|
juicyjames
United States3815 Posts
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/4135187/Q__A_With_David_Kim-12_15_2011
At the recent (November 10th and 11th) G-Star event in Korea, we had an opportunity to talk to some of the GSL’s top competitors and get their feedback on the current state of StarCraft II. This was also a good opportunity to show our players around the world how pro player feedback influences the act of balancing StarCraft II.
While we’ve made a number of balance tweaks over time, at this point the overall game balance is quite solid. There are always variations from region to region, so we rarely make a balance decision based on the numbers from a single region, or even a single tournament or tournament series. While we’re likely to see more changes in the future, we’re going to remain cautious when making even small changes, since they can have sweeping (and sometimes surprising) effects on overall balance. The purpose of this feature is to highlight some of the feedback we received from pro players, and to discuss our perspectives based on that feedback.
+ Show Spoiler [MULE -- Too effective on gold bases] +MULE -- Too effective when used on high yield mineral patches.
Concerns about the MULE are something that we hear most frequently from the player community at large, but it’s also feedback that we’ve seen from some pro players specifically with regard to high yield mineral patches. In fact, the GSL recently removed high yield patches from its maps in response to this concern. This change seems to have worked out well for the GSL so far, but all the other major tournaments that didn’t remove high yield resources from their maps are still showing very good race representation, so the change doesn’t appear necessary.
There are a lot of potential reasons this could be, but we’ll examine a couple of the most likely. First is that the change really did reduce terran effectiveness in the GSL specifically, but because the terran race does unusually well in Korea, it all balanced out. Another possible reason could be that there is an advantage to terran players from using MULEs on high yields, but it’s not significant enough for the removal of high yield resources to result in a noticeable effect on overall performance.
Regardless, we don’t jump to conclusions and we’re still investigating. If further research suggests conclusively that MULEs do offer too much of an advantage to terran players when used on high yield minerals, we’ll consider an appropriate course of action then.
+ Show Spoiler [Spawn Larvae -- Too much management] +Spawn Larvae -- This requires too much management; even pro players are unable to manage Spawn Larvae perfectly.
Our stance on this kind of issue is simple: We intentionally make different aspects of the game difficult for the different races. We want each of them to have asymmetric advantages and disadvantages that contribute to very different play styles, but still result in a satisfying, balanced game at the end of the day. Spawn Larvae is more difficult to manage than Chrono Boost or MULEs, but zerg has other advantages -- for example, unit production is relatively easy to manage for zerg compared with the other races. Making side-by-side comparisons of isolated elements won’t show you the whole picture because StarCraft II is asymmetrically balanced, meaning that if a race is strong in one way, then it’s probably also weak where another race is strong.
We also like to see this kind of feedback, because making games easy to learn but difficult to master is one of Blizzard’s core game design philosophies. So, we don’t see it as a problem that, even at the pro level, perfect mastery hasn’t been achieved yet.
+ Show Spoiler [Give Reapers back early-game speed] +Reapers -- Give Reapers back the early-game speed upgrade.
We tend to agree that Reapers can stand to see some improvement. We like the unit, but the problem previously was that Reapers with Nitro Packs were too effective versus zerg in the early game. Unfortunately, after losing their role in early-game harassment, Reapers haven’t proven to be a very powerful or useful unit at most stages of the game.
As we discussed at BlizzCon, we’re taking a hard look at the Reaper, and we’re experimenting with different options to see where Reapers can fit into the terran arsenal with Heart of the Swarm.
+ Show Spoiler [Terran -- Stop nerfing us] +Terran -- Stop nerfing us!
There will always be changes as we develop StarCraft II, and we try to minimize nerfs as much as possible. We don’t like making changes unless they’re necessary. Still, we will continue to make small adjustments that we feel need to be made to achieve the best balance possible, and we don’t keep score regarding who is getting the most or the fewest changes. Ultimately, we’re invested in the success of all three races, and we want to make all three perform well.
+ Show Spoiler [EMP Radius decrease is too significant] +EMP -- Radius decrease is too significant.
We feel that the dynamic between protoss and terran especially was in need of a change, and this was an efficient method of achieving that. We’re still paying close attention to how the change to EMP affects this matchup globally, as well as on the tournament stage.
+ Show Spoiler [Choke Points -- More variance] +Choke Points -- More variance in choke point placement on maps.
We love variety, but maps play a significant role in how balance is achieved, and with that in mind, we need to maintain a certain amount of consistency in map features. For example, all of our 1v1 maps feature relatively close natural expansions, while our 2v2 maps lean toward starting teammates relatively close together.
Ramps into starting positions are another feature which we try to keep pretty consistent. Certain ramp structures, such as particularly wide ramps, would favor fairly specific builds, which is why the ramps leading from starting positions are all alike. We still want diversity in the map pool though, so the ramps leading into natural expansions display more variety, since we see a greater diversity of strategies even when those ramps differ from the norm. This way, an essential terrain feature becomes more interesting.
We also look for other ways to make maps interesting and unique, though it’s difficult to do that without potentially hurting a map’s tournament potential. Typically, tournament map creation is subject to a lot of restrictions, which is also why so many tournament maps share features with one another.
+ Show Spoiler [Khaydarin Amulet -- Bring it back] +Khaydarin Amulet -- Bring it back!
We wanted to change the dynamic between the protoss and other races, and we like to make small changes to do that. Unfortunately, when the Khaydarin Amulet was still available, we would see players do things like spread pylons everywhere simply to gain the ability to warp in High Templars and storm passing armies. Also, because High Templars were often warped in to cast an immediate storm, there wasn’t a lot of decision making about which ability would be used -- in the vast majority of cases, it would be one cast of Psi Storm, which would deplete all available energy. Also, positioning wasn’t a consideration in too many cases, since the unit would appear, cast storm, and then effectively be forgotten for that battle.
We like the way the High Templar work now, because, while they remain very powerful, some thought and consideration must go into how they’re positioned and which spells are used.
For Heart of the Swarm, we’re exploring better ways to handle energy upgrades, since we’re not quite satisfied with how they work currently.
+ Show Spoiler [Void Ray damage is difficult to read] +Void Ray -- Damage output is difficult to read in-game.
We like the visuals in StarCraft II to have clear meaning, and this is good feedback. We'll take a closer look at how the graphic communicates damage output to players at various skill levels. If it does turn out to be unclear, we’ll find ways to improve it.
+ Show Spoiler [More varied Protoss playstyles] +Protoss Play Style -- More variety please!
This was another issue that came up at BlizzCon. We’re definitely looking at ways to give protoss players more tactical options and more strategic paths. We’ll probably achieve this via new units which will be added in Heart of the Swarm.
We do have good reasons for delaying a large change like this for the expansion. Not to be taken lightly is the fact that balance is actually quite good right now, and major play style changes can have a disruptive effect on balance. Also, patches are intended to fix issues in a small, incremental way, not to introduce entirely new playing experiences and sweeping changes to gameplay. That kind of change is much better left for an expansion, where new units and dramatic shifts in strategy are expected and welcomed.
In short, we do want to give protoss players a better variety of strategic options. We’ve learned a lot from Wings of Liberty, and we’re hoping to achieve an even better and more varied competitive environment overall. In Heart of the Swarm, we expect to see the strategic options available to all three races grow.
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/4135187/Q__A_With_David_Kim-12_15_2011#c-3760756040
These were concerns that were brought up by pro-players at G-Star, which occurred just as 1.4.2 was being applied (Patch 1.4.2 on November 8th, Q&A on November 10th and 11th). These weren't questions selected at random; they specifically reflect the feedback David received there.
I think it's worth mentioning that, at the time that the event was occurring, the match up heavily favored terran.
|
I always like to hear what the game balancers have to say about the game ^^ Good Read
|
Some hope for change. I'd like to see a lot of what the questions suggest, but the answers from David Kim seem to indicate that nothing will change in the short term (substantially).
Sigh. Plus ça change.
|
Love David Kim interviews, so interesting to hear his thoughts more than any one else on the scene, since he balances the whole damn thing!
Really excited as they seem to state that the expansion will bring so many new strats and playstyles, i feel like WoL was a warmup game for whats to come.....
either way, so excited!
|
Some of the answers are pretty cool to hear but some of these questions were kinda... foolish... Reapers dont need their speed back, HT's just need a different form of upgrade as they said, and Ghost emp is fine the way it is..
|
His answers don't seem to indicate things are going to change...
|
Interesting, nothing really compelling about possible future patches though, and I doubted there would be 
That map question brought back unglamorous memories of Kulas Ravine though t.t
|
On December 16 2011 11:55 mrtomjones wrote:
Some of the answers are pretty cool to hear but some of these questions were kinda... foolish... Reapers dont need their speed back, HT's just need a different form of upgrade as they said, and Ghost emp is fine the way it is..
Seems like you're agreeing with David Kim on all those points.
|
He seems to have a solid plan and understanding. If the top thing on the list is Mules on high yield patches, I think we are in a good spot.
|
I really enjoy David Kim interviews. He is the most articulate balance designer I have seen. Its obvious he plays this game at a high level and spends alot of time thinking about improvements. Thanks for the interview.
|
david knows how to l2p
dustin actually has a bachelors degree in english litterature, i dunno how he got into game making.......
but he is a good spokesperson,
player.. eh not so much,
atleast davvy kept in GM for 3 seasons and he was a formor pro Sc1 and BW player and played WoW quite actively
|
Switzerland2892 Posts
Were those questions really from top GSL players? I would have believed the questions would be more "complicated" and specific.
I think I have already seen all of this on bnet forums
|
thats completely empty as usual.. not a single line worth reading.. you could summarize the hole post with "we r working hard , wait for HOTS"
|
I feel this interview is dated and if it is not then his answers don't reflect any awareness of the state of the meta-game.
|
Nice effort, no content from Blizz as usual.
|
their view on reapers IMO was completely wrong.
the only reason that reapers were too good against zerg was the tiny map size, and that they could kite everything
i preached back in the 5rax reaper days that all that needed to change was roach range increased to prevent kiting of roaches.
now with that increased range, bringing back the reaper speed will bring another way in which the tvz game could be played.
|
On December 16 2011 11:58 SarcasmMonster wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 11:55 mrtomjones wrote:
Some of the answers are pretty cool to hear but some of these questions were kinda... foolish... Reapers dont need their speed back, HT's just need a different form of upgrade as they said, and Ghost emp is fine the way it is.. Seems like you're agreeing with David Kim on all those points.
The way David Kim phrases everyone wants to agree with him isnt it true? :D
|
For Heart of the Swarm, we’re exploring better ways to handle energy upgrades, since we’re not quite satisfied with how they work currently.
Probably upgrade faster regen rate. Calling it.
|
Just explain why current master/GM are flooded with zerg. Hard race and need auto lava inject? I dont think so.
User was warned for this post
|
Decent answers for the most part... The only one I'm really upset about is that removing gold minerals in the GSL worked out because in Korea, Terrans are doing so much better, and because non-Korean tournaments with gold mineral maps don't have a large amount of Terran top finishes, it isn't necessary to remove them.
Either the game is balanced and gold patches can stay no matter how well Terrans are doing (this would simply mean there are more good Terran players) or the game isn't balanced and gold minerals need to go so Terrans don't have an unfair advantage. I thought this would be fairly obvious to a balance designer...
|
I don't understand why you would ask David Kim about the EMP range reduction being too severe. All the EMP change did was bring the EMP radius in line with the current radius for Psi Storm.
|
On December 16 2011 12:06 Corsica wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 11:58 SarcasmMonster wrote:On December 16 2011 11:55 mrtomjones wrote:
Some of the answers are pretty cool to hear but some of these questions were kinda... foolish... Reapers dont need their speed back, HT's just need a different form of upgrade as they said, and Ghost emp is fine the way it is.. Seems like you're agreeing with David Kim on all those points. The way David Kim phrases everyone wants to agree with him isnt it true? :D
The way you phrase things makes understanding very difficult yes? >
|
As usual, very little in the responses, but I'm consistently impressed with how well-informed David Kim always is (or seems to be).
Set of questions were a little disappointing (early reaper speed, really?).
|
There will never be enough space for the amount of questions we want to ask but that was a good read. Hope it happens more often. I love the disclaimer at the start also because their words get blown out of proportion way too often.
|
no carrier Q's 
|
This doesnt really tell me anything
|
Wow that interview makes HotS sound very promising! I'm excited for an energy upgrade that works for the HT, and for more toss strategies!
|
On December 16 2011 12:10 Wren wrote:
As usual, very little in the responses, but I'm consistently impressed with how well-informed David Kim always is (or seems to be).
Set of questions were a little disappointing (early reaper speed, really?).
The unit is basically unused except for early game scouting and minor worker harass. From a design standpoint, it is a worthless unit that has little place in the game. I can see them wanting to try to make it a valid part of game play.
|
No substance. He keeps talking about research, well what research are they looking at? A win rate is made up of so many factors that there has to be case studies for individual games for any player demands to be examined. I have a feeling they're not doing the work needed to make a competent analysis.
|
Why do people even interview Blizz employees? I don't think they have ever in the history of any blizzard game ever given a straight answer to anything.
|
On December 16 2011 12:07 VirgilSC2 wrote:
I don't understand why you would ask David Kim about the EMP range reduction being too severe. All the EMP change did was bring the EMP radius in line with the current radius for Psi Storm.
Ya, but high templars are free and have 0 build time and after you cast storm.. which is like.. alot of work to dodge, you instantly get an archon which is essentialyl invinsible
Havent you been paying attention to all of the terran forum posts? my god, man!
|
seems like he's saying things will change in heart of the swarm which to me is a pretty bs answer considering hots has some time before its out. What about now? what're they going to fix now? TvP is pretty bad atm
|
|
|
Still waiting on that KA.
|
On December 16 2011 12:17 MurMiLLo wrote:
seems like he's saying things will change in heart of the swarm which to me is a pretty bs answer considering hots has some time before its out. What about now? what're they going to fix now? TvP is pretty bad atm
Kim disagrees
Not to be taken lightly is the fact that balance is actually quite good right now
|
lol at the larva inject issue. who the hell is complaining about how "hard" it is?!
|
On December 16 2011 12:07 eleaf wrote:
Just explain why current master/GM are flooded with zerg. Hard race and need auto lava inject? I dont think so.
Huh? Nobody was suggesting anything of the sort.
In any case, number of Zergs in GM is currently 71/200 on US, 79/200 on EU, and 51/200 on KR.
OT: I'm pleased to see some well thought out responses from Blizzard here. It'll be interesting to see how HotS shakes out.
|
Nice effort, but his answers were so broad and general, i know as much as before.
|
On December 16 2011 12:04 TyrantPotato wrote:
their view on reapers IMO was completely wrong.
the only reason that reapers were too good against zerg was the tiny map size, and that they could kite everything
i preached back in the 5rax reaper days that all that needed to change was roach range increased to prevent kiting of roaches.
now with that increased range, bringing back the reaper speed will bring another way in which the tvz game could be played.
You mean 1 rax proxy with tech lab reaper speed opening?All terrans will abuse the shit out of the reapers.I cant believe people actually think that map size was the problem.
In my opinion,they reduced the reaper to non-existant in TvZ .They will change it in HotS so as of now i dun think we will see any reaper change in WoL.
|
On December 16 2011 12:07 VirgilSC2 wrote:
I don't understand why you would ask David Kim about the EMP range reduction being too severe. All the EMP change did was bring the EMP radius in line with the current radius for Psi Storm.
Yeah but Terrans cant win anymore in a balanced game. -.-
That one and the nerf question were just poor questions to ask. KA one was fair enough but once again he dodged the question everyone wanted answered: Why no energy up? He also dodged how it is the weakest caster around currently.
|
Some additional info from the community manager too:
Show nested quote +VTavilo said:
Very disappointed that there is zero points here addressing mech TvP, as well as lategame TvP in general.
You would think one of the lead and influential balance designers would have mentioned these things or pick up that the community is talking about them a lot.
TvP is in protoss favor, and mech was nerfed into the ground by blizzard themselves. They still are not addressing this and fixing it?
Even the statistics agree with player input right now, TvP flip flopped from 55% in Terrans favor to 55% in Protosses favor.
They obviously made a mistake in the last palance patch and it needs to be addressed.
Daxxarri said:@VTavilo: These were concerns that were brought up by pro-players at G-Star, which occurred just as 1.4.2 was being applied. These weren't questions selected at random; they specifically reflect the feedback David received there.
I think it's worth mentioning that, at the time that the event was occurring, the match up heavily favored terran. Also, our numbers do not reflect the flip flop that you've cited.
Lol avilo.
|
On December 16 2011 12:29 Dingobloo wrote:Some additional info from the community manager too: Show nested quote +VTavilo said:
Very disappointed that there is zero points here addressing mech TvP, as well as lategame TvP in general.
You would think one of the lead and influential balance designers would have mentioned these things or pick up that the community is talking about them a lot.
TvP is in protoss favor, and mech was nerfed into the ground by blizzard themselves. They still are not addressing this and fixing it?
Even the statistics agree with player input right now, TvP flip flopped from 55% in Terrans favor to 55% in Protosses favor.
They obviously made a mistake in the last palance patch and it needs to be addressed.
Daxxarri said:@VTavilo: These were concerns that were brought up by pro-players at G-Star, which occurred just as 1.4.2 was being applied. These weren't questions selected at random; they specifically reflect the feedback David received there.
I think it's worth mentioning that, at the time that the event was occurring, the match up heavily favored terran. Also, our numbers do not reflect the flip flop that you've cited. Lol avilo.
Where did you find that quote? Also lol avilo.
|
On December 16 2011 12:31 SarcasmMonster wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 12:29 Dingobloo wrote:Some additional info from the community manager too: VTavilo said:
Very disappointed that there is zero points here addressing mech TvP, as well as lategame TvP in general.
You would think one of the lead and influential balance designers would have mentioned these things or pick up that the community is talking about them a lot.
TvP is in protoss favor, and mech was nerfed into the ground by blizzard themselves. They still are not addressing this and fixing it?
Even the statistics agree with player input right now, TvP flip flopped from 55% in Terrans favor to 55% in Protosses favor.
They obviously made a mistake in the last palance patch and it needs to be addressed.
Daxxarri said:@VTavilo: These were concerns that were brought up by pro-players at G-Star, which occurred just as 1.4.2 was being applied. These weren't questions selected at random; they specifically reflect the feedback David received there.
I think it's worth mentioning that, at the time that the event was occurring, the match up heavily favored terran. Also, our numbers do not reflect the flip flop that you've cited.Lol avilo. Where did you find that quote? Also lol avilo.
Comment section
|
Vatican City State582 Posts
I still disagree with the Khaydarin Amulet changes. He states that the amulet upgrade simply makes Protoss players bring out the unit, use the storm, then forget about it. How does it even help when you have to make a harder decision to make it. 55s of build time, wait 25s to have it useful.
Comparing to ghosts which cost a bit more mineral, but less gas, has the energy upgrade, could snipe twice right out of the barracks, and with the upgrade, has enough energy for EMP.
Just saying that there's a parallel here, and there should be some sort of adjustment made to offset the problems caused by the removal of Khaydarin Amulet upgrade.
|
On December 16 2011 12:32 Dingobloo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 12:31 SarcasmMonster wrote:On December 16 2011 12:29 Dingobloo wrote:Some additional info from the community manager too: VTavilo said:
Very disappointed that there is zero points here addressing mech TvP, as well as lategame TvP in general.
You would think one of the lead and influential balance designers would have mentioned these things or pick up that the community is talking about them a lot.
TvP is in protoss favor, and mech was nerfed into the ground by blizzard themselves. They still are not addressing this and fixing it?
Even the statistics agree with player input right now, TvP flip flopped from 55% in Terrans favor to 55% in Protosses favor.
They obviously made a mistake in the last palance patch and it needs to be addressed.
Daxxarri said:@VTavilo: These were concerns that were brought up by pro-players at G-Star, which occurred just as 1.4.2 was being applied. These weren't questions selected at random; they specifically reflect the feedback David received there.
I think it's worth mentioning that, at the time that the event was occurring, the match up heavily favored terran. Also, our numbers do not reflect the flip flop that you've cited.Lol avilo. Where did you find that quote? Also lol avilo. Comment section
Thanks, I usually avoid the comment section on Blizzard's site.
|
Not too much here we didn't already know, but cool of D.K. to share his thoughts with us.
But no mention of mutalisks being too strong in ZvP? I thought that was a more popular issue than the void ray animation...
|
On December 16 2011 12:07 Andreas wrote:
Decent answers for the most part... The only one I'm really upset about is that removing gold minerals in the GSL worked out because in Korea, Terrans are doing so much better, and because non-Korean tournaments with gold mineral maps don't have a large amount of Terran top finishes, it isn't necessary to remove them.
Either the game is balanced and gold patches can stay no matter how well Terrans are doing (this would simply mean there are more good Terran players) or the game isn't balanced and gold minerals need to go so Terrans don't have an unfair advantage. I thought this would be fairly obvious to a balance designer...
I agree with this. How can they try to balance the games differently in different regions. It's like terran players are allowed to have an easier time playing at non GSL tournaments.
What he said can work both ways as well. He said leaving it in didn't affect much. Then, taking it out shouldn't affect much either. But, everyone knows who can get the most benefit out of it.
|
On December 16 2011 12:34 dacimvrl wrote:
I still disagree with the Khaydarin Amulet changes. He states that the amulet upgrade simply makes Protoss players bring out the unit, use the storm, then forget about it. How does it even help when you have to make a harder decision to make it. 55s of build time, wait 25s to have it useful.
Comparing to ghosts which cost a bit more mineral, but less gas, has the energy upgrade, could snipe twice right out of the barracks, and with the upgrade, has enough energy for EMP.
Just saying that there's a parallel here, and there should be some sort of adjustment made to offset the problems caused by the removal of Khaydarin Amulet upgrade.
I think DK is absoloutly correct. Being able to bank gas or start upgrades / longer build time units and in an emergency cancel them, warp in a HT and be able to storm right away is super powerful.
The point is you can use your gas elsewhere and still be able to cancel and get emergency storms which is stupid. By having to warp in the HT and wait till they ahve energy for storm you are commiting to getting that HT before you see the opponent pushing out.
You are making a strategic decision, not a reactive tactic.
|
the VR beam should have a Ring-pulse that moves along the beam at .6 second intervals. This pulse tells you when the damage is coming and hits.
I still think the damage rate of VRs is too fast. It's insane really. I mean if you look at the fact it does bonus to armored, and it does 20% more to massive on top of that, and THEN it does more damage after charging, VRs are actually insane.
If the firing rate (or damage/time) was more visible, people would start seeing a clearer picture of how good VRs are and maybe be able to come up with a reasonable solution to VR rushes that doesn't prevent them from being useless, but more refined and tactical, as they are supposed to be. A lot of people are bad at the maths, but if they have visual feedback along with results, people can key in pretty quick to what's good and bad.
give back KA, add a cooldown timer to psi storm for 15 seconds.
reapers really need to lose the damage to building. Lose that and I'll let them have 4 speed, as a zerg player. sure, they can be untouchable if you want. But when you can just mass them and take out buildings in one volley and drones in a few seconds, they're OP. that is why they are OP. It had northing to do with them being too fast in the first place, and had everything to do with the fact that they do ridiculous damage to structures. Allow them 1 bomb or remove it completely. P.S. this unit was ripped from Warhammer40k. They have jetpacking raiders with dual guns and a special bomb attack vs buildings in Warhammer40k. This game existed long before. Then again Tyranids are Zergs.
spawn larvae IS too much management. It's too important to drop as a player. The other macro mechanics are not. Theres nothing as hard for terran or protoss to do. They are like they were in brood war, barring chrono and mule. Zerg is completely changed by inject. I'm perfectly willing to drop inject for something else more difficult. hell, I'll take even more unit cost inefficiency than already exists to get rid of it.
|
On December 16 2011 12:29 Dingobloo wrote:Some additional info from the community manager too: Show nested quote +VTavilo said:
Very disappointed that there is zero points here addressing mech TvP, as well as lategame TvP in general.
You would think one of the lead and influential balance designers would have mentioned these things or pick up that the community is talking about them a lot.
TvP is in protoss favor, and mech was nerfed into the ground by blizzard themselves. They still are not addressing this and fixing it?
Even the statistics agree with player input right now, TvP flip flopped from 55% in Terrans favor to 55% in Protosses favor.
They obviously made a mistake in the last palance patch and it needs to be addressed.
Daxxarri said:@VTavilo: These were concerns that were brought up by pro-players at G-Star, which occurred just as 1.4.2 was being applied. These weren't questions selected at random; they specifically reflect the feedback David received there.
I think it's worth mentioning that, at the time that the event was occurring, the match up heavily favored terran. Also, our numbers do not reflect the flip flop that you've cited. Lol avilo.
I always find this point confusing from terran players- when TvP was 55-45% terran favored (actually 65-35% terran favored in Korea), there's absolutely nothing wrong with the match up and nothing needs to change, but if it's 45-55 the other way it's a huge problem. Doesn't seem very consistent to me.
|
Solid, cool to hear about ptoss, I just hope they don't think the replicator gives us more roots or anything like that.
|
People on bnet are still bitching about the Khaydarin Amulet? Blizzard seriously needs to stop answering scrubs.
In any case, I like these interviews. It shows that they do listen to the community.
|
I always find this point confusing from terran players- when TvP was 55-45% terran favored (actually 65-35% terran favored in Korea), there's absolutely nothing wrong with the match up and nothing needs to change, but if it's 45-55 the other way it's a huge problem. Doesn't seem very consistent to me.
I think you would find that Terran players are more concerned/complaining about the balance of TvP at the masters-GM level rather than the pros. In these games the TvP balance hasn't flipped, it has just become imblanced in favour of protoss (from a position of relative balance). That is where I believe your confusion arises.
|
On December 16 2011 13:05 awwnuts07 wrote:
People on bnet are still bitching about the Khaydarin Amulet? Blizzard seriously needs to stop answering scrubs.
These were concerns that were brought up by pro-players at G-Star, which occurred just as 1.4.2 was being applied. These weren't questions selected at random; they specifically reflect the feedback David received there.
/quote Daxxarri
|
On December 16 2011 12:59 Oreo7 wrote:
Solid, cool to hear about ptoss, I just hope they don't think the replicator gives us more roots or anything like that.
The replicator fixes everything. Watch the TvP whining then.
I'm going to replicate 3 medivacs and watch my heal-charge-lots kill EVERYTHING. MUWAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA!!
I'm going to load up some medivacs with zealots, drop them in your base with armour 3 and laugh as your puny bullets do NOTHING. GAHAHAHAHAHAH
The should just remove the zealot death sound. It's a waste of resources from then on.
|
Man, I gladly trade the old EMP radius for a nerf to snipe. Really weird to not see it being brought up :S
|
You'd think acknowledging that "terrans do unusual well in korea" would be indicative of some overarching balance problem (other races being easier to play at a high level), but apparently not.
|
On December 16 2011 13:09 Seiferz wrote:
You'd think acknowledging that "terrans do unusual well in korea" would be indicative of some overarching balance problem (other races being easier to play at a high level), but apparently not.
No, koreans are made of magic and poo rainbows.
And saying "terrans do unusual well in korea" implies they do better in korea, not that they do worse in the rest of the world.
|
I love Dayvie! He's super nice if you ever get the chance to meet him. Thanks for the read.
|
On December 16 2011 12:55 Humanfails wrote:
spawn larvae IS too much management. It's too important to drop as a player. The other macro mechanics are not. Theres nothing as hard for terran or protoss to do. They are like they were in brood war, barring chrono and mule. Zerg is completely changed by inject. I'm perfectly willing to drop inject for something else more difficult. hell, I'll take even more unit cost inefficiency than already exists to get rid of it.
Remembering your larvae injects is not hard ... at all. Have you played Brood War? It requires 10X the mechanics and multitasking that there is in SC2.
|
"And saying "terrans do unusual well in korea" implies they do better in korea, not that they do worse in the rest of the world."
No...but they do..
|
On December 16 2011 12:29 Sabu113 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 12:07 VirgilSC2 wrote:
I don't understand why you would ask David Kim about the EMP range reduction being too severe. All the EMP change did was bring the EMP radius in line with the current radius for Psi Storm. Yeah but Terrans cant win anymore in a balanced game. -.- That one and the nerf question were just poor questions to ask. KA one was fair enough but once again he dodged the question everyone wanted answered: Why no energy up? He also dodged how it is the weakest caster around currently.
In terms of casters, the raven is pretty weak imo. (except in late game air t v t)
Would love to see blizzard's plans for the raven.
|
KA upgrade causes the warp in time for HTs to increase by 10 seconds... causes WG (that warped it) cooldown to increase by 5 seconds. Also flashing floating text outlining that "IT'S A HIGH TEMPLAR, WATCH OUT FOR STORMS"
Haha. I really want to see snipe get a nerf though... it's painful watching TvZ nowadays.
|
Reaper could definitely stand for some further tweaks, but I do not feel that the HOTS reveal of auto-HP regen is the way to go. Why should the reaper get a zerg-like mechanic? Doesn't make sense for a terran bio unit. if you're hurt - that's that, unless you have medivacs.
Since roach range has been buffed, depot is required before rax, and rax build time increase, reapers can honestly stand to have their speed upgrade back to the way it was. 5 rax reaper will never be the huge threat it used to be due to these nerfs, even with early speed upgrade. If David Kim is still a bit paranoid, then just make some adjustments to the upgrade time.
|
On December 16 2011 13:18 Ghola wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 12:55 Humanfails wrote:
spawn larvae IS too much management. It's too important to drop as a player. The other macro mechanics are not. Theres nothing as hard for terran or protoss to do. They are like they were in brood war, barring chrono and mule. Zerg is completely changed by inject. I'm perfectly willing to drop inject for something else more difficult. hell, I'll take even more unit cost inefficiency than already exists to get rid of it.
Remembering your larvae injects is not hard ... at all. Have you played Brood War? It requires 10X the mechanics and multitasking that there is in SC2.
10 years zerg brood war player. Don't lie. there were no forced macro mechanics in the game.
|
I shudder to think about khaydarin coming back. TvP is already broken once chargelot archon is in, once storm is a buyable option I will say that P will always have the upper hand no matter how many ghosts are involved.
|
this was awsome. thank you
|
On December 16 2011 11:58 babo213 wrote:
His answers don't seem to indicate things are going to change...
What do you think should change?
To me, the interview was more "things wont change until HOTS".
|
On December 16 2011 13:28 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 11:58 babo213 wrote:
His answers don't seem to indicate things are going to change... What do you think should change? To me, the interview was more "things wont change until HOTS".
Terran needs to do double damage to zealot type units. That will fix EVERYTHING!
|
On December 16 2011 13:23 Humanfails wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 13:18 Ghola wrote:On December 16 2011 12:55 Humanfails wrote:
spawn larvae IS too much management. It's too important to drop as a player. The other macro mechanics are not. Theres nothing as hard for terran or protoss to do. They are like they were in brood war, barring chrono and mule. Zerg is completely changed by inject. I'm perfectly willing to drop inject for something else more difficult. hell, I'll take even more unit cost inefficiency than already exists to get rid of it.
Remembering your larvae injects is not hard ... at all. Have you played Brood War? It requires 10X the mechanics and multitasking that there is in SC2. 10 years zerg brood war player. Don't lie. there were no forced macro mechanics in the game.
The reason there are forced mechanics in SC2 is because Blizzard rightly realized that with multiple building selection, no unit selection cap, automine, and smartcast, the mechanical skill cap for Starcraft 2 would be too low. Especially for Zerg, whose units all come from the same building.
|
On December 16 2011 12:29 Dingobloo wrote:Some additional info from the community manager too: Show nested quote +VTavilo said:
Very disappointed that there is zero points here addressing mech TvP, as well as lategame TvP in general.
You would think one of the lead and influential balance designers would have mentioned these things or pick up that the community is talking about them a lot.
TvP is in protoss favor, and mech was nerfed into the ground by blizzard themselves. They still are not addressing this and fixing it?
Even the statistics agree with player input right now, TvP flip flopped from 55% in Terrans favor to 55% in Protosses favor.
They obviously made a mistake in the last palance patch and it needs to be addressed.
Daxxarri said:@VTavilo: These were concerns that were brought up by pro-players at G-Star, which occurred just as 1.4.2 was being applied. These weren't questions selected at random; they specifically reflect the feedback David received there.
I think it's worth mentioning that, at the time that the event was occurring, the match up heavily favored terran. Also, our numbers do not reflect the flip flop that you've cited. Lol avilo.
Why is it "lol" that I brought up the mech TvP issue? And lategame TvP issues? If no other Terran is going to step up to the plate, I will say what needs to be said and some concerns like I did in that post.
|
LoL.
All I read is, were not sure about anything, we just try things.
I think balance in this game scares the crap out of blizzard.
I also think it's funny how balancing issues are only regarding common issues.
What about Raven balance? It's not nearly as effective as it's price would incline it to be.
What about the carrier, Is it balanced?
What about all the Terran upgrades people don't use? Balanced?
It's great to look into pro games for balancing issues. But when you're looking at the top tier of competition you avoid the fundamental issues which make units good or not that good. They won't get any readings from unused aspects of each race because more noticeable issues arise. Like for example, gold minerals.
In heart of the swarm, new units are mostly too fancy. I mean come on. Giving zerg a new detection mechanic which requires a caster unit?
They changed the overseer multiple times and it's so ridiculous to see they give up on it.
Same goes for the carrier. Instead of trying to make it a viable rounded unit. Just scratch one of the most nostalgic units and replace it with IMO something protoss does not need.
The shredder is another example of make shift attempts at new units. The role it fits is space control, something terran had very little issues with.
The replicator, a really interesting unit. But does it really have a place in the protoss arsenal? Observer + replicator = Being able to use the enemy's race against them. Mind you, this isn't cut and clear but really bizarre....
Blizzard should open it's doors to community suggestions for the next expansion, something like community testing, voting, to truly have a diplomatic synergy between the creators and the users.
On their own, blizzard clearly has an extremely hard time fine tuning this game.
I repeat, Blizzard has excluded the community when it comes to new Units in all it's games. In return, they compound themselves with problems by making additions which at times crack the foundations of balance by insufficient knowledge which they have repeatedly stated they acquire from the community.
For the good of this Game.
Blizzard should lean on the community for the support they cannot live without to a degree which they never have.
I actually think it's unfair to us the community which carries this game on our shoulders to be excluded in the generation process of new mechanics and units.
Again, in my opinion. Blizzard smears the community with the stain of incompetent human beings who complain continuously because of their self frustration.
Hire me blizzard. I'll work for free.
|
That was a very interesting read. I do think however that it's universally agreed that late game mules on gold patches is a bit unfair, but I guess they'll be looking further into that.
|
We also like to see this kind of feedback, because making games easy to learn but difficult to master is one of Blizzard’s core game design philosophies. So, we don’t see it as a problem that, even at the pro level, perfect mastery hasn’t been achieved yet.
I really enjoyed reading this part.
|
On December 16 2011 13:38 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 12:29 Dingobloo wrote:Some additional info from the community manager too: VTavilo said:
Very disappointed that there is zero points here addressing mech TvP, as well as lategame TvP in general.
You would think one of the lead and influential balance designers would have mentioned these things or pick up that the community is talking about them a lot.
TvP is in protoss favor, and mech was nerfed into the ground by blizzard themselves. They still are not addressing this and fixing it?
Even the statistics agree with player input right now, TvP flip flopped from 55% in Terrans favor to 55% in Protosses favor.
They obviously made a mistake in the last palance patch and it needs to be addressed.
Daxxarri said:@VTavilo: These were concerns that were brought up by pro-players at G-Star, which occurred just as 1.4.2 was being applied. These weren't questions selected at random; they specifically reflect the feedback David received there.
I think it's worth mentioning that, at the time that the event was occurring, the match up heavily favored terran. Also, our numbers do not reflect the flip flop that you've cited.Lol avilo. Why is it "lol" that I brought up the mech TvP issue? And lategame TvP issues? If no other Terran is going to step up to the plate, I will say what needs to be said and some concerns like I did in that post.
Patch 1.4.2 has been out for a month. Isn't it a bit early to pull numbers and conclude that it was a mistake? A month of 45% vs 55% isn't necessarily imbalance. In fact, this 45% vs 55% win rates happen all the time in BW.
|
OMG THIS IS EPIC time to read ^_^
hurray david kim lol
edit: aw wasn't very satisfying T_T more like david kim defending himself against flaming/qq
|
Most of his answers were "we are looking at it closely and monitoring it." I am ok with this usually, but on some questions, that irked me a little. Also, for Amulet, why cant they just decrease the amount of energy given, so that there are not any instant storms, but high templar can be a little more reactionary.
|
On December 16 2011 13:44 SarcasmMonster wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 13:38 avilo wrote:On December 16 2011 12:29 Dingobloo wrote:Some additional info from the community manager too: VTavilo said:
Very disappointed that there is zero points here addressing mech TvP, as well as lategame TvP in general.
You would think one of the lead and influential balance designers would have mentioned these things or pick up that the community is talking about them a lot.
TvP is in protoss favor, and mech was nerfed into the ground by blizzard themselves. They still are not addressing this and fixing it?
Even the statistics agree with player input right now, TvP flip flopped from 55% in Terrans favor to 55% in Protosses favor.
They obviously made a mistake in the last palance patch and it needs to be addressed.
Daxxarri said:@VTavilo: These were concerns that were brought up by pro-players at G-Star, which occurred just as 1.4.2 was being applied. These weren't questions selected at random; they specifically reflect the feedback David received there.
I think it's worth mentioning that, at the time that the event was occurring, the match up heavily favored terran. Also, our numbers do not reflect the flip flop that you've cited.Lol avilo. Why is it "lol" that I brought up the mech TvP issue? And lategame TvP issues? If no other Terran is going to step up to the plate, I will say what needs to be said and some concerns like I did in that post. Patch 1.4.2 has been out for a month. Isn't it a bit early to pull numbers and conclude that it was a mistake? A month of 45% vs 55% isn't necessarily imbalance. In fact, this 45% vs 55% win rates happen all the time in BW.
Ssshhh, terran have been waiting since launch to cry about balance but never had the stats to support it, UNTIL NOW!
Let them have their time in the sun. I mean, it's been 12 months with terran being ahead in every matchup, think of how suffocating that must have been if you were losing games.
Now they can finally blame it on balance!
What about the carrier, Is it balanced?
The carrier is exactly where they want it to be. They didn't want to put it in the game, so they ensured that no one would use it. Job well done!
|
On December 16 2011 13:38 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 12:29 Dingobloo wrote:Some additional info from the community manager too: VTavilo said:
Very disappointed that there is zero points here addressing mech TvP, as well as lategame TvP in general.
You would think one of the lead and influential balance designers would have mentioned these things or pick up that the community is talking about them a lot.
TvP is in protoss favor, and mech was nerfed into the ground by blizzard themselves. They still are not addressing this and fixing it?
Even the statistics agree with player input right now, TvP flip flopped from 55% in Terrans favor to 55% in Protosses favor.
They obviously made a mistake in the last palance patch and it needs to be addressed.
Daxxarri said:@VTavilo: These were concerns that were brought up by pro-players at G-Star, which occurred just as 1.4.2 was being applied. These weren't questions selected at random; they specifically reflect the feedback David received there.
I think it's worth mentioning that, at the time that the event was occurring, the match up heavily favored terran. Also, our numbers do not reflect the flip flop that you've cited.Lol avilo. Why is it "lol" that I brought up the mech TvP issue? And lategame TvP issues? If no other Terran is going to step up to the plate, I will say what needs to be said and some concerns like I did in that post.
It would be pretty hard to make mech viable without significantly altering the fundamentals of each race. you make mech stronger and suddenly the 111 is completely broken, unless you make Protoss gateway units beefy like they were in brood war. But then that would fuck up zerg because suddenly the 4gate and any other early game rush becomes unstoppable.
I agree though, mech TvP was awesome in Brood War.
|
Does anyone else cringe when he says "We didn't like how.." for some of the answers? Seems to me they have this set logic about how the game is supposed to be played and everyone is wrong if they deviate from that...
|
EMP should not be in the game at all...its crazy how fast my 100 food army can get crushed from 4 emp's...if Protoss and Terran are on the same mining rate then protoss cannot rebuild the army to deal with 4 emp's to the face.
EMP is way too good.
|
Well this will surely be a balance whine thread (already is) and people will bash DK. Nothing new here, and no interesting information/anything useful. Wait for HOTS for anything, yep, we've heard.
|
IMO, if the emp radius is larger, then the temps need khydarian. It's because the ghost is already very effective, doing a considerable amount of damage to small units. Templar doesn't have a firsthand attack. The last thing we want is a 125/200 Terran army crushing a 200/200 toss army because of two cloaked ghosts.
The one unit that might need nerf is marauder because in the TZ vs TP combo, TZ can rush the protoss all too easily, most well demonstrated by the Kas/Aristeo of Empire. Protoss cant do anything, because the slow will kite the zealot all day, and if terran moves out, there are plenty of lings waiting outside.
Injects are pretty okay, because Zerg has ability to make 3 hatches when their army is maxed, inject time to time, and then when the engage comes, they max out back on lings or something like that in about 3 seconds.
+ Show Spoiler +Im not a protoss player, just saying if my words reflected that
|
On December 16 2011 13:55 Energizer wrote:
Does anyone else cringe when he says "We didn't like how.." for some of the answers? Seems to me they have this set logic about how the game is supposed to be played and everyone is wrong if they deviate from that...
They have to have some goal for how the game should play out or it would be a mess, and KA and one EMP ending the game were a mess. There is a middle ground between them dictating every moment of the game, and fixing broken abilities and units, largely because they work towards the same goal. If something is too strong it makes it feel like it's the only way to play rather than one of many viable options.
|
On December 16 2011 13:59 TSCrEaToR- wrote:IMO, if the emp radius is larger, then the temps need khydarian. It's because the ghost is already very effective, doing a considerable amount of damage to small units. Templar doesn't have a firsthand attack. The last thing we want is a 125/200 Terran army crushing a 200/200 toss army because of two cloaked ghosts. The one unit that might need nerf is marauder because in the TZ vs TP combo, TZ can rush the protoss all too easily, most well demonstrated by the Kas/Aristeo of Empire. Protoss cant do anything, because the slow will kite the zealot all day, and if terran moves out, there are plenty of lings waiting outside. Injects are pretty okay, because Zerg has ability to make 3 hatches when their army is maxed, inject time to time, and then when the engage comes, they max out back on lings or something like that in about 3 seconds. + Show Spoiler +Im not a protoss player, just saying if my words reflected that
The game is not, and will never be, balanced around 2v2. If we reach a time where that is true, Starcraft will no longer be fit to be seen as an ESPORT for 1v1.
I don't think the majority of Terran players realize that the EMP Radius is now identical to that of Psi Storm, perhaps there needs to be a PSA about it or something.
|
On December 16 2011 13:55 Energizer wrote:
Does anyone else cringe when he says "We didn't like how.." for some of the answers? Seems to me they have this set logic about how the game is supposed to be played and everyone is wrong if they deviate from that...
He didn't say 'We didn't like' once. The closest he got was 'We don’t like making changes unless they’re necessary' in the Terran stop nerfing us section.
In every other instance he actually said 'We like ... '
Seems to me you need to re-read it
And I hope to hell that have some 'logic' of how they want the game to played. Otherwise they are just making random changes and crossing their fingers that it works.
As he stated 'We also like to see this kind of feedback, because making games easy to learn but difficult to master is one of Blizzard’s core game design philosophies.'
That is part of their 'logic' as to how the game 'should' be balanced and played.
|
On December 16 2011 13:59 TSCrEaToR- wrote:IMO, if the emp radius is larger, then the temps need khydarian. It's because the ghost is already very effective, doing a considerable amount of damage to small units. Templar doesn't have a firsthand attack. The last thing we want is a 125/200 Terran army crushing a 200/200 toss army because of two cloaked ghosts. The one unit that might need nerf is marauder because in the TZ vs TP combo, TZ can rush the protoss all too easily, most well demonstrated by the Kas/Aristeo of Empire. Protoss cant do anything, because the slow will kite the zealot all day, and if terran moves out, there are plenty of lings waiting outside. Injects are pretty okay, because Zerg has ability to make 3 hatches when their army is maxed, inject time to time, and then when the engage comes, they max out back on lings or something like that in about 3 seconds. + Show Spoiler +Im not a protoss player, just saying if my words reflected that
I have lost significantly more games to a 125 army vs my 200 army from getting stormed twice, then I have won ( dont think I have ever won) a with a 125 army emping a 200 army, this is flat ridiculous. As usual I don't want to bash him but DK's answers are extremely lackluster to say the least, not that this is anything knew. I wish they had more people on the balance team so their could be more opinions on what needs to be changed, because blizzard always seems to be behind the metagame.
The only thing I liked was that they take input from GSL players although this is nothing new I believe.
|
On December 16 2011 13:52 Ghola wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 13:38 avilo wrote:On December 16 2011 12:29 Dingobloo wrote:Some additional info from the community manager too: VTavilo said:
Very disappointed that there is zero points here addressing mech TvP, as well as lategame TvP in general.
You would think one of the lead and influential balance designers would have mentioned these things or pick up that the community is talking about them a lot.
TvP is in protoss favor, and mech was nerfed into the ground by blizzard themselves. They still are not addressing this and fixing it?
Even the statistics agree with player input right now, TvP flip flopped from 55% in Terrans favor to 55% in Protosses favor.
They obviously made a mistake in the last palance patch and it needs to be addressed.
Daxxarri said:@VTavilo: These were concerns that were brought up by pro-players at G-Star, which occurred just as 1.4.2 was being applied. These weren't questions selected at random; they specifically reflect the feedback David received there.
I think it's worth mentioning that, at the time that the event was occurring, the match up heavily favored terran. Also, our numbers do not reflect the flip flop that you've cited.Lol avilo. Why is it "lol" that I brought up the mech TvP issue? And lategame TvP issues? If no other Terran is going to step up to the plate, I will say what needs to be said and some concerns like I did in that post. It would be pretty hard to make mech viable without significantly altering the fundamentals of each race. you make mech stronger and suddenly the 111 is completely broken, unless you make Protoss gateway units beefy like they were in brood war. But then that would fuck up zerg because suddenly the 4gate and any other early game rush becomes unstoppable. I agree though, mech TvP was awesome in Brood War.
Not really, because there are indirect ways to buffing mech tvp without affecting unit interactions, such as decreasing armory price to 150/50, as well as reducing cost of mech level 2 and 3 upgrades (similar to what they did for Protoss upgrades). And while yes, a type of change like that would help mech out in the other match-ups as well, the question is to blizzard from players that want mech to be viable: what is so wrong with mech becoming a viable strategy? Why are they so against tanks being usable in TvP in the fashion that they are in brood war, which produced exciting positional games?
There are other things they can do that do include unit changes again, such as thors energy and such, but yes I agree those would probably impact unit interactions way too much.
But as of now, it's difficult to even say they are even looking at what they've done to mech tvp...
|
I liked seeing him mention that unit production is harder for protoss and terran than for zerg. Every time I hear someone talk about how zerg is a macro race and 'macro is hard', they follow it up with some cry about how they struggle with injects. Then I look at people managing factories, barracks and starports and I'm really glad I play zerg. But I'm not gonna delude myself into thinking I've got it rough because I have to inject...
|
if they're concerned about warp in templars, they should add amulet back but have a few second cooldown until you can use any spells. for example, amulet is back but a cooldown of 2 seconds so that you can't just warp in a templar and immediately storm
|
when was the last time someone won GSL finals with protoss?
|
On December 16 2011 13:59 TSCrEaToR- wrote:IMO, if the emp radius is larger, then the temps need khydarian. It's because the ghost is already very effective, doing a considerable amount of damage to small units. Templar doesn't have a firsthand attack. The last thing we want is a 125/200 Terran army crushing a 200/200 toss army because of two cloaked ghosts. The one unit that might need nerf is marauder because in the TZ vs TP combo, TZ can rush the protoss all too easily, most well demonstrated by the Kas/Aristeo of Empire. Protoss cant do anything, because the slow will kite the zealot all day, and if terran moves out, there are plenty of lings waiting outside. Injects are pretty okay, because Zerg has ability to make 3 hatches when their army is maxed, inject time to time, and then when the engage comes, they max out back on lings or something like that in about 3 seconds. + Show Spoiler +Im not a protoss player, just saying if my words reflected that
... Seriously?
A Terran army that is 75 supply down on a Protoss army can win due to four EMPs or twelve snipes?
The game needs balancing around 2v2 due to an early game TZ v TP "imbalance"?
Getting back to the interview if would have been interesting what to know what they are actually going to do in some concrete form on at least one thing, rather than just knowing they are looking at things...
|
He managed to type up that whole thing without stating anything they haven't before. Basically just "we like feedback"/"we're cautious with changes"/"we made a change because we thought something needed to be changed" (how enlightening) / "patches = small changes, expansions = big changes". While it's nice to actually hear from them, there isn't a single new piece of information there.
|
EMP radius nerf too severe? EMP still completely devastates a protoss army without counter. range was never the issue and nerfing it didnt make it any less overpowered against protoss
|
LOL too many noob complaints. I feel bad for blizzard having to listen to this shit
|
On December 16 2011 14:25 ATLzac wrote:
LOL too many noob complaints. I feel bad for blizzard having to listen to this shit
Like Idra said re: the PPSN thing. It's most entertaining if you just believe everything you read.
That dude had a 200 supply army and lost to a 125 supply army cause of 2 storms OMFG! He must have stimmed twice and run back and forth in the storm to get it to hit his entire army. That shit takes skill man!
HT scouted! Quick, hold position!! I'm picturing him spamming the H and T on his marines. HOLD STILL FASTER!!
That's it! that's what HT means! Hold and Stim!
|
If they nerf mules because their shitty rock-covered gold bases are imbalanced, I'm going to rage so hard.
|
There is no way top GSL competitors made those complaints. Spawn Larvae too hard to manage? Really? Most of those questions seem more like they were pulled from the Battle.net forums or the dregs of the Strategy Forum.
Good answers from Kim though. And I agree, game balance is basically there. That's why I'm not too worried about Heart of the Swarm. They have a really solid base to build on.
|
Solution for inject difficulties? Build another Hatch brooooooooo
|
On December 16 2011 14:28 Kharnage wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 14:25 ATLzac wrote:
LOL too many noob complaints. I feel bad for blizzard having to listen to this shit Like Idra said re: the PPSN thing. It's most entertaining if you just believe everything you read. That dude had a 200 supply army and lost to a 125 supply army cause of 2 storms OMFG! He must have stimmed twice and run back and forth in the storm to get it to hit his entire army. That shit takes skill man! HT scouted! Quick, hold position!! I'm picturing him spamming the H and T on his marines. HOLD STILL FASTER!! That's it! that's what HT means! Hold and S tim!
Some of these comments are so rediculous you gota wonder if people have actually played sc2 or just watch GSL and listen to SOTG. 2 storms kills all your marines if you move out right away, and pure maraduers suck vs zealots. You have probably never played terran though so I won't bother saying more.
Anyways its interesting that david kim seems to care a lot about GSL balance, but I think he has somewhat of the right idea. The problem is is that I don't think he takes into accounts that the GSL is a remarkably small pool of players, and even though they are the best as a group, some players are significantly just better than others, but to the average plat/gold or low league player it may look like the race they play is imbalanced. I have seen so many comments about "this is OP" after a player wins, even though one player is clearly better.
If you are a bronze and you go play a masters you will get completely owned no matter what the MU is.
|
interesting how no one mentioned helions. would like to see them be more viable in mech play.
|
100% PR answers, didn't tough any points that weren't toughed already and did not gave any ACTUAL yes/no answer.
|
Interesting, I particularly enjoyed his comments about terran. Thanks so much mate!
|
basically... buff protoss?
|
|
|
I would love for a faster energy regen instead of + base energy. Infested terrrans EVERYWHERE!
That was a great read. I got the impression that Blizzard is always trying to improve what they have planned with the expansion. It reminds me of Day[9]. On SoTG he said he is always incredibly hard on himself. Otherwise he stops improving. Just like a player's ability, SC balancing is always terrible when compared to perfection.
|
I lol'd at Larva Inject too hard. haha. Bnet forums make my day.
|
On December 16 2011 13:55 Energizer wrote:
Does anyone else cringe when he says "We didn't like how.." for some of the answers? Seems to me they have this set logic about how the game is supposed to be played and everyone is wrong if they deviate from that...
Well duh, you develop a game on what you want it to be like. You don't just put random things in it and, no matter what the game turns out to be like, say that it's ok. Otherwise they might as well not make 3 races, why not just 1. Etc.
|
i think its so hard to properly balance races in a game like starcraft2 since there are just so many factors such as the map the player and the strategy, just looking at statistics alone isnt a particularly accurate way of inspecting balance... i guess balance will just have to come with time, i mean look at BW and how long it took for blizzard to balance that
|
I can't believe zerg players actually complained "larvae is too hard to use" lol
|
I just think mules need a cooldown if anything. The gold minerals are fine really if the maps are made properly. Would we be seeing units like the shredder if Terrans properly defended their 3rd+ bases with planetaries instead of greedily going for orbitals, not being able to keep up with macro while they're busy stutterstepping, then just spamming mules on gold bases? Perhaps, but it wouldn't be needed as much for map control.
What frustrates me most is that blizzard never really reverts nerfs after specific issues are addressed. Reaper too good with speed vs zerg? No problem, just nerf reapers instead of making queens slightly faster or increasing roach range. Then when roaches get increased range because zerg needs it, they don't go back and address what caused reapers to get nerfed to begin with. Same goes for the queen speed nerf (due to the spine crawler/creep tumor push), they nerf the spine crawler burrow speed. Would it really hurt to give queens faster movement speed off creep now that the crawlers were nerfed so badly or are they afraid of letting zergs pressure so early in the same ways that protoss can cannon rush or terrans can bunker rush much earlier?
The thing is they bandaid patch things over and over until very little of what they originally intended remains: That being these cool units that they worked so hard on rarely get used (reapers, mothership, viking harass, hydras, ultras, carriers, BCs, numerous engineering bay upgrades) and eventually get removed or forgotten.
|
On December 16 2011 15:10 MildSeven wrote:
I can't believe zerg players actually complained "larvae is too hard to use" lol
I'm sure its the same people who said the campaign was too long....fags.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On December 16 2011 15:00 KevinIX wrote:
I lol'd at Larva Inject too hard. haha. Bnet forums make my day.
Except, they're actually made by pro-gamers at G-star (Korea?) People should read before trying to give their opinions.
|
blizzcon was awhile ago, i wonder if DK feels the same now?
|
On December 16 2011 12:06 SarcasmMonster wrote:Show nested quote +For Heart of the Swarm, we’re exploring better ways to handle energy upgrades, since we’re not quite satisfied with how they work currently. Probably upgrade faster regen rate. Calling it.
I am very much in support of this idea
BW upgrades generally increased max energy 50 and and starting energy by 12.5, which isn't a bad way to go either. I don't know why it was decided that increasing max energy was a bad idea for WoL (smartcast, I guess?)
Warp-in storm is bad design, whether it's balanced or not, and it's not coming back.
|
I find it rather weird that the Protoss race, the ones who are less complete (not balance-wise, I am not talking about balance in this entire reply), are the ones who get the less stuff in HoTS.
Terrans: 2 new units, 4 upgraded units (battle helions, Battlecruiser ability, reaper ability, thor)
Zergs: 2 new units, 3 upgraded units (Ultras, Banelings, Hydras), 1 removed unit (overseer)
Protoss: 3 new units, 2 removed units, 2 nexus abilities.
So Terrans, whom in Blizzard's own words are the most complete race in WoL, get the most in HoTS....??
|
Some pretty decent responses, I think.
I like that he's willing to point out that difficult /= broken. Certain things are intentionally difficult, but it's a matter of comparing them with their asymmetrical counterparts to see if the game is balanced overall.
Good read.
|
It always astounds me how blizzard can go about saying so many words without actually answering or addressing a single thing.
|
I agree they need to stop nerfing terrans. I also agree that the reaper needs to be fixed. Minor adjustments will make this game perfectly balanced.
|
On December 16 2011 15:53 Patate wrote:
I find it rather weird that the Protoss race, the ones who are less complete (not balance-wise, I am not talking about balance in this entire reply), are the ones who get the less stuff in HoTS.
Terrans: 2 new units, 4 upgraded units (battle helions, Battlecruiser ability, reaper ability, thor)
Zergs: 2 new units, 3 upgraded units (Ultras, Banelings, Hydras), 1 removed unit (overseer)
Protoss: 3 new units, 2 removed units, 2 nexus abilities.
So Terrans, whom in Blizzard's own words are the most complete race in WoL, get the most in HoTS....??
Not all new additions are equal in significance. For example, I think nexus recall will revolutionize protoss play.
|
They should either remove the reaper and replace it with something more interesting or at least make it somewhat useful.
|
Good to know that David Kim still understands how to balance a game, and hears player concerns and tournament results. I think part of the reason Blizzard has been doing so well: Taking a mediated approach to the chorus of imbalance cries from all sides.
|
If void ray animations are one of the major concerns, I think we can say Wings of Liberty was pretty well done
|
The mule thing is just funny. Anyway i hope they removed the golds, because of the reason that if you are ahead get more ahead, simply broke the game thanks to golds, making it impossible to come back after getting behind. And because rockless golds meant protoss lost the game before it started against zerg. If they removed those only because of the mules it would be hilarious.
Was crazy how strongly abused the golds were on antiga and dual sight, just before they removed them.
|
On December 16 2011 12:00 Zergrusher wrote:
david knows how to l2p
dustin actually has a bachelors degree in english litterature, i dunno how he got into game making.......
but he is a good spokesperson,
player.. eh not so much,
atleast davvy kept in GM for 3 seasons and he was a formor pro Sc1 and BW player and played WoW quite actively
He's a white guy that looks people in the eye while talking emphatically.
(just kidding. sort of)
|
On December 16 2011 12:07 Andreas wrote:
Decent answers for the most part... The only one I'm really upset about is that removing gold minerals in the GSL worked out because in Korea, Terrans are doing so much better, and because non-Korean tournaments with gold mineral maps don't have a large amount of Terran top finishes, it isn't necessary to remove them.
Either the game is balanced and gold patches can stay no matter how well Terrans are doing (this would simply mean there are more good Terran players) or the game isn't balanced and gold minerals need to go so Terrans don't have an unfair advantage. I thought this would be fairly obvious to a balance designer...
even though other races complain about mules. the day they take out mules, terrans will start doing very poorly in tournaments everywhere.
|
On December 16 2011 12:20 Kharnage wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 12:17 MurMiLLo wrote:
seems like he's saying things will change in heart of the swarm which to me is a pretty bs answer considering hots has some time before its out. What about now? what're they going to fix now? TvP is pretty bad atm Kim disagrees Show nested quote +Not to be taken lightly is the fact that balance is actually quite good right now
They always say that. Why would they say otherwise? They'd lose face.
|
MULEs are too embedded in the game to take out out now...the entire game would have to be rebalanced, because the income curves of one-base terran would be so different. They'd have to change everything from gateway build times to stim cost.
Put MULEs on a 30-second cooldown, or something similar, so Terran can't spam 8 MULEs on a naked gold base. "I'm almost afraid to look at the income tab" is a common caster quote because everyone knows its embarrassing to see a Terran income of 3000 from a single gold mining base.
|
1. Mules are awesome everywhere and its kinda funny that a terran on 2 base can out mine a protoss or a zerg on 3 easily with mules. They make all ins a lot more effective, they encourage poor play like players never using their energy then going wait I have loads of energy lets drop 15 mules.
2. People's complaints about the gold bases weren't specifically about mules being dropped on them its just that gold bases favor the race of terran a lot more than Zerg or Protoss because of planetary fortresses being very good specifically against zerg. Its a huge investment to be able to deny the gold if there is a pf on it with turrets surrounding it.
3. He didn't talk about how neural parasite isn't at all being used because of the range nerf. They need to return it to its previous form asap because its entirely useless now, thats not an exaggeration. There is no way you can np a colossus without getting your infestors killed, there is no way you can np a tank without getting your infestors killed. All in all the only thing np is good for at the moment is maybe nping a probe and making the enemies units or maybe a high templar if they dont feedback them right away since that costs barely anything to cast and then they can turn it into a perfectly useful unit.
4. The removing the golds from the GSL has only happened recently and going by the GSL format there is never all that much change right away it happens over 2-3 seasons so they were never going to see huge changes for a little while. It has helped the GSL in the fact that a Zerg was in the last final and it wasn't just because leenock is great it was because of the gold bases being removed. If they weren't everyone would have said right away that GSL is going to be another TvT final. Id predict right away next year its going to be pretty even in terms of race distribution in the GSL at least more than previous seasons anyway.
To be honest I get what he is saying about looking at the raw numbers he doesn't see much of a problem at the moment but if he listened to a lot of the players like on state of the game or day9 they would hear them joke about how np is bloody useless now.
|
Not complete!! Why do all casters have 3 spells each except the high templar?
|
Mules are to good have you watched korean Terran players play late game they just sacc all scvs except for those that harvest gas and mule spam from like 6-8 orbitals. But yes mules has been in the game to long to remove them mb a slight nerf to the mineral harvest gain would make them less abusive
|
On December 16 2011 12:00 Zergrusher wrote:
david knows how to l2p
dustin actually has a bachelors degree in english litterature, i dunno how he got into game making.......
but he is a good spokesperson,
player.. eh not so much,
atleast davvy kept in GM for 3 seasons and he was a formor pro Sc1 and BW player and played WoW quite actively
Heaps of people end up in careers very different from what their first bachelor degree was, he probably got that degree over 20 years ago...
Not much specific info but it's nice to know they are aware of the community's concerns.
|
On December 16 2011 13:35 Ghola wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 13:23 Humanfails wrote:On December 16 2011 13:18 Ghola wrote:On December 16 2011 12:55 Humanfails wrote:
spawn larvae IS too much management. It's too important to drop as a player. The other macro mechanics are not. Theres nothing as hard for terran or protoss to do. They are like they were in brood war, barring chrono and mule. Zerg is completely changed by inject. I'm perfectly willing to drop inject for something else more difficult. hell, I'll take even more unit cost inefficiency than already exists to get rid of it.
Remembering your larvae injects is not hard ... at all. Have you played Brood War? It requires 10X the mechanics and multitasking that there is in SC2. 10 years zerg brood war player. Don't lie. there were no forced macro mechanics in the game. The reason there are forced mechanics in SC2 is because Blizzard rightly realized that with multiple building selection, no unit selection cap, automine, and smartcast, the mechanical skill cap for Starcraft 2 would be too low. Especially for Zerg, whose units all come from the same building.
you realize what you're saying is that blizzard made things easy by purposely doing so, and as such lowered the skill cap, so they brought it back up by bringing in what are confounding variables in game balance, things that only detract from the game, and inject is actually extraordinarily hard to maintain while ALSO trying to micro .
give me back brood war mechanics.
remember, this is the same balance designer who gave oprotoss a fast cycle firing splash unit that fires concave death lines, a 3 range anti-bio unit, and now a +1 range immortal that rapes roaches while being invincible, as NP was -1 range at the same time. I'd like a unit comp other than lingfestor please.
Look at this. Tanks worked in brood war, where there was no smartfire. Reavers existed, and reavers with 125 (!!) damage were balanced because you could micro your zerg army to sac some units and keep killing the reavers until you got through. Unlike colossus which can walk over its own army to retreat to safety, can walk up cliffs to retreat, does far less damage, and yet manages to wipe out zerg armies with ridiculous ease.
So, tanks worked in brood war, even with the overkilling via lack of smartfire. Smartfire was added to the game. Why? What did it bring to the game? It made tanks overpowered, and tanks had to be nerfed. Instead of removing smartfire, tank damage was nerfed. tanks still slaughter roaches, when roaches were supposed to be the main go-to unit for zerg.
they were. dont deny it. Zerg main unit in brood war: hydralisk. 75m25g. 1 supply. roach in beta. 75m25g, 1 supply. Smartfire makes them very poor choices without great unit control, burrow move,etc. zerg army was cut in half when roaches were made 2 supply. nothing has been added or changed to replace them. roaches were overpowered as 1 supply 2 armor. but their role was to soak damage, and possibly always be built but in equal numbers with lings to be damage soaks while lings attacked. This theoretical does not work out duiring actual gameplay, and this should've been noted by playtesters before the beta. Look at the theoretical swarm host that spawns units at enemies every so often. The game video showed a completely optimal scenario for the zerg spawning and the terran player was trash, and it did very little to nothing, unlike the terran area denial unit that raped everything. I recall browderhead saying that "we put things in a little overpowered, and we like to tone it down later". Well, the terran unit lived up to that, the zerg unit looked like it needed to be toned UP.
Lets look at terrans now.
Firebat. 16 damage, could stim to do quite a bit more, good splash, forget the range but 4 of them in a bunker could wipe out droves of lings or zealots. hellions? Cool in concept, turned out to be too much. and too little at the same time. had to be nerfed because of runby, but takes no gas, unlike any other splash unit in the game. versatility increased.
smartfire, especially for tanks. versatility increased. no more micro required for aiming tanks.
medivac. medics were already tough as shit. it's difficult to deal with terran bio at all until lurkers in brood war. the main reason was they made stim and go cake. Lurker shut that down. Drops with medics either were heal light or dps light. Now drops are DPS heavy and heal medium. Remember, lurker was removed and baneling added. A unit must be made over and over to counter a unit thats very cheap, synergizes with mule, and can be made over and over the same way. thats not hard counter. thats soft counter. anyone who's read Sirlin (google) would be familiar with the concept.
Look at all that versatility added intentionally. And then DB comes out and says terrans have too much versatility. Of course, because they were designed to be that way. The took what worked with Terran, and improved on it. could the same be said for zerg or protoss? All the Terran qq about nerfs, those nerfs would be unneecssary if Z and P had instead both gotten buffs, to keep their MU equal to each other and themselves, and to raise their MU to equall evel with T.
Questionable decisions, bad logic, faulty logic, every step of the way. I'm not going to say someone could've done better, but someone could've done better.
What was a problem with TvZ? bunker rush and reapers. star queens with 50 energy, so 1 inject and 1 creep tumor immediately. increase creep tumor spread radius 1.
what was problem with TvP? 1-1-1. Immortal shields reduce incoming range damage by 66%. instead of down to 10. Now they're short range tanky units with high DPS, not busted by marines or banshees as much.
PvZ, now that immortal is like that? Doesn't really change. Immortals will be out front to get neuraled and ling'd and hydra'd. And never getting 1 range means they cant hide behind stalkers. Theyre meant to be the tanks dammit. stalkers were obviiously meant to be light hp support units that jump into combat and do damage. (personally, I think protoss QQ'd about immortal because they lacked the ability to zealot/stalker hug while using immortals. Or they lacked the ability to just use some zealots, unlike now. its funny the metagame has jumped up to solve exactly the problem protoss had with immortals after immortals were buffed. One person said "my immortals run around in back and do nothing". bad micro is the fault of not enough range, herp).
I can't imagine that in 10 years they didn't work out some formula and draw up some tables charts and other stuff to help guide them in creating units and abilities in sc2.
Another way to do it, a way that would work infinitely faster,would be for the community of sc2 to take it upon themselves to balance the game. After seeing someone mimic swarm host as it shot out miniature hydralisks, I reasoned that why doesn't the community do this already? create maps that you can tweak onyour own with very little effort, or be tweaked in game immediately, such as hellion speed or damage and damage multiplication.
the sc2 community could run its own "patches" of maps released to test specific buffs and nerfs and the community itself could vote as a whole whether its a positive or negative step.
Going even further, there could be a joinable group, and people should have to "show their work" when it comes to what they propose to be changed and why. Then those who are serious get their ideas noticed, these ideas get put into a "faux-patch" map that is released, and everyone who wants to get involved can play it and give feedbACk. think of it like starcraft2 balance wiki.
Point is, if the gamers really feel there's imbalances, why are we letting two people who obviously cant do it right after 10 years do it for us? sc2 communities already make "balanced" maps for the races. taking it one step further, they could create true balance in far quicker time. As a side note, "balanced" maps... all maps should be balanced ofr all races regardless. If any map has an imbalance, I blame racial imbalance. All races should be equally capable of taking advantage of terrain, or failing that, as we don't want mirror match up chess games all day, all races should have unique advantages of terrain to them and also unique ways of countering other race's advantages with good countering selection.
back on the subject of inject.
Inject is one of those mechanics that creates a need to halve your attention. Protoss and terran both have this to some degree. But! Zerg positioning is important. Micro is important. I've lost games from going back to inject and letting the A-move happen 1 second too long. I've lost games from playing micro wars and not having enough backup larvae. Anyone who says "Zerg is the remax race" is shortsighted at best. Remaxing only occurs with enough larvae and mineral/gas float. which means zerg has to sit on its army for a while to "remax instantly". This argument is therefore a huge fallacy. i've been getting straight out killed by high level 4 gates lately, and the raeson is that inject actually tkes 69 seconds to pop 8 zerglings, while 4 gate takes 25 zseconds to pop unchrono'd zealots. Z and P have polar opposite army production mechanisms, and lots of people would say warpgte was just a bad mechanic that shouldn't have been added. In a way I agree. remove WG, remove reactors, an d remove inject. Let terrans even keep mule and protoss even keep chrono, hell.
Protoss can micro very well (FF and colossus moving isn't that difficult), and make up for any slack created by not using their macro abilities for army. Terran can do the same thing. Zerg cannot. Zerg must macro while trying to micro. failure at one usually means the battle swings in their favor. but then theres how the excess energy gets used. macro hatches are bad because they are economy waste, unless you can make 100% use of them while injected 100% of the time. waste = behind in the unit production/attack scenario. terran and protoss can mule drop and chrono WG their way down to 0 energy in no time and in this way, their mechanics reward superior micro and forgetting to macro. Zerg is not rewarded like this, because an inject lost is lost forever.
|
OK interview. David Kim would make a good politician, all answers sounds quite good at first but the true content to word ratio is pretty low..
|
On December 16 2011 16:52 Rexeus wrote:
Not complete!! Why do all casters have 3 spells each except the high templar?
storm feedback merge?
|
On December 16 2011 17:30 ShotgunMike wrote:
OK interview. David Kim would make a good politician, all answers sounds quite good at first but the true content to word ratio is pretty low..
how do you know he wrote it himself?
|
To me only the first of the first seven questions were worth asking, I don't understand why people think the others are real issues. :S
Were people having trouble reading that Void Ray damage is 6, but 10 vs armoured, or is the complaint that there is no mention of the charged damage? On the Prismatic Beam description, they can simply include the text
"Once charged, the Void Ray's damage output is increased by +2 range, +6 vs Armoured and further increased by 20% overall vs Massive units."
It would be nice if Blizzard would clarify this 20%, as it could just be a bonus rounded off once that they just called 20%* or a consistent bonus that rounds off to the nearest whole number, which seems likely, because the damage and hit points are stored as floating point numbers by simply displayed as integers, unless it's different from Brood War.
I could probably find the 20% in the map editor, but I don't want to bother now. 
*Adrenal Glands gives "20%" to attack rate (~18.57% really). There were (may still be) other cases of this rounding off of bonuses to sound neater, like their "20%", one other example being the Fungal Growth damage to Armoured after the initial buff. 36 + "30% vs armoured" would equal 46.8, a lot of people just assumed it was 33% and thought the damage must be 48 to armoured (but never checked), some others thought it was 46 because hey did the calculation and assumed, like in many games, that it would be rounded down and others, like me, thought it was probably 47 and Blizzard wasn't going to bother writing "+30.555%". Some people claimed it was 48 but that the spell was affected by the 1 point of armour many units had. >.> The spell....
Point being, this 20% is a little vague and I at least haven't YET heard anyone state whether or not it does change damage by that exact amount rounding off appropriately every time.
I don't see why they can't also mention in the Prismatic Beam description that the range extends to 8 if it chases a fleeing target, seeing as people who are new to the game really should now that before pointlessly attempting to move units away that aren't much faster than void rays (queens on creep, trying to keep it alive but instead just granting the void ray free hits versus that queen).
|
DK should go to politics, talk a lot, say a little...
|
On December 16 2011 16:47 FlukyS wrote:
1. Mules are awesome everywhere and its kinda funny that a terran on 2 base can out mine a protoss or a zerg on 3 easily with mules. They make all ins a lot more effective, they encourage poor play like players never using their energy then going wait I have loads of energy lets drop 15 mules.
2. People's complaints about the gold bases weren't specifically about mules being dropped on them its just that gold bases favor the race of terran a lot more than Zerg or Protoss because of planetary fortresses being very good specifically against zerg. Its a huge investment to be able to deny the gold if there is a pf on it with turrets surrounding it.
3. He didn't talk about how neural parasite isn't at all being used because of the range nerf. They need to return it to its previous form asap because its entirely useless now, thats not an exaggeration. There is no way you can np a colossus without getting your infestors killed, there is no way you can np a tank without getting your infestors killed. All in all the only thing np is good for at the moment is maybe nping a probe and making the enemies units or maybe a high templar if they dont feedback them right away since that costs barely anything to cast and then they can turn it into a perfectly useful unit.
4. The removing the golds from the GSL has only happened recently and going by the GSL format there is never all that much change right away it happens over 2-3 seasons so they were never going to see huge changes for a little while. It has helped the GSL in the fact that a Zerg was in the last final and it wasn't just because leenock is great it was because of the gold bases being removed. If they weren't everyone would have said right away that GSL is going to be another TvT final. Id predict right away next year its going to be pretty even in terms of race distribution in the GSL at least more than previous seasons anyway.
To be honest I get what he is saying about looking at the raw numbers he doesn't see much of a problem at the moment but if he listened to a lot of the players like on state of the game or day9 they would hear them joke about how np is bloody useless now.
1. People keep forgetting that when you can drop 15 mules at the same time it means the terran didn't have the economy he should have had earlier. Pooling energy is worse then using it consistently. I wouldn't mind a change on mules, but chronoboost and spawn larvae makes terran need something.
2. Gold bases were just getting some more tactics to them, alot of zergs started taking them again P for example. And Im sure they havn't played around enough with it. I think zerg had a decent way of handling any type of base right now(even planetaries). I think the main problem with golds is that we dont see protoss using them as much as zerg/terran.
4. I think that's a bit extreme, Leenock has shown some awesome play and very irritating baneling mines. His style is pretty "new" and underused. AND it makes terran economy worse. The reason we didn't see Lenoock win GSL was some unfortunete decisions from his side. I'm still very impressed.
I will still stand by my reasoning that Zerg is by far the best race, aslong as you know whats going on. There is so much potential in the race that I think once people figure zerg out completly it will very hard to handle.
|
On December 16 2011 17:36 Fuchsteufelswild wrote:
To me only the first of the first seven questions were worth asking, I don't understand why people think the others are real issues. :S
Were people having trouble reading that Void Ray damage is 6, but 10 vs armoured, or is the complaint that there is no mention of the charged damage? On the Prismatic Beam description, they can simply include the text
"Once charged, the Void Ray's damage output is increased by +2 range, +6 vs Armoured and further increased by 20% overall vs Massive units."
I think it's more about the actual graphical feedback, it being too hard to see how charged a voidray is and how fast it does its damage.
|
On December 16 2011 16:52 Rexeus wrote:
Not complete!! Why do all casters have 3 spells each except the high templar?
Merge to archon?
Edit: I like reading this stuff cause it means they at least are aware of some of the problems the community talks about. Its still a lot of words that don't say anything but a tleast its being talked about.
|
On December 16 2011 12:01 Carras wrote:
thats completely empty as usual.. not a single line worth reading.. you could summarize the hole post with "we r working hard , wait for HOTS"
Well said!
|
I don't understand so well the part on "Protoss Strategy". IMHO this is the race with the most opening strategy, all kinda effective. Like 3 gate expand, forge fast expand, 4 gate, forge expand 6 gate, forge expand 2 stairport, double forge, double robot, 6 gate blink stalker, dt opening to archon zealoth build , etc...
Did i misunderstood the question?
|
Oh that's what they meant. :/ Well, I think they could still add some of the info, like the 8 range increases, newer players need to know that, but thanks.
It's really easy to see whether it is charged or not. 13 attacks = 7.8 seconds and the beam clearly gets larger. 0.6 game second attack = .4335 real seconds between attacks, so you can figure it out. Do these people having troubles always have all health bars turned off even on selected units? I don't see how people have a problem with this.
|
On December 16 2011 17:33 Falcor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 16:52 Rexeus wrote:
Not complete!! Why do all casters have 3 spells each except the high templar? storm feedback merge?
Merge is not a spell. A spell requires energy. Just like nuke doesn't need energy.
|
Are these questions really from pros? If you are pro and feel like injects are to hard then you should work on your mechanics if anything. Being able to have a good flow with your injects and spend as much energy you can are what makes a difference when it comes to bad zergs and good zergs. Also have in mind that if you have your queens hotkeyed you can inject via the minimap so you never need to go back to your bases except if you're gonna put down a building that takes 1 second.
If they would make inject easier I don't know what I would do, seriously. If anything they should remove the whole inject mechanic, reactors and chronoboost but that would never happen and you only get "GO BACK AND PLAY BROOD WAR THEN THIS IS SC2!!!" thing back as a response when you mention it.
|
On December 16 2011 12:00 Zergrusher wrote:
dustin actually has a bachelors degree in english litterature, i dunno how he got into game making.......
Are you sure ? I thought he was in geology...
|
I'm happy davie and co dont listen to the community too much.
Some of the shit you QQ whores say is just down right retarded.
|
On December 16 2011 18:27 FFW_Rude wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 12:00 Zergrusher wrote:
dustin actually has a bachelors degree in english litterature, i dunno how he got into game making.......
Are you sure ? I thought he was in geology...
Oh you..
|
On December 16 2011 18:20 Rexeus wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 17:33 Falcor wrote:On December 16 2011 16:52 Rexeus wrote:
Not complete!! Why do all casters have 3 spells each except the high templar? storm feedback merge? Merge is not a spell. A spell requires energy. Just like nuke doesn't need energy.
So infestor is the only one with 3 "spells" ?
Note that neural is no longer used because of the huge nerf on range.
|
On December 16 2011 18:10 Jumonji wrote:
I don't understand so well the part on "Protoss Strategy". IMHO this is the race with the most opening strategy, all kinda effective. Like 3 gate expand, forge fast expand, 4 gate, forge expand 6 gate, forge expand 2 stairport, double forge, double robot, 6 gate blink stalker, dt opening to archon zealoth build , etc...
Did i misunderstood the question?
Kinda, I think he's referring to playstyles in general - as in, either defensive play into upgraded deathball or some form of all-in.
Semi-bullshit though, if you watch complete P players (whity-ra, for example), they can put pressure, harass, attack on timings while still expanding behind, or play one of the styles above.
|
kind of interesting that terrans are complaining about unit utility when they probably have the most utility out of any race in the game. All in all I think blizzard has done a pretty good job at taking some feedback from the community without giving in too much to the complainers.
|
Just reduce marine damage from 6 -> 5 and you have the game fixed. They are simply too high dps. Sure, you can hard counter them with colossus etc but hard counters dont make a good game.
|
Yeah i tought they were talking about the "defensive" playstyles but like you said this is just because people can win with that style with no effort that they use it. The warpprism just negate any zerg push and force him to go for something that hit air.
Blink Stalker are uncatchable till infestor so i don't understand why there isn't more push with them.
Toss evolution from diamond to master is wierd : it's hard for me to beat some good diamond toss, but i just wipe out some middle master toss. The only reason is because diamond players push and force you to make army instead of drone.
|
PvP is not mentioned.
PvZ mass muta is not mentioned -or- the already high cost & high tech of the new counter called tempest
The need of a hero unit is not mentioned. Why are they removing the mothership, while giving terrans a hero unit? Why a hero unit at all?
Too expensive protoss units is also not mentioned. If the idea is 'expensive but stronger', then why are both races so cost effective vs P (hydra vs stalker, roach vs stalker, marauder vs stalker, etc). I'd have liked to hear that they were working on a new protoss unit that is cheaper.
|
On December 16 2011 18:28 Dauntless wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 18:27 FFW_Rude wrote:On December 16 2011 12:00 Zergrusher wrote:
dustin actually has a bachelors degree in english litterature, i dunno how he got into game making.......
Are you sure ? I thought he was in geology... Oh you..
I'm so sorry...
|
Mass muta is bad: you just have to full canon your base with 2 archon and they it's over. Thanks to toss legendary lazyness that currently works.
It is also very funny to see toss "pro" taking ALL their army to defend drop/muta/warp harass...
|
On December 16 2011 18:47 Jumonji wrote:
Mass muta is bad: you just have to full canon your base with 2 archon and they it's over. Thanks to toss legendary lazyness that currently works.
This is actually not good. You just give more and more advantage to zerg. Generally, anything that requires super heavy static def IS bad and shouldn't happen.
|
On December 16 2011 18:50 darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 18:47 Jumonji wrote:
Mass muta is bad: you just have to full canon your base with 2 archon and they it's over. Thanks to toss legendary lazyness that currently works. This is actually not good. You just give more and more advantage to zerg. Generally, anything that requires super heavy static def IS bad and shouldn't happen.
Base trad before he gets 40 + muta / go for ht in your army and to defend your base. Go for mass air too etc...
|
On December 16 2011 15:01 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 13:55 Energizer wrote:
Does anyone else cringe when he says "We didn't like how.." for some of the answers? Seems to me they have this set logic about how the game is supposed to be played and everyone is wrong if they deviate from that... Well duh, you develop a game on what you want it to be like. You don't just put random things in it and, no matter what the game turns out to be like, say that it's ok. Otherwise they might as well not make 3 races, why not just 1. Etc.
With the developers taking full control of the game, they essentially dictate how the meta game goes and also warp game play styles when something happened that the developers didn't want. By doing that they essentially limit depth in a strategy game, which is something that should never happen.
IE Mineral optimizing (or w/e it was called) got removed
Queen tumor/offensive spine crawler ended up getting killed because the queens speed got nerfed
viking flower removed
various VR changes to how they function
I'm sure you can think of plenty more, but you get the jest of it.
|
On December 16 2011 18:42 laguu wrote:
Just reduce marine damage from 6 -> 5 and you have the game fixed. They are simply too high dps. Sure, you can hard counter them with colossus etc but hard counters dont make a good game.
I don't know what game you are playing, but terrans are vannishing from the ladder, and outside korea terrans have very few succes. TvP is a nightmare and TvZ is fine. By nerfing the marine you would make TvP a joke and TvZ a nightmare.
You can also check the recent winrates here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=291886
This is the winrate at the HIGHEST level, where terrans have good macro and really good micro. Now think about the winrates from terrans @ masters and below, who don't have that godly micro.
|
The problem I have with mules is how they're abusable late game (see Major for a perfect example).
I think they should "waste" minerals, as in take 30 to the CC, but take 50 (or whatever the number is) off the mineral patch. That way, using mules would have a bad side. Using too many mules in early game would totally destroy your main base's mineral patches, so the Terran would actually have to use it more carefully.
Early game is more calculated, and I THINK mules can't really be early game "fixed" without causing some kind of imbalances.
|
On December 16 2011 19:11 Snowbear wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 18:42 laguu wrote:
Just reduce marine damage from 6 -> 5 and you have the game fixed. They are simply too high dps. Sure, you can hard counter them with colossus etc but hard counters dont make a good game. I don't know what game you are playing, but terrans are vannishing from the ladder, and outside korea terrans have very few succes. TvP is a nightmare and TvZ is fine. By nerfing the marine you would make TvP a joke and TvZ a nightmare.
TvP is a nightmare because they have nerfed everything except the real problem: Marauders. For the sake of TvZ, they made the tanks useless in TvP. IMHO they should just revert to BW's terrans, and the problem would be solved
|
who's the genius who asked for the amulett to be back rofl..
|
On December 16 2011 19:12 Patate wrote:
The problem I have with mules is how they're abusable late game (see Major for a perfect example).
I think they should "waste" minerals, as in take 30 to the CC, but take 50 (or whatever the number is) off the mineral patch. That way, using mules would have a bad side. Using too many mules in early game would totally destroy your main base's mineral patches, so the Terran would actually have to use it more carefully.
Early game is more calculated, and I THINK mules can't really be early game "fixed" without causing some kind of imbalances.
It's funny that you mention a problem in late game. Do you know that terrans are having a very hard time lategame, especially vs protoss, and this with the advantage of mules?
|
" for example, unit production is relatively easy to manage for zerg compared with the other races."
Is this true? Is hitting 5 as terran then aaaaaaa tab ee tab etc, any harder than a zerg who has to make units at individual hatcheries so his roaches spawn by the protoss pressure rather than take a long walk? Like yes at times zerg holds down Z R or T and maxes out on 1 unit, but that's not much easier than just queueing up 4 coll from 2 robos and using ur entire warp in, imo.
|
On December 16 2011 19:11 Snowbear wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 18:42 laguu wrote:
Just reduce marine damage from 6 -> 5 and you have the game fixed. They are simply too high dps. Sure, you can hard counter them with colossus etc but hard counters dont make a good game. I don't know what game you are playing, but terrans are vannishing from the ladder, and outside korea terrans have very few succes. TvP is a nightmare and TvZ is fine. By nerfing the marine you would make TvP a joke and TvZ a nightmare. You can also check the recent winrates here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=291886This is the winrate at the HIGHEST level, where terrans have good macro and really good micro. Now think about the winrates from terrans @ masters and below, who don't have that godly micro.
Ok, I guess my point was that balance is more than just winrates. Like, for example, rock paper sciccors is a balanced game but it's not a very good game.
|
On December 16 2011 19:14 Patate wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 19:11 Snowbear wrote:On December 16 2011 18:42 laguu wrote:
Just reduce marine damage from 6 -> 5 and you have the game fixed. They are simply too high dps. Sure, you can hard counter them with colossus etc but hard counters dont make a good game. I don't know what game you are playing, but terrans are vannishing from the ladder, and outside korea terrans have very few succes. TvP is a nightmare and TvZ is fine. By nerfing the marine you would make TvP a joke and TvZ a nightmare. TvP is a nightmare because they have nerfed everything except the real problem: Marauders. For the sake of TvZ, they made the tanks useless in TvP. IMHO they should just revert to BW's terrans, and the problem would be solved
complaining about marauders is so 2009 ...
|
On December 16 2011 19:23 Vei wrote:
" for example, unit production is relatively easy to manage for zerg compared with the other races."
Is this true? Is hitting 5 as terran then aaaaaaa tab ee tab etc, any harder than a zerg who has to make units at individual hatcheries so his roaches spawn by the protoss pressure rather than take a long walk? Like yes at times zerg holds down Z R or T and maxes out on 1 unit, but that's not much easier than just queueing up 4 coll from 2 robos and using ur entire warp in, imo.
No, if we are talking lategame, Terran is the hardest macrorace (at least in plat - diamond - master) as there's no production boost which Z and P has (Z units are all built from one building, usually under 8 hatcheries, and is fast as shit - and P can insta remax with lots of gates and chrono) T has 15 + rax, 2-3 facs and usually 2 starports and can't queue when maxed and has to macro micro when he's loosing units - whereas P and Z after, not in a battle, just needs to remacro in seconds, no worries about queueing up. This is a design problem.
|
On December 16 2011 19:38 sagdashin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 19:23 Vei wrote:
" for example, unit production is relatively easy to manage for zerg compared with the other races."
Is this true? Is hitting 5 as terran then aaaaaaa tab ee tab etc, any harder than a zerg who has to make units at individual hatcheries so his roaches spawn by the protoss pressure rather than take a long walk? Like yes at times zerg holds down Z R or T and maxes out on 1 unit, but that's not much easier than just queueing up 4 coll from 2 robos and using ur entire warp in, imo.
No, if we are talking lategame, Terran is the hardest macrorace (at least in plat - diamond - master) as there's no production boost which Z and P has (Z units are all built from one building, usually under 8 hatcheries, and is fast as shit - and P can insta remax with lots of gates and chrono) T has 15 + rax, 2-3 facs and usually 2 starports and can't queue when maxed and has to macro micro when he's loosing units - whereas P and Z after, not in a battle, just needs to remacro in seconds, no worries about queueing up. This is a design problem.
Reactor on 6+racks on late game?
|
On December 16 2011 19:23 Vei wrote:
" for example, unit production is relatively easy to manage for zerg compared with the other races."
Is this true? Is hitting 5 as terran then aaaaaaa tab ee tab etc, any harder than a zerg who has to make units at individual hatcheries so his roaches spawn by the protoss pressure rather than take a long walk? Like yes at times zerg holds down Z R or T and maxes out on 1 unit, but that's not much easier than just queueing up 4 coll from 2 robos and using ur entire warp in, imo.
Unit production also has to do with adding unit producing structures, which zerg has to do/think about the least.
And queuing 4 colossi from 2 robos? That a nono.
|
I don't understand why they still think they need to make -tournament maps-.
edit: Also the stupid restrictions for maps they have is entirely there own fault. Tournament maps like Daybreak and others have shown that one gas expansions work and make sense if placed correctly, just like mineral only bases in Brood War. Yet Blizzard refuses to use them and basically said mapmakers couldn't use them for the TL Map Contest maps.
I could list a lot more example of things Blizzard refuses to use.
But maybe it's better that way since already with their strict rules of standard shit they produce mediocre (if not awful) maps.
|
It always amazes me how these questions asked by pro players sound almost exactly like something taken straight from the B.Net forums. What's up with that, seriously?
On December 16 2011 19:00 Jumonji wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 18:50 darkness wrote:On December 16 2011 18:47 Jumonji wrote:
Mass muta is bad: you just have to full canon your base with 2 archon and they it's over. Thanks to toss legendary lazyness that currently works. This is actually not good. You just give more and more advantage to zerg. Generally, anything that requires super heavy static def IS bad and shouldn't happen. Base trad before he gets 40 + muta / go for ht in your army and to defend your base. Go for mass air too etc...
Are you really telling people to basetrade against muta/ling? I mean, why would you even think this is a good idea? Is that how you lose with Mutas against Protoss? I'm honestly confused.
|
It's quite balance for me. I lose with all and against all the races.
|
On December 16 2011 19:44 Jumonji wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 19:38 sagdashin wrote:On December 16 2011 19:23 Vei wrote:
" for example, unit production is relatively easy to manage for zerg compared with the other races."
Is this true? Is hitting 5 as terran then aaaaaaa tab ee tab etc, any harder than a zerg who has to make units at individual hatcheries so his roaches spawn by the protoss pressure rather than take a long walk? Like yes at times zerg holds down Z R or T and maxes out on 1 unit, but that's not much easier than just queueing up 4 coll from 2 robos and using ur entire warp in, imo.
No, if we are talking lategame, Terran is the hardest macrorace (at least in plat - diamond - master) as there's no production boost which Z and P has (Z units are all built from one building, usually under 8 hatcheries, and is fast as shit - and P can insta remax with lots of gates and chrono) T has 15 + rax, 2-3 facs and usually 2 starports and can't queue when maxed and has to macro micro when he's loosing units - whereas P and Z after, not in a battle, just needs to remacro in seconds, no worries about queueing up. This is a design problem. Reactor on 6+racks on late game?
Take in to consideration you need marauders and ghosts (you need them hard vs z lategame), and as maxed you stack money so the best way for you to compensate is to put down additional barracks, and cc's.
|
Cool interview, fun to see his view of things and to know that they "listen" to us.
|
On December 16 2011 12:34 dacimvrl wrote:
I still disagree with the Khaydarin Amulet changes. He states that the amulet upgrade simply makes Protoss players bring out the unit, use the storm, then forget about it. How does it even help when you have to make a harder decision to make it. 55s of build time, wait 25s to have it useful.
Comparing to ghosts which cost a bit more mineral, but less gas, has the energy upgrade, could snipe twice right out of the barracks, and with the upgrade, has enough energy for EMP.
Just saying that there's a parallel here, and there should be some sort of adjustment made to offset the problems caused by the removal of Khaydarin Amulet upgrade.
I don`t understand why they not make the khaydarin amulet just like the Brood War equivalent, so that HTs start with 62.5 energy.
|
On December 16 2011 13:57 soulking wrote:
EMP should not be in the game at all...its crazy how fast my 100 food army can get crushed from 4 emp's...if Protoss and Terran are on the same mining rate then protoss cannot rebuild the army to deal with 4 emp's to the face.
EMP is way too good.
You would not go that far, but i thinks it`s arguable if the ghost should have the emp spell or should there be another unit (like the science vessel in broodwar).
|
On December 16 2011 13:57 soulking wrote:
EMP should not be in the game at all...its crazy how fast my 100 food army can get crushed from 4 emp's...if Protoss and Terran are on the same mining rate then protoss cannot rebuild the army to deal with 4 emp's to the face.
EMP is way too good.
How can you say that? Do you realise TvP is P favoured even WITH emp? Take away EMP and TvP would be impossible. You should talk to other terrans and ask them about tvp
|
On December 16 2011 16:52 Rexeus wrote:
Not complete!! Why do all casters have 3 spells each except the high templar?
because toss have the sentry, that has 3 spells
|
On December 16 2011 20:28 Snowbear wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 13:57 soulking wrote:
EMP should not be in the game at all...its crazy how fast my 100 food army can get crushed from 4 emp's...if Protoss and Terran are on the same mining rate then protoss cannot rebuild the army to deal with 4 emp's to the face.
EMP is way too good. How can you say that? Do you realise TvP is P favoured even WITH emp? Take away EMP and TvP would be impossible. You should talk to other terrans and ask them about tvp
TvP is not P favoured.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On December 16 2011 20:34 JOJOsc2news wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 20:28 Snowbear wrote:On December 16 2011 13:57 soulking wrote:
EMP should not be in the game at all...its crazy how fast my 100 food army can get crushed from 4 emp's...if Protoss and Terran are on the same mining rate then protoss cannot rebuild the army to deal with 4 emp's to the face.
EMP is way too good. How can you say that? Do you realise TvP is P favoured even WITH emp? Take away EMP and TvP would be impossible. You should talk to other terrans and ask them about tvp TvP is not P favoured. + Show Spoiler +
1) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=291886 --> winrates from the highest level
2) since the winrates at the highest level point towards P being favoured, the winrates at the lower levels (high masters and below) will point even more towards P being favoured. Why? Because at the highest level terrans can abuse their race very well, with amazing micro and multitasking. Lower players can't micro and multitask like that, so they have a harder time.
3) talk to basicly any terran about TvP.
|
On December 16 2011 12:34 dacimvrl wrote:
I still disagree with the Khaydarin Amulet changes. He states that the amulet upgrade simply makes Protoss players bring out the unit, use the storm, then forget about it. How does it even help when you have to make a harder decision to make it. 55s of build time, wait 25s to have it useful.
Comparing to ghosts which cost a bit more mineral, but less gas, has the energy upgrade, could snipe twice right out of the barracks, and with the upgrade, has enough energy for EMP.
Just saying that there's a parallel here, and there should be some sort of adjustment made to offset the problems caused by the removal of Khaydarin Amulet upgrade.
The difference is you can't have Ghost spawn anywhere you want on the map. I would be fine with KA if High Templar could only spawn out of gatewys.
|
what i would like to see is a medic build in the rax and a dropship, that doesn`t heal, but maybe i`m still to attached to the broodwar days
|
United States7483 Posts
On December 16 2011 20:41 TheSwamp wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 12:34 dacimvrl wrote:
I still disagree with the Khaydarin Amulet changes. He states that the amulet upgrade simply makes Protoss players bring out the unit, use the storm, then forget about it. How does it even help when you have to make a harder decision to make it. 55s of build time, wait 25s to have it useful.
Comparing to ghosts which cost a bit more mineral, but less gas, has the energy upgrade, could snipe twice right out of the barracks, and with the upgrade, has enough energy for EMP.
Just saying that there's a parallel here, and there should be some sort of adjustment made to offset the problems caused by the removal of Khaydarin Amulet upgrade. The difference is you can't have Ghost spawn anywhere you want on the map. I would be fine with KA if High Templar could only spawn out of gatewys.
KA should let High Templars warp in with like... +12 energy or faster energy regen instead of +25 energy. Warp in storms were dumb, but making the HT sit there for so long before it's capable of doing anything useful is kinda dumb too, especially when no other caster in the game has that issue (except for maybe the raven).
That said, I can't wait for HOTS when terrans get to play mech vs. protoss. It's so dull playing against bio all the freaking time, although I am worried about battle hellions being too good vs. chargelots: extra hp and cone AoE instead of line AoE makes me die a little inside.
|
United States7483 Posts
On December 16 2011 20:30 PaterPatriae wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 16:52 Rexeus wrote:
Not complete!! Why do all casters have 3 spells each except the high templar? because toss have the sentry, that has 3 spells
Merge archon is kind of a spell?
No, I guess it isn't. Some casters even go further with an extra ability, like the infestor who can burrow + spells and the ghost who can cloak + spells.
|
United States7483 Posts
On December 16 2011 20:00 Toadvine wrote:It always amazes me how these questions asked by pro players sound almost exactly like something taken straight from the B.Net forums. What's up with that, seriously? Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 19:00 Jumonji wrote:On December 16 2011 18:50 darkness wrote:On December 16 2011 18:47 Jumonji wrote:
Mass muta is bad: you just have to full canon your base with 2 archon and they it's over. Thanks to toss legendary lazyness that currently works. This is actually not good. You just give more and more advantage to zerg. Generally, anything that requires super heavy static def IS bad and shouldn't happen. Base trad before he gets 40 + muta / go for ht in your army and to defend your base. Go for mass air too etc... Are you really telling people to basetrade against muta/ling? I mean, why would you even think this is a good idea? Is that how you lose with Mutas against Protoss? I'm honestly confused.
He clearly has no idea what he's talking about, he thinks having archons at your bases defends against mutas effectively.
|
On December 16 2011 19:14 Patate wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 19:11 Snowbear wrote:On December 16 2011 18:42 laguu wrote:
Just reduce marine damage from 6 -> 5 and you have the game fixed. They are simply too high dps. Sure, you can hard counter them with colossus etc but hard counters dont make a good game. I don't know what game you are playing, but terrans are vannishing from the ladder, and outside korea terrans have very few succes. TvP is a nightmare and TvZ is fine. By nerfing the marine you would make TvP a joke and TvZ a nightmare. TvP is a nightmare because they have nerfed everything except the real problem: Marauders. For the sake of TvZ, they made the tanks useless in TvP. IMHO they should just revert to BW's terrans, and the problem would be solved
Still we see more variety in SC2 Terran than in BW terran.
|
Too bad we won't see Khaydarin Amulet again.
Anyway, in regards to PvT... Despite all the nerfs from both races in this respective matchup, the one thing that's still a problem is Marauders. Very cost effective to almost anything Protoss can throw except Immortals. Sometimes, even Immortals aren't enough either.
|
Lol funny to see statisctics. At highest lvl of play tvp is 45-55. And most likely the stats are even more toss favored at master league level. Hope blizzard soon comes up with an intelligent fix for tvp.
|
On December 16 2011 21:01 Hider wrote:
Lol funny to see statisctics. At highest lvl of play tvp is 45-55. And most likely the stats are even more toss favored at master league level. Hope blizzard soon comes up with an intelligent fix for tvp.
45-55 really doesn't mean anything. TvP is all about the engagements. Poking collosi with vikings, trying to feedback ghosts, sniping high templars, drops. Nothing about it needs to be fixed.
|
"Protoss Play Style -- More variety please!"
What the hell? Protoss have so many different strategies, especially compared to zerg. I think zerg is the race with least options in zvt and zvp
|
On December 16 2011 21:01 Hider wrote:
Lol funny to see statisctics. At highest lvl of play tvp is 45-55. And most likely the stats are even more toss favored at master league level. Hope blizzard soon comes up with an intelligent fix for tvp.
I would say that is pretty balanced.
|
On December 16 2011 21:13 Fjodorov wrote:
"Protoss Play Style -- More variety please!"
What the hell? Protoss have so many different strategies, especially compared to zerg. I think zerg is the race with least options in zvt and zvp
I chuckled when I saw that question ^_^
|
On December 16 2011 21:27 WaSa wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 21:13 Fjodorov wrote:
"Protoss Play Style -- More variety please!"
What the hell? Protoss have so many different strategies, especially compared to zerg. I think zerg is the race with least options in zvt and zvp I chuckled when I saw that question ^_^
Same ^^
zerg>>>>Shitting in your pant while you don't know if he is going for a 12 min push, 9 minute push, DT, mass air, light air + push , immortal archomte , or colossus high templar storm...
Toss>>> " Well he is gonna make roach for sure " XD
|
Playstyle is not the same as openings or all ins or whatever. Playstyle is like Mech or Bio. Like MutaLing or LingInfestor. Like Chargelot Archon/Templar or Stalker Colossi. It's a fact that the Playstyles Protoss can use are not equally good, so it almost always comes down to Colossi instead of Templars in the midgame for example. And that is the reason why all Protoss look like the same. I think it's cool that they're keeping an eye on that aspect to be changed in the add-on.
|
I think it's the same thing as move from PES to FIFA: Fifa is better but need some adaptation and some sacrifice for a few time.
Toss have good playstyle but more multitaskier (like terran) with less chance to win if you fail than defensive style
|
On December 16 2011 18:42 laguu wrote:
Just reduce marine damage from 6 -> 5 and you have the game fixed. They are simply too high dps. Sure, you can hard counter them with colossus etc but hard counters dont make a good game.
Dumbest thing ive ever read right here...
Terrans are doing bad lately so you want to nerf the most used unit in the entire terran army? -.-
gj winning anything above bronze level if they nerf the marines
|
Some great points. But why did they choose to nerf EMP with a splash radius nerf and not add a prerequisite upgrade? I want to know that. I think a 200/200 upgrade is better than a radius nerf. It makes it expensive but strong. Where now it's just weak without the option of making an investment to have access to something stronger.
Or how about a slow 150/75 upgrade that increases EMP splash range? That might be good. As person who quit Protoss (too limited options, so many builds lost their effectiveness), the khaydarin amulet removal fucked up PvT and the EMP nerf gave T the shorter end of the stick in the Ghost vs HT battle. They need to do something to make EMP a little more effective but not as much as it used to be.
Can't they just make the VR's fully charged beam orange (or any other color)? It's not that hard.
Have the balance team ever considered Enriched Vespene Geysers? I want to know Blizz' opinion on those.
|
more vaierty for Protoss sounds the best. gerneally we have to do what we do(which other races hate) ebcause if we dont... we lose vs any type of capable players.. would be nice to have a lotmore options!!!
|
On December 16 2011 20:48 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 20:00 Toadvine wrote:It always amazes me how these questions asked by pro players sound almost exactly like something taken straight from the B.Net forums. What's up with that, seriously? On December 16 2011 19:00 Jumonji wrote:On December 16 2011 18:50 darkness wrote:On December 16 2011 18:47 Jumonji wrote:
Mass muta is bad: you just have to full canon your base with 2 archon and they it's over. Thanks to toss legendary lazyness that currently works. This is actually not good. You just give more and more advantage to zerg. Generally, anything that requires super heavy static def IS bad and shouldn't happen. Base trad before he gets 40 + muta / go for ht in your army and to defend your base. Go for mass air too etc... Are you really telling people to basetrade against muta/ling? I mean, why would you even think this is a good idea? Is that how you lose with Mutas against Protoss? I'm honestly confused. He clearly has no idea what he's talking about, he thinks having archons at your bases defends against mutas effectively.
He clearly knows that toss wait 10 min to attack the zerg then YES the zerg have 50+ mutalisk and like 10 tower per base. If toss were more clever they would push sooner when the first muta pop and harass his base and base trade. The poor zerg will just have gling wich is easily counterd by zealoth and sentry.
Specially when you understand that zerg expand and drone while harassing with muta...stop thinking zerg repop is amazing , if everything the zerg can pop is gling or poor roach with no upgrade the toss can push easily and crush the zerg.
Harass is a psychologic strategy: you are expecting the oponent to not attack you when he is busy with your harass: you just have to all in immediatly with all your drone and a +click like a bronze player while the zerg player have 2 tower and 12 ling 10 muta and no more larva because he maked drone , expecting the toss to stay home .Then it's over.
How many time a toss could have beat me if he wasn't so stupid trying to deal with my poor harass instead of just pushing me...
|
Im curious who asked those questions. Some of them are pretty dumb. Auto larva inject? Reaper speed? EMP?
|
On December 16 2011 22:56 power-overwhelming wrote:
Im curious who asked those questions. Some of them are pretty dumb. Auto larva inject? Reaper speed? EMP?
I was wondering the same... I mean the only question I found to some point interesting were the ones regarding MULEs and choke points. The others have either sufficiently been discussed before or they just seem like forum-qq.
However I liked the remarks regarding TvP, which seems to me at this point to be the most balanced and watchable match up along with TvZ.
|
On December 16 2011 11:45 juicyjames wrote:+ Show Spoiler [MULE -- Too effective on gold bases] +MULE -- Too effective when used on high yield mineral patches.
Concerns about the MULE are something that we hear most frequently from the player community at large, but it’s also feedback that we’ve seen from some pro players specifically with regard to high yield mineral patches. In fact, the GSL recently removed high yield patches from its maps in response to this concern. This change seems to have worked out well for the GSL so far, but all the other major tournaments that didn’t remove high yield resources from their maps are still showing very good race representation, so the change doesn’t appear necessary.
There are a lot of potential reasons this could be, but we’ll examine a couple of the most likely. First is that the change really did reduce terran effectiveness in the GSL specifically, but because the terran race does unusually well in Korea, it all balanced out. Another possible reason could be that there is an advantage to terran players from using MULEs on high yields, but it’s not significant enough for the removal of high yield resources to result in a noticeable effect on overall performance.
Regardless, we don’t jump to conclusions and we’re still investigating. If further research suggests conclusively that MULEs do offer too much of an advantage to terran players when used on high yield minerals, we’ll consider an appropriate course of action then.
If only they realized that the problem with mule is not the mule itself but the fact that there is no tradeoff Economy - Army in terran.
Protoss can chrono Eco - Tech - Army
Zerg can use larvae for Eco - Army in a strong way in one or the other direction
Terran can get Eco - Unblock supply - Ultimate scouting
That is the part that hey should look into.
|
Great interview, always nice to see Davids PoV
|
It was a nice interview, I feel like I had many of the same questions to ask. And so I'm pleased to hear back what I was looking for.
|
The protoss army is very slow. High templars have the speed of a battle cruiser, for example. Warp-ins compensate this fact, but if you manage to clear all pylons it's just like you are playing against terran mech. I feel that terran players don't take enough advantage of this fact, especially on a big map. As terran you need to be the aggressor (that's the whole idea of the race). You need medivacs anyway, so just drop as soon as he moves out of his base.
On December 16 2011 20:28 Snowbear wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 13:57 soulking wrote:
EMP should not be in the game at all...its crazy how fast my 100 food army can get crushed from 4 emp's...if Protoss and Terran are on the same mining rate then protoss cannot rebuild the army to deal with 4 emp's to the face.
EMP is way too good. How can you say that? Do you realise TvP is P favoured even WITH emp? Take away EMP and TvP would be impossible. You should talk to other terrans and ask them about tvp
And why is the opinion of Protoss less relevant? :S
|
These were suppose to be concerns of progamers right? So Blizzard responds to the larve inject/management concern by saying: "Don't forget that all the races are different, you guys!"
Blizzard, I think the people who play your game for a living know that.
|
If i have 3 replicators and an observer i will make 3 ghosts as protoss and EMP their ghosts and medivacs ... or snipe the ghosts...
Protosses are the best race with a 200 supply army , so why they always try to win with a cheese strat on GSL ? maybe the problem is the economy i dont know... Ghosts are fine against protoss , and snipe is probably to good vs tier 3 zerg , but i like the fact that they know that they will unbalance the game with Hots in ways we never though it was possible..
I hope they release hots fast so that we can abuse the new units before the future nerfs...
The way i see the game right now :
TvZ : if terrans does nothing to zerg early they will drone and kill you fast
TvP : Terrans need to kill protosses ASAP,before they get upgrades and collusus, archons , HT ,chargelots in the same army
ZvP : same as TvZ ( zergs macro is to powerfull for mules and chrono boost
Z v Z is pretty insane , too fast .. spines should get more range , like the creep range or 10 range
P v P is better now , but hots will probably help
T v T is perfect , because terrans are perfect too
|
On December 17 2011 00:55 Cobbbler wrote:
These were suppose to be concerns of progamers right? So Blizzard responds to the larve inject/management concern by saying: "Don't forget that all the races are different, you guys!"
Blizzard, I think the people who play your game for a living know that.
I seriously doubt these were the questions the pro gamers asked.
|
On December 17 2011 01:11 tapk69 wrote:Protosses are the best race with a 200 supply army , so why they always try to win with a cheese strat on GSL ?
Eh no
|
I wish they wouldn't take these questions from the b.net forums, who the hell thinks larva injects are too hard? And for that matter who in their right minds complaints about something being hard? Thats the nice part about starcraft, the game itself is so hard that it allows for an insanely wide skill gap between the worst and best possible player, injects only add to that.
Liked the interview, love that they don't want to change thinks to drastically and rather safe huge changes for expansions.
|
On December 17 2011 00:52 epicdemic wrote:The protoss army is very slow. High templars have the speed of a battle cruiser, for example. Warp-ins compensate this fact, but if you manage to clear all pylons it's just like you are playing against terran mech. I feel that terran players don't take enough advantage of this fact, especially on a big map. As terran you need to be the aggressor (that's the whole idea of the race). You need medivacs anyway, so just drop as soon as he moves out of his base. Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 20:28 Snowbear wrote:On December 16 2011 13:57 soulking wrote:
EMP should not be in the game at all...its crazy how fast my 100 food army can get crushed from 4 emp's...if Protoss and Terran are on the same mining rate then protoss cannot rebuild the army to deal with 4 emp's to the face.
EMP is way too good. How can you say that? Do you realise TvP is P favoured even WITH emp? Take away EMP and TvP would be impossible. You should talk to other terrans and ask them about tvp And why is the opinion of Protoss less relevant? :S
Because you are very bad if you think terran would even stand a chance without EMP.
|
On December 16 2011 20:39 Snowbear wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 20:34 JOJOsc2news wrote:On December 16 2011 20:28 Snowbear wrote:On December 16 2011 13:57 soulking wrote:
EMP should not be in the game at all...its crazy how fast my 100 food army can get crushed from 4 emp's...if Protoss and Terran are on the same mining rate then protoss cannot rebuild the army to deal with 4 emp's to the face.
EMP is way too good. How can you say that? Do you realise TvP is P favoured even WITH emp? Take away EMP and TvP would be impossible. You should talk to other terrans and ask them about tvp TvP is not P favoured. + Show Spoiler + 1) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=291886 --> winrates from the highest level 2) since the winrates at the highest level point towards P being favoured, the winrates at the lower levels (high masters and below) will point even more towards P being favoured. Why? Because at the highest level terrans can abuse their race very well, with amazing micro and multitasking. Lower players can't micro and multitask like that, so they have a harder time. 3) talk to basicly any terran about TvP.
Way to ignore the fact that TvP was P favored for the first time this month. TvP has been heavily T favored since the removal of the amulette where it was pretty much at 50/50 on pro level. This month is the first time ever T has under 50% in any matchup for that matter, so please stop thinking terran is the race in need for some buffs here. It took them almost half a year to nerf EMP after TvP heavily tipped into T favore, 1 month of P being slightly favored won't change anything.
|
On December 16 2011 12:15 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 12:10 Wren wrote:
As usual, very little in the responses, but I'm consistently impressed with how well-informed David Kim always is (or seems to be).
Set of questions were a little disappointing (early reaper speed, really?). The unit is basically unused except for early game scouting and minor worker harass. From a design standpoint, it is a worthless unit that has little place in the game. I can see them wanting to try to make it a valid part of game play.
i think that this stigma of "useless units" needs to change. the ghost in sc:bw was useless, as well as the valkyrie and queens and scouts (for a long while). but the game still worked...really well. yeah the reaper might not be used, but that's OK because terran still has PLENTY of other options to go to (the hellion and the reaper fill a similar role). I am all for the "useless" units as they make games more exciting when they are actually used.
|
Nice interview, Davim Kim is a cool guy but I just hope that they don't mess the balance of the game with HotS because right now the game is almost perfectly balanced.
|
|
|
He didnt answer the question that is concerning a lot of tosses for HOTS: Why did they not even TRY to fix the carrier and just take it away now?
|
I didnt like the questions in general, some of them were really not good.
Every answer was expected too, Blizzard is very cautious about making big changes, and rightfully so.
|
Anyone else feel that HTs just need a speed upgrade?
|
On December 17 2011 01:11 tapk69 wrote:
If i have 3 replicators and an observer i will make 3 ghosts as protoss and EMP their ghosts and medivacs ... or snipe the ghosts...
Protosses are the best race with a 200 supply army , so why they always try to win with a cheese strat on GSL ? maybe the problem is the economy i dont know... Ghosts are fine against protoss , and snipe is probably to good vs tier 3 zerg , but i like the fact that they know that they will unbalance the game with Hots in ways we never though it was possible..
I hope they release hots fast so that we can abuse the new units before the future nerfs...
The way i see the game right now :
TvZ : if terrans does nothing to zerg early they will drone and kill you fast
TvP : Terrans need to kill protosses ASAP,before they get upgrades and collusus, archons , HT ,chargelots in the same army
ZvP : same as TvZ ( zergs macro is to powerfull for mules and chrono boost
Z v Z is pretty insane , too fast .. spines should get more range , like the creep range or 10 range
P v P is better now , but hots will probably help
T v T is perfect , because terrans are perfect too
10 range on spine crawlers? Hahah wow, let's make spine crawlers broken.
|
No, all High Templars need is dat sexy blue shadow from SC:BW. Then Protoss will become magically the god race.
|
On December 16 2011 12:35 SarcasmMonster wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 12:32 Dingobloo wrote:On December 16 2011 12:31 SarcasmMonster wrote:On December 16 2011 12:29 Dingobloo wrote:Some additional info from the community manager too: VTavilo said:
Very disappointed that there is zero points here addressing mech TvP, as well as lategame TvP in general.
You would think one of the lead and influential balance designers would have mentioned these things or pick up that the community is talking about them a lot.
TvP is in protoss favor, and mech was nerfed into the ground by blizzard themselves. They still are not addressing this and fixing it?
Even the statistics agree with player input right now, TvP flip flopped from 55% in Terrans favor to 55% in Protosses favor.
They obviously made a mistake in the last palance patch and it needs to be addressed.
Daxxarri said:@VTavilo: These were concerns that were brought up by pro-players at G-Star, which occurred just as 1.4.2 was being applied. These weren't questions selected at random; they specifically reflect the feedback David received there.
I think it's worth mentioning that, at the time that the event was occurring, the match up heavily favored terran. Also, our numbers do not reflect the flip flop that you've cited.Lol avilo. Where did you find that quote? Also lol avilo. Comment section Thanks, I usually avoid the comment section on Blizzard's site.
Curiosity got the best of me this time. Some of them were really painful, like the kid challenging David Kim to a game--provided David Kim doesn't harass with mutas.
Anyway, I thought both the questions asked and the the answers given were a little underwhelming, but I at least appreciate the attempt to give us anything at all. Hopefully they don't take the shit storm comments too seriously and do more like this in the future.
On December 17 2011 03:08 Louis8k8 wrote:
No, all High Templars need is dat sexy blue shadow from SC:BW. Then Protoss will become magically the god race.
My vote is for dripping blue goo when immortals die. I wonder if that's the kind of thing they could add with the new HotS physics improvements. I can't stop getting excited at the thought of an immortal dying on a ramp and leaving a smear of blue mess running down to the bottom.
|
always nice to hear from the developers
pd: this is my first post :D i always read but i never comment
|
David kim-"sorry I can't take any more questions because my G6 is waiting to take me to a Playboy party, hard life for a pimp"
|
|
|
On December 17 2011 01:49 Recognizable wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2011 00:52 epicdemic wrote:The protoss army is very slow. High templars have the speed of a battle cruiser, for example. Warp-ins compensate this fact, but if you manage to clear all pylons it's just like you are playing against terran mech. I feel that terran players don't take enough advantage of this fact, especially on a big map. As terran you need to be the aggressor (that's the whole idea of the race). You need medivacs anyway, so just drop as soon as he moves out of his base. On December 16 2011 20:28 Snowbear wrote:On December 16 2011 13:57 soulking wrote:
EMP should not be in the game at all...its crazy how fast my 100 food army can get crushed from 4 emp's...if Protoss and Terran are on the same mining rate then protoss cannot rebuild the army to deal with 4 emp's to the face.
EMP is way too good. How can you say that? Do you realise TvP is P favoured even WITH emp? Take away EMP and TvP would be impossible. You should talk to other terrans and ask them about tvp And why is the opinion of Protoss less relevant? :S Because you are very bad if you think terran would even stand a chance without EMP.
They seemed to be doing more then fine for the first 10 months of the game, Terrans have been using EMP/ghosts in general for a very short amount of time.
|
I really hope they designed more than 3-5 units for each race. By that I mean having a back up plan in case a new unit needs replacement. This because the Protoss units look like shit. Shiny and gimmicky shit, but shit nonetheless.
|
On December 17 2011 05:17 SaYyId wrote:
I really hope they designed more than 3-5 units for each race. By that I mean having a back up plan in case a new unit needs replacement. This because the Protoss units look like shit. Shiny and gimmicky shit, but shit nonetheless.
Their "plan" is to go into early stages of beta, see what people think and go from there by changing things up as and when required.
No plan survives contact with the enemy and all that.
|
On December 17 2011 05:17 SaYyId wrote:
I really hope they designed more than 3-5 units for each race. By that I mean having a back up plan in case a new unit needs replacement. This because the Protoss units look like shit. Shiny and gimmicky shit, but shit nonetheless.
My guess is if one of the Protoss units is not viable, they'll rework the carrier or mothership.
|
Very interesting read. Surprised to see Zerg whining about Larvae Management though, when as he says, it hasn't yet been mastered even at the highest level.
Thanks.
|
At least hes paying attention to the community and clearing things up. Most corporate businesses release a game and dont pay attention the user base. Good job, Blizzard :D
|
Agree re: KA. It's a shame that P has to wait ~45 seconds in order to vaporize a 200 food army of roaches in just 2 quick waves of storms.
|
On December 16 2011 21:54 Pulimuli wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 18:42 laguu wrote:
Just reduce marine damage from 6 -> 5 and you have the game fixed. They are simply too high dps. Sure, you can hard counter them with colossus etc but hard counters dont make a good game. Dumbest thing ive ever read right here... Terrans are doing bad lately so you want to nerf the most used unit in the entire terran army? -.- gj winning anything above bronze level if they nerf the marines
You guys are both clueless, Marines have 5 range 
What needs to happen is Tanks need to be good in TvP because they have and always should form the backbone of the Terran army.
|
On December 17 2011 05:43 jdsowa wrote:
Agree re: KA. It's a shame that P has to wait ~45 seconds in order to vaporize a 200 food army of roaches in just 2 quick waves of storms.
HTs against roaches? That's barely cost efficient.
|
On December 17 2011 05:55 Zombo Joe wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 21:54 Pulimuli wrote:On December 16 2011 18:42 laguu wrote:
Just reduce marine damage from 6 -> 5 and you have the game fixed. They are simply too high dps. Sure, you can hard counter them with colossus etc but hard counters dont make a good game. Dumbest thing ive ever read right here... Terrans are doing bad lately so you want to nerf the most used unit in the entire terran army? -.- gj winning anything above bronze level if they nerf the marines You guys are both clueless, Marines have 5 range What needs to happen is Tanks need to be good in TvP because they have and always should form the backbone of the Terran army.
to make terran better, just remove colossus and give back reaver.
its not tank, although tanks + smartfire was overpowered. they could remove smartfire. but the real issue is and has always been colossus. vs marines, vs all zerg, etc.
|
On December 16 2011 17:42 Capiachi wrote:
1. People keep forgetting that when you can drop 15 mules at the same time it means the terran didn't have the economy he should have had earlier. Pooling energy is worse then using it consistently. I wouldn't mind a change on mules, but chronoboost and spawn larvae makes terran need something.
2. Gold bases were just getting some more tactics to them, alot of zergs started taking them again P for example. And Im sure they havn't played around enough with it. I think zerg had a decent way of handling any type of base right now(even planetaries). I think the main problem with golds is that we dont see protoss using them as much as zerg/terran.
4. I think that's a bit extreme, Leenock has shown some awesome play and very irritating baneling mines. His style is pretty "new" and underused. AND it makes terran economy worse. The reason we didn't see Lenoock win GSL was some unfortunete decisions from his side. I'm still very impressed.
I will still stand by my reasoning that Zerg is by far the best race, aslong as you know whats going on. There is so much potential in the race that I think once people figure zerg out completly it will very hard to handle.
Well if I pool energy on my queens I cant inject 15 times why should terrans be able to drop 15 mules?
Explain your second point a bit more how exactly do zerg have easy ways of handling planetary fortress? Like have you ever tried to kill a pf on shattered temple? Tanks marines and a pf on the gold with turrets. Like you can push into it but you will be losing a good deal of units in the process. Personally ive just had to resort to letting them have the gold and just hoping I can out macro them myself and that isnt a perfect solution. Protoss actually take it just fine with cannons id say they just prefer to take safer bases it might be a race difference.
Ill take your point about 4 but still I don't think he could have gotten to the final without the map changes but ill drop that point.
|
On December 17 2011 05:58 RavenLoud wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2011 05:43 jdsowa wrote:
Agree re: KA. It's a shame that P has to wait ~45 seconds in order to vaporize a 200 food army of roaches in just 2 quick waves of storms. HTs against roaches? That's barely cost efficient.
In most situations, especially in pro games, it actually is not cost efficient. Colossi are FAR better vs Zerg ground units in general than HTs. HTs are mostly used because either Zerg has overcountered Colossi with Corruptors, or because Mutas/BLs are out.
EDIT: Or because of Infestors, althought HTs aren't a plausible fast response to seeing Infestors.
|
United States7483 Posts
On December 17 2011 06:05 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2011 05:58 RavenLoud wrote:On December 17 2011 05:43 jdsowa wrote:
Agree re: KA. It's a shame that P has to wait ~45 seconds in order to vaporize a 200 food army of roaches in just 2 quick waves of storms. HTs against roaches? That's barely cost efficient. In most situations, especially in pro games, it actually is not cost efficient. Colossi are FAR better vs Zerg ground units in general than HTs. HTs are mostly used because either Zerg has overcountered Colossi with Corruptors, or because Mutas/BLs are out. EDIT: Or because of Infestors, althought HTs aren't a plausible fast response to seeing Infestors.
Yeah, the issue here isn't that HT's are good against roaches, they aren't, but that a 200/200 roach army is just freaking terrible: you should never max on roaches against a protoss army that actually has good amounts of tech (like storm or colossi) in it. Roaches are a midgame army, you should have swapped a while ago if they can actually afford to blanket storm your entire army.
|
So to sum this up, there are some concerns they are looking and possible changes will be implemented with HotS... I dont like that kind of thinking, also few things like mules/larvae mechanics are discussing in community for over a year and they still dont have any conclusions and still investigating this issues... I know balancing cannot involve rushed decisions but seriously after 1.5 year you still dont know if some mechanic are broken or not?
|
hey cool thread, david kim is a baoss.
|
United States1839 Posts
On December 16 2011 12:04 TyrantPotato wrote:
their view on reapers IMO was completely wrong.
the only reason that reapers were too good against zerg was the tiny map size, and that they could kite everything
i preached back in the 5rax reaper days that all that needed to change was roach range increased to prevent kiting of roaches.
now with that increased range, bringing back the reaper speed will bring another way in which the tvz game could be played.
And because players were bad. Go back and watch IdrA vs MorroW at IEM. Both players are consistently making mistakes, so I think it would be interesting to see Reaper speed brought back.
|
United States1839 Posts
Also as far as "more varied Protoss play," how about more varied TvP to go along with it. Protoss has plenty of options in PvT, but TvP is literally limited to one type of play (that is if you don't want to All-in).
|
United States1839 Posts
On December 17 2011 01:11 tapk69 wrote:
If i have 3 replicators and an observer i will make 3 ghosts as protoss and EMP their ghosts and medivacs ... or snipe the ghosts...
Protosses are the best race with a 200 supply army , so why they always try to win with a cheese strat on GSL ? maybe the problem is the economy i dont know... Ghosts are fine against protoss , and snipe is probably to good vs tier 3 zerg , but i like the fact that they know that they will unbalance the game with Hots in ways we never though it was possible..
I hope they release hots fast so that we can abuse the new units before the future nerfs...
The way i see the game right now :
TvZ : if terrans does nothing to zerg early they will drone and kill you fast
TvP : Terrans need to kill protosses ASAP,before they get upgrades and collusus, archons , HT ,chargelots in the same army
ZvP : same as TvZ ( zergs macro is to powerfull for mules and chrono boost
Z v Z is pretty insane , too fast .. spines should get more range , like the creep range or 10 range
P v P is better now , but hots will probably help
T v T is perfect , because terrans are perfect too
TvZ late game is a lot more balanced then you're giving it credit. Terrans just need to go mech and get Ghosts. TvP late game is impossibly hard though. ZvZ is actually getting a lot better recently, PvP could still use some help, and TvT is far from perfect. TvT was a great match-up pre Patch 1.4. Now that Mech is so much harder to do, the match-up really has become a lot worse. TvT with Bio play is bad to watch, boring to play, and often is changed by single seconds--something that TvT shouldn't be. TvT should be the super-macro oriented match-up that it always has been. Tank pushes or Banshee play is fine because they add a certain dynamic to the match-up, but when people are going so bio-intensive, there's something wrong with it.
|
Kind of depressing to hear an actual developer follow terrible misconceptions.
"Terran do unusually well in Korea"
You aren't getting it! They're doing well becuase Koreans are the best players! And in the most skilled hands, you will see results much more in line with a game's actual balance! He's basically attributing it to some magical force when the answer is right in front of him.
|
On December 17 2011 06:31 The Final Boss wrote:
Also as far as "more varied Protoss play," how about more varied TvP to go along with it. Protoss has plenty of options in PvT, but TvP is literally limited to one type of play (that is if you don't want to All-in).
I don't agree that Protoss has plenty of options, but I do think the matchup in general needs a bit more variety and sustained excitement, rather than just "lets up build armies for X amount of time, have an exchange in 2 minutes than Y person wins".
I think the two matchups to look up to in this regard are TvT and TvZ, probably the two most consistently exciting matchups in the game. While there have been stand-out matches in PvT (NASL 1 finals, Dreamhack Winter 1 finals), most PvT matches have not got any sustained excitement.
|
"Terran do unusually well in Korea"
You aren't getting it! They're doing well becuase Koreans are the best players! And in the most skilled hands, you will see results much more in line with a game's actual balance! He's basically attributing it to some magical force when the answer is right in front of him.
What about this answer...
The best players picked terran because was the most powerful race when the game was released..
Terran is the race that has most options also...
or both...
|
On December 17 2011 07:22 tapk69 wrote:Show nested quote +
"Terran do unusually well in Korea"
You aren't getting it! They're doing well becuase Koreans are the best players! And in the most skilled hands, you will see results much more in line with a game's actual balance! He's basically attributing it to some magical force when the answer is right in front of him.
What about this answer... The best players picked terran because was the most powerful race when the game was released.. Terran is the race that has most options also... or both...
Wouldn't having more viable options than another race be considered stronger? If that's the point you're making then I agree, but saying that Terran simply does well now becuase over a year ago the best players picked it is a bit wrong. There were more Korean Protoss at release. Where'd they go?
|
|
|
The only thing I will understand about this article is the fact you must wait hots
|
United States1839 Posts
On December 17 2011 07:08 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2011 06:31 The Final Boss wrote:
Also as far as "more varied Protoss play," how about more varied TvP to go along with it. Protoss has plenty of options in PvT, but TvP is literally limited to one type of play (that is if you don't want to All-in). I don't agree that Protoss has plenty of options, but I do think the matchup in general needs a bit more variety and sustained excitement, rather than just "lets up build armies for X amount of time, have an exchange in 2 minutes than Y person wins". I think the two matchups to look up to in this regard are TvT and TvZ, probably the two most consistently exciting matchups in the game. While there have been stand-out matches in PvT (NASL 1 finals, Dreamhack Winter 1 finals), most PvT matches have not got any sustained excitement.
As far as TvP is concerned, in the late stages of the game Protoss has far more variety. Terran has to go MMMGV (maybe add in Ravens? Banshees? but not enough to be a significant impact) where as Protoss can go for a multitude of mixtures of Colossi, High Templar, Phoenix, and Gateway units. Terran armies always look the same, but Protoss armies vary a lot of the time based on the player's preference or their response.
|
On December 17 2011 07:22 tapk69 wrote:Show nested quote +
"Terran do unusually well in Korea"
You aren't getting it! They're doing well becuase Koreans are the best players! And in the most skilled hands, you will see results much more in line with a game's actual balance! He's basically attributing it to some magical force when the answer is right in front of him.
What about this answer... The best players picked terran because was the most powerful race when the game was released.. Terran is the race that has most options also... or both...
Given how much the game has evolved since release, I hardly doubt that anybody could have said for certain back in summer 2010 that Terran is by design the strongest race.
I'd even say that this assumption is completely wrong.
It is more probable to assume that skill among races is evenly distributed and that players (at least those who played SC2 from the beginning) choose their race according to personal preferences.
Yes, there may be players with exceptional skill that might skew results in a certain direction (e. g. MVP), but there is no reason, except for self-deception, to believe that "more skilled players" (I wonder: How do you as a player know when you start playing SC2 if you are good or bad?) have a Terran bias.
|
Those were probably some of the most neutral responses I've read :o
Its good that they are acknowledging it though.
|
Sooooooo many comments I wish I didn't read here...but that's what I get for entering a thread about balance =X...
David's got hella work coming up with HoTS on the way...
|
Oh wow, nothing about chargelots lategame TvP? Disappointing I guess they have their Band-Aid fix for it lined up with the battle hellion for HOTS.
Still, cant help but like David Kim for some reason.
|
Hmm cant help but feel that the answers were full of fluff. Wait for HOTS, we are working hard to balance the game, we don't want to make changes to quickly because it causes surprising effects.
What I really want to hear is what David Kim thinks, not the process of balancing he uses, we all already know that.
|
On December 17 2011 10:45 HystericaLaughter wrote:
Hmm cant help but feel that the answers were full of fluff. Wait for HOTS, we are working hard to balance the game, we don't want to make changes to quickly because it causes surprising effects.
What I really want to hear is what David Kim thinks, not the process of balancing he uses, we all already know that.
You could tell what he and Dustin thinks with the HotS reveal. It'll be even clearer when the beta hits.
|
On December 17 2011 06:30 The Final Boss wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 12:04 TyrantPotato wrote:
their view on reapers IMO was completely wrong.
the only reason that reapers were too good against zerg was the tiny map size, and that they could kite everything
i preached back in the 5rax reaper days that all that needed to change was roach range increased to prevent kiting of roaches.
now with that increased range, bringing back the reaper speed will bring another way in which the tvz game could be played. And because players were bad. Go back and watch IdrA vs MorroW at IEM. Both players are consistently making mistakes, so I think it would be interesting to see Reaper speed brought back.
I do admit that that both players made mistakes but the game was imbalanced at that time.Morrow abused the reapers to its maximum.
|
On December 16 2011 12:07 eleaf wrote:
Just explain why current master/GM are flooded with zerg. Hard race and need auto lava inject? I dont think so.
User was warned for this post
Are you retarded? The race distribution is extremely close if you actually look at the statistics instead of bullshitting, and also when I last looked at Korean grandmaster (which was when people were QQing a lot about zerg) there were about equal terran and protoss and much less zerg.
|
Good read, Q&A/Interviews with blizzard employees should be done more often imo.
|
United States7483 Posts
On December 17 2011 07:58 The Final Boss wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2011 07:08 SeaSwift wrote:On December 17 2011 06:31 The Final Boss wrote:
Also as far as "more varied Protoss play," how about more varied TvP to go along with it. Protoss has plenty of options in PvT, but TvP is literally limited to one type of play (that is if you don't want to All-in). I don't agree that Protoss has plenty of options, but I do think the matchup in general needs a bit more variety and sustained excitement, rather than just "lets up build armies for X amount of time, have an exchange in 2 minutes than Y person wins". I think the two matchups to look up to in this regard are TvT and TvZ, probably the two most consistently exciting matchups in the game. While there have been stand-out matches in PvT (NASL 1 finals, Dreamhack Winter 1 finals), most PvT matches have not got any sustained excitement. As far as TvP is concerned, in the late stages of the game Protoss has far more variety. Terran has to go MMMGV (maybe add in Ravens? Banshees? but not enough to be a significant impact) where as Protoss can go for a multitude of mixtures of Colossi, High Templar, Phoenix, and Gateway units. Terran armies always look the same, but Protoss armies vary a lot of the time based on the player's preference or their response.
Best TvP of all time might have been Thorzain vs. MC on Tal'darim Altar in the TSL 3. What a freaking amazing match.
|
TL;DR
David Kim is an advocate for the status quo.
|
United States1839 Posts
On December 17 2011 11:37 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2011 07:58 The Final Boss wrote:On December 17 2011 07:08 SeaSwift wrote:On December 17 2011 06:31 The Final Boss wrote:
Also as far as "more varied Protoss play," how about more varied TvP to go along with it. Protoss has plenty of options in PvT, but TvP is literally limited to one type of play (that is if you don't want to All-in). I don't agree that Protoss has plenty of options, but I do think the matchup in general needs a bit more variety and sustained excitement, rather than just "lets up build armies for X amount of time, have an exchange in 2 minutes than Y person wins". I think the two matchups to look up to in this regard are TvT and TvZ, probably the two most consistently exciting matchups in the game. While there have been stand-out matches in PvT (NASL 1 finals, Dreamhack Winter 1 finals), most PvT matches have not got any sustained excitement. As far as TvP is concerned, in the late stages of the game Protoss has far more variety. Terran has to go MMMGV (maybe add in Ravens? Banshees? but not enough to be a significant impact) where as Protoss can go for a multitude of mixtures of Colossi, High Templar, Phoenix, and Gateway units. Terran armies always look the same, but Protoss armies vary a lot of the time based on the player's preference or their response. Best TvP of all time might have been Thorzain vs. MC on Tal'darim Altar in the TSL 3. What a freaking amazing match.
I agree with that statement (that game was freaking amazing) but I don't see how it responds to my question.
|
Great read as David is always boss.
I wonder though were they get the idea of balancing around mutalisks? Most HOtS changes are based on this assumption.
|
Pretty much what I expected, we'll just have to wait and see.
|
United States7483 Posts
On December 17 2011 13:44 The Final Boss wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2011 11:37 Whitewing wrote:On December 17 2011 07:58 The Final Boss wrote:On December 17 2011 07:08 SeaSwift wrote:On December 17 2011 06:31 The Final Boss wrote:
Also as far as "more varied Protoss play," how about more varied TvP to go along with it. Protoss has plenty of options in PvT, but TvP is literally limited to one type of play (that is if you don't want to All-in). I don't agree that Protoss has plenty of options, but I do think the matchup in general needs a bit more variety and sustained excitement, rather than just "lets up build armies for X amount of time, have an exchange in 2 minutes than Y person wins". I think the two matchups to look up to in this regard are TvT and TvZ, probably the two most consistently exciting matchups in the game. While there have been stand-out matches in PvT (NASL 1 finals, Dreamhack Winter 1 finals), most PvT matches have not got any sustained excitement. As far as TvP is concerned, in the late stages of the game Protoss has far more variety. Terran has to go MMMGV (maybe add in Ravens? Banshees? but not enough to be a significant impact) where as Protoss can go for a multitude of mixtures of Colossi, High Templar, Phoenix, and Gateway units. Terran armies always look the same, but Protoss armies vary a lot of the time based on the player's preference or their response. Best TvP of all time might have been Thorzain vs. MC on Tal'darim Altar in the TSL 3. What a freaking amazing match. I agree with that statement (that game was freaking amazing) but I don't see how it responds to my question.
Oh I was just quoting the general conversation with regards to TvP not being as good as TvT and TvZ.
Protoss can't really go for a multitude of mixtures of colossi, HT, and other units, it's pretty much always zealot/stalker, maybe some sentries if you have any left, + colossi or HT or both. Sure you can sort of sprinkle in some more, in much the same way terran could sprinkle some reapers in to their harass squads, or banshees for some extra dps or add a raven etc, but against bio that's pretty much the basic composition, and it's always going to look more or less like that. Ghosts are added in to deal with sentries and HT/archons, vikings are added in to deal with colossi.
|
His answers are brilliant.
What concerns me more is the complaints he is addressing. Terran complaing about nerfs? Zerg complaining about larva injects? These are absolutely ridiculous. If a races dominates for a long time of course you should balance that and larva inject is one of the aspects that makes the game challenging for zergs.
Protoss needing more varied playstyle? Maybe, but I don't think zergs are in any better situation when it comes to variety.
The way gold bases are now is fine. It's only GSL terrans who are dominating - so they get removed in tournies where these guys show up...but I don't feel it's any issues against the random Terran scrubs on ladder
|
Its a bit unfortunate the way David Kim shut down on nearly every point :\. I found the interview a little discouraging.
|
I agree with what he said about choke points and map balance.
I hope HOTS turn out to be an awesome game
|
Spawn Larva requiring too much management? Honestly guys, is this a joke? I play Terran and Zerg, and let me tell you, what takes far more management and clicking around all game long is having to rally building SCV's back to the mineral line after constructing just about every single building, every game, from start to finish. While I obviously haven't played at a professional level, I can't see how it's anything BUT balanced that the Spawn Larva mechanic exists as it does; part of Zerg's strength lies in being able to produce all of their units (that they have tech for) AT THE SAME TIME. Honestly, if people are having trouble managing Queen injects, why don't you just hotkey your first 2-3 queens? That's what I do and it works just fine. I am so surprised to see pros hotkey their hatcheries individually and not their Queens, while it works similarly it saves a split second if you just 'key the Queens.
Also, on the subject of management, doesn't SC1 require infinite more management all-around? Yet BW became huge and pros didn't ragequit because the game wasn't as user-friendly as SC2; they mastered the tools at their disposal and kept on going. Zerg has a unique advantage in unit production that the other races don't have; I honestly don't see the problem here. In HotS, if SCV's are given an option to rally back to mining with the click of a button or something lazy, then I honestly feel there would be a stronger argument for Spawn Larva management.
Sidenote: What about Chronoboost? I don't see any qualms about this mechanic...
|
Can someone ask David Kim what he thinks about the terran mobility on big maps?
Because I think big maps are so unfairly imbalanced against terran that I basically removed all of them from my preferred 1v1 map pool. I don't want to play on a huge map because I can't defend all my bases against mutas while at the same time slowly moving through the map scanning the ground for burrowed banelings or burrowed banelings that move underground (see: HotS, QQ)
In SC:BW big maps were my favourite, because it allowed for a longer and more interesting games. While in SC2, big maps favour only zerg players and 4gate-protoss.
I think this is the biggest design flaw in SC2. If terran won't get better mobility, then all other changes/nerfs are pointless.
We can't just stim all the time or do those risky medivac drops, that with mutas on the map are doomed to fail, unless you are just lucky.
|
I for one think this is a beautiful interview with complete responses in relation to the questions shown. If you think otherwise then I think you simply expect too much.
On December 18 2011 10:16 Aiurr wrote:
Can someone ask David Kim what he thinks about the terran mobility on big maps?
Because I think big maps are so unfairly imbalanced against terran that I basically removed all of them from my preferred 1v1 map pool. I don't want to play on a huge map because I can't defend all my bases against mutas while at the same time slowly moving through the map scanning the ground for burrowed banelings or burrowed banelings that move underground (see: HotS, QQ)
In SC:BW big maps were my favourite, because it allowed for a longer and more interesting games. While in SC2, big maps favour only zerg players and 4gate-protoss.
I think this is the biggest design flaw in SC2. If terran won't get better mobility, then all other changes/nerfs are pointless.
We can't just stim all the time or do those risky medivac drops, that with mutas on the map are doomed to fail, unless you are just lucky.
Ever hear of a raven? It is extremely useful in late game TvX, let alone mid game. On a side note, nobody ever asked you to siege hop all the way across the map. Are you hoping for +move speed aura or something? lolol. In case David Kim never tells us what he thinks about terran mobility on big maps, I will. It's perfectly fine
|
maybe they should make Khaydarin Amulet available , but take away the warp tech for the Templars, or increase the warp time to the equivalent of normal building times. This would make it same as SC1, and I would have no problem with it. Otherwise, the protoss should not complain because with the emp area nerf, Temps should not be buffed.
THe emp is nerfed so much since SC1 though,
-originally aoe is nerfed from science vessels, but since it is lower tier unit, this is reasonable
-instead of taking all shield away now it only takes 100 shield
- take only 100 energy instead of all energy.
- The emp was nerfed 2 times in terms of aoe, i believe once during beta, and now again. It is hard to hit multiple units, now they should just give a target attack then, because it is so easy to miss now, pros miss them a lot as well.
PS: Make sure you actually play terran after the patch to see the EMP nerf, it is ridiculously small radius
|
Terrans are only doing well in Korea because so many Koreans play the Terran race. A lot of Terran players in SC1 as well, it is like a tradition, and they are the coolest looking race to use (i think to general public). Also a lot of top terran players were actually good SC1 players (more recent players i mean), such as MVP and FIN. It is understandable they have better multi-tasking skills, and one can see this easily in competitions, where they can micro is like 2 or 3 fronts almost simultaneously
|
On December 18 2011 13:44 Puph wrote:I for one think this is a beautiful interview with complete responses in relation to the questions shown. If you think otherwise then I think you simply expect too much. Show nested quote +On December 18 2011 10:16 Aiurr wrote:
Can someone ask David Kim what he thinks about the terran mobility on big maps?
Because I think big maps are so unfairly imbalanced against terran that I basically removed all of them from my preferred 1v1 map pool. I don't want to play on a huge map because I can't defend all my bases against mutas while at the same time slowly moving through the map scanning the ground for burrowed banelings or burrowed banelings that move underground (see: HotS, QQ)
In SC:BW big maps were my favourite, because it allowed for a longer and more interesting games. While in SC2, big maps favour only zerg players and 4gate-protoss.
I think this is the biggest design flaw in SC2. If terran won't get better mobility, then all other changes/nerfs are pointless.
We can't just stim all the time or do those risky medivac drops, that with mutas on the map are doomed to fail, unless you are just lucky. Ever hear of a raven? It is extremely useful in late game TvX, let alone mid game. On a side note, nobody ever asked you to siege hop all the way across the map. Are you hoping for +move speed aura or something? lolol. In case David Kim never tells us what he thinks about terran mobility on big maps, I will. It's perfectly fine
by saying "scanning" I also ment raven, you do not suppose me to name every unit I use do you?
terran mobility is not "fine" on big maps, I think you are trolling...
everyone knows that big maps are imbalanced against terran
|
I think it is more about style...terran is kind of like protoss in SC1, you always need to attack the opponent and not just sit back and max. That is why you always see these early aggression from terran, while the opponent plays more of a turtle style, at the earlier stages of the game. In SC1, similarly you always see like reaver drops, corsair harass, dragoon pressure before siege tanks come out, more 2 base timing attacks.
|
On December 18 2011 19:39 Aiurr wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2011 13:44 Puph wrote:I for one think this is a beautiful interview with complete responses in relation to the questions shown. If you think otherwise then I think you simply expect too much. On December 18 2011 10:16 Aiurr wrote:
Can someone ask David Kim what he thinks about the terran mobility on big maps?
Because I think big maps are so unfairly imbalanced against terran that I basically removed all of them from my preferred 1v1 map pool. I don't want to play on a huge map because I can't defend all my bases against mutas while at the same time slowly moving through the map scanning the ground for burrowed banelings or burrowed banelings that move underground (see: HotS, QQ)
In SC:BW big maps were my favourite, because it allowed for a longer and more interesting games. While in SC2, big maps favour only zerg players and 4gate-protoss.
I think this is the biggest design flaw in SC2. If terran won't get better mobility, then all other changes/nerfs are pointless.
We can't just stim all the time or do those risky medivac drops, that with mutas on the map are doomed to fail, unless you are just lucky. Ever hear of a raven? It is extremely useful in late game TvX, let alone mid game. On a side note, nobody ever asked you to siege hop all the way across the map. Are you hoping for +move speed aura or something? lolol. In case David Kim never tells us what he thinks about terran mobility on big maps, I will. It's perfectly fine by saying "scanning" I also ment raven, you do not suppose me to name every unit I use do you? terran mobility is not "fine" on big maps, I think you are trolling... everyone knows that big maps are imbalanced against terran
I think what he is getting at is Terran might need an equivalent of the vultures, while hellions are quite good, they do not have the same speed nor the map presence with mines. But hellions will give terran reasonable mobility unfortunately vs toss, if you mech purely, those immortals will rip you apart.
|
On December 18 2011 19:46 thesums wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2011 19:39 Aiurr wrote:On December 18 2011 13:44 Puph wrote:I for one think this is a beautiful interview with complete responses in relation to the questions shown. If you think otherwise then I think you simply expect too much. On December 18 2011 10:16 Aiurr wrote:
Can someone ask David Kim what he thinks about the terran mobility on big maps?
Because I think big maps are so unfairly imbalanced against terran that I basically removed all of them from my preferred 1v1 map pool. I don't want to play on a huge map because I can't defend all my bases against mutas while at the same time slowly moving through the map scanning the ground for burrowed banelings or burrowed banelings that move underground (see: HotS, QQ)
In SC:BW big maps were my favourite, because it allowed for a longer and more interesting games. While in SC2, big maps favour only zerg players and 4gate-protoss.
I think this is the biggest design flaw in SC2. If terran won't get better mobility, then all other changes/nerfs are pointless.
We can't just stim all the time or do those risky medivac drops, that with mutas on the map are doomed to fail, unless you are just lucky. Ever hear of a raven? It is extremely useful in late game TvX, let alone mid game. On a side note, nobody ever asked you to siege hop all the way across the map. Are you hoping for +move speed aura or something? lolol. In case David Kim never tells us what he thinks about terran mobility on big maps, I will. It's perfectly fine by saying "scanning" I also ment raven, you do not suppose me to name every unit I use do you? terran mobility is not "fine" on big maps, I think you are trolling... everyone knows that big maps are imbalanced against terran I think what he is getting at is Terran might need an equivalent of the vultures, while hellions are quite good, they do not have the same speed nor the map presence with mines. But hellions will give terran reasonable mobility unfortunately vs toss, if you mech purely, those immortals will rip you apart.
Yea, this is what I am talking about. Without something like spider mines, or a fast air-ground flying unit, terran can only use banshees and medivac drops. But this is only harassment. You still have to leapfrog all the way with siege tanks, and by the time you can lose your whole base to a single warp-prism / mutas / nydus.
So I think terran needs the equivalent of either: nydus / warp-tech / blink / mutas / burrowed banelings / creep
|
I would like to see the replicant changed or scrapped tho because I don't think it serves the role Protoss needs, especially when you keep in mind that they want more variety with toss in hots, imo I think they should get a unit which supports the protoss arsenal more overall.
Anyway good read, gj David Kim trying to balance the game, so far the game is actually pretty balanced now. Glad David Kim doesn't want to rush stuff which would ruin the balance,
|
On December 16 2011 12:07 VirgilSC2 wrote:
I don't understand why you would ask David Kim about the EMP range reduction being too severe. All the EMP change did was bring the EMP radius in line with the current radius for Psi Storm.
you have to remember though that terran units generally take up less space and are tighter packed than protoss units, so while you may be hitting less area, you are still hitting about the same number of units. Spreading helps mitigate this of course but the same can be said for protoss and it's also not feasible to spread perfectly in large engagements. Also remember that more important than raw damage is damage as a percentage of total health, which gives a more accurate picture of its effect on a unit/army, and one storm has the potential to do much more damage in that regard to terran units than emp does to protoss units in that regard, since terran bio units are typically high dps but low health where protoss units are higher health but lower dps.
|
On December 19 2011 02:42 jcarlson08 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 12:07 VirgilSC2 wrote:
I don't understand why you would ask David Kim about the EMP range reduction being too severe. All the EMP change did was bring the EMP radius in line with the current radius for Psi Storm. you have to remember though that terran units generally take up less space and are tighter packed than protoss units, so while you may be hitting less area, you are still hitting about the same number of units. Spreading helps mitigate this of course but the same can be said for protoss and it's also not feasible to spread perfectly in large engagements. Also remember that more important than raw damage is damage as a percentage of total health, which gives a more accurate picture of its effect on a unit/army, and one storm has the potential to do much more damage in that regard to terran units than emp does to protoss units in that regard, since terran bio units are typically high dps but low health where protoss units are higher health but lower dps.
thats why EMP is instant while Storm damage over time -.-
|
On December 16 2011 13:21 Rinrun wrote:
KA upgrade causes the warp in time for HTs to increase by 10 seconds... causes WG (that warped it) cooldown to increase by 5 seconds. Also flashing floating text outlining that "IT'S A HIGH TEMPLAR, WATCH OUT FOR STORMS"
Haha. I really want to see snipe get a nerf though... it's painful watching TvZ nowadays.
yh snipe is very strong, it also ignores armor and costs only 25 energy, for a range 10 45 damage no cool down shot
it should jsut cost 50 energy
also i would love to see ultralisk have a movement speed of 3
and hydralisk have 6 range, and grooved spine removed
also mules should jsut have a cooldown( since beta people have said this)
BTW on regular patches workers bring back 5 minerals per trip
on gold they bring 7 per trip
mules on regular minerals bring back 42 minerals
on gold bases they bring in double that( and THATS why its an issue)
just saying -_-
|
On December 17 2011 11:49 TheRedViper wrote:
TL;DR
David Kim is an advocate for the status quo.
He seems to think that statistical racial balance should be his only concern but doesn't address the fact that Protoss games are less interesting to watch.
Since amulet went P matchups are just less interesting than TvZ. He should really acknowledge that as a problem.
Although it doesn't really matter because HotS will change everything anyway.
|
On December 19 2011 03:22 Klive5ive wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2011 11:49 TheRedViper wrote:
TL;DR
David Kim is an advocate for the status quo. He seems to think that statistical racial balance should be his only concern but doesn't address the fact that Protoss games are less interesting to watch. Since amulet went P matchups are just less interesting than TvZ. He should really acknowledge that as a problem. Although it doesn't really matter because HotS will change everything anyway.
It's because Warpgate.
It makes all three match-ups shit for the spectator.
Either you go all-in or you turtle because gateway units are expensive trash that you can't easily replace like marines / lings / roaches etc.
|
On December 19 2011 03:28 Elefanto wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2011 03:22 Klive5ive wrote:On December 17 2011 11:49 TheRedViper wrote:
TL;DR
David Kim is an advocate for the status quo. He seems to think that statistical racial balance should be his only concern but doesn't address the fact that Protoss games are less interesting to watch. Since amulet went P matchups are just less interesting than TvZ. He should really acknowledge that as a problem. Although it doesn't really matter because HotS will change everything anyway. It's because Warpgate. It makes all three match-ups shit for the spectator. Either you go all-in or you turtle because gateway units are expensive trash that you can't easily replace like marines / lings / roaches etc.
Agreed. I feel like, especially with larger maps, Warp Gate should be a very lategame upgrade for harassment.
Or else, you could have Warp Gates still warping in at Warp Prisms, but not Pylons. Interesting idea, though it would have its flaws.
|
It's hard to imagine a game with decent gw units. What would gateway stalkers and zealots look like thne? Would they recieve a movement speed boost atleast? I can't ever see them beating marine balls. That problem is more because terrans cant be forced down a mech route like BW. I can't see blizz changing the dynamic of Z. Roaches and hydras will always remain super effective against GW units as even without insta reinforcements blink stalkers would be difficult to deal with (since they are such momentum units and the nature of zerg unit production makes it especially difficult to deal with.)
WGs are here to stay. KA needs to go back to its 65 energy start to be robust enough to be a viable option. Right now IMO collosi are the obviously better option unless there's 10 or so aa air units about. A moderate wait will give Toss a nice unique advantage, something it seems to lack. It will also put hts more on par with the other , superior casters.
|
On December 18 2011 19:34 thesums wrote:
maybe they should make Khaydarin Amulet available , but take away the warp tech for the Templars, or increase the warp time to the equivalent of normal building times. This would make it same as SC1, and I would have no problem with it. Otherwise, the protoss should not complain because with the emp area nerf, Temps should not be buffed.
THe emp is nerfed so much since SC1 though,
-originally aoe is nerfed from science vessels, but since it is lower tier unit, this is reasonable
-instead of taking all shield away now it only takes 100 shield
- take only 100 energy instead of all energy.
- The emp was nerfed 2 times in terms of aoe, i believe once during beta, and now again. It is hard to hit multiple units, now they should just give a target attack then, because it is so easy to miss now, pros miss them a lot as well.
PS: Make sure you actually play terran after the patch to see the EMP nerf, it is ridiculously small radius
Did you see the thread about the PTR? The old beta radius was HUGE, the SC1 vessel box size is about the same as the current one, with the same radius/box size but it's a box instead of a circle.
The ridiculously small radius is the same as psi storm, just so you know.
|
On December 19 2011 03:08 freetgy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2011 02:42 jcarlson08 wrote:On December 16 2011 12:07 VirgilSC2 wrote:
I don't understand why you would ask David Kim about the EMP range reduction being too severe. All the EMP change did was bring the EMP radius in line with the current radius for Psi Storm. you have to remember though that terran units generally take up less space and are tighter packed than protoss units, so while you may be hitting less area, you are still hitting about the same number of units. Spreading helps mitigate this of course but the same can be said for protoss and it's also not feasible to spread perfectly in large engagements. Also remember that more important than raw damage is damage as a percentage of total health, which gives a more accurate picture of its effect on a unit/army, and one storm has the potential to do much more damage in that regard to terran units than emp does to protoss units in that regard, since terran bio units are typically high dps but low health where protoss units are higher health but lower dps. thats why EMP is instant while Storm damage over time -.-
It is probably one of the reasons, but it doesn't have to be the only one. Perhaps Dot isn't enough to correct the disparity alone? It's silly to isolate one stat from one race's spell and compare it vs another; Proper balance discussion has to account for all factors. It's even possible emp should be "imbalanced" when compared to storm as a whole in order to compensate for weakness elsewhere. Balance discussion is meaningless outside the context of the matchup taken as a whole; statements such as yours and "it was done to bring emp radius in line with storm radius" don't really contribute much value unless the goal is to balance the game by making every race the same.
|
On December 18 2011 19:38 thesums wrote:
Terrans are only doing well in Korea because so many Koreans play the Terran race. A lot of Terran players in SC1 as well, it is like a tradition, and they are the coolest looking race to use (i think to general public). Also a lot of top terran players were actually good SC1 players (more recent players i mean), such as MVP and FIN. It is understandable they have better multi-tasking skills, and one can see this easily in competitions, where they can micro is like 2 or 3 fronts almost simultaneously
This is true, but the current Korean GM ladder is not dominated by Terrans. The current spread (as of this post) is 35% terran, 37.5% toss, and 25.5% zerg. The NA server is 29% T, 32% Toss, 36% Zerg. EU is the zerg heaviest GM ladder with 40%, and China GM ladder is uniquely weird in that it has the highest proportion of any one race, with Toss at 42%. SEA has the most even balance of GM frequency between the races.
|
On December 16 2011 12:07 eleaf wrote:
Just explain why current master/GM are flooded with zerg. Hard race and need auto lava inject? I dont think so.
User was warned for this post
higher percentage of zerg being player on ladder = higher percentage of representation in all divisions and leagues. There are two reasons races can appear balanced. One is that more people player the harder race, and despite this the races come withing 55% w/l so they appear balanced. The other is that skill level plays a part in high level balance. Even if a race is unbalanced, a person cannot go beyond a certain amount of skill relative to other players.
For example. Lets say we could reduce timing attacks, build orders, and unit comps, and micro, essentially everything to numbers.
Lets say of these numbers, it takes 100 skill, which is a number of all these combined traits, to beat race Y when the player of race Y has 90 skill. Now, the previous player of race X gets 100 skill. He can now beat race Y, but his skill ceiling peak, because in order to beat the player of race Y when he gets 100 skill himself, the players of race X actually has to experience and strive to get the skills to beat the players of race Y at 100. As long as player of race Y only has 90 skill, player of race X does not increase in skill beyond what is necessary to kill player of race Y at 90 skill.
to summarize, at the highest levels of play, the skill ceiling is what keeps races appearing balanced to each other. Its relative to players. That tells you something about how these players are so good, that prevalent imbalances can appear meaningless, which is why I believe that true balance should be achieved at all levels of play, and not simply at the highest. IF you achieve balance at all levels of play, player skill means more in order to get higher in the game.
|
fairly standard we are aware of the concerns, we're looking into it, and wont do much about it, buy HotS
|
On December 16 2011 12:01 Carras wrote:
thats completely empty as usual.. not a single line worth reading.. you could summarize the hole post with "we r working hard , wait for HOTS"
indeed. I'd rather have nothing than this. they don't really like to talk about the real problems, and if they do, they marginalize them and tell us to wait for HotS...
|
He basically answered the same politically correct answer to all the questions... Didn't go in depth at all. What a useless Q&A...
|
Wh do they give Q+A's when they answer like NOTHING? Even on problems that are widely known since the Beta?..
Mules are, especially on Gold Minerals, a bit strong? NO SHIT SHERLOCK?
|
On December 19 2011 03:34 SeaSwift wrote:
Agreed. I feel like, especially with larger maps, Warp Gate should be a very lategame upgrade for harassment.
Or else, you could have Warp Gates still warping in at Warp Prisms, but not Pylons. Interesting idea, though it would have its flaws.
agree with both things.
games would be a lot more interesting if warpgate was a very late game tech as it would then have more of a "holy shit, he has warptech, now I have a problem" feeling and an actual strategic choice instead of the 100% predictability of today, where you could just as well make it available from the beginning...
(I also think the cooldown of both warpgates and gateway buildtime should be the same.)
a speed upgrade for zealots instead of charge would also be much more interesting as you'd get a very fast ground unit you can harrass and scout, and micro would become more interesting. (but there are really just too many things wrong with protoss unit design and this is just one of them.)
|
If reapers were stronger against armored late game cost 75 minerals (no gas) and could go faster than speedlings they would be used a lot more
[vultures]
On December 19 2011 18:50 KULA_u wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2011 03:34 SeaSwift wrote:
Agreed. I feel like, especially with larger maps, Warp Gate should be a very lategame upgrade for harassment.
Or else, you could have Warp Gates still warping in at Warp Prisms, but not Pylons. Interesting idea, though it would have its flaws.
agree with both things. games would be a lot more interesting if warpgate was a very late game tech as it would then have more of a "holy shit, he has warptech, now I have a problem" feeling and an actual strategic choice instead of the 100% predictability of today, where you could just as well make it available from the beginning... (I also think the cooldown of both warpgates and gateway buildtime should be the same.) a speed upgrade for zealots instead of charge would also be much more interesting as you'd get a very fast ground unit you can harrass and scout, and micro would become more interesting. (but there are really just too many things wrong with protoss unit design and this is just one of them.)
This was what happened with recall in BW, and is the source of a lot of very exciting moments. It was a very expensive upgrade and the highest tier tech out of any upgrade of any race, why Protoss gets it now for 50/50 from a cybercore with no energy or arbiter makes no sense to me.
|
On December 19 2011 17:32 Geo.Rion wrote:
fairly standard we are aware of the concerns, we're looking into it, and wont do much about it, buy HotS
When there are big imbalances in design or balance you can't just change numbers around, you'll have to make big changes (remove or add units).
On December 19 2011 18:42 Velr wrote:
Wh do they give Q+A's when they answer like NOTHING? Even on problems that are widely known since the Beta?..
Mules are, especially on Gold Minerals, a bit strong? NO SHIT SHERLOCK?
The Q&A's purpose is to find out what the balance team is feeling, not specifically what changes they will implement. You'll find that out when such changes show up in a PTR. Without the Q&A, hell we might not know that David Kim agrees that MULEs on gold patches might be imbalanced. Instead we might be afraid that he thinks that they are perfectly fine and working as intended.
|
On December 16 2011 12:04 TyrantPotato wrote:
their view on reapers IMO was completely wrong.
the only reason that reapers were too good against zerg was the tiny map size, and that they could kite everything
i preached back in the 5rax reaper days that all that needed to change was roach range increased to prevent kiting of roaches.
now with that increased range, bringing back the reaper speed will bring another way in which the tvz game could be played.
I was another who thought that was all that was needed to stop the 5 rax from being such an OP strat. I will never understand why Blizz both took away the speed up AND gave roaches extra range.
Yet they somehow sit there and say "gee it's weird that no one uses reapers anymore..."
Even in this interview, he didn't say anything noteworthy.
It blows my mind how both David Kim and Dustin Browder can speak for 15 minutes and not say a single useful or interesting thing.
|
On December 19 2011 19:23 genius_man16 wrote:
I was another who thought that was all that was needed to stop the 5 rax from being such an OP strat. I will never understand why Blizz both took away the speed up AND gave roaches extra range.
Yet they somehow sit there and say "gee it's weird that no one uses reapers anymore..."
The reasoning behind the extra Roach range wasn't just because of Reapers. In ZvP the prevalent unit composition was Roach/Hydra but the Roaches wouldn't "stack" well with the Hydras because of such a short range. Stalkers could also kite the Roaches a lot easier and because Hydras are so slow, you'd end up losing half your army before you reached the opponents base.
Yes, Nitro Packs need to be put back on Tech Lab tech, and I wouldn't mind seeing the proposed change (Slow health regen, no building attack) go into at least the first beta build to see how it will play out.
The major problem at the current stage is that they have no role. Hellions do tremendous amounts of damage to both Zerglings and Drones even with the BFH nerf, so there's no need for a Reaper. They buffed the health of the Hatchery/Lair/Hive as well as the Spawning Pool, and nerfed the Reaper building attack so now they're useless in quickly assaulting tech structures or buildings of any kind. So what's the point in making a Reaper at all? It's not as simple as pushing back their speed tech and giving Roaches an extra range.
|
Basically "wait for HOTS for the fixes to anything" and "we won't make any comments on any real balance/design issues and just pretend that everything is fine because the numbers we have say so". Also most of the questions were terrible. I don't understand why they wouldn't look at the real issues like chargelots in TvP. Meh
|
On December 19 2011 03:21 Zergrusher wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 13:21 Rinrun wrote:
KA upgrade causes the warp in time for HTs to increase by 10 seconds... causes WG (that warped it) cooldown to increase by 5 seconds. Also flashing floating text outlining that "IT'S A HIGH TEMPLAR, WATCH OUT FOR STORMS"
Haha. I really want to see snipe get a nerf though... it's painful watching TvZ nowadays. yh snipe is very strong, it also ignores armor and costs only 25 energy, for a range 10 45 damage no cool down shot it should jsut cost 50 energy also i would love to see ultralisk have a movement speed of 3 and hydralisk have 6 range, and grooved spine removed also mules should jsut have a cooldown( since beta people have said this) BTW on regular patches workers bring back 5 minerals per trip on gold they bring 10 per trip mules on regular minerals bring back 42 minerals on gold bases they bring in double that( and THATS why its an issue) just saying -_-
Actually gold patches only give 7 per trip for workers.
MULEs only mine 30 per trip on regular patch and 42 on gold.
|
On December 16 2011 13:57 soulking wrote:
EMP should not be in the game at all...its crazy how fast my 100 food army can get crushed from 4 emp's...if Protoss and Terran are on the same mining rate then protoss cannot rebuild the army to deal with 4 emp's to the face.
EMP is way too good.
At higher levels EMP does little vs a protoss that doesn't ball up.
|
On December 16 2011 14:09 soulking wrote:
when was the last time someone won GSL finals with protoss?
Tournaments have no correlation to actual game, "Balance".
Remember those MLGs where GSL winners got stomped by non-gsl winners? (huk, idra, whitera etc)
|
On December 20 2011 01:14 cydial wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 13:57 soulking wrote:
EMP should not be in the game at all...its crazy how fast my 100 food army can get crushed from 4 emp's...if Protoss and Terran are on the same mining rate then protoss cannot rebuild the army to deal with 4 emp's to the face.
EMP is way too good. At higher levels EMP does little vs a protoss that doesn't ball up.
I watch the "highest levels" all the time, and they bunch up...literally...every single game. I have yet to see a Toss actively keep his army split up enough so that EMP was ineffective. Sure, they're getting a little better, but I still see 4 EMPs taking out the shields + energy of every single unit in the Toss's army in almost every TvP where the T gets ghosts.
|
On December 16 2011 18:42 laguu wrote:
Just reduce marine damage from 6 -> 5 and you have the game fixed. They are simply too high dps. Sure, you can hard counter them with colossus etc but hard counters dont make a good game.
This would just completely destroy what little Terran had to hold off early immortal pressure from protoss.
|
On December 20 2011 01:25 Sm3agol wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2011 01:14 cydial wrote:On December 16 2011 13:57 soulking wrote:
EMP should not be in the game at all...its crazy how fast my 100 food army can get crushed from 4 emp's...if Protoss and Terran are on the same mining rate then protoss cannot rebuild the army to deal with 4 emp's to the face.
EMP is way too good. At higher levels EMP does little vs a protoss that doesn't ball up. I watch the "highest levels" all the time, and they bunch up...literally...every single game. I have yet to see a Toss actively keep his army split up enough so that EMP was ineffective. Sure, they're getting a little better, but I still see 4 EMPs taking out the shields + energy of every single unit in the Toss's army in almost every TvP where the T gets ghosts.
When a swarm of mass chargelots and archons are rushing you, not even mass emp is very effective against it unless the Terran army is already significantly larger.
|
On December 20 2011 01:31 cydial wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 18:42 laguu wrote:
Just reduce marine damage from 6 -> 5 and you have the game fixed. They are simply too high dps. Sure, you can hard counter them with colossus etc but hard counters dont make a good game. This would just completely destroy what little Terran had to hold off early immortal pressure from protoss.
Remove the arbitrary "forced in" hardened shields and make Immos a bit beefier in genera?
Suddenly Tanks could do something in PvT but still don't dominate it due to Zealots with Charge/Speed?
But thats just a wild idea.
Even better Idea:
Remove Colossus and Immortal and add actually fun units to the Robo... Not a super-dragoon and the epitome of "I HAS TO CREATE BALL!"...
|
On December 20 2011 01:33 cydial wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2011 01:25 Sm3agol wrote:On December 20 2011 01:14 cydial wrote:On December 16 2011 13:57 soulking wrote:
EMP should not be in the game at all...its crazy how fast my 100 food army can get crushed from 4 emp's...if Protoss and Terran are on the same mining rate then protoss cannot rebuild the army to deal with 4 emp's to the face.
EMP is way too good. At higher levels EMP does little vs a protoss that doesn't ball up. I watch the "highest levels" all the time, and they bunch up...literally...every single game. I have yet to see a Toss actively keep his army split up enough so that EMP was ineffective. Sure, they're getting a little better, but I still see 4 EMPs taking out the shields + energy of every single unit in the Toss's army in almost every TvP where the T gets ghosts. When a swarm of mass chargelots and archons are rushing you, not even mass emp is very effective against it unless the Terran army is already significantly larger.
That's a cop-out rofl.
When a swarm of stimmed terran army is rushing you, only shields can be make it even unless the Protoss army is already significantly larger.
See, I can do it too.
|
On December 16 2011 20:56 trinxified wrote:Too bad we won't see Khaydarin Amulet again. Anyway, in regards to PvT... Despite all the nerfs from both races in this respective matchup, the one thing that's still a problem is Marauders. Very cost effective to almost anything Protoss can throw except Immortals. Sometimes, even Immortals aren't enough either.
This thread made my brain hurt, but this just officially gave me a mind headache.
Cost effective against anything protoss has? Have you ever seen what happens when mass chargelot archon meets a bio ball?
|
On December 19 2011 21:50 Garnet wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2011 03:21 Zergrusher wrote:On December 16 2011 13:21 Rinrun wrote:
KA upgrade causes the warp in time for HTs to increase by 10 seconds... causes WG (that warped it) cooldown to increase by 5 seconds. Also flashing floating text outlining that "IT'S A HIGH TEMPLAR, WATCH OUT FOR STORMS"
Haha. I really want to see snipe get a nerf though... it's painful watching TvZ nowadays. yh snipe is very strong, it also ignores armor and costs only 25 energy, for a range 10 45 damage no cool down shot it should jsut cost 50 energy also i would love to see ultralisk have a movement speed of 3 and hydralisk have 6 range, and grooved spine removed also mules should jsut have a cooldown( since beta people have said this) BTW on regular patches workers bring back 5 minerals per trip on gold they bring 7 per trip mules on regular minerals bring back 42 minerals on gold bases they bring in double that( and THATS why its an issue) just saying -_- Actually gold patches only give 7 per trip for workers. MULEs only mine 30 per trip on regular patch and 42 on gold.
mules bring back 42 on regular and lol did i not say 7?
look for yourself
and did you not read the other stuff i said?
|
On December 20 2011 01:36 StyLeD wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2011 01:33 cydial wrote:On December 20 2011 01:25 Sm3agol wrote:On December 20 2011 01:14 cydial wrote:On December 16 2011 13:57 soulking wrote:
EMP should not be in the game at all...its crazy how fast my 100 food army can get crushed from 4 emp's...if Protoss and Terran are on the same mining rate then protoss cannot rebuild the army to deal with 4 emp's to the face.
EMP is way too good. At higher levels EMP does little vs a protoss that doesn't ball up. I watch the "highest levels" all the time, and they bunch up...literally...every single game. I have yet to see a Toss actively keep his army split up enough so that EMP was ineffective. Sure, they're getting a little better, but I still see 4 EMPs taking out the shields + energy of every single unit in the Toss's army in almost every TvP where the T gets ghosts. When a swarm of mass chargelots and archons are rushing you, not even mass emp is very effective against it unless the Terran army is already significantly larger. That's a cop-out rofl. When a swarm of stimmed terran army is rushing you, only shields can be make it even unless the Protoss army is already significantly larger. See, I can do it too.
.... Read what you just wrote very carefully.
So if the protoss army is significantly larger ff doesn't even matter right? Combine shields with a smaller army, then they still hold off. If it's shields + a larger army then it's just overkill.
With what I said emp would be still bad even if BOTH ARMIES ARE MAXED.
|
On December 20 2011 01:46 Zergrusher wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2011 21:50 Garnet wrote:On December 19 2011 03:21 Zergrusher wrote:On December 16 2011 13:21 Rinrun wrote:
KA upgrade causes the warp in time for HTs to increase by 10 seconds... causes WG (that warped it) cooldown to increase by 5 seconds. Also flashing floating text outlining that "IT'S A HIGH TEMPLAR, WATCH OUT FOR STORMS"
Haha. I really want to see snipe get a nerf though... it's painful watching TvZ nowadays. yh snipe is very strong, it also ignores armor and costs only 25 energy, for a range 10 45 damage no cool down shot it should jsut cost 50 energy also i would love to see ultralisk have a movement speed of 3 and hydralisk have 6 range, and grooved spine removed also mules should jsut have a cooldown( since beta people have said this) BTW on regular patches workers bring back 5 minerals per trip on gold they bring 7 per trip mules on regular minerals bring back 42 minerals on gold bases they bring in double that( and THATS why its an issue) just saying -_- Actually gold patches only give 7 per trip for workers. MULEs only mine 30 per trip on regular patch and 42 on gold. mules bring back 42 on regular and lol did i not say 7? look for yourself and did you not read the other stuff i said?
When in doubt, Liquipedia !
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/MULE
"MULEs carry 6 times more minerals per trip than an SCV, gathering 30 minerals per trip on standard patches and 42 on High-Yield patches."
|
On December 20 2011 02:18 FranzP wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2011 01:46 Zergrusher wrote:On December 19 2011 21:50 Garnet wrote:On December 19 2011 03:21 Zergrusher wrote:On December 16 2011 13:21 Rinrun wrote:
KA upgrade causes the warp in time for HTs to increase by 10 seconds... causes WG (that warped it) cooldown to increase by 5 seconds. Also flashing floating text outlining that "IT'S A HIGH TEMPLAR, WATCH OUT FOR STORMS"
Haha. I really want to see snipe get a nerf though... it's painful watching TvZ nowadays. yh snipe is very strong, it also ignores armor and costs only 25 energy, for a range 10 45 damage no cool down shot it should jsut cost 50 energy also i would love to see ultralisk have a movement speed of 3 and hydralisk have 6 range, and grooved spine removed also mules should jsut have a cooldown( since beta people have said this) BTW on regular patches workers bring back 5 minerals per trip on gold they bring 7 per trip mules on regular minerals bring back 42 minerals on gold bases they bring in double that( and THATS why its an issue) just saying -_- Actually gold patches only give 7 per trip for workers. MULEs only mine 30 per trip on regular patch and 42 on gold. mules bring back 42 on regular and lol did i not say 7? look for yourself and did you not read the other stuff i said? When in doubt, Liquipedia ! http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/MULE"MULEs carry 6 times more minerals per trip than an SCV, gathering 30 minerals per trip on standard patches and 42 on High-Yield patches."
why.......... thank you XD
that explains it
kk so realistically the mule need a cooldown
and the other ideas?
|
On December 20 2011 02:18 FranzP wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2011 01:46 Zergrusher wrote:On December 19 2011 21:50 Garnet wrote:On December 19 2011 03:21 Zergrusher wrote:On December 16 2011 13:21 Rinrun wrote:
KA upgrade causes the warp in time for HTs to increase by 10 seconds... causes WG (that warped it) cooldown to increase by 5 seconds. Also flashing floating text outlining that "IT'S A HIGH TEMPLAR, WATCH OUT FOR STORMS"
Haha. I really want to see snipe get a nerf though... it's painful watching TvZ nowadays. yh snipe is very strong, it also ignores armor and costs only 25 energy, for a range 10 45 damage no cool down shot it should jsut cost 50 energy also i would love to see ultralisk have a movement speed of 3 and hydralisk have 6 range, and grooved spine removed also mules should jsut have a cooldown( since beta people have said this) BTW on regular patches workers bring back 5 minerals per trip on gold they bring 7 per trip mules on regular minerals bring back 42 minerals on gold bases they bring in double that( and THATS why its an issue) just saying -_- Actually gold patches only give 7 per trip for workers. MULEs only mine 30 per trip on regular patch and 42 on gold. mules bring back 42 on regular and lol did i not say 7? look for yourself and did you not read the other stuff i said? When in doubt, Liquipedia ! http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/MULE"MULEs carry 6 times more minerals per trip than an SCV, gathering 30 minerals per trip on standard patches and 42 on High-Yield patches."
lol nice you cut out the part where they need double mine time for it
|
On December 20 2011 01:16 cydial wrote:
Remember those MLGs where GSL winners got stomped by non-gsl winners? (huk, idra, whitera etc)
Neither Huk, Idra nor Whitera ever "stomped", or even beat a GSL winner in MLG, unless you count Huk in a PvP. Using that "evidence" to say that "tournament results have no impact therefore Protoss is fine in Code S GSL" is ridiculous.
I'm not saying that Protoss is doing bad, just that your assertions here are ignorant.
|
On December 20 2011 01:25 Sm3agol wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2011 01:14 cydial wrote:On December 16 2011 13:57 soulking wrote:
EMP should not be in the game at all...its crazy how fast my 100 food army can get crushed from 4 emp's...if Protoss and Terran are on the same mining rate then protoss cannot rebuild the army to deal with 4 emp's to the face.
EMP is way too good. At higher levels EMP does little vs a protoss that doesn't ball up. I watch the "highest levels" all the time, and they bunch up...literally...every single game. I have yet to see a Toss actively keep his army split up enough so that EMP was ineffective. Sure, they're getting a little better, but I still see 4 EMPs taking out the shields + energy of every single unit in the Toss's army in almost every TvP where the T gets ghosts.
Protoss units love to clump up, because they all move at different speeds and acceleration rates. Units of like speed end up together. So HTs and senteries all get into a big group hug before the EMP hits. Pros try to limit this by splitting their army, but the instant a move or attack move command is issued, they all clump up again.
The other issue is that the protoss units want to be close together to be effective. If charglots are spead out to much, they get focused down faster by the auto targeting. By blobing them, they tank for eachother and the damage is more spead out. Plus, once charge is popped, the protoss player is at the mercy of the AI. Any attempt to micro the zealots will kill the charge and make them dumb slow.
|
On December 16 2011 21:01 Hider wrote:
Lol funny to see statisctics. At highest lvl of play tvp is 45-55. And most likely the stats are even more toss favored at master league level. Hope blizzard soon comes up with an intelligent fix for tvp.
Terrans have been really lazy with TvP strats at highest level because they've had a very high win percentage for the past 1 year. You have been 1-1-1 ing and carpet EMP+ sniping your way to ez victories for the past 1 year. And now for just 1 month the balance is slightly reversed (55-45) in 1 patch and immediately Terran apologists start crawling out of the woodwork.
I would like to invoke the old TL saying of let the "metagame" develop. Because thats what you've been saying to protoss all these months.
|
Did the David 'the newb' Kim forget that the Khaydarin Amulet from Brood War increased the starting energy from 50 to 62? In SC2 newbs like Browder and Kim made it to 75 which means instant storm.
50->62 is a meaningful upgrade, but it's not an "automatic decision" for spending 150/150 resources...
50-> 75 IS an automatic decision, it's simply too good.
Point is: bring back the Brood War Khaydarin Amulet..........
|
|
|
Cooldown for mule would be golden, means you actually have to manage it like P and Z have to manage their macro functions, not just spam the hotkey on mineral patches when you remember your energy is probably maxed.
|
I don't like David Kim's take on the MULE at all. IMO, the MULE is perfectly fine for most of the game, even on gold bases. The issue becomes in the late game where Terran can sneak a single base (preferably on gold minerals), drop 10-20 MULEs, and accumulate thousands of minerals in less than a minute. That and the ability to sacrifice 50 SCVs for increased army supply makes MULEs favor Terran heavily in the late late game. I wish they would playtest a cooldown, because I think this is a common suggestion that would only affect the late game and make it a little less ridiculous.
|
On December 20 2011 06:09 Sentient wrote:
I don't like David Kim's take on the MULE at all. IMO, the MULE is perfectly fine for most of the game, even on gold bases. The issue becomes in the late game where Terran can sneak a single base (preferably on gold minerals), drop 10-20 MULEs, and accumulate thousands of minerals in less than a minute. That and the ability to sacrifice 50 SCVs for increased army supply makes MULEs favor Terran heavily in the late late game. I wish they would playtest a cooldown, because I think this is a common suggestion that would only affect the late game and make it a little less ridiculous.
Then explain me why terran is struggling lategame in tvp?
|
+ Show Spoiler +Our stance on this kind of issue is simple: We intentionally make different aspects of the game difficult for the different races.
where's the weak point for terran? no troll here I honestly wanna know.
|
You're not trolling? Ever seen Terran doing some multitasking; constant drops, splitting units, targeting Colossus, EMP, build units (cuz when playing Terran you actually have to make them during the battle.) And ofcourse you do that all at the same time..
|
On December 20 2011 06:15 MutaKingPrime wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Our stance on this kind of issue is simple: We intentionally make different aspects of the game difficult for the different races. where's the weak point for terran? no troll here I honestly wanna know.
I think that's what he meant by the Terran race feeling more complete (both him and Browder have stated this), and that because of this the other two races need more design work.
They (theoretically) struggle with "board control", where Protoss has warp-in and Sentries and Zerg has speed and Burrowed banelings, Terrans are missing Spider mines, which is where the Shredder is supposed to come in to play.
Protoss were struggling with being more turtley/all-iny (no back and forth games, either deathball or X-gate all-in design), so the Nexus recall, Oracle and building -> cannon ability were invented to help Protoss engage in more back and forth games.
Zerg struggles with assaulting fortified positions, so they are given the Locust-building thing. Burrowed baneling movement, for the lulz, don't think that will make it through, and Ultra charge.
Blizzard's balance/design team has thought about this and all the races are theoretically intended to be changed to prevent their weaknesses from being too big.
TLDR; it isn't that Terran has too few weaknesses, it's that the other races have too many. HotS is meant to fix that.
On December 20 2011 06:47 SiaBBo wrote:
You're not trolling? Ever seen Terran doing some multitasking; constant drops, splitting units, targeting Colossus, EMP, build units (cuz when playing Terran you actually have to make them during the battle.) And ofcourse you do that all at the same time..
That's not what he meant at all.
|
I think larva inject is fine the way it is because although it is hard to time most pros have it down pretty well. If they we're computer powered machines it would mean every race would have to be too which they have their own advantages and disadvantages in macro.
The energy upgrades are so/so with me due to joining the sc2 community after they removed amulet. I play toss but i agree the energy HTs have is fine any way.
Terran have hellion openings and reaper openings which do fine against all races currently. The speed would just create issues of instability that the blue flame hellions had created.
|
On December 20 2011 06:51 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2011 06:15 MutaKingPrime wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Our stance on this kind of issue is simple: We intentionally make different aspects of the game difficult for the different races. where's the weak point for terran? no troll here I honestly wanna know. I think that's what he meant by the Terran race feeling more complete (both him and Browder have stated this), and that because of this the other two races need more design work. They (theoretically) struggle with "board control", where Protoss has warp-in and Sentries and Zerg has speed and Burrowed banelings, Terrans are missing Spider mines, which is where the Shredder is supposed to come in to play. You're not trolling? Ever seen Terran doing some multitasking; constant drops, splitting units, targeting Colossus, EMP, build units (cuz when playing Terran you actually have to make them during the battle.) And ofcourse you do that all at the same time..
They have siege tanks, it's the best board control in the game lol
|
Terran have plenty of weaknesses, including:
Worst production
Worst unpositioned 200 army
These problems are compensated by a top terran that abuses position in both matchups, and constantly attacks, abusing MULEs and compressed tech tree, so that the other races are unable to fully exercise a late game production advantage.
|
I think the mule is much stronger early game that it is late-game and that's the problem. If Terran had something else instead of mule, we wouldn't be seeing so many retarded should-be-allin builds that can still transition into a normal mid-game.
It also makes 1 Rax FE give more economy than 15CC which makes no sense at all from a risk/reward point of view.
All of ZvT and TvP problems stem from the early game mule.
|
When does Protoss have to manage their macro functions? Chrono Boost has no cooldown. If you miss one cycle, double up on a building or boost something else. If MULES get a cooldown, Chrono Boost would logically need one too. The only reason Inject Larva has one is because that's the "hard" part of Zerg macro, not having to worry about 5-12 buildings is the "easy" part. So conversely P/T Macro mechanic is easier because you have to manage buildings as the harder part.
|
On December 20 2011 03:25 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2011 01:16 cydial wrote:
Remember those MLGs where GSL winners got stomped by non-gsl winners? (huk, idra, whitera etc)
Neither Huk, Idra nor Whitera ever "stomped", or even beat a GSL winner in MLG, unless you count Huk in a PvP. Using that "evidence" to say that "tournament results have no impact therefore Protoss is fine in Code S GSL" is ridiculous. I'm not saying that Protoss is doing bad, just that your assertions here are ignorant.
Koreans obv beat foreigners more than foreigners beat them, but as it stands that's because Koreans are simply better players than foreigners because of how they practice.
Have you ever wondered why Terran is so prominent in korea yet outside of korea it's actually underrepresented? It's ONLY in korea
What do tournaments have to do with balance when it's the players' preference to what race they play? A tournament is also a completely different setting from over all balance because the tournament itself is a new game (many outside factors contribute that have nothing to do with the game being played).
I'm going to throw out there that maybe it's people preferring to play a more dynamic race instead of one that is brain dead a move?
|
This guy is a very intelligent, dedicated dude.
|
Spawn larvae management? Really? People are complaining that SCII is too hard?
|
I'm honestly surprised he didn't comment on the mass muta problem, I know it is being addressed in HoTS but still. And I'm also surprised he didn't make any comments on mass repair.
|
Blizzard's design idea is that, the less mobile the race, the least you should have to expand. That's why they put the mule in.
The thing that I don't like about it is the SCV-pull strategies that it creates.
|
I really don't understand David Kim sometimes and his half dead answers.
On the mule question he basically said
-Yea, we get a lot of feedback from the community about mules being OP
-Progamers say that mules are too strong, too
-the GSL removed gold patches because of mules being too strong
....but we're not certain if there's a problem
...wait what?
|
On December 21 2011 10:34 AndAgain wrote:
Blizzard's design idea is that, the less mobile the race, the least you should have to expand. That's why they put the mule in.
The thing that I don't like about it is the SCV-pull strategies that it creates.
There's also the design flaw that Terran is far from being the least mobile race. So the whole idea kind of falls down straight away.
|
On January 05 2012 08:01 neoghaleon55 wrote:
I really don't understand David Kim sometimes and his half dead answers.
On the mule question he basically said
-Yea, we get a lot of feedback from the community about mules being OP
-Progamers say that mules are too strong, too
-the GSL removed gold patches because of mules being too strong
....but we're not certain if there's a problem
...wait what?
That's not what he said... he said that certain progamers thought the mules are too strong, specifically on gold bases. BUT because in tournaments that still have gold bases and have the same amount of P, T and Z representation it doesn't seem to matter and it's balanaced. The GSL removed gold patches because terrans in korea are really good. He basically said GSL terran players are better then their Z en P counterparts and removing the mule gold bases balances that a bit.
On January 05 2012 08:03 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2011 10:34 AndAgain wrote:
Blizzard's design idea is that, the less mobile the race, the least you should have to expand. That's why they put the mule in.
The thing that I don't like about it is the SCV-pull strategies that it creates. There's also the design flaw that Terran is far from being the least mobile race. So the whole idea kind of falls down straight away.
The only way for terran to all in is by pulling their SCV's because there is no other way to jump ahead in production. So if we nerf the mule because of SCV pulling strategies you should also nerf larva inject because of how it allows to just have a shit ton of units whenever you want and we should remove warpgates because units can be instantly on the other side of the map.
|
But tournament racial representation alone does not determine balance.
What should be looked into is the overall fairness of the game.
How many times in the GSL have we seen Terrans losing 80% of their worker force and is still on equal or greater economy than their counterparts? In response, the GSL removed gold bases, something that is needed for the integrity of the game.
You only need to look to yesterday's AoL MarineKing vs DRG game 4 to see that the removal of gold mineral muling significantly makes the game more fair. Had the center bases been gold patches, MKP's mule dropping off 5 orbitals would have probably won him the game, regardless that he lost the majority of his scvs.
|
On January 05 2012 08:14 neoghaleon55 wrote:
But tournament racial representation alone does not determine balance.
What should be looked into is the overall fairness of the game.
How many times in the GSL have we seen Terrans losing 80% of their worker force and is still on equal or greater economy than their counterparts? In response, the GSL removed gold bases, something that is needed for the integrity of the game.
You only need to look to yesterday's AoL MarineKing vs DRG game 4 to see that the removal of gold mineral muling significantly makes the game more fair. Had the center bases been gold patches, MKP's mule dropping off 5 orbitals would have probably won him the game, regardless that he lost the majority of his scvs.
The Gold bases were an interesting idea, but they just can't be balanced, especially when some races can hold the open gold positions easier than others.
Antiga minus the gold patches is one of the best maps out there; it even has great destructable rock usage.
|
But tournament racial representation alone does not determine balance.
No ofcourse not, Blizzard has ladder statistics and also outside of Korea no foreign terran pro has won any major tournament in the last year so yeah...
How many times in the GSL have we seen Terrans losing 80% of their worker force and is still on equal or greater economy than their counterparts? In response, the GSL removed gold bases, something that is needed for the integrity of the game.
I don't know? Link me all the games please.
Had the center bases been gold patches, MKP's mule dropping off 5 orbitals would have probably won him the game, regardless that he lost the majority of his scvs.
This is such a baseless and biased assumption, there is no way to know.
|
Baseless?
You want to try this again?
GSL Oct CodeS match 3 losira vs happy
Happy lost basically all his scvs, but muled at the gold for long enough to buy a 5 thor mass marine army to victory.
Also to prove the point that mules are strong even without gold
GSL AoL Ro8 Ganzi vs Curious match 3
What did the game come down to after ganzi lost 8 million scvs?
mass mule mass marines...
Stuff like this has happened before, not so baseless
|
If you want to give the protoss more playstyles, MAKE THE CARRIER MICROABLE
|
They really need to bringing the moving shot back instead of dumbing everything down.
|
Larva inject seems fair considering zergs do not have to go back to their base to build depots/pylons.
|
On December 16 2011 13:20 ThaSlayer wrote:
In terms of casters, the raven is pretty weak imo. (except in late game air t v t)
Would love to see blizzard's plans for the raven.
well Terra could use them to detect DTs or burrowed Banlelings but they rather scan 1000 times. Don't get it why no Terra is making a Raven lategame. PDD also helps a lot in big fights.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
