login works. please do screenshots and send them via pm to me, so i can link trusted evidence.
Patchloggaments!
Many of the following bug fixes were intended for internal testing only, and are now being reverted.
250mm Strike Cannons can no longer deal damage to hidden targets. Barracks build time decreased from 65 to 60 seconds. Bunker build time decreased from 40 to 30 seconds. Canceling morphing Banelings now returns 75% of the cost like other morphing Zerg units. Hellion range reverted from 6 to 5. Reaper build time decreased from 45 to 40 seconds. Zealot build time decreased from 38 to 33 seconds.
On July 14 2010 07:35 GabeTheBeast wrote: So earlier, I switched my patch thing to eu (in order to begin patching .19)so I switched it back to us. to get the patch. Here is what I did:
Go to Program Files- Starcraft II- Support- Find a file called 'realmlist' or something. Open it with notepad, and if it should say: set patchlist us-beta.patch.battle.net:1120/patch if it says: set patchlist eu-beta.patch.battle.net:1120/patch, simply change the us to eu, and you will begin patching. If it says us, then try changing it to eu, starting SC2, letting it crash, then changing it back to US, and restarting. Hopefully you will patch (I had windows clogging my screen up, so I missed the patcher at first)
For those of you having problems with it logging you out as soon as you start sc2.
There is where you can find the patch if your luncher don't want to download it
ps : i've just download it i didn't even try it so I can't tell if it really work
Quick update: We know what the issue is (more of a battle.net issue versus the code in the game) and will be making the appropriate changes server-side sometime in the wee hours of the morning. I apologize for keeping you guys in the dark. Thanks for your understanding. Unless you stay up really late, I'd recommend just trying back in the morning. Source: Bnet Forums
On July 14 2010 16:43 benemann wrote: Apparently there are plenty of new portraits and some graphical updates for the lava and other things in this patch.
On July 14 2010 06:42 onemoretry wrote: Barracks back to 60, Reapers back to 40, I think they undid all the unlisted balance changes to what they officially said patch 16 originally included.
I was able to login, couldn't play any games. Logged out and then got client error and now cannot login anymore. Come on blizz, atleast give us a reason or warning.
This is a joke. I just kept on trying to log in and after 15th time or so it let me in. No rebooting no restarting. And it already says 750 000 people on battle.net. Do wow players count or what?
On July 14 2010 06:28 Feremuntrus wrote: It seems like there's gonna be more portraits or something along the line. This caught my eye when I see Diablo marine being downloaded.
On July 14 2010 06:28 MadJack wrote: downloaded patch, bnet doesnt recognize verson not gonna redownload 1gb in patches again
I doubt you'll need to do so. Just hang tight I'm sure they'll update the version requirements on every battle.net server soon. Seems like only a few are updated at the moment which is why spamming it works. I'm sure the number will increase.
On July 14 2010 06:31 gillon wrote: Is there a word on any patch notes as of yet?
there will most likely be a million new threads if and when the patch notes are released, so it'll probably be hard to miss them if you just refresh TL every once in a while.
random droppings. (heh...heh..) Battle.net is REALLY slow, I do not know if it is a feature of bnet 2.0 or if battle.net servers are tired or something.
Ive tried to play a few games and as soon as both players get in it says victory for both and if you hit continue playing you get allied with your opponent so you can chat I guess.
On July 14 2010 06:40 The Communist wrote: Ive tried to play a few games and as soon as both players get in it says victory for both and if you hit continue playing you get allied with your opponent so you can chat I guess.
This should mean that chatrooms is the next step in an what seems to be an evolving process ;D
Barracks back to 60, Reapers back to 40, I think they undid all the unlisted balance changes to what they officially said patch 16 originally included.
On July 14 2010 06:42 onemoretry wrote: Barracks back to 60, Reapers back to 40, I think they undid all the unlisted balance changes to what they officially said patch 16 originally included.
I hope this is true, surprisingly this change really messed with my timing
Just faced a terran comp... rushing chargelots is very, very dirty. They come out so fast not that you have almost an even number of zeals to marines if the terran is doing a relatively standard BO
Did anybody noticed that orbital command is 150 m /35 gas but anytime you research it you don't lose any gas at all? i noticed at the end of phase1 and it was still in patch 19 don't know if it will get fixed now.
Um I'm looking at the editor atm and notice the infestor having some ability called leech. Was this always there because I don't seem to find threads about this at all.
On July 14 2010 06:46 Diablo666 wrote: Did anybody noticed that orbital command is 150 m /35 gas but anytime you research it you don't lose any gas at all? i noticed at the end of phase1 and it was still in patch 19 don't know if it will get fixed now.
orbital command is 150m. the 35 is the buildtime....
On July 14 2010 06:46 Diablo666 wrote: Did anybody noticed that orbital command is 150 m /35 gas but anytime you research it you don't lose any gas at all? i noticed at the end of phase1 and it was still in patch 19 don't know if it will get fixed now.
On July 14 2010 06:46 Diablo666 wrote: Did anybody noticed that orbital command is 150 m /35 gas but anytime you research it you don't lose any gas at all? i noticed at the end of phase1 and it was still in patch 19 don't know if it will get fixed now.
thats not gas..... its showing build time to convert from normal CC :S
On July 14 2010 06:46 Diablo666 wrote: Did anybody noticed that orbital command is 150 m /35 gas but anytime you research it you don't lose any gas at all? i noticed at the end of phase1 and it was still in patch 19 don't know if it will get fixed now.
On July 14 2010 06:46 Diablo666 wrote: Did anybody noticed that orbital command is 150 m /35 gas but anytime you research it you don't lose any gas at all? i noticed at the end of phase1 and it was still in patch 19 don't know if it will get fixed now.
orbital command is 150m. the 35 is the buildtime....
On July 14 2010 06:46 Diablo666 wrote: Did anybody noticed that orbital command is 150 m /35 gas but anytime you research it you don't lose any gas at all? i noticed at the end of phase1 and it was still in patch 19 don't know if it will get fixed now.
On July 14 2010 06:46 Diablo666 wrote: Did anybody noticed that orbital command is 150 m /35 gas but anytime you research it you don't lose any gas at all? i noticed at the end of phase1 and it was still in patch 19 don't know if it will get fixed now.
thats not gas..... its showing build time to convert from normal CC :S
On July 14 2010 06:46 Diablo666 wrote: Did anybody noticed that orbital command is 150 m /35 gas but anytime you research it you don't lose any gas at all? i noticed at the end of phase1 and it was still in patch 19 don't know if it will get fixed now.
On July 14 2010 06:47 Feremuntrus wrote: Um I'm looking at the editor atm and notice the infestor having some ability called leech. Was this always there because I don't seem to find threads about this at all.
The infestor had that ability at the beginning of beta.
On July 14 2010 06:46 Diablo666 wrote: Did anybody noticed that orbital command is 150 m /35 gas but anytime you research it you don't lose any gas at all? i noticed at the end of phase1 and it was still in patch 19 don't know if it will get fixed now.
orbital command is 150m. the 35 is the buildtime....
On July 14 2010 06:46 Diablo666 wrote: Did anybody noticed that orbital command is 150 m /35 gas but anytime you research it you don't lose any gas at all? i noticed at the end of phase1 and it was still in patch 19 don't know if it will get fixed now.
On July 14 2010 06:46 Diablo666 wrote: Did anybody noticed that orbital command is 150 m /35 gas but anytime you research it you don't lose any gas at all? i noticed at the end of phase1 and it was still in patch 19 don't know if it will get fixed now.
thats not gas..... its showing build time to convert from normal CC :S
On July 14 2010 06:46 Diablo666 wrote: Did anybody noticed that orbital command is 150 m /35 gas but anytime you research it you don't lose any gas at all? i noticed at the end of phase1 and it was still in patch 19 don't know if it will get fixed now.
its time not gas duh
GUYS GUYS... GUYS!!! HOLD ON...
its not gas its build time...
This is made all the more funny by the fact that 2 more were posted while you wrote this.
On July 14 2010 06:48 Phayze wrote: My friend is patched, but whenever I launch the game im at 0.19.xxxx hes at 0.20. How do i get the patcher going???
In the same boat. Anyone have an answer.
@ paramore
Lawlz. Thank you, I wanted to do that but was worried I had already ousted enough TL morons for a single 15 minute period.
EDIT: Joeflop has to be a smurf'd Troll here (used correctly, if maybe a little overzealously). I wonder if the IP police have corroborating evidence.
I don't know when the leech infestor skill was added to the editor but I'm fairly certain it was there since at least the end of phase 1 (obviously not implemented in the actual game). I don't think it's all there in the editor though, just a few references to it.
Edit: Guy above me says it's an old skill that got removed.
On July 14 2010 07:04 Spyridon wrote: Infestors still seem the same as they were pre patch - they still have inf terran, it can still be used underground. Havent tried NP yet.
On July 14 2010 07:01 sickoota wrote: Terran macro is still horrible. I really don't know what they were thinking if this change is intentional and it looks like it is.
I can log in, get matched up against someone in the 1v1 ladder, game will load, and then it crashes and I'm told I have a corrupt version, that I need to repair, the repair fails and says I must reinstall. Anyone else getting the same?
On July 14 2010 07:01 sickoota wrote: Terran macro is still horrible. I really don't know what they were thinking if this change is intentional and it looks like it is.
It actually improved imo. I hated it when I have like 7 different types of buildings on 1 hotkey it was constant tabbing. Now I just make shure I order tech lab units first and no problem.
On July 14 2010 07:04 Spyridon wrote: Infestors still seem the same as they were pre patch - they still have inf terran, it can still be used underground. Havent tried NP yet.
It still has the retarded 12s limit.
On July 14 2010 07:09 tru_power22 wrote: Oh thank god. Force field will now be way less OP!
You could tell 16 was a good patch as they rolled back most of the changes.
They don't seem to have rolled back any of the zerg nerfs.
Not sure if it was like this in 0.19.xx, but when infestors cast infested terran now, it spawns an egg that takes a few seconds to hatch. I think previously there was no egg, sorry if I'm mistaken.
On July 14 2010 07:15 ShaSKiRa wrote: After install, its let me play without patching anything. I try to use Blizzard Update. Its said "There is no patch file to apply"
On July 14 2010 07:19 GabeTheBeast wrote: When I open SC2, it automatically closes =\. Anyone having this issue/ solved it? (I haven't received a patch)
thats exactly what i have, thank god its not just me no idea how to solve it, using EU for now
just read about the hellion range, yep could definitely feel that change, thats how they could chase stuff on a-move that ran away. case solved i guess lol
On July 14 2010 07:20 Gaius Baltar wrote: Not sure if it was like this in 0.19.xx, but when infestors cast infested terran now, it spawns an egg that takes a few seconds to hatch. I think previously there was no egg, sorry if I'm mistaken.
On July 14 2010 07:19 GabeTheBeast wrote: When I open SC2, it automatically closes =\. Anyone having this issue/ solved it? (I haven't received a patch)
Are you getting any error message at all? My brother is having what sounds like the same problem, he starts up the game and it begins loading and right before he gets to the login screen the game just alt tabs itself and dissapears.
We tried changing the realmlist setting from US to EU and that didn't work. He also reinstalled and got the same problem...although its been going on since before today.
I am trying to start the US server of sc2 beta but it keep starting eu servers... not sure if the switcher works any more:/ EDIT: Never mind got 2 beta folders and changed the wrong one lol xd Got the same problem as Morrow
On July 14 2010 07:19 GabeTheBeast wrote: When I open SC2, it automatically closes =\. Anyone having this issue/ solved it? (I haven't received a patch)
Are you getting any error message at all? My brother is having what sounds like the same problem, he starts up the game and it begins loading and right before he gets to the login screen the game just alt tabs itself and dissapears.
We tried changing the realmlist setting from US to EU and that didn't work. He also reinstalled and got the same problem...although its been going on since before today.
You mean, when he clicks 'connect'? That's when it crashes for myself and my friend.
On July 14 2010 07:19 GabeTheBeast wrote: When I open SC2, it automatically closes =\. Anyone having this issue/ solved it? (I haven't received a patch)
I have the same problem TT. and i'm using US server.
On July 14 2010 07:20 Gaius Baltar wrote: Not sure if it was like this in 0.19.xx, but when infestors cast infested terran now, it spawns an egg that takes a few seconds to hatch. I think previously there was no egg, sorry if I'm mistaken.
I forget if overseers spawned the egg or just pooped the terran directly, but infestor's infested terrans always came out of eggs. There's an old youtube vid that shows how you could exploit infestor egg shooting and cliffs to throw eggs cross-map.
So earlier, I switched my patch thing to eu (in order to begin patching .19)so I switched it back to us. to get the patch. Here is what I did:
Go to Program Files- Starcraft II- Support- Find a file called 'realmlist' or something. Open it with notepad, and if it should say: set patchlist us-beta.patch.battle.net:1120/patch if it says: set patchlist eu-beta.patch.battle.net:1120/patch, simply change the us to eu, and you will begin patching. If it says us, then try changing it to eu, starting SC2, letting it crash, then changing it back to US, and restarting. Hopefully you will patch (I had windows clogging my screen up, so I missed the patcher at first)
Just checked things with the infestor and nothing changed this patch. As stated, neural parasite still has a time limit. They also haven't fixed the bug that allows you to cast neural parasite and fungal growth while burrowed by queueing the actions.
so they revert all those unlisted changes back to normal? But not the other unlisted zerg changes? Wow, awesome. Real awesome! I'll just become a Terran player and stuff
•250mm Strike Cannons can no longer deal damage to hidden targets.
Does this sound really .... nonsensical to anyone else? If you can manually target where you know something is cloaked or burrowed, you should be able to hit it... the thing is supposed to be hidden, not invincible when undetected.
On July 14 2010 07:51 Kodan wrote: so they revert all those unlisted changes back to normal? But not the other unlisted zerg changes? Wow, awesome. Real awesome! I'll just become a Terran player and stuff
Witch unlisted change on zerg are you talking about ?
replays bugged for everyone else? It reloads the previous version for me as well (phase 2 replays) but then it is just a black screen with game sounds... anyone else?
On July 14 2010 08:00 shlomo wrote: Rofl. Zerg is looking seriously weak. 12s NP, slower tumors, rally-move=lolnydus and now the timing nerfs reverted on T and P, ouch ouch ouch.
I'm going to lol @ all the idiot T's saying Zerg is fine when Idra switches to Terran to actually win tournaments.
You must have forgot why he switched to Zerg, and why he still plays it.
•250mm Strike Cannons can no longer deal damage to hidden targets.
Does this sound really .... nonsensical to anyone else? If you can manually target where you know something is cloaked or burrowed, you should be able to hit it... the thing is supposed to be hidden, not invincible when undetected.
As far as I'm aware the problem was that the strike cannons carried on dealing damage to units that were loaded into a drop ship or similar unit.
Aslo you cant manually target the ground so your argument on cloaked/burrowed units is invalid.
Ladder not working for anyone else? I can get games but get no points for wins or losses. Also, I'm playing a lot of favored matches when those were very rare before.
On July 14 2010 08:00 shlomo wrote: Rofl. Zerg is looking seriously weak. 12s NP, slower tumors, rally-move=lolnydus and now the timing nerfs reverted on T and P, ouch ouch ouch.
I'm going to lol @ all the idiot T's saying Zerg is fine when Idra switches to Terran to actually win tournaments.
Hmmm. It was sad enough that they had NP at 15 seconds. So if I would NP a tank or a Thor, I would only get off like 1-3 shots, perhaps just 1 shot with the tank? 12 seconds is just a killer....
I agree with the rally-move situation with the nydus. Its a major joke to surprise an opponent and not have them attack right when they come out. Reverting the original Rally-attack-move for the just the nydus would be nice.
On July 14 2010 08:00 shlomo wrote: Rofl. Zerg is looking seriously weak. 12s NP, slower tumors, rally-move=lolnydus and now the timing nerfs reverted on T and P, ouch ouch ouch.
I'm going to lol @ all the idiot T's saying Zerg is fine when Idra switches to Terran to actually win tournaments.
You must have forgot why he switched to Zerg, and why he still plays it.
You mean because he thought Zerg was the best race, and would get him the most wins, which is why he's considering going back to Terran?
•250mm Strike Cannons can no longer deal damage to hidden targets.
Does this sound really .... nonsensical to anyone else? If you can manually target where you know something is cloaked or burrowed, you should be able to hit it... the thing is supposed to be hidden, not invincible when undetected.
Being able to target a cloaked unit makes even less sense. That defeats the whole purpose of cloak
anyone else worried that the closer we get to launch the more problems appear?:D I found the game pretty darn polished at beta launch, now its just a bugged mess..
On July 14 2010 07:35 GabeTheBeast wrote: So earlier, I switched my patch thing to eu (in order to begin patching .19)so I switched it back to us. to get the patch. Here is what I did:
Go to Program Files- Starcraft II- Support- Find a file called 'realmlist' or something. Open it with notepad, and if it should say: set patchlist us-beta.patch.battle.net:1120/patch if it says: set patchlist eu-beta.patch.battle.net:1120/patch, simply change the us to eu, and you will begin patching. If it says us, then try changing it to eu, starting SC2, letting it crash, then changing it back to US, and restarting. Hopefully you will patch (I had windows clogging my screen up, so I missed the patcher at first)
For those of you having problems with it logging you out as soon as you start sc2.
The zealot revert will make protoss life much easier against allin ling rushes. On steppes you can't do anything other than 10 gate v zerg, and you will lose at least 2-3 probes holding it up.
If you do anything else with the old gateway timings, you lose.
•250mm Strike Cannons can no longer deal damage to hidden targets.
Does this sound really .... nonsensical to anyone else? If you can manually target where you know something is cloaked or burrowed, you should be able to hit it... the thing is supposed to be hidden, not invincible when undetected.
Being able to target a cloaked unit makes even less sense. That defeats the whole purpose of cloak
You can fungal growth a cloaked banshee, so blizzard seems to think otherwise.
On July 14 2010 08:10 arnold(soTa) wrote: anyone else worried that the closer we get to launch the more problems appear?:D I found the game pretty darn polished at beta launch, now its just a bugged mess..
a lot more people playing now then at beta launch, and a lot more features enabled. I'm sure that factors in
On July 14 2010 08:12 kar1181 wrote: The zealot revert will make protoss life much easier against allin ling rushes. On steppes you can't do anything other than 10 gate v zerg, and you will lose at least 2-3 probes holding it up.
If you do anything else with the old gateway timings, you lose.
Toss 80% + of the time 10gates me if im zerg, its become standard
So if this was what they were testing internally, then I guess we could assume they are working on a couple minor terran nerfs? Reverting back to the older patch probably means they werent satisfied with changes and/or are working on new/different changes
Does anyone have any idea where i can download the new patch? Ive been trying everything but just cant. When i click sc2 to play, it doesnt download the patch, just goes straight to playing the game.
•250mm Strike Cannons can no longer deal damage to hidden targets.
Does this sound really .... nonsensical to anyone else? If you can manually target where you know something is cloaked or burrowed, you should be able to hit it... the thing is supposed to be hidden, not invincible when undetected.
Being able to target a cloaked unit makes even less sense. That defeats the whole purpose of cloak
You can fungal growth a cloaked banshee, so blizzard seems to think otherwise.
i think the argument here is that you need to select a unit when casting 250mm strike cannons, while fungal growth is an area of effect attack so of course you can fungal growth cloaked units
•250mm Strike Cannons can no longer deal damage to hidden targets.
Does this sound really .... nonsensical to anyone else? If you can manually target where you know something is cloaked or burrowed, you should be able to hit it... the thing is supposed to be hidden, not invincible when undetected.
Being able to target a cloaked unit makes even less sense. That defeats the whole purpose of cloak
I guess I wasn't clear enough -- I meant that, for example, if you see a zergling burrow at place A, and you target the 250mm right on top of it, you should still be able to hit it.
In game terms, "hidden" means cloaked or burrowed, right?
Because from the patch change it sounds like the 250mm will not damage the example zergling unless you have detection.
On July 14 2010 08:01 {88}iNcontroL wrote: replays bugged for everyone else? It reloads the previous version for me as well (phase 2 replays) but then it is just a black screen with game sounds... anyone else?
Yeah I'm getting the same bug, they mentioned in the patch notes that a lot of "bug fixes" were meant for internal testing. So I'm assuming that this error is something they put in the patch that wasn't supposed to be there. Anyway, I hope it gets sorted out soon.
Already lost a game the other day in Steppes due to a Terran plopping a Barracks and Bunker 15 feet from my Nexus and not having a dang clue until it was too late (really, who sends workers around their starting area THAT early in the game?). Bet that dude is laughing his ass off now.
On July 14 2010 08:27 Bibdy wrote: Already lost a game the other day in Steppes due to a Terran plopping a Barracks and Bunker 15 feet from my Nexus and not having a dang clue until it was too late (really, who sends workers around their starting area THAT early in the game?). Bet that dude is laughing his ass off now.
On July 14 2010 08:24 Day[9] wrote: blergh. I want to do my daily on TLO vs White-rA, but I can't watch patch v19 games. Anyone have any solutions?
I'm not so sure that any type of loader will be able to use the previous software iteration of replays. The current bug is inherent to the software, so a loader probably won't change that unless someone else has the older data files. Hopefully it's resolved before your cast, in the patch notes it states that they're in the process of reverting some of the supposed bug fixes.
Yes, this is a beta, so lots of things have been changed - when the changes don't work like they expect - they revert back. Thats what a beta is all about man.
Yes, this is a beta, so lots of things have been changed - when the changes don't work like they expect - they revert back. Thats what a beta is all about man.
true but the game's release is quickly approaching.
On July 14 2010 09:05 TheAngelofDeath wrote: Yeah, with two weeks until release having this many bugs is NOT a good sign at all.
A smooth release for a popular multiplayer game would be miraculous. Game developers don't ever expect to have one and most gamers who have experienced some major releases have appropriately adjusted their expectations.
On July 14 2010 09:05 TheAngelofDeath wrote: Yeah, with two weeks until release having this many bugs is NOT a good sign at all.
A smooth release for a popular multiplayer game would be miraculous. Game developers don't ever expect to have one and most gamers who have experienced some major releases have appropriately adjusted their expectations.
This is clearly evidence of some evil malignant plot by Activision. If only Blizzard were an independent company, there wouldn't be so many bugs at launch.
I get the sinking feel that SC2's launch is going to be pretty disastrous. I'm anticipating lots of downtime after release. We still have huge problems with the servers and patching that will only be multiplied when hundreds of thousands of people are trying to play it. The beta is still relatively small, and this is supposed to be a world wide release in exactly 2 weeks.
I hope it doesn't affect singleplayer but with the always-online thing, who knows.
Patch 19 replays do NOT work, they eventually load but then the screen just goes black/we can still hear the stuff happening in the background tho, anyone can confirm this?
On July 14 2010 09:05 TheAngelofDeath wrote: Yeah, with two weeks until release having this many bugs is NOT a good sign at all.
A smooth release for a popular multiplayer game would be miraculous. Game developers don't ever expect to have one and most gamers who have experienced some major releases have appropriately adjusted their expectations.
Your point is entirely valid, we also need to consider battle.net 2.0 being a brand new client that happen to be very intricate. The game was running flawlessly for me prior to this current iteration, and i'd imagine these facile bugs will be easily mitigated within two weeks time. It will be like any other blizzard release, the moment you install the game you're going to download a patch. Considering how long it takes to produce millions of copies of a game, I'd imagine that a fairly sizable patch post installation.
Also, I fondly remember the initial days of the Diablo 2 launch, "Closed" battle.net was unusable for almost two weeks. Nothing is perfect, we're all humans and it is inherent to our nature to make mistakes, though this game is flawed, the imperfections are minor when considering the history of Blizzards online multiplayer history.
dunno whats up mine seems to be dling a patch but it just keeps looping it over and over and over again. the play button is available for like a sec or two if I hit it though th egame just loads then crashes
Everyone needs to quit being so dramatic and over zealous about their feelings. This patch's bugs have only been present for a few hours at most, they also seem fairly minor so just relax.
Yes, this is a beta, so lots of things have been changed - when the changes don't work like they expect - they revert back. Thats what a beta is all about man.
true but the game's release is quickly approaching.
On the bright side of things, maybe they'll extend beta to get more testing in.
ugh I'm really not down with this patch. Last patch the creep nerf was alright as the other changes balanced it out. This patch Zerg is just left with creep nerf and nothing to show for it. My creep feels more like a hindrance to my options than a benefit now.
On July 14 2010 10:13 scojac wrote: i can't log back in now at all still, says i have the wrong client version.
i patched though, does anyone else have this problem or should i try a reinstall?
getting this right now as well. On mac.
When the patch downloaded, it showed the release notes from the previous one from last week again, but the client says v. 20, so maybe it's correct and the login server is just screwed up?
On July 14 2010 07:35 GabeTheBeast wrote: So earlier, I switched my patch thing to eu (in order to begin patching .19)so I switched it back to us. to get the patch. Here is what I did:
Go to Program Files- Starcraft II- Support- Find a file called 'realmlist' or something. Open it with notepad, and if it should say: set patchlist us-beta.patch.battle.net:1120/patch if it says: set patchlist eu-beta.patch.battle.net:1120/patch, simply change the us to eu, and you will begin patching. If it says us, then try changing it to eu, starting SC2, letting it crash, then changing it back to US, and restarting. Hopefully you will patch (I had windows clogging my screen up, so I missed the patcher at first)
For those of you having problems with it logging you out as soon as you start sc2.
Please put this in the OP. I can verify it works. Thanks! (The solution inside of the quote)
Can anyone confirm whether or not the frame rate limiter has been put back in? I've been having to play with two large fans pointed directly at my laptop because the unlimited frame rate tries to melt my laptop
On July 14 2010 09:05 TheAngelofDeath wrote: Yeah, with two weeks until release having this many bugs is NOT a good sign at all.
A smooth release for a popular multiplayer game would be miraculous. Game developers don't ever expect to have one and most gamers who have experienced some major releases have appropriately adjusted their expectations.
I don't think anyone would disagree with you but I think his point still stands. It's still not a good sign.
On July 14 2010 10:13 scojac wrote: i can't log back in now at all still, says i have the wrong client version.
i patched though, does anyone else have this problem or should i try a reinstall?
getting this right now as well. On mac.
When the patch downloaded, it showed the release notes from the previous one from last week again, but the client says v. 20, so maybe it's correct and the login server is just screwed up?
I'm also on a mac, so I'm worried that it might just be a mac thing :/
In that case, we're probably looking at a little while before it's fixed. Maybe one of us should put in a bug report
On July 14 2010 09:05 TheAngelofDeath wrote: Yeah, with two weeks until release having this many bugs is NOT a good sign at all.
A smooth release for a popular multiplayer game would be miraculous. Game developers don't ever expect to have one and most gamers who have experienced some major releases have appropriately adjusted their expectations.
This is clearly evidence of some evil malignant plot by Activision. If only Blizzard were an independent company, there wouldn't be so many bugs at launch.
Indy company would delay the launch, having to fight for those customers instead of customers fighting for its product. I would prefer them to delay.
lolol they finally make a patch that makes zerg early game safer while making their mid/late game weaker in an intelligent way. then they totally revert all the stuff that was good for zerg and actually make it even worse than it was before. awesome
i'm fairly indifferent to pretty much all the changes....
except for the creep tumors. they make everything feel so SLOW for the zerg.
but, maybe it's more balanced in the long run. you can still creep forward with overlords, though air pressure is stronger now. maybe this is better, instead of requiring detection in order to stop zerg map control.
all in all though, it's really throwing off my timing to keep coming back to the creep tumors and seeing that they're only ~half way done now.
On July 14 2010 10:36 IdrA wrote: lolol they finally make a patch that makes zerg early game safer while making their mid/late game weaker in an intelligent way. then they totally revert all the stuff that was good for zerg and actually make it even worse than it was before. awesome
um, what? They only reverted terran and toss things, any zerg changes stayed. Unless what you were talking about was the terran and toss nerfs. The only zerg change reverted was something with banelings (they has made cancelling them return something other than 75% I assume).
On July 14 2010 10:36 IdrA wrote: lolol they finally make a patch that makes zerg early game safer while making their mid/late game weaker in an intelligent way. then they totally revert all the stuff that was good for zerg and actually make it even worse than it was before. awesome
um, what? They only reverted terran and toss things, any zerg changes stayed. Unless what you were talking about was the terran and toss nerfs. The only zerg change reverted was something with banelings (they has made cancelling them return something other than 75% I assume).
by nerfing zealots, racks and reapers zerg early game was surely safer
now that was reverted, but creep tumor remained 30 seconds..
On July 14 2010 10:36 IdrA wrote: lolol they finally make a patch that makes zerg early game safer while making their mid/late game weaker in an intelligent way. then they totally revert all the stuff that was good for zerg and actually make it even worse than it was before. awesome
um, what? They only reverted terran and toss things, any zerg changes stayed. Unless what you were talking about was the terran and toss nerfs. The only zerg change reverted was something with banelings (they has made cancelling them return something other than 75% I assume).
I think by saying zergs are safer early game he ment barracks, bunker, zealots etc. build time. It's not a zerg change, but still affects zerg early game greatly.
On July 14 2010 10:36 IdrA wrote: lolol they finally make a patch that makes zerg early game safer while making their mid/late game weaker in an intelligent way. then they totally revert all the stuff that was good for zerg and actually make it even worse than it was before. awesome
um, what? They only reverted terran and toss things, any zerg changes stayed. Unless what you were talking about was the terran and toss nerfs. The only zerg change reverted was something with banelings (they has made cancelling them return something other than 75% I assume).
by nerfing zealots, racks and reapers zerg early game was surely safer
now that was reverted, but creep tumor remained 30 seconds..
Oh right, I cant believe I completely forgot that >.> Nevermind that then, although I didn't really play too much of the previous change, so I don't really know exactly how much safer it was, I'll just have to agree with Idra.
Also, unrelated issue, I am not getting bonus pool points for winning, Is anyone else having this issue?
On July 14 2010 07:35 GabeTheBeast wrote: So earlier, I switched my patch thing to eu (in order to begin patching .19)so I switched it back to us. to get the patch. Here is what I did:
Go to Program Files- Starcraft II- Support- Find a file called 'realmlist' or something. Open it with notepad, and if it should say: set patchlist us-beta.patch.battle.net:1120/patch if it says: set patchlist eu-beta.patch.battle.net:1120/patch, simply change the us to eu, and you will begin patching. If it says us, then try changing it to eu, starting SC2, letting it crash, then changing it back to US, and restarting. Hopefully you will patch (I had windows clogging my screen up, so I missed the patcher at first)
For those of you having problems with it logging you out as soon as you start sc2.
Please put this in the OP. I can verify it works. Thanks! (The solution inside of the quote)
On July 14 2010 10:36 IdrA wrote: lolol they finally make a patch that makes zerg early game safer while making their mid/late game weaker in an intelligent way. then they totally revert all the stuff that was good for zerg and actually make it even worse than it was before. awesome
On July 14 2010 10:36 IdrA wrote: lolol they finally make a patch that makes zerg early game safer while making their mid/late game weaker in an intelligent way. then they totally revert all the stuff that was good for zerg and actually make it even worse than it was before. awesome
Yep.
I think this is the worst patch in the history of beta for Zerg, at least since like 8-9 when I started playing. I'm trying to think of which patch would be worse to play as zerg in, but am a little hard pressed to come up with anything.
this sucks i have not been able to log in for hours. I get the client does not exist message that everyone else is talking about. come on blizzard. Updates are supposed to fix, not cripple.
On July 14 2010 10:26 BlueSorc wrote: Can anyone confirm whether or not the frame rate limiter has been put back in? I've been having to play with two large fans pointed directly at my laptop because the unlimited frame rate tries to melt my laptop
This has not been put back in, just checked. I'm guessing what's listed is all that was put in.
On July 14 2010 09:46 ItsTheFark wrote: This is such crap, they really need to fix TvZ
My favorite part is how all the stealth nerfs to all the races were reversed - except all the ones to Z.
Honestly, I'm expecting some major Z buffs / major T nerfs once the game actually goes live and they realize exactly how lopsided it is. Game was far more balanced at the middle-end of phase 1 than it is now.
Also nthing what Idra said. I think it's time to work on my offraces for a while and put Z on the backburner.
As a protoss player i am ambivalent about this patch. Gonna make it harder to survive 2 gate proxies though.
But i seriously think they are TRYING to imbalance terran or something. It was initially too strong and they just haven't done enough to reverse that yet.
ZvT was already a pain in the ass as it was. Now they revert terran changes while leaving creep tumor and infestor NP crippled. 12 second Neural Parasite is so worthless they might as well remove the spell.
Say hello to more gay ass bunker rushes with random cheese followups.
I am still just floored how every patch they seem to knock Z down a notch when it is so widely agreed ZvT feels so incredibly unbalanced in so many ways etc etc...
There was a Korean Q&A with Blizzard that talked about balance, http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=23766801006&sid=5020. It looks like the next patch will be PvP and Terran balance focused. Though, from the sound of the questions, Koreans want mech buffed.
On July 14 2010 10:36 IdrA wrote: lolol they finally make a patch that makes zerg early game safer while making their mid/late game weaker in an intelligent way. then they totally revert all the stuff that was good for zerg and actually make it even worse than it was before. awesome
um, what? They only reverted terran and toss things, any zerg changes stayed. Unless what you were talking about was the terran and toss nerfs. The only zerg change reverted was something with banelings (they has made cancelling them return something other than 75% I assume).
by nerfing zealots, racks and reapers zerg early game was surely safer
now that was reverted, but creep tumor remained 30 seconds..
Oh right, I cant believe I completely forgot that >.> Nevermind that then, although I didn't really play too much of the previous change, so I don't really know exactly how much safer it was, I'll just have to agree with Idra.
Also, unrelated issue, I am not getting bonus pool points for winning, Is anyone else having this issue?
Zealot nerf in 19.0 was really huge in PvZ, it basically made 2 gate pressure useless vs zerg.. Now that is back to normal, so 2 gate is viable, and zerg needs to stay on their toes again earlygame. Thats a good change.
But I have no idea about this bunker and barracks change.. Specifically the barracks.. The only building terran really needs, not to mention how the 3rax pressure builds have been dominating lately in everything (as shown by Morrow vs Socke) and it gets a buff? Bunkers being 10 seconds faster is also huge for any bunker-rush tactics.. why not do only 5 seconds faster?
On July 14 2010 14:12 Skyze wrote: But I have no idea about this bunker and barracks change.. Specifically the barracks.. The only building terran really needs, not to mention how the 3rax pressure builds have been dominating lately in everything (as shown by Morrow vs Socke) and it gets a buff? Bunkers being 10 seconds faster is also huge for any bunker-rush tactics.. why not do only 5 seconds faster?
I dont understand blizzard.
I think blizzard's just trolling everyone that wants a balanced game lol. They are trying to make it as unbalanced as possible. Don't worry though I'm sure if it keeps up it competitive sc2 will just all be TvTs. And blizzard doesnt have their damn excuse that terran is the lowest winrate or whatever, because theres no way in hell Terran has the lowest winrate in any of the regions.
On July 14 2010 14:12 Skyze wrote: But I have no idea about this bunker and barracks change.. Specifically the barracks.. The only building terran really needs, not to mention how the 3rax pressure builds have been dominating lately in everything (as shown by Morrow vs Socke) and it gets a buff? Bunkers being 10 seconds faster is also huge for any bunker-rush tactics.. why not do only 5 seconds faster?
I dont understand blizzard.
I think blizzard's just trolling everyone that wants a balanced game lol. They are trying to make it as unbalanced as possible. Don't worry though I'm sure if it keeps up it competitive sc2 will just all be TvTs. And blizzard doesnt have their damn excuse that terran is the lowest winrate or whatever, because theres no way in hell Terran has the lowest winrate in any of the regions.
its looking like that.
Im gonna go practice my TvT.. maybe I can "learn" to love it eventually if I force myself to it..
On July 14 2010 14:21 FromGorkyWithLove wrote: do you guys can download the patch?! (EU server) i dont seem to have any downloads starting...
Not working for me at least, no auto-patcher loading and manual patching didn't work either, and here I was thinking I could crunch in a couple of matches of sc2 before work today :o
EDIT: Okay, scratch that, patcher working fine now
On July 14 2010 07:15 ShaSKiRa wrote: After install, its let me play without patching anything. I try to use Blizzard Update. Its said "There is no patch file to apply"
The problem with nuking the mac people, and the issue with people saying "oh problems will exist!" is that the bugs we are finding are easy to find if you have a competent QA department.
I mean, "all Mac people are fucked" is not a bug you should see after a patch release. And yes, I am a SW Engineer. That is terrible.
On July 14 2010 14:48 peep wrote: The problem with nuking the mac people, and the issue with people saying "oh problems will exist!" is that the bugs we are finding are easy to find if you have a competent QA department.
I mean, "all Mac people are fucked" is not a bug you should see after a patch release. And yes, I am a SW Engineer. That is terrible.
I'm not that upset cause it's beta.
I doubt the patch would go live with these problems post-release. If this happens then i will be furious however.
Edit: Though i'm sure everyone has seen it, Mac won't be fixed until early morning. =(.
On July 14 2010 10:36 IdrA wrote: lolol they finally make a patch that makes zerg early game safer while making their mid/late game weaker in an intelligent way. then they totally revert all the stuff that was good for zerg and actually make it even worse than it was before. awesome
um, what? They only reverted terran and toss things, any zerg changes stayed. Unless what you were talking about was the terran and toss nerfs. The only zerg change reverted was something with banelings (they has made cancelling them return something other than 75% I assume).
by nerfing zealots, racks and reapers zerg early game was surely safer
now that was reverted, but creep tumor remained 30 seconds..
Oh right, I cant believe I completely forgot that >.> Nevermind that then, although I didn't really play too much of the previous change, so I don't really know exactly how much safer it was, I'll just have to agree with Idra.
Also, unrelated issue, I am not getting bonus pool points for winning, Is anyone else having this issue?
Zealot nerf in 19.0 was really huge in PvZ, it basically made 2 gate pressure useless vs zerg.. Now that is back to normal, so 2 gate is viable, and zerg needs to stay on their toes again earlygame. Thats a good change.
But I have no idea about this bunker and barracks change.. Specifically the barracks.. The only building terran really needs, not to mention how the 3rax pressure builds have been dominating lately in everything (as shown by Morrow vs Socke) and it gets a buff? Bunkers being 10 seconds faster is also huge for any bunker-rush tactics.. why not do only 5 seconds faster?
I dont understand blizzard.
What I don't get is saying how it's a buff. If something was never supposed to go live in the first place, and was merely reverted back, how is it a buff? Nothing changed.
Update by blue on the bnet forum about the Mac problem :
Quick update: We know what the issue is (more of a battle.net issue versus the code in the game) and will be making the appropriate changes server-side sometime in the wee hours of the morning. I apologize for keeping you guys in the dark. Thanks for your understanding. Unless you stay up really late, I'd recommend just trying back in the morning.
Of course it's a battle.net problem. The issue is where is the QA? That could have been identified and fixed so easily by only having one mac client in the testing set.
It's just more ammo for people who think the battle.net developers should be wiped and replaced with actually competent people.
What does building time on zealots, reapers etc have to do with bug fixing? I havnt followed the development regarding these bugs so someone who is informed please explain.
On July 14 2010 15:03 peep wrote: Of course it's a battle.net problem. The issue is where is the QA? That could have been identified and fixed so easily by only having one mac client in the testing set.
It's just more ammo for people who think the battle.net developers should be wiped and replaced with actually competent people.
On July 14 2010 15:03 peep wrote: Of course it's a battle.net problem. The issue is where is the QA? That could have been identified and fixed so easily by only having one mac client in the testing set.
It's just more ammo for people who think the battle.net developers should be wiped and replaced with actually competent people.
well it is a beta...
It is a beta but this kind of error is lame. When I was a SW engineer our QA people would test basic things. In this case; no.
I have no confidence in the battle.net programmers or QA people.
Reaper build time decreased from 45 to 40 seconds. Barracks build time decreased from 65 to 60 seconds. Bunker build time decreased from 40 to 30 seconds.
On July 14 2010 16:09 SandTSquared wrote: Reaper build time decreased from 45 to 40 seconds. Barracks build time decreased from 65 to 60 seconds. Bunker build time decreased from 40 to 30 seconds.
.........why
Because it was always like that, it changed unofficially with the last patch (if you read the OP, it states that Blizz wanted slower rax / reaper / zealot for internal testing only, but it made it into the public patch somehow).
You guys can say what you want. I'm in silver. Would be higher but I can't play. Else let me tell you Blizzard has shit for QA because the errors are obvious and not subtle.
I'm so sick of people whining about Terran being imbalanced. It litterally makes me rage nowadays. You whiners should take a lesson from Day[9]'s book about imbalance and overpoweredness. I'm a random player, btw, so don't think I'm biased because of my icon.
Yeah, you guys can think what you want but I've been an SW ENG and creating a patch that has ladder games broken = WRONG and then mac client borked = NO,when each would take minimal testing = fail & fired. Not sure what lame crap you guys come from; where is come from, you get fired for sucking. Bnet2 sucks. Every update proves they suck. End Of Discussion.
Why are people acting like blizzard is making terran OP? Blizzard is known for making their games balanced so why would they make terran imbalanced? If something is OP then they will nerf it.
Blizzard nerfed mech immediately when it became popular (thor, helion and tanks got a nerf). They made the marauder shells an upgrade when the marauder became too strong. Do you really think that they will not do something about terran when they are OP?
It is kinda to be expected, this is the 'terran' game wings of liberty. When heart of the swarm comes I would wager Zerg will become pretty mean.
I seriously hope you are kidding...
It's actually kind of true . The most thoughts have been put in to terran while developing wings of liberty and the less in to zerg , protoss is kind of balanced between the two . Thats why terran has a big arsenal of strategies and has the biggest diversity of units and the exact opposite is the zerg which has low unit diversity and strategies . In Heart of the swarm zerg will have the most updates while protoss and terran will also have something new , but not to the comparison of zerg .
I'm not really. Terran is by far the most cohesive race in the game, and I half wonder if it's down to the fact the designers and game developers set out to design a terran game. It makes sense most of the thought went into that and that flowed into the multiplayer.
In the next release most of the creative thinking will be going into zerg and I don't doubt that some of that thinking will effect the multiplayer options Zerg end up with.
Of course it's not going to be perfect with respect to balance. But your ladder games? 3 2 2 0 -1 -2? bad. Needless to say, the people working on battlenet are incompetent. Let alone breaking mac play.
On July 14 2010 16:43 benemann wrote: Apparently there are plenty of new portraits and some graphical updates for the lava and other things in this patch.
And oh my god zealot build time back to 33
I got excited and went and checked...I did not see any new portraits.
On July 14 2010 18:20 lew wrote: Why are people acting like blizzard is making terran OP? Blizzard is known for making their games balanced so why would they make terran imbalanced? If something is OP then they will nerf it.
Easy answer: Marketing
Terrans are featured in the campaign, so the Average Joe is way more familiar with Terrans than the other two races. Making it easier to play compared to the other two races makes sense if you want to keep the casuals interested in the game.
Remember how "balanced" Death Knights at the start of Wrath of the Lich King were while Blizzard advertised WotLK with the DK? Casuals loved how DKs ripped everything apart.
And I wouldn't be suprised if the Lurker returned in Heart of the Swarm "by popular request".
On July 14 2010 18:20 lew wrote: Why are people acting like blizzard is making terran OP? Blizzard is known for making their games balanced so why would they make terran imbalanced? If something is OP then they will nerf it.
Easy answer: Marketing
Terrans are featured in the campaign, so the Average Joe is way more familiar with Terrans than the other two races. Making it easier to play compared to the other two races makes sense if you want to keep the casuals interested in the game.
Remember how "balanced" Death Knights at the start of Wrath of the Lich King were while Blizzard advertised WotLK with the DK? Casuals loved how DKs ripped everything apart.
And I wouldn't be suprised if the Lurker returned in Heart of the Swarm "by popular request".
On July 14 2010 18:54 Inori wrote: People complaining about QA should realize that we (you, him, me) are in fact the QA. This is beta test. We are participating in it. We should be looking for bugs and reporting them. Playing the game is secondary.
Most people think beta test means unrestricted demo version.
On July 14 2010 18:54 Inori wrote: People complaining about QA should realize that we (you, him, me) are in fact the QA. This is beta test. We are participating in it. We should be looking for bugs and reporting them. Playing the game is secondary.
Most people think beta test means unrestricted demo version.
Ofcourse betatesting also includes playability. Wouldn't the Betatesters play, there would be no statistics blizzard could go 4 extracting data for concluding changes out of.. etc.
The point i m trying to bring to light: Betatesting includes reciprocity! It s pretty unreal .. trying to say, "u should be happy, there is no reason to get pissed off, if u get disconnected out of nowhere without any informations backing this up ..!", is a bit too onesided.
On July 14 2010 18:20 lew wrote: Why are people acting like blizzard is making terran OP? Blizzard is known for making their games balanced so why would they make terran imbalanced? If something is OP then they will nerf it.
Blizzard nerfed mech immediately when it became popular (thor, helion and tanks got a nerf). They made the marauder shells an upgrade when the marauder became too strong. Do you really think that they will not do something about terran when they are OP?
Balanced would be removing the concussive shells altogether. It's not an ability that adds anything to the game.
Takes no skill using it. A no brainer upgrading it for 50/50. Creates the illusion that terran players are actually pulling off *amazing* micro, when infact it's easy as hell, concussive shelled units are basically queens off of creep. A major pain in the ass for the opponent who has to micro 5 times harder to not fuck up and hopefully at least come out even after the encounter.
Don't get me started on Medivacs. They fucking nerfed burrowed roach regeneration rate, when terran have their own roach (MARAUDER) with higher range, slowing attack (concussive shells), more damage, and when healed by a medivac: 3 times the regeneration rate of a burrowed roach!
So terrans are basically walking around with superranged roaches with concussive shells, healing at 13.5hp/sec. How hard is it really to be cost efficient with that set up?
And mech, let's not go there. The amount of micro it takes for the opponent to even stand a chance beating mech is incomparable to the abysmal amount of micro involved on the terran part. With enough practice, anyone can set up and leap frog a dozen tanks in a push and watch the AI do the rest.
While the zerg has to think about: the timing to start producing units, unit mix reacting on terrans units, flanks, counter attacks, drop research/overlord speed upgrade timings, muta switch timing, constantly re-rallying all bases due to sick tank range, saving or abandoning main, refugee style or charge the terran blob? Also need to find time to macro somewhere in there, while constantly thinking about tech switching.
Basically there is no way of practising any specific build as a zerg. You merely react. In every case you react to what the terran does. His moving out is the cue for the counter attack. No way for a counter attack? Tough shit, hope you guessed right and timed the drop research well. Actually demolishing a terran main army blob of any composition in a straight on confrontation? Might work 2/10 or 3/10 times, at best, all depending on how well you guessed, i.e. how well your tech tree actually fits to what's moving out of the terran base.
The games I win against terrans probably average 35minutes. And they're all after epic and heroic amounts of effort. It's probably been 3-4 patches since I won a game vs a terran in less than 15 minutes (a game not involving baneling bust all-in). There is a huge discrepancy in the amount of effort involved winning a game of ZvT as compared to winning a game of TvZ. Lots of noob players beat me easy all the time. They got no mechanics whatsoever but that don't really matter. Me and the rest of the zergs have to make at least 2-3 educated guesses each game. If we happen to guess wrong it's basically gg, game over just like that. If we happen to survive, it usually turns into an ugly 30-40 minute game where we just barely stay above water while being tormented because our opponents are fucking noobs that don't know how to finish us properly. Attacking a terran or trying to take the initiative in any offensive fashion at this point is impossible. The utterly skillful concussive shell ability sees to that if the terran opts for bio. Mech... yeah pretty much suicide attacking a terran sitting in his base.
It's tormenting as hell. Because you don't have any unit that let's you make a comeback. That let's you take the initiative if you're the better player. A unit like the defiler for example. I've never seen a zerg make any sort of awe inspiring comeback against a terran. It just doesn't happen. I've seen a million terrans get lucky with zergs overextending themselves against marauders, or accidentally clumping mutas together too much vs 2 thors who instantly blast them out of the sky, or failing miserably to break a relatively "weak" push involving tanks. There is soooo much room for error on the zerg side it's not even funny.
Needed to rant about this. I've been playing the sickest games where I've made some of the sickest moves I've ever made in SC2. Burrow banelingbombing marines in the hundreds repeatedly, tech switching perfectly to mutas vs marauder heavy armies, counter attacking like a god, dropping simultaneous locations like a multitasking god. Yet after 40 minutes of blood, sweat and tears some mechanically inferior terran idiot, not in the least straining himself -- to whom this was "just another game", rolls into my base after I've finally made 1 mistake. Because I'm Zerg, that mistake is irreperable. GG.
On July 14 2010 18:20 lew wrote: Why are people acting like blizzard is making terran OP? Blizzard is known for making their games balanced so why would they make terran imbalanced? If something is OP then they will nerf it.
Blizzard nerfed mech immediately when it became popular (thor, helion and tanks got a nerf). They made the marauder shells an upgrade when the marauder became too strong. Do you really think that they will not do something about terran when they are OP?
Lots of crying.
That's not even close to reality. Z is insanely strong against bio play (1a2a with ling/baneling/muta), and the roach which you happen to mention is probably the worst zerg unit against anything atm, and thanks to banelings still being OP and fungal growth being the best spell in the game, T bio is simply not viable most of the time and you HAVE to go mech to not lose.
Mech is actually balanced now and the epic games you play are clear indicator of that.
I think it's just a bit frustrating if you, as zerg, macro like a god, never miss any larva injection, perfect scouting etc., and your opponent is a "HEARP DERP I WALL OF MY MAIN, CAMP, BUILD 3 TANKS 1 TOR, SOME MARINES / RAUDERS, TAKE A NAP FOR 5MIN, AND AFTER I A-CLICK TO HIS MAIN AND WIN, ME SO PRO" and you lose horrible to such an 40 apm noob?
Maybe better maps could change this problem without actually changing much on the balance side, because i think all maps utterly SUCK. They are small as hell, little good fighting spaces, extremely close for rushing distance and those fucking nearly unbeatable timing-pushes sometimes.
Would also add some key elements back into the game, like harassing (don't see many harassing scenes at all)
I lost about 5 straight last night as terran. It's true that these games were against high diamond (and I'm low diamond) but I'm pretty sure that implies balance. Counters exist for everything and it isn't as bleak as some make it out to be.
On July 14 2010 18:20 lew wrote: Why are people acting like blizzard is making terran OP? Blizzard is known for making their games balanced so why would they make terran imbalanced? If something is OP then they will nerf it.
Blizzard nerfed mech immediately when it became popular (thor, helion and tanks got a nerf). They made the marauder shells an upgrade when the marauder became too strong. Do you really think that they will not do something about terran when they are OP?
Because you don't have any unit that let's you make a comeback.
On July 14 2010 18:20 lew wrote: Why are people acting like blizzard is making terran OP? Blizzard is known for making their games balanced so why would they make terran imbalanced? If something is OP then they will nerf it.
Blizzard nerfed mech immediately when it became popular (thor, helion and tanks got a nerf). They made the marauder shells an upgrade when the marauder became too strong. Do you really think that they will not do something about terran when they are OP?
Balanced would be removing the concussive shells altogether. It's not an ability that adds anything to the game.
Takes no skill using it. A no brainer upgrading it for 50/50. Creates the illusion that terran players are actually pulling off *amazing* micro, when infact it's easy as hell, concussive shelled units are basically queens off of creep. A major pain in the ass for the opponent who has to micro 5 times harder to not fuck up and hopefully at least come out even after the encounter.
Don't get me started on Medivacs. They fucking nerfed burrowed roach regeneration rate, when terran have their own roach (MARAUDER) with higher range, slowing attack (concussive shells), more damage, and when healed by a medivac: 3 times the regeneration rate of a burrowed roach!
So terrans are basically walking around with superranged roaches with concussive shells, healing at 13.5hp/sec. How hard is it really to be cost efficient with that set up?
And mech, let's not go there. The amount of micro it takes for the opponent to even stand a chance beating mech is incomparable to the abysmal amount of micro involved on the terran part. With enough practice, anyone can set up and leap frog a dozen tanks in a push and watch the AI do the rest.
While the zerg has to think about: the timing to start producing units, unit mix reacting on terrans units, flanks, counter attacks, drop research/overlord speed upgrade timings, muta switch timing, constantly re-rallying all bases due to sick tank range, saving or abandoning main, refugee style or charge the terran blob? Also need to find time to macro somewhere in there, while constantly thinking about tech switching.
Basically there is no way of practising any specific build as a zerg. You merely react. In every case you react to what the terran does. His moving out is the cue for the counter attack. No way for a counter attack? Tough shit, hope you guessed right and timed the drop research well. Actually demolishing a terran main army blob of any composition in a straight on confrontation? Might work 2/10 or 3/10 times, at best, all depending on how well you guessed, i.e. how well your tech tree actually fits to what's moving out of the terran base.
The games I win against terrans probably average 35minutes. And they're all after epic and heroic amounts of effort. It's probably been 3-4 patches since I won a game vs a terran in less than 15 minutes (a game not involving baneling bust all-in). There is a huge discrepancy in the amount of effort involved winning a game of ZvT as compared to winning a game of TvZ. Lots of noob players beat me easy all the time. They got no mechanics whatsoever but that don't really matter. Me and the rest of the zergs have to make at least 2-3 educated guesses each game. If we happen to guess wrong it's basically gg, game over just like that. If we happen to survive, it usually turns into an ugly 30-40 minute game where we just barely stay above water while being tormented because our opponents are fucking noobs that don't know how to finish us properly. Attacking a terran or trying to take the initiative in any offensive fashion at this point is impossible. The utterly skillful concussive shell ability sees to that if the terran opts for bio. Mech... yeah pretty much suicide attacking a terran sitting in his base.
It's tormenting as hell. Because you don't have any unit that let's you make a comeback. That let's you take the initiative if you're the better player. A unit like the defiler for example. I've never seen a zerg make any sort of awe inspiring comeback against a terran. It just doesn't happen. I've seen a million terrans get lucky with zergs overextending themselves against marauders, or accidentally clumping mutas together too much vs 2 thors who instantly blast them out of the sky, or failing miserably to break a relatively "weak" push involving tanks. There is soooo much room for error on the zerg side it's not even funny.
Needed to rant about this. I've been playing the sickest games where I've made some of the sickest moves I've ever made in SC2. Burrow banelingbombing marines in the hundreds repeatedly, tech switching perfectly to mutas vs marauder heavy armies, counter attacking like a god, dropping simultaneous locations like a multitasking god. Yet after 40 minutes of blood, sweat and tears some mechanically inferior terran idiot, not in the least straining himself -- to whom this was "just another game", rolls into my base after I've finally made 1 mistake. Because I'm Zerg, that mistake is irreperable. GG.
That's very interesting. And what would you have to say about Carriers?
The best analogy would be imagining Zerg in Broodwar without lurkers. That's pretty much the situation the race is in the way the game is designed. You got medics, but no lurkers.
With no lurkers in BW, you can still win, sure. But you are severely limited in your strategic choices. You have to adopt a "brute force"-like style of playing. Terran will know what strategy you'll opt for every game... mutas. Or mass hydra vs M&M (LOL, pretty much SC2 for you, only thing making SC2 "balanced" is the zerg macro mechanic. In SC2 you can produce more useless units for the terran to kill in a ridiculously cost efficient manner; sometimes you'll luck out though, i mean look at kwanro).
And the zerg mid and lategame can be likened to... defilers without lurkers. Fruitless attempts of killing terrans with pure zerglings and dark swarm. And HYDRAS IN DARK SWARM, LOL. Maybe the occasional guardians (brood lords). In SC2 terran have ground based anti air tanks though (thors), and wraiths (vikings) that fire missiles with longer range than guardians.
That's not even close to reality. Z is insanely strong against bio play (1a2a with ling/baneling/muta), and the roach which you happen to mention is probably the worst zerg unit against anything atm, and thanks to banelings still being OP and fungal growth being the best spell in the game, T bio is simply not viable most of the time and you HAVE to go mech to not lose.
Mech is actually balanced now and the epic games you play are clear indicator of that.
Yea bro, going pure bio might be not the best idea(although it's still quite decent), but for example MMM+tank, or marine+tank+banshee or many other combinations from terran seem to be just too strong. Just like lalush said, even if you have clear mechanical and just rts-wise advantage you still might loose due to deadly timing pushes (3 drones too much - you are dead, 3 drones too little - he will outeco your ass off). Playing zerg vs terran feels so dull, I feel like terrans have way more options than we have and all of them are very strong. I'm far from screaming "imba imba", the game is very young and there might be interesting strats developed, but me and even the toppest players feel kinda helpless about terran.
I would have to agree with lalush here, terran has a much better synergy with their forces than the zerg does. Coupled with all the options they can go early game ( reaper, bunker rush, hellions, hellion marine push, MM push, tank marine push, banshees, banshee viking, pure viking ) zerg is pretty much forced to sit back and wait until the terran attacks right into the defences of the zerg player.
Its even worse when the terran doesn't decide to move out. A turtling terran is the hardest nut to crack in the entire game as zerg.
The only time I won against mech was when I did a huge tech switch to corruptor-broodlord at the end . Because my opponent was too busy killing off my expansions while he could have steamrolled my main long ago.
I would stand by any view saying TvZ is T favoured. They have way more options and not even all the options have been explored ( ghosts with nukes ).
i wouldn't mind the concussive shells upgrade to be later down the road ( after armory is researched ) or be upped in cost like the overlord speed. It won't take away from the fact that marauders are still very cost efficient.
Look. I'm not necessarily saying the matchup is super imbalanced and broken.
It's more along the lines of: Zerg have absolutely no way in which they can take control. There is no zerg unit that doesn't fall into the "brute force" category, that can help a clearly superior player win easier or make a comeback. In every game, we're basically doomed to play a broodwar PvT without arbiters, and without the ability to tech to carriers.
Our only option is to keep making speedlots, goons, DTs and templars off of 20 gateways, and keep charging into that 3-3 upgraded terran blob. It's not the least fun whatsoever, and it's scewed in the amount of effort the respective races have to put in to win a game.
There is a HUGE discrepancy in the amount of effort it takes for a zerg to win a game, as opposed to the amount of effort it takes a terran. For terrans it's just another standard game using their practised standard build again.
I would be really interested in seeing statistics of average game length where a zerg wins in ZvT, as opposed to average game length where a terran wins TvZ.
On July 14 2010 20:48 GTR wrote: Anyone not able to watch old replays from the previous Phase 2 patch?
Rename or move Base16036 from the Versions directory of SC2, then drag and drop the replay on SC2Switcher.exe (from the Support directory). That should help, worked for me - before I did that replays would load up, but appear as a black screen with nothing but some ambient sound.
On July 14 2010 20:48 GTR wrote: Anyone not able to watch old replays from the previous Phase 2 patch?
Rename or move Base16036 from the Versions directory of SC2, then drag and drop the replay on SC2Switcher.exe (from the Support directory). That should help, worked for me - before I did that replays would load up, but appear as a black screen with nothing but some ambient sound.
good call, I was having the same issue. Thanks for the tip!
yep lalush, sc2 is all about bruteforce. in sc2 u had a few solutions to stopping somethign "ok i got swarm, okay i got the ramp, ok i have some siege tanks and some mines, ok 2 lurekrs on a ramp, awesome, alright so ill emp this and he backs off". and in sc "ok i gotta rape this with a larger army". sad but true
On July 14 2010 22:13 MorroW wrote: yep lalush, sc2 is all about bruteforce. in sc2 u had a few solutions to stopping somethign "ok i got swarm, okay i got the ramp, ok i have some siege tanks and some mines, ok 2 lurekrs on a ramp, awesome, alright so ill emp this and he backs off". and in sc "ok i gotta rape this with a larger army". sad but true
Yeah, hopefully this will change in the expansions with the introduction of new units/upgrades. Also, at all the zergs whining about terran's imbalance, if zerg plays well then on most maps its not that hard to beat terran. Bio isn't even viable mid-game because of infestors and muta/ling/baneling, unless the zerg is already at a disadvantage, and if the zerg player takes out the terran ball even once its game over for the terran because he can pump ultras, and in fights between small numbers of ultras and small numbers of thor/tank/marauder, the ultras kinda rape.
On July 14 2010 22:13 MorroW wrote: yep lalush, sc2 is all about bruteforce. in sc2 u had a few solutions to stopping somethign "ok i got swarm, okay i got the ramp, ok i have some siege tanks and some mines, ok 2 lurekrs on a ramp, awesome, alright so ill emp this and he backs off". and in sc "ok i gotta rape this with a larger army". sad but true
I feel like this is just because the game is so new. IIRC SC1/BW were like this in their infancy. Players are still working out timings and tactics on kinda-sorta-maybe-halfway-decent maps and units are changing almost weekly.
Give the game a year (maybe even less) and let peoples mechanics improve a little bit more - even you have to admit, MorroW, that trying to have two or three mini-battles at once feels a lot more awkward then the almost inevitable blob vs blob battles that are common on the ladder today.
I just don't feel the metagame has matured enough for most things to be called imbalanced yet. Though I do agree with LaLush that ZvT generally is less forgiving then TvZ - and I play T.
A Protoss put to 33 seconds!? how did that get in there!? They must have meant 66 and were using the num pad and miss typed. We all know blizzard is trying make protoss useless. :-)
On July 14 2010 22:13 MorroW wrote: yep lalush, sc2 is all about bruteforce. in sc2 u had a few solutions to stopping somethign "ok i got swarm, okay i got the ramp, ok i have some siege tanks and some mines, ok 2 lurekrs on a ramp, awesome, alright so ill emp this and he backs off". and in sc "ok i gotta rape this with a larger army". sad but true
I feel like this is just because the game is so new. IIRC SC1/BW were like this in their infancy. Players are still working out timings and tactics on kinda-sorta-maybe-halfway-decent maps and units are changing almost weekly.
Give the game a year (maybe even less) and let peoples mechanics improve a little bit more - even you have to admit, MorroW, that trying to have two or three mini-battles at once feels a lot more awkward then the almost inevitable blob vs blob battles that are common on the ladder today.
I just don't feel the metagame has matured enough for most things to be called imbalanced yet. Though I do agree with LaLush that ZvT generally is less forgiving then TvZ - and I play T.
I do think this is true, but at the same time what options are available to zerg? For T and P it's pretty clear where the micro can come in and be improved (FF, Templars, Drops, Warp-ins, Ravens, etc.) but not so with zerg.
So what tactical tools does zerg have?
Infestors Banelings Drops Nydus Worms Queen (transfusion) Burrow Move Mobile units (lings and mutas)
There's an important trend with all of these things though.
None of them are particularly cost effective, especially universally, and they all require a good sized investment.
A lot of the tactical units of other races are sure to be cost effective if managed well. It's very difficult for a Templar to get off a well placed storm and NOT have it cause massive damage, it's really tough for a siege tank positioned well to NOT kill its worth in units. But there's no guarantee on the Zerg side. FG only really does meaningful damage to small clumped units, NP is only really relevant in head on battles, Banelings are only cost effective vs light units, Nydus worms are just flanking tools especially if your opponent is on the ball about killing in base worms. Doom drops are a hefty investment (300/300 now), sure long term it's super cost effective but short term not so much, and it's still not garunteed to be cost effective. Burrow move is the same boat, at times it's great, but there's no real backing to it, all you're doing is assuring you have good positioning with your roaches.
This could be ok as a racial flavor, but it seems a little too extreme right now. There's really no tactical zerg thing you can lean on like you can with the other races, it's all shaky and inconsistent.
i can see baneling drops mixed in with roach/hydra to be very deadly in the future.. Like say you attack, you float over like 6 ovies over top of their army, and banelings in only two of them.. They have to guess which ovie has the banelings in it and try to kill that first, or pop goes their entire army... all while having Hydras and Roachs spitting in your face. That is going to be a pain. If they are backed in a corner such as Steppes of war first natural, what can you do vs that other than die?
Zerg also will become dependant on attacking at multiple places at once, with drops, nydus worm, mutas, etc. SC1 all you had was drops, but way more options in SC2 and with roach/hydra actually being a formidable army in big battles that dont die all in 1 second like they did in BW, it gives time to do those things.
I just worry as the game goes on and people start doing these more complex things.. Terran is going to gain even more of an edge from them while the other races will fall behind.
On July 15 2010 01:07 Bibdy wrote: Anyone else sitting on X number of bonus pool that refuses to get spent?
Yea I have the same issue. I wonder if this is a patch 20 (or whatever the most recent patch is) issue, or if it has been there since the start of phase 2.
On July 15 2010 01:07 Bibdy wrote: Anyone else sitting on X number of bonus pool that refuses to get spent?
Yea I have the same issue. I wonder if this is a patch 20 (or whatever the most recent patch is) issue, or if it has been there since the start of phase 2.
On July 14 2010 22:13 MorroW wrote: yep lalush, sc2 is all about bruteforce. in sc2 u had a few solutions to stopping somethign "ok i got swarm, okay i got the ramp, ok i have some siege tanks and some mines, ok 2 lurekrs on a ramp, awesome, alright so ill emp this and he backs off". and in sc "ok i gotta rape this with a larger army". sad but true
I feel like this is just because the game is so new. IIRC SC1/BW were like this in their infancy. Players are still working out timings and tactics on kinda-sorta-maybe-halfway-decent maps and units are changing almost weekly.
Give the game a year (maybe even less) and let peoples mechanics improve a little bit more - even you have to admit, MorroW, that trying to have two or three mini-battles at once feels a lot more awkward then the almost inevitable blob vs blob battles that are common on the ladder today.
I just don't feel the metagame has matured enough for most things to be called imbalanced yet. Though I do agree with LaLush that ZvT generally is less forgiving then TvZ - and I play T.
I do think this is true, but at the same time what options are available to zerg? For T and P it's pretty clear where the micro can come in and be improved (FF, Templars, Drops, Warp-ins, Ravens, etc.) but not so with zerg.
So what tactical tools does zerg have?
Infestors Banelings Drops Nydus Worms Queen (transfusion) Burrow Move Mobile units (lings and mutas)
There's an important trend with all of these things though.
None of them are particularly cost effective, especially universally, and they all require a good sized investment.
A lot of the tactical units of other races are sure to be cost effective if managed well. It's very difficult for a Templar to get off a well placed storm and NOT have it cause massive damage, it's really tough for a siege tank positioned well to NOT kill its worth in units. But there's no guarantee on the Zerg side. FG only really does meaningful damage to small clumped units, NP is only really relevant in head on battles, Banelings are only cost effective vs light units, Nydus worms are just flanking tools especially if your opponent is on the ball about killing in base worms. Doom drops are a hefty investment (300/300 now), sure long term it's super cost effective but short term not so much, and it's still not garunteed to be cost effective. Burrow move is the same boat, at times it's great, but there's no real backing to it, all you're doing is assuring you have good positioning with your roaches.
This could be ok as a racial flavor, but it seems a little too extreme right now. There's really no tactical zerg thing you can lean on like you can with the other races, it's all shaky and inconsistent.
Zerg is the swarm race. At no point in time should you have a force that is cost efficient to levels anywhere near that of the other races. You need more resources because you need to be able to rebuild your next wave after sacrificing the first. Your equal food/resources army must always be inferior to the other races (terran more so then protoss) because you can "snap back" so much more quickly. Such is the nature of your race. Does it need a little tweaking? Probably. But improving your cost efficiency isn't the way to do it.
RE Drops and Burrow Moves: These are tactics, which have an opportunity cost, they can be stopped/negated or they can be extremely effective. It's rare that a properly executed doom drop isn't effective however, while burrow movement is more easily handled. The same can be said for many tactics, like siege drops or cloaked harass of any kind.
they're not cost effective if you A-move them into tanks/thors. but it's not like any unit in the game is especially cost effective compared to the ling/marine/zealot, and they are meant to be pawns.
A unit's only cost effective if you can obliterate stuff without getting hit...
You know, Void Rays when there aren't any Marines or Vikings around...Siege Tanks or Collossi against a blob of ground units...
Nothing in the Zerg army is MEANT to be cost-effective. You're meant to ram as much shit down the guy's throat as you can reasonably fit in a choke point.
When your gigantic blob of Hydras and Roaches gets up in the guy's face, or you build a magnificent concave of death, THEN they're cost-effective.
On July 15 2010 02:31 tarsier wrote: mutas are not cost effective?
infestors are not cost effective?
banelings are not cost effective?
they're not cost effective if you A-move them into tanks/thors. but it's not like any unit in the game is especially cost effective compared to the ling/marine/zealot, and they are meant to be pawns.
Well, tanks are extremely cost effective, as are hellions. The only part of mech that isnt all that cost effective are thors, and they arent necessary to mech.
Saying Zerg isn't mean to have strong a cost effective unit is just stupid. The lurker is a key unit for zerg in BW percisely because it could be cost-effective at times.
The point isn't that Zerg needs all these uber cost effective units, clearly they don't. The point is that Zerg lacks any ability to flex a tactic that can use cost effectiveness to open up zerg comebacks and zerg strategies. And no, such a unit does not need to be as strong as the Terran and Protoss counter parts, it just merely needs to exist.
Infestor and Banelings are meant to be that unit but the problem is both cover some of the same role (killing off many light units) and can be rendered relatively ineffective by enemy unit compositions. Meanwhile a siege tank or templar is almost always a good investment.
From my perspective the two classes of units are best explained with a difference in psychology. For a templar or siege tank the question is often, "I can grab more of this unit, but can I instead trim it back to do something better" while the choice to grab more infestors is more, "Will the infestor be able to do anything for me if I make it?"
You see this in high level games. Players who have the capacity (as in they went mech or got templars) to make something like Templars or Siege tanks will rarely skip an opportunity unless they feel that there's something else that takes more precedence. With the infestors though the situation is more of, "Will this unit get any use if I make it?" Players with the capacity to make infestors may still have an army completely without infestors due to not being useful. It's almost more of a difference between having an army composition and sprinkling a unit into a composition to strengthen it.
Now I love Infestors/Banelings and love their roles, but what I'm trying to point out is just how Zerg has this gap. It's tough to explain, but really if you play zerg enough you should completely pick up on it as it feels very distinct in game. Maybe the way to put it is this type of tactical unit that forces your opponent to react and play differently, but is then still good even when they do or just simplify and put it as Zerg lacks a comeback unit, I don't know.
Saying Zerg isn't mean to have strong a cost effective unit is just stupid. The lurker is a key unit for zerg in BW percisely because it could be cost-effective at times.
The point isn't that Zerg needs all these uber cost effective units, clearly they don't. The point is that Zerg lacks any ability to flex a tactic that can use cost effectiveness to open up zerg comebacks and zerg strategies. And no, such a unit does not need to be as strong as the Terran and Protoss counter parts, it just merely needs to exist.
Infestor and Banelings are meant to be that unit but the problem is both cover some of the same role (killing off many light units) and can be rendered relatively ineffective by enemy unit compositions. Meanwhile a siege tank or templar is almost always a good investment.
From my perspective the two classes of units are best explained with a difference in psychology. For a templar or siege tank the question is often, "I can grab more of this unit, but can I instead trim it back to do something better" while the choice to grab more infestors is more, "Will the infestor be able to do anything for me if I make it?"
You see this in high level games. Players who have the capacity (as in they went mech or got templars) to make something like Templars or Siege tanks will rarely skip an opportunity unless they feel that there's something else that takes more precedence. With the infestors though the situation is more of, "Will this unit get any use if I make it?" Players with the capacity to make infestors may still have an army completely without infestors due to not being useful. It's almost more of a difference between having an army composition and sprinkling a unit into a composition to strengthen it.
Now I love Infestors/Banelings and love their roles, but what I'm trying to point out is just how Zerg has this gap. It's tough to explain, but really if you play zerg enough you should completely pick up on it as it feels very distinct in game. Maybe the way to put it is this type of tactical unit that forces your opponent to react and play differently, but is then still good even when they do or just simplify and put it as Zerg lacks a comeback unit, I don't know.
This right here is exactly what I think. However, i am not too concerned about this issue. It is likely that Blizzard is very much aware of this issue and that they will "complete" the Zerg race when the second chapter of SC2 rolls around. I am curious however as to what they could add to the other races (especially Terran) as they have so many combat units already and got all bases pretty much covered.
On July 15 2010 00:15 Skyze wrote: i can see baneling drops mixed in with roach/hydra to be very deadly in the future.. Like say you attack, you float over like 6 ovies over top of their army, and banelings in only two of them.. They have to guess which ovie has the banelings in it and try to kill that first, or pop goes their entire army... all while having Hydras and Roachs spitting in your face. That is going to be a pain. If they are backed in a corner such as Steppes of war first natural, what can you do vs that other than die?
Zerg also will become dependant on attacking at multiple places at once, with drops, nydus worm, mutas, etc. SC1 all you had was drops, but way more options in SC2 and with roach/hydra actually being a formidable army in big battles that dont die all in 1 second like they did in BW, it gives time to do those things.
I just worry as the game goes on and people start doing these more complex things.. Terran is going to gain even more of an edge from them while the other races will fall behind.
Day9 recently showed a ZvT matchup where Artosis used baneling/zergling drops in coordination with a Roach ground force maneuvered using burrow. During the matchup you see 2 drops, one that goes well and one that goes awful. The difference is getting the banelings to hit the marines instead of the marauders. Now, I think this should absolutely make a difference because it is rewarding good mechanics used in conjunction with good strategy. What I do not like is in both situations, the Terran simply has to stim and a move his forces. It is just so blindingly simple to play Terran. Unlike the other races, all you have to do is focus on macro and will win. The only exception I've seen to this is TLO with his ling/investor/ultra play, but the man just does not make mistakes when it comes to micro and it shouldn't be that difficult to match up against a Terran.
I can't play any games after the new patch, i can log on fine, but when I search for matches (1v1), it just keeps searching for minutes and eventually i have to quit or log off sc2. Is anyone experiencing the same problem? I thought it was my internet connection, but I run other applications smoothly and simultaneously. It seems like I am getting dropped everytime. and after I log off and come back onto sc2, I checked my profile and match history, it says I have tied matches. (all those times that I searched and waited, and gave up, it counted as Tied Matches). Its weird to me.
@sidemon0809 unfortunately I can't help you, but I can tell you that my game works fine (on the europe servers) on my macbook pro. Have you tried connecting to the europe servers? If that also crashes I would suggest reinstalling the game.
Please put some effort into your posts. One word replies and other low content posts are not appreciated here.
What? My most is longer than the two before me and the one after it, but I don't see them getting warnings. Oh wait, maybe I said something that you disagree with.
Please put some effort into your posts. One word replies and other low content posts are not appreciated here.
What? My most is longer than the two before me and the one after it, but I don't see them getting warnings. Oh wait, maybe I said something that you disagree with.
I'm not a moderator or staff so don't take my comment as anything but another poster's opinion. Both your posts in this thread are unnecessarily insulting. I see people get away with low content posts when they express a harmless and relevant opinion. You insulted Blizzard's balancing. That's not a problem in itself. Critiques of Blizzard are some of the best posts made on tl.net. But you could take a neutral tone with your critique. You could provide reasons. You could be detailed. But nah, you thought you'd improve the thread by assuming the tone of an asshole and saying the patch sucks. And now you're defending it. Anyone can see that your reply wasn't a wonderful addition to the thread.
There is no legitimacy to comparing your posts with the posts of other people that have gone unpunished. Either your post sucked or it didn't. It did. The Banlings thing is just getting going. Hopefully bad posts will become less frequent. Are you really suggesting that those posts sucked, but you made sure to cross some threshold (higher word count?) to ensure that your post doesn't? Or you think all those posts are great? Or do you think they all suck? I can see how they all suck but I can also see how yours is a step below theirs.
Suggesting that you get a warning because a moderator disagreed with you does not help you at all. If you think your post was really legitimate, there are much more effective ways to defend yourself. If you admit your post sucked, there are much better ways to apologize. You just want to be a martyr. Or, I guess more likely, you don't put any thought into these posts at all.
EPT![[image loading]](http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/661/patchp.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img541.imageshack.us/img541/7079/patchzr.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/2782/patchg.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/1559/patcho.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/2922/patchs.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/7466/dddfs.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i31.tinypic.com/2r41xxh.jpg)
not gonna redownload 1gb in patches again![[image loading]](http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/4396/wtfnh.jpg)
