• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 23:24
CEST 05:24
KST 12:24
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall10HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0TL Team Map Contest #5: Presented by Monster Energy6
Community News
Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation12$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced6Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles6[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China9Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL66
StarCraft 2
General
Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation TL Team Map Contest #4: Winners Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings
Tourneys
$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series WardiTV Mondays
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma
Brood War
General
BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ [G] Progamer Settings ASL20 Preliminary Maps [ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall SC uni coach streams logging into betting site
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China [BSL20] Grand Finals - Sunday 20:00 CET CSL Xiamen International Invitational
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games? Beyond All Reason
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Positive Thoughts on Setting Up a Dual-Caliber FX
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Summer Games Done Quick 2025! Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
Culture Clash in Video Games…
TrAiDoS
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 544 users

LotV Design Changes announced - Page 43

Forum Index > SC2 General
907 CommentsPost a Reply
Prev 1 41 42 43 44 45 46 Next All
seemsgood
Profile Joined January 2016
5527 Posts
August 19 2016 23:59 GMT
#841
Well...they took the risk to make this sc2 feels unique from BW but didn't work out too well.
I agree mechanics of this game need address but don't make it looks like BW ver 2
Loccstana
Profile Blog Joined November 2012
United States833 Posts
August 20 2016 02:28 GMT
#842
Stalker Blink and Adept shade need to be taken a look at. When you can ignore proper army positioning without any drawback or costs, it violates one of the most fundamental principles of RTS games.
[url]http://i.imgur.com/lw2yN.jpg[/url]
Destructicon
Profile Blog Joined September 2011
4713 Posts
August 20 2016 02:50 GMT
#843
On August 19 2016 22:59 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 19 2016 20:37 Destructicon wrote:
On August 19 2016 11:57 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
On August 19 2016 11:44 TT1 wrote:
SC2 failed because theres too much shit going on in the game, theres way too many units and way too many abilities. WoL was the most successful version of the game because it was simple, there were fewer units, fewer activatable abilities etc. These future changes follow the same balance philosophy, don't expect anything to change.

If they really wanted to fix the game they'd have to do something about warpprism warpins (maybe even warpins in general), speedvacs etc. The pace of the game needs to be slowed down, theres alot of different ways that could be achieved.

Here is my interpretation:

I want SC2 with less stuff going on, less units to manage, and less abilities. I think WoL was successful because it was not complicated. I want it to be easier. Its too fast to play. I can't adapt to change.

I'm not being rude, and I respect your opinion, but when I read your comment it feels like you want the game to be easier. I have to totally disagree with you. SC2 should be harder. There should be units with great impact to the game. There should be abilities that are meaningful and fun to use. It should stretch your ability to manage and pay attention to everything on the map. Reaching the skill ceiling should be incredibly difficult, nay near impossible.

I feel this will result in exciting battles with awesome comebacks.

Of course this is coming from a spectator. I would imagine from a pro player this is not something to look forward to. Akin to if NFL decided the field should be 200 yards long.


Except its the wrong kind of hard and it spews into volatility.
When you have so much freely available damage the game stops becoming a game about who can consistently control his units best and more about who doesn't have a 1 second lapse in concentration that leads to the loss of his game.

Its not normal for entire economies or armies to be vaporized in seconds, it makes the game too volatile. Slowing down the game by reducing damage numbers in some way will actually benefit the game because:

1st The better player will lose less in those small intervals where their concentration falters.
2nd The better player will have less of those moments of inattention.
3rd The better player, will have more time to recover in the long run.

Adding more abilities to all units is also not a very interesting way to make the game harder, it just promotes more spamming on the units itself instead of more interesting micro like pulling back weakened units, splitting, stutter-stepping, dodging etc.

I agree that the game should be hard, but this isn't the right way to do it.

Edit: And don't tell me the pros don't have lapses in concentration and moments where they make mistakes, that's not a valid argument since they are still humans, they make mistakes, everyone makes mistakes.

And as proof when a mistake happens at the pro level and its expertly punished we get those sort of games that end anticlimactically after one major battle or successful harass.

There is no such thing as the 'wrong kind of hard'. Hard is just a relative position on a spectrum that starts from easy and ends in near impossible.

This '1 second lapse' pushes SC2 into the boundaries of very hard. However, your opponent is also within the same boundaries. You also have the same opportunity to vaporize his army or economy. Slowing the game down only serves to place the game within the easier spectrum.

I agree that if a game is placed on the harder end of the spectrum, things can get a little more volatile, but its this volatility that will separate the better player from the best of the best. All that 1st, 2nd, and 3rd means that the better player will be harder to discern. If we slow down the game or reduce the damage output, all we are doing is making the game easier. If its easier, player skill level will normalize.

Yes pros make mistakes and they are punished, but there are pros that recover from the mistakes and end up winning the battle. These games are the greatest to watch, and I want SC2 to create more of those players and games. Sure many games end up anticlimactic due to a small mistake that snowballed.


Wrong! Because of how fast paced SC2 and punishing the game is the better player doesn't always win because he isn't afforded a chance to come back. That 1 moment of intention where you lose your economy or army is all that it takes.

Its the same thing as forcing players to play a BO1 style format, we can all agree that its volatile, boring and there isn't actually much skill to it as you could potentially have the reigning champion knocked out just because of 1 weird cheese.

You also severely underestimate what kind of an impact slowing the game down will have, instead of making the game easier, quite the opposite will happen, the game will become harder.

Think about it, if combat takes longer, players have a bit more time to do more of everything else, harass, macro, etc.

Since combat is slower now, economies don't die as fast to a single or small groups of units.

Since the economy is now more resilient, to be able to gain the benefits of one attack you should, perhaps do many more attacks across multiple bases.

Since the combat is slower you now have more time to do more multi-pronged attacks/harass.

Since the combat is slower, your adversary also has more time to do more multi-pronged harass and defense.

And that's how a perfect little dance of micro, macro and multi-tasking occurs.

If the pacing is done just right, no one move is enough to kill one player and it takes several fights worth to do it.

SC2's pacing now is just wrong since the fate of either player can be decided in 1 second, where as in a game like Warhammer Dawn of War 2, or BW or Company of Heroes, the game gives the player time to recover.
WriterNever give up, never surrender! https://www.youtube.com/user/DestructiconSC
jinjin5000
Profile Joined May 2010
United States1419 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-08-20 07:52:18
August 20 2016 06:50 GMT
#844
as good as cyclone changes look, more and more I play balance test map, it doesn't really feel like it adds anything and that it actually isnt that good

it nigh unmicroable with its 0.07 attack, scales ridiculously hard with upgrade, even more so than BC, and while it does heavy damage vs ground armored (stalkers in particular), it doesnt really excell at anything else.

Making double cyclone with reactor vs protoss is death sentence as 2 cyclones cannot kill oracle even if reacted as soon as you can and is a huge investment early on. It also doesn't trade well vs adepts, which is big problem when you are going tank mech vs protoss (because shading on top of tanks) and it rather gets destroyed by adepts, especially with new redesign

I mean, does mech need another stationary anti-armor unit?

Not only that, heavy armor damage is a role already filled with tank. What mech really lacks is anti air and I feel like cyclone should be able to fill in that instead. Nerf its ground and make it bit more mediocre and give it a good anti-air is my idea, especially with blizzard pushing viper-hydra style with new zerg vs mech and carriers.
StarMoon
Profile Joined April 2011
Canada682 Posts
August 20 2016 07:09 GMT
#845
They FINALLY made siege tanks decent again.

They should also increase their hp/armor, but there's hope! Finally hope!
MasterCynical
Profile Joined September 2012
505 Posts
August 20 2016 07:30 GMT
#846
I'm extremely skeptical that David Kim will let any of these changes pass. Last time he promised a siege tank buff, it was completely scrapped.

I feel like this is just a publicity stunt to generate hype for the game, and then once the patch day comes, we get extremely watered down versions of these changes that make almost no difference to core designs.
JackONeill
Profile Joined September 2013
861 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-08-20 07:49:54
August 20 2016 07:48 GMT
#847
The main problem i see with the cyclone is that it was filling a role that mech really needed : the ability to chase an army and force an engage.
If you had a mech army and you win a fight, if the ennemy starts to back you can unsiege and lock on with cyclones to assure the destruction of some of the units running away. You can also, with the lock, lure an ennemy into siege tank fire.
Also, because mech is so suceptible to fake engages, forcing tank siege and slowing down a move out, the cyclone was very cool because it punished reckless fake engages by assuring some damage. Stalkers moving in, sniping a tank or two, then blink out as soon as the tanks start to siege? A scan allowed the cyclones to lock and kill as much stalkers as they are cyclones to punish this kind of strategy.

What i would like to see for the cyclone :
- little better movespeed
- AG toned down from 3+3 every 0,07 secs (42/84 dps) to 3+1 every 0,07 seconds (42/56 dps)
- lock is able to target air and ground, and deals 200 dmg in 10 seconds (20 dps)

This way, auto attack would be better for fights, but against air, and to chase ennemy units, you could lock on. Because the auto attack is so crappy as a chase option (because it's very fast, it requires the unit to stand still so exploit the full dps), lock on would allow the cyclone to deal less than half its dps in exchange for some chasing power.
seemsgood
Profile Joined January 2016
5527 Posts
August 20 2016 09:34 GMT
#848
On August 20 2016 15:50 jinjin5000 wrote:
as good as cyclone changes look, more and more I play balance test map, it doesn't really feel like it adds anything and that it actually isnt that good

it nigh unmicroable with its 0.07 attack, scales ridiculously hard with upgrade, even more so than BC, and while it does heavy damage vs ground armored (stalkers in particular), it doesnt really excell at anything else.

Making double cyclone with reactor vs protoss is death sentence as 2 cyclones cannot kill oracle even if reacted as soon as you can and is a huge investment early on. It also doesn't trade well vs adepts, which is big problem when you are going tank mech vs protoss (because shading on top of tanks) and it rather gets destroyed by adepts, especially with new redesign

I mean, does mech need another stationary anti-armor unit?

Not only that, heavy armor damage is a role already filled with tank. What mech really lacks is anti air and I feel like cyclone should be able to fill in that instead. Nerf its ground and make it bit more mediocre and give it a good anti-air is my idea, especially with blizzard pushing viper-hydra style with new zerg vs mech and carriers.

No,cyclone's design is fine it just needs more tweak to be able to fight better against adepts.Watching avilo gets rekt left and right by adepts and cyclones take 4ever to kill them,he couldn't do anything outside the map and let protss take the whole map.I think mech really needs an answer for protoss's most common harrassment.Zealot should be the only unit can counter cyclones alone and sentry+ immortal/archon are key units can gain cost effect trade against non-tank mech army.
About protoss tier 3 counter,they should let BCs do the job cause its awesome as fuck and for the first time bcs have a role versus protoss.
And due to tier 3's clunkiness.Both terran and protoss need ground army anyway to defend against harrasment.
Jett.Jack.Alvir
Profile Blog Joined August 2011
Canada2250 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-08-20 12:39:27
August 20 2016 12:37 GMT
#849
On August 20 2016 11:50 Destructicon wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 19 2016 22:59 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
On August 19 2016 20:37 Destructicon wrote:
On August 19 2016 11:57 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
On August 19 2016 11:44 TT1 wrote:
SC2 failed because theres too much shit going on in the game, theres way too many units and way too many abilities. WoL was the most successful version of the game because it was simple, there were fewer units, fewer activatable abilities etc. These future changes follow the same balance philosophy, don't expect anything to change.

If they really wanted to fix the game they'd have to do something about warpprism warpins (maybe even warpins in general), speedvacs etc. The pace of the game needs to be slowed down, theres alot of different ways that could be achieved.

Here is my interpretation:

I want SC2 with less stuff going on, less units to manage, and less abilities. I think WoL was successful because it was not complicated. I want it to be easier. Its too fast to play. I can't adapt to change.

I'm not being rude, and I respect your opinion, but when I read your comment it feels like you want the game to be easier. I have to totally disagree with you. SC2 should be harder. There should be units with great impact to the game. There should be abilities that are meaningful and fun to use. It should stretch your ability to manage and pay attention to everything on the map. Reaching the skill ceiling should be incredibly difficult, nay near impossible.

I feel this will result in exciting battles with awesome comebacks.

Of course this is coming from a spectator. I would imagine from a pro player this is not something to look forward to. Akin to if NFL decided the field should be 200 yards long.


Except its the wrong kind of hard and it spews into volatility.
When you have so much freely available damage the game stops becoming a game about who can consistently control his units best and more about who doesn't have a 1 second lapse in concentration that leads to the loss of his game.

Its not normal for entire economies or armies to be vaporized in seconds, it makes the game too volatile. Slowing down the game by reducing damage numbers in some way will actually benefit the game because:

1st The better player will lose less in those small intervals where their concentration falters.
2nd The better player will have less of those moments of inattention.
3rd The better player, will have more time to recover in the long run.

Adding more abilities to all units is also not a very interesting way to make the game harder, it just promotes more spamming on the units itself instead of more interesting micro like pulling back weakened units, splitting, stutter-stepping, dodging etc.

I agree that the game should be hard, but this isn't the right way to do it.

Edit: And don't tell me the pros don't have lapses in concentration and moments where they make mistakes, that's not a valid argument since they are still humans, they make mistakes, everyone makes mistakes.

And as proof when a mistake happens at the pro level and its expertly punished we get those sort of games that end anticlimactically after one major battle or successful harass.

There is no such thing as the 'wrong kind of hard'. Hard is just a relative position on a spectrum that starts from easy and ends in near impossible.

This '1 second lapse' pushes SC2 into the boundaries of very hard. However, your opponent is also within the same boundaries. You also have the same opportunity to vaporize his army or economy. Slowing the game down only serves to place the game within the easier spectrum.

I agree that if a game is placed on the harder end of the spectrum, things can get a little more volatile, but its this volatility that will separate the better player from the best of the best. All that 1st, 2nd, and 3rd means that the better player will be harder to discern. If we slow down the game or reduce the damage output, all we are doing is making the game easier. If its easier, player skill level will normalize.

Yes pros make mistakes and they are punished, but there are pros that recover from the mistakes and end up winning the battle. These games are the greatest to watch, and I want SC2 to create more of those players and games. Sure many games end up anticlimactic due to a small mistake that snowballed.


Wrong! Because of how fast paced SC2 and punishing the game is the better player doesn't always win because he isn't afforded a chance to come back. That 1 moment of intention where you lose your economy or army is all that it takes.

Its the same thing as forcing players to play a BO1 style format, we can all agree that its volatile, boring and there isn't actually much skill to it as you could potentially have the reigning champion knocked out just because of 1 weird cheese.

You also severely underestimate what kind of an impact slowing the game down will have, instead of making the game easier, quite the opposite will happen, the game will become harder.

Think about it, if combat takes longer, players have a bit more time to do more of everything else, harass, macro, etc.

Since combat is slower now, economies don't die as fast to a single or small groups of units.

Since the economy is now more resilient, to be able to gain the benefits of one attack you should, perhaps do many more attacks across multiple bases.

Since the combat is slower you now have more time to do more multi-pronged attacks/harass.

Since the combat is slower, your adversary also has more time to do more multi-pronged harass and defense.

And that's how a perfect little dance of micro, macro and multi-tasking occurs.

If the pacing is done just right, no one move is enough to kill one player and it takes several fights worth to do it.

SC2's pacing now is just wrong since the fate of either player can be decided in 1 second, where as in a game like Warhammer Dawn of War 2, or BW or Company of Heroes, the game gives the player time to recover.

The better player shouldn't always win though, unless of course they are leagues better. The better player should win majority of the time, and the larger the skill discrepancy the more they should win.

Is SC2 too fast? Perhaps it is, but its designed that way to force mistakes. Mistakes need to happen for the game to be competitive. If we slow it down, less mistakes will occur. If less mistakes occur, it will be an easier game.

I get your point. You want the pace slowed down enough so players have more time to do things. But that just isn't SC2. Its a fast paced game that requires all your attention; split second reaction; and quick decision making. That will truly separate the good from the great.

Slowing down the game only serves to normalize skill level and lowers skill ceiling, thus making it easier to play, and harder to discern the better player.

Honestly, I don't play SC2 anymore. I quit because it's too hard to play. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed playing it, and occasionally will boot it up. Its just not the game for me.

However, I truly love watching it. I am in awe of Innovation, MC, Neeb, Scarlett, Bomber, etc. They continually amaze me with their impeccable timing, quick decision-making, fast reaction time. I don't want SC2 to be slower just because it will be easier for me to play the game. I want it harder so the truly great can rise from the mediocre and show me awesome games.

This is the same discussion I had with someone else on this thread, and we are viewing SC2 from different lenses. You want it slower as a player. You want to have more time to do things. You don't want to lose your army because you had to scratch your head. You can't accept the truth though. A slower game is an easier game overall.

I like the pace of SC2. I like how hard it is to play, because I enjoy watching the pros do it.

And don't give me the bullshit argument that players will quit if its too hard. If that were the case, SC2 would truly be a dead game. But it isn't. Its still surviving, with many people that love the challenge it offers.

If SC2 is too hard for you, I suggest you just quit also. Start enjoying the pros play. However, if you truly want to continue playing, quit worrying about the pace of the game.

Zulu23
Profile Joined August 2011
Germany132 Posts
August 20 2016 16:08 GMT
#850
I agree that the cyclone looks good on paper. But after a decent number of games I played, I have to say its bad in almost every aspect. Its an expensive 150/100 resources for decent damage output on armored units. anything else is just bad on this unit. Its clumping, slow and has not good dps on its cast.
It can be reactored but this is not affordable is a way to get out good supporting units.

The old hots marauder, was for 100/25 much better.
I played a tvz today. 5 cyclones kill a hatchery faster than the queen standing beside this hatchery.... its rediculus.

I was thinking about some nice synergies with hellions, marines, vikings or hellbats and tanks. You die to quickly to mutas. One cannot afford thors while building some cyclones and liberators suck now against mutas.
vult
Profile Blog Joined February 2012
United States9400 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-08-20 16:31:48
August 20 2016 16:12 GMT
#851
What I don't think you are grasping as a concept is that SC2 is a game above all else. Sure, it's a spectator's esport and more people probably watch than play. But that sort of environment has a limited shelf life. Once current pros that you claim everyone should enjoy spectating retire due to lack of funding/popularity of events, the professional scene will in theory die because new pros are so few and far between. In order to successfully sustain and nurture growth at all levels, especially the professional level, the game needs to be more accessible and less punishing.

Your arguments against changing the pace of the game are misguided as well. While you say the game would be "easier", I argue the opposite. While you say the better player shouldn't win every time, sure that's not a realistic expectation, but a better player should not be brutally punished by one misplay, where the game should promote and reward a higher ratio of good plays vs. Bad plays. A better player will essentially have less bad plays than good, thus rewarding them and putting them in a better place in the long run as a game/series goes on.

Changing the pace of the game will also allow better players differentiate themselves from others through deeper aspects of macro, micro, and harass. Slowing the game down even slightly will provide opportunities for players to locate weaknesses before, during, and after battles, as well as allow a player who loses a certain battle or takes heavy damage to come up with a way to mitigate their current resources to accommodate.

For example, let's take a 200 vs 200 battle between a Terran and Protoss. In the current state of the game, all focus basically needs to be on the battle for the terran or they lose. They need to focus on things like EMP, viking target fire on colossus/tempests, Bio stutter step, storm dodging, concaving, etc. That is a lot to do in the 1 sec it takes to decide the battle. If you take that one sec and slow the pace down by .25 (exemplifying a 25% damage or speed reduction of the game) that allows a better player to find weaknesses and even use their other aspects of the game to take advantage (expand, backstab, reinforce, etc). While that .25 seconds in the moment might not seem to be much, that .25 sec over time allows for both players to use their skills to attack in different locations, micro, and test their skills. From the Protoss perspective, this allows for more micro in stalker blinks, Templar splitting/storms, tempest spreading/targeting, and colossus target fire and pulling back the ones weakened by the Viking target fire, while at the same time also allows for macro opportunities like chronoboost (imo they should bring back old chrono) as well as warp prism harass, DT harass, etc.

This sort of dynamic will stray the game away from "whoever wins the big battle wins the whole game" and brings it more towards "okay player A won the battle but player B took advantage through macro and harass so Player A can try to go for an attack and potentially lose to the defense, thus putting them slightly behind thus player B is still in the game". More opportunities for a player to use every mechance available to them at any given point will differentiate themselves.

The current iteration of SC2 and it's battles are severely underwhelming to play, and allowing for even a shred more variety/opportunity for the main aspects of the game (macro, micro, harass) will only make the game more fun to play. And if the game is more fun to play, more players will stay, more good players will arose, and the game will experience innovations similar to BW. The more eyes/minds that are working with the game, the more potential depth can be found within the game. And that can ONLY be done through experimentation, not through spectating or theorycrafting.
I used to play random, but for you I play very specifically.
Clbull
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
United Kingdom1439 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-08-20 17:55:19
August 20 2016 17:28 GMT
#852
Personally, here are the changes I'd make to the game.

General:
  • To encourage active scouting and flanking, vision ranges have been reduced for all units across the board.
  • All mining bases will now have six 2000 mineral nodes, and two 750 mineral nodes. This means that bases will take longer to mine out, but you will mine from them less efficiently, encouraging additional bases without punishing turtle or defensive strategies as hard.

Terran:

Orbital Command:
  • Calldown MULE has been removed.
  • NEW ABILITY: SCV Drop. For 50 Energy and 1 Supply, you can drop a free SCV at any location where you have vision.

Yes, this is basically the ability that Terran has in Starbow, minus the additional 50 Mineral cost. It will allow Terran to more easily make proxy buildings later in the game and up their worker counts in a more unique way. Let's face it, MULEs are stupidly broken value for money and discourage scan usage because of how much value they give.

Reaper:
  • Can now see up cliffs from lower ground.
  • Now requires a Tech Lab to produce.
  • NEW ABILITY: Stagger - The Reaper does not take direct damage from attacks, but will instead stagger the damage from any weapon or spell hit it takes. The Reaper now takes 9 damage over 3 seconds whenever it is struck by an attack or spell. This effect stacks.
  • Combat Drugs now trigger whenever the Reaper is not staggering damage.
  • KD8 Charge has been removed.

The Reaper has been redesigned as a scout unit, designed to scout enemy bases and positions. While they lose their ability to drop KD8 Charges, they can now see up cliffs. In addition, Adrenaline will allow them to shrug off powerful hits, i.e. siege tank fire, while still making them vulnerable to fast hitting units or large armies.

Siege Tank
  • Attack cooldown in Siege Mode increased to 3.15 seconds, from 2.
  • Now deals 35 (+35 vs Armored) damage in Siege Mode.
  • Now costs 2 Supply, 150 Minerals and 100 Gas.
  • Will now revert to Tank Mode if picked up while in Siege Mode.

This change to the Siege Tank still allows players to micro tanks out of danger, but will prevent the Siegeivac drop strategies you'd normally see in every TvX game.

The supply, attack speed and gas cost reductions are also to bring the Siege Tank in line with its Brood War counterpart.

Widow Mine
  • Removed from the game

The Widow Mine is a rather broken idea for a unit. On one hand, it heavily punishes players into build order losses for not having detection, while on the other hand, it's practically replaced the Siege Tank in most aspects. Instead, I'd like to bring back an old unit into the game...

Hellion/Hellbat
  • Infernal Pre-Igniter has been removed.
  • Hellbats no longer require an Armory to produce or morph.
  • NEW ABILITY: Spider Mine - Hellions can now drop Spider Mines, which will burrow into the ground and target nearby ground units (excluding workers) and explode. Hellions can hold a maximum of 3, and can construct more for 25 Minerals at a time.
  • NEW UPGRADE: Neosteel Shielding - Hellbats gain +3 Armor. Costs 150 Minerals and 150 Gas to research.

Removing Infernal Pre-Igniter in favour of bringing back Spider Mines is a good thing for the late game usefulness of this unit. In addition, the ability to morph into a Hellbat and gain an extra 3 Armor will help them perform the same function that Firebats did back in Brood War.

Medivac
  • Ignite Afterburners has been removed.

This change is necessary. There were no problems with the viability of drop strategies back in Brood War or Wings of Liberty, because players generally relied on both the element of surprise and outmultitasking their opponent to make their drops work.

Stimivacs and the mobility they give to Terran aggressive plays are simply too overpowered, to the point where units such as Blink Stalkers and the Mothership Core are mandatory just to survive against them.

Cyclone
  • Now costs 125 Minerals and 50 Gas to produce.
  • No longer requires a Tech Lab to produce.
  • Now deals 6 damage (down from 18 damage)
  • Can only target ground units with its weapon attack.
  • Lock On can now only target air units, and deals 14 damage per second (affected by weapon upgrades and armor) to its target until it either dies or moves out of range.

Cyclones have been redesigned as a Mech anti-air unit, because Terran needs a worthy successor to the Goliath.

Raven
  • Seeker Missiles will no longer fizzle out if the target moves beyond 13 range of the projectile.
  • Seeker Missile now costs 75 Energy, down from 125.
  • Seeker Missiles move 25% faster, and take less time to lock on.

Unlike Irradiate, Seeker Missile is a shit tier, underpowered ability that is almost impossible to successfully land on any players with competent micro. By preventing the projectile from fizzling out, this will now force players to micro and split their units to minimise the amount of damage that Seeker Missile's splash can do.

Also, reducing the cost to 75 Energy puts it in-line with more reliable splash damage abilities like Psionic Storm and Fungal Growth.

This change also allows the Raven to be useful alongside bio forces, creating an SC2 equivalent to SK Terran.

Ghost:
  • Steady Targeting can now target all units, not just Biological.
  • Steady Targeting now has a range of 12, up from 10.

This change makes Steady Targeting easier to aim and makes the Ghost feel more like a sniper. It allows them to slowly pick off siege tank lines in the blind spot between the Siege Tank's vision range and maximum attack range.

Also, being unable to snipe non-biological units like the Archon, Thor, Battlecruiser and Siege Tank is quite bullshit. Do any of you recall Yoko Litner from Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann going up against huge mecha robots?

Protoss:

Sentry
  • Forcefield has been removed
  • NEW ABILITY: Shield Battery - Restore 40 Shields to all units within the targeted area. 9 range, 25 Energy.

Forcefields either broke the game outright, or were useless in the case where Ravagers or any Massive unit existed. So I thought... let's bring back shield regeneration, since it's led to so many sick plays back in Brood War.

Dark Templar
  • Dark Templar can now use Blink (when researched from the Twilight Council.)
  • Dark Templar now temporarily de-cloak for 4 seconds after attacking.
  • Dark Templar are now Detectors, and can see cloaked units.

The Dark Templar is too much of an all-in unit. It lacks mobility or any form of escape cooldown, but at the same time its permanent cloaking abilities lead to cheap build order losses. It's one of those units that either wrecks when detection isn't out, or is useless when detection is out.

By giving them Blink for increased mobility, but at the same time de-cloaking them when they attack to allow players without detection to fight against them, two major flaws with the unit have been fixed.

Making them Detectors also increase their scouting capabilities, which is only a good thing for Protoss.

Archon
  • Is now an Armored unit.

There is no reason for the Archon to not be considered Armored. Back in Brood War, it was considered a Large unit, and therefore took full damage from units that did explosive damage, like Siege Tanks.

In SC2, this isn't the case, and the Archon currently takes 11 hits to kill, unlike the 6 it took in BW. This needed to change.

Carrier
  • Release Interceptors has been removed.

Release Interceptors was too powerful as an ability, but at the same time Carriers do not deserve a cost reduction to spawning Interceptors, because they're already a good unit.

Adept
  • Shields reduced to 60, from 70.

The Adept is currently one of the most ridiculously powerful units in the game. In almost every single matchup, it has replaced the Zealot for its increased mobility, its status as a ranged unit, and its equal amount of effective HP. Hence, the Adept needs a survivability nerf in order to make the Zealot relevant again.

Warp Prism
  • Can no longer pick up units from range.

This is another one of those necessary dropship changes. Drop aggression needs to be nerfed across the board, and where better to continue addressing this issue than with a nerf to the Warp Prism.

Tempest
  • Supply cost increased to 6, from 4.
  • Attack range reduced to 12, from 15.

All the Tempest really needs is a supply cost increase, and a significant attack range reduction. It doesn't need a splash damage ability that outclasses Psionic Storm in almost every single way.

Colossus
  • Is no longer considered an Air unit, and therefore cannot be hit by anti-air attacks.
  • Base range increased to 9, from 6.
  • Movement speed reduced to 0.75, from 3.15
  • Now deals 18 (+17 vs Armored) x2 damage.
  • Attack cooldown increased to 3.7 seconds, from 1.07

The Colossus has been overhauled into a long range Siege unit. Its weapon now has a longer range that almost compares to the Siege Tank with a max range of 12 when upgraded. However, it now moves much more slowly, requiring a Warp Prism to effectively micro it, just like how Reaver/Shuttle micro was so integral to Brood War. This also allows Colossus to be shut down more easily with flanks.

Disruptor
  • Removed from the game.

With the Colossus now performing its role as a long range, immobile siege unit, the Disruptor is no longer needed.

Zerg:

Queen
  • Ground attack range reduced to 3, from 5.
  • Air attack range reduced to 7, from 8.

The attack range increases to the Queen back in Wings of Liberty and more recently in Legacy of the Void have outright broken the balance of the game.

If anybody recalled the Patch 1.4.3 Balance Update, the Queen change alone single-handedly broke Wings of Liberty and turned the meta into a zerg-dominated mess which Blizzard didn't even address until Heart of the Swarm. You could hold virtually all aggressive builds with just Queens - and therefore no larvae or gas commitment to units - alone while you mass produced drones, got to 3 bases, and then teched into an unstoppable Infestor Brood Lord army by the 14 minute mark.

The same goes for the Queen's ability to attack air units. With dropships becoming less powerful, there is no reason for the Queen to have 8 air attack range. It just kills build diversity.

Infestor
  • Fungal Growth's damage has been increased to 36 (+12 vs Armored) damage over 3 seconds.
  • Fungal Growth's projectile now moves 10% more slowly
  • Neural Parasite can now be used while burrowed.

This change accomplishes two things. Firstly, it increases the Infestor's DPS to 12 (or 16 vs Armored units) and makes the Infestor better overall while simultaneously making Fungal Growth a bit easier to (partially) dodge. It is also a reversal of a previous Wings of Liberty nerf back when Fungal Growth was instant and not projectile-based.

Secondly, it makes Neural Parasite relevant again by allowing players to use it while burrowed, adding an element of surprise that only detection can counter.

Ravager
  • Now considered an Armored unit.
  • Corrosive Bile damage has been reduced to 40 (+30 vs Biological)

The damage of Corrosive Bile is already too damn high against everything other than Lurkers - and with Ravagers now becoming Armored, the Lurker is going to make mincemeat of it even more.

Therefore, the damage of Corrosive Bile has been reduced against everything except for Biological units. For Bio units, they actually deal 10 more damage, making the Ravager a more effective soft-counter against Lurkers.

Hydralisk
  • Ground and air attack deals +2 damage to Biological units.
  • Now moves faster on and off creep when Muscular Augments has been researched.

This change improves the effectiveness of Hydralisks against Terran Bio (where Roach Hydra Ravager already gets crushed), against Zealots, against Adepts, and against Mutalisks. It also makes them more relevant in ZvZ.

Ultralisk
  • Chitinous Plating now increases Ultralisk armor by 2, down from 4.

I'm sorry but this change is absolutely necessary because of the complete lack of damage that Terran bio does to the Ultralisk.

Overlord
  • Mutate Ventral Sacs now requires a Lair.

Allowing Zerg to perform drops with a scouting Overlord without a commitment into Lair tech is stupid game design. This is also another one of the changes designed to rein in a harassment-heavy meta.
Wohodix
Profile Joined September 2011
France34 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-08-21 15:27:42
August 21 2016 15:18 GMT
#853
On August 21 2016 01:12 vult wrote:


Changing the pace of the game will also allow better players differentiate themselves from others through deeper aspects of macro, micro, and harass. Slowing the game down even slightly will provide opportunities for players to locate weaknesses before, during, and after battles, as well as allow a player who loses a certain battle or takes heavy damage to come up with a way to mitigate their current resources to accommodate.



It will still be too fast for some player, so its an endless problem, if you want more time to think you can play turn base games.

I like the speed of the game in lotv as it allows you to play way more games.

I think the game lack of players due to the fact it is label as hard but there is not so much contents up to date .

Also players needs to get in a totally different mindsets than other games : you have to accept you will "loose" a lot, while its not really "loosing" its learning something you didnt know.

You have to not care about your rank, you have to accept there is a lot of people above you that will beat you with no chance for you to win until you learn more.

The rewarding thing of sc2 is learning and then progressing.
Thats why I like this new pace, you have a lot more time outside of the game to learn. Pro games are faster, you can check your replay faster etc... it produce a lot more of experiences to learn.

But this is absolutely not taught to new players.
Instead People are obsessed with ranks and playing macro games like pro when their early game is bad.

Also an important thing to learn to new players is, even if you have a main races you should learn the other races to play better against them.






cheekymonkey
Profile Joined January 2014
France1387 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-08-21 16:21:09
August 21 2016 16:15 GMT
#854
The adept's ridiculous strength is showing itself more and more. Insane mobility, insane damage vs light coupled with insane sturdiness. You can do things with mass adept that just shouldn't be possible for the cost. If anything should be nerfed, it is the adept. I've never liked it, and I hate how it practically has replaced the zealot. It is just way too beefy for the way it functions. In terms of both balance and design, it needs a serious health/shield nerf.

With a significant nerf to health, I wouldn't even mind a buff to the shade ability. Just to make it so that it can be an effective harassment tool if left unhindered, but slaughtered if met with combat units or similar cost.
90ti
Profile Joined August 2010
United States100 Posts
August 21 2016 16:47 GMT
#855
On August 21 2016 01:12 vult wrote:
What I don't think you are grasping as a concept is that SC2 is a game above all else. Sure, it's a spectator's esport and more people probably watch than play. But that sort of environment has a limited shelf life. Once current pros that you claim everyone should enjoy spectating retire due to lack of funding/popularity of events, the professional scene will in theory die because new pros are so few and far between. In order to successfully sustain and nurture growth at all levels, especially the professional level, the game needs to be more accessible and less punishing.

Your arguments against changing the pace of the game are misguided as well. While you say the game would be "easier", I argue the opposite. While you say the better player shouldn't win every time, sure that's not a realistic expectation, but a better player should not be brutally punished by one misplay, where the game should promote and reward a higher ratio of good plays vs. Bad plays. A better player will essentially have less bad plays than good, thus rewarding them and putting them in a better place in the long run as a game/series goes on.

Changing the pace of the game will also allow better players differentiate themselves from others through deeper aspects of macro, micro, and harass. Slowing the game down even slightly will provide opportunities for players to locate weaknesses before, during, and after battles, as well as allow a player who loses a certain battle or takes heavy damage to come up with a way to mitigate their current resources to accommodate.

For example, let's take a 200 vs 200 battle between a Terran and Protoss. In the current state of the game, all focus basically needs to be on the battle for the terran or they lose. They need to focus on things like EMP, viking target fire on colossus/tempests, Bio stutter step, storm dodging, concaving, etc. That is a lot to do in the 1 sec it takes to decide the battle. If you take that one sec and slow the pace down by .25 (exemplifying a 25% damage or speed reduction of the game) that allows a better player to find weaknesses and even use their other aspects of the game to take advantage (expand, backstab, reinforce, etc). While that .25 seconds in the moment might not seem to be much, that .25 sec over time allows for both players to use their skills to attack in different locations, micro, and test their skills. From the Protoss perspective, this allows for more micro in stalker blinks, Templar splitting/storms, tempest spreading/targeting, and colossus target fire and pulling back the ones weakened by the Viking target fire, while at the same time also allows for macro opportunities like chronoboost (imo they should bring back old chrono) as well as warp prism harass, DT harass, etc.

This sort of dynamic will stray the game away from "whoever wins the big battle wins the whole game" and brings it more towards "okay player A won the battle but player B took advantage through macro and harass so Player A can try to go for an attack and potentially lose to the defense, thus putting them slightly behind thus player B is still in the game". More opportunities for a player to use every mechance available to them at any given point will differentiate themselves.

The current iteration of SC2 and it's battles are severely underwhelming to play, and allowing for even a shred more variety/opportunity for the main aspects of the game (macro, micro, harass) will only make the game more fun to play. And if the game is more fun to play, more players will stay, more good players will arose, and the game will experience innovations similar to BW. The more eyes/minds that are working with the game, the more potential depth can be found within the game. And that can ONLY be done through experimentation, not through spectating or theorycrafting.


what? no mention of the lib? Watch any recent TvP whether korean or foreign and tell me that this unit is fine.
TheWildShooter
Profile Joined September 2011
79 Posts
August 21 2016 17:02 GMT
#856
Archon
  • Is now an Armored unit.

There is no reason for the Archon to not be considered Armored. Back in Brood War, it was considered a Large unit, and therefore took full damage from units that did explosive damage, like Siege Tanks.

In SC2, this isn't the case, and the Archon currently takes 11 hits to kill, unlike the 6 it took in BW. This needed to change.


Only if archons will get 53% attack speed buff to match their SC1 counterparts. Blizzard massively nerfed their attack speed in SC2. Instead they got extra durability due to lack of armor type so they could absorb more damage, but overall archons in SC1 were better.
oGsMC <3
JimmyJRaynor
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Canada16681 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-08-21 17:16:25
August 21 2016 17:11 GMT
#857
On August 20 2016 11:50 Destructicon wrote:
SC2's pacing now is just wrong since the fate of either player can be decided in 1 second, where as in a game like Warhammer Dawn of War 2, or BW or Company of Heroes, the game gives the player time to recover.


interesting that you characterize SC2 pacing as "wrong". in my view .. it simply "is". like a bishop moves diagonally on a chess board.

the gods at Blizzard have made their decisions on what SC2 will be. DK announced no drastic changes. It appears my strategy for dealing with SC2 pacing for the past 5 years has been more effective than providing "feedback" to the SC2 team.

Here is my 3 point solution.

when i'm in the mood for a faster pace than SC2 i play RA3.
when i'm in the mood for a slower paced game i play Company of Heroes 1.
when i'm in the mood for an SC2 paced game i play SC2.

RA3, CoH1, and SC2 all have a slightly different slant on RTS. I prefer the variety and I'm glad DK is going to keep SC2 exactly where it is as far as pacing goes. Furthermore, i'm glad LotV is substantially different economy-wise than HotS. This offers consumers further choice.

i'm all about having multiple choices because i can pick the game that suits my mood of the day.

if you're in the mood to play a game paced like Brood War or CoH1 .. why not just play those games? they're fun.
Ray Kassar To David Crane : "you're no more important to Atari than the factory workers assembling the cartridges"
Jett.Jack.Alvir
Profile Blog Joined August 2011
Canada2250 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-08-21 20:51:01
August 21 2016 20:28 GMT
#858
On August 22 2016 02:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 20 2016 11:50 Destructicon wrote:
SC2's pacing now is just wrong since the fate of either player can be decided in 1 second, where as in a game like Warhammer Dawn of War 2, or BW or Company of Heroes, the game gives the player time to recover.


interesting that you characterize SC2 pacing as "wrong". in my view .. it simply "is". like a bishop moves diagonally on a chess board.

the gods at Blizzard have made their decisions on what SC2 will be. DK announced no drastic changes. It appears my strategy for dealing with SC2 pacing for the past 5 years has been more effective than providing "feedback" to the SC2 team.

Here is my 3 point solution.

when i'm in the mood for a faster pace than SC2 i play RA3.
when i'm in the mood for a slower paced game i play Company of Heroes 1.
when i'm in the mood for an SC2 paced game i play SC2.

RA3, CoH1, and SC2 all have a slightly different slant on RTS. I prefer the variety and I'm glad DK is going to keep SC2 exactly where it is as far as pacing goes. Furthermore, i'm glad LotV is substantially different economy-wise than HotS. This offers consumers further choice.

i'm all about having multiple choices because i can pick the game that suits my mood of the day.

if you're in the mood to play a game paced like Brood War or CoH1 .. why not just play those games? they're fun.

Thank you JJR. That's the point I was hoping to get across. Blizz designed SC2, it was their intention for the pace to be exactly what it is. If people don't like it, don't play SC2.

On August 22 2016 00:18 Wohodix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 21 2016 01:12 vult wrote:


Changing the pace of the game will also allow better players differentiate themselves from others through deeper aspects of macro, micro, and harass. Slowing the game down even slightly will provide opportunities for players to locate weaknesses before, during, and after battles, as well as allow a player who loses a certain battle or takes heavy damage to come up with a way to mitigate their current resources to accommodate.



It will still be too fast for some player, so its an endless problem, if you want more time to think you can play turn base games.

I like the speed of the game in lotv as it allows you to play way more games.

I think the game lack of players due to the fact it is label as hard but there is not so much contents up to date .

Also players needs to get in a totally different mindsets than other games : you have to accept you will "loose" a lot, while its not really "loosing" its learning something you didnt know.

You have to not care about your rank, you have to accept there is a lot of people above you that will beat you with no chance for you to win until you learn more.

The rewarding thing of sc2 is learning and then progressing.
Thats why I like this new pace, you have a lot more time outside of the game to learn. Pro games are faster, you can check your replay faster etc... it produce a lot more of experiences to learn.

But this is absolutely not taught to new players.
Instead People are obsessed with ranks and playing macro games like pro when their early game is bad.

Also an important thing to learn to new players is, even if you have a main races you should learn the other races to play better against them.

I keep hearing a lot of people say "if the game pace is slowed down, the better player will win". When I read this, I interpret as "I was the better player, but I lost because the game is too fast paced. If it was slower I would have won that game"

I don't get why people just ask themselves, "why did I lose? what can I do to prevent it next time?" I understand the pace is fast, but that's the game they signed up to play.

I think Nony said something to that effect. Don't try to change the game, just try to get better.
The_Red_Viper
Profile Blog Joined August 2013
19533 Posts
August 21 2016 20:43 GMT
#859
It's not about not liking it, it's about not liking everything about the game for reasons we discuss here.
You will never like 100% about a game or any work of art really. Discussing the design behind it, trying to understand why you don't like it and how it would be possible to change that, etc is incredibly fun and rewarding.

A lot of people would never ever play bw because it's as mechanically hard as it is. That doesn't mean that these people wouldn't enjoy the general pace, the units, the economy, the pathing (or rather what it does), etc.

In the end blizzard obviously has the last word, but that doesn't stop people from arguing about the topic, and that is a good thing imo.
Are these discussions gonna change sc2? Maybe not, but it will change your understanding of the topic if there are enough people willing to make (good) points.

IU | Sohyang || There is no God and we are his prophets | For if ‘Thou mayest’—it is also true that ‘Thou mayest not.” | Ignorance is the parent of fear |
JimmyJRaynor
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Canada16681 Posts
August 21 2016 20:58 GMT
#860
On August 22 2016 05:43 The_Red_Viper wrote:
It's not about not liking it, it's about not liking everything about the game for reasons we discuss here.
You will never like 100% about a game or any work of art really. Discussing the design behind it, trying to understand why you don't like it and how it would be possible to change that, etc is incredibly fun and rewarding.

A lot of people would never ever play bw because it's as mechanically hard as it is. That doesn't mean that these people wouldn't enjoy the general pace, the units, the economy, the pathing (or rather what it does), etc.

In the end blizzard obviously has the last word, but that doesn't stop people from arguing about the topic, and that is a good thing imo.
Are these discussions gonna change sc2? Maybe not, but it will change your understanding of the topic if there are enough people willing to make (good) points.


every one should feel free to discuss every aspect of the game. Nothing is stopping some like minded people from creating their own SC2 league/clan/group that plays SC2 at a slower speed setting. if a group similar to Starbow forms around that kind of game .. that's awesome.

i prefer the author/designer create the heart and soul of the game and it merely gets tweaked and modified in small ways during beta and after release. Although i prefer that DK proved its not the only way to do things during the development of LotV. SC2 saw some monster changes at the start of the LotV beta with community input an integral part of DKs decision making. If other developers pull off what DK and Blizz did with LotV i'm open to changing my view..

Ray Kassar To David Crane : "you're no more important to Atari than the factory workers assembling the cartridges"
Prev 1 41 42 43 44 45 46 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Replay Cast
00:00
SEL Masters #4 - Day 1
CranKy Ducklings102
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Nina 209
RuFF_SC2 165
Livibee 88
ProTech53
StarCraft: Brood War
PianO 274
Bale 31
Dota 2
monkeys_forever611
NeuroSwarm84
febbydoto14
League of Legends
JimRising 1001
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K473
Coldzera 318
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox899
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor100
Other Games
summit1g10088
shahzam478
Maynarde186
ViBE162
ToD41
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick44466
BasetradeTV84
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH294
• Hupsaiya 105
• gosughost_ 6
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• Azhi_Dahaki18
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Jankos1917
Other Games
• Scarra1328
Upcoming Events
RSL Revival
6h 36m
ByuN vs SHIN
Clem vs Reynor
OSC
9h 36m
Replay Cast
20h 36m
RSL Revival
1d 6h
Classic vs Cure
FEL
1d 12h
OSC
1d 16h
RSL Revival
2 days
FEL
2 days
FEL
2 days
CSO Cup
2 days
[ Show More ]
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
Bonyth vs QiaoGege
Dewalt vs Fengzi
Hawk vs Zhanhun
Sziky vs Mihu
Mihu vs QiaoGege
Zhanhun vs Sziky
Fengzi vs Hawk
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
RSL Revival
3 days
FEL
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
Bonyth vs Dewalt
QiaoGege vs Dewalt
Hawk vs Bonyth
Sziky vs Fengzi
Mihu vs Zhanhun
QiaoGege vs Zhanhun
Fengzi vs Mihu
Replay Cast
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2025-07-07
HSC XXVII
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
Acropolis #3
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025

Upcoming

2025 ACS Season 2: Qualifier
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSL Xiamen Invitational
CSL Xiamen Invitational: ShowMatche
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Underdog Cup #2
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.