EPTBuffing blue flame hellions seems psychotic.
Screwing around with Zerg fundamentals at this point also just wild. Spine crawler rush implications in ZvZ extremely annoying.
SC2 5.0.14 PTR patch notes - (Balance, Oct 21, 2024) - Pag…
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Gescom
Canada3505 Posts
Buffing blue flame hellions seems psychotic. Screwing around with Zerg fundamentals at this point also just wild. Spine crawler rush implications in ZvZ extremely annoying. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12377 Posts
| ||
|
Fango
United Kingdom8987 Posts
But the balance is way off. Protoss got a mix of buffs and nerfs, while zerg simply got all buffs? When Zerg won 10 of the last 12 world championships and half were ZvZ finals? Don't let anyone tell you queens being 25 min more will make a difference. Hatcheries costing 25 min less is what you would call a "silent buff", something that makes a huge difference but isn't noticeable to the average viewer. Also spores, spines, hydras, and ultras got buffed? The reasons are sound but there's no balance to make up for it. | ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10366 Posts
On October 22 2024 21:52 Nebuchad wrote: So, people are probably going to die to bio and roach pushes before we get to that point of the game anyway but this thread is sleeping a little bit on the energy overcharge I reckon. Getting to supercharge templars is not insignificant at all. Yep, it even helps give HTs a backup against EMP! You can save your energy overcharge after the EMPs hit and still have 1 storm to zone out! I do think Batteries could also heal slightly faster, I'm not sure the Energy Overcharge will be good enough in the early game, but they could decrease its cooldown or make each Nexus have its own cooldown (not sure if it's global cd right now or not). But i suppose it might be fine because you can also invest into building up lots more energy before a push even comes! For example Oracles can use all its energy to harass, come back asap and start putting stasis wards down. Being able to invest energy ahead of time to build up energy is such a fun idea, rather than simply saving 50 energy always to Battery Overcharge when a push comes. Now there's much more tradeoff between using it for chrono or recall or energy overcharge | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On October 22 2024 21:57 Fango wrote: Once again the balance council have good ideas in terms of game and unit design. But the balance is way off. Protoss got a mix of buffs and nerfs, while zerg simply got all buffs? When Zerg won 10 of the last 12 world championships and half were ZvZ finals? Don't let anyone tell you queens being 25 min more will make a difference. Hatcheries costing 25 min less is what you would call a "silent buff", something that makes a huge difference but isn't noticeable to the average viewer. Also spores, spines, hydras, and ultras got buffed? The reasons are sound but there's no balance to make up for it. Yea, whenever somebody brings the zerg winning everything ... ah, never mind, another year not watching SC2 | ||
|
Spirral
77 Posts
On October 22 2024 03:10 Waxangel wrote: I think some of the changes are a bit incoherent in terms of overall policy. So you heavily nerf mine drops and disruptors in previous patches because insta-lose moments feel bad, but then you buff disruptor range and blue flame hellions in the next patch? I don't really get it. I think it was called design by committee  | ||
|
RPR_Tempest
Australia7798 Posts
Let's pump the brakes, and think about maybe going back rather than forwards. Return to Heart of the Swarm (Post SH nerf obviously) or better yet, Wings of Liberty. Nerf infestors and ravens and you're golden, you've got a great template to work off! The further they go by trying to put in all these gimmicks and abilities (hydra speed boost lol) the consistently worse they seem to make the game feel to play. Every unit needs an ability or a gimmick, apparently. Make mutalisks playable again too, please! | ||
|
Wintex
Norway16838 Posts
also HAHA buff spines, spores, brood lord, infestor yall david kim is on his 2012 grind lmaooo hope people have fun with this PTR! | ||
|
Balnazza
Germany1247 Posts
On October 22 2024 23:48 Wintex wrote: Just increase queen supply cost to like 4 or 6 the min change aint anythin. free us Sure, good idea. I mean ofc you would need to remove any Air from the game pre-10 minutes, but sure :3 Can we acknowledge that this isn't a "balance patch"? Because the game is balanced. In fact, if we go by numbers alone, the only race that doesn't seem to be balanced is Terran, which was tremendously over-represented at the World Cup. Zerg even was the lowest represented race in the Knockout Stage. It is baffling to me that people still buy into the whole "a balanced game means that every race should win 33% of the tournaments". No, that's not balance, especially with such a small pro-scene. Because that would mean the best players are all equally skilled and none of them is exceptional. Even in a game that is perfectly balanced it is entirely possible that one race or even one player wins everything. If you want to balance against that, you don't want a balanced game, you want a "balanced scene". Anyway, back to the patch: I really don't think it is meant to "Balance" the game. Because, again, it is balanced. The idea of the patch is to "mix it up" and give new inputs. And yes, that opens up the chance that the game becomes more unbalanced than before. But that's what the PTR is for, right? | ||
Cricketer12
United States13990 Posts
On October 22 2024 21:57 Fango wrote: Once again the balance council have good ideas in terms of game and unit design. But the balance is way off. Protoss got a mix of buffs and nerfs, while zerg simply got all buffs? When Zerg won 10 of the last 12 world championships and half were ZvZ finals? Don't let anyone tell you queens being 25 min more will make a difference. Hatcheries costing 25 min less is what you would call a "silent buff", something that makes a huge difference but isn't noticeable to the average viewer. Also spores, spines, hydras, and ultras got buffed? The reasons are sound but there's no balance to make up for it. Kinda crazy to look at the Immortal change on the struggling race and compare it to the Queen/Building changes. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12377 Posts
On October 23 2024 00:02 Balnazza wrote: It is baffling to me that people still buy into the whole "a balanced game means that every race should win 33% of the tournaments". No, that's not balance, especially with such a small pro-scene. Because that would mean the best players are all equally skilled and none of them is exceptional. Even in a game that is perfectly balanced it is entirely possible that one race or even one player wins everything. If you want to balance against that, you don't want a balanced game, you want a "balanced scene". The reason why people still buy into it is because it's factually true, this is what would happen if the game was balanced. What truly happens when someone always wins is not that we celebrate their skill, it's that we lose interest. Which is what happened by the way, there's a reason why nobody really cares about this as much as we did in 2017. | ||
|
Ronin2011
Greece30 Posts
On October 23 2024 00:14 Cricketer12 wrote: Kinda crazy to look at the Immortal change on the struggling race and compare it to the Queen/Building changes. Immortal change, specifically targets the PvZ matchup, and if u think the lagging race in PvZ is P then there is a huge problem in u being able to read numbers and ur game understanding. | ||
|
Balnazza
Germany1247 Posts
On October 23 2024 00:15 Nebuchad wrote: The reason why people still buy into it is because it's factually true, this is what would happen if the game was balanced. What truly happens when someone always wins is not that we celebrate their skill, it's that we lose interest. Which is what happened by the way, there's a reason why nobody really cares about this as much as we did in 2017. As if that is the main reason for losing interest...TheViper dominated AoE 2 for years without competition and the game grew nevertheless. Because a player being the best doesn't make it uninteresting. And if you want to nerf the "best player" right now, you would need to nerf terran, not zerg. | ||
|
fLyiNgDroNe
Belgium4033 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12377 Posts
On October 23 2024 02:01 Balnazza wrote: As if that is the main reason for losing interest...TheViper dominated AoE 2 for years without competition and the game grew nevertheless. Because a player being the best doesn't make it uninteresting. And if you want to nerf the "best player" right now, you would need to nerf terran, not zerg. I know, yes. The consensus is that the game is fairly balanced but the map pool is very terran favored, which is why Clem wins (a whole lot-) more than he's supposed to. I never said that we should nerf zerg, maybe it read like that to you because you only perceive players to be exceptional when they do good with a specific race. | ||
|
quaristice
114 Posts
On October 22 2024 19:51 Mizenhauer wrote: Changing the price of the hatchery after 14 years ranks among some of the most heinous offenses I've ever seen. And, not because it will alter all Z builds, but because that number (300 minerals) has some sanctity after nearly 15 years. i'm a bw player, and i dont play sc2. i only clicked on this thread because i saw it in the sidebar, because i was curious what they would even be balance patching on a game as old as sc2. i saw this hatchery mineral change and i honestly was very confused and felt similarly weird about it. i'm only reading these comments because i was wondering if anyone else felt as weird about it as i did, and it seems like you did at least. the hatchery costed 300 minerals on the release of starcraft vanilla. while it was briefly increased to 350 minerals in vanilla starcraft 1.02, upon the release of brood war and the 1.04 patch in 1998 it was again reduced back down to 300 minerals. since then, in both games, it has remained 300 minerals for not 15 years, but 26 years. is this really the variable to be tweaking for the sake of a balance patch? i know maybe i'm just old, but part of the reason i play bw and not some other games is because the game itself doesn't keep changing the rules out from under me, and as a sort of casual-competitive player i can slowly improve and learn at my own pace and i won't take a break for a couple months and come back and have everything i know be just wrong. i don't know how sc2 players feel about that kind of attitude, but i would feel so shitty if i literally had to relearn the costs of my basic units periodically | ||
|
Blitzball04
191 Posts
On October 22 2024 12:46 Vindicare605 wrote: It is a nerf to Protoss. Removing Battery Overcharge without any kind of compensation (the proposed energy recharge is a joke) is a pretty substantial nerf. The other changes hardly matter compared to that one. Disruptors can't one shot Roaches or Marauders anymore. Meaning they are pretty useless in PvZ. Oh but hey Tempests cost 1 less supply and Motherships are a tiny bit better in combat but cost 400/400/8 again. None of it helps Protoss. And the removal of Battery Overcharge means they'll die to a lot more all ins, especially Roach Ravager all ins they would have held before. And this is without taking into consideration the goodies that Zerg got like the buffs to Hydras and Broodlords and the QoL buff for the Ultralisk. Oh but Queens cost 25 minerals more now! big deal. Thankfully none of the Terran buffs seem like they will do anything in TvP. Thanks for confirming Protoss got another shitshow nerf patch. But hey we got the colossal armor buff, what a joke. I think the turret buff will play a very important role in tvp going forward since terran can just auto spam turret early on. Oracle / comitted DT builds will go extinct really quickly How about give us back our 200 mineral prism! We need our immortal all in build back | ||
|
Creager
Germany1921 Posts
On October 23 2024 02:07 fLyiNgDroNe wrote: From Nexus Photon Ovecharge to Pylon Photon Overcharge to Battery Overcharge to Energy Overcharge. Peak creativity in solving fundamental design problems. I propose the upcoming iteration 'Nexus Chargeover', which spawns a Zealot that rushes to the rallypoint of the building or up to a maximum range of 10. | ||
|
Moonerz
United States459 Posts
Also curious to see how the cheaper hatch affects hatch first and other eco openings. | ||
|
CicadaSC
United States1849 Posts
| ||
| ||
