Lings of Liberty: The Rise of the Patchzergs - Page 41

On December 04 2012 15:17 Danglars wrote:
I'm gradually being weaned over to supporting a more-than-small change affecting ZvT primarily. The sacrificing of bases for that army knowing that nothing mattered once it was attained really solidified it. The split viking answer is diminished with the approach of the army to a place where you cannot retreat from infested terran fire on your vikings (with blanket fungals). More and more the gameplay at the top shows zerg dominance in a level hardly able to be matched by top terrans.

Simultaneously, I fully reject the notion that it belies a Blizzard balance towards the games that get more viewers. It just has not been even close to well-argued in my eyes. Small changes have big effects, and we have seen unassailable strategies die in a day even in the days of Fruitdealer making unstoppable seem pathetic. I absolutely understand why Blizzard would be hesitant to nerf something to pivotal in every matchup. If you think they're losing face now, consider the ramifications of Roach-Infestor ZvZ, Infestor/Ling Infestor/Ling/Baneling ZvT, and Roach/Infestor to Broodlord or Ling/Infestor to Broodlord right now. It's lose-lose if Zergs cannot win any matches but their mirror suddenly after they made one matchup look very easy to win and another look pretty favored to win. Their game is played very often by ladder players, and I take at face value their claim that everything statistically looks fine on ladder. (No, I'm not saying to balance around ladder and ignore tourneys, I'm saying this is another reason for hesitation on Blizzard's part).

I cannot dismiss the age it seems we just came out from. Zerg with slow overlords and less reason to build queens to spread creep (low range unit unable to deflect anything from harass to an attack, larva-bot) died to allin Terran attacks with scvs from 1base and 2base. PvZ/ZvP being very rocky from both sides of the aisle (at the time resolving to very close balance it would seem). An unstoppable wall of Korean Terrans armed with their micro inspiring the kind of comments I see leveled at Immortal/Sentry, "If your opponent has the micro required, he wins the game despite everything you do." In this case, you are bound to make a mistake as he continues to drop to kill or drop to harass and he has a very easy time of it. We've moved out of this age for quite some months now. I don't wanna flip back to it, merely hearing the same volume of complaints in a different direction that I hear now, and slightly elevated compared to what I was hearing then.

We already had long threads of pro gamers discussing the huge core balancing problems facing the PvZ matchups. How can you balance forcefields and vortex so long as they remain in the game? Result: It's a huge problem. It coalesces once enough viewers see a single man/woman figure out the best way to carry the change into action, and suddenly it spreads as fast as you can view the VOD or replay. So I look back and see a need for extreme caution in the approach here. Do a balance test map. Put on a few small things and get a buncha testers on it. See what happens when you buff the counters slightly or lower the unit's power slightly. Avoid the shotgun nerfs that so easily have more unintended consequences than anticipated benefits. It would appear Blizzard thinks a more capable raven is the way to go, and the part of the infestor arsenal that too often completes its power is the infested terran (give it a chance to be destroyed before max effectiveness). I would also like tested the HT nerf (Work for your fungal growths) and the costs of the abilities (woah, just how many fungals did he throw down?). In another couple months of testing without solutions, let's talk infestor removal, compensating buffs, and the corresponding seismic change in metagame rules. When its balanced on the knife's edge falling one way, its just as easy to have it fall the other by shifting that edge too much to counterbalance.