EPTOh, and nerf the WP, make the Adept 3 shot workers and marines and do a non-cheesy buff of some core Protoss units to compensate.
Community Feedback Update - January 8 - Page 10
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
DeadByDawn
United Kingdom476 Posts
Oh, and nerf the WP, make the Adept 3 shot workers and marines and do a non-cheesy buff of some core Protoss units to compensate. | ||
|
Penev
28500 Posts
On January 10 2016 03:09 DeadByDawn wrote: A long while back there was a post from David Kim on reducing the insane amount of damage that SC2 units can dish out. The idea was to allow players more time to micro the fight by saving injured units and repositioning units to counter the enemy. Obviously it got shelved as the rebalancing of units would have been a huge job (shame they never had a long beta period to try something like this  ).This would have been a better way of slowing down the game, both for players and spectators. Especially for casuals the fights in SC2 seem to be over in the blink of an eye and you are dependent on the analysis from the casters to understand what happened. It was more than shelved. There's even more damage output now. Terrible, terrible d.. well, you get the point | ||
|
crazedrat
272 Posts
I would say wait, I actually don't think the game is incredibly imbalanced at the moment, people just whine and don't know how to play so they blame the game. If there are areas that are imbalanced it's not clear how badly or even what the correct fix would be. So no, wait for a season or so. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9407 Posts
On January 10 2016 03:41 crazedrat wrote: I actually don't think roach ravager is OP, as time goes on people will be doing other things. It doesn't transtion as well into lategame as other comps. Mostly Zergs don't know what to build and ravager is an all around solid comp so they all default to building ravagers. Not really a balance issue imo. I would say wait, I actually don't think the game is incredibly imbalanced at the moment, people just whine and don't know how to play so they blame the game. If there are areas that are imbalanced it's not clear how badly or even what the correct fix would be. So no, wait for a season or so. Roaches should be 1 supply (and Ravager 3) and have marginally worse core stats. This would make them slightly worse in midgame and more viable late game. | ||
|
heishe
Germany2284 Posts
On January 10 2016 03:44 Hider wrote: Roaches should be 1 supply (and Ravager 3) and have marginally worse core stats. This would make them slightly worse in midgame and more viable late game. No, roaches should actually just be removed, and the early/mid game units redesigned around that hole in Zerg defense. It's just a plain boring and stupid unit, it's also by far the most not-Zerg like unit in the Zerg arsenal. Its original design intention was actually to be a beefy harasser that burrows everywhere and is annoying, with its early game function just there to transition into a place where its safe to tech But that clearly failed. Think about how the roach is used now: It's a slow ranged unit with mediocre damage output and high health that is mostly a moved. It's not like Zerg at all and more importantly, it's not interesting at all. Zerg needs more units that benefit from the player skill directly. Zerg is mostly a move right now, with a few spammable spell caster abilities, which creates this kind of weird dynamic where it's most powerful for bad players, because it's easy to use and hard to counter, and weaker and weaker the stronger the Zerg player gets because their opponents learn to deal with stuff like ravager biles and the Zerg can't use their skill to improve its usage. Toss and Terran have heaps and heaps of units that benefit greatly from positioning and micro of the player throughout all phases of the game. Zerg has Mutas and maybe the Lurker and that's mostly it. The rest is mostly a move. | ||
|
crazedrat
272 Posts
On January 10 2016 03:44 Hider wrote: Roaches should be 1 supply (and Ravager 3) and have marginally worse core stats. This would make them slightly worse in midgame and more viable late game. The ravager does not feel imbalanced to me. Midgame if you have problems use drops and defend. I don't use mass roach ravager in any matchup, .. they scale off as you approach lategame, hold out and you will be doing well. At most 4-5 ravagers is good. That amount does scale well, but more and the investment in roaches - you don't want that. Also I want to say that I do not care if bronze gets a slower speed, actually I think it's an excellent idea, I don't know why you would not do this. I've said many times this has to be the hardest game for a noob to learn of any game I've ever seen. | ||
|
papaz
Sweden4149 Posts
Ladder is ladder and there should only be one ruleset. Anything else belongs to custom games. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
Why would it be different now? Because of David Kim? Blizzard cares about balance 99%. Exaggerating. Still, I really wish they did changes cuz of Design. It would make the game healthier which means more fun but is it gonna happen? I seriously doubt it. | ||
|
p68
100 Posts
On January 10 2016 03:09 DeadByDawn wrote: A long while back there was a post from David Kim on reducing the insane amount of damage that SC2 units can dish out. The idea was to allow players more time to micro the fight by saving injured units and repositioning units to counter the enemy. Obviously it got shelved as the rebalancing of units would have been a huge job (shame they never had a long beta period to try something like this ).This would have been a better way of slowing down the game, both for players and spectators. Especially for casuals the fights in SC2 seem to be over in the blink of an eye and you are dependent on the analysis from the casters to understand what happened. Yeah, it's really too bad. Then they went and introduced units like the disruptor and abilities like parasitic bomb, which just make it even more volatile. Why couldn't they just start simple and give everything an HP buff while keeping the damage the same? Got to start somewhere. Probably too late at this point. | ||
|
Tresher
Germany404 Posts
On January 10 2016 03:54 heishe wrote: No, roaches should actually just be removed, and the early/mid game units redesigned around that hole in Zerg defense. It's just a plain boring and stupid unit, it's also by far the most not-Zerg like unit in the Zerg arsenal. Its original design intention was actually to be a beefy harasser that burrows everywhere and is annoying, with its early game function just there to transition into a place where its safe to tech But that clearly failed. Think about how the roach is used now: It's a slow ranged unit with mediocre damage output and high health that is mostly a moved. It's not like Zerg at all and more importantly, it's not interesting at all. Zerg needs more units that benefit from the player skill directly. Zerg is mostly a move right now, with a few spammable spell caster abilities, which creates this kind of weird dynamic where it's most powerful for bad players, because it's easy to use and hard to counter, and weaker and weaker the stronger the Zerg player gets because their opponents learn to deal with stuff like ravager biles and the Zerg can't use their skill to improve its usage. Toss and Terran have heaps and heaps of units that benefit greatly from positioning and micro of the player throughout all phases of the game. Zerg has Mutas and maybe the Lurker and that's mostly it. The rest is mostly a move. Most of this is right except the speed. Roaches are not slow at all. Unupgraded yes. But not after speed upgrade and on creep(they almost are as fast as Hellions wtf). They are actually too fast then for the stats they have. They are also tanky and have ok damage and can be burrowed AND are cheap. They should have been adjusted a long time ago. But Im afraid SC 2 will never be really balanced. During the 5 years there was constantly back and forth which race is stronger and there where some terrible designs in terms of Units. e.g. reapers,oracles, mutas with speed buff and regen now adepts, all units that are frustating to play against because they are fast, hard to catch and can get to full Hp (for the most part). One playstyle has basiclly been cut for one race(Mech) and the others aren´t relly diverse either. The balance team doesn´t know what is good for the game which is sad. The Game needs to change(something that should have been done at the beginning of the beta) or the future for it will be dark. | ||
|
ThunderJunk
United States711 Posts
Zerg muta switch in ZvP is awful to deal with. Buffing archon anti air would limit the strength of the lategame muta switch while making storm more viable in ZvP. More options is usually better right? That's how I would approach it. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On January 10 2016 03:30 Penev wrote: It was more than shelved. There's even more damage output now. Terrible, terrible d.. well, you get the point Newly introduced units tend to be more resilient at the same time. If one looks at the new additions in this expansion, adepts have an escape ability, disruptors shoot safely from a distance, lurkers are invisible and ranged, cyclones are very fast and maneuverable, ravagers augment roaches with hit points and range, liberators are fairly beefy. Most of those units are gas-heavy and expensive as well. I think the high damage output mainly targets marines and zealots, that is to say mineral units. I'm curious whether army compositions will over time drift towards emphasizing gas units, treating mineral units as disposable fodder. A related example based on the same dynamics is the bio composition where frequent trading causes marines to die and medivacs to survive, only straining mineral income. I don't know how it works out in practice though. | ||
|
oGsChess
23 Posts
Now, for the changes, I think all of Korea is pretty much agreeing that pylon overcharge has a problem, that concerns mostly energy cost, but possibly damage too. The option of a third base from 3:10 - 4:00 vs T and Z with mostly no problem to reflect aggression or harassment simply concludes into too many viable unit compositions and forces Terran in particular to not be able to play aggressive in the mid game and be very vulnerable to warpprism harassment at the same time. I think regarding the warpprism - adept issue, I have heard korean pros such as Dream, Forte and Byun talk about the pick up range being still very difficult in many cases and True actually suggested it to be better if the shade ability had a higher cooldown too, however I also agree with your point that the issue should be waited out longer until players figure out how to deal with it, again in particular terran. I think the cyclone is still a big issue in the inability for high level korean Terrans to win TvPs, since warpprism escape it mostly due to missing vision - what about the suggestion that lock on grants vision for the duration - which would make the cyclone better versus all forms of harass and fewer units would hardcounter it; for example stalker would be hardcountered by them before they have blink, opening a window of aggression in the ealry game and ealry mid game also against pylon overcharge, in my opinion exactly what terran needs & this change would barely affect TvZ since the cyclone is not used and hard to imagine to mass up with, since the few HP and big cost. TvZ seems surprisingly balanced on highest level at the moment, with the meta swifting into Terrans favor slightly. Although the meta has always been focusing on heavy mid game drop or push styles by both races, meaning there is few to be sure about the late game, apart from that aswell ghosts and liberators seem more than enough to deal with the new ultras, however mass liberator lategame seems to still be neglected by parasitic bomb and corruptors (also combined with spores & queens). Obviously even the best of the best have yet found it hard to deal with "mass" reaper openings, but I do think that is extremely dependent of the map & often just an element terran has, to be favored on some maps. Furthermore, everyone really, really enjoys the game, all agree that it is better than HotS considering high level development. Lastly, keep an eye on Zerg endgame overall and the skillceiling of tankivacs and adept/disruptor warpprism, could prove to be situationally undefeatable. Cheers Blizz | ||
|
flipstar
226 Posts
| ||
|
bObA
France300 Posts
On January 10 2016 14:38 oGsChess wrote: Im very positive with the thoughts of the balance team, really undermining how they have been working with the community, in particular pros, and have gotten a better sense of the new game. Now, for the changes, I think all of Korea is pretty much agreeing that pylon overcharge has a problem, that concerns mostly energy cost, but possibly damage too. The option of a third base from 3:10 - 4:00 vs T and Z with mostly no problem to reflect aggression or harassment simply concludes into too many viable unit compositions and forces Terran in particular to not be able to play aggressive in the mid game and be very vulnerable to warpprism harassment at the same time. I think regarding the warpprism - adept issue, I have heard korean pros such as Dream, Forte and Byun talk about the pick up range being still very difficult in many cases and True actually suggested it to be better if the shade ability had a higher cooldown too, however I also agree with your point that the issue should be waited out longer until players figure out how to deal with it, again in particular terran. I think the cyclone is still a big issue in the inability for high level korean Terrans to win TvPs, since warpprism escape it mostly due to missing vision - what about the suggestion that lock on grants vision for the duration - which would make the cyclone better versus all forms of harass and fewer units would hardcounter it; for example stalker would be hardcountered by them before they have blink, opening a window of aggression in the ealry game and ealry mid game also against pylon overcharge, in my opinion exactly what terran needs & this change would barely affect TvZ since the cyclone is not used and hard to imagine to mass up with, since the few HP and big cost. TvZ seems surprisingly balanced on highest level at the moment, with the meta swifting into Terrans favor slightly. Although the meta has always been focusing on heavy mid game drop or push styles by both races, meaning there is few to be sure about the late game, apart from that aswell ghosts and liberators seem more than enough to deal with the new ultras, however mass liberator lategame seems to still be neglected by parasitic bomb and corruptors (also combined with spores & queens). Obviously even the best of the best have yet found it hard to deal with "mass" reaper openings, but I do think that is extremely dependent of the map & often just an element terran has, to be favored on some maps. Furthermore, everyone really, really enjoys the game, all agree that it is better than HotS considering high level development. Lastly, keep an eye on Zerg endgame overall and the skillceiling of tankivacs and adept/disruptor warpprism, could prove to be situationally undefeatable. Cheers Blizz Nice analysis | ||
|
Big-t
Austria1350 Posts
Change Game Speed !  | ||
|
StarscreamG1
Portugal1653 Posts
| ||
|
zizerg
Kyrgyzstan16 Posts
| ||
|
egrimm
Poland1199 Posts
On January 10 2016 03:44 Hider wrote: Roaches should be 1 supply (and Ravager 3) and have marginally worse core stats. This would make them slightly worse in midgame and more viable late game. Agree  | ||
|
Aegwynn
Italy460 Posts
| ||
| ||
