Community Feedback Update - March 24 - Page 7
Forum Index > SC2 General |
danl9rm
United States3111 Posts
| ||
Ape_Island
29 Posts
On March 26 2016 15:30 IcemanAsi wrote: They already have a huge problem with new player frustration and retention rates. Showing MMR will only make that worse, then again, at this point I think they pretty much gave up about expanding the multiplayer player base. This a bold statement to just interject with in this thread, but I think it's time to implement Box Limit! *cue car crash sound byte* Deathball must be killed. | ||
IcemanAsi
Israel681 Posts
On March 27 2016 14:37 Ape_Island wrote: This a bold statement to just interject with in this thread, but I think it's time to implement Box Limit! *cue car crash sound byte* Deathball must be killed. I got to admit you completely lost me. I'm guessing I'm missing some vital reference because I have zero idea what you are talking about. | ||
liberatorgtb
Andorra14 Posts
| ||
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16647 Posts
| ||
Archeon
3253 Posts
On March 27 2016 16:10 IcemanAsi wrote: I got to admit you completely lost me. I'm guessing I'm missing some vital reference because I have zero idea what you are talking about. I guess he means a limit to the amount of units you can select at the same time with box limit? Not that that'd kill the deathball unless you set it to <20. | ||
petro1987
Brazil374 Posts
On March 26 2016 15:30 IcemanAsi wrote: They already have a huge problem with new player frustration and retention rates. Showing MMR will only make that worse, then again, at this point I think they pretty much gave up about expanding the multiplayer player base. I don't think showing MMR will have a great impact on this. Dota 2, for instance, shows the MMR directly and they have a huge player base. | ||
coolmiyo
51 Posts
On March 28 2016 04:20 petro1987 wrote: I don't think showing MMR will have a great impact on this. Dota 2, for instance, shows the MMR directly and they have a huge player base. but dota 2 is 5vs5, u can blame everyone and complain about ur bad luck. totally different. | ||
BaronVonOwn
299 Posts
On March 26 2016 05:04 AxionSteel wrote: Liberators seem overpowered for sure, everyone knows they're strong.Terran really relies on them to stay in the game though. I can't help but feel Terran will be pretty weak against Protoss if this is a really strong Nerf. Would definitely prefer a tank buff instead of some speed banshee thing to compensate.. It feels like terran got left behind in LOTV. Marauder nerf, ultra buff, adepts and the immortal change have really weakened terran's ground game. Terran's additions were all gimmicks. As someone said earlier cyclones and thors really need to be revamped and for that matter I think liberator needs some changes too. I imagine liberators could be given the corsair/valkyrie treatment with high attack speed / low damage. As for terran mech I feel like all the abilities need to be swapped around. For example I agree with the devs that thors should have a strong single-target anti-air attack to deal with capital ships / armored air. But then terran would have no ground anti-light air attack so cyclones should pick up thor's attack albeit with higher mobility and a lower range to balance that. Lastly it would make my Starcraft dreams come true if hot pickups were removed and tanks could take the cyclone's shoot-while-moving ability so I can micro tank battles and tank mode would finally not be useless. | ||
Chaggi
Korea (South)1936 Posts
On March 28 2016 04:20 petro1987 wrote: I don't think showing MMR will have a great impact on this. Dota 2, for instance, shows the MMR directly and they have a huge player base. Losing in any team game or MOBA means 1) You can blame your teammates/shift blame elsewhere 2) The games are longer so you can't just drop like 200 points in a blink of an eye SC is unique because the games start faster so you can be tilted from previous games, 1v1 so you can't blame anyone and tilt actually will affect you more, and it's more mechanically and attention demanding than other comparable games. | ||
PressureSC2
122 Posts
How many days do you believe you will need to determine what might be a good damage amount to initially try out on a balance test map for the Thor? We could begin to run some numbers on hits per unit against BL, Tempest, etc. How many weeks before it could be ok to try out some numbers/changes to the Cyclone? I am sure that everyone would welcome some kind of timetable on beginning to test. Thank you | ||
MaxTa
61 Posts
TERRAN - Tankivac: Increase delay time on shooting + damage buff to siege (what blizzard talked about for the last 2 months) - Liberator: 4 supply cost, radius nerf but gets it back with the range upgrade, reduce move speed to 4.25 (instead of 4.72) - Thor: new upgrade that requires fusion core and give 15 range in AA (similar to Bw goliath range upgrade) - Cyclone: Lower cost to 150/75/2, Increase Hp to 150 ZERG - Ravager: Increase corrosive bile cooldown, Increase morph time to 20 sec (instead of 9 sec Hots time) - Lurker: Reduce range to 8 - Nydus: Remove invulnerability, decrease cost to 150/100 - Ultra: 6 armor in total (instead of 8) - Brood lord: 6 supply cost PROTOSS - Warp Prism: Increase cost to 200/100 - Phenix: Reduce move speed to 5.4 (instead of 5.95) - Oracle: Increase creation time to 43 sec (instead of 36 hots time) - Voidray: Increase Charge cooldown to 75 sec (instead of 60 sec hots time) - Tempest: 6 supply cost | ||
Pseudorandom
United States120 Posts
On March 29 2016 04:42 MaxTa wrote: Here are my suggestions for balance : TERRAN - Tankivac: Increase delay time on shooting + damage buff to siege (what blizzard talked about for the last 2 months) - Liberator: 4 supply cost, radius nerf but gets it back with the range upgrade, reduce move speed to 4 (instead of 4.72) - Thor: new upgrade that requires fusion core and give 15 range in AA (similar to Bw goliath range upgrade) - Cyclone: Lower cost to 150/75/2, Increase Hp to 150 ZERG - Ravager: Increase corrosive bile cooldown, Increase morph time to 20 sec (instead of 9 sec Hots time) - Lurker: Reduce range to 7 - Nydus: Remove invulnerability, decrease cost to 150/100 - Ultra: 6 armor in total (instead of 8) - Brood lord: 8 supply cost PROTOSS - Warp Prism: Increase cost to 200/100 - Phenix: Reduce move speed to 5 (instead of 5.95) - Voidray: Increase Charge cooldown to 75 sec (instead of 60 sec hots time) - Tempest: 6 supply cost - Carrier: 8 supply cost 8 supply broods? 8 supply carriers? Excluding everything else, these should not happen at the least. No one is going to waste 24 supply to have 3 broods. | ||
MaxTa
61 Posts
8 supply broods? 8 supply carriers? Excluding everything else, these should not happen at the least. No one is going to waste 24 supply to have 3 broods. Well maybe it might me too much so I agree we could try it at 6 to see... I will update that ^^ | ||
coolmiyo
51 Posts
| ||
MaxTa
61 Posts
maxta got better ideas than david kim lol thanks but most of those ideas are summed up from what I have gathered here on TL since Lotv release and I just added my 2 cents... | ||
tokinho
United States785 Posts
On March 25 2016 03:17 Musicus wrote: + Show Spoiler + ![]() We’ve arrived at a point where we want to work with you guys to lock down changes regarding the ladder revamp and begin work on the implementation side. We have been discussing more based on you previous feedback in a similar post, and have been making improvements as we started implementing the feature little by little. Now we’re at the stage where the overall design looks very solid, and we want to focus on doing the implementation. So we’ll review where we are at now, collect your feedback, and finalize our direction. GM League Currently, we’re thinking that the best way to go is to update Grandmaster League with new players, promotions, and demotions each day at a specified time—all based strictly on skill. We see two main advantages to this approach. First, we can have an accurate, skill-based representation of the best 200 players on the server on any given day. Second, it also makes things clearer on the esports side, especially if tournaments pull from this list. As an added bonus, we also like that this could promote more intense competition during this period of the day (though mostly for just this specific group of top players). Showing MMR This is something we’ve received the most feedback on and we’ve been exploring the concept heavily internally. Currently, we’re leaning towards clearly displaying your MMR in the UI. The more we dug into the topic of making the ranks, divisions, and leagues as accurate as possible, the more we realized that there were other potential problems that we could have introduced. Since we have the MMR available already, we think it might be best to just show it as the most accurate measurement of a player’s skill. League & Tier In developing the new League & Tier system, the main concern was that achieving a high-degree of accuracy required that we enable mid-season demotions. Although we know that there are many players out there who want to see demotions enabled, we believe this feedback mostly stems from the fact that there currently isn’t a reliable way to tell your skill right now. The downside of enabling demotions is that we could potentially take away from a players’ biggest accomplishment that season; this downside is magnified if it’s their first time getting to a specific league, which may make the person not want to play the game anymore due to the risk of losing this reward. Because we will be showing MMR, we wonder if it’s best to have the ranking system display the highest League & Tier achieved during the current season. There’s really no need to show the same number two different ways, and we can show two cool numbers instead. This way, if I were to tell my friends that I’m in Master Tier 1, but my MMR is a solid Master Tier 2 (naming is not final), it clearly shows 1) the highest I’ve achieved this season and 2) where my skill is at the moment. For the number of tiers, we’ve spent time analyzing and evaluating how the Heroes of the Storm system works because their 50 ranks would be very similar to our originally announced 10 tiers per league (we would have 60 tiers if we strip out the leagues). For StarCraft II, due to the amount of movement that would occur with having this many tiers, this system doesn’t look to be the way to go. So we debated on going with 5 tiers or 3 tiers, and we’re currently leaning towards 3 for a couple reasons. First, talking about leagues in StarCraft II has naturally tended towards using 3 tiers. When players talk about where they are at within a league, perhaps the most common way to refer to the tiers currently is to say that he or she is in “High Diamond,” “Mid Diamond,” or “Low Diamond.” So colloquially, this fits well with how players already discuss the ladder. The second reason is that we can always increase the number of tiers available in the future if 3 is not enough. Going from 3 to 5 or 3 to 10 would be easier than doing the reverse, which means we don’t need to remove functionality from the system. This is where we’re at currently, and as you can see we’ve narrowed in on the most critical components of Ladder Revamp. If you have thoughts on these areas, we’d ask that we get discussions going so that we can lock down the design. We’re currently aiming to finalize the design of this feature within the next couple weeks, and are potentially aiming for a mid- to late-summer release in order to have enough time to fully work through the implementation. Separate MMR Per Race We hear your feedback regarding this feature. We had originally set the priority for this to come after ladder revamp, but we’re currently exploring ways to potentially get started on this feature even sooner. Although we haven’t set an exact timeline, we just wanted to let you know that we agree that this feature is important to the game and we’re discussing ways to release it more quickly. We’ll be sure to keep everyone updated! Balance Moving onto balance in Legacy of the Void, we’ve been discussing and testing various topics and we want to get a Balance Test Map out as soon as possible after hearing your opinions on our proposed changes for testing. We’re currently aiming to release the Balance Test Map next week, so let’s start discussing the following changes more aggressively this weekend. Ravager Corrosive Bile cooldown increased from 10 to 14 We definitely hear the pros and cons you’ve discussed that nerfing Overlord drops instead could bring. The reason why we’re more interested in the Ravager nerf being tested is because it is the more impactful, bigger nerf. The main concern many of our community members point out (especially on the KR side) is that this change is a nerf against both Terran and Protoss, whereas nerfing Overlord drops is targeted more as a nerf vs. Protoss. This is true. To be clear—we’re not saying that we have to be going the Ravager nerf route—we just want to test this one first. Therefore, before we make a decision on what unit to nerf, we wanted to test this concept out fully to know the effects of this change in both matchups. The Overlord drop nerf doesn’t require as much testing because it’s a very safe nerf that can’t really break another area of the game. Banshee speed upgrade requirement changed to Armory and cost reduced to 100/100 Due to the current state of the Banshees, we wanted to try going more aggressive with this change, so that we can potentially bring various Banshee-based strategies back into the mix. We know from testing before the release of the game that the speed upgrade at a much earlier tier is a huge buff to Terran, and we wanted to make sure to combo this with a nerf in a similar area so that we make sure to not just buff Terran. Liberator ability radius reduction from 5 to 4 After going through the details of reducing the range of the ability and hearing your feedback on the current strength of Liberators, we thought it might be better to go a bit harder on this nerf so that we can also go heavier on the Banshee buff, so that we can potentially get situations where going one or the other unit can be viable instead of it being Liberators all the time. With this change, the total range of Liberators will be nerfed, as well as the damaging area. We hope this change feels more fitting, and once we get the Balance Test Map online we’d love your opinions on how these changes feel. Thor AA damage changed to flat and single target We’re still looking at numbers for this, but we’re thinking something similar to the idea of the Thor’s damage against the ground: High damage per shot with a low rate of fire. With this change, we wonder if we can separate out the Thor’s AA role from units such as the Widow Mine or the Liberator. We considered whether this could overlap with the Viking, and although there will be more overlap than before, there are still many differences between the two units. Between the many obvious differences, the Thor’s resistance to splash damage, and their different flat damage values, the two units will still be in unique places. Cyclone We’ve also been testing different numbers for the Cyclone, but we feel that a change to this unit isn’t as critical right now compared to the other unit changes mentioned above, so it might be better to hold off on exploring this route for now. The main goal here is still to eventually get the unit to a place where it has a solid role in the early/mid stages of the game, but not be effective en masse in the late game. I don't understand. The ladder maps have been mostly frustrating. I guess to add diversity to play they just make it so one race is broken. Trying to grind out all 3 races is super frustrating(as random, you get no vetoes and I swear you get the maps and styles that are vetoed by the other players). I hate lerilak so fucking bad. I've hated that map since it came out. Its been on rotation for soo long. I play it almost exclusively as protoss, even though I'm a random player and have an abysmal 38% win rate on that map with nearly 3 times the number of games as protoss over the other 2 races on it. The level of stress from the map pool makes the game really not good after a day of working. As far as ladder showing MMR. I could really care less. There isn't a rewards system in starcraft 2 and the only reward is having some internet nerds shove their e-penis in your face with a MMR number. Just another way to have people feel some kind of reward for playing by putting other's down. Not really going to make me want to play more or less. What is the exact purpose of the cyclone? I really want to know. Blizzard what is this unit supposed to do? If you want it used in the mid game. It shouldn't cost so much gas. You get 2 cyclone vs 2 cloaked banshees, but with 0 harass potential and almost no defensive potential. It is literally only effective in 1 on 1 anti-air fights, with absolutely no other units present. This is something that a viking or liberator is better at. There is nothing else worth saying about this unit. I don't know which is worse swarm hosts or cyclones. It is not designed for the mid-game. Never has been, and never will be. I would like to see if the game designers are random players. They make decisions that don't feel right for play sometimes. Also, as far as ravager balance. The biggest issue is not ravager damage. It's the ability to choose between, burrow, nydus, lurker, mutas, ling drops, or ravagers when the units are already across the map. There is no commitment to the unit until morphing and it kills many openers if you don't prepare for it. I don't understand why there isn't a ravager den in the game like a lurker den. This could be used to allow more scouting, fine tune upgrades for the unit, and keep all the great features that ravagers have. It would bring back much more stabilty to PvZ with forge openers. (that could be bypassed by ling drops if you skip the cannon in the main.) Why this options isn't being discussed is confusing? Did the koreans say it was a bad idea? As far as the ones i'm talked to they all agree its a good idea, similar to the oracle changes proposed. | ||
PressureSC2
122 Posts
| ||
LSN
Germany696 Posts
| ||
RaFox17
Finland4581 Posts
On March 29 2016 05:10 Pseudorandom wrote: 8 supply broods? 8 supply carriers? Excluding everything else, these should not happen at the least. No one is going to waste 24 supply to have 3 broods. With those changes Immortal/archon/charge zealot composition would be even more difficult for zerg to beat. At this point they often walk trough even heavy lurker lines. You would need to nerf immortals quite heavily to compensate for those nerfs. | ||
| ||