EPTHow important is it for StarCraft II to get a new balance…
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
starvingbox1
18 Posts
| ||
NonY
8751 Posts
| ||
Nakajin
Canada8989 Posts
On September 09 2021 05:30 NonY wrote: i think it's important for blizzard to do it because they said they'd do it. it'd be a huge hit to blizzard's reputation if they ended sc2 with this broken commitment. I'm unsure if it's sarcasm or not, but I think Blizz has multiple more pressing reputation problems than not patching Starcraft 2. | ||
|
Ciaus_Dronu
South Africa1848 Posts
On September 09 2021 05:30 NonY wrote: i think it's important for blizzard to do it because they said they'd do it. it'd be a huge hit to blizzard's reputation if they ended sc2 with this broken commitment. While I feel that a patch is needed for SC2's sake, as a fan of SC2, I'm not sure about this one  For Blizzard as a whole, it'd be like an ice-lolly in an avalanche at this point. | ||
|
washikie
United States752 Posts
But we may be in a post patch world. The current state of the game might be its final state, so I’ve tried to get used to that. | ||
|
112StaminaX
37 Posts
Only then can you have a look at the balance. this would be even better if the 10 games you sample have a very good mix of players. The reason i bring this up is ive seen way too many complaints over cannon rushes and some of the pro players that stream never seem to die to it . . .so it cant be a problem, of course the issues lie in how easy these are executed in the leeauges but we have to ignore this. this is what id like to see before balance is raised but for me, ive always liked the idea of having a unit of the month, buff something of each race and watch different strategies be developed rather than MU's getting stale | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26536 Posts
On September 09 2021 06:23 washikie wrote: I think it’s very important especially for pvz. The meta is stale and the way it evolved is really boring and uninteresting. But we may be in a post patch world. The current state of the game might be its final state, so I’ve tried to get used to that. More than most matchups, it’s usually an arms race of Protoss finding new timings, Zergs figuring out optimal defences and it eventually stabilises into whatever lategame comps are the thing being reached with greater and greater regularity. PvZ has generally always sucked because there’s no appreciable skirmish-focused midgame, which is exacerbated further by LoTVs shorter early thru midgame. Protoss doesn’t want to be out on the map unless they’re trying to kill you, or trying to fake out that they’re trying to kill you. TvZ conversely isn’t exactly flowering with tons of new innovations, but it feels considerably less stale because each matchup has a lot of skirmishing for position, tactical supremacy etc. I suppose in SC2 we’ve never seen some real extended periods of the game being left alone, a la WC3 never mind BW, equally even within the (relatively) brief span of patches PvZ tends to get rather mapped out and stagnant. If this is to be the final patch, well there have certainly been worse metas we could have left things be. | ||
|
RogerChillingworth
Chad3132 Posts
I think that's the biggest issue in SC2--personally, humbly. That and just Protoss in general being pretty poorly designed compared to its predecessor. | ||
|
oGsChess
23 Posts
| ||
|
SiegfriedSC
9 Posts
On September 08 2021 02:37 [Phantom] wrote: And Protoss barely wins any tournaments as is, so is it really necessary? I feel a lot of it is in perceptions. Protoss feels unfair, but it isn't, and imo, its' in fact kind of bad. This isn't true anymore, in 2021 a Protoss player won 7 out of 13 Premier events, and 9 of 16 Major events. Just because they're not winning in Code S doesn't mean they're not winning at all. | ||
|
Turbovolver
Australia2396 Posts
On September 09 2021 10:16 RogerChillingworth wrote: I consistently think that widow mines, banelings and disruptors just make for exceptionally frustrating games where shit swings in a millisecond because of a unit that isn't even difficult to control in the first place. Thanks for saying this. I only watch pro games so I don't have the best grasp on the reality, and especially the reality for an average player, but there was a whole thread about how disruptors suck and are poorly designed and I'm just there the whole time thinking "how are they really that different to widow mines when it comes to RNG or swingy design?". | ||
|
Beelzebub1
1004 Posts
On September 09 2021 10:16 RogerChillingworth wrote: I consistently think that widow mines, banelings and disruptors just make for exceptionally frustrating games where shit swings in a millisecond because of a unit that isn't even difficult to control in the first place. I think that's the biggest issue in SC2--personally, humbly. That and just Protoss in general being pretty poorly designed compared to its predecessor. Disruptors are actually just a terrible bastardization of the Reaver, worst unit in the game imo. I love mines, they rely on positioning from the Terran and are APM intensive to unburrow so they don't shoot too early, and they are APM intensive for a Zerg to dodge, it adds a big skill element to the match up. Random shots be damned, sometimes in war it's better to be lucky then good. Banelings are a decent unit I think, they are still critical in ZvT, you can't always fight a Terran with Roaches. Warpgate imo is the worst design aspect of Protoss, it's been beaten to death for years, but it's still just such a glaring design mistake that sounded cool on paper but just makes for terrible balance. | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16062 Posts
On September 09 2021 05:30 NonY wrote: i think it's important for blizzard to do it because they said they'd do it. it'd be a huge hit to blizzard's reputation if they ended sc2 with this broken commitment. they haven't promised to patch the game. They have only said they will continue patching the game as necessary. But it's debatable if it's really necessary. edit: Ah... I think I missed the sarcasm with the Blizzard reputation | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26536 Posts
On September 09 2021 12:37 Beelzebub1 wrote: Disruptors are actually just a terrible bastardization of the Reaver, worst unit in the game imo. I love mines, they rely on positioning from the Terran and are APM intensive to unburrow so they don't shoot too early, and they are APM intensive for a Zerg to dodge, it adds a big skill element to the match up. Random shots be damned, sometimes in war it's better to be lucky then good. Banelings are a decent unit I think, they are still critical in ZvT, you can't always fight a Terran with Roaches. Warpgate imo is the worst design aspect of Protoss, it's been beaten to death for years, but it's still just such a glaring design mistake that sounded cool on paper but just makes for terrible balance. There comes a point where beyond some basic counter splits that the cool and taxing stuff you can do with mines stops being possible and it becomes a basic crapshoot as to whether the mine player gets huge hits and cleans up, or hits whiff and they get wiped. Overall I don’t mine-d them, but while it can be exciting to see if it’s a huge hit or not, it can be a bit silly. Maybe it’s genuine stubbornness over making a new unit rather than bringing the Reaver over. I would suspect it’s a nightmare to bring into SC2 with its speedy progression into maxed confrontations. Either it’s reliable damage but borderline impossible to manually target 4+ reavers and it either wipes out chunks of the enemy or doesn’t (kinda like mines), or you make it’s scarabs whiff like they are known to in BW which makes it super frustrating to use. I mean Collosus have never been a particularly beloved unit with their reliable AoE damage because there’s never really been a need (or possibility) to manually target 5/6 of them for maximum effect, nor is there all that reliable counter-play. A lot of units that work great in BW do so because they’re generally engaging in either lower supply skirmishes, or at higher supplies it’s still spread out a lot more. SC2 is maxed clumps more often than not and AoE units have to have this taken more into account. It feels like maybe despite its flaws the disruptor is a better suited unit to SC2. And man I fucking love Reavers! Yeah wall of text for earlier, a sentence for this. Warp gate in its current form is a bad design choice that requires multiple bad design choices on top of it to balance. | ||
|
geokilla
Canada8246 Posts
| ||
|
purakushi
United States3301 Posts
1. Formation movement - not necessarily allowing players to change it on the fly but generally to spread units more. This feature was introduced to the editor in https://news.blizzard.com/en-us/starcraft2/23471116/starcraft-ii-4-13-0-ptr-patch-notes 2. Higher than 200 max supply. Perhaps 250. Unit food costs are higher compared to BW, which is not inherently bad, but larger armies would be great. | ||
|
[Phantom]
Mexico2170 Posts
Many zergs, from bronze to master rely on just macro to get there. Zerg macro is the hardest at the beginning and then in plat/diamond becomes the easiest due to only needing one building and the superior eco Zerg can get. So they win a lot of games due to macro and then get hit in the face by a brick wall when that's no longer enough. Also I'm sorry, but the Reaver is not a good unit. It looks cool, and it even existed in the SC2 alpha, but it sucks and is unusable without a prism. Disruptors, as binary as they are and I hope they aren't in SC3, are a much better unit. | ||
|
Ciaus_Dronu
South Africa1848 Posts
On September 10 2021 02:23 [Phantom] wrote: Imo, if a Zerg just dies to an a+click sky toss army they don't deserve to be in that league. I always recommend zergs to play Terran for at least a month so they improve their strategy and decision making. It's honestly pathetic how bad the Zerg players I get matches against are. They are too used to a+click their armies thanks to their superior eco and win everything, that they barely use infestors/vipers or flank. If the Zerg has lurkers, Corruptors, infectors/vipers there is literally no way a Protoss can a+click and win unless the Zerg doesn't use any abilities. Many zergs, from bronze to master rely on just macro to get there. Zerg macro is the hardest at the beginning and then in plat/diamond becomes the easiest due to only needing one building and the superior eco Zerg can get. So they win a lot of games due to macro and then get hit in the face by a brick wall when that's no longer enough. Also I'm sorry, but the Reaver is not a good unit. It looks cool, and it even existed in the SC2 alpha, but it sucks and is unusable without a prism. Disruptors, as binary as they are and I hope they aren't in SC3, are a much better unit. Wait til you see how bad the protoss players are Honestly skytoss is the easiest composition to use *somewhat* effectively in the entire game. At least roaches and zealot archon can get stuck in chokes. On the other hand, the amount of reactive spellcasting Zerg needs to effectively fight it is definitely non-trivial. I honestly don't see how you can look at those two lategame armies, or the current state of the top end of ladder, and think that the Zerg players being bad is the problem. Even ShowTime said that he thinks Protoss is easier to play than other races for players below his level on a recent pylon show. Lambo's first piece of advice about fighting skytoss before going into composition and tactics is don't, it's really hard. | ||
|
Draddition
United States59 Posts
On September 10 2021 03:31 Ciaus_Dronu wrote: Wait til you see how bad the protoss players are Honestly skytoss is the easiest composition to use *somewhat* effectively in the entire game. At least roaches and zealot archon can get stuck in chokes. On the other hand, the amount of reactive spellcasting Zerg needs to effectively fight it is definitely non-trivial. I honestly don't see how you can look at those two lategame armies, or the current state of the top end of ladder, and think that the Zerg players being bad is the problem. Even ShowTime said that he thinks Protoss is easier to play than other races for players below his level on a recent pylon show. Lambo's first piece of advice about fighting skytoss before going into composition and tactics is don't, it's really hard. This all to also ignore the things that exaggerate everything terrible about skytoss. Cannons and shield batteries make it very difficult to break a protoss before they decide to move out. They also mean you can't distract a protoss with small runbys- and committing with a large enough force means you probably don't have the army supply to fight skytoss on the front lines. Recall means you can't base trade, and also means protoss can just nope out of a fight when you do piece together a good battle vs skytoss. All this makes it feel like strategy isn't really involved in the match-up. It's all mechanics, and a lopsided affair | ||
|
darklycid
3541 Posts
| ||
| ||
