|
Hello everyone, this week we wanted to start talking about what we’re thinking for a potential upcoming balance patch. The main intention here is to ensure that our goals are aligned with the community, and to collect any feedback on what else we should be looking at for a balance update. In the post below there are some specific changes mentioned, but everything is open for discussion.
Thor
We haven’t been seeing as much Mech play as we would like, and the Thor is often referenced by the community. In addition, the Thor is rarely used in high level play, and so we think it is a good target for a buff. Since the Thor is mostly used for zoning out enemy flying units we think it would be good to buff that aspect of the unit to give it a more clear and defined role. However, it would be important to make sure that any changes don’t make the unit too much of an all-around unit; it should be something you build a few of for AA purposes and not to be the backbone of your army.
Raven
We feel that the Auto Turret is a little too good in the harassment role. Terran already has a lot of harass options, so we’d like to decrease the damage (down to the 3-shot range for workers) while increasing the duration. With a slightly longer duration, there will be more of a choice to run away from Auto Turrets or attack them. Right now, the turret expires so quickly that its rarely a good idea to try to kill them and is usually better to let them expire.
Protoss vs Protoss Matchup
The PvP matchup, especially in the EU region, has been favoring skytoss compositions too heavily. We’re seeing players take 3 bases, then turtle with Void Rays and Disruptors while building towards the late game composition including Carriers. We think part of the problem here is that there is a lack of options for protoss to attack into Void Rays. Stalkers are the primary non-Stargate option and Void Rays are fairly effective against them. Another part of the problem is that once a protoss player builds the late game composition with Carriers, an opponent has limited options except to build a similar army. We’re thinking we could potentially relocate some of the +armored power from Void Rays into the Prismatic Alignment ability to create better windows of opportunity to attack while they are on cooldown. In addition, we want Tempests to be more effective against capital ships to encourage players to build a more varied army composition.
Protoss vs Zerg Matchup
We don’t think we’re seeing enough variety in the early stages of this matchup as we are frequently seeing Adept openers with Warp Prisms, followed by DT/Archon harass with Warp Prisms. While we aren’t necessarily seeing an imbalance in win rates, we want to make sure that the meta doesn’t settle into a single strategy that gets used for every matchup. We are still deciding what the best course of action would be here, but some early thoughts are to look at reducing the effectiveness of the Psionic Transfer ability, or having the Warp Prism have a “slow warp” power field until an upgrade is researched.
As always, none of this is final. We wanted to communicate some of our early thoughts on what the next balance patch may contain so that we have time to read through your feedback and make adjustments as needed. If you think any of these directions are the wrong way to go, or if you think we should be taking a look at something this isn’t on this list, please let us know. Thanks!
|
|
|
I edited the post already was looking for the proper balance update picture 
|
United States30730 Posts
We are still deciding what the best course of action would be here, but some early thoughts are to look at reducing the effectiveness of the Psionic Transfer ability, or having the Warp Prism have a “slow warp” power field until an upgrade is researched.
FFS YES!
The raven change sounds reasonable as well.
|
Austria24422 Posts
Pretty terrible as far as Protoss is concerned. PvZ variety is perfectly fine, and it's not going to improve if they take away potential Protoss openings without giving anything in return. No idea what they were thinking there. Meanwhile in PvT, there's exactly one somewhat reliable playstyle in phoenix/adept, everything else dies to tank pushes. How about addressing that first?
|
The reason you pull away from auto-turrets instead of trying to kill them is not just the short duration. It's also the absurd damage output. For the first few minutes of the game you don't have anything that can kill an auto-turret without pulling workers while retaining cost-efficiency. For any race. If you want to up the duration, the damage has to go down even further than just 3-shotting workers.
Regarding PvZ - if you go through with either of those, you obviously have to adjust Zerg as well. Otherwise it's just a flat nerf to Protoss. Not to mention they would both affect PvT.
|
I agree with the Thor and Raven changes. Thors currently do not not do their job against Carriers, Tempest, BC or Liberators. They are basically useless except against mass muta. So any improvement to Thors like +1 armour (better vs Carriers) and increased single target air damage would be a good idea.
Making Tempest stronger vs capitals ships seems like the wrong move. The problem is that Carriers are too strong so it better to adress the actual problem by nerfing Carriers instead of just making Protoss air even stronger, so that not even BCs can work vs Protoss air. This of course depends on how much you improve Thors. If you improve Thor armour by 1 and increase Thor single target air damage maybe mech could trade and do timing attacks vs Protoss instead of being forced to turtle to BC.
|
Canada8991 Posts
I really like the idea of the WP having slow warp in and hadding an upgrade for faster warp in (or maybe having it with WP speed?), it would keep the nice mid-late game WP harras but punish the "8 gates I flew into your base and warp a million adept after 6 minute" bulshit.
|
Austria24422 Posts
On March 31 2017 05:21 Nakajin wrote:
I really like the idea of the WP having slow warp in and hadding an upgrade for faster warp in (or maybe having it with WP speed?), it would keep the nice mid-late game WP harras but punish the "8 gates I flew into your base and warp a million adept after 6 minute" bulshit.
I'd much rather see adepts nerfed, no other unit works like thst anyway. Depending on what tech the faster prism warpin field woild be, you run the risk of removing every aggressive protoss strategy. They all rely on warp prisms now. I know people don't like all ins, but they're necessary options to keep an opponent in check. And believe me, slow warpins remove them. That's why players go out of their way to get a robo and a prism before attacking instead of bringing a probe.
|
Canada8991 Posts
On March 31 2017 05:26 Olli wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2017 05:21 Nakajin wrote:
I really like the idea of the WP having slow warp in and hadding an upgrade for faster warp in (or maybe having it with WP speed?), it would keep the nice mid-late game WP harras but punish the "8 gates I flew into your base and warp a million adept after 6 minute" bulshit. I'd much rather see adepts nerfed, no other unit works like thst anyway. Depending on what tech the faster prism warpin field woild be, you run the risk of removing every aggressive protoss strategy. They all rely on warp prisms now. I know people don't like all ins, but they're necessary options to keep an opponent in check. And believe me, slow warpins remove them. That's why players go out of their way to get a robo and a prism before attacking instead of bringing a probe.
Can't you build a foward pylon and proxi one of your gates if you want to do a frontal push? Sure you lose the micro capacity of the WP and your warpin are a lot more immobille but I think it could still work, and building a gate is cheaper then a WP and I would think take around the same time to build. And after that you can just build the upgrade.
I feel like nerfing adept is a lot more risky since they are a huge part of P army right now, for exemple against hydra.
Maybe I am wrong but I would like to see it.
|
On March 31 2017 05:20 MockHamill wrote:
I agree with the Thor and Raven changes. Thors currently do not not do their job against Carriers, Tempest, BC or Liberators. They are basically useless except against mass muta. So any improvement to Thors like +1 armour (better vs Carriers) and increased single target air damage would be a good idea.
Making Tempest stronger vs capitals ships seems like the wrong move. The problem is that Carriers are too strong so it better to adress the actual problem by nerfing Carriers instead of just making Protoss air even stronger, so that not even BCs can work vs Protoss air. This of course depends on how much you improve Thors. If you improve Thor armour by 1 and increase Thor single target air damage maybe mech could trade and do timing attacks vs Protoss instead of being forced to turtle to BC.
lol no they nerfed tempest to the ground back in hots which is why carirers shit on them now. Tempest use to counter carriers before they changed the +massive dmg. Also the carrier isn't the problem in any of the mus its the units that support it the voidray/storm/archon that make it unbeatable because the counter the corrupter is legit terrible vs those units. As we can see tho late game terran can beat late game protoss because their units can trade with this late game army from energy abilities from a far.
|
On March 31 2017 05:26 Olli wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2017 05:21 Nakajin wrote:
I really like the idea of the WP having slow warp in and hadding an upgrade for faster warp in (or maybe having it with WP speed?), it would keep the nice mid-late game WP harras but punish the "8 gates I flew into your base and warp a million adept after 6 minute" bulshit. I'd much rather see adepts nerfed, no other unit works like thst anyway. Depending on what tech the faster prism warpin field woild be, you run the risk of removing every aggressive protoss strategy. They all rely on warp prisms now. I know people don't like all ins, but they're necessary options to keep an opponent in check. And believe me, slow warpins remove them. That's why players go out of their way to get a robo and a prism before attacking instead of bringing a probe.
This is why, if they are going to change the warp prism, it would make more sense to reduce the starting pickup range, and have it come back with the Gravitic Drive upgrade.
|
On March 31 2017 05:21 Nakajin wrote:
I really like the idea of the WP having slow warp in and hadding an upgrade for faster warp in (or maybe having it with WP speed?), it would keep the nice mid-late game WP harras but punish the "8 gates I flew into your base and warp a million adept after 6 minute" bulshit.
but building a million zerglings and press a click into the wall and drop is fine? sure.
|
On March 31 2017 05:34 Nakajin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2017 05:26 Olli wrote:On March 31 2017 05:21 Nakajin wrote:
I really like the idea of the WP having slow warp in and hadding an upgrade for faster warp in (or maybe having it with WP speed?), it would keep the nice mid-late game WP harras but punish the "8 gates I flew into your base and warp a million adept after 6 minute" bulshit. I'd much rather see adepts nerfed, no other unit works like thst anyway. Depending on what tech the faster prism warpin field woild be, you run the risk of removing every aggressive protoss strategy. They all rely on warp prisms now. I know people don't like all ins, but they're necessary options to keep an opponent in check. And believe me, slow warpins remove them. That's why players go out of their way to get a robo and a prism before attacking instead of bringing a probe. Can't you build a foward pylon and proxi one of your gates if you want to do a frontal push? Sure you lose the micro capacity of the WP and your warpin are a lot more immobille but I think it could still work, and building a gate is cheaper then a WP and I would think take around the same time to build. And after that you can just build the upgrade. I feel like nerfing adept is a lot more risky since they are a huge part of P army right now, for exemple against hydra. Maybe I am wrong but I would like to see it.
At the pro level that would never work good zergs are always looking for pylons. Also the delaying of the prism moveouts by protoss will allow zergs to be more greedy/weaken any adept pushes. The reason for this is that any warp ins into their mains will be slow warpins meaning they would only need honestly queens with a few lings to push back the prisms in the main and then have all focus at their 3rd base location reducing the multitasking needed by the zerg.
|
Is adept warp prism into dt/archon warp prism an actual thing? Isn't it usually one or the other? They are two different openings, obviously both start with a couple of adepts but that is in every build.
They are used quite a lot but you often see stargate openings in PvZ too Stats go to build for a while was nexus first into stargate double oracle, voidray.
Any adept nerf for PvZ is gonna impact PvT a lot which bassically only has 1 way to play because of the stupid marine/tank/mine/lib pushes so I wouldn't want to see that.
|
blizzard logic: balance is fine, only one build is good. lets nerf it.
|
Mostly going in the right direction i think, but the problem with the prism is the pickup range. Protoss can harass a lot while building safely at home, but if zerg loses a few drones or delay injects, protoss gets a big economic lead and just gets a free win with the following push. They don't even have fear a ling counter attack denying the third, because 3 adepts between pylons can defend a ton of lings.
I found hilarious learning that PvP in EU is mass carriers, i thought this was the protoss dream. hahahahahaha
|
I don't think the thor needs any buffs. The ONLY problem with mech in tvz is the swarmhost, fix the swarmhost and mech will be viable.
Also I don't agree with their thoughts on pvz, oracle openers are very common too. A warpprism nerf would be terrible as it would remove a lot of protoss options to be aggressive and force them to be the "turtle race" again.
|
Lol, the balance team and their incessant habit of noticing an issue that exists and coming up with some backwards and nonsensical approach to fixing the issue.
PvZ variety is fine except for the fact that Adepts are superior to Zealots and Stalkers in pretty much every single way. Beefier, ranged, scouting, puts "fake" but very real pressure on, and 2 shots workers. Stop making things more complex then they really are, nerf the Adept and give the Zealot and Stalker some early game buffs for Christ's sake, I'm a Zerg player and can realize this.
Also, Skytoss is so cancerous that it's even cancer in it's own mirror match up, nerf the damn Carrier but don't cut it's balls off, once again, how hard is this really?
The Thor has also been a huge balance problem in that it shifts away from being an OP a move unit and totally useless because it get's hard countered by cracklings, remove the unit from the game and replace it with the Goliath, and be...done....with....it....You can really only polish a turd so much, even if the turd is glimmering and covered in chrome, it's still a turd.
Lol, their little Raven discussion, "Terran already has powerful harassment tools out the wazzoo, so we're going to take this broken and OP harassment option, make it 3 shot instead of 2 shot workers, and call it a day." The Raven is hilariously bad on a design stand point, trading out mana for free damage is just begging to be massed up in a turtle fashion. Why not change the Raven to a strict utility unit more like the Science Vessel? Terrans problem in the late game is that bio has no beef/staying power on the field, let the Raven fill a hole that the Terran arsenal has maybe?
5 years later and somehow David Kim is still in charge of these ludicrous "balance changes" as the games player base slowly but surely dwindles and tournaments get less funding from less viewers. How is this game even going to compete with a remastered BW which already crushes SC2 on a stream viewership level. I don't want SC2 to continue to shrink, and while I'm sitting here praising the Starcraft Gods for delivering us a remastered BW I summarily curse them for the balance teams ineptitude.
David Kim is like a bad coach in the NFL who has been grandfathered in because the manager likes him. At this point, it's just bad for the health of the game.
New Balance Update
- David Kim has been removed from lead balance and design and replaced with someone who knows what he's doing
^ The only patch this game really needs.
User was warned for this post
|
On March 31 2017 05:40 Zaros wrote:
Is adept warp prism into dt/archon warp prism an actual thing? Isn't it usually one or the other? They are two different openings, obviously both start with a couple of adepts but that is in every build.
They are used quite a lot but you often see stargate openings in PvZ too Stats go to build for a while was nexus first into stargate double oracle, voidray.
Any adept nerf for PvZ is gonna impact PvT a lot which bassically only has 1 way to play because of the stupid marine/tank/mine/lib pushes so I wouldn't want to see that.
Yeah that's true. Archon drop openings usually don't warp in any units before the 4 DTs.
So with adept openers, archon drop openers and stargate openers there are already 3 viable popular builds atm, surprising DK sees a problem there, it's more variety than in any terran matchup.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/blog_header/vv/VVKA6LVZUA0Y1448482273038.jpg)
