|
On May 21 2016 19:57 Terence Chill wrote:
dont go after the "major community feedback" but the one that matters FFS
Kespa feedback doesn't matter at all too.
- it hasn't brought up anything useful to sustainably improve SC2 over the past 5 years from what I know, just little tweaks
- former kespa players keep turning their back towards SC2 and play broodwar in spite of Blizzard recognizing this Kespa feedback all that much in the past with their decisionmaking.
- inside Kespa there are many voices and therefore they are only able to provide a least common denominator feedback which results in small tweaks here or there from what they are feeling the majority of their players say, think or experience. It wont give that decisive step into the right direction to deactivate certain mechanics that cause the issues in their roots.
Before ppl. start flaming me: Yes they know best about balance in detail for sure. But thats not the major issue of SC2. Giving the one unit one more damage or one less armor and any of such things wont fix what we call the decline of SC2, the frustration of players, the no fun argument, the lack of strategic options, the "I rather spend my time with something else"-feeling, and so on.
SC2 will win when players like flash and grubby (just to name two prominent examples out of thousands of players) decide to play SC2 over broodwar or any other game in their sparetime or for streaming as they get out more fun and satisfaction when playing SC2 and the feeling of being able to dominate the game with their adaptive skill and not by only strictly following the current metagame mixed with a certain amount of luck and chance when it comes to positionings and timings.
This is the measurement for SC2 and nothing else. Adding a larva to zerg or nerfing liberator vs. ground wont achieve that.
|
On May 21 2016 19:15 LSN wrote:
...
A mechanic like the mule would fit better to the zerg race in terms of current design and general meta.
...
Wouldn't increasing the amount of larvae make the game for zerg (almost) equally forgiving? With more larvae you can better compensate units lost by being harassed or by harassing the enemy. Of course you need to invest more resources than the terran but your eco and number of bases should be higher as well.
I agree with you, I just think that the points you give regarding zerg's harassment are actually adressed with such a change.
|
On May 21 2016 20:42 CyanApple wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 19:15 LSN wrote:
...
A mechanic like the mule would fit better to the zerg race in terms of current design and general meta.
...
Wouldn't increasing the amount of larvae make the game for zerg (almost) equally forgiving? With more larvae you can better compensate units lost by being harassed or by harassing the enemy. Of course you need to invest more resources than the terran but your eco and number of bases should be higher as well. I agree with you, I just think that the points you give regarding zerg's harassment are actually adressed with such a change.
Thats right to a certain point.
But:
- we don't need randomly more forgivingness for zerg without it being embedded a big context of changes.
- we had 4 larva queen gameplay for a long time and that alone was
- game mechanics in terms of unit interactions need to change. We don't need more mechanics like tankivacs that deal damage without any risk as the counterpart can just not catch them for a certain period of time.
- it wont change the bio dominating every game of terran with its overpowered dps and mobility (at same time) which requires zerg to be defensive and play for a stronger lategame
- terran got the forgiving mechanic of mules after harrassment, so it should become subject to harrassment and aim for a strong lategame with cost efficient units, which is the total opposite of what it is now
- in the end it may very well be that 4 larva are suitable for zerg or 3, or whatever else, but we can't know now. Therefore it is some tweak that should be done at the end of things.
I would like to write more but am into something else right now.
|
I agree, as I said, it only adresses zerg's potential to endure and deal out harassment (to a certain point) while leaving other (more) important topics untouched.
It is only nice to see, that Blizzard points out subjects, that would actually improve the gameplay, even if it doesn't make it perfect. I am trying to focus on the improvement Blizzard suggests/realizes, to get things done faster and move on to the next issue, in hope to close in on the problems at the core.
This seems to better fit the way Blizzard works.
|
On May 21 2016 21:23 CyanApple wrote:
I agree, as I said, it only adresses zerg's potential to endure and deal out harassment (to a certain point) while leaving other (more) important topics untouched.
It is only nice to see, that Blizzard points out subjects, that would actually improve the gameplay, even if it doesn't make it perfect. I am trying to focus on the suggestions Blizzard makes, to get things done faster and move on to the next issue, in hope to close in on the problems at the core.
This seems to better fit the way Blizzard works.
It not really does imo.
You still have to commit the units against a mule economy which is in the very most of situations a bad idea. Or go mutas where you have that 0 risk vs 100 reward situation again as they heal up that quickly and can't be catched. But mutas not in current meta.
Also zerg doesn't even need to harrass terran now but the other way round. As zerg got the strong lategame but not terran.
|
On May 21 2016 17:58 Salteador Neo wrote:
I'm sure that in this matter KeSPA is right and the community is wrong, zerg is the weakest, not terran.
I'm shocked by the response here and on reddit. Kespa represents all of Korea, for the most part. That means multiple teams, hundreds of players (Remember all of the b teamers), all playing constant games for ~10 hours a day.
Not only that, but they're constantly trying to break the game. Dark didn't pull out ling bane against protoss on a whim, it took a shit ton of games before he figured it out.
They have the most data and authority to be making these balance suggestions out of anybody. Most of the fucking foreigner pros don't even play the game half the time, throwing out that "less is more" bullshit.
|
On May 21 2016 21:34 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 21:23 CyanApple wrote:
I agree, as I said, it only adresses zerg's potential to endure and deal out harassment (to a certain point) while leaving other (more) important topics untouched.
It is only nice to see, that Blizzard points out subjects, that would actually improve the gameplay, even if it doesn't make it perfect. I am trying to focus on the suggestions Blizzard makes, to get things done faster and move on to the next issue, in hope to close in on the problems at the core.
This seems to better fit the way Blizzard works. It not really does imo. You still have to commit the units against a mule economy which is in the very most of situations a bad idea. Or go mutas where you have that 0 risk vs 100 reward situation again as they heal up that quickly and can't be catched. But mutas not in current meta. Also zerg doesn't even need to harrass terran now but the other way round. As zerg got the strong lategame but not terran.
Harassing the terran always does damage, even if mules kind of compensate for it. But the terran is still missing the workers it would have otherwise. Currently the damage done to the terran eco compared to the investment of the zerg is just not enough to set back the terran. This could be changed by increasing the number of larva, to allow for successive small attacks on the eco.
Having a zerg capable of harassing would then hopefully make Blizzard realize that terran needs better lategame.
EDIT: Anyways, I was starting from your point, that zerg could use a mule-like economy more in the current gameplay, which is a bad point to start from, if the intention is to actually change the gameplay. My hope probably is not to close in on the core problem as I stated, but to improve the game as far as we can with the way Blizzard patches the game.
|
Is good to hear Kespa feedback, highest level of play, probably the feedback who matter the most, i really hope Blizzard take this in consideration. Zerg is struggling in pro level and need major buffs!
|
On May 21 2016 21:45 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 17:58 Salteador Neo wrote:
I'm sure that in this matter KeSPA is right and the community is wrong, zerg is the weakest, not terran. I'm shocked by the response here and on reddit. Kespa represents all of Korea, for the most part. That means multiple teams, hundreds of players (Remember all of the b teamers), all playing constant games for ~10 hours a day. Not only that, but they're constantly trying to break the game. Dark didn't pull out ling bane against protoss on a whim, it took a shit ton of games before he figured it out. They have the most data and authority to be making these balance suggestions out of anybody. Most of the fucking foreigner pros don't even play the game half the time, throwing out that "less is more" bullshit.
Honestly I think the larva suggestion is what causes people to react like this.
Not sure why blizzard suggests this because it would probably be broken, maybe they asked the koreans what they thought caused muta ling bling to not be viable anymore and the logic answer is the larva nerf in lotv.
Zerg took the hardest hit when they nerfed all the macro mechanics, they got compensated for that with strong units like ravagers and lurkers but ling styles got no compensation at all for it while being hurt the most by the nerf.
Obviously we don't want a muta buff since that unit already requires so many hardcounters in the game because it is so strong.
I think the best course of action would be a bane buff, either make them cheaper, faster, faster buildtime or more damage/radius or something like that.
Zerg needs to be able to trade more cost efficiënt since getting the economy and larva required to play ling styles is not possible to get reliably in high level play.
|
On May 21 2016 17:21 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 07:56 Nakajin wrote:On May 21 2016 04:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Next Week’s Patch/Map Updates
Split feedback from community and KeSPA pros
We’re seeing another complete split in feedback here. Please let us know if we’re wrong about what the major community feedback is regarding Terran, but what we’re seeing is that our community thinks Terran is the weakest race right now. From another angle, we received KeSPA feedback that said Terran is the strongest, Protoss is also too strong and need more nerfs than just the Immortal nerf, and that Zerg is the clear weakest and could use major buffs.
I am a Random Diamond player and Terran is my favourite race. Terran is also my worst race even though i love it. Terran is my weakest race BECAUSE my APM is low. You do not need to change the game so that I am better with Terran. I fully accept that Terran can only be played with high APM and I will just struggle along. Just because Terran is weak for me and my old and slow friends doesn't mean the race is weak for everyone. So please just balance the game for the top level players and don't worry about slow guys like me. On May 21 2016 04:04 Kafka777 wrote:
Kespa is probably right about their suggestions and obviously they are interested in keeping the game balanced and competitive. They want balance around highest level of game play. It would be silly to balance it around low tier players, that would cause a need to issue balance patches every two weeks. i agree. i have a 50/50 win percentage with all 3 races. Its just the league i do it in with Terran has a different logo. I don't care. i'm not 12 years old... i can get over losing a video game to a player who might "technically" be slightly worse than me and beatable with a different race. I never understood the Terran need high APM thing, as a plat player, Diamon in hots with terran I feel the opposite, I like Terran because it dosen't need high amp (at least at my level) I hardly go over the 120 APM in average playing bio, I hate liberator because it is to much amp. For me Protoss seem impossible with all the casting to do it feel it need a lot more APM even more in LOTV, Zerg is just to much apm to macro for me with the injects. Zerg is just easier. Its the same for Brood War.
Lol. You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. Please don't talk about brood war at all.
|
On May 21 2016 21:46 CyanApple wrote:
Harassing the terran always does damage, even if mules kind of compensate for it. But the terran is still missing the workers it would have otherwise. Currently the damage done to the terran eco compared to the investment of the zerg is just not enough to set back the terran. This could be changed by increasing the number of larva, to allow for successive small attacks on the eco.
Having a zerg capable of harassing would then hopefully make Blizzard realize that terran needs better lategame.
EDIT: Anyways, I was starting from your point, that zerg could use a mule-like economy more in the current gameplay, which is a bad point to start from, if the intention is to actually change the gameplay. My hope probably is not to close in on the core problem as I stated, but to improve the game as far as we can with the way Blizzard patches the game.
"Currently the damage done to the terran eco compared to the investment of the zerg is just not enough to set back the terran."
Thats my point. But currently in the meta it is not even required that the zerg does damage to terran eco by harrassments. If we wanted this to change then zerg needs to get rid of this super strong lategame and it must be granted to terran however.
So we basically agree.
Putting the mule to zerg or nerfing it was never my intension, just to point out the problem that it creates. For me, in opposite to you, more larva doesn't necessarily change too much, you are right it loosens it a bit tho.
If you argue from a current point of meta, where zerg is constant subject of harrassments, then you are right zerg should get increased forgiveness for that by buffing the mechanic which can be #larva per inject or what I said: nerf the mule.
But when the game switches first to a metagame where terran is the strong lategame part and the goal is to get a cost efficient army up while zerg tries to deny and delay that by harrassing left and right, then the mule is at a pretty goo place suddenly and both mule and larva must be reevaluated an the end of this process and not in the beginning.
Btw: I hate to see ppl. jumping on the Kespa waggon, probably zergs being frustrated from the game, seeing confirmation by Kespa that Z up T op as that is the highest level of play and they must know. This is not the case and it i wrong. The same happens the other way round when Kespa says buff terran, then all of them come out and put "I knew it" posts in here, lol.
This wont go anywhere. The matchup cannot be balanced and made satisfactory to play for each party that way. The root of the problem are op game/unit/combination mechanics that stand against each other, which also go against the nature of the races by design (zerg strong lategame and terran max mobility + dps + harrassment).
|
On May 21 2016 19:34 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 17:37 DalaiiLameR wrote:On May 21 2016 17:21 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 21 2016 07:56 Nakajin wrote:On May 21 2016 04:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Next Week’s Patch/Map Updates
Split feedback from community and KeSPA pros
We’re seeing another complete split in feedback here. Please let us know if we’re wrong about what the major community feedback is regarding Terran, but what we’re seeing is that our community thinks Terran is the weakest race right now. From another angle, we received KeSPA feedback that said Terran is the strongest, Protoss is also too strong and need more nerfs than just the Immortal nerf, and that Zerg is the clear weakest and could use major buffs.
I am a Random Diamond player and Terran is my favourite race. Terran is also my worst race even though i love it. Terran is my weakest race BECAUSE my APM is low. You do not need to change the game so that I am better with Terran. I fully accept that Terran can only be played with high APM and I will just struggle along. Just because Terran is weak for me and my old and slow friends doesn't mean the race is weak for everyone. So please just balance the game for the top level players and don't worry about slow guys like me. On May 21 2016 04:04 Kafka777 wrote:
Kespa is probably right about their suggestions and obviously they are interested in keeping the game balanced and competitive. They want balance around highest level of game play. It would be silly to balance it around low tier players, that would cause a need to issue balance patches every two weeks. i agree. i have a 50/50 win percentage with all 3 races. Its just the league i do it in with Terran has a different logo. I don't care. i'm not 12 years old... i can get over losing a video game to a player who might "technically" be slightly worse than me and beatable with a different race. I never understood the Terran need high APM thing, as a plat player, Diamon in hots with terran I feel the opposite, I like Terran because it dosen't need high amp (at least at my level) I hardly go over the 120 APM in average playing bio, I hate liberator because it is to much amp. For me Protoss seem impossible with all the casting to do it feel it need a lot more APM even more in LOTV, Zerg is just to much apm to macro for me with the injects. my APM ranges from 70 to 150 depending on how serious i feel like playing. i've spent 10X as much time playing Terran as i have playing Zerg. i'm still a better Zerg player. i've studied, gone over replays, experiment with different hotkey setups etc etc. I've just accepted it and I don't think DK should alter the game because of my personal issue. injects are easy.. i just hot key all my queens to "3" and use hte minimap to keep injecting. my "elite" expansion harass consists of the micro-intense strategically deep "throw some zerglings at it while doing other macro stuff".... also i have the backspace key, the "3" and the "V" assigned to thumb buttons on my G502. terran infantry is vulnerable in a way 30 zerglings and 10 banelings can never be. Terran macro is a just a giant PITA relative to Zerg. Zerg is just easier. Its the same for Brood War. to be clear: none of this is a complaint and i'm not expecting DK/Blizz to change the game. my winning percentage is the same for both races... i just play against worse players on my terran account. no offence, but that is just not true. for terran macro, you dont even need to jump into your mainbase. having all raxes on one hotkey allows you to build units easily. if you forget mules - no problem. just call 5,6 mules at the same time, when you remember it. you dont lose mins, you just get them later, so theres no punishment for forgetting mules. If you forget to make units and have overmins, no punishment you still can make the same units you just get them later, right?
nope. when you forget to inject, u sit on f.e. 2k mins and have like.. 9 larva. yay.. so you can build 9 roaches and still have ~1500 mins over. forgetting to inject punish you rly, if the opponent suddenly attacks you.
|
On May 21 2016 22:38 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 21:46 CyanApple wrote:
Harassing the terran always does damage, even if mules kind of compensate for it. But the terran is still missing the workers it would have otherwise. Currently the damage done to the terran eco compared to the investment of the zerg is just not enough to set back the terran. This could be changed by increasing the number of larva, to allow for successive small attacks on the eco.
Having a zerg capable of harassing would then hopefully make Blizzard realize that terran needs better lategame.
EDIT: Anyways, I was starting from your point, that zerg could use a mule-like economy more in the current gameplay, which is a bad point to start from, if the intention is to actually change the gameplay. My hope probably is not to close in on the core problem as I stated, but to improve the game as far as we can with the way Blizzard patches the game. "Currently the damage done to the terran eco compared to the investment of the zerg is just not enough to set back the terran." Thats my point. But currently in the meta it is not even required that the zerg does damage to terran eco by harrassments. If we wanted this to change then zerg needs to get rid of this super strong lategame and it must be granted to terran however. So we basically agree. Putting the mule to zerg or nerfing it was never my intension, just to point out the problem that it creates. For me, in opposite to you, more larva doesn't necessarily change too much, you are right it loosens it a bit tho. If you argue from a current point of meta, where zerg is constant subject of harrassments, then you are right zerg should get increased forgiveness for that by buffing the mechanic which can be #larva per inject or what I said: nerf the mule. But when the game switches first to a metagame where terran is the strong lategame part and the goal is to get a cost efficient army up while zerg tries to deny and delay that by harrassing left and right, then the mule is at a pretty goo place suddenly and both mule and larva must be reevaluated an the end of this process and not in the beginning. Btw: I hate to see ppl. jumping on the Kespa waggon, probably zergs being frustrated from the game, seeing confirmation by Kespa that Z up T op as that is the highest level of play and they must know. This is not the case and it i wrong. The same happens the other way round when Kespa says buff terran, then all of them come out and put "I knew it" posts in here, lol. This wont go anywhere. The matchup cannot be balanced and made satisfactory to play for each party that way. The root of the problem are op game/unit/combination mechanics that stand against each other, which also go against the nature of the races by design (zerg strong lategame and terran max mobility + dps + harrassment).
I wonder if anyone in TL has seen the last late game zvt in tournament or ladder because the combinaison of Ghost+Liberators is extremely cost efficient, Bunny vs Elazer on Dusk Tower, Elazer vs Botvinnik on Endion (Elazer got a good lead and despite the "op composition", he almost lost and lost way more ressources than his opponent), the Stream of Happy who was losing and reversed the situation or Snute who lost badly against uthermal, after 1,43 sec, the snipe do 170 damages, this is quite a lot for a supposed useless unit. So, I don't think the late game is so imblanced that ppl thinks it is, it seems like they are just lacking of experience.
However, I agree that this MU is just about reaching timing with hardcounter, go to ultras, go to mass libe, go to viper, go to ghosts, ext, this is quite depressing considering the time of MMMM vs MLB when the counters of every units involved was basically pure micro and engagement in both sides. it leads to the most beautiful games from my pov. (DRG vs Inno, Inno vs Curious, Life vs Taeja...). Now, zerg players must just spread their army, A click and activate capacities like a moba, this is quite boring to play and watch, on this perspective, lotv is a total failure.
Btw, I understand that many protoss regreat the time of blink stalkers into late game aka "I have a mid game which responds to anything you can have and an autowin lategame" but still, it does not seem like a sensible reason to jump on the Kespa hate waggon, this rupture between the perception on balance of the TL community and the korean pros is not recent when you see the advices of Canata and pro players.reported by Crank so it is a trending which lasts, so there is not a middle in which both kespa players and TL community are rights, either they are wrongs, either you are right, no one can be objective in discussion around balance so I guess the best choice is to follow the advice of the people who have the best knowledges of hight level and I put my two cents on kespa players (despite the previous advice of Rain on T as op as the BL/infest during the blink area, oh god, that was funny), too bad for you, it seems like Blizzard does the same, well, maybe they would retract and follow the idea of a lower league player like they did for the canon (well, it was not a stupid proposition I would dare say) but I don't think it would be such a great idea.
Hum, this is kind of a guilty pleasure, I am bit happy of those complains as the community seems totally biaised.
Anyway, a WP nerf seems better than the immortal's one, for the liberators anti-ground nerf, I prefer that Blizzard waits a bit how the meta evolved after the AA nerf and concerning the larva, well, if it makes MLB easier... I miss the old inject and creep spread mechanics.
|
Please implement the patch and then let the meta settle for 2-3 months before even thinking about doing another patch.
And please cut down on the community feedback post, you are over communicating. It is better to have one quality analysis every second month instead of contradictory communications every week.
|
On May 22 2016 00:16 MockHamill wrote:
Please implement the patch and then let the meta settle for 2-3 months before even thinking about doing another patch.
And please cut down on the community feedback post, you are over communicating. It is better to have one quality analysis every second month instead of contradictory communications every week.
I wish they'd let the dust settle a bit too. We still don't know how some changes (maps, immortal nerf) will transform (or not) certain match-ups so I'd like them to wait a bit.
Agree about the overcommunicating part as well. The intention is good but in the end it gets confusing. I'd rather have less community updates with a sharper direction.
|
On May 21 2016 22:35 B-royal wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 17:21 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 21 2016 07:56 Nakajin wrote:On May 21 2016 04:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Next Week’s Patch/Map Updates
Split feedback from community and KeSPA pros
We’re seeing another complete split in feedback here. Please let us know if we’re wrong about what the major community feedback is regarding Terran, but what we’re seeing is that our community thinks Terran is the weakest race right now. From another angle, we received KeSPA feedback that said Terran is the strongest, Protoss is also too strong and need more nerfs than just the Immortal nerf, and that Zerg is the clear weakest and could use major buffs.
I am a Random Diamond player and Terran is my favourite race. Terran is also my worst race even though i love it. Terran is my weakest race BECAUSE my APM is low. You do not need to change the game so that I am better with Terran. I fully accept that Terran can only be played with high APM and I will just struggle along. Just because Terran is weak for me and my old and slow friends doesn't mean the race is weak for everyone. So please just balance the game for the top level players and don't worry about slow guys like me. On May 21 2016 04:04 Kafka777 wrote:
Kespa is probably right about their suggestions and obviously they are interested in keeping the game balanced and competitive. They want balance around highest level of game play. It would be silly to balance it around low tier players, that would cause a need to issue balance patches every two weeks. i agree. i have a 50/50 win percentage with all 3 races. Its just the league i do it in with Terran has a different logo. I don't care. i'm not 12 years old... i can get over losing a video game to a player who might "technically" be slightly worse than me and beatable with a different race. I never understood the Terran need high APM thing, as a plat player, Diamon in hots with terran I feel the opposite, I like Terran because it dosen't need high amp (at least at my level) I hardly go over the 120 APM in average playing bio, I hate liberator because it is to much amp. For me Protoss seem impossible with all the casting to do it feel it need a lot more APM even more in LOTV, Zerg is just to much apm to macro for me with the injects. Zerg is just easier. Its the same for Brood War. Lol. You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. Please don't talk about brood war at all.
Zerg is the easiest race for me and for the group i play with in both SC2 and Brood War. No one has an APM over 150. You can take it leave it do whatever you want with it. it is a fact.
However, this is an SC2 thread about feedback. and my feedback is that Zerg is easiest for me to play. Another fact.
On May 22 2016 00:16 MockHamill wrote:
Please implement the patch and then let the meta settle for 2-3 months before even thinking about doing another patch.
And please cut down on the community feedback post, you are over communicating. It is better to have one quality analysis every second month instead of contradictory communications every week.
true, they are over communicating. i prefer 2 detailed posts a month. But, basically i agree.
I like the frequent PTR maps though. They are not changing the actual game that often. i think its healthy to experiment and play with various changes in the PTR maps. If some of the ideas totally suck balls its the cost of being creative and they do not have to be included in the actual game.
game was released November 10th or so and there was a balance patch around January 30th. So the meta is being given time to settle down.
|
Honestly I wish they would just tone down the realy op units across the board. Make ultras not rofl stomp bio, but make libs not rofl stomp ultras. Make it so that p ground does not A move+storm over t ground and that p is actually vulnerable in the early game but make it so that libs don't kill everything. I don't know what tweeks this would require but at least from my low level masters perspective it would make the game less about hard counters and abusive units and more about tactics and decision making.
|
May we know who represents Kespa?
|
This feedback really doesn't seem legit based on what we just saw in the PL finals.
15 games - 3 Terrans fielded and 1 victory.
Why would you not field the strongest race?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
