|
On September 03 2012 21:00 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 18:20 Clarity_nl wrote:On September 01 2012 01:49 [F_]aths wrote:
I am amazed how many guys think when they don't agree with Blizzard's stance, that Blizzard is wrong. This. All the people complaining that because of MVP it's harder for other terrans..... I thought everyone was interested in the game being balanced at the very top level? I remember complaints because of patches where they made matchups more balanced in the bronze/silver league area, but you guys complain when they don't do it for low/mid masters? MVP raised the bar, you follow suit or you fall behind, this has been the way for every race. Just be happy you have someone to copy/look up to. Zerg didn't have this for a while when they were losing, and neither did protoss. If the game truly was balanced at the highest level all the koreans terrans would be dominating, because they're fucking better than the rest of the pros with few exceptions. The fact that foreign zergs and protosses can keep up with korean terrans speaks volumes about the game balance. MVP raised the bar so Terran got nerfed. That's not balance. That's just knee jerk nerfing based on individual players skills and it's absolutely retarded. It's like giving Spain additional limiting penalties in the world cup because they're awesome as a team. Spain is supposed to dominate at the world cups because they're superior to other teams. The same goes to players like MVP. There is no purpose to have e-celebs and pros if Blizzard keeps nerfing the race of whoever is doing the best currently, either individually or because of the metagame to keep balance statistics at 50%. It's not true balance and it never has been. Every change Blizzard has made since the ghost snipe nerf has been for the worse.
The problem is proving that korean terrans are better players than korean zergs and protoss.
Nothing you can do can prove that... every race is very different.
|
This is what I think they should do for ravens:
1. Let them be built from reactored starports. The build time is already very long and you would still need at least 1 tech lab for upgrades in the same way you get stim for example.
2. Reduce the energy cost of seeker missle to 75 or 100 BUT add like a 20-30 second cooldown to seeker missle just like the way storm is. I think 2 seeker missles back to back from 1 raven would probably be OP but this would prevent that and you need good micro to save the raven after 1 seeker missle so I don't think it would be overly strong.
|
On September 03 2012 15:29 Doko wrote:
As a terran buff: Ravens could use -10 build time and maybe a slightly stronger auto turret, pretty much anything else breaks a lot of things.
As a zerg nerf: A model size reduction on infestors to make them more susceptible to emp or movement speed reduction would make a huge difference as well. I highly doubt they would touch dmg or casting range.
imo, Fungal Growth shouldn't hit air units. It's basically "they all die" as the balance for units involves abusing aerial mobility. If they have to stand and fight against something that can fight back, they are basically dead. It's not like they don't already have the best air-to-air unit (Corruptors having a very powerful transition that they inherently pave-the-way-for/protect) and the most versatile aerial harass unit.
Does Zerg really needs Fungal hitting air units? Are Corruptors, Queens, and Hydras not enough?
Don't know about Ravens, as I don't play Terran. But the "novel" (i.e. not balanced, but just personally nteresting) solution I had for heat-seeker missle, was to increase the speed, but make it targetable with an HP. So the "counter" to it, isn't run away, but instead shooting it down (which has to be done manually). Of course, that sort of changes the nature of the thing, but seems more interesting to me than just forcing a retreat.
|
United Kingdom12067 Posts
On September 04 2012 06:58 nkr wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 06:50 Qikz wrote:On September 03 2012 20:54 WaesumNinja wrote:
broodlord infestor has shit for mobility, abuse that... you can also beat infestors with ghosts handily with either snipe or emp. You know what. You've just made me realise what the problem is. Due to the way the maps are designed with bases so close together, you can't actually do this because sacking one of your bases in this game means they're already at your other base straight away so it's either base race or fight them. Bases need badly to be spread out more. Zerg has nydus to go between bases, Protoss has warp ins and Terrans can build production at them/wall off/planetary. protoss wouldn't be able to take a third vs zergs if you spread them out, it would break the matchup completely
What about maps like Fighting Spirit in BW where you can wall your third base off and although it's further away you can go run save it really quickly?
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/maps/237_Fighting%20Spirit.jpg)
The bases being so close together is literally breaking the game. Base races are inevitable if both players go back to attack as it's literally impossible to get back before you lose 2 or three bases. Take a look at Cloud Kingdom for example, once your fourth is under attack and you're off out on the map you may aswell go for a base race as there's no way in hell you'll get back before he's killed your fourth, third and is pushing at your natural. If you go back to defend in that situation you may as well GG as he has all his bases and you're down to 1 mining base at that point.
Ohana is even worse. It's a smaller map and your bases are even more closer together.
It's far too easy to secure a fourth base on the majority of maps in this game and leads to not only base races but people forgoing any form of mid game at all as as soon as you get your third, your fourth is basically secured and you might as well go straight for Hive.
|
On September 04 2012 07:58 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 06:58 nkr wrote:On September 04 2012 06:50 Qikz wrote:On September 03 2012 20:54 WaesumNinja wrote:
broodlord infestor has shit for mobility, abuse that... you can also beat infestors with ghosts handily with either snipe or emp. You know what. You've just made me realise what the problem is. Due to the way the maps are designed with bases so close together, you can't actually do this because sacking one of your bases in this game means they're already at your other base straight away so it's either base race or fight them. Bases need badly to be spread out more. Zerg has nydus to go between bases, Protoss has warp ins and Terrans can build production at them/wall off/planetary. protoss wouldn't be able to take a third vs zergs if you spread them out, it would break the matchup completely What about maps like Fighting Spirit in BW where you can wall your third base off and although it's further away you can go run save it really quickly? The bases being so close together is literally breaking the game. Base races are inevitable if both players go back to attack as it's literally impossible to get back before you lose 2 or three bases. Take a look at Cloud Kingdom for example, once your fourth is under attack and you're off out on the map you may aswell go for a base race as there's no way in hell you'll get back before he's killed your fourth, third and is pushing at your natural. If you go back to defend in that situation you may as well GG as he has all his bases and you're down to 1 mining base at that point. Ohana is even worse. It's a smaller map and your bases are even more closer together. It's far too easy to secure a fourth base on the majority of maps in this game and leads to not only base races but people forgoing any form of mid game at all as as soon as you get your third, your fourth is basically secured and you might as well go straight for Hive.
I completely agree. Especially on maps like cloud kingdom if you play a meching style, which I know you do, then it's ridiculously hard to move out on the map because any small counter attack with bio will do immense damage.
|
United Kingdom12067 Posts
A better example would be Match Point as that's a 2 player map like the others.
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/maps/235_Match%20Point.jpg)
The third is further away than say for example Ohana which the third is just a second natural, yet it's close enough to defend both bases and by getting your third you don't instantly have a fourth base secured.
|
walloff expansions in sc2 I really miss them, testbug and crossfire had those, was really nice to expand there as protoss. Liked the crossfire one especially, hard to reinforce, but easy to defend against a bigger force, unless they went full force or drop. And imo every race in sc2 can utilize these bases in some way or the other.
But they dropped out of fashion i think, when the whole middle of the map had to be a giant open area, because otherwise siege tanks were op.
Still hoping they make a return, but doubt it a little with the highest ingame normal attack range moving from 13 to 22 soon. (including everyone moves over to HotS) Atleast its a t3 unit, but with detection from stargate there is no risky involved into a fast air tech.
But thats so far in the future, right now i am really interested in the new gsl map. Kinda fell in love with the middle.
|
United States97277 Posts
On September 04 2012 08:06 Qikz wrote:A better example would be Match Point as that's a 2 player map like the others. The third is further away than say for example Ohana which the third is just a second natural, yet it's close enough to defend both bases and by getting your third you don't instantly have a fourth base secured.
Wasnt it concluded that daybreak is the sc2 remake of match point. It does work in your favor since daybreak is a pretty good map
|
Come on, guys. It's really not like the speed buff would have revolutionized the MU.
God, I hope I'm in that beta.
|
On September 03 2012 13:12 My_Fake_Plastic_Luv wrote:
I'm really just a whiny terran and don't really understand anything. But I got a few questions
1) Why does DKim/Blizz team make the changes so drastic (thinking for instance snipe with ghosts). I mean is there a big problem with adding like 5 hitpoints to something or 1 range.
2) Are terrans complaining about fungal growth (I think this is the real problem zvt btw)? I really hate watching sht get fungaled over and over. I mean after the first fungal it takes minimal skillz to repeat fungal a bunch of units to death. Personally I think there should be a cool down for fungaled units... so they can run/snipe infestas; think that would make for some nice micro situations. Compare fungal to emp/storm, these spells don't necessarily bone a bunch of opposing units.
3) Why don't pro-terrans pop one raven before starporting medievacs (especially with that reactor hellions, cloaked banshee). Seems to me terran should use an early game raven with their map-control hellion force. Or does this completely f the build order into rine/tank.
Discuss this sht plz.
I'm a bit late to your discussion but you bring up interesting points!
1) Completely agree - I feel like subtle changes would make more sense
2) I hate fungals but I understand it's an integral part of balance. I feel that it is the strongest spell in the game, given how it punishes so absolutely, especially at the low skill level where you can't split your units constantly.
3)This heavily delays your initial tech - i.e. you couldn't do double ebay upgrades, or hit your regular double medvac timing for a push/drops, or it would delay your siege/stim/CS tech.
Gas is no problem for late game, but for early game it is absolutely crucial. 200 less gas that early means you're delaying _something_ by 30~60 seconds (depending on how greedy you are and when you get to quad gas). Plus I feel it makes you more vulnerable to aggressive zerg builds like fast muta or bane/roach busts.
|
On September 04 2012 09:06 edwahn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 13:12 My_Fake_Plastic_Luv wrote:
I'm really just a whiny terran and don't really understand anything. But I got a few questions
1) Why does DKim/Blizz team make the changes so drastic (thinking for instance snipe with ghosts). I mean is there a big problem with adding like 5 hitpoints to something or 1 range.
2) Are terrans complaining about fungal growth (I think this is the real problem zvt btw)? I really hate watching sht get fungaled over and over. I mean after the first fungal it takes minimal skillz to repeat fungal a bunch of units to death. Personally I think there should be a cool down for fungaled units... so they can run/snipe infestas; think that would make for some nice micro situations. Compare fungal to emp/storm, these spells don't necessarily bone a bunch of opposing units.
3) Why don't pro-terrans pop one raven before starporting medievacs (especially with that reactor hellions, cloaked banshee). Seems to me terran should use an early game raven with their map-control hellion force. Or does this completely f the build order into rine/tank.
Discuss this sht plz. I'm a bit late to your discussion but you bring up interesting points! 1) Completely agree - I feel like subtle changes would make more sense 2) I hate fungals but I understand it's an integral part of balance. I feel that it is the strongest spell in the game, given how it punishes so absolutely, especially at the low skill level where you can't split your units constantly. 3)This heavily delays your initial tech - i.e. you couldn't do double ebay upgrades, or hit your regular double medvac timing for a push/drops, or it would delay your siege/stim/CS tech. Gas is no problem for late game, but for early game it is absolutely crucial. 200 less gas that early means you're delaying _something_ by 30~60 seconds (depending on how greedy you are and when you get to quad gas). Plus I feel it makes you more vulnerable to aggressive zerg builds like fast muta or bane/roach busts.
For point one, let me say that they tried that in Warcraft 3. At one point, they lowered the Beastmaster's strength by one (25 less HP out of a few hundred, 1 less damage out of a couple dozen). It turned out that people just needed to L2P.
|
I think terran players are enraged by two points, that unfortunately get mixed up and twisted around.
1) Out of the sudden, Blizzard is careful not to change the game too much and rather lets the meta game evolve. That's for two changes that have a rather minor effect.
This is the opposite of giving two significant buffs when the meta-game is balanced seemingly out of the blue. Especially if one change completely trashes the main build and win % of one race.
2) The reasoning by Blizzard along the line of "One Terran did great and another one did OK in one major tournament - thus it appears there isn't a problem. Especially as one Terran did use ravens as we want and even won the game".
This suck thrice. First of all, the same reason could be applied to the Zerg's dark age, where Fruitdealer and Nestea still won the GSL. Did that prevent Terran nerfs or Zerg buffs? Nope! Secondly they took the worst snapshot possible when they look at a tourney where MVP, the guy with the most GSL titles, who is hailed as probably the best player in the world, beats a bunch of Zergs that are good, but NOT GSL calibre. Even MVP only used the ravens on a giant map that is prone to be split in half, so to conclude that ravens are fine because a superior player could make them work on a single map is ludicrous. Finally there is the comparison to the queen buff, which allegedly should help against the 'imba 4-6 hellion contain'. This contain as not a problem at all at the pro-level and tourney scene. Yet the buff still came through.
For those two major reasons many terran players are frustrated and annoyed, because it's a clear display of double standards, because David Kim still seems to only remember the ages of Zerg tears.
|
On September 04 2012 18:23 Thrombozyt wrote:
I think terran players are enraged by two points, that unfortunately get mixed up and twisted around.
1) Out of the sudden, Blizzard is careful not to change the game too much and rather lets the meta game evolve. That's for two changes that have a rather minor effect.
This is the opposite of giving two significant buffs when the meta-game is balanced seemingly out of the blue. Especially if one change completely trashes the main build and win % of one race.
2) The reasoning by Blizzard along the line of "One Terran did great and another one did OK in one major tournament - thus it appears there isn't a problem. Especially as one Terran did use ravens as we want and even won the game".
This suck thrice. First of all, the same reason could be applied to the Zerg's dark age, where Fruitdealer and Nestea still won the GSL. Did that prevent Terran nerfs or Zerg buffs? Nope! Secondly they took the worst snapshot possible when they look at a tourney where MVP, the guy with the most GSL titles, who is hailed as probably the best player in the world, beats a bunch of Zergs that are good, but NOT GSL calibre. Even MVP only used the ravens on a giant map that is prone to be split in half, so to conclude that ravens are fine because a superior player could make them work on a single map is ludicrous. Finally there is the comparison to the queen buff, which allegedly should help against the 'imba 4-6 hellion contain'. This contain as not a problem at all at the pro-level and tourney scene. Yet the buff still came through.
For those two major reasons many terran players are frustrated and annoyed, because it's a clear display of double standards, because David Kim still seems to only remember the ages of Zerg tears.
Well said, exactly my thoughts... double standards during the balancing process.
|
On September 04 2012 18:29 Aetherial wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 18:23 Thrombozyt wrote:
I think terran players are enraged by two points, that unfortunately get mixed up and twisted around.
1) Out of the sudden, Blizzard is careful not to change the game too much and rather lets the meta game evolve. That's for two changes that have a rather minor effect.
This is the opposite of giving two significant buffs when the meta-game is balanced seemingly out of the blue. Especially if one change completely trashes the main build and win % of one race.
2) The reasoning by Blizzard along the line of "One Terran did great and another one did OK in one major tournament - thus it appears there isn't a problem. Especially as one Terran did use ravens as we want and even won the game".
This suck thrice. First of all, the same reason could be applied to the Zerg's dark age, where Fruitdealer and Nestea still won the GSL. Did that prevent Terran nerfs or Zerg buffs? Nope! Secondly they took the worst snapshot possible when they look at a tourney where MVP, the guy with the most GSL titles, who is hailed as probably the best player in the world, beats a bunch of Zergs that are good, but NOT GSL calibre. Even MVP only used the ravens on a giant map that is prone to be split in half, so to conclude that ravens are fine because a superior player could make them work on a single map is ludicrous. Finally there is the comparison to the queen buff, which allegedly should help against the 'imba 4-6 hellion contain'. This contain as not a problem at all at the pro-level and tourney scene. Yet the buff still came through.
For those two major reasons many terran players are frustrated and annoyed, because it's a clear display of double standards, because David Kim still seems to only remember the ages of Zerg tears. Well said, exactly my thoughts... double standards during the balancing process.
It could also be that they are learning and like you said "out of the blue" they decided to let the metagame take its course because thats the better course of action. Like they said, its the first time they are doing this, and of course there always has to be a first time for everything.
|
On September 04 2012 06:50 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 20:54 WaesumNinja wrote:
broodlord infestor has shit for mobility, abuse that... you can also beat infestors with ghosts handily with either snipe or emp. You know what. You've just made me realise what the problem is. Due to the way the maps are designed with bases so close together, you can't actually do this because sacking one of your bases in this game means they're already at your other base straight away so it's either base race or fight them. Bases need badly to be spread out more. Zerg has nydus to go between bases, Protoss has warp ins and Terrans can build production at them/wall off/planetary.
Bigger maps with more spread out bases would pretty much nerf the composition yeah, since you can't nydus broodlords. All other zerg units would be fine.
Wouldn't really large maps disfavor terrans though? Protoss and zerg would be capable of reinforcing quickly with nydus/warpin. The only thing i can think of really would be that terran moves his production facilities forward but it doesn't sound viable unless he's maxed already. I think mech would need a buff also since because of its poor mobility, it would need to be spread out to protect the bigger area around the bases.
|
On September 04 2012 19:36 Disastorm wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 18:29 Aetherial wrote:On September 04 2012 18:23 Thrombozyt wrote:
I think terran players are enraged by two points, that unfortunately get mixed up and twisted around.
1) Out of the sudden, Blizzard is careful not to change the game too much and rather lets the meta game evolve. That's for two changes that have a rather minor effect.
This is the opposite of giving two significant buffs when the meta-game is balanced seemingly out of the blue. Especially if one change completely trashes the main build and win % of one race.
2) The reasoning by Blizzard along the line of "One Terran did great and another one did OK in one major tournament - thus it appears there isn't a problem. Especially as one Terran did use ravens as we want and even won the game".
This suck thrice. First of all, the same reason could be applied to the Zerg's dark age, where Fruitdealer and Nestea still won the GSL. Did that prevent Terran nerfs or Zerg buffs? Nope! Secondly they took the worst snapshot possible when they look at a tourney where MVP, the guy with the most GSL titles, who is hailed as probably the best player in the world, beats a bunch of Zergs that are good, but NOT GSL calibre. Even MVP only used the ravens on a giant map that is prone to be split in half, so to conclude that ravens are fine because a superior player could make them work on a single map is ludicrous. Finally there is the comparison to the queen buff, which allegedly should help against the 'imba 4-6 hellion contain'. This contain as not a problem at all at the pro-level and tourney scene. Yet the buff still came through.
For those two major reasons many terran players are frustrated and annoyed, because it's a clear display of double standards, because David Kim still seems to only remember the ages of Zerg tears. Well said, exactly my thoughts... double standards during the balancing process. It could also be that they are learning and like you said "out of the blue" they decided to let the metagame take its course because thats the better course of action. Like they said, its the first time they are doing this, and of course there always has to be a first time for everything.
If you realized, that you messed up, then why not take back the offending change? Man up!
|
On September 04 2012 21:03 Thrombozyt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 19:36 Disastorm wrote:On September 04 2012 18:29 Aetherial wrote:On September 04 2012 18:23 Thrombozyt wrote:
I think terran players are enraged by two points, that unfortunately get mixed up and twisted around.
1) Out of the sudden, Blizzard is careful not to change the game too much and rather lets the meta game evolve. That's for two changes that have a rather minor effect.
This is the opposite of giving two significant buffs when the meta-game is balanced seemingly out of the blue. Especially if one change completely trashes the main build and win % of one race.
2) The reasoning by Blizzard along the line of "One Terran did great and another one did OK in one major tournament - thus it appears there isn't a problem. Especially as one Terran did use ravens as we want and even won the game".
This suck thrice. First of all, the same reason could be applied to the Zerg's dark age, where Fruitdealer and Nestea still won the GSL. Did that prevent Terran nerfs or Zerg buffs? Nope! Secondly they took the worst snapshot possible when they look at a tourney where MVP, the guy with the most GSL titles, who is hailed as probably the best player in the world, beats a bunch of Zergs that are good, but NOT GSL calibre. Even MVP only used the ravens on a giant map that is prone to be split in half, so to conclude that ravens are fine because a superior player could make them work on a single map is ludicrous. Finally there is the comparison to the queen buff, which allegedly should help against the 'imba 4-6 hellion contain'. This contain as not a problem at all at the pro-level and tourney scene. Yet the buff still came through.
For those two major reasons many terran players are frustrated and annoyed, because it's a clear display of double standards, because David Kim still seems to only remember the ages of Zerg tears. Well said, exactly my thoughts... double standards during the balancing process. It could also be that they are learning and like you said "out of the blue" they decided to let the metagame take its course because thats the better course of action. Like they said, its the first time they are doing this, and of course there always has to be a first time for everything. If you realized, that you messed up, then why not take back the offending change? Man up!
cause you already bought the game, they have your money. they simply dont give a fuck
|
On September 04 2012 21:14 fawkz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 21:03 Thrombozyt wrote:On September 04 2012 19:36 Disastorm wrote:On September 04 2012 18:29 Aetherial wrote:On September 04 2012 18:23 Thrombozyt wrote:
I think terran players are enraged by two points, that unfortunately get mixed up and twisted around.
1) Out of the sudden, Blizzard is careful not to change the game too much and rather lets the meta game evolve. That's for two changes that have a rather minor effect.
This is the opposite of giving two significant buffs when the meta-game is balanced seemingly out of the blue. Especially if one change completely trashes the main build and win % of one race.
2) The reasoning by Blizzard along the line of "One Terran did great and another one did OK in one major tournament - thus it appears there isn't a problem. Especially as one Terran did use ravens as we want and even won the game".
This suck thrice. First of all, the same reason could be applied to the Zerg's dark age, where Fruitdealer and Nestea still won the GSL. Did that prevent Terran nerfs or Zerg buffs? Nope! Secondly they took the worst snapshot possible when they look at a tourney where MVP, the guy with the most GSL titles, who is hailed as probably the best player in the world, beats a bunch of Zergs that are good, but NOT GSL calibre. Even MVP only used the ravens on a giant map that is prone to be split in half, so to conclude that ravens are fine because a superior player could make them work on a single map is ludicrous. Finally there is the comparison to the queen buff, which allegedly should help against the 'imba 4-6 hellion contain'. This contain as not a problem at all at the pro-level and tourney scene. Yet the buff still came through.
For those two major reasons many terran players are frustrated and annoyed, because it's a clear display of double standards, because David Kim still seems to only remember the ages of Zerg tears. Well said, exactly my thoughts... double standards during the balancing process. It could also be that they are learning and like you said "out of the blue" they decided to let the metagame take its course because thats the better course of action. Like they said, its the first time they are doing this, and of course there always has to be a first time for everything. If you realized, that you messed up, then why not take back the offending change? Man up! cause you already bought the game, they have your money. they simply dont give a fuck
yeah, that's why they are not patching, investing into tournaments and watching the game.
I wish TL was a bit stricter about brainless blizzard bashing...
|
On September 04 2012 21:16 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 21:14 fawkz wrote:On September 04 2012 21:03 Thrombozyt wrote:On September 04 2012 19:36 Disastorm wrote:On September 04 2012 18:29 Aetherial wrote:On September 04 2012 18:23 Thrombozyt wrote:
I think terran players are enraged by two points, that unfortunately get mixed up and twisted around.
1) Out of the sudden, Blizzard is careful not to change the game too much and rather lets the meta game evolve. That's for two changes that have a rather minor effect.
This is the opposite of giving two significant buffs when the meta-game is balanced seemingly out of the blue. Especially if one change completely trashes the main build and win % of one race.
2) The reasoning by Blizzard along the line of "One Terran did great and another one did OK in one major tournament - thus it appears there isn't a problem. Especially as one Terran did use ravens as we want and even won the game".
This suck thrice. First of all, the same reason could be applied to the Zerg's dark age, where Fruitdealer and Nestea still won the GSL. Did that prevent Terran nerfs or Zerg buffs? Nope! Secondly they took the worst snapshot possible when they look at a tourney where MVP, the guy with the most GSL titles, who is hailed as probably the best player in the world, beats a bunch of Zergs that are good, but NOT GSL calibre. Even MVP only used the ravens on a giant map that is prone to be split in half, so to conclude that ravens are fine because a superior player could make them work on a single map is ludicrous. Finally there is the comparison to the queen buff, which allegedly should help against the 'imba 4-6 hellion contain'. This contain as not a problem at all at the pro-level and tourney scene. Yet the buff still came through.
For those two major reasons many terran players are frustrated and annoyed, because it's a clear display of double standards, because David Kim still seems to only remember the ages of Zerg tears. Well said, exactly my thoughts... double standards during the balancing process. It could also be that they are learning and like you said "out of the blue" they decided to let the metagame take its course because thats the better course of action. Like they said, its the first time they are doing this, and of course there always has to be a first time for everything. If you realized, that you messed up, then why not take back the offending change? Man up! cause you already bought the game, they have your money. they simply dont give a fuck yeah, that's why they are not patching, investing into tournaments and watching the game. I wish TL was a bit stricter about brainless blizzard bashing...
and i wish all blizzard fanboys like you would get cancer, and when your family goes to see you in the hospital they get in a car accident and die, so that you die all alone.
User was banned for this post.
|
Now all terran needs is 100 gas vikings and 25 gas hellions. (:
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
