On February 08 2014 07:41 Wombat_NI wrote: WM nerf was premature IMO, just like the Queen patch in that it really did look that top Zergs were really figuring out ways to engage optimally anyway.
Win rates were really close to 50/50 before the nerf, and now I think that muta/ling vs bio/mine/thor favours zerg. I do feel the mine was probably too good pre nerf, but the tank "buff" was in no way adequate compensation.
I really miss that from BW, there was tons of OP shit, but it was ok since everyone had it. As soon as something sticks out in SC2 it gets mauled with the nerfhammer and some other unit is given a speed increase for no apparent reason.
Win rates were not 50/50 pre-nerf, they were grossly in T's favor, Soulkey was the only Zerg who could take games off Terran, and he had to vastly outplay his opponent to do so. Imbalanced TvZ was the primary reason we only got 2 Z's in '13 WCS Global Finals. WM nerf was not premature; in fact it was the complete opposite -- it should have been implemented way before it was, and part of the reason it took so long was because Zergs don't whine near as much, and when they do they are chastised and suppressed far more readily than the other races, I mean compare the amount of whine from Z during '13 WCS Global Finals versus what we get from Terrans now, the ratio is like 1:∞.
No really, what you are seeing now is Zerg play that was built around countering the WM of old, and was seeing some success in an era where the mine is also nerfed.
On February 08 2014 07:41 Wombat_NI wrote: WM nerf was premature IMO, just like the Queen patch in that it really did look that top Zergs were really figuring out ways to engage optimally anyway.
Win rates were really close to 50/50 before the nerf, and now I think that muta/ling vs bio/mine/thor favours zerg. I do feel the mine was probably too good pre nerf, but the tank "buff" was in no way adequate compensation.
I really miss that from BW, there was tons of OP shit, but it was ok since everyone had it. As soon as something sticks out in SC2 it gets mauled with the nerfhammer and some other unit is given a speed increase for no apparent reason.
Win rates were not 50/50 pre-nerf, they were grossly in T's favor, Soulkey was the only Zerg who could take games off Terran, and he had to vastly outplay his opponent to do so. Imbalanced TvZ was the primary reason we only got 2 Z's in '13 WCS Global Finals. WM nerf was not premature; in fact it was the complete opposite -- it should have been implemented way before it was, and part of the reason it took so long was because Zergs don't whine near as much, and when they do they are chastised and suppressed far more readily than the other races, I mean compare the amount of whine from Z during '13 WCS Global Finals versus what we get from Terrans now, the ratio is like 1:∞.
No. '113 WCS Global Finals include WCS points from 2 seasons, in which 2 of the seasons Terran was probably slightly stronger, in the third, however, Zerg was pretty much fine in TvZ. The game was really back and forth and the better player won. AND THEN the mine patch came.
On February 08 2014 07:41 Wombat_NI wrote: WM nerf was premature IMO, just like the Queen patch in that it really did look that top Zergs were really figuring out ways to engage optimally anyway.
Win rates were really close to 50/50 before the nerf, and now I think that muta/ling vs bio/mine/thor favours zerg. I do feel the mine was probably too good pre nerf, but the tank "buff" was in no way adequate compensation.
I really miss that from BW, there was tons of OP shit, but it was ok since everyone had it. As soon as something sticks out in SC2 it gets mauled with the nerfhammer and some other unit is given a speed increase for no apparent reason.
Win rates were not 50/50 pre-nerf, they were grossly in T's favor, Soulkey was the only Zerg who could take games off Terran, and he had to vastly outplay his opponent to do so. Imbalanced TvZ was the primary reason we only got 2 Z's in '13 WCS Global Finals. WM nerf was not premature; in fact it was the complete opposite -- it should have been implemented way before it was, and part of the reason it took so long was because Zergs don't whine near as much, and when they do they are chastised and suppressed far more readily than the other races, I mean compare the amount of whine from Z during '13 WCS Global Finals versus what we get from Terrans now, the ratio is like 1:∞.
No. '113 WCS Global Finals include WCS points from 2 seasons, in which 2 of the seasons Terran was probably slightly stronger, in the third, however, Zerg was pretty much fine in TvZ. The game was really back and forth and the better player won. AND THEN the mine patch came.
On February 08 2014 07:41 Wombat_NI wrote: WM nerf was premature IMO, just like the Queen patch in that it really did look that top Zergs were really figuring out ways to engage optimally anyway.
Win rates were really close to 50/50 before the nerf, and now I think that muta/ling vs bio/mine/thor favours zerg. I do feel the mine was probably too good pre nerf, but the tank "buff" was in no way adequate compensation.
I really miss that from BW, there was tons of OP shit, but it was ok since everyone had it. As soon as something sticks out in SC2 it gets mauled with the nerfhammer and some other unit is given a speed increase for no apparent reason.
Win rates were not 50/50 pre-nerf, they were grossly in T's favor, Soulkey was the only Zerg who could take games off Terran, and he had to vastly outplay his opponent to do so. Imbalanced TvZ was the primary reason we only got 2 Z's in '13 WCS Global Finals. WM nerf was not premature; in fact it was the complete opposite -- it should have been implemented way before it was, and part of the reason it took so long was because Zergs don't whine near as much, and when they do they are chastised and suppressed far more readily than the other races, I mean compare the amount of whine from Z during '13 WCS Global Finals versus what we get from Terrans now, the ratio is like 1:∞.
There is always a period of time where players have to figure out new mechanics. When SC2 was released, and for quite a while after that, Zerg players still weren't using creep to it's maximum. Now, it would be unheard of top Zergs that don't cover most of their side of the map with creep in a TvZ.
Ex: I saw this on Idra's retirement thread. Note that Idra beats Mvp, despite not utilizing creep the way top zergs currently do.
As to your point on TvZ before widow-mine was nerfed, the WR was beginning to shift back towards 50/50 gradually as Zergs began to figure out the way to beat widow-mines. Reducing damage by splitting more often and using the friendlyfire against the Terrans themselves.
Now 4M is largely considered impotent. Why? Nerf + Zergs figuring it out = compounded nerf.
On February 08 2014 07:41 Wombat_NI wrote: WM nerf was premature IMO, just like the Queen patch in that it really did look that top Zergs were really figuring out ways to engage optimally anyway.
Win rates were really close to 50/50 before the nerf, and now I think that muta/ling vs bio/mine/thor favours zerg. I do feel the mine was probably too good pre nerf, but the tank "buff" was in no way adequate compensation.
I really miss that from BW, there was tons of OP shit, but it was ok since everyone had it. As soon as something sticks out in SC2 it gets mauled with the nerfhammer and some other unit is given a speed increase for no apparent reason.
Win rates were not 50/50 pre-nerf, they were grossly in T's favor, Soulkey was the only Zerg who could take games off Terran, and he had to vastly outplay his opponent to do so. Imbalanced TvZ was the primary reason we only got 2 Z's in '13 WCS Global Finals. WM nerf was not premature; in fact it was the complete opposite -- it should have been implemented way before it was, and part of the reason it took so long was because Zergs don't whine near as much, and when they do they are chastised and suppressed far more readily than the other races, I mean compare the amount of whine from Z during '13 WCS Global Finals versus what we get from Terrans now, the ratio is like 1:∞.
There was the overload speed buff that solved the WM problem and TvZ was fairly balance if not slightly Zerg favor because of mass mutas. The terrans were overrepresented in WCS because of MMAA, Mvp, Polt, Alive were farming WCS points ez mode in non-Korea regions.
On February 08 2014 07:41 Wombat_NI wrote: WM nerf was premature IMO, just like the Queen patch in that it really did look that top Zergs were really figuring out ways to engage optimally anyway.
Win rates were really close to 50/50 before the nerf, and now I think that muta/ling vs bio/mine/thor favours zerg. I do feel the mine was probably too good pre nerf, but the tank "buff" was in no way adequate compensation.
I really miss that from BW, there was tons of OP shit, but it was ok since everyone had it. As soon as something sticks out in SC2 it gets mauled with the nerfhammer and some other unit is given a speed increase for no apparent reason.
Win rates were not 50/50 pre-nerf, they were grossly in T's favor, Soulkey was the only Zerg who could take games off Terran, and he had to vastly outplay his opponent to do so. Imbalanced TvZ was the primary reason we only got 2 Z's in '13 WCS Global Finals. WM nerf was not premature; in fact it was the complete opposite -- it should have been implemented way before it was, and part of the reason it took so long was because Zergs don't whine near as much, and when they do they are chastised and suppressed far more readily than the other races, I mean compare the amount of whine from Z during '13 WCS Global Finals versus what we get from Terrans now, the ratio is like 1:∞.
There was the overload speed buff that solved the WM problem and TvZ was fairly balance if not slightly Zerg favor because of mass mutas. The terrans were overrepresented in WCS because of MMAA, Mvp, Polt, Alive were farming WCS points ez mode in non-Korea regions.
I wouldn't say it was Z favoured after the overseer speed buff. But it definitely helped a lot and wr was shifting back to balance at the least.
The Overlord speed buff was useful because it allowed mutas to roam about without having to wait for Overseers to catch up and actually fulfill their designated role without having to pussyfoot around mines.
I'm getting annoyed at Blizzard simply not giving the game enough time to develop. Compared to BW it's much easier to publicize balance whining and forums are much more prevalent. So they feel like they have to do something.
Oftentimes they nerf something that people have figured out how to deal with or that the change in maps has made not viable and it ends up skewing balance.
Just let the game sit for like a whole year without patching ANYTHING please. Win rates are close enough to 50 that we can coast on this for a while. Especially that the MsC and Ghost changes have gone through as of this week.
On February 08 2014 08:33 DinoMight wrote: I'm getting annoyed at Blizzard simply not giving the game enough time to develop. Compared to BW it's much easier to publicize balance whining and forums are much more prevalent. So they feel like they have to do something.
Oftentimes they nerf something that people have figured out how to deal with or that the change in maps has made not viable and it ends up skewing balance.
Just let the game sit for like a whole year without patching ANYTHING please. Win rates are close enough to 50 that we can coast on this for a while. Especially that the MsC and Ghost changes have gone through as of this week.
To be honest, WR by itself isn't the best metric for balance. In combination with race representation, WR becomes more robust as an indicator of balance.
Having said this, I agree that we need to let the MsC and Ghost changes play out a bit. I know a lot of people, including pros, are saying it's not enough in TvP. But they are quite biased and not thinking straight. Long-term speaking; gradual and and measured changes are the best in my humble opinion.
On February 08 2014 08:33 DinoMight wrote: I'm getting annoyed at Blizzard simply not giving the game enough time to develop. Compared to BW it's much easier to publicize balance whining and forums are much more prevalent. So they feel like they have to do something.
Oftentimes they nerf something that people have figured out how to deal with or that the change in maps has made not viable and it ends up skewing balance.
Just let the game sit for like a whole year without patching ANYTHING please. Win rates are close enough to 50 that we can coast on this for a while. Especially that the MsC and Ghost changes have gone through as of this week.
No thanks, it seems you're forgetting the superior BW game design which entailed way more entertaining games than we get in SC2. SC2 gets real stale real fast, and, at least for the time being (until LotV?), change is better than no change.
On February 08 2014 03:07 Ghanburighan wrote: Whitewing and Plansix, the two people I'd like to have balancing the game... I would love getting every fact and complaint responded to with patronising and trolling.
Edit: And IdrA, when still a top foreigner, predicted a number of imbalances, including ghosts getting nerfed almost a year before they were, alongside obvious ones like infestors getting nerfed. So, yes, being good at the game does give you good knowledge of the game. Actually arguing his point with facts and examples makes it much better, of course.
In early WOL while zergs were hugely underpresented and Dustin Browder stated that TvZ win/rates were close to 50-50, it was clear for everyone who ignored the useless win/rate statistics (that always goes towards 50/50 regardless of balance) and either looked at more relevant numbers or simply analyzed games, that it was heavily T favored. Blizzad, however, back then acted a bit quicker than they do today and nerfed Reapers and Siege tanks shortly after the patch. Idra, however, kept saying that it still was T favored and argued that it was more imbalanced (prepatch) than most people realized.
He was !@#$%^&* right, According to statistics by Aliguac, there was a terran invovled in all non-mirror matchups 70-77% of all games in early WOL compared to 50-55% for zerg --> That indicates that the matchup was heavily T favored.
How does that look today? Protoss = 72% and terran = 56% --> T very underpowered.
While some of the suggestions Dwf presents might not be neccasary (tactical Nuke), I really think its extremely unlikely that the combo of these suggestions will make the game T favored. I would even argue that the combo of these suggestions are much less drastic than the fungal growth buff that Blizzards gave Zerg in spring 2011. And back then FYI terran representation was around 68%, zerg representation around 65%. Aliguac W/R were slightly T favored (similar to how PvT w/r today are slightly toss favored).
So overall, Z wasn't underperforming as badly as T is today, and even later on (after Z representation equalized T representation), Zerg got another buff --> Queen range increased from 3 to 5, which arguably also was a more significant than the combo of Dwf's suggestions.
So IMO, either a big change is needed (like a big Hellion buff to buff mech) or it could be a combo of small suggestions, such as what Dwf presents.
I think the change that I would like to see the most is a different way to access balance. With WR we either have a sample size problem or when we don't then it is too insensitive to balance change (better players of the worse race play worse players of the better race)
I think using mirror MU statistics would be a good approach.
Well we don't really have sample size probelms with W/R's by using Aliguac's stats. There are enough data there + you can clearly see general trends across the periods. W/R's though are just not very important to look at, unless you see it together with the distribution of players. For instance if the only terran players that are good enuogh to play comepetitively (and thus be included on Aliguac's stats), then they will naturally have a good win/rates (regardless of balance) if they are facing a top 200 protoss player.
So we can't simpy look at win/rates isolated, Doing that is extremely deceiving and I believe its why we are in such a situation as today where David Kim has waited so ridicilously long by buffing terran. Had David Kim had a better understanding on how to interpret statistics, he would have buffed terran a long time ago, and the buffs would have been more significant.
On February 08 2014 07:41 Wombat_NI wrote: WM nerf was premature IMO, just like the Queen patch in that it really did look that top Zergs were really figuring out ways to engage optimally anyway.
Win rates were really close to 50/50 before the nerf, and now I think that muta/ling vs bio/mine/thor favours zerg. I do feel the mine was probably too good pre nerf, but the tank "buff" was in no way adequate compensation.
I really miss that from BW, there was tons of OP shit, but it was ok since everyone had it. As soon as something sticks out in SC2 it gets mauled with the nerfhammer and some other unit is given a speed increase for no apparent reason.
Win rates were not 50/50 pre-nerf, they were grossly in T's favor, Soulkey was the only Zerg who could take games off Terran, and he had to vastly outplay his opponent to do so. Imbalanced TvZ was the primary reason we only got 2 Z's in '13 WCS Global Finals. WM nerf was not premature; in fact it was the complete opposite -- it should have been implemented way before it was, and part of the reason it took so long was because Zergs don't whine near as much, and when they do they are chastised and suppressed far more readily than the other races, I mean compare the amount of whine from Z during '13 WCS Global Finals versus what we get from Terrans now, the ratio is like 1:∞.
No. '113 WCS Global Finals include WCS points from 2 seasons, in which 2 of the seasons Terran was probably slightly stronger, in the third, however, Zerg was pretty much fine in TvZ. The game was really back and forth and the better player won. AND THEN the mine patch came.
On February 08 2014 05:39 Plansix wrote: If you nerf blink stalker openings and oracle opens to much, you just end up with turtle toss, which no one wants. If Terran needs more options, make that possible through scouting or other routes. Nerfing effective builds is not the way to go. Buffing underused strats is better.
You also don't want a game with too many amazing early game/all-in possibilities. Blink is too strong right now, it needs to be looked at.
No, thanks. Blink research was already nerfed by about 70 seconds (iirc) in HOTS. Reduce the vision of the MSC to 11 (as with all other flyers). That will help with countering blink play. Make TW an upgrade at Core. That will help with blink all-ins.
Continue tweaking PO (by looking at range and casting range).
But, don't nerf an option that allows for pressure and good active play. The game is worse as a result.
Edit/ Sorry, 30 seconds, I think. I'll have to check that.
Don't nerf an option that allows for pressure and good active play? Then why were hellbats nerfed?
From what I remember, it was because TvT had become a Hellbat fest. I was in two minds about that patch (as you may or may not know, I generally dislike most, if not all, patches) but it seemed the right way to go as a once cool match-up (TvT) had become just silly. If they want to return the Hellbat to 2 cargo space, rather than 4 that would be fine with me.
Note also, that I was against the WM nerf. But that was because of all the ZvT complaining. A stronger WM and 4 HB per Medivac seems OK to me. Heck, I'd even be on board with looking at stim timings again (as that is one powerful upgrade). But, you would have to consider the effect of all of this on TvZ too (I am not sure if a big stim buff would not be too much).
Unfortunately, generally speaking Blizzard have been very unwilling to roll back any patch. Realistically speaking I doubt any of these will happen. But, if nerfs to Protoss are to happen. Then, I'd like them to be good and intelligent tweaks rather than massive swings of the nerf hammer. This way Protoss get to still enjoy some of their new found HOTS flexibility while giving some back to Terran too. That way, hopefully, both races are better off in aggregate and Starcraft itself better off as a result.
Nobody has disagreed with the hellbat nerfs - but the amount they nerfed them. It was not a TvT nerf despite whatever they tell you: it was an accross the board nerf to Terran openings.
WM nerf was 'because TvZ is getting stale', another pretty terrible reason. Balance in TvZ was looking really good with the better player usually winning (Unlike now - see any LR threat). The problem was that the same game over and over and over and over got boring so Mines got nerfed.
I don't agree with that. That patch came after a whole bunch of rather silly TvT games. The unit itself was OK in TvZ and TvP from what I remember. I see no reason why Blizzard would lie. The nerf may have been over-heavy (I can't say for sure). But this is why, along with the WM nerf, I am generally against patching. Patches tend to cause more trouble than they are worth.
Bold position to hold (against patching) given the current state of the game.
My preferred approach to Blizzard's balancing is an adaptation of the Civil Service's 4 stage strategy to foreign affairs crisis from Yes, Prime Minister. A race appeals to help from Blizzard in a time of crisis, this is what they get.
On February 08 2014 07:41 Wombat_NI wrote: WM nerf was premature IMO, just like the Queen patch in that it really did look that top Zergs were really figuring out ways to engage optimally anyway.
Win rates were really close to 50/50 before the nerf, and now I think that muta/ling vs bio/mine/thor favours zerg. I do feel the mine was probably too good pre nerf, but the tank "buff" was in no way adequate compensation.
I really miss that from BW, there was tons of OP shit, but it was ok since everyone had it. As soon as something sticks out in SC2 it gets mauled with the nerfhammer and some other unit is given a speed increase for no apparent reason.
Win rates were not 50/50 pre-nerf, they were grossly in T's favor, Soulkey was the only Zerg who could take games off Terran, and he had to vastly outplay his opponent to do so. Imbalanced TvZ was the primary reason we only got 2 Z's in '13 WCS Global Finals. WM nerf was not premature; in fact it was the complete opposite -- it should have been implemented way before it was, and part of the reason it took so long was because Zergs don't whine near as much, and when they do they are chastised and suppressed far more readily than the other races, I mean compare the amount of whine from Z during '13 WCS Global Finals versus what we get from Terrans now, the ratio is like 1:∞.
No. '113 WCS Global Finals include WCS points from 2 seasons, in which 2 of the seasons Terran was probably slightly stronger, in the third, however, Zerg was pretty much fine in TvZ. The game was really back and forth and the better player won. AND THEN the mine patch came.
Keep telling yourself that.
That is indeed a very mature way to argue!
Maybe if there was an argument to be had (there wasn't).
On February 08 2014 07:41 Wombat_NI wrote: WM nerf was premature IMO, just like the Queen patch in that it really did look that top Zergs were really figuring out ways to engage optimally anyway.
Win rates were really close to 50/50 before the nerf, and now I think that muta/ling vs bio/mine/thor favours zerg. I do feel the mine was probably too good pre nerf, but the tank "buff" was in no way adequate compensation.
I really miss that from BW, there was tons of OP shit, but it was ok since everyone had it. As soon as something sticks out in SC2 it gets mauled with the nerfhammer and some other unit is given a speed increase for no apparent reason.
Win rates were not 50/50 pre-nerf, they were grossly in T's favor, Soulkey was the only Zerg who could take games off Terran, and he had to vastly outplay his opponent to do so. Imbalanced TvZ was the primary reason we only got 2 Z's in '13 WCS Global Finals. WM nerf was not premature; in fact it was the complete opposite -- it should have been implemented way before it was, and part of the reason it took so long was because Zergs don't whine near as much, and when they do they are chastised and suppressed far more readily than the other races, I mean compare the amount of whine from Z during '13 WCS Global Finals versus what we get from Terrans now, the ratio is like 1:∞.
No. '113 WCS Global Finals include WCS points from 2 seasons, in which 2 of the seasons Terran was probably slightly stronger, in the third, however, Zerg was pretty much fine in TvZ. The game was really back and forth and the better player won. AND THEN the mine patch came.
Keep telling yourself that.
That is indeed a very mature way to argue!
Maybe if there was an argument to be had (there wasn't).
What so Zergs weren't starting to figure out how to mitigate the widowmine, weren't starting to do better and the patch wasn't at all premature or potentially damaging long-term?
On February 08 2014 05:39 Plansix wrote: If you nerf blink stalker openings and oracle opens to much, you just end up with turtle toss, which no one wants. If Terran needs more options, make that possible through scouting or other routes. Nerfing effective builds is not the way to go. Buffing underused strats is better.
You also don't want a game with too many amazing early game/all-in possibilities. Blink is too strong right now, it needs to be looked at.
No, thanks. Blink research was already nerfed by about 70 seconds (iirc) in HOTS. Reduce the vision of the MSC to 11 (as with all other flyers). That will help with countering blink play. Make TW an upgrade at Core. That will help with blink all-ins.
Continue tweaking PO (by looking at range and casting range).
But, don't nerf an option that allows for pressure and good active play. The game is worse as a result.
Edit/ Sorry, 30 seconds, I think. I'll have to check that.
Don't nerf an option that allows for pressure and good active play? Then why were hellbats nerfed?
From what I remember, it was because TvT had become a Hellbat fest. I was in two minds about that patch (as you may or may not know, I generally dislike most, if not all, patches) but it seemed the right way to go as a once cool match-up (TvT) had become just silly. If they want to return the Hellbat to 2 cargo space, rather than 4 that would be fine with me.
Note also, that I was against the WM nerf. But that was because of all the ZvT complaining. A stronger WM and 4 HB per Medivac seems OK to me. Heck, I'd even be on board with looking at stim timings again (as that is one powerful upgrade). But, you would have to consider the effect of all of this on TvZ too (I am not sure if a big stim buff would not be too much).
Unfortunately, generally speaking Blizzard have been very unwilling to roll back any patch. Realistically speaking I doubt any of these will happen. But, if nerfs to Protoss are to happen. Then, I'd like them to be good and intelligent tweaks rather than massive swings of the nerf hammer. This way Protoss get to still enjoy some of their new found HOTS flexibility while giving some back to Terran too. That way, hopefully, both races are better off in aggregate and Starcraft itself better off as a result.
Nobody has disagreed with the hellbat nerfs - but the amount they nerfed them. It was not a TvT nerf despite whatever they tell you: it was an accross the board nerf to Terran openings.
WM nerf was 'because TvZ is getting stale', another pretty terrible reason. Balance in TvZ was looking really good with the better player usually winning (Unlike now - see any LR threat). The problem was that the same game over and over and over and over got boring so Mines got nerfed.
I don't agree with that. That patch came after a whole bunch of rather silly TvT games. The unit itself was OK in TvZ and TvP from what I remember. I see no reason why Blizzard would lie. The nerf may have been over-heavy (I can't say for sure). But this is why, along with the WM nerf, I am generally against patching. Patches tend to cause more trouble than they are worth.
Bold position to hold (against patching) given the current state of the game.
My preferred approach to Blizzard's balancing is an adaptation of the UK's 4 stage strategy to Foreign Policy from Yes, Prime Minister.
On February 08 2014 07:41 Wombat_NI wrote: WM nerf was premature IMO, just like the Queen patch in that it really did look that top Zergs were really figuring out ways to engage optimally anyway.
Win rates were really close to 50/50 before the nerf, and now I think that muta/ling vs bio/mine/thor favours zerg. I do feel the mine was probably too good pre nerf, but the tank "buff" was in no way adequate compensation.
I really miss that from BW, there was tons of OP shit, but it was ok since everyone had it. As soon as something sticks out in SC2 it gets mauled with the nerfhammer and some other unit is given a speed increase for no apparent reason.
Win rates were not 50/50 pre-nerf, they were grossly in T's favor, Soulkey was the only Zerg who could take games off Terran, and he had to vastly outplay his opponent to do so. Imbalanced TvZ was the primary reason we only got 2 Z's in '13 WCS Global Finals. WM nerf was not premature; in fact it was the complete opposite -- it should have been implemented way before it was, and part of the reason it took so long was because Zergs don't whine near as much, and when they do they are chastised and suppressed far more readily than the other races, I mean compare the amount of whine from Z during '13 WCS Global Finals versus what we get from Terrans now, the ratio is like 1:∞.
No. '113 WCS Global Finals include WCS points from 2 seasons, in which 2 of the seasons Terran was probably slightly stronger, in the third, however, Zerg was pretty much fine in TvZ. The game was really back and forth and the better player won. AND THEN the mine patch came.
Keep telling yourself that.
That is indeed a very mature way to argue!
Maybe if there was an argument to be had (there wasn't).
What so Zergs weren't starting to figure out how to mitigate the widowmine, weren't starting to do better and the patch wasn't at all premature or potentially damaging long-term?
He's just cherry picking; ignoring posts that provide arguments and then claiming there is no argument to be had. Classic troll.
On February 08 2014 08:52 Wombat_NI wrote: A fine clip nonetheless
Yes, but doing nothing during the era of blatantly lopsided results - at least gradual and measured changes are to be expected. Blizzard has done exactly that, and I am very happy with it. I just don't agree with aZealot's use of the clip in in the context of the thread.
On February 08 2014 05:39 Plansix wrote: If you nerf blink stalker openings and oracle opens to much, you just end up with turtle toss, which no one wants. If Terran needs more options, make that possible through scouting or other routes. Nerfing effective builds is not the way to go. Buffing underused strats is better.
You also don't want a game with too many amazing early game/all-in possibilities. Blink is too strong right now, it needs to be looked at.
No, thanks. Blink research was already nerfed by about 70 seconds (iirc) in HOTS. Reduce the vision of the MSC to 11 (as with all other flyers). That will help with countering blink play. Make TW an upgrade at Core. That will help with blink all-ins.
Continue tweaking PO (by looking at range and casting range).
But, don't nerf an option that allows for pressure and good active play. The game is worse as a result.
Edit/ Sorry, 30 seconds, I think. I'll have to check that.
Don't nerf an option that allows for pressure and good active play? Then why were hellbats nerfed?
From what I remember, it was because TvT had become a Hellbat fest. I was in two minds about that patch (as you may or may not know, I generally dislike most, if not all, patches) but it seemed the right way to go as a once cool match-up (TvT) had become just silly. If they want to return the Hellbat to 2 cargo space, rather than 4 that would be fine with me.
Note also, that I was against the WM nerf. But that was because of all the ZvT complaining. A stronger WM and 4 HB per Medivac seems OK to me. Heck, I'd even be on board with looking at stim timings again (as that is one powerful upgrade). But, you would have to consider the effect of all of this on TvZ too (I am not sure if a big stim buff would not be too much).
Unfortunately, generally speaking Blizzard have been very unwilling to roll back any patch. Realistically speaking I doubt any of these will happen. But, if nerfs to Protoss are to happen. Then, I'd like them to be good and intelligent tweaks rather than massive swings of the nerf hammer. This way Protoss get to still enjoy some of their new found HOTS flexibility while giving some back to Terran too. That way, hopefully, both races are better off in aggregate and Starcraft itself better off as a result.
Nobody has disagreed with the hellbat nerfs - but the amount they nerfed them. It was not a TvT nerf despite whatever they tell you: it was an accross the board nerf to Terran openings.
WM nerf was 'because TvZ is getting stale', another pretty terrible reason. Balance in TvZ was looking really good with the better player usually winning (Unlike now - see any LR threat). The problem was that the same game over and over and over and over got boring so Mines got nerfed.
I don't agree with that. That patch came after a whole bunch of rather silly TvT games. The unit itself was OK in TvZ and TvP from what I remember. I see no reason why Blizzard would lie. The nerf may have been over-heavy (I can't say for sure). But this is why, along with the WM nerf, I am generally against patching. Patches tend to cause more trouble than they are worth.
Bold position to hold (against patching) given the current state of the game.
My preferred approach to Blizzard's balancing is an adaptation of the UK's 4 stage strategy to Foreign Policy from Yes, Prime Minister.
Partially facetious? God I hope completely facetious. The skit appears to poke fun at the ineptitude of the UK foreign ministry.
Hahaha, it is wholly tongue in cheek from me and having a laugh! :D
And yeah, mate. There are times when you do need to patch. I accept that. (Generally, however, it's difficult to know when and what - no-one knows the totality of the game.) But, right now for example, I don't like the constriction in Terran play in TvP (the numbers are not the point). So, I think Blizzard should be tweaking Protoss by looking at PO, MSC vision and the Time Warp.
Btw, if I remember right, you used to be a lot more in favour of patches and Blizzard intervention, no? (Or have I got that wrong?) You now seem to be in favour of a slow and incremental approach. What changed your mind?
EPT
