|
Poll: Did the gold base affect WCS CircuitYes (13) 24% No (6) 11% Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers. A peck of pickled peppers Peter Piper picked. (35) 65% 54 total votes Your vote: Did the gold base affect WCS Circuit (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
(Vote): Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers. A peck of pickled peppers Peter Piper picked.
|
On June 27 2017 06:17 washikie wrote:
I think overall game ballance is in an ok spot right now except for pvz. Bane hydra allins are just to strong in this map pool. Even the best Protoss pros can't deal well with it and generally have to rely on gimikey 2 base builds to stop it. (See classic vs Soo in recent gsl for an example) I just want to encounter Protoss in high-mid masters on ladder agian. Right now the game on NA server feels like it's zvt and tvt craft.
The blood boil change is a good start since having a gold base that easy to take will usualy make a map highly Zerg favored in pvz, but more changes will be needed, mabey it would be better to somehow nerf hydra name or buff Protoss against it so that we don't have to have such a restriction on map design, this map pool is prity interesting and fun some of the maps, especially abyssal have interesting and novel terrain use. It would suck to see all these maps go because of bane hydra.
My God...Just go and watch Serral vs Neeb WCS Finals. And Serral is concidered the best foreign Zerg nowadays. If anything I would say this matchup is P favored. If Zerg is second late with hydra/bane attack- it's GG. Hydra/bane timing attacks or some crazy ling allin with double droplords is like the only way to win vs Protoss. If u don't believe me just go and play some Zerg.
To be honest i would gladly seee some Immortal nerf. That would fix some issues in PvZ and could make mech more viable vs Protoss.
|
On June 27 2017 07:19 hiroshOne wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 06:17 washikie wrote:
I think overall game ballance is in an ok spot right now except for pvz. Bane hydra allins are just to strong in this map pool. Even the best Protoss pros can't deal well with it and generally have to rely on gimikey 2 base builds to stop it. (See classic vs Soo in recent gsl for an example) I just want to encounter Protoss in high-mid masters on ladder agian. Right now the game on NA server feels like it's zvt and tvt craft.
The blood boil change is a good start since having a gold base that easy to take will usualy make a map highly Zerg favored in pvz, but more changes will be needed, mabey it would be better to somehow nerf hydra name or buff Protoss against it so that we don't have to have such a restriction on map design, this map pool is prity interesting and fun some of the maps, especially abyssal have interesting and novel terrain use. It would suck to see all these maps go because of bane hydra. My God...Just go and watch Serral vs Neeb WCS Finals. And Serral is concidered the best foreign Zerg nowadays. If anything I would say this matchup is P favored. If Zerg is second late with hydra/bane attack- it's GG. Hydra/bane timing attacks or some crazy ling allin with double droplords is like the only way to win vs Protoss. If u don't believe me just go and play some Zerg. To be honest i would gladly seee some Immortal nerf. That would fix some issues in PvZ and could make mech more viable vs Protoss.
Isn't that how a timing attack is supposed to work the higher level you go? If you're late in a timing attack, then it will fail. You can see this effect in a similar fashion in your own games on the ladder. If you miss a timing window, your attack will fail.
As for the 2 timings being the only way to win (personally I think they're all in, and not just "only a timing"), I think there are other ways to beat a Protoss, its just that the 2 best ways right now are based on the two aforementioned very strong timings. When Protosses figure out how to reliably hold off those timings, Zergs will probably find another way to beat it.
I can say from 1st hand experience though, that damn hydra/bane timing is VERY hard to deal with as a toss player.
|
Wtf are you saying hiroshOne o_O. The immortal was the biggest nerf of mech history. Do you remember how many tank shots were needed to kill, and those that are now? (you can even forget that siege tank damage was 50).
|
this granular map change will have no impact on the low level players i play with. we're happy any how.
On June 27 2017 04:27 avilo wrote:
Where is the balance update for swarmhosts? 3 updates in a row now from the balance team...that have no actual balance changes.
Is the community actually ok with this?
the game is great. S2 is one of the best GSL seasons i've seen. Lots of Terrans in S1 and S2 of the GSL so its not like the game is totally imbalanced against Terran. Its not like playing Terran is a lost cause the way you characterize it.
Swarmhosts are only a problem when i'm overwhelmed midgame and can NOT multitask well enough to be active out on the map and i must resort to turtley passive play. I view that as my problem and not a problem with the game.
I'm a happy camper. The 8 players in my clan that range from Silver to Diamond are happy with the game.
Great work Blizzard.
|
the game is great. S2 is one of the best GSL seasons i've seen. Lots of Terrans in S1 and S2 of the GSL so its not like the game is totally imbalanced against Terran. Its not like playing Terran is a lost cause the way you characterize it.
Indeed, its quite the opposite. The game is balanced in favor of Terran for the last 12 months. Only the balance team knows why. Perhaps it is because there are few good foreign Terrans? Its some political issue, as this imbalance is fairly obvious. In every tournament they have to make terrans eliminate each other so its less obvious.
|
On June 27 2017 08:16 Kafka777 wrote:Show nested quote +the game is great. S2 is one of the best GSL seasons i've seen. Lots of Terrans in S1 and S2 of the GSL so its not like the game is totally imbalanced against Terran. Its not like playing Terran is a lost cause the way you characterize it. Indeed, its quite the opposite. The game is balanced in favor of Terran for the last 12 months. Only the balance team knows why. Perhaps it is because there are few good foreign Terrans? Its some political issue, as this imbalance is fairly obvious. In every tournament they have to make terrans eliminate each other so its less obvious.
This sounds like a conspiracy theory like they give Serral a worse computer to animate the NA scene or something
|
On June 27 2017 04:30 Scarlett` wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 04:27 avilo wrote:
Where is the balance update for swarmhosts? 3 updates in a row now from the balance team...that have no actual balance changes.
Is the community actually ok with this? gsl final won by mech not enough for you? 
This guy was saying in his stream that SoO, the best Zerg in the world, 6th time GSL finalist SUCKS to play against mech and that he was blatantly RAPED by Gumiho. The guy apparently didn't note the aggresive mech of Gumiho, where he didnt wait 15 minutes into he game to attack. But well, I'm just a nobody, I suppose that someone who cannot even qualify for WCS can easily teach me... or you, or SoO...
|
On June 27 2017 08:51 Corvuuss wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 08:16 Kafka777 wrote:the game is great. S2 is one of the best GSL seasons i've seen. Lots of Terrans in S1 and S2 of the GSL so its not like the game is totally imbalanced against Terran. Its not like playing Terran is a lost cause the way you characterize it. Indeed, its quite the opposite. The game is balanced in favor of Terran for the last 12 months. Only the balance team knows why. Perhaps it is because there are few good foreign Terrans? Its some political issue, as this imbalance is fairly obvious. In every tournament they have to make terrans eliminate each other so its less obvious. This sounds like a conspiracy theory like they give Serral a worse computer to animate the NA scene or something
Sounds like it because it basically is. The idea that the balance team is somehow conspiring to keep Terran OP is close to avilo levels of delusional (except opposite in viewpoint).
Whether it be avilo perennially whining that a perfectly viable style is somehow UP, or people like this who imagine a shadowy cabal that plots around the clock to ruin specifically their race and their race alone (for teh evulz, cuz why not) just showcases that there's lunatics wherever you go.
Balance is fine. Not perfect or anywhere close to perfect, but fine nonetheless. ZvP with hydra/ling/bane is the biggest issue atm, and presumably the reason for the maps being adjusted. If hydra/ling/bane continues to be a problem, further adjustments will be made accordingly.
Whiners will whine, it's what they do. In the meantime, sane players will enjoy playing.
|
On June 27 2017 10:06 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 08:51 Corvuuss wrote:On June 27 2017 08:16 Kafka777 wrote:the game is great. S2 is one of the best GSL seasons i've seen. Lots of Terrans in S1 and S2 of the GSL so its not like the game is totally imbalanced against Terran. Its not like playing Terran is a lost cause the way you characterize it. Indeed, its quite the opposite. The game is balanced in favor of Terran for the last 12 months. Only the balance team knows why. Perhaps it is because there are few good foreign Terrans? Its some political issue, as this imbalance is fairly obvious. In every tournament they have to make terrans eliminate each other so its less obvious. This sounds like a conspiracy theory like they give Serral a worse computer to animate the NA scene or something Sounds like it because it basically is. The idea that the balance team is somehow conspiring to keep Terran OP is close to avilo levels of delusional (except opposite in viewpoint). Whether it be avilo perennially whining that a perfectly viable style is somehow UP, or people like this who imagine a shadowy cabal that plots around the clock to ruin specifically their race and their race alone (for teh evulz, cuz why not) just showcases that there's lunatics wherever you go. Balance is fine. Not perfect or anywhere close to perfect, but fine nonetheless. ZvP with hydra/ling/bane is the biggest issue atm, and presumably the reason for the maps being adjusted. If hydra/ling/bane continues to be a problem, further adjustments will be made accordingly. Whiners will whine, it's what they do. In the meantime, sane players will enjoy playing.
But this doesn't have to be about balance. It can be just about "design"/"fun" or whatever you wanna call it. Just because something is balanced doesn't mean it is fine. Nobody would want to play starcraft if it was only tvt and the only two units you could build were scvs and marines. That game would quite obviously suck, even if it was 100% balanced.
The same can be applied to the current (or any) state of the game. Arguing from a balance pov is simply irrelevant as long as the balance is "good enough" (obviously you have to define that part)
What the conversation should be about is design and what it means for the gameplay (unit interactions, strategic diversity, things like that)
At the end of the day this is subjective ofc, but there are patterns and design philosophies which "work better" than others.
|
On June 27 2017 10:27 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 10:06 pvsnp wrote:On June 27 2017 08:51 Corvuuss wrote:On June 27 2017 08:16 Kafka777 wrote:the game is great. S2 is one of the best GSL seasons i've seen. Lots of Terrans in S1 and S2 of the GSL so its not like the game is totally imbalanced against Terran. Its not like playing Terran is a lost cause the way you characterize it. Indeed, its quite the opposite. The game is balanced in favor of Terran for the last 12 months. Only the balance team knows why. Perhaps it is because there are few good foreign Terrans? Its some political issue, as this imbalance is fairly obvious. In every tournament they have to make terrans eliminate each other so its less obvious. This sounds like a conspiracy theory like they give Serral a worse computer to animate the NA scene or something Sounds like it because it basically is. The idea that the balance team is somehow conspiring to keep Terran OP is close to avilo levels of delusional (except opposite in viewpoint). Whether it be avilo perennially whining that a perfectly viable style is somehow UP, or people like this who imagine a shadowy cabal that plots around the clock to ruin specifically their race and their race alone (for teh evulz, cuz why not) just showcases that there's lunatics wherever you go. Balance is fine. Not perfect or anywhere close to perfect, but fine nonetheless. ZvP with hydra/ling/bane is the biggest issue atm, and presumably the reason for the maps being adjusted. If hydra/ling/bane continues to be a problem, further adjustments will be made accordingly. Whiners will whine, it's what they do. In the meantime, sane players will enjoy playing. But this doesn't have to be about balance. It can be just about "design"/"fun" or whatever you wanna call it. Just because something is balanced doesn't mean it is fine. Nobody would want to play starcraft if it was only tvt and the only two units you could build were scvs and marines. That game would quite obviously suck, even if it was 100% balanced. The same can be applied to the current (or any) state of the game. Arguing from a balance pov is simply irrelevant as long as the balance is "good enough" (obviously you have to define that part) What the conversation should be about is design and what it means for the gameplay (unit interactions, strategic diversity, things like that) At the end of the day this is subjective ofc, but there are patterns and design philosophies which "work better" than others.
The problem with arguing design and enjoyability is that, for a great many people, enjoying a game is in large part connected to victory. Enjoying is also in large part connected to the idea that a victory was justly deserved, as a direct result of superior effort or skill on behalf of the victor (this is ofc why people hate cheese, WMs, amove units, etc).
Balance is a (mostly) objective issue, defined by winrates and hard numbers, and thus inherently easier (though far from easy) to address and improve than a completely subjective and often polarized (winner vs loser) experience that is enjoyment.
|
On June 27 2017 07:19 hiroshOne wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 06:17 washikie wrote:
I think overall game ballance is in an ok spot right now except for pvz. Bane hydra allins are just to strong in this map pool. Even the best Protoss pros can't deal well with it and generally have to rely on gimikey 2 base builds to stop it. (See classic vs Soo in recent gsl for an example) I just want to encounter Protoss in high-mid masters on ladder agian. Right now the game on NA server feels like it's zvt and tvt craft.
The blood boil change is a good start since having a gold base that easy to take will usualy make a map highly Zerg favored in pvz, but more changes will be needed, mabey it would be better to somehow nerf hydra name or buff Protoss against it so that we don't have to have such a restriction on map design, this map pool is prity interesting and fun some of the maps, especially abyssal have interesting and novel terrain use. It would suck to see all these maps go because of bane hydra. My God...Just go and watch Serral vs Neeb WCS Finals. And Serral is concidered the best foreign Zerg nowadays. If anything I would say this matchup is P favored. If Zerg is second late with hydra/bane attack- it's GG. Hydra/bane timing attacks or some crazy ling allin with double droplords is like the only way to win vs Protoss. If u don't believe me just go and play some Zerg. To be honest i would gladly seee some Immortal nerf. That would fix some issues in PvZ and could make mech more viable vs Protoss.
And Neeb isn't the best foreign Protoss?
|
On June 27 2017 10:38 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 10:27 The_Red_Viper wrote:On June 27 2017 10:06 pvsnp wrote:On June 27 2017 08:51 Corvuuss wrote:On June 27 2017 08:16 Kafka777 wrote:the game is great. S2 is one of the best GSL seasons i've seen. Lots of Terrans in S1 and S2 of the GSL so its not like the game is totally imbalanced against Terran. Its not like playing Terran is a lost cause the way you characterize it. Indeed, its quite the opposite. The game is balanced in favor of Terran for the last 12 months. Only the balance team knows why. Perhaps it is because there are few good foreign Terrans? Its some political issue, as this imbalance is fairly obvious. In every tournament they have to make terrans eliminate each other so its less obvious. This sounds like a conspiracy theory like they give Serral a worse computer to animate the NA scene or something Sounds like it because it basically is. The idea that the balance team is somehow conspiring to keep Terran OP is close to avilo levels of delusional (except opposite in viewpoint). Whether it be avilo perennially whining that a perfectly viable style is somehow UP, or people like this who imagine a shadowy cabal that plots around the clock to ruin specifically their race and their race alone (for teh evulz, cuz why not) just showcases that there's lunatics wherever you go. Balance is fine. Not perfect or anywhere close to perfect, but fine nonetheless. ZvP with hydra/ling/bane is the biggest issue atm, and presumably the reason for the maps being adjusted. If hydra/ling/bane continues to be a problem, further adjustments will be made accordingly. Whiners will whine, it's what they do. In the meantime, sane players will enjoy playing. But this doesn't have to be about balance. It can be just about "design"/"fun" or whatever you wanna call it. Just because something is balanced doesn't mean it is fine. Nobody would want to play starcraft if it was only tvt and the only two units you could build were scvs and marines. That game would quite obviously suck, even if it was 100% balanced. The same can be applied to the current (or any) state of the game. Arguing from a balance pov is simply irrelevant as long as the balance is "good enough" (obviously you have to define that part) What the conversation should be about is design and what it means for the gameplay (unit interactions, strategic diversity, things like that) At the end of the day this is subjective ofc, but there are patterns and design philosophies which "work better" than others. The problem with arguing design and enjoyability is that, for a great many people, enjoying a game is in large part connected to victory. Enjoying is also in large part connected to the idea that a victory was justly deserved, as a direct result of superior effort or skill on behalf of the victor (this is ofc why people hate cheese, WMs, amove units, etc). Balance is a (mostly) objective issue, defined by winrates and hard numbers, and thus inherently easier (though far from easy) to address and improve than a completely subjective and often polarized (winner vs loser) experience that is enjoyment.
Sure, but we play games to have this experience, not because we know it is balanced. I would even say that the actual balance doesn't matter at all, the perceived one is what matters and that is oftentimes just a design question.
Games are "art" and it is subjective, sure. But as i said, there absolutely are certain patterns and philosophies we can apply to get a "better" product.
Enjoying is also in large part connected to the idea that a victory was justly deserved, as a direct result of superior effort or skill on behalf of the victor (this is ofc why people hate cheese, WMs, amove units, etc).
Oh yeah absolutely! Which is why the game should be designed in a way which doesn't interfere too much with this aspect. So we basically want to create a game which follows certain goals and find solutions to get there which don't interfere with any of the goals, or realistically the least amount possible.
So really, i think the balance question is pretty uninteresting. Ofc it has to be good enough but realistically most people won't lose because of balance. Though people will lose interest because of design decisions. That's what the debate should be about.
|
Seriously?
Still no nerfs to reaper grenade or 80dmg siege tanks or ravens or BC jump?
|
I think some people will disagree with this opinion but I think burrowed infestors being able to cast fungal is too strong haha. If you don't got ravens (Which unless you went for skymech, its useless, it'll die to corruptors) you're kind of screwed.. its hard to notice even with the changes and its just too strong.. I feel like a good way to change it would be to take away burrow cast, or to make the travel speed slower. I am not a pro though so my solution isn't the best suggestion out there 
|
still not happy with the strength of ravens/BC in all matchups.
still not happy with the map pool in zerg's favor.
I slightly blame TL for doing their map making contest and having a category like "rush maps". can we never do that again and let people make only great maps?
|
I guess the "mech not viable" guys will chill for a week or two after Gumiho won GSL. Their supreme leader is the only one mad enough to still complain right now.
|
On June 27 2017 12:35 xTJx wrote:
I guess the "mech not viable" guys will chill for a week or two after Gumiho won GSL. Their supreme leader is the only one mad enough to still complain right now.
Hopefully. I am a Terran, and I like Mech. But I would not like the kind of mech that Avilo plays, turtling in your base to the ultimate army and then still losing. He wants to be able to beat better players simply by choosing to go mech, not to have to earn it like Gumigod. The gulf in play between a top level player and Avilo is amazing.
|
On June 27 2017 11:01 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 10:38 pvsnp wrote:On June 27 2017 10:27 The_Red_Viper wrote:On June 27 2017 10:06 pvsnp wrote:On June 27 2017 08:51 Corvuuss wrote:On June 27 2017 08:16 Kafka777 wrote:the game is great. S2 is one of the best GSL seasons i've seen. Lots of Terrans in S1 and S2 of the GSL so its not like the game is totally imbalanced against Terran. Its not like playing Terran is a lost cause the way you characterize it. Indeed, its quite the opposite. The game is balanced in favor of Terran for the last 12 months. Only the balance team knows why. Perhaps it is because there are few good foreign Terrans? Its some political issue, as this imbalance is fairly obvious. In every tournament they have to make terrans eliminate each other so its less obvious. This sounds like a conspiracy theory like they give Serral a worse computer to animate the NA scene or something Sounds like it because it basically is. The idea that the balance team is somehow conspiring to keep Terran OP is close to avilo levels of delusional (except opposite in viewpoint). Whether it be avilo perennially whining that a perfectly viable style is somehow UP, or people like this who imagine a shadowy cabal that plots around the clock to ruin specifically their race and their race alone (for teh evulz, cuz why not) just showcases that there's lunatics wherever you go. Balance is fine. Not perfect or anywhere close to perfect, but fine nonetheless. ZvP with hydra/ling/bane is the biggest issue atm, and presumably the reason for the maps being adjusted. If hydra/ling/bane continues to be a problem, further adjustments will be made accordingly. Whiners will whine, it's what they do. In the meantime, sane players will enjoy playing. But this doesn't have to be about balance. It can be just about "design"/"fun" or whatever you wanna call it. Just because something is balanced doesn't mean it is fine. Nobody would want to play starcraft if it was only tvt and the only two units you could build were scvs and marines. That game would quite obviously suck, even if it was 100% balanced. The same can be applied to the current (or any) state of the game. Arguing from a balance pov is simply irrelevant as long as the balance is "good enough" (obviously you have to define that part) What the conversation should be about is design and what it means for the gameplay (unit interactions, strategic diversity, things like that) At the end of the day this is subjective ofc, but there are patterns and design philosophies which "work better" than others. The problem with arguing design and enjoyability is that, for a great many people, enjoying a game is in large part connected to victory. Enjoying is also in large part connected to the idea that a victory was justly deserved, as a direct result of superior effort or skill on behalf of the victor (this is ofc why people hate cheese, WMs, amove units, etc). Balance is a (mostly) objective issue, defined by winrates and hard numbers, and thus inherently easier (though far from easy) to address and improve than a completely subjective and often polarized (winner vs loser) experience that is enjoyment. Sure, but we play games to have this experience, not because we know it is balanced. I would even say that the actual balance doesn't matter at all, the perceived one is what matters and that is oftentimes just a design question. Games are "art" and it is subjective, sure. But as i said, there absolutely are certain patterns and philosophies we can apply to get a "better" product.
In general for a fun game with no competition involving money percieved balance is way better, but if there is money involved (which in sc2 there is) real balance is the only tollerable way to go.
|
On June 27 2017 04:30 Scarlett` wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 04:27 avilo wrote:
Where is the balance update for swarmhosts? 3 updates in a row now from the balance team...that have no actual balance changes.
Is the community actually ok with this? gsl final won by mech not enough for you?
What do you expect from Terran? OP race but since they can't win it all, balance whine is their extra skill they practice on the side as well.
User was warned for this post
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
