|
On January 09 2016 08:35 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2016 08:15 A_needle_jog wrote:On January 09 2016 08:07 MiCroLiFe wrote:
Does the word Ultralisk vanish on the blizzard staff meetings? Look at it differently mate. Yes Ultralisk the unit is strong, but good players won't let you get them. I know they are a problem in lower leagues like platinum and diamond, but just look at the korean games the last couple of days. If a Zerg is able to go to Ultralisk then you already failed as a Terran. I don't think I have seen a single Ultralisk in todays 9 matches ZvT. In my honest opinion if Blizzard nerfed the Ultralisk then TvZ is a dead matchup. I could see terran winrate of over 65% in TvZ (good players/koreans) if ultralisk was nerfed alongside all the other zerg nerfs they already announced. while it's true that current ultras are needed to maintain balance I think the current interaction with ultras vs liberator/ghost is terrible and the most extreme form of hardcounters the game has seen yet. If ultras are out and you don't get the necessary units out in time - or you get them out but the zerg takes them out because you mismicroed - the game is over, no matter if you have completely outplayed your opponent until this point or if it's 6 base terran vs 1 base zerg.
That I can agree on. If blizzard nerf ultra then they need to change a lot of other things and people would hate on Zerg if Blizzard buff other units.
Lets agree on that Zerg has a bad balance within.
Too Strong :
- Ultralisk
- Viper
- Ravager
Too Weak :
- Baneling
- Hydra
- Swarm Host
To be fair playing a race makes blind. I understand your point, but if Terran has an easy way to deal with Ultralisk even if he does mistakes in game then the game will be huge failure.
In my honest opinion overall terran is stronger than zerg. I am very much convinced of this.
I wish non-zerg players would try themself and see how frustrating it can be in LOTV to macro and tech to Ultralisks against good opponents 
|
I still think the adept + WP problem needs to be adressed, and I don't like the slower game speed for lower levels people idea at all. I mean, the fun thing is to be taxed by the game in the same conditions as the pros... And what happens when a gold is matched with a platinum ? It's really too complicated IMO.
|
On January 09 2016 04:42 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: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. Source
Does anyone else think this statement is bullshit?
Korean pros give a shit about gold league? huh? what? ... I can't actually believe that any Korean (or other pro) is giving that any thought... I maybe believe that blizzard is asking tons of pros and they could get maybe 1-3 of them to comment on such a topic so they would stop asking.
Personally I think changing game speed is one of the top 3 (or the absolute worst) worst idea they have had for a potential patch.
You want to make the game more enjoyable for casuals, why not make a build order practice mode so people can learn to play.
The list of problems such a change would bring is pretty vast imo.
I like what others have said, 1) All timings would change from league to league 2) wouldn't it actually just make the person playing at a faster speed have the advantage? considering his workers would be mining faster lolz? 3) When one guy loses he would just diminish the win by saying (you played on slow) 4) If I'm a masters player playing 2s with my buddy I have to play at frustratingly slow speed 5) I'm sure there are more, I can't wait to her other peoples' thoughts on such a change.
Honestly I couldn't focus on anything else because I'm stuck on what a terrible idea this is.
I'll be the first to admit I thought very poorly of the "no macro mechanics" change, and I did end up liking that, but this... I really can't imagine.
|
On January 09 2016 08:15 A_needle_jog wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2016 08:07 MiCroLiFe wrote:
Does the word Ultralisk vanish on the blizzard staff meetings? Look at it differently mate. Yes Ultralisk the unit is strong, but good players won't let you get them. I know they are a problem in lower leagues like platinum and diamond, but just look at the korean games the last couple of days.
Saw HyuN push Dream's far superior bio/tank army all the way back to Dream's base, where he would have died if he didn't have a 1k bank saved up to build a Barracks maze. That was pretty stupid.
Or is Dream a bad player for letting HyuN get to them?
If a Zerg is able to go to Ultralisk then you already failed as a Terran. I don't think I have seen a single Ultralisk in todays 9 matches ZvT.
What 9 matches? Who else played besides aLive vs ByuL and Dream vs HyuN?
|
On January 09 2016 09:02 ShambhalaWar wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2016 04:42 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: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. Source Does anyone else think this statement is bullshit? Korean pros give a shit about gold league? huh? what? ... I can't actually believe that any Korean (or other pro) is giving that any thought... I maybe believe that blizzard is asking tons of pros and they could get maybe 1-3 of them to comment on such a topic so they would stop asking. Personally I think changing game speed is one of the top 3 (or the absolute worst) worst idea they have had for a potential patch. You want to make the game more enjoyable for casuals, why not make a build order practice mode so people can learn to play. The list of problems such a change would bring is pretty vast imo. I like what others have said, 1) All timings would change from league to league 2) wouldn't it actually just make the person playing at a faster speed have the advantage? considering his workers would be mining faster lolz? 3) When one guy loses he would just diminish the win by saying (you played on slow) 4) If I'm a masters player playing 2s with my buddy I have to play at frustratingly slow speed 5) I'm sure there are more, I can't wait to her other peoples' thoughts on such a change. Honestly I couldn't focus on anything else because I'm stuck on what a terrible idea this is. I'll be the first to admit I thought very poorly of the "no macro mechanics" change, and I did end up liking that, but this... I really can't imagine.
Reading the phrase you've marked in bold, I think you have not understood the basic idea. Both players would play at the same speed.
The speed should be selectable, not just enforced.
|
-Gamespeed change is the worst idea ever, watching replays, timings & coaching will make less sense the lower players and it will slow their learning speed imho.
-I think parasidic bomb should be removed completely and hydras need a huge aa buff(possibly range increase or a new ability). Hydras has zero role in the current meta, this would fix many problems(liberator, zvz muta cancer, not getting rekt by phoneix in low numbers)
-There are certain things that still looks really ugly in this game, to be spesific there are three worst designs: tankivacs, invincible nydus & warp prism pick range. I don't have balance problem with them personally but they look really horribly bad in the game
-Overcharge energy increase is good but damage shouldn't be increased along with the energy. It has just too much damage, it killed all the fun in zvp, there is no possible agression by zerg except ravager all-in or just camping with lurkers and waiting for tech without dying.
-You will probably take your time and give players time to "figure out" how to defend vs adepts but the straight fact is they are op, just as simple. Eventually it will get nerfed after adepts will dominate all korean tournaments anyways. They cost 25 gas and have all the tools. Shade cd must be increased and need a serious shield nerf.
-Something should be done about SH & Infested Terrans
|
On January 09 2016 09:04 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2016 08:15 A_needle_jog wrote:On January 09 2016 08:07 MiCroLiFe wrote:
Does the word Ultralisk vanish on the blizzard staff meetings? Look at it differently mate. Yes Ultralisk the unit is strong, but good players won't let you get them. I know they are a problem in lower leagues like platinum and diamond, but just look at the korean games the last couple of days. Saw HyuN push Dream's far superior bio/tank army all the way back to Dream's base, where he would have died if he didn't have a 1k bank saved up to build a Barracks maze. That was pretty stupid. Or is Dream a bad player for letting HyuN get to them? Show nested quote +If a Zerg is able to go to Ultralisk then you already failed as a Terran. I don't think I have seen a single Ultralisk in todays 9 matches ZvT. What 9 matches? Who else played besides aLive vs ByuL and Dream vs HyuN?
I think I mean games and not matches as a whole haha 
aLive (terran) 3 - 1 ByuL (zerg)
Dream (terran) 3 - 2 HuyN (zerg)
3+1+3+2 = 9 
|
On January 09 2016 09:09 Xamo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2016 09:02 ShambhalaWar wrote:On January 09 2016 04:42 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: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. Source Does anyone else think this statement is bullshit? Korean pros give a shit about gold league? huh? what? ... I can't actually believe that any Korean (or other pro) is giving that any thought... I maybe believe that blizzard is asking tons of pros and they could get maybe 1-3 of them to comment on such a topic so they would stop asking. Personally I think changing game speed is one of the top 3 (or the absolute worst) worst idea they have had for a potential patch. You want to make the game more enjoyable for casuals, why not make a build order practice mode so people can learn to play. The list of problems such a change would bring is pretty vast imo. From reading this, it stands to reason that gold players would get matched against platinum players, that is currently how matchmaking works. If you are gold and playing at a high level you could be matched against plat and diamond players. They would be playing at "faster" speed, therefore their workers would mine faster, units would move faster, everything in the game would progress faster for them... This would give completely unbalanced advantage to higher skilled player, which is the exact opposite of what I imagine they are trying to achieve (helping the player with lower skill). For that to not happen they would have to rework matchmaking, which would make matchmaking less accurate to accommodate an extraneous variable not related to accurate matching of skill. I like what others have said, 1) All timings would change from league to league 2) wouldn't it actually just make the person playing at a faster speed have the advantage? considering his workers would be mining faster lolz? 3) When one guy loses he would just diminish the win by saying (you played on slow) 4) If I'm a masters player playing 2s with my buddy I have to play at frustratingly slow speed 5) I'm sure there are more, I can't wait to her other peoples' thoughts on such a change. Honestly I couldn't focus on anything else because I'm stuck on what a terrible idea this is. I'll be the first to admit I thought very poorly of the "no macro mechanics" change, and I did end up liking that, but this... I really can't imagine. Reading the phrase you've marked in bold, I think you have not understood the basic idea. Both players would play at the same speed. The speed should be selectable, not just enforced.
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.
Source[/QUOTE]
The way matchmaking currently works, if you are in gold league and playing at a higher level than gold, you will get match against a higher league player, such as plat or diamond. Based on this statement it stands to reason that you would be matched against plat or even diamond players playing at different game speeds.
This would mean that a gold league player playing at a slower speed could end up playing against a diamond playing at the faster speed.
Because everything about the game progresses more quickly at faster game speeds this means the diamond player's workers would mine faster, the units would move across the map faster, he could expand faster, it would a completely unfair advantage to the better player.
By trying to help the player with lower skill they would be making it even harder for them.
You would actually have to change the way matchmaking works just to make sure you didn't have matching across leagues. Then you would have a less accurate matchmaking system because you are matching on an extraneous variable that is unrelated to how well you are playing, but only concerns not mixing and matching outside of game speeds.
Also imagine playing in gold league at slower speeds, then you finally advance to plat and you're super happy about it, then you get crushed over and over because you've been playing with training wheels this whole time. I imagine that would feel like running into a brick wall.
|
The problem with ultras is this :
In good balancing - army compositions trade cost efficiently vs each other - but both sides lose units, for example,
1-1 marnies will trade vs 1:0 marines well - but you will both lose units. At the end you might end up with a 200- 300 mineral advantage that snowballs and lets you win the game
Another example, roach ravager vs protoss - Protoss might win the fight, but will lose units. To compensate, zerg might have a better economy.
This was a huge problem in Wol and Hots. Collossus deathballs or Swarmhost plays for example - made your opponent lose too many units - without losing enough yourself. It wasnt trading, it was just removing your opponents army from the game.
The same problem is found with ultras. There arent many units that actually cost effectively challenge the Ultralisk. Liberators, thors, and Ghosts are good - but hard to tech into and much harder to control.
|
|
|
Faster Banelings? I had to go back and re-read that 5 times to make sure I saw that correctly. Maybe they can make them fly too while they're tweaking them.
|
On January 09 2016 09:47 NKexquisite wrote:
Faster Banelings? I had to go back and re-read that 5 times to make sure I saw that correctly. Maybe they can make them fly too while they're tweaking them.
In my personal opinion your post is very disrespectful towards other gamers and Blizzard itself.
Banelings are currently in a very bad shape.
Please in future contribute something with more substance.
|
On January 09 2016 09:51 A_needle_jog wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2016 09:47 NKexquisite wrote:
Faster Banelings? I had to go back and re-read that 5 times to make sure I saw that correctly. Maybe they can make them fly too while they're tweaking them. In my personal opinion your post is very disrespectful towards other gamers and Blizzard itself. Banelings are currently in a very bad shape. Please in future contribute something with more substance.
I don't think buffing the base speed helps much though. It could also make them (unintentionally) really strong in early game offense and defense if Blizzard overtunes it. They could try changing the research time for baneling speed instead or something to that extent, or buff their health slightly so that tanks can't kill them in one shot.
In the end, the problem for ling/bane/muta seems to be the fact that it's not larva efficient.
|
On January 09 2016 09:51 A_needle_jog wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2016 09:47 NKexquisite wrote:
Faster Banelings? I had to go back and re-read that 5 times to make sure I saw that correctly. Maybe they can make them fly too while they're tweaking them. In my personal opinion your post is very disrespectful towards other gamers and Blizzard itself. Banelings are currently in a very bad shape. Please in future contribute something with more substance.
They are decent. They deal well with some of the strongest units in the game - marines, zerglings, workers and aren't terrible against various other units (hellbats, hydras, hellions, zealots, adepts). If dropped into the middle of them, they can even be used efficiently against various armored units. + Show Spoiler +Problem with that is not the baneling but the achingly slow speed of speed upgraded overlords. As a reference, it's the same as Thor speed.
The baneling is in an OK place and makes for very fun micro scenarios. They shouldn't tinker with its speed, tags or damage vs light. They could tinker a bit with its damage vs nonlight targets to see if it would be too universal if it did like 25+10 instead of 20+15, or maybe add 5 health or 1 armor, but neither of those is necessary. Or maybe buff baneling speed to 100/100 or so. (really, I'm just throwing out unnecessary tweaks that might not be broken)
Against Protoss and Zerg as I said a major buff to its viability would be faster drops, which obviously would also have other (probably problematic) implications.
In the end, the problem for ling/bane/muta seems to be the fact that it's not larva efficient.
I think it is only partly that. It has a lot to do with the openings in my opinion. It looks like just can't smoothly open into ling/bling at the moment, you probably need some form of roach/ravagers early, not just due to larva but due to liberators and possibly mass reaper openings.
I think this is one thing that zergs will figure out eventually, how to not overcommit to roaches, how to get the melee upgrades faster, transition back into the zerglings/banelings and get a spire up to actually deal with the drops. But at the moment the roach/ravager is just the much less technical options to deal with the variety of terran builds thrown around. Maybe the larva and the 12 worker start that allows for much harder terran 2-bases ends up too much and maybe ravager/infestor is really the way to deal with marine midgames, but I personally believe that we will eventually see some form of ling/bling/corruptor compositions.
|
wtf why don`t change adapt Adept and Warp Prism?? DK and blance tam is definite idiot
User was temp banned for this post.
|
New minor patch was just posted; looks unrelated. Just adds a 'pre-purchase now' thing for Covert Ops.
|
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.
True. However, i really don't think to slow down game speed for the low leagues is a great idea.
What about "training league" ? Does it still exist ? I remember to play a lot of games in this league to get rid of ladder stress. I think it is the best way to practice. If my memory is right, time was slowly and maps pool was specific (rocks to avoid early rush).
|
On January 09 2016 06:21 CannonsNCarriers wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2016 06:19 Charoisaur wrote:
the fact that there are pros that say ghost liberator is unbeatable for zerg is quite ridicolous.
Did they ask firecake for feedback? Ghost/Lib is handily beaten by Zerglings of all things. No ghosts will be getting off snipes if zerglings are on the field. I mean really, who did they talk to here? I think it is Catz.
I didn't offer feedback, because I understand the game well enough to know that I don't understand the game well enough yet, unlike you. But trust me on this, whichever pro they did talk to, understands the game far better than you do.
|
|
|
On January 09 2016 10:04 Elentos wrote:
In the end, the problem for ling/bane/muta seems to be the fact that it's not larva efficient.
I've heard this a few times now, and I'm not sure how it makes sense. OK, Injects are worse, but at least until 3 Rax Reaper became a thing in the last couple of weeks, Zerg was rolling in more minerals than ever before (free 3 bases in general, Prion Terrances on top of that). So how did Zerg not have enough minerals to get one extra Hatchery + Queen? What am I missing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
