|
On April 12 2016 06:21 Nerchio wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2016 06:18 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 12 2016 06:15 Nerchio wrote:On April 12 2016 06:10 DinoMight wrote:
Wait 6 months to take any action on a stupidly Zerg favored PvZ.
A couple of Protoss players figure out how to win the matchup a bit... Talk about P nerfs immediately. Cool.
Blizzard hates Protoss confirmed. And you know what? It's probably because of people writing stupid whiny threats. Or some delusion that people actually like Nerchio (I keep hearing this a lot, in casts and stuff... who actually likes Nerchio?)
I think there's no other explanation. It makes NO sense how fucking quickly they've even hinted at a Protoss nerf when for so long win rates have been low 40s for P and they've done nothing.
Also, pretty much everything that they've done or want to do makes life for the sub GM Protoss INFINITELY harder and less fun. I really don't get how you can decide to just make life hell for 1/3 of your player base.
If you care about Protoss, tweet at Blizzard using #Protosslivesmatter
I like how you came into this topic and started talking about liking me or not like if I was the only reason they do not nerf zerg. People that do not understand this game should not talk about game balance so you can be mad all you want but the truth is that without early game advantage zerg doesn't exist in mid and late game at all. if you were to keep it realistic, what kind of move would you like Blizzard to make to improve things in the mu ? For instance, when you say "nerf immortal", what kind of nerf would you want to be tested ? I think we are not going to achieve a lot of meta changes with small updates unfortunately. Maybe going back to pre-lotv Immortal or trying shield less cooldown/less shield? But I also understand that if we nerf Immortal we need to nerf Ravagers and Lurkers as well.
I think this is the main problem : phoenix into immortals is really hard to deal with but P can't play anything else. So you would have to at least nerf lurkers for the mu to remain fair.
By the way do you think bane centric styles have any chance of shaking the meta ?
|
On April 12 2016 06:18 sAsImre wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2016 06:14 Big J wrote:
Thinking about it, I think blizzard is mainly trying to react to the daily whine-thread on reddit with this. They haven't talked about anything specifically how to nerf protoss or anything, it's just them telling reddit that Protoss isn't weak by supporting the other side for a moment in time, after heating up the discussion for a long time the other way around by making it sound as if Protoss needed buffs. What i really like about all of this is that we're getting map updates and they don't patch anything else. Which right now is pretty much the best move imo.
I guess given that blizzard is not going to go back to the active patch philosophy that made 2010-2011 WoL so amazing and kept it always fresh, this may really be a good thing as you say. At least they are not going to patch something big and then watch for 8 months like that.
Though it doesn't really make me want to play a lot to be honest. Regardless whether it is balanced or not, regardless whether there is still stuff to figure out or not, I'm not in love with many of the basic dynamics like being pylon rushed nearly every TvP, losing TvTs on the basis of dropping my tanks 0.3 seconds after my opponent or the stupidity that is the current superpower bio-midgame vs giving up against an equal supply ultralisk army.
|
On April 12 2016 06:23 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2016 06:21 Nerchio wrote:On April 12 2016 06:18 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 12 2016 06:15 Nerchio wrote:On April 12 2016 06:10 DinoMight wrote:
Wait 6 months to take any action on a stupidly Zerg favored PvZ.
A couple of Protoss players figure out how to win the matchup a bit... Talk about P nerfs immediately. Cool.
Blizzard hates Protoss confirmed. And you know what? It's probably because of people writing stupid whiny threats. Or some delusion that people actually like Nerchio (I keep hearing this a lot, in casts and stuff... who actually likes Nerchio?)
I think there's no other explanation. It makes NO sense how fucking quickly they've even hinted at a Protoss nerf when for so long win rates have been low 40s for P and they've done nothing.
Also, pretty much everything that they've done or want to do makes life for the sub GM Protoss INFINITELY harder and less fun. I really don't get how you can decide to just make life hell for 1/3 of your player base.
If you care about Protoss, tweet at Blizzard using #Protosslivesmatter
I like how you came into this topic and started talking about liking me or not like if I was the only reason they do not nerf zerg. People that do not understand this game should not talk about game balance so you can be mad all you want but the truth is that without early game advantage zerg doesn't exist in mid and late game at all. if you were to keep it realistic, what kind of move would you like Blizzard to make to improve things in the mu ? For instance, when you say "nerf immortal", what kind of nerf would you want to be tested ? I think we are not going to achieve a lot of meta changes with small updates unfortunately. Maybe going back to pre-lotv Immortal or trying shield less cooldown/less shield? But I also understand that if we nerf Immortal we need to nerf Ravagers and Lurkers as well. I think this is the main problem : phoenix into immortals is really hard to deal with but P can't play anything else. So you would have to at least nerf lurkers for the mu to remain fair. By the way do you think bane centric styles have any chance of shaking the meta ?
I am not a fan of those right now because I didn't have enough practice with that but we can see it's working quite well for some Zergs so I believe it's a viable style. On the other hand I feel like you rely on your opponent making a lot of mistakes.
|
On April 12 2016 06:15 Nerchio wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2016 06:10 DinoMight wrote:
Wait 6 months to take any action on a stupidly Zerg favored PvZ.
A couple of Protoss players figure out how to win the matchup a bit... Talk about P nerfs immediately. Cool.
Blizzard hates Protoss confirmed. And you know what? It's probably because of people writing stupid whiny threats. Or some delusion that people actually like Nerchio (I keep hearing this a lot, in casts and stuff... who actually likes Nerchio?)
I think there's no other explanation. It makes NO sense how fucking quickly they've even hinted at a Protoss nerf when for so long win rates have been low 40s for P and they've done nothing.
Also, pretty much everything that they've done or want to do makes life for the sub GM Protoss INFINITELY harder and less fun. I really don't get how you can decide to just make life hell for 1/3 of your player base.
If you care about Protoss, tweet at Blizzard using #Protosslivesmatter
I like how you came into this topic and started talking about liking me or not like if I was the only reason they do not nerf zerg. People that do not understand this game should not talk about game balance so you can be mad all you want but the truth is that without early game advantage zerg doesn't exist in mid and late game at all.
Right. And as I've said countless times before, the changes to LotV economy and warpgate give Zerg an INCREDIBLE early game advantage with which they're able to bully Protoss all game long and finally tech switch/remax after the big fight.
Like a previous poster said, if a Zerg army could actually engage and fight a Protoss end game army straight up... then the game would be completely broken because of the way that Zerg production inherently works.
Zerg wins with econ and overwhelming numbers. This has always been the case.
EDIT - also, I talked about a lot of things that weren't Nerchio specific that you just chose to ignore.
|
The best change would be pathing changes. Sc2 always falls back to an army which simply does its damage way too fast because the dps/area is too high for the enemy army to trade reasonably.
Change the blob pathing and you will have a better foundation to balance around it.
It would also look a lot better which is imo just as important for enjoyment (both watching and playing the game) than actual balance numbers. Not that this is anything new, but hey blizzard said they are still open for bigger changes... (i think they also said one time that they already tried it internally though)
|
On April 12 2016 06:27 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2016 06:15 Nerchio wrote:On April 12 2016 06:10 DinoMight wrote:
Wait 6 months to take any action on a stupidly Zerg favored PvZ.
A couple of Protoss players figure out how to win the matchup a bit... Talk about P nerfs immediately. Cool.
Blizzard hates Protoss confirmed. And you know what? It's probably because of people writing stupid whiny threats. Or some delusion that people actually like Nerchio (I keep hearing this a lot, in casts and stuff... who actually likes Nerchio?)
I think there's no other explanation. It makes NO sense how fucking quickly they've even hinted at a Protoss nerf when for so long win rates have been low 40s for P and they've done nothing.
Also, pretty much everything that they've done or want to do makes life for the sub GM Protoss INFINITELY harder and less fun. I really don't get how you can decide to just make life hell for 1/3 of your player base.
If you care about Protoss, tweet at Blizzard using #Protosslivesmatter
I like how you came into this topic and started talking about liking me or not like if I was the only reason they do not nerf zerg. People that do not understand this game should not talk about game balance so you can be mad all you want but the truth is that without early game advantage zerg doesn't exist in mid and late game at all. Right. And as I've said countless times before, the changes to LotV economy and warpgate give Zerg an INCREDIBLE early game advantage with which they're able to bully Protoss all game long and finally tech switch/remax after the big fight. Like a previous poster said, if a Zerg army could actually engage and fight a Protoss end game army straight up... then the game would be completely broken because of the way that Zerg production inherently works. Zerg wins with econ. This has always been the case.
Yeah, I am playing a different game than you so there is no point in talking.
|
There is a zerg who talk about protoss abusing his race but he abuse his zerg race all the time in lotv with cheap allins.
David Kim speak about different maps and so on, but the only think that do, is force to play only 1 strategy on 1 map like on ulrena adept upgrade too not die vs zerg a click allin or drop or both.
|
Czech Republic12131 Posts
On April 12 2016 06:05 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2016 05:57 BronzeKnee wrote:On April 12 2016 05:53 BretZ wrote:
Does this make Dark's Starleague win even more prestigious? (considering win rate/path to win) Well, the main event win rate in SSL for Zerg versus Protoss was 63% (Zerg favored). But the sample size was tiny, and Dark was the reason that win rate was so good... So draw whatever conclusion you like. There is too little data to have any significance. Sure, but at the same time you probably should balance the game around the highest lvl of play possible by humans, i think? The difference between koreans and other "high lvl" gameplay (which is part of the aligulac stats) is simply too high to not consider. It's really a question of philosophy at this point.
Korean tournaments like GSL hugely shifted the WR because they get rid off idiotic maps when WCS still uses them. You cannot nerf Protoss when there are idiotic maps like Prion in tournaments. That doesn't make sense...
|
On April 12 2016 06:27 The_Red_Viper wrote:
The best change would be pathing changes. Sc2 always falls back to an army which simply does its damage way too fast because the dps/area is too high for the enemy army to trade reasonably.
Change the blob pathing and you will have a better foundation to balance around it.
It would also look a lot better which is imo just as important for enjoyment (both watching and playing the game) than actual balance numbers. Not that this is anything new, but hey blizzard said they are still open for bigger changes... (i think they also said one time that they already tried it internally though)
I'd love to see a test map where unit clumping was lessened, see what would happen to the meta. I don't trust Blizzard too much when they say they're open to big changes though, at least not that big.
|
Blizzard is open for big changes only if protoss is the race who gets the nerf because then the other 2 races will not cry, thats how it feels and terrans are the best at crying over 5 years, gg wp.
|
On April 12 2016 06:28 Nerchio wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2016 06:27 DinoMight wrote:On April 12 2016 06:15 Nerchio wrote:On April 12 2016 06:10 DinoMight wrote:
Wait 6 months to take any action on a stupidly Zerg favored PvZ.
A couple of Protoss players figure out how to win the matchup a bit... Talk about P nerfs immediately. Cool.
Blizzard hates Protoss confirmed. And you know what? It's probably because of people writing stupid whiny threats. Or some delusion that people actually like Nerchio (I keep hearing this a lot, in casts and stuff... who actually likes Nerchio?)
I think there's no other explanation. It makes NO sense how fucking quickly they've even hinted at a Protoss nerf when for so long win rates have been low 40s for P and they've done nothing.
Also, pretty much everything that they've done or want to do makes life for the sub GM Protoss INFINITELY harder and less fun. I really don't get how you can decide to just make life hell for 1/3 of your player base.
If you care about Protoss, tweet at Blizzard using #Protosslivesmatter
I like how you came into this topic and started talking about liking me or not like if I was the only reason they do not nerf zerg. People that do not understand this game should not talk about game balance so you can be mad all you want but the truth is that without early game advantage zerg doesn't exist in mid and late game at all. Right. And as I've said countless times before, the changes to LotV economy and warpgate give Zerg an INCREDIBLE early game advantage with which they're able to bully Protoss all game long and finally tech switch/remax after the big fight. Like a previous poster said, if a Zerg army could actually engage and fight a Protoss end game army straight up... then the game would be completely broken because of the way that Zerg production inherently works. Zerg wins with econ. This has always been the case. Yeah, I am playing a different game than you so there is no point in talking.
So remind me again why you're here? This is a discussion forum.
|
Immo is strong but is the only thing we currently have as a backbone in our protoss army.
Please consider letting the zerg adapt a bit. And change map pool for god ! 
|
On April 12 2016 06:30 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2016 06:27 The_Red_Viper wrote:
The best change would be pathing changes. Sc2 always falls back to an army which simply does its damage way too fast because the dps/area is too high for the enemy army to trade reasonably.
Change the blob pathing and you will have a better foundation to balance around it.
It would also look a lot better which is imo just as important for enjoyment (both watching and playing the game) than actual balance numbers. Not that this is anything new, but hey blizzard said they are still open for bigger changes... (i think they also said one time that they already tried it internally though) I'd love to see a test map where unit clumping was lessened, see what would happen to the meta. I don't trust Blizzard too much when they say they're open to big changes though, at least not that big.
With less unit clumping the game would have less cool moments like an army evaporating in 2 seconds to mass AOE. So that probably won't happen
|
Look, all I'm trying to say is Protoss got hosed for 6 months and nothing happened. Then we figure out a build that can win and IN THE NEXT UPDATE David Kim is already talking about nerfing it.
They haven't even given the build enough time to be validated as a legitimate balance concern.
It's like if the game after Jaedong vs. Has they immediately nerfed Photon Cannons.
|
On April 12 2016 06:37 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2016 06:30 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:On April 12 2016 06:27 The_Red_Viper wrote:
The best change would be pathing changes. Sc2 always falls back to an army which simply does its damage way too fast because the dps/area is too high for the enemy army to trade reasonably.
Change the blob pathing and you will have a better foundation to balance around it.
It would also look a lot better which is imo just as important for enjoyment (both watching and playing the game) than actual balance numbers. Not that this is anything new, but hey blizzard said they are still open for bigger changes... (i think they also said one time that they already tried it internally though) I'd love to see a test map where unit clumping was lessened, see what would happen to the meta. I don't trust Blizzard too much when they say they're open to big changes though, at least not that big. With less unit clumping the game would have less cool moments like an army evaporating in 2 seconds to mass AOE. So that probably won't happen
cool is really another word in the mouth of David Kim ^^
|
On April 12 2016 06:39 DinoMight wrote:
Look, all I'm trying to say is Protoss got hosed for 6 months and nothing happened. Then we figure out a build that can win and IN THE NEXT UPDATE David Kim is already talking about nerfing it.
They haven't even given the build enough time to be validated as a legitimate balance concern.
It's like if the game after Jaedong vs. Has they immediately nerfed Photon Cannons.
More like nerfing pylons, which would actually be a good thing in lotv 
|
On April 12 2016 06:39 DinoMight wrote:
Look, all I'm trying to say is Protoss got hosed for 6 months and nothing happened. Then we figure out a build that can win and IN THE NEXT UPDATE David Kim is already talking about nerfing it.
They haven't even given the build enough time to be validated as a legitimate balance concern.
It's like if the game after Jaedong vs. Has they immediately nerfed Photon Cannons.
double robo immortals styles have been said to be pretty hard to deal with for months, and now that P players have learnt to defend the early game shenanigans they're becoming problematic and I understand the update. That being said, I think not making a balance move and waiting for things like Dark's style to emerge would be the wisest idea.
|
Czech Republic12131 Posts
On April 12 2016 06:30 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2016 06:27 The_Red_Viper wrote:
The best change would be pathing changes. Sc2 always falls back to an army which simply does its damage way too fast because the dps/area is too high for the enemy army to trade reasonably.
Change the blob pathing and you will have a better foundation to balance around it.
It would also look a lot better which is imo just as important for enjoyment (both watching and playing the game) than actual balance numbers. Not that this is anything new, but hey blizzard said they are still open for bigger changes... (i think they also said one time that they already tried it internally though) I'd love to see a test map where unit clumping was lessened, see what would happen to the meta. I don't trust Blizzard too much when they say they're open to big changes though, at least not that big.
If they are open to big changes, here are my suggestions:
- remove mutalisk regen
- remove speed buffs from these units:
-- oracle
-- mutalisk(i think, not sure)
-- banshee's upgrade from LotV
-- warp prism(not sure about this, but I think its speed was buffed too)
-- DT
- remove ferrari mode from medevacs
- nerf phoenix a little
- give back Amulet for templars which are NOT warped in by wapring tech(building via gateway is warping too, sadly ><)
- also remove pick up range for WP, it was added because of Kamikaze ball and this is no longer a kamikaze ball, thus it's not needed
- remove mines, give them to hellion and finally admit it is a replacement of vulture(also mines no longer target workers, because helion harass would be insane)
So, now we have slowed the game down and it is time to rework the oracle so it is skill unit more like banshee and less like this shit we have now(meaning micro depends and better player does more damage than worse player consistently).
Now all we have to do is fix the 50 shades of doom and I think the game would be lovely
Also removing some of the "press button" micro abilities and replacing them with actual micro would be nice, but that's probably too much to ask with the heavy load of what I wrote.
One can dream
|
yepyep, basically all the stuff that's 'cool to watch' (In David Kim's opinion) needs to be replaced by stuff thats 'fun to play' (and not just for one race while the other bangs its head against the desk and ragequits the game). 
|
On April 12 2016 06:41 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2016 06:39 DinoMight wrote:
Look, all I'm trying to say is Protoss got hosed for 6 months and nothing happened. Then we figure out a build that can win and IN THE NEXT UPDATE David Kim is already talking about nerfing it.
They haven't even given the build enough time to be validated as a legitimate balance concern.
It's like if the game after Jaedong vs. Has they immediately nerfed Photon Cannons. double robo immortals styles have been said to be pretty hard to deal with for months, and now that P players have learnt to defend the early game shenanigans they're becoming problematic and I understand the update. That being said, I think not making a balance move and waiting for things like Dark's style to emerge would be the wisest idea.
I think it comes down to how often they want to patch the game. Some games do it all the damn time. Dota is almost a new game every time they patch it.
I think it's okay to have a strategy that lasts a couple of months before someone finds an answer to it. But 6 months of a race getting owned in win% in a particular matchup is too much.
They should at least try to even out the times that they're willing to let players adapt. So the balance team at least has some sort of arbitrary way of identifying what is a balance issue and what is simply a new build that players haven't learned to deal with yet.
That way, if a new "unstoppable" build comes out, we can at least judge arbitrarily if it's more or less unstoppable than the last unstoppable build.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
