|
I think at this point it's safe to say the economy changes aside from the mineral patch rebalancing has been a failed experiment.
Doesn't add any value, just detracts.
The random decision to power creep zerg's larva was one of the most asinine things I've ever read, especially with no additional changes (aside from a queen cost revert which is even more ludicrous in conjunction).
Doesn't fall into the realm of oversight, it's just utter incompetence.
I think gateway build times post research has been an interesting experiment (current construction times are quite wild with how quick they are), but then on the other hand we've landed on a triple nerf to warpgate is most cases... The base research increase, cost resource per gateway, every unit except for stalker and sentry actually has a 2-3second longer cooldown.
If this is the chosen path it makes more sense to just axe the idea of warp-ins altogether. Myself and others have given several alternatives that create a much more cohesive experience.
|
|
|
On June 21 2026 00:49 bela.mervado wrote:
let the meta settle
Yes, I agree. There's so many exciting nuances to the ZvZ meta that have yet to be explored. And I'm sure that in the months to come many of them will be unveiled. I can't wait.
|
|
|
Protoss - 4600 mmr
~30 games on PTR 2, mostly against Zergs (like, 20 times out of 30), +100 on PTR 1
The larva change is bonkers, no way around it
Even Z pros are saying it is
During a game I killed 23 drones with a 10 adepts pressure, and the guy still have 72 drones vs my 60 lmao, what am I supposed to do
The WG change is obviously way better than the monstrosity we had before, but unlike some people are trying to make you think, it's still a nerf compared to the live version
"but you can prod faster with it after 3 cycles"
Yeah no thanks I'd rather have mobility with the warp in mechanic and not have to pre build units for potentially nothing
The potential use cases are way too niche for this change to be worth it
Harstem explained it pretty well in his video, this change is just a bad idea imo
Regarding the 8 workers start I'm also not convinced still, I simply don't see the point of it
The games are slower and don't bring any kind of strategic variety
I can already manage most bs my opponents throw at me so we're already past the "discover new cheeses" point and games are already the same as before
Except they're slower ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Don't touch the worker count, don't change WG
It's stupid and the only people who want it are the ones not playing the game
|
On June 20 2026 21:25 Balnazza wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 18:08 SC-Shield wrote:
Blizzard isn't doing enough to keep players aside from 1vs1 changes.
For team games you:
- wait up to 6 minutes to find a game
- get matched unevenly sometimes (e.g. 1 diamond + 1 bronze + 1 silver vs 1 diamond + 2 platinums)
- team killers and non-cooperative players don't get punished (there needs to be some sort of feedback that punishes such players), you can get even matched with the same such player 2-3 games in a row and your MMR just tanks
Small fixes that can keep casual players playing without touching any of 1vs1 balance. How are these "small fixes"?
Do you really think they are not? For example, if you get vote kicked in Counter-Strike a lot, you get a ban at some point.
If enough players report/vote that you're not co-operative enough in team games or that you team kill, I believe you should get banned from ladder games. If you did that in 2vs2, you get banned in 2vs2. I believe it used to be exponential in CS where the more you get kicked/banned, the longer period becomes.
As for long wait, I don't want to wait 6 minutes only to be matched in a one-sided game. After all, I play a team game to relax, not to carry team. If I wanted to play hard, there is 1vs1 for that. I want team to do equally well ideally, skill difference shouldn't be too significant. I don't know how Blizzard does it, but the current system doesn't work. The current matchmaking from my point of view results in people almost never scouting, building whatever they want (e.g. mass voids) and then complaining. If this sounds like fun experience with added 6 minutes wait time, then please go ahead and play more team matchmaking.
|
On June 21 2026 07:22 SC-Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 21:25 Balnazza wrote:On June 20 2026 18:08 SC-Shield wrote:
Blizzard isn't doing enough to keep players aside from 1vs1 changes.
For team games you:
- wait up to 6 minutes to find a game
- get matched unevenly sometimes (e.g. 1 diamond + 1 bronze + 1 silver vs 1 diamond + 2 platinums)
- team killers and non-cooperative players don't get punished (there needs to be some sort of feedback that punishes such players), you can get even matched with the same such player 2-3 games in a row and your MMR just tanks
Small fixes that can keep casual players playing without touching any of 1vs1 balance. How are these "small fixes"? Do you really think they are not? For example, if you get vote kicked in Counter-Strike a lot, you get a ban at some point. If enough players report/vote that you're not co-operative enough in team games or that you team kill, I believe you should get banned from ladder games. If you did that in 2vs2, you get banned in 2vs2. I believe it used to be exponential in CS where the more you get kicked/banned, the longer period becomes. As for long wait, I don't want to wait 6 minutes only to be matched in a one-sided game. After all, I play a team game to relax, not to carry team. If I wanted to play hard, there is 1vs1 for that. I want team to do equally well ideally, skill difference shouldn't be too significant. I don't know how Blizzard does it, but the current system doesn't work. The current matchmaking from my point of view results in people almost never scouting, building whatever they want (e.g. mass voids) and then complaining. If this sounds like fun experience with added 6 minutes wait time, then please go ahead and play more team matchmaking.
I would assume that the big problem is that not many people play RT 2v2. So if you "fix" the matchmaking in terms of teaming up, you will inevitably increase the time you have to wait - up to basically infinity (because if you are annoyed with bad teams after 6min, how annoyed would you be after 15/25/60 and so...).
So yes, it is an easy fix to make the teams fairer, but you can't fix waiting times like this.
And while I agree with you that any kind of moderation is always good for a game, I would assume Blizzard is not investing much manpower (if any) into the moderation of SC2. So you might leave it to the whims of an AI if your teammate, who reported you because he thinks he lost because of you, gets you banned or not.
|
FUCK THE BALANCE COUNCIL, ALL THE FUCKING MENBER OF THIS TEAM SHOULD HAVE TO BE KILLED WITH ALL THIER FAMILIES; JUST FUCKING NERF TERRAN AND FUCKING POWERED UP ZERG FOR NUMBERS OF TIMES, WHY DONT YOU JUST DELETE THE FUCKING TERRAN AS LONG AS THE FUCKING ZERG PLAYERS MATCHED UP WITH A NON-ZERG PLAYER. KILL YOUR SELF MOTHERFUCKERS, IF ANY NERF THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENT FIANLLY, THIS FUCKING GAME IS DONE, NO NEED TO WASTE A SINGLE SECOND OF MY LIFE ON THIS BULLSHIT ANYMORE. I HOPE THE GUY WHO MADE THE PATCH IN RECENT FIVE YEARS BETTER BE SLAUGHTERED BY MY FUCKING AXE.
User was banned for this post.
|
Seems hatch got more expensive 275->300 and larvaspawn slightly slower 9s->9,4-5
Any other small adjustement since yesterday?
|
France13017 Posts
The patch seems very bad on tournaments. I did not try to play it, as I find live patch more enjoyable (albeit not perfect, the bunker refund nerf is very silly, and there are basically no real early aggro options in the TvX matchups).
There was a former French streamer (with illegal political views) that insulted the likes of ToD because there is a 8 worker patch (and he was an « advocate » of it) so he was right to argue for it bla-bla-bla, but as expected, this change is particularly bad -> less interaction, just more boring early game
Who the hecks come up with this patch if there is no balance council anymore? What is the strategy behind the patch and why make a patch so bad even pro players benefitting from it are complaining? (Ex. Pro zergs)
|
As far as I know there is a group of active players that gives input etc on the patch to I assume a group at blizzard. If they should be namnet balance council or not no idea
|
They should remove the ability to warp the gates, improve them, just so we can strike the balance of them being viable - then, AFTER we can put in WG with a cost. That's if he still wanna pursue the idea.
|
United States1955 Posts
On June 21 2026 11:56 Balnazza wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2026 07:22 SC-Shield wrote:On June 20 2026 21:25 Balnazza wrote:On June 20 2026 18:08 SC-Shield wrote:
Blizzard isn't doing enough to keep players aside from 1vs1 changes.
For team games you:
- wait up to 6 minutes to find a game
- get matched unevenly sometimes (e.g. 1 diamond + 1 bronze + 1 silver vs 1 diamond + 2 platinums)
- team killers and non-cooperative players don't get punished (there needs to be some sort of feedback that punishes such players), you can get even matched with the same such player 2-3 games in a row and your MMR just tanks
Small fixes that can keep casual players playing without touching any of 1vs1 balance. How are these "small fixes"? Do you really think they are not? For example, if you get vote kicked in Counter-Strike a lot, you get a ban at some point. If enough players report/vote that you're not co-operative enough in team games or that you team kill, I believe you should get banned from ladder games. If you did that in 2vs2, you get banned in 2vs2. I believe it used to be exponential in CS where the more you get kicked/banned, the longer period becomes. As for long wait, I don't want to wait 6 minutes only to be matched in a one-sided game. After all, I play a team game to relax, not to carry team. If I wanted to play hard, there is 1vs1 for that. I want team to do equally well ideally, skill difference shouldn't be too significant. I don't know how Blizzard does it, but the current system doesn't work. The current matchmaking from my point of view results in people almost never scouting, building whatever they want (e.g. mass voids) and then complaining. If this sounds like fun experience with added 6 minutes wait time, then please go ahead and play more team matchmaking. I would assume that the big problem is that not many people play RT 2v2. So if you "fix" the matchmaking in terms of teaming up, you will inevitably increase the time you have to wait - up to basically infinity (because if you are annoyed with bad teams after 6min, how annoyed would you be after 15/25/60 and so...). So yes, it is an easy fix to make the teams fairer, but you can't fix waiting times like this. And while I agree with you that any kind of moderation is always good for a game, I would assume Blizzard is not investing much manpower (if any) into the moderation of SC2. So you might leave it to the whims of an AI if your teammate, who reported you because he thinks he lost because of you, gets you banned or not.
I've had to sit through 20-30 minute queues in 2v2 before and I can say I'd rather get an actual game than wait 15 minutes and get teamkilled.
|
|
|
hey guys, i havent followed sc2 in a long time, but im actually mad no one consulted my opinion on pushing this patch through. please dont make this mistake again. ill be refreshing this thread nearly 24/7 for a few days to get to the bottom of things. first of all, buff zealot base speed by 25% to make them legit scary early game so protoss can bully around and establish dominance. thank you and again ill be around
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
