EPTSurfacingTroubling issues with the Balance Council - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
CicadaSC
United States1979 Posts
| ||
|
ETisME
12822 Posts
| ||
|
{Frozen}
16 Posts
On October 23 2024 18:25 CicadaSC wrote: wow, if that is true that the actual guy in charge of balancing has a bias against protoss then the game is doomed. Toss might receive some buffs in the future, but i fully expect them to always be the lagging race then. It would make sense though; Protoss gets tiny sentry and vision buffs but disruptors and shield batteries get mega nerfed. | ||
Mizenhauer
United States1946 Posts
On October 23 2024 18:52 {Frozen} wrote: It would make sense though; Protoss gets tiny sentry and vision buffs but disruptors and shield batteries get mega nerfed. TBF, Shield Battery was a crutch that made up for poor design. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20343 Posts
On October 23 2024 19:32 Mizenhauer wrote: TBF, Shield Battery was a crutch that made up for poor design. It was, but we're not exactly deleting warp gate and buffing gateway units so it's sorely needed. | ||
|
Fango
United Kingdom8987 Posts
They aren't trying to make the game good, everyone is just fighting to make their own play style easier. The zerg players seem to have the best debate skills as well. But how loud or unwavering you are should not be what decides balance changes. Every patch seems to come out with 'silent buffs' to Zerg that the average player won't notice but will sneakily try to improve their winrates. For example, buffing hatcheries and spore crawlers, Zerg economy never falls behind compared to Toss and Terrain, there's no reason for this other than Zerg players gettng frustrated at worker blocks, drone snipers, bunker rushes etc | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18405 Posts
On October 23 2024 18:25 CicadaSC wrote: wow, if that is true that the actual guy in charge of balancing has a bias against protoss then the game is doomed. Toss might receive some buffs in the future, but i fully expect them to always be the lagging race then. A protoss says they're biased against protoss. I'm not sure it's fair to take DnS's word about someone else's view on protoss. That said, it's obvious that any one person is going to have their singular biases and idiosyncrasies. No one person should be in charge, and it should be a committee. And as long as it's all run on a shoestring, at the very least the process (but maybe not the people involved due to the nature of the internet) should be transparent. | ||
|
Creager
Germany1956 Posts
Otherwise I can mostly agree with the sentiment of the balance council failing to achieve their proclaimed goals (e.g rework Cyclone to make mech more viable, make Queens more expensive to counter massing them, or make the game less defensive and promote aggressive play). As much as I hate playing against Protoss as a low-level player it's not really hard to see from a little distance that both Terran and even more-so Zerg get the far more favorable trades here, I mean, seriously, Queens get a 25 mineral cost increase and this is overcompensated with Hatchery cost reduced (just lol) plus Spines and Spores being just outright better?! | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12491 Posts
On October 23 2024 23:08 Creager wrote: The last bit where they complain about build order variety from Terran in PvT early game right now made me chuckle, because that's what Terran had to deal with for what felt like a decade - you might remember the Protoss book of bullshit article. At least if you survived something from the book of bullshit you had the game won | ||
|
Philippe
354 Posts
On October 23 2024 21:00 Acrofales wrote: A protoss says they're biased against protoss. I'm not sure it's fair to take DnS's word about someone else's view on protoss. That said, it's obvious that any one person is going to have their singular biases and idiosyncrasies. No one person should be in charge, and it should be a committee. And as long as it's all run on a shoestring, at the very least the process (but maybe not the people involved due to the nature of the internet) should be transparent. Enough hate against Protoss amongst other parts of the community and some players directly (on stream sometimes) on one hand, and they can't defend their bucket on the other hand without being slightly discounted. Sounds like a catch-22 situation for me. Either way, I don't care whether this is handled by a Balance Council or by the developers directly, but should it be said that asking for transparency in this matter is too much, this will sum up lots of things, and not in a good way. | ||
|
yubo56
690 Posts
There is an unnamed top-level Terran who is given extreme credence to his opinions (HM has famously said he refuses to join because of such conflict of interest, so not sure who. Clem makes sense but doesnt strike me as the type, possibly Maru or Spirit). Naming Spirit as a top-level Terran before naming Cure, Byun, and (most importantly) Oliveira, who literally won a WC less than 2 years ago, is kinda funny hahaha. Not to give OP a hard time, I know they were just spitballing names, and I know we're not here to witch hunt & gossip names, so it's not important. | ||
|
Creager
Germany1956 Posts
On October 23 2024 23:45 Nebuchad wrote: At least if you survived something from the book of bullshit you had the game won True, but that's more of a general problem with the 12-worker economy. | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16086 Posts
On October 23 2024 12:20 luxon wrote: I'd much rather have a system where we have (pay) knowledgeable people who have the least conflict of interest themselves. Someone like PiG, possibly Rotti, (and of course they wouldn't be allowed to compete in tourneys). Thoughts? I heavily doubt they'd be willing to do it voluntarily. That's the problem, nobody wants to take responsibility because of all the shit David Kim got. Even Blizzards successor to David Kim prefered to stay anonymous | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16086 Posts
On October 23 2024 21:00 Acrofales wrote: A protoss says they're biased against protoss. I'm not sure it's fair to take DnS's word about someone else's view on protoss. That said, it's obvious that any one person is going to have their singular biases and idiosyncrasies. No one person should be in charge, and it should be a committee. And as long as it's all run on a shoestring, at the very least the process (but maybe not the people involved due to the nature of the internet) should be transparent. Heromarine also said in his video that this patch is biased against Protoss. If he of all people is saying this, alarm bells should be ringing | ||
|
CicadaSC
United States1979 Posts
| ||
|
luxon
United States117 Posts
Naming Spirit as a top-level Terran before naming Cure, Byun, and (most importantly) Oliveira, who literally won a WC less than 2 years ago, is kinda funny hahaha. Hah yeah definitely not putting him as the same caliber as Oliveira or Korean pros, I just have seen him balance whine on stream before so I figured it may be him. From what Pig (or Harstem idr) said a while ago, the Koreans dont seem very active on the balance council, maybe because of language barrier. Again pure speculation and not a witch hunt, but I am very curious who. | ||
|
LTCM
174 Posts
On October 23 2024 18:25 CicadaSC wrote: the actual guy in charge of balancing Be careful, that'll get you cancelled in this day and age. | ||
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19372 Posts
| ||
Nakajin
Canada8990 Posts
On October 24 2024 04:25 BisuDagger wrote: I’m curious what the happiness ratio is in retrospect of the last few years of balance changes. So far I think they’ve done better than worse. I think so too. They generaly have had some good idea. It's fair to say they haven't been willing to truly buff or nerf a race with the explicit goal to change pro results though. Which is something Blizzard use to do in my memory. | ||
|
Blitzball04
191 Posts
Rotti, Harstem, Pig, and zombiegrub Everyone happy | ||
| ||
