| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Balnazza
Germany1304 Posts
On February 12 2026 19:50 Vision_ wrote: you can t balance this kind of game effectively if you didn t reduce the speed for testing it internally That is definetly one of the sentences of all time. If I had to rate it, I would | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3509 Posts
| ||
|
Think13
Canada2 Posts
Ghost +25 hp feels appropriate as it now has "Light" put on it. Other than that it feels good. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27125 Posts
On February 12 2026 19:50 Vision_ wrote: you can t balance this kind of game effectively if you didn t reduce the speed for testing it internally What do you mean by ‘speed for testing it internally’? | ||
|
Vision_
875 Posts
On February 15 2026 08:51 WombaT wrote: What do you mean by ‘speed for testing it internally’? Reduce speed game for people who are in charge of the balance during the patch creation. There s no competition between these guys, all they have to do is understand what proffesionnals are questionning. Now if there s no name behing this balance team, then i would say that the game will be more and more partial. | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3509 Posts
| ||
|
SC-Shield
Bulgaria870 Posts
| ||
|
Balnazza
Germany1304 Posts
On February 15 2026 23:10 Vision_ wrote: Reduce speed game for people who are in charge of the balance during the patch creation. There s no competition between these guys, all they have to do is understand what proffesionnals are questionning. Now if there s no name behing this balance team, then i would say that the game will be more and more partial. Okay, I gotta ask: How is that going to help? | ||
|
Vision_
875 Posts
World lacks of volunteers, do you ignore it ? It s not a huge work to modify all the time value in cooldowns and building construction, which would only slow the game during fights (mod would be played in "fast" instead of "very fast") The second advantage of this type of mod is the ability to transform the game in the very long term into something more macro oriented, with more strategy and richer buids order (like SC:BW) Then if nobody else answer to this kind of idea, i guess the game won t evolve anymore | ||
|
Vision_
875 Posts
Then how many questions behind this ? One, If you reverse the number of workers also (let s say 9), why don t add base with half number of basic nodes ? let s say 4 or 5.. Because they added minerals per nodes with the "12 workers patch" but couldn't the reverse work? What if smaller bases could work ? Then from this question i found that prices base (400 minerals) could be divided by 2, 200 minerals for a base able to only harvest minerals, and other 200 minerals for upgrade the base to build workers and have spells. Then the image comparaison that can be understood by everyone is chess. Chess like SC2 have Openings, middle part and finale. If you only plays popular openings, then you won t be a GM and for the middle game, it s oftenly more demanding if you haven t enought practice this chicky opening. For the finale, then it s when the minerals are gone, when you should be able to guess which chance you have against the ennemy to win. | ||
|
Balnazza
Germany1304 Posts
On February 18 2026 17:58 Vision_ wrote: Why should i help ? World lacks of volunteers, do you ignore it ? ...does your comprehension of the english language really stop at the word "how"? Really no offense, but you might want to consider using a translator... The second advantage of this type of mod is the ability to transform the game in the very long term into something more macro oriented, with more strategy and richer buids order (like SC:BW) Why stop there? Why not introduce heroes to get the more strategic and richer builds like in WC3? Or we could add like 20 new races, so we get the novelty of AoE 2. Banger idea: If we make the game first person and include more silly dances we could easily get all the young blood from Fortnite! | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27125 Posts
On February 19 2026 06:16 Balnazza wrote: ...does your comprehension of the english language really stop at the word "how"? Really no offense, but you might want to consider using a translator... Why stop there? Why not introduce heroes to get the more strategic and richer builds like in WC3? Or we could add like 20 new races, so we get the novelty of AoE 2. Banger idea: If we make the game first person and include more silly dances we could easily get all the young blood from Fortnite! I too think it’s desirable and realistic to completely redesign the game, especially when almost nobody is actively working on it. I mean I’ve done plenty of spitballing about things I perceive as mistakes or what I’d like to see in the next big RTS, but it’s all Vision does, and he isn’t even that active in the threads that such stuff actually fits into | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3509 Posts
There also were cheeses they just got patched out, void ray, battery, ravager egg, depot heal, spore without evo, overlord speed increase, adept and oracle dmg nerf, queen transfuse, bunker salvage, roach moveburrow, the list just goes on and on. So I would say get back 4 player maps and see if the cheese game increases or if it's even possible, this will slow the game in itself. Spread out the bases more, so you can't camp on the same area of the map until maxed. Possibly change mineral income from 5->4 and mule from 25->20. Increase the minerals on the big patches, I think 1k on the small ones and 2k on the big, and use 6 nodes, and the game will play out totally different. | ||
|
BlackEyed
22 Posts
| ||
|
ProTech
United States490 Posts
On February 18 2026 18:38 Vision_ wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oe0fF8Vs2C0 Then how many questions behind this ? One, If you reverse the number of workers also (let s say 9), why don t add base with half number of basic nodes ? let s say 4 or 5.. Because they added minerals per nodes with the "12 workers patch" but couldn't the reverse work? What if smaller bases could work ? Then from this question i found that prices base (400 minerals) could be divided by 2, 200 minerals for a base able to only harvest minerals, and other 200 minerals for upgrade the base to build workers and have spells. Then the image comparaison that can be understood by everyone is chess. Chess like SC2 have Openings, middle part and finale. If you only plays popular openings, then you won t be a GM and for the middle game, it s oftenly more demanding if you haven t enought practice this chicky opening. For the finale, then it s when the minerals are gone, when you should be able to guess which chance you have against the ennemy to win. Worker change from 6 to 12 single handedly destroyed the strategy from the game. It was by far one of the worst changes that they could have possibly made to RTS. If you revert this, the game becomes popular again especially for the casual crowd, if you don't do this the game will continue to all-time lows, with zero possibility of a come back. You can track the player numbers over time through https://nonapa.com/teams this link. LoTV has done nothing but perform poorly in terms of overall player base aside from a very short period of time, and in my opnion one of the main reasons for this, is that the balance team has stripped the strategy from the game, and made defenders advantage way too strong, which is resulting in the stale play that we're seeing on a casual bases, but also in the pro scene. So yes, immediately changing the workers back to 6 will give SC a bit of its identity back, but the truth is whoever we have working on the game doesn't really have much of a clue as to what they're doing w/ the balance, based on the last few patches that we've had. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27125 Posts
On February 24 2026 01:04 ProTech wrote: Worker change from 6 to 12 single handedly destroyed the strategy from the game. It was by far one of the worst changes that they could have possibly made to RTS. If you revert this, the game becomes popular again especially for the casual crowd, if you don't do this the game will continue to all-time lows, with zero possibility of a come back. You can track the player numbers over time through https://nonapa.com/teams this link. LoTV has done nothing but perform poorly in terms of overall player base aside from a very short period of time, and in my opnion one of the main reasons for this, is that the balance team has stripped the strategy from the game, and made defenders advantage way too strong, which is resulting in the stale play that we're seeing on a casual bases, but also in the pro scene. So yes, immediately changing the workers back to 6 will give SC a bit of its identity back, but the truth is whoever we have working on the game doesn't really have much of a clue as to what they're doing w/ the balance, based on the last few patches that we've had. I dunno if that’s true really, WoL was a few years old when HoTS cane out, the HoTS iteration added another few to that. By Legacy’s launch and especially now you’re simply talking about a pretty old game. Rare is the game that’s on its third expansion, it’s 15th year or w/e and not dropping player count. I mean personally I prefer the WoL/HoTS economic pacing, many do, but they had plenty of problems too. Maps initially in WoL absolutely sucked for one. There were matchup metas in both that were absolutely awful. Additionally, the tastes of the player base and those who primarily view quite frequently diverge, but it doesn’t stop the latter being very vocal about the state of the game. Coinflips, crazy cheeses are great fun to watch, but for many infuriating to play against. I do agree that Legacy has maybe stripped a bit too much away in terms of strategic divergence and options, and has gone a bit too far in that direction. But there are plenty of players who enjoy the relative stability and forcing of macro games too | ||
|
Balnazza
Germany1304 Posts
If you revert this, the game becomes popular again especially for the casual crowd, if you don't do this the game will continue to all-time lows, with zero possibility of a come back. In what universe do some of you live where one singular change magically makes a game "popular again"? If they would reverse the worker-change tomorrow (which on its own is a terrible idea anyway), that would literally do nothing. It's not like a million players anxiously check the SC2 patchnotes every day to look how the current status of the game is. The only people who care about that stuff are the people that are already playing or atleast engaging with the game/scene anyway. I think the only time I can remember an ingame change actually made a game much more popular again was in Diablo 3, when they introduced the Loottable 2.0 that finally fixed Diablos horrifyingly bad Loot System, but if I recall, that change was either introduced with Reaper of Souls or came shortly afterwards. But beyond that: You cannot make a game popular again by changing a purely gameplay-related thing. You can make a game popular again with a lot of patches and exciting announcements, not with very specific changes. Legacy of the Void got released at the end of 2015. If someone disliked the worker change so much he quit the game shortly after, that guy hasn't cared about SC2 in 10 years now. How can anyone think someone like that would read the news "worker-change reverted" and go "oh wow, I will totally play SC2 ladder again now!". That guy is currently teaching his kid math ffs and hasn't time for SC2 anymore. And it is even more ludicrous to believe that there are kids out there who would totally pick up SC2 instead of Fortnite if they would just half the amount of starting workers. Like...seriously? SC2 is in decline because it is a fucking old game. And don't give me the shit about "uhhhhhh, look at BW! Look at WC3! Look at AoE 2!" They all do sooooo great!" Yes, they do...relatively speaking. But are we all pretending like each of these games didn't go through a fucking long drought before they returned? I know BW never went fully away in Korea, but no one else ever cared about it until SC:R got released. And even thought Reforged was a shitshow, it had massive impact on the revitalisation of WC3. And AoE 2 is effectively still an "active" game with new DLCs every year, so that is hardly a fair comparison. SC2 might just have the unfortunate problem that it is the pinnacle of RTS developement and not much else has happened since it release, so we might never get a SC2:R, because there isn't much to remaster about the game in the first place. I would say everything about it is pretty much still state of the art. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27125 Posts
On February 24 2026 04:46 Balnazza wrote: In what universe do some of you live where one singular change magically makes a game "popular again"? If they would reverse the worker-change tomorrow (which on its own is a terrible idea anyway), that would literally do nothing. It's not like a million players anxiously check the SC2 patchnotes every day to look how the current status of the game is. The only people who care about that stuff are the people that are already playing or atleast engaging with the game/scene anyway. I think the only time I can remember an ingame change actually made a game much more popular again was in Diablo 3, when they introduced the Loottable 2.0 that finally fixed Diablos horrifyingly bad Loot System, but if I recall, that change was either introduced with Reaper of Souls or came shortly afterwards. But beyond that: You cannot make a game popular again by changing a purely gameplay-related thing. You can make a game popular again with a lot of patches and exciting announcements, not with very specific changes. Legacy of the Void got released at the end of 2015. If someone disliked the worker change so much he quit the game shortly after, that guy hasn't cared about SC2 in 10 years now. How can anyone think someone like that would read the news "worker-change reverted" and go "oh wow, I will totally play SC2 ladder again now!". That guy is currently teaching his kid math ffs and hasn't time for SC2 anymore. And it is even more ludicrous to believe that there are kids out there who would totally pick up SC2 instead of Fortnite if they would just half the amount of starting workers. Like...seriously? SC2 is in decline because it is a fucking old game. And don't give me the shit about "uhhhhhh, look at BW! Look at WC3! Look at AoE 2!" They all do sooooo great!" Yes, they do...relatively speaking. But are we all pretending like each of these games didn't go through a fucking long drought before they returned? I know BW never went fully away in Korea, but no one else ever cared about it until SC:R got released. And even thought Reforged was a shitshow, it had massive impact on the revitalisation of WC3. And AoE 2 is effectively still an "active" game with new DLCs every year, so that is hardly a fair comparison. SC2 might just have the unfortunate problem that it is the pinnacle of RTS developement and not much else has happened since it release, so we might never get a SC2:R, because there isn't much to remaster about the game in the first place. I would say everything about it is pretty much still state of the art. Well-said sir | ||
|
DR
54 Posts
| ||
|
Antithesis
Germany1256 Posts
On February 24 2026 04:46 Balnazza wrote: In what universe do some of you live where one singular change magically makes a game "popular again"? If they would reverse the worker-change tomorrow (which on its own is a terrible idea anyway), that would literally do nothing. It's not like a million players anxiously check the SC2 patchnotes every day to look how the current status of the game is. The only people who care about that stuff are the people that are already playing or atleast engaging with the game/scene anyway. Yes; and all this even ignores the most important fact, which is that it is highly doubtful if not plain wrong that most casuals would prefer a lower number of starting workers. I am positive the reaction of the vast majority of causal players to starting with 12 workers rather than 6 or 9 is simply, "Oh, neat, the game is faster and action begins sooner." Virtually nobody who is not already invested in SC dwells on the economic and strategic ramifications of a slightly higher or lower number of starting workers. It is sort of like saying, "If only the 5. d4 variation of the Berlin Defense was not so drawish, many more casuals would play Chess." | ||
| ||
|
|
GSL
Replay Cast
WardiTV Weekly
PiGosaur Cup
The PondCast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
