|
On December 29 2022 07:30 ejozl wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2022 06:09 The_Red_Viper wrote:
The problem with creep isn't how fast it spreads or any of the stats itself (though it is arguable that creep should never have been this integral to zerg gameplay in the first place, but that's another topic).
The imo real aspect to focus on is the energy drain on the queen. The queen was supposed to be a unit where energy usage is a decision, you either spread creep, or you inject, or you use it for healing (the last was always just a gimmick though). That idea works well in a state of the game where you only build a few queens, but as we've seen the ideal way to play it is quite different. If there is a design change regarding creep, it has to target the queen and its energy usage, to make it so there is more decision making going on for the zerg side regarding it. There are many ways to do that, personally i think it could be interesting to remove the autoattack of the queen altogether and make it akin to the oracle where energy is used and you have to activate it. That puts strain on its energy use, gives the other races more opportunity to inflict damage through harass in an indirect manner if they are active and requires more thought from the zerg side regarding the queen.
Where the balance lies regarding that new energy drain i don't know, but i think it's an interesting idea regardless.
Zerg illuminati making all the decisions now, think about! The change I did was: Queen starts with 50 energy. Creep Tumour from 25 -> 50. Then you can give it a few buffs, for instance I would let it Transfuse full value instantly and off Creep. Doing this makes them very capable fighting units, but every Tumour apart from the first one, is simply nerfed, making the mass Queen strat way more costly.
It s so obvious @red_viper that i m wondering why this kind of changes haven t been done yet...
|
On December 29 2022 14:21 Turbovolver wrote:
That doesn't feel too kludgy a solution to me. Holding up Warcraft 3 as a game constructed of bandaids upon bandaids is funny to me, have you looked at something like League of Legends balance?
You misunderstood me. Warcraft 3 is not a game constructed of bandaids.
My point was that things like hero units and global cooldown abilities being central to how a race plays are design ideas that belong in games like Warcraft 3, and it's a kludgy bandaid of a fix to use to them to stop design issues in Starcraft 2 from being balance problems.
|
On December 30 2022 03:53 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2022 14:21 Turbovolver wrote:
That doesn't feel too kludgy a solution to me. Holding up Warcraft 3 as a game constructed of bandaids upon bandaids is funny to me, have you looked at something like League of Legends balance? You misunderstood me. Warcraft 3 is not a game constructed of bandaids. My point was that things like hero units and global cooldown abilities being central to how a race plays are design ideas that belong in games like Warcraft 3, and it's a kludgy bandaid of a fix to use to them to stop design issues in Starcraft 2 from being balance problems.
Ahhh I see. Sorry, yeah, that makes a lot more sense!
|
I like the idea of nerfing Creep Tumor from 25 energy to 50, and allowing Queens to start with 50 energy.
It doesn't seem to break anything? If the nerf on creep is too much, then you can buff the tumor back slightly.
The alternative ofc is just nerfing Creep Tumor a little more, which I think would be fine with these Hydra/Ultra/BL/Lurker mobility buffs. Maybe Creep Tumor can have the same cooldown as it does now, but it spawns creep ~20% slower (in terms of radius), that way if you really want to speed it up, you have use Queens to plant multiple Tumors.
I also don't mind the idea of requiring each Hatchery to only build 1 Queen, I mean think about it from a lore perspective, why can you have more than 1 Queen per "colony" or whatever?
Also, it would make macro Hatches more of a thing again, if you want to increase production, or get more energy.
This way when you're on 3 base, maybe you will want 4-5 Hatches, and 4-5 Queens at that stage isn't bad.
Hatchery could be buffed from 300 to 250 minerals too, so that you could get 5 Hatches on 3 base early game to get 5 Queens.
In return, we can buff Transfuse back a bit more. We could also buff the stats of the Queen slightly so Zerg doesn't die to a few Banshees/BCs/Voids etc. 5 Queens is a lot weaker than having the ~10 that is sometimes gotten to fend off BCs/Voids and such, so 5 Queens need to be the strength of around 7 Queens currently.
Nerfing Creep Tumor spread speed would be the simplest/safest change to me though. If it encourages Zerg to put more multiple Tumors, then it will also make them have to decide a little more between whether to save Energy for creep/inject/transfuse. Having 8 queens on 3 bases to me is fine if they have a little less Transfuse energy than currently.
It's really the sustain of the Queens thanks to Transfuse that gives them the bulk of their fighting strength, because they're able to have all Queens shooting and alive instead of dying 1 by 1 like most units. Queens are exponentially stronger the more energy you have banked up, so having even 4 less Transfuses when a push hits will already be a noticeable nerf. (If they decide to focus more on Creep spread than banking Transfuse energy for more fighting strength).
|
Creep tumour should not give vision.
Lurkers should have a seige timer, like a seige tank.
EMP should not remove shields.
|
1. Zerg should get buffs in something else then, creep vision is integral to them (even if it's too strong now).
2. Absolutely agree.
3. This more or less removes ghosts from TvP making them a single matchup unit.
But maybe remove 50 shields instead of 100?
|
On December 29 2022 07:30 ejozl wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2022 06:09 The_Red_Viper wrote:
The problem with creep isn't how fast it spreads or any of the stats itself (though it is arguable that creep should never have been this integral to zerg gameplay in the first place, but that's another topic).
The imo real aspect to focus on is the energy drain on the queen. The queen was supposed to be a unit where energy usage is a decision, you either spread creep, or you inject, or you use it for healing (the last was always just a gimmick though). That idea works well in a state of the game where you only build a few queens, but as we've seen the ideal way to play it is quite different. If there is a design change regarding creep, it has to target the queen and its energy usage, to make it so there is more decision making going on for the zerg side regarding it. There are many ways to do that, personally i think it could be interesting to remove the autoattack of the queen altogether and make it akin to the oracle where energy is used and you have to activate it. That puts strain on its energy use, gives the other races more opportunity to inflict damage through harass in an indirect manner if they are active and requires more thought from the zerg side regarding the queen.
Where the balance lies regarding that new energy drain i don't know, but i think it's an interesting idea regardless.
Zerg illuminati making all the decisions now, think about! The change I did was: Queen starts with 50 energy. Creep Tumour from 25 -> 50. Then you can give it a few buffs, for instance I would let it Transfuse full value instantly and off Creep. Doing this makes them very capable fighting units, but every Tumour apart from the first one, is simply nerfed, making the mass Queen strat way more costly.
That solves the issue of 'having too much creep', and makes each creep tumor kill more valuable while also being a 'conservative' change regarding the design itself. So something like this is obviously way more realistic to happen than my idea.
I just don't like it as much because it's imo a 'boring' change and doesn't really address the queen status per se. I prefer to make the energy question to be a more decision based scenario myself. In your case you still have a lot of queens and just place as many tumors as you can, you just have less of them. Solves the issue (if we think there is an issue), but is kinda binary.
My idea obviously would require more work, queens would probably have to spawn with more than 25 energy too for example (to be able to inject and fight off something like the reaper early on), but overall i think the dynamic would be good if one finds a sweet spot with the energy drain and energy levels.
Though i admit that it is based on me thinking that queens are just too flexible to begin with, allowing zergs to be too safe too 'easily' (not much thought).
|
Well, the PTR tournament went about as well as expected. No new viable strategies for Protoss or Terran, and Zerg is even more oppressive than before--so mission accomplished?
|
Poll: How do you feel Stalkers in end game ?There are mandatory because of air ennemy units (6) 40% I prefer use my 50 gas/stalker into robot unit (5) 33% I m satisfied about stalkers strength (4) 27% 15 total votes Your vote: How do you feel Stalkers in end game ? (Vote): I m satisfied about stalkers strength
(Vote): I prefer use my 50 gas/stalker into robot unit
(Vote): There are mandatory because of air ennemy units
|
On December 31 2022 02:14 The_Red_Viper wrote:
Though i admit that it is based on me thinking that queens are just too flexible to begin with, allowing zergs to be too safe too 'easily' (not much thought).
i would like to know how you envision ZvX early game. should zerg move more or build more specific units?
because example 80% of Zerg attack options in early are stopped by walls, meaning Zerg has only 2 options push/ allin or ecco for stronger push later.
|
Without the Hydra and Ultra buffs I'd actually like the patch but the idea of buffing those two units in the current state of the game is just mind-boggling to me, especially when there are no relevant buffs for the other races to compensate them.
|
On December 31 2022 04:03 Charoisaur wrote:
Without the Hydra and Ultra buffs I'd actually like the patch but the idea of buffing those two units in the current state of the game is just mind-boggling to me, especially when there are no relevant buffs for the other races to compensate them.
I understand your feelings, i imagine how hard laddering is, and now more than ever because you will have new issues against powerfull units like Lurkers or Ultralisks.
|
So what is purpose of the patch? It doesn't look reasonable to make anything from the list. The wall of text that was suggested by players like Harstem, Scarlett aka "the council" and etc doesn't fit modern needs of starcraft. None of these changes. I understand that somewhere in march people were asked. Like, hey, nerds, give us what you want. And the wall of text was created but not edited. Because Blizzard intern has zero meaning and understanding. So what is purpose of the patch?
|
On December 31 2022 14:13 depressed1 wrote:
So what is purpose of the patch? It doesn't look reasonable to make anything from the list. The wall of text that was suggested by players like Harstem, Scarlett aka "the council" and etc doesn't fit modern needs of starcraft. None of these changes. I understand that somewhere in march people were asked. Like, hey, nerds, give us what you want. And the wall of text was created but not edited. Because Blizzard intern has zero meaning and understanding. So what is purpose of the patch?
the purpose to ensure toss don't win a championship again :^)
|
On December 31 2022 16:20 SHODAN wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2022 14:13 depressed1 wrote:
So what is purpose of the patch? It doesn't look reasonable to make anything from the list. The wall of text that was suggested by players like Harstem, Scarlett aka "the council" and etc doesn't fit modern needs of starcraft. None of these changes. I understand that somewhere in march people were asked. Like, hey, nerds, give us what you want. And the wall of text was created but not edited. Because Blizzard intern has zero meaning and understanding. So what is purpose of the patch?
the purpose to ensure toss don't win a championship again :^)
Given that the patch buffs the style that herO already plays (gateway units), it's quite laughable to claim it.
It only shows how little TL knows about balance at all.
|
In fact i should have created a poll to ask if you find ok that hydras get a buff while stalkers don t.
|
On December 31 2022 14:13 depressed1 wrote:
So what is purpose of the patch? It doesn't look reasonable to make anything from the list. The wall of text that was suggested by players like Harstem, Scarlett aka "the council" and etc doesn't fit modern needs of starcraft. None of these changes. I understand that somewhere in march people were asked. Like, hey, nerds, give us what you want. And the wall of text was created but not edited. Because Blizzard intern has zero meaning and understanding. So what is purpose of the patch?
To buff Zerg, nerf Protoss, and nerf Terran (and nerf Mech).
After watching some PTR games of the new BLs, the new speed looks too crazy. They'd be fine with just the broodling nerf and same speed. They'd still be good and usable in many situations, just a little less good for deathballs specifically. Why the speed buff? Carriers were nerfed, Disruptors were nerfed, Shield Overcharged was nerfed. So we're buffing Zerg midgame and lategame, and nerfing Protoss and Terran lategame?
I know I sound like a broken record at this point, but there is so so much wrong with this patch. Giving zerg the strongest lategame makes their gameplan even more 1 dimensional, since they can just play passive and macro and it's all on the opponent to stop the game from getting into lategame. If lategames are equally balanced, then at least there's a chance for a losing player to stabilize in the lategame, thus encouraging the winning player to try to interact and be more active.
That Viper nerf won't be enough to make up for the Ultra, BL, Hydra, Lurker buffs. Viper being able to start moving as they're pulling is not at all the design issue with that move. It's a combination of having so much energy thanks to Consume, Abduct being very punishing if you're not watching your army carefully at all times, and in general discouraging players from playing positionally with their army (since it means slower units always get picked off when retreating), Abduct not being spectator friendly since it's not interesting or exciting to watch, and Vipers being effective in deathball situations when its very design was to discourage the opponent from deathballing. Viper was introduced in HotS as a way to help Zerg with deathballs, but now in LotV Zerg has arguably the strongest lategame and deathballs themselves, and Abduct just synergizes well with deathballs, so the entire concept of Abduct is super fucked now.
There are so so many ways Abduct could have been adjusted to address at least 1 of these issues, but it was adjusted in the most boring and insignificant way possible.
Abduct could have pulled Massive units half distance, and not target Heroic units, so that it wouldn't just hard counter Colossus play (especially now that Hydralisks are even stronger, and Disruptors weaker). Or Consume could have been nerfed to have a longer cooldown and/or give less energy per HP drained. Or Abduct could have been channeling, so that you potentially can snipe or Feedback the unit before it finishes pulling the unit all the way (instead of only having the chance to stop it before Abduct starts).
If any of these changes made it too weak, then you can buff the Viper slightly in another aspect.
Buffing BL speed and making Cyclone better at units that Mech players don't have trouble with, and worse at units that Mech players need Cyclone to help counter? Why couldn't we have just straight up buffed the Cyclone instead of making it less useful and arguably worse? We gave Hydras 2 buffs, Ultras 2 buffs. Is the Cyclone a problematic unit? Would giving Mag Field +5 attack, +15 vs armored break anything? Or +10 attack, +5 vs armored? (Instead of +10 attack).
I would like Thors to move faster and have faster attack point too, thanks, let's give the Ultra treatment to the Thor so we can see more Thors instead of Ghosts. How about we give the Hydra treatment to Cyclones and make Cyclones as fast as Hellions too, since Cyclone Hellion is rarely used and weak, just like how Hydras need to move the same speed as Roaches?
I'm also confused and upset at how we don't know who contributed to the balance patch. Are they under NDA? If not then why are they hiding? Balancing a game is a very important responsibility, and if you want to contribute to it, then you also need to be held accountable by making your name known. If you can't do it well or are afraid, then don't contribute, because this patch is just making things worse.
I've heard pro streamers say in their PTR reaction videos that it's important for pros to balance the game because you need both a good understanding of the game, and understanding of game design. That's true, but being a pro doesn't mean you understand the game design well. Sure, someone who is not a pro might not understand the game at a top level - but they may understand the design better. Pros should not get preferential treatment just because they're pros, as some pros seem to have implied in their videos.
I've also heard a pro opinion that the Raven autoturret wasn't changed because the Raven comes out earlier and has more starting energy and you'll have about the same amount of turrets for your early harass. True, but their complete failure to acknowledge that the lategame power is extremely nerfed is again proof that just because you're a pro doesn't mean you're not overlooking very obvious side effects.
If community patches are going to be like this from now on, I would really rather not and stay on the current patch forever. Zerg might be slightly stronger at the top top level, but I love the game as is right now.
If community patches are going to be a thing, there needs to be transparency so it's actually a community patch, otherwise there's no point. And if the patch is going to be contributed to mainly by NA pros, I'd rather again not, because KR pros are so much better. The opinion of an NA pro will differ greatly from the understanding/opinions of say Rogue, Maru, herO, and Dark.
|
I was watching quite alot of the PTR matches, I think I have slightly more of an educated opinion on a few of these changes. Some of the changes like the Raven I actually didn't get to see a whole lot (probably because I don't watch TvT) so I'll let someone else educate me a bit more on that one. I've said it once and I'll say it before, radical redesigns of spell caster units are massive changes and should warrant their own individual patch imo.
The Zerg changes seem great, especially for Hydras, buffing BL speed however is unnecessary and imo will only result in more aerial deathballs. Strike the BL buff and I think the changes are good, Hydras are interesting units to have in the meta and Ultralisks have sucked for far too long.
The Protoss changes strike me as bizarre because I don't really see Protoss over performing, so nerfing defensive capabilities, Disruptor radius and Carriers all at once seems too severe. I'm fine with any nerfing of aerial deathball units, but why would the Carrier be singled out vs. the BL?
The upgrade buffs are minor but nice, Observer changes I'm pretty neutral on.
As for the Terran changes?
Ghost changes are terrible, absolutely awful from what I saw in the PTR.
Cyclone changes seem, ok? What was the purpose with this exactly? Was the Cyclone under performing? Is it too strong vs. armored units? I'm good with changes to under used units but I'm lost on this one.
|
On December 30 2022 16:22 Rexeus wrote:
Creep tumour should not give vision.
Lurkers should have a seige timer, like a seige tank.
EMP should not remove shields.
my man wants to start a revolution. While simple in concept those 3 changes you propose can make an entire new game. Call it sc3
|
I'm not sure about TvZ (it's the mu i understand the least by far), but for lategame P, I feel like adding one more damage tick to psi storm (so that it does 90 damage total with the same exact dps) might be a nice offset to the carrier/disruptor nerfs.
That way, storm dodging is just as effective, but lazily sitting in a full storm is even more discouraged.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
