Also, funny part about the whole "changed for ZvZ" part, the reaper is STILL only used in TvT and turns it into old-school PvP and ZvZ, with coinflips and BO wins.
On December 21 2012 07:23 aksfjh wrote: Also, funny part about the whole "changed for ZvZ" part, the reaper is STILL only used in TvT and turns it into old-school PvP and ZvZ, with coinflips and BO wins.
It is not only used in TvT, watch Blade55555's stream, I see Terran players using Reapers vs. him. He even lose to one of those timings.
On December 21 2012 05:45 Interstellar wrote: I'm surprised how many people act like these changes affect them. Notice how Blizzard always references "players at the top level" when they introduce these patches. Balance issues don't apply to anyone below Diamond league. You don't play well enough to benefit/lose from such balance patches. I'm a Plat Protoss players and sometimes I lose to broodlord/infestor, sometimes I totally own Zerg. It all depends on how well my opponent plays. Not race balance issues.
You play platin and try to judge about people playing in the diamond league? Im master as most of the posters and i can speak for all: These patches affect our matchups pretty hard and its no only the 200 progamer who feel the changes. Damn guys like you make me so angry i will stop writing before i lose myself....
You can get angry but he's right. Players below the very highest levels do not and should not impact balance decisions. Of course everyone's affected but if Blizzard made balance changes based on the struggles of random master and even random GM level players, the game would be an utter mess. Nevertheless, the infestor change just seems bizarre. Maybe infestors still won't be worth the investment but it just seems kind of silly given how widely hated the infestor is. I can't think of another unit that has generated as much widespread loathing as the infestor. At their peak, ghosts were also pretty nauseous but I think infestors are even less popular. Even crowds groan when blord infestor appears, the opposing army gets fungaled and then disappears.
He isnt right.
No blizzard shouldnt balance it for 'random' masters players, but they should balance it for the average masters player, and diamond, and plat, and even bronze, as far as reasonably possible. No that won't always be possible, but only balancing it for pros is stupid and also results in a mess. There have been significant balance changes in SC2 because of a single player. And no I am not talking about a strategy invented by a single player, but purely because one player shows something nice, balance changes happen. You are not telling me basing balance changes around a single player is a good idea.
Lets say we got a new player, we call him Lee. Lee has sick marine micro. So sick it makes everything other pros do look like children playing. Now should blizzard do balance changes because of Lee? And when Lee retires we get in the patch notes that Terran would be boosted back to normal levels because Lee is gone?
Of course balance at the pro level is important for e-sports, but there wont be an SC2 e-sports scene if no one below pro level wants to play anymore. And while it wont be always easy, it really isnt impossible to balance it for different play levels, in a well designed game that is the case: It basicly means all races need to have a healthy choice between a-move armies and micro intensive armies, where micro should pay off, but not that one race needs way more micro than another race to be competitive.
That you arent affected by balance changes if you arent a pro is just simply not true. My fungaled vikings have also something to say about that. If an average bronze player playing race A would immediatly get to silver when switching to race B, then that is a balance issue.
Balancing for when the player plays correct or as close to possible should matter , balancing for people who make alot of mistakes and then whine and bitch would make an even more mess and ruin the highest level where people make MONEY. There is such room for people in the lower levels and work on the imbalance they perceive if they just worked on things and got better with practice , the game isn't designed for easy wins everytime that would make the game boring. Edit : spread your damn units and they don't get chain fungal-ed especially your vikings , fungal is really strong but i need to get my infestors closer now so they get blown up by tanks.
On December 21 2012 07:41 Shakattak wrote: Balancing for when the player plays correct or as close to possible should matter , balancing for people who make alot of mistakes and then whine and bitch would make an even more mess and ruin the highest level where people make MONEY. There is such room for people in the lower levels and work on the imbalance they perceive if they just worked on things and got better with practice , the game isn't designed for easy wins everytime that would make the game boring.
Do u really think that every single sc2 player cares about "pros making MONEY"? No. I bet only minority does. Now if the game is not balanced at casual level, people will quit before they get more interested in competetive scene and before they throw their penny for pros to win.
Actually, doing anything with the game by looking only at pros is wrong. You need to start with the foundation, keep the casuals playing, cuz pros carieers mean absolutely nothing when nobody is watching them. Make the game good, then think about making it an Esport.
On December 21 2012 05:45 Interstellar wrote: I'm surprised how many people act like these changes affect them. Notice how Blizzard always references "players at the top level" when they introduce these patches. Balance issues don't apply to anyone below Diamond league. You don't play well enough to benefit/lose from such balance patches. I'm a Plat Protoss players and sometimes I lose to broodlord/infestor, sometimes I totally own Zerg. It all depends on how well my opponent plays. Not race balance issues.
You play platin and try to judge about people playing in the diamond league? Im master as most of the posters and i can speak for all: These patches affect our matchups pretty hard and its no only the 200 progamer who feel the changes. Damn guys like you make me so angry i will stop writing before i lose myself....
You can get angry but he's right. Players below the very highest levels do not and should not impact balance decisions. Of course everyone's affected but if Blizzard made balance changes based on the struggles of random master and even random GM level players, the game would be an utter mess. Nevertheless, the infestor change just seems bizarre. Maybe infestors still won't be worth the investment but it just seems kind of silly given how widely hated the infestor is. I can't think of another unit that has generated as much widespread loathing as the infestor. At their peak, ghosts were also pretty nauseous but I think infestors are even less popular. Even crowds groan when blord infestor appears, the opposing army gets fungaled and then disappears.
He isnt right.
No blizzard shouldnt balance it for 'random' masters players, but they should balance it for the average masters player, and diamond, and plat, and even bronze, as far as reasonably possible. No that won't always be possible, but only balancing it for pros is stupid and also results in a mess. There have been significant balance changes in SC2 because of a single player. And no I am not talking about a strategy invented by a single player, but purely because one player shows something nice, balance changes happen. You are not telling me basing balance changes around a single player is a good idea.
Lets say we got a new player, we call him Lee. Lee has sick marine micro. So sick it makes everything other pros do look like children playing. Now should blizzard do balance changes because of Lee? And when Lee retires we get in the patch notes that Terran would be boosted back to normal levels because Lee is gone?
Of course balance at the pro level is important for e-sports, but there wont be an SC2 e-sports scene if no one below pro level wants to play anymore. And while it wont be always easy, it really isnt impossible to balance it for different play levels, in a well designed game that is the case: It basicly means all races need to have a healthy choice between a-move armies and micro intensive armies, where micro should pay off, but not that one race needs way more micro than another race to be competitive.
That you arent affected by balance changes if you arent a pro is just simply not true. My fungaled vikings have also something to say about that. If an average bronze player playing race A would immediatly get to silver when switching to race B, then that is a balance issue.
Balancing for when the player plays correct or as close to possible should matter , balancing for people who make alot of mistakes and then whine and bitch would make an even more mess and ruin the highest level where people make MONEY. There is such room for people in the lower levels and work on the imbalance they perceive if they just worked on things and got better with practice , the game isn't designed for easy wins everytime that would make the game boring. Edit : spread your damn units and they don't get chain fungal-ed especially your vikings , fungal is really strong but i need to get my infestors closer now so they get blown up by tanks.
Yes because 10 range is less than 9/8 range... Also my bad for forgetting to turn off the chain fungal checkbox. The entire problem with chain fungal is that you pretty much cant do anything about it.
And you capitalized money as if that makes them magically more important. Is for blizzard a single pro more important than a single bronze player? Yep. Are all pros combined more important than all regular players combined? Not even close.
But anyway we should balance for people playing correctly? So then we first need to have the magical being who plays correct. Since the pros make enough mistakes, and different pros got different strengths. In other words: I for one, welcome out automaton2000 balance overlords. Makes more sense to balance it for someone microing perfectly than for however the current pros are feeling to micro.
To quote you:
the game isn't designed for easy wins everytime that would make the game boring.
Which is why it should be also balanced at non-pro levels so the game isnt a bunch of easy wins/hopeless losses depending on whatever is imbalanced at your level. Because that would make it boring.
Even Idra agrees on this (even if he realizes it or not). He made a long post telling that the pro-scene depends on SC2 being popular for casual players. It wont be popular when there are huge imbalances for people at their level.
On December 21 2012 05:45 Interstellar wrote: I'm surprised how many people act like these changes affect them. Notice how Blizzard always references "players at the top level" when they introduce these patches. Balance issues don't apply to anyone below Diamond league. You don't play well enough to benefit/lose from such balance patches. I'm a Plat Protoss players and sometimes I lose to broodlord/infestor, sometimes I totally own Zerg. It all depends on how well my opponent plays. Not race balance issues.
You play platin and try to judge about people playing in the diamond league? Im master as most of the posters and i can speak for all: These patches affect our matchups pretty hard and its no only the 200 progamer who feel the changes. Damn guys like you make me so angry i will stop writing before i lose myself....
You can get angry but he's right. Players below the very highest levels do not and should not impact balance decisions. Of course everyone's affected but if Blizzard made balance changes based on the struggles of random master and even random GM level players, the game would be an utter mess. Nevertheless, the infestor change just seems bizarre. Maybe infestors still won't be worth the investment but it just seems kind of silly given how widely hated the infestor is. I can't think of another unit that has generated as much widespread loathing as the infestor. At their peak, ghosts were also pretty nauseous but I think infestors are even less popular. Even crowds groan when blord infestor appears, the opposing army gets fungaled and then disappears.
He isnt right.
No blizzard shouldnt balance it for 'random' masters players, but they should balance it for the average masters player, and diamond, and plat, and even bronze, as far as reasonably possible. No that won't always be possible, but only balancing it for pros is stupid and also results in a mess. There have been significant balance changes in SC2 because of a single player. And no I am not talking about a strategy invented by a single player, but purely because one player shows something nice, balance changes happen. You are not telling me basing balance changes around a single player is a good idea.
Lets say we got a new player, we call him Lee. Lee has sick marine micro. So sick it makes everything other pros do look like children playing. Now should blizzard do balance changes because of Lee? And when Lee retires we get in the patch notes that Terran would be boosted back to normal levels because Lee is gone?
Of course balance at the pro level is important for e-sports, but there wont be an SC2 e-sports scene if no one below pro level wants to play anymore. And while it wont be always easy, it really isnt impossible to balance it for different play levels, in a well designed game that is the case: It basicly means all races need to have a healthy choice between a-move armies and micro intensive armies, where micro should pay off, but not that one race needs way more micro than another race to be competitive.
That you arent affected by balance changes if you arent a pro is just simply not true. My fungaled vikings have also something to say about that. If an average bronze player playing race A would immediatly get to silver when switching to race B, then that is a balance issue.
Balancing for when the player plays correct or as close to possible should matter , balancing for people who make alot of mistakes and then whine and bitch would make an even more mess and ruin the highest level where people make MONEY. There is such room for people in the lower levels and work on the imbalance they perceive if they just worked on things and got better with practice , the game isn't designed for easy wins everytime that would make the game boring. Edit : spread your damn units and they don't get chain fungal-ed especially your vikings , fungal is really strong but i need to get my infestors closer now so they get blown up by tanks.
Yes because 10 range is less than 9/8 range... Also my bad for forgetting to turn off the chain fungal checkbox. The entire problem with chain fungal is that you pretty much cant do anything about it.
And you capitalized money as if that makes them magically more important. Is for blizzard a single pro more important than a single bronze player? Yep. Are all pros combined more important than all regular players combined? Not even close.
But anyway we should balance for people playing correctly? So then we first need to have the magical being who plays correct. Since the pros make enough mistakes, and different pros got different strengths. In other words: I for one, welcome out automaton2000 balance overlords. Makes more sense to balance it for someone microing perfectly than for however the current pros are feeling to micro.
the game isn't designed for easy wins everytime that would make the game boring.
Which is why it should be also balanced at non-pro levels so the game isnt a bunch of easy wins/hopeless losses depending on whatever is imbalanced at your level. Because that would make it boring.
Even Idra agrees on this (even if he realizes it or not). He made a long post telling that the pro-scene depends on SC2 being popular for casual players. It wont be popular when there are huge imbalances for people at their level.
So, do you have any winrates for lower levels? Because the only ones I ever saw (from very early this year) were pretty balanced, blizzard said at multiple occasions that the winrates are pretty balanced across all leagues when they commented on balance.
On December 21 2012 05:45 Interstellar wrote: I'm surprised how many people act like these changes affect them. Notice how Blizzard always references "players at the top level" when they introduce these patches. Balance issues don't apply to anyone below Diamond league. You don't play well enough to benefit/lose from such balance patches. I'm a Plat Protoss players and sometimes I lose to broodlord/infestor, sometimes I totally own Zerg. It all depends on how well my opponent plays. Not race balance issues.
You play platin and try to judge about people playing in the diamond league? Im master as most of the posters and i can speak for all: These patches affect our matchups pretty hard and its no only the 200 progamer who feel the changes. Damn guys like you make me so angry i will stop writing before i lose myself....
You can get angry but he's right. Players below the very highest levels do not and should not impact balance decisions. Of course everyone's affected but if Blizzard made balance changes based on the struggles of random master and even random GM level players, the game would be an utter mess. Nevertheless, the infestor change just seems bizarre. Maybe infestors still won't be worth the investment but it just seems kind of silly given how widely hated the infestor is. I can't think of another unit that has generated as much widespread loathing as the infestor. At their peak, ghosts were also pretty nauseous but I think infestors are even less popular. Even crowds groan when blord infestor appears, the opposing army gets fungaled and then disappears.
He isnt right.
No blizzard shouldnt balance it for 'random' masters players, but they should balance it for the average masters player, and diamond, and plat, and even bronze, as far as reasonably possible. No that won't always be possible, but only balancing it for pros is stupid and also results in a mess. There have been significant balance changes in SC2 because of a single player. And no I am not talking about a strategy invented by a single player, but purely because one player shows something nice, balance changes happen. You are not telling me basing balance changes around a single player is a good idea.
Lets say we got a new player, we call him Lee. Lee has sick marine micro. So sick it makes everything other pros do look like children playing. Now should blizzard do balance changes because of Lee? And when Lee retires we get in the patch notes that Terran would be boosted back to normal levels because Lee is gone?
Of course balance at the pro level is important for e-sports, but there wont be an SC2 e-sports scene if no one below pro level wants to play anymore. And while it wont be always easy, it really isnt impossible to balance it for different play levels, in a well designed game that is the case: It basicly means all races need to have a healthy choice between a-move armies and micro intensive armies, where micro should pay off, but not that one race needs way more micro than another race to be competitive.
That you arent affected by balance changes if you arent a pro is just simply not true. My fungaled vikings have also something to say about that. If an average bronze player playing race A would immediatly get to silver when switching to race B, then that is a balance issue.
Balancing for when the player plays correct or as close to possible should matter , balancing for people who make alot of mistakes and then whine and bitch would make an even more mess and ruin the highest level where people make MONEY. There is such room for people in the lower levels and work on the imbalance they perceive if they just worked on things and got better with practice , the game isn't designed for easy wins everytime that would make the game boring. Edit : spread your damn units and they don't get chain fungal-ed especially your vikings , fungal is really strong but i need to get my infestors closer now so they get blown up by tanks.
Yes because 10 range is less than 9/8 range... Also my bad for forgetting to turn off the chain fungal checkbox. The entire problem with chain fungal is that you pretty much cant do anything about it.
And you capitalized money as if that makes them magically more important. Is for blizzard a single pro more important than a single bronze player? Yep. Are all pros combined more important than all regular players combined? Not even close.
But anyway we should balance for people playing correctly? So then we first need to have the magical being who plays correct. Since the pros make enough mistakes, and different pros got different strengths. In other words: I for one, welcome out automaton2000 balance overlords. Makes more sense to balance it for someone microing perfectly than for however the current pros are feeling to micro.
To quote you:
the game isn't designed for easy wins everytime that would make the game boring.
Which is why it should be also balanced at non-pro levels so the game isnt a bunch of easy wins/hopeless losses depending on whatever is imbalanced at your level. Because that would make it boring.
Even Idra agrees on this (even if he realizes it or not). He made a long post telling that the pro-scene depends on SC2 being popular for casual players. It wont be popular when there are huge imbalances for people at their level.
So, do you have any winrates for lower levels? Because the only ones I ever saw (from very early this year) were pretty balanced, blizzard said at multiple occasions that the winrates are pretty balanced across all leagues when they commented on balance.
Was just giving my opinion you shouldnt only look at only pro games. I think WoL is fairly well balanced at my level (diamond). There were some issues of course with zerg, just like on pro games. I have the feeling bio vs toss is hard for people at my level/lower due to amount of storm dodging required, but I personally have no problems against toss by meching. (My micro is fairly horrible so everytime I try bio I end up crying myself to sleep).
So personally I dont have much problems with balance in WoL, but I just think for balance issues in general you should try to fix them for all levels of play and not only focus on pros. (Note the 'only', I do think balance for pros is important, just not the only thing).
On December 21 2012 05:45 Interstellar wrote: I'm surprised how many people act like these changes affect them. Notice how Blizzard always references "players at the top level" when they introduce these patches. Balance issues don't apply to anyone below Diamond league. You don't play well enough to benefit/lose from such balance patches. I'm a Plat Protoss players and sometimes I lose to broodlord/infestor, sometimes I totally own Zerg. It all depends on how well my opponent plays. Not race balance issues.
You play platin and try to judge about people playing in the diamond league? Im master as most of the posters and i can speak for all: These patches affect our matchups pretty hard and its no only the 200 progamer who feel the changes. Damn guys like you make me so angry i will stop writing before i lose myself....
You can get angry but he's right. Players below the very highest levels do not and should not impact balance decisions. Of course everyone's affected but if Blizzard made balance changes based on the struggles of random master and even random GM level players, the game would be an utter mess. Nevertheless, the infestor change just seems bizarre. Maybe infestors still won't be worth the investment but it just seems kind of silly given how widely hated the infestor is. I can't think of another unit that has generated as much widespread loathing as the infestor. At their peak, ghosts were also pretty nauseous but I think infestors are even less popular. Even crowds groan when blord infestor appears, the opposing army gets fungaled and then disappears.
He isnt right.
No blizzard shouldnt balance it for 'random' masters players, but they should balance it for the average masters player, and diamond, and plat, and even bronze, as far as reasonably possible. No that won't always be possible, but only balancing it for pros is stupid and also results in a mess. There have been significant balance changes in SC2 because of a single player. And no I am not talking about a strategy invented by a single player, but purely because one player shows something nice, balance changes happen. You are not telling me basing balance changes around a single player is a good idea.
Lets say we got a new player, we call him Lee. Lee has sick marine micro. So sick it makes everything other pros do look like children playing. Now should blizzard do balance changes because of Lee? And when Lee retires we get in the patch notes that Terran would be boosted back to normal levels because Lee is gone?
Of course balance at the pro level is important for e-sports, but there wont be an SC2 e-sports scene if no one below pro level wants to play anymore. And while it wont be always easy, it really isnt impossible to balance it for different play levels, in a well designed game that is the case: It basicly means all races need to have a healthy choice between a-move armies and micro intensive armies, where micro should pay off, but not that one race needs way more micro than another race to be competitive.
That you arent affected by balance changes if you arent a pro is just simply not true. My fungaled vikings have also something to say about that. If an average bronze player playing race A would immediatly get to silver when switching to race B, then that is a balance issue.
Balancing for when the player plays correct or as close to possible should matter , balancing for people who make alot of mistakes and then whine and bitch would make an even more mess and ruin the highest level where people make MONEY. There is such room for people in the lower levels and work on the imbalance they perceive if they just worked on things and got better with practice , the game isn't designed for easy wins everytime that would make the game boring. Edit : spread your damn units and they don't get chain fungal-ed especially your vikings , fungal is really strong but i need to get my infestors closer now so they get blown up by tanks.
Yes because 10 range is less than 9/8 range... Also my bad for forgetting to turn off the chain fungal checkbox. The entire problem with chain fungal is that you pretty much cant do anything about it.
And you capitalized money as if that makes them magically more important. Is for blizzard a single pro more important than a single bronze player? Yep. Are all pros combined more important than all regular players combined? Not even close.
But anyway we should balance for people playing correctly? So then we first need to have the magical being who plays correct. Since the pros make enough mistakes, and different pros got different strengths. In other words: I for one, welcome out automaton2000 balance overlords. Makes more sense to balance it for someone microing perfectly than for however the current pros are feeling to micro.
To quote you:
the game isn't designed for easy wins everytime that would make the game boring.
Which is why it should be also balanced at non-pro levels so the game isnt a bunch of easy wins/hopeless losses depending on whatever is imbalanced at your level. Because that would make it boring.
Even Idra agrees on this (even if he realizes it or not). He made a long post telling that the pro-scene depends on SC2 being popular for casual players. It wont be popular when there are huge imbalances for people at their level.
So, do you have any winrates for lower levels? Because the only ones I ever saw (from very early this year) were pretty balanced, blizzard said at multiple occasions that the winrates are pretty balanced across all leagues when they commented on balance.
Was just giving my opinion you shouldnt only look at only pro games. I think WoL is fairly well balanced at my level (diamond). There were some issues of course with zerg, just like on pro games. I have the feeling bio vs toss is hard for people at my level/lower due to amount of storm dodging required, but I personally have no problems against toss by meching. (My micro is fairly horrible so everytime I try bio I end up crying myself to sleep).
So personally I dont have much problems with balance in WoL, but I just think for balance issues in general you should try to fix them for all levels of play and not only focus on pros.
Ah yeah, kk. I guess everybody agrees on that, though priority "what to fix first" might differ.
Well, at least you can tell it's obvious that they really thought this one through /sarcastiball
Which is why I laugh at people saying it's just beta...It has to release sometime, it has to be played in real tournaments that player's careers depend on and if this is how they balance things then it's going to be a mess. There isn't infinite development time, they're on a clock. Some of the changes are comical, like they can throw stuff on a wall and have all the time in the world to fix the disaster when it doesn't stick. Hopefully they develop a real plan instead of this oddball patching.
On December 21 2012 01:14 Grumbels wrote: I think it would be cool if medivacs with the speed boost could only turn very slowly. It would make them uncontrollable, like rockets, the idea being that abilities should come with drawbacks.
slow turn speed is something that would be very cool in balancing a lot of abilities and units, and even was in sc2 alpha at one point (i remember seeing a video about the thor not being able to shoot fast-moving units because he couldnt turn fast enough)
would make flanking very cool and give the game way more tactical depth, but for some reason blizz decided to streamline everything and take it out
I thought it would be nice for missile turrets. A slow turning rate so that for instance mutalisks can somewhat navigate their way through the base. Players are also encouraged to re-position the turret to better prepare for incoming air harass. Or with your example for the thor: one hellion should be able to kill one thor by endlessly circling around it. I don't know if these ideas translate very well to actually interesting gameplay, but I think it's a pity Blizzard hasn't experimented further with it - as far as I know. I suppose they think it would feel clumsy and weird.
On December 21 2012 01:14 Grumbels wrote: I think it would be cool if medivacs with the speed boost could only turn very slowly. It would make them uncontrollable, like rockets, the idea being that abilities should come with drawbacks.
slow turn speed is something that would be very cool in balancing a lot of abilities and units, and even was in sc2 alpha at one point (i remember seeing a video about the thor not being able to shoot fast-moving units because he couldnt turn fast enough)
would make flanking very cool and give the game way more tactical depth, but for some reason blizz decided to streamline everything and take it out
I thought it would be nice for missile turrets. A slow turning rate so that for instance mutalisks can somewhat navigate their way through the base. Players are also encouraged to re-position the turret to better prepare for incoming air harass. Or with your example for the thor: one hellion should be able to kill one thor by endlessly circling around it. I don't know if these ideas translate very well to actually interesting gameplay, but I think it's a pity Blizzard hasn't experimented with it - as far as I know. I suppose they think it would feel clumsy and weird.
They said it was a bad drawback on the Thor, because just having more Thors countered it. I guess this would be more interesting and easier to balance on positional units/statics (though it could also just turn out to make such things useless in low numbers). Maybe on Ultras it would be cool. But generally I think it is a very uninteresting ability, as it just means that your unit can be outppayed and you cant do shit about it. Even if it takes a lot of skill to pull off, it would be just a "get good enough and you can counter it" without interaction
Remove the immobilize component, instead double the damage ticks if affected units are moving. Perhaps make the application of fungal force a stop command, so the player has to decide whether to micro out at the cost of additional damage, but avoiding chain fungal.
On December 21 2012 01:14 Grumbels wrote: I think it would be cool if medivacs with the speed boost could only turn very slowly. It would make them uncontrollable, like rockets, the idea being that abilities should come with drawbacks.
slow turn speed is something that would be very cool in balancing a lot of abilities and units, and even was in sc2 alpha at one point (i remember seeing a video about the thor not being able to shoot fast-moving units because he couldnt turn fast enough)
would make flanking very cool and give the game way more tactical depth, but for some reason blizz decided to streamline everything and take it out
I thought it would be nice for missile turrets. A slow turning rate so that for instance mutalisks can somewhat navigate their way through the base. Players are also encouraged to re-position the turret to better prepare for incoming air harass. Or with your example for the thor: one hellion should be able to kill one thor by endlessly circling around it. I don't know if these ideas translate very well to actually interesting gameplay, but I think it's a pity Blizzard hasn't experimented further with it - as far as I know. I suppose they think it would feel clumsy and weird.
They said it was a bad drawback on the Thor, because just having more Thors countered it. I guess this would be more interesting and easier to balance on positional units/statics (though it could also just turn out to make such things useless in low numbers). Maybe on Ultras it would be cool. But generally I think it is a very uninteresting ability, as it just means that your unit can be outppayed and you cant do shit about it. Even if it takes a lot of skill to pull off, it would be just a "get good enough and you can counter it" without interaction
I guess it wouldn't work so well on thors. I honestly think there must be applications for it though, but maybe not for your regular army units.
Well, at least you can tell it's obvious that they really thought this one through /sarcastiball
That is so ridiculous. So easy to chain fungal and looks so boring.. Disgusting! How about fungal allowing units to slowly regain their movement over the duration of the spell?
Many people have been complaining about the recent re-buffing of fungal growth, because even if its a projectile, it is hard to dodge, and once hit the first time, it doesnt matter because the zerg can chain. Heres an idea that doesnt make fungal unusable (like patch 9), keeps it strong, and allows for micro from the enemy, and the person using the infestors.
I think a really easy solution is to make the root and damage timer not reset/not stack at all. So a fungal lasts for 4 seconds. For instance, if you fungal, and wait two seconds, there are 2 seconds left of stun. If you fungal during those 2, you reset it to 4 seconds, and the unit has to wait another four, or get fungal again. This constant, micro-restricting phenomenon is known as "chain fungal."
What blizz should do is that if a unit is fungaled when already stunned by fungal, the new fungal should not stun at all or do damage. So if a unit has been rooted for 3 seconds, and the zerg fungals the same unit again before the first fungal is done, it would not be rooted for another 4 seconds. It would be released after the last second is over, and the chain fungal wouldve been a total waste, not rooting the unit for another 4 seconds, not damaging it either. This would allow the other player to escape after each fungal, instead of being rooted forever, since if the zerg cuts it too close, and there is 1ms left of fungal when a unit gets fungaled again, the fungal will only last for 1ms, instead of 1ms + the time it takes for the second fungal to go away, and it would penalize zergs for spamming fungal, because 2 fungals at the same time is a complete waste, becoming an indirect nerf to damage, root time, and anti-micro. so if a marine is fungled and is fungled again during the first fungal, the second fungal has no effect at all. The marine will sustain the full time of the first fungal, and the time added by the second fungal is ignored. It does nothing, unless it catches units that weren't previously fungled, fungaling only those.
So basically, a unit cannot be fungled when already fungled, and is not affected by fungal for a short amout of time after a fungal has worn off.
Another way to phrase it is to give fungal an "overkill effect," where having more than enough is not advantageous at all
This is good, because it... -allows for micro/dodging because the zerg can no longer perfectly deny micro -forces the zerg to micro more, and time fungals -makes fungal a good spell, but does not ruin the game fun-wise or balance-wise -makes massing infestors lose effect, because spamming fungal no longer is advantageous, and theres no point in having more because the zerg only needs (and is only allowed to use) a few fungals. It would be like having 10 tempests against 120 lings, overkilling one ling at a time. -opens up other possibilities for the game because since getting 5+ infestors is useless, and allows the zerg to make different units with excess gas -makes zvz more exciting
This doesn't really matter unless you go back to the slow projectile, because the current one is too fast to be dodgable. You'd just wait until it ends, the units would move half an inch, and then get hit again.
Instead of spamming fungal on everything, you'd be playing whack-a-mole. Yeah it's slightly more challenging than not having to pay attention at all, but it's not hard.
Good point. If we settled with a reasonable speed (greater than 10, but not 15) that was dogeable, we would resolve most or even all the problems. And making it harder for Z wasnt the main purpose. It is mainly to fix the anti-micro problems we've been having with it, especially when it comes to the coin flip otherwise known as tvz bio play
On December 21 2012 07:41 Shakattak wrote: Balancing for when the player plays correct or as close to possible should matter , balancing for people who make alot of mistakes and then whine and bitch would make an even more mess and ruin the highest level where people make MONEY. There is such room for people in the lower levels and work on the imbalance they perceive if they just worked on things and got better with practice , the game isn't designed for easy wins everytime that would make the game boring.
Do u really think that every single sc2 player cares about "pros making MONEY"? No. I bet only minority does. Now if the game is not balanced at casual level, people will quit before they get more interested in competetive scene and before they throw their penny for pros to win.
Actually, doing anything with the game by looking only at pros is wrong. You need to start with the foundation, keep the casuals playing, cuz pros carieers mean absolutely nothing when nobody is watching them. Make the game good, then think about making it an Esport.
At the casual level (which is the level 99.99% of players play at), the game is always balanced because of the way MMR functions; over time, you will win about as much as you lose. You're always going to be matched against players who are just about as bad as you are. If you're getting better you'll win a little more than you lose, and vice versa. Thus, it's pointless to balance for casuals. You just need to keep them happy by making the game something they enjoy. When it's balancing Blizzard does need to consider whether a particular change will make the game more "interesting" from a viewer and player perspective. Here the experiences and thoughts from the non-pros are probably most valuable. However, it should not, and I'm guessing it doesn't, consider how a change will impact "balance" in, say, the masters league in NA.
Many people have been complaining about the recent re-buffing of fungal growth, because even if its a projectile, it is hard to dodge, and once hit the first time, it doesnt matter because the zerg can chain. Heres an idea that doesnt make fungal unusable (like patch 9), keeps it strong, and allows for micro from the enemy, and the person using the infestors.
I think a really easy solution is to make the root and damage timer not reset/not stack at all. So a fungal lasts for 4 seconds. For instance, if you fungal, and wait two seconds, there are 2 seconds left of stun. If you fungal during those 2, you reset it to 4 seconds, and the unit has to wait another four, or get fungal again. This constant, micro-restricting phenomenon is known as "chain fungal."
What blizz should do is that if a unit is fungaled when already stunned by fungal, the new fungal should not stun at all or do damage. So if a unit has been rooted for 3 seconds, and the zerg fungals the same unit again before the first fungal is done, it would not be rooted for another 4 seconds. It would be released after the last second is over, and the chain fungal wouldve been a total waste, not rooting the unit for another 4 seconds, not damaging it either. This would allow the other player to escape after each fungal, instead of being rooted forever, since if the zerg cuts it too close, and there is 1ms left of fungal when a unit gets fungaled again, the fungal will only last for 1ms, instead of 1ms + the time it takes for the second fungal to go away, and it would penalize zergs for spamming fungal, because 2 fungals at the same time is a complete waste, becoming an indirect nerf to damage, root time, and anti-micro. so if a marine is fungled and is fungled again during the first fungal, the second fungal has no effect at all. The marine will sustain the full time of the first fungal, and the time added by the second fungal is ignored. It does nothing, unless it catches units that weren't previously fungled, fungaling only those.
So basically, a unit cannot be fungled when already fungled, and is not affected by fungal for a short amout of time after a fungal has worn off.
Another way to phrase it is to give fungal an "overkill effect," where having more than enough is not advantageous at all
This is good, because it... -allows for micro/dodging because the zerg can no longer perfectly deny micro -forces the zerg to micro more, and time fungals -makes fungal a good spell, but does not ruin the game fun-wise or balance-wise -makes massing infestors lose effect, because spamming fungal no longer is advantageous, and theres no point in having more because the zerg only needs (and is only allowed to use) a few fungals. It would be like having 10 tempests against 120 lings, overkilling one ling at a time. -opens up other possibilities for the game because since getting 5+ infestors is useless, and allows the zerg to make different units with excess gas -makes zvz more exciting
This doesn't really matter unless you go back to the slow projectile, because the current one is too fast to be dodgable. You'd just wait until it ends, the units would move half an inch, and then get hit again.
Instead of spamming fungal on everything, you'd be playing whack-a-mole. Yeah it's slightly more challenging than not having to pay attention at all, but it's not hard.
Good point. If we settled with a reasonable speed (greater than 10, but not 15) that was dogeable, we would resolve most or even all the problems. And making it harder for Z wasnt the main purpose. It is mainly to fix the anti-micro problems we've been having with it, especially when it comes to the coin flip otherwise known as tvz bio play
Completely agree and I can't see how blizzard could possibly have tested this. I'm still largely positive towards this patch but after seeing the video of fungals in action and multiple people commenting that its stronger than before, I feel like blizzard should have known this change was too much even for testing purposes. 15 speed is not dodgeable. 10 was maybe too easy. I feel like 12 would be fine.
What really got me though: why boost the range? Lowering the range to 8 was a great decision, it lowered the infestors direct combat utility and made it less of a massable unit (due to infestors blocking each other when they all try to carpet fungal and needing to get in range of enemy siege)... 10 range on a spell like fungal makes no sense unless you WANT people to mass them and carpet chain fungal everything.
EPT
