|
On January 24 2023 04:36 [Phantom] wrote:Let me be the first to congratulate Zerg players for their 7th world championship in a row. If we get another ZvZ finals we better get the patch reversed and a public apology from the balance council. We should not accept this insult of a patch. I've come to understand the delusion of zerg players now, some of which compare a unit being 1 pixel to the right wich is impossible to see, making the unit act in an unintended and unpredicted fashion, to units being in a completely different base, but the other races should not accept this madness. Show nested quote +Developer Comment: Recently Protoss have been heavily relying on Disruptors in ground engagements. With the nerf to Disruptors as well as Battery Overcharge, earlier upgrades should give some compensation for fighting strength on the ground. this is such a dishonest statement is ridiculous. No, having upgrades 5 seconds early in exchaange for lategame nerfs will only force protoss to all-in. It doesn't in any way "compensate for fighting strenght on the ground" when your opponent also finishes they 2-2 or 3-3 upgrades. Things like changing the research speed might give more power momentarily, but after that brief period has passed there's no buff at all, just the disruptors and carrier nerfs. That doesn't compensate at all for the fighting strenght of the ground army. It's just telling Protoss that going early all-in is the only way they'll win. Show nested quote +On January 24 2023 03:59 InfCereal wrote: And I swear to fuck if someone says "protoss has to play that way to compete". No, they don't. Why don't go ladder for a week and make a stalker instead of an adept. It will not cause you to lose games. Cross my heart, your win rate will probably go up because you're making up for your mechanical inefficiencies with smarter strategic decisions.
It's not as simple as just making a Stalker. They are terrible vs lings. If you make them they might block the entrance, but they are terrible agaisnt link floods/baneling bust etc. You're also using more gas than you want, and you lose the ability to scout with the adept and it shade or do light harass with it. Furthermore you say you'll get angry if someone says protoss has to cut corners like that and say it's a choice. Maybe it is, but look at pro winrates in pvz, depending on which matches in a best case scnenario protoss isn't significantly ahead or anything, so if they don't make the adept they would be slightly behind. But that's still ignoring the most important point that you refuse to aknowlegde: There's no way to clearly see at a glance if the adept will block the lings or not. It appears it will, it should do it as it's in the middle of two gates, and then sometiems it doesn't cause it's 1 mm to the side in a manner that's impossible to see. That's not intendent or consistent behaviour, and thus it should be fixed.
The patch is not the issue why you're 3.4k MMR.
Celebrate that sc2 is getting some support.
|
Phantom, can you post your replay please.
|
On January 24 2023 06:29 bela.mervado wrote:
Phantom, can you post your replay please.
LOL.
And he's copy-pasting the same tears on Reddit, too.
Lame...
|
On January 24 2023 06:35 Gescom wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2023 06:29 bela.mervado wrote:
Phantom, can you post your replay please. LOL. And he's copy-pasting the same tears on Reddit, too. Lame...
The amount of terrans tears in this thread is quite entertaining
I guarantee majority of these posters in this thread are gold league, however, they talk and act like they are grandmasters
|
Fairly controversial patch being pushed 2 weeks before the biggest tournament of the year, what could go wrong?
Honestly terrible, but sc2 is in a state where we should be happy that there are any patches at all i guess, even if it means that the zerg illuminati can run wild. Oh well.
|
I thought that before this patch the state of SC2 was pretty damn fine. Truly it had been years since the game felt as competitive as it felt before this patch.
So no, if this ends up how we have reason to fear it may, I'm not particularly happy about it.
|
On January 25 2023 00:57 Nebuchad wrote:
I thought that before this patch the state of SC2 was pretty damn fine. Truly it had been years since the game felt as competitive as it felt before this patch.
For this reason I was really surprised we were having a patch.
|
On January 25 2023 00:57 Nebuchad wrote:
I thought that before this patch the state of SC2 was pretty damn fine. Truly it had been years since the game felt as competitive as it felt before this patch.
So no, if this ends up how we have reason to fear it may, I'm not particularly happy about it.
I agree in the short term, but longterm you need some shakeup through patches for the game to stay somewhat fresh imo. But certainly not like this, both in its content and the way of release...
The zerg illuminati are real.
|
Mmm I would say shaking up things work in the short term, but for the long term we just need the game to be in a solid state.
Zerg illuminati using the fact that people want a fresher game to push in their Zerg agenda, for shame..
|
On January 25 2023 02:55 ejozl wrote:
Mmm I would say shaking up things work in the short term, but for the long term we just need the game to be in a solid state.
Zerg illuminati using the fact that people want a fresher game to push in their Zerg agenda, for shame..
I mean for the appeal of the game in the longterm there need to be switchups here and there. Whereas a solid state of the game is great until the meta becomes so figured out and stale that it becomes boring.
Maps can switch things up too, but
1) the choice of maps in sc2 is incredible conservative
2) maps aren't as potent as changes which switch up unit dynamics
But i see what you are saying, yes in the short term figuring out a patch is quite fun, but you want it to create a solid foundation when it is figured out too. Totally. I guess maybe super longterm would be what i meant then :D
|
On January 25 2023 03:21 The_Red_Viper wrote:
1) the choice of maps in sc2 is incredible conservative
2) maps aren't as potent as changes which switch up unit dynamics
Yes I agree. I still wonder why terrans, zerg and protoss build their base far from the minerals. Why don t just build aside ? 
|
On January 25 2023 02:27 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2023 00:57 Nebuchad wrote:
I thought that before this patch the state of SC2 was pretty damn fine. Truly it had been years since the game felt as competitive as it felt before this patch.
So no, if this ends up how we have reason to fear it may, I'm not particularly happy about it. I agree in the short term, but longterm you need some shakeup through patches for the game to stay somewhat fresh imo. But certainly not like this, both in its content and the way of release... The zerg illuminati are real.
To be thorough I think some of the things in the patch might surprise us. Imagine how hard you counter lategame runbys with an archon in the wall, this has to be significant. Vipers will also die a lot more than they do now. Carriers get nerfed but you're already losing in this patch if you build a bunch of carriers, tempests are already the better option.
The most concerning thing for toss is by far the disruptor imo
|
I agree in the short term, but longterm you need some shakeup through patches for the game to stay somewhat fresh imo. But certainly not like this, both in its content and the way of release...
Brood War didn't need lots of patches to stay fresh...
|
On January 25 2023 21:22 MJG wrote:Show nested quote +I agree in the short term, but longterm you need some shakeup through patches for the game to stay somewhat fresh imo. But certainly not like this, both in its content and the way of release... Brood War didn't need lots of patches to stay fresh...
Brood War doesnt have mechanics like Boosted Medivac, Nydus and WARP GATE, which make the balance through map design easier, thats what Artosis said on his stream.
|
If you want the game to stay fresh, play around with the maps and not the balance. Also some love to 2v2 maps will be great.
|
Damn, the patch really went through before Katowice...
At least I'm happy they included Developer comments. Would have been better for the PTR so we can discuss properly, but it sounds like they're listening at least!
I'm not happy with the Raven changes reducing the lategame power and being less useful for mech, but oh well...
Seems that the Interference Matrix nerf is still gone, so the cheaper and faster to build Raven will be even nicer to add to your army to lock down Archon/Immortal/Carrier/Tempests! Maybe it'd even be viable against Immortal/Archon armies in the mid game, instead of using only ghosts.
Cyclone being able to target air (and carriers!!) easier and having slightly more effective lock on range are nice changes for mech
And same with the viking being able to micro a little better
I guess there is still many things to be happy about with this patch, if things are imbalanced then they will surely address it in another future patch
On January 24 2023 01:01 syndbg wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2023 00:45 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
I've been mentioning this too, Zealots and Adepts really need building collission increased a tiny bit so that you don't need to place them as pixel-perfect as you do now, as that requires extra effort and time (and stress).
If the balance team was any bit fair and competent, they would have addressed one of the stupidest (and relevant) ways pros lose games before thinking about if it'd be nice to buff Hydras and Ultras. Suppose you actually thought a bit before immediately blaming the balance team. In that case, you'd realize that by increasing the collision size of some gateway units, you're severely affecting the potential of adepts/zealots offensively and defensively. Fewer adepts/zealots in mineral lines is a huge change, just cause protoss can't place a gateway unit. The "protoss door" is legit a skill issue.
No, I did consider that, and they can simply adjust the building collission size separately from collission with minerals if you're concerned about that. If it requires a little extra programming then they can do that. Also, i don't think increasing the collission size by 1 pixel would stop you from being able to fit as many zealots/adepts in your mineral line as before.
And maybe it's not even a collission size issue, maybe it really is an unintended feature for zerglings to be able to move spam to wiggle past your unit. In that case, that's what should be fixed.
If pros keep letting ling runbys happen, by slightly misplacing their zealot/adept, which often leads to them just losing the game, then maybe it requires too much skill to do for something that is so punishing for one player and rewarding and easy to do for the other player. Do we really want to place so much emphasis on a player having to place their unit pixel perfect?
|
On January 25 2023 21:22 MJG wrote:Show nested quote +I agree in the short term, but longterm you need some shakeup through patches for the game to stay somewhat fresh imo. But certainly not like this, both in its content and the way of release... Brood War didn't need lots of patches to stay fresh...
Brood war isn't staying fresh, it's a game which has a hardcore fanbase which likes the ever same gameplay (and tbf, i can enjoy it too here and there). It also adds maps which are not as conservative as the sc2 ones which help a little.
And even then you had people talk about potential patches when the remake came out, including ex proplayers.
I get it, people in starcraft on the whole think that the game is good when the balance is good, but for most people it becomes quite stale after seeing the same game being played hundreds of times. Modern game design changes up the meta fairly regularly for a reason.
|
On January 26 2023 03:58 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2023 21:22 MJG wrote:I agree in the short term, but longterm you need some shakeup through patches for the game to stay somewhat fresh imo. But certainly not like this, both in its content and the way of release... Brood War didn't need lots of patches to stay fresh... Brood war isn't staying fresh, it's a game which has a hardcore fanbase which likes the ever same gameplay (and tbf, i can enjoy it too here and there). It also adds maps which are not as conservative as the sc2 ones which help a little. And even then you had people talk about potential patches when the remake came out, including ex proplayers. I get it, people in starcraft on the whole think that the game is good when the balance is good, but for most people it becomes quite stale after seeing the same game being played hundreds of times. Modern game design changes up the meta fairly regularly for a reason.
Changing up the meta works a lot better in team games with lots of character options to pick from. Like MOBA balance can shift and things come in and out of meta and that's fine. Then, you can just say that adaptability to different champions/metas, etc is one of the skills you are testing.
It's completely different when you have three races and players are all basically locked into playing their race. Unless every patch comes out in a perfectly balanced state, and none will, you're not testing adaptability to slight shifts in meta you are straight up buffing and nerfing certain players for the sake of variety. This is unbelievably stupid, and in this sense at least the whiners are right. If the patch is bad, it's not just a change in wind direction for some players to flourish and others to wither, it's hurting the game. Of course then some of those whiners go on to point out the comparative number of Zerg champions and claim that that lack of variety is evidence the game is not in a good state and shoot themselves in the foot lol
In a properly competitive game, the best will distinguish themselves. Looking at what cream rises to the top is not evidence of balance or imbalance, not when you have like what, ~30 players competing in GSLs.
That said, it's certainly true that if one race is best when played optimally, even if it's harder to do so, your game has issues in that to be most competitive you essentially have to pick that race and learn it (and then your pro matches all go mirrors woooooo). How can you tell when your game is slightly, secretly unbalanced at the top top top top level, as opposed to just the current crop of good players ending up disproportionately in one race? It's very difficult.
You certainly can't do it by clicking a Liquipedia link and counting up numbers all less than 20 and ignoring hundreds of years of statistical knowledge, that's for sure.
I am a BW guy so maybe I am biased, but I think when you are sitting on a good competitive game, you do lock in the base game. Honestly there could be a little less variety in BW maps and I don't even think that would be terrible. Games like Go and Chess are great evidence that you can have a "stale" game and it still be fascinating, and offer plenty of room for players to have playstyles, for trends in play to shift, and for skill to be differentiated.
The only reason I'm pro patch in this case is because TvZ was not a fun match to watch (or presumably play for at least one side) when it went lategame. I don't think SC2 is sitting in quite the same spot BW is where we can just lock it in and Stockholm Syndrome everyone into liking it yet.
|
I dont think the patch changed much on the current Meta, imo. Zerg still does Hydra-Ling-Bane for the most part in TvZ, and they still trying to stay away from making Muta for the most part, at least from games I have seen. And Ultra is being used sparingly like it used to be. If anything, I believe it strengthen the meta by making unit that being used a lot, outside of Ghost, being used more. ZvP and PvT are pretty much the same as well.
|
On January 27 2023 11:56 tigera6 wrote:
I dont think the patch changed much on the current Meta, imo. Zerg still does Hydra-Ling-Bane for the most part in TvZ, and they still trying to stay away from making Muta for the most part, at least from games I have seen. And Ultra is being used sparingly like it used to be. If anything, I believe it strengthen the meta by making unit that being used a lot, outside of Ghost, being used more. ZvP and PvT are pretty much the same as well.
The goal is not to shake up the units used necessarily, but to shake up the dynamics of the games. If TvZ still tends towards lategames where T is kinda forced to Ghost turtle to stand a chance, and Z has little answer to Ghost turtle if they do, then the patch has failed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
