|
On October 13 2015 11:43 starslayer wrote: ah teamliquid you never ceases to amaze me thanks for the read keep the hate and balance whine coming. it doesnt matter whats going on your race is underpowered and the rest are OP lol. honestly I stopped caring about whats op and not and just play the game. I have faith in blizzard that they will figure it out and leave it to them. Also playing random helps cause you feel the pain of every race so you cant bitch.Also complaining and bitching does nothing for you beside waste time not imporving.
I strongly agree with that. TL is supposed to be a serious SC2 site where we can debate properly about our favourite game. Nowadays, it seems that TL is like the b.net forums, half of the threads in the LoTV section are pure balance whine. I simply don't understand why this thread is not closed.
I mean, come on, you know there is no a serious LoTV discussion when you read sentences like: "zerg is the god-tier race" "terran is underperforming", and so forth.
Avilo is the most known balance whiner since WoL times, and he still recieves free chart to post crap on a serious site. Just ban the guy like you guys do with TB.
|
On October 13 2015 22:31 Apoteosis wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2015 11:43 starslayer wrote: ah teamliquid you never ceases to amaze me thanks for the read keep the hate and balance whine coming. it doesnt matter whats going on your race is underpowered and the rest are OP lol. honestly I stopped caring about whats op and not and just play the game. I have faith in blizzard that they will figure it out and leave it to them. Also playing random helps cause you feel the pain of every race so you cant bitch.Also complaining and bitching does nothing for you beside waste time not imporving. I strongly agree with that. TL is supposed to be a serious SC2 site where we can debate properly about our favourite game. Nowadays, it seems that TL is like the b.net forums, half of the threads in the LoTV section are pure balance whine. I simply don't understand why this thread is not closed. I mean, come on, you know there is no a serious LoTV discussion when you read sentences like: "zerg is the god-tier race" "terran is underperforming", and so forth. Avilo is the most known balance whiner since WoL times, and he still recieves free chart to post crap on a serious site. Just ban the guy like you guys do with TB.
I strongly, strongly disagree with this. Have you been to Battle.net lately? It is orders of magnitude worse than TL. It's way--way--beyond the pale.
Something else I don't understand ... this is the beta. Blizzard has specifically asked us for "balance whine". Lol! People are acting like the game is currently balanced. It's not. It won't be for some time. Things are broken, and yes, even though we don't play with professional-level mechanics, imbalanced elements of this game are currently causing wins and losses. That's a fact. And I think many from the HotS era are still in the knee-jerk "balance whine!" mindset. This is a beta. A new game. We're all growing with it.
|
Example #38572935 of why I tune into your stream to watch you scream.
|
On October 13 2015 02:25 Spyridon wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2015 02:19 TenMin wrote:On October 13 2015 02:06 Daizer wrote:On October 13 2015 01:49 SC2Angora wrote:On October 13 2015 01:10 Daizer wrote: Right now Mule is OP, 18% less then Hots while Zerg has 25% and Toss more then 25% nerfs.
You assume that everyone gets to late game and 60-80 workers.
Yet Zerg dies now to bio timings easily, Protoss to.
We can agree on something, they need to revert the nerfed MM patch.
4 larva 18% Chrono Mule
Yes they need to fix late game mule but that is easy with just giving the mule Hammer certain range like 25 Just look some stream and you will see so many protoss and zerg who have incredible strong timing to Terran too and can hold easilly the Terran Bio push. Terran was under the grave since the start of the beta, just incredibly weak with all theses macro change, this was indubitably the race the more affected by theses nerf, now the race become playable at a decent level for the first time since forever, so yes after these month of free win against terran that cant seem hard to play against them again but just open the eyes please. Look at top 16 GM It was full of Protoss and Terrans and 2-3 Zergs Its now 6 Terrans, 3 Zergs and the rest Protoss Terran wasn't the weakest at all, if a race had problems then Zerg is. And the trend is that all terrans are climbing, if it keeps like this we just have terrans in a week. This is true. Sadly Blizzard listens to peoples complaints like this and it ends up ruining the game... All of the races got nerfed, and it's arguable which race got it worst. But to act like Terran are incapable of producing just because the current Mule nerf (which after last patch is not really that bad at all) is silly. Also to act like Mules are only to "keep up" is silly.... In many situations Mules actually allow terran to not simply "keep up" but also OUTPRODUCE the other races. Mules are still CRAZY strong... just look at the math of how much a single mule gives you!! Even compared to the HotS version it is still a huge benefit!! This thread is littered with Terran bias. Like how "Zerg is a god tier race" and "they can drone exponentially"... If Zerg was god tier than how come they have had the worst showing in lotv GM for months? And yes they can drone exponentially but ONLY if they sacrifice production elsewhere, any time a Zerg is able to drone exponentially they are giving the opponent a window of vulnerability. This should open happen if you are being passive and letting them drone, or if they have gained the advantage on the battlefield already. Find a training partner and play some straight macro games, and look at the resource graphs at the end. If the Terran player is on point with mules the production is still insane... and is AHEAD OF ZERG for a sizable portion of the game! So untrue. If they actually listened they would have not reverted removal of macro boosters.
|
we need a avilo for each race and see them fight off each other. that would be interesting
|
lol and this is partly why beta is not getting any good changes, people even here on TL blind bashing my post instead of reading the content and understanding that the nerfs they did to macro mechanics are not equal.
Zerg will reach 50-60 drones in games, and then be essentially playing the exact game vs T/P with nerfed macro mechanics.
Maybe you do not see that every game right now because the game is newer and people are doing really suboptimal builds or games end fast. But as games go longer, WHICH THEY WILL, you'll see how right i am and that i actually analyze the game and the impact the changes have on the game down the line.
The macro changes and nerfs to mules/chrono impact the game a lot. P is less affected in late game because chrono will still be useful, but is affected early game to reach their desired worker count.
T is impacted the worst in early and late game because you're simply getting less money than you previously were due to nerfed mules.
Zerg is virtually not impacted because most of the time pre-nerf you would have enough larva anyways, and now you are playing vs nerfed T/P essentially.
People should objectively look at the changes rather than bash me, maybe that would lead to good discussion about them. Otherwise have fun with the mass liberators/carriers/brood viper that is taking over the beta (which by the way i have another entire post in the making about).
|
You are blind due to your own perception of how the game should be played. Many, if not even most games get decided before or right around 3base saturations are being reached through various cheeses, timings and allins. Large tempo advantages are being achieved in this phase. A nerf to something like larva production, as well as chronoboost or mules all affects the races differently in that phase. For example, the larva nerf makes it harder to get to 4saturated bases with 70-80drones before parade pushing bio-players force you to spend all your larva into never ending unit production of zerglings and banelings.
It's annoying to say the least, you found your own ways to play the game which is nice for you, but not only are you failing at even basic comprehensions of way more popular ways to play the game, you are pretending that your ways are ultimately massively superior to everyone elses.
Most annoyingly you keep on contradicting yourself all the time. At the one moment you are close to tears because "aggression is way too strong in this game", at the next moment you write a thread like this one pretending that every game starts with everyone having a finished setup and that setup on top of that favors your opponent naturally.
Edit: I actually agree on the down the line comment, but I think that has to do with parasitic bomb and ultras moreso than anything else.
|
On October 14 2015 01:10 avilo wrote: lol and this is partly why beta is not getting any good changes, people even here on TL blind bashing my post instead of reading the content and understanding that the nerfs they did to macro mechanics are not equal.
Zerg will reach 50-60 drones in games, and then be essentially playing the exact game vs T/P with nerfed macro mechanics.
Maybe you do not see that every game right now because the game is newer and people are doing really suboptimal builds or games end fast. But as games go longer, WHICH THEY WILL, you'll see how right i am and that i actually analyze the game and the impact the changes have on the game down the line.
The macro changes and nerfs to mules/chrono impact the game a lot. P is less affected in late game because chrono will still be useful, but is affected early game to reach their desired worker count.
T is impacted the worst in early and late game because you're simply getting less money than you previously were due to nerfed mules.
Zerg is virtually not impacted because most of the time pre-nerf you would have enough larva anyways, and now you are playing vs nerfed T/P essentially.
People should objectively look at the changes rather than bash me, maybe that would lead to good discussion about them. Otherwise have fun with the mass liberators/carriers/brood viper that is taking over the beta (which by the way i have another entire post in the making about). And yet again you fail to even respond to constructive arguments. You are the one bashing something blindly. You are the one who isn't looking objectivly at the changes. Your assumptions mostly are pulled out of your butt or are based of your own expierences.
That you fail to reflect upon yourself has never changed, since WoL beta . Maybe you should start to at least acknowledge that other people have good input too.
you'll see how right i am and that i actually analyze the game and the impact the changes have on the game down the line. Put your crystal ball away, get yourself some tissues, and start to be constructive.
#patchavilo
|
On October 14 2015 01:10 avilo wrote: Zerg is virtually not impacted because most of the time pre-nerf you would have enough larva anyways
The first time it was funny, now it's kind of pathetic. You said you "analyze the game", do you understand that inject nerf slows the drone production ?
|
bluQ do you realize how much more constructive avilo's post that you quoted is and that you criticizing exactly what you are doing yourself and ending your "argument" in "start to be constructive" can only be viewed as ironic? I mean maybe I'm completely missing why avilo is obviously very wrong but so far he seems pretty right no? if you are not pointing out where he is going wrong in his argument how can he know about what he should respond to build a more detailed constructive answer? How is basing assumptions or arguments on own experience a bad way to construct an opinion?????
|
On October 14 2015 01:56 Big J wrote: You are blind due to your own perception of how the game should be played. Many, if not even most games get decided before or right around 3base saturations are being reached through various cheeses, timings and allins. Large tempo advantages are being achieved in this phase. A nerf to something like larva production, as well as chronoboost or mules all affects the races differently in that phase. For example, the larva nerf makes it harder to get to 4saturated bases with 70-80drones before parade pushing bio-players force you to spend all your larva into never ending unit production of zerglings and banelings.
It's annoying to say the least, you found your own ways to play the game which is nice for you, but not only are you failing at even basic comprehensions of way more popular ways to play the game, you are pretending that your ways are ultimately massively superior to everyone elses.
Most annoyingly you keep on contradicting yourself all the time. At the one moment you are close to tears because "aggression is way too strong in this game", at the next moment you write a thread like this one pretending that every game starts with everyone having a finished setup and that setup on top of that favors your opponent naturally.
Edit: I actually agree on the down the line comment, but I think that has to do with parasitic bomb and ultras moreso than anything else.
Do you have any data to support this claim? It just seems very anecdotal (which is fine, for what it is). But I'm dubious about the veracity of that one.
I think he's making an observation about the economy after desired worker count is reach, which describes so-called "macro games". Or, rather, it describes a specific game state. I don't think it describes "a way the game should be played."
I don't know Avilo, and can't speak for him, but I'd guess he's completely fine with plays (what our community calls cheese). Wouldn't it be hilarious if in the NFL the commentators referred to a fake handoff or a fake field goal attempt as cheese? Lol. Anyway ...
Avilo has a playstyle, and a personality that is part of his brand, but I don't think that's what he is talking about here (though his OP is hilariously in his brand, and done rather well, imo).
P.S. Parasitic bomb and Ultras are just insane, atm. But so is the Carrier. And so is the Liberator.
On October 14 2015 01:10 avilo wrote: lol and this is partly why beta is not getting any good changes, people even here on TL blind bashing my post instead of reading the content and understanding that the nerfs they did to macro mechanics are not equal.
Zerg will reach 50-60 drones in games, and then be essentially playing the exact game vs T/P with nerfed macro mechanics.
Maybe you do not see that every game right now because the game is newer and people are doing really suboptimal builds or games end fast. But as games go longer, WHICH THEY WILL, you'll see how right i am and that i actually analyze the game and the impact the changes have on the game down the line.
The macro changes and nerfs to mules/chrono impact the game a lot. P is less affected in late game because chrono will still be useful, but is affected early game to reach their desired worker count.
T is impacted the worst in early and late game because you're simply getting less money than you previously were due to nerfed mules.
Zerg is virtually not impacted because most of the time pre-nerf you would have enough larva anyways, and now you are playing vs nerfed T/P essentially.
People should objectively look at the changes rather than bash me, maybe that would lead to good discussion about them. Otherwise have fun with the mass liberators/carriers/brood viper that is taking over the beta (which by the way i have another entire post in the making about).
The price of fame, man. The price of fame.
Anyway, onto the substance of what you're saying. Within the context of a macro game--which is what I think you're getting at--I think you are making some substantive remarks.
(1) A nerf to Spawn Larva does not directly affect the income a Zerg is able to produce. It affects the time it takes to reach the desired worker count (maybe). Assuming each of three hatches get a Queen as quickly as possible, and they all three Spawn Larva efficiently, is it even possible to spend every bit of larva? I'm thinking probably not, but I don't know. Zerg is not my main. But I think this is the point you're making. Zerg will still get their economy up--maybe slightly slower--but then once it is up, it's at the exact same level as pre-nerf.
(2) Chronoboost is similar to Spawn Larva in that is does not directly affect income, but rather, the time it takes to reach the desired worker count. And, because of certain Protoss builds, CB will not always be used on workers. But, once Protoss has the desired number of workers, their economy is exactly the same as pre-nerf.
(3) A nerf to MULE directly nerfs the amount of income Terran is able to produce. It also affects the time it takes to reach the desired number of workers (less minerals to build command centers while not dying). Once Terran has achieved the desired number of workers, his economy is weaker than pre-nerf because the MULE is less efficient. Maybe this is the point of the nerf, I don't know, but I think this is the main drive of your entire post. And I think it's a demonstrable fact--whether or not it's good, or balanced is a different argument.
|
On October 14 2015 03:07 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2015 01:56 Big J wrote: You are blind due to your own perception of how the game should be played. Many, if not even most games get decided before or right around 3base saturations are being reached through various cheeses, timings and allins. Large tempo advantages are being achieved in this phase. A nerf to something like larva production, as well as chronoboost or mules all affects the races differently in that phase. For example, the larva nerf makes it harder to get to 4saturated bases with 70-80drones before parade pushing bio-players force you to spend all your larva into never ending unit production of zerglings and banelings.
It's annoying to say the least, you found your own ways to play the game which is nice for you, but not only are you failing at even basic comprehensions of way more popular ways to play the game, you are pretending that your ways are ultimately massively superior to everyone elses.
Most annoyingly you keep on contradicting yourself all the time. At the one moment you are close to tears because "aggression is way too strong in this game", at the next moment you write a thread like this one pretending that every game starts with everyone having a finished setup and that setup on top of that favors your opponent naturally.
Edit: I actually agree on the down the line comment, but I think that has to do with parasitic bomb and ultras moreso than anything else. Do you have any data to support this claim? It just seems very anecdotal (which is fine, for what it is). But I'm dubious about the veracity of that one. I think he's making an observation about the economy after desired worker count is reach, which describes so-called "macro games". Or, rather, it describes a specific game state. I don't think it describes "a way the game should be played." I don't know Avilo, and can't speak for him, but I'd guess he's completely fine with plays (what our community calls cheese). Wouldn't it be hilarious if in the NFL the commentators referred to a fake handoff or a fake field goal attempt as cheese? Lol. Anyway ... Avilo has a playstyle, and a personality that is part of his brand, but I don't think that's what he is talking about here (though his OP is hilariously in his brand, and done rather well, imo). P.S. Parasitic bomb and Ultras are just insane, atm. But so is the Carrier. And so is the Liberator.
I doubt you will find statistical evidence on when games take decisive leads and turns.
|
On October 13 2015 01:38 NonY wrote: the equivalent things between races in starcraft are not supposed to be equal. races are supposed to be better at some things and worse at others. the win percentages are all that need to be kept balanced. everything else is supposed to be as unequal as possible, for the sake of variety. it's no good looking at the "macro mechanics" of each race and trying to bring them in line with each other's effectiveness in every situation. that's not how the game is supposed to be balanced or designed Reading this was a breath of fresh air in an ocean of "your race is more OP than mine!" posts
|
On October 14 2015 00:15 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2015 02:25 Spyridon wrote:On October 13 2015 02:19 TenMin wrote:On October 13 2015 02:06 Daizer wrote:On October 13 2015 01:49 SC2Angora wrote:On October 13 2015 01:10 Daizer wrote: Right now Mule is OP, 18% less then Hots while Zerg has 25% and Toss more then 25% nerfs.
You assume that everyone gets to late game and 60-80 workers.
Yet Zerg dies now to bio timings easily, Protoss to.
We can agree on something, they need to revert the nerfed MM patch.
4 larva 18% Chrono Mule
Yes they need to fix late game mule but that is easy with just giving the mule Hammer certain range like 25 Just look some stream and you will see so many protoss and zerg who have incredible strong timing to Terran too and can hold easilly the Terran Bio push. Terran was under the grave since the start of the beta, just incredibly weak with all theses macro change, this was indubitably the race the more affected by theses nerf, now the race become playable at a decent level for the first time since forever, so yes after these month of free win against terran that cant seem hard to play against them again but just open the eyes please. Look at top 16 GM It was full of Protoss and Terrans and 2-3 Zergs Its now 6 Terrans, 3 Zergs and the rest Protoss Terran wasn't the weakest at all, if a race had problems then Zerg is. And the trend is that all terrans are climbing, if it keeps like this we just have terrans in a week. This is true. Sadly Blizzard listens to peoples complaints like this and it ends up ruining the game... All of the races got nerfed, and it's arguable which race got it worst. But to act like Terran are incapable of producing just because the current Mule nerf (which after last patch is not really that bad at all) is silly. Also to act like Mules are only to "keep up" is silly.... In many situations Mules actually allow terran to not simply "keep up" but also OUTPRODUCE the other races. Mules are still CRAZY strong... just look at the math of how much a single mule gives you!! Even compared to the HotS version it is still a huge benefit!! This thread is littered with Terran bias. Like how "Zerg is a god tier race" and "they can drone exponentially"... If Zerg was god tier than how come they have had the worst showing in lotv GM for months? And yes they can drone exponentially but ONLY if they sacrifice production elsewhere, any time a Zerg is able to drone exponentially they are giving the opponent a window of vulnerability. This should open happen if you are being passive and letting them drone, or if they have gained the advantage on the battlefield already. Find a training partner and play some straight macro games, and look at the resource graphs at the end. If the Terran player is on point with mules the production is still insane... and is AHEAD OF ZERG for a sizable portion of the game! So untrue. If they actually listened they would have not reverted removal of macro boosters.
I completely agree that if they listened to the entire community they would not have removed them.
But they listen to complaints such as this one, that is the problem.
If it allows them to make launch day with less work, they will QUICKLY revert.
|
are they on a balance nightmare right now that the game being so unstable and inconsistent, the slightest change they make tends to be the cause for one race to suddenly dominate?
|
On October 14 2015 04:02 Spyridon wrote: I completely agree that if they listened to the entire community they would not have removed them.
If they listened to the community the game would never be released, ever. It would be a continuous quagmire of constant posturing, politics, and bickering.
On October 14 2015 04:02 Spyridon wrote: But they listen to complaints such as this one, that is the problem.
Translation: But they appear to have sided with the camp I disagree with.
On October 14 2015 04:02 Spyridon wrote: If it allows them to make launch day with less work, they will QUICKLY revert.
What? Lol.
|
I do believe people need to be a bit less result oriented on small sample size of games and give some more time to each change, it takes time for the meta to settle, people are testing builds out, execution is far from flawless from either side, this takes time
also I do feel that avilo is a bit too quick to jump on conclusion, based on some games I played vs him his view of balance seemed completely off after every one of his losses
|
On October 14 2015 04:25 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2015 04:02 Spyridon wrote: I completely agree that if they listened to the entire community they would not have removed them.
If they listened to the community the game would never be released, ever. It would be a continuous quagmire of constant posturing, politics, and bickering. Show nested quote +On October 14 2015 04:02 Spyridon wrote: But they listen to complaints such as this one, that is the problem.
Translation: But they appear to have sided with the camp I disagree with. Show nested quote +On October 14 2015 04:02 Spyridon wrote: If it allows them to make launch day with less work, they will QUICKLY revert. What? Lol.
1) The posturing, politics, and bickering we are having right now is mostly a direct result of how they handled the last couple months of beta. Complete turn-around from the direction they were working towards the entire time, in a rush to get the game ready for release date, AFTER asking users for feedback.
2) Wrong. Correct Translation: They appear to have sided with the vocal minority that has a (well-deserved) reputation for overreacting and spewing bold statements that have been proven as false over the last 5 years. And they are still doing the same thing.
3) Look at their goals and direction at the beginning of beta. Look at their requests for feedback. Look to mid september when they were saying they were pleased with this direction. Then look at the complete switch within 3 days of the release date announcement. Then everything got reverted. Then they claimed it was because of "perceptions in the community". Then a whopping 80% of the polls disagreed with their patch.
This showed us without a doubt that our feedback really does not matter. They listen to a minority of people's PERCEPTION (not FACTS) and use it to justify reverting changes. Then when the majority of the player base is giving feedback pleading with them, peoples perception no longer matters. The common denominator? It will be easier to re balance the game for launch day in all of these scenarios.
That's all that matters to them right now. Getting the game ready for the (extremely rushed) release. So much that they completely scrapped their direction of beta, and proved themselves as dishonest (like the claims that this beta would run "far longer" than any of Blizzards other betas?), and even their Blizzard Store page stated the game was going to be released by March 2016. Then all of a sudden, release date pushed up, and beta changes start getting scrapped...
As I said, if it will allow them to get to launch day with less work, they will revert.
|
Just adding one important point to the table. The chrono nerf has another major impact - last time Tech Switches are much harder to do. You might answer "scout", but when you're against a late game zerg, 4k - 4k, with all tech available you need to react on time, not in advance.
|
The 3 larvae actually put zerg somewhat behind protoss throughout the early game but lategame zerg is unaffected so I can see that complaint. Then again I never liked the MULE situation lategame and many think it needs help. But I prefer the HOTS mechanics or some form of them, more variety in the openings and already balanced I don't see such a need to screw with it. I much prefered more focus on the units themselves and different redesigns the community has been asking for which can still be tested
|
|
|
|