|
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CM809rKWoAAiV0C.jpg)
Overview of the past ~2 weeks
During the break, our SC2 Multiplayer team has been keeping up with all the major tournaments going on, as well as gathering feedback from the highest end of players. From the tournament games, we were seeing the advantages and disadvantages per matchup still swinging quite drastically in some cases, and the main strategies/timings being used seem to still be changing. We wonder if this is because Legacy of the Void is such a different game than Heart of the Swarm that even the highest skilled players are still in the process of figuring the game out.
From the top-end pro players we’ve consulted with so far, we’re seeing a variety of feedback. Getting mixed feedback on opposing viewpoints on a topic is something that is normal, but what was not normal was how different the viewpoints were even among the same races. For example, when the question was something like "who has the advantage in the late game in TvZ in an even game," the feedback among one race would range from Terran having no chance due to Ultra/Brood/Viper combo to Zerg having no chance due to Liberator/Ghost combo. Again, we wondered if the such varied feedback from pro players is due to the highest skilled players out there are still trying to master and figure out the game.
Due to these factors, we wanted to ask for feedback on a couple possible courses of action before committing. We currently wonder whether it's best to quickly turn around a balance patch with changes that feel necessary (maybe a patch consisting of the 2-3 most ‘important’ changes), or if it's best to wait and give a chance for players to discover new solutions and strategies. So far, the majority of the top-pro players we've pinged seemed to prefer waiting for the moment, and our team is also slightly leaning towards keeping a close eye on how the game develops while focusing more on balance test maps. Nevertheless, we wanted to hear your thoughts in this area.
Now let's talk a bit more about the specifics of some potential issues that we could address.
Photon Overcharge Energy Cost Increase
This is a change that seems correct right now, because we want to promote a more action packed game, and it's really difficult to go on the offense at certain stages against Photon Overcharge, especially on maps where Protoss just needs to defend a single area. The main thing to figure out here is how well or badly Protoss is doing in the other matchups to tweak the race as a whole accordingly. We also agreed with your assessment of Protoss in that they looked to be the weakest race initially with the launch of Legacy of the Void, then they looked to be on the stronger side towards the end of last year, and we're not quite certain where they stand today.
Adept
We wonder if over time, Adept strength won't be as big of an issue. There are two reasons why we think this. First is that we have seen time and time again that it takes much more time to learn how to defend against attacks using new or changed units compared to the time it takes to learn how to execute the attacks. Second is while Adepts still look very powerful in games, they seem to be weaker than when Legacy of the Void first launched. We intend to keep a close eye on this unit in the coming weeks, and we think it would be best to not be too quick to judge on whether they're OP or not. While it could be the case that Adepts should receive a nerf, waiting to see how things play out could allow for better decisions. Please give us your thoughts in this area.
Roach/Ravager Combo
We do agree with you and think that in the long run, if the Roach/Ravager combo remains powerful, it may be problematic due to Zerg players mostly focusing on utilizing this combo in most of their matchups. Here, the main thing to figure out is where Zerg strength really lies. We completely agreed with you in that Zerg looked to be the strongest race at the start of Legacy of the Void. However, after pinging many of the highest level players during the break, we wonder if this is changing due to players adapting to the new Zerg strengths.
For example, if Zerg turns out to be weaker vs. Terran and solid vs. Protoss, instead of focusing on a Ravager nerf like we are currently, we can potentially look at other things such as an increase to Baneling movement speed to combat the new Terran tools against them such as Tier 1 Reaper grenades or Tier 2 Siege Tank medivac pick up. Of course, this is just one example and depending on how things turn out, we would obviously need to come up with the right solution accordingly.
Parasitic Bomb Nerf
Parasitic bomb is another area that could most likely use a nerf, and we can definitely continue testing the change to see if the fix is correct.
Multiplayer Game Speed
We also wanted to bring up a new idea for your feedback. We have received multiple pieces of feedback from Korean pro players who believe it would be nice if lower-level players had a slower game speed on ladder, similar to how it is in co-op missions mode.
If we are to consider something like this, we could imagine an approach like this: platinum and above players would play on the current speed (fastest), whereas gold and below would play one notch slower on fast speed. There are some feasibility issues we’d have to overcome, but we’d like to at least get your feedback on this.
We see both advantages and disadvantages to a change like this. Similar to why co-op missions uses different game speeds, StarCraft II is one of the most difficult games to master, and it may be both helpful and enjoyable for players of certain skill levels to be given extra time to think and act during their games. At the same time however, this would mean that the game wouldn’t feel the same for everyone, and it could also just feel “wrong” to make a change such as this since the game has been working a certain way for so long.
Obviously there are other pros and cons of making a change like this, and we have much time to consider the idea. We would love to hear your thoughts on this concept.
Summary
Other issues that we've previously worked on don't seem as necessary, but we don't want to brush them off until you have had your chance to provide your input, so please point out other issues that you think is problematic, and we'll definitely go over them within our design team and discuss those issues with pro players as well.
Whether we do a quick turn around on a balance patch or not, there looks to be many things we need to keep a look out for and many topics to discuss/figure out. Let's get discussions going as soon as possible to start off this year and continue working towards what the best moves are for the game. Happy new year!
Source
|
Yours looks best SGTK so I'll post here :p
Why Blizz didn't you pick up on the suggestions that the Adept problem is best taken care of by nerfing the WP?
|
adepts warp prism are way too powerful and that does need a nerf
|
First is that we have seen time and time again that it takes much more time to learn how to defend against attacks using new or changed units compared to the time it takes to learn how to execute the attacks
The reason for this is that the opponent limits his build order diversity and opts for 1-2 different builds that are safe and allow him to defend against it. That is, however, absolutely terrible game design. It is essential that overly strong early game units gets nerfed accordingly so players can opt for different types of openings.
|
I like this. It sounds like they are realizing what I have been saying all along 
We completely agreed with you in that Zerg looked to be the strongest race at the start of Legacy of the Void. However, after pinging many of the highest level players during the break, we wonder if this is changing due to players adapting to the new Zerg strengths.
One thing I am wondering is why they are ignoring the map issues so much. I hope they are working hard on a new map pool
|
Oh my fucking god if they touch game speed on ladder I'm gonna start crying. The game is way too slow below faster, it feels absurd.
|
Another week of blablalbla and no changes, what a suprise!
"Give us feedback" , its something the community is doing for ages, but you do have to listen to it Blizzard.....
|
RIP tournament Terrans. Another month of this and SSL/GSL really won't have any more Terran players left.
// Marinelord doesn't count because he was up against Innovation, a Terran player. Marinelord almost lost to the Z, but he managed to hit a timing where the Ultras were out but didn't have the armor upgrade. The P player he beat only killed 1 tank with 3 disruptors.
|
On January 09 2016 04:53 CannonsNCarriers wrote:
RIP tournament Terrans. Another month of this and SSL/GSL really won't have any more Terran players left.
// Marinelord doesn't count because he was up against Innovation, a Terran player. Marinelord almost lost to the Z, but he managed to hit a timing where the Ultras were out but didn't have the armor upgrade. The P player he beat only killed 1 tank with 3 disruptors.
Excuse me sir. Have you seen todays matches? As far as I am aware out of 3 matches 3 terrans advanced.
|
i hope they don't attach ladder ranking to game speed, i know i'm bad at the game but i like the speed that I can play it on, I'm comfortable with it. Maybe you could choose your game speed when you ladder so you only play other people who want to play that game speed.
|
On January 09 2016 04:53 CannonsNCarriers wrote:
RIP tournament Terrans. Another month of this and SSL/GSL really won't have any more Terran players left.
// Marinelord doesn't count because he was up against Innovation, a Terran player. Marinelord almost lost to the Z, but he managed to hit a timing where the Ultras were out but didn't have the armor upgrade. The P player he beat only killed 1 tank with 3 disruptors.
if you're making that gargantuan claim based off of one best of 9 you need some help
|
On January 09 2016 04:55 KingofdaHipHop wrote:
i hope they don't attach ladder ranking to game speed, i know i'm bad at the game but i like the speed that I can play it on, I'm comfortable with it. Maybe you could choose your game speed when you ladder so you only play other people who want to play that game speed.
Good post. With the ladder spee change they would create a two class society. People playing on normal speed and being used to it would never ever be able to catch up with the fast players!
|
Making gold and below on training wheels feels like the incorrect move. It then also brings up the logistics of which game speed does a gold looking for a promotion playing a low platinum play on? Logically you'd think Fastest but that puts the Gold player at a massive disadvantage because how would he gain practice to effectively kill Platinums at the fastest speed outside of potential promotion ledges?
|
That game speed change is a pretty weird one to consider. It feels like it would end up more annoying than helpful.
|
Ahhhhh, we already got this one. Sorry!
|
Katowice25012 Posts
It's surprising to see the mention of ladder game speed to me. That falls under the same category as "why isn't there a pro-mode and casual where one has easier mechanics" in that it's bad to split the player base on that line.
Seems like there's no reasonable way to do it, that transition would be really messed up after you're climbing the ranks especially after the new ladder system is eventually implemented.
|
On January 09 2016 04:48 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +First is that we have seen time and time again that it takes much more time to learn how to defend against attacks using new or changed units compared to the time it takes to learn how to execute the attacks The reason for this is that the opponent limits his build order diversity and opts for 1-2 different builds that are safe and allow him to defend against it. That is, however, absolutely terrible game design. It is essential that overly strong early game units gets nerfed accordingly so players can opt for different types of openings.
I think that David Kim's reasoning leaves out some important details.
Given time the power level of any unit will be incorporated into standard assumptions about what the race is capable of, strategies will be built around it to the point that people can no longer imagine the game functioning without it. You see this all the time, Blizzard introduces something powerful and controversial, but they leave it in the game and when you suggest later on that it's too powerful you're berated for trying to cripple the race by removing an essential tool. So you can leave the adept as it is, the game will still function, but you'll just see adepts every single game as the cornerstone for every single strategy and you'll just be overly restricted in your own build orders by having to account for adept rushes all the time.
The take-away is that units are rarely OP, which in the common understanding only happens in two cases: unstoppable rushes (reapers) and unstoppable compositions (infestors). In both scenarios there is a problem with the win rates which hinges on the power of these units, that is to say it's clearly identifiable in the game flow that there is a direct link between the outcome of a game and certain things that these units enable. The adept is a somewhat generic army unit like the marauder, stalker or roach, by itself it can hardly decide games because you need to have the economy to back it up, they are still susceptible to certain counters, you can still outplay your opponent with harassment etc. It is not like the reaper where you could announce your rush before the game and even championship level players could not stop them and it is not like the infestor where your economy would cease to matter as long as you had a composition that could literally not be defeated. It's just a very powerful unit, like the medivac, but it's merely problematic, not gamebreaking.
And note David Kim's phrasing. First of all he incorrectly poses the question of OPness presumably to deflect from the question of whether it's correctly tuned and also he is so careful about committing to anything: the adept might or might not be too strong, it's impossible to tell, we can only wait and do nothing, but we'll pay close attention to the situation to see whether they literally break the game. He is the one that maybe incorrectly tuned the unit, but he's not really promising to do much about it, is he?
|
I think the speed change could only work if you make the game speed related to your mmr. So that the game becomes slowly faster and faster. Once you hit platin or something the gamespeed stays the same. The growth of speed should be almost not noticeable.
|
Ladder is very overwhelming for new players, especially with the economy changes. I'm not surprised that the community here would be against the game speed suggestion, but hopefully we can all agree that we could still do more to make the game more accessible at lower levels. We all want the game to grow a lot more than it has, that's for sure.
|
On January 09 2016 05:15 p68 wrote:
Ladder is very overwhelming for new players, especially with the economy changes. I'm not surprised that the community here would be against the game speed suggestion, but hopefully we can all agree that we could still do more to make the game more accessible at lower levels. We all want the game to grow a lot more than it has, that's for sure.
yeah i think there should still be a way for it, it's just implementing a system that doesn't split the player base or change certain people's experience drastically.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
