|
Dayvie said
2. Ladder data is showing no sign of imbalance at any skill level.
4. Oracle/Burrow changes could be problematic as you guys bring up, and we really don't want to risk messing with a game that's already really solid. Especially since the game is still changing frequently without balance patches, we just don't think it's a good time to be exploring new options yet.
#2 Rofl ... as if the ladder didnt adjust itself automatically. Ladder data doesnt say anything about the game being good, because BALANCE <> GOOD GAME. Balance is necessary to a certain degree, but it isnt the "be all, end all" of game design.
#4 As if it wasnt totally obvious that a faster Oracle would be a stupid idea and making burrow cheaper doesnt change a thing anyways. People who want the upgrade will get it and will have the time (so its not the same issue as for the Siege upgrade change - which I disagree with).
|
I like it. The spore change is needed.
|
Introduce something like an airbaneling guys!
|
Why don't they return the scourge?
|
Spore change isn't going to do jack shit
|
Spore crawler is the new Bunker!! you heard it here first!
|
On May 10 2013 14:47 SamirDuran wrote:
Why don't they return the scourge?
because you're just going to get people patrolling scourge everywhere and it'll be super boring.
|
On May 10 2013 14:24 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +Dayvie said
2. Ladder data is showing no sign of imbalance at any skill level.
4. Oracle/Burrow changes could be problematic as you guys bring up, and we really don't want to risk messing with a game that's already really solid. Especially since the game is still changing frequently without balance patches, we just don't think it's a good time to be exploring new options yet. #2 Rofl ... as if the ladder didnt adjust itself automatically. Ladder data doesnt say anything about the game being good, because BALANCE <> GOOD GAME. Balance is necessary to a certain degree, but it isnt the "be all, end all" of game design.
Ladder has a lot of data of balance, it has all the played games on ladder! You can tell many things about balance from the ladder data. On top of that blizzard might be collecting even more data from ladder that is know at this point. In a competitive game balance is a huge part of a game being good. Good balancing equals more interested players. If people play more games then before doesn't that mean it is a better game in average? I think that SC2 hots has all the other stuff solid (other then balancing).
|
+ Show Spoiler +On May 10 2013 06:59 Markwerf wrote:
Bleh hots still sucks ass in many parts and they dont change anything. PvT is a crap matchup still, completely stale and any new unit is a gimmick at most there, practically useless except for cheeses. Where is the mech fix for example? ZvT is a bit stale too but more in flux stale so i guess its fine to let that sort out a bit still.
PvZ, PvP and TvT only good matchups now, ZvZ is at least getting some sort of fix and ZvT is okish too but they really need to focus on PvT.. The matchup is the same as WoL but even worse, MsC removes most early aggression but isnt used for recall and aggression at all. Oracle just provides a new gimmick allin or dt like strat which does amazing damage or fails and is completely useless afterwards, stargate has almost no use except keeping mech out of the game in PvT.
I had hoped they wouldnt resort to just balance fixing now. Dynamic play should be much more important than balance and matchups involving terran are just a little too onesided in harassment capability. T is dropping and attcking, the other race just waits to get to their superior endgame occassionally doing an allin to keep T honest. Its not fun and fixing mech is the obvious answer. Giving T a slow way to play, perhaps nerfing drops a little as well opens up possibilites for the other race to finally dictate play a bit instead of just having to react and defend mostly.
I dont believe at all ZvT is balanced by the way, pro game statistics mean little as they have qualifiers usually and thus correct themselves to 50/50. I would be very surprised if T will not show to be favored a fair bit overall in a month or two but i guess its a fair move delaying real balance changes till that hows. Unfortunatelt i find watching dropfests only to be quite repetetive already
I don't understand your complaint about tvz being stale it is far less stale and way way way more dynamic then it has been for the last year. drops are exiting not stale and so is constant agresion and constant defense. There are so many decisions made by both players in these high aggression games that its really interesting and exciting to watch. Whats stale is watching low to no agro games were t banks all his chances on one big push and then z either dies to the push or stops it, get bl infestor then turtles until t inevitably dies to it, if that's what you consider fun to watch i don't understand why you watch esports. T having aggressive options in the match up is really good, though i wouldn't mind having mech play being more viable so that as you said we could see zerg and protoss get a chance to dictate the pace of the game, though in some ways they already do because the amount of agro t commits to is largely determined by how fast their opponent techs and econs since both p and z need to be prevented by t from safely and stabaly getting late game tech or things can get ugly for t. Still it was realy cool to see zerg and protoss try disassemble the slow but strong mech army in bw and i bet it would be fun to watch in hots as well.
I also do agree that tvp is kind of stale but i think that it might be not fixible without drastic changes to mech otherwise it will always be the same kind of metta were p can allin or macro. If they allin the game ends prity quick with their allin either working or failing. If they macro, well right now what t has to deal with p is mmmvg and what p has to deal with that composition are hts, colosus, and archons with a gateway based meatshield. This is how the matchup is and i don't think any small changes to the game can ever change that. Sure we see mech pop up everyone in awhile in the pro scen such as when liquid sea and strelock used it but no stable and safe way to use it has been found, mech is really vulnerable early on to some builds and also has terrible trouble with imortal,archon,chargelot,ht into air.
overall I'm happy though that blizz is not messing with the game to much its just to new and changing to fast to make any major adjustments, though the zvz fix from both a viewer and player perspective is a good step in the right direction.
|
On May 10 2013 07:05 DemigodcelpH wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2013 05:43 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 05:05 Rostam wrote:On May 10 2013 05:04 RogerChillingworth wrote:
TvZ is still terran favored, i don't care what anyone says. Other match-ups are better--can go either way--and really map dependent, but non-retarded Terrans will still make zerg look silly. stats fail to illustrate the full picture, i'm afraid. Good thing Code S is filled with retarded Terrans, then, otherwise zerg would be having issues. The game is very well balanced at the pro level but at the mere-humans level, mines are pretty silly. Incredibly cost efficient, takes 10 times more effort to counter than to use, and one mistake vs mines can be game ending. Welcome to Banelings for all of WoL. As a Zerg player you're simply not accustomed to having to face which you've been dishing out. Infestor/BL really did a number on what players like you perceive as a "balanced" matchup causing you to complain when ZvT is the best it has ever been not only from a gameplay depth and viability standpoint but from a spectator standpoint too.
Like I've been saying, banelings are not particularly cost efficient. Yes they are slightly harder to counter than to use, but not anywhere near the level that mines take things.
It's fine for an RTS game to have strong units that take a specialized effort to deal with, but mines take it too far. "Be ready to split your army when the banelings come and try to target them down" is a challenge, but an achievable one with practice. "Always have detection around, and follow this complex mine-removal process, and don't ever send units across the map without being ready to instantly turn around if you see a mine, and don't mess up even once or you'll be too cost inefficient" is too much effort and requires too much skill to perform for all but the very best of players.
Don't put that "infestor/BL was balanced" strawman on me.
|
On May 10 2013 07:01 Rostam wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2013 06:23 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 06:00 Kergy wrote:On May 10 2013 05:43 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 05:05 Rostam wrote:On May 10 2013 05:04 RogerChillingworth wrote:
TvZ is still terran favored, i don't care what anyone says. Other match-ups are better--can go either way--and really map dependent, but non-retarded Terrans will still make zerg look silly. stats fail to illustrate the full picture, i'm afraid. Good thing Code S is filled with retarded Terrans, then, otherwise zerg would be having issues. The game is very well balanced at the pro level but at the mere-humans level, mines are pretty silly. Incredibly cost efficient, takes 10 times more effort to counter than to use, and one mistake vs mines can be game ending. I know that balancing the game for the pro level is far more important than other skill levels... but I can't help but wish they didn't introduce a unit like this into the game. For me in low masters mines just make me want to quit the game. I can't leave my base, I can't ling harrass or go for surrounds, just in case there's a mine there that'll blow up everything for free. I can get mine dropped before I have detection. And even if I know exactly where every mine is, it's still a mess to deal with them... and the only unit that really counters them is broodlords. It's just so frustrating and half the time I just allin against terran now because I'm sick of facing bio/mines and not being able to do anything about it because it takes pro level control to deal with it. WoL ZvT was zerg-favored for a long time but the infestor nerfs and raven buffs made it close to balanced at the very end... then HotS hits and the matchup changed so much in terran's favor. Reapers, speedvacs, hellbats, and mines are all so good and can be gotten quickly, they can affect every game. Meanwhile SH is bad vs terran, so zerg's new toys are the ultra and viper... which are great, but the early game is so much harder. I'm disappointed that changes to mines or reapers apparently weren't even discussed... and something potentially useful for zerg (early burrow) was tossed out before giving it a chance. I feel like I should switch races just so I can use units that can deal with mines better. There's no such thing as imbalance in lower levels, it just means you're not doing things correctly. It's different with mines, because it's so challenging to find them and deal with them effectively. Instead of the bottom 40% of players struggling to counter a simple offensive style, it's the bottom 97%. You have to be very skilled to counter bio + mines in a cost efficient way - far more skill than it takes to scout a dark shrine, wall off vs 10p, or split your marines up. Do you have any proof that 97% of zerg players are struggling, other than your own experiences? I'm having a hard time seeing evidence of it based on the ladder statistics.
No, but if they're ruining the game for me at mid masters, somehow I doubt that platinum zergs are dealing with mines just fine. Now that I think about it I suppose 97% is too high though, because at lower levels the terrans will put mines in bad places or forget to burrow them and things like that... it's still a large percentage of zergs though.
|
Really like this approach. Only concern is Oracle which I like, but it cost a lot and yes, spells aren't that good. Revelation on a muta pack is fun, but its easily sniped. I actually wanted the speedbuff/acceleration because of Revelation. The unit looks badass!
As a protoss player I love speedvacs, they really make you kind of respect the terran a lot. I get all nerdschill when I am afraid to leave my base. I want to feel the power of my opponents race, not laughing at the nerf-fest they received over the last few months. Bravo Blizzard, I enjoy your approach <3
|
Too soon to change anything indeed. Perhaps the spore conoly could you a brush up against biological units.
|
On May 10 2013 13:00 vRadiatioNv wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2013 07:05 DemigodcelpH wrote:On May 10 2013 05:43 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 05:05 Rostam wrote:On May 10 2013 05:04 RogerChillingworth wrote:
TvZ is still terran favored, i don't care what anyone says. Other match-ups are better--can go either way--and really map dependent, but non-retarded Terrans will still make zerg look silly. stats fail to illustrate the full picture, i'm afraid. Good thing Code S is filled with retarded Terrans, then, otherwise zerg would be having issues. The game is very well balanced at the pro level but at the mere-humans level, mines are pretty silly. Incredibly cost efficient, takes 10 times more effort to counter than to use, and one mistake vs mines can be game ending. Welcome to Banelings for all of WoL. As a Zerg player you're simply not accustomed to having to face which you've been dishing out. Infestor/BL really did a number on what players like you perceive as a "balanced" matchup causing you to complain when ZvT is the best it has ever been not only from a gameplay depth and viability standpoint but from a spectator standpoint too. The Mine vs Banelings argument has been done so many times it shouldn't be brought up anymore. It's not a very good comparison to begin with and how often do you see Banelings come out as cost efficient as Mines? People see Banelings melt Marines and they go "OMG IMBA". Newsflash: that's minerals vs minerals+gas, more often than not it's not actually very efficient for Zerg lol. Not only do Mines pwn Zerglings but they pwn Banelings, Mutas and almost every Zerg unit. At best Banelings serve as a "stall" form of AoE where you are just trying to keep the Terran army small to avoid dying while going for Hive tech and more efficient forms of AoE (Infestors/Ultras). On the other hand Mines are very efficient and can be used almost all game long.
The Mine vs Banelings argument has been done so many times it shouldn't be brought up anymore. It's not a very good comparison to begin with and how often do you see Banelings come out as cost efficient as Mines?[/quote]
Quite often when they are used as baneling mines. Which cannot be detected by simply running a single ling ahead of the rest. Really that isn't that much work. Not to mention speedlings can run pretty much directly over mines without activating them.
Another newsflash: Not only do mines pwn lings and mutas, they pwn marines too. I tested it before, do equal supply/cost of speedlings vs marine/mine, unmicro'd on both sides, even with stimming the marines, and the end result is generally a draw. Mines kill everything, including friendly units. So that balances it out for lower levels.
And then talking about being used all-game long? Mines are pretty much useless when BLs come out, and tbh also infestors and ultras don't make them more impressive, although with BLs out they actually only kill your own army. Meanwhile banelings stay very useful throughout all the game.
And of course it is hard to compare two units which are quite different, but I agree that mines are probably more cost efficient generally. At the same time banelings are generally more supply efficient.
|
Austria637 Posts
On May 10 2013 16:22 Chocobo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2013 07:01 Rostam wrote:On May 10 2013 06:23 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 06:00 Kergy wrote:On May 10 2013 05:43 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 05:05 Rostam wrote:On May 10 2013 05:04 RogerChillingworth wrote:
TvZ is still terran favored, i don't care what anyone says. Other match-ups are better--can go either way--and really map dependent, but non-retarded Terrans will still make zerg look silly. stats fail to illustrate the full picture, i'm afraid. Good thing Code S is filled with retarded Terrans, then, otherwise zerg would be having issues. The game is very well balanced at the pro level but at the mere-humans level, mines are pretty silly. Incredibly cost efficient, takes 10 times more effort to counter than to use, and one mistake vs mines can be game ending. I know that balancing the game for the pro level is far more important than other skill levels... but I can't help but wish they didn't introduce a unit like this into the game. For me in low masters mines just make me want to quit the game. I can't leave my base, I can't ling harrass or go for surrounds, just in case there's a mine there that'll blow up everything for free. I can get mine dropped before I have detection. And even if I know exactly where every mine is, it's still a mess to deal with them... and the only unit that really counters them is broodlords. It's just so frustrating and half the time I just allin against terran now because I'm sick of facing bio/mines and not being able to do anything about it because it takes pro level control to deal with it. WoL ZvT was zerg-favored for a long time but the infestor nerfs and raven buffs made it close to balanced at the very end... then HotS hits and the matchup changed so much in terran's favor. Reapers, speedvacs, hellbats, and mines are all so good and can be gotten quickly, they can affect every game. Meanwhile SH is bad vs terran, so zerg's new toys are the ultra and viper... which are great, but the early game is so much harder. I'm disappointed that changes to mines or reapers apparently weren't even discussed... and something potentially useful for zerg (early burrow) was tossed out before giving it a chance. I feel like I should switch races just so I can use units that can deal with mines better. There's no such thing as imbalance in lower levels, it just means you're not doing things correctly. It's different with mines, because it's so challenging to find them and deal with them effectively. Instead of the bottom 40% of players struggling to counter a simple offensive style, it's the bottom 97%. You have to be very skilled to counter bio + mines in a cost efficient way - far more skill than it takes to scout a dark shrine, wall off vs 10p, or split your marines up. Do you have any proof that 97% of zerg players are struggling, other than your own experiences? I'm having a hard time seeing evidence of it based on the ladder statistics. No, but if they're ruining the game for me at mid masters, somehow I doubt that platinum zergs are dealing with mines just fine. Now that I think about it I suppose 97% is too high though, because at lower levels the terrans will put mines in bad places or forget to burrow them and things like that... it's still a large percentage of zergs though.
You have to look at it from another perspective:
Mines are no burrow and forget units. If a terran has no idea how to use them and burrows them at the wrong spots, they will never ever trigger any explosions or do crucial damage. So it's not only that zergs are worse at lower levels, terrans also neither play perfect. Yes, maybe zergs can lose like 30 lings on a single mine here and there, but such mistakes are forgiveable below diamond I'd say.
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37039 Posts
YES!!!!
NO ORACLE CHANGE!!!
|
Ugh please don't bring back infestors in zvz. I actually watch zvz now
|
On May 10 2013 16:45 Prugelhugel wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2013 16:22 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 07:01 Rostam wrote:On May 10 2013 06:23 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 06:00 Kergy wrote:On May 10 2013 05:43 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 05:05 Rostam wrote:On May 10 2013 05:04 RogerChillingworth wrote:
TvZ is still terran favored, i don't care what anyone says. Other match-ups are better--can go either way--and really map dependent, but non-retarded Terrans will still make zerg look silly. stats fail to illustrate the full picture, i'm afraid. Good thing Code S is filled with retarded Terrans, then, otherwise zerg would be having issues. The game is very well balanced at the pro level but at the mere-humans level, mines are pretty silly. Incredibly cost efficient, takes 10 times more effort to counter than to use, and one mistake vs mines can be game ending. I know that balancing the game for the pro level is far more important than other skill levels... but I can't help but wish they didn't introduce a unit like this into the game. For me in low masters mines just make me want to quit the game. I can't leave my base, I can't ling harrass or go for surrounds, just in case there's a mine there that'll blow up everything for free. I can get mine dropped before I have detection. And even if I know exactly where every mine is, it's still a mess to deal with them... and the only unit that really counters them is broodlords. It's just so frustrating and half the time I just allin against terran now because I'm sick of facing bio/mines and not being able to do anything about it because it takes pro level control to deal with it. WoL ZvT was zerg-favored for a long time but the infestor nerfs and raven buffs made it close to balanced at the very end... then HotS hits and the matchup changed so much in terran's favor. Reapers, speedvacs, hellbats, and mines are all so good and can be gotten quickly, they can affect every game. Meanwhile SH is bad vs terran, so zerg's new toys are the ultra and viper... which are great, but the early game is so much harder. I'm disappointed that changes to mines or reapers apparently weren't even discussed... and something potentially useful for zerg (early burrow) was tossed out before giving it a chance. I feel like I should switch races just so I can use units that can deal with mines better. There's no such thing as imbalance in lower levels, it just means you're not doing things correctly. It's different with mines, because it's so challenging to find them and deal with them effectively. Instead of the bottom 40% of players struggling to counter a simple offensive style, it's the bottom 97%. You have to be very skilled to counter bio + mines in a cost efficient way - far more skill than it takes to scout a dark shrine, wall off vs 10p, or split your marines up. Do you have any proof that 97% of zerg players are struggling, other than your own experiences? I'm having a hard time seeing evidence of it based on the ladder statistics. No, but if they're ruining the game for me at mid masters, somehow I doubt that platinum zergs are dealing with mines just fine. Now that I think about it I suppose 97% is too high though, because at lower levels the terrans will put mines in bad places or forget to burrow them and things like that... it's still a large percentage of zergs though. You have to look at it from another perspective: Mines are no burrow and forget units. If a terran has no idea how to use them and burrows them at the wrong spots, they will never ever trigger any explosions or do crucial damage. So it's not only that zergs are worse at lower levels, terrans also neither play perfect. Yes, maybe zergs can lose like 30 lings on a single mine here and there, but such mistakes are forgiveable below diamond I'd say.
I'm sorry but it takes more effort for Terran to counter 99% of Zerg units than it does to use them. Mines are just one unit that finally Zerg can't just amove around the map into. I'm not saying Zerg is easier to play overall than Terran (I play mid master random) but the justification that mines are ruining the game because it takes Zerg more effort to deal with them is just stupid.
|
On May 10 2013 16:20 Chocobo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2013 07:05 DemigodcelpH wrote:On May 10 2013 05:43 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 05:05 Rostam wrote:On May 10 2013 05:04 RogerChillingworth wrote:
TvZ is still terran favored, i don't care what anyone says. Other match-ups are better--can go either way--and really map dependent, but non-retarded Terrans will still make zerg look silly. stats fail to illustrate the full picture, i'm afraid. Good thing Code S is filled with retarded Terrans, then, otherwise zerg would be having issues. The game is very well balanced at the pro level but at the mere-humans level, mines are pretty silly. Incredibly cost efficient, takes 10 times more effort to counter than to use, and one mistake vs mines can be game ending. Welcome to Banelings for all of WoL. As a Zerg player you're simply not accustomed to having to face which you've been dishing out. Infestor/BL really did a number on what players like you perceive as a "balanced" matchup causing you to complain when ZvT is the best it has ever been not only from a gameplay depth and viability standpoint but from a spectator standpoint too. Like I've been saying, banelings are not particularly cost efficient. Yes they are slightly harder to counter than to use
Bolded for emphasis. With all due respect you are incredibly biased, and unfortunately the rest of your post falls victim to this style of thinking. Downplaying things to suit your agenda isn't making a valid point, so everything I mentioned still effectively stands.
|
On May 10 2013 16:20 Chocobo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2013 07:05 DemigodcelpH wrote:On May 10 2013 05:43 Chocobo wrote:On May 10 2013 05:05 Rostam wrote:On May 10 2013 05:04 RogerChillingworth wrote:
TvZ is still terran favored, i don't care what anyone says. Other match-ups are better--can go either way--and really map dependent, but non-retarded Terrans will still make zerg look silly. stats fail to illustrate the full picture, i'm afraid. Good thing Code S is filled with retarded Terrans, then, otherwise zerg would be having issues. The game is very well balanced at the pro level but at the mere-humans level, mines are pretty silly. Incredibly cost efficient, takes 10 times more effort to counter than to use, and one mistake vs mines can be game ending. Welcome to Banelings for all of WoL. As a Zerg player you're simply not accustomed to having to face which you've been dishing out. Infestor/BL really did a number on what players like you perceive as a "balanced" matchup causing you to complain when ZvT is the best it has ever been not only from a gameplay depth and viability standpoint but from a spectator standpoint too. Like I've been saying, banelings are not particularly cost efficient. Yes they are slightly harder to counter than to use, but not anywhere near the level that mines take things. It's fine for an RTS game to have strong units that take a specialized effort to deal with, but mines take it too far. "Be ready to split your army when the banelings come and try to target them down" is a challenge, but an achievable one with practice. "Always have detection around, and follow this complex mine-removal process, and don't ever send units across the map without being ready to instantly turn around if you see a mine, and don't mess up even once or you'll be too cost inefficient" is too much effort and requires too much skill to perform for all but the very best of players. Don't put that "infestor/BL was balanced" strawman on me.
Stop arguing with them. Mines don't even suicide, and you name all the problems we have with Mines, while they start to compare them to Banelings that suicides, you lose them to do damage, you almost always lose half of them before they even connect to something, and in the end, if our attack and Banelings hit were good, the resources lost are about equal.
I am not saying that things are imbalanced at the moment. I enjoy new match-ups a lot more than the camping ones from WoL, but saying that Widow Mines are same as Banelings is stupid as hell. You can't reason with Terran players that are saying this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
