|
On September 21 2025 06:32 BlackEyed wrote:
I’ll put it this way: this game doesn’t just need radical changes, they’re absolutely necessary. The list of things to fix could go on and on: the lack of AA units for Zerg on tier 1; the overly versatile Oracle; the awful and unnecessary Disruptor; the highly questionable Tempest; the overly versatile Ghost, which literally counters every Zerg unit except maybe Banelings; the dreadful TvT because of tanks being so strong that the matchup is unplayable without them (some players even learned another race just to avoid playing TvT); the almost completely destroyed strategic diversity (most games play out in exactly the same way—how often do you see a PvZ opener that isn’t Stargate?). And these are only the most pressing issues—if you dig deeper, it gets even worse.
So the problem isn’t that the proposed changes are too radical, but that patches are far too rare and far too minor. The game needs frequent and large-scale updates to keep the meta fresh and prevent it from stagnating into just two viable builds, which is exactly what’s happening lately.
I don't disagree, but that's extremely unrealistic. I think some level of balance with the occasional overhaul of things that are useless/broken is the best we realistically get.
Generally I think every meta refines itself into 2-3 builds depending on the matchup without changes. I don't think that's based on poor balance or design, some builds are just safer and more sturdy and allow you to do certain things more effectively. Sc2 has a long history of standard openers or spammed all-ins (1-1-1 and MKP come to mind). Obviously with lower starting economy we had more cheeses and maps generally developed into the direction where they're larger and have longer rush distances, but tbh I'd rather see the same macro builds battle it out for the third time than the third cheese in a row.
|
On September 21 2025 07:56 Archeon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2025 06:32 BlackEyed wrote:
I’ll put it this way: this game doesn’t just need radical changes, they’re absolutely necessary. The list of things to fix could go on and on: the lack of AA units for Zerg on tier 1; the overly versatile Oracle; the awful and unnecessary Disruptor; the highly questionable Tempest; the overly versatile Ghost, which literally counters every Zerg unit except maybe Banelings; the dreadful TvT because of tanks being so strong that the matchup is unplayable without them (some players even learned another race just to avoid playing TvT); the almost completely destroyed strategic diversity (most games play out in exactly the same way—how often do you see a PvZ opener that isn’t Stargate?). And these are only the most pressing issues—if you dig deeper, it gets even worse.
So the problem isn’t that the proposed changes are too radical, but that patches are far too rare and far too minor. The game needs frequent and large-scale updates to keep the meta fresh and prevent it from stagnating into just two viable builds, which is exactly what’s happening lately. I don't disagree, but that's extremely unrealistic. I think some level of balance with the occasional overhaul of things that are useless/broken is the best we realistically get. Generally I think every meta refines itself into 2-3 builds depending on the matchup without changes. I don't think that's based on poor balance or design, some builds are just safer and more sturdy and allow you to do certain things more effectively. Sc2 has a long history of standard openers or spammed all-ins (1-1-1 and MKP come to mind). Obviously with lower starting economy we had more cheeses and maps generally developed into the direction where they're larger and have longer rush distances, but tbh I'd rather see the same macro builds battle it out for the third time than the third cheese in a row.
maybe he isn't talking about opening build orders or the early-game. of course the early game should be a lot more standardized. he seemed to be pointing more towards the lack of strategy in the mid-game and late-game of sc2
|
On September 21 2025 07:48 SHODAN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2025 06:32 BlackEyed wrote:
I’ll put it this way: this game doesn’t just need radical changes, they’re absolutely necessary. The list of things to fix could go on and on: the lack of AA units for Zerg on tier 1; the overly versatile Oracle; the awful and unnecessary Disruptor; the highly questionable Tempest; the overly versatile Ghost, which literally counters every Zerg unit except maybe Banelings; the dreadful TvT because of tanks being so strong that the matchup is unplayable without them (some players even learned another race just to avoid playing TvT); the almost completely destroyed strategic diversity (most games play out in exactly the same way—how often do you see a PvZ opener that isn’t Stargate?). And these are only the most pressing issues—if you dig deeper, it gets even worse.
So the problem isn’t that the proposed changes are too radical, but that patches are far too rare and far too minor. The game needs frequent and large-scale updates to keep the meta fresh and prevent it from stagnating into just two viable builds, which is exactly what’s happening lately. I completely agree with this sentiment. 9 out of 10 redditors and TL users complaining about the patch don't even play sc2 anymore. their only excuse for whining is that they are overly concerned about prize money, trophies, and an even distribution of races in the ro4 of major tournaments. sure, that plays a factor - but what really breaths life into a game is making it fun and interesting enough for regular players to enjoy on ladder. you gave some very strong examples of tedious unit interactions, tedious match-ups, stale meta and the almost complete removal of strategy from sc2. if the people around here actually played sc2, they would understand what you mean. the only time that strategy ever mattered in sc2 was when we were playing a major new patch or expansion, when stuff was still being figured out. that's the biggest problem for the long-term survival of this game. it's a very tall task, but I would love to see sc2 discover its "final form" no matter how many tumultuous balance patches that might take. I hope this PTR is just a starting point for another set of radical changes further down the road
We don't need to play the game to know the proposed changes on the PTR suck.
Also the pro circuit is essentially dead. Excluding EWC and Homestory Cup, I can't think of any other major LAN tournaments that occurred in 2025 outside of the Weekly Cups.
|
On September 21 2025 08:30 geokilla wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2025 07:48 SHODAN wrote:On September 21 2025 06:32 BlackEyed wrote:
I’ll put it this way: this game doesn’t just need radical changes, they’re absolutely necessary. The list of things to fix could go on and on: the lack of AA units for Zerg on tier 1; the overly versatile Oracle; the awful and unnecessary Disruptor; the highly questionable Tempest; the overly versatile Ghost, which literally counters every Zerg unit except maybe Banelings; the dreadful TvT because of tanks being so strong that the matchup is unplayable without them (some players even learned another race just to avoid playing TvT); the almost completely destroyed strategic diversity (most games play out in exactly the same way—how often do you see a PvZ opener that isn’t Stargate?). And these are only the most pressing issues—if you dig deeper, it gets even worse.
So the problem isn’t that the proposed changes are too radical, but that patches are far too rare and far too minor. The game needs frequent and large-scale updates to keep the meta fresh and prevent it from stagnating into just two viable builds, which is exactly what’s happening lately. I completely agree with this sentiment. 9 out of 10 redditors and TL users complaining about the patch don't even play sc2 anymore. their only excuse for whining is that they are overly concerned about prize money, trophies, and an even distribution of races in the ro4 of major tournaments. sure, that plays a factor - but what really breaths life into a game is making it fun and interesting enough for regular players to enjoy on ladder. you gave some very strong examples of tedious unit interactions, tedious match-ups, stale meta and the almost complete removal of strategy from sc2. if the people around here actually played sc2, they would understand what you mean. the only time that strategy ever mattered in sc2 was when we were playing a major new patch or expansion, when stuff was still being figured out. that's the biggest problem for the long-term survival of this game. it's a very tall task, but I would love to see sc2 discover its "final form" no matter how many tumultuous balance patches that might take. I hope this PTR is just a starting point for another set of radical changes further down the road We don't need to play the game to know the proposed changes on the PTR suck.
ok armchair protoss player
|
On September 21 2025 09:12 SHODAN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2025 08:30 geokilla wrote:On September 21 2025 07:48 SHODAN wrote:On September 21 2025 06:32 BlackEyed wrote:
I’ll put it this way: this game doesn’t just need radical changes, they’re absolutely necessary. The list of things to fix could go on and on: the lack of AA units for Zerg on tier 1; the overly versatile Oracle; the awful and unnecessary Disruptor; the highly questionable Tempest; the overly versatile Ghost, which literally counters every Zerg unit except maybe Banelings; the dreadful TvT because of tanks being so strong that the matchup is unplayable without them (some players even learned another race just to avoid playing TvT); the almost completely destroyed strategic diversity (most games play out in exactly the same way—how often do you see a PvZ opener that isn’t Stargate?). And these are only the most pressing issues—if you dig deeper, it gets even worse.
So the problem isn’t that the proposed changes are too radical, but that patches are far too rare and far too minor. The game needs frequent and large-scale updates to keep the meta fresh and prevent it from stagnating into just two viable builds, which is exactly what’s happening lately. I completely agree with this sentiment. 9 out of 10 redditors and TL users complaining about the patch don't even play sc2 anymore. their only excuse for whining is that they are overly concerned about prize money, trophies, and an even distribution of races in the ro4 of major tournaments. sure, that plays a factor - but what really breaths life into a game is making it fun and interesting enough for regular players to enjoy on ladder. you gave some very strong examples of tedious unit interactions, tedious match-ups, stale meta and the almost complete removal of strategy from sc2. if the people around here actually played sc2, they would understand what you mean. the only time that strategy ever mattered in sc2 was when we were playing a major new patch or expansion, when stuff was still being figured out. that's the biggest problem for the long-term survival of this game. it's a very tall task, but I would love to see sc2 discover its "final form" no matter how many tumultuous balance patches that might take. I hope this PTR is just a starting point for another set of radical changes further down the road We don't need to play the game to know the proposed changes on the PTR suck. ok armchair protoss player
I don't play Protoss. Nice try.
|
Northern Ireland27474 Posts
On September 21 2025 09:12 SHODAN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2025 08:30 geokilla wrote:On September 21 2025 07:48 SHODAN wrote:On September 21 2025 06:32 BlackEyed wrote:
I’ll put it this way: this game doesn’t just need radical changes, they’re absolutely necessary. The list of things to fix could go on and on: the lack of AA units for Zerg on tier 1; the overly versatile Oracle; the awful and unnecessary Disruptor; the highly questionable Tempest; the overly versatile Ghost, which literally counters every Zerg unit except maybe Banelings; the dreadful TvT because of tanks being so strong that the matchup is unplayable without them (some players even learned another race just to avoid playing TvT); the almost completely destroyed strategic diversity (most games play out in exactly the same way—how often do you see a PvZ opener that isn’t Stargate?). And these are only the most pressing issues—if you dig deeper, it gets even worse.
So the problem isn’t that the proposed changes are too radical, but that patches are far too rare and far too minor. The game needs frequent and large-scale updates to keep the meta fresh and prevent it from stagnating into just two viable builds, which is exactly what’s happening lately. I completely agree with this sentiment. 9 out of 10 redditors and TL users complaining about the patch don't even play sc2 anymore. their only excuse for whining is that they are overly concerned about prize money, trophies, and an even distribution of races in the ro4 of major tournaments. sure, that plays a factor - but what really breaths life into a game is making it fun and interesting enough for regular players to enjoy on ladder. you gave some very strong examples of tedious unit interactions, tedious match-ups, stale meta and the almost complete removal of strategy from sc2. if the people around here actually played sc2, they would understand what you mean. the only time that strategy ever mattered in sc2 was when we were playing a major new patch or expansion, when stuff was still being figured out. that's the biggest problem for the long-term survival of this game. it's a very tall task, but I would love to see sc2 discover its "final form" no matter how many tumultuous balance patches that might take. I hope this PTR is just a starting point for another set of radical changes further down the road We don't need to play the game to know the proposed changes on the PTR suck. ok armchair protoss player
You could be in a persistent vegetative state, unable to respond to your family, having never played an RTS game and still jump out of your hospital bed if someone showed you these patch notes. They’re insane
They’re actually not too bad overall, I think some of the proposals are either outright good or at least ‘interesting’, minus maybe the Viking change. Which not just in PvT, but I think will make TvT pretty wonky. Then you get to the storm change.
It’s like having a first date that’s going pretty damn well actually, but then you shit yourself, really obviously.
In terms of PvT epochs in the last few years we had:
1. Overcharge too strong. Peak Trap, when Parting was having some runs. You could reliably hold your third while being crazy greedy, and if you held a committed push you could just mass expand and end up in late games with like a 3 base advantage and Zealots and blink DTs everywhere.
2. Overcharge gets nerfed. But not crazily. Felt like quite a balanced meta overall. Toss couldn’t be as absurdly greedy as before, but they weren’t hugely vulnerable either if they were diligent.
3. Overcharge of the battery gets removed, Toss get energy overcharge. Turns out to be too strong.
4. Rather than just tone down energy overcharge, storm itself gets nerfed. With no reversions of previous nerfs to other options. And Vikings get buffed, and banelings get buffed. Zergs get baby dark swarm as well.
It doesn’t take a genius to work out how this goes, far from it. There’s probably a trained rat in some lab who’s capable of understanding this and providing negative feedback by pressing some button.
|
Northern Ireland27474 Posts
On September 21 2025 09:29 geokilla wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2025 09:12 SHODAN wrote:On September 21 2025 08:30 geokilla wrote:On September 21 2025 07:48 SHODAN wrote:On September 21 2025 06:32 BlackEyed wrote:
I’ll put it this way: this game doesn’t just need radical changes, they’re absolutely necessary. The list of things to fix could go on and on: the lack of AA units for Zerg on tier 1; the overly versatile Oracle; the awful and unnecessary Disruptor; the highly questionable Tempest; the overly versatile Ghost, which literally counters every Zerg unit except maybe Banelings; the dreadful TvT because of tanks being so strong that the matchup is unplayable without them (some players even learned another race just to avoid playing TvT); the almost completely destroyed strategic diversity (most games play out in exactly the same way—how often do you see a PvZ opener that isn’t Stargate?). And these are only the most pressing issues—if you dig deeper, it gets even worse.
So the problem isn’t that the proposed changes are too radical, but that patches are far too rare and far too minor. The game needs frequent and large-scale updates to keep the meta fresh and prevent it from stagnating into just two viable builds, which is exactly what’s happening lately. I completely agree with this sentiment. 9 out of 10 redditors and TL users complaining about the patch don't even play sc2 anymore. their only excuse for whining is that they are overly concerned about prize money, trophies, and an even distribution of races in the ro4 of major tournaments. sure, that plays a factor - but what really breaths life into a game is making it fun and interesting enough for regular players to enjoy on ladder. you gave some very strong examples of tedious unit interactions, tedious match-ups, stale meta and the almost complete removal of strategy from sc2. if the people around here actually played sc2, they would understand what you mean. the only time that strategy ever mattered in sc2 was when we were playing a major new patch or expansion, when stuff was still being figured out. that's the biggest problem for the long-term survival of this game. it's a very tall task, but I would love to see sc2 discover its "final form" no matter how many tumultuous balance patches that might take. I hope this PTR is just a starting point for another set of radical changes further down the road We don't need to play the game to know the proposed changes on the PTR suck. ok armchair protoss player I don't play Protoss. Nice try.
Zerg right? I see your TL Zerg icon, it’s a Devourer right?
|
On September 21 2025 08:30 geokilla wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2025 07:48 SHODAN wrote:On September 21 2025 06:32 BlackEyed wrote:
I’ll put it this way: this game doesn’t just need radical changes, they’re absolutely necessary. The list of things to fix could go on and on: the lack of AA units for Zerg on tier 1; the overly versatile Oracle; the awful and unnecessary Disruptor; the highly questionable Tempest; the overly versatile Ghost, which literally counters every Zerg unit except maybe Banelings; the dreadful TvT because of tanks being so strong that the matchup is unplayable without them (some players even learned another race just to avoid playing TvT); the almost completely destroyed strategic diversity (most games play out in exactly the same way—how often do you see a PvZ opener that isn’t Stargate?). And these are only the most pressing issues—if you dig deeper, it gets even worse.
So the problem isn’t that the proposed changes are too radical, but that patches are far too rare and far too minor. The game needs frequent and large-scale updates to keep the meta fresh and prevent it from stagnating into just two viable builds, which is exactly what’s happening lately. I completely agree with this sentiment. 9 out of 10 redditors and TL users complaining about the patch don't even play sc2 anymore. their only excuse for whining is that they are overly concerned about prize money, trophies, and an even distribution of races in the ro4 of major tournaments. sure, that plays a factor - but what really breaths life into a game is making it fun and interesting enough for regular players to enjoy on ladder. you gave some very strong examples of tedious unit interactions, tedious match-ups, stale meta and the almost complete removal of strategy from sc2. if the people around here actually played sc2, they would understand what you mean. the only time that strategy ever mattered in sc2 was when we were playing a major new patch or expansion, when stuff was still being figured out. that's the biggest problem for the long-term survival of this game. it's a very tall task, but I would love to see sc2 discover its "final form" no matter how many tumultuous balance patches that might take. I hope this PTR is just a starting point for another set of radical changes further down the road We don't need to play the game to know the proposed changes on the PTR suck. Also the pro circuit is essentially dead. Excluding EWC and Homestory Cup, I can't think of any other major LAN tournaments that occurred in 2025 outside of the Weekly Cups.
Bro... Homestory cup and EWC are not on the same level. What are these labels? Those are what you consider a major? Id say EWC is world championship, homestory cup, meistros, GSL, RSL, are majors.
|
Anyone remember when way back in WoL, fungal growth was changed to do the same amount of damage but over 4 seconds instead of 8, and infestors pretty quickly went from being a niche unit (though one that people were starting to find more success with compared to before) to being a unit that any zerg would be a fool not to use?
I guess this time we're gonna see what happens to protoss, but this time with the big aoe's dps being halved instead of doubled 🙃.
|
On September 21 2025 09:34 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2025 09:12 SHODAN wrote:On September 21 2025 08:30 geokilla wrote:On September 21 2025 07:48 SHODAN wrote:On September 21 2025 06:32 BlackEyed wrote:
I’ll put it this way: this game doesn’t just need radical changes, they’re absolutely necessary. The list of things to fix could go on and on: the lack of AA units for Zerg on tier 1; the overly versatile Oracle; the awful and unnecessary Disruptor; the highly questionable Tempest; the overly versatile Ghost, which literally counters every Zerg unit except maybe Banelings; the dreadful TvT because of tanks being so strong that the matchup is unplayable without them (some players even learned another race just to avoid playing TvT); the almost completely destroyed strategic diversity (most games play out in exactly the same way—how often do you see a PvZ opener that isn’t Stargate?). And these are only the most pressing issues—if you dig deeper, it gets even worse.
So the problem isn’t that the proposed changes are too radical, but that patches are far too rare and far too minor. The game needs frequent and large-scale updates to keep the meta fresh and prevent it from stagnating into just two viable builds, which is exactly what’s happening lately. I completely agree with this sentiment. 9 out of 10 redditors and TL users complaining about the patch don't even play sc2 anymore. their only excuse for whining is that they are overly concerned about prize money, trophies, and an even distribution of races in the ro4 of major tournaments. sure, that plays a factor - but what really breaths life into a game is making it fun and interesting enough for regular players to enjoy on ladder. you gave some very strong examples of tedious unit interactions, tedious match-ups, stale meta and the almost complete removal of strategy from sc2. if the people around here actually played sc2, they would understand what you mean. the only time that strategy ever mattered in sc2 was when we were playing a major new patch or expansion, when stuff was still being figured out. that's the biggest problem for the long-term survival of this game. it's a very tall task, but I would love to see sc2 discover its "final form" no matter how many tumultuous balance patches that might take. I hope this PTR is just a starting point for another set of radical changes further down the road We don't need to play the game to know the proposed changes on the PTR suck. ok armchair protoss player You could be in a persistent vegetative state, unable to respond to your family, having never played an RTS game and still jump out of your hospital bed if someone showed you these patch notes. They’re insane They’re actually not too bad overall, I think some of the proposals are either outright good or at least ‘interesting’, minus maybe the Viking change. Which not just in PvT, but I think will make TvT pretty wonky. Then you get to the storm change. It’s like having a first date that’s going pretty damn well actually, but then you shit yourself, really obviously. In terms of PvT epochs in the last few years we had: 1. Overcharge too strong. Peak Trap, when Parting was having some runs. You could reliably hold your third while being crazy greedy, and if you held a committed push you could just mass expand and end up in late games with like a 3 base advantage and Zealots and blink DTs everywhere. 2. Overcharge gets nerfed. But not crazily. Felt like quite a balanced meta overall. Toss couldn’t be as absurdly greedy as before, but they weren’t hugely vulnerable either if they were diligent. 3. Overcharge of the battery gets removed, Toss get energy overcharge. Turns out to be too strong. 4. Rather than just tone down energy overcharge, storm itself gets nerfed. With no reversions of previous nerfs to other options. And Vikings get buffed, and banelings get buffed. Zergs get baby dark swarm as well. It doesn’t take a genius to work out how this goes, far from it. There’s probably a trained rat in some lab who’s capable of understanding this and providing negative feedback by pressing some button.
the difference between energy overcharge and psi storm is that one is a multi-faceted racial boon with several critical applications, while the other is just an AOE damage spell.
under-tuning energy overcharge will break the early game for Protoss. it'll fuck your scouting and your ability to harass, defend and regen. these are some of the real issues that have held Protoss back in the past.
I don't want to go back to Protoss being super vulnerable to abusive early-game shit and being pigeon-holed in such a way that they are forced to all-in every game.
psi storm is easier to tune than energy overcharge. it's application is way more specific than energy overcharge. psi storm does not affect deeper elements of gameplay the way energy overcharge does.
undertuning energy overcharge by a small margin is potentially game-breaking. undertuning psi storm by a similar margin is not game-breaking.
clearly there is someone with influence who wants energy overcharge to be a defining part of Protoss play, and I agree with them. I think Harstem has it right. tuning energy overcharge correctly is as important as tuning MULEs or injects.
let's say energy overcharge is busted in the mid-late game (as it is currently), but in exactly the right spot to make the early game as stable as possible for Protoss. you would rather nerf overcharge from this state, creating an even bigger problem? you'd rather break the early game for the sake of a cool spell?
I'm sentimental about seeker missile, archon toilet and infested terrans - but tough shit, those feelings are all secondary to the wider balance. psi storm wouldn't be the first "iconic" unit or ability to be nerfed into the ground, or removed from the game entirely.
|
On September 21 2025 09:35 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2025 09:29 geokilla wrote:On September 21 2025 09:12 SHODAN wrote:On September 21 2025 08:30 geokilla wrote:On September 21 2025 07:48 SHODAN wrote:On September 21 2025 06:32 BlackEyed wrote:
I’ll put it this way: this game doesn’t just need radical changes, they’re absolutely necessary. The list of things to fix could go on and on: the lack of AA units for Zerg on tier 1; the overly versatile Oracle; the awful and unnecessary Disruptor; the highly questionable Tempest; the overly versatile Ghost, which literally counters every Zerg unit except maybe Banelings; the dreadful TvT because of tanks being so strong that the matchup is unplayable without them (some players even learned another race just to avoid playing TvT); the almost completely destroyed strategic diversity (most games play out in exactly the same way—how often do you see a PvZ opener that isn’t Stargate?). And these are only the most pressing issues—if you dig deeper, it gets even worse.
So the problem isn’t that the proposed changes are too radical, but that patches are far too rare and far too minor. The game needs frequent and large-scale updates to keep the meta fresh and prevent it from stagnating into just two viable builds, which is exactly what’s happening lately. I completely agree with this sentiment. 9 out of 10 redditors and TL users complaining about the patch don't even play sc2 anymore. their only excuse for whining is that they are overly concerned about prize money, trophies, and an even distribution of races in the ro4 of major tournaments. sure, that plays a factor - but what really breaths life into a game is making it fun and interesting enough for regular players to enjoy on ladder. you gave some very strong examples of tedious unit interactions, tedious match-ups, stale meta and the almost complete removal of strategy from sc2. if the people around here actually played sc2, they would understand what you mean. the only time that strategy ever mattered in sc2 was when we were playing a major new patch or expansion, when stuff was still being figured out. that's the biggest problem for the long-term survival of this game. it's a very tall task, but I would love to see sc2 discover its "final form" no matter how many tumultuous balance patches that might take. I hope this PTR is just a starting point for another set of radical changes further down the road We don't need to play the game to know the proposed changes on the PTR suck. ok armchair protoss player I don't play Protoss. Nice try. Zerg right? I see your TL Zerg icon, it’s a Devourer right?
Isn't it a Seige Tank? Anyways I used to play Terran. I think I had about 4,500 ladder games and best I could get was Diamond 1 or 4000 MMR on NA at my peak...
|
My thoughts on different MU
TvZ hard to tell, might be balanced after the changes. I dont like the abduct nerf, siege tank pushes are already tricky to hold. Zerg would get also buffs. The MU feels quite balanced atm
TvP So many buffs to terran that is grazy. Protoss might have very slight edge in MU, but come on. Lets nerf indirectly colossus and very directly storm(the most critical aspects in the protoss army). Also surveillance mode cant be used anymore (even in overlord spots)because terran will always have medivacs. Well surveillance mode wont be used in any MU. Also protoss Air would be weaker (viking buff, storm nerf) so definitely endgame would be much harder also, dt change is a joke in comparation. Did balance team/person forgot that shield overcharge was removed and energy overcharge was a thing to compensate for that. Im not sure if the new energyovercharge would be better than just chronoboosting.
TvT viking buff will definitely make the MU worse, vikings are already strong.
PvP not a lot would change
PvZ protoss already struggle vs zerg in many games. Those nerfs would hit hard, storm nerf is a game changer for example vs corruptors and vs ling/bane/hydra attacks. Microbial shroud is also better. Blink dts werent never too strong vs zerg
ZvZ muta vs muta is one of the stupidiest things ever and this patch will increase the possibility of it.
So protoss would be totally butchered. Other changes are harder to predict. I dont like the idea of changing core abilities like storm in the game. The energy overcharge nerf alone would probably make us miss protoss champions. These changes would make us miss a protoss quarter finalist. I think these are the most unbalances suggestions I have ever seen.
|
On September 21 2025 10:57 SHODAN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2025 09:34 WombaT wrote:On September 21 2025 09:12 SHODAN wrote:On September 21 2025 08:30 geokilla wrote:On September 21 2025 07:48 SHODAN wrote:On September 21 2025 06:32 BlackEyed wrote:
I’ll put it this way: this game doesn’t just need radical changes, they’re absolutely necessary. The list of things to fix could go on and on: the lack of AA units for Zerg on tier 1; the overly versatile Oracle; the awful and unnecessary Disruptor; the highly questionable Tempest; the overly versatile Ghost, which literally counters every Zerg unit except maybe Banelings; the dreadful TvT because of tanks being so strong that the matchup is unplayable without them (some players even learned another race just to avoid playing TvT); the almost completely destroyed strategic diversity (most games play out in exactly the same way—how often do you see a PvZ opener that isn’t Stargate?). And these are only the most pressing issues—if you dig deeper, it gets even worse.
So the problem isn’t that the proposed changes are too radical, but that patches are far too rare and far too minor. The game needs frequent and large-scale updates to keep the meta fresh and prevent it from stagnating into just two viable builds, which is exactly what’s happening lately. I completely agree with this sentiment. 9 out of 10 redditors and TL users complaining about the patch don't even play sc2 anymore. their only excuse for whining is that they are overly concerned about prize money, trophies, and an even distribution of races in the ro4 of major tournaments. sure, that plays a factor - but what really breaths life into a game is making it fun and interesting enough for regular players to enjoy on ladder. you gave some very strong examples of tedious unit interactions, tedious match-ups, stale meta and the almost complete removal of strategy from sc2. if the people around here actually played sc2, they would understand what you mean. the only time that strategy ever mattered in sc2 was when we were playing a major new patch or expansion, when stuff was still being figured out. that's the biggest problem for the long-term survival of this game. it's a very tall task, but I would love to see sc2 discover its "final form" no matter how many tumultuous balance patches that might take. I hope this PTR is just a starting point for another set of radical changes further down the road We don't need to play the game to know the proposed changes on the PTR suck. ok armchair protoss player You could be in a persistent vegetative state, unable to respond to your family, having never played an RTS game and still jump out of your hospital bed if someone showed you these patch notes. They’re insane They’re actually not too bad overall, I think some of the proposals are either outright good or at least ‘interesting’, minus maybe the Viking change. Which not just in PvT, but I think will make TvT pretty wonky. Then you get to the storm change. It’s like having a first date that’s going pretty damn well actually, but then you shit yourself, really obviously. In terms of PvT epochs in the last few years we had: 1. Overcharge too strong. Peak Trap, when Parting was having some runs. You could reliably hold your third while being crazy greedy, and if you held a committed push you could just mass expand and end up in late games with like a 3 base advantage and Zealots and blink DTs everywhere. 2. Overcharge gets nerfed. But not crazily. Felt like quite a balanced meta overall. Toss couldn’t be as absurdly greedy as before, but they weren’t hugely vulnerable either if they were diligent. 3. Overcharge of the battery gets removed, Toss get energy overcharge. Turns out to be too strong. 4. Rather than just tone down energy overcharge, storm itself gets nerfed. With no reversions of previous nerfs to other options. And Vikings get buffed, and banelings get buffed. Zergs get baby dark swarm as well. It doesn’t take a genius to work out how this goes, far from it. There’s probably a trained rat in some lab who’s capable of understanding this and providing negative feedback by pressing some button. the difference between energy overcharge and psi storm is that one is a multi-faceted racial boon with several critical applications, while the other is just an AOE damage spell. under-tuning energy overcharge will break the early game for Protoss. it'll fuck your scouting and your ability to harass, defend and regen. these are some of the real issues that have held Protoss back in the past. I don't want to go back to Protoss being super vulnerable to abusive early-game shit and being pigeon-holed in such a way that they are forced to all-in every game. psi storm is easier to tune than energy overcharge. it's application is way more specific than energy overcharge. psi storm does not affect deeper elements of gameplay the way energy overcharge does. undertuning energy overcharge by a small margin is potentially game-breaking. undertuning psi storm by a similar margin is not game-breaking. clearly there is someone with influence who wants energy overcharge to be a defining part of Protoss play, and I agree with them. I think Harstem has it right. tuning energy overcharge correctly is as important as tuning MULEs or injects. let's say energy overcharge is busted in the mid-late game (as it is currently), but in exactly the right spot to make the early game as stable as possible for Protoss. you would rather nerf overcharge from this state, creating an even bigger problem? you'd rather break the early game for the sake of a cool spell? I'm sentimental about seeker missile, archon toilet and infested terrans - but tough shit, those feelings are all secondary to the wider balance. psi storm wouldn't be the first "iconic" unit or ability to be nerfed into the ground, or removed from the game entirely.
AoE has been the primary way to deal damage for Protoss in the late game since WoL. The other ways to deal AoE damage were already nerfed. Halving the damage of storm without providing any alternative is absolutely game breaking.
|
Oh, is it already time again to demolish P? 
|
Anyone advocating for massive gameplay overhauls is deluding themselves because Blizzard are dedicating a fraction of a fraction of the resources that they used to. It won't be done properly, it will be haphazard, it will be based on the opinions of casters/players generating low-effort clickbait videos on YouTube, and it will fail.
|
Thank god they're finally deleting protoss.
|
On September 21 2025 22:25 MJG wrote:
Anyone advocating for massive gameplay overhauls is deluding themselves because Blizzard are dedicating a fraction of a fraction of the resources that they used to. It won't be done properly, it will be haphazard, it will be based on the opinions of casters/players generating low-effort clickbait videos on YouTube, and it will fail.
Which is why if they are not gonna overhaul the game to actually fix the mechanics that don't work they need to be focusing around finding the most stable and balanced version of the existing game they can find.
This shit isn't doing either of those. It's implementing huge changes to existing spells that will take years of additional updates to eventually get perfectly balanced and meanwhile they'll keep making adjustments to other shit that will destabilize the matches even further.
If their goal is to make the game more fun then they need to do serious overhauls to fix the problems the game has in its core design, problems that have been there since Wings of Liberty. If they aren't going to do that, then just focus on getting the balance right.
|
On September 22 2025 00:10 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2025 22:25 MJG wrote:
Anyone advocating for massive gameplay overhauls is deluding themselves because Blizzard are dedicating a fraction of a fraction of the resources that they used to. It won't be done properly, it will be haphazard, it will be based on the opinions of casters/players generating low-effort clickbait videos on YouTube, and it will fail. If their goal is to make the game more fun then they need to do serious overhauls to fix the problems the game has in its core design, problems that have been there since Wings of Liberty. If they aren't going to do that, then just focus on getting the balance right.
This. The balance is actually quite close to being fine, and the things that currently make TvP unfair - everyone probably agrees on that - are subtler than it looks. Keep the overcharge change, the spire change, maybe the bane change. Nerf storm a bit if you absolutely need to (slightly reduce the damage per tick or have the first two ticks do 5 and then get to the usual 10, a lot of things could be tried), but then I think you're good to go.
|
On September 22 2025 00:40 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2025 00:10 Vindicare605 wrote:On September 21 2025 22:25 MJG wrote:
Anyone advocating for massive gameplay overhauls is deluding themselves because Blizzard are dedicating a fraction of a fraction of the resources that they used to. It won't be done properly, it will be haphazard, it will be based on the opinions of casters/players generating low-effort clickbait videos on YouTube, and it will fail. If their goal is to make the game more fun then they need to do serious overhauls to fix the problems the game has in its core design, problems that have been there since Wings of Liberty. If they aren't going to do that, then just focus on getting the balance right. This. The balance is actually quite close to being fine, and the things that currently make TvP unfair - everyone probably agrees on that - are subtler than it looks. Keep the overcharge change, the spire change, maybe the bane change. Nerf storm a bit if you absolutely need to (slightly reduce the damage per tick or have the first two ticks do 5 and then get to the usual 10, a lot of things could be tried), but then I think you're good to go.
Yeah. Here is my view: Drop the ridiculous storm nerf; the nerf to energy overcharge is more important and already substantial, and it can be further adjusted as necessary. Drop the non-abductability of siege-tanks. Drop the viking buff; the unit is perfectly fine and being built all the time. Drop the observer change. Now we have a reasonable point of departure. Probably the effectiveness of microbial shroud needs to be reduced somewhat.
|
On September 19 2025 21:22 Captain Peabody wrote:
Look, I've generally been pro-Balance Council and have defended them for many, many patches. I think they've come up with some good, interesting concepts, shaking things up while keeping the game reasonably balanced. I haven't believed in the Zerg Cabal conspiracy theories. But this proposed patch is utterly absurd, and in itself practically vindicates every claim ever made about the Balance Council being reactive and basing their changes around mob-dynamic buffing and nerfing of races.
(...)
But the thing is, there are no interesting concepts in this proposed patch: the only way to read this is literally just Protoss being punished and nerfed into virtual unplayability. I can't imagine what kind of process would result in this patch. If this is the model for balancing, then something's clearly gone massively wrong somewhere.
I thought about these conspiracy theories the same way as when Trump cries about how the election was stolen - undocumented and harmful claims far from reality. But with this......I just don't see any explanation. Even though these changes won't go through (and they most definitely won't) then I think the damage has been done and the councils intentions seem more clear than ever before. What an absolute disaster for the game and the community.
Edit: If Blizz are indeed back in the drivers seat I still can't comprehend how they ended up with this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
