|
Changing from 12 to 8 is just asking for StarCraft to die faster.
Back when it was changed from 6 to 12, StarCraft II was still in its prime. Even with such a huge adjustment, people were willing to play. At least back then the game was at its peak. Everyone, including me, had to relearn everything from scratch. But since everyone had to, it was like no one was at a disadvantage.
Now, changing from 12 to 8 means everyone has to relearn everything again. But here’s the problem: the game is no longer in its prime. It’s in its twilight years — already half in the grave. A change like this will cause a significant portion of players (maybe 40%?) to simply not want to invest that much effort into relearning the game. So they’ll just say goodbye and quit.
Honestly, instead of doing this, why not just add one new unit per race? Unlike messing with macro mechanics — which increases the learning curve and causes frustration — a new unit would naturally generate countless new playstyles and actually make the game more fun. Veteran players would be eager to explore these high-interest innovations, and new players would also be intrigued. Unit compositions and fighting styles would become more varied. The game’s activity and online player count would likely increase in a fun and exciting way.
|
I heavily disagree with your take.
When LotV released in late 2015 SC2 was nowhere near it's peak anymore, but we saw some resurgence of players with the F2P switch in 2017 and even after that. so the player base proved to stay somewhat stable over the years despite waning support from Blizzard for both the game and the esports eco system.
The way I see it this means two things:
1. For new(er) players that never experienced the old economy and game pace this is the first time they have to "re-learn" the game, which btw I find to be exaggerated and atrocious framing since the only things that will change are build orders scouting and timings, which are relatively small adjustments compared to all the knowledge and skills that will transfer over.
2. For veterans that have been around during the old economy era and are still playing, most of them will adapt again over time, since SC2 seems to be a game they enjoy regardless. While I can understand this frustration in people that feel they are getting robbed of their hard-earned aquired skills (which they are really not), for other people getting the opportunity to figure out, discover and learn things once again is a major part of the fun.
Just speaking for myself here I can tell you that I've always hated the 12 worker change, because it essentially killed the early game, made build orders way less impactful and took a lot of the strategy out of the game once it got figured out due to the accelerated economy. I've played less and less SC2 over the years, not solely because of the change, but it definitely contributed to me losing interest, yet I never quit and still played occasionally even despite all the balance changes and unit reworks over the years, because at the end of the day I still love SC2.
I think your proclaimed 40% exodus is bullshit and you also don't factor in the possibility of returning players that are excited about the game slowing down again.
Regarding the addition of units I'd have a much bigger problem with that since this directly impacts and changes unit interactions, match-up dynamics and is a far more delicate process to balance than a economy change as it simply introduces way more variables to keep in mind. Also with new units as we have seen multiple times in the past there's a strong possibility of role overlap, which might be fine to a certain extent, but as we already have gotten a couple of those over the course of the game's life cycle there's no more gaps to fill really, which then only increases risk of making the game worse or even breaking it vs. very little to no benefit.
Of course you can also make the same argument of not wanting to "re-learn the game" (just that it's unit interactions and build orders vs. timings and build orders this time) here, which then would also threaten to alienate a "significant portion of players" just the same.
While I won't comment on the other PTR changes, the economy change itself is a GOOD thing IMHO, it makes the game emphasize strategy more again and gives back players the ability for more distinguished play styles.
|
Yeah, if this goes through I'm done with sc2. Pro gamers and full time streamers may have time to relearn every build order. I do not
|
On May 29 2026 18:02 Charoisaur wrote:
Yeah, if this goes through I'm done with sc2. Pro gamers and full time streamers may have time to relearn every build order. I do not
First, why didn't you quit with the 12-worker change? Second, how many build orders do you utilize during your ladder play that makes it an insurmountable task to re-learn them? I mean sure, some people will stop playing, others that stopped playing due to other changes might pick it up again, that's just how things go, I guess, can't please everybody.
If I had the option to still play Wings of Liberty with some balance adjustments, I'd be playing that instead, but here we are, aren't we?
|
On May 29 2026 18:18 Creager wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2026 18:02 Charoisaur wrote:
Yeah, if this goes through I'm done with sc2. Pro gamers and full time streamers may have time to relearn every build order. I do not First, why didn't you quit with the 12-worker change?
Because back then I was a student with all the time in the world, today I'm an adult with responsibilities that can't play any more than 5 hours per week
|
On the other hand I think a lot of people already quit the game because it got "stale". This may bring some of those people back.
|
Northern Ireland26913 Posts
I think the 12 worker change partly did what it was meant to in speeding up the game and getting to the phases people enjoyed, but it ended up being at the expense of strategic diversity
I think an 8 worker start may straddle those two lines, but we’ll have to see how it works out
I’m very time limited myself, but I’m interested in trying out the game with such a fundamental shakeup that to a degree resets the playing field
|
On May 29 2026 20:26 WombaT wrote:
I think the 12 worker change partly did what it was meant to in speeding up the game and getting to the phases people enjoyed, but it ended up being at the expense of strategic diversity
I think an 8 worker start may straddle those two lines, but we’ll have to see how it works out
I’m very time limited myself, but I’m interested in trying out the game with such a fundamental shakeup that to a degree resets the playing field
Oh, it definitely sped up the game, but in hindsight I don't think that it made the game better. I would actually prefer just returning to 6 workers, so I agree that 8 seems to be a good middle ground to have a somewhat accelerated start without sacrificing all the variety, but as you said, we'll have to wait and see how things turn out.
I always find the comparison to BW interesting here, because there you start with 4 workers, but due to different economy scaling still have relatively quick games that cover the whole spectrum, from being overrun by 4 pool in a couple of minutes or playing macro games that still only last around 20-30 minutes.
|
On May 29 2026 18:44 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2026 18:18 Creager wrote:On May 29 2026 18:02 Charoisaur wrote:
Yeah, if this goes through I'm done with sc2. Pro gamers and full time streamers may have time to relearn every build order. I do not First, why didn't you quit with the 12-worker change? Because back then I was a student with all the time in the world, today I'm an adult with responsibilities that can't play any more than 5 hours per week
So you spend like two weeks adjusting and then can enjoy the game again, great.
|
Well, to put it quite simply, you're wrong. Good thing you aren't Nostradamus.
And actually it doesn't mean you have to relearn the game, it means you approach it in a different way, it actually opens up a myriad of options, and I am actually excited to see how it works.
I think it will actually make the game a lot more diverse, just with the 12 to 8 change in itself.
|
On May 29 2026 18:44 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2026 18:18 Creager wrote:On May 29 2026 18:02 Charoisaur wrote:
Yeah, if this goes through I'm done with sc2. Pro gamers and full time streamers may have time to relearn every build order. I do not First, why didn't you quit with the 12-worker change? Because back then I was a student with all the time in the world, today I'm an adult with responsibilities that can't play any more than 5 hours per week
The entire game is staying the same apart from build orders and some scout timings. To act like you need a large investment of time when you have 16 years of play under your belt is wild.
|
The idea that people will have to think about strategy for a week will kill all interest in a real time strategy game is funny to me
|
Problem is it's not just worker count change, it's a lot more changes. Too many things are changed at once instead of incrementally.
|
Northern Ireland26913 Posts
On May 30 2026 00:59 cabarkapa wrote:
The idea that people will have to think about strategy for a week will kill all interest in a real time strategy game is funny to me
A week? It took me about 2 minutes to theorycraft the new PvT meta
Zealotman with heavy armour upgrades. With the proposed faster naked gateway production, you should be able to go absolutely fucking nuts, even more so if you bank Chrono for production, although I imagine it’s better cycled on upgrades
If you want to go insane, gamble on FFE, your upgrades will be ridiculously fast. You are gambling that Terran doesn’t like, build a reaper, and that is quite a gamble, but isn’t that the fun? Probably not if you lose all the time. That build did genuinely use to work very well versus a Terran 1 rax gasless expo, in a totally different epoch
 isclaimer - I don’t actually think I have cracked whatever the new meta will look like. But the changes are very interesting and do get one thinking of real possibilities in a way that’s hard to do in today’s relatively stable meta
|
It's definitely a risky change, we should remember when the change from 6->12 happened, it was split down the middle what ppl enjoyed more. Doing it again doesn't sound like the best strategy, and seeing the other changes in this patch, I would say it's borderline reckless.
I agree the pacing have turned to shit, but start of LotV was both a cheese fest and was forever mid game, with minerals mining out as fast as players were expanding. So, it's not like a true mid game is not achievable with 12-worker start, actually not at all. Selfishly I do think 8-worker is exciting, but the rest of the patch gives my stomach butterlies, and I'm truly terrified how much they can mess up a truly great game with excellent balance at the current point.
|
Wow is this really happening? The intern went nuts!
I must say I am very excited especially for the economy changes. Can't wait to see some games and maybe even go back and ladder 
|
Im pretty sure at 12 workers you could still cheese. We have GM cannon rushers after all.
|
United States340 Posts
On May 29 2026 18:18 Creager wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2026 18:02 Charoisaur wrote:
Yeah, if this goes through I'm done with sc2. Pro gamers and full time streamers may have time to relearn every build order. I do not First, why didn't you quit with the 12-worker change?
I actually quit playing with the 12-worker change and went back to WC3. At the time, going from 6 to 12 + an entire new expansion was just too much for me. Going from 12 to 8 within the same expansion seems fairly manageable, but I don't even play, so what do I know.
|
It will drives players away in such a dead game as old build order or tactics are all scrapped，especially for pro players.
and same way，the beginner couldn’t find any more effective tutorials cause old ones will all be out-dated
|
On May 30 2026 18:17 axi wrote:
It will drives players away in such a dead game as old build order or tactics are all scrapped，especially for pro players.
and same way，the beginner couldn’t find any more effective tutorials cause old ones will all be out-dated
No, since there's still content creators providing tutorials and learning content for players. What this will do is just enable them to start another Bronze to GM series and put out new tutorial content.
|
On May 29 2026 18:44 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2026 18:18 Creager wrote:On May 29 2026 18:02 Charoisaur wrote:
Yeah, if this goes through I'm done with sc2. Pro gamers and full time streamers may have time to relearn every build order. I do not First, why didn't you quit with the 12-worker change? Because back then I was a student with all the time in the world, today I'm an adult with responsibilities that can't play any more than 5 hours per week
alright just looked you up and you have 124 games this season which is basically 2 games every day, will it be that difficult for mr. adult with responsibilities to skip 1 day of playing just to learn a new build order? challenge impossible
the patch is fine and its about time the game gets some changes, i'm up for any big updates
|
On May 30 2026 21:18 MM-yingxiong wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2026 18:44 Charoisaur wrote:On May 29 2026 18:18 Creager wrote:On May 29 2026 18:02 Charoisaur wrote:
Yeah, if this goes through I'm done with sc2. Pro gamers and full time streamers may have time to relearn every build order. I do not First, why didn't you quit with the 12-worker change? Because back then I was a student with all the time in the world, today I'm an adult with responsibilities that can't play any more than 5 hours per week alright just looked you up and you have 124 games this season which is basically 2 games every day, will it be that difficult for mr. adult with responsibilities to skip 1 day of playing just to learn a new build order? challenge impossible the patch is fine and its about time the game gets some changes, i'm up for any big updates
Completely agreed.
Out of all the arguments for and against the economy changes, the necessity to learn or relearn a couple of build orders in my view is not too much to ask of players of what is still a strategy game. And that's even ignoring that the core of the game remains unchanged, and that anyone who has played that game for years, which is almost everyone, will know a bunch of older BOs anyway.
For instance, it occurred to me that I could now play again the dear old Idra 14 gas 14 pool 14 hatch from the first days of WoL.
|
yeah
StarCraft's appeal has never needed to rely on tweaking basic stuff like worker units to force some fake "innovation."
A lot of people love to whine about "rigid build orders," but half the time they haven't even mastered the current meta builds—so what gives them the right to call it "rigid"? Chasing perfect macro and optimizing your build is literally one of the core joys of StarCraft.
Wiping everything clean and starting over every five minutes isn't just disrespectful to players who've spent ages refining their builds—it's actively destroying the game's competitive system. People poured their blood, sweat, and tears into developing these strategies, and you just flip a switch and call it "revolutionary"? That's not helping the game. That's ignoring its competitive ecosystem entirely.
"Oh, let's make it 8 today, 10 tomorrow. Hey, I'll swap your mom for your dad today, your mother-in-law for your grandpa tomorrow—isn't that great? I'm 'innovating'!"
Unnecessary changes aren't innovation. It's the devs trying to play the game for you. That's the real arrogance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
