Thread title is confusing. It's no longer group stage. By including that, it makes it hard to know which link to click in the sidebar because you can't see Championship in the title, it stops after Group Stage.
I wish all the Korean players were as good at English as Solar is. It's so much better when they can be interviewed in English. Very interesting to listen to what they think.
On November 12 2017 22:49 sneakyfox wrote: I wish all the Korean players were as good at English as Solar is. It's so much better when they can be interviewed in English. Very interesting to listen to what they think.
There is no real difference when they answer in Korean and we have it translated :D
On November 12 2017 22:49 sneakyfox wrote: I wish all the Korean players were as good at English as Solar is. It's so much better when they can be interviewed in English. Very interesting to listen to what they think.
There is no real difference when they answer in Korean and we have it translated :D
Even if they say the same thing, it's better when they know English. It helps convey personality better and improves the pacing of the interview. Knowing English is also good for making fans and for streaming.
On November 12 2017 22:49 sneakyfox wrote: I wish all the Korean players were as good at English as Solar is. It's so much better when they can be interviewed in English. Very interesting to listen to what they think.
There is no real difference when they answer in Korean and we have it translated :D
Even if they say the same thing, it's better when they know English. It helps convey personality better and improves the pacing of the interview. Knowing English is also good for making fans and for streaming.
I actually disagree. I would very much prefer to see the real emotion in their own language. I think even if you speak English fluently a little bit always gets lost. Obviously it would be better for making fans and streaming but I really dont think its important.
On November 12 2017 22:49 sneakyfox wrote: I wish all the Korean players were as good at English as Solar is. It's so much better when they can be interviewed in English. Very interesting to listen to what they think.
There is no real difference when they answer in Korean and we have it translated :D
Even if they say the same thing, it's better when they know English. It helps convey personality better and improves the pacing of the interview. Knowing English is also good for making fans and for streaming.
...so Korean players need to master a foreign language completely different from their own to have as many fans as foreigners who don't have to learn Korean while playing much worse...
On November 12 2017 23:06 usopsama wrote: "I don't think it is a balance problem," says a zerg.
While I've heard players express happiness over changes being made, the only players I've heard say anything positive about balance are Zerg players. That includes a player who complained about a match up that the Blizzcon champion made his name winning. Maybe other people have said positive things about it that I just haven't heard, but yeah.
I was also gone all yesterday because I was in a different town. But I'm back today, and will be playing Trails of Cold Steel over watching HSC probably.
On November 13 2017 00:29 youngjiddle wrote: Terrans whining about only one Terran in top 8 in a fun new balance test map tournament.
Meanwhile only one protoss in the year end blizzcon and many wcs tournaments but there was no whining then.
We had a Zerg pro complain about the previous state of late game Protoss at this tournament despite a ZvZ finals at Blizzcon including a champion who consistently won late game ZvP.
On November 13 2017 00:56 Morbidius wrote: alive just looked completely outclassed here. Didn't even let us see how garbage terran is.
pretty much
stats just spoke real talk, I want to see some innovation and some new builds from terran. The Terrans at HSC are not on the level of the better korean terrans skill level like stats and even zest level of play.
On November 13 2017 00:56 Morbidius wrote: alive just looked completely outclassed here. Didn't even let us see how garbage terran is.
pretty much
stats just spoke real talk, I want to see some innovation and some new builds from terran. The Terrans at HSC are not on the level of the better korean terrans skill level like stats and even zest level of play.
aLive was 6th among Korean Terrans in WCS Korea points and had he advanced 1 round further in any of his tournaments he would have likely ended 4th. Admittedly, most of his success in 2017 was early in the year, but aLive is not a scrub.
I didn't watch any of his interviews. Did he say how much he'd played the test map?
Zerg being strong late game doesn't necessarily mean that you can turtle and auto win. If you let your opponent get a great economy for free, you're going to have issues.
On November 13 2017 01:29 Boggyb wrote: Zerg being strong late game doesn't necessarily mean that you can turtle and auto win. If you let your opponent get a great economy for free, you're going to have issues.
Seems like Z and P just swapped places and now Z actually wants the lategame.
I don't know why they are so stubborn on making zergs anti air completely spellcaster/static defense. It's so boring to watch and just uninspiring to play.
On November 13 2017 01:41 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: After skytoss being so hard to kill for so long this is a little bit cathartic to watch. It's OP as fuck though
On November 13 2017 01:43 Mozdk wrote: So basicly Protoss will be forced to two base all in again? Because well controlled infestors will just kill anything.
Regarding late game, I'd like to see the forward recall of the mothership used. There should be some sick timings to tear apart the zerg during the transition.
thanks. first impressions? how are the matchups? is shield restore useful?
Zerg late game is completely broken. They really should heavily nerf infestors, and nerf carriers into oblivion instead. The chrono-buff, the shield battery, the new stalker, the widow mine nerf put together make TvP insanely hard. There needs to be some change there too.
Honestly that long fight at the end was super close, and hard to call who would come out ahead here. Especially with the players point of view, it looked like both were about to be ahead and win it, i can see why scarlett went for the slight "chase" here that did end up losing the game.
On November 13 2017 02:32 Ansibled wrote: Is that kind of FPV might be a turn off to 'casual' viewers though?
Maybe? Looked super exciting to be honest.
I enjoyed it too, though I'm not sure if I'd want it every single game.
It would be cool if it at least became a bigger part of casts even if not the whole game might be done like that.
Yeah they definitely should use it more.
WCS was using it a lot for a while, they stopped for some reason though. Maybe newer players didn't like it but newer players aren't the majority so idk
On November 13 2017 02:32 Ansibled wrote: Is that kind of FPV might be a turn off to 'casual' viewers though?
Maybe? Looked super exciting to be honest.
I enjoyed it too, though I'm not sure if I'd want it every single game.
It would be cool if it at least became a bigger part of casts even if not the whole game might be done like that.
Yeah they definitely should use it more.
I think it does a pretty good job of showing how hard the game is at the top level, it's certainly exciting but it can make it a bit difficult to tell what exactly is happening
On November 13 2017 04:41 usopsama wrote: The tears from a reverse 3-0 is much more delicious than a simple 3-0 sweep. You can really taste the extra hopefulness.
Give them a bit of hope and take it all back the very next moment.
Man those Solar interviews are just pure gold. The complete disrespect of his opponent, and promising his fans amazing games. What else could you possibly want?
On November 13 2017 04:41 usopsama wrote: The tears from a reverse 3-0 is much more delicious than a simple 3-0 sweep. You can really taste the extra hopefulness.
Give them a bit of hope and take it all back the very next moment.
Nice with the switch to first person view, but the Homestory Cup screen in between is very annoying. It should just switch immediately so we don't miss 2-3 seconds of the fight.
Shield batteries are damn good and only Stats doesn't know that. If he had two(150 minerals) in the main he would have blocked the drop by saving the pylon and warping in units.
Also in game 1 he could have won if he built bunch of SB instead of microing his units retreating to main
On November 13 2017 05:22 Bagration wrote: I took a break after Snute was up 2-0...damn what a comeback
Go away so Stats can come back and win 3-2.
yes please!
i like how the stalker change makes them borderline op in PvT and they are still crap in PvP, protoss just too strong also Stats pls don't attack in to shield batteries again
On November 13 2017 05:26 Zzzapper wrote: Zest is well on his way to match Taeja's 17 homestory cups
He is the last titan after all
2 HSC wins should make him GOAT
I hadn't read that article so I looked it up and this line stood out
[...] soO and INnoVation have all fallen from their primes.
Inno was garbage at the time to be fair.
That's true, I just found it interesting that the article talks about how Zest was the only great player from the earlier part of SC2 who was still one of the best at that time and now, 1½ year later, he's had a bad year (by Zest standards at least) while Inno and soO have been killing it
On November 13 2017 05:38 Boggyb wrote: How did Zest win that fight?
Stats didn't have enough stuff in the correct position to punish him for the bad zealot positioning. Basically, it was Archon/Immortal vs. Archon/Immortal. And don't forget the prism.
On November 13 2017 06:46 Penev wrote: just one job, don't let the spore die
harder than it looks like
you click on it and press a button
And then it dies anyway. With just ling queen there in that count you aren't saving that. Solar had to be in position to prevent the DTs getting on it at all.
On November 13 2017 06:46 Penev wrote: just one job, don't let the spore die
harder than it looks like
you click on it and press a button
And then it dies anyway. With just ling queen there in that count you aren't saving that. Solar had to be in position to prevent the DTs getting on it at all.
So in their update to improve the game for this year they didn't get rid of the super extended warp prism pick up? Did they at least reduce it a little?
On November 13 2017 07:03 chipmonklord17 wrote: So in their update to improve the game for this year they didn't get rid of the super extended warp prism pick up? Did they at least reduce it a little?
On November 13 2017 07:03 chipmonklord17 wrote: So in their update to improve the game for this year they didn't get rid of the super extended warp prism pick up? Did they at least reduce it a little?
On November 13 2017 07:04 virpi wrote: That one reminded me of my games. Decision making at its worst. But Elazer is right: Sometimes it's damn hard to judge if you can go for the kill.
But Rotti is right too, he had very little economy back home so you may as well go for it.
On November 13 2017 07:04 intotheheart wrote: The Warp Prism control was some amazing stuff.
On November 13 2017 07:04 virpi wrote: That one reminded me of my games. Decision making at its worst. But Elazer is right: Sometimes it's damn hard to judge if you can go for the kill.
Yeah, Solar can't see the enemy supply or production tab as they can ...
On November 13 2017 07:04 virpi wrote: That one reminded me of my games. Decision making at its worst. But Elazer is right: Sometimes it's damn hard to judge if you can go for the kill.
But Rotti is right too, he had very little economy back home so you may as well go for it.
On November 13 2017 07:06 shid0x wrote: Haven't watched SC2 in a long time, is this modern starcraft ? Looks bloody terrible.
it's a HSC on a balance test map. i don't think it's really reflective of anything too much
The most important thing is - it's a HSC. When was the last time HSC was reprezenting how SC2 looks like? Half the players are bad. But are great personalities. C'mon, this tournament is about the mood it gives
It's my understanding that Blizzard uses major tournaments like this in the off season to look at balance for the patch. I think they did the same thing last year as well. WCS Circuit qualifiers are starting a little early in China and the WESG qualifiers are starting up soon too. The new patch has got to be going live fairly soon.
On November 13 2017 07:16 Lexender wrote: Immortal/archon the new sentry/immortal.
"new"
I mean as in use, sentry/immortal was done to stop zergs for going to BL/Infestor winning before that. I know immortal/archon has been the meta since LotV came out.
So I don't wanna balance whine toooo much.... but Protoss have won 6 of the last 7 HSCs. This proves that Protoss is easy because you can play it while drunk and tired
On November 13 2017 07:21 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: So I don't wanna balance whine toooo much.... but Protoss have won 6 of the last 7 HSCs. This proves that Protoss is easy because you can play it while drunk and tired
To be fair, it is the best indicator of skill. Next to the EPS.
On November 13 2017 07:21 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: So I don't wanna balance whine toooo much.... but Protoss have won 6 of the last 7 HSCs. This proves that Protoss is easy because you can play it while drunk and tired
And the one non-protoss winner in MMA didn't need to face a single protoss the whole tournament.
On November 13 2017 07:16 Lexender wrote: Immortal/archon the new sentry/immortal.
"new"
I mean as in use, sentry/immortal was done to stop zergs for going to BL/Infestor winning before that. I know immortal/archon has been the meta since LotV came out.
On November 13 2017 07:25 ShowTheLights wrote: I know Take is loaded, but does he make profit from these events? I only ask b/c I love them and I never want them to end
I believe he runs fundraisers for these tournaments actually, so the cost isn't entirely out of pocket.
On November 13 2017 07:36 Fango wrote: I missed the final :/ but amazing result from Zest. Only annoying thing now is that he was 1 map away from winning 3 HSC in a row
On November 13 2017 08:07 Fango wrote: Are you serious Zest was 5 army supply to 70?? His whole army was 2 prisms and an observer? I really hope Solar doesn't watch that reply
He might have realized it already he looked very tilted
On November 13 2017 09:37 blunderfulguy wrote:Can't wait to hear what the design team thinks of this.
I would hope the design team doesn't read too much into these games. Some things are obviously broken (Infestors), but most things require more games from people who've spent more time figuring out the changes. A GSL super tournament type Korean tournament in December that did NOT offer WCS Points would be perfect if yearly major changes are going to be a thing going forward.
My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree.
On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote: My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree.
It is a design patch, not a balance patch. There are some flaws in balance, but they didn't nerf Terran into the ground because of INnoVation. Had they been making balance changes, Zerg would have been nerfed based on the last few months.
It is also unfair to really read too much into balance considering the huge variations in skill and preparation from the players. If we see broken things like BL/Infestor winning at a Korean tournament in a month or two, then yeah, raging would be a lot more reasonable.
On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote: My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree.
It's not that they butchered Terran. They have made design changes that aren't even live yet.
On November 13 2017 07:57 Shathe wrote: The best thing for me was that Zest completely slaughtered Stats. I think the changes will favor his style much.
I don't want to read too much into these games, however it seems like they are evenly matched in terms of mechanics, but this patch plays a bit more to Zests strenghts which have always been his decision-making, positioning and engagments
On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote: My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree.
You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW)
C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all.
On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote: My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree.
You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW)
C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all.
this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak.
On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote: My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree.
You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW)
C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all.
this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak.
On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote: My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree.
You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW)
C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all.
this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak.
You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well.
It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it.
However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono.
I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out.
Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle.
On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote: My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree.
You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW)
C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all.
this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak.
You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well.
It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it.
However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono.
I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out.
Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle.
I realize that the MSC removal is a big nerf but most people seem to think the new chronoboost + shield battery + stalker buff more than make up for it. Which buff did terran get that is significant?
On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote: My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree.
You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW)
C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all.
this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak.
You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well.
It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it.
However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono.
I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out.
Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle.
I realize that the MSC removal is a big nerf but most people seem to think the new chronoboost + shield battery + stalker buff more than make up for it. Which buff did terran get that is significant?
No race got changed as much as Protoss, that is true. But the issue isn't that Zerg and Protoss got buffed while Terran got nerfed.
Terran did receive some token buffs as well as a raven redesign. The main nerf that Terran received was the mine nerf, and I don't think it's significant enough to drop T winrates or make them by far the worse race.
The SB, as I've maintained, is bad because it scales too well in the mid-late game. Because you can spam SBs, you can make base defense way more powerful than it should be.
However, I have also maintained that the SB is not sufficient to protect Protoss against early pressure. It doesn't kill the units, which is what Protoss needs, and stalkers are fairly expensive early game units even though they have survivability and damage now.
I think the other issue is that we had no really high level Terran at HSC. Some things that seem op may not necessarily be op until the best of the best take a solid crack at it. Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. But perhaps it just requires a couple months of experimentation to deal with the other Protoss changes. For instance, if P is building more stalkers and SBs, perhaps ghosts could be mixed in. You drop the ghost, emp, and then wipe out the defending forces because the SB has a max of 100 energy.
Even though it was annoying seeing Protoss with low winrates in January, with minimal tweaking, Protoss still did become about even with Terran, which I think needs to happen here. And ultimately, if things are overpowered, then they can be changed.
I do think shield batteries are sufficient early game defense, perhaps even a bit too strong/cheap at the moment. And I generally agree that Terran will need a bit of help to keep up, but we're talking about a patch that isn't even live yet. It'll be figured out soon.
On November 13 2017 22:08 Olli wrote: I do think shield batteries are sufficient early game defense, perhaps even a bit too strong/cheap at the moment. And I generally agree that Terran will need a bit of help to keep up, but we're talking about a patch that isn't even live yet. It'll be figured out soon.
Yeah it's hard to say what Terran needs until we see Inno, TY, Gumiho and Co play, but they need something. I'm confident that it will be fine before WCS 2018 though.
On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote: Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak.
How do you make that tweak without reverting the chrono change or completely destroying stargate openers?
Surely you can have oracles build a bit slower without completely ruining SG openings.
Is this really that big? I mean - if you see a Protoss stacking energy do you know what's coming or do they have another possibilities? (let's assume T hasn't seen any tech building that would be good for CB)
I didn't catch any PvT so I have no clue TBH, being curious.
On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote: My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree.
You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW)
C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all.
this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak.
You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well.
It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it.
However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono.
I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out.
Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle.
I realize that the MSC removal is a big nerf but most people seem to think the new chronoboost + shield battery + stalker buff more than make up for it. Which buff did terran get that is significant?
No race got changed as much as Protoss, that is true. But the issue isn't that Zerg and Protoss got buffed while Terran got nerfed.
Terran did receive some token buffs as well as a raven redesign. The main nerf that Terran received was the mine nerf, and I don't think it's significant enough to drop T winrates or make them by far the worse race.
The SB, as I've maintained, is bad because it scales too well in the mid-late game. Because you can spam SBs, you can make base defense way more powerful than it should be.
However, I have also maintained that the SB is not sufficient to protect Protoss against early pressure. It doesn't kill the units, which is what Protoss needs, and stalkers are fairly expensive early game units even though they have survivability and damage now.
I think the other issue is that we had no really high level Terran at HSC. Some things that seem op may not necessarily be op until the best of the best take a solid crack at it. Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. But perhaps it just requires a couple months of experimentation to deal with the other Protoss changes. For instance, if P is building more stalkers and SBs, perhaps ghosts could be mixed in. You drop the ghost, emp, and then wipe out the defending forces because the SB has a max of 100 energy.
Even though it was annoying seeing Protoss with low winrates in January, with minimal tweaking, Protoss still did become about even with Terran, which I think needs to happen here. And ultimately, if things are overpowered, then they can be changed.
Typing stuff doesn't make it true. The fact that terrans couldnt qualify and then got 3-0'd every single round should be a red alert that the balance team is failing. HSC last year had more than 15,000 people watching. This was probably the first SC2 tournament I can think of that I literally just turned off and stopped caring about. I don't know who won, doesn't really matter because the patch is clearly developed by someone who can't play terran and doesn't know high level gameplay.
we didn't get to see it here, but if this 'balance' patch doesn't get fixed, my friends and I have practiced a 2-3 nexus early forge chronoboost on armor. If you don't die in 1 minute after starting it, you win the game almost no matter what because terran will be on +1 maybe halfway to 2 and protoss will already be on 3.
One race should not be completely gutted and butchered just because 2-3 people on the planet are on another level than everyone else.
On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote: My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree.
You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW)
C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all.
this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak.
You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well.
It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it.
However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono.
I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out.
Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle.
I realize that the MSC removal is a big nerf but most people seem to think the new chronoboost + shield battery + stalker buff more than make up for it. Which buff did terran get that is significant?
No race got changed as much as Protoss, that is true. But the issue isn't that Zerg and Protoss got buffed while Terran got nerfed.
Terran did receive some token buffs as well as a raven redesign. The main nerf that Terran received was the mine nerf, and I don't think it's significant enough to drop T winrates or make them by far the worse race.
The SB, as I've maintained, is bad because it scales too well in the mid-late game. Because you can spam SBs, you can make base defense way more powerful than it should be.
However, I have also maintained that the SB is not sufficient to protect Protoss against early pressure. It doesn't kill the units, which is what Protoss needs, and stalkers are fairly expensive early game units even though they have survivability and damage now.
I think the other issue is that we had no really high level Terran at HSC. Some things that seem op may not necessarily be op until the best of the best take a solid crack at it. Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. But perhaps it just requires a couple months of experimentation to deal with the other Protoss changes. For instance, if P is building more stalkers and SBs, perhaps ghosts could be mixed in. You drop the ghost, emp, and then wipe out the defending forces because the SB has a max of 100 energy.
Even though it was annoying seeing Protoss with low winrates in January, with minimal tweaking, Protoss still did become about even with Terran, which I think needs to happen here. And ultimately, if things are overpowered, then they can be changed.
Typing stuff doesn't make it true. The fact that terrans couldnt qualify and then got 3-0'd every single round should be a red alert that the balance team is failing. HSC last year had more than 15,000 people watching. This was probably the first SC2 tournament I can think of that I literally just turned off and stopped caring about. I don't know who won, doesn't really matter because the patch is clearly developed by someone who can't play terran and doesn't know high level gameplay.
we didn't get to see it here, but if this 'balance' patch doesn't get fixed, my friends and I have practiced a 2-3 nexus early forge chronoboost on armor. If you don't die in 1 minute after starting it, you win the game almost no matter what because terran will be on +1 maybe halfway to 2 and protoss will already be on 3.
One race should not be completely gutted and butchered just because 2-3 people on the planet are on another level than everyone else.
I agree that some of what I said was theorycrafting, and sometimes, things need to be changed.
Aside from the fact that Terrans didn't get 3-0ed every round, I can point to the fact uThermal beat Neeb I think 3-1 when Neeb has been the best foreigner by far for 2017.
If your counterpoint is that Neeb isn't at the highest skill level and then point to aLive and jjakji getting wrecked, then I will say the same thing. Those are players are simply not on the same level as the players they were playing against.
At HSC, the top 5 Terrans were nowhere to be seen, whereas two of the top 5 Protoss were here, and a top 4 Zerg was present.
And, the thing is, most people are not a top 5 or even top 10 Terran. What might be unholdable at a certain level may be holdable at their level.
I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
The Raven redesign was done explicitly to prevent massing them, and yet we have another cancerous Zerg playstyle that involves massing spellcasters (literal Broodlord/Infestor!), and somehow that's ok? Even supposing that Terrans and Protosses find an answer, what's the benefit to keeping this sort of stuff in the game?
Is there any reason to have a super-powerful Zerg air deathball vs a super-powerful Protoss air deathball? What, exactly, is the improvement here?
Or does anyone think the game needs more Protoss cheese?
Even supposing the meta settles into a somewhat balanced equilibrium, what's the point of doing a big redesign that leaves things worse than before?
None of this shit needs to exist. If it's a choice between keeping this crap around to maintain balance or just reverting the changes wholesale, I'd pick the latter any day of the week.
Fortunately, I don't think that that's necessary. Blizzard can probably fix most of this with some minor tweaks. But what they definitely shouldn't do is sit on their ass for eight months waiting for players to solve a problem that they caused ala WoL.
On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote: Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak.
How do you make that tweak without reverting the chrono change or completely destroying stargate openers?
Surely you can have oracles build a bit slower without completely ruining SG openings.
You could do that, but I don't think oracles are the core problem in PvT. Better chrono, better stalkers, shield battery, the widow mine nerf all put together just gives Protoss so many more options in the opening (which from a build diversity perspective is pretty good tbf). And terran just struggles to deal with all the different things Protoss can do.
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
You completely missed the point. Balance is not the issue. What is the point of doing a redesign if the gameplay that arises is worse than before?
Do you really think, for example, that T/P players will find a response that makes massing infestors unviable? And if so, do you think that we should wait months waiting for this miracle to materialize?
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
Not only that, but the "wait and see" attitude was how most people and Blizzard responded to Protoss being weak in December through January. And what happened? Protoss developed the Phoenix/adept style to counter the heavy liberator and mine style.
On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote: Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak.
How do you make that tweak without reverting the chrono change or completely destroying stargate openers?
Surely you can have oracles build a bit slower without completely ruining SG openings.
You could do that, but I don't think oracles are the core problem in PvT. Better chrono, better stalkers, shield battery, the widow mine nerf all put together just gives Protoss so many more options in the opening (which from a build diversity perspective is pretty good tbf). And terran just struggles to deal with all the different things Protoss can do.
For the early game, I think it's oracles + new chrono. For the mid game, I think Terran is hampered by Shield battery + stalkers or adepts making drops so much less useful.
The widow mine nerf really only nerfs the multiple shot potential of mines and keeps their initial strength similarly powerful. Potentially, the buff to stalkers indirectly nerfed the mine because of the range difference.
On November 14 2017 04:27 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:
On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote:
On November 13 2017 19:51 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 13 2017 19:34 FrkFrJss wrote:
On November 13 2017 18:29 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 13 2017 18:02 deacon.frost wrote:
On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote: My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree.
You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW)
C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all.
this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak.
You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well.
It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it.
However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono.
I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out.
Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle.
I realize that the MSC removal is a big nerf but most people seem to think the new chronoboost + shield battery + stalker buff more than make up for it. Which buff did terran get that is significant?
No race got changed as much as Protoss, that is true. But the issue isn't that Zerg and Protoss got buffed while Terran got nerfed.
Terran did receive some token buffs as well as a raven redesign. The main nerf that Terran received was the mine nerf, and I don't think it's significant enough to drop T winrates or make them by far the worse race.
The SB, as I've maintained, is bad because it scales too well in the mid-late game. Because you can spam SBs, you can make base defense way more powerful than it should be.
However, I have also maintained that the SB is not sufficient to protect Protoss against early pressure. It doesn't kill the units, which is what Protoss needs, and stalkers are fairly expensive early game units even though they have survivability and damage now.
I think the other issue is that we had no really high level Terran at HSC. Some things that seem op may not necessarily be op until the best of the best take a solid crack at it. Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. But perhaps it just requires a couple months of experimentation to deal with the other Protoss changes. For instance, if P is building more stalkers and SBs, perhaps ghosts could be mixed in. You drop the ghost, emp, and then wipe out the defending forces because the SB has a max of 100 energy.
Even though it was annoying seeing Protoss with low winrates in January, with minimal tweaking, Protoss still did become about even with Terran, which I think needs to happen here. And ultimately, if things are overpowered, then they can be changed.
Typing stuff doesn't make it true. The fact that terrans couldnt qualify and then got 3-0'd every single round should be a red alert that the balance team is failing. HSC last year had more than 15,000 people watching. This was probably the first SC2 tournament I can think of that I literally just turned off and stopped caring about. I don't know who won, doesn't really matter because the patch is clearly developed by someone who can't play terran and doesn't know high level gameplay.
we didn't get to see it here, but if this 'balance' patch doesn't get fixed, my friends and I have practiced a 2-3 nexus early forge chronoboost on armor. If you don't die in 1 minute after starting it, you win the game almost no matter what because terran will be on +1 maybe halfway to 2 and protoss will already be on 3.
One race should not be completely gutted and butchered just because 2-3 people on the planet are on another level than everyone else.
I agree that some of what I said was theorycrafting, and sometimes, things need to be changed.
Aside from the fact that Terrans didn't get 3-0ed every round, I can point to the fact uThermal beat Neeb I think 3-1 when Neeb has been the best foreigner by far for 2017.
If your counterpoint is that Neeb isn't at the highest skill level and then point to aLive and jjakji getting wrecked, then I will say the same thing. Those are players are simply not on the same level as the players they were playing against.
At HSC, the top 5 Terrans were nowhere to be seen, whereas two of the top 5 Protoss were here, and a top 4 Zerg was present.
And, the thing is, most people are not a top 5 or even top 10 Terran. What might be unholdable at a certain level may be holdable at their level.
Wasn't Neeb busy practicing vanilla LotV (current ladder patch) PvZ for blizzcon whereas uThermal played the test map as every other failing foreigner did tho? Plus it's probably an outlier, I only watched liquipedia results but terrans got wrecked in this HSC and in the comments people were saying that almost all pros agreed on terran being weak or something.
It's now time to discuss it, better safe than sorry so if there is an obvious issue Blizzard has to take notes before going live with it?
Glad to see HSC still going, too bad Stephano still couldn't perform.
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
Not only that, but the "wait and see" attitude was how most people and Blizzard responded to Protoss being weak in December through January. And what happened? Protoss developed the Phoenix/adept style to counter the heavy liberator and mine style.
And then liberators and mines got nerfed. Also, phoenix adept was invented before Protoss underperformed at the beginning of this year, so I don't think you can characterize that as a new development. At most you can say that that style became more prevalent as a response.
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
You completely missed the point. Balance is not the issue. What is the point of doing a redesign if the gameplay that arises is worse than before? Do you really think, for example, that T/P players will find a response that makes massing infestors unviable? And if so, do you think that we should wait months waiting for this miracle to materialize?
Infestors need to be nuked from orbit. That's the one issue which doesn't require a wait and see. The fact that a player like Scarlett who has never won anything of note was in an unlosable position against a multi-GSL champion despite not entering late game massively ahead is more than enough evidence that the unit is broken. Pretty much everything requires a lot more evidence to make informed decisions.
On November 14 2017 04:27 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:
On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote:
On November 13 2017 19:51 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 13 2017 19:34 FrkFrJss wrote:
On November 13 2017 18:29 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 13 2017 18:02 deacon.frost wrote:
On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote: My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree.
You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW)
C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all.
this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak.
You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well.
It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it.
However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono.
I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out.
Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle.
I realize that the MSC removal is a big nerf but most people seem to think the new chronoboost + shield battery + stalker buff more than make up for it. Which buff did terran get that is significant?
No race got changed as much as Protoss, that is true. But the issue isn't that Zerg and Protoss got buffed while Terran got nerfed.
Terran did receive some token buffs as well as a raven redesign. The main nerf that Terran received was the mine nerf, and I don't think it's significant enough to drop T winrates or make them by far the worse race.
The SB, as I've maintained, is bad because it scales too well in the mid-late game. Because you can spam SBs, you can make base defense way more powerful than it should be.
However, I have also maintained that the SB is not sufficient to protect Protoss against early pressure. It doesn't kill the units, which is what Protoss needs, and stalkers are fairly expensive early game units even though they have survivability and damage now.
I think the other issue is that we had no really high level Terran at HSC. Some things that seem op may not necessarily be op until the best of the best take a solid crack at it. Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. But perhaps it just requires a couple months of experimentation to deal with the other Protoss changes. For instance, if P is building more stalkers and SBs, perhaps ghosts could be mixed in. You drop the ghost, emp, and then wipe out the defending forces because the SB has a max of 100 energy.
Even though it was annoying seeing Protoss with low winrates in January, with minimal tweaking, Protoss still did become about even with Terran, which I think needs to happen here. And ultimately, if things are overpowered, then they can be changed.
Typing stuff doesn't make it true. The fact that terrans couldnt qualify and then got 3-0'd every single round should be a red alert that the balance team is failing. HSC last year had more than 15,000 people watching. This was probably the first SC2 tournament I can think of that I literally just turned off and stopped caring about. I don't know who won, doesn't really matter because the patch is clearly developed by someone who can't play terran and doesn't know high level gameplay.
we didn't get to see it here, but if this 'balance' patch doesn't get fixed, my friends and I have practiced a 2-3 nexus early forge chronoboost on armor. If you don't die in 1 minute after starting it, you win the game almost no matter what because terran will be on +1 maybe halfway to 2 and protoss will already be on 3.
One race should not be completely gutted and butchered just because 2-3 people on the planet are on another level than everyone else.
I agree that some of what I said was theorycrafting, and sometimes, things need to be changed.
Aside from the fact that Terrans didn't get 3-0ed every round, I can point to the fact uThermal beat Neeb I think 3-1 when Neeb has been the best foreigner by far for 2017.
If your counterpoint is that Neeb isn't at the highest skill level and then point to aLive and jjakji getting wrecked, then I will say the same thing. Those are players are simply not on the same level as the players they were playing against.
At HSC, the top 5 Terrans were nowhere to be seen, whereas two of the top 5 Protoss were here, and a top 4 Zerg was present.
And, the thing is, most people are not a top 5 or even top 10 Terran. What might be unholdable at a certain level may be holdable at their level.
Wasn't Neeb busy practicing vanilla LotV (current ladder patch) PvZ for blizzcon whereas uThermal played the test map as every other failing foreigner did tho? Plus it's probably an outlier, I only watched liquipedia results but terrans got wrecked in this HSC and in the comments people were saying that almost all pros agreed on terran being weak or something.
It's now time to discuss it, better safe than sorry so if there is an obvious issue Blizzard has to take notes before going live with it?
Glad to see HSC still going, too bad Stephano still couldn't perform.
Again, there were fewer and worse Terrans at HSC, which artificially inflates the loss ratio. Put two top five Terrans there like Inno and TY, and suddenly I don't think Terran looks as underpowered.
Also, I have to keep going back to January. This was two months after the redesign, and Protoss had an overall winrate of 41%. That winrate is much lower than the TvP winrate at HSC.
As for TvZ, I can't really speak for that matchup.
All that being said, if after like two-four weeks, if there is still blatantly op or up stuff, then I do support appropriate buffs/nerfs.
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
You completely missed the point. Balance is not the issue. What is the point of doing a redesign if the gameplay that arises is worse than before? Do you really think, for example, that T/P players will find a response that makes massing infestors unviable? And if so, do you think that we should wait months waiting for this miracle to materialize?
Infestors need to be nuked from orbit. That's the one issue which doesn't require a wait and see. The fact that a player like Scarlett who has never won anything of note was in an unlosable position against a multi-GSL champion despite not entering late game massively ahead is more than enough evidence that the unit is broken. Pretty much everything requires a lot more evidence to make informed decisions.
Why not put super-fast Oracles in that category as well? How does having potentially game-ending damage available that early in the game make things better? Wasn't one of their goals for this patch to tone that sort of stuff down?
The shield battery and stalker changes, I agree, need more time, if only because the general direction is good even if balance might need tweaking. But I don't see any reason for Oracles to stay the way they are. "Lol ur dead" isn't fun for anyone even if it somehow ends up balanced.
On November 14 2017 04:27 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:
On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote:
On November 13 2017 19:51 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 13 2017 19:34 FrkFrJss wrote:
On November 13 2017 18:29 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 13 2017 18:02 deacon.frost wrote:
On November 13 2017 11:44 YourFavoriteTerran wrote: My friends and I tuned in for a few moments but found it hard to enjoy it. My buddy said it best- "It's hard to enjoy the tournament because the patch clearly destroyed terran. Should one race really be completely butchered just because 2-3 terrans are the best in the world?". Can't say I disagree.
You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW)
C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all.
this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak.
You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well.
It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it.
However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono.
I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out.
Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle.
I realize that the MSC removal is a big nerf but most people seem to think the new chronoboost + shield battery + stalker buff more than make up for it. Which buff did terran get that is significant?
No race got changed as much as Protoss, that is true. But the issue isn't that Zerg and Protoss got buffed while Terran got nerfed.
Terran did receive some token buffs as well as a raven redesign. The main nerf that Terran received was the mine nerf, and I don't think it's significant enough to drop T winrates or make them by far the worse race.
The SB, as I've maintained, is bad because it scales too well in the mid-late game. Because you can spam SBs, you can make base defense way more powerful than it should be.
However, I have also maintained that the SB is not sufficient to protect Protoss against early pressure. It doesn't kill the units, which is what Protoss needs, and stalkers are fairly expensive early game units even though they have survivability and damage now.
I think the other issue is that we had no really high level Terran at HSC. Some things that seem op may not necessarily be op until the best of the best take a solid crack at it. Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. But perhaps it just requires a couple months of experimentation to deal with the other Protoss changes. For instance, if P is building more stalkers and SBs, perhaps ghosts could be mixed in. You drop the ghost, emp, and then wipe out the defending forces because the SB has a max of 100 energy.
Even though it was annoying seeing Protoss with low winrates in January, with minimal tweaking, Protoss still did become about even with Terran, which I think needs to happen here. And ultimately, if things are overpowered, then they can be changed.
Typing stuff doesn't make it true. The fact that terrans couldnt qualify and then got 3-0'd every single round should be a red alert that the balance team is failing. HSC last year had more than 15,000 people watching. This was probably the first SC2 tournament I can think of that I literally just turned off and stopped caring about. I don't know who won, doesn't really matter because the patch is clearly developed by someone who can't play terran and doesn't know high level gameplay.
we didn't get to see it here, but if this 'balance' patch doesn't get fixed, my friends and I have practiced a 2-3 nexus early forge chronoboost on armor. If you don't die in 1 minute after starting it, you win the game almost no matter what because terran will be on +1 maybe halfway to 2 and protoss will already be on 3.
One race should not be completely gutted and butchered just because 2-3 people on the planet are on another level than everyone else.
I agree that some of what I said was theorycrafting, and sometimes, things need to be changed.
Aside from the fact that Terrans didn't get 3-0ed every round, I can point to the fact uThermal beat Neeb I think 3-1 when Neeb has been the best foreigner by far for 2017.
If your counterpoint is that Neeb isn't at the highest skill level and then point to aLive and jjakji getting wrecked, then I will say the same thing. Those are players are simply not on the same level as the players they were playing against.
At HSC, the top 5 Terrans were nowhere to be seen, whereas two of the top 5 Protoss were here, and a top 4 Zerg was present.
And, the thing is, most people are not a top 5 or even top 10 Terran. What might be unholdable at a certain level may be holdable at their level.
Wasn't Neeb busy practicing vanilla LotV (current ladder patch) PvZ for blizzcon whereas uThermal played the test map as every other failing foreigner did tho? Plus it's probably an outlier, I only watched liquipedia results but terrans got wrecked in this HSC and in the comments people were saying that almost all pros agreed on terran being weak or something.
It's now time to discuss it, better safe than sorry so if there is an obvious issue Blizzard has to take notes before going live with it?
Glad to see HSC still going, too bad Stephano still couldn't perform.
Again, there were fewer and worse Terrans at HSC, which artificially inflates the loss ratio. Put two top five Terrans there like Inno and TY, and suddenly I don't think Terran looks as underpowered.
Also, I have to keep going back to January. This was two months after the redesign, and Protoss had an overall winrate of 41%. That winrate is much lower than the TvP winrate at HSC.
As for TvZ, I can't really speak for that matchup.
All that being said, if after like two-four weeks, if there is still blatantly op or up stuff, then I do support appropriate buffs/nerfs.
I agree, the Terran field overall at HSC was weaker (though the foreign terrans were competitive, both Heromarine and UThermal were there) and they clearly weren't trying new stuff. So HSC isn't an indication of much except of how stupid infestors are (I don't remember if there were any particularly egregious fast proxy-Oracle games off the top of my head).
That said, this is the off-season and Blizzard needs to be more aggressive with changes. Tweaks every two weeks until the dumbest stuff has been ironed sounds fine to me.
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
Not only that, but the "wait and see" attitude was how most people and Blizzard responded to Protoss being weak in December through January. And what happened? Protoss developed the Phoenix/adept style to counter the heavy liberator and mine style.
And then liberators and mines got nerfed. Also, phoenix adept was invented before Protoss underperformed at the beginning of this year, so I don't think you can characterize that as a new development. At most you can say that that style became more prevalent as a response.
Regardless, this is all besides the point.
True, but the liberator got nerfed at the end of January, two months after the redesign. The widow mine got nerfed in March.
The point being, they did change things, but they did it months after the release.
EDIT: the Protoss probably hadn't figured out the super fast oracle opening at that point.
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
Not only that, but the "wait and see" attitude was how most people and Blizzard responded to Protoss being weak in December through January. And what happened? Protoss developed the Phoenix/adept style to counter the heavy liberator and mine style.
And then liberators and mines got nerfed. Also, phoenix adept was invented before Protoss underperformed at the beginning of this year, so I don't think you can characterize that as a new development. At most you can say that that style became more prevalent as a response.
Regardless, this is all besides the point.
True, but the liberator got nerfed at the end of January, two months after the redesign. The widow mine got nerfed in March.
The point being, they did change things, but they did it months after the release.
Yes, but that was during the regular season. It's fine to be more conservative while major tournaments are going on. It's not fine to wait months during the off-season to address glaring design issues that your design patch was supposed to fix.
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
Not only that, but the "wait and see" attitude was how most people and Blizzard responded to Protoss being weak in December through January. And what happened? Protoss developed the Phoenix/adept style to counter the heavy liberator and mine style.
And then liberators and mines got nerfed. Also, phoenix adept was invented before Protoss underperformed at the beginning of this year, so I don't think you can characterize that as a new development. At most you can say that that style became more prevalent as a response.
Regardless, this is all besides the point.
True, but the liberator got nerfed at the end of January, two months after the redesign. The widow mine got nerfed in March.
The point being, they did change things, but they did it months after the release.
Yes, but that was during the regular season. It's fine to be more conservative while major tournaments are going on. It's not fine to wait months during the off-season to address glaring design issues that your design patch was supposed to fix.
I mean, liberators had been tough for Protoss to deal with ever since they came into being. Tempests being nerfed only made this worse. But, I do agree that the off season is when the more frequent and radical changes should be made. Though, that being said, it's sometimes the competitive nature of the regular season that makes balance problems more prevalent. And sometimes, it's during this time that people figure out the meta.
On November 14 2017 04:27 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:
On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote:
On November 13 2017 19:51 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 13 2017 19:34 FrkFrJss wrote:
On November 13 2017 18:29 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 13 2017 18:02 deacon.frost wrote: [quote] You do realize this tournament had exactly 1 good Terran player and this Terran player met a really strong Protoss in the RO8? The next good Terran to aLive was jjakji and while I don't want to be mean - he's nowhere near Stats, Zest or Solar.(the 2 latter kicked him out of the tourney BTW)
C'mon, based on this tourney we can talk about PvZ balance and how it affects mirror matches and that's, sadly, all.
this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak.
You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well.
It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it.
However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono.
I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out.
Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle.
I realize that the MSC removal is a big nerf but most people seem to think the new chronoboost + shield battery + stalker buff more than make up for it. Which buff did terran get that is significant?
No race got changed as much as Protoss, that is true. But the issue isn't that Zerg and Protoss got buffed while Terran got nerfed.
Terran did receive some token buffs as well as a raven redesign. The main nerf that Terran received was the mine nerf, and I don't think it's significant enough to drop T winrates or make them by far the worse race.
The SB, as I've maintained, is bad because it scales too well in the mid-late game. Because you can spam SBs, you can make base defense way more powerful than it should be.
However, I have also maintained that the SB is not sufficient to protect Protoss against early pressure. It doesn't kill the units, which is what Protoss needs, and stalkers are fairly expensive early game units even though they have survivability and damage now.
I think the other issue is that we had no really high level Terran at HSC. Some things that seem op may not necessarily be op until the best of the best take a solid crack at it. Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. But perhaps it just requires a couple months of experimentation to deal with the other Protoss changes. For instance, if P is building more stalkers and SBs, perhaps ghosts could be mixed in. You drop the ghost, emp, and then wipe out the defending forces because the SB has a max of 100 energy.
Even though it was annoying seeing Protoss with low winrates in January, with minimal tweaking, Protoss still did become about even with Terran, which I think needs to happen here. And ultimately, if things are overpowered, then they can be changed.
Typing stuff doesn't make it true. The fact that terrans couldnt qualify and then got 3-0'd every single round should be a red alert that the balance team is failing. HSC last year had more than 15,000 people watching. This was probably the first SC2 tournament I can think of that I literally just turned off and stopped caring about. I don't know who won, doesn't really matter because the patch is clearly developed by someone who can't play terran and doesn't know high level gameplay.
we didn't get to see it here, but if this 'balance' patch doesn't get fixed, my friends and I have practiced a 2-3 nexus early forge chronoboost on armor. If you don't die in 1 minute after starting it, you win the game almost no matter what because terran will be on +1 maybe halfway to 2 and protoss will already be on 3.
One race should not be completely gutted and butchered just because 2-3 people on the planet are on another level than everyone else.
I agree that some of what I said was theorycrafting, and sometimes, things need to be changed.
Aside from the fact that Terrans didn't get 3-0ed every round, I can point to the fact uThermal beat Neeb I think 3-1 when Neeb has been the best foreigner by far for 2017.
If your counterpoint is that Neeb isn't at the highest skill level and then point to aLive and jjakji getting wrecked, then I will say the same thing. Those are players are simply not on the same level as the players they were playing against.
At HSC, the top 5 Terrans were nowhere to be seen, whereas two of the top 5 Protoss were here, and a top 4 Zerg was present.
And, the thing is, most people are not a top 5 or even top 10 Terran. What might be unholdable at a certain level may be holdable at their level.
Wasn't Neeb busy practicing vanilla LotV (current ladder patch) PvZ for blizzcon whereas uThermal played the test map as every other failing foreigner did tho? Plus it's probably an outlier, I only watched liquipedia results but terrans got wrecked in this HSC and in the comments people were saying that almost all pros agreed on terran being weak or something.
It's now time to discuss it, better safe than sorry so if there is an obvious issue Blizzard has to take notes before going live with it?
Glad to see HSC still going, too bad Stephano still couldn't perform.
Again, there were fewer and worse Terrans at HSC, which artificially inflates the loss ratio. Put two top five Terrans there like Inno and TY, and suddenly I don't think Terran looks as underpowered.
Also, I have to keep going back to January. This was two months after the redesign, and Protoss had an overall winrate of 41%. That winrate is much lower than the TvP winrate at HSC.
As for TvZ, I can't really speak for that matchup.
All that being said, if after like two-four weeks, if there is still blatantly op or up stuff, then I do support appropriate buffs/nerfs.
I agree, the Terran field overall at HSC was weaker (though the foreign terrans were competitive, both Heromarine and UThermal were there) and they clearly weren't trying new stuff. So HSC isn't an indication of much except of how stupid infestors are (I don't remember if there were any particularly egregious fast proxy-Oracle games off the top of my head).
That said, this is the off-season and Blizzard needs to be more aggressive with changes. Tweaks every two weeks until the dumbest stuff has been ironed sounds fine to me.
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
Not only that, but the "wait and see" attitude was how most people and Blizzard responded to Protoss being weak in December through January. And what happened? Protoss developed the Phoenix/adept style to counter the heavy liberator and mine style.
And then liberators and mines got nerfed. Also, phoenix adept was invented before Protoss underperformed at the beginning of this year, so I don't think you can characterize that as a new development. At most you can say that that style became more prevalent as a response.
Regardless, this is all besides the point.
True, but the liberator got nerfed at the end of January, two months after the redesign. The widow mine got nerfed in March.
The point being, they did change things, but they did it months after the release.
Yes, but that was during the regular season. It's fine to be more conservative while major tournaments are going on. It's not fine to wait months during the off-season to address glaring design issues that your design patch was supposed to fix.
I mean, liberators had been tough for Protoss to deal with ever since they came into being. Tempests being nerfed only made this worse. But, I do agree that the off season is when the more frequent and radical changes should be made. Though, that being said, it's sometimes the competitive nature of the regular season that makes balance problems more prevalent. And sometimes, it's during this time that people figure out the meta.
Protoss had to adjust to liberators, but I don't think they were ever a balance problem until tanks got buffed in patch 3.8. And they were never an issue gameplay-wise. Giving Terran a way to play a positional macro game as opposed to "multidrop until one of you dies" or "YOLO SCV pull" will never be a bad thing in my book.
Anyway, my argument still stands--if you're redesigning the game, your redesign shouldn't exacerbate problems that you're supposedly trying to fix.
On November 14 2017 04:27 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:
On November 13 2017 20:52 FrkFrJss wrote:
On November 13 2017 19:51 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 13 2017 19:34 FrkFrJss wrote:
On November 13 2017 18:29 Charoisaur wrote: [quote] this tournament alone doesn't indicate that terran is weak but pro players from all 3 races agree that terran is to weak. Also when 1 race gets only nerfs while the other two get mostly buffs it's clear they will be struggling post-patch assuming the matchups were balanced before. I don't think we have to wait for GSL to realize that terran is weak.
You would be correct except that Terran got buffs, and Protoss got nerfs as well.
It would be more correct to say that both P and T got buffs and nerfs. The removal of the MSC is a massive nerf to early game defense, and the SB only partially makes up for it.
However, the SB in mid game combined with the stalker change is a buff as well as the new chrono.
I still say it's too early to change anything major aside from how fast oracles come out.
Besides, at last year's patch when Protoss got the short end of the stick, people advocated waiting for the meta to settle.
I realize that the MSC removal is a big nerf but most people seem to think the new chronoboost + shield battery + stalker buff more than make up for it. Which buff did terran get that is significant?
No race got changed as much as Protoss, that is true. But the issue isn't that Zerg and Protoss got buffed while Terran got nerfed.
Terran did receive some token buffs as well as a raven redesign. The main nerf that Terran received was the mine nerf, and I don't think it's significant enough to drop T winrates or make them by far the worse race.
The SB, as I've maintained, is bad because it scales too well in the mid-late game. Because you can spam SBs, you can make base defense way more powerful than it should be.
However, I have also maintained that the SB is not sufficient to protect Protoss against early pressure. It doesn't kill the units, which is what Protoss needs, and stalkers are fairly expensive early game units even though they have survivability and damage now.
I think the other issue is that we had no really high level Terran at HSC. Some things that seem op may not necessarily be op until the best of the best take a solid crack at it. Certainly, the new chrono + oracle might need a tweak. But perhaps it just requires a couple months of experimentation to deal with the other Protoss changes. For instance, if P is building more stalkers and SBs, perhaps ghosts could be mixed in. You drop the ghost, emp, and then wipe out the defending forces because the SB has a max of 100 energy.
Even though it was annoying seeing Protoss with low winrates in January, with minimal tweaking, Protoss still did become about even with Terran, which I think needs to happen here. And ultimately, if things are overpowered, then they can be changed.
Typing stuff doesn't make it true. The fact that terrans couldnt qualify and then got 3-0'd every single round should be a red alert that the balance team is failing. HSC last year had more than 15,000 people watching. This was probably the first SC2 tournament I can think of that I literally just turned off and stopped caring about. I don't know who won, doesn't really matter because the patch is clearly developed by someone who can't play terran and doesn't know high level gameplay.
we didn't get to see it here, but if this 'balance' patch doesn't get fixed, my friends and I have practiced a 2-3 nexus early forge chronoboost on armor. If you don't die in 1 minute after starting it, you win the game almost no matter what because terran will be on +1 maybe halfway to 2 and protoss will already be on 3.
One race should not be completely gutted and butchered just because 2-3 people on the planet are on another level than everyone else.
I agree that some of what I said was theorycrafting, and sometimes, things need to be changed.
Aside from the fact that Terrans didn't get 3-0ed every round, I can point to the fact uThermal beat Neeb I think 3-1 when Neeb has been the best foreigner by far for 2017.
If your counterpoint is that Neeb isn't at the highest skill level and then point to aLive and jjakji getting wrecked, then I will say the same thing. Those are players are simply not on the same level as the players they were playing against.
At HSC, the top 5 Terrans were nowhere to be seen, whereas two of the top 5 Protoss were here, and a top 4 Zerg was present.
And, the thing is, most people are not a top 5 or even top 10 Terran. What might be unholdable at a certain level may be holdable at their level.
Wasn't Neeb busy practicing vanilla LotV (current ladder patch) PvZ for blizzcon whereas uThermal played the test map as every other failing foreigner did tho? Plus it's probably an outlier, I only watched liquipedia results but terrans got wrecked in this HSC and in the comments people were saying that almost all pros agreed on terran being weak or something.
It's now time to discuss it, better safe than sorry so if there is an obvious issue Blizzard has to take notes before going live with it?
Glad to see HSC still going, too bad Stephano still couldn't perform.
Again, there were fewer and worse Terrans at HSC, which artificially inflates the loss ratio. Put two top five Terrans there like Inno and TY, and suddenly I don't think Terran looks as underpowered.
Also, I have to keep going back to January. This was two months after the redesign, and Protoss had an overall winrate of 41%. That winrate is much lower than the TvP winrate at HSC.
As for TvZ, I can't really speak for that matchup.
All that being said, if after like two-four weeks, if there is still blatantly op or up stuff, then I do support appropriate buffs/nerfs.
I agree, the Terran field overall at HSC was weaker (though the foreign terrans were competitive, both Heromarine and UThermal were there) and they clearly weren't trying new stuff. So HSC isn't an indication of much except of how stupid infestors are (I don't remember if there were any particularly egregious fast proxy-Oracle games off the top of my head).
That said, this is the off-season and Blizzard needs to be more aggressive with changes. Tweaks every two weeks until the dumbest stuff has been ironed sounds fine to me.
What new stuff? the new transformation upgrade?
Among other things, yes. Servos are really good with Mech (it makes Hellions incredible).
Shredder missile is also under-rated, IMO. It hits much more reliably, lasts a long time, and debuffs a big area. It has potentially huge synergy with bio and starport units (liberator AA and even BC's). Your marines doing +3 damage is no joke (shredder takes armor below 0, so it doesn't even matter if your opponent has upgrades or not).
Scrambler may be good against Protoss (locking down up to four archons/colossuses/immortals is a pretty big deal) if you can keep your Ravens safe from feedback, but it's too early to see if this is practical. It's useless against Z of course, the range is too short against the stuff they're meant to be locking down.
Repair drone isn't amazing, but it's a decent bonus. The drone lasts for a long time and is super-efficient energy-wise, so at the very least if you have a few Ravens around anyway you're healing up all your mech units for free between fights with a drone or two.
I've seen Semper and BeastyQT experiment with the Raven on stream, it's too early to say that it's useless.
Terran definitely got the most niche/esoteric changes and it's going to take them the longest to see if any of them work out.
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
You completely missed the point. Balance is not the issue. What is the point of doing a redesign if the gameplay that arises is worse than before? Do you really think, for example, that T/P players will find a response that makes massing infestors unviable? And if so, do you think that we should wait months waiting for this miracle to materialize?
Infestors need to be nuked from orbit. That's the one issue which doesn't require a wait and see. The fact that a player like Scarlett who has never won anything of note was in an unlosable position against a multi-GSL champion despite not entering late game massively ahead is more than enough evidence that the unit is broken. Pretty much everything requires a lot more evidence to make informed decisions.
Why not put super-fast Oracles in that category as well? How does having potentially game-ending damage available that early in the game make things better? Wasn't one of their goals for this patch to tone that sort of stuff down?
The shield battery and stalker changes, I agree, need more time, if only because the general direction is good even if balance might need tweaking. But I don't see any reason for Oracles to stay the way they are. "Lol ur dead" isn't fun for anyone even if it somehow ends up balanced.
How do you slow down double chrono proxy oracle enough without destroying stargate openings?
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
You completely missed the point. Balance is not the issue. What is the point of doing a redesign if the gameplay that arises is worse than before? Do you really think, for example, that T/P players will find a response that makes massing infestors unviable? And if so, do you think that we should wait months waiting for this miracle to materialize?
Infestors need to be nuked from orbit. That's the one issue which doesn't require a wait and see. The fact that a player like Scarlett who has never won anything of note was in an unlosable position against a multi-GSL champion despite not entering late game massively ahead is more than enough evidence that the unit is broken. Pretty much everything requires a lot more evidence to make informed decisions.
Why not put super-fast Oracles in that category as well? How does having potentially game-ending damage available that early in the game make things better? Wasn't one of their goals for this patch to tone that sort of stuff down?
The shield battery and stalker changes, I agree, need more time, if only because the general direction is good even if balance might need tweaking. But I don't see any reason for Oracles to stay the way they are. "Lol ur dead" isn't fun for anyone even if it somehow ends up balanced.
How do you slow down double chrono proxy oracle enough without destroying stargate openings?
Which stargate openings do you want to preserve that would get destroyed by slowing down proxy oracle?
And who says you need to keep the Oracle itself the way it is? Why not do something radical like remove pulsar beam and reduce stasis ward energy cost to 25? Or make the beam a regular weapon (no energy cost, benefits from upgrades) at the cost of lower damage. There's lots of things they can try, but the first step is acknowledging that it's a problem even if the solution isn't immediately apparent.
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
You completely missed the point. Balance is not the issue. What is the point of doing a redesign if the gameplay that arises is worse than before? Do you really think, for example, that T/P players will find a response that makes massing infestors unviable? And if so, do you think that we should wait months waiting for this miracle to materialize?
Infestors need to be nuked from orbit. That's the one issue which doesn't require a wait and see. The fact that a player like Scarlett who has never won anything of note was in an unlosable position against a multi-GSL champion despite not entering late game massively ahead is more than enough evidence that the unit is broken. Pretty much everything requires a lot more evidence to make informed decisions.
Why not put super-fast Oracles in that category as well? How does having potentially game-ending damage available that early in the game make things better? Wasn't one of their goals for this patch to tone that sort of stuff down?
The shield battery and stalker changes, I agree, need more time, if only because the general direction is good even if balance might need tweaking. But I don't see any reason for Oracles to stay the way they are. "Lol ur dead" isn't fun for anyone even if it somehow ends up balanced.
How do you slow down double chrono proxy oracle enough without destroying stargate openings?
Which stargate openings do you want to preserve that would get destroyed by slowing down proxy oracle?
And who says you need to keep the Oracle itself the way it is? Why not do something radical like remove pulsar beam and reduce stasis ward energy cost to 25? Or make the beam a regular weapon (no energy cost, benefits from upgrades) at the cost of lower damage. There's lots of things they can try, but the first step is acknowledging that it's a problem even if the solution isn't immediately apparent.
If you slow down proxy oracle, you slow down non-proxied, non-double chrono'd oracles which already have a very tight window to get damage against players who know what they are doing.
If you change Oracles such that they cannot do harassment damage, you completely kill Stargate openings as you'd have absolutely zero way to get early damage or pressure. Opening Stargate would signal to your opponent to play super greedy as you couldn't do anything to touch them for ages.
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
You completely missed the point. Balance is not the issue. What is the point of doing a redesign if the gameplay that arises is worse than before? Do you really think, for example, that T/P players will find a response that makes massing infestors unviable? And if so, do you think that we should wait months waiting for this miracle to materialize?
Infestors need to be nuked from orbit. That's the one issue which doesn't require a wait and see. The fact that a player like Scarlett who has never won anything of note was in an unlosable position against a multi-GSL champion despite not entering late game massively ahead is more than enough evidence that the unit is broken. Pretty much everything requires a lot more evidence to make informed decisions.
Why not put super-fast Oracles in that category as well? How does having potentially game-ending damage available that early in the game make things better? Wasn't one of their goals for this patch to tone that sort of stuff down?
The shield battery and stalker changes, I agree, need more time, if only because the general direction is good even if balance might need tweaking. But I don't see any reason for Oracles to stay the way they are. "Lol ur dead" isn't fun for anyone even if it somehow ends up balanced.
How do you slow down double chrono proxy oracle enough without destroying stargate openings?
Which stargate openings do you want to preserve that would get destroyed by slowing down proxy oracle?
And who says you need to keep the Oracle itself the way it is? Why not do something radical like remove pulsar beam and reduce stasis ward energy cost to 25? Or make the beam a regular weapon (no energy cost, benefits from upgrades) at the cost of lower damage. There's lots of things they can try, but the first step is acknowledging that it's a problem even if the solution isn't immediately apparent.
If you slow down proxy oracle, you slow down non-proxied, non-double chrono'd oracles which already have a very tight window to get damage against players who know what they are doing.
If you change Oracles such that they cannot do harassment damage, you completely kill Stargate openings as you'd have absolutely zero way to get early damage or pressure. Opening Stargate would signal to your opponent to play super greedy as you couldn't do anything to touch them for ages.
So if the only reason to open stargate is to get damage done with Oracles, then what's the loss? It's not like Protoss doesn't have other ways to apply early pressure (new stalkers and shield battery come to mind).
Put it another way. There are two cases.
We keep Oracles as is. Best case, Terrans find a response, and the number of viable Terran openings go down (because they now have to account for the earlier timing).
On the other hand, we delay the Oracle timing or redesign the unit. Worst case, stargate openings against Terran are dead, but the unit is still useful in the mid/late game. The number of Protoss openings go down, the number of Terran openings stay the same.
In both cases one side loses a bit of diversity. But at least the latter gets rid of a frustrating mechanic.
And for people complaining about this being unfair to Protoss, keep in mind that Terran has already lost an opening (mine drop), and for the same reason (lowering the occurrence of sudden, game-ending damage).
So, what's the virtue of the first approach? Was there some early-game disparity that super-fast Oracles were supposed to address that makes them worth the downside? Did Protoss have too few openings? Terran too many?
On November 14 2017 07:51 Athenau wrote:I don't understand the rationale behind this "wait and see" attitude, apart from blatant self-interest.
Because sometimes things aren't imbalanced but appear to be because players aren't responding correctly.
Take Adept Phoenix vs. Terran last year. Terran's refused to adapt their play style, got murdered (trying to drop against an opponent with lots of phoenix? LOL), then screamed IMBA. Was that really imbalanced? We have no way of knowing because Blizzard immediately nerfed adepts rather than forcing Terran players to figure it out then changing things if they couldn't.
You completely missed the point. Balance is not the issue. What is the point of doing a redesign if the gameplay that arises is worse than before? Do you really think, for example, that T/P players will find a response that makes massing infestors unviable? And if so, do you think that we should wait months waiting for this miracle to materialize?
Infestors need to be nuked from orbit. That's the one issue which doesn't require a wait and see. The fact that a player like Scarlett who has never won anything of note was in an unlosable position against a multi-GSL champion despite not entering late game massively ahead is more than enough evidence that the unit is broken. Pretty much everything requires a lot more evidence to make informed decisions.
Why not put super-fast Oracles in that category as well? How does having potentially game-ending damage available that early in the game make things better? Wasn't one of their goals for this patch to tone that sort of stuff down?
The shield battery and stalker changes, I agree, need more time, if only because the general direction is good even if balance might need tweaking. But I don't see any reason for Oracles to stay the way they are. "Lol ur dead" isn't fun for anyone even if it somehow ends up balanced.
How do you slow down double chrono proxy oracle enough without destroying stargate openings?
Which stargate openings do you want to preserve that would get destroyed by slowing down proxy oracle?
And who says you need to keep the Oracle itself the way it is? Why not do something radical like remove pulsar beam and reduce stasis ward energy cost to 25? Or make the beam a regular weapon (no energy cost, benefits from upgrades) at the cost of lower damage. There's lots of things they can try, but the first step is acknowledging that it's a problem even if the solution isn't immediately apparent.
If you slow down proxy oracle, you slow down non-proxied, non-double chrono'd oracles which already have a very tight window to get damage against players who know what they are doing.
If you change Oracles such that they cannot do harassment damage, you completely kill Stargate openings as you'd have absolutely zero way to get early damage or pressure. Opening Stargate would signal to your opponent to play super greedy as you couldn't do anything to touch them for ages.
So if the only reason to open stargate is to get damage done with Oracles, then what's the loss? It's not like Protoss doesn't have other ways to apply early pressure (new stalkers and shield battery come to mind).
Put it another way. There are two cases.
We keep Oracles as is. Best case, Terrans find a response, and the number of viable Terran openings go down (because they now have to account for the earlier timing).
On the other hand, we delay the Oracle timing or redesign the unit. Worst case, stargate openings against Terran are dead, but the unit is still useful in the mid/late game. The number of Protoss openings go down, the number of Terran openings stay the same.
In both cases one side loses a bit of diversity. But at least the latter gets rid of a frustrating mechanic.
And for people complaining about this being unfair to Protoss, keep in mind that Terran has already lost an opening (mine drop), and for the same reason (lowering the occurrence of sudden, game-ending damage).
So, what's the virtue of the first approach? Was there some early-game disparity that super-fast Oracles were supposed to address that makes them worth the downside? Did Protoss have too few openings? Terran too many?