|
This was posted on reddit, but I didn't see i there.
Original post is by /u/skadiskadi.
Original post is here
Original article here
Q. Please introduce yourself.
A. Hello, My name is David Kim who takes on SC2 league and multiplayer design.
Q. Dark's baneling builds is so op. Do you prepare patch only from match with pros?
A. I made a patch not only pros but also ordinary user's play. Dark's strategy is new, so it is hard to determine. New strategy always be powerful, hence it takes to time to respond. I'm watching this build and I will decide later.
Q. Zerg and terran's ground unit become powerful, keeping colossus in current status is right?
A. What we intended first was colossus could be used in users' level, but in pros level colossus may compete with disruptors. Actually, colossus in hots or wol was too strong, so there was no difference in pros' and users' level. However, I agree with the nerf was too much. If we buff colossus, there will be a small buff but not a rollback. We want to make colossus to be used regularly but ground splash unit position should be taken to disruptors. However, we can't buff colossus now because protoss is not weak now.
Q. Maru's only liberator build in TvZ was too strong, and nobody seems to win against that build. Also, even before liberator comes out, terran is also strong. Do you think balance in TvZ is appropriate?
A. If only liberator build is too strong, I'm absolutely sure there should be nerf. Even not strong as you think, if liberator always be key part of army, this also should be changed. If opponent can't defend and counter only one unit build, nerf must be needed. We tested the solution at balance test map, also are thinking about reworking thor to take up the slack.
Q. There is a voice which breaks balance in TvZ, one of major reason of balance breaking is reducing the number of larva injected from queen. Are you keeping this status?
A. Not only nerf larva, there was a nerf of other race's macro such as mule, chrono boost. In this situation, we can't hardly tell the larva nerf is the reason of balance. 'Siege Tank + Medivac' is powerful to TvZ and liberator is hard to stop without Ravager. We should be cautious about larva buff even zerg has a hard time now, because this could change PvZ. I think we need to decide who needs buff or nerf exactly then finding solution should be next in this situation.
Q. TvT always be 'Siege Tank + Medivac' combat. You tried to change this aspect through balance test map, do you have same opinion now?
A. First of all, we decide that we don't need to change now. At first, why we decided to change that aspect was there was a problem as a variation, whereas there was many feedback like "why do you nerf 'Siege Tank + Medivac'? It is so fun!" I think 'Siege Tank + Medivac' have a problem in variation, but if players love this, we put this aside now and solve the problem later when it arise as a huge problem. I'm sure that this aspect will be a huge problem if it repeats and seems to be never changed. We are going to prepare to fix the problem when it emerge to the surface, but this is not a huge problem now.
Q. there was huge debate around zerg balance, I want your opinion about zerg.
A. I think ZvP is most hard to make balance. Feedback always goes extreme. Foreign community says protoss can't beat zerg, Korean pros says zerg can't beat protoss so immortals nerf should be needed. Sometimes I feel I'm not sure what to do, but at last week, we started to test adding +bio damage to photon cannon. In pros, mutalisks are not used often, but in ordinary users level, mutalisks may be a problem. So we wanted not to affect this patch to pro level. I think we need to decide this kind of problem correctly.
Q. What kind of race vs race (종족전, hard to translate) well balanced as your opinion?
A. It is hard to tell now. It haven't been long time after launching lotv, gamers are studying various strategy now. Even balance may be good this week, in next week it could be worse. I think accepting instant feedback and applying this to game is important.
Q. One of major complaint from korean players is "Blizzard only accept feedback from NA/EU players who have bad skilled players, so game become weird". Is feedback from korean players lower than from NA/EU? or rate of reflection of feedback from NA/EU is major?
A. We also heard same complaint from foreign players. Korean pros complain about why Blizzard heard voice only from foreign pros, and Foreign complain about same thing(only from Korean pros). We can't take sides. We hear all voices from pros from Korea, NA, and ordinary users, so we agree that all players have same thought. For example from last balance test map, thor and liberator is from Korean feedback and +bio damage to photon cannon was from ordinary user level. WE DON'T TAKE SIDES.
Q. There have been 5 months from last balance patch, even you test balance test map so long time. Do you have a plan of balance patch and when balance patch comes out?
A. First of all, I want to explain why balance test patch isn't coming out. We are looking the situation rather than hasty patch. Direct change of balance should be come out as possible as we can when most needed. I think this is good timing to patch. I was going to patch next week, but Dreamhack Austin will be held next week. We are discussing time of patch, before Dreamhack or after dreamhack. If we patch at start of next week, we patch as current balance test map but will remove the changes of banshee.
Q. What do you think most important things in next balance patch?
A. First of all, this week's balance test map shows my thought. If you see balance test map updated every week, you may realize the point. Currently, we are interested in swarm host buff, changes of liberator and thor.
Q. Please say last words to Korean fans.
A. Recently, Korean users didn't get translation of sc2 update. It was a mistake. Korean fans became angry saying "Now, you are not going to communicate with us!", but we want to say that we are sorry for that. I think Korea is most easiest region to gather feedback. We think communication between fans and adjusting balancing direction is most important thing, so please give us feedback as much as you can.
|
So he doesn't want to change tankivacs because players love it. Ahahahaha nice excuse DK.
the questions are horrible btw who did this interview?
.
|
We also heard same complaint from foreign players. Korean pros complain about why Blizzard heard voice only from foreign pros, and Foreign complain about same thing(only from Korean pros). We can't take sides. We hear all voices from pros from Korea, NA, and ordinary users, so we agree that all players have same thought. For example from last balance test map, thor and liberator is from Korean feedback and +bio damage to photon cannon was from ordinary user level. WE DON'T TAKE SIDES.
Foreign community says protoss can't beat zerg, Korean pros says zerg can't beat protoss so immortals nerf should be needed.
This is the very politically correct answer, and to be honest I don't what else he could reasonably answer.
Nevertheless, I hope it's not entirely true, because, at the moment, foreign pros still have a lot of things to improve in mechanics and decision making which makes actual balance issues totally minors when it come to explain the ZvP winrates.
Back in the days, you had people like Thorzain and Stephano who were strong enough to proove imbalances and influence the design team, I don't think many foreigners are able to do this nowadays.
On the other hand, Korea has some monster protosses atm, plus one titan in Zest, and these guys don't really need any help.
To sum up, it's ok to listen to foreign protosses when they say ZvP is imba, but I hope Blizzard keeps in mind 80% of their problems come from skills. Having a lot of Z in foreign scene is ok if the top Korean remains balanced, but breaking Top Korean balance just to allow more foreign protosses in DreamHacks will only lead to big issues.
|
Terrible interview in my opininion.
Terrible questions (Maru's only liberator build in TvZ was too strong, and nobody seems to win against that build, when Maru did that build only once from what i recall, and the same day TY tried something similar but lost) and terrible answers, players do love tankivac? Not all of them, and most of all he keeps ignoring the fact that TvT is same composition every match. No variation.
I seriously doubt he takes feedbacks from normal ladder players, because a lot of them keep saying that the game is too fast and too focused on harrass, but not a single word about it has come from Blizzard's side.
|
On April 28 2016 22:20 Charoisaur wrote:
the questions are horrible btw who did this interview?
.
Well the questions went though translation process, so don't pay attention to their tone. aside from this, they seemed quite interesting to me.
On April 28 2016 22:20 Charoisaur wrote:
So he doesn't want to change tankivacs because players love it. Ahahahaha nice excuse DK..
Yeah I know, why the fuck is he listening to the community? It's totally not what he's been asked to do for over 4 years....
|
On April 28 2016 22:32 Temporary Happiness wrote:
...
I seriously doubt he takes feedbacks from normal ladder players, because a lot of them keep saying that the game is too fast and too focused on harrass, but not a single word about it has come from Blizzard's side.
Dude, he did propose to make the game slower for lower leagues, but everybody seemed to hate this idea.
So normal ladder players don't really seem to share your opinion...
+ Show Spoiler +
|
If only liberator build is too strong, I'm absolutely sure there should be nerf
'Siege Tank + Medivac' is powerful to TvZ
I hope that this not means that they will nerf terran..
|
Keep in mind this was translated from Korean. Don't infer anything from tone.
|
On April 28 2016 22:29 Gwavajuice wrote:
To sum up, it's ok to listen to foreign protosses when they say ZvP is imba, but I hope Blizzard keeps in mind 80% of their problems come from skills. Having a lot of Z in foreign scene is ok if the top Korean remains balanced, but breaking Top Korean balance just to allow more foreign protosses in DreamHacks will only lead to big issues.
true.
i hope DK insures the game is balanced at the very top level and ignores or puts little weight to the complaints of foreign protosses and foreign terrans.
for me zerg is the easiest race to play.
i play all 3 races and Zerg is always my highest ranked race even though i put far less time into it than the other 2 races. it comes down to my APM just not being good enough.
if i were complaining DK shouldn't listen to me either.
|
I won't blame him about medank.He ignores medank and disruptor because the community.Don't say this community is innocent LUL.....
And i believe we have another situation like that.Its PvZ.
|
On April 28 2016 22:34 Gwavajuice wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2016 22:20 Charoisaur wrote:
the questions are horrible btw who did this interview?
. Well the questions went though translation process, so don't pay attention to their tone. aside from this, they seemed quite interesting to me. Show nested quote +On April 28 2016 22:20 Charoisaur wrote:
So he doesn't want to change tankivacs because players love it. Ahahahaha nice excuse DK.. Yeah I know, why the fuck is he listening to the community? It's totally not what he's been asked to do for over 4 years....
I haven't heard a single player say that tankivacs are fun, the only people who like it are spectators.
But let's just assume pro players really like them, why is DK suddenly listening to them? Pro players also want a good mappool but DK doesn't give that either.
I don't believe for a second he really considered removing tankivacs and now he's just cherry-picking feedback to fit his agenda
|
On April 28 2016 23:09 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2016 22:34 Gwavajuice wrote:On April 28 2016 22:20 Charoisaur wrote:
the questions are horrible btw who did this interview?
. Well the questions went though translation process, so don't pay attention to their tone. aside from this, they seemed quite interesting to me. On April 28 2016 22:20 Charoisaur wrote:
So he doesn't want to change tankivacs because players love it. Ahahahaha nice excuse DK.. Yeah I know, why the fuck is he listening to the community? It's totally not what he's been asked to do for over 4 years.... I haven't heard a single player say that tankivacs are fun, the only people who like it are spectators. But let's just assume pro players really like them, why is DK suddenly listening to them? Pro players also want a good mappool but DK doesn't give that either. I don't believe for a second he really considered removing tankivacs and now he's just cherry-picking feedback to fit his agenda
yeah because every morning when he wakes up, his first thought is "Hmm how will I ruin the game and make players angry today?"
I don't mean to be DK's attorney, but at least try to come up with stuff that makes some kind of sense...
|
On April 28 2016 23:09 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2016 22:34 Gwavajuice wrote:On April 28 2016 22:20 Charoisaur wrote:
the questions are horrible btw who did this interview?
. Well the questions went though translation process, so don't pay attention to their tone. aside from this, they seemed quite interesting to me. On April 28 2016 22:20 Charoisaur wrote:
So he doesn't want to change tankivacs because players love it. Ahahahaha nice excuse DK.. Yeah I know, why the fuck is he listening to the community? It's totally not what he's been asked to do for over 4 years.... I haven't heard a single player say that tankivacs are fun, the only people who like it are spectators. But let's just assume pro players really like them, why is DK suddenly listening to them? Pro players also want a good mappool but DK doesn't give that either. I don't believe for a second he really considered removing tankivacs and now he's just cherry-picking feedback to fit his agenda
because NASA was caught lying about how it spent a couple million of its budget 3 years ago the earth must be flat.
Tankivacs are fun.
you've now heard from a single player that Tankivacs are fun.
what is "DKs Agenda" ? the secret formation of the nwo?.. or could it be to sell as many copies of SC2 as possible? hmmm. i'll wager his contract is laden with incentives and bonuses tied to sales totals.
|
Dude, he did propose to make the game slower for lower leagues, but everybody seemed to hate this idea.
So normal ladder players don't really seem to share your opinion...
Of course, because that idea is a very bad bandaid and not a fix at all. Normal players do share my opinion, thats why they quit.
|
On April 28 2016 23:15 Gwavajuice wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2016 23:09 Charoisaur wrote:On April 28 2016 22:34 Gwavajuice wrote:On April 28 2016 22:20 Charoisaur wrote:
the questions are horrible btw who did this interview?
. Well the questions went though translation process, so don't pay attention to their tone. aside from this, they seemed quite interesting to me. On April 28 2016 22:20 Charoisaur wrote:
So he doesn't want to change tankivacs because players love it. Ahahahaha nice excuse DK.. Yeah I know, why the fuck is he listening to the community? It's totally not what he's been asked to do for over 4 years.... I haven't heard a single player say that tankivacs are fun, the only people who like it are spectators. But let's just assume pro players really like them, why is DK suddenly listening to them? Pro players also want a good mappool but DK doesn't give that either. I don't believe for a second he really considered removing tankivacs and now he's just cherry-picking feedback to fit his agenda yeah because every morning when he wakes up, his first thought is "Hmm how will I ruin the game and make players angry today?" I don't mean to be DK's attorney, but at least try to come up with stuff that makes some kind of sense...
no but he wants to change the game how he wants it and not how the players want it
|
United Kingdom20315 Posts
Copying post from other thead
--
However, we can't buff colossus now because protoss is not weak now
In pros, mutalisks are not used often, but in ordinary users level, mutalisks may be a problem. So we wanted not to affect this patch to pro level
"Ordinary users level" - I think this is completely backwards, any imbalance or lack of available playstyles is magnified at the highest level of play.
I think there is a big mistake here in assuming that because mutalisks are not used often, they are not affecting the matchup.
|
On April 28 2016 22:43 Tuckleberry wrote:Show nested quote +If only liberator build is too strong, I'm absolutely sure there should be nerf I hope that this not means that they will nerf terran..
I hope it does
|
On April 28 2016 23:29 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2016 23:15 Gwavajuice wrote:On April 28 2016 23:09 Charoisaur wrote:On April 28 2016 22:34 Gwavajuice wrote:On April 28 2016 22:20 Charoisaur wrote:
the questions are horrible btw who did this interview?
. Well the questions went though translation process, so don't pay attention to their tone. aside from this, they seemed quite interesting to me. On April 28 2016 22:20 Charoisaur wrote:
So he doesn't want to change tankivacs because players love it. Ahahahaha nice excuse DK.. Yeah I know, why the fuck is he listening to the community? It's totally not what he's been asked to do for over 4 years.... I haven't heard a single player say that tankivacs are fun, the only people who like it are spectators. But let's just assume pro players really like them, why is DK suddenly listening to them? Pro players also want a good mappool but DK doesn't give that either. I don't believe for a second he really considered removing tankivacs and now he's just cherry-picking feedback to fit his agenda yeah because every morning when he wakes up, his first thought is "Hmm how will I ruin the game and make players angry today?" I don't mean to be DK's attorney, but at least try to come up with stuff that makes some kind of sense... no but he wants to change the game how he wants it and not how the players want it
don't speak for me.
"every voice matters"
i doubt you have the world wide perspective on player feedback that DK has
try listening to people in Korea, Brazil and North America whose opinion varies from yours... you might be surprised what you hear.
that said, i hope he balances the game for the top level of play and forces lesser players to accept lower ladder ranks for certain races if they multi-race like i do.
|
Any VODs of this Dark's baneling build games?
|
|
|
On April 28 2016 23:54 -Archangel- wrote:
Any VODs of this Dark's baneling build games?
Chick his SSL finals against Stats.
There is also a strategy guide/discussion about it here
|
I don't understand why are you criticizing the questions? I think they're great!!! The interviewer asked things people have been wondering about for a while now.
And the answers are short and direct, I like them too.
|
Foreign community says protoss can't beat zerg, Korean pros says zerg can't beat protoss so immortals nerf should be needed.
One reason why I kinda sympathize for DK, I wouldn't know who to listen to if I was in his shoes
|
On April 29 2016 00:38 Silvana wrote:
I don't understand why are you criticizing the questions? I think they're great!!! The interviewer asked things people have been wondering about for a while now.
And the answers are short and direct, I like them too.
I haven't seen anyone wondering that marus liberator build was too atrong. It seemed more like a gimmick that worked because solar had no idea how to deal with it.
Later on the same day byul crushed that build and after that nobody tried it anymore
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On April 29 2016 00:43 MiniFotToss wrote:Show nested quote +Foreign community says protoss can't beat zerg, Korean pros says zerg can't beat protoss so immortals nerf should be needed. One reason why I kinda sympathize for DK, I wouldn't know who to listen to if I was in his shoes
For once it would be nice to have the same map pool so the reason can be "foreign protoss are just bad players". Right now there are maps which are in BO5+ inevitable heavily pro Zerg.
Which could mean that foreign Zerg players cannot be beaten but at the same time once these maps are removed they cannot win.
Meaning the MU could be mostly affected by maps.
|
On April 29 2016 00:51 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2016 00:43 MiniFotToss wrote:Foreign community says protoss can't beat zerg, Korean pros says zerg can't beat protoss so immortals nerf should be needed. One reason why I kinda sympathize for DK, I wouldn't know who to listen to if I was in his shoes For once it would be nice to have the same map pool so the reason can be "foreign protoss are just bad players". Right now there are maps which are in BO5+ inevitable heavily pro Zerg. Which could mean that foreign Zerg players cannot be beaten but at the same time once these maps are removed they cannot win. Meaning the MU could be mostly affected by maps.
I always think that with ZvP it's ALWAYS with maps, that's why maps like Deadwing/Cactus Valley can be very protoss favored.
In HOTS, Protoss relied on holding ramps and FF or solid defenses till you get the ultra late-game army to combat zerg.
in LOTV, Zerg has that role, to get past the time where Adepts/DT's are no longer able to do fatal damage, the nthey can be favored with Tier 3 units.
Basically Zerg and Toss have reversed roles in LOTV
|
A. We also heard same complaint from foreign players. Korean pros complain about why Blizzard heard voice only from foreign pros, and Foreign complain about same thing(only from Korean pros). We can't take sides. We hear all voices from pros from Korea, NA, and ordinary users, so we agree that all players have same thought. For example from last balance test map, thor and liberator is from Korean feedback and +bio damage to photon cannon was from ordinary user level. WE DON'T TAKE SIDES.
I kinda feel sorry for this guy and understand his pain. He just takes SO MUCH BASHING, it's insane. Literally from everyone, without exception - progamers from all cultures, regular players, everyone.
He takes as much bashing as Greg Street used to take for balancing World of Warcraft.
|
ZvP balance is extremely map dependent, probably alot more so then unit buffs and nerfs.
It's just like in ZvT with close air position always favoring Terrans over Zerg.
We don't really need too many of these changes (except the Liberator change is completely warranted) we just need better maps.
|
Does anyone here actually enjoy watching colossi battling?
|
On April 29 2016 02:19 Lazare1969 wrote:
Does anyone here actually enjoy watching colossi battling?
Does anyone here actually enjoy watching colossi in the game?
Fixed
Oh, and the answer is no.
|
"However, we can't buff colossus now because protoss is not weak now."
This is the kind of attitude that's driving me insane right now. So much focus is going towards how are races doing right now, not which strategies are doing well. Can we please consider the option of putting out MULTIPLE changes in a single patch? Nerf the units that are problematic, buff the ones that aren't.
|
On April 29 2016 02:20 Beelzebub1 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2016 02:19 Lazare1969 wrote:
Does anyone here actually enjoy watching colossi battling? Does anyone here actually enjoy watching colossi in the game? Fixed Oh, and the answer is no.
... I guess Im a rebel then
|
Why does David Kim say protoss is not weak at the moment when nerfs are considered to help PvZ? If something is not weak, it does not need help. This guy needs to learn some logic. Also, protoss is the least played race in LotV.
|
On April 29 2016 02:34 Draddition wrote:
"However, we can't buff colossus now because protoss is not weak now."
This is the kind of attitude that's driving me insane right now. So much focus is going towards how are races doing right now, not which strategies are doing well. Can we please consider the option of putting out MULTIPLE changes in a single patch? Nerf the units that are problematic, buff the ones that aren't.
They tried that before and that was what led to BL infestor era. When you nerf something and buff something at the same time, that can happen. The reason why Blizzard is taking forever with patches now is because back when EVERYONE was complaining about the game, they rolled out patches pretty constantly and it created BL/Infestor era and leading into hots with mass SH games. I like that they are taking it slow actually, give people time to figure things out. Remember when Terran were ALL complaining about Adepts? The only change was a -1 damage and now people are whinning about other things.
|
I think for Protoss it's because the OP units require a lot of micro i.e. Phoenix, Disruptor, and Warp Prism. Most nonpros just fall apart juggling everything so the OP is never realized. Then you have Zest who's on point with all 3 at once and there's nothing the opponent can do. Perhaps Phoenix is due for a mild nerf for the sake of all 3 matchups these days, but in exchange a less skill intensive buff. My money is on reverting Chrono or buffing Sentries or buffing GtA somehow against Mutas. I think most of the other Protoss units are in great spots right now and don't need buffs. If upgraded Libs became less obscene Terran can get a TvP buff like Helbats/Hellions/Cyclone/Raven or something.
|
mutalisks are not used on pro level in pvz so they buff cannons because low level players struggle against mutalisk, this is blizzard logic nowadays...
also no patches happening is the same mistake as in hots, more patches please
|
One of major complaint from korean players is "Blizzard only accept feedback from NA/EU players who have bad skilled players, so game become weird".
Haha
Interesting interview, thanks
|
Why not +light damage instead of +bio damage that will make it even more impossible to kill airtoss ? And as I said in other related posts, +light also helps in PvP phoenix wars.
|
On April 28 2016 23:48 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2016 23:29 Charoisaur wrote:On April 28 2016 23:15 Gwavajuice wrote:On April 28 2016 23:09 Charoisaur wrote:On April 28 2016 22:34 Gwavajuice wrote:On April 28 2016 22:20 Charoisaur wrote:
the questions are horrible btw who did this interview?
. Well the questions went though translation process, so don't pay attention to their tone. aside from this, they seemed quite interesting to me. On April 28 2016 22:20 Charoisaur wrote:
So he doesn't want to change tankivacs because players love it. Ahahahaha nice excuse DK.. Yeah I know, why the fuck is he listening to the community? It's totally not what he's been asked to do for over 4 years.... I haven't heard a single player say that tankivacs are fun, the only people who like it are spectators. But let's just assume pro players really like them, why is DK suddenly listening to them? Pro players also want a good mappool but DK doesn't give that either. I don't believe for a second he really considered removing tankivacs and now he's just cherry-picking feedback to fit his agenda yeah because every morning when he wakes up, his first thought is "Hmm how will I ruin the game and make players angry today?" I don't mean to be DK's attorney, but at least try to come up with stuff that makes some kind of sense... no but he wants to change the game how he wants it and not how the players want it don't speak for me..
lol.
User was warned for this post
|
I also would like to say that I don't think they should take feedback from lower leagues players. Who cares if lower league players struggle vs mutas ? They're not struggling vs mutas even half as much as they're struggling vs their poor control, bad macro, nonexistent multitask etc. So doing this buff will not truly help them, while it definitely shuts down mutas in high level ZvP and reinforces the "kill him before he gets there" aspect of mothership + tempests/void rays + storm.
|
On April 29 2016 04:45 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I also would like to say that I don't think they should take feedback from lower leagues players. Who cares if lower league players struggle vs mutas ? They're not struggling vs mutas even half as much as they're struggling vs their poor control, bad macro, nonexistent multitask etc. So doing this buff will not truly help them, while it definitely shuts down mutas in high level ZvP and reinforces the "kill him before he gets there" aspect of mothership + tempests/void rays + storm.
For DK an "ordinary user" is obviously any non-pro, not only "lower league" players.
|
Papua New Guinea1059 Posts
this translation is making me cringe hard
I always liked dayvie. Balance team does a good job imo.
|
On April 29 2016 04:45 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I also would like to say that I don't think they should take feedback from lower leagues players. Who cares if lower league players struggle vs mutas ? They're not struggling vs mutas even half as much as they're struggling vs their poor control, bad macro, nonexistent multitask etc. So doing this buff will not truly help them, while it definitely shuts down mutas in high level ZvP and reinforces the "kill him before he gets there" aspect of mothership + tempests/void rays + storm.
But where would we draw the line? Because I'm pretty sure GSL players, Korean GMs, and even the majority of our community would consider the entire NA/EU scene "lower league." Even top GMs in EU/NA would get destroyed by mid-tier kespa players at this point. The skill gap is just too high.
That's why I understand David Kim's hesitation on balancing. The Korean scene is saying Protoss is imba, but EU/NA scene is saying Zerg is imba, it's just hard to balance around that.
|
On April 29 2016 05:49 phodacbiet wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2016 04:45 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I also would like to say that I don't think they should take feedback from lower leagues players. Who cares if lower league players struggle vs mutas ? They're not struggling vs mutas even half as much as they're struggling vs their poor control, bad macro, nonexistent multitask etc. So doing this buff will not truly help them, while it definitely shuts down mutas in high level ZvP and reinforces the "kill him before he gets there" aspect of mothership + tempests/void rays + storm. But where would we draw the line? Because I'm pretty sure GSL players, Korean GMs, and even the majority of our community would consider the entire NA/EU scene "lower league." Even top GMs in EU/NA would get destroyed by mid-tier kespa players at this point. The skill gap is just too high. That's why I understand David Kim's hesitation on balancing. The Korean scene is saying Protoss is imba, but EU/NA scene is saying Zerg is imba, it's just hard to balance around that.
I really don't think the best P NA/EU players say Z is imba in PvZ any more.
|
On April 29 2016 05:53 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2016 05:49 phodacbiet wrote:On April 29 2016 04:45 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I also would like to say that I don't think they should take feedback from lower leagues players. Who cares if lower league players struggle vs mutas ? They're not struggling vs mutas even half as much as they're struggling vs their poor control, bad macro, nonexistent multitask etc. So doing this buff will not truly help them, while it definitely shuts down mutas in high level ZvP and reinforces the "kill him before he gets there" aspect of mothership + tempests/void rays + storm. But where would we draw the line? Because I'm pretty sure GSL players, Korean GMs, and even the majority of our community would consider the entire NA/EU scene "lower league." Even top GMs in EU/NA would get destroyed by mid-tier kespa players at this point. The skill gap is just too high. That's why I understand David Kim's hesitation on balancing. The Korean scene is saying Protoss is imba, but EU/NA scene is saying Zerg is imba, it's just hard to balance around that. I really don't think the best P NA/EU players say Z is imba in PvZ any more.
Maybe not everyone, but all it takes is a few vocal streamers. For example, Terran is doing pretty well for the most part. However, a few vocal Terran streamers still think that T is the worst race ever and if it wasn't for them playing T, they would have won 10 GSLs by now as P or Z. But yeah, I really like that Blizzard is taking balancing extremely slow. I would like a faster map rotation, since I feel like that is how the game should be balanced (like BW). If we confuse map imbalances with actual racial imbalance, then we might mistakenly nerf/buff something. Once the maps are swapped out, then we might create even more problems that we're not originally there.
|
On April 29 2016 06:10 phodacbiet wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2016 05:53 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 29 2016 05:49 phodacbiet wrote:On April 29 2016 04:45 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I also would like to say that I don't think they should take feedback from lower leagues players. Who cares if lower league players struggle vs mutas ? They're not struggling vs mutas even half as much as they're struggling vs their poor control, bad macro, nonexistent multitask etc. So doing this buff will not truly help them, while it definitely shuts down mutas in high level ZvP and reinforces the "kill him before he gets there" aspect of mothership + tempests/void rays + storm. But where would we draw the line? Because I'm pretty sure GSL players, Korean GMs, and even the majority of our community would consider the entire NA/EU scene "lower league." Even top GMs in EU/NA would get destroyed by mid-tier kespa players at this point. The skill gap is just too high. That's why I understand David Kim's hesitation on balancing. The Korean scene is saying Protoss is imba, but EU/NA scene is saying Zerg is imba, it's just hard to balance around that. I really don't think the best P NA/EU players say Z is imba in PvZ any more. Maybe not everyone, but all it takes is a few vocal streamers. For example, Terran is doing pretty well for the most part. However, a few vocal Terran streamers still think that T is the worst race ever and if it wasn't for them playing T, they would have won 10 GSLs by now as P or Z. But yeah, I really like that Blizzard is taking balancing extremely slow. I would like a faster map rotation, since I feel like that is how the game should be balanced (like BW). If we confuse map imbalances with actual racial imbalance, then we might mistakenly nerf/buff something. Once the maps are swapped out, then we might create even more problems that we're not originally there.
I like it a lot too. If we take things too hastily where is the incentive to innovate for the players ?
I like the upcoming changes a bit less but we get what we get.
|
On April 28 2016 23:07 seemsgood wrote:
I won't blame him about medank.He ignores medank and disruptor because the community.Don't say this community is innocent LUL.....
And i believe we have another situation like that.Its PvZ.
He could just have nerfed it by increasing unload duration. This would reward pickup micro but deincentiveze "transport-in-medivacs-tanks". Then they could even buff the Siege Tanks core stats on top of that and we could get proper mech.
But nononono David Kim doesn't wanna do anything that could reward diversity besides adding in crappy maps.
|
Btw crappy maps often turn out to be the opposite of diversity, ie there are one very very strong/imba build per MU per map, and everyone does this, even when the opponent knows it's coming (see Prion and the gold to mass Ravagers strategy, cf Soo vs Maru )
Finally a bit sad the interviewer didn't ask about some design issues, besides tankivacs. Like 2/3 pylons with 0 units holding up to 2/3 medivacs (cf. Classic vs a terran on Lerilak ), photonpylons attack BS, the marauder now totally useless (even shitty vs stalkers nowdays), terran forced every game to make mass Libs or die because bio is shit and mech is shit (talking about diversity...), etc.
To came back to balance and patchs, Koreans says toss is OP, in Korea and in ForeignLand Protoss and Zergs wins tournaments and so.... he want to nerf terran because of one Maru game ? (it's now a ridiculous but prestigious tradition : Thorzain, MVP, Maru ! ).
Libs are already very bad vs corruptors(+vipers) with a bit of micro. (cf Mlord and TY games ) Don't even understand why he thinks it's an issue.
|
United Kingdom20315 Posts
Btw crappy maps often turn out to be the opposite of diversity, ie there are one very very strong/imba build per MU per map, and everyone does this
very true
the biggest stragic diversity comes from middle ground maps where a wide variety of aggression as well as expanding is quite viable
|
On April 29 2016 06:58 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +Btw crappy maps often turn out to be the opposite of diversity, ie there are one very very strong/imba build per MU per map, and everyone does this very true the biggest stragic diversity comes from middle ground maps where a wide variety of aggression as well as expanding is quite viable
definitely. If you have to rely on maps to create diversity there is a problem. Maps should only be the prisms through which different viable strategies are made stronger or weaker.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On April 29 2016 04:45 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I also would like to say that I don't think they should take feedback from lower leagues players. Who cares if lower league players struggle vs mutas ? They're not struggling vs mutas even half as much as they're struggling vs their poor control, bad macro, nonexistent multitask etc. So doing this buff will not truly help them, while it definitely shuts down mutas in high level ZvP and reinforces the "kill him before he gets there" aspect of mothership + tempests/void rays + storm.
Without a balance in lower leagues you are losing player base. Without a player base the viewer numbers won't grow. In the end the game will die.
Yes, they shouldn't balance a game based on low league players. But they should try to give them the best enjoyable experience in the game. And if we are talking about mutas they don't feel enjoyable at all. They are annoying because maps have too much free air space. Protoss units lack mobility and static defense is like "lol, he tried to build cannons".
I think a lot of this could be solved by less air space around the map. For the start. But hey, that's another stupid restriction on map makers 
|
So much things are potentially non-enjoyable to lower league players I don't even know where to start if I wanted to list them all. These players just do not play the same game at all.
I deeply dislike this philosophy behind making some units "lower-leaguer-friendly" like the Colossus, while still letting them in a bad spot in higher level play to discourage using them. This is very much the same to say "hey, let's make another piece in chess that is super strong in lower leagues but that grandmasters would never even bother to move just because it is bad at high level play, so it is easier to get noob to get into chess, thus increasing our player base, whoohoo!". This would make the game utterly inelegant.
In lower league I am sure pretty much any kind of easy-to-pull-off cheese from P would smash the wannabe muta zerg player before he can get those anyway, and nobody's asking for nerfing those in order to make it "more enjoyable for lower league Zergs".
Part of the attraction to the game for outsiders is precisely the fact that the game is elegant, with crisp mechanics and design, ultimately balanced but hard to master. If is not enjoyable enough, maybe SC is not the game for them, and I'm perfectly ok with that. I don't thing I'm alone in this case, and I don't even play competitively...
|
On April 28 2016 22:20 Charoisaur wrote:
So he doesn't want to change tankivacs because players love it. Ahahahaha nice excuse DK.
the questions are horrible btw who did this interview?
.
Yeah, Tankvacs are literally THE reason i can't get myself to play or watch the game. Pee shooting flying Tanks are just the complete opposite of what i love about Terran.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On April 29 2016 18:03 DjayEl wrote:
So much things are potentially non-enjoyable to lower league players I don't even know where to start if I wanted to list them all. These players just do not play the same game at all.
I deeply dislike this philosophy behind making some units "lower-leaguer-friendly" like the Colossus, while still letting them in a bad spot in higher level play to discourage using them. This is very much the same to say "hey, let's make another piece in chess that is super strong in lower leagues but that grandmasters would never even bother to move just because it is bad at high level play, so it is easier to get noob to get into chess, thus increasing our player base, whoohoo!". This would make the game utterly inelegant.
In lower league I am sure pretty much any kind of easy-to-pull-off cheese from P would smash the wannabe muta zerg player before he can get those anyway, and nobody's asking for nerfing those in order to make it "more enjoyable for lower league Zergs".
Part of the attraction to the game for outsiders is precisely the fact that the game is elegant, with crisp mechanics and design, ultimately balanced but hard to master. If is not enjoyable enough, maybe SC is not the game for them, and I'm perfectly ok with that. I don't thing I'm alone in this case, and I don't even play competitively...
Are you really sure nobody is asking it? I remember the 4gate time, Soul train time. Oracle speed buff time. Ferrarivacs time. That's simply not true. You don't see it here that often, but such a topic would be closed in few seconds because "balance whine"(or something). I remember bloody well the posts "even pro players have problem with mine drops, they need to be nerfed, how am I supposed to defense them when pro players die to them? Medevacs with boost are too fast!".
Just check the balance thread(not sure the correct name now).
|
On April 29 2016 17:47 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2016 04:45 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I also would like to say that I don't think they should take feedback from lower leagues players. Who cares if lower league players struggle vs mutas ? They're not struggling vs mutas even half as much as they're struggling vs their poor control, bad macro, nonexistent multitask etc. So doing this buff will not truly help them, while it definitely shuts down mutas in high level ZvP and reinforces the "kill him before he gets there" aspect of mothership + tempests/void rays + storm. Without a balance in lower leagues you are losing player base. Without a player base the viewer numbers won't grow. In the end the game will die. Yes, they shouldn't balance a game based on low league players. But they should try to give them the best enjoyable experience in the game. And if we are talking about mutas they don't feel enjoyable at all. They are annoying because maps have too much free air space. Protoss units lack mobility and static defense is like "lol, he tried to build cannons". I think a lot of this could be solved by less air space around the map. For the start. But hey, that's another stupid restriction on map makers
It's literally impossible to balance at all levels simultaneously. How do you set, for example, banes vs marines split fort it to be balanced at all levels of play ?
Furthermore, players play according to their skill, so in gold league, a terran player will not attempts to heavy multi-task and split-just-in-time his marines vs Z, he will make 15 tanks and push one time, with marines pre-split.
More importantly, imao, that's not the balance that keeps the players playing this game, but the fun. Fun is the more under-estimated & miss-understood concept of Starcraft, but every non-pro player plays fort it, not for balance or whatsoever.
|
On April 29 2016 19:17 xongnox wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2016 17:47 deacon.frost wrote:On April 29 2016 04:45 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I also would like to say that I don't think they should take feedback from lower leagues players. Who cares if lower league players struggle vs mutas ? They're not struggling vs mutas even half as much as they're struggling vs their poor control, bad macro, nonexistent multitask etc. So doing this buff will not truly help them, while it definitely shuts down mutas in high level ZvP and reinforces the "kill him before he gets there" aspect of mothership + tempests/void rays + storm. Without a balance in lower leagues you are losing player base. Without a player base the viewer numbers won't grow. In the end the game will die. Yes, they shouldn't balance a game based on low league players. But they should try to give them the best enjoyable experience in the game. And if we are talking about mutas they don't feel enjoyable at all. They are annoying because maps have too much free air space. Protoss units lack mobility and static defense is like "lol, he tried to build cannons". I think a lot of this could be solved by less air space around the map. For the start. But hey, that's another stupid restriction on map makers It's literally impossible to balance at all levels simultaneously. How do you set, for example, banes vs marines split fort it to be balanced at all levels of play ? Furthermore, players play according to their skill, so in gold league, a terran player will not attempts to heavy multi-task and split-just-in-time his marines vs Z, he will make 15 tanks and push one time, with marines pre-split. More importantly, imao, that's not the balance that keeps the players playing this game, but the fun. Fun is the more under-estimated & miss-understood concept of Starcraft, but every non-pro player plays fort it, not for balance or whatsoever.
I don't think fun is underestimated or misunderstood.
There's a lot of fun to be had in starcraft. The issue is all the fun is in the doing. It's fun to kill a mineral line with oracles, it's fun to obliterate an army with lurkers. It's fun to get huge widow mine hits.
Unfortunately being on the other end of any of those things is soul wrenchingly terrible. So in order to have fun, you also have to endure painfully anti-fun things every game.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On April 29 2016 19:17 xongnox wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2016 17:47 deacon.frost wrote:On April 29 2016 04:45 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I also would like to say that I don't think they should take feedback from lower leagues players. Who cares if lower league players struggle vs mutas ? They're not struggling vs mutas even half as much as they're struggling vs their poor control, bad macro, nonexistent multitask etc. So doing this buff will not truly help them, while it definitely shuts down mutas in high level ZvP and reinforces the "kill him before he gets there" aspect of mothership + tempests/void rays + storm. Without a balance in lower leagues you are losing player base. Without a player base the viewer numbers won't grow. In the end the game will die. Yes, they shouldn't balance a game based on low league players. But they should try to give them the best enjoyable experience in the game. And if we are talking about mutas they don't feel enjoyable at all. They are annoying because maps have too much free air space. Protoss units lack mobility and static defense is like "lol, he tried to build cannons". I think a lot of this could be solved by less air space around the map. For the start. But hey, that's another stupid restriction on map makers It's literally impossible to balance at all levels simultaneously. How do you set, for example, banes vs marines split fort it to be balanced at all levels of play ? Furthermore, players play according to their skill, so in gold league, a terran player will not attempts to heavy multi-task and split-just-in-time his marines vs Z, he will make 15 tanks and push one time, with marines pre-split. More importantly, imao, that's not the balance that keeps the players playing this game, but the fun. Fun is the more under-estimated & miss-understood concept of Starcraft, but every non-pro player plays fort it, not for balance or whatsoever.
It is not fun to lose all the time to mutalisk. Is that a low league balance problem or fun problem?
|
A low league fun problem ?
It's like unscouted oracle/dts/etc kicking you early of the game in 2 seconds, very frustrating, particularly in low league when players doesn't know how to scout / respond / etc, so that simply feels "random" for them.
Imho 'fun' is more related to design than to balance. For example the oracle was strong but not 'imbalanced' in HoTS, still, killing all your stuff in 10 sec when u have 4 marines in a standard opening was an horrible design. ( because, contrary to other cheeses like 4g, proxy 2gates etc, if an 2nd pylon proxy oracle was scouted, the protoss was still in a OK position. If unscouted, he simply wins. )
From this perspective mutalisks are a far, far better design. They need a long time to pop out, so you should be aware, they need repeated and risked actions and micro to really hurt eco, there are a choice to make about how to play with them and where you position them on the map, etc.
Still it's not that fun for certain ppl to play against i guess :D
|
On April 29 2016 00:38 Silvana wrote:
I don't understand why are you criticizing the questions? I think they're great!!! The interviewer asked things people have been wondering about for a while now.
And the answers are short and direct, I like them too.
Its just as you say, the questions were great.
Some people just like to complain and have no idea whats a good.
|
On April 29 2016 00:44 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2016 00:38 Silvana wrote:
I don't understand why are you criticizing the questions? I think they're great!!! The interviewer asked things people have been wondering about for a while now.
And the answers are short and direct, I like them too. I haven't seen anyone wondering that marus liberator build was too atrong. It seemed more like a gimmick that worked because solar had no idea how to deal with it. Later on the same day byul crushed that build and after that nobody tried it anymore
How can you say that marus strategy is gimmicky, when you saw it countered only once. Maybe byuls counterplay is gimmicky. How can you know that?
The truth is that you just make it up in your mind.
|
On April 29 2016 01:26 MiniFotToss wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2016 00:51 deacon.frost wrote:On April 29 2016 00:43 MiniFotToss wrote:Foreign community says protoss can't beat zerg, Korean pros says zerg can't beat protoss so immortals nerf should be needed. One reason why I kinda sympathize for DK, I wouldn't know who to listen to if I was in his shoes For once it would be nice to have the same map pool so the reason can be "foreign protoss are just bad players". Right now there are maps which are in BO5+ inevitable heavily pro Zerg. Which could mean that foreign Zerg players cannot be beaten but at the same time once these maps are removed they cannot win. Meaning the MU could be mostly affected by maps. I always think that with ZvP it's ALWAYS with maps, that's why maps like Deadwing/Cactus Valley can be very protoss favored. In HOTS, Protoss relied on holding ramps and FF or solid defenses till you get the ultra late-game army to combat zerg. in LOTV, Zerg has that role, to get past the time where Adepts/DT's are no longer able to do fatal damage, the nthey can be favored with Tier 3 units. Basically Zerg and Toss have reversed roles in LOTV
Your conclusion makes no sense, because zerg is weak lategame in pvz. Its the same as in hots, just more extreme. Protoss still has to survive until lategame.
|
On April 29 2016 02:34 Draddition wrote:
"However, we can't buff colossus now because protoss is not weak now."
This is the kind of attitude that's driving me insane right now. So much focus is going towards how are races doing right now, not which strategies are doing well. Can we please consider the option of putting out MULTIPLE changes in a single patch? Nerf the units that are problematic, buff the ones that aren't.
I hope you read this.
If you make multiple changes, how can you now what caused what? If you make one change, you know that you have to revert that change or make another change. Thats not the case if you do a lot of (especially overlapping) changes.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On April 29 2016 20:22 xongnox wrote:
A low league fun problem ?
It's like unscouted oracle/dts/etc kicking you early of the game in 2 seconds, very frustrating, particularly in low league when players doesn't know how to scout / respond / etc, so that simply feels "random" for them.
Imho 'fun' is more related to design than to balance. For example the oracle was strong but not 'imbalanced' in HoTS, still, killing all your stuff in 10 sec when u have 4 marines in a standard opening was an horrible design. ( because, contrary to other cheeses like 4g, proxy 2gates etc, if an 2nd pylon proxy oracle was scouted, the protoss was still in a OK position. If unscouted, he simply wins. )
From this perspective mutalisks are a far, far better design. They need a long time to pop out, so you should be aware, they need repeated and risked actions and micro to really hurt eco, there are a choice to make about how to play with them and where you position them on the map, etc.
Still it's not that fun for certain ppl to play against i guess :D
Mutalisk in PvZ requires a hardcounter otherwise you lose. Now, with nerfed chrono, even more.
Which is what is essentially wrong.
An Oracle requires a hardcounter otherwise you lose. Which is the same problem.
A non cloaked banshee can be killed by better control(TvT) or you can kill more marines with godly control. This cannot be said about oracle. You simple have enough marines or don't have, you have a turret or don't have.
I think that's the problem, units which require hard counters are not fun to play against and they are not properly balanced in lower leagues.
And yes, it is a design problem, but Blizzard won't redesign the game, so that is out of the question, thus they need to "balance" the game so the fun > frustration 
|
On April 29 2016 06:10 phodacbiet wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2016 05:53 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 29 2016 05:49 phodacbiet wrote:On April 29 2016 04:45 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I also would like to say that I don't think they should take feedback from lower leagues players. Who cares if lower league players struggle vs mutas ? They're not struggling vs mutas even half as much as they're struggling vs their poor control, bad macro, nonexistent multitask etc. So doing this buff will not truly help them, while it definitely shuts down mutas in high level ZvP and reinforces the "kill him before he gets there" aspect of mothership + tempests/void rays + storm. But where would we draw the line? Because I'm pretty sure GSL players, Korean GMs, and even the majority of our community would consider the entire NA/EU scene "lower league." Even top GMs in EU/NA would get destroyed by mid-tier kespa players at this point. The skill gap is just too high. That's why I understand David Kim's hesitation on balancing. The Korean scene is saying Protoss is imba, but EU/NA scene is saying Zerg is imba, it's just hard to balance around that. I really don't think the best P NA/EU players say Z is imba in PvZ any more. Maybe not everyone, but all it takes is a few vocal streamers. For example, Terran is doing pretty well for the most part. However, a few vocal Terran streamers still think that T is the worst race ever and if it wasn't for them playing T, they would have won 10 GSLs by now as P or Z. But yeah, I really like that Blizzard is taking balancing extremely slow. I would like a faster map rotation, since I feel like that is how the game should be balanced (like BW). If we confuse map imbalances with actual racial imbalance, then we might mistakenly nerf/buff something. Once the maps are swapped out, then we might create even more problems that we're not originally there.
I actually believe that Lotv depends less on maps than hots. For example force fields, one way center for zerg create no problems because zerg has ravagers and reliable nydus and drop play. There are a lot of things that opened map restrictions.
But there might be also new ones such as ravager, siege tank drop, liberator and disruptors. For example a larger place behind mineral lines is needed, so that liberators cant stay out of range.
Also maps are not comparable to what we had in hots. Some lotv maps are extremely different. Imagine ulrena played in hots, protoss would win that map with force fields alone.
But thats just an opinion until time proves it.
|
On April 29 2016 20:41 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2016 20:22 xongnox wrote:
A low league fun problem ?
It's like unscouted oracle/dts/etc kicking you early of the game in 2 seconds, very frustrating, particularly in low league when players doesn't know how to scout / respond / etc, so that simply feels "random" for them.
Imho 'fun' is more related to design than to balance. For example the oracle was strong but not 'imbalanced' in HoTS, still, killing all your stuff in 10 sec when u have 4 marines in a standard opening was an horrible design. ( because, contrary to other cheeses like 4g, proxy 2gates etc, if an 2nd pylon proxy oracle was scouted, the protoss was still in a OK position. If unscouted, he simply wins. )
From this perspective mutalisks are a far, far better design. They need a long time to pop out, so you should be aware, they need repeated and risked actions and micro to really hurt eco, there are a choice to make about how to play with them and where you position them on the map, etc.
Still it's not that fun for certain ppl to play against i guess :D Mutalisk in PvZ requires a hardcounter otherwise you lose. Now, with nerfed chrono, even more. Which is what is essentially wrong. An Oracle requires a hardcounter otherwise you lose. Which is the same problem. A non cloaked banshee can be killed by better control(TvT) or you can kill more marines with godly control. This cannot be said about oracle. You simple have enough marines or don't have, you have a turret or don't have. I think that's the problem, units which require hard counters are not fun to play against and they are not properly balanced in lower leagues. And yes, it is a design problem, but Blizzard won't redesign the game, so that is out of the question, thus they need to "balance" the game so the fun > frustration
Marins will always lose to banshees until you have stim.
Oracle might kill a lot of worker but it has a simple answer. Put a turret and you are save against many things. It costs you nothing! You need the upgrades anyway.
But hardcounter means that they deal in low numbers with a high number of units, no matter what! Collossus were hardcounters, immortals vs roaches are hardcounters. 3 Immortals + gateway army (130 supply) could stop 200 supply roach army. 3 Liberators kill already 12 mutalisks and 5-6 liberator can decimate 40 mutalisks that makes it a hardcounter.
Hardcounter dont need skill! They just counter it. Thats why phoenix even with range is not a hardcounter. If you have the skill to stay just in range of mutalisks, mutalisks will never catch them and die. But it takes a lot of attention, time and you need a reasonable number of phoenixes. Nontheless they work in low numbers very good as defense because mutas can't chase them. If mutas attack, they will slowly die to phoenixes. Thats not worth it, if you think that one mutalisk costs 100-100.
|
" 3 Liberators kill already 12 mutalisks and 5-6 liberator can decimate 40 mutalisks that makes it a hardcounter."
Technically yes, but no, that is not true.
|
On April 29 2016 21:23 wjat wrote:
" 3 Liberators kill already 12 mutalisks and 5-6 liberator can decimate 40 mutalisks that makes it a hardcounter."
Technically yes, but no, that is not true.
You can fight liberators with both those ratios, just split.
This is kind of like saying 12 marines can't fight 4 banelings. Or 100 lings can't fight 1 baneling.
|
"TvT is only marine tankivacs vs marine tankivacs but it's fine because players like it".
There is no word in mortal tongues to qualify how vile, dishonnest, unfaithfull, ridiculously pathetically PR orientated and corporate talking this statement is.
Every time i seen a tvt on stream i leave and just watch the results. Because i know how it's gonna be played. There is absolutely no surprise whatsoever. No variation. One of the players will win, but the match on itself is predictable, boring, and actually quite random.
Shame on you DK for not taking care of your game, giving bullshit excuses for your laziness (there is NO EXCUSE for a game in the state of LOTV not to be patched in 5 months). You're just afraid to loose the last bastion of unconditional love for the game (esports), the one that generates money, while shitting on the face of casuals.
|
On April 29 2016 21:35 JackONeill wrote:
"TvT is only marine tankivacs vs marine tankivacs but it's fine because players like it".
There is no word in mortal tongues to qualify how vile, dishonnest, unfaithfull, ridiculously pathetically PR orientated and corporate talking this statement is.
Every time i seen a tvt on stream i leave and just watch the results. Because i know how it's gonna be played. There is absolutely no surprise whatsoever. No variation. One of the players will win, but the match on itself is predictable, boring, and actually quite random.
Shame on you DK for not taking care of your game, giving bullshit excuses for your laziness (there is NO EXCUSE for a game in the state of LOTV not to be patched in 5 months). You're just afraid to loose the last bastion of unconditional love for the game (esports), the one that generates money, while shitting on the face of casuals.
I'd argue casuals aren't shoehorned into marine tankivac. There's enough mistakes on both sides to open up more viable strategies.
|
On April 29 2016 21:38 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2016 21:35 JackONeill wrote:
"TvT is only marine tankivacs vs marine tankivacs but it's fine because players like it".
There is no word in mortal tongues to qualify how vile, dishonnest, unfaithfull, ridiculously pathetically PR orientated and corporate talking this statement is.
Every time i seen a tvt on stream i leave and just watch the results. Because i know how it's gonna be played. There is absolutely no surprise whatsoever. No variation. One of the players will win, but the match on itself is predictable, boring, and actually quite random.
Shame on you DK for not taking care of your game, giving bullshit excuses for your laziness (there is NO EXCUSE for a game in the state of LOTV not to be patched in 5 months). You're just afraid to loose the last bastion of unconditional love for the game (esports), the one that generates money, while shitting on the face of casuals. I'd argue casuals aren't shoehorned into marine tankivac. There's enough mistakes on both sides to open up more viable strategies.
Totally agree.
By the way: In more than 75% of situations I face (diamond level), players run into the dark (no scouting marines) and loose their units to siege tank lines. In these scenarios it often does not matter whether I fly the tanks into position or just roll them there and siege them all at once. So the error here is not the medivac+tank combination but the lacking vision of the opponent.
|
On April 29 2016 21:38 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2016 21:35 JackONeill wrote:
"TvT is only marine tankivacs vs marine tankivacs but it's fine because players like it".
There is no word in mortal tongues to qualify how vile, dishonnest, unfaithfull, ridiculously pathetically PR orientated and corporate talking this statement is.
Every time i seen a tvt on stream i leave and just watch the results. Because i know how it's gonna be played. There is absolutely no surprise whatsoever. No variation. One of the players will win, but the match on itself is predictable, boring, and actually quite random.
Shame on you DK for not taking care of your game, giving bullshit excuses for your laziness (there is NO EXCUSE for a game in the state of LOTV not to be patched in 5 months). You're just afraid to loose the last bastion of unconditional love for the game (esports), the one that generates money, while shitting on the face of casuals. I'd argue casuals aren't shoehorned into marine tankivac. There's enough mistakes on both sides to open up more viable strategies.
Oh yeah of course for bronze to diam's you can play pretty much any style and win. But once you get into high masters there is no other way. By casual i include masters and GM as long as they don't play professionally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
