|
Team Color Selection
We wanted to let you know that the team color selection that we talked about last time should be going out sometime next month due to feedback around the suggestion being super positive. We were initially planning for it to go out this summer, but the team members who are implementing the feature were able to find a more efficient implementation, so we were able to speed up the release date. Players will be able to customize the “team colors” which they see (which by default, display the player as green, enemies as red, allies as yellow, and neutral units as white) . It will be possible to set these 4 colors to whichever colors you prefer.
Protoss
There has been a lot of talk around Protoss lately regarding Protoss needing help, diversity in build orders in PvZ, and questions on buffs vs. nerfs. We wanted to discuss these points in detail this week.
Helping Protoss and Protoss Build Order Diversity in PvZ
First, we would like to point out the main reason we’ve been exploring things like Ravager nerf or Overlord drop nerf were to increase Protoss strategic diversity and to help Protoss early game vs. Zerg. Because of these two threats, Protoss looks to be opening Phoenix as they are quite effective at stopping drops, and also are able to be effective versus Ravagers while the Protoss buys time to time to tech up to Robo. Exploring changes to Ravagers or Overlords drops are still on the table, and we’re have two lines of thought on this front right now.
- If the top pros are correct on their stance, we can do a nerf in this area to help Protoss opening diversity while helping out Zerg with other changes such as nerfing Immortals in the later stages of the game or exploring changes to mi- game Zerg options such as Swarm Host buffs.
- If not, we can just simply do a nerf to Zerg on this front to help Protoss out, and we’d have a better situation not only with the strength of each side in PvZ, but Protoss will also be able to have a bit more diversity in openings.
Buffs over Nerfs
While we agree that its preferable to do a buff over a nerf where possible, we don’t see this as our highest priority. Our highest priority for making balance changes in Starcraft 2 has been to make the smallest change possible that will only affect the specific, problematic area of the game. Doing buffs over nerfs is secondary to this main goal.
By “smallest changes possible,” we mean the change only affects that one, specific balance issue (not necessarily that the change is numerically small). This is a common misunderstanding we see in newer designers, so we just wanted to clear this up so that there is little room for miscommunication. For example, 20% damage buff to Battlecruisers will be a much smaller change than a 10% buff to Marines with this definition, because the overall impact of changing Marines to this degree would be much larger.
I’m sure many of you remember the situation we had in HotS where ZvZ games came down to whoever has more Mutalisks was the winner. If we look first for buffs instead of seeking for the “smallest possible changes”, we could buff units that are good vs. Mutalisks that weren’t used such as Hydralisks or Infestors. However, either of these changes would have been such huge changes in other matchups that were not problematic at the time (infestors were used vs. Terran and Roach/Hydralisk pushes were common in PvZ). We also think that a nerf to Mutalisk would be just as bad, because Mutalisks were also used often in other matchups. In this specific case, we found a small change that happened to be a buff, and we went with the Spore Crawler +bio damage change so that there was no impact in TvZ and PvZ.
Generally speaking, the game’s most basic units are very difficult to touch due to how often they are used, how large in numbers they are used, and how tight the balance is around them currently. A 10% buff to units like Roaches, Stalkers, or Marauders is clearly not the same as a 10% buff to a unit that’s only specifically used in certain situations such as Vikings. With that said though, obviously we would prefer to find the smallest changes that are buffs rather than nerfs, but we wanted to get this information out there so that the discussions happening when there is a need for a balance change can take this into account. If the popular suggestion is something like Stalkers need a damage buff, obviously it’ll be near impossible to execute on that. Alternatively, say we were to suggest a nerf, but someone in the community was able to locate a buff instead that is even a smaller change that affects only that issue, obviously we would go with a buff instead in that situation (such as the old Brood Lord and Viper interactions).
Next Balance Test Map
The current thinking is that there isn’t enough information right now to make sure that the top pro feedback regarding PvZ is in as severe of a situation as the feedback suggests. We’d like to continue testing changes while discussing potential solutions and figuring out the specific situation of PvZ right now by playing and analyzing games.
There was also a good suggestion on the Overlord transport upgrade of having it require the speed upgrade instead, so we would definitely like to try it out. Changing the Thor to be single target and better against armored air units while making Liberators more anti light focused against air is another thing we would like to explore for sure. We believe that if we go this route, maybe the Liberator range nerf and banshee buff aren’t needed like many players point out.
We can release the next balance test map as early as next Thursday, so we’d like to hear your thoughts over the weekend before making this call.
Other things that we believe are not “must haves” that we wanted to get your input on are:
- Changing the Immortal Barrier ability to be much less powerful, but also lowering the cooldown as well so that each use isn’t as extreme.
- We also saw an interesting suggestion this week: The theory on this suggestion was that PvZ is only problematic for Protoss only at lower skill levels.
- If this is true, we could target the difficulty of usage of Disruptors by giving a bit more strength to Colossi to make it a more attractive, less micro-intensive option. This seemed like a great suggestion.
|
I still think that the Liberator anti-ground need to be tweaked. At least at my level (Diamond) it is amazing how this unit can affect a game. They disrupt my mining so much it is crazy!
I have even seen people rushing to the range upgrade and then they deny my ability to mine minerals completely.
|
On April 16 2016 02:42 b0ub0u wrote:
I still think that the Liberator anti-ground need to be tweaked. At least at my level (Diamond) it is amazing how this unit can affect a game. They disrupt my mining so much it is crazy!
I have even seen people rushing to the range upgrade and then they deny my ability to mine minerals completely.
I have seen Oracles and DTs going into my mineral lines, killing all my workers. It disrupts my mining so much it is crazy!!! 
Really like the suggestions this time.
|
On April 16 2016 02:39 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:Helping Protoss and Protoss Build Order Diversity in PvZ First, we would like to point out the main reason we’ve been exploring things like Ravager nerf or Overlord drop nerf were to increase Protoss strategic diversity and to help Protoss early game vs. Zerg. Because of these two threats, Protoss looks to be opening Phoenix as they are quite effective at stopping drops, and also are able to be effective versus Ravagers while the Protoss buys time to time to tech up to Robo.
Are they for real? I am starting to lose all hope that Blizzard actually has any idea of what's going on in this game.
|
The most disappointing thing for me in this was buffing colossi. They buff that so it's "easier" for lower level players lol... Game will be back to boring seeing colossi every game with their A move. They were going in such a good direction to if they do go this route.
|
On April 16 2016 02:55 Glorfindel! wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2016 02:42 b0ub0u wrote:
I still think that the Liberator anti-ground need to be tweaked. At least at my level (Diamond) it is amazing how this unit can affect a game. They disrupt my mining so much it is crazy!
I have even seen people rushing to the range upgrade and then they deny my ability to mine minerals completely. I have seen Oracles and DTs going into my mineral lines, killing all my workers. It disrupts my mining so much it is crazy!!! Really like the suggestions this time.
I get what you are saying. I still feel that these are much easier to deal with than Liberators. Spores? They just dance around those. And with range upgrade I can't kill them until I have air myself. If I didn't get a spire I am dead.
It is my nightmare unit to play against.
|
On April 16 2016 02:42 b0ub0u wrote:
I still think that the Liberator anti-ground need to be tweaked. At least at my level (Diamond) it is amazing how this unit can affect a game. They disrupt my mining so much it is crazy!
I have even seen people rushing to the range upgrade and then they deny my ability to mine minerals completely.
Yes, liberator is just too good against ground. Either lower its dps or reduce its damage. At the moment, it is too difficult to counter it without stargate even if it is just for worker harassment if a liberator is well placed.
|
Please don't bring back brainless colo compositions.
On April 16 2016 03:07 Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2016 02:42 b0ub0u wrote:
I still think that the Liberator anti-ground need to be tweaked. At least at my level (Diamond) it is amazing how this unit can affect a game. They disrupt my mining so much it is crazy!
I have even seen people rushing to the range upgrade and then they deny my ability to mine minerals completely. Yes, liberator is just too good against ground. Either lower its dps or reduce its damage. At the moment, it is too difficult to counter it without stargate even if it is just for worker harassment if a liberator is well placed.
I don't believe zerg/protoss players would be willing to entertain the necessary buff to terran army strength needed to reduce liberator strength. So rather than enduring another widow mine style nerf for the sake of 'design' they should just drop it.
|
Buff everyting, make everything faster as well, because; exciting!!!
It's "great" if they buff the colossus, so we can see HOTS game all over again. More lasers, corrosive bile everywhere, Micheal bayplosions! We already recieved a lot of blooming effect, all we need now is more lensflares! JJ abrams will be so jelly! oh wait, lets rethink, maybe the problem is caused by the many "random" buffs. Broodlord range, ling buff, ultralisk absurd , corruptors attacking buildings etc etc. But that would be too obvious to mention.
Helping Protoss and Protoss Build Order Diversity
So what about mech? because 99,9% bio with liberators seems enough diversity. 0,1% is the few skyterran games.
|
a colossus buff creates a scar on my brain
|
|
|
Blizzard still stalling while the game is fucking hemoraging players and viewership. Okay. Seems fine.
|
While the idea of changing the Immortal Barrier to less cooldown and less damage absorbed does sound cool enough, the intention does seem to be based around an overall nerf and that really troubles me.
To me the immortal right now is the most fundamentally core unit Protoss has right now against all races as it really serves a key role against a variety of units in all matchups that otherwise could be hard to replace.
I agree with the Balance Update that the goal should be to have the smallest/most efficient impact on the game to specifically isolate and target a problem in the specific matchup, I would like to propose an alternative to nerfing the Immortal as the following suggestion would largely only target the specific issue:
- Increase Corrupter +massive damage.
This change will allow Zerg to play the same and other strategies as now, but with a better ability to transition to Brood Lords. Brood Lords are great at helping with attacks against Immortals, but due to the fact that Protoss can tech to Tempest, Zerg tends to lack proper DPS versus Tempests. By allowing a better synergy between Brood Lord and Corrupter, we can actually see Zerg transition beyond their midgame aggression and into a Corrupter-based composition when facing Tempests.
The effect of the change will be very small with almost no impcat on ZvT and ZvZ but will definitely help Zerg in lategame PvZ.
There are other possibilities like buffing abduct range or parasitic bomb +massive damage, but I believe this is the most solid I have seen/heard so far that exactly lives up to the design philosophy stated in the Balance Update.
With that being said, I like the idea of making Liberator a +light oriented unit with Thor being a +armored AA unit.
Making Overlord speed a requirement for Overlord transport seems to be the perfect solution for a possible change on that area assuming we still believe there are issues even with the new maps and map changes.
|
more strength to Colossi
no
I'm glad they are backpedaling on the liberator and banshee changes but I hope thors stay good against mutas so you can use them vs a ling bane muta army which is their only use atm.
|
Pls no colossusbuff :O I thought they always tried to balance around the highlevel competition.
|
The theory on this suggestion was that PvZ is only problematic for Protoss only at lower skill levels.
If this is true, we could target the difficulty of usage of Disruptors by giving a bit more strength to Colossi to make it a more attractive, less micro-intensive option. This seemed like a great suggestion.
What does he mean "if this is true"? Isn't he aware he has all of the statistical data available to be analyzed so he can be 100% of whether this is the case or not.
And this isn't a new theory at all. It's the most obvious one. David Kim's comments just tilts me.
That aside, I rather have them increase the micro skillcap of Zerg. The race just has too many amove friendly units.
|
I just wish they would buff terrans lategame. It's tiring to play on a timer every game.
|
I think all of this sounds nice and dandy, but there should be design changes or quality of life changes as well and IMO sometimes over balance.
The Immortal nerf I think is both unwarranted and also in the wrong direction. It would be cool to see pro's turn off auto-cast more and use it manually. So I think if it should indeed be nerfed, it would be much cooler to nerf the cooldown, as that promotes the use of manual Barrier, also the counter utility of being able to proc the shield, with just one shot would be much stronger.
|
plz buff the colossus, id come back to sc2. old ppl like me get arthritis from microing disruptors 
|
Let's go through it step by step:
PvZ build order diversity
Protoss don't open phoenix because of drops and ravagers. If you specifically wanted to just defend those there are better options. But phoenixes are much more all-around, give protoss vital scouting, deter the zerg from mutalisk play to counter immortals, can do a bit of damage to drones, overlords and queens and most of all deter zerg from mutalisk play.
If you nerf drops or ravagers protoss will still play phoenixes.
Also, what about the other races? I want build order diversity in TvP too and not always open with a CC, a starport, a factory and 3 barracks. Same goes for TvZ and TvT... give me more openings than factory/starport/a few rax expansions.
Colossus buff
If you buff this unit it will be used on the prolevel too, in particular in TvP. If you want to buff the colossus for easier splash damage in lower leagues without affecting the prolevel, buff it a bit but nerf its mobility a bit.
Buffs over nerfs
Just do whatever is best. Don't choose a buff over a nerf just because it sells better to the community.
Immortal barrier change
Sounds like an interesting idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CM809rKWoAAiV0C.jpg)
