|
Italy12246 Posts
On May 21 2016 04:28 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 04:21 Teoita wrote:
I really don't understand korea's feedback. Sample size is super small, but Zergs do fine in proleague, won SSL, and got murdered in GSL where they had some pretty unfavourable groups that led to only Losira in the ro8. Seems fine to me. When koreans give feedback they probably don't only take the leagues into consideration. They play in their teamhouses vs eachother every day. I think their feedback is mainly based around their teamhouse practice as that probably gives you a good idea of balance when you play vs the same players over and over again. I'm just surprised there's still no mention of ultras and tempests but I guess koreans aren't really concerned with absurdly stupid design as long as they can reliably win their games. And yeah only korean feedback should be considered when balancing their game, for foreigners it's simply a learn to play issue.
It makes no sense that they'd lose in practice and do just fine in tournaments, and if we go by your meter of only the very highest level counts (which to a certain extent i agree with), tournament games are what matters, not practice.
|
On May 21 2016 04:46 Squaal wrote:
Liberator nerf against ground (don't need to nerf a lot in my opinion) and remove bonus against light AA dmg, ultra armor nerf (back to +2), prism pick-up range nerf and adept health nerf or dmg 19 against light (and a bit faster attack), and game is probably in a good shape.
notice how you're just trying to tone down what everyone has been saying was retardedly strong since those ideas were introduced in the beta. But hey, 8 armor ultras, infinite range prisms and 85 damage liberators probably sounded cool once upon a time.
|
United Kingdom20319 Posts
I disagree w/ further adept combat power nerfs on the basis that they're already not that amazing vs zerg and terran low tiered units and protoss design of bad t1 units supporting all-important OP tier 3 was much worse than the current design IMO.
|
On May 21 2016 05:03 Teoita wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 04:28 Charoisaur wrote:On May 21 2016 04:21 Teoita wrote:
I really don't understand korea's feedback. Sample size is super small, but Zergs do fine in proleague, won SSL, and got murdered in GSL where they had some pretty unfavourable groups that led to only Losira in the ro8. Seems fine to me. When koreans give feedback they probably don't only take the leagues into consideration. They play in their teamhouses vs eachother every day. I think their feedback is mainly based around their teamhouse practice as that probably gives you a good idea of balance when you play vs the same players over and over again. I'm just surprised there's still no mention of ultras and tempests but I guess koreans aren't really concerned with absurdly stupid design as long as they can reliably win their games. And yeah only korean feedback should be considered when balancing their game, for foreigners it's simply a learn to play issue. It makes no sense that they'd lose in practice and do just fine in tournaments, and if we go by your meter of only the very highest level counts (which to a certain extent i agree with), tournament games are what matters, not practice.
I mean assuming Blizzard/Kespa are talking to all the races and not just one, then I can understand their reasoning. I think +4 larva might be too much, but in Korea Terran and Protoss are not struggling versus zerg.
One thing you are forgetting about SSL, is when SSL started Zerg was considered OP as fuck, then Terran and Protosses started learning the game (after most had already been eliminated as well). So early SSL isn't much of an indicator because of this. If we went by how SSL was originally, Zerg would have been nerfed into the ground.
Just looking at GSL, Zergs were getting smashed. I don't find it a coincidence that once Protosses/Terrans adapted (and better maps), that Zerg got crushed. I don't think they should be overly buffing zerg or overly nerfing the other races though.
|
Italy12246 Posts
On May 21 2016 05:11 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 05:03 Teoita wrote:On May 21 2016 04:28 Charoisaur wrote:On May 21 2016 04:21 Teoita wrote:
I really don't understand korea's feedback. Sample size is super small, but Zergs do fine in proleague, won SSL, and got murdered in GSL where they had some pretty unfavourable groups that led to only Losira in the ro8. Seems fine to me. When koreans give feedback they probably don't only take the leagues into consideration. They play in their teamhouses vs eachother every day. I think their feedback is mainly based around their teamhouse practice as that probably gives you a good idea of balance when you play vs the same players over and over again. I'm just surprised there's still no mention of ultras and tempests but I guess koreans aren't really concerned with absurdly stupid design as long as they can reliably win their games. And yeah only korean feedback should be considered when balancing their game, for foreigners it's simply a learn to play issue. It makes no sense that they'd lose in practice and do just fine in tournaments, and if we go by your meter of only the very highest level counts (which to a certain extent i agree with), tournament games are what matters, not practice. I mean assuming Blizzard/Kespa are talking to all the races and not just one, then I can understand their reasoning. I think +4 larva might be too much, but in Korea Terran and Protoss are not struggling versus zerg. One thing you are forgetting about SSL, is when SSL started Zerg was considered OP as fuck, then Terran and Protosses started learning the game (after most had already been eliminated as well). So early SSL isn't much of an indicator because of this. If we went by how SSL was originally, Zerg would have been nerfed into the ground. Just looking at GSL, Zergs were getting smashed. I don't find it a coincidence that once Protosses/Terrans adapted (and better maps), that Zerg got crushed. I don't think they should be overly buffing zerg or overly nerfing the other races though.
Of course a race does better when they get used to another race's favourite styles. Doesn't mean nerfs or buffs are required. Zerg wasn't nerfed significantly, and Protoss and Terran weren't buffed significantly (in fact P got nerfed in early game PvZ), yet the matchups changed. Now Zerg seems to struggle for half a tournament in which they had bad RNG in the first place, and kespa Zergs go to blizzard whining for buffs? That's absurd.
|
On May 21 2016 05:11 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 05:03 Teoita wrote:On May 21 2016 04:28 Charoisaur wrote:On May 21 2016 04:21 Teoita wrote:
I really don't understand korea's feedback. Sample size is super small, but Zergs do fine in proleague, won SSL, and got murdered in GSL where they had some pretty unfavourable groups that led to only Losira in the ro8. Seems fine to me. When koreans give feedback they probably don't only take the leagues into consideration. They play in their teamhouses vs eachother every day. I think their feedback is mainly based around their teamhouse practice as that probably gives you a good idea of balance when you play vs the same players over and over again. I'm just surprised there's still no mention of ultras and tempests but I guess koreans aren't really concerned with absurdly stupid design as long as they can reliably win their games. And yeah only korean feedback should be considered when balancing their game, for foreigners it's simply a learn to play issue. It makes no sense that they'd lose in practice and do just fine in tournaments, and if we go by your meter of only the very highest level counts (which to a certain extent i agree with), tournament games are what matters, not practice. Just looking at GSL, Zergs were getting smashed. I don't find it a coincidence that once Protosses/Terrans adapted (and better maps), that Zerg got crushed. I don't think they should be overly buffing zerg or overly nerfing the other races though.
Maps are huge and the fact that they're working to unify the map pool (thankfully in the direction of the uncompromising Korean leagues) is a very good thing. Korea might only be concerned with Korean results (which honestly aren't as bad as people are making them out to be), but international viewers care about results everywhere. For a healthy scene you have to consider both.
|
On May 21 2016 05:01 Dungeontay wrote:
I dont know which other options than liberators terran has, to counter ultralisks. Ghosts suck dick, as the snipe ability just gets cancelled with every fungel, and the split up ghosts, that didnt get hit, dont kill the ultras off. I dont even know what to do in TvZ if this patch is coming online. Alone the AAdamage nerf will have a lot of impact on the TvZ late game...
Forced to all-in pre-ultra every game. Unlike now, where we choose to all-in pre-ultra every game.
|
As Terran,I agree with Lib nerf because it looks pretty OP .The real problem is that we need HUGE mech buffs to compensate a lib nerf.We are going MMM+libs every game because we don't have choice,our opponent hasn't even too scout us because they know that we are Going bio.
I suggest to :
Nerf lib antiground
Redesign cyclone
Buff Thor antiground attack
Change BC attack mode
Buff raven autotorrets
|
these changes rly surprises me. maybe they should wait, how the current patch will change the win ratio. the immo nerf is rly big and could totally flip the zvp in zergs favour. but instead of waiting, theyre allrdy planing the next nerfes/buffs. (and im zerg btw).
im sure, the larva buff wont make it through. that would just to big of a change. i would like to see some reasons for that larva change. a simple "because korean pros said it" wont make it for me.
i dont know, how they want to nerf the AG of the lib, without making it useless. i think blizz should remove that marauder nerf in comparison.
and im also surprised, that they still dont touch the adept shade ability.
|
This game has become absurdly stupid.
I miss hots, really.
|
On May 21 2016 05:03 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 04:46 Squaal wrote:
Liberator nerf against ground (don't need to nerf a lot in my opinion) and remove bonus against light AA dmg, ultra armor nerf (back to +2), prism pick-up range nerf and adept health nerf or dmg 19 against light (and a bit faster attack), and game is probably in a good shape. notice how you're just trying to tone down what everyone has been saying was retardedly strong since those ideas were introduced in the beta. But hey, 8 armor ultras, infinite range prisms and 85 damage liberators probably sounded cool once upon a time.
So? Would you prefer that no one talks about the main issues so that Blizzard can create some other bullshit instead of fixing the game?
|
On May 21 2016 05:25 DalaiiLameR wrote:
these changes rly surprises me. maybe they should wait, how the current patch will change the win ratio. the immo nerf is rly big and could totally flip the zvp in zergs favour. but instead of waiting, theyre allrdy planing the next nerfes/buffs. (and im zerg btw).
Agree ! We should let the dust settle a bit after the immo patch. If needed, we can then plan something addressing warp prism (potentially adept cooldown), liberator anti-ground and ultras.
@Squaal above : of course not ! I'm just disappointed how much time they needed to see the issues when the numbers only reeked of potential problems.
|
4 larva? are they freaking crazy?
|
If you actually watch Korean Sc2 then all of those changes make sense. At the highest level their sense of the balance is correct. If you just ladder and/or watch WCS then those suggestions will not make sense.
|
I feel like these guys are so desperate to do something that they're reaching out and taking any feedback from anyone.
Of course, if you ask 10 pro gamers, each will tell you the others' race is imbalanced. Let's all take a moment to remember when Rain said Terran was more imba vs Protoss than Infestor Brood Lord. RAIN.
I don't think Blizzard should ask for "what is imbalanced." Rather they should be collecting feedback such as "this is not fun to play against" and "this forces all X race players into Y build."
You can't really determine "balance" from 2 championships. But you can say hey, balanced or not, we think 8 armor ultras are a stupid way to play. So let's adjust those things.
Game design > balance right now. There are so many STUPID things that "balance" can be figured out later.
8 armor ultras? Liberators? Ghost snipe being a joke? Cyclones and Swarm Hosts being useless.
|
wtf. Protoss nerf. no comment. Good job David Kim KAPPA
User was warned for this post
User was warned for this post
|
On May 21 2016 05:27 DinoMight wrote:
This game has become absurdly stupid.
I miss hots, really.
Me too but I think with a few changes lotv could become superior to HotS. The potential is there the economy change was great the new positional units (liberators, lurkers, disruptors) are awesome)
Blizzard just needs to fix the broken things in the game such as liberators, tempests, ultras, parasitic bomb and the game will be infinitely better.
And the strength of worker harassment has become a little bit to extreme in this expansion imo.
|
While I would agree with Kespa feedback on balance which is representative of the balance of the game in Korea, where we have : Zest > Terran > Protoss > Zerg, the revert to 4 larva would be, in my opinion, a big mistake and something extremely hard to balance.
Now, for protoss, if they are committed to nerfing them, it's reaaaally time to look at revelation and/or tempest. Tempest being 4 supply is ridiculous enough, but the range/energy cost/AOE of revelation is what's make tempest too strong.
|
On May 21 2016 05:45 DinoMight wrote:
I feel like these guys are so desperate to do something that they're reaching out and taking any feedback from anyone.
Of course, if you ask 10 pro gamers, each will tell you the others' race is imbalanced. Let's all take a moment to remember when Rain said Terran was more imba vs Protoss than Infestor Brood Lord. RAIN.
I don't think Blizzard should ask for "what is imbalanced." Rather they should be collecting feedback such as "this is not fun to play against" and "this forces all X race players into Y build."
You can't really determine "balance" from 2 championships. But you can say hey, balanced or not, we think 8 armor ultras are a stupid way to play. So let's adjust those things.
i dont think, that they do it this way.. f.e. the larva change. maybe a zerg has suggested it, but they dont just go like "ok, we make it". they talk also with terran and toss pros about that suggestion, so they dont get only one side of the medal.
i wonder what some people think, how this balance changes come into these patches..
|
On May 21 2016 05:57 Vanadiel wrote:
While I would agree with Kespa feedback on balance which is representative of the balance of the game in Korea, where we have : Zest > Terran > Protoss > Zerg, the revert to 4 larva would be, in my opinion, a big mistake and something extremely hard to balance.
Now, for protoss, if they are committed to nerfing them, it's reaaaally time to look at revelation and/or tempest. Tempest being 4 supply is ridiculous enough, but the range/energy cost/AOE of revelation is what's make tempest too strong.
revelation is fine, it's an original and rather well done spell. Tempest supply on the other hand makes little sense, a raise in supply has been advocated for for ages...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
