• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 18:17
CEST 00:17
KST 07:17
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL21] Ro16 Preview Pt2: All Star10Team Liquid Map Contest #22 - The Finalists16[ASL21] Ro16 Preview Pt1: Fresh Flow9[ASL21] Ro24 Preview Pt2: News Flash10[ASL21] Ro24 Preview Pt1: New Chaos0
Community News
2026 GSL Season 1 Qualifiers13Maestros of the Game 2 announced82026 GSL Tour plans announced14Weekly Cups (April 6-12): herO doubles, "Villains" prevail1MaNa leaves Team Liquid24
StarCraft 2
General
Maestros of the Game 2 announced Team Liquid Map Contest #22 - The Finalists MaNa leaves Team Liquid 2026 GSL Tour plans announced Blizzard Classic Cup @ BlizzCon 2026 - $100k prize pool
Tourneys
Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament 2026 GSL Season 1 Qualifiers GSL CK: More events planned pending crowdfunding RSL Revival: Season 5 - Qualifiers and Main Event Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2)
Strategy
Custom Maps
[D]RTS in all its shapes and glory <3 [A] Nemrods 1/4 players [M] (2) Frigid Storage
External Content
Mutation # 522 Flip My Base The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 521 Memorable Boss Mutation # 520 Moving Fees
Brood War
General
Pros React To: ASL S21, Ro.16 Group C ASL21 General Discussion BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ [TOOL] Starcraft Chat Translator Data needed
Tourneys
[ASL21] Ro16 Group C [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [ASL21] Ro16 Group D [ASL21] Ro16 Group B
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers What's the deal with APM & what's its true value Any training maps people recommend? Fighting Spirit mining rates
Other Games
General Games
Diablo IV Nintendo Switch Thread Dawn of War IV Starcraft Tabletop Miniature Game General RTS Discussion Thread
Dota 2
The Story of Wings Gaming
League of Legends
G2 just beat GenG in First stand
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
Vanilla Mini Mafia Mafia Game Mode Feedback/Ideas TL Mafia Community Thread Five o'clock TL Mafia
Community
General
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine US Politics Mega-thread Canadian Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread YouTube Thread
Fan Clubs
The IdrA Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece [Req][Books] Good Fantasy/SciFi books Movie Discussion!
Sports
McBoner: A hockey love story 2024 - 2026 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion Cricket [SPORT]
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
[G] How to Block Livestream Ads
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Sexual Health Of Gamers
TrAiDoS
lurker extra damage testi…
StaticNine
Broowar part 2
qwaykee
Funny Nicknames
LUCKY_NOOB
Iranian anarchists: organize…
XenOsky
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 2962 users

Feb 10 Proposed Changes: Pro Opinions - Page 5

Forum Index > SC2 General
343 CommentsPost a Reply
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 16 17 18 Next All
Sufinsil
Profile Joined January 2011
United States760 Posts
February 11 2014 20:55 GMT
#81
Oracle heavy metagame, and also because of the maps, of which many are good for blink possibly because mapmakers want the reaper to be able to get scouting information)


They could always make bases be surrounded by areas that require two blinks to get into the base, while reapers can easily still get in.


I do like qxc's point 2 and 3 suggestion for SH. Something to try.

I always though the infested terran changes were a bit extreme. At least allow them weapon upgrades.

Maybe give Devourer spores to Corrupters in some form?
aZealot
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
New Zealand5447 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-02-11 20:56:07
February 11 2014 20:55 GMT
#82
Good read, thanks. Quite informative. Good to see general agreement on the Blink nerf. It is one of the more stupid ideas Blizzard have ever come up with. I have to wonder if it is a case of a diversion so that we all engage in a discussion of Blink and Stalkers while Blizzard carry on peacefully with the rest of the patch. A classic case of bait and switch.

Not sure if it is working all that effectively though, given the ongoing discussion on SH.
KT best KT ~ 2014
Waise
Profile Joined June 2013
3165 Posts
February 11 2014 20:56 GMT
#83
On February 12 2014 05:25 Survivor61316 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 12 2014 05:00 Waise wrote:
On February 12 2014 04:53 Survivor61316 wrote:
I'm sorry qxc, but those were some terrible proposed changes to the sh..

Why don't they just decrease the time between waves and shorten the timer until the locusts die. Zerg would no longer be able to hit you with free units from 1/3 the way across the map, and would have to keep their sh much closer to the opponents army. Combine this with a reduction to the burrow time for the swarm host, and suddenly Zergs have to continue to reposition them, which doesnt allow for them to just passively keep them next to a great wall of spores and spines. Also, a quicker burrow time would mean that they could be used for hit and run tactics around the map, which should add to the watchability/playability of the MU.

zerg already has to aggressively reposition their SH to succeed in high level play. SH already require good multitasking and map awareness. this is not the issue with SH at all. please stop suggesting this

No they don't. They plant them and thats about the end of it. Thats why they can also plant static d, because the sh aren't going anywhere anytime soon.
they plant static d AROUND THE MAP so the swarm hosts can be MOVED around the map without support from the rest of the army. do you even watch pro level swarm host games? what you're saying is simply not true of high level play. if you're losing to zergs who never move their swarm hosts, your problem is with your own play, not theirs.
Teoita
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
Italy12246 Posts
February 11 2014 20:58 GMT
#84
On February 12 2014 05:52 Zealously wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 12 2014 05:49 shivver wrote:
If they put that hydra buff through, it will break 2 base immortal style all ins I don't think you will ever see one again.


Not that I'm necessarily advocating that one particular buff, but would it really be so bad to shake up the repertoir of builds and styles (for all races) a bit? If the immortal all-in were to become less effective but be replaced by something else, that's something I wouldn't mind seeing.


We have allined zergs with literally every protoss unit except carriers and tempest. At this point it's safe to say there aren't many undiscovered 2base pvz timings out there. Soultrain just so happens to be the most powerful.
ModeratorProtoss all-ins are like a wok. You can throw whatever you want in there and it will turn out alright.
aeligos
Profile Joined January 2013
United States172 Posts
February 11 2014 21:00 GMT
#85
Wow. I'm really surprised at the very limited view points made by the pros.

They take a proposed change and semi-analyze the change as it relates to only *few* variables while ignoring the other potential variables.

My brain hurts now. Seriously.
libera te tvtemet ex inferis A.'.A.'.
stuchiu
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
Fiddler's Green42661 Posts
February 11 2014 21:01 GMT
#86
On February 12 2014 05:58 Teoita wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 12 2014 05:52 Zealously wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:49 shivver wrote:
If they put that hydra buff through, it will break 2 base immortal style all ins I don't think you will ever see one again.


Not that I'm necessarily advocating that one particular buff, but would it really be so bad to shake up the repertoir of builds and styles (for all races) a bit? If the immortal all-in were to become less effective but be replaced by something else, that's something I wouldn't mind seeing.


We have allined zergs with literally every protoss unit except carriers and tempest. At this point it's safe to say there aren't many undiscovered 2base pvz timings out there. Soultrain just so happens to be the most powerful.


Hongun used a 2 base carrier allin before. So just tempest.
Moderator
Deleted User 137586
Profile Joined January 2011
7859 Posts
February 11 2014 21:03 GMT
#87
On February 12 2014 05:23 ZeromuS wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 12 2014 05:13 tenklavir wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:00 ZeromuS wrote:
On February 12 2014 04:19 avilo wrote:
On February 12 2014 03:53 NonY wrote:
Big thing about the blink cooldown change is mobility. Blink stalkers are typically pretty safe to explore the map, even when marauders or ling/roach could also be on the field. However, it's the second blink that really gets you to safety when running from those things. If the second blink is delayed 5 seconds, I think it'll force protoss to be much more passive with stalkers. It crosses a threshold where you run a risk of the stalkers getting caught and they all die.

In my opinion, Blizzard clearly isn't just targeting the PvT blink all-ins with the blink change. But why they would want to nerf blink in general is beyond me. Stalkers kinda suck in general. They're a niche unit that becomes viable in a decent number of situations only because of blink.


The problem is right now there's no risk at all to really using blink stalkers in PvT. You can virtually always escape every single time either from the Terran's base after offensive blinks, or you can do the fake blink macro builds and never lose any stalkers but still heavily pressure Terran at no risk whatsoever to yourself.

Making blink require more thought to use and have more risk associated to it will go a long way to help TvP balance because right now the balance of TvP is quite abysmal. There are too, too many PvT openings that have low risks associated with them, blink probably being the one that almost always puts the Protoss player ahead, or at the very worst even which is pretty lame.

With 9 range vision the MsC cannot provide adequate vision from a safe range of the positioning of all of terran forces. This means protoss players cannot blink into a terran base with full knowledge of the terran army position every time without also gaining extra info from a poke at the front for example to see what is there.

If protoss does want that vision of terran base they must commit the MsC close enough that it is danger of taking damage or being killed.

Why exactly is Protoss entitled to a safe blink into the Terran base? The whole idea is that there should be some risk involved in this kind of play, which is exactly why so many Terran hate (and continue to hate) the Oracle change - an aggressive, potentially high-reward play should come with some degree of risk.

Show nested quote +

I am specifically mentioning how the MsC nerf is already adding a lot more risk to the blink options vs Terran. I don't see what you are arguing?

If you cant see everything its not a free safe blink. This provides more chances for terran to abuse either the more limited vision of the mama core leading to quick poor blink decisions or for terran to damage or kill the mothership core.

Further the widow mine change means its even more effective vs one base blink all ins if the terran player has a fact coming see Twilight or a lot of stalkers and no natural.

Will it help vs blink expands? Not specifically, I mean, Protoss can still make 6 - 8 stalkers off 2 base with blink and pressure terran while taking a third, but that build doesnt get a lot of gates. If the Protoss player gets a lot of gates and doesnt commit to a big attack instead expanding with 2 gas to a third base terran should have a timing to hurt the protoss player in some way or get ahead in tech/upgrades pretty easily. The reaction from terran will require scouting and reaction to that scouting which is a metagame thing that slowly evolves and grows as the Terrans deal with it more. But thats different from balance, thats an issue of understanding from both sides. Once terran figures out the reaction Protoss will either stop doing it or retool the build to be more safe allowing terran less timing options, but more stable opportunities to expand or not lose much to the small stalker squad assuming good reactions. Thats how the game evolves


Show nested quote +
On February 12 2014 05:23 Plansix wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:18 TimKim0713 wrote:
Why so low terran contributors...

Need korean opinions as well

As always, teamliquid get the answers from people that respond. I am sure they would be happy to publish any pros opinion if they took the time to write it down.


YES! We had a shorter deadline for this one and a few things compound the smaller number of terrans:

- fewer foreign terrans than the other races in general
- fewer terrans willing to provide feedback in general (we hope as these releases get more positive answers, people open up to contributing)
- some Koreans who were available and willing this time provided either limited comments or ones that were a little off topic or not related to this patch note

So I hope you can understand. If any pro Terrans want to contribute to the next one PM and I will try to include you in the next one, as long as you have a decently level head, as we try to focus on people who can consolidate their race bias and look at the game a little more objectively (pure objectivity is impossible though so we take that with a grain of salt)


Are you saying that some Korean terrans did contribute but you didn't include them in the OP? Why would you do that? Even if it's off topic or ``limited'' (whatever that means), at least we understand what they're thinking about. In the end, those guys did want to give you their feedback.
Cry 'havoc' and let slip the dogs of war
Falling
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
Canada11497 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-02-11 21:11:40
February 11 2014 21:09 GMT
#88
This is a very cool initiative.

The combination of incredibly high range, and constantly spawning free units that soak and deal damage allows players to take an incredibly passive stance in the game where the cost efficiency of static defense can be combined with the cost efficiency of not spending money to make ground units. The ability of the swarm host to drag games out to absurd lengths needs to be addressed and it needs to be addressed now before any other change.


Totally called this. SH as they currently stand lend themselves towards more passive, defensive play. Might be a meta-game thing that will switch around. But they tend towards passivity and safe play.

Decreasing cooldown on Stalkers makes me sad
Blink micro is some of the better sort of micro in SC2.
Moderator"In Trump We Trust," says the Golden Goat of Mar a Lago. Have faith and believe! Trump moves in mysterious ways. Like the wind he blows where he pleases...
LikeTheSnow
Profile Joined April 2012
Italy16 Posts
February 11 2014 21:10 GMT
#89
They're nerfing and buffing too many things at once. If the main problem are blink allins in PvT, they should try to nerf/buff one thing at a time and see if it works, otherwise the game will completely change for Protoss.

And Swarm Hosts have to be nerfed in some way, or make the locusts costs money as qxc said, or maybe giving energy to SH, so they have to use locusts carefully. Or maybe make locusts spawn only if there are enemy units in their vision range. There are many ways to fix that unit, but they don't do anything
Sprouter
Profile Joined December 2009
United States1724 Posts
February 11 2014 21:10 GMT
#90
Buffs tempests but not carriers and leaves swarm hosts alone. Maybe they feel that the SH are in that weird spot where it'll be too strong/weak if they change it. I think it would be cool if SH were more lurker-esque and had to get fairly close to do damage. But why do that when you can replace them with lurkers? Maybe remove swarm hosts and buff nydus and overlords? I think a cool change would be to make the overlord creep drop generate more creep initially and remove/shorten the range over time mechanic.

I think it's a really sad state of affairs that they want to increase the cooldown on blink. Why not nerf how far stalkers can jump instead?
Waise
Profile Joined June 2013
3165 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-02-11 21:13:27
February 11 2014 21:12 GMT
#91
On February 12 2014 06:03 Ghanburighan wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 12 2014 05:23 ZeromuS wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:13 tenklavir wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:00 ZeromuS wrote:
On February 12 2014 04:19 avilo wrote:
On February 12 2014 03:53 NonY wrote:
Big thing about the blink cooldown change is mobility. Blink stalkers are typically pretty safe to explore the map, even when marauders or ling/roach could also be on the field. However, it's the second blink that really gets you to safety when running from those things. If the second blink is delayed 5 seconds, I think it'll force protoss to be much more passive with stalkers. It crosses a threshold where you run a risk of the stalkers getting caught and they all die.

In my opinion, Blizzard clearly isn't just targeting the PvT blink all-ins with the blink change. But why they would want to nerf blink in general is beyond me. Stalkers kinda suck in general. They're a niche unit that becomes viable in a decent number of situations only because of blink.


The problem is right now there's no risk at all to really using blink stalkers in PvT. You can virtually always escape every single time either from the Terran's base after offensive blinks, or you can do the fake blink macro builds and never lose any stalkers but still heavily pressure Terran at no risk whatsoever to yourself.

Making blink require more thought to use and have more risk associated to it will go a long way to help TvP balance because right now the balance of TvP is quite abysmal. There are too, too many PvT openings that have low risks associated with them, blink probably being the one that almost always puts the Protoss player ahead, or at the very worst even which is pretty lame.

With 9 range vision the MsC cannot provide adequate vision from a safe range of the positioning of all of terran forces. This means protoss players cannot blink into a terran base with full knowledge of the terran army position every time without also gaining extra info from a poke at the front for example to see what is there.

If protoss does want that vision of terran base they must commit the MsC close enough that it is danger of taking damage or being killed.

Why exactly is Protoss entitled to a safe blink into the Terran base? The whole idea is that there should be some risk involved in this kind of play, which is exactly why so many Terran hate (and continue to hate) the Oracle change - an aggressive, potentially high-reward play should come with some degree of risk.


I am specifically mentioning how the MsC nerf is already adding a lot more risk to the blink options vs Terran. I don't see what you are arguing?

If you cant see everything its not a free safe blink. This provides more chances for terran to abuse either the more limited vision of the mama core leading to quick poor blink decisions or for terran to damage or kill the mothership core.

Further the widow mine change means its even more effective vs one base blink all ins if the terran player has a fact coming see Twilight or a lot of stalkers and no natural.

Will it help vs blink expands? Not specifically, I mean, Protoss can still make 6 - 8 stalkers off 2 base with blink and pressure terran while taking a third, but that build doesnt get a lot of gates. If the Protoss player gets a lot of gates and doesnt commit to a big attack instead expanding with 2 gas to a third base terran should have a timing to hurt the protoss player in some way or get ahead in tech/upgrades pretty easily. The reaction from terran will require scouting and reaction to that scouting which is a metagame thing that slowly evolves and grows as the Terrans deal with it more. But thats different from balance, thats an issue of understanding from both sides. Once terran figures out the reaction Protoss will either stop doing it or retool the build to be more safe allowing terran less timing options, but more stable opportunities to expand or not lose much to the small stalker squad assuming good reactions. Thats how the game evolves


On February 12 2014 05:23 Plansix wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:18 TimKim0713 wrote:
Why so low terran contributors...

Need korean opinions as well

As always, teamliquid get the answers from people that respond. I am sure they would be happy to publish any pros opinion if they took the time to write it down.


YES! We had a shorter deadline for this one and a few things compound the smaller number of terrans:

- fewer foreign terrans than the other races in general
- fewer terrans willing to provide feedback in general (we hope as these releases get more positive answers, people open up to contributing)
- some Koreans who were available and willing this time provided either limited comments or ones that were a little off topic or not related to this patch note

So I hope you can understand. If any pro Terrans want to contribute to the next one PM and I will try to include you in the next one, as long as you have a decently level head, as we try to focus on people who can consolidate their race bias and look at the game a little more objectively (pure objectivity is impossible though so we take that with a grain of salt)


Are you saying that some Korean terrans did contribute but you didn't include them in the OP? Why would you do that? Even if it's off topic or ``limited'' (whatever that means), at least we understand what they're thinking about. In the end, those guys did want to give you their feedback.

it's probably a polite way of saying that some of the korean terrans' english wasn't strong enough to provide interesting answers. i think this thread is much better with only detailed responses like the one in the OP. if you throw in 10 koreans writing single sentences like "blink so weak too much nerf tt" it would be less readable and less interesting

not saying that to be culturally offensive, it's just a fact that not all kr players have perfect english and readable english content is better suited to an english language website. i'd say the same thing if a NA player didn't have an interesting response
Exitor45
Profile Joined August 2012
United States72 Posts
February 11 2014 21:14 GMT
#92
Overall, they seem like all good changes to me!
Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you react.
Survivor61316
Profile Joined July 2012
United States470 Posts
February 11 2014 21:14 GMT
#93
On February 12 2014 05:56 Waise wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 12 2014 05:25 Survivor61316 wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:00 Waise wrote:
On February 12 2014 04:53 Survivor61316 wrote:
I'm sorry qxc, but those were some terrible proposed changes to the sh..

Why don't they just decrease the time between waves and shorten the timer until the locusts die. Zerg would no longer be able to hit you with free units from 1/3 the way across the map, and would have to keep their sh much closer to the opponents army. Combine this with a reduction to the burrow time for the swarm host, and suddenly Zergs have to continue to reposition them, which doesnt allow for them to just passively keep them next to a great wall of spores and spines. Also, a quicker burrow time would mean that they could be used for hit and run tactics around the map, which should add to the watchability/playability of the MU.

zerg already has to aggressively reposition their SH to succeed in high level play. SH already require good multitasking and map awareness. this is not the issue with SH at all. please stop suggesting this

No they don't. They plant them and thats about the end of it. Thats why they can also plant static d, because the sh aren't going anywhere anytime soon.
they plant static d AROUND THE MAP so the swarm hosts can be MOVED around the map without support from the rest of the army. do you even watch pro level swarm host games? what you're saying is simply not true of high level play. if you're losing to zergs who never move their swarm hosts, your problem is with your own play, not theirs.

I play Terran man, I only know about this style from watching "high level" pro games..
Liquid Fighting
ZeromuS
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
Canada13407 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-02-11 21:22:59
February 11 2014 21:19 GMT
#94
On February 12 2014 06:03 Ghanburighan wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 12 2014 05:23 ZeromuS wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:13 tenklavir wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:00 ZeromuS wrote:
On February 12 2014 04:19 avilo wrote:
On February 12 2014 03:53 NonY wrote:
Big thing about the blink cooldown change is mobility. Blink stalkers are typically pretty safe to explore the map, even when marauders or ling/roach could also be on the field. However, it's the second blink that really gets you to safety when running from those things. If the second blink is delayed 5 seconds, I think it'll force protoss to be much more passive with stalkers. It crosses a threshold where you run a risk of the stalkers getting caught and they all die.

In my opinion, Blizzard clearly isn't just targeting the PvT blink all-ins with the blink change. But why they would want to nerf blink in general is beyond me. Stalkers kinda suck in general. They're a niche unit that becomes viable in a decent number of situations only because of blink.


The problem is right now there's no risk at all to really using blink stalkers in PvT. You can virtually always escape every single time either from the Terran's base after offensive blinks, or you can do the fake blink macro builds and never lose any stalkers but still heavily pressure Terran at no risk whatsoever to yourself.

Making blink require more thought to use and have more risk associated to it will go a long way to help TvP balance because right now the balance of TvP is quite abysmal. There are too, too many PvT openings that have low risks associated with them, blink probably being the one that almost always puts the Protoss player ahead, or at the very worst even which is pretty lame.

With 9 range vision the MsC cannot provide adequate vision from a safe range of the positioning of all of terran forces. This means protoss players cannot blink into a terran base with full knowledge of the terran army position every time without also gaining extra info from a poke at the front for example to see what is there.

If protoss does want that vision of terran base they must commit the MsC close enough that it is danger of taking damage or being killed.

Why exactly is Protoss entitled to a safe blink into the Terran base? The whole idea is that there should be some risk involved in this kind of play, which is exactly why so many Terran hate (and continue to hate) the Oracle change - an aggressive, potentially high-reward play should come with some degree of risk.


I am specifically mentioning how the MsC nerf is already adding a lot more risk to the blink options vs Terran. I don't see what you are arguing?

If you cant see everything its not a free safe blink. This provides more chances for terran to abuse either the more limited vision of the mama core leading to quick poor blink decisions or for terran to damage or kill the mothership core.

Further the widow mine change means its even more effective vs one base blink all ins if the terran player has a fact coming see Twilight or a lot of stalkers and no natural.

Will it help vs blink expands? Not specifically, I mean, Protoss can still make 6 - 8 stalkers off 2 base with blink and pressure terran while taking a third, but that build doesnt get a lot of gates. If the Protoss player gets a lot of gates and doesnt commit to a big attack instead expanding with 2 gas to a third base terran should have a timing to hurt the protoss player in some way or get ahead in tech/upgrades pretty easily. The reaction from terran will require scouting and reaction to that scouting which is a metagame thing that slowly evolves and grows as the Terrans deal with it more. But thats different from balance, thats an issue of understanding from both sides. Once terran figures out the reaction Protoss will either stop doing it or retool the build to be more safe allowing terran less timing options, but more stable opportunities to expand or not lose much to the small stalker squad assuming good reactions. Thats how the game evolves


On February 12 2014 05:23 Plansix wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:18 TimKim0713 wrote:
Why so low terran contributors...

Need korean opinions as well

As always, teamliquid get the answers from people that respond. I am sure they would be happy to publish any pros opinion if they took the time to write it down.


YES! We had a shorter deadline for this one and a few things compound the smaller number of terrans:

- fewer foreign terrans than the other races in general
- fewer terrans willing to provide feedback in general (we hope as these releases get more positive answers, people open up to contributing)
- some Koreans who were available and willing this time provided either limited comments or ones that were a little off topic or not related to this patch note

So I hope you can understand. If any pro Terrans want to contribute to the next one PM and I will try to include you in the next one, as long as you have a decently level head, as we try to focus on people who can consolidate their race bias and look at the game a little more objectively (pure objectivity is impossible though so we take that with a grain of salt)


Are you saying that some Korean terrans did contribute but you didn't include them in the OP? Why would you do that? Even if it's off topic or ``limited'' (whatever that means), at least we understand what they're thinking about. In the end, those guys did want to give you their feedback.


I think its fair to reserve some editorial judgement. And I have always believed in being very open. When I say limited, I mean the full impact of the potential change was either not expressed well. Keep in mind we do not have access to every single pro player, and Waxangel does not always have the ability to converse with the Koreans in Hangul because he does live a life. We wanted to release this quickly while it is still pertinent and to give the community some additional perspectives to digest, which is a goal I feel we achieved. There are a series of varying opinions from different races and for the most part everyone was quite objective (as much as possible) and provided different perspectives and reasoning.

Jjakji chose not to make a comment. Ryung and Crank were unavailable considering our timeline. MMA provided some comments and they are included as you can see in the article.

As for your concerns regarding not including information here is a very good example from Mouz Dear:

"if sc2 need protoss nerf , first of all DK must do oracle roll back
if it will be changed , specially blink cool down .. toss will be stupid" (via SeoHyun via Nathanias)

With limited access we only have so much we can do to contact and enter into discussion to clarify things. On its own, this time we didn't get very easily understood or clear feedback. So here we see a recommendation to nerf the oracle (which is outside the scope of our article and not its aim) and we also see no mention of mothership core. We get a mention of "blink cooldown .. toss will be stupid", while the intention is there that its a bad change, it adds very little to overall article and no additional information that isn't already presented more eloquently and with more nuance than the English speaking professional players we asked.

We need to remember that Koreans are not magical creatures from a far away land. They can be just as biased as any one else, and the language barrier doesn't help. We also still need people to be willing to take part and answer. I had as my aim to ask people who are generally not going to be extremely biased and I feel as though I succeeded in that regard.
StrategyRTS forever | @ZeromuS_plays | www.twitch.tv/Zeromus_
Survivor61316
Profile Joined July 2012
United States470 Posts
February 11 2014 21:24 GMT
#95
On February 12 2014 06:19 ZeromuS wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 12 2014 06:03 Ghanburighan wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:23 ZeromuS wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:13 tenklavir wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:00 ZeromuS wrote:
On February 12 2014 04:19 avilo wrote:
On February 12 2014 03:53 NonY wrote:
Big thing about the blink cooldown change is mobility. Blink stalkers are typically pretty safe to explore the map, even when marauders or ling/roach could also be on the field. However, it's the second blink that really gets you to safety when running from those things. If the second blink is delayed 5 seconds, I think it'll force protoss to be much more passive with stalkers. It crosses a threshold where you run a risk of the stalkers getting caught and they all die.

In my opinion, Blizzard clearly isn't just targeting the PvT blink all-ins with the blink change. But why they would want to nerf blink in general is beyond me. Stalkers kinda suck in general. They're a niche unit that becomes viable in a decent number of situations only because of blink.


The problem is right now there's no risk at all to really using blink stalkers in PvT. You can virtually always escape every single time either from the Terran's base after offensive blinks, or you can do the fake blink macro builds and never lose any stalkers but still heavily pressure Terran at no risk whatsoever to yourself.

Making blink require more thought to use and have more risk associated to it will go a long way to help TvP balance because right now the balance of TvP is quite abysmal. There are too, too many PvT openings that have low risks associated with them, blink probably being the one that almost always puts the Protoss player ahead, or at the very worst even which is pretty lame.

With 9 range vision the MsC cannot provide adequate vision from a safe range of the positioning of all of terran forces. This means protoss players cannot blink into a terran base with full knowledge of the terran army position every time without also gaining extra info from a poke at the front for example to see what is there.

If protoss does want that vision of terran base they must commit the MsC close enough that it is danger of taking damage or being killed.

Why exactly is Protoss entitled to a safe blink into the Terran base? The whole idea is that there should be some risk involved in this kind of play, which is exactly why so many Terran hate (and continue to hate) the Oracle change - an aggressive, potentially high-reward play should come with some degree of risk.


I am specifically mentioning how the MsC nerf is already adding a lot more risk to the blink options vs Terran. I don't see what you are arguing?

If you cant see everything its not a free safe blink. This provides more chances for terran to abuse either the more limited vision of the mama core leading to quick poor blink decisions or for terran to damage or kill the mothership core.

Further the widow mine change means its even more effective vs one base blink all ins if the terran player has a fact coming see Twilight or a lot of stalkers and no natural.

Will it help vs blink expands? Not specifically, I mean, Protoss can still make 6 - 8 stalkers off 2 base with blink and pressure terran while taking a third, but that build doesnt get a lot of gates. If the Protoss player gets a lot of gates and doesnt commit to a big attack instead expanding with 2 gas to a third base terran should have a timing to hurt the protoss player in some way or get ahead in tech/upgrades pretty easily. The reaction from terran will require scouting and reaction to that scouting which is a metagame thing that slowly evolves and grows as the Terrans deal with it more. But thats different from balance, thats an issue of understanding from both sides. Once terran figures out the reaction Protoss will either stop doing it or retool the build to be more safe allowing terran less timing options, but more stable opportunities to expand or not lose much to the small stalker squad assuming good reactions. Thats how the game evolves


On February 12 2014 05:23 Plansix wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:18 TimKim0713 wrote:
Why so low terran contributors...

Need korean opinions as well

As always, teamliquid get the answers from people that respond. I am sure they would be happy to publish any pros opinion if they took the time to write it down.


YES! We had a shorter deadline for this one and a few things compound the smaller number of terrans:

- fewer foreign terrans than the other races in general
- fewer terrans willing to provide feedback in general (we hope as these releases get more positive answers, people open up to contributing)
- some Koreans who were available and willing this time provided either limited comments or ones that were a little off topic or not related to this patch note

So I hope you can understand. If any pro Terrans want to contribute to the next one PM and I will try to include you in the next one, as long as you have a decently level head, as we try to focus on people who can consolidate their race bias and look at the game a little more objectively (pure objectivity is impossible though so we take that with a grain of salt)


Are you saying that some Korean terrans did contribute but you didn't include them in the OP? Why would you do that? Even if it's off topic or ``limited'' (whatever that means), at least we understand what they're thinking about. In the end, those guys did want to give you their feedback.


We need to remember that Koreans are not magical creatures from a far away land. They can be just as biased as any one else, and the language barrier doesn't help. We also still need people to be willing to take part and answer. I had as my aim to ask people who are generally not going to be extremely biased and I feel as though I succeeded in that regard.
And yet you asked desrow?
Liquid Fighting
Falling
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
Canada11497 Posts
February 11 2014 21:29 GMT
#96
Oh come now. What desrow had to say was very even handed- map issues, zerg lacks options vs skytoss, etc.
Moderator"In Trump We Trust," says the Golden Goat of Mar a Lago. Have faith and believe! Trump moves in mysterious ways. Like the wind he blows where he pleases...
pure.Wasted
Profile Blog Joined December 2008
Canada4701 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-02-11 21:32:45
February 11 2014 21:29 GMT
#97
On February 12 2014 06:19 ZeromuS wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 12 2014 06:03 Ghanburighan wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:23 ZeromuS wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:13 tenklavir wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:00 ZeromuS wrote:
On February 12 2014 04:19 avilo wrote:
On February 12 2014 03:53 NonY wrote:
Big thing about the blink cooldown change is mobility. Blink stalkers are typically pretty safe to explore the map, even when marauders or ling/roach could also be on the field. However, it's the second blink that really gets you to safety when running from those things. If the second blink is delayed 5 seconds, I think it'll force protoss to be much more passive with stalkers. It crosses a threshold where you run a risk of the stalkers getting caught and they all die.

In my opinion, Blizzard clearly isn't just targeting the PvT blink all-ins with the blink change. But why they would want to nerf blink in general is beyond me. Stalkers kinda suck in general. They're a niche unit that becomes viable in a decent number of situations only because of blink.


The problem is right now there's no risk at all to really using blink stalkers in PvT. You can virtually always escape every single time either from the Terran's base after offensive blinks, or you can do the fake blink macro builds and never lose any stalkers but still heavily pressure Terran at no risk whatsoever to yourself.

Making blink require more thought to use and have more risk associated to it will go a long way to help TvP balance because right now the balance of TvP is quite abysmal. There are too, too many PvT openings that have low risks associated with them, blink probably being the one that almost always puts the Protoss player ahead, or at the very worst even which is pretty lame.

With 9 range vision the MsC cannot provide adequate vision from a safe range of the positioning of all of terran forces. This means protoss players cannot blink into a terran base with full knowledge of the terran army position every time without also gaining extra info from a poke at the front for example to see what is there.

If protoss does want that vision of terran base they must commit the MsC close enough that it is danger of taking damage or being killed.

Why exactly is Protoss entitled to a safe blink into the Terran base? The whole idea is that there should be some risk involved in this kind of play, which is exactly why so many Terran hate (and continue to hate) the Oracle change - an aggressive, potentially high-reward play should come with some degree of risk.


I am specifically mentioning how the MsC nerf is already adding a lot more risk to the blink options vs Terran. I don't see what you are arguing?

If you cant see everything its not a free safe blink. This provides more chances for terran to abuse either the more limited vision of the mama core leading to quick poor blink decisions or for terran to damage or kill the mothership core.

Further the widow mine change means its even more effective vs one base blink all ins if the terran player has a fact coming see Twilight or a lot of stalkers and no natural.

Will it help vs blink expands? Not specifically, I mean, Protoss can still make 6 - 8 stalkers off 2 base with blink and pressure terran while taking a third, but that build doesnt get a lot of gates. If the Protoss player gets a lot of gates and doesnt commit to a big attack instead expanding with 2 gas to a third base terran should have a timing to hurt the protoss player in some way or get ahead in tech/upgrades pretty easily. The reaction from terran will require scouting and reaction to that scouting which is a metagame thing that slowly evolves and grows as the Terrans deal with it more. But thats different from balance, thats an issue of understanding from both sides. Once terran figures out the reaction Protoss will either stop doing it or retool the build to be more safe allowing terran less timing options, but more stable opportunities to expand or not lose much to the small stalker squad assuming good reactions. Thats how the game evolves


On February 12 2014 05:23 Plansix wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:18 TimKim0713 wrote:
Why so low terran contributors...

Need korean opinions as well

As always, teamliquid get the answers from people that respond. I am sure they would be happy to publish any pros opinion if they took the time to write it down.


YES! We had a shorter deadline for this one and a few things compound the smaller number of terrans:

- fewer foreign terrans than the other races in general
- fewer terrans willing to provide feedback in general (we hope as these releases get more positive answers, people open up to contributing)
- some Koreans who were available and willing this time provided either limited comments or ones that were a little off topic or not related to this patch note

So I hope you can understand. If any pro Terrans want to contribute to the next one PM and I will try to include you in the next one, as long as you have a decently level head, as we try to focus on people who can consolidate their race bias and look at the game a little more objectively (pure objectivity is impossible though so we take that with a grain of salt)


Are you saying that some Korean terrans did contribute but you didn't include them in the OP? Why would you do that? Even if it's off topic or ``limited'' (whatever that means), at least we understand what they're thinking about. In the end, those guys did want to give you their feedback.


I think its fair to reserve some editorial judgement. And I have always believed in being very open. When I say limited, I mean the full impact of the potential change was either not expressed well. Keep in mind we do not have access to every single pro player, and Waxangel does not always have the ability to converse with the Koreans in Hangul because he does live a life. We wanted to release this quickly while it is still pertinent and to give the community some additional perspectives to digest, which is a goal I feel we achieved. There are a series of varying opinions from different races and for the most part everyone was quite objective (as much as possible) and provided different perspectives and reasoning.

Jjakji chose not to make a comment. Ryung and Crank were unavailable considering our timeline. MMA provided some comments and they are included as you can see in the article.

As for your concerns regarding not including information here is a very good example from Mouz Dear:

"if sc2 need protoss nerf , first of all DK must do oracle roll back
if it will be changed , specially blink cool down .. toss will be stupid" (via SeoHyun via Nathanias)

With limited access we only have so much we can do to contact and enter into discussion to clarify things. On its own, this time we didn't get very easily understood or clear feedback. So here we see a recommendation to nerf the oracle (which is outside the scope of our article and not its aim) and we also see no mention of mothership core. We get a mention of "blink cooldown .. toss will be stupid", while the intention is there that its a bad change, it adds very little to overall article and no additional information that isn't already presented more eloquently and with more nuance than the English speaking professional players we asked.

We need to remember that Koreans are not magical creatures from a far away land. They can be just as biased as any one else, and the language barrier doesn't help. We also still need people to be willing to take part and answer. I had as my aim to ask people who are generally not going to be extremely biased and I feel as though I succeeded in that regard.


I totally respect your guys editorial judgment, but just for the record, I think that the sentiment "nerf Oracle before touching anything else" adds something valuable to the discussion. Even if some of these changes go through, conversations about the Oracle will still probably be warranted. What Dear unfortunately doesn't address is whether he thinks Oracles are the only problem in PvT or one of the biggest or what.
INna Maru-da-FanTa, Bbaby, TY Dream that I'm Flashing you
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
February 11 2014 21:30 GMT
#98
On February 12 2014 06:24 Survivor61316 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 12 2014 06:19 ZeromuS wrote:
On February 12 2014 06:03 Ghanburighan wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:23 ZeromuS wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:13 tenklavir wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:00 ZeromuS wrote:
On February 12 2014 04:19 avilo wrote:
On February 12 2014 03:53 NonY wrote:
Big thing about the blink cooldown change is mobility. Blink stalkers are typically pretty safe to explore the map, even when marauders or ling/roach could also be on the field. However, it's the second blink that really gets you to safety when running from those things. If the second blink is delayed 5 seconds, I think it'll force protoss to be much more passive with stalkers. It crosses a threshold where you run a risk of the stalkers getting caught and they all die.

In my opinion, Blizzard clearly isn't just targeting the PvT blink all-ins with the blink change. But why they would want to nerf blink in general is beyond me. Stalkers kinda suck in general. They're a niche unit that becomes viable in a decent number of situations only because of blink.


The problem is right now there's no risk at all to really using blink stalkers in PvT. You can virtually always escape every single time either from the Terran's base after offensive blinks, or you can do the fake blink macro builds and never lose any stalkers but still heavily pressure Terran at no risk whatsoever to yourself.

Making blink require more thought to use and have more risk associated to it will go a long way to help TvP balance because right now the balance of TvP is quite abysmal. There are too, too many PvT openings that have low risks associated with them, blink probably being the one that almost always puts the Protoss player ahead, or at the very worst even which is pretty lame.

With 9 range vision the MsC cannot provide adequate vision from a safe range of the positioning of all of terran forces. This means protoss players cannot blink into a terran base with full knowledge of the terran army position every time without also gaining extra info from a poke at the front for example to see what is there.

If protoss does want that vision of terran base they must commit the MsC close enough that it is danger of taking damage or being killed.

Why exactly is Protoss entitled to a safe blink into the Terran base? The whole idea is that there should be some risk involved in this kind of play, which is exactly why so many Terran hate (and continue to hate) the Oracle change - an aggressive, potentially high-reward play should come with some degree of risk.


I am specifically mentioning how the MsC nerf is already adding a lot more risk to the blink options vs Terran. I don't see what you are arguing?

If you cant see everything its not a free safe blink. This provides more chances for terran to abuse either the more limited vision of the mama core leading to quick poor blink decisions or for terran to damage or kill the mothership core.

Further the widow mine change means its even more effective vs one base blink all ins if the terran player has a fact coming see Twilight or a lot of stalkers and no natural.

Will it help vs blink expands? Not specifically, I mean, Protoss can still make 6 - 8 stalkers off 2 base with blink and pressure terran while taking a third, but that build doesnt get a lot of gates. If the Protoss player gets a lot of gates and doesnt commit to a big attack instead expanding with 2 gas to a third base terran should have a timing to hurt the protoss player in some way or get ahead in tech/upgrades pretty easily. The reaction from terran will require scouting and reaction to that scouting which is a metagame thing that slowly evolves and grows as the Terrans deal with it more. But thats different from balance, thats an issue of understanding from both sides. Once terran figures out the reaction Protoss will either stop doing it or retool the build to be more safe allowing terran less timing options, but more stable opportunities to expand or not lose much to the small stalker squad assuming good reactions. Thats how the game evolves


On February 12 2014 05:23 Plansix wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:18 TimKim0713 wrote:
Why so low terran contributors...

Need korean opinions as well

As always, teamliquid get the answers from people that respond. I am sure they would be happy to publish any pros opinion if they took the time to write it down.


YES! We had a shorter deadline for this one and a few things compound the smaller number of terrans:

- fewer foreign terrans than the other races in general
- fewer terrans willing to provide feedback in general (we hope as these releases get more positive answers, people open up to contributing)
- some Koreans who were available and willing this time provided either limited comments or ones that were a little off topic or not related to this patch note

So I hope you can understand. If any pro Terrans want to contribute to the next one PM and I will try to include you in the next one, as long as you have a decently level head, as we try to focus on people who can consolidate their race bias and look at the game a little more objectively (pure objectivity is impossible though so we take that with a grain of salt)


Are you saying that some Korean terrans did contribute but you didn't include them in the OP? Why would you do that? Even if it's off topic or ``limited'' (whatever that means), at least we understand what they're thinking about. In the end, those guys did want to give you their feedback.


We need to remember that Koreans are not magical creatures from a far away land. They can be just as biased as any one else, and the language barrier doesn't help. We also still need people to be willing to take part and answer. I had as my aim to ask people who are generally not going to be extremely biased and I feel as though I succeeded in that regard.
And yet you asked desrow?

Well, better than Naniwa. And Desrow is pretty honest wih his bias, but still seems as objective as expected.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
Deleted User 137586
Profile Joined January 2011
7859 Posts
February 11 2014 21:31 GMT
#99
On February 12 2014 06:19 ZeromuS wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 12 2014 06:03 Ghanburighan wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:23 ZeromuS wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:13 tenklavir wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:00 ZeromuS wrote:
On February 12 2014 04:19 avilo wrote:
On February 12 2014 03:53 NonY wrote:
Big thing about the blink cooldown change is mobility. Blink stalkers are typically pretty safe to explore the map, even when marauders or ling/roach could also be on the field. However, it's the second blink that really gets you to safety when running from those things. If the second blink is delayed 5 seconds, I think it'll force protoss to be much more passive with stalkers. It crosses a threshold where you run a risk of the stalkers getting caught and they all die.

In my opinion, Blizzard clearly isn't just targeting the PvT blink all-ins with the blink change. But why they would want to nerf blink in general is beyond me. Stalkers kinda suck in general. They're a niche unit that becomes viable in a decent number of situations only because of blink.


The problem is right now there's no risk at all to really using blink stalkers in PvT. You can virtually always escape every single time either from the Terran's base after offensive blinks, or you can do the fake blink macro builds and never lose any stalkers but still heavily pressure Terran at no risk whatsoever to yourself.

Making blink require more thought to use and have more risk associated to it will go a long way to help TvP balance because right now the balance of TvP is quite abysmal. There are too, too many PvT openings that have low risks associated with them, blink probably being the one that almost always puts the Protoss player ahead, or at the very worst even which is pretty lame.

With 9 range vision the MsC cannot provide adequate vision from a safe range of the positioning of all of terran forces. This means protoss players cannot blink into a terran base with full knowledge of the terran army position every time without also gaining extra info from a poke at the front for example to see what is there.

If protoss does want that vision of terran base they must commit the MsC close enough that it is danger of taking damage or being killed.

Why exactly is Protoss entitled to a safe blink into the Terran base? The whole idea is that there should be some risk involved in this kind of play, which is exactly why so many Terran hate (and continue to hate) the Oracle change - an aggressive, potentially high-reward play should come with some degree of risk.


I am specifically mentioning how the MsC nerf is already adding a lot more risk to the blink options vs Terran. I don't see what you are arguing?

If you cant see everything its not a free safe blink. This provides more chances for terran to abuse either the more limited vision of the mama core leading to quick poor blink decisions or for terran to damage or kill the mothership core.

Further the widow mine change means its even more effective vs one base blink all ins if the terran player has a fact coming see Twilight or a lot of stalkers and no natural.

Will it help vs blink expands? Not specifically, I mean, Protoss can still make 6 - 8 stalkers off 2 base with blink and pressure terran while taking a third, but that build doesnt get a lot of gates. If the Protoss player gets a lot of gates and doesnt commit to a big attack instead expanding with 2 gas to a third base terran should have a timing to hurt the protoss player in some way or get ahead in tech/upgrades pretty easily. The reaction from terran will require scouting and reaction to that scouting which is a metagame thing that slowly evolves and grows as the Terrans deal with it more. But thats different from balance, thats an issue of understanding from both sides. Once terran figures out the reaction Protoss will either stop doing it or retool the build to be more safe allowing terran less timing options, but more stable opportunities to expand or not lose much to the small stalker squad assuming good reactions. Thats how the game evolves


On February 12 2014 05:23 Plansix wrote:
On February 12 2014 05:18 TimKim0713 wrote:
Why so low terran contributors...

Need korean opinions as well

As always, teamliquid get the answers from people that respond. I am sure they would be happy to publish any pros opinion if they took the time to write it down.


YES! We had a shorter deadline for this one and a few things compound the smaller number of terrans:

- fewer foreign terrans than the other races in general
- fewer terrans willing to provide feedback in general (we hope as these releases get more positive answers, people open up to contributing)
- some Koreans who were available and willing this time provided either limited comments or ones that were a little off topic or not related to this patch note

So I hope you can understand. If any pro Terrans want to contribute to the next one PM and I will try to include you in the next one, as long as you have a decently level head, as we try to focus on people who can consolidate their race bias and look at the game a little more objectively (pure objectivity is impossible though so we take that with a grain of salt)


Are you saying that some Korean terrans did contribute but you didn't include them in the OP? Why would you do that? Even if it's off topic or ``limited'' (whatever that means), at least we understand what they're thinking about. In the end, those guys did want to give you their feedback.


I think its fair to reserve some editorial judgement. And I have always believed in being very open. When I say limited, I mean the full impact of the potential change was either not expressed well. Keep in mind we do not have access to every single pro player, and Waxangel does not always have the ability to converse with the Koreans in Hangul because he does live a life. We wanted to release this quickly while it is still pertinent and to give the community some additional perspectives to digest, which is a goal I feel we achieved. There are a series of varying opinions from different races and for the most part everyone was quite objective (as much as possible) and provided different perspectives and reasoning.

Jjakji chose not to make a comment. Ryung and Crank were unavailable considering our timeline. MMA provided some comments and they are included as you can see in the article.

As for your concerns regarding not including information here is a very good example from Mouz Dear:

"if sc2 need protoss nerf , first of all DK must do oracle roll back
if it will be changed , specially blink cool down .. toss will be stupid" (via SeoHyun via Nathanias)

With limited access we only have so much we can do to contact and enter into discussion to clarify things. On its own, this time we didn't get very easily understood or clear feedback. So here we see a recommendation to nerf the oracle (which is outside the scope of our article and not its aim) and we also see no mention of mothership core. We get a mention of "blink cooldown .. toss will be stupid", while the intention is there that its a bad change, it adds very little to overall article and no additional information that isn't already presented more eloquently and with more nuance than the English speaking professional players we asked.

We need to remember that Koreans are not magical creatures from a far away land. They can be just as biased as any one else, and the language barrier doesn't help. We also still need people to be willing to take part and answer. I had as my aim to ask people who are generally not going to be extremely biased and I feel as though I succeeded in that regard.


I see you have good intentions and overall it's an excellent initiative, but I think you've taken a wrong turn for all the right reasons. I find Dear's response excellent content. Sure, it would be nice if it were more detailed and elaborate, but the idea that these changes as a whole will not lead to a balancing of TvP and the fact that, in his mind, an oracle change will bring about balance, is something I like to know, and I assume that DK would like to know as well.

As for excluding people because they are biased, once again, I don't see the responses, so I don't know exactly, but the idea is that if you have a large number of responses, especially from different races, it balances itself out. As I commented before, I do not think Desrow's comments are as unbiased as, for example, TLO's or Qxc's, but it's still valuable content to see how he thinks in his context. I'd like to see similar content from terrans, if only to counter-balance the comments from the large number of protoss players.

In the end, I would not put too much emphasis on eloquence and rather get feedback from the highest level. This partly comes from my experience in diplomacy, the highest officials in the EU, WTO, UN, etc. are not very eloquent and easy to communicate with, but deciphering their comments is incredibly valuable because they are the ones performing the most important actions.
Cry 'havoc' and let slip the dogs of war
matthy
Profile Joined January 2013
66 Posts
February 11 2014 21:31 GMT
#100
this treath is awesome hope david kim will read as well
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 16 17 18 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 1h 43m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
elazer 278
ProTech135
NeuroSwarm 54
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 13896
Artosis 330
ajuk12(nOOB) 34
Dota 2
monkeys_forever377
Counter-Strike
tarik_tv2856
pashabiceps2047
Pyrionflax151
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox450
Heroes of the Storm
Liquid`Hasu359
Other Games
summit1g8124
Grubby3942
FrodaN713
shahzam556
C9.Mang0304
Trikslyr151
Mew2King64
ViBE54
ArmadaUGS39
NightEnD3
Organizations
Other Games
BasetradeTV370
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 14 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• davetesta31
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Doublelift2950
Other Games
• imaqtpie1173
• Shiphtur269
Upcoming Events
Replay Cast
1h 43m
The PondCast
11h 43m
KCM Race Survival
11h 43m
WardiTV Map Contest Tou…
12h 43m
Gerald vs herO
Clem vs Cure
ByuN vs Solar
Rogue vs MaxPax
ShoWTimE vs TBD
OSC
16h 43m
CranKy Ducklings
1d 1h
Escore
1d 11h
RSL Revival
1d 18h
Replay Cast
2 days
WardiTV Map Contest Tou…
2 days
[ Show More ]
Universe Titan Cup
2 days
Rogue vs Percival
Ladder Legends
2 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
2 days
BSL
2 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
WardiTV Map Contest Tou…
3 days
Ladder Legends
3 days
BSL
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Wardi Open
4 days
Afreeca Starleague
4 days
Soma vs hero
Monday Night Weeklies
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Afreeca Starleague
5 days
Leta vs YSC
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2026-04-20
RSL Revival: Season 4
NationLESS Cup

Ongoing

BSL Season 22
ASL Season 21
CSL 2026 SPRING (S20)
IPSL Spring 2026
KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 2
Proleague 2026-04-22
StarCraft2 Community Team League 2026 Spring
WardiTV TLMC #16
Nations Cup 2026
IEM Rio 2026
PGL Bucharest 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 1
BLAST Open Spring 2026
ESL Pro League S23 Finals
ESL Pro League S23 Stage 1&2
PGL Cluj-Napoca 2026
IEM Kraków 2026

Upcoming

Escore Tournament S2: W4
Acropolis #4
BSL 22 Non-Korean Championship
CSLAN 4
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
HSC XXIX
uThermal 2v2 2026 Main Event
Maestros of the Game 2
2026 GSL S2
RSL Revival: Season 5
2026 GSL S1
XSE Pro League 2026
IEM Cologne Major 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 2
CS Asia Championships 2026
IEM Atlanta 2026
Asian Champions League 2026
PGL Astana 2026
BLAST Rivals Spring 2026
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.