We at teamliquid.net were given the chance to ask the StarCraft 2 development team a few questions regarding the upcoming major design patch for the game due after BlizzCon.
You've now made substantial changes to the game every year after LotV's release. Do you plan on making this an annual thing? Do you see these annual patches as an iterative process towards a final goal, or a more cyclical process to shake up the game on a year-by-year basis?
The plan all along for ongoing support for StarCraft II was to make patches on an as-needed basis. That doesn’t necessarily mean we will do major changes annually. As we did last year, we saw an opportunity to make some positive changes to the game, so that’s why we’re putting this into testing.
Has the first design patch last year fulfilled your expectations in shaking the game up sufficiently?
Overall, yes. Not only did we see new strategies develop, but we also think the game is in a better place now than it was a year ago.
In general, a lot of issues debated by our community have found their way into this patch (Mech, Macro Mechanics, the economy even). How much has community discussion influenced these specific patches you're making?
Community feedback plays a big part in the goals we set for an update like this. We are very lucky to have a community that is so active and engaged with SC2, and we want to continue working with the community going forward.
Have these changes been developed in conjunction with progamer feedback or will they have to explore everything side by side with the community?
Pro level feedback is very important to us, and making sure the pros can give their feedback directly to us on the dev team has been a big goal of ours. While we don’t directly involve external sources into our design process, their feedback plays a big factor in how we approach this type of update.
Matchup "identity" is something that changed drastically with LotV. ZvT went from a tug of war between lair tech and 3/3 upgrades to a race to survive until Ultralisks for much of 2016. PvZ shifted from being focused on timings to the Zerg trying to overwhelm with ling/bane based armies. When making changes of this magnitude, is matchup identity something you take into account?
When making these kinds of changes we start with seeing how the current game is played. What options does each race have? What do they struggle with? Do they need new tools in any of the matchups? From there we consider what the race identities are and where we can make improvements or nerfs while still preserving how unique each race is. We take matchup states into account, but it is hard to predict where the meta will settle in the individual matchups when making so many changes, so we tend to place a greater emphasis making sure each race has enough tools for a variety of situations while still feeling unique.
Which of the changes are the most experimental in your eyes? That is, which ones are you most uncertain of?
The removal of the Mothership Core is likely the riskiest of the changes on the Protoss side due to how much power it gives in the early game. For Zerg the most experimental change is the Infestor, as its ability to interact with air units is changing quite drastically. And on the Terran side the Mule change is possibly the most experimental as it changes how they gather resources which in turn can greatly change what Terran players have access to over the course of a game.
Removing the MSC and Photon Overcharge has always been a heavy topic of debate among the community. Why was the decision finally made to scrap the unit entirely after two expansions? Why now?
It lined up nicely with the goals we had for Protoss. We wanted to try to reduce the number of active abilities on Protoss, so removing a caster that is around for most of the game made sense. We wanted to try to clean up the macro mechanic, so moving abilities to the nexus gave us an opportunity to take another look at Chrono Boost. And we wanted Protoss to be less reliant on Photon Overcharge for early game defense, so when looking for a solution that fit these goals it seemed like removing the MSC would be a good thing to try.
Recall on the MSC has been used primarily for scouting and instant recall of a main army under pressure, as well as some niche cases such as moving probes to a hidden base. What do you intend to accomplish with the new implementation of recall? With the 4s delay on teleporting, do you view it as a purely positional ability?
With the removal of Photon Overcharge, Protoss players will need to reinforce their base with units, so we wanted to make sure Protoss players had a tool for moving units into position. It can also be used to retreat from a battle, but since you can have multiple Nexus structures vs. a single MSC, we needed to add a longer cast time to make sure you can’t escape from every engagement with minimal losses. It is also worth mentioning that the Mothership has the same version of the spell as the nexus, meaning there could be cases where you send a Mothership behind enemy lines and use it offensively.
Are you concerned that certain changes (like the new Disruption Nova or the easier-to-kill Widow Mines–in short: What you call game ending units/abilities) will reduce excitement in games by taking out big “wow” moments for the viewers?
Yes, and that’s something we try to be careful with. For example, Widow Mines will still be able to get big exciting hits off, but they are easier to clean up. Disruption Nova can also still do a lot of damage in a shot, but the more extreme cases where a Protoss vs Protoss match is decided on a single Disruption Nova landing on the enemies Disruptors should be less likely to happen.
The proposed changes to mech units would greatly affect the way a mech army operates, fights and potentially, what units it is composed of. What is the balance team's vision for a mech army's role and how do you see it being utilized?
A pure mech army has always been about slower positional play, we aren’t looking to change that since it provides a nice contrast to the fast-paced play of bio. We hope that our changes don’t completely change the role of a mech army, but rather make it more competitive choice when comparing it to bio play.
How will the repair drone function? Can you micro it to repair multiple units during its lifespan? And what is the current repair rate intended to be?
It currently functions very similarly to a medivac, you will be able to target the specific unit you want healed and the heal rate is the same as a medivac.
There seemed to be a push in LotV to reduce the mechanical aspect of the game, particularly with the reduction of larva per inject and the changes regarding Chronoboost. These proposed changes to the Infestor and Swarm Host place increase the importance placed on spreading creep, however. Changes to Chronoboost are a move in a similar direction. Is it fair to say that increasing the impact of mechanical aspects of the game is now a greater focus?
In Legacy of the Void our goal was not exactly to reduce overall mechanics, but rather shift some of the mechanical difficulty from the macro systems over to unit control. Here we are looking to see if we can make other changes to streamline some of the mechanics a bit more, or improve consistency across races to make sure players of all skill levels are rewarded properly for their efforts.
Many of the changes (Lurker speed upgrade, mech transform time upgrades, splitting anti air between different Infestor abilities) seemed to be aimed towards increasing a unit's utility and versatility. How does this method of "buffing" units compare to just adjusting numbers (like the proposed changes to the Stalker) and how do the two approaches fit into the larger plan of balancing the game?
How we approach a change largely depends on what we are trying to achieve with the unit or ability. For example, Stalkers have plenty of utility (they can shoot air and ground, they have mobility with blink) so there’s no need to add something on that front, but Lurkers have a narrower set of situations where they are effective, so we are trying to open up some aggressive options there.
How much does the new Cyclone upgrade, Armor Piercing Rockets, cost?
150/150, 79 sec (on faster speed).
How much does the new mech upgrade, Smart Servos, cost?
Those new upgrades are joke. Who is going to blow that much resources on something before 4 bases? You aren't going to see clever viking harass any time soon with those prices. If they wanted to make the viking into some kind of harrassment unit like is almost was in beta ... then they should add in something to make it faster. For instance:
If given a move order, after 2 seconds the viking doubles in speed after not getting another move order.
This way the viking is still slow in the deadly and exciting back and forth end game fights, but it can possible get across the board and do something if you give it a far away destination and don't mind it not firing.
I love this changes and am happy about big updates like those, it keeps the game fresh.
A game that has "big" patches every year is not unstable, it (hopefully) improves balance and and makes the game more diverse, take League as an example with its annual mid season updates etc..
thx 4 this interview. was the guy u interviewed wearing a mask? this is good timing to release these changes now so that BlizzCon attendees can provide in person feedback in November.
TL is hiding the identity of the employee they interviewed.. however i managed to snap a picture of him. if any one knows his name, please PM me. + Show Spoiler +
I love how they try to argue that window mines being revealed when entering cooldown won't make the unit absolutely irrelevant
"Make it unable to target workers? NO, we want widow mines to be used only for that and then picked up in a medivac ! This is much more exciting than a smart mine positionning to gain map control !"
Have these changes been developed in conjunction with progamer feedback or will they have to explore everything side by side with the community?
Pro level feedback is very important to us, and making sure the pros can give their feedback directly to us on the dev team has been a big goal of ours. While we don’t directly involve external sources into our design process, their feedback plays a big factor in how we approach this type of update.
expertly dodged question, expected nothing less from Blizzard
Have these changes been developed in conjunction with progamer feedback or will they have to explore everything side by side with the community?
Pro level feedback is very important to us, and making sure the pros can give their feedback directly to us on the dev team has been a big goal of ours. While we don’t directly involve external sources into our design process, their feedback plays a big factor in how we approach this type of update.
expertly dodged question, expected nothing less from Blizzard
via the TL.Net interview and their orginal BNet post announcing these changes Blizzard provided a lot of the thinking that went into making these changes. u've got lots to go on. if u dislike the design direction and the thinking behind it no one is forcing you to play. there is a community C&C4 server that is really well run.. and Halo Wars 2 is also looking for players.
On August 18 2017 04:46 Wulfey_LA wrote: Those new upgrades are joke. Who is going to blow that much resources on something before 4 bases? You aren't going to see clever viking harass any time soon with those prices. If they wanted to make the viking into some kind of harrassment unit like is almost was in beta ... then they should add in something to make it faster. For instance:
If given a move order, after 2 seconds the viking doubles in speed after not getting another move order.
This way the viking is still slow in the deadly and exciting back and forth end game fights, but it can possible get across the board and do something if you give it a far away destination and don't mind it not firing.
It makes the transformations instant pretty much, its a must have with any mech style. Hellions can run into a mineral line and then instantly transform into hellbats its pretty crazy.
On August 18 2017 04:46 Wulfey_LA wrote: Those new upgrades are joke. Who is going to blow that much resources on something before 4 bases? You aren't going to see clever viking harass any time soon with those prices. If they wanted to make the viking into some kind of harrassment unit like is almost was in beta ... then they should add in something to make it faster. For instance:
If given a move order, after 2 seconds the viking doubles in speed after not getting another move order.
This way the viking is still slow in the deadly and exciting back and forth end game fights, but it can possible get across the board and do something if you give it a far away destination and don't mind it not firing.
It makes the transformations instant pretty much, its a must have with any mech style. Hellions can run into a mineral line and then instantly transform into hellbats its pretty crazy.
I am not saying this won't be a good upgrade. I am just seeing that 150/150 and thinking, I am not going to see this in a pro, high level game. In one of my sit in my base mech fests, sure, I am going to get that upgrade.
I've been asking for the shield battery forever. I really like that idea, and I predict we will start seeing some pros use a Nexus as part of the wall.
And we can finally get rid of the stupid msc.
I don't mind the ms is still here.
And it seems like the leak was pretty accurate. Almost too close...
i'd like to see them add the shield battery as an experiment. i based this on my own limited experience and the plethora of other far more experienced people who want it back as well.
please, Mr. Blizzard Sir. Please, try adding the Shield Battery.
On August 18 2017 08:24 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote: And it seems like the leak was pretty accurate. Almost too close...
the last time there was a leak like this noah built himself a boat.
On August 18 2017 05:07 JackONeill wrote: I love how they try to argue that window mines being revealed when entering cooldown won't make the unit absolutely irrelevant
"Make it unable to target workers? NO, we want widow mines to be used only for that and then picked up in a medivac ! This is much more exciting than a smart mine positionning to gain map control !"
Maybe they can balance it out by tweaking the cost and build time
They always say that they take pro player feedback quite serious but whenever I ask a pro (on their streams) they all answer the same : blizzard never asked me about my thoughts on the balance/there is nothing i can do to give them feedback if they dont reach out to me. Blizzard is straight up lying to us right there. If they would care about pro player feedback they would communicate with them.
On August 20 2017 03:20 IceTea_Sc2 wrote: They always say that they take pro player feedback quite serious but whenever I ask a pro (on their streams) they all answer the same : blizzard never asked me about my thoughts on the balance/there is nothing i can do to give them feedback if they dont reach out to me. Blizzard is straight up lying to us right there. If they would care about pro player feedback they would communicate with them.
This, they need to make their communication with the pro's more transparent, because the inconsistencies do kind of point to them lying about it. Although I wonder if maybe they only ask tip top pro's? Maybe not all pro's are equal in the eyes of the balance team?
I have no idea, all I know is that currently, Protoss is in pretty bad shape, I've been playing low diamonds mostly (I'm like mid/high diamond because Heroes is stealing my life away currently, usually a master league player) but they are still pretty decent and wow, I had no clue Protoss was so reliant on MSC, their early game defense is in shambles.
ZvZ is kind of stupid, Lurkers feel really really good in the match up, and against Protoss, and just, against everything, making them faster really boosted their viability. But now that Infestors don't hit air I've noticed it's really hard to take a 4th base if you want to do a Hydra based build, big Muta flocks can just run circles around you and eventually spore crawlers just don't do the job. Maybe if they want to keep Fungal the way it is they need to add a kind of band-aid balance fix to the spore that allows it to do splash vs. biological?
Mech feels good, like really good. My friend is a mech it happen kind of Terran guy who maintains a decent win rate vs. Zerg on ladder with it and it feels kind of, invincible? Raven's are still definitely good in mass because the more Ravens you add late game, the more you can heal your mech units. Also, the missile that does the armor debuff is way out of line, an armor reduction of 3? You have got to be kidding me, look at the difference between a 3/0 army vs a 3/3, it generally doesn't go very well for the 3/0 upgrade army, add on top of that heals and it's just ridiculous. After all of these changes, the Raven still feels extremely oppressive and very good to mass.
It just reads itself like every interview ever from that PR team. Like after every question I can already guess what the answer is going to be.
On August 18 2017 05:42 JimmyJRaynor wrote: if u dislike the design direction and the thinking behind it no one is forcing you to play. there is a community C&C4 server that is really well run.. and Halo Wars 2 is also looking for players.
Thats not an argument. If you dislike a change you can just say it without someone like you shutting them down and telling them to go somewhere else ffs. According to you: Hypothetically if they patch it so that terran starts with 1000 minerals, you shouldn't complain cause you can just go play something else. I hope you know how ridiculous that sounds.
On August 20 2017 03:20 IceTea_Sc2 wrote: They always say that they take pro player feedback quite serious but whenever I ask a pro (on their streams) they all answer the same : blizzard never asked me about my thoughts on the balance/there is nothing i can do to give them feedback if they dont reach out to me. Blizzard is straight up lying to us right there. If they would care about pro player feedback they would communicate with them.
This, they need to make their communication with the pro's more transparent, because the inconsistencies do kind of point to them lying about it. Although I wonder if maybe they only ask tip top pro's? Maybe not all pro's are equal in the eyes of the balance team?
I have no idea, all I know is that currently, Protoss is in pretty bad shape, I've been playing low diamonds mostly (I'm like mid/high diamond because Heroes is stealing my life away currently, usually a master league player) but they are still pretty decent and wow, I had no clue Protoss was so reliant on MSC, their early game defense is in shambles.
ZvZ is kind of stupid, Lurkers feel really really good in the match up, and against Protoss, and just, against everything, making them faster really boosted their viability. But now that Infestors don't hit air I've noticed it's really hard to take a 4th base if you want to do a Hydra based build, big Muta flocks can just run circles around you and eventually spore crawlers just don't do the job. Maybe if they want to keep Fungal the way it is they need to add a kind of band-aid balance fix to the spore that allows it to do splash vs. biological?
Mech feels good, like really good. My friend is a mech it happen kind of Terran guy who maintains a decent win rate vs. Zerg on ladder with it and it feels kind of, invincible? Raven's are still definitely good in mass because the more Ravens you add late game, the more you can heal your mech units. Also, the missile that does the armor debuff is way out of line, an armor reduction of 3? You have got to be kidding me, look at the difference between a 3/0 army vs a 3/3, it generally doesn't go very well for the 3/0 upgrade army, add on top of that heals and it's just ridiculous. After all of these changes, the Raven still feels extremely oppressive and very good to mass.
Mass means your army is almost one unit only.I wouldn't call 10-20 ravens is mass because protoss and terran do it with ghosts and HTs for years...
On August 20 2017 07:26 Psychobabas wrote: What is a pro exactly. Streamer? GSL contender? Grandmaster player? Anyway I am glad they dont cater to that.
Someone who earns a living from playing StarCraft in this context.
On August 20 2017 03:20 IceTea_Sc2 wrote: They always say that they take pro player feedback quite serious but whenever I ask a pro (on their streams) they all answer the same : blizzard never asked me about my thoughts on the balance/there is nothing i can do to give them feedback if they dont reach out to me. Blizzard is straight up lying to us right there. If they would care about pro player feedback they would communicate with them.
A forum user accusing Blizzard of "straight up lying" with some personal, anecdotal evidence.
On August 20 2017 03:20 IceTea_Sc2 wrote: They always say that they take pro player feedback quite serious but whenever I ask a pro (on their streams) they all answer the same : blizzard never asked me about my thoughts on the balance/there is nothing i can do to give them feedback if they dont reach out to me. Blizzard is straight up lying to us right there. If they would care about pro player feedback they would communicate with them.
A forum user accusing Blizzard of "straight up lying" with some personal, anecdotal evidence.
Have heard the same from a handful of people (not) involved with blizz over the years
On August 20 2017 07:44 404AlphaSquad wrote: It just reads itself like every interview ever from that PR team. Like after every question I can already guess what the answer is going to be.
On August 18 2017 05:42 JimmyJRaynor wrote: if u dislike the design direction and the thinking behind it no one is forcing you to play. there is a community C&C4 server that is really well run.. and Halo Wars 2 is also looking for players.
Thats not an argument. If you dislike a change you can just say it without someone like you shutting them down and telling them to go somewhere else ffs. According to you: Hypothetically if they patch it so that terran starts with 1000 minerals, you shouldn't complain cause you can just go play something else. I hope you know how ridiculous that sounds.
context drop.
if u include my entire comment you'll see the conclusion arose from the fact that Blizzard has provided a giant amount of background info about their thinking behind many design decisions and changes... both currently and over the past 7 years.
the person i responded to is a consumer not a game designer. consumers make choices from set options that vendors provide. its not an "argument" it is the position every consumer is in. pick ur best option. for me, its SC2 and Brood War.
the original guy said he felt a question was "dodged". u can make that claim about every RTS game designer discussing game design decisions about any game. relative to the other choices out there Blizz gives lots of info. can we focus in on 1 question and obsess over it and then claim Blizz is ripping us off.. sure.. but u have to do even more context dropping to twist your mind into a pretzel to believe that.
On August 18 2017 04:56 crashpoint wrote: I love this changes and am happy about big updates like those, it keeps the game fresh.
A game that has "big" patches every year is not unstable, it (hopefully) improves balance and and makes the game more diverse, take League as an example with its annual mid season updates etc..
On the other hand, Brood War is so timeless in its design, gameplay and balance that it doesn't require annual updates. The closest you'd get are new maps.
On September 10 2017 21:59 the_last_terran1 wrote: I have a question : Why do the Ultralisk is faster on creep ? Have you ever seen Ultraliskk on a skateboard ?
On August 18 2017 04:46 Wulfey_LA wrote: Those new upgrades are joke. Who is going to blow that much resources on something before 4 bases? You aren't going to see clever viking harass any time soon with those prices. If they wanted to make the viking into some kind of harrassment unit like is almost was in beta ... then they should add in something to make it faster. For instance:
If given a move order, after 2 seconds the viking doubles in speed after not getting another move order.
This way the viking is still slow in the deadly and exciting back and forth end game fights, but it can possible get across the board and do something if you give it a far away destination and don't mind it not firing.
It makes the transformations instant pretty much, its a must have with any mech style. Hellions can run into a mineral line and then instantly transform into hellbats its pretty crazy.
I am not saying this won't be a good upgrade. I am just seeing that 150/150 and thinking, I am not going to see this in a pro, high level game. In one of my sit in my base mech fests, sure, I am going to get that upgrade.
Lol are you suggesting that you won't see Mech Servos, the most important upgrade in the new patch, in any pro games? Ummm, are you sure you're correct about that? =\
On August 20 2017 03:20 IceTea_Sc2 wrote: They always say that they take pro player feedback quite serious but whenever I ask a pro (on their streams) they all answer the same : blizzard never asked me about my thoughts on the balance/there is nothing i can do to give them feedback if they dont reach out to me. Blizzard is straight up lying to us right there. If they would care about pro player feedback they would communicate with them.
meh, the pros would all push for their race to be buffed and others nerfed, as long as Blizz considers the pro-scene I'm OK
Just saw that testing is online again. Just a quick question after playing (protoss). Isn't stalker/colossus too good again? Isn't shield battery SO WEAK?
Check protoss streamers. I'm speaking about pros. (Hartem, Showtime)
They can take a third quite quickly, the new chrono makes you have enough units even though you don't have many facilities, and the shield battery helps you buying the time you need if there are all-ins or harass.
The new blink stalkers are very powerful. But the problem those players have, at least in PvZ, is the late game. A zerg the creeped the map well can use the new infested terrans as AA, and paired with brood lords it creates an unbeatable army.
I assume infestor brood lord will be nerfed to some extent.
But holding blink stalkers is hard now, so we'll see if the pros come up with something solid against it or whether the stalkers will have to be nerfed as well. Stalker timing also come way earlier now due to the new chrono...
Those players don't really know how should they use collosus, as it maintained its strength and weaknesses. And its weaknesses is something that is hard to compensate for, even with the new stalker.
On November 05 2017 19:15 Mun_Su wrote: Do we have a date for this new patch ?
On the Starcraft 2 site it says "The full Multiplayer update will arrive with the next major patch coming after BlizzCon, so stay tuned!", which I would assume to be November 14 when the game goes F2P.
On November 05 2017 19:15 Mun_Su wrote: Do we have a date for this new patch ?
On the Starcraft 2 site it says "The full Multiplayer update will arrive with the next major patch coming after BlizzCon, so stay tuned!", which I would assume to be November 14 when the game goes F2P.
On August 18 2017 04:56 crashpoint wrote: I love this changes and am happy about big updates like those, it keeps the game fresh.
A game that has "big" patches every year is not unstable, it (hopefully) improves balance and and makes the game more diverse, take League as an example with its annual mid season updates etc..
Sorry for quoting a comment that's a little old now, I haven't looked at any MP update threads in a bit and I saw this and wanted to comment as I've been seeing similar posts around Twitch this week as well (specifically the comparison to moba update models).
The thing about League (and DOTA 2, WoW from time to time, and plenty of single player and multiplayer games) is that their big/annual/monthly updates don't necessarily strive for game balance. They strive to change the game, sometimes to make it imbalanced in a different way, not to make the game more balanced.
Yearly updates like this one, with how it looks to me now, are not striving to make a balanced game (in the most common sense of the word with regards to StarCraft), but to first and foremost freshen up the experience for players at all skill levels, with game balance coming second. (Or possibly even third after attempting to change the game so that there are fewer catastrophic game winning/losing moments or whatever they said when they announced it that I don't actually believe they followed through with or that needed to be a "selling point" to begin with, but I digress.)
Take the Mothership Core, for example. A larger portion of the more vocal players and viewers have been asking/demanding/begging to have it removed for a while, but there is, and has been, a sizable chunk of players at all skill levels who don't have any issues with it after it's been in the game and the game has been balanced around it after this long, and the removal of the Mothership Core itself brings about several balance issues. Is removing it alongside the list of other major changes really about game balance and design, or is it more about trying something different and seeing if it sticks, or perhaps seeing if it sticks just long enough for next year when they change it again?
I think it will be something to think about more through the next couple of patches after the update which might show what their intentions are. Personally, I disagree with some changes and with some of their intentions behind the update (at least their supposed intentions). However, I think some of the changes are interesting, are geared towards making a more fun and interactive game, and I think that it's good to experiment now and then. So, yeah, I guess there's some rambling that hopefully gets somebody else thinking.
"Are you concerned that certain changes (like the new Disruption Nova or the easier-to-kill Widow Mines–in short: What you call game ending units/abilities) will reduce excitement in games by taking out big “wow” moments for the viewers?" The guy who asks this funny question thinks that these are "wow" moments for the viewers? Wow.
The beauty of the MSC was the fact that it had extremely poor scaleability. Drops across two or more bases mitigated the damage over charge could do, and the MSC gave the Protoss the killing power it needed early game.
Now, I'm not sure how Protoss deals with early-mid game pushes with low dps gateway units against a higher dps T/Z army. However, in the mid-lategame, a couple of units + some well-placed batteries and a cannon or two completely shut down drops.
And late game Protoss will be mass batteries in offensive positions so that the Protoss just tanks the damage and then heals up.
That's not to say this isn't/won't be balanced, but now you have three different areas to worry about because the shield battery scales a lot better than the MSC.
Not to mention gateway/battery cheeses will become a thing.
First, can someone tell me why the widow mine still in the game ?
Dunno why Blizz absolutly wants an useless unit by race, because whith this patch widow mine will be one for sure.
Second, why Blizz talks about Mule buff as THE massive change for T ? will MULE be able to shot something ? On the other hand, nothing about huge mine nerf or those useless upgrades (servos what ?)
This patch is definitly a joke for terran. Maybe Mech style will be more viable, but I fear so much for bio style. I don't know where we go boys.
On November 09 2017 21:22 Aegwynn wrote: "Are you concerned that certain changes (like the new Disruption Nova or the easier-to-kill Widow Mines–in short: What you call game ending units/abilities) will reduce excitement in games by taking out big “wow” moments for the viewers?" The guy who asks this funny question thinks that these are "wow" moments for the viewers? Wow.
Projection, basically. A lot of high-level players enjoy the game in a different way from lower-level players and casual spectators. Not everyone is self-aware enough to realize that what they like might be different from what others like.
What I don't understand is the dev team's adamant urge to make Terran bio and mech a viable option in every matchup- enabling Terran to choose however they want to play. Why is the goal with the dev team to force unit usage in certain situations like why is that such a big deal to them? Do they really see the situation like you can't use both unit classifications together? Aren't RTS units supposed to fill specific rolls such as light splash, siege range, tank, buffer, etc- why are there so many units in LOTV with overlapping roles? Idk but it just feels like the core philosophy behind balancing the game is what's causing it to be less fun and more gimmicky. Also, you can't really get around the fact that predeterming a trilogy for an RTS game w/ the inclusion of new units each release- whether it reaches some sore of relative balance or not- is going to negatively effect the game.
On September 10 2017 21:59 the_last_terran1 wrote: I have a question : Why do the Ultralisk is faster on creep ? Have you ever seen Ultraliskk on a skateboard ?
Bottom line is it is too early to talk about the patch....let us wait 3 months of solid play by Korean pros and then see where the balance is ok. Please no more crying. I play random and the game is super fun at the moment. Just enjoy.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/munch/BlizzardDesignPatch.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/suPJkDV.jpg)
