January, with minimal tweaking, Protoss still did become about even with Terran, which I think needs to happen here. And ultimately, if things are overpowered, then they can be changed. Typing stuff doesn't make it true. The fact that terrans couldnt qualify and then got 3-0'd every single round should be a red alert that the balance team is failing. HSC last year had more than 15,000 people watching. This was probably the first SC2 tournament I can think of that I literally just turned off and stopped caring about. I don't know who won, doesn't really matter because the patch is clearly developed by someone who can't play terran and doesn't know high level gameplay. we didn't get to see it here, but if this 'balance' patch doesn't get fixed, my friends and I have practiced a 2-3 nexus early forge chronoboost on armor. If you don't die in 1 minute after starting it, you win the game almost no matter what because terran will be on +1 maybe halfway to 2 and protoss will already be on 3. One race should not be completely gutted and butchered just because 2-3 people on the planet are on another level than everyone else. I agree that some of what I said was theorycrafting, and sometimes, things need to be changed. Aside from the fact that Terrans didn't get 3-0ed every round, I can point to the fact uThermal beat Neeb I think 3-1 when Neeb has been the best foreigner by far for 2017. If your counterpoint is that Neeb isn't at the highest skill level and then point to aLive and jjakji getting wrecked, then I will say the same thing. Those are players are simply not on the same level as the players they were playing against. At HSC, the top 5 Terrans were nowhere to be seen, whereas two of the top 5 Protoss were here, and a top 4 Zerg was present. And, the thing is, most people are not a top 5 or even top 10 Terran. What might be unholdable at a certain level may be holdable at their level.
Wasn't Neeb busy practicing vanilla LotV (current ladder patch) PvZ for blizzcon whereas uThermal played the test map as every other failing foreigner did tho?
Plus it's probably an outlier, I only watched liquipedia results but terrans got wrecked in this HSC and in the comments people were saying that almost all pros agreed on terran being weak or something.
It's now time to discuss it, better safe than sorry so if there is an obvious issue Blizzard has to take notes before going live with it?
Glad to see HSC still going, too bad Stephano still couldn't perform.
|
On November 14 2017 08:59 FrkFrJss wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 08:50 Boggyb wrote:On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest. Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly. Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't. Not only that, but the "wait and see" attitude was how most people and Blizzard responded to Protoss being weak in December through January. And what happened? Protoss developed the Phoenix/adept style to counter the heavy liberator and mine style.
And then liberators and mines got nerfed. Also, phoenix adept was invented before Protoss underperformed at the beginning of this year, so I don't think you can characterize that as a new development. At most you can say that that style became more prevalent as a response.
Regardless, this is all besides the point.
|
On November 14 2017 08:59 Athenau wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 08:50 Boggyb wrote:On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest. Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly. Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't. You completely missed the point. Balance is not the issue. What is the point of doing a redesign if the gameplay that arises is worse than before? Do you really think, for example, that T/P players will find a response that makes massing infestors unviable? And if so, do you think that we should wait months waiting for this miracle to materialize?
Infestors need to be nuked from orbit. That's the one issue which doesn't require a wait and see. The fact that a player like Scarlett who has never won anything of note was in an unlosable position against a multi-GSL champion despite not entering late game massively ahead is more than enough evidence that the unit is broken. Pretty much everything requires a lot more evidence to make informed decisions.
|
On November 14 2017 09:03 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 05:00 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 14 2017 04:27 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 13 2017 19:51 Charoisaur wrote:On November 13 2017 19:34 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 13 2017 18:29 Charoisaur wrote:On November 13 2017 18:02 deacon.frost wrote:On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:
My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree. You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW) C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all. this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak. You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well. It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it. However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono. I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out. Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle. I realize that the MSC removal is a big nerf but most people seem to think the new chronoboost + shield battery + stalker buff more than make up for it. Which buff did terran get that is significant? No race got changed as much as Protoss, that is true. But the issue isn't that Zerg and Protoss got buffed while Terran got nerfed. Terran did receive some token buffs as well as a raven redesign. The main nerf that Terran received was the mine nerf, and I don't think it's significant enough to drop T winrates or make them by far the worse race. The SB, as I've maintained, is bad because it scales too well in the mid-late game. Because you can spam SBs, you can make base defense way more powerful than it should be. However, I have also maintained that the SB is not sufficient to protect Protoss against early pressure. It doesn't kill the units, which is what Protoss needs, and stalkers are fairly expensive early game units even though they have survivability and damage now. I think the other issue is that we had no really high level Terran at HSC. Some things that seem op may not necessarily be op until the best of the best take a solid crack at it. Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. But perhaps it just requires a couple months of experimentation to deal with the other Protoss changes. For instance, if P is building more stalkers and SBs, perhaps ghosts could be mixed in. You drop the ghost, emp, and then wipe out the defending forces because the SB has a max of 100 energy. Even though it was annoying seeing Protoss with low winrates in January, with minimal tweaking, Protoss still did become about even with Terran, which I think needs to happen here. And ultimately, if things are overpowered, then they can be changed. Typing stuff doesn't make it true. The fact that terrans couldnt qualify and then got 3-0'd every single round should be a red alert that the balance team is failing. HSC last year had more than 15,000 people watching. This was probably the first SC2 tournament I can think of that I literally just turned off and stopped caring about. I don't know who won, doesn't really matter because the patch is clearly developed by someone who can't play terran and doesn't know high level gameplay. we didn't get to see it here, but if this 'balance' patch doesn't get fixed, my friends and I have practiced a 2-3 nexus early forge chronoboost on armor. If you don't die in 1 minute after starting it, you win the game almost no matter what because terran will be on +1 maybe halfway to 2 and protoss will already be on 3. One race should not be completely gutted and butchered just because 2-3 people on the planet are on another level than everyone else. I agree that some of what I said was theorycrafting, and sometimes, things need to be changed. Aside from the fact that Terrans didn't get 3-0ed every round, I can point to the fact uThermal beat Neeb I think 3-1 when Neeb has been the best foreigner by far for 2017. If your counterpoint is that Neeb isn't at the highest skill level and then point to aLive and jjakji getting wrecked, then I will say the same thing. Those are players are simply not on the same level as the players they were playing against. At HSC, the top 5 Terrans were nowhere to be seen, whereas two of the top 5 Protoss were here, and a top 4 Zerg was present. And, the thing is, most people are not a top 5 or even top 10 Terran. What might be unholdable at a certain level may be holdable at their level. Wasn't Neeb busy practicing vanilla LotV (current ladder patch) PvZ for blizzcon whereas uThermal played the test map as every other failing foreigner did tho? Plus it's probably an outlier, I only watched liquipedia results but terrans got wrecked in this HSC and in the comments people were saying that almost all pros agreed on terran being weak or something. It's now time to discuss it, better safe than sorry so if there is an obvious issue Blizzard has to take notes before going live with it? Glad to see HSC still going, too bad Stephano still couldn't perform.
Again, there were fewer and worse Terrans at HSC, which artificially inflates the loss ratio. Put two top five Terrans there like Inno and TY, and suddenly I don't think Terran looks as underpowered.
Also, I have to keep going back to January. This was two months after the redesign, and Protoss had an overall winrate of 41%. That winrate is much lower than the TvP winrate at HSC.
As for TvZ, I can't really speak for that matchup.
All that being said, if after like two-four weeks, if there is still blatantly op or up stuff, then I do support appropriate buffs/nerfs.
|
On November 14 2017 09:06 Boggyb wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 08:59 Athenau wrote:On November 14 2017 08:50 Boggyb wrote:On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest. Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly. Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't. You completely missed the point. Balance is not the issue. What is the point of doing a redesign if the gameplay that arises is worse than before? Do you really think, for example, that T/P players will find a response that makes massing infestors unviable? And if so, do you think that we should wait months waiting for this miracle to materialize? Infestors need to be nuked from orbit. That's the one issue which doesn't require a wait and see. The fact that a player like Scarlett who has never won anything of note was in an unlosable position against a multi-GSL champion despite not entering late game massively ahead is more than enough evidence that the unit is broken. Pretty much everything requires a lot more evidence to make informed decisions.
Why not put super-fast Oracles in that category as well? How does having potentially game-ending damage available that early in the game make things better? Wasn't one of their goals for this patch to tone that sort of stuff down?
The shield battery and stalker changes, I agree, need more time, if only because the general direction is good even if balance might need tweaking. But I don't see any reason for Oracles to stay the way they are. "Lol ur dead" isn't fun for anyone even if it somehow ends up balanced.
|
On November 14 2017 09:09 FrkFrJss wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 09:03 Poopi wrote:On November 14 2017 05:00 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 14 2017 04:27 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 13 2017 19:51 Charoisaur wrote:On November 13 2017 19:34 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 13 2017 18:29 Charoisaur wrote:On November 13 2017 18:02 deacon.frost wrote:On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:
My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree. You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW) C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all. this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak. You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well. It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it. However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono. I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out. Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle. I realize that the MSC removal is a big nerf but most people seem to think the new chronoboost + shield battery + stalker buff more than make up for it. Which buff did terran get that is significant? No race got changed as much as Protoss, that is true. But the issue isn't that Zerg and Protoss got buffed while Terran got nerfed. Terran did receive some token buffs as well as a raven redesign. The main nerf that Terran received was the mine nerf, and I don't think it's significant enough to drop T winrates or make them by far the worse race. The SB, as I've maintained, is bad because it scales too well in the mid-late game. Because you can spam SBs, you can make base defense way more powerful than it should be. However, I have also maintained that the SB is not sufficient to protect Protoss against early pressure. It doesn't kill the units, which is what Protoss needs, and stalkers are fairly expensive early game units even though they have survivability and damage now. I think the other issue is that we had no really high level Terran at HSC. Some things that seem op may not necessarily be op until the best of the best take a solid crack at it. Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. But perhaps it just requires a couple months of experimentation to deal with the other Protoss changes. For instance, if P is building more stalkers and SBs, perhaps ghosts could be mixed in. You drop the ghost, emp, and then wipe out the defending forces because the SB has a max of 100 energy. Even though it was annoying seeing Protoss with low winrates in January, with minimal tweaking, Protoss still did become about even with Terran, which I think needs to happen here. And ultimately, if things are overpowered, then they can be changed. Typing stuff doesn't make it true. The fact that terrans couldnt qualify and then got 3-0'd every single round should be a red alert that the balance team is failing. HSC last year had more than 15,000 people watching. This was probably the first SC2 tournament I can think of that I literally just turned off and stopped caring about. I don't know who won, doesn't really matter because the patch is clearly developed by someone who can't play terran and doesn't know high level gameplay. we didn't get to see it here, but if this 'balance' patch doesn't get fixed, my friends and I have practiced a 2-3 nexus early forge chronoboost on armor. If you don't die in 1 minute after starting it, you win the game almost no matter what because terran will be on +1 maybe halfway to 2 and protoss will already be on 3. One race should not be completely gutted and butchered just because 2-3 people on the planet are on another level than everyone else. I agree that some of what I said was theorycrafting, and sometimes, things need to be changed. Aside from the fact that Terrans didn't get 3-0ed every round, I can point to the fact uThermal beat Neeb I think 3-1 when Neeb has been the best foreigner by far for 2017. If your counterpoint is that Neeb isn't at the highest skill level and then point to aLive and jjakji getting wrecked, then I will say the same thing. Those are players are simply not on the same level as the players they were playing against. At HSC, the top 5 Terrans were nowhere to be seen, whereas two of the top 5 Protoss were here, and a top 4 Zerg was present. And, the thing is, most people are not a top 5 or even top 10 Terran. What might be unholdable at a certain level may be holdable at their level. Wasn't Neeb busy practicing vanilla LotV (current ladder patch) PvZ for blizzcon whereas uThermal played the test map as every other failing foreigner did tho? Plus it's probably an outlier, I only watched liquipedia results but terrans got wrecked in this HSC and in the comments people were saying that almost all pros agreed on terran being weak or something. It's now time to discuss it, better safe than sorry so if there is an obvious issue Blizzard has to take notes before going live with it? Glad to see HSC still going, too bad Stephano still couldn't perform. Again, there were fewer and worse Terrans at HSC, which artificially inflates the loss ratio. Put two top five Terrans there like Inno and TY, and suddenly I don't think Terran looks as underpowered. Also, I have to keep going back to January. This was two months after the redesign, and Protoss had an overall winrate of 41%. That winrate is much lower than the TvP winrate at HSC. As for TvZ, I can't really speak for that matchup. All that being said, if after like two-four weeks, if there is still blatantly op or up stuff, then I do support appropriate buffs/nerfs.
I agree, the Terran field overall at HSC was weaker (though the foreign terrans were competitive, both Heromarine and UThermal were there) and they clearly weren't trying new stuff. So HSC isn't an indication of much except of how stupid infestors are (I don't remember if there were any particularly egregious fast proxy-Oracle games off the top of my head).
That said, this is the off-season and Blizzard needs to be more aggressive with changes. Tweaks every two weeks until the dumbest stuff has been ironed sounds fine to me.
|
On November 14 2017 09:04 Athenau wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 08:59 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 14 2017 08:50 Boggyb wrote:On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest. Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly. Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't. Not only that, but the "wait and see" attitude was how most people and Blizzard responded to Protoss being weak in December through January. And what happened? Protoss developed the Phoenix/adept style to counter the heavy liberator and mine style. And then liberators and mines got nerfed. Also, phoenix adept was invented before Protoss underperformed at the beginning of this year, so I don't think you can characterize that as a new development. At most you can say that that style became more prevalent as a response. Regardless, this is all besides the point.
True, but the liberator got nerfed at the end of January, two months after the redesign. The widow mine got nerfed in March.
The point being, they did change things, but they did it months after the release.
EDIT: the Protoss probably hadn't figured out the super fast oracle opening at that point.
|
On November 14 2017 09:19 FrkFrJss wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 09:04 Athenau wrote:On November 14 2017 08:59 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 14 2017 08:50 Boggyb wrote:On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest. Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly. Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't. Not only that, but the "wait and see" attitude was how most people and Blizzard responded to Protoss being weak in December through January. And what happened? Protoss developed the Phoenix/adept style to counter the heavy liberator and mine style. And then liberators and mines got nerfed. Also, phoenix adept was invented before Protoss underperformed at the beginning of this year, so I don't think you can characterize that as a new development. At most you can say that that style became more prevalent as a response. Regardless, this is all besides the point. True, but the liberator got nerfed at the end of January, two months after the redesign. The widow mine got nerfed in March. The point being, they did change things, but they did it months after the release.
Yes, but that was during the regular season. It's fine to be more conservative while major tournaments are going on. It's not fine to wait months during the off-season to address glaring design issues that your design patch was supposed to fix.
|
On November 14 2017 09:22 Athenau wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 09:19 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 14 2017 09:04 Athenau wrote:On November 14 2017 08:59 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 14 2017 08:50 Boggyb wrote:On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest. Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly. Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't. Not only that, but the "wait and see" attitude was how most people and Blizzard responded to Protoss being weak in December through January. And what happened? Protoss developed the Phoenix/adept style to counter the heavy liberator and mine style. And then liberators and mines got nerfed. Also, phoenix adept was invented before Protoss underperformed at the beginning of this year, so I don't think you can characterize that as a new development. At most you can say that that style became more prevalent as a response. Regardless, this is all besides the point. True, but the liberator got nerfed at the end of January, two months after the redesign. The widow mine got nerfed in March. The point being, they did change things, but they did it months after the release. Yes, but that was during the regular season. It's fine to be more conservative while major tournaments are going on. It's not fine to wait months during the off-season to address glaring design issues that your design patch was supposed to fix.
I mean, liberators had been tough for Protoss to deal with ever since they came into being. Tempests being nerfed only made this worse. But, I do agree that the off season is when the more frequent and radical changes should be made. Though, that being said, it's sometimes the competitive nature of the regular season that makes balance problems more prevalent. And sometimes, it's during this time that people figure out the meta.
|
On November 14 2017 09:19 Athenau wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 09:09 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 14 2017 09:03 Poopi wrote:On November 14 2017 05:00 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 14 2017 04:27 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 13 2017 19:51 Charoisaur wrote:On November 13 2017 19:34 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 13 2017 18:29 Charoisaur wrote:On November 13 2017 18:02 deacon.frost wrote:
[quote]
You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW)
C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all. this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak. You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well. It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it. However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono. I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out. Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle. I realize that the MSC removal is a big nerf but most people seem to think the new chronoboost + shield battery + stalker buff more than make up for it. Which buff did terran get that is significant? No race got changed as much as Protoss, that is true. But the issue isn't that Zerg and Protoss got buffed while Terran got nerfed. Terran did receive some token buffs as well as a raven redesign. The main nerf that Terran received was the mine nerf, and I don't think it's significant enough to drop T winrates or make them by far the worse race. The SB, as I've maintained, is bad because it scales too well in the mid-late game. Because you can spam SBs, you can make base defense way more powerful than it should be. However, I have also maintained that the SB is not sufficient to protect Protoss against early pressure. It doesn't kill the units, which is what Protoss needs, and stalkers are fairly expensive early game units even though they have survivability and damage now. I think the other issue is that we had no really high level Terran at HSC. Some things that seem op may not necessarily be op until the best of the best take a solid crack at it. Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. But perhaps it just requires a couple months of experimentation to deal with the other Protoss changes. For instance, if P is building more stalkers and SBs, perhaps ghosts could be mixed in. You drop the ghost, emp, and then wipe out the defending forces because the SB has a max of 100 energy. Even though it was annoying seeing Protoss with low winrates in January, with minimal tweaking, Protoss still did become about even with Terran, which I think needs to happen here. And ultimately, if things are overpowered, then they can be changed. Typing stuff doesn't make it true. The fact that terrans couldnt qualify and then got 3-0'd every single round should be a red alert that the balance team is failing. HSC last year had more than 15,000 people watching. This was probably the first SC2 tournament I can think of that I literally just turned off and stopped caring about. I don't know who won, doesn't really matter because the patch is clearly developed by someone who can't play terran and doesn't know high level gameplay. we didn't get to see it here, but if this 'balance' patch doesn't get fixed, my friends and I have practiced a 2-3 nexus early forge chronoboost on armor. If you don't die in 1 minute after starting it, you win the game almost no matter what because terran will be on +1 maybe halfway to 2 and protoss will already be on 3. One race should not be completely gutted and butchered just because 2-3 people on the planet are on another level than everyone else. I agree that some of what I said was theorycrafting, and sometimes, things need to be changed. Aside from the fact that Terrans didn't get 3-0ed every round, I can point to the fact uThermal beat Neeb I think 3-1 when Neeb has been the best foreigner by far for 2017. If your counterpoint is that Neeb isn't at the highest skill level and then point to aLive and jjakji getting wrecked, then I will say the same thing. Those are players are simply not on the same level as the players they were playing against. At HSC, the top 5 Terrans were nowhere to be seen, whereas two of the top 5 Protoss were here, and a top 4 Zerg was present. And, the thing is, most people are not a top 5 or even top 10 Terran. What might be unholdable at a certain level may be holdable at their level. Wasn't Neeb busy practicing vanilla LotV (current ladder patch) PvZ for blizzcon whereas uThermal played the test map as every other failing foreigner did tho? Plus it's probably an outlier, I only watched liquipedia results but terrans got wrecked in this HSC and in the comments people were saying that almost all pros agreed on terran being weak or something. It's now time to discuss it, better safe than sorry so if there is an obvious issue Blizzard has to take notes before going live with it? Glad to see HSC still going, too bad Stephano still couldn't perform. Again, there were fewer and worse Terrans at HSC, which artificially inflates the loss ratio. Put two top five Terrans there like Inno and TY, and suddenly I don't think Terran looks as underpowered. Also, I have to keep going back to January. This was two months after the redesign, and Protoss had an overall winrate of 41%. That winrate is much lower than the TvP winrate at HSC. As for TvZ, I can't really speak for that matchup. All that being said, if after like two-four weeks, if there is still blatantly op or up stuff, then I do support appropriate buffs/nerfs. I agree, the Terran field overall at HSC was weaker (though the foreign terrans were competitive, both Heromarine and UThermal were there) and they clearly weren't trying new stuff. So HSC isn't an indication of much except of how stupid infestors are (I don't remember if there were any particularly egregious fast proxy-Oracle games off the top of my head). That said, this is the off-season and Blizzard needs to be more aggressive with changes. Tweaks every two weeks until the dumbest stuff has been ironed sounds fine to me.
What new stuff? the new transformation upgrade?
|
On November 14 2017 09:26 FrkFrJss wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 09:22 Athenau wrote:On November 14 2017 09:19 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 14 2017 09:04 Athenau wrote:On November 14 2017 08:59 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 14 2017 08:50 Boggyb wrote:On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest. Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly. Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't. Not only that, but the "wait and see" attitude was how most people and Blizzard responded to Protoss being weak in December through January. And what happened? Protoss developed the Phoenix/adept style to counter the heavy liberator and mine style. And then liberators and mines got nerfed. Also, phoenix adept was invented before Protoss underperformed at the beginning of this year, so I don't think you can characterize that as a new development. At most you can say that that style became more prevalent as a response. Regardless, this is all besides the point. True, but the liberator got nerfed at the end of January, two months after the redesign. The widow mine got nerfed in March. The point being, they did change things, but they did it months after the release. Yes, but that was during the regular season. It's fine to be more conservative while major tournaments are going on. It's not fine to wait months during the off-season to address glaring design issues that your design patch was supposed to fix. I mean, liberators had been tough for Protoss to deal with ever since they came into being. Tempests being nerfed only made this worse. But, I do agree that the off season is when the more frequent and radical changes should be made. Though, that being said, it's sometimes the competitive nature of the regular season that makes balance problems more prevalent. And sometimes, it's during this time that people figure out the meta.
Protoss had to adjust to liberators, but I don't think they were ever a balance problem until tanks got buffed in patch 3.8. And they were never an issue gameplay-wise. Giving Terran a way to play a positional macro game as opposed to "multidrop until one of you dies" or "YOLO SCV pull" will never be a bad thing in my book.
Anyway, my argument still stands--if you're redesigning the game, your redesign shouldn't exacerbate problems that you're supposedly trying to fix.
|
On November 14 2017 09:27 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 09:19 Athenau wrote:On November 14 2017 09:09 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 14 2017 09:03 Poopi wrote:On November 14 2017 05:00 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 14 2017 04:27 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 13 2017 19:51 Charoisaur wrote:On November 13 2017 19:34 FrkFrJss wrote:On November 13 2017 18:29 Charoisaur wrote:
[quote]
this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak.
Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before.
I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak. You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well. It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it. However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono. I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out. Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle. I realize that the MSC removal is a big nerf but most people seem to think the new chronoboost + shield battery + stalker buff more than make up for it. Which buff did terran get that is significant? No race got changed as much as Protoss, that is true. But the issue isn't that Zerg and Protoss got buffed while Terran got nerfed. Terran did receive some token buffs as well as a raven redesign. The main nerf that Terran received was the mine nerf, and I don't think it's significant enough to drop T winrates or make them by far the worse race. The SB, as I've maintained, is bad because it scales too well in the mid-late game. Because you can spam SBs, you can make base defense way more powerful than it should be. However, I have also maintained that the SB is not sufficient to protect Protoss against early pressure. It doesn't kill the units, which is what Protoss needs, and stalkers are fairly expensive early game units even though they have survivability and damage now. I think the other issue is that we had no really high level Terran at HSC. Some things that seem op may not necessarily be op until the best of the best take a solid crack at it. Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. But perhaps it just requires a couple months of experimentation to deal with the other Protoss changes. For instance, if P is building more stalkers and SBs, perhaps ghosts could be mixed in. You drop the ghost, emp, and then wipe out the defending forces because the SB has a max of 100 energy. Even though it was annoying seeing Protoss with low winrates in January, with minimal tweaking, Protoss still did become about even with Terran, which I think needs to happen here. And ultimately, if things are overpowered, then they can be changed. Typing stuff doesn't make it true. The fact that terrans couldnt qualify and then got 3-0'd every single round should be a red alert that the balance team is failing. HSC last year had more than 15,000 people watching. This was probably the first SC2 tournament I can think of that I literally just turned off and stopped caring about. I don't know who won, doesn't really matter because the patch is clearly developed by someone who can't play terran and doesn't know high level gameplay. we didn't get to see it here, but if this 'balance' patch doesn't get fixed, my friends and I have practiced a 2-3 nexus early forge chronoboost on armor. If you don't die in 1 minute after starting it, you win the game almost no matter what because terran will be on +1 maybe halfway to 2 and protoss will already be on 3. One race should not be completely gutted and butchered just because 2-3 people on the planet are on another level than everyone else. I agree that some of what I said was theorycrafting, and sometimes, things need to be changed. Aside from the fact that Terrans didn't get 3-0ed every round, I can point to the fact uThermal beat Neeb I think 3-1 when Neeb has been the best foreigner by far for 2017. If your counterpoint is that Neeb isn't at the highest skill level and then point to aLive and jjakji getting wrecked, then I will say the same thing. Those are players are simply not on the same level as the players they were playing against. At HSC, the top 5 Terrans were nowhere to be seen, whereas two of the top 5 Protoss were here, and a top 4 Zerg was present. And, the thing is, most people are not a top 5 or even top 10 Terran. What might be unholdable at a certain level may be holdable at their level. Wasn't Neeb busy practicing vanilla LotV (current ladder patch) PvZ for blizzcon whereas uThermal played the test map as every other failing foreigner did tho? Plus it's probably an outlier, I only watched liquipedia results but terrans got wrecked in this HSC and in the comments people were saying that almost all pros agreed on terran being weak or something. It's now time to discuss it, better safe than sorry so if there is an obvious issue Blizzard has to take notes before going live with it? Glad to see HSC still going, too bad Stephano still couldn't perform. Again, there were fewer and worse Terrans at HSC, which artificially inflates the loss ratio. Put two top five Terrans there like Inno and TY, and suddenly I don't think Terran looks as underpowered. Also, I have to keep going back to January. This was two months after the redesign, and Protoss had an overall winrate of 41%. That winrate is much lower than the TvP winrate at HSC. As for TvZ, I can't really speak for that matchup. All that being said, if after like two-four weeks, if there is still blatantly op or up stuff, then I do support appropriate buffs/nerfs. I agree, the Terran field overall at HSC was weaker (though the foreign terrans were competitive, both Heromarine and UThermal were there) and they clearly weren't trying new stuff. So HSC isn't an indication of much except of how stupid infestors are (I don't remember if there were any particularly egregious fast proxy-Oracle games off the top of my head). That said, this is the off-season and Blizzard needs to be more aggressive with changes. Tweaks every two weeks until the dumbest stuff has been ironed sounds fine to me. What new stuff? the new transformation upgrade?
Among other things, yes. Servos are really good with Mech (it makes Hellions incredible).
Shredder missile is also under-rated, IMO. It hits much more reliably, lasts a long time, and debuffs a big area. It has potentially huge synergy with bio and starport units (liberator AA and even BC's). Your marines doing +3 damage is no joke (shredder takes armor below 0, so it doesn't even matter if your opponent has upgrades or not).
Scrambler may be good against Protoss (locking down up to four archons/colossuses/immortals is a pretty big deal) if you can keep your Ravens safe from feedback, but it's too early to see if this is practical. It's useless against Z of course, the range is too short against the stuff they're meant to be locking down.
Repair drone isn't amazing, but it's a decent bonus. The drone lasts for a long time and is super-efficient energy-wise, so at the very least if you have a few Ravens around anyway you're healing up all your mech units for free between fights with a drone or two.
I've seen Semper and BeastyQT experiment with the Raven on stream, it's too early to say that it's useless.
Terran definitely got the most niche/esoteric changes and it's going to take them the longest to see if any of them work out.
|
On November 14 2017 09:13 Athenau wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 09:06 Boggyb wrote:On November 14 2017 08:59 Athenau wrote:On November 14 2017 08:50 Boggyb wrote:On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest. Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly. Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't. You completely missed the point. Balance is not the issue. What is the point of doing a redesign if the gameplay that arises is worse than before? Do you really think, for example, that T/P players will find a response that makes massing infestors unviable? And if so, do you think that we should wait months waiting for this miracle to materialize? Infestors need to be nuked from orbit. That's the one issue which doesn't require a wait and see. The fact that a player like Scarlett who has never won anything of note was in an unlosable position against a multi-GSL champion despite not entering late game massively ahead is more than enough evidence that the unit is broken. Pretty much everything requires a lot more evidence to make informed decisions. Why not put super-fast Oracles in that category as well? How does having potentially game-ending damage available that early in the game make things better? Wasn't one of their goals for this patch to tone that sort of stuff down? The shield battery and stalker changes, I agree, need more time, if only because the general direction is good even if balance might need tweaking. But I don't see any reason for Oracles to stay the way they are. "Lol ur dead" isn't fun for anyone even if it somehow ends up balanced.
How do you slow down double chrono proxy oracle enough without destroying stargate openings?
|
On November 14 2017 09:47 Boggyb wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2017 09:13 Athenau wrote:On November 14 2017 09:06 Boggyb wrote:On November 14 2017 08:59 Athenau wrote:On November 14 2017 08:50 Boggyb wrote:On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest. Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly. Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't. You completely missed the point. Balance is not the issue. What is the point of doing a redesign if the gameplay that arises is worse than before? Do you really think, for example, that T/P players will find a response that makes massing infestors unviable? And if so, do you think that we should wait months waiting for this miracle to materialize? Infestors need to be nuked from orbit. That's the one issue which doesn't require a wait and see. The fact that a player like Scarlett who has never won anything of note was in an unlosable position against a multi-GSL champion despite not entering late game massively ahead is more than enough evidence that the unit is broken. Pretty much everything requires a lot more evidence to make informed decisions. Why not put super-fast Oracles in that category as well? How does having potentially game-ending damage available that early in the game make things better? Wasn't one of their goals for this patch to tone that sort of stuff down? The shield battery and stalker changes, I agree, need more time, if only because the general direction is good even if balance might need tweaking. But I don't see any reason for Oracles to stay the way they are. "Lol ur dead" isn't fun for anyone even if it somehow ends up balanced. How do you slow down double chrono proxy oracle enough without destroying stargate openings?
Which stargate openings do you want to preserve that would get destroyed by slowing down proxy oracle?
And who says you need to keep the Oracle itself the way it is? Why not do something radical like remove pulsar beam and reduce stasis ward energy cost to 25? Or make the beam a regular weapon (no energy cost, benefits from upgrades) at the cost of lower damage. There's lots of things they can try, but the first step is acknowledging that it's a problem even if the solution isn't immediately apparent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
