|
Next Week’s Patch/Map Updates
We agree with many of you that because the Swarm Host cost decrease is smaller now, it may be better to not nerf the supply cost right away. We would like to take out the Swarm Host supply cost increase for next week’s patch, but leave everything else the same as we discussed earlier this week. With that in mind, next week we’ll have a patch go out and the map changes will happen as well.
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.
To be clear, this one point of feedback doesn’t say everything, but we definitely wanted to relay the feedback we got from KeSPA to the community so that we can all work towards making Starcraft 2..
Given their stance, KesPA suggested the following nerfs:
1. A Warp Prism nerf
2. An additional nerf to the Liberator’s targeting its anti-ground mode
3. Zerg Larva inject buff back to giving 4 per
Our general thought right now when evaluating the big picture with all of these factors considered is that Terran is the slightly weaker race, and Protoss being the clear strongest race. However, because the next patch is coming out so soon with a bunch of changes, it’s impossible to say for certain exactly where each race will land after the changes go in.
Note that there will also be many changes to maps in the near future to align the map pool to be much more similar to Korea. This will mean that we definitely need to provide players with the time to figure out how these changes shake things up. Ultimately, however, keeping all of this feedback in mind as we go forward can only prove beneficial.
Dreamhack Tours
We were so excited to see the Showtime vs Nerchio finals last weekend! It was super interesting how each of the finalists dominated the players in the semi-finals, and then went on to play the closest series. Many of us woke up early in the morning to watch it before work on Monday morning, and it was really awesome seeing such entertaining games! We need to thank the tournament organizers and esports people around the world who worked together to form the amazing changes to WCS this year that really allowed many players to step up their game.
Source
|
Hoping KeSPA continues to provide decently specific suggestions and that Blizzard tells us.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
Note that there will also be many changes to maps in the near future to align the map pool to be much more similar to Korea.
Pretty important if you're balancing tightly around KR results
---------------------------
I'd like to see some acknowledgement of racial representation at the moment as it's quite bad, maybe even the worst in the history of the game. EU has a split of 39% zerg, 35% terran and 24% protoss at masters.
What's the cause of that huge imbalance if protoss is to be considered the strongest race at the highest level of play?
Pre-LOTV the distribution was much better.
|
I'm not surprised at all that KeSPA thinks Terran is the strongest. Of late TvZ has been pretty favourable to Terran in Korea.
|
4 supply cyclone still going strong .... :D
"terran weakest atm"
lets nerf the lib and increase cyclone supply.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
On May 21 2016 03:34 PinoKotsBeer wrote:
4 supply cyclone still going strong .... :D
Cyclone was both better and more popular than SH, been killed by more than a couple of all-ins with a few cyclones in them (while playing early stargate PvT) and threatened exactly 0 times by swarmhosts
"terran weakest atm"
lets nerf the lib
I think this is just worded a little confusingly. Terran is strong vs Zerg, but not vs Protoss @ highest level
|
|
|
On May 21 2016 03:35 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 03:34 PinoKotsBeer wrote:
4 supply cyclone still going strong .... :D Cyclone was both better and more popular than SH, been killed by more than a couple of all-ins with a few cyclones in them (while playing early stargate PvT) and threatened exactly 0 times by swarmhosts
True, its good to see more options for zerg. they were very limited.
|
Hope they will finally go back on the pick up range of the Warp Prism, that shit is ridiculous.
If Kespa is providing that specific feedback I'd love to see some kind of testmap tournaments where suggested changes are tested so not only Blizzard can look at some data but the community can evaluate as well as provide additional insights. I mean, since we're involved in the process so much now, anyway they surely could be more open about public test stuff and give people some incentive, like that BoX format where players play each map regardless and there are 50 or 100 additional bucks on the line per game, I'd really like that.
|
I can really see oov's passion in wanting to make soO a champion in that KeSPA feedback.
|
Prism and liberators need the nerf, but im not sure about the larvas guys. honestly, seriously?
|
|
|
The larva revert is probably the dumbest suggestion entertained in any post-beta community feedback update. It is the very definition of a completely game breaking change.
|
Whatever changes they make to SH, they need to ask this question first.
"Are people going to start using SH after this change?"
For me, i think it's still going to be a big fat "NO".
|
I hope with larva revert we would get closer to ling/bling/muta ZvT which is SC2 at it's best. Although only this change wont be enough.
|
I would hope blizzard waits for Code A and SSL Challenge to begin before they do any changes because atm the only games in korea have been bo1s from proleague which aren't the best way to judge balance. We also haven't had bo5+ zvp's since the ssl finals so to say zerg is struggling is hard to support since the only zvp after that was losira vs dear which was a huge skill gap. Need to wait and see Dark/Rogue/soO/Solar play :D. Also zerg seems to be doing quite well in the foreign scene with nerchio barely losing to showtime in spring and hydra winning austin. Also note zerg has been in every lotv final since release except the gsl final.
|
On May 21 2016 03:30 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +Note that there will also be many changes to maps in the near future to align the map pool to be much more similar to Korea. Pretty important if you're balancing tightly around KR results --------------------------- I'd like to see some acknowledgement of racial representation at the moment, EU has a split of 39% zerg, 35% terran and 24% protoss at masters. What's the cause of that huge imbalance if protoss is to be considered the strongest race at the absolute highest level of play?
It's because masters and grandmasters aren't even close to being "the absolute highest level of play" haha.
|
I don't care about SwarmHost but 4 LARVA? Seriously?
That is ridiculous, I hope they don't even try...
I mean "Ok, let's nerf all MM but then let's keep the Zerg one... even more! let's buff it making it stack"
NO, absolutely NOPE.
The other changes are okish for now, they are going in the right direction IMO, except that Larva possible buff which drove me insane when I read about KeSPA suggesting it.
|
On May 21 2016 03:52 Tuczniak wrote:
I hope with larva revert we would get closer to ling/bling/muta ZvT which is SC2 at it's best. Although only this change wont be enough.
Or just faster drones boosting echo to faster Ultras 
With Libs getting a hard Nerfhammer aswell, what latr game does Terran have left?
|
I'd like to see the prism nerf personally . Though these changes are a step in the right direction. The larva buff sounds scary because with the faster macro, Zerg would be in an even better position to get out more units on maps with easy golds....
|
at the latest blizzard should now only nerf a race when it is compensated by a buff in a different area. the units and their related features they address are the right ones, imo. they now need to find the units which should be buffed for compensation.
with the liberator nerfed (as proposed), terran lacks late-game options.
with nerfed warp prism (and maybe increased tempest supply), increasing stalker AA damage might be a good idea (from PvZ standpoint)
i can't make out the consequences of 4 larvae per inject, but design-wise i think it would fit the zerg race very well
|
Canada16699 Posts
i'm satisfied with how DK altered Terran. I wanted stronger Terran ground and weaker Terran air. I felt the tendency to go "sky terran" into the mid and late game was just too high. I felt my advice was middle of the road and conserative and never gave any kind of ultimatum. I didn't post "give me a Tank that does 100 splash damage or i'm never playing SC2 again". Surprise, Surprise, I got what i requested.
please keep the proposed changes to Terran (thor, cyclone, liberator) and if Terran needs any kind of nerf please nerf an air unit.
Any how, I'm happy with the game and having fun.
Keep up the great work Blizzard/Mr. Kim.
|
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.
|
Oh god, I'm getting banned... This is a fucking joke, I'll not even try to make this look like a constructive criticism.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
On May 21 2016 03:51 TheWinks wrote:
The larva revert is probably the dumbest suggestion entertained in any post-beta community feedback update. It is the very definition of a completely game breaking change.
If you take 100 shields off immortal, nerf WP and nerf liberator AA and AG before making inject give 4 larvae, you would probably be inviting a list of further changes to compensate for that (maybe P and T buffs, things like less armor on Ultralisk..).
We're just getting the second patch in 6 months, we don't need another quick fix right after that lands followed up by a fourth one to fix the fix if it goes horribly wrong
Larvae (and economy) is even more important than damage, health and speed values on t1 units like marines and zerglings and will affect every zerg game
|
Canada16699 Posts
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.
|
On May 21 2016 03:35 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 03:34 PinoKotsBeer wrote:
4 supply cyclone still going strong .... :D Cyclone was both better and more popular than SH, been killed by more than a couple of all-ins with a few cyclones in them (while playing early stargate PvT) and threatened exactly 0 times by swarmhosts I think this is just worded a little confusingly. Terran is strong vs Zerg, but not vs Protoss @ highest level
I on the other hand have played a couple zergs that abused swarmhost hit- and run tactics but have never seen a terran making more than one cyclone.
This clearly shows that swarmhosts are both better and more popular than cyclones.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
|
On May 21 2016 03:37 PinoKotsBeer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 03:35 Cyro wrote:On May 21 2016 03:34 PinoKotsBeer wrote:
4 supply cyclone still going strong .... :D Cyclone was both better and more popular than SH, been killed by more than a couple of all-ins with a few cyclones in them (while playing early stargate PvT) and threatened exactly 0 times by swarmhosts True, its good to see more options for zerg. they were very limited.
Wait until you play terran, then you know what it really means to have limited options.
|
Italy12246 Posts
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.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
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.
GSL PvZ was also played overwhelmingly on a very small list of maps (the same ~3 maps) due to vetos in bo3 and bo5 games
-----------
On May 21 2016 04:20 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 03:37 PinoKotsBeer wrote:On May 21 2016 03:35 Cyro wrote:On May 21 2016 03:34 PinoKotsBeer wrote:
4 supply cyclone still going strong .... :D Cyclone was both better and more popular than SH, been killed by more than a couple of all-ins with a few cyclones in them (while playing early stargate PvT) and threatened exactly 0 times by swarmhosts True, its good to see more options for zerg. they were very limited. Wait until you play terran, then you know what it really means to have limited options.
I think every race feels that they have few options at the moment
|
Yes, let's make Zerg great again. #teamKeSPA
But honestly, I always said the warp prism had to be nerfed and some point, even it's just a cost increase, because right now the investment is way too low for what you get out of it.
I also think nerfing Liberator anti ground is more important that nerfing anti air, but you can't nerf both at once.
Still I think the larva buff is over the top and we should see where the game is going with next week's changes first.
|
On May 21 2016 04:08 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 03:51 TheWinks wrote:
The larva revert is probably the dumbest suggestion entertained in any post-beta community feedback update. It is the very definition of a completely game breaking change. If you take 100 shields off immortal, nerf WP and nerf liberator AA and AG before making inject give 4 larvae, you would probably be inviting a list of further changes to compensate for that (maybe P and T buffs, things like less armor on Ultralisk..).
I have no idea what you're trying to say. 4 larva is fundamentally game breaking. No amount of little tweaks like reducing ultra armor by 1 or something is going to make up for something like that.
|
Italy12246 Posts
On May 21 2016 04:26 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 04:08 Cyro wrote:On May 21 2016 03:51 TheWinks wrote:
The larva revert is probably the dumbest suggestion entertained in any post-beta community feedback update. It is the very definition of a completely game breaking change. If you take 100 shields off immortal, nerf WP and nerf liberator AA and AG before making inject give 4 larvae, you would probably be inviting a list of further changes to compensate for that (maybe P and T buffs, things like less armor on Ultralisk..). I have no idea what you're trying to say. 4 larva is fundamentally game breaking. No amount of little tweaks like reducing ultra armor by 1 or something is going to make up for something like that.
I agree. For comparison, the queen buff was rather minor at the time and we know what happened. I'm so incredibly confused.
|
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.
|
On May 21 2016 04:26 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 04:08 Cyro wrote:On May 21 2016 03:51 TheWinks wrote:
The larva revert is probably the dumbest suggestion entertained in any post-beta community feedback update. It is the very definition of a completely game breaking change. If you take 100 shields off immortal, nerf WP and nerf liberator AA and AG before making inject give 4 larvae, you would probably be inviting a list of further changes to compensate for that (maybe P and T buffs, things like less armor on Ultralisk..). I have no idea what you're trying to say. 4 larva is fundamentally game breaking. No amount of little tweaks like reducing ultra armor by 1 or something is going to make up for something like that.
Zerg was to me always explained as the race that needs the best economy, the highest supplycount and the possibility to remax quickly in order to win, because the units are worth less than the units of terran and protoss.
thats a design ive liked, but recently i rarely see zerg with an eco or supply lead and yet they are still balanced, because in lotv they have strong units aswell (ravagers, lurkers, ultras especially).
if the inject was returned to 4 larvae per cycle, it could imo very well be balanced by nerfing individual units, as it was done in the past. it would probably require quite a bit of work to balance it properly though, so i prefer it not to be changed, as zerg works quite well currently.
|
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.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
On May 21 2016 04:26 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 04:08 Cyro wrote:On May 21 2016 03:51 TheWinks wrote:
The larva revert is probably the dumbest suggestion entertained in any post-beta community feedback update. It is the very definition of a completely game breaking change. If you take 100 shields off immortal, nerf WP and nerf liberator AA and AG before making inject give 4 larvae, you would probably be inviting a list of further changes to compensate for that (maybe P and T buffs, things like less armor on Ultralisk..). I have no idea what you're trying to say. 4 larva is fundamentally game breaking. No amount of little tweaks like reducing ultra armor by 1 or something is going to make up for something like that.
Doubling chrono boost and mule strength would probably do it, but i still think that it's a ridiculous change
|
Warp prism nerf is like LONG overdue. The long range pick-up idea buff was utterly stupid.
On the other hand, giving back 4 larva with no compensation ? Wtf ? Why not have zerglings one shot command centers ?
|
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...
|
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 Kingdom20285 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...
|
On May 21 2016 06:03 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +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...
I don't think revelation should last as long as it does tbh. It's easy to get a tag (and not lose the oracle in the process), and you can't do anything with the tagged part of the army as long as it is tagged (except trying to distract), even when there's no tempests.
I'm not saying it's broken or anything, but in SC2 a minute is an eternity.
|
btw, what about a spell for terran, that could temporarely reduce the armor of a unit? maybe for the ghost. this would fix the "terran cant do anything against ultras" without making the ultras to weak, if the energy cost (or cd) would be high enough.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
I'm not saying it's broken or anything, but in SC2 a minute is an eternity.
It lasts 43 seconds.
|
On May 21 2016 06:09 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 06:03 [PkF] Wire wrote: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... I don't think revelation should last as long as it does tbh. It's easy to get a tag (and not lose the oracle in the process), and you can't do anything with the tagged part of the army as long as it is tagged (except trying to distract), even when there's no tempests. I'm not saying it's broken or anything, but in SC2 a minute is an eternity.
It could be shorter I kinda agree, but as you say it's not a major problem at all.
|
On May 21 2016 06:13 Cyro wrote:It lasts 43 seconds
Even a HotS minute is an eternity.
|
On May 21 2016 06:13 DalaiiLameR wrote:
btw, what about a spell for terran, that could temporarely reduce the armor of a unit? maybe for the ghost. this would fix the "terran cant do anything against ultras" without making the ultras to weak, if the energy cost (or cd) would be high enough.
They tried this during beta. Nobody liked it.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
On May 21 2016 06:14 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 06:13 Cyro wrote:I'm not saying it's broken or anything, but in SC2 a minute is an eternity. It lasts 43 seconds Even a HotS minute is an eternity.
Immortal Barrier also has a 43 second cooldown and people talk about that as if it's really short every day
|
On May 21 2016 06:15 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 06:14 Elentos wrote:On May 21 2016 06:13 Cyro wrote:I'm not saying it's broken or anything, but in SC2 a minute is an eternity. It lasts 43 seconds Even a HotS minute is an eternity. Immortal Barrier also has a 43 second cooldown and people talk about that as if it's really short every day
Tbh I've not seen any serious person say that the barrier cooldown is short. It really isn't. It's about as long as it should be for an ability that strong.
|
On May 21 2016 06:15 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 06:13 DalaiiLameR wrote:
btw, what about a spell for terran, that could temporarely reduce the armor of a unit? maybe for the ghost. this would fix the "terran cant do anything against ultras" without making the ultras to weak, if the energy cost (or cd) would be high enough. They tried this during beta. Nobody liked it.
No one liked it because it was awful and poorly implemented. Also, an armor reducing effect designed specifically to cancel out an armor buff is just dumb.
|
On May 21 2016 06:03 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +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...
The design of revelation is okay, I agree. But not the number. it's a 50 energy spell that last one entire minute, meaning that you can almost continuously tag an army with a single oracle because when the spell ends you're almost back to 50 energy anyway. It's a 9 range so not a single Zerg unit can prevent it, it has an AOE of 5 which is enough to tag an entire army, gives the spell an effective range of 14 and you detect all the cloaked units during that time. Either the range, the AOE or the time the spell is active must be diminished.
As said like this, to me it's already quite problematic. But the combo with Tempest... There is literally no counter-play.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
It lasts 43 seconds and has about 60% uptime IIRC, not sure on the exact energy regeneration stat. If you nerf energy specifically then people will just use 4-5 oracles instead of 2-3.
Oracle detection is pretty bad in some other situations - playing stargate into DT worked much better with the old revelation.
The revelation spell was specifically added to give protoss reliable detection to tech paths that were not robotics facility, so i'm sad to see it go this way and then get talks of nerfs.
|
Canada16699 Posts
On May 21 2016 05:27 DinoMight wrote:
This game has become absurdly stupid.
I miss hots, really.
nothing is stopping you from playing it and building your own community of like minded people similar to the community around brood war. i have low league friends that still play WoL 2v2s because they feel the expansions are too complex.
|
Please don't do any major balance skewing changes, clearly it is not known which is a clear stronger race and furthermore we do not know if the right response is used currently. Instead of trying to balance a balanced game, try to change some design for the better or improve how much the best players wins by.
|
On May 21 2016 06:03 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +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...
Revelation would indeed be a cool ability if it lasted 10-20 seconds instead of an hour...
|
A Warp Prism nerf
Always welcome any solution to buff terran's early game.
An additional nerf to the Liberator’s targeting its anti-ground mode
I knew this day will come,not surprise.
Zerg Larva inject buff back to giving 4 per
FUCK OFF SOLAR!
|
i think the larva change is a game changing change...
|
I can understand the first 2 nerfs, but I don't understand the larvae buff. Returning to 4 larvae just seems uninspired and unneccessary. Perhaps like the nonsensical proposed cannon buff, the idea is to promote another style of play in a certain matchup?
|
On May 21 2016 07:10 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
I can understand the first 2 nerfs, but I don't understand the larvae buff. Returning to 4 larvae just seems uninspired and unneccessary. Perhaps like the nonsensical proposed cannon buff, the idea is to promote another style of play in a certain matchup?
The difference is while the cannon buff was a really inelegant and probably ineffective solution to perceived problem, it wasn't that dangerous. Returning to 4 larva seems potentially broken.
|
Warp prism change - yes, it's been too strong for a while, the pick up range needs to be toned down.
Liberator - Terran is already the weakest race atm, nerfing Terran more will make a lot of people lose interest in SC2.
Cyclone - 4 supply is an outright nerf and slap in the face to anyone that knows anything about SC2.
Larva inject - nope, not happening. Will ruin the game. You cannot re-buff this because chrono/mule are weakened in LOTV.
Swarmhost - what? Nerfing cyclone for no reason, but bringing back this awful unit? yeah...
I have no words. Or rather i do have words, but i'd rather not say them because it's all been said before, and it's all quite depressing to me.
edit:
actually saw dinomight's comment and 100% agree
On May 21 2016 05:27 DinoMight wrote:
This game has become absurdly stupid.
I miss hots, really.
Imo, i'd rather have HOTS back with balance changes such as raven/tempest/air nerfs. Then at least we'd have mech play back and none of the 8 armor / invincible nydus worm / reaper all-ins every game =/
|
Funny that no foreigner can play Terran, almost since Wol ... Dreamhack, no terran but Kor. Suddendly, noobs like showtime and nerchio show off why ?? because for foreigners noob level, Zerg and Toss are clearyl to EZ to play.
Yeah, at better level, Kespa, things are different, but we can't rely just on godlike Kor play to balance a game..
The approach is bad, still..
Still you won't see any foreigner Terran performing, Terran will stay the weakest race.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
ib4 i said they really want to make cyclone becomes mothership core/queen for terran.They just make us feel the Mag-Field upgrade is very attractive and worth to invest in early game.Of course don't expect this change will make cyclones appear more in the mid game.
|
On May 21 2016 07:28 beefITek wrote:
Funny that no foreigner can play Terran, almost since Wol ... Dreamhack, no terran but Kor. Suddendly, noobs like showtime and nerchio show off why ?? because for foreigners noob level, Zerg and Toss are clearyl to EZ to play.
Yeah, at better level, Kespa, things are different, but we can't rely just on godlike Kor play to balance a game..
The approach is bad, still..
Still you won't see any foreigner Terran performing, Terran will stay the weakest race.
MarineLord? HeroMarine (if he would be active) and MaSa (went Semis @ WCS Spring Circuit and btw as far as Polt)
Btw: Nerchio 3:0 Polt, ShoWTimE 3:0 viOLet
|
Gotta give explanations and compensations for buffs and nerfs, not simply throwing all those ideas and hoping people would understand the though process behind them.
Imo the game is really really boring and repetitive right now. Also Lurkers, Ultras, Liberators and Disruptors are just silly, probably demotivating to lower league players to face them.
If Blizzard wanted to make the game better, they needed to look at the gameplay first, but i doubt this will ever happen.
|
Marinelord won on the european server against the KR doing reaper allins each time if i remember correctly, no?
As a whole it seems like the dev team is only starting to look at the state of their game.
OF COURSE the community says terran is the weakest, and OF COURSE pro KR players think it's very strong. It's been like that since f**ing 2011.
DH is a good exemple : Polt and Masa are the only NA/EU terran that are good, and even then Polt come from a strong kr background so it's not really surprising.
ATM terran is relying on very agressive builds where bio is supporting the two clearly OP units (liberators and tankivacs), but are pigeonholed into this gamestyle. It's not about balance, it's about diversity. That's where blizz goes the wrong way about this : balance comes second to design and diversity.
Nerf the liberator all you want, hell nerf the tankivac and the reaper too : terran needs some diversity, because right now we see only the same 2 compositions OVER AND OVER.
And OF COURSE blinkprism needs to go.
|
On May 21 2016 07:14 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 07:10 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
I can understand the first 2 nerfs, but I don't understand the larvae buff. Returning to 4 larvae just seems uninspired and unneccessary. Perhaps like the nonsensical proposed cannon buff, the idea is to promote another style of play in a certain matchup? The difference is while the cannon buff was a really inelegant and probably ineffective solution to perceived problem, it wasn't that dangerous. Returning to 4 larva seems potentially broken. Whatever your opinion is on balance to the respective proposed changes were, it is irrelevent to my thinking on blizzards reasoning.
|
Canada8989 Posts
On May 21 2016 04:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +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. Show nested quote +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.
|
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
Your playing bio the wrong way then.
|
So... larva buff to 4, but remove inject stacking.
Helps with Zerg being up in Korea where they already have almost perfect injects, but nerfs Zerg outside. Seems like the simplest solution worth trying.
|
I really don't care anymore, Blizzard can do whatever it wants and i will still play the game and watch korean sc2.
Simply accepting that blizzard will never actually address things i would care for (or at a too slow pace) was the best thing i did regarding their patch/design philosophy.
|
I cannot believe some people actually think that HotS was more fun than LotV. LotV is harder than Hots but my god it is so far superior to it. Maybe Blizz should just stop patching and balance with maps. We went from PvZ is unwinnable for P to PvZ is unwinnable for Z back to PvZ is pretty balanced without patches the past few months.
|
whats the point of buffing zerg economy/timings. it seems already good and dealing with allins gonna be a nightmare. Another suggestion i dont understand ... I got no problems with warp prism and liberator’s nerf even if i was hoping for an ultra nerf because its gonna be way too strong in tvz.
|
I understand and agree with Kespa's first 2 changes but I'm not sure if I can get behind the third. Honestly, I think Blizzard really backed themselves in a corner with larva injects. Zerg only works on a macro level because of their presence and its very easy to disrupt inject from happening. On the flip side you can't just increase larva because that would break Zerg. I don't really know what the solution to the problem is but its a very real problem.
Nothing in the game has the same ripple effect as distracting/killing queens. You can't buff the queen because it still is a powerful unit on its own. The only thing I could remotely see as a possibility is to increase the amount of larva normally produced but reduce the amount given by inject. However, that might prove too Zerg favored.
Also I kind of agree with the people discussing revelation earlier. It needs some form of change as there is zero counter play associated with it. My suggestion has always been to remove its detection aspect, as the economy changes between HotS and LotV has made it more likely that a player will already have both a stargate and a robo. This would decrease immortal production and make stargate have SOME weakness as an opener PvZ
|
I feel like in Korea, we have something like this recently : Protoss >> Terran (see Zest); Zerg >= Protoss (see Dark); Terran >= Zerg.
While in foreignland protoss>>T, Protoss>=Z, Z=>T.
Tbh, since Life retirement, we only have one god-tier zerg for multiple god-tier terran (Maru, TY, then Dream, inno, Cure not so far) and protoss (Zest, Classic, maybe herO & Stats not far ), and no other zerg is even close to Dark level.
I think a Lib anti-ground nerf could be great... if we compensate it by a ground/opening buff, like merging Shield and Stim in one cheap upgrade, or even delete Shield upgrade, marines coming with it naturally. In a area of adepts, adepts shadows, photonpylons, oracles, buffedqueens, ravagers, tankivacs and liberators, pre-upgraded marines are incredibly UP. So UP every terran open 1/1/1 these days, cause non-upgraded marines are simply plain shit.
Then, with the new eco, we have games where shield is finishing with the 2/2, when tier3 is halfway done... ridiculous isn't it ?
This would make sense, and this would help earl-game TvP, where most of the TvP issues reside.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
or even delete Shield upgrade, marines coming with it naturally. In a area of adepts, adepts shadows, photonpylons, oracles, buffedqueens, ravagers, tankivacs and liberators, pre-upgraded marines are incredibly UP
Proxy rax would be very good then. I'm all for amping up early game aggression (3 base at 3:30 games are not as entertaining to watch IMO..) but more changes would be nice as well
|
Liberator nerf is probably mildly unnecessary, although most Korean level ZvT the Zerg get's handily raped, that's usually because when one of the few strong Terran players get sent out the match up is usually something silly like Maru vs Departure or Solar or some other Zerg that they are clearly better then. I don't think it's fair to keep nerfing Terran at this point, the Liberator tone down was probably the best and most appropriate move to be made. Although lately it seems like Terrans are becoming much more skilled using Ghosts and preparing for the Ultralisk transition and the new Snipe makes short work of Zerg's tier 3 units so Terran seems to have a bit of an edge late game and of course a shit load of powerful all ins.
I'm still not sold that they are imbalanced or anything, some of these maps are complete shit and lend themselves well to powerful medivac harass or banshee all in play (Ulrena, Endion) so I think better maps will balance ZvT by themselves. Maps have always been centrifugal in this match ups balance, more so then then others in my opinion.
Warp Prisms in their current form are literally retarded, a (quick) flying Pylon that costs no gas and can warp 8 + Adepts into your base and pick units up from a distance? Rofl? Especially now that Mutalisks are pretty much phased out of both match ups due to the strength of their hard counters being pretty much standard openers. Remind me how the Prism doesn't deserve a good nerf bat smack, theres literally no down side to building it, you will do damage, always. IF anyone has a reasonable idea for why this unit shouldn't be nerfed, I'm all ears.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
so I think better maps will balance ZvT by themselves. Maps have always been centrifugal in this match ups balance, more so then then others in my opinion
The vs Zerg matchups are very map dependant for P too
Especially now that Mutalisks are pretty much phased out of both match ups due to the strength of their hard counters being pretty much standard openers
For PvZ the mutalisk is one of the main reasons for phoenix being standard, you can't play chargelot-immortal into muta.
Muta switches actually happen often, the stuff that you never see is straight obvious mutalisk play
|
Canada8989 Posts
On May 21 2016 08:26 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +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 Your playing bio the wrong way then.
I guess, I mean of course I am not gm but I don't see where the APM go, I just shift click the drop I do and apart from that my army is rarely split in more then 2 groups. I don't want to say it's easy it just feel more about position then APM (at least for me). A soon as I go out of bio (Gost, Liberator, viking or tank but I am starting to be better with that one) I just get destroyed nearly most of the time. And it seem like protoss is like that from the start there seems to be to many thing to control, I played less with zerg but the macro seem to need a lot of apm.
But maybe I am just a scrub who is not able to play with complex units
|
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...
Nerf liberator ground attack would be a bad idea indeed. To have nerfed the anti air damage is already hard because that will be harder to have a counter against ultras and we will need more vikings to kill corruptors but that means less liberators...
And one or two fungals and the game is sealed...
To have nerfed so hard marauders and buff so hard ultras was a bad move imo.
I don't understand how it is possible to say terran is strongest than zerg.
Terran vs zerg is balanced imo until ultras come into games.. Terran has to find a way to kill zerg before late game as he should do against protoss death ball on hots.
Regarding protoss I think that's good immortals get nerf this unit is a joke.
War prism needs a nerf because this unit is so easy to micro : ultra fast, very easy to pick up units with them, and you can warp so many units everywhere on the map.
This is a very cheap unit for this core role in every single protoss strategy.
|
On May 21 2016 09:48 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +so I think better maps will balance ZvT by themselves. Maps have always been centrifugal in this match ups balance, more so then then others in my opinion The vs Zerg matchups are very map dependant for P too Show nested quote +Especially now that Mutalisks are pretty much phased out of both match ups due to the strength of their hard counters being pretty much standard openers For PvZ the mutalisk is one of the main reasons for phoenix being standard, you can't play chargelot-immortal into muta. Muta switches actually happen often, the stuff that you never see is straight obvious mutalisk play
True, I just think it hits the ZvT match up a bit harder. When Protoss is playing vs Zerg on a difficult to take a third kind of map they still have lots of powerful 2 base options, Immortal/Adept being the first that comes to mind, it's hard to stop that push even if the Protoss player tells you it's coming, so they can tilt win rates a bit more evenly. With Terran and Zerg, Terran favored maps usually lop the win rates over to Terran and vice versa with Zerg. This is all purely my opinion though I'm not spouting it as fact.
And I know (about the Mutalisk and Phoenix relationship) but Phoenixes have been fine tuned into Mutalisk killing machines AND they are very potent units in and of themselves, them being on the field pretty much makes Spire wasted resources unless the Protoss foolishly looses all of his Phoenix due to some silly mistake. It's standard to open Phoenix not only because it nullifies Mutalisks but also because it's damn good, same with Terran being able to easily deflect Mutalisk pressure with a few Liberators.
Both races medium tier tech units that are already standard in every composition both hard counter the unit very well, making it pretty much extinct in everything but ZvZ (ZvT if you count building 8 of them to defend drops as standard).
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
Mutas have been buffed repeatedly until the game wouldn't work properly without OP mutalisk counters. I've gone into this in lots of detail before
|
On May 21 2016 11:04 Cyro wrote:
Mutas have been buffed repeatedly until the game wouldn't work properly without OP mutalisk counters. I've gone into this in lots of detail before
I agree with this, Mutalisks should have been nerfed, not all other air units designed to kill them straight up. Bad design is definitely bad.
|
i would absolutely love a muta nerf, just because muta vs muta in zvz is just so damn dumb, but theres not rly another option to control the map and deny opponents expansions..
4 larva instead of 3 is the biggest buff for zerg since the queen buff, i feel.
|
A larva inject buff would be such a massive buff that I can't see it ever happening. It'd completely tip the game onto its head by allowing Zergs to play even more greedy than they already do particularly on maps with easy to access gold bases. I'm honestly surprised that anyone at KESPA even felt justified in suggesting such a thing.
|
Canada16699 Posts
On May 21 2016 07:56 Nakajin wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
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. 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.
larva instead is unforgiving. if you forget it, you just cant produce units. is it as simple as that. yeah, you can stack injects, but you have to wait till the inject pops, unitl the next circle starts. besides inject, you HAVE to spread creep. its easier to produce units for zerg, thats true, since you dont need any production facilities, but the zerg macro is rly hard and unforgiving, if you want to master it!
just curious.. wich league are you in?
|
Hahaha. nerf terran more, buff zerg! this is ridicolous. Terran alredy have zera chance late game..
|
I'm sure that in this matter KeSPA is right and the community is wrong, zerg is the weakest, not terran.
|
On May 21 2016 03:30 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +Note that there will also be many changes to maps in the near future to align the map pool to be much more similar to Korea. Pretty important if you're balancing tightly around KR results --------------------------- I'd like to see some acknowledgement of racial representation at the moment as it's quite bad, maybe even the worst in the history of the game. EU has a split of 39% zerg, 35% terran and 24% protoss at masters. What's the cause of that huge imbalance if protoss is to be considered the strongest race at the highest level of play? Pre-LOTV the distribution was much better.
Because race distribution is not a directly related to balance. Balance is only a cause of race distribution, but it has many more causes (cause -> effect, balance -> distribution, but there are more causes). There are better tools to measure balance, but they are difficult to understand.
Blizzard uses pretty much the same system as microsoft: TrueSkill Ranking System. The only diffrence is, that they added a race performance.
Blizzards formula:
https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/1uv5uh/this_is_the_complex_formula_blizzard_uses_to/
I think distribution is a good source for how fun a race is in which league. Also what is real balance? I believe, it means that both sides have the same chance to win the game. But not all people play to win games and some refuse to adapt, so that statistics doesnt always reflect balance. Thats why you need to research a population that adapts and tries to win such as the korean proleague.
|
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.
Zerg is not doing fine in proleague though.
I agree with the lib nerfs and immortal/warp prism nerf the larva buff would be way too much.
However we should still search for a way to make ling bling muta viable vs terran, zerg simply can't keep up with terran in the midgame atm and none of these changes are gonna help much with that.
|
When will they buff the Siege Tank?
|
Libs to be nerfed... ? So revert back marauder' nerf?
|
Canada16699 Posts
On May 21 2016 17:37 DalaiiLameR 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. 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. larva instead is unforgiving. if you forget it, you just cant produce units. is it as simple as that. yeah, you can stack injects, but you have to wait till the inject pops, unitl the next circle starts. besides inject, you HAVE to spread creep. its easier to produce units for zerg, thats true, since you dont need any production facilities, but the zerg macro is rly hard and unforgiving, if you want to master it! just curious.. wich league are you in?
there is a reason there are so few top notch foriegn Terrans. its harder to play.
i'm a diamond random player and i'm usually able to keep my terran account in the diamond league... but not always.
Larva injects have a rhythm just like SCV building... just make a timer that beeps every "X" seconds and play 50 games with it in the background. Then turn it off.. and you should have the rhythm memorized. Make larva injects your #1 priority and you are fine.
i mainly play with other low APM people and we pretty much share the same experience: Zerg is the easiest race to play in both SC2 and Brood War. In Brood War you really have to babysit your terran infantry... and then micro the fuck out of them to make them effective. With Zerg you can just throw your units at the opponent army.. the most you might do is "surround and then attack".
|
Instead of bringing zerg back to 4 larva I would rather like to see a further nerf of the mule and nerfs of some protoss units, as I don't see reason to nerf CB mechanic more.
All that in a context of long term change of direction: Drop that buffs over nerfs thing.
I don't see why terran should get about constant 3-4 free workers per OC on the map. This results in the the lack of shades of grey in interactions. Harrassment on terran is either game ending or it deals more damage to yourself because of the investments you had to spend on it.
A mechanic like the mule would fit better to the zerg race in terms of current design and general meta. In TvZ terran can drop zerg with medivacs, deal damage and load units back in and fly out. As long as there are no mutalisks/infestors out, there is few to no risk at all to lose the dropship a 0 to 100 risk vs. reward mechanic. And in the current meta mutalisks are not being played.
However if zerg wants to harrass terran it has to commit its units. Runby with 15 lings? They wont get out of there no matter if they kill 10 or 1 scv. Going mutalisks? A unit that throws you back and makes you weaker in the face to face fight that might be following a few minutes later.
That combines with the fact that mules over-counter the investement in units that have to commit when you execute harrassment. Mules would work well against units that are no investment like a bio drop which is a perfect part of the main army and can stop harrassment and join back with the main army or simultanious army fight + drops at any given time.
It creates the situation of either dealing game ending damage to terran or leave it at all and focus on defending only until strong lategame.
Now I am not suggesting to move mules to zerg but want to emphasize again how much of negative impact they have on the game. And I am viewing this totally out of the context that terran has to efficiently harrass zerg in order to delay zergs op lategame because I want this to be changed as well. One step after the other.
So the options here are to either move terran away from 80% bio + X metagame so that inveting into bio drop harrassment becomes an investment instead of an obligatory action you do in every TvZ as medivacs and bio is the main component of your army, or
to give mechanics that counter 0 investment harrassments like mules to the race that are vulnerable to that.
That is why I am rooting for moving terran away from 80% bio + X.
What doesn't work is to give Z in TvZ only the choice to commit units on harrassment which is getting 100% absorbed by mules if it doesn't deal game ending damage and then wonder why zerg either has only passive playstyles or invest in all-in play.
Because this results in and requires zerg to get tools to overpower the terran without too big efforts in certain situation such as right now the ravager late midgame thing or the ultralisk to keep things in balance. I want that to go as well.
And I am not getting tired to repeat that since about 3 years now. Once you have understood what I am talking about you acknowledge that it is the only real chance to fix the game. All other options are shifting problems only! And that is what we have done and seen for the past 5 years. By default the explained mechanics make for a bad metagame in terms of design and balance. (I want to remind everybody what TvZ has been over the past: starting off with lol op terran moving into winfestors shifting into a playstyle of bio/mines vs muta/bling which kept 60% of the units of both races out of the meta (but was balanced at a certain point of time) and left zero strategical choices to be made than just spamming units and microing them into a half assed mech vs. swarm host playstyle towards what we get now with op unit vs. unit mechanics all over the place.).
In order to name the changes I support again:
- remove marauder (reintroduce in lategame tier 3 potentially with academy building)
- lategame 200/200 terran army (not 80% bio + X) should overpower lategame 200/200 zerg army at any given time (terran benefits from unit efficiency and zerg from faster reproduction abilities)
- zerg needs to get the role of actively and efficiently harrassing T (which then can be nullified to a certain extend by mules, which will work perfectly) in order to delay terrans powerful endgame which does not require endless exansions due to it's unit effciency.
- switch lurker + ravager spot in game in order to achieve less counters of zerg vs tanks/mech in early game but have tank counter potential lurker play which then later can be countered by ravagers of zerg. Tanks vs. Lurker also adds interesting scan vs. mule mechanics before raven is out.
- nerf baneling: they then just would be mixed into the main army in low numbers instead of being the main component of the army vs. bio
- remove muta healing or lower it, so that we get a risk vs. reward situation here
and so on.
Results:
- midgame is not going to be skipped almost completely as now
- many choices by each T and Z how to play: go for a bit more or less marines? rush out the raven? using scans to be aggressive vs. zerg or stay defensive a bit longer with using mules? Muta play? roach/hydra play? How many lurkers? Dropping any of the named units? etc.
- step by step unit interactions: marines better zerglings, roaches better marines, lurkers better marines, tanks better roaches/lurkers, ravagers better tanks, mutas better too few marines, rines better muta, etc. instead of hey I build the best unit composition overall from the beginning as I can.
So this is what I actually want and then we don't need a nerf of mules as well. I focus on TvZ solely as I am sure that this is the key thing to be fixed and all other matchups should evolve around such changes. Also it doesn't make much sense to talk about everything at once.
|
Terran is the weakest race right now according to Blizz, so they're nerfing them.
No, wait, actually, the Cyclone nerf/buff/nerf whathehellisitanyway will create new all-ins so we will have more ways to not let them get there! Genius DK!
|
On May 21 2016 17:37 DalaiiLameR 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. 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?
|
Anyone remember DKIM used to say he wants to buff baneling's speed ??? That solution is much simpler than community's suggestion and Kespa's suggestion and it effects both match up.But i kinda surprise about protoss still favors against zerg even with new ling bane style according from korean :-/
|
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.
Must be why SKT, KT and JinAir refuses to play any Terrans in the SPL play offs...
|
Noone of the is right, neither kespa nor community. The current meta just shifts back and forth from one or the other being favoured due to the mechanics of interactions are overpowered itself in almost all cases and it only depends on very little things if game deciding damage can be dealt.
Any suggested change will only result in the counter part being favoured afterwards or nothing changes, which both results in "nothing changes".
The root of the issue must be fixed, not the results of the issue being slightly tweaked in one or another side's favour as we have done it in the past 5 years.
|
On May 21 2016 19:48 Glorfindel! 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. Must be why SKT, KT and JinAir refuses to play any Terrans in the SPL play offs...
KeSPA Terrans have been saying since even Code A that T >> Z.
|
dont go after the "major community feedback" but the one that matters FFS
|
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.
|
Canada16699 Posts
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?
|
|
|
On May 22 2016 00:29 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 22:35 B-royal 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. 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.
i mainly play with other low APM people and we pretty much share the same experience: Zerg is the easiest race to play in both SC2 and Brood War. In Brood War you really have to babysit your terran infantry... and then micro the fuck out of them to make them effective. With Zerg you can just throw your units at the opponent army.. the most you might do is "surround and then attack"
Seemed to me like you didn't state it in a way constituting only an opinion or a fact applying solely to you.
Furthermore, why don't you call it a personal experience instead of a fact? You can call anything a fact by your standard of measure. Also, why are you sharing your experience of which race is easiest when it only applies at the D-/D level? Not very relevant to a game that revolves around its competitive nature...
|
Canada16699 Posts
On May 22 2016 00:49 B-royal wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2016 00:29 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 21 2016 22:35 B-royal 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. 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. Show nested quote +i mainly play with other low APM people and we pretty much share the same experience: Zerg is the easiest race to play in both SC2 and Brood War. In Brood War you really have to babysit your terran infantry... and then micro the fuck out of them to make them effective. With Zerg you can just throw your units at the opponent army.. the most you might do is "surround and then attack" Seemed to me like you didn't state it in a way constituting only an opinion or a fact applying solely to you. Furthermore, why don't you call it a personal experience instead of a fact? You can call anything a fact by your standard of measure. Also, why are you sharing your experience of which race is easiest when it only applies at the D-/D level? Not very relevant to a game that revolves around its competitive nature...
you are not fully reading my posts.
1) blizz should balance according to the top level of play and not worry about other players ( stated this several times)
2) within this top level balancing act...however they chose to nerf or buff terran i want weaker Terran air and stronger Terran ground and i've been saying it for months
3) the players i play with are trying their absolute best while we are playing...so they are competitive.
4) Blizzard states "every voice matters" so i'd like to direct them to examine item #2
and so far i like how Blizzard has been handling LotV changes.
|
JimmyJRaynor, what a U turn. States opinion like facts. When this is pointed out, he ignores it and pretends he was talking about something else 
|
As a Zerg, reverting to 4 larvae injects would be insane. A buff enough in itself to turn the tides, and a return to my mass ling style i always preferred in LOTV/HOTS.
|
Canada16699 Posts
On May 22 2016 01:58 Dangermousecatdog wrote:JimmyJRaynor, what a U turn. States opinion like facts. When this is pointed out, he ignores it and pretends he was talking about something else
nah , you're just not reading my posts completely.
|
On May 21 2016 03:53 SNSeigifried wrote:
I would hope blizzard waits for Code A and SSL Challenge to begin before they do any changes because atm the only games in korea have been bo1s from proleague which aren't the best way to judge balance. We also haven't had bo5+ zvp's since the ssl finals so to say zerg is struggling is hard to support since the only zvp after that was losira vs dear which was a huge skill gap. Need to wait and see Dark/Rogue/soO/Solar play :D. Also zerg seems to be doing quite well in the foreign scene with nerchio barely losing to showtime in spring and hydra winning austin. Also note zerg has been in every lotv final since release except the gsl final.
Blizzard has months of testing and data. Why would they want to implement a change midway through a season? If anything, this is the perfect time to change up unit stats. And most probably, that is why they ARE doing it now. How bad would it be if they invoked a balance patch 2 days before a SSL Final? GSL Final? The weekend of DreamHack Austin? DreamHack Tours? Players would be ticked. It makes perfect sense they are making changes at the beginning of a new season.
|
i wonder how long they will wait, till this next patch could happen (alltrough its not that clear, what exactly they will change, these points are no numbers). will they wait another gsl season? with the upcomming patch, i think they just have to. but that would mean, that this next patch wont come in the next weeks/months.
|
Won't Zerg just use the extra larva to rush to Ultralisks faster? Vs nerfed Liberators?
I'm all for less dependence on Liberators (no fun unit for all races IMO) but Blizzard will have to give something else to fall back to. Granted, I haven't seen fellow Terrans incorporate Ghosts vs Ultralisks much but given that one single point of damage will just straight up cancel Snipe, Ghosts feel a lot more wonky to use against Ultralisks (and Brood Lords).
Which is funny, given that the original Snipe nerf came from that game against Nestea (on Cloud Kingdom I think?) and was aimed to make Snipe useless against Ultralisks and Brood Lords (which it did, along with all other Snipe targets other than Infestor/HT).
|
On May 22 2016 04:01 Thezzy wrote:
Granted, I haven't seen fellow Terrans incorporate Ghosts vs Ultralisks much but given that one single point of damage will just straight up cancel Snipe
That is exactly the problem. Fungal ruins your day if you rely on ghosts vs ultras. As do lings and banes.
Tanks are better unsieged vs ultras and sieged vs everything else so that doesn't really work. Thors are really expensive considering how many you'd need to get down the ultras at the rate you want them down. So at the end you settle for liberators or you just try to kill them before Chitinous.
|
So anyone knows which weekday blizz usually releases patches? "Next week" is not very specific.
|
On May 22 2016 05:07 JayuSC2 wrote:
So anyone knows which weekday blizz usually releases patches? "Next week" is not very specific.
Tuesdays
|
Protoss learned to play with a garbage chrono, but what's on table is giving back de +1 larva. Right....
|
Yeeaaahhh, I don't think David should listen to Kespa pros anymore. +1 larva per inject? Are they freaking nuts?
|
A Liberator nerf should be compensated with a tank buff and a Tankivac removal (or nerf) to further encourage tank based play which is the funnest style to watch from Terran at least in my opinion. It's a shit load more fun then mass Liberators that's pretty safe to say.
Warp Prism nerf ridiculously long over due, make it cost gas at the very least for Christ's sake anytime a Protoss loses the first question to be asked is, "Did he use Prism harass? No? Well..why not?".
Larvae buff isn't going to happen, David isn't going to put that one in, I'd bet money on it.
|
On May 22 2016 00:29 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2016 22:35 B-royal 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. 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.
It always depends on the meta and the playstyle of the moment though. Roach Ravager is easier, but its strength has diminished lately so it's less playable, and muta ling bane is actually way much harder with respect to HOTS since the nerf of larva and the liberator counter.
At the period of time where mech was strong, I would say that this playstyle was the easiest of the game, I have played high master terrans with less than 50 APM. They just did nothing, turtling, and it was just about being patient.
On May 22 2016 00:46 DomeGetta wrote:
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?
Well.... Zerg didn't win a single ZvP out of 7 games though. Actually, the only one winning against a Protoss was Maru.
|
On May 22 2016 04:07 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2016 04:01 Thezzy wrote:
Granted, I haven't seen fellow Terrans incorporate Ghosts vs Ultralisks much but given that one single point of damage will just straight up cancel Snipe That is exactly the problem. Fungal ruins your day if you rely on ghosts vs ultras. As do lings and banes. Tanks are better unsieged vs ultras and sieged vs everything else so that doesn't really work. Thors are really expensive considering how many you'd need to get down the ultras at the rate you want them down. So at the end you settle for liberators or you just try to kill them before Chitinous.
Yea and that's the reason that having already nerfed liberators air damage is a bit bad, since we NEED liberators for late game.
They are our only chance, and if they are less effective against corruptors and if we need more vikings, which are very easy to be kill by fungals ( vikings need to be stacked to focus on one target so one or two fungals and we lose everything ) we won't have any liberators to deal with ultras.
|
I'd agree with the WP nerf. But the game is becoming very stale for me, please bring mech back and do something about Tankvacs.
|
On May 22 2016 07:31 Vanadiel wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2016 00:29 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 21 2016 22:35 B-royal 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. 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. It always depends on the meta and the playstyle of the moment though. Roach Ravager is easier, but its strength has diminished lately so it's less playable, and muta ling bane is actually way much harder with respect to HOTS since the nerf of larva and the liberator counter. At the period of time where mech was strong, I would say that this playstyle was the easiest of the game, I have played high master terrans with less than 50 APM. They just did nothing, turtling, and it was just about being patient. .
no the easiest playstyle is turtling to ultras. The zergs do nothing the entire game, get ultras and amove across the map
-don't comment on the difficulty of a playstyle when you've never played it. I played bio and mech both 50% of the time in HotS and found bio slightly easier to play since it mostly relies on good mechanics whereas with mech you need extremely good positioning and gamesense and you can instantly lose a game you have completely dominated for 20 minutes when you fuck up your positioning one time.
it's also far harder to close out a game when you're ahead.
there is a reason why nobody could make it work as good as INnoVation.
|
Last game between Dark and TY during cross finals with supreme air late game and before the nerf liberator patch show us that is totally wrong to nerf liberator air attack.
Range has already been nerfed, air attack is about to be nerfed and now you are talking to nerf ground attack as well...
That's insane...
Or get back old ghost snipe, better tanks, revert marauder nerf because we do not have any solution against late game zerg.
I do not talk about protoss, warp prism nerf and immortal nerfs should fix a bit things because the match ups were fucked up both pvz and pvt.
|
On May 22 2016 21:11 bObA wrote:
Last game between Dark and TY during cross finals with supreme air late game and before the nerf liberator patch show us that is totally wrong to nerf liberator air attack.
Range has already been nerfed, ari attack and now you are talking to nerf ground attack as well...
That's insane...
Or get back old ghost snipe, better tanks, revert marauder nerf because we do not have any solution against late game zerg.
I do not talk about protoss, warp prism nerf and immortal nerfs should fix a bit things because the match ups were fucked up both pvz and pvt.
To be able to go straight into skyterran is wrong to begin with. Just watched the game, and I'm glad it doesn't work at high level. It'd be like a protoss going straight skytoss in PvZ, and winning the game.
So I really don't mind this style going down the drain with the patch.
What I do mind however is that skyterran in TvZ was the only other/alternate terran composition we could see. Bio tankivacs and bio liberator in every matchup is getting old very rapidly.
Sad thing is that the patch won't change anything about it. Thors won't have a purpose since they're doing what the liberator and viking are doing, but less effectively, and that no one will be retarded enough to invest 4 pop into 120hps except for allin strats.
So be happy, at least 6 more months of bio tankivacs and/or bio liberators in every single matchup, yaaaay.
|
I won't say that it doesn't work though, if he didn't waste thousands of nuke to kill creep tumor, I'm not sure how the game would have turned out. At the very least he might have been able forced a draw. By the way, he's still doing it and looks evenly strong in this game.
Charoisaur : That's why I say it depends on the level you play and the meta. "Turtling to ultra", yes maybe. For high level Europe, it does work well I'd agree. For high level Korea, it doesn't at all and it's actually extremely hard to pull of because you'll die before most of the time. It's a matter of perspective. And when I refered to mech at the end of HoTS, I did played a lot of high master terran playing mech with a sub-50 APM and a high winrate in TvZ. You can take it leave it do whatever you want with it. it is a fact.
|
If david kim was confident terran bio was balanced to the point it competes with protoss and z at the highest level
then he could buff mech units substantially without fear of it being favored over bio
david kim is not balancing the game for any communities, kespa or foreigner, he is biding for time while doing nothing
naturally the 4 larvae change will not make it into the game, this is a decoy to take your attention away from what matters.
To fix the game? i would revert everything back to heart of the swarm, add in new units and tweak them, this is what should have been done in the first place, and we probably should make a petition to see if we can get GML back in hots for those who want to play lategame because right now terran cant.
The only reason i play lotv is for grandmasters rank, if i could get that in hots i would stay in hots, because i hate literally every change in lotv, the game feels like a chore of one build order, and i feel like a bot doing a build blindly with no ability to react or deviate.
|
I think Dark vs TY on Dusk shows something needs to be done to make up for the loss of liberator AA. Corruptor/viper just rolled the air army even fighting over turrets with pre-nerf liberators.
|
On May 22 2016 22:56 TheWinks wrote:
I think Dark vs TY on Dusk shows something needs to be done to make up for the loss of liberator AA. Corruptor/viper just rolled the air army even fighting over turrets with pre-nerf liberators.
True and exactly what I said a bit earlier in the thread
|
You say that, but TY rolled dark on Prion, so...
|
Come on guys, the two game are remotely comparable.
Game on Dusk TY turtled ultra hard and lost because Dark did not empale 3 armies before getting a corru/BL/viper composition. TY dealt little damage, while Dark built the exact composition needed to clean TY's army once then win with the repop.
Game on Prion TY dealt extreme damage, while Dark when for hydras that allow even more harass. TY then just took his time to win a game that was already won very early.
|
On May 22 2016 07:31 Vanadiel wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2016 00:29 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 21 2016 22:35 B-royal 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. 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. It always depends on the meta and the playstyle of the moment though. Roach Ravager is easier, but its strength has diminished lately so it's less playable, and muta ling bane is actually way much harder with respect to HOTS since the nerf of larva and the liberator counter. At the period of time where mech was strong, I would say that this playstyle was the easiest of the game, I have played high master terrans with less than 50 APM. They just did nothing, turtling, and it was just about being patient. Show nested quote +On May 22 2016 00:46 DomeGetta wrote:
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? Well.... Zerg didn't win a single ZvP out of 7 games though. Actually, the only one winning against a Protoss was Maru.
Yeah I would agree that Z is struggling vs P at the moment so I don't really disagree with that point of the feedback.. the bizarre thing to me is the point that T is the strongest race right now when it seems pretty clear that Protoss is dominating. I feel like the matchup that is closest to being balanced is TvZ but I don't see T being favored in that matchup - which is why nerfing any T units seems like a bad idea (reference hots widow mine nerf for TvZ when TvZ was very even results wise). I think one thing to be careful of is to use games like Maru vs Zest in PL finals as good examples of balance illustration - Maru was horrendously behind and the only reason he won is because Zest made huge blunders (which is really rare for him) - Maru took a eco / army and tech disadvantage and was able to get Zest to split his army incorrectly to force good engagements (which is something that T need to exploit) - but thinking that should work every game is not realistic - Zest will watch that replay and understand his mistakes (not a balance issue).
You have multiple Protoss in Korea getting great results (Classic/Stats/SOS/Zest) where as TY and Maru are basically the only Terran's winning games - and still yet to take a major. TY's code S run went through 2 Terran players ro8/ro4 and Zest made pretty light work out of him. You have Korean Terran's playing in NA (Polt) losing to foreign Z and P in every tournament now - I'm not saying that means T needs a buff - it just seems like a nerf would make very little sense - we should learn from history on this type of situation (nerf widow mines fix "stale" meta even though game is balanced equates to Terran genocide from code S etc) - I would also like to point out I don't think we've seen enough games at the highest level where T exploits the mech/sky-terran style that may be possible and OP without some change - but typically there is a reason that those styles aren't used at the top level that the rest of the world hasn't come around to understanding yet.
|
On May 23 2016 01:34 JackONeill wrote:
Come on guys, the two game are remotely comparable.
Game on Dusk TY turtled ultra hard and lost because Dark did not empale 3 armies before getting a corru/BL/viper composition. TY dealt little damage, while Dark built the exact composition needed to clean TY's army once then win with the repop.
Game on Prion TY dealt extreme damage, while Dark when for hydras that allow even more harass. TY then just took his time to win a game that was already won very early.
Game on Dusk TY waste a shit tons of money in nuke to kill one creep tumor at a time, and got 6 misplaced spatioport killed by corruptors so he was never able to remax his army. I mean, maybe you are right and it's not a viable strat, but to deduce that from this one game... That's a big stretch. I honestly still believe it's a strong and very viable strategy on some maps.
|
On May 22 2016 21:35 Vanadiel wrote:
I won't say that it doesn't work though, if he didn't waste thousands of nuke to kill creep tumor, I'm not sure how the game would have turned out. At the very least he might have been able forced a draw. By the way, he's still doing it and looks evenly strong in this game.
Charoisaur : That's why I say it depends on the level you play and the meta. "Turtling to ultra", yes maybe. For high level Europe, it does work well I'd agree. For high level Korea, it doesn't at all and it's actually extremely hard to pull of because you'll die before most of the time. It's a matter of perspective. And when I refered to mech at the end of HoTS, I did played a lot of high master terran playing mech with a sub-50 APM and a high winrate in TvZ. You can take it leave it do whatever you want with it. it is a fact.
APM isn't an indicator for skill.
|
On May 23 2016 01:52 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2016 21:35 Vanadiel wrote:
I won't say that it doesn't work though, if he didn't waste thousands of nuke to kill creep tumor, I'm not sure how the game would have turned out. At the very least he might have been able forced a draw. By the way, he's still doing it and looks evenly strong in this game.
Charoisaur : That's why I say it depends on the level you play and the meta. "Turtling to ultra", yes maybe. For high level Europe, it does work well I'd agree. For high level Korea, it doesn't at all and it's actually extremely hard to pull of because you'll die before most of the time. It's a matter of perspective. And when I refered to mech at the end of HoTS, I did played a lot of high master terran playing mech with a sub-50 APM and a high winrate in TvZ. You can take it leave it do whatever you want with it. it is a fact. APM isn't an indicator for skill.
True statement but it is relevant when discussing degree of difficulty in play.
As a Terran - I don't have any problem with changes that prevent the end of HOTS horror show of turtle mech vs. hive tech for 45 minutes until the map is mined out or 1 player dies of boredom. I don't agree at all that a player with 50 apm should be able to compete at the highest level of play in this game - even ignoring the obvious spectator issues that these types of matches cause.
|
On May 23 2016 01:52 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2016 21:35 Vanadiel wrote:
I won't say that it doesn't work though, if he didn't waste thousands of nuke to kill creep tumor, I'm not sure how the game would have turned out. At the very least he might have been able forced a draw. By the way, he's still doing it and looks evenly strong in this game.
Charoisaur : That's why I say it depends on the level you play and the meta. "Turtling to ultra", yes maybe. For high level Europe, it does work well I'd agree. For high level Korea, it doesn't at all and it's actually extremely hard to pull of because you'll die before most of the time. It's a matter of perspective. And when I refered to mech at the end of HoTS, I did played a lot of high master terran playing mech with a sub-50 APM and a high winrate in TvZ. You can take it leave it do whatever you want with it. it is a fact. APM isn't an indicator for skill.
I agree. You were the one using APM as an argument in the first place. I believe a discussion about which race is easier is completely irrelevant, because there is no clear indicator for skill. It completely depends on the style you like, the level at which you play and the meta of the moment which fits (or not) your play-style.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
APM is literally tied to race; 50 supply of zerglings gives 4x more actions than 50 supply of zealots by some measurements.
It's not only a bad indicator of skill, it's also a bad indicator of how fast you are (especially when used to compare people who are not playing the same race and same style)
|
On May 23 2016 01:46 DomeGetta wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2016 07:31 Vanadiel wrote:On May 22 2016 00:29 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 21 2016 22:35 B-royal 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. 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. It always depends on the meta and the playstyle of the moment though. Roach Ravager is easier, but its strength has diminished lately so it's less playable, and muta ling bane is actually way much harder with respect to HOTS since the nerf of larva and the liberator counter. At the period of time where mech was strong, I would say that this playstyle was the easiest of the game, I have played high master terrans with less than 50 APM. They just did nothing, turtling, and it was just about being patient. On May 22 2016 00:46 DomeGetta wrote:
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? Well.... Zerg didn't win a single ZvP out of 7 games though. Actually, the only one winning against a Protoss was Maru. Yeah I would agree that Z is struggling vs P at the moment so I don't really disagree with that point of the feedback.. the bizarre thing to me is the point that T is the strongest race right now when it seems pretty clear that Protoss is dominating. I feel like the matchup that is closest to being balanced is TvZ but I don't see T being favored in that matchup - which is why nerfing any T units seems like a bad idea (reference hots widow mine nerf for TvZ when TvZ was very even results wise). I think one thing to be careful of is to use games like Maru vs Zest in PL finals as good examples of balance illustration - Maru was horrendously behind and the only reason he won is because Zest made huge blunders (which is really rare for him) - Maru took a eco / army and tech disadvantage and was able to get Zest to split his army incorrectly to force good engagements (which is something that T need to exploit) - but thinking that should work every game is not realistic - Zest will watch that replay and understand his mistakes (not a balance issue). You have multiple Protoss in Korea getting great results (Classic/Stats/SOS/Zest) where as TY and Maru are basically the only Terran's winning games - and still yet to take a major. TY's code S run went through 2 Terran players ro8/ro4 and Zest made pretty light work out of him. You have Korean Terran's playing in NA (Polt) losing to foreign Z and P in every tournament now - I'm not saying that means T needs a buff - it just seems like a nerf would make very little sense - we should learn from history on this type of situation (nerf widow mines fix "stale" meta even though game is balanced equates to Terran genocide from code S etc) - I would also like to point out I don't think we've seen enough games at the highest level where T exploits the mech/sky-terran style that may be possible and OP without some change - but typically there is a reason that those styles aren't used at the top level that the rest of the world hasn't come around to understanding yet.
If you actually watched some of the korean sc2 scène you would know zerg is actually struggling in TvZ.
Long time ago since zerg actually won a series vs terran in an offline setting until today.
And Dark seems like the only one that can actually manage to do it.
In gsl Zerg got stomped hard, in proleague they have about 42% winrate in both matchups, and in recent qualifiers they performed very bad.
I think the ZvP issues will actually be fixed with the incoming immortal nerf.
The ZvT midgame won't change at all, ling bling styles just take so much economy and larva to play properly and just isn't efficient enough.
Roach ravager is pretty much figured out now in Korea.
Surely if you buff larva the that would break zerg early game economy for other styles since ravagers and lurkers are so strong and got added in.
But ling bling muta midgame certainly needs some kind of buff to make ZvT fair again.
|
well, toss and terran did defend zerg at hots and wol with 4 larva per inject, so i guess they will do this also in lotv. some allins (roach rav allin vs terran f.e.) could become stronger, but there are options for terran to scout this allin and f.e. skip hellions in favour of tanks (im no terran, so yolo).
theres not rly anything new in lotv that allows the zerg to be more greedier than in hots (like overcharge for toss), so i believe, that the zerg macro would reset to where it was in hots and wol. that means, that the zerg should always have the better eco.
i think noone can rly predict all the consequenses of the larva change, but i trust korean pros, if they say, that this would be ok for the game. like i said in an earlier post, blizz is talking to alot of pros (and not just zergs), so im assuming, that even the non-zerg pros are okay with that maybe-change.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
But ling bling muta midgame certainly needs some kind of buff to make ZvT fair again.
I think that Lib anti-light anti-air splash is more of a barrier for muta play right now
well, toss and terran did defend zerg at hots and wol with 4 larva per inject
Mule and Chrono Boost both recieved large nerfs at the same time that Inject got reduced from +4 larvae to +3
theres not rly anything new in lotv that allows the zerg to be more greedier than in hots (like overcharge for toss), so i believe, that the zerg macro would reset to where it was in hots and wol
Different timings, new zerg units/mechanics and rework of warpgate (takes 5x longer to warp to a proxy pylon unless there is a finished gateway on it) made most WOL-HOTS era PvZ all-ins impossible
|
On May 22 2016 00:46 DomeGetta wrote:
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?
Saving secret stats for the grand finals...
|
Canada16699 Posts
On May 23 2016 03:50 Cyro wrote:
APM is literally tied to race; 50 supply of zerglings gives 4x more actions than 50 supply of zealots by some measurements.
It's not only a bad indicator of skill, it's also a bad indicator of how fast you are (especially when used to compare people who are not playing the same race and same style)
my APM is always higher when i play Zerg and i think i'm just as fast with Zerg as with the other 2 races. so i agree its a bad indicator of how fast one is. However, it can indicate a ceiling on your speed with the particular race you are using if you have a carefully planned out hotkey set up.
|
On May 23 2016 06:04 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 03:50 Cyro wrote:
APM is literally tied to race; 50 supply of zerglings gives 4x more actions than 50 supply of zealots by some measurements.
It's not only a bad indicator of skill, it's also a bad indicator of how fast you are (especially when used to compare people who are not playing the same race and same style) my APM is always higher when i play Zerg and i think i'm just as fast with Zerg as with the other 2 races. so i agree its a bad indicator of how fast one is. However, it can indicate a ceiling on your speed with the particular race you are using if you have a carefully planned out hotkey set up.
APM is useless. Mechanics on the other hand can roughly be defined as EAPM * mouse accuracy.
|
On May 23 2016 06:22 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 06:04 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 23 2016 03:50 Cyro wrote:
APM is literally tied to race; 50 supply of zerglings gives 4x more actions than 50 supply of zealots by some measurements.
It's not only a bad indicator of skill, it's also a bad indicator of how fast you are (especially when used to compare people who are not playing the same race and same style) my APM is always higher when i play Zerg and i think i'm just as fast with Zerg as with the other 2 races. so i agree its a bad indicator of how fast one is. However, it can indicate a ceiling on your speed with the particular race you are using if you have a carefully planned out hotkey set up. APM is useless. Mechanics on the other hand can roughly be defined as EAPM * mouse accuracy.
No it cannot. For one thing, how can you define eapm? For another thing, that's not how mechanics is defined.
|
Canada16699 Posts
i define APM using the indicator after the match is over. and i find that # is higher when i play Zerg. I think i'm just as fast with all 3 races and i've played much more Terran than Zerg.
On May 22 2016 22:04 FoxDog wrote:
If david kim was confident terran bio was balanced to the point it competes with protoss and z at the highest level
then he could buff mech units substantially without fear of it being favored over bio
david kim is not balancing the game for any communities, kespa or foreigner, he is biding for time while doing nothing
naturally the 4 larvae change will not make it into the game, this is a decoy to take your attention away from what matters.
To fix the game? i would revert everything back to heart of the swarm, add in new units and tweak them, this is what should have been done in the first place, and we probably should make a petition to see if we can get GML back in hots for those who want to play lategame because right now terran cant.
The only reason i play lotv is for grandmasters rank, if i could get that in hots i would stay in hots, because i hate literally every change in lotv, the game feels like a chore of one build order, and i feel like a bot doing a build blindly with no ability to react or deviate.
i'm happy with the game and i don't want it going back to HotS. HotS is there and represents an alternative to LotV. i prefer the diversity of the 3 choices namely WoL, HotS and LotV.
Some of my low league friends play WoL because they say HotS and LotV are too complex even though they liked their campaign missions.
If you make a petition then i'll make a counter petition supporting LotV.
I do not want the diversity between the 3 games diminished. Its bad for the player base.
|
On May 23 2016 07:38 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 06:22 Hider wrote:On May 23 2016 06:04 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 23 2016 03:50 Cyro wrote:
APM is literally tied to race; 50 supply of zerglings gives 4x more actions than 50 supply of zealots by some measurements.
It's not only a bad indicator of skill, it's also a bad indicator of how fast you are (especially when used to compare people who are not playing the same race and same style) my APM is always higher when i play Zerg and i think i'm just as fast with Zerg as with the other 2 races. so i agree its a bad indicator of how fast one is. However, it can indicate a ceiling on your speed with the particular race you are using if you have a carefully planned out hotkey set up. APM is useless. Mechanics on the other hand can roughly be defined as EAPM * mouse accuracy. No it cannot. For one thing, how can you define eapm? For another thing, that's not how mechanics is defined.
Eh eapm is already implemented by Blizzard. And whether you agree with their defintion or not is completely irrelevant here. Point is that its still a much better metric to look at than APM.
And yes, the only sensisible definiton of the internal part of mechanics that makes sense is: EAPM * mouse accuracy. The external definition is: Micro + multitasking + macro. (external: what viewers can see).
Thus it follows that:
Micro + Multitasking + Macro = EAPM * Mouse accuracy.
An increase in mouse accuracy (ceteris paribus) always leads to either better macro, micro or multitasking. The same thing is the case with EAPM.
APM alone on other hand doesn't imply that.
And if you make a ton of misclicks, having 400 EAPM is not neccasarily better than 200 EAPM. Thus if EAPM increases but mouse accuracy declines, the overall effect on mechanics is ambigious.
|
Canada16699 Posts
On May 23 2016 08:35 Hider wrote:
Eh eapm is already implemented by Blizzard. And whether you agree with their defintion or not is completely irrelevant here. Point is that its still a much better metric to look at than APM.
so is EAPM the stat Blizzard tracks in their post game graphs that you can examine just after the game?
|
On May 23 2016 08:58 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 08:35 Hider wrote:
Eh eapm is already implemented by Blizzard. And whether you agree with their defintion or not is completely irrelevant here. Point is that its still a much better metric to look at than APM.
so is EAPM the stat Blizzard tracks in their post game graphs that you can examine just after the game?
Yes.
|
Canada16699 Posts
ah ok.
its labelled as APM in Blizzard's charts and graphs which is why i call it APM.
|
On May 23 2016 09:43 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
ah ok.
its labelled as APM in Blizzard's charts and graphs which is why i call it APM.
Eh. I never look at after graphs so I have no clue. If its called APM then its probably APM and not EAPM.
But you can definitely see EAPM during replays.
|
Canada16699 Posts
so we have users discussing various aspects of EAPM and APM without a crystal clear definition of those terms and how Blizzard calculates them. so let's get meta about meta.
step 1: definition of terms.
|
If ZvP really is 42%, we should just repeat what we did when PvZ was 42%, nerf the weaker race and let them sweat it out for 7-8 months.
|
On May 23 2016 11:07 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
so we have users discussing various aspects of EAPM and APM without a crystal clear definition of those terms and how Blizzard calculates them. so let's get meta about meta.
step 1: definition of terms.
EAPM removes double clicks/spamming.
|
SERIOUSLY ITS 2 DIFFERENT MAP POOLS!!!!!!!!!!! Standard maps zerg stucks, close allin maps with little drop space Zerg has a too many options. The ravagers push too easily when close. Its like for months they don't even bother to read the feedback from any of us people who do statistics. Instead just keep reading feedback from people who don't ladder and buff protoss when they are already dominant why not get good feedback from the community that knows.
|
I would like if we could have a pool of ~20 popular, well-known maps and increase the number of vetoes proportionally. The only map in this pool which I feel successfully executes its concept is Ulrena. The rest are all forgettable or just plain bad. I'm really happy to see Frost jumping back into the pool 
|
> 3. Zerg Larva inject buff back to giving 4 per
This would be absolutely game breaking. I doubt it will make it in, but if it does the domination that Zergs will break out would make a 25 gas hydralisks look reasonable by comparison.
> 1. A Warp Prism nerf
I care a lot more about design than balance per se, so I'd agree with toning down the range of the warp-prism pick-up so that they are more vulnerable to ground units -- at least as a design change. As a balance change, it just feels like the wrong time to be making the change without recompense.
I feel that Protoss has been eeking wins out by the skin of their teeth by heavily relying upon early adept damage and immortal's mid-game damage. With one receiving two nerfs (the previous adept nerf, and the warp prism nerf) and the other receiving a significant nerf as well ... what's to come?
|
I have one question - when will the nerf happen this week?
As they are playing the first GSL groups already on Friday, will they be able to practice at all before Friday?
|
AWESOME patch, just add terran favored maps, cause zerg not being able to go muta is not enough.
|
The patch is live.
Sad to see the Cyclone change went through with 4 supply. It's insane to have this unit on the same cost as a fing Tempest. Nerf the Tempest at least.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
They actually gave the swarm host a different gas and supply cost in the patch than they said in the patch notes, pretty unusual for blizz to mess up a patch like that
|
The thor "buff" (its no buff its just the hots thor) needs to be stronger and more range and remove the lib range upgrade. The broodlords are buffed to range 11 and once zerg got air domination the game is more less over (if you go mech). Maybe revert the PDD cost? that will help a bit in tvz and tvp vs tempests.
I know its just me because im bad at the game, but once zerg got broodlord, corruptor, viper, infestor it feels the game is over. Parasitic bomb cant be dodged and the fights are so hard, and all terran air units clump up too much when moving them around. Same when protoss got their tempest carrier HT army. no idea anymore.
|
DK said explicitly that "most mech games are boring" so I don't think mech viablility is on the table anymore. Making mech viable would take for DK to end his ego trip : if every single unit that isn't marine marauder is only viable as support for marine marauder, that means obviously that some units won't be used in the terran arsenal, because some of them will be better at doing what bio lacks, or that some units simply wont' be used.
For exemple : why go for thors for anti capital AA when the viking does a better and cheaper job? Why go for siege tanks when liberator provides much better area control? Why go for cyclones against ultralisks since ghosts or liberators do a much more reliable job at it? Why go for banshees when 4 marauders in a medivac do a much better and safer job ?
Finally, about the cyclone and thor buffs :
- cyclone buff only means you can take your save 50 gaz in TvP and TvT IF you decide to use a cyclone for defense. It doesn't change anything concerning the viability of the unit.
- thor buff : has no purpose whatsoever. We see all pro terrans rely heavily on bio and liberators in TvZ and TvP late game, because bio in medivacs and liberators are basically an air comp. Terrans late game nowadays relies mainly on a up/down gimmick. There is no role for the thor in that, especially since the viking does a better job in all regards. The only use the thor might have is to make mech suck less in TvT, but that's a strech.
|
A warp prism nerf is really what is needed. I strongly agree to the feedback provided in that point.
Even a simple comparison of the "dropships" and the utilities they provide the Warpprsim is way to cheap.
Warp Prism / Medivac
200 mins / 100mins/100gas
100Schield+100hp / 150hp 1armor
4.13movement (+1.23upgrade) / 3.5movement (+2.44 boost)
long range pickup / heals bio units
8capacity+unlimited no warpin ability / 8 capacity
one or two units needed to max utility / +x units needed to scale and synergy well enough
The gas consumptiopn on medivacs is huge and limits the tech opportunities of terran. At least the warp prism should cost the same gas than a medivac and thus prolnging the tech time for protoss, or making WP timings hit a little later.
|
On May 27 2016 20:57 Zulu23 wrote:
A warp prism nerf is really what is needed. I strongly agree to the feedback provided in that point.
Even a simple comparison of the "dropships" and the utilities they provide the Warpprsim is way to cheap.
Warp Prism / Medivac
200 mins / 100mins/100gas
100Schield+100hp / 150hp 1armor
4.13movement (+1.23upgrade) / 3.5movement (+2.44 boost)
long range pickup / heals bio units
8capacity+unlimited no warpin ability / 8 capacity
one or two units needed to max utility / +x units needed to scale and synergy well enough
The gas consumptiopn on medivacs is huge and limits the tech opportunities of terran. At least the warp prism should cost the same gas than a medivac and thus prolnging the tech time for protoss, or making WP timings hit a little later.
I fully agree on that, its hard/near impossible to catch warprisms as terran. Yes medivac can heal units, but cant reinforce new units on the spot. A gas cost would make sense.
|
On May 24 2016 20:07 PinoKotsBeer wrote:
The thor "buff" (its no buff its just the hots thor) needs to be stronger and more range and remove the lib range upgrade.
Wut.
HoTS thor: 23 damage vs armored target with 1 base armor/2 sec cooldown = 11.5 dps
LoTV thor: 49 damage vs armored target with 1 base armor/3 sec cooldown = 16.33 dps
(all numbers using Blizzard time, not real time)
The LoTV thor has 42% more dps. With +3 upgrades the LoTV thor is 56% better.
|
On May 27 2016 21:41 Athenau wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2016 20:07 PinoKotsBeer wrote:
The thor "buff" (its no buff its just the hots thor) needs to be stronger and more range and remove the lib range upgrade. Wut. HoTS thor: 23 damage vs armored target with 1 base armor/2 sec cooldown = 11.5 dps LoTV thor: 49 damage vs armored target with 1 base armor/3 sec cooldown = 16.33 dps (all numbers using Blizzard time, not real time) The LoTV thor has 42% more dps. With +3 upgrades the LoTV thor is 56% better.
I stand corrected, you are correct. Its indeed a better Thor.
|
On May 27 2016 21:41 Athenau wrote:
Show nested quote +
Wut.
HoTS thor: 23 damage vs armored target with 1 base armor/2 sec cooldown = 11.5 dps
LoTV thor: 49 damage vs armored target with 1 base armor/3 sec cooldown = 16.33 dps
(all numbers using Blizzard time, not real time)
The LoTV thor has 42% more dps. With +3 upgrades the LoTV thor is 56% better.
I stand corrected, you are correct. Its indeed a better Thor.
Better, but for its cost compared to other Tier 3 endgame units.... still terrible
|
On May 27 2016 21:57 Zulu23 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2016 21:41 Athenau wrote:
Show nested quote +
Wut.
HoTS thor: 23 damage vs armored target with 1 base armor/2 sec cooldown = 11.5 dps
LoTV thor: 49 damage vs armored target with 1 base armor/3 sec cooldown = 16.33 dps
(all numbers using Blizzard time, not real time)
The LoTV thor has 42% more dps. With +3 upgrades the LoTV thor is 56% better.
I stand corrected, you are correct. Its indeed a better Thor. Better, but for its cost compared to other Tier 3 endgame units.... still terrible
It trades favorably with carriers and brood lords now, which both costs more than a thor.
|
On May 27 2016 22:23 BaronVonOwn wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2016 21:57 Zulu23 wrote:On May 27 2016 21:41 Athenau wrote:
Show nested quote +
Wut.
HoTS thor: 23 damage vs armored target with 1 base armor/2 sec cooldown = 11.5 dps
LoTV thor: 49 damage vs armored target with 1 base armor/3 sec cooldown = 16.33 dps
(all numbers using Blizzard time, not real time)
The LoTV thor has 42% more dps. With +3 upgrades the LoTV thor is 56% better.
I stand corrected, you are correct. Its indeed a better Thor. Better, but for its cost compared to other Tier 3 endgame units.... still terrible It trades favorably with carriers and brood lords now, which both costs more than a thor.
since when does a thor get close enough to a BL/carrier?
|
On May 27 2016 22:57 Tankz123 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2016 22:23 BaronVonOwn wrote:On May 27 2016 21:57 Zulu23 wrote:On May 27 2016 21:41 Athenau wrote:
Show nested quote +
Wut.
HoTS thor: 23 damage vs armored target with 1 base armor/2 sec cooldown = 11.5 dps
LoTV thor: 49 damage vs armored target with 1 base armor/3 sec cooldown = 16.33 dps
(all numbers using Blizzard time, not real time)
The LoTV thor has 42% more dps. With +3 upgrades the LoTV thor is 56% better.
I stand corrected, you are correct. Its indeed a better Thor. Better, but for its cost compared to other Tier 3 endgame units.... still terrible It trades favorably with carriers and brood lords now, which both costs more than a thor. since when does a thor get close enough to a BL/carrier?
I think it has the same range as carriers and vs broodlords you can stutter-step forward when you have enough hellbats to kill the broodlings fast. the new thor is really amazingly good. the only problem remains tempest but no unit in the game can deal with mass tempest.
|
On May 27 2016 23:34 Charoisaur wrote:
I think it has the same range as carriers and vs broodlords you can stutter-step forward when you have enough hellbats to kill the broodlings fast. the new thor is really amazingly good. the only problem remains tempest but no unit in the game can deal with mass tempest.
I am really confused right now, but I play zerg on the ladder and haven't played any TvP in LOTV. Is this just a problem for mech, or terran bio as well?
|
I hope this makes muta,ling bane stronger
|
On May 27 2016 22:23 BaronVonOwn wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2016 21:57 Zulu23 wrote:On May 27 2016 21:41 Athenau wrote:
Show nested quote +
Wut.
HoTS thor: 23 damage vs armored target with 1 base armor/2 sec cooldown = 11.5 dps
LoTV thor: 49 damage vs armored target with 1 base armor/3 sec cooldown = 16.33 dps
(all numbers using Blizzard time, not real time)
The LoTV thor has 42% more dps. With +3 upgrades the LoTV thor is 56% better.
I stand corrected, you are correct. Its indeed a better Thor. Better, but for its cost compared to other Tier 3 endgame units.... still terrible It trades favorably with carriers and brood lords now, which both costs more than a thor.
Wait wait wait. Since when does Thor trade favorably against carrier? They lose hard if its anything more than 1v1.
It does better vs bl but you are straight up delusional if you think it trades well vs Terran and protoss capital ships. Stop testing it 1v1
|
On May 28 2016 00:08 BaronVonOwn wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2016 23:34 Charoisaur wrote:
I think it has the same range as carriers and vs broodlords you can stutter-step forward when you have enough hellbats to kill the broodlings fast. the new thor is really amazingly good. the only problem remains tempest but no unit in the game can deal with mass tempest. I am really confused right now, but I play zerg on the ladder and haven't played any TvP in LOTV. Is this just a problem for mech, or terran bio as well?
When there are templar and/or disruptor underneath with archons and a few other units mass tempest is incredibly hard to deal with for bio as well.
Many protoss players on ladder currently just sit in their base and turtle to mass tempests without doing anything else in the game.
The thing is that tempests are only 4 supply and so you can just get an absurd number of tempests.
|
Tempest are disabled by PDD with Raven, the problem are Tempests + Templars, then you start playing with Ghost and such, but you can't hide when Oracle tags you.
Tempest by themselves in late game are not a the only problem IMO...
|
On May 28 2016 01:15 jinjin5000 wrote:
Wait wait wait. Since when does Thor trade favorably against carrier? They lose hard if its anything more than 1v1.
It does better vs bl but you are straight up delusional if you think it trades well vs Terran and protoss capital ships. Stop testing it 1v1
Since patch 3.3? I never tested them 1v1. I did all tests 10v10, max upgrades and abilities, only microing each side to focus fire. 1 thor left with a few red bars. I did not test thor vs. BC because I know BC will win.
On May 28 2016 01:54 Charoisaur wrote:
When there are templar and/or disruptor underneath with archons and a few other units mass tempest is incredibly hard to deal with for bio as well.
Many protoss players on ladder currently just sit in their base and turtle to mass tempests without doing anything else in the game.
The thing is that tempests are only 4 supply and so you can just get an absurd number of tempests.
I can see how tempests are a key part of that comp but I am skeptical that their supply cost of all things is the reason it is OP. Tempests have less dps than a single crackling, at rock bottom prices of 300/200. Massing them seems grossly cost-inefficient.
|
On May 28 2016 02:38 BaronVonOwn wrote:
Massing them seems grossly cost-inefficient.
Wrong. their DPS doesn't matter when you can shoot over and over without the opponent being able to shoot back, slowly you will whittle them down.
You can't engage the tempests because of cannons, storms + disruptors so you just slowly lose.
tempests are probably the unit that benefits the most from massing them.
btw lillekanin just destroyed a liberator-tank army with mass thors in the map test tournament.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
