Designated Balance Discussion Thread - Page 13

On August 16 2011 11:37 Disquiet wrote:
I like to think I'm impartial here, since I play all 3 races, but I definitely lean towards terran as its my "main" race.

Any way here are my personal views on balance:
TVP: pretty even at my level, but with good micro for avoiding storms/kiting colossi and chargelots perfectly and the 1/1/1 I think its Terran favored at high levels
TvZ: Relatively even right now, small variations with metagame shifts but overall pretty well balanced.
ZvP: Zerg favoured, very heavily on an open map with few chokes

Potential Changes that in my view will help the game:

1.)I'd like to see infestors fungal growth returned to its projectile state that it had for a short period on the PTR. I feel that excessive and in my view unnecessary zerg whinging made them change it to its current form before the projectile mechanic had a chance to be properly tested at a high level. In its current form I think fungal growth is a little strong, especially against protoss. With a projectile instead of instant cast, Fungal growth would require a lot more micro/skill/prediction to use, while potentially still being just as powerful if landed properly. I think this would make games a lot more exciting and balanced, instead of its current form which is just a very easy to use ability that completely removes the opposing players ability to micro once landed. In addition the projectile speed can always easily be tweaked for balance purposes.


2.) I'd like to see immortals buffed, probably a range increase to 6 or maybe a production time/cost buff. Right now they are just not very useful outside of the midgame because they tend to get stuck in the back and unable to fire as armies get large because of their poor range. I also feel an immortal buff would greatly assist protoss in defending the 1/1/1 which seems like a pretty big issue right now.

Even though I mainly play terran, I think the race is mostly fine at the moment, I'd like to see marauder buff, but that could only come after an immortal buff for protoss or it would ruin the PVT matchup. My reasoning for this buff is not really balance related, so don't count it as a real comment on the current state of balance. I want it simply because I think it would improve the TvT matchup as right now the viability of the bio army is rapidly diminishing. A small buff to bio I think would create a truly awesome tvt metagame where mech, air and bio are all viable.

On August 16 2011 13:25 Hollis wrote:
The interesting thing about balance discussion in a game as complex as SC2 is there's always, always a counter-argument. It reminds me of theological discussions; there's never an end and no way to define anything because every single perspective brought to the table is inherently and unavoidably biased because it's based on the arguer's own unique experiences.

For that reason I think the only appreciable purpose for this thread is to herd up the junk and put a fence around it. Hopefully it works for that.

On August 16 2011 13:28 mrKamiya wrote:



Options doesn't mean all of them are very good, any harass can be very good if you haven't scouted good enough, and don't react correctly/at all. Reaper harass earlygame is easily cleaned up by early roaches, or queens, or just spines. Vikings can only be effective if you let them. A ling runby can also be just as devastating as a terran drop if a terran's army is in the middle of the map, so can a drop. Reapers are very fragile, if you go fast blue flame hellions a roach push can easily kill you or contain you for a while. I could do a queen drop and do damage if you let me or didnt react fast enough.

On August 16 2011 13:57 pwadoc wrote:


I think the mistake people make in discussing balance is focussing on one or two units or combinations, rather than addressing larger theoretical issues with the design of a race. Any single given unit or composition can be countered, but the overall design of a race can confer a significant advantage regardless of the specific strategy the player chooses to adopt.

For instance, many people seem to think that terran has a lot of balance problems, but everyone has a suggestion for why that might be. I think the problem has a lot more to do with choices the game designers made across the entire race, rather than specific problem units. The issue with terran is that the race possesses defensive capabilities far more powerful than the other two races do, but those abilities don't come at the cost of aggressive potential. In fact, terran players are often more aggressive than their opponent. The powerful base defenses allow terrans to be fairly profligate with their units, and MULE macro mechanics provides for a steady stream of disposable, cheap units.

It seems that blizzard's intention, in giving terran such strong defensive potential—cheap, refundable bunkers, turrets, planetary fortresses, scv repair, and extremely long range units, was to create a race that operates by slowly extending a defensive advantage while using harassment tactics to keep the enemy at bay. However, because terrans also have powerful, fast offensive units, the race has the capability to execute strong pushes while still maintaining a strong defensive advantage. I think it is these fast, effective offensive units that create most of the problems, and that need to be addressed.

On August 16 2011 13:46 RavenLoud wrote:
Food for thought as an attempt to fix PvP: Make warpgate research require a twilight council and possibly decrease its research time for that reason, probably like the original one from beta.

On August 16 2011 14:08 dbddbddb wrote:


PvP isnt easy fixed because anything you try to do will nerf protoss too much in other match ups

On August 16 2011 13:23 mrKamiya wrote:
Zergs say scan is imba, but mules are so essential for our economy, and scanning is a risk because i dont know where your tech'll be, your natural, your main, your third, etc. Zergs have a mobile scout, it costs only 100/100 once to get speed on them, and if you get overseers, 2.75 speed with the upgrade, pretty fast. Scans are not mobile, and terran doesnt have something as fast as a ling that can scout. If you keep all of your tech in the same base that's your fault, its not op that terran scan and see it.

On August 16 2011 13:57 pwadoc wrote:


I think the mistake people make in discussing balance is focussing on one or two units or combinations, rather than addressing larger theoretical issues with the design of a race. Any single given unit or composition can be countered, but the overall design of a race can confer a significant advantage regardless of the specific strategy the player chooses to adopt.

For instance, many people seem to think that terran has a lot of balance problems, but everyone has a suggestion for why that might be. I think the problem has a lot more to do with choices the game designers made across the entire race, rather than specific problem units. The issue with terran is that the race possesses defensive capabilities far more powerful than the other two races do, but those abilities don't come at the cost of aggressive potential. In fact, terran players are often more aggressive than their opponent. The powerful base defenses allow terrans to be fairly profligate with their units, and MULE macro mechanics provides for a steady stream of disposable, cheap units.

It seems that blizzard's intention, in giving terran such strong defensive potential—cheap, refundable bunkers, turrets, planetary fortresses, scv repair, and extremely long range units, was to create a race that operates by slowly extending a defensive advantage while using harassment tactics to keep the enemy at bay. However, because terrans also have powerful, fast offensive units, the race has the capability to execute strong pushes while still maintaining a strong defensive advantage. I think it is these fast, effective offensive units that create most of the problems, and that need to be addressed.

On August 16 2011 07:28 Elefanto wrote:
I'd like to discuss the effects of EMP / Fungal Growth.

EMP: Drains 100 shield, 100 mana, decloaks
Fungal Growth: Damage, 100% snare, decloaks

Why are these two spells decloaking? It's not like they aren't strong enough damage / primary effect wise to warrant additional effects.
I'm currently trying to experiment with lots of Dt harass / Warp-Prism and Dts in main army.
Dts do ridiculous amount of damage when upgraded, but the harass is denied by basic stationary defense.
That's fine, but if you want to mix them in your army, for instance against zerg, you would have the chance to go for a phoenix / chargelot / dt build, or something similar, where you can force map control and effectively harass the zerg. And in the bigger fights you could try to snipe the overseers so that you're dts can help you out in the battle and you're gateway units aren't completely screwed. But the natural response to heavy phoenix / gateway heavy play is infestor, and he counters EVERYTHING. Snares the phoenix / stalker so you can't try to snipe overseers, i could live with that, you could try to force a better position to blink in, flank with the phoenixes etc.
But that's also completely nullified because he fungals your dts and then they become visible and attackable.

The same goes for terran, you could go gateway heavy with good upgrades and try to harass as much as possible with dts. And when he's forcing a fight sending dts to force scans.
But if he sees you're not going colossus he'll go medivac / ghost heavier, thus rendering your dt's obsolte in the fight.

Do these two caster really need decloaking? It makes Dts even more of a gimmicky unit, and easier to counter.

On August 16 2011 14:13 Ruscour wrote:

Exactly, there needs to be a major shift (i.e., HotS) for anything like that to be implemented, Protoss simply can't put on offensive pressure without Warpgate.