• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 09:55
CEST 15:55
KST 22:55
  • 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 Tall9HomeStory 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
Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL50Weekly Cups (June 23-29): Reynor in world title form?12FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event16Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster16Weekly Cups (June 16-22): Clem strikes back1
StarCraft 2
General
The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings How does the number of casters affect your enjoyment of esports? The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation Statistics for vetoed/disliked maps Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster
Tourneys
RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series https://www.facebook.com/MiracleSheetsOnline/ [GSL 2025] Code S: Season 2 - Semi Finals & Finals $5,100+ SEL Season 2 Championship (SC: Evo) FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady
Brood War
General
Player “Jedi” cheat on CSL BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Unit and Spell Similarities Help: rep cant save Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL
Tourneys
[BSL20] Grand Finals - Sunday 20:00 CET [Megathread] Daily Proleagues Small VOD Thread 2.0 [BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread 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
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 Trading/Investing Thread The Games Industry And ATVI
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread NBA General Discussion Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
Blogs
Culture Clash in Video Games…
TrAiDoS
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
Blog #2
tankgirl
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 781 users

Blizz: Proposed changes for post-BlizzCon patch 2019 - Pag…

Forum Index > SC2 General
642 CommentsPost a Reply
Prev 1 11 12 13 14 15 33 Next All
winsonsonho
Profile Joined October 2012
Korea (South)143 Posts
October 08 2019 11:02 GMT
#241
Please just try out Arbiters rather than the silly mothership. It doesn't make sense to have a unit that you can only produce one of in a game like Starcraft, especially when there are abilities like abduct, neural, and interference matrix. This is not a balance problem, its a design problem.
showstealer1829
Profile Blog Joined May 2014
Australia3123 Posts
October 08 2019 12:59 GMT
#242
On October 08 2019 07:58 seemsgood wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 08 2019 05:29 deacon.frost wrote:
On October 08 2019 02:44 BisuDagger wrote:
On October 08 2019 02:28 deacon.frost wrote:
On October 08 2019 02:08 BisuDagger wrote:
After watching Parting vs Ty and being such a huge BW fan I've been thinking about how to prop up Gateway-centric play with a big change to how gateways work. I would love to hear what ideas anyone might have. Here's one of mine.

1. Only zealot, sentry, adepts can utilize warpgates (still available in all gateway states)
2. You must use normal gateways to build all other gateway units

Take a page from campaign:
* Buff health of stalkers to make them more like dragoons or make it so blink will replenish a portion of their shields.
* Templar Amulate upgrade returns. Starting with storm available would clearly be weakened by travel distance.
* Decrease recall time slightly

This maintains the early aggression and harassment options throughout the game and strengthens the core of the gateway army while giving it a spawn disadvantage.

Please no.

So constructive, thanks for the post...

You want something constructive?

This is not bw, go for bw to bw. Let's start with the obvious. (edit> this is not me hating on you for this, this is a very different game with different units and you won't get the BW in this)

Also, this would result in 4 pruduction buildings on 4 different hotkeys unless Blizzard in their infinite wisdom goes for warpgate + gateway can be on a same hotkey and units will be prioritized(same as barracks). I don't think this will work properly(considering you can build all those units from gateways).
Current Protoss gateway design resulted in some big nerfs in the units - your buffs are not enough to operate around this if we're thinking about late game - e.g. anti-air of stalkers is weak because they can be warped any time you need them and anywhere, buffing them results in really heavy hitting combo with colossi. Leaving them be means they will still be laughed at by speed banshees.

Without the warp in mechanic you won't get what you saw in the Parting v TY game because without the warp in the units have to walk from the main(not even from the 4th, from the main). The last time they made Stalkers more dragoon like(same DPS, bigger CD on shots, bigger shot damage), they reverted it back quite fast because TvP got fucked up with proxy stalkers. Why do you think this time it won't be reverted right away? Also there's a reason why stalkers are not massed in the lategame, they're trash against everything and a slight buff of HP won't change this, they're trash because they're at best mediocre at dps and their model is so big they have bad scaling(you need a huge arch). It gets better with blink but not much.

Also they're quite easy to hardcounter with EMP. (even with the HP buff)

And now the fun part. Marauders? Tanks with smartfire?

This is not BW, if you want gateway compositions, we had that before. It was named archon/chargelot/templar. Now you can't go this because
1) Mines
2) Hellbats(if we talk about mech)
3) Liberators(and you need tempests if the game goes to this stage, this alone should tell you how garbage stalker is)

And we're at just the TvP.

Now to the ZvP.
Lurkers? Mutalisks? Fungals?

Edit> TL, DR - we need much more changes in all 3 races to make this viable, not just Protoss. It is a big game redesign.

i know uncle blizz doesnt want to admit this but because of the warp in mechanic,protoss cant have strong gateway units while still being able to instantly warp them.putting thier power spike behind an upgrade looks bandaid and confusing at first but i am sure protoss players will thank the balance team later for not straight up trashing them
so yeah i d think protoss can have strong stalkers just like last year


Why would we thank the balance team for not straight up trashing us when they ARE straight up trashing us?
There is no understanding. There is only Choya. Choya is the way. Choya is Love. Choya is Life. Has is the Light in the Protoss Dark and Nightmare is his chosen Acolyte
deacon.frost
Profile Joined February 2013
Czech Republic12129 Posts
October 08 2019 13:52 GMT
#243
On October 08 2019 07:58 seemsgood wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 08 2019 05:29 deacon.frost wrote:
On October 08 2019 02:44 BisuDagger wrote:
On October 08 2019 02:28 deacon.frost wrote:
On October 08 2019 02:08 BisuDagger wrote:
After watching Parting vs Ty and being such a huge BW fan I've been thinking about how to prop up Gateway-centric play with a big change to how gateways work. I would love to hear what ideas anyone might have. Here's one of mine.

1. Only zealot, sentry, adepts can utilize warpgates (still available in all gateway states)
2. You must use normal gateways to build all other gateway units

Take a page from campaign:
* Buff health of stalkers to make them more like dragoons or make it so blink will replenish a portion of their shields.
* Templar Amulate upgrade returns. Starting with storm available would clearly be weakened by travel distance.
* Decrease recall time slightly

This maintains the early aggression and harassment options throughout the game and strengthens the core of the gateway army while giving it a spawn disadvantage.

Please no.

So constructive, thanks for the post...

You want something constructive?

This is not bw, go for bw to bw. Let's start with the obvious. (edit> this is not me hating on you for this, this is a very different game with different units and you won't get the BW in this)

Also, this would result in 4 pruduction buildings on 4 different hotkeys unless Blizzard in their infinite wisdom goes for warpgate + gateway can be on a same hotkey and units will be prioritized(same as barracks). I don't think this will work properly(considering you can build all those units from gateways).
Current Protoss gateway design resulted in some big nerfs in the units - your buffs are not enough to operate around this if we're thinking about late game - e.g. anti-air of stalkers is weak because they can be warped any time you need them and anywhere, buffing them results in really heavy hitting combo with colossi. Leaving them be means they will still be laughed at by speed banshees.

Without the warp in mechanic you won't get what you saw in the Parting v TY game because without the warp in the units have to walk from the main(not even from the 4th, from the main). The last time they made Stalkers more dragoon like(same DPS, bigger CD on shots, bigger shot damage), they reverted it back quite fast because TvP got fucked up with proxy stalkers. Why do you think this time it won't be reverted right away? Also there's a reason why stalkers are not massed in the lategame, they're trash against everything and a slight buff of HP won't change this, they're trash because they're at best mediocre at dps and their model is so big they have bad scaling(you need a huge arch). It gets better with blink but not much.

Also they're quite easy to hardcounter with EMP. (even with the HP buff)

And now the fun part. Marauders? Tanks with smartfire?

This is not BW, if you want gateway compositions, we had that before. It was named archon/chargelot/templar. Now you can't go this because
1) Mines
2) Hellbats(if we talk about mech)
3) Liberators(and you need tempests if the game goes to this stage, this alone should tell you how garbage stalker is)

And we're at just the TvP.

Now to the ZvP.
Lurkers? Mutalisks? Fungals?

Edit> TL, DR - we need much more changes in all 3 races to make this viable, not just Protoss. It is a big game redesign.

i know uncle blizz doesnt want to admit this but because of the warp in mechanic,protoss cant have strong gateway units while still being able to instantly warp them.putting thier power spike behind an upgrade looks bandaid and confusing at first but i am sure protoss players will thank the balance team later for not straight up trashing them
so yeah i d think protoss can have strong stalkers just like last year

Stalkers are trash. Even with blink. Why do you think you need tempests in the lategame TvP? Why do you think you need immortals/tempests in the lategame ZvP? Stalkers are trashy early to mid game unit. There's nothing wrong about it. Similarly reaper is an early game scout and cheesy option, that's it. Blink doesn't change that, blink just changes their value for midgame otherwise they would be just like reapers, trashy early game unit That's their role, many Protoss are fine with that, but saying power spike behind upgrade and write stalkers in the same sentence Have you seen how powerful they are against strong liberator position with some siege tanks and emp?
I imagine France should be able to take this unless Lilbow is busy practicing for Starcraft III. | KadaverBB is my fairy ban mother.
totalpigeon
Profile Joined September 2010
United Kingdom162 Posts
October 08 2019 15:26 GMT
#244
The real problem is that these changes still don't fix foundational problems. Balancing the game is made much harder by having absurdly broken stuff in it, and making small tweaks to hp etc doesn't get to the heart of the problem. Once the issues are solved, that is when numbers should be played about with. I'd start with this kind of stuff;

Abduct and neural should not work against massive units. It's neither fun nor reasonable to pick off big units like that. There's no counterplay.

Air units need a collision radius to limit clumping or a fast, forced splitting that overrides fungal slow. Fungal and parasitic bomb counter light air units way too hard as it is. I think a collision radius would be best, so the power of clumped air units is also nerfed, because balancing mass voids has been impossible because of it.

Mothership should not be a hero unit. It should be cheaper, weaker and massable so it doesn't contribute to the deathball issue. Smaller msss recalls around the map would make the zerg spine forest less ridiculous to deal with without having to be all or nothing assaults. Non massive, cheaper arbiters could also be abducted or neuraled without making toss want to uninstall.

Warp gate should be more expensive to research and have longer unit build time compared to gateways. This would give a defenders advantage back in PvP and allow small buffs to gateway units to be possible to keep them viable into the late game (since toss would have to make more gateways for the same reinforcement capabilities, which means smaller armies / slower maxs).

Sure, some numbers would need to be tweaked after. Maybe fungal would need more dps against air units if they didn't clump. But the point is is that even with an e.g. 50% DPS increase, it would never lead to that ridiculous scenario where you lose 10 expensive air units to a single spell because you clumped, got hit and couldn't retreat. It would still suck, but it wouldn't feel completely unfair.
bela.mervado
Profile Joined December 2008
Hungary386 Posts
October 08 2019 16:29 GMT
#245
On October 09 2019 00:26 totalpigeon wrote:
Air units need a collision radius to limit clumping or a fast, forced splitting that overrides fungal slow. Fungal and parasitic bomb counter light air units way too hard as it is. I think a collision radius would be best, so the power of clumped air units is also nerfed, because balancing mass voids has been impossible because of it.


I was thinking about a similar solution, but my problem was that i would like to have clumped mutas, corruptors, phoenixes, oracles, banshees, vikings in the game.
Maybe make that it is a bit harder to make these air units group up,
and increase other air units collision radius greatly, so that we will never see clumped up broods/voids/carriers/tempests/bcs again. This would nerf these heavily.
totalpigeon
Profile Joined September 2010
United Kingdom162 Posts
October 08 2019 18:07 GMT
#246
On October 09 2019 01:29 bela.mervado wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 09 2019 00:26 totalpigeon wrote:
Air units need a collision radius to limit clumping or a fast, forced splitting that overrides fungal slow. Fungal and parasitic bomb counter light air units way too hard as it is. I think a collision radius would be best, so the power of clumped air units is also nerfed, because balancing mass voids has been impossible because of it.


I was thinking about a similar solution, but my problem was that i would like to have clumped mutas, corruptors, phoenixes, oracles, banshees, vikings in the game.
Maybe make that it is a bit harder to make these air units group up,
and increase other air units collision radius greatly, so that we will never see clumped up broods/voids/carriers/tempests/bcs again. This would nerf these heavily.


It's a broken part of the game. The interaction between aoe spells on ground units and aoe spells on clumped air units is just so different that it is impossible to balance in a manner that feels fair to everyone, especially when there is no realistic way for the owner of the air units to keep their units from clumping. It worked in BW because you could only have 12 units on a hotkey, so things could never be too densely packed in. It's a problem for SC2 because you can have 200 supply on a hotkey, so the dps of the army can be absurdly dense.
Overkill from using all of these units to attack the same target is a thing, which helps a little to keep things in check, but the fact that everything can be on the front line means that the dps / area is still extremely high - something like mass muta or voids can be very strong in a straight up fight if you have no aoe to deal with it, and utterly useless if you do. If units didn't clump then the dps would be lower and aoe would be both less effective and less necessary.

I think it would be a sensible direction to go, anyway. It's not a change that will balance things in and of itself, but removing the ridiculous possibility of ultra stacked air units will make the game easier to balance in the long run, since the range of potential interactions that aoe damage can have reduces dramatically.
Yoshi Kirishima
Profile Blog Joined July 2009
United States10325 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-10-08 19:30:08
October 08 2019 19:20 GMT
#247
I like the direction of some changes but some of the changes are weird and don't seem that well geared towards the intended goal that was stated.

Just some brief thoughts on a few things:

1) Infested Terran Change

Infested Terrans being 25 energy were nice and unique. They were weak individually but massed together it could do something. This being buffed reminds me of the Autoturret change to being a more high damage density unit. Everything in the game keeps being buffed to move faster or do more damage faster, which is something we've wanted to avoid (and go in the other direction when possible) throughout SC2.

One thing about ITs being 25 energy is that it was difficult to get a ton of them to actually shoot the intended target, like sniping a base from a cliff. Now that they can be clumped more easily, it will be more volatile and harder to deal with in a way as well.

While it's true that you could now kill a group of clumped ITs with splash easier, did the balance team not realize and think that the Zerg could simply spam click the ITs in a slightly more spread out area, taking up about the same amount of space as when they were 25 energy?? It would basically nullify the intended purpose of buffing splash's effectiveness vs ITs, and is a near straight up buff for most situations as long as the Zerg spam summons ITs in a slightly spread out area instead of clicking 1 point.

Also, it was harder to spawn a hundred ITs to snipe a base, because it took longer to click. This was also a natural balancing mechanic that will now be reduced.

You could say that if you were to try to spread out the new 50 energy ITs, that it would also be a natural balancing mechanic and require the Zerg more time to setup a large amount of ITs, similar to how spawning a ton of 25 energy ITs takes a ton of clicks. If these roughly equal out, then the new IT changes basically is a straight slight DPS buff. AND, in situations where the other player does not yet have much splash, will allow the ITs' higher damage density (and higher dps) to be able to snipe bases even more effectively than now.

At best, the IT changes are not clean enough for what the intended goals are. At worst, the IT change could buff them overall and make things even more volatile than they already are.

2) Battle Cruiser Warp Jump 1 Second Delay

Finally, I'm a Terran but that should have been obvious and there from the start.

3) Nydus Changes

Hurray again that the starting load/unload time is slightly nerfed. In pro games it seems as if an entire army can just go through it almost instantly, like teleporting around the map, which is obviously not what it should be (both lore wise and gamplay wise, as it makes it less unique compared to simply teleporting).

So, I do like that it takes longer to unload/load. What I don't like though, is that for only a 100/100 upgrade you can boost it back to the current speed for the rest of the game. You shouldn't be able to transfer your army between huge points nearly instantly, it should take some time for your army to move through. You should be able to reinforce a position with an army coming through, but there should be more of a hidden cost to it (it should take a bit longer for the rest of your army to go through to fight, instead of your maxed out army being there almost instantly). If you bring a big enough army and are in position already, you should be able to have a strong advantage vs the army that is trying to come out, enough to discourage the player to go through the Nydus with the rest of their army unless they have a much bigger army.

I believe it would be much better and more unique for them to simply tweak the Nydus in a way that involve the load/unload time increase, and force players to spawn MULTIPLE Nydus for each position later in the game if they want to move a huge army quicker. Nydus is not very expensive as it is, I think an upgrade is unnecessary. A Nydus Network is 150/150 that you can use throughout the whole game, and spawning a Nydus Worm is a measly 50/50.

If you want to move your 130 supply army through to the opponent's base, then you should just be encouraged to spawn 2 Nydus for that one position to get it through faster as a commitment. It would be very Zerg-like and more interesting than Zergs only using 1 Nydus for 99% of situations like it is now.

It would also be much less volatile. Right now it's like, if you don't finish off the Nydus, then their whole army comes through suddenly and it's over. But if the slower unload/load changes are passed, and there is no upgrade to buff it back to the current speed, it would mean Zergs would need to spawn 2 Nydus Worms to get their army through for a slightly higher price. It would also indeed mean you would need to kill both Worms as opposed to 1 to stop their army from coming through, but it would be more interesting this way, as if you killed only 1 of the 2 Worms, if the Zerg wanted to still come through the remaining Worm, it would be much more expensive to do so anyway as much more of their army would be killed due to the slower unloading. So it's an option for the Zerg but much much less cost efficient. If needed, the Worm durability could be reduced to to help balance this out.

Basically I think they should nerf the unload/load time for Nydus Worm a little to make it less scary early and mid game. And late game, it would be better for the design and gameplay if Zerg needed to spawn more than 1 Worm to get a big army through quickly. It's weird to me that in almost all situations, 1 Worm is enough whether you want to move a small force through or your maxed out army. It's wrong when you see pro matches where a defending player already has their whole army in their main base, failing to kill the Worm but is fighting the units spewing out, but yet the attacking player is able to commit and just send the rest of their army through it with little disadvantage. There needs to be a little more of a defender's advantage here, lest the attacking Zerg wants to spend a little more to spawn more Worms.

Props to them for the 14 second thing, that was well thought out.

4) Mech

It's great that they haven't forgotten about TvP mech, which was very weak last I tried (way weaker than Mech in HOTS which is very sad as it actually was pretty solid in HOTS). Nerfing the Chargelot by removing the +8 damage will help Mech take their third which is really crucial with how many bases Protoss can take in LOTV, and had been incredibly difficult to defend with the LOTV Warp Prism and other buffs (Charge +8 damage, existence of Adepts, Immortal Shield change "nerf" which only actually made it harder to counter in mid-game it made EMP much less useful, etc).

And the Cyclone revert made it even harder to tech to Mech while getting a 3rd because they no longer had a jack-of-all-trades solid unit they could open with to scout, harass, and defend, while working up to other Mech units.
I don't know how significant the +8 damage initially even was, but if it means getting a near extra full volley of tank shots off during the fight, that would be quite helpful.


Also it was cool to see them remind us and give props to SlayerS for that BFH drop build. That was an amazing time and it was so cool to see all their Terrans coordinate together and dominate a tournament like that with a new build.
Mid-master streaming MECH ONLY + commentary www.twitch.tv/yoshikirishima +++ "If all-in fails, all-in again."
Loccstana
Profile Blog Joined November 2012
United States833 Posts
October 08 2019 21:21 GMT
#248
I have an interesting idea: give the battlecruiser cargo capacity like a medivac, maybe 16 slots. Lore wise, it makes sense that a capital ship can carry troops inside it. This would allow the rest of the Terran army to come along when a battlecruiser tactical jumps to a new location and opens up for some exciting tactics.
[url]http://i.imgur.com/lw2yN.jpg[/url]
BisuDagger
Profile Blog Joined October 2009
Bisutopia19229 Posts
October 09 2019 00:58 GMT
#249
On October 09 2019 04:20 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
I like the direction of some changes but some of the changes are weird and don't seem that well geared towards the intended goal that was stated.

Just some brief thoughts on a few things:

1) Infested Terran Change

Infested Terrans being 25 energy were nice and unique. They were weak individually but massed together it could do something. This being buffed reminds me of the Autoturret change to being a more high damage density unit. Everything in the game keeps being buffed to move faster or do more damage faster, which is something we've wanted to avoid (and go in the other direction when possible) throughout SC2.

One thing about ITs being 25 energy is that it was difficult to get a ton of them to actually shoot the intended target, like sniping a base from a cliff. Now that they can be clumped more easily, it will be more volatile and harder to deal with in a way as well.

While it's true that you could now kill a group of clumped ITs with splash easier, did the balance team not realize and think that the Zerg could simply spam click the ITs in a slightly more spread out area, taking up about the same amount of space as when they were 25 energy?? It would basically nullify the intended purpose of buffing splash's effectiveness vs ITs, and is a near straight up buff for most situations as long as the Zerg spam summons ITs in a slightly spread out area instead of clicking 1 point.

Also, it was harder to spawn a hundred ITs to snipe a base, because it took longer to click. This was also a natural balancing mechanic that will now be reduced.

You could say that if you were to try to spread out the new 50 energy ITs, that it would also be a natural balancing mechanic and require the Zerg more time to setup a large amount of ITs, similar to how spawning a ton of 25 energy ITs takes a ton of clicks. If these roughly equal out, then the new IT changes basically is a straight slight DPS buff. AND, in situations where the other player does not yet have much splash, will allow the ITs' higher damage density (and higher dps) to be able to snipe bases even more effectively than now.

At best, the IT changes are not clean enough for what the intended goals are. At worst, the IT change could buff them overall and make things even more volatile than they already are.

2) Battle Cruiser Warp Jump 1 Second Delay

Finally, I'm a Terran but that should have been obvious and there from the start.

3) Nydus Changes

Hurray again that the starting load/unload time is slightly nerfed. In pro games it seems as if an entire army can just go through it almost instantly, like teleporting around the map, which is obviously not what it should be (both lore wise and gamplay wise, as it makes it less unique compared to simply teleporting).

So, I do like that it takes longer to unload/load. What I don't like though, is that for only a 100/100 upgrade you can boost it back to the current speed for the rest of the game. You shouldn't be able to transfer your army between huge points nearly instantly, it should take some time for your army to move through. You should be able to reinforce a position with an army coming through, but there should be more of a hidden cost to it (it should take a bit longer for the rest of your army to go through to fight, instead of your maxed out army being there almost instantly). If you bring a big enough army and are in position already, you should be able to have a strong advantage vs the army that is trying to come out, enough to discourage the player to go through the Nydus with the rest of their army unless they have a much bigger army.

I believe it would be much better and more unique for them to simply tweak the Nydus in a way that involve the load/unload time increase, and force players to spawn MULTIPLE Nydus for each position later in the game if they want to move a huge army quicker. Nydus is not very expensive as it is, I think an upgrade is unnecessary. A Nydus Network is 150/150 that you can use throughout the whole game, and spawning a Nydus Worm is a measly 50/50.

If you want to move your 130 supply army through to the opponent's base, then you should just be encouraged to spawn 2 Nydus for that one position to get it through faster as a commitment. It would be very Zerg-like and more interesting than Zergs only using 1 Nydus for 99% of situations like it is now.

It would also be much less volatile. Right now it's like, if you don't finish off the Nydus, then their whole army comes through suddenly and it's over. But if the slower unload/load changes are passed, and there is no upgrade to buff it back to the current speed, it would mean Zergs would need to spawn 2 Nydus Worms to get their army through for a slightly higher price. It would also indeed mean you would need to kill both Worms as opposed to 1 to stop their army from coming through, but it would be more interesting this way, as if you killed only 1 of the 2 Worms, if the Zerg wanted to still come through the remaining Worm, it would be much more expensive to do so anyway as much more of their army would be killed due to the slower unloading. So it's an option for the Zerg but much much less cost efficient. If needed, the Worm durability could be reduced to to help balance this out.

Basically I think they should nerf the unload/load time for Nydus Worm a little to make it less scary early and mid game. And late game, it would be better for the design and gameplay if Zerg needed to spawn more than 1 Worm to get a big army through quickly. It's weird to me that in almost all situations, 1 Worm is enough whether you want to move a small force through or your maxed out army. It's wrong when you see pro matches where a defending player already has their whole army in their main base, failing to kill the Worm but is fighting the units spewing out, but yet the attacking player is able to commit and just send the rest of their army through it with little disadvantage. There needs to be a little more of a defender's advantage here, lest the attacking Zerg wants to spend a little more to spawn more Worms.

Props to them for the 14 second thing, that was well thought out.

4) Mech

It's great that they haven't forgotten about TvP mech, which was very weak last I tried (way weaker than Mech in HOTS which is very sad as it actually was pretty solid in HOTS). Nerfing the Chargelot by removing the +8 damage will help Mech take their third which is really crucial with how many bases Protoss can take in LOTV, and had been incredibly difficult to defend with the LOTV Warp Prism and other buffs (Charge +8 damage, existence of Adepts, Immortal Shield change "nerf" which only actually made it harder to counter in mid-game it made EMP much less useful, etc).

And the Cyclone revert made it even harder to tech to Mech while getting a 3rd because they no longer had a jack-of-all-trades solid unit they could open with to scout, harass, and defend, while working up to other Mech units.
I don't know how significant the +8 damage initially even was, but if it means getting a near extra full volley of tank shots off during the fight, that would be quite helpful.


Also it was cool to see them remind us and give props to SlayerS for that BFH drop build. That was an amazing time and it was so cool to see all their Terrans coordinate together and dominate a tournament like that with a new build.


I really like the nydus discussion here.

A slightly different take on what you said, it would be interesting if spawning a nydus worm cost 10 supply. That would make it really hard to mass multiple worms and a great counter to nydus worms would be to snipe overlords. I'm the late game there would be a big trade off on being maxed versus saving supply to spawn worms.
ModeratorFormer Afreeca Starleague Caster: http://afreeca.tv/ASL2ENG2
WombaT
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
Northern Ireland25030 Posts
October 09 2019 02:41 GMT
#250
On October 09 2019 09:58 BisuDagger wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 09 2019 04:20 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
I like the direction of some changes but some of the changes are weird and don't seem that well geared towards the intended goal that was stated.

Just some brief thoughts on a few things:

1) Infested Terran Change

Infested Terrans being 25 energy were nice and unique. They were weak individually but massed together it could do something. This being buffed reminds me of the Autoturret change to being a more high damage density unit. Everything in the game keeps being buffed to move faster or do more damage faster, which is something we've wanted to avoid (and go in the other direction when possible) throughout SC2.

One thing about ITs being 25 energy is that it was difficult to get a ton of them to actually shoot the intended target, like sniping a base from a cliff. Now that they can be clumped more easily, it will be more volatile and harder to deal with in a way as well.

While it's true that you could now kill a group of clumped ITs with splash easier, did the balance team not realize and think that the Zerg could simply spam click the ITs in a slightly more spread out area, taking up about the same amount of space as when they were 25 energy?? It would basically nullify the intended purpose of buffing splash's effectiveness vs ITs, and is a near straight up buff for most situations as long as the Zerg spam summons ITs in a slightly spread out area instead of clicking 1 point.

Also, it was harder to spawn a hundred ITs to snipe a base, because it took longer to click. This was also a natural balancing mechanic that will now be reduced.

You could say that if you were to try to spread out the new 50 energy ITs, that it would also be a natural balancing mechanic and require the Zerg more time to setup a large amount of ITs, similar to how spawning a ton of 25 energy ITs takes a ton of clicks. If these roughly equal out, then the new IT changes basically is a straight slight DPS buff. AND, in situations where the other player does not yet have much splash, will allow the ITs' higher damage density (and higher dps) to be able to snipe bases even more effectively than now.

At best, the IT changes are not clean enough for what the intended goals are. At worst, the IT change could buff them overall and make things even more volatile than they already are.

2) Battle Cruiser Warp Jump 1 Second Delay

Finally, I'm a Terran but that should have been obvious and there from the start.

3) Nydus Changes

Hurray again that the starting load/unload time is slightly nerfed. In pro games it seems as if an entire army can just go through it almost instantly, like teleporting around the map, which is obviously not what it should be (both lore wise and gamplay wise, as it makes it less unique compared to simply teleporting).

So, I do like that it takes longer to unload/load. What I don't like though, is that for only a 100/100 upgrade you can boost it back to the current speed for the rest of the game. You shouldn't be able to transfer your army between huge points nearly instantly, it should take some time for your army to move through. You should be able to reinforce a position with an army coming through, but there should be more of a hidden cost to it (it should take a bit longer for the rest of your army to go through to fight, instead of your maxed out army being there almost instantly). If you bring a big enough army and are in position already, you should be able to have a strong advantage vs the army that is trying to come out, enough to discourage the player to go through the Nydus with the rest of their army unless they have a much bigger army.

I believe it would be much better and more unique for them to simply tweak the Nydus in a way that involve the load/unload time increase, and force players to spawn MULTIPLE Nydus for each position later in the game if they want to move a huge army quicker. Nydus is not very expensive as it is, I think an upgrade is unnecessary. A Nydus Network is 150/150 that you can use throughout the whole game, and spawning a Nydus Worm is a measly 50/50.

If you want to move your 130 supply army through to the opponent's base, then you should just be encouraged to spawn 2 Nydus for that one position to get it through faster as a commitment. It would be very Zerg-like and more interesting than Zergs only using 1 Nydus for 99% of situations like it is now.

It would also be much less volatile. Right now it's like, if you don't finish off the Nydus, then their whole army comes through suddenly and it's over. But if the slower unload/load changes are passed, and there is no upgrade to buff it back to the current speed, it would mean Zergs would need to spawn 2 Nydus Worms to get their army through for a slightly higher price. It would also indeed mean you would need to kill both Worms as opposed to 1 to stop their army from coming through, but it would be more interesting this way, as if you killed only 1 of the 2 Worms, if the Zerg wanted to still come through the remaining Worm, it would be much more expensive to do so anyway as much more of their army would be killed due to the slower unloading. So it's an option for the Zerg but much much less cost efficient. If needed, the Worm durability could be reduced to to help balance this out.

Basically I think they should nerf the unload/load time for Nydus Worm a little to make it less scary early and mid game. And late game, it would be better for the design and gameplay if Zerg needed to spawn more than 1 Worm to get a big army through quickly. It's weird to me that in almost all situations, 1 Worm is enough whether you want to move a small force through or your maxed out army. It's wrong when you see pro matches where a defending player already has their whole army in their main base, failing to kill the Worm but is fighting the units spewing out, but yet the attacking player is able to commit and just send the rest of their army through it with little disadvantage. There needs to be a little more of a defender's advantage here, lest the attacking Zerg wants to spend a little more to spawn more Worms.

Props to them for the 14 second thing, that was well thought out.

4) Mech

It's great that they haven't forgotten about TvP mech, which was very weak last I tried (way weaker than Mech in HOTS which is very sad as it actually was pretty solid in HOTS). Nerfing the Chargelot by removing the +8 damage will help Mech take their third which is really crucial with how many bases Protoss can take in LOTV, and had been incredibly difficult to defend with the LOTV Warp Prism and other buffs (Charge +8 damage, existence of Adepts, Immortal Shield change "nerf" which only actually made it harder to counter in mid-game it made EMP much less useful, etc).

And the Cyclone revert made it even harder to tech to Mech while getting a 3rd because they no longer had a jack-of-all-trades solid unit they could open with to scout, harass, and defend, while working up to other Mech units.
I don't know how significant the +8 damage initially even was, but if it means getting a near extra full volley of tank shots off during the fight, that would be quite helpful.


Also it was cool to see them remind us and give props to SlayerS for that BFH drop build. That was an amazing time and it was so cool to see all their Terrans coordinate together and dominate a tournament like that with a new build.


I really like the nydus discussion here.

A slightly different take on what you said, it would be interesting if spawning a nydus worm cost 10 supply. That would make it really hard to mass multiple worms and a great counter to nydus worms would be to snipe overlords. I'm the late game there would be a big trade off on being maxed versus saving supply to spawn worms.

Pretty good post there Yoshi, hadn’t actually considered that IT DPS would be more locally concentrated.

Specifics aside, just introducing more trade-offs as a general principle is definitely a direction I wish Blizzard would explore.

As per previous discussions on the warpgate mechanic, I’m ok with potent things being in the game but, introduce more risk or difficulty of execution, or a strategic dimension to it.

Introducing a supply cost I quite like actually, have a more mobile but slightly smaller army than you could otherwise have. Would also make the allins hit slightly less hard.

I’m just sick of nydus play because the balance feels so far off in the lategame. When Rogue threw down 25 or something in one game against Dark, just silly.

If they entered the mass nuke zone where you could still keep pumping them out, but lose because of it, cool. I can recall offhand plenty of games where a Terran has bled himself out with inefficient overnuking and you can point to it as a contributory factor.

I really can’t think of a game that goes late where I’ve ever felt, ‘oh he made too many nyduses that game, that was bad strategically and cost him the game.’

I really cannot think of a mechanic in a game that is easy to execute, difficult to defend in a stretched lategame and has legitimate game winning potential if it comes off once, that you can just keep repeating over and over again with little cost.

Or at least a mechanic in a good game anyway. Silver lining I guess is for once by theorycrafting of many moons ago that lategame Nydus was mystifyingly underused has been validated of late if nothing else :p

'You'll always be the cuddly marsupial of my heart, despite the inherent flaws of your ancestry' - Squat
bela.mervado
Profile Joined December 2008
Hungary386 Posts
October 09 2019 03:18 GMT
#251
I feel that in late game nydus is a nice tool to break a defensive opponent.

One other way to stop or tone down mid game nydus to require creep for exit (as someone already mentioned) before the hive time upgrade.
So the Z would have to fly a (slow) overlord over the base, quite visible, drop creep, then plant the nydus exit.
The hive upgrade would revert to the vision is enough behavior, as it is currently.
BerserkSword
Profile Joined December 2018
United States2123 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-10-09 03:30:25
October 09 2019 03:26 GMT
#252
On October 09 2019 04:20 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
I like the direction of some changes but some of the changes are weird and don't seem that well geared towards the intended goal that was stated.

Just some brief thoughts on a few things:

1) Infested Terran Change

Infested Terrans being 25 energy were nice and unique. They were weak individually but massed together it could do something. This being buffed reminds me of the Autoturret change to being a more high damage density unit. Everything in the game keeps being buffed to move faster or do more damage faster, which is something we've wanted to avoid (and go in the other direction when possible) throughout SC2.

One thing about ITs being 25 energy is that it was difficult to get a ton of them to actually shoot the intended target, like sniping a base from a cliff. Now that they can be clumped more easily, it will be more volatile and harder to deal with in a way as well.

While it's true that you could now kill a group of clumped ITs with splash easier, did the balance team not realize and think that the Zerg could simply spam click the ITs in a slightly more spread out area, taking up about the same amount of space as when they were 25 energy?? It would basically nullify the intended purpose of buffing splash's effectiveness vs ITs, and is a near straight up buff for most situations as long as the Zerg spam summons ITs in a slightly spread out area instead of clicking 1 point.

Also, it was harder to spawn a hundred ITs to snipe a base, because it took longer to click. This was also a natural balancing mechanic that will now be reduced.

You could say that if you were to try to spread out the new 50 energy ITs, that it would also be a natural balancing mechanic and require the Zerg more time to setup a large amount of ITs, similar to how spawning a ton of 25 energy ITs takes a ton of clicks. If these roughly equal out, then the new IT changes basically is a straight slight DPS buff. AND, in situations where the other player does not yet have much splash, will allow the ITs' higher damage density (and higher dps) to be able to snipe bases even more effectively than now.

At best, the IT changes are not clean enough for what the intended goals are. At worst, the IT change could buff them overall and make things even more volatile than they already are.


The IT change is nowhere near a buff in direct engagements. It's a straight up nerf.

First of all, despite costing double the energy, it only gets a 50% buff in HP. This is huge, especially considering the fact that 75 HP is enough to be OHKO'd by liberators, psionic storm, and disruptors. This means that Infested Terrans now take half as many liberator shots and half (maybe more, since, like you said, they can be spread out) as many disruptor and psionic storms to kill. Overall less firepower is needed to contend with a full spawn of ITs.

On the other hand, ITs got a slight DPS buff, taking the double energy into consideration. However, it must be noted that ITs are now more susceptible to overkill.

Finally, the amount of space 25 energy ITs take up cannot be understated. With 50 energy ITs, a Zerg player cannot just flood the space beneath Protoss and Terran air units with ITs and zone their ground units out to the same extent they did before. ITs will take up less space and will be surrounded by Protoss and Terran ground units easier as well.

Overall ITs were massively nerfed in direct engagements. It will be significantly harder to employ the same tactics to break a Terran position or dive on a Skytoss death ball.

You are right that the new IT is a buff in indirect engagements/harassment like sniping a base from a cliff like you mentioned. But that is not where mass infestors are insanely powerful. Their insane strength occurs when they are massed in death balls and participate in direct engagements.

Amount of clicks needed to deploy infestors is basically a nonfactor at the highest levels of play.
TL+ Member
WombaT
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
Northern Ireland25030 Posts
October 09 2019 03:39 GMT
#253
Just thinking, it would be awesome if Blizzard could use AlphaStar with particular parameters to actually test proposed changes.

It’s really hard to crunch the maths on how engagements will actually go down based just on the numbers themselves and crunching those.

All the nitty gritty of numbers/positioning, targeting, overkill etc make it a lot more complicated.

'You'll always be the cuddly marsupial of my heart, despite the inherent flaws of your ancestry' - Squat
heronn
Profile Joined January 2013
34 Posts
October 09 2019 08:04 GMT
#254
+
Reduce workers at start to ~8-10
Nerf WGate and move it to TC + buff GW units
Replace MShip by MSC as a normal unit with all MS abilities
Bring back Ultralisk speed upgrade
Add some new upgrades
Harris1st
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
Germany6888 Posts
October 09 2019 09:20 GMT
#255
On October 09 2019 04:20 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:


Also, it was harder to spawn a hundred ITs to snipe a base, because it took longer to click. This was also a natural balancing mechanic that will now be reduced.



AFAIK progamers do this with the mousewheel, therefore no clicks needed. You spin the wheel which basically accounts for 100s of clicks in a sec
Go Serral! GG EZ for Ence. Flashbang dance FTW
dUTtrOACh
Profile Joined December 2010
Canada2339 Posts
October 09 2019 15:03 GMT
#256
That's a lot of changes. I guess the balance team wants to create work for themselves next year?
twitch.tv/duttroach
hg2g2
Profile Joined January 2013
Canada71 Posts
October 09 2019 15:28 GMT
#257
On October 09 2019 12:18 bela.mervado wrote:
I feel that in late game nydus is a nice tool to break a defensive opponent.

One other way to stop or tone down mid game nydus to require creep for exit (as someone already mentioned) before the hive time upgrade.
So the Z would have to fly a (slow) overlord over the base, quite visible, drop creep, then plant the nydus exit.
The hive upgrade would revert to the vision is enough behavior, as it is currently.

Honestly, I've always wondered whether a nydus worm just shouldn't spread creep, taking the creep buffs away, the ability to spread tumors, and possibly take up important space even after it's gone. Being able to fight 'on creep' from an effective nydus seems like an unfair offender's advantage taking into account how important creep is, and I've never really seen that discussed before.
Ben...
Profile Joined January 2011
Canada3485 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-10-09 16:10:02
October 09 2019 16:06 GMT
#258
On October 09 2019 18:20 Harris1st wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 09 2019 04:20 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:


Also, it was harder to spawn a hundred ITs to snipe a base, because it took longer to click. This was also a natural balancing mechanic that will now be reduced.



AFAIK progamers do this with the mousewheel, therefore no clicks needed. You spin the wheel which basically accounts for 100s of clicks in a sec

Either that or you can also bind left click to an unused key in the hotkey settings (I have it set to space). With that, you can hit the IT spell cast key, hold down shift, then hold down the key you set to be left click and it will cast the spell far faster than you could ever click. Even worse, you don't even need to move your mouse since it will automatically spread out the ITs in an increasing radius around where your mouse pointer is for you. You can technically use this method for any spell, but the IT spell is the only spell it's actually good for other than maybe creep spreading. Protoss players also use it for warping in units fast (I learned it from Parting's stream).
"Cliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiide" -Tastosis
Allred
Profile Joined November 2010
United States352 Posts
October 09 2019 20:12 GMT
#259
I would love for games to require more midrange units for longer peiords of time. There are a lot of ways to go about this, but just as an example, this is what I would change to zerg

Zerg: move upgrades for units to be completed at the Hatchery / Lair / Hive.

This would make the following changes.
Lingspeed: the upgrade can be completed at a hatchery.
Roach movement speed/burrow movement. upgrades moved to lair.
Hydra den: Require Hatchery. Hydra upgrades can be completed at Lair.
(Hydras attack range = 4, range upgrade now gives +2)

Spire: Requires Lair. attack / armor upgrades still at spire.
Infestation Pit: upgrades for infestor are done at the Hive.
Infestor Changes: Reduce unit size by 0.25
Fungal Growth: able to cast while burrowed. Units take damage and slow movement speed, but the fungal should cover the ground, and allow units to move out of it / blink etc. Area of fungal growth increased by .25
Neural parasite removed.
Neural Inhibition added: Requires upgrade at hive. Costs 100 energy. Sends microspores at an enemy unit that is capable of disrupting it's neural / electrical network and disables the units similar to that of the raven's interference matrix. The only difference is that the unit will be unable to be given a new command. for example, if a mothership is moved forward slightly and during this time period before it stops moving, it is hit with neural inhibition, it will continue moving forward until it wears off. If the mother ship is stationary when hit with the spell, the MS will be unable to perform any new commands. If the mothership is attacked moved forward towards another specific building/creature it will continue to move towards that unit until it reaches that unit at which time it will stop moving until the spell wears off.
(personally I think this is one of the better changes of all of these that should be considered, it will allow good counterplay on both parts and won't completely punish a retreating player nearly as bad as neural parasite would, but can be used to punish an aggressive player who moves to far forward.

Hive: Require Infestation pit
Lurker Den: Requires Hive. Lurker upgrades to be done at the hive
Greater Spire: Requires Hive.
* make broodlords initially have attack similar to guardian. Upgrade at hive attack changes to broodling.
Ultralisk Cavern: Requires Hive. Ultra Upgrades are done at Hive.

This should drastically add to the amount of time it will take a zerg player to move all the way up the tech tree and extend the mid-game. At the same time, it would allow for strategic decisions such as making more than 1 lair to hit certain upgrades, and will create more strategic choices in determining how many queens to build, when in the build order to build them since the lair / hatchery / Hive will need to also be performing upgrades. With the queens you do build, you will have to decide if they should do larvae injections or creep spreading. At the same time, Hydras can come out sooner to help defend. Some of the units would need the base stats altered to be balanced to account for the change in pace that will happen to the zerg economically. I think this would help the zerg brood feel more similar to it's BW counterpart where it slowly builds up and then overwhelms an opponent and is capable of playing on a level playing field with a smaller army supply until the end game when it overruns an opponent.



Obviously such a drastic change would need to be balanced in a similar fashion for terran / protoss as well. one of the ways this can be done is by increasing the costs and timings of certain upgrades for units, and by adding in some late game upgrades for the Tier 1 units. This would allow all 3 races to have late game low tier armies that can be supplemented by higher tier units instead of a large mass of high tier units that completely dominate the lower tier compositions.

Just as a few quick examples.
Increase build time for Twighlight council, Robo Bay, and Fleet Beacon

Add a stalker upgrade that gives small amounts of splash damage to it. at the same time reduce the strength of storm. this upgrade would require DT tech
Give immortal / disruptors a useful upgrade. This would cause Protoss to commit more to a specific robounit.
Disruptors + 0.25 nova range explosion
Immortals + 1 range attack

For Terran.
Move Bio Upgrades to the Ghost Academy. (Stim, Combat shields, concussive shell). Ghost Academy Costs reduced to 150 minerals / 0 gas
Give Bio an antisplash upgrade such that if a marine is hit with splash damage, it reduces it's life to 1 instead of killing it if it's currently being healed by a unit. (requires an upgrade at the ghost academy)
Give medivacs the ability to heal 2 units at the same time - upgrade at the fusion core.
Ghost Cloak upgrades / Nuke now require a fusion core.

Siege Tanks:
Siege ability now requires an upgrade.
Fast Siege: Siege tanks now siege faster, requires an upgrade, requires armory
Widow Mines: By default do not do splash damage Can get splash damage by an upgrade

Terran mech upgrades should require an armory but are completed with a tech lab addon

Similar to zerg tech tree being slowed down, this will also slow down the advancement of the Terran and protoss tech trees by requiring more of a commitment to certain units. The examples of Protoss and Terran changes are not all the changes I would make, but it is more of a theme of slowing down the progression of the game and making the late early game and midgame last longer and require more commitment to tech choices while also allowing flexibility to respond to what you are scouting your opponent doing.




An expert is a man who tells you a simple thing in a confused way in such a fashion as to make you think the confusion is your own fault. ~William Castle
WayTeh
Profile Joined May 2018
Belarus18 Posts
October 09 2019 20:12 GMT
#260
Just make queen hero unit, limit 1 queen per hatch -_- and game fixed.
It is so bad...that's actually good.
Prev 1 11 12 13 14 15 33 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
OSC
13:00
King of the Hill #216
davetesta65
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Lowko601
Hui .168
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 59261
Calm 7901
Rain 5096
Horang2 1711
EffOrt 860
Larva 719
actioN 401
BeSt 351
Light 221
hero 215
[ Show more ]
Mini 186
Leta 170
ToSsGirL 122
Snow 102
Hyun 94
Mind 91
Pusan 68
Mong 57
JYJ54
Barracks 45
Rush 35
Shinee 32
Backho 30
Movie 22
Shine 21
PianO 18
Terrorterran 17
sSak 17
HiyA 15
IntoTheRainbow 10
Nal_rA 9
SilentControl 8
yabsab 8
soO 8
Dota 2
Gorgc7222
qojqva2429
XcaliburYe413
League of Legends
singsing2906
Super Smash Bros
Chillindude17
Other Games
Grubby2714
B2W.Neo1140
hiko874
DeMusliM533
Fuzer 295
XaKoH 271
ArmadaUGS114
Organizations
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• StrangeGG 88
• Kozan
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• sooper7s
• Migwel
• intothetv
• IndyKCrew
StarCraft: Brood War
• Michael_bg 5
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• C_a_k_e 2624
• WagamamaTV353
League of Legends
• Nemesis5984
• Stunt529
• TFBlade361
Upcoming Events
WardiTV European League
2h 5m
Scarlett vs Percival
Jumy vs ArT
YoungYakov vs Shameless
uThermal vs Fjant
Nicoract vs goblin
Harstem vs Gerald
FEL
2h 5m
Big Brain Bouts
2h 5m
Korean StarCraft League
13h 5m
CranKy Ducklings
20h 5m
RSL Revival
20h 5m
FEL
1d 2h
RSL Revival
1d 20h
FEL
1d 22h
BSL: ProLeague
2 days
Dewalt vs Bonyth
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
3 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
The PondCast
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
RSL Revival
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
RSL Revival
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2025-06-28
HSC XXVII
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
Acropolis #3
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
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
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
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.