TL Poll: How do you feel about the 5.0.16 PTR balance chan…

On May 30 2026 19:25 Agh wrote:
Should just implement everything stormgate had going for it. (Mainly referring to control group binds. Eg. Being able to set up customizable selection/be able to omit things from it. )... But might as well go further and do the whole command card automation. Hell do the right click and drag spread/arc thing too. Think it's wild that you can't remove an overseer/observer/medivac/etc from all army selection in 2026. Also make the rapid fire keybind setup a default option for the game.

Idea to change economy at this point is beyond half baked. I will be extremely surprised if it results in anything other than games averaging 1-2 extra minutes.
Don't think this will entice any new player into trying it out, and for every potential returning player this might appeal to, an equal or greater amount will probably be irked and demotivated.


Even with all that said it's unfortunate that any change is a positive one because the game is in such a piss poor state. (Right now Probably 3rd all time right behind WoL launch and the final form broodlord infestor era)

Very disappointed this is the 'phase 1 feeler' patch they came up with

On May 30 2026 16:45 ejozl wrote:
balance and qol changes mostly suck.

eco changes are in the right direction.

On May 30 2026 20:54 baldgye wrote:
I'm not a very high MMR player... but I this entirely changes the marco requirements for Protoss in such a cool and interesting way... at least, with what I've been playing around with on the PTR... idk about balance or anything like that.. but

- macro'ing from gateways is now much easier, because you no longer have to physically look at a warpin point and then spam the units you want.. and remember to do this all the time... now you can just hotkey your gates and macro from them like any other production unit
- but ontop of that, you now get to dynamically change that, when you have a warp prism, you can switch them over, warp in a bunch of zelots, transform them back and go into an easier macro style...

The early game and openings are going to be really interesting though, as idk how to open without going 2gate just because of early pressure and the new warpgate research stopping you from producing from a gateway for so long... it would also be nice if the core could do *something* as for most of the game until the late game, it just sits there...

On May 31 2026 05:46 SC-Shield wrote:


I don't see why you want to stay on gates once you have warp gate technology. What if you get a medivac drop or nydus in base? Good luck with gateway tech if your army is far away. There is a reason why warp gates are convenient. Now if you remove nydus and tweak here and there, you may even remove warp gate entirely.

On May 30 2026 17:41 depressed1 wrote:
And we are going to watch +1 or +2 additional minutes of nothing at the game.

On June 07 2026 13:45 Whiztard wrote:
They change Protoss so much more than any other race. Super major changes: Mothership Core, Pylon Overcharge, Mothership Core removal, Nexus Overcharge, Shield Battery, then Warpgate.

Meanwhile for Terran....bunker, reaper, supply depot barracks requirement, ok.

For Zerg....I don't even know what fundamental changes they ever got! I suppose queens got easier to use. Hydralisk speed and dash? It was an upgrade overall iirc?

Every major change for Protoss changes how the race survives in the early game which is insane since it upends entire build orders.

On May 30 2026 18:21 axi wrote:
Blizzard looked at a skyscraper teetering on collapse and decided to blow up the foundation. This isn’t a “balance patch”—it’s a catastrophic demolition of SC2’s core DNA. The 5.0.16 PTR doesn’t iterate; it obliterates.
Your “pro scene” is already on life support. Most pros are semi-retired, and the few still playing aren’t theorycrafting—they’re mourning. You’ve taken a competitive ecosystem running on fumes and poured sand in the gas tank. Few will waste months re-learning economy, supply, and production timings because some detached developer had a “vision” for one-to-three-base gameplay.
The casuals? They’re not adapting—they’re lost. The playerbase that endured a decade of neglect is now told to forget everything they know about macro, builds, and timing.
But the real crime is the knowledge death spiral. Veterans who spent years refining guides and coaching methods now have curricula that are worthless overnight. They can’t teach what they don’t understand. Meanwhile, new players—already fighting SC2’s brutal learning curve—have been cut off at the knees. They learn half a build, the patch hits, and suddenly they’re stuck in a game that no longer resembles the one they were trying to learn. You’ve walled off generations of players and bricked up the door.
SC2 wasn’t dying because the early game was too short. It was dying because Blizzard abandoned it, then occasionally returned to kick it in the teeth. This isn’t a revival. It’s the final shovel of dirt on the coffin.

On May 30 2026 19:48 WombaT wrote:

Implementing the UI tweaks Stormgate and other modern RTS games have made is a no-brainer for me, presuming it’s non-trivial to do

Lemme customise unit priority dagbabbit!

On May 30 2026 18:21 axi wrote:
Blizzard looked at a skyscraper teetering on collapse and decided to blow up the foundation. This isn’t a “balance patch”—it’s a catastrophic demolition of SC2’s core DNA. The 5.0.16 PTR doesn’t iterate; it obliterates.
Your “pro scene” is already on life support. Most pros are semi-retired, and the few still playing aren’t theorycrafting—they’re mourning. You’ve taken a competitive ecosystem running on fumes and poured sand in the gas tank. Few will waste months re-learning economy, supply, and production timings because some detached developer had a “vision” for one-to-three-base gameplay.
The casuals? They’re not adapting—they’re lost. The playerbase that endured a decade of neglect is now told to forget everything they know about macro, builds, and timing.
But the real crime is the knowledge death spiral. Veterans who spent years refining guides and coaching methods now have curricula that are worthless overnight. They can’t teach what they don’t understand. Meanwhile, new players—already fighting SC2’s brutal learning curve—have been cut off at the knees. They learn half a build, the patch hits, and suddenly they’re stuck in a game that no longer resembles the one they were trying to learn. You’ve walled off generations of players and bricked up the door.
SC2 wasn’t dying because the early game was too short. It was dying because Blizzard abandoned it, then occasionally returned to kick it in the teeth. This isn’t a revival. It’s the final shovel of dirt on the coffin.

On June 09 2026 12:42 BaiZhuZhu wrote:


HAHA THE OLD FANS OF SC2 WILL NEVER ALLOW ANY CHANGES LIKE THAT

On June 09 2026 12:41 BaiZhuZhu wrote:
total crap lol. slowing down an already boring early game, WHY?!?!

On June 10 2026 20:45 Durnuu wrote:
I like the changes, but honestly ? It's too late. The only players left are the ones that like the current state of LotV.
The creative players are all gone, and they're not coming back.

On June 11 2026 14:03 TelecoM wrote:
I love it, please make it go live already.

On June 11 2026 05:52 NinjaDuckBob wrote:
In an ideal world, I'd love to see a Protoss that isn't reliant on Warp Gate, Forcefield, Adept Shade, and Recall to compete.

On June 11 2026 22:39 Robert White wrote:
PTR balance changes are always interesting because they can feel very different once players start testing them in real games. I’d like to see how the changes affect each matchup over a few weeks before judging them too strongly.

On June 12 2026 04:07 ProTech wrote:



One gigantic misconception that goes around in SC2 communities in general is that the theory side of StarCraft somehow translates into the practical side of StarCraft.

I've said it many times, but I'll say it again:

You are not going to have any sort of understanding about the game after 100 games, and 30 hours. The reason for this is because while YOU may have more more experience than most players, players on average have ZERO understanding of what they are doing.

This is why you need thousands, upon thousands of games under your belt before you try and convince anyone who's even remotely decent at starcraft that you know what you're talking about.

This is a massive mistake that developers have made in the past 11 years with LOTV, they spend too much time rushing things rather than getting an accurate reading of whats going on in the gam, thus resulting in the garbage we have in lotv.

On June 12 2026 04:18 WombaT wrote:

What about, I dunno, fun? Do people need thousands of hours to assess that too?

On June 12 2026 05:01 ProTech wrote:
In theory, a slowed down game should cater to lower tiers of play, at least that's how it was from 1998 - 2015

On June 12 2026 05:58 JimmyJRaynor wrote:

my sister-in-law loves the lore and the campaign. At best, she was a Gold level player in 1v1s. She preferred the slowed down game. She quit playing 1v1 after the LOTV expansion. She continued to play 2v2s with me in the WoL mode until Blizzard merged the different ladders 2v2s into 1.

i prefer the C&C "fast and fluid" feel that develops out of LotV's higher worker count. However, if they slow down the economy with this patch i'll give it a shot

On June 14 2026 18:46 Drahkn wrote:
SC2 balance has never truly been addressed, they have played wack a mole since release and to scared of major redesign and did easy quick fixes throughout its lifespan. Only a true redesign and major changes like adding or removing units will put this game where it should be. Needs a new vision

On June 14 2026 18:46 Drahkn wrote:
SC2 balance has never truly been addressed, they have played wack a mole since release and to scared of major redesign and did easy quick fixes throughout its lifespan. Only a true redesign and major changes like adding or removing units will put this game where it should be. Needs a new vision

On June 15 2026 07:59 WombaT wrote:

It is quite a bloody well-balanced game with genuine factional assymetry, and has been for years.

I do agree there’s been some scope for more radical design changes for quite some time, 100% on board there, but I think one can also neglect the former somewhat.

On June 15 2026 09:21 ProTech wrote:



and yes I agree broadly speaking, that the balance in terms of unit interactions are pretty good at the moment. it's just the economy that has made the game pretty unfun for the better part of a decade.

however, things like free siege mode, and free injecting will probably have to be patched, as these are macro mechanics designed for the influx in eco.

On June 15 2026 15:29 Slydie wrote:


Remember the LotV design choices did not come from nothing! I can vividly remember how WoL and HotS e-sport matches started with casters struggling to fill the time when the players made nothing but buildings and workers. Also, kids nowdays want to get right into the action, even the LotV speedrun eco feels slow by today's standards; kids want to be bombed with impressions and earn millions right off the bat, did anyone play "Steel a Brainrot"?

Siege mode and injects won't ever be patched, as you would have to redesign the entire game. Starbow and another MOD were moderately successful some point, feel free to make another one!

On June 15 2026 19:46 Balnazza wrote:


I think I asked you this before and I don't remember getting an answer, so I will try again: Why exactly are you playing a game for a decade that has been "pretty unfun"?

On June 15 2026 15:29 Slydie wrote:


Remember the LotV design choices did not come from nothing! I can vividly remember how WoL and HotS e-sport matches started with casters struggling to fill the time when the players made nothing but buildings and workers. Also, kids nowdays want to get right into the action, even the LotV speedrun eco feels slow by today's standards; kids want to be bombed with impressions and earn millions right off the bat, did anyone play "Steel a Brainrot"?

Siege mode and injects won't ever be patched, as you would have to redesign the entire game. Starbow and another MOD were moderately successful some point, feel free to make another one!

On June 15 2026 15:29 Slydie wrote:
Remember the LotV design choices did not come from nothing! I can vividly remember how WoL and HotS e-sport matches started with casters struggling to fill the time when the players made nothing but buildings and workers.

Also, kids nowdays want to get right into the action, even the LotV speedrun eco feels slow by today's standards; kids want to be bombed with impressions and earn millions right off the bat, did anyone play "Steel a Brainrot"?

Siege mode and injects won't ever be patched, as you would have to redesign the entire game. Starbow and another MOD were moderately successful some point, feel free to make another one!

On June 16 2026 10:48 Turbovolver wrote:
That doesn't necessarily invalidate your overall point about attention spans, but I think it's overstated.

On June 17 2026 04:52 mathphyswithvic wrote:
in my honest opinion, we should have gone even further. start with 6 workers, and either:
add 1 unit / race, or add 3 units (e.g. 1 at barracks 1 at factory 1 at starport). there are enough units in campaign to get inspiration from.
game needs a complete shake up to make it not feel scripted when watching.
also would give the new blood a chance against those 16 yo grinding mechanical dinosaurs that dominate the scene.

On June 17 2026 14:00 mathphyswithvic wrote:


So regarding balance, I quite disagree.

People have the false impression that if winrate is ~50% it is a balanced game (yay mathematics, nay logic).

MMR system is designed in this way, so in no way having 50% winrate across the board implies it is a balanced game.

Let us do a gedankenexperiment (thought experiment), albeit exagerated:

Imagine this: every time you get over 50% winrate vs Terran, you face Maru, and quite suddenly the MMR SYSTEM humbles your over 50% winrate by making you lose (well what you expect vs Maru?), and return back to 50%.

While this experiment is purely imaginary, the idea stands. Unless you are top top or bottom bottom you will hover around 50% win rate and this is where majority of ladder hovers. Moreover, it is not indicative of game balance, at all.

edit1: p.s. in my opinion, the only metric that truly shows balance, is tournament wins.