|
On October 18 2019 07:56 Shuffleblade wrote: While I can get behind complaints that Z seems too strong this P has been removed from the game bullshit is just not true. Sure ZvP seems to be in an especially bad place and has been for a lot of this year but what about PvT? That matchup isn't so bad. Since the problems is in one matchup, specifically against Z maybe the problem is Z and not P, seems like a reasonable conclusion.
In general any time protoss late game isn't stronger than T and Z late game P whines, when P has the strongest late game its called just stop us from getting there but when its reversed then their race got deleted?
Also Blizz would notice if protoss would get deleted, because winrates would not be even. lol
No, they can't just watch winrates, they need to observe the games. Winrates are not reflected in how people win, If winning lategame is nearly impossible, then you try rushes or hard timing attacks. A lot of balance will be hidden behind statistcs this way. Also statistics can hide balance at different levels. I much rather sacrifice a little balance in the lower leagues to have it balanced at the top, sadly I'm not so sure Blizzard thinks the same way. I for one don't wan't a balance where races are identified by different times during the game. all races should be as close to equal during the different timesegments of a game. Having unbalance in WHEN races are strong or week also makes games much less intresting to watch and over time the "lategame race" will learn to scout and identify different rushes/timings cause they only have to survive until a certain point to get a overwhelming advantage, this is especially true at the top I believe. The reality of the game right now, if Zerg survive to lategame they win most of the time, this is simply not fair. The game don't fully allow for macro-protoss or macro-terrans. Also, for a long time I've wondered how the game would look if you have the "macro-race" also the strongest lategame-race, now I know, not fun to either play or watch.
Sadly Blizzard is not famous to act fast or hard, the "wait and see" -approach seems to the most common, and "small tweaks to get there" is the usual remedy. So sad that "the world championship" this year will be stained by Blizzards hesitance when they should have acted a long time ago, I don't understand what they have to loose the game is unfair and unbalanced in so many ways at the moment that it can hardly be worse...
Imagine a Hockey game were one team have to score first and the other team automaticly wins if they reach the third period even score or in the lead... That's the current ZvP/T.
|
On October 18 2019 12:14 Majk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2019 07:56 Shuffleblade wrote: While I can get behind complaints that Z seems too strong this P has been removed from the game bullshit is just not true. Sure ZvP seems to be in an especially bad place and has been for a lot of this year but what about PvT? That matchup isn't so bad. Since the problems is in one matchup, specifically against Z maybe the problem is Z and not P, seems like a reasonable conclusion.
In general any time protoss late game isn't stronger than T and Z late game P whines, when P has the strongest late game its called just stop us from getting there but when its reversed then their race got deleted?
Also Blizz would notice if protoss would get deleted, because winrates would not be even. lol No, they can't just watch winrates, they need to observe the games. Winrates are not reflected in how people win, If winning lategame is nearly impossible, then you try rushes or hard timing attacks. A lot of balance will be hidden behind statistcs this way. Also statistics can hide balance at different levels. I much rather sacrifice a little balance in the lower leagues to have it balanced at the top, sadly I'm not so sure Blizzard thinks the same way. I for one don't wan't a balance where races are identified by different times during the game. all races should be as close to equal during the different timesegments of a game. Having unbalance in WHEN races are strong or week also makes games much less intresting to watch and over time the "lategame race" will learn to scout and identify different rushes/timings cause they only have to survive until a certain point to get a overwhelming advantage, this is especially true at the top I believe. The reality of the game right now, if Zerg survive to lategame they win most of the time, this is simply not fair. The game don't fully allow for macro-protoss or macro-terrans. Also, for a long time I've wondered how the game would look if you have the "macro-race" also the strongest lategame-race, now I know, not fun to either play or watch. Sadly Blizzard is not famous to act fast or hard, the "wait and see" -approach seems to the most common, and "small tweaks to get there" is the usual remedy. So sad that "the world championship" this year will be stained by Blizzards hesitance when they should have acted a long time ago, I don't understand what they have to loose the game is unfair and unbalanced in so many ways at the moment that it can hardly be worse... Imagine a Hockey game were one team have to score first and the other team automaticly wins if they reach the third period even score or in the lead... That's the current PvZ. I'll eat a shoe if you're in GM.
User was warned for this post.
|
Didn't know it was a GM-reqirement to be allowed to post an opinion. I don't even play atm. I have never been higher then Masters if that should matter. I have been a persistent watcher of both pro BW and SC2. Starcraft has not been so uninteresting to watch as it is now, even the BL/infestor era during WoL was more interesting cause then there were at least "hail mary" options like the archon-toilet who made the games at least a bit tense.
|
On October 18 2019 12:14 Majk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2019 07:56 Shuffleblade wrote: While I can get behind complaints that Z seems too strong this P has been removed from the game bullshit is just not true. Sure ZvP seems to be in an especially bad place and has been for a lot of this year but what about PvT? That matchup isn't so bad. Since the problems is in one matchup, specifically against Z maybe the problem is Z and not P, seems like a reasonable conclusion.
In general any time protoss late game isn't stronger than T and Z late game P whines, when P has the strongest late game its called just stop us from getting there but when its reversed then their race got deleted?
Also Blizz would notice if protoss would get deleted, because winrates would not be even. lol No, they can't just watch winrates, they need to observe the games. Winrates are not reflected in how people win, If winning lategame is nearly impossible, then you try rushes or hard timing attacks. A lot of balance will be hidden behind statistcs this way. Also statistics can hide balance at different levels. I much rather sacrifice a little balance in the lower leagues to have it balanced at the top, sadly I'm not so sure Blizzard thinks the same way. I for one don't wan't a balance where races are identified by different times during the game. all races should be as close to equal during the different timesegments of a game. Having unbalance in WHEN races are strong or week also makes games much less intresting to watch and over time the "lategame race" will learn to scout and identify different rushes/timings cause they only have to survive until a certain point to get a overwhelming advantage, this is especially true at the top I believe. The reality of the game right now, if Zerg survive to lategame they win most of the time, this is simply not fair. The game don't fully allow for macro-protoss or macro-terrans. Also, for a long time I've wondered how the game would look if you have the "macro-race" also the strongest lategame-race, now I know, not fun to either play or watch. Sadly Blizzard is not famous to act fast or hard, the "wait and see" -approach seems to the most common, and "small tweaks to get there" is the usual remedy. So sad that "the world championship" this year will be stained by Blizzards hesitance when they should have acted a long time ago, I don't understand what they have to loose the game is unfair and unbalanced in so many ways at the moment that it can hardly be worse... Imagine a Hockey game were one team have to score first and the other team automaticly wins if they reach the third period even score or in the lead... That's the current ZvP/T. I agree with your discussion on assymatrical balance design when it comes to different phases of the game. I believe the differences in strengths depending on the phase of the game in non mirror matchup is way to big, there can be differences but they need to be closer than they are now.
However most posters underestimate the complexity of assymatrical balance design, if you want races that are different but yet balanced what dimensions of the game should be absolutely balanced and which should be assymetrical? It is isn't so easy as to just balance the game at all phases, then the game either becomes stale or it needs to be more differences between the races in some other way. The standard example is counters, the other clear option besides different power spikes based on the phases is that there are clear cut counter units. It turns into a rock papper scissors game, I don't like that either and then there isn't many options left. The game turns into different races that play the same but look different, what we would call a flat strategy game lacking depth.
One example would be terran bio, they are so different from what zerg has (upgrades and units) making stim+combat shield+medivacs into a very strong phase in the game for a terran player in most situations. If you dont want terran to have a power spike there you either need to give zerg similar options or remove some of the terran units strengths, which means you are ironing out the defining differences between the races and making them more similar to each other. That is the option you need to choose if you want absolute balance in different phases of the game.
My argument was that if protoss would be deleted, in other words so unplayable no one chooses the race then it would show in the winrates. Blizz looks at winrates across the board but also each league individually, of course there can still be imbalance but no races is bloody deleted. Maybe they have 0.5% lower winrate, oh noes my life is over.
Well imagine if hockey was assymatrical and thus played in the way that the teams were so different from each other that one team for example had 8 legged 1 armed players that used ping pong rackets instead of clubs. How would that look
|
Czech Republic12128 Posts
On October 18 2019 13:26 Majk wrote: Didn't know it was a GM-reqirement to be allowed to post an opinion. I don't even play atm. I have never been higher then Masters if that should matter. I have been a persistent watcher of both pro BW and SC2. Starcraft has not been so uninteresting to watch as it is now, even the BL/infestor era during WoL was more interesting cause then there were at least "hail mary" options like the archon-toilet who made the games at least a bit tense. And yet when Rogue said Zerg OP people are ignoring it. It appears you can be only GM who's not good enough to win any big tournament to write here data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3594e/3594ed82511d459ad4f879c5b933937c65093cdc" alt=""
|
On October 18 2019 17:27 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2019 13:26 Majk wrote: Didn't know it was a GM-reqirement to be allowed to post an opinion. I don't even play atm. I have never been higher then Masters if that should matter. I have been a persistent watcher of both pro BW and SC2. Starcraft has not been so uninteresting to watch as it is now, even the BL/infestor era during WoL was more interesting cause then there were at least "hail mary" options like the archon-toilet who made the games at least a bit tense. And yet when Rogue said Zerg OP people are ignoring it. It appears you can be only GM who's not good enough to win any big tournament to write here data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3594e/3594ed82511d459ad4f879c5b933937c65093cdc" alt="" He said Zerg was too strong against Protoss which is what the statistics reflect, and what other pros seem to agree on.
|
Czech Republic12128 Posts
On October 18 2019 17:33 Ej_ wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2019 17:27 deacon.frost wrote:On October 18 2019 13:26 Majk wrote: Didn't know it was a GM-reqirement to be allowed to post an opinion. I don't even play atm. I have never been higher then Masters if that should matter. I have been a persistent watcher of both pro BW and SC2. Starcraft has not been so uninteresting to watch as it is now, even the BL/infestor era during WoL was more interesting cause then there were at least "hail mary" options like the archon-toilet who made the games at least a bit tense. And yet when Rogue said Zerg OP people are ignoring it. It appears you can be only GM who's not good enough to win any big tournament to write here data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3594e/3594ed82511d459ad4f879c5b933937c65093cdc" alt="" He said Zerg was too strong against Protoss which is what the statistics reflect, and what other pros seem to agree on. Considering the original post it was about PvZ, wasn't it?
|
@Shuffleblade You are correct, there need to be diffrences, I agree on that. But giving Z the strongest lategame should at least now be proven (twice) the worst design. My main concern is whats fun to watch. The current state of the ZvX is horrendous. The only storyline atm is if Z will reach lategame, thats it. Look at NationWars, the teams strengths are decided by how many strong Z they have. And the BlizzCon will either be a ZvZ madness or a ZvX stomping in the end...
|
I ve just watched the TvT match up stream by wardi, and these patch is pretty exciting (only for mirror match for now)
For TvT
- +25 cost for interference matrix is what we need to go out of this mess - thor changes are awesome and synergize with reduce range of liberators - medivacs changes was needed since a long time imo - i think they were afraid of strenght of vikings against thors (and BC) but the results seems good - liberators upgrades in fusion core is a good design decision - blue flame is ok even if i think it was already strong
Finally only the battlecruisers teleport seems a bit boring (like nydus, obviously not fair in diamond league), and the timing cast looks too short (maybe 1,5 sec)
For TvZ
- I always find neural parasite interesting and strong and for now the timing of the spell doesn t seem to break Terrans - Infested terrans will be more used but they seems to lack something (maybe they can pop faster or walk a little bit faster to chase their prey. - Nydus summons timing is ofc needed
For P - Good to see the zealots charge coming back, even if the timing research seems deadly for a thrird base.. - I hope to see more voyd rays, hope the new design works
Only the upgrade of adept seems weird, it doesn t seems a good design - and the research is not so powerfull.. But i m not against new upgrades cause Protoss doesn t have so many SPELLS Upgrades. This upgrade could be stronger with research time a bit longer OR this kind of upgrades could required glaives
In definitive, it s a good adaptation patch it remains to my mind : - creeps tumors number must really depends of Queens number and the strategy from zerg players opening - New design of bunker has never been used.. Terrans can always spam planetary forteress and it s not worth it to invest in bunker near the creep or near a siege front line.. - Battlecruiser teleport could make an alert when an ennemy unit teleports into your base...
Thanks Wardi !!!
|
Something I just realized about this many changes this late in a games life span..
I'm not trying to be hateful against blizzard but how are they making changes to some of these units that have been around since WOL and they still cant get it right? I find this to be the most frustrating part because the community has always been vocal about the issues with the game, they just refuse to budge on (invincible nydus worm). They acknowledge the strength of it and still refuse to remove invulnerability? It just doesn't make sense. It literally advertises the fact that they have no clue what theyre doing.
They try to balance terran by giving or removing strength to upgrades...really? This is really lazy and shows that they have no vision.
Protoss changes? Some of them seem like they were thrown in as filler...an observer speed nerf? Still cant get the zealot right???
For the amount of time they take to put these changes out you would think there would be more thought put into it. I have read interesting ideas from people in the community before and the balance team wont give them a 2nd thought.
|
On October 19 2019 08:50 RandomPlayer416 wrote: Something I just realized about this many changes this late in a games life span..
I'm not trying to be hateful against blizzard but how are they making changes to some of these units that have been around since WOL and they still cant get it right? I find this to be the most frustrating part because the community has always been vocal about the issues with the game, they just refuse to budge on (invincible nydus worm). They acknowledge the strength of it and still refuse to remove invulnerability? It just doesn't make sense. It literally advertises the fact that they have no clue what theyre doing.
They try to balance terran by giving or removing strength to upgrades...really? This is really lazy and shows that they have no vision.
Protoss changes? Some of them seem like they were thrown in as filler...an observer speed nerf? Still cant get the zealot right???
For the amount of time they take to put these changes out you would think there would be more thought put into it. I have read interesting ideas from people in the community before and the balance team wont give them a 2nd thought.
Part of what one does have to understand is that WoL and LotV have had significant changes in between them. Some strategies that worked well in WoL don't work at all in LotV. In addition, the way creators make maps has changed significantly as well. Map design has a massive impact on balance, and for instance, the relatively easy second and third that we see more often now did not exist in WoL. Or take the reaper. It was used early in 2010 and 2011, but until its redesign, the unit was not as common in most matchups. Now, it's a mainstay in every matchup.
Second, oftentimes, it's just tweaks and minor map changes that are needed to change balance. Look at the Blink era in 2014. A large part of the imbalance was caused by maps having an exposed natural that blink stalkers could abuse. Blizzard overcorrected and swung the winrates in the opposite direction until we had the same number of TvT finals as we did PvP finals.
Also, I would like to add that the vocal SC2 community is very often wrong about balance. Or at least they're not getting the whole picture. Again, back in WoL, people complained that the colossi were imbalanced....and they were not. I remember quite clearly how people thought colossi/voidray was an unstoppable composition.
This isn't to say that the balance team hasn't made mistakes (and pretty massive ones at that). The Broodlord/infestor days, although not quite as imbalanced as people make it out to be, should have been changed earlier. The Swarmhost meta in HotS was extremely cancerous and should have been fixed.
TL;DR: WoL and LotV have some significant differences that make equating balance illogical, and the map pool has always affected balance, and sometimes minor tweaks are needed more than major design swings.
|
i honestly think zerg needs a heavy nerf. with terran they overdid it by making ravens useless, that was more than a nerf, it would be the same as if they removed neutral, and removed the dmg from fungal. . lastest patch did nothing towards zerg late game. i dont think this will fix zergs OPness in late game. with guys like rogue and serral being super honest about zerg being overpowered in late game its even more reason to do something with it.
4 zerg champs compeared to 1 T+1 P is horrible, that means Zerg is op, if it was just 1 guy being above everyone else like maru was it was ok. if serral was winning everything while we had 2 zergs in ro 16 and 1 in ro8, it would be fine, but with zergs overperforming like this they shouldnt nerf zergs with their gloves on. just remove the gloves, like they did with terran and ravens. for some reason they are super careful when nerfing zerg, and i do not know why. i honestly cant figure it out.
also a race being overpowered in late game is way worse than being overpowered in early or mid game, because you can turtle while being slightly behind in economy, and still get to late game.
|
I think all these forum discussion about Zergs comes from a misunderstanding in the lecture. While viewers are writing what they would like to see instead of OP late game Zergs, they didn t get the whole picture as it was said..
The main problem is deep but everybody can clearly understand it, it s just a question of phrasing between Blizzard and casual players. For now, it seems taboo to discuss about End game Zergs unless it was done separetly from queens, creep spreading mechanics and the OP army composition, .. I don t remmenber Blizzard talking about this synergy in just one of his patch. So of course, you understand Bliz fear to change "the heart of the swarm", losing a big part of his viewers and players.
All these things was done slowly and it s great.. Now i would be happy to hear Serral or Dark explaining what could be done like changes, which parts of the mechanics has to be study between in every features of the game.
To me, the only "change issue" is to force Zerg to make a gamble on their number of queens which will give a creep spread more or less faster. Actually, it should be like that but also in diamond league, generally Grand Masters players know every timing of push so they are always aware of an attack.. And they can spend time to create tumors.
If i was in charge of balance i would study this part of the game untill the mid-game (then see consequences on the End game) :
- the first idea could be to deal with visible tumors - the second idea is to calculate a cooldown and a new energy cost between injections/tumors.
|
I wonder how many of the proposed changes go through in the post-blizzcon patch. So much anticipation. Just have to wait. :x
|
Ugh ZvP is so gross right now. Watching Elazer vs Trap right now, lategame zerg just roflstomps +3 air upgraded protoss.
|
On October 27 2019 13:01 greenturtle23 wrote: Ugh ZvP is so gross right now. Watching Elazer vs Trap right now, lategame zerg just roflstomps +3 air upgraded protoss. I agree. I play Terran and think ZvP seems kind of unfair late game.
|
On October 19 2019 10:21 FrkFrJss wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2019 08:50 RandomPlayer416 wrote: Something I just realized about this many changes this late in a games life span..
I'm not trying to be hateful against blizzard but how are they making changes to some of these units that have been around since WOL and they still cant get it right? I find this to be the most frustrating part because the community has always been vocal about the issues with the game, they just refuse to budge on (invincible nydus worm). They acknowledge the strength of it and still refuse to remove invulnerability? It just doesn't make sense. It literally advertises the fact that they have no clue what theyre doing.
They try to balance terran by giving or removing strength to upgrades...really? This is really lazy and shows that they have no vision.
Protoss changes? Some of them seem like they were thrown in as filler...an observer speed nerf? Still cant get the zealot right???
For the amount of time they take to put these changes out you would think there would be more thought put into it. I have read interesting ideas from people in the community before and the balance team wont give them a 2nd thought. Second, oftentimes, it's just tweaks and minor map changes that are needed to change balance. Look at the Blink era in 2014. A large part of the imbalance was caused by maps having an exposed natural that blink stalkers could abuse. Blizzard overcorrected and swung the winrates in the opposite direction until we had the same number of TvT finals as we did PvP finals.
This is one thing I still have regret in my mind over. I really wish they reverted some of the changes that were almost exclusively due to map issues in the past. For example, small maps made stim scv timings too strong. Or, the blink issue you mentioned. Well finally terran saw a revert in some way to the stim timing, but blink is something that hasn't even been looked at for YEARS due to the above issue mentioned.
I really wish we saw blink at least considered in the changes for reduced research time. It doesn't have to be anything huge, but the time it takes now feels like forever in comparison to things like charge or normal upgrades.
|
If you keep adding and taking away from a mess, then you still have a mess (bad foundations of design).
Just start again, fresh , and do it properly this time.
|
Czech Republic12128 Posts
On October 27 2019 17:21 Parcelleus wrote: If you keep adding and taking away from a mess, then you still have a mess (bad foundations of design).
Just start again, fresh , and do it properly this time. They don't have the resources as it looks like. At least that's what i think based on how long they "analyze" the issues before doing something about them.
|
Do we know who is the chief developer in balance team?
|
|
|
|