EPTAnyway, protoss issues probably can't be fixed via unit balance. But making gimmicks better gimmicks won't help a lot either, except by frustrating other races' players I guess :/
6 possible balance changes - David Kim - Page 31
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Nimix
France1809 Posts
Anyway, protoss issues probably can't be fixed via unit balance. But making gimmicks better gimmicks won't help a lot either, except by frustrating other races' players I guess :/ | ||
|
nSDeception
Canada96 Posts
| ||
|
beesinyoface
2450 Posts
On September 24 2013 09:25 SC2BF3Love wrote: Protoss getting some nice buff... dont know why many people dont like those buff... Protoss is becoming more interesting early game as they were in BW. people keep calm this is just testing purpuses... dont need to be bashing new things on the game... anyways the game right now is so borring and stale that we need to test things and look how they work out... Because they don't need another fucking buff? I'm sure these exact changes/numbers won't get patched in thankfully, or else it'd segment even more players away from the game. Still, these changes propose a really dumb way of dealing with certain aspects in the game. | ||
|
FreedomSC2
Canada224 Posts
Mech ground and air attack upgrades combined Initial Thought: I believe this upgrade is smart move in correlation to the tank buff. This will allow mech units to help better protect tanks in tvz. I feel this overall is a great concept to make mech more viable but if blizzard decides to go down this path its something they will have to commit too since its such a dramatic change. I feel has the potential to fix all the problems but perhaps not in the immediate future. My Rating for this change: 4.5/5 (Smart move, heading in the right direction may take a few patches to iron it out.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Widow mine splash radius decreased from 1.75 to 1.1 Intial Thoughts: I believe this downgrade is a bit to harsh. In order for mines to remain viable and consistent in game play they must stay around a similar setup. I don't feel a dramatic change like this really helps anyone because it changes things so much so fast. I believe a reduction from 1.1 to 1.5 would be a more reasonable approach. From there blizzard could evaluate things but its unsure if this proposed change is just posturing to prepare players for bigger changes a head. My Rating for this change: 2/5 (Poor planning on blizzards part feel this change is to polarizing and will hurt the game. Changing units stats so dramatically will only cause more frustration and uncertainty within the game.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Siege tank attack period decreased from 3 to 2.7 Initial Thoughts: I believe this is a smart change wit the correlating mech ground / air upgrade change. This will make tanks more viable but more changes may be required before the tanks are fully functional and ironed out. The proposed window mine changes would increase experimentation with tanks but in the long hall I'm unconvinced this will make a huge impact without other correlating changes to mech. My Rating for this change: 3.5/5 (Great step forward but still not convinced this will be what blizzard needs in the long run. But its a good steady change that is healthy for the community.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Oracle cost decreased from 150/150 to 150/100 Initial Thoughts: I believe this is an interesting concept but I feel blizzard is missing the point entirely. If blizzard wants oracle to be more sustainable later on in a match its important that they look at whats holding it back from being used. It isnt the cost of the unit but the units effectiveness in the later part of a match. I believe a change focusing more on higher shield hp then cost effectiveness is the key. My Rating for this change: 2.5/5 (It's a step in the right direction by addressing the issue but the core problem isn't its cost but rather its cost effectiveness. Blizzard should look to model it off a reaper where it can regain a higher shield count so it can absorb more dps and still be useful later in the game.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dark Templar movement speed increased from 2.813 to 3.375 Initial Thoughts: I believe Dark Templar are highly under utilized and have great effectiveness in the late game. This upgrade would essentially force terrans to make ravens since dt's would be easily able to escape scans. I feel it has potential but I feel the speed buff is similar to that of the window mine change being to dramatic. Perhaps a slower speed of 3 or 3.1 instead of 3.375. Overall a great change to mix things up but I can see terrans becoming very frustrated. But it could be what protoss needs to be able to be aggressive and less turtle like. My Rating: 3.5/5 (Overall a positive step forward. It would give protoss more options and leave terrans more accountable. I believe this change could make pvt/tvp more exciting like zvt/tvz. Not sure if the speed buff would be to much but it could be slightly to much.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Roach speed upgrade also increases the burrowed roach movement speed from 1.41 to 2.25 Initial Thoughts: I believe this is a great idea. Roach movement in combat is highly under utilized imagine if zerg could burrow units back like protoss could blink stalkers. We have seen it before back in early 2010 but it wasn't as effective as it could of been due to the speed. It would provide zerg more versatility in their matchups but the change itself may be to over powering in the long hall. In theory it could work great or it could cause a lot of problems. Definitely an interesting concept though. Great to see blizzard willing to put forth some creative ideas to make the game more rounded. My Rating: 3.5/5 (Like the concept of making roaches more viable but am uncertain about the ramifications of such a drastic change. It would solve that problem of burrowed roaches being less viable but it could if not handled well could cause some dysfunction in other matchups. Overall a positive step forward and time will tell if its the right move.) | ||
|
JeanLuc
Canada377 Posts
| ||
|
xyzz
567 Posts
On September 24 2013 09:38 JeanLuc wrote: Can't buff terran and zerg without also giving a buff to toss ldo. Don't bring logic and sensibility into this thread. Apparently buffs to the most succesful race in Starcraft II (vanilla + expansion) are wonderful and required changes, and changes to the least succesful race in Starcraft II (vanilla + expansion) are absolutely unnecessary and therefore voted down. The community has spoken. | ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
| ||
|
NOFX
France32 Posts
On September 24 2013 09:22 Necosarius wrote: In WoL Terran was the aggressive harassment oriented race and Protoss was the defensive base management race, now it seems like they want to flip things around. Only problem is that Terran still has to do damage in the mid game to prevent the protoss deathball. This. Playing TvP means be aggressive and gain an advantage with harassment to be equal in late game ? allright I can take it, in WoL it wasn't that bad. Giving P every thing he needs to be greedy and defend mid game harassment AND give them more and more options to be aggressive or more "gimmicky" ? I just don't get it, what's the point ? | ||
|
hansonslee
United States2027 Posts
| ||
|
Scarecrow
Korea (South)9172 Posts
| ||
|
AxionSteel
United States7754 Posts
On September 24 2013 09:33 nSDeception wrote: It's kinda funny how protoss has struggled for the last year and a half in both tourny results and in general, and yet there are thumbs down for both buffs. The dt one is kinda strange and but the oracle one should be accepted to make oracle play more viable, there way to much of a investment right now so i think that would help alot. It's probably because protoss is a really, really frustrating race to place against, particularly for mere mortals like us on ladder, so typically if you're not a protoss player you don't particularly enjoy all the gimmicky shit they can pull off. Super fast DTs...i mean i find them very hard to deal with in the late game already, cheaper oracles? more gimmicky oracle allins. ugh. It's just a race that doesn't get a lot of love from non protoss players  That being said, the game is so stale at the moment, especially from a terran perspective. PvZ actually seems rather decent and varied. So I guess changes are really needed for Terran with the widow mine nerf and tank buff, but not sure how useful the tank buff will be outside of making mech more dominant in TvT. gogogogo | ||
|
Pazuzu
United States632 Posts
| ||
|
Waise
3165 Posts
On September 24 2013 09:53 AxionSteel wrote: It's probably because protoss is a really, really frustrating race to place against, particularly for mere mortals like us on ladder, so typically if you're not a protoss player you don't particularly enjoy all the gimmicky shit they can pull off. Super fast DTs...i mean i find them very hard to deal with in the late game already, cheaper oracles? more gimmicky oracle allins. ugh. It's just a race that doesn't get a lot of love from non protoss players That being said, the game is so stale at the moment, especially from a terran perspective. PvZ actually seems rather decent and varied. So I guess changes are really needed for Terran with the widow mine nerf and tank buff, but not sure how useful the tank buff will be outside of making mech more dominant in TvT. gogogogo yeah... it's not that there's no way to buff protoss, it's just kind of bewildering for kim to apparently think that buffing the two cheesiest units protoss has in things like speed and gas cost is going to promote them as anything but gimmick play. i'm not gonna lie, as a mediocre gold player who struggles with my scouting, the idea of oracles hitting 50 gas earlier and DT play being harder to shut down terrifies me. i know my level of play isn't the basis for balance, but at my level losing because of lack of preparation for cheese can be extremely frustrating... plus i just disagree that the oracle change would make people at any level more willing to add them on lategame i mean, even HP buffs for both units would seem to make more sense than just making them both "faster" (one in how fast it hits, one in how fast it moves) | ||
|
Deleted User 132135
702 Posts
On September 24 2013 09:45 GinDo wrote: Love all the changes. Funny how through this poll you can see how TL is predominately Zerg seeing how the Roach speed buff got the most votes compared to all the polls. ^_^ No you can't! What people vote for is decided by how much they think a certain change makes sense or not at the first glance. The terran siege tank buff has the same proportion of positive to negative votes. The number of votes on the DT buff is alot higher than on both of them tho. Why? Because people are convinved that it is more important to vote on things they DON'T like. What does your reply show? Maybe you answer this correctly at least. ;-) | ||
|
shin_toss
Philippines2589 Posts
| ||
|
forsooth
United States3648 Posts
On September 24 2013 09:33 nSDeception wrote: It's kinda funny how protoss has struggled for the last year and a half in both tourny results and in general, and yet there are thumbs down for both buffs. The dt one is kinda strange and but the oracle one should be accepted to make oracle play more viable, there way to much of a investment right now so i think that would help alot. How is it funny? The success of Protoss in premier tournaments has nothing to do with whether or not a buff would make sense, or make the game better. If Terran was doing badly and I suggested doubling stimmed bio move speed as a buff, people would laugh at at me because that's a really dumb idea. | ||
|
rpddropshot
United States82 Posts
| ||
|
greenDron
Korea (South)94 Posts
| ||
|
xyzz
567 Posts
On September 24 2013 09:58 forsooth wrote: How is it funny? The success of Protoss in premier tournaments has nothing to do with whether or not a buff would make sense, or make the game better. If Terran was doing badly and I suggested doubling stimmed bio move speed as a buff, people would laugh at at me because that's a really dumb idea. What's really dumb is the people on forums ridiculing David Kim and basically declaring themselves superior game designers despite having absolutely no work experience on that level in the field. Not one poster in this thread has made a convincing argument yet on why the Protoss changes supposedly don't make sense and completed that argument with an alternate change (that makes more sense since we're using that terminology) that achieves a roughly equal increase in army efficiency / race win rates. | ||
|
HeavenResign
United States702 Posts
Rest of the changes sound great, though | ||
| ||
