On September 02 2012 03:41 zakmaa wrote: I'm finding some really surprisingly ignorant comments in here from TL users. I haven't been on this site in a while but I was expecting something much more positive.
The good thing is that we know Blizzard is looking at the balance of the game logically. It makes a lot more sense to allow the meta-game play itself out to it's potential before making balance patches. Zergs were underpowered for a very long time before the infestor buff, and as we all saw, that took it much too far. The same thing can be said for the Queen buff, which is the cause of this in the first place.
Let Blizzard learn their lessons. If they hadn't allowed SC:BWs final balance patch to play itself out, and had instead jumped at balance immediately, BW would not be the game that it is. The perfect balance of a game is a marathon, not a sprint. If we indeed want to create a perfectly balanced game, then we must deal with imbalance. There has been times throughout SC:BW where races went months without any serious wins. It takes players like SaviOr to come and change things.
Maybe the Korean Terrans are on to something with the Raven.
But then why make the Queen change? All we're asking for is for Blizz to revert a change that they did before, to let that previous metagame play itself out.
I think main reason Ts would like a buff is because they have weaker late game compare to zerg or protoss.
Zerg is teching to infestors+BLs.
Protoss is teching to Collossus+HT with storm.
Terran is trying to counter opponents army with low tier units + vikings/ghosts. Going for BCs / ravens / thors is far less rewarding compare to tech of other races. That's why T is usually staying low-tech. I think that is main problem Blizzard should investigate.
On September 02 2012 03:58 howLiN wrote: Team Liquid should make some system that showed each poster's league in these kind of threads, it would be funny as hell to read through them.
On September 02 2012 03:41 zakmaa wrote: I'm finding some really surprisingly ignorant comments in here from TL users. I haven't been on this site in a while but I was expecting something much more positive.
The good thing is that we know Blizzard is looking at the balance of the game logically. It makes a lot more sense to allow the meta-game play itself out to it's potential before making balance patches. Zergs were underpowered for a very long time before the infestor buff, and as we all saw, that took it much too far. The same thing can be said for the Queen buff, which is the cause of this in the first place.
Let Blizzard learn their lessons. If they hadn't allowed SC:BWs final balance patch to play itself out, and had instead jumped at balance immediately, BW would not be the game that it is. The perfect balance of a game is a marathon, not a sprint. If we indeed want to create a perfectly balanced game, then we must deal with imbalance. There has been times throughout SC:BW where races went months without any serious wins. It takes players like SaviOr to come and change things.
Maybe the Korean Terrans are on to something with the Raven.
But then why make the Queen change? All we're asking for is for Blizz to revert a change that they did before, to let that previous metagame play itself out.
Reverting the queen buff might have the same drastic results putting it in had: huge drops in winrates for zerg. They've finally arrived at this conclusion, lets embrace it and hope their future patches are much more calculated and thought out -- which includes reverting the queen buff.
On September 02 2012 03:03 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
On September 02 2012 02:57 Godwrath wrote:
On September 01 2012 09:53 SmokeMonster wrote: Remember that time when every Terran in the world thought the only way to play Terran was by being cheesy and aggressive?
Remember that time when TvZ was actually fun to watch because of that?
only if you have poor game understanding. basically most games where decided early on (10 drones slaughtered), the players still played it out trying to entertain.
Could you please stop with this fallacy? Only Zergs playing terrible would lose to Hellions running in to kill drones. Good building placement, a Spine and some Zerglings at the top of the ramp to prevent Hellions from entering main easily fended off any commitment from the Terran player. At the Terran Help me thread, people would frequently ask if trying to trade those early Hellions for drones was a good idea, and invariably we would reply: no, this relies on the Zerg player being bad, you will lose map control and Zerg will be able to get his third and start creep spread, just keep your Hellions at front until the Zerg player challenges them. So please stop with this “Zergs had no answer to Hellions raids” theme, it's really infuriating to read again and again the same untruth.
Actually, Zergs have always had the answer to hellions: Roaches, and spines. But no, Zergs complained that they were forced to stop drone production to make defensive units. I mean, isn't that the point of a build like reactored hellions? Force at least some defensive units out of zerg?
No, I don't think it had anything to do with QQ. I remember David Kim and/or DB discussing how they didn't like the control Hellions could exert on a Zerg early on from a design standpoint. I'm pretty sure their intention was to open up the game and give a zerg more freedom to create better games. However, I don't think they had the foresight to predict the consequences. If it was because of QQ I'm sure we'd have seen it reverted, just like the infestor buff was reverted.
I also remember around this time that there was little to no whine in TvZ from either side, not much discussion either. The patch came out of no where and any Zerg grievances that might have existed were miniscule in comparison to the deafening uproar of Terran that followed.
On September 01 2012 01:34 Vete wrote: In my Opinion they do a marketing trick . At the beginning of sc2 terra was in advantage and I guess they want to do that with Zerg. The queen range + Show Spoiler +
I think they will change the position with Terran in Hots ( Zergs dominate).After some months zergs wonder why they only get nerfs and terrans get buff. finally Hots Toss will get a good buff and will dominate ( the same things with this Addon then) ect.
it is most likly crap what I wrote but it could be a possibility to explain the strong buffs for Zerg.
This is exactly what I was starting to wonder, I'm pretty disillusioned with Kotick et al these days...
On September 01 2012 01:34 Vete wrote: In my Opinion they do a marketing trick . At the beginning of sc2 terra was in advantage and I guess they want to do that with Zerg. The queen range + Show Spoiler +
I think they will change the position with Terran in Hots ( Zergs dominate).After some months zergs wonder why they only get nerfs and terrans get buff. finally Hots Toss will get a good buff and will dominate ( the same things with this Addon then) ect.
it is most likly crap what I wrote but it could be a possibility to explain the strong buffs for Zerg.
This is exactly what I was starting to wonder, I'm pretty disillusioned with Kotick et al these days...
If that theory is true, I'd rather expect the viper, swarm host etc. to be OP, which could very well happen. It seems likely that they want the race that is supposed to bring new players to feel strong, but unlikely for them to do that with queens and overlords.
(The weirdest use of spoiler tags I've ever seen btw.)
On September 02 2012 04:22 FrogOfWar wrote: Isn't WoL balance obsolete anyway with HotS coming out?
Wtf are you smoking, players are still playing for money in GSL and all kinds of tournaments.
Yup, but balance changes are not made for tomorrow's matches but for the long term, and I was wondering how much of a long term there is for WoL. Obviously some players would like a buff, but I was talking about Blizzard's decision making in the current situation.
On September 02 2012 02:40 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: this is real high level play (SPL), this game is typical for TvZ in SPL, the late terran macro is just not beatable, in the midgame zerg has no real 'game ending' unit against a turtling terran ..
believe it or not .. terran probably is still OP (at top level only) , 33 marines and mules counter everything with pro micro
Okay, I've had enough of your biased, ignorant posts. How does that game in any way show that it was "unbeatable terran lategame turtle macro" that was the reason why fantasy won? All I saw was that with superior multitasking, harassment and micro fantasy was able to dominate jaedong, who essentially played passive unless he decided to throw away a group of zerglings and banelings every minute without even doing any damage with them, and then finally engaging OFF CREEP to lose his entire army. Fantasy was the better player EVERY SINGLE MOMENT OF THAT GAME yet no, it's "unbeatable terran macro". It's those OP marines. You are so ignorant it baffles me why you think you understand so much.
biased .. maybe, i play zerg. I don't think T is "unbeatable", i think Terran is still slightly OP at the very top level.
I choosed this game, because any early harrass of Fantasy failed to do damage, so both players basically could macro up undisturbed (though JD killed several scv's at 9 and fantasy lost some ressources trying to harrass without doing damage). Fantasy lost his whole army several times, while doing little to no damage with 'multitasking' harass. Fantasy did not do significant damage up to 20'00. He succeed late when jaedong ran out of money+army while Fantasy had a massive army production powered by basically ONE BASE WITH MULES (fantasy had 6 or 7 OC's). Fantasy outmacroed Jaedong. Jaedong did not "throw away" his units .. he HAD to attack, because if the zerg fails to kill Terran >3 bases, he stands no chance economically. Sitting back and only engaging on creep (=defense, not attack) would have lost him for sure. Creep gives defendors advantage, it should not be a requirement for the Zerg to engage (how should a zerg ever be able to attack ever then ?).
For the books: note fantasy is getting 2 extra macro OC's at 14'00, so has 6 OC's at 14'00 on 3 base)
Long story short: Terran loses early SCV's, looses a lot of units trying to harrass with no results, looses his army several times. Finally outmacroes the Zerg muling from one base with 7 OC's. Zerg is forced to all-in, because the longer the game goes, the stronger the mule economy gets.
edit: no doubt the all-in attack of JD was fail, however time is working against zerg late game, and ofc JD could have won, T is by no means 'unbeatable' - just maybe a bit OP, lets wait for the OSL results ..
I like the players who want the game to be balanced around them because they don't have taeja esque micro/macro... As far as I knew, if you weren't as good as the best, you were supposed to practice and get better, rather than ask Blizzard to make the game easier.
Anyway, it seems like a fair enough decision, they aren't saying the changes won't happen, they are just waiting to make sure they are necessary ^^
If Blizzard has decided to go for long macro games as policy then it would be counter to the initial design philosophy behind WoL. DB gave a presentation (30 minutes at least, I think) on the foundation design of WoL (as an E-Sport) where he was pretty clear that he wanted a game which could be over in 5 minutes and could also last for up to 30 minutes or more.
If there has been a conscious decision to do away with the former that would be interesting. I'm not sure it has, because, if so, we would be seeing that in TvP as well and this is not the case. Early game deciding (i.e. before 8 - 10 minutes) aggression is still possible in this MU. If it is not possible in TvZ then it may be the unintended effect of the last Queen and Overlord buff patch. However, the fact that Blizzard has suggested Raven use may mean that they don't think Terran (mistakenly?) has a problem in the early game; only the late game. I don't think we should assume, too easily, that we know what Blizzard was aiming for in their balance patches (or at least this one). Therefore, if the MU is becoming a snooze turtle fest, it may just be the result of both Zerg and Terran exploring their options in the post patch game and, for the moment, playing safe (i.e. passive). In time, the early/mid game may return with new tactics and strategies (from both races). Of course, it may not.
"We feel that at this time, we should give players more opportunities to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game before we change the balance of the game."
On September 02 2012 07:40 rbarreira wrote: Not so long ago I posted a comment on youtube saying Taeja should stop playing so well otherwise Terran would get nerfed.
Despite being a (semi) joke, turns out that comment was almost spot-on.
If only blizzard took that approach to zerg pros : /
i am a terran player, i like that we're given more time on our own as players to figure this out, i am sick of all these quick patches within a month or two, there's no time for players to figure things out on their own at all.
What I don't understand is loads of people are complaining about zerg dominance when infact in this current metagame Protoss are the ones winning everything.
EPT
biased .. maybe, i play zerg. I don't think T is "unbeatable", i think Terran is still slightly OP at the very top level. 
